AMD RDNA3 Specifications Discussion Thread

Decent of them to target Ubisoft games since they're virtually guaranteed benchmark staples but they'll remain out of reach for now in terms of both transistor count and die size ...
 
Doesn't leave much room going by the lowerish numbers. Assuming ~1.5x is average ish for 7900XTX.
7900XTX ~1.5x Navi21
7900XT ~1.35x Navi21
7800XTX ~1.2x Navi21
7800XT ~1.05x Navi21
7700XTX <Navi21
Best case would seem to put the highest Navi33 somewhere between 6800 and 6800XT which is a pretty big gap, so likely closer to 6800.

Edit- Navi33 is rumored to be ~300m2 wasn't it?
The claim was "50% higher RT performance per CU". 7900 XTX has 16 more CUs than 6900 XT. So eh, possibly +20% on top of the 50%, eh?...
 
One has to wonder what sort of impact the MCDs have to that equation.
Moving to the MCDs makes the GCD smaller and therefore should clock higher.
But are there power inefficiencies involved with the MCD approach?

Now I wonder about that originally rumored 8SE 15-16k shader chip.
Seeing the 355w TDP of 6SEs though... a bigger chip would definitely blow the power budget with something at least ~500w.

Hopefully it'll get clearer once AMD put out more details regd. the architecture. Considering the huge core overhaul, I'd expect them to get drivers right next year.
 
I think the only interesting (could actually be good) thing is "new ray box sorting and traversal" - but that's probably purely a software thing enabled by memory hierarchy/usage and extra VGPRs.
Just thought the same. If it was HW, increased perf should be better.

50% more VGPRs is quite nice. Coming from the constraints we are used at, this basically means no more register pressure at all, with rare exceptions.

But that's where my excitement ends. The practical uplift in FPS over pref gen is disappointing. I'd expect more than 1.5 from 2.7 x TF.

Price isn't bad, though. Expected this to be worse.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't leave much room going by the lowerish numbers. Assuming ~1.5x is average ish for 7900XTX.
7900XTX ~1.5x Navi21
7900XT ~1.35x Navi21
7800XTX ~1.2x Navi21
7800XT ~1.05x Navi21
7700XTX <Navi21
Best case would seem to put the highest Navi33 somewhere between 6800 and 6800XT which is a pretty big gap, so likely closer to 6800.

Edit- Navi33 is rumored to be ~300mm2 wasn't it?
1.5X 6650 XT would be around 6800 level at 1440p.
 
Well, everyone round here who says that 3080(ti) ray tracing performance with DLSS speed-up is good enough to play max RT in all games will be happy with 7900XTX RT with FSR 3.

Yuck.
Kinda but that performance has been on the market for 2 years now, and it was launched at $700...

The biggest elephant in the room now is how a $1000 7900XTX will compete against a $1200 4080. 355W vs 320W should also be interesting.
 
Well, everyone round here who says that 3080(ti) ray tracing performance with DLSS speed-up is good enough to play max RT in all games will be happy with 7900XTX RT with FSR 3.

Yuck.
For me personally it wouldn't be enough of an increase over my 3080 to warrant a purchase. The big games I am looking forward too would be Starfield , fable , elder scrolls 6 , avowed , dead space remake and Calisto protocol. I think I can safely hold off and wait to see what the new carsd look like performance wise on those games as they come. Think my 3700 and am4 socket might get an upgrade . The 5800 3d dropped offically to $330 so could see that sub $300 for black friday and maybe we will see a good 3d cache 7x00 series and I will just jump onto that.

I think these cards are a good jump relative to the previous amd line up. However I think its tough compared to the current Nvidia line up. I do wonder if we actually had benchmarks of the 4080 runt if this wouldn't have looked better
 
When discussing Snowdrop they talked about "smarter ray processing than what DXR alone can provide" which seemed like the opportunities mentioned in console development and what some comments from Epic devs have brought up.

Was expecting more performance for RT and would have like more details on the architecture instead of driving monitors that will probably be 5x the price of the GPU.

Still the presentation was at least concentrated on the gaming side, nvidia's presentation was combined with datacenter and had details and clarifications trickle out over the next few days which could have been avoided.
 
Kinda but that performance has been on the market for 2 years now, and it was launched at $700...

The biggest elephant in the room now is how a $1000 7900XTX will compete against a $1200 4080. 355W vs 320W should also be interesting.
3080 was 700, it looks more like 3090ti which was 2k or 3090 which was 1.5k
 
4080@16 is also silly versus it.
Only 4090 is and was reasonable value to begin with.
Yeah 4080 16GB probably loses to 7900XT in raster, doesn't look great value.

Basically AMD just competes vs Ampere price wise, even with subpar RT compared to Ada they are absolutely fine, they should match or exceed ampere RT and obliterate in raster.
 
Back
Top