Question Speculation: RDNA3 + CDNA2 Architectures Thread

[uzzi38]

Man I have been dying to make this one for a while now.

First rumours for RDNA3 are here so new thread time!

Just going to start off with this one for now: kopite7kimi on Twitter: "@VideoCardz Ah, I mean a simple mcm design with 10240 cores is not enough. Because the lift from RDNA2 to RDNA3 is much bigger than from RDNA1 to RDNA2. We should expect many big improvements in GFX11. 🤔" / Twitter

 

[Hitman928]

What are you talking about?! The lower end segment is getting performance bars so large they don't even fit the charts! /s
View attachment 91796

PS: when I played X-COM: Terror from the Deep as a kid, I took such great care of one marine that I managed to bring it over 250 health. That marine was my pride and joy until I realized the game was not prepared for a 255+ health unit (probably 8 bit integer). HP went over the limit and become something like 5 or 7. I lost a good man that day

Age catches up with everyone eventually. I can only imagine the physical and mental toll that adds up on a war torn soldier fighting super natural enemies.

 

[itsmydamnation]

What are you talking about?! The lower end segment is getting performance bars so large they don't even fit the charts! /s
View attachment 91796

PS: when I played X-COM: Terror from the Deep as a kid, I took such great care of one marine that I managed to bring it over 250 health. That marine was my pride and joy until I realized the game was not prepared for a 255+ health unit (probably 8 bit integer). HP went over the limit and become something like 5 or 7. I lost a good man that day

its sad that a game from 1994 is still the peak of PC gaming, openxcom is awesome if you havent tried it.

 

[Glo.]

Since this is RDNA3.5 and we don't have RDNA3.5 thread I'll put it here.

Anyone wanna chime in with a guess what RDNA3.5 brings over RDNA3? Does dual issue work properly, and brings perf/WGP upgrade over RDNA3 WGP?

 

[Kepler_L2]

Since this is RDNA3.5 and we don't have RDNA3.5 thread I'll put it here.

Anyone wanna chime in with a guess what RDNA3.5 brings over RDNA3? Does dual issue work properly, and brings perf/WGP upgrade over RDNA3 WGP?

Architecturally there are only minor improvements, the problem with RDNA3 (that is hopefully fixed in RDNA3.5) was the physical design.

 

[gdansk]

My uneducated guess is

1. "fixed" clock rates
2. some new SALU float instructions

 

[TESKATLIPOKA]

Anyone wanna chime in with a guess what RDNA3.5 brings over RDNA3? Does dual issue work properly, and brings perf/WGP upgrade over RDNA3 WGP?

Dual issue is working properly as shown in Cyberpunk for example.
If the game is not optimized for It, then of course It won't work correctly or at all.

Maybe "fixed" clocks If we are lucky.

 

[Aapje]

Dual issue is working properly as shown in Cyberpunk for example.
If the game is not optimized for It, then of course It won't work correctly or at all.

The issue is more that the AMD driver is often not very good at using dual issue when possible:

Microbenchmarking AMD’s RDNA 3 Graphics Architecture

Editor’s Note (6/14/2023): We have a new article that reevaluates the cache latency of Navi 31, so please refer to that article for some new latency data. RDNA 3 represents the third iteratio…

chipsandcheese.com

 

[SolidQ]

270-300$ would be ok, otherwise no

 

[Timorous]

270-300$ would be ok, otherwise no

It will get to $300 once the 6700XT stock has dried up.

Halo Infinite just shows that you can't take FPS charts at face value due to the massive IQ differences that can occur when a game resorts to texture swapping rather than simply tanking the frame rate due to insufficient VRAM.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

7600xt is looking at a ~10% bump over the 7600.

More than I expected, but not nearly enough for the extra asking price of $60...

 

[blckgrffn]

I totally forgot about It. Yes, 1080Ti still had the SLI connector.

$329 supposedly. @jpiniero was faster.
Thanks for saying what I wanted to say.

Yet it should be less embarrassing that the RX460 was? I was shocked at how pedestrian & disapointing that card was. I am sure there is no great analogy here, like a 8GB RX470 or something that was very usable but that 8GB was very conditional, its greatest value came from making them $400 when sold to miners.

That said, I think the issue is going to be lazy console ports. Do we think more or less games will be like Forza 5? If more, than getting to 12-16GB is rather important and likely worth getting to the $300+ level where 12 & 16 GB cards start to be available.

In the meantime, the 6700XT looks like its still the better call, which is a bit of a bummer. But not surprising.

 

[MrTeal]

7600xt is looking at a ~10% bump over the 7600.

More than I expected, but not nearly enough for the extra asking price of $60...

Even that is probably more than the actual difference, since the Sapphire card tested has a 3% OC from stock specs. Turn up the sliders to equalize clock speed between the two and it's probably close to a wash.

 

[Timorous]

Even that is probably more than the actual difference, since the Sapphire card tested has a 3% OC from stock specs. Turn up the sliders to equalize clock speed between the two and it's probably close to a wash.

Until 8GB runs out of vram which happens at 1080p and more often at 1440p.

Also if more games do like Halo Infinite and tank IQ to keep the frame rate up then the pure numbers are not necessarily reliable.

 

[jpiniero]

Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse Review

The Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse is priced at the AMD MSRP of $330, offering 16 GB of VRAM for future-proofing. It comes equipped with an excellent dual-slot cooler, providing good noise levels and temperatures.

www.techpowerup.com

Quite a bit faster in Ratchet and Clank... it is true that GPU decompression doesn't have to do as much with more VRAM.

