** The AMD Navi Thread **

[Martini1991]

In relation to Navi, I would love to see Nvidia fans comments when the new Futuremark PCI4.0 benchmark comes out.
When Nvidia custom made benchmarks come out (Time Spy, Ray Tracing), they are up there showing their hubris. I do wonder when there is a new benchmark out, what they going to say
Or stay away from it and not run it?

Frankly who cares? A Pci-e benchmark wouldn't do anything for relation to performance in the graphics cards.

I'm all for faster drives though.

 

[h4rm0ny]

In my mind AMD should have focused on 1 killer card and then just the low to medium end, i.e rx 5xx series and then 1 monster, just to touch the minds of people who have the blanket of nvidia having the best always.

Having the market leader in your catalogue is nice, but the halo effect doesn't do you any good if you don't have a lot of lower tier products to receive the sales boost. The big money isn't in the super high-end for the PC market. I'm not even sure the PC market is the big money. Polaris focused heavily on lowering power to make something suitable for the mobile market. And Google's cloud gaming service (I forget the name) appears to have gone with Vega cards en masse (Vega 56, I think). That's both substantial money and an inducement to game manufacturers to stop taking the Nvidia inducements to do Nvidia only technologies in their games. And of course consoles. Strategically, AMD are probably doing exactly the right thing for their revenue. Home-building PC enthusiasts with lots of spare cash on hand are a nice to have, not the mainstay I think.

A thought I had on the train. Mainly surrounding PCIE 4.0 - right now current cards do not saturate PCIE 3.0 so I have been scratching my head and trying to figure out the benefit of and reason for ensuring the new NAVi cards are on PCIE 4.0

I think PCE-Ev4 will be good for having lots of devices. I think it will be good for a few things like super-fast SSDs. But like you, unless we see a resurgence in multi-card gaming, I don't think it has much immediate benefit for GPUs.

 

[Illuminist]

Having the market leader in your catalogue is nice, but the halo effect doesn't do you any good if you don't have a lot of lower tier products to receive the sales boost. The big money isn't in the super high-end for the PC market. I'm not even sure the PC market is the big money. Polaris focused heavily on lowering power to make something suitable for the mobile market. And Google's cloud gaming service (I forget the name) appears to have gone with Vega cards en masse (Vega 56, I think). That's both substantial money and an inducement to game manufacturers to stop taking the Nvidia inducements to do Nvidia only technologies in their games. And of course consoles. Strategically, AMD are probably doing exactly the right thing for their revenue. Home-building PC enthusiasts with lots of spare cash on hand are a nice to have, not the mainstay I think.



I think PCE-Ev4 will be good for having lots of devices. I think it will be good for a few things like super-fast SSDs. But like you, unless we see a resurgence in multi-card gaming, I don't think it has much immediate benefit for GPUs.

In this rare case, AMD whether it makes money or not need to have a top tier gpu, it would drive sales of their lower gpus immensely just for the fact that they were the performance leaders, even if was only for 6 months until nvidia brought out something.
Nvidia users I believe mostly are not loyal, they just want to brag that they have the best and imo would shift over to amd.

 

[MarkA]

People are not loyal, they just want the best and would shift over to amd.

Fixed that for you.

 

[D.P.]

Also, if you can produce a high-performance GPU that competes with a 2080ti well within realistic 300w limits, then scaling that architecture down to tower tired is trivial. AMDs problem is they haven't managed to produce a capable scalable GPU, so theybjuat can't reach the high end.

Nvidia don't design a new architecture to get a new halo card. They design a new architecture in order to increase performance across the board. The upshot is the high end also progresses

If AMD produces something 30% faster than a 2080ti at 250w then tge restvof the line up would be mkre competitive. The fact is tgey can't so AMD just have to concede the high end and all the marketing surudoung that to Nvidia who happily make observe margins on halo cards with minimal additional outlay.

 

[Curlyriff]

They do at 4K yes however the processing power of the Navi shown by Lisa is not enough to make this a 4K card. Chances are most buyers will use them at 1080p and then 1440p and 8gb is plenty fine for that application

I have and still do game at 4k on my 980 thanks. To suggest that something as powerful as the 2070 isn't possible to game at 4k is an odd statement.

