AMD: Navi Speculation, Rumours and Discussion [2019]

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Kaotik, Jan 2, 2019.

  1. Cat Merc

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    108
    It's 64 CU Vega vs 40 CU Navi.

    Power calculated from Vega 64 results -23% also appears to be 225~W, which is exactly what AMD stated as the TBP.

    So as it says, 14% higher perf, 23% lower power, results in 1.5x perf/watt gain over Vega 64.

    Perf/mm^2 increased by 20% over Vega VII, which is impressive considering smaller chips tend to be worse in that regard due to the media engines and other blocks being a fixed cost, and I didn't calculate it but from eyeballing the GDDR6 PHY's appear to be a bit larger than Navi's?

    That said Vega VII also has half rate DP, so hard to compare.

    Perf/watt appears to be 10% or so better than Vega VII.
     
    #921 Cat Merc, Jun 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
    Lightman likes this.
  2. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,277
    Likes Received:
    3,522
    I am afraid one game shouldn't be enough.

    The end notes had several other caveats, they never specified which Navi GPU they are comparing to. They also tested some 3D mark 11 tests @ 720p.
    Not it's not, it's a Vega 64 with 40 CUs enabled. It states so quite clearly in the endnotes.
     
  3. anexanhume

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,920
    Likes Received:
    1,262
    It’s a hat tip. They know people are looking.
     
  4. Cat Merc

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    108
    Where?

    Considering the performance they're claiming for 5700XT, it would make zero sense for that to be anything but a full Vega 64.
     
  5. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,277
    Likes Received:
    3,522
    here:
    and yet here we are
     
  6. Cat Merc

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    108
    That's... Not good looking for performance. Good looking for power though.

    Maybe the "Navi GPU" in that slide isn't a 5700XT, but rather some other configuration at a more efficient point in the voltage/frequency curve, which would explain the power difference vs a 40CU Vega 64.
    23% lower than a full Vega 64 would be 225W as it is, if that's a 40CU Vega 64 then power would have to be lower.
     
  7. fehu

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    692
    Location:
    Somewhere over the ocean
    Wait! We now have the responses.

     
  8. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    9,045
    Likes Received:
    2,921
    Location:
    Finland
    Which one exactly did you mean?
     
  9. Gubbi

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,581
    Likes Received:
    981
    AMD claim 2.3 x performance per area, a Vega 64 is 495mm², Navi us 251mm².

    That comes out to 5700XT (40 RDNA CUs) being 16% faster than a Vega 64 (64 GCN CUs).

    Cheers
     
    TheAlSpark likes this.
  10. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    'Zona
    Even more confusion... end notes says they compared benchmark scores of "Navi" vs Vega56 and had the Vega 10 die size at 486mm2, but the slide says 495mm2...
    Who the heck fact checks their presentations?
    Are they cutting out 9mm2 for the Vega56's disabled parts?
     
    pharma likes this.
  11. del42sa

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2017
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    107
    fixed it for you

    which is more close to reality

    https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/2046674/
     
    #931 del42sa, Jun 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
  12. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,277
    Likes Received:
    3,522
    They mention the configuration of Navi is 40CU, so it is the 5700XT, but maybe with different clocks.

    Nope, the comparison was made against a Vega 56 (486 mm2), while running some weird tests like 3D Mark 11 @720p.

    Navi scored 140 (251 mm2)
    V56 scored 113 (486 mm2)

    This is where you get your 2.3X per/area.
     
    #932 DavidGraham, Jun 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
    Pixel and pharma like this.
  13. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    'Zona
    Nope, the Vega64 with 40CUs is only for the perf/watt metric.
    The perf/area metric is against a Vega56.


    Well at least that part sorta makes sense now.
     
  14. del42sa

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2017
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    107
    Vega 56 or Vega 64 doesn´t matter if it comes to chip area, because both dies are physically same size
     
  15. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    'Zona
    It does when a person is trying to extrapolate Navi performance with a performance/area metric.
     
    Pixel likes this.
  16. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,277
    Likes Received:
    3,522
    A more revealing set of benches, from the slides ..

    FireStrike GT1 @1440p:
    Navi: 49
    Vega56: 41

    Navi is 19% faster

    FireStrike GT2 @1440p:
    Navi: 37
    Vega56: 32

    Navi is 15% faster

    Unigine Heaven @1080p:
    Navi: 84
    Vega56: 72

    Navi is 16% faster

    In these common artificial tests, Navi is barely any faster than a Vega 64.
     
    pharma likes this.
  17. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,338
    Likes Received:
    9,957
    Location:
    The North
    Seems fairly significant. Barely is a word
    I use for 1-2% difference.

    15-20% is a fairly significant difference.
     
  18. DavidGraham

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    3,277
    Likes Received:
    3,522
    These results are against a Vega 56, my statement is for Vega 64, which is usually 15% faster than a Vega 56.
     
    #938 DavidGraham, Jun 14, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2019
    pharma, Pixel and iroboto like this.
  19. Globalisateur

    Globalisateur Globby
    Veteran Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3,459
    Likes Received:
    2,162
    Location:
    France
    Are those tests done with the same number of CUs and same frequency ?
     
  20. Rootax

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,458
    Likes Received:
    829
    Location:
    France
    Is this surprising ? Navi 10 is a mid range gpu. At least it seems too match with previous amd "kind of" high end. And with that price, it the least they can propose.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...