AMD: RDNA 3 Speculation, Rumours and Discussion

Van Gogh was 7-9W APU. Rembrandt is 15-65W APU. It's like saying that RTX 3060 is not needed because RTX 3090 eats it for breakfast.

 

I don't think it will eat its breakfast. Rembrandt has no Infinity Cache:

Furthermore purely going from 8->12 CUs will not matter that much at low TDP (maybe 10-20% diff at 15W?), it will probably really matter at higher TDP where the extra +50% CUs results in a significantly higher performance ceiling. The CPU generally doesn't really matter as all the power is eaten by the GPU and at the low end Zen2 can decently keep up with Zen3. I have some concerns about only having 4 cores wrt possible stutters when games try to do something depending on how fast CPU reclocking kicks in but I think that will only matter in very select games, and have a reduced impact due to most games only being able to run at 30 fps due to GPU performance.

If they can get VanGogh at a significantly cheaper price than Rembrandt it might be totally worth it. Sure it won't be the top product but it might go a significant direction in making these devices cheaper and hence more accessible. (As an aside I doubt X3D is going to be cheap for a bit)

 

Only 50mm^2 smaller and is a niche part.
It was never made for lowend turdflinging.
AMD has a different part planned for that.

 

VGH is probably not 128-bit either. On both RDNA and RDNA2, L2 is tied to IMC width. If VGH is 128-bit, it would be the only RDNA2 part with 1MB L2 for 128b bus.

Everything else is 1MB per 64b bus, including RMB.

 

I'd be actually be really down for a IC-enabled APU even if it cost a kidney to get, my current tablet with Atom is barely useable as a typewriter, let alone anything serious...

 

I think price isn't just die size. AMD seems to mostly price their older gens significantly discounted but still supported. Think Lucienne and Barcelo. Just my speculation here but I wouldn't be surprised if VanGogh could be significantly cheaper here.

 

Oh it is.

Not TSMC parts really.

Those are just embedded padding.

Jfc it is labeled under "premium FF" for a reason.
It's the expensive part of the bunch.

 

I'm aware it was labeled for premium FF, with stuff like NN acceleration specifically for these usecases. However AFAICT Rembrandt is AFAICT pretty much a superset of VanGogh with the same features (edit: besides the changed CPU setup obviously). So I'm not sure what would make these chips particularly expensive outside of the target market (which I think we can agree on is to be thrown out at this point).

 

Then that's a damn shame because memory bandwidth is pretty much the only thing preventing AMD from developing high performance APUs for laptops and DIYs.

 

Was priced as such too,

Two very different segments and packages.

Think late'23 timeline for maybe pile-o-SRAM in APUs.

 

Just got this email from AMD. Any thoughts?
I don’t recall this product from computex


That’s a lot of mini display ports ?its dated for June 21

 

They're W6800 and W6600.
Basically N21/23 but Radeon Pro.

 

AMD to launch Zen 4 and RDNA 3 both in Q4 2022 (guru3d.com)

 

https://videocardz.com/newz/sk-hynix-expects-hbm3-memory-with-665-gb-s-bandwidth



I was wondering if on a rdna3 refresh, or even rdna4, having already afforded the cost for a substrate, and being less reliant on pure BW, they can add a single hbm3 die, maybe one of the ~800MB/s flavour...

 

No such thing.

Hell no MORE SRAM.
More.

Why even.

 

How likely is it that RDNA3 will include dedicated tessellation hardware? Between mesh shaders and high poly methods like Nanite it seems fixed function tessellation is on its way out. Are GPUs fast enough now to run DirectX tessellation in software at reasonable performance?

 

As AMD ties it logically to the individual primitive units for each SE, I too think it's here to stay at least as long as the next major overhaul of the (SE) front end. But one day...? Maybe rasterizer and raster back-ends will be gone as well.

 

I dont‘t think so. Rasterising is a special step. Maybe we se next time a Rasterizer which suites more Engines like Nanite. The Rasterizer area should be much smaller and efficient than the software shader rasterizer. If you see patents we are at the beginning of changing the Frontend. I think major steps come with chipset design.

This patent sounds like Nanite:
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/10957094.html