Now if you are suggesting gaming above 60fps then yes but the majority of people out there are still on 60hz monitors. If you want 4k 144hz then that is a difference but then nothing really does that well.

1440p 144hz seems to be the sweet spot though and that is certainly in the range of the 2070 and hopefully by that the Navi 5700.

 

[Gerard]

Also, if you can produce a high-performance GPU that competes with a 2080ti well within realistic 300w limits, then scaling that architecture down to tower tired is trivial. AMDs problem is they haven't managed to produce a capable scalable GPU, so theybjuat can't reach the high end.

Nvidia don't design a new architecture to get a new halo card. They design a new architecture in order to increase performance across the board. The upshot is the high end also progresses

If AMD produces something 30% faster than a 2080ti at 250w then tge restvof the line up would be mkre competitive. The fact is tgey can't so AMD just have to concede the high end and all the marketing surudoung that to Nvidia who happily make observe margins on halo cards with minimal additional outlay.

 

[ltron]

Also, if you can produce a high-performance GPU that competes with a 2080ti well within realistic 300w limits, then scaling that architecture down to tower tired is trivial. AMDs problem is they haven't managed to produce a capable scalable GPU, so theybjuat can't reach the high end.

Nvidia don't design a new architecture to get a new halo card. They design a new architecture in order to increase performance across the board. The upshot is the high end also progresses

If AMD produces something 30% faster than a 2080ti at 250w then tge restvof the line up would be mkre competitive. The fact is tgey can't so AMD just have to concede the high end and all the marketing surudoung that to Nvidia who happily make observe margins on halo cards with minimal additional outlay.

Exactly right, I agree and it's very frustrating.

 

[nashathedog]

True. Sad that they are releasing apparently what is a new architecture, which is 7nm and they cannot even release something that beats a 2080Ti.

It's not as bad as that sounds, The first Navi releases are mid & low end replacements for Polaris, bigger & faster is eventually coming, Plus being AMD it'll take them time to get the drivers up to scratch & eek every bit of performance out of RDNA cards but hey at least they gave it a cool name. RDNA

 

[h4rm0ny]

In this rare case, AMD whether it makes money or not need to have a top tier gpu, it would drive sales of their lower gpus immensely just for the fact that they were the performance leaders, even if was only for 6 months until nvidia brought out something.
Nvidia users I believe mostly are not loyal, they just want to brag that they have the best and imo would shift over to amd.

Well it would be a nice to have for AMD, but it wouldn't be the best strategy is what I'm saying. They are constrained in their choices and cannot do everything. Nor do I think they could actually catch Nvidia at the current moment in time. They would sacrifice everything to focus on their super-high end card only to see Nvidia move the goal posts just a little further along. And then AMD would collapse having no remaining foundation for their graphics business. AMD are a company run by engineers. And that means they always take a long view. It's that long-view that bit them hard with Bulldozer when they thought the whole world was going multi-threaded years before it did. But it's also the long-view that has seen them rise to their CPU success right now. What you suggest isn't possible.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Samsung gets an RDNA license from AMD:

http://ir.amd.com/news-releases/new...nnounce-strategic-partnership-ultra-low-power

News
AMD and Samsung Announce Strategic Partnership in Ultra Low Power, High Performance Graphics Technologies
Samsung to integrate custom AMD Radeon™ graphics IP into future SoCs for mobile applications
SEOUL, South Korea & SANTA CLARA, Calif., June 03, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. today announced a multi-year strategic partnership in ultra low power, high performance mobile graphics IP based on AMD Radeon graphics technologies. As part of the partnership, Samsung will license AMD graphics IP and will focus on advanced graphics technologies and solutions that are critical for enhancing innovation across mobile applications, including smartphones.

“As we prepare for disruptive changes in technology and discover new opportunities, our partnership with AMD will allow us to bring groundbreaking graphics products and solutions to market for tomorrow’s mobile applications," said Inyup Kang, president of Samsung Electronics’ S.LSI Business. "We look forward to working with AMD to accelerate innovations in mobile graphics technologies that will help take future mobile computing to the next level.”

“Adoption of our Radeon graphics technologies across the PC, game console, cloud and HPC markets has grown significantly and we are thrilled to now partner with industry leader Samsung to accelerate graphics innovation in the mobile market,” said Dr. Lisa Su, AMD president and CEO. “This strategic partnership will extend the reach of our high-performance Radeon graphics into the mobile market, significantly expanding the Radeon user base and development ecosystem.”

