sonomamashine
Member
They can still skip 5nm to 3nm to compete against Nvidia, till they manage to build a new architecture that could flip the coin for AMD.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Unreleased AMD Radeon RX GPU Shows Up in OpenVR Benchmark & Outperforms The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti by Up To 17%
- Thread starter sonomamashine
- Start date
- News Rumor
VFXVeteran
Banned
You guys are way too optimistic. If your hero is down today, you have to come up with some "future" where they catch up and win.
sonomamashine
Member
You misunderstood what i said, i do agree with you that AMD is playing catch up and that big navi wont suffice to compete against Ampere, now to be able to compete on their next generation GPU (rdna3) or whatever they call it, they need to built a new architecture more power efficient and skip 5nm to 3nm to be able to COMPETE at the high end, GET IT !You guys are way too optimistic. If your hero is down today, you have to come up with some "future" where they catch up and win.
CyberPanda
Banned
Ampere will poop on it
thelastword
Banned
These are rumors sure, but usually these reports, especially benches don't lie, they come from legit tests...…...Yet there is room to be optimistic......NV has always done better in VR than AMD, so the fact that an AMD card beats NV's best card a $1200 card btw by 17% in VR is extremely optimistic......These bodes well for traditional games, where NAVI has shown it's a force to be reckoned with only 40 CU's......With RDNA 2.0 increase in IPC, it being more efficient and reports of it being twice faster than Navi 1, a 64 CU, 72CU and 80CU cards are going to slay and be the Yojimbo trio of GPU's later this year......
Well would be great to have some competition in super/ultra high end segment, but as soon as nvidia brings out 7nm this won't be a good score anymore for ultra high end.
AMD needed 7nm to be on par (almost) with nvidia in high end marked. So I hope they can make it and if AMD is lucky, nvidia needs a bit more time to get the 7nm jump done.
AMD needed 7nm to be on par (almost) with nvidia in high end marked. So I hope they can make it and if AMD is lucky, nvidia needs a bit more time to get the 7nm jump done.
VFXVeteran
Banned
But you are happy about AMDs newest card that is way late to the party. Nvidia is already past Ampere and we know that will kick AMDs latest card. I get the milestones it's making but Nvidia has already made those milestones like over a year ago. We see a new generation GPU from Nvidia every 2yrs without fail. Each generation is always better/faster/more expensive than AMDs best. Their RDNA 2.0 chip is only now competing with 2080Ti. We know nothing of their chips past RDNA 2.0 but we know Ampere will destroy RDNA 2.0. So I'm not understanding the cheerfulness. AMD is still behind.
kiphalfton
Member
17% improvement is just about what I would expect of the rtx 3070 or rtx 3080, over the rtx 2080 ti, based on past trends (i.e. the subsequent generation of the xx70 graphics card is slightly better or on par with the previous gen xx80 ti graphics card). That means if nvidia release around the same time, this AMD graphics card would be dead in the water.
Last edited:
Elektro Demon
Banned
I don't even know where to begin.
OT: Hell yeah, I'm excited. I just hope it draws less power then my current vega64. That thing is really hot.
Insane Metal
Member
Sell them all then.
thelastword
Banned
Nvidia has enjoyed the high end for a while, but you pay for it too......AMD has been happy to put better low to mid end cards.....RX 570/580 were the best value GPU's in their section for years, 5600XT is going to take over mid tier and 5700XT is the best valued product in it's range....
The really top end cards is an area AMD shied away from since GPU people defended the 1650 over the RX 570, people would rather buy a 1050ti over an RX 570 and 580 because they drank the coolaid…..AMD would not take a gamble on really high end cards and face a bigger loss....Now people are more informed, Ryzen has made people do a bit more research and notice AMD a bit more, especially since they went to town and developed a really strong and fast architecture in RDNA, they finally have the foundation to build and iterate on their GPU technology and that is exactly what they are doing.....The company as a whole is doing much better financially, so they have a lot more cash to invest in RTG too, and it's clearly showing.....
