[Rumor, Tweaktown] AMD to launch next-gen Navi graphics cards at E3

[lobz]

Not really GTX970 was best selling maxwell card.700USd/250w tdp 780TI perf for 330usd with more ram and 150w tdp

And the second best was 960. Complete garbage? It's always the hyperbole with you

 

[joesiv]

Hmm... I wish it was cheaper. But of course we should want it cheaper (as we want Nvidias cards to be cheaper). I'll bet AMD doesn't want the demand to be TOO large for these. This product is competing for 7nm supply with all the rest of the CPU business, along with consoles this year too. I would assume many calculations went in to come up with a price that would sell enough, but not drain their supply of 7nm wafers and the bad PR of more product that can't be bought.

It's probably why AMD hasn't intruduced big Navi yet, it would consume a lot of wafers that they don't have allocated.

I also feel like AMD is just "holding the line" with the GPU market, they pushed hard on the CPU front the last couple years, it's just starting to pay dividends as they are paying off the huge debt they owe. With 7nm and 5nm coming online, the timing seems right to push this second product stack (GPU's) hard late this year and next year.

 

[Veradun]

Not sure how do you mean that, the 960 was one of the most popular cards ever.

And this says a lot about consumers' ability to understand what's redacted and what's not.

We have a zero tolerance policy for profanity in the tech sub-forums.

Iron Woode
Super Moderator

 

[SteveGrabowski]

And the second best was 960. Complete garbage? It's always the hyperbole with you

Nah I'm the one who called the 960 complete garbage, and I stand by it since it was barely an improvement over the 760. Putting out a crap 960 really pushed a lot of people to buy the 970.

 

[mohit9206]

$279 would have been acceptable if not for 6gb vram, sorry but i ain't buying a 6gb card for $279(+20% tax) in 2020. It should have been 8 or 12gb.

 

[linkgoron]

And the second best was 960. Complete garbage? It's always the hyperbole with you

The 960 was complete garbage, its popularity only shows how Nvidia's mindshare is so strong vs AMD. (then, as it is now)

 

[lifeblood]

So did Navi 12 ever actually exist or not? I really don't see any room in AMD's stack (low end) for yet another chip.

 

[zinfamous]

Q3 2019 was around when AMD released RX 5700, a new card with a new architecture. That generates interest and a sales bump. And I'm not talking so much about quarter to quarter but total sales AMD vs Nvidia for the past few years.

We're going badly off topic here so I'll just say, imho AMD needs to stop responding to Nvidia 15 months late and start putting new stuff on the table before Nvidia does.

That isn't really informative. What matters is that they were selling product against RTX, taking marketshare from Nvidia in the process, which rejects your hypothesis that people specifically want ray tracing for some reason, even though they may still know that it isn't very functional in current iteration, and that they will choose Nvidia over AMD for this.

The best data that we have to determine this rejects your argument. Nvidia's marketshare would have also had to increase to counter AMD's growth (meaning the market grew, but there was a ~neutral change in consumer choice). The data shows the opposite--AMD took marketshare away from NVidia--this means that more consumers switched to AMD over Nvidia compared to previous quarters.

 

[AtenRa]

So did Navi 12 ever actually exist or not? I really don't see any room in AMD's stack (low end) for yet another chip.

NAVI 12 could only be mobile (5600M) ??

 

[VirtualLarry]

Whee! Just got "RX 5700 space invaders" reading this thread, followed by a VPU recovery. Checking my Adrenaline 2020 settings, seems it forgot my Power Limiter settings again. Sigh.

 

[Head1985]

By AMD own numbers the 5600xt is 11% average faster than 1660super oc.Gigabyte 1660super oc cost on newegg 240usd https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932224?Item=N82E16814932224&Description=1660 super&cm_re=1660_super-_-14-932-224-_-Product
It looks like 1660super will have better price/perf ratio.

Looks like 5600xt should really cost 250usd max.It looks good vs 1660TI, but bad vs 1660super...

 

[lobz]

And this says a lot about consumers' ability to understand what's redacted and what's not.

That doesn't mean what he's saying. He said novideo blatantly released the 960 so the people would buy more 970...

 

[Glo.]

By AMD own numbers the 5600xt is 11% average faster than 1660super oc.Gigabyte 1660super oc cost on newegg 240usd https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932224?Item=N82E16814932224&Description=1660 super&cm_re=1660_super-_-14-932-224-_-Product
It looks like 1660super will have better price/perf ratio.

Looks like 5600xt should really cost 250usd max.It looks good vs 1660TI, but bad vs 1660super...

Check out the footnotes. One GPU was tested with Ryzen CPU, and one with Intel. Which is the very reason why you get the different performance between GTX 1660 Ti and Super, here.

 

[lobz]

Nah I'm the one who called the 960 complete garbage, and I stand by it since it was barely an improvement over the 760. Putting out a crap 960 really pushed a lot of people to buy the 970.

If you wanna see it that way, I can't help it.

 

[mohit9206]

Nah I'm the one who called the 960 complete garbage, and I stand by it since it was barely an improvement over the 760. Putting out a crap 960 really pushed a lot of people to buy the 970.

The 960 was complete garbage, its popularity only shows how Nvidia's mindshare is so strong vs AMD. (then, as it is now)

See if you want to call 960 garbage that's fine and i even agree but only if you agree that 5500XT and 5600XT are garbage as well.

