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

[Bidley]

So shops have them but AMD has not even acknowledged their existence officially.

I mean Frank Azor was interviewing with people holding them in their hands so I think that's a bit of a stretch

But yeah, it seems like they're figuring out pricing and how to pitch performance.

 

[Thekwango]

The price was right yeah, but didn't they also compete in every area including the very top end?

Not just price being right, the ‘bang per buck’ is what swayed a lot, if not most, to jump ship. As @Phixsator says, suddenly people could get an 8c16t cpu that was relatively cheap and within spitting distance in gaming terms of intels ‘clocked to death’ 4/8 offerings. and yea as fas I remember they cut Intel price/performance to pieces right across the product line.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Not just price being right, the ‘bang per buck’ is what swayed a lot, if not most, to jump ship. As @Phixsator says, suddenly people could get an 8c16t cpu that was relatively cheap and within spitting distance in gaming terms of intels ‘clocked to death’ 4/8 offerings. and yea as fas I remember they cut Intel price/performance to pieces right across the product line.

Zen1 was beaten in most games,but AMD offered good prices and a great all round package. Not only was it much cheaper per core,the motherboards were feature packed for the price and offered good upgrades. AMD even made sure they bundled decent stock coolers too.

If they followed their dGPU division,they would have offered the Ryzen 5 1600X for the same price as the Core i7 7700K,without a stock cooler.

What AMD actually did was offered it at the same price as Core i5 7600K,and then released the Ryzen 5 1600 which was even cheaper. AMD had 3X the number of threads for less money.

 

[kieran_read]

It does seem daft that AMD apparently have the responsibility of doing us a favour by pricing low, but Nvidia can charge whatever they want and get away with shrinkflation.

AMD need to price based on Nvidia. They're not going to give us a 4080 for £400 and nor should they be expected to. Madness.

Look at the B580. It's the same price as a 2 year old budget Nvidia card while being 5% faster with 4gb extra VRAM and everyone is gobbling it up.

We're actually basing this on leaks.

Apparently the 9070xt it is around 4080 level of Rasta, or very close, and the rumoured price was 479 or something for the reference.

People are not "Expecting" anything, we're simply speculating on what the leaks are suggesting, and which we all think would be a pretty damn good price it true.

 

[Joxeon]

Not just price being right, the ‘bang per buck’ is what swayed a lot, if not most, to jump ship. As @Phixsator says, suddenly people could get an 8c16t cpu that was relatively cheap and within spitting distance in gaming terms of intels ‘clocked to death’ 4/8 offerings. and yea as fas I remember they cut Intel price/performance to pieces right across the product line.

I think AMD has to match the pricing of the Nvidia card a tier below its performance at a minimum, if AMD can match a 5070ti in performance yet price it the same as a 5070 then it’ll be a winner.

 

[Bidley]

We're actually basing this on leaks.

Apparently the 9070xt it is around 4080 level of Rasta, or very close, and the rumoured price was 479 or something for the reference.

People are not "Expecting" anything, we're simply speculating on what the leaks are suggesting, and which we all think would be a pretty damn good price it true.

People are also saying if it's over £500 it's dead.

£479 was for the MBA, which will be less performant apparently. AIBs will be more with more performance, allegedly.

I certainly agree that's a brilliant price if it's 4080 in raster and 4070ti in RT with FSR4. I'm just saying £600 isn't the international war crime it's made out to be against the much more expensive 5070ti.

 

[Joxeon]

I certainly agree that's a brilliant price if it's 4080 in raster and 4070ti in RT with FSR4. I'm just saying £600 isn't the international war crime it's made it to be against the much more expensive 5070ti

The problem with that is if AMD price it at £600+ then it’s getting to the point where people will just pony up and get the 5070ti instead for the full package.

 

[mountaincow]

People are also saying if it's over £500 it's dead.

£479 was for the MBA, which will be less performant apparently. AIBs will be more with more performance, allegedly.

I certainly agree that's a brilliant price if it's 4080 in raster and 4070ti in RT with FSR4. I'm just saying £600 isn't the international war crime it's made out to be against the much more expensive 5070ti.

If AIBs have higher power limits and performance it makes it much more complicated as a consumer to make a decision and means benchmarks between review sites are more difficult to compare and even less likely to exist for the exact model on any given site.

What tends to be the performance difference with these various AIB cards?

Are they really worth the extra money compared to just stepping up a model, or are there huge benefits to sticking a water block on them and clocking to the moon?
It's been a while so I'm not sure if things have changed or it's just an AMD thing.
The last time I bought new and flagship was the gtx580 where there was basically no difference and while heat was a limit, if you stuck a block on there was no difference beyond the silicon lottery.