Key terms of the partnership include:

• AMD will license custom graphics IP based on the recently announced, highly-scalable RDNA graphics architecture to Samsung for use in mobile devices, including smartphones, and other products that complement AMD product offerings.
• Samsung will pay AMD technology license fees and royalties.

 

[D.P.]

Well it would be a nice to have for AMD, but it wouldn't be the best strategy is what I'm saying. They are constrained in their choices and cannot do everything. Nor do I think they could actually catch Nvidia at the current moment in time. They would sacrifice everything to focus on their super-high end card only to see Nvidia move the goal posts just a little further along. And then AMD would collapse having no remaining foundation for their graphics business. AMD are a company run by engineers. And that means they always take a long view. It's that long-view that bit them hard with Bulldozer when they thought the whole world was going multi-threaded years before it did. But it's also the long-view that has seen them rise to their CPU success right now. What you suggest isn't possible.

The problem with bulldozer and other aspects of AMD's so called long-view is they completely it ore reality, and the world of software engineering. Msking slowr CPU core and putting more of them on a die is simple. Multithreading software is far header, and the software simply doesn't exist to do this automatically in many domains. In fact, not every problem can be done in parallel.

Nvidia on the other ha d design hardware that yakes in to account the current design trends in software, understanding that hardware and drivers that are easy to work with gain the most support and performance from developers.

 

[Scougar]

I don't know if anyone else is like this, but there was no chance I was buying bulldozer, but I was very intrigued by Ryzen and wanted to try something new after my 2500k (briefly on an A10-7850k), so got a R5 1600. If AMD hadn't been as successful as it is, I would be looking to Intel right now. I like the best, but sometimes I just like to be nerdy.

Edit: opps! Didn't realize this was the Navi thread as was distracted and read the cpu comments and replied lol. Sorry!

 

[hominid]

Samsung gets an RDNA license from AMD:

http://ir.amd.com/news-releases/new...nnounce-strategic-partnership-ultra-low-power

Good news for AMD, this could turn into a massive revenue stream in the not-to-distant future!

 

[Safetytrousers]

I have and still do game at 4k on my 980 thanks. To suggest that something as powerful as the 2070 isn't possible to game at 4k is an odd statement.

I fully expect that with settings adjusted you can game at 4k on a 2070.
But I would have thought most people who get a 4k monitor want the best possible graphics, so having a 4k screen and having to game at graphically reducing settings seems a bit pointless to me.

 

[MyBrainz]

I fully expect that with settings adjusted you can game at 4k on a 2070.
But I would have thought most people who get a 4k monitor want the best possible graphics, so having a 4k screen and having to game at graphically reducing settings seems a bit pointless to me.

Not everyone has a 4K monitor for gaming

 

[Brazo]

I fully expect that with settings adjusted you can game at 4k on a 2070.
But I would have thought most people who get a 4k monitor want the best possible graphics, so having a 4k screen and having to game at graphically reducing settings seems a bit pointless to me.

I can game at 4K/60 ultra in certain games on my 2070 but in some others I’d average around 30 and god knows what the minimums would be. Even a 2080ti won’t max out all games at 4K/60.

 

[Illuminist]

I game at 4k without a 4k monitor, and there's nothing wrong with lowering some anti aliasing as the higher res removes need for it.

 

[Curlyriff]

I fully expect that with settings adjusted you can game at 4k on a 2070.
But I would have thought most people who get a 4k monitor want the best possible graphics, so having a 4k screen and having to game at graphically reducing settings seems a bit pointless to me.

I had the 4k monitor for my work, just happened at time when brought the GPU that was best for not silly monies. It worked pretty reasonably. You can drop from ultra/extreme to high on most games, turn off motion blur and be good to game at reasonable frames 45-60 with them being consistent and lack of stutter which for me seems to be suitable as it is the stutter that always makes it look bad personally.

Some games I do turn down to 1440p but for whatever reason the colour grading seems off when I do that with the 980.

 

[ltron]

Samsung gets an RDNA license from AMD:

http://ir.amd.com/news-releases/new...nnounce-strategic-partnership-ultra-low-power

Excellent news, it just keeps on coming. Lisa Su is a great CEO.