 

[Stuka87]

$279 would have been acceptable if not for 6gb vram, sorry but i ain't buying a 6gb card for $279(+20% tax) in 2020. It should have been 8 or 12gb.

You can't have 8GB of VRAM with a 192bit bus. And 12GB is a total joke for this level of card. The card is not fast enough to run high enough settings or resolutions that would require 8+ GB.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

See if you want to call 960 garbage that's fine and i even agree but only if you agree that 5500XT and 5600XT are garbage as well.

For the prices I think they are. The only halfway decent deal for gpus right now is the RX 5700, and only because it goes on sale for $300 and less pretty often.

 

[beginner99]

You can't have 8GB of VRAM with a 192bit bus. And 12GB is a total joke for this level of card. The card is not fast enough to run high enough settings or resolutions that would require 8+ GB.

This really makes you wonder if yields really are that good? Why cripple the card with a smaller bus and vram? dumb market segmentation. Better to give it 12gb but lower clocks and or less CUs if one thinks it's too close to a 5700.

 

[lifeblood]

That isn't really informative. What matters is that they were selling product against RTX, taking marketshare from Nvidia in the process, which rejects your hypothesis that people specifically want ray tracing for some reason, even though they may still know that it isn't very functional in current iteration, and that they will choose Nvidia over AMD for this.

The best data that we have to determine this rejects your argument. Nvidia's marketshare would have also had to increase to counter AMD's growth (meaning the market grew, but there was a ~neutral change in consumer choice). The data shows the opposite--AMD took marketshare away from NVidia--this means that more consumers switched to AMD over Nvidia compared to previous quarters.

Again, I’m looking at long term trends like the past five years, not so much monthly or quarterly. Also, i'm not saying just RTX, but things like RTX.

Q2 2019 is the first quarter in five years that AMD has passed Nvidia in TOTAL graphics market which includes discreet GPU’s and APU’s. Nvidia has for the past five years outsold AMD in the discreet add in graphic card market. AMD has gained market share from Nvidia in discreet cards recently, but Nvidia still sells more than AMD.

As has been discussed here ad nauseam, it’s not only RTX that gets people to buy Nvidia over better performing & cheaper AMD cards. It’s RTX, and the Halo effect, and G-Sync, and Nvidia sponsored games, and slick advertisements, and PhysX (back when that was a big thing), and dirty tricks, etc. (by dirty tricks I mean everything from Nvidia trying to arm twist OEMs to drop AMD from their gaming card lineups, to unaffiliated anti-amd trolls, things like that).

Regardless of which reason, more people continue to buy Nvidia even when they’re are better performing & cheaper AMD cards.

We’re kinda missing the forest through the trees here. The whole argument is that Nvidia is putting forth shiny new features and AMD is failing to respond in anything near a reasonable amount of time. How valuable those features are can clearly be argued as well as whether its RTX or G-Sync or whatever, but the fact Nvidia continues to outsell AMD in the discreet graphics card market cannot.

AMD released anti-lag and image sharpening improvements which was excellent. They need more of that. They need to quit responding to Nvidia 15 months late (and still counting) and instead make Nvidia respond to them like they did with anti-lag and image sharpening.

 

[lobz]

For the prices I think they are.

By that definition every nvidia GPau is complete garbage, except for the 1650 S.
I'd call this pretty much hyperbolic.

 

[mohit9206]

You can't have 8GB of VRAM with a 192bit bus. And 12GB is a total joke for this level of card. The card is not fast enough to run high enough settings or resolutions that would require 8+ GB.

Just slap 12gb and make some progress in this category of gpu, ryzen 1600 had 6C/12T but games don't really use that many cores but amd still went for it so why not 12gb for $300. Could use more than 8gb in future at 1440p if someone is ok with locking to 30fps.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

By that definition every nvidia GPau is complete garbage, except for the 1650 S.
I'd call this pretty much hyperbolic.

I think it's fair since Nvidia has jacked prices up so far this gen.

 

[Bouowmx]

GDDR6 Deep Dive

GDDR6 standard also allows for in-between capacities, ex. 12 Gb (1.5 GB). So, a 192b bus can use 9 GB, and 256b, 12 GB. Though I don't know of any manufacturer who picked up on these capacities.

 

[Glo.]

Just slap 12gb and make some progress in this category of gpu, ryzen 1600 had 6C/12T but games don't really use that many cores but amd still went for it so why not 12gb for $300. Could use more than 8gb in future at 1440p if someone is ok with locking to 30fps.

Why not?

Because 12 GB's of GDDR6 VRAM would cost 90$ on a 280$ GPU.

Its that bloody simple.

2 GB GDDR6 modules cost 50% more than 1 GB modules. And each 1 GB module costs 10$ with potential of going up by another 10-20% during 2020.

This is also the reason why RTX 2060 Supers costs 50$ more than RTX 2060, BOM is 20-25$ higher, than 2060, and this is the reason why RX 5500 XT 8 GB has 30$ MSRP higher than RX 5500 XT 4 GB with at least 20$ higher BOM.

 

[linkgoron]

See if you want to call 960 garbage that's fine and i even agree but only if you agree that 5500XT and 5600XT are garbage as well.

The 5600XT looks quite decent vs the competition. Both vs the 1660ti and the 2060, which also have 6GB. 6GB is still quite bad at this price point.

The 5500XT is a turd, and I've already stated this in the 5500xt thread (or maybe it was on this thread? Not sure) . It doesnt have one redeeming quality vs the 1650S.