RDNA 2.0 sounds really impressive and AMD is poised to take Nvidia on in all GPU tiers...….You should be happy competition is coming, I fear just like intel, NV fans see the writing on the wall, just go back a few years back when AMD announced and launched Ryzen and notice the arrogance of Intel fans and all their talks of (impossibilities)...Don't forget AMD has the console business, which is a key strategy....These RDNA 2 GPU's are also in next gen consoles, so games will run better on Big Navi over Nvidia too......
The real fake news in all of this is Nvidia's promise of 50% improvement over Turing with Ampere, I can say right now that's not happening, this is not voodoo......Nvidia promised big improvements from Pascal to Turing too......Where the biggest improvement was actually how much more money you had to fork out for Turing over Pascal and into Nvidia's pockets....
thelastword
Banned
This is in VR where Nvidia always excelled by a good margin......The margin in traditional games should be more substantial...…...
Ascend
Member
People never say that a certain nVidia card will be moot when a faster AMD card is released afterwards. AMD is always considered 'late' in such a case. But if AMD releases this before the 3080Ti, it's somehow still considered moot...
Boggles my mind... It really shows inherent bias, and even worse, it seems that most are not even aware of it.
That's exactly what people were saying regarding Intel CPUs and AMD CPUs.
Last edited:
Ascend
Member
Bold statement, considering we don't know the most important thing; Pricing.
VFXVeteran
Banned
A couple of things:
There is no official verification that RDNA 2 is in the next-gen consoles. Don't assume that.
I believe the 50% improvement. It may not be across the board, but if it's even focused on the RT cores, then that'll be huge as devs begin to harness the capabilities of ray-traced scenes.
Yes, Nvidia is more expensive but you get what you pay for in this regard. The cards may not be worth $1,200 but they are worth close to it. It's about the entire ecosystem and not just the GPU itself. Their drivers, CUDA language, tight integration with Windows/Visual Studio, etc.. all of that plays a role in that high price. I look forward to getting the 3080Ti or Titan 3x so my development will use the best of the best out there.
There is no official verification that RDNA 2 is in the next-gen consoles. Don't assume that.
I believe the 50% improvement. It may not be across the board, but if it's even focused on the RT cores, then that'll be huge as devs begin to harness the capabilities of ray-traced scenes.
Yes, Nvidia is more expensive but you get what you pay for in this regard. The cards may not be worth $1,200 but they are worth close to it. It's about the entire ecosystem and not just the GPU itself. Their drivers, CUDA language, tight integration with Windows/Visual Studio, etc.. all of that plays a role in that high price. I look forward to getting the 3080Ti or Titan 3x so my development will use the best of the best out there.
VFXVeteran
Banned
It's considered moot because it's entering a zone that was held by Nvidia for nearly 2 yrs uncontested. Nvidia is on schedule as usual. I think AMD is just a generation behind. Could they make it up? Possibly.
There's always bias. Between GPUs, consoles, games, game companies, etc.. nothing wrong with being biased.
Intel slept way too long and relaxed with their tech. Now they are going to have to readjust to the competition. Nvidia doesn't rest and let 2-3generations pass. They are always releasing every 2yrs.
Ascend
Member
That would make sense, except, if we look at the past, the same thing happened with the R9 290X. At its time of release, it was the fastest card around, and cheaper... But, everyone wait for nVidia. No one said nVidia was late. And that wasn't long after the disaster that was Fermi (which still sold well btw).
Bias, especially in extremities like we see with gamers, is literally dangerous. And even in 'moderate' amounts, it allows for the price-gouging that we see nVidia doing over the years. Technically, being biased by itself is not wrong, but, it does take away the capability to be rational and thus make proper judgments and purchasing decisions.
This is true. But independent from the technology aspect, there is a strategic aspect as well. AMD's strategy with CPUs changed while Intel's stayed the same. That change is also what gave AMD the advantage. It seems to be changing with GPUs as well.
Their releases right now have more to do with what they deliberately want, rather than releasing things based on desperation. If this was the old AMD they would've tried rushing a 2080Ti competitor out the door just to be present in the market, just like what happened with the R9 390 cards and the Fury line. The last 'desperate' release was the Radeon VII. But it seems they aren't really chasing nVidia anymore. They're simply doing their own thing.