 

[kieran_read]

People are also saying if it's over £500 it's dead.

£479 was for the MBA, which will be less performant apparently. AIBs will be more with more performance, allegedly.

I certainly agree that's a brilliant price if it's 4080 in raster and 4070ti in RT with FSR4. I'm just saying £600 isn't the international war crime it's made out to be against the much more expensive 5070ti.

I'm expecting 500 for the entry models from AIBs with 600-650 for the highend AIBs, I don't think that will be "dead" but if the 7000 series is anything to go by, the shear build quality on the Sapphire Models for example it would be pretty pointless getting a fancy cooler if you don't need it.

 

[Bidley]

The problem with that is if AMD price it at £600+ then it’s getting to the point where people will just pony up and get the 5070ti instead for the full package.

For 33% more? I don't value MFG that highly, so I will definitely not be. I appear to be the only one though!

Again, if the difference is MFG and slightly lower RT performance (which everyone says they don't care about), then £600 is a reasonable price (for me). There has to be a point where people take responsibility for their own buying decisions.

Also in the frame is the 5080, which is £1k and could potentially turn out to be just 15% faster if leaks are to be believed. Although this is probably stretching the speculation.

 

[Bidley]

If AIBs have higher power limits and performance it makes it much more complicated as a consumer to make a decision and means benchmarks between review sites are more difficult to compare and even less likely to exist for the exact model on any given site.

What tends to be the performance difference with these various AIB cards?

Are they really worth the extra money compared to just stepping up a model, or are there huge benefits to sticking a water block on them and clocking to the moon?
It's been a while so I'm not sure if things have changed or it's just an AMD thing.
The last time I bought new and flagship was the gtx580 where there was basically no difference and while heat was a limit, if you stuck a block on there was no difference beyond the silicon lottery.

From memory the reference card is 260w with 2x8 pin, the AIBs can go well over 300w with 3x pin. The AsRock Taichi has a 12v2x6.

Nobody knows the real performance yet, just the leaks saying AIBs getting around 4080 in raster. From memory.

I'm expecting 500 for the entry models from AIBs with 600-650 for the highend AIBs, I don't think that will be "dead" but if the 7000 series is anything to go by, the shear build quality on the Sapphire Models for example it would be pretty pointless getting a fancy cooler if you don't need it.

Agreed. But having pointlessly overbuilt coolers is a thing now, not just with AMD! And to be fair it's a nice option to have.

 

[kieran_read]

From memory the reference card is 260w with 2x8 pin, the AIBs can go well over 300w with 3x pin. The AsRock Taichi has a 12v2x6.

Nobody knows the real performance yet, just the leaks saying AIBs getting around 4080 in raster. From memory.

Agreed. But having pointlessly overbuilt coolers is a thing now, not just with AMD! And to be fair it's a nice option to have.

True, but even with Nvidia I quite like the ref design. The Sapphire Pulse designs are incredible IMO the best of the "Basic" designs i'd say. Ill aim for a pulse most likely if I go AMD.

 

[humbug]

Grain of salt with this one....

As of internal testing, AMD, December 2024.

9700 XT = 7% slower in raster than 7900 XTX, between 4070 Ti and 4070 Ti S in RT at 305 Watts
(believes there was a Wokong benchmark where it was 60% faster in RT than the 7900 XTX)

9700 = 5% weaker than 7900 XT in raster, = to 4070 in RT at 240 Watts

 

[mountaincow]

From memory the reference card is 260w with 2x8 pin, the AIBs can go well over 300w with 3x pin. The AsRock Taichi has a 12v2x6.

Nobody knows the real performance yet, just the leaks saying AIBs getting around 4080 in raster. From memory.

I understand nobody knows about these cards. It was more a question about previous generations and what has happened there, as I'm out of the loop and I'm sure someone will have been paying attention.

I'm guessing that there will probably be very little in it as AMD are already struggling to compete and if they could clock them much higher without huge inefficiency then they would already.

 

[Bidley]

Grain of salt with this one....

As of internal testing, AMD, December 2024.

9700 XT = 7% slower in raster than 7900 XTX, between 4070 Ti and 4070 Ti S in RT at 305 Watts
(believes there was a Wokong benchmark where it was 60% faster in RT that the 7900 XTX)

9700 = 5% weaker than 7900 XT in raster, = to 4070 in RT at 240 Watts

Yeah I saw that too. In line with the leaks, sounding good, dependent on price.

I understand nobody knows about these cards. It was more a question about previous generations and what has happened there, as I'm out of the loop and I'm sure someone will have been paying attention.

