• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

*** The AMD RDNA 4 Rumour Mill ***

StarShock said:
I mean, they have said almost nothing other than "we think it needs its own announcement event" so they might be getting the dancers and singers ready
Click to expand...
You'd think that this is what they would have done at the prime opening day of the CES keynote. Too many things stink here, I think the hyped up folks might be in for a bit of a disappointment :o
 
mrk said:
Is the 9070XT = 4080S performance not just wishful thinking? Considering the supposed price, if that was the case then why are AMD not making a massive song and dance about it given how expensive the 4080S is by comparison? Seems highly backwards.
Click to expand...
No way it hits 4080S perf.. 4070Ti at best, with similar RT perf and they'll want over $600 for it.

Because AMD being AMD.

Seems they only had 45 minutes to squeeze in what they squeezed in :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Please oh please AMD make FSR4 available on RDNA3.

If I use upscaling, my go to is XeSS 1.3 UQ. FSR3 quality in Cyberpunk still looks unacceptably bad to my eye.

Honestly wonder if going back to FSR1, which had the option to manually set the resolution scaling (say from 80-85%) would look better than the highest setting of FSR3 (quality) which I believe uses 65% res. Sure, the framerate gained would be less, but then XeSS UQ only improves my framerate half as much as FSR3 Quality, but looks a whole lot better.

The same principle applies if there's a significantly lower performance uplift with FSR4 on RDNA3 than on RDNA4 - I'd still chose FSR4 over the current FSR.
 
The estimated chip size is slightly bigger than a 4080s and it's on the same manufacturing node as a 4080s along with being a monolithic chip. With this in mind it's all about how many transistors AMD packed in and how good RDNA 4 is. In theory 4080 performance is not out of the realms of possibility.
 
TheRealDeal said:
The estimated chip size is slightly bigger than a 4080s and it's on the same manufacturing node as a 4080s along with being a monolithic chip. With this in mind it's all about how many transistors AMD packed in and how good RDNA 4 is. In theory 4080 performance is not out of the realms of possibility.
Click to expand...
If AMD are capable of releasing a 500 quid GPU that matches/beats the 4080 in raw raster then it's the sort of opportunity that AMD will absolutely find some way to totally balls up.
 
t2na said:
If AMD are capable of releasing a 500 quid GPU that matches/beats the 4080 in raw raster then it's the sort of opportunity that AMD will absolutely find some way to totally balls up.
Click to expand...
If it's 4080 performance i don't think that will be the price as it would be far faster than the 5070 going by what Nvidia showed.
 
TheRealDeal said:
If it's 4080 performance i don't think that will be the price as it would be far faster than the 5070 going by what Nvidia showed.
Click to expand...
What do you mean? Nvidia showed the 5070 matching the 4090.

thierry-henry-laugh.gif
 
humbug said:
7900 XTX: 119%
4080: 115%
7900 XT: 100%

The rumour always was between the 7900 XT and 7900 XTX, if the 9070 is 10% faster than the 7900 XT then its 95% a 4080 or 91% a 7900 XTX.
Click to expand...
AMD said that's all junk though and nobody has a proper driver. The only proper info is the IGN bench and they probably went wrong there as well.
 
It needs to gain 38% over a 7800 XT to achieve that.

60 CU's vs 64 CU's +7%
2.4 Ghz vs 3.0 Ghz +25%
Memory Bandwidth 624 GB/s vs 650 GB/s +4%

Its possible, AMD's slide also said RDNA 4 is faster per shader.

RDNA 3 is at least 25% per shader faster than RDNA 2, the 6900 XT has 80 CU's vs 60 CU's on the 7800 XT (+33%) they are clocked almost identical and yet the 7800 XT is 97% the performance of the 6900 XT, 10% faster in RT.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
Is the 9070XT = 4080S performance not just wishful thinking? Considering the supposed price, if that was the case then why are AMD not making a massive song and dance about it given how expensive the 4080S is by comparison? Seems highly backwards.
Click to expand...
Probably because Nvidia come out and said the 5070 delivers 4090 performance so for AMD to now say that the 9070XT has 4080 performance makes it look slower in the minds of the masses.

AMD are best to let the dust settle and wait for reviews to show up the 5070 as only slightly faster than a 4070S then drop the 9070XT in and say hey we're giving you 4080 performance for the same money.
 
Last edited:
Summary of AI translation from Chief Architect of Gaming at AMD interview:

1. They decided to not mess it up this time and rather observe Nvidia and respond more appropriately, so the actual reveal is set for a later date

2. He says that most gamers these days don't want to spend $1000 in a GPU, they released $1000 GPUs last gen but only got a very favourable response from the market when they lowered the prices and released the 7900 GRE.

3. The new GPUs won't cost $300 but they won't cost $1000 either, because 90% of gaming market is anywhere in between

4. FSR 4 requires lots of Machine Learning power, that's the reason why it's RDNA 4 exclusive, but they're making efforts to optimize it as much as possible so """"maybe"""" they can put it in RDNA 3 too.

5. They understand that a ML solution has much better quality, but they won't stop investing in FSR 3, it's still continuing to evolve.

6. RDNA 4 has "much much better, but muuuuuch better" Raytracing performance, he insists saying it twice in the interview

7. Developing a GPU chip is expensive in part because of how many chips have to be developed and that the prices of all of them spread across all the model prices, so they rather focused on a more limited selection to keep prices as low as possible in the range that most gamers put their money on

8. He says that AMD have been learning a lot from their mistakes on the GPU segment

9. There are comments about the new CPU and the new mobile chip but they're not too relevant IMO
Click to expand...

 
Last edited:
I don’t see it matching a 4080s at the rumoured prices. I just don’t think AMD have got the message from the 7900 XT and XTX debacle that they can’t price like that.

Am I correct that Blackwell is on the 4NP process node and that this is not a full enhancement from the 4N node used for Lovelace? While RDNA 3 used N5 and RDNA 4 will use N4 node?

So this means Blackwell does not get the same benefits of a full node increase that the RDNA4 GPUs get?
 
ICDP said:
I don’t see it matching a 4080s at the rumoured prices. I just don’t think AMD have got the message from the 7900 XT and XTX debacle that they can’t price like that.

Am I correct that Blackwell is on the 4NP process node and that this is not a full enhancement from the 4N node used for Lovelace? While RDNA 3 used N5 and RDNA 4 will use N4 node?

So this means Blackwell does not get the same benefits of a full node increase that the RDNA4 GPUs get?
Click to expand...

Right, RDNA 3 was 5nm for the main die, it did have 6nm IMC / Cache chips but they are not relevant in this context, RDNA 4 will move to a purely monolithic 4nm node, the same node that the current RTX 4000 series is on, i don't know what Nvidia are doing other than the 5000 series is still on some form of 4nm, it could be a different / more enhanced 4nm node or the same as AMD.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom