• 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 ***

Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,910
Why would it have 800 Watts power draw? The 7900 XTX is less than half of that. If the 5090 is 50% faster than the 4090 no one is going to say that's impossible it would have 700 watts power draw.

The rumour is it got cancelled because it would be too expensive.


Too expensive? Sounds like bs. People have been paying $2k for a 4090
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
21 Jun 2018
Posts
154
"Unfortunately, though, we’re not expecting to see such a GPU or card ever appear, as it’s rumored that AMD hasn’t been able to make its new chiplet technology scale to this level."

So its not being released because AMD have tried to make it, but haven't been able to get it to work yet; so price not the reason (or at least not the sole one if it could have been made to work by spending more on it than they would get back).
 
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2022
Posts
601
Location
Pyongyang
i reckon amd too will be eventually embracing a superscalar architecture like nvidia, all basic functional units bunched together, its been a great success for nvidia, not only have they utterly destroyed amd in raw performance but are currently 1.5 generations ahead of them in efficiency
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
48,495
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
i reckon amd too will be eventually embracing a superscalar architecture like nvidia, all basic functional units bunched together, its been a great success for nvidia, not only have they utterly destroyed amd in raw performance but are currently 1.5 generations ahead of them in efficiency

Supescaler is simply executing multiple instructions per clock cycle, or what we now call and measure as IPC, this was cracked in the 1970's along with the move away from RISC to programable logic.
For decades everything has been Superscaler.

Also, the 7900 XTX despite being on 5nm vs the 4090 4nm is 85% the performance at 85% the power consumption.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2022
Posts
601
Location
Pyongyang
Supescaler is simply executing multiple instructions per clock cycle, or what we now call and measure as IPC, this was cracked in the 1970's along with the move away from RISC to programable logic.
For decades everything has been Superscaler.

amd has vector units, nvidia has scalar bunched up functional units called cuda/tensor/rt cores etc... amd has to package instructions using a more complicated scheduler to maintain high utilisation of their vector units, nvidia just has to segregate instructions by the type of operation and then push it in the pipeline..

a very simplistic way to describe both architectures could be in terms of lets say visa application:
amd: runs a single window to process a single visa application. to process an application documents A, B, C will be processed by a single window per applicant
nvidia: maintains separate dedicated windows for processing documents A, B, C.. everyone submits their documents in a common queue, the documents are then separated and reorganized in smaller downstream queues specific to a given document type (separate queues for A, B, C and so on)


Also, the 7900 XTX despite being on 5nm vs the 4090 4nm is 85% the performance at 85% the power consumption.

perf numbers below for timespy extreme
rtx 4090: 19261
7900 xtx: 14688
and rtx 4090 doesnt touch max rated TDPs

and the performance gulf will be even greater for RT apps
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
48,495
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
amd has vector units, nvidia has scalar bunched up functional units called cuda/tensor/rt cores etc... amd has to package instructions using a more complicated scheduler to maintain high utilisation of their vector units, nvidia just has to segregate instructions by the type of operation and then push it in the pipeline..

a very simplistic way to describe both architectures could be in terms of lets say visa application:
amd: runs a single window to process a single visa application. to process an application documents A, B, C will be processed by a single window per applicant
nvidia: maintains separate dedicated windows for processing documents A, B, C.. everybody, submits their documents in a common queue, the documents are then separated and processed by dedicated windows which specialise in processing a specific document




perf numbers below for timespy extreme
rtx 4090: 19261
7900 xtx: 14688
and rtx 4090 doesnt touch max rated TDPs

and the performance gulf will be even greater for RT apps

None of this has anything to do with Superscaling.

8FP.

H100: 3.96 TeraFlops
MI 300X: 5.23 TeraFlops

You're cherry picking a synthetic benchmark.

Multiple Gamers overall performance 4K.

RX 7900 XTX: 100%
RTX 4090 : 122%

Power consumption in gaming.

7900 XTX: 356 watts
RTX 4090: 411 watts (116%)

They are near enough the same performance per watt, again despite the 4090 being on a better lithography node, TSMC 4nm vs TSNC 5nm.

 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2022
Posts
601
Location
Pyongyang
None of this has anything to do with Superscaling.
thats how scalar-ness is interpreted, nvidia has a scalar architecture, amd uses a vector architecture, in a relative sense
H100: 3.96 TeraFlops
MI 300X: 5.23 TeraFlops
this is misleading because:
a. these are theoretical max values, only works for ideal load
b. you havent mentioned the data type which makes those numbers meaningless (fp64/fp32/fp16/tf32/int8.. what?)
c. tdp's are missing: mi300x 750 watt, h100 350w
oh yeah and they are not from the same generation either going by launch dates, maybe you are unaware but nvidia has already launched b200

You're cherry picking a synthetic benchmark.
its the defacto dx12 benchmark
and its hypocritical at the same time, because you have conveniently skipped RT benchmarks
we are talking about the full extent of capabilities of both chips, so it doesnt make much sense to skip RT performance

here data on port royal:
7900 xtx: 15793
rtx 4090: 25692 (+63%)

TSMC 4nm vs TSNC 5nm.
and tsmc 4n is just a custom 5n node for nvidia as has been reported by popular press outlets
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
19 Feb 2007
Posts
14,491
Location
ArcCorp
thats how scalar-ness is interpreted, nvidia has a scalar architecture, amd uses a vector architecture, in a relative sense

this is misleading because:
a. these are theoretical max values, only works for ideal load
b. you havent mentioned the data type which makes those numbers meaningless (fp64/fp32/fp16/tf32/int8.. what?)
c. tdp's are missing: mi300x 750 watt, h100 350w
oh yeah and they are not from the same generation either going by launch dates, maybe you are unaware but nvidia has already launched b200


its the defacto dx12 benchmark
and its hypocritical at the same time, because you have conveniently skipped RT benchmarks
we are talking about the full extent of capabilities of both chips, so it doesnt make much sense to skip RT performance

here data on port royal:
7900 xtx: 15793
rtx 4090: 25692 (+63%)


and tsmc 4n is just a custom 5n node for nvidia as has been reported by popular press outlets

Yeah but listen... pineapple belongs on pizza.
 
Back
Top Bottom