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

[Nate75]

The RT performance of the 7900 XT is decent enough to run heavy RT with upscaling at 1440p. It most certainly is not “crap” even at that current level.

A 7900 XTX is even better and a 45% uplift in that level of RT is going to be a very viable 4K mid range GPU similar to an RTX 4080 RT performance. The only potential issue will be where AMD price it.

All the people on 7900 XT or “mid range” RTX 4000 will not be remotely excited or hyped for the 8800 XT, but they not who AMD are aiming at. If you look at this from a perspective of those who held on to RDNA 2 and 3000 series Nvidia cards, they will finally have a decent upgrade path if the price is right. That’s who are more excited at this level of GPU for the right price.

Not hyped or exciting, just a potentially good GPU if the price is right.

Yeh I'm hoping this is the right fit from a 6700 (non XT) for me.

But due to the actual amount of gaming I do thesedays I want to see a price point whereby it will be hard to say no. But I'm not hoping really as those days are gone.

I guess more realistically, for me at least, it will be the effect the card has on the 7800 / 7900 etc.

 

[Phixsator]

Yeh I'm hoping this is the right fit from a 6700 (non XT) for me.

But due to the actual amount of gaming I do thesedays I want to see a price point whereby it will be hard to say no. But I'm not hoping really as those days are gone.

I guess more realistically, for me at least, it will be the effect the card has on the 7800 / 7900 etc.

Considering how happy I've been going from a 6700XT to a 6950XT, I think that a 8800XT will be a stellar upgrade for you as long as its priced in a consumer friendly manner.

 

[Grim5]

Reference vs AIB Modela?

Quite likely to be reference, as AMD tend to launch with reference only on day one and AIB comes few days later? Nvidia has now started doing that as well on the most recent launch with RTX4000

 

[ICDP]

Considering how happy I've been going from a 6700XT to a 6950XT, I think that a 8800XT will be a stellar upgrade for you as long as its priced in a consumer friendly manner.

I went from 6700 XT to 7900 XT on my son’s PC and it was a massive uplift. His 7900 XT is doing 1440p perfectly, even with decent levels of RT. The people giving off about RDNA3 being bad are just ignorant to be brutally honest. The problem at launch with RDNA3 was the price, not the actual tech. Raster was great, RT was average but OK and certainly useable at typical resolution.

I’m not seeing any hype for the 8800 XT, just hope that it’s a decent mid range GPU for a decent price. It is literally people hoping it gives current upper mid tier GPU performance for a few tiers lower price.

Let’s hope AMD don’t do the usual eye rolling nonsense with a terrible launch strategy on RDNA 4.

 

[uscool]

Reference vs AIB Modela?

I recall 5700xt reference was 225w odd and high end AIB 300w +

With rumours going off seems to be 2 sets of people here the 7900xt/xtx / mid range 40 series not wanting it to be as good for less money and another 6000 / 30 series wanting it to be good upgrade for the money

 

[JediFragger]

I think that a 8800XT will be a stellar upgrade for you as long as its priced in a consumer friendly manner.

The dude bought a 6700, probably in a sale. His budget isn't going to be enough, like he says a well-price s/h 7800XT around 300ish would serve him well whilst not spending more than he thinks is necessary.

 

[StarShock]

As others have said, pricing is gonna be important here, even if it meets the top end of the rumoured performance here, you can already get a 7900 xt, which is just about there for ~£600 so would need to be less than that to even matter a tiny bit. Otherwise it's effectively just more of the same again

 

[ICDP]

As others have said, pricing is gonna be important here, even if it meets the top end of the rumoured performance here, you can already get a 7900 xt, which is just about there for ~£600 so would need to be less than that to even matter a tiny bit. Otherwise it's effectively just more of the same again

Exactly this. Even if we low ball by ~15% for the typical marketing BS. That could mean ~7900 XT performance with a 30% - 40% RT uplift and that will make for a very decent GPU at £500 - £550 (max). And that is easily achievable from a technical standpoint, it’s just how AMD price it.

 

[Nate75]

The dude bought a 6700, probably in a sale. His budget isn't going to be enough, like he says a well-price s/h 7800XT around 300ish would serve him well whilst not spending more than he thinks is necessary.

Yeh I paid £330 for the 6700 at the time. It's one of those, as in if the card is outstanding and not hugely expensive (to me!) then I will "find" the money.

If not a 7800XT for ~£300 would do me very nicely.

Wait and see I guess

 

[rare]

Otherwise it's effectively just more of the same again

I’m concerned this is going to be the case. 7800 was already a 6800. And AMD have history with this, look at the 280/380/480/580…

 

[gpuerrilla]

This is true shatters the latest rumours

The latest rumours claimed 25% less TDP than 7900xtx, which would be 270w, but Seasonic says it's 220w. So if the leaker couldn't even get the TDP right then what else did they get wrong?