Sadly, it's being downplayed. If nVidia had anti-lag or a Radeon boost equivalent and AMD had ray tracing, everyone would be flocking behind those technologies and ignoring ray tracing. And that is why I have a problem with bias. Because ultimately, blind consumerism harms all of us. Look at what is happening with Freesync vs G-Sync right now. Prime example.
Last edited:
slade
Member
Because the faster AMD card is late to the party by about 2 years. At that point, it doesn't matter what they do except to their fans.
VFXVeteran
Banned
Yea.. pretty much really nothing to say. Whatever card gives me the fastest performance, better drivers, and excellent support is what I'm going for. Has nothing to do with being a cheerleader.
Ascend
Member
So the whole "fastest performance money can buy" is basically only relevant when nVidia is on top. Got it.
VFXVeteran
Banned
I own both.
VFXVeteran
Banned
Lower resolution.
magnumpy
Member
AMD has all the contracts for consoles. I mean except for nintendo, for whatever that's worth. don't get me wrong, AMD and Nvidia are both profitable companies with good future prospects.
Last edited:
Phase
Member
Yeah this is how I'm leaning. I'd love for it to be true though. More competition the better for us all.
slade
Member
When they give you that performance years before anyone else, shrug, yes.
I mean, do you need a hug or something. Your argument is some kind of stupid, Baby Huey, 'nobody wants to play with me,' spiel.
Heinrich
Banned
how much time do you have For gaming? Lol
hybrid_birth
Gold Member
llien
Member
Is it "buthurt on The Leather Man's behalf" syndrome?
Please remind me, whether 5500 or 2600s are new cards.
When that happens, I hope AMD prices it so that people who want new AMD cards only to get cheaper NV cards, won't see a major change.
Say same price, but 5% better perf.
Last edited:
Ascend
Member
The only thing that's stupid is people's blind loyalty to nVidia.
pawel86ck
Banned
When VFXVeteran says he doubt something then I already know I will be positively surprised
.
Last edited:
llien
Member
etp_1
Member
I hope AMD just leaves the high-end sector as it is. Some people want AMD to "compete" only to have cheaper green cards...no interest to buy red at all. Some "fine" examples around here already.
Let nvidia gauge the fools even more with higher prices.
General Lee
Member
Unfortunately when it comes to GPUs, Nvidia tends to be the only company that delivers. AMD only comes once in a blue moon to offer slightly better value in mainstream segments if you only play the mainstream titles and review benchmarks that their driver is optimized for. There's next to nothing indicating this is changing from AMD's end any time soon.
While this rumor kinda sounds promising, if this GPU comes some time in H2 and goes right against Nvidia's next gen, suddenly it'll just be another 5700XT at best, slightly better value with inferior feature set, driver support and power consumption. If the consoles actually come anywhere close providing 10 TF class performance for $500, they stand a far bigger chance of bringing down price in the PC GPU market, since no mainstream user in their sane mind will pay $2000 for a PC that'll achieve the same, even if they'd like mods or other things only PC truly offers.
AMD needs an actual architectural miracle to catch up to Nvidia, and the way they drag on introducing new GPUs doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. It's hard to believe that they'll be superior in ray-tracing, or VR performance like this rumor suggests. They couldn't even update their new 7nm mobile APUs with Navi gen and still use the old Vega mobile parts, in 2020. They lack the resources to keep up to date in the full graphics product stack, and have only offered single notable product launches per year. They are forced to concentrate on volume segments since that's the only thing they can keep up with, price sensitive mainstream users with mainstream needs. Anything beyond that they've got nothing but nope and bubkis.
On a more optimistic note, maybe if the stars align, AMD might get some sort of advantage with next gen consoles customization, and at the same time they actually manage to make Navi 2.0 significantly more efficient than Navi is right now. Even then, it would merely force Nvidia to actually compete with their full stack rather than just milking even the segments AMD is supposedly competitive in. Betting on this happening will most likely end up just as sure as AMD getting major benefit from being in PS4/Xbox One, which ended up being the gen where AMD dropped the GPU ball severely despite every multiplatform studio having to utilize their architecture in consoles. Really though, next gen consoles are the real problem for Nvidia, since their subsidized prices will seriously make all of the more casual audience seriously question the value of a massively overpriced Nvidia rig if it'll only provide relatively modest improvement.