I'm guessing that there will probably be very little in it as AMD are already struggling to compete and if they could clock them much higher without huge inefficiency then they would already.

Yeah I think you're probably right. I remember the 7900xtx MBA being particularly weak, but not so weak it dropped down a tier. It was worth spending the extra few quid for the cooling and performance in an AIB.

Some leaks for this gen seem to suggest massive jumps in performance but that remains to be seen.

 

[mahius]

Grain of salt with this one....
...
9700 XT = 7% slower in raster than 7900 XTX, between 4070 Ti and 4070 Ti S in RT at 305 Watts
...
9700 = 5% weaker than 7900 XT in raster, = to 4070 in RT at 240 Watts
...

Definitely grain of salt... how are the AIB cards that big at 305W with 3x 8pin power? Even if AIB sucks 20% more power, thats just about within what PCIe slot and 2x 8pin can supply. Power and cooling doesn't add up for that rumour.

Call me fussy, but I also don't appreciate the recent trend of bigger coolers over 2 slots. Makes other PCIe slots inaccessible and unable to be used and there's not significantly better temps from them.

 

[RavenXXX2]

mild realy wants that $600 price point, ****

 

[humbug]

Definitely grain of salt... how are the AIB cards that big at 305W with 3x 8pin power? Even if AIB sucks 20% more power, thats just about within what PCIe slot and 2x 8pin can supply. Power and cooling doesn't add up for that rumour.

Call me fussy, but I also don't appreciate the recent trend of bigger coolers over 2 slots. Makes other PCIe slots inaccessible and unable to be used and there's not significantly better temps from them.

I shouldn't think that a disqualifier, i have 2X 8 pin PCIe connectors, with the PCIe slot that's 375 watts, its a 250 watt GPU.

Modern GPU's don't really pull much if any power from the slot, they are more stable not relying on power from the motherboard, the 9700 XT is a 300 watt + GPU, each 8 pin is 150 watts, 2 would be 300 watts, 2X 8 pin + a 6 pin would be 375 watts, for a bit more headroom (they do come with a 15% adjustable power profile) 3X 8 pin makes sense for a 300 or a bit more watt GPU.

 

[Martini1991]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/s/l5N3QLx2xA

apparently scan have had stock of the 9070 come in.

This is such a strange bloody launch. I have no idea if these things are coming next week or 2 months from now.

This is more or less standard launch.

Products basically just appear one day when NDA expires, it's all generally rumour till then.
Sometimes you get leaks (Basically like Switch 2 announcement today)

Sometimes you get something more official (Like Nvidia and their 5XXX series announcement)

AMD on this particular launch fumbled the messaging directly mind. Cancelling your GPU segment while you've already briefed the media, while it's literally shipping ready to launch is a very strange move unless it's specifically about price (Since Nvidia went and announced the full bloody lot with specs and pricing)

 

[Sumanji]

If the 5070ti is £800 (no FE remember, I doubt we'll get one for MSRP here), then a 9070xt that offers similar performance minus MFG (which has no appeal to me) at £600 gets my money. It's really quite simple. If you think £600 is too much, then buy a 5070ti for £200 more, then you're part of the problem. A general 'you', not you specifically

I think this nails the heart of it, tbh.

I think AMD has to match the pricing of the Nvidia card a tier below its performance at a minimum, if AMD can match a 5070ti in performance yet price it the same as a 5070 then it’ll be a winner.

I just don't agree with this line of thinking, man... see Bidley's comment above.

<snip>

• This whole "we want to get market share" strategy is relatively new iirc? I'm still not sure they actually mean that in the way that we do (i.e., they may want more share, but not at the expense of decimating margins). It's clear that they were chasing profit margins by slipstreaming behind Nvidia's pricing for the prior two generations.
• Do you have data on unsold inventory? Anecdotally, on OcUK there seems to be decent stock of the 7600/700/800 series, but both 7900 models look thin (for XTX, only the Sapphire is in stock!)
• The console business part is interesting, but I see it from the other side:
  • AMD have entrenched a great position here for the past two console generations (and have already reportedly beat Intel and Broadcom to win the PS6 design)
  • Many games are initially designed for console and then ported (often lazily!) over to PC
  • They've failed to leverage that into better relationships and support for PC devs, and driving more PC gamer awareness - I agree that this is down to lack of spending, as you pointed out
  • But I don't see failure in PC impacting console wins (they're so far down the e-curve on that)
• Strix Halo vs. the Nvidia SOC will be super interesting - we're likely going to get a total erosion of the lower end discrete card market, which I suspect will continue to creep upwards...