Wasn't this the same when Ada was launching though and massive PSU ratings and tdp of the 4090 was exaggerated then when it released it was much lower than the 600w rubbish?

 

[ICDP]

I’m concerned this is going to be the case. 7800 was already a 6800. And AMD have history with this, look at the 280/380/480/580…

Wow, so much wrong in one single sentence.

There was no such thing as a 7800. It was a 7800 XT and was about on par with the 6800 XT (not the non XT). It was also about 25% cheaper at release MSRP. So the name was a problem, but not the price.

So by your “logic” the 8800 XT will be sub £500 on release and match the 7900 XT. Wow, you are optimistic… you might want to reign in your expectations

 

[Grim5]

Wasn't this the same when Ada was launching though and massive PSU ratings and tdp of the 4090 was exaggerated then when it released it was much lower than the 600w rubbish?

So then the 220w stated by seasonic would be exaggerated if it followed the same logic, so the 8800xt is probably like a 150w gpu then?

This is where the 600w comes from: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-founders-edition/41.html

If you install an overclocking tool you can manually set the power limit to 600w.
The card never uses that much but it lets you set that as a soft limit

 

[gpuerrilla]

So then the 220w stated by seasonic would be exaggerated if it followed the same logic, so the 8800xt is probably like a 150w gpu then?

I never mentioned seasonic, but the element about what people think they "could pull" is what your missing when I mentioned the exaggerated. The seasonic figure would sound about right.

 

[rare]

There was no such thing as a 7800. It was a 7800 XT and was about on par with the 6800 XT (not the non XT). It was also about 25% cheaper at

Well obviously - I just assumed we all knew what

I meant a 7800 XT was already very much a 6800 XT in terms of performance. I’m concerned we are looking at a card that is going to be in a similar ball park again. Not really moving the needle much.

 

[Murphy]

As others have said, pricing is gonna be important here, even if it meets the top end of the rumoured performance here, you can already get a 7900 xt, which is just about there for ~£600 so would need to be less than that to even matter a tiny bit. Otherwise it's effectively just more of the same again

To drill down into that some more it's not so much the pricing because we've seen some people are willing to pay whatever, it's the price to performance ratio.

If, and this applies to all GPU makers, you give people 10% more performance for 10% more money people rightly turn their noses up at it (excluding the very top).

There needs to be a return to the days when you'd get more performance for a similar outlay, if it remains more money for more performance there's little to no reason to buy the newer stuff.

 

[ICDP]

Well obviously - I just assumed we all knew what

I meant a 7800 XT was already very much a 6800 XT in terms of performance. I’m concerned we are looking at a card that is going to be in a similar ball park again. Not really moving the needle much.

The problem is you forget that the needle did move, even on the earlier 380/480/580 GPUs you mentioned. If the performance stays the same the cost has to drop and previous history shows ~30% - 40% better performance at the same price, or the same performance for 25% - 30% less cost. So in each of those GPUs the price/perf needle did indeed budge.

Naming is irrelevant, only price/perf matters.

So we either get a ~30% -40% faster GPU in raster and about 50% - 70% faster in RT than the current 7800 XT, or the same performance for ~30% less cost. The most logical scenario is a faster GPU for the same ~$500 - $550 price point.

So not great technically compared to already existing GPUs, but a significant reduction in price. So if accurate (and I stress if), then the needle will indeed move significantly. At least for the majority of gamers.

 

[Troezar]

A 200-250W GPU with enough grunt to run 1440p at high settings and $500 would sell well IMO. Lots of people in that market, or thinking of moving to it. Not so my many needing 4K power.

 

[Owenb]

A 200-250W Nvidia GPU with enough grunt to run 1440p at high settings and $500 would sell well IMO. Lots of people in that market, or thinking of moving to it. Not so my many needing 4K power.

Fixed that for you!
It's pretty rare to see an AMD card sell well. Usually it only happens after a big Nvidia misstep which we haven't seen.

 

[tommybhoy]

Regardless It will be close enough, I haven't looked but have we ever had new gen 70 tier that never matched or been way behind previous 80 tier ?

3070 was introduced to the world by NV as 'faster than a 2080Ti'...

Fast forward to the end of 2024-even the 1080ti can run higher settings than a 3070@1080p.

The 4070, can be faster/slower dependant on the settings, imo, intentionally designed so that it can't comprehensively always match a 10Gb 3080-never mind be faster-100% of the time.

4070 v's the 12Gb 3080, it's going to lose out even less to the 4070-surprisingly(not really), the 12Gb 3080 was mia in most 4070 reviews that relied on DLSS3 to showcase fps 'performance gains'.

Edit, from personal experience going 1070>2070>3070>4070.

4070-compared with my 3080 in the 'faster' system.