 

[TESKATLIPOKA]

RX 7600XTR 16GB has higher performance increase than expected, but still not worth the price and very bad power consumption. ~197-200W ->41-45W higher than 7600XT 8GB.

 

[MrTeal]

Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse Review

The Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse is priced at the AMD MSRP of $330, offering 16 GB of VRAM for future-proofing. It comes equipped with an excellent dual-slot cooler, providing good noise levels and temperatures.

www.techpowerup.com

Quite a bit faster in Ratchet and Clank... it is true that GPU decompression doesn't have to do as much with more VRAM.

Those results are pretty nuts. The 8GB cards don't entirely fall apart; the 8GB 3070 is still faster than the 7600XT at 1080P and actually pulls ahead at 4k by quite a bit. The difference between the 7600 XT and 7600, and between the 4060 Ti 16GB and 8GB is huge though even at 1080p.

 

[blckgrffn]

The Last Of Us wasn't the best port but you can tell it likes memory, especially at 1440p and up where the 7600XT has a ~50% performance advantage:

Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse Review

The Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse is priced at the AMD MSRP of $330, offering 16 GB of VRAM for future-proofing. It comes equipped with an excellent dual-slot cooler, providing good noise levels and temperatures.

www.techpowerup.com

If that's a sizable portion of future console ports, the extra memory will easily be worth it. (IMO)

It looks like the 3060 is just on the cusp of having enough GPU power to need the memory. I suppose that makes it a well balanced card. The 4060Ti at 12 GB is such a glaring hole... should never have been 8 & 16 GB variants. The way the 16GB hangs with the 2080Ti is my main take away from these graphs What a "sweet" $400 card with a 192 bit bus that would have been.

 

[Aapje]

If that's a sizable portion of future console ports, the extra memory will easily be worth it. (IMO)

It looks like the 3060 is just on the cusp of having enough GPU power to need the memory. I suppose that makes it a well balanced card. The 4060Ti at 12 GB is such a glaring hole...

The 6700 XT just looks so good compared to all of these. The 7600 XT is too weak for 16 GB and with the 6700 XT you get the proper trade-off, more power and 12 GB should be sufficient for that level.

 

[blckgrffn]

The 6700 XT just looks so good compared to all of these. The 7600 XT is too weak for 12 GB and with the 6700 XT you get the proper trade-off, more power and 12 GB should be sufficient for that level.

Exactly, I agree and I mentioned that above. Great minds and all that

I guess maybe the 7700XT will someday drop into that slot? The 6700XT could be a card they make for quite a while, however, it's a mature card at this point. I always preferred the 6800 - the wide and "slow" approach - but I would guess margins are better on the 6700XT on all fronts....

Is the 7700XT/7800XT missing from those TPU graphs on purpose? seems like they would be very relevant to the discussion. I suppose I'll have to dig into that review more and see what they say....

 

[Aapje]

I guess maybe the 7700XT will someday drop into that slot?

It's probably just too expensive to make and the semi-failure of RDNA3 means that it is not even competitive with the predecessor. So if they fix RDNA4, I expect the 7700 XT to quickly disappear.

 

[SteinFG]

Does anyone think N44 will at least match N22? Current speculation is that it's a 32CU 96bit or 128bit die.

 

[Timorous]

Does anyone think N44 will at least match N22? Current speculation is that it's a 32CU 96bit or 128bit die.

If it clocks high enough and has enough bandwidth sure. The 7600XT is not exactly a mile away and with an OC to 3Ghz with 2500 ram it gets pretty close. If RDNA 4 can do 3.5Ghz on the smaller dies it should be somewhere between 6700XT and 7700XT.

 

[Aapje]

7600 XT on N5 with 3 Ghz and 12 GB GDDR7 on a 128 bit bus should beat the 6700 XT, I would think.

 

[AtenRa]

270-300$ would be ok, otherwise no

199$ for the 8GB and 249$ for the 16GB would be ok, current prices are a joke.
AMD currently selling 6700XT 12GB at the same price as the slower 7600XT 16GB, priceless

Also,

With the 4080 Super MSRP at $999 , 7900XTX should drop to $849 to even be relevant

 

[Rigg]

199$ for the 8GB and 249$ for the 16GB would be ok, current prices are a joke.
AMD currently selling 6700XT 12GB at the same price as the slower 7600XT 16GB, priceless

Also,

With the 4080 Super MSRP at $999 , 7900XTX should drop to $849 to even be relevant

I agree that this is probably about where they should be priced given their relative performance. I could understand them being $225 and $275 until the remaining 6000 series stock clears out but I don't really see very much incentive to buy them at the MSRP. I hope ultimately they end up at $200ish and $250ish later in the year and will be a good option in that price range. When it launched, I thought the 7600 would already be around that price at this point in it's life cycle but 6000 stock has hung around longer than I thought it would. I think official cuts to $850/$700 for the 7900XTX/XT would make them really good options. The 7900XT at $750 looks pretty competitive next to the 4070 ti super already. It's been pretty easy to get one at that price for months.

It was really dumb to even release this card right now when you still have the 6700/6750XT readily available for around the same price. It also makes the 7700XT look even worse with it's 12GB of VRAM and $450 price tag. I guess this is to be expected with AMD launch pricing at this point. You'd think after all the positive buzz (and presumably strong sales) the 7800XT received (in stark contrast to the overpriced 7700XT's icy cold reception) would have influenced them to have better launch MSRP's. It appears that was wishful thinking and they'd rather overprice new cards to sell old cards. How AMD is this oblivious to where the market thinks their cards should be priced is beyond me.