It would certainly make things interesting if AMD is actually able to deliver.
AMD Radeon RDNA2 Navi (RX 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, 6900 XT)
It would certainly make things interesting if AMD is actually able to deliver.
RX 6600XT and RX 6600 about to be released. First leaks appear. It looks like my future GPU, but we shall see.
TDP is less than 130W for the RX 6600XT and less than 100W for the RX 6600, :smile2:uses a single 6 pins connector... both have 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM.
https://www.igorslab.de/en/amd-rade...emory-same-bandwidth-limit-as-the-rx-5500-xt/
My biggest question mark is if performance is going to be affected. My Asrock B450M Steel Legend only has a PCIe 3.0 port, not 4.0.
TDP is less than 130W for the RX 6600XT and less than 100W for the RX 6600, :smile2:uses a single 6 pins connector... both have 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM.
https://www.igorslab.de/en/amd-rade...emory-same-bandwidth-limit-as-the-rx-5500-xt/
My biggest question mark is if performance is going to be affected. My Asrock B450M Steel Legend only has a PCIe 3.0 port, not 4.0.
Jawed
Legend
Is that a worthwhile upgrade from your 1080? About 20% max performance boost?
There's no way that PCI Express 4.0 is relevant to the performance you would get.
DegustatoR
Legend
From the link:
It's 4.0 x8 which will work as 3.0 x8 in a PCIE 3.0 system. This may affect performance in b/w limited scenarios.
Bondrewd
Veteran
Pretty sure he just wants something cute low power.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
That's a pretty old article. Going by the mobile Navi 23 variants, the RX 6600 should have only 32MB of IC, not 64 as igor's lab suggests.
https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-radeon-rx-6600xt-and-rx-6600-with-navi-23-gpu-appear-in-the-drivers
I doubt you'll get much of a performance cut from running the GPU at PCIe 3.0 8x, considering it's a GPU designed for 1080p or 1440p at most.
IIRC this is also the chip going into the new Teslas for infotainment.
Leoneazzurro5
Regular
D
Deleted member 90741
Guest
Nice one
, You forgot ∞$ ™
10 teraflops, 90-100W TDP, not bad! This reminds me of the days when I purchased the RX 570, and specially the 1060 3GB -which was a gift from another persona-, and was so happy with the performance and power consumption at 1080p, I showed quite a few pictures in this very forum.
Some articles I read on it mention that it's a 1080p GPU. But I wonder why.... Maybe with RT on, but without RT, 1440p seems easily doable on it. I am currently using a 1060 3GB as my main GPU and sure it's a 100-120$ GPU nowadays, which lacks some important features, low VRAM (even the 6GB version of the 1060 is unappealing to me these days 'cos the performance is what it is), 120W of power consumption and an old 16nm architecture...
However, a lacklustre GTX 1060 3GB is still running quite a few games I have at 1440p; RE2 RE, sports games like FIFA 21 and NBA 2k21, my favourite game -Divinity Original Sin 2-, and some others. That being said, I dont even try some AAA games 'cos lets be honest, it's not a good GPU nowadays, and Resident Evil Village runs at 15-20fps (1440p, though is not much better at 1080p).
The 6600XT and 6600 compete with the 3060, so I guess a 250-300$ is going to be the recommended price. More than that and.., since I am not in a hurry, I can wait for alternatives.
Bondrewd
Veteran
Cuz that's what is written on the box.
Also it has a too small (32MiB) LLC to actually drive 1440p stuff off a puny 128b membus.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Looks like the number of ROPs is scaled with the number of shader engines, and AMD is putting 32 ROPs per SE. It'll be interesting to see how many ROPs there are in the RDNA2 APUs.
Bondrewd
Veteran
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
The GPU shortage might be getting better, but I'm not betting average users are going to be happy for quite a while. Looking at profit margins for the various dies/memory sizes AMD has, it easily makes the most sense to concentrate all its limited resources on the biggest dies. The poor Navi 23 die would have to sell at an average of $400 a pop to match whatever margins AMD gets from the Navi 21.
Which seems like an obvious statement really. But it means we're likely to see an increased supply of 6800/6900s far before 6600s. Which is a shame, depending on the pricing it seems like the 6600 series is aimed at the most popular category, what was filled by the 1060/(4/5)70/80s. That's a category that's felt a bit neglected ever since, so there's probably a large amount of consumers there ready and willing to buy. If you've got a 1080p monitor possibly a good deal too; if it can sell for sub $300.
Which seems like an obvious statement really. But it means we're likely to see an increased supply of 6800/6900s far before 6600s. Which is a shame, depending on the pricing it seems like the 6600 series is aimed at the most popular category, what was filled by the 1060/(4/5)70/80s. That's a category that's felt a bit neglected ever since, so there's probably a large amount of consumers there ready and willing to buy. If you've got a 1080p monitor possibly a good deal too; if it can sell for sub $300.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
That's only for short term profits though. AMD must penetrate the notebook market where they find tremendous resistance but they're now able to compete.
Bondrewd
Veteran
N23 gets them OEM slots.
All and every CPU part wins that contest no questions asked.
^
He gets it.
sry my ignorance in certain technical matters ,but.., dont you think it could be one of the most unbalanced GPUs ever then?
It has more computation power than say the PS5 and also more than my GTX 1080 (9tf), I think. Is it me or should it do 1440p just fine only judging by the raw teraflops numbers?
I mean...10 teraflops for 1080p seems a bit too much. Although if that means playing many games at 240fps I wouldnt mind returning to my previous 1080p 240Hz monitor, which I liked very much, but still kinda odd. Just curious....
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
It is pretty damned weird, especially being so utterly close to the Navi 22 die. The only possible target market I can imagine for this is very highly targeting gaming laptops. With that many CUs you can cut clockspeed drastically, think to like 1.1/1.2ghz while still getting performance roughly that or above like, an rx580/GTX 1060 in no doubt quite a low power envelope. Thus making a potentially incredibly power efficient GPU. That a lot of gaming laptops target 1080p already fits nicely.
Laptop gamers usually arent chasing high resolutions, so theres alot of performance to 'win' there. Also, id guess that these will outperform GTX1060/RX580 class gpus quite easily down the line. Not to forget efficieny etc. Anyway, i see someone mentioning GTX1080 (9TF part), its still a quite powerfull GPU even today. I wouldnt recommend anyone getting one now for serious future gaming, but something with the raw power of a 1080 with a modern feature set will be quite nice for a laptop.
Leoneazzurro5
Regular
It is not so weird if you understand that it is done on the same process, it has approximately same performances of RX 5700XT(at the intended target resolutions) but with way less power consumption, more features, and half the VRAM bandwidth. Design is always a matter of trade-offs, so it depends on what you want to achieve and look at the methods you are able to use for reaching your goal. In this case, AMD seems to have wanted a 1080p chip (fullHD being still the reference resolution for most of the gamers out there) and quite probably a mobile-first one.
