videocardz.com
N32 kind of sits between AD103 and AD104. Since the 4080 is a cut down AD103 it makes decent point of comparison. Of course the 4080 gives the 7800XT an epic spanking. There are other factors at play (GDDR6X vs GDDR6, N32 being on 5nm and 6nm) but I'm just saying NVIDIA is further ahead than we tend to think. I think if we could see the BOM for the 7800XT and 4080 they would be shockingly close.
AD103 has 63% more transistors than N32. AD104 is a much closer comparison and there the 7800 XT competes with the cut down version.
These comparisons are hard to make now with AMD and NVIDIA pursuing different strategies in chip production. Most fair to me is how much the cards cost to produce. Estimates I've seen put 7800XT and RTX4080 pretty close to each other.
Navi32 and Navi31 necessarily have some higher idle power draw due to the inter-chiplet communication links needing to be powered up.
Using the below calculator, with a defect density of 0.07 and an edge loss of 4, on a 300mm wafer, and ballpark costs of $17000/$10000 per wafer for 5nm/6nm, as suggested by Ian Cutress, I make it ~$156 for the AD103 silicon vs ~$110 for the 7800 XT, not taking into account packaging costs. GDDR6X memory is probably more expensive than GDDR6 also.
web.archive.org
It's still gonna suck due to low memory bandwidth and they'll probably want >$350us for it.AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT to feature 10GB and 12GB memory configs, according to PowerColor EEC filing - VideoCardz.com
PowerColor submits Radeon RX 7600 XT graphics card with 10GB and 12GB memory to EEC, white Radeon RX 7800 XT cards also coming AMD might be adding a new SKU soon. AMD has completed its addition of more ASIC (GPUs) to the Radeon RX 7000 series, but there’s still space for another SKU. According...
That's good to know. So it does sit between AD103 and AD104, closer to AD104. IDK why NVIDIA even bothers with GDDR6X but I assume they got a good price on it. Seems not worth if it's significantly more expensive.Using the below calculator, with a defect density of 0.07 and an edge loss of 4, on a 300mm wafer, and ballpark costs of $17000/$10000 per wafer for 5nm/6nm, as suggested by Ian Cutress, I make it ~$156 for the AD103 silicon vs ~$110 for the 7800 XT, not taking into account packaging costs. GDDR6X memory is probably more expensive than GDDR6 also.
Die Per Wafer Calculator - CALY Technologies
Die Per Wafer Calculator Die Yield Calculator Max Die Per Wafer Murphy’s Low model of Die Yield Wafer Map SiC Devices 100mm 200mm Silicon wafer
While the AD104 silicon is ~$101, counting all partial dies as usable (4070 being a cut down version). So maybe AMD is a bit further behind, but I still think AD103 is the wrong comparison point.
Oh yeah, to that end, one more interesting thing i noticed about the 7700XT from Eurogamer's review.
www.tomshardware.com
7800 XT has both more cache and membandwidth enough to explain the difference though, not quite sure how you can draw the conclusion it's the membandwidth instead of caches or both combined making the difference
It shouldn't be that complicated to make a sort of rough guess based on some basic generalities and specs.
Die size is still very critical, even when talking about chiplets. I think I covered all the general stipulations well enough in my comment. And yes, N32 is probably closer to AD104 in costs than AD103. That was kinda my whole point.
I dont think that's entirely fair. RDNA3 is not a good barometer for the benefits of chiplets since it seems the core architecture itself just is just kinda terrible. But lots of people wont really consider that, and will just point to the more overt and physical difference and say, "Oh RDNA3 is bad cuz of chiplets", even though there's really no reason to think that.
The 4070Ti (full AD104) is the more suitable comparison if we want a comparison based on absolute theoreticals. Here the 4070Ti is significantly ahead of the 7800XT. Compute resources (CUs, TMUs, ROPs, RT Cores) are almost identical, the die size is comparable too, 294 mm² (4070Ti) vs 346 mm² (7800XT). TDP is also comparable 280w (4070Ti) vs 265w (7800XT).
TSMC N6 is supposed to be a "cost effective" replacement of N7, which should have been well under $10k in 2022, I think we were throwing around the ~$7-$8k number last year.Using the below calculator, with a defect density of 0.07 and an edge loss of 4, on a 300mm wafer, and ballpark costs of $17000/$10000 per wafer for 5nm/6nm, as suggested by Ian Cutress, I make it ~$156 for the AD103 silicon vs ~$110 for the 7800 XT, not taking into account packaging costs. GDDR6X memory is probably more expensive than GDDR6 also.
Die Per Wafer Calculator - CALY Technologies
Die Per Wafer Calculator Die Yield Calculator Max Die Per Wafer Murphy’s Low model of Die Yield Wafer Map SiC Devices 100mm 200mm Silicon wafer
While the AD104 silicon is ~$101, counting all partial dies as usable (4070 being a cut down version). So maybe AMD is a bit further behind, but I still think AD103 is the wrong comparison point.
N4 is probably the exact same price as the N5-family process it's based on. Every big customer gets to customize the process for their chips to a point and so far there's no indication of N4 being any different, except NVIDIA wanting to call it different.