While this rumor kinda sounds promising, if this GPU comes some time in H2 and goes right against Nvidia's next gen, suddenly it'll just be another 5700XT at best, slightly better value with inferior feature set, driver support and power consumption. If the consoles actually come anywhere close providing 10 TF class performance for $500, they stand a far bigger chance of bringing down price in the PC GPU market, since no mainstream user in their sane mind will pay $2000 for a PC that'll achieve the same, even if they'd like mods or other things only PC truly offers.
AMD needs an actual architectural miracle to catch up to Nvidia, and the way they drag on introducing new GPUs doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. It's hard to believe that they'll be superior in ray-tracing, or VR performance like this rumor suggests. They couldn't even update their new 7nm mobile APUs with Navi gen and still use the old Vega mobile parts, in 2020. They lack the resources to keep up to date in the full graphics product stack, and have only offered single notable product launches per year. They are forced to concentrate on volume segments since that's the only thing they can keep up with, price sensitive mainstream users with mainstream needs. Anything beyond that they've got nothing but nope and bubkis.
On a more optimistic note, maybe if the stars align, AMD might get some sort of advantage with next gen consoles customization, and at the same time they actually manage to make Navi 2.0 significantly more efficient than Navi is right now. Even then, it would merely force Nvidia to actually compete with their full stack rather than just milking even the segments AMD is supposedly competitive in. Betting on this happening will most likely end up just as sure as AMD getting major benefit from being in PS4/Xbox One, which ended up being the gen where AMD dropped the GPU ball severely despite every multiplatform studio having to utilize their architecture in consoles. Really though, next gen consoles are the real problem for Nvidia, since their subsidized prices will seriously make all of the more casual audience seriously question the value of a massively overpriced Nvidia rig if it'll only provide relatively modest improvement.
thelastword
Banned
Here you go, you believe the 50% Nvidia said no questions asked, no graphs, nothing, but a leak which shows a benchmark, not from AMD mind you, so you would assume bias, so no reason to lie, but you have doubts over such a card beating the 2080ti......I think I heard the narrative sometime ago that AMD would never have a card to beat Nvidia.....So this fightback is essentially the position I knew NV fans would take when AMD did.....
As for LTTP, that means nothing, you start at some point...…..2070 is not much faster than a 1080ti, 2060 is not much stronger than a 1070Ti, 1650 is weaker than a 570...….I'm sure you have no issues with that, yet AMD who purposefully had no reason to compete at the $1000+ pricepoint due to Nvidia mindshare has said we now have some cash now, much more mindshare and trust from consumers, we will invest much more in RTG and compete with Nvidia on all tiers, why so defensive, why all the fightback, you are going to be buying Nvidia anyway and Nvidia is clearly infallible...…..And you doubt it's fastest card will ever be beat? NV is perched right?
It doesn't matter how LTTP a high end AMD card is, the fact is they never targeted or were competing in that bracket before and now they are......If their 5600Xt and 5700XT is anything to go by, they will dominate on Price/Perf on the extreme high end just the same.....And from there, iterating on their high end will be much easier going forward.....
Yeah, remember when 5700 was faster than a 2060 which are about the same price, 5700 was even cheaper, NV fans said, RTX on 3 games and a demo is all we need (how about how they propped up DLSS), who speaks of DLSS anymore, I'm sure people are saying here's a term I've not heard in a long time...So they try their utmost to minimize the performance advantages of AMD hardware over NV every time and exaggerate that of Nvidia over AMD...….
5700> 2060 = it doesn't matter
5700XT> 2060S/2070 = it doesn't matter
5700XT < 2070S by 3% = This is huge , even though the 5700XT is much cheaper, especially against the Founder's Editiion.
5700XT vs 2080ti = This is huge AMD just can't compete with Nvidia, yet, the price on the 2080ti is about 3 times the cost of a 5700XT
And the one that has baffled me for ages.....
RX 570 > 1650 by a huge margin = 1650 only needs 75 watts, no power connector necessary, that's more important to gamers than performance, how much have you saved on your electricity bill lately?
Ascend
Member
When I read that first sentence, I already knew the whole wall of text was going to include a bunch of BS. But let's humor you...
REALLY? What do you define value as? Because if we define value as price/performance ratio, AMD is practically almost always ahead. But let me guess. The definition of value changes depending on the advantage that nVidia has at that moment, right?
Inferior feature set? Ah yes. Ray tracing. The feature available in a handful of games that in practice is pretty much useless. Where's nVidia's equivalent of Radeon Chill and Radeon Boost? And remember concurrent Async Compute? Did you argue that nVidia had an inferior feature set back then? Yeah, you didn't, didn't you?
And why are you acting like the 5700XT is bad? The 5700 series cards are the best value for money for EVERYTHING above $300. And anyone that buys something else either has money to waste and doesn't care about value, or is simply ignorant, or is an nVidia fanboy.
And that is exactly what is going to happen. You can start looking at the specs of the XSX.
Clock for clock, the performance of RDNA 1.0 is pretty much the same compared to Turing. People are somehow forgetting how small the 5700XT chip really is.
AMD dragging on is your opinion based on the perspective of seeing nVidia flooding the market with a bunch of useless cards as default.
And we can thank people that still buy nVidia when AMD releases competitive products for that.
That was the whole focus of RDNA 2.0 from the beginning.
'Merely' force nVidia to actually compete? Why merely though? Isn't that what we want? I wouldn't want AMD to completely dominate the GPU market either. Not in the long term anyway. Look at AMD's CES presentation. They already started with deceitful marketing slides on the CPU side, simply because they are ahead. The ultimate goal is balance, and well, at this point things are as disproportionate as it can be, and ultimately, we suffer for it. And yes, it's our own fault for buying into nonsense, the latest example being ray tracing, which was obviously used to jack up prices way beyond what is necessary.
And that's a good thing.
Last edited:
llien
Member
The 2080Ti results referenced are outliers, likely from heavily OCed cards.
Actual gap is about 30%, whatever mysterious card that is.
With perfect scaling and on 7nm DUV (which is inferior to EUV), AMD would need a 422mm2 chip to have that perf.
If on 7nm EUV (7nm+), it would be about 340mm2.
Actual gap is about 30%, whatever mysterious card that is.
With perfect scaling and on 7nm DUV (which is inferior to EUV), AMD would need a 422mm2 chip to have that perf.
If on 7nm EUV (7nm+), it would be about 340mm2.
KungFucius
King Snowflake
So nobody buys XX70 or XX80s? If AMD can compete against the 3080 it could lead to better prices. It could even lead to better 3080Ti prices as nVidia would have to optimize the it pricing structure to push the idiots like me that tend to buy the more expensive product if it is not too much more expensive than the model below it. Competition is badly needed in this space. A decent 4k card that is not over 1000 bucks has a place in the market.
Another opportunity they have is with timing. A lot of people want a new GPU for Cyberpunk. nVidia is likely going to miss that window. If AMD can put out one of their big Navis in time to capture that, they will be the only new thing in the water. There is still some time for this, but it's starting to look unlikely. There have been rumors about these big Navis for 6 months.
Irobot82
Member
I'm interested to see where this goes. I have a 1080 right now. Before that I had a 7950. I usually go for whatever gives me the best bang for my buck that is right under top end. I managed to pick up my EVGA Classified 1080 for like $480 just before the bitcoin boom. Ray tracing looks great but I feel we need probably one or two more gpu generations before they are worth a shit. I hope this AMD card is legit, it's been a while since they had a full stack that was worth anything.
General Lee
Member
I guess I can answer some of your pressing questions then since you're asking so politely...
AMD's recent GPUs have all been very late responses to what Nvidia has long had on the market, and only then they come out with a marginally better value product, if the only thing you really care about is performance/$ in mainstream benchmarked games. Try a little something outside mainstream like OpenGL emulation on CEMU, and performance was atrocious until finally we're getting Vulkan options, which we can't really thank AMD for. And let's not go into AMD's old DX9/DX11 CPU overhead issue that they never fixed. These sort of issues prop up left and right once you go out of the comfort zone that is the mainstream benchmark games, and even those have some doozies that AMD often fails to address. I don't want it to be like that, but that's just reality.
There's far more to Nvidia's feature support than just Ray-tracing. They've pushed most of the real improvements in the industry, beginning with things like G-Sync. AMD has merely followed suit. Things like Chill, Boost, Async compute, what do these really offer me when AMD GPUs are louder, slower and demand more power regardless? FreeSync was useful response to proprietary G-Sync, but it would not exist without it either, and most often the implementations were sub-par.
Then there's the software feature set. AMD has a new pretty GUI, and half the shit in it doesn't work on their newest GPUs as per Gamers Nexus. Nvidia's control panel is old, but at least it works. Then there's features like Ansel and now adding Reshade filter support on top of what they already. Where's AMD's equivalent OSD features? They took forever even with Relive or whatever they call the equivalent of Shadowplay is these days. Even if AMD manages to bring some marginally useful software feature that Nvidia doesn't have, image sharpening for example, it's usually replicated in no time, whereas the opposite takes forever or never happens at all. That's the reality of the differences between AMD and Nvidia when it comes to software support and resources they can dedicate.
I'm not acting like it's bad in itself. Not sure how you got that idea. I got a 2070S for ~100€ more compared to what I could've gotten a 5700XT for a few reasons. I play games like BOTW on CEMU, and modded Skyrim LE. Performance with these games on Radeon is atrociously bad, due to their ignored optimizations for things like OpenGL and CPU overhead issues like I already mentioned. I play on a 4K panel, and even 2070S isn't fast enough for it, and going 5700XT would not help there and beyond there's no choice at all. AMD cards also like to suck a bunch of idle power for no reason on multi-monitor setups. I could go on endlessly about all these sort of little issues that AMD never gets around to addressing, which ultimately makes it more reasonable to pick an Nvidia card. It's so much more than just the perf/$ in currently benchmarked titles, and that's where Radeon starts to stumble.
Why would I need to look at the rumored specs, that I obviously have already looked at to make that statement in the first place?
You seem to forget AMD has a node advantage, one that'll be erased this year. Clock to clock is a useless metric in real world products. I'm not saying AMD is dragging because Nvidia has a lot of cards on the market. I'm saying they're dragging because they don't have competitive products out on the market in several segments. Any fool can see that. They had essentially 5700XT and non-XT last year, everything else was either old or effectively useless in terms of moving the market. This year they'll have Navi 20. That's probably it. Nvidia in turn will likely refresh their whole stack or close to it.
If AMD is just competitive, people still go for Nvidia, right? It's not the job of consumers to help failing companies. It's their job to sell the product, and in AMD's case that's going to require a product faster and more efficient than Nvidia. There's absolutely no worry right now that AMD is going to deliver a product that will dominate Nvidia in the GPU market. They could have a dominating product for half a decade and they still wouldn't be where Nvidia is right now in terms of market leadership. If AMD can push some next gen console RT/Navi advantage in the PC market, great for them, but we've all heard these stories before. They amounted to less than nothing this gen.
I would like nothing more than AMD to actually offer better products. As it stands, we're a long way off from that. I don't bemoan people who get themselves an AMD GPU, there's plenty of use cases where they offer plenty of value and sufficient support, aka the mainstream volume segment I talked about. I bemoan people who think there's no reason to pick Nvidia other than overpaying for more performance or blind brand worship. Or people that claim AMD is on par with their feature set outside "that useless ray-tracing feature". That's crassly oversimplifying things. On paper Radeon is always better perf/$. Once you start playing with them (year or two later) and shit don't work right (you don't play that mainstream benchmark), it might not feel that way anymore.
Last edited:
llien
Member
What the heck is wrong with you?
How on planet earth is the product that is 10% faster, for the same price "marginally" better?
2070super is 5% faster than 5700xt, but is 100 bucks more expensive. How does 5% difference spell out?
The level of misinfromation within green bubble is astonishing.
General Lee
Member
I already explained it to you, but clearly you aren't comprehending. There's no helping some people.
Croatoan
They/Them A-10 Warthog
Jesus you're a tool. I don't care what brand I buy but I always buy the absolute best regardless of price. If that is AMD so be it. If AMD isn't the best but is close and lowers NV prices then that is great too. Why be a fanboy?
Last edited: