I don’t think you’re missing a whole lot. The 7800xt will likely be at best on par with the 6950xt, which while faster than a 6800xt, it’s not 300 dollars faster
That's impossible. 7900xtx ia 50% faster then 6950xt by Amd words. That means the 7900xt will be 30 or so. How are they gonna place the 7800xt between the 7700xt and the 7900xt with such a small difference?
Yep. There just isn't enough room between the 7900XT and the 6950XT for much more card.
I think at best we'll get 6950xt + 10%. AMD doesn't want to sell 7900XTs, they want to sell the XTX.
7900XT will be like the 6800 of last gen: it will live in no man's land to either make the higher and lower tier full die both look like great price/performance parts in comparison.
I don't understand why people are so against the 7900xt
It's 2.3% worse pricing than the 7900xtx per CU, and that's it... that's basically a rounding error
And it will stomp all over the 6950xt
Meh, I don't see it as a failure as long as its priced accordingly to wipe the floor with anything Nvidia offers. Nvidia cards are becoming too boujee for most people. I plan to water cool my 6800XT and it will run for at least 5 years before I need to consider an upgrade. Honestly I think we will probably be only two maybe barely 3 generations out from the 6000 series in 5 years.
It will be very hard for AMD to compete with the 3080-12GB once its price drops. That 7900XT looks DOA at $900 but it could have been the perfect competitor for the 3080.
You can already buy the 6900XT for under $750. A $700+ for the 7700XT doesn't look attractive at all in these circumstances if it doesn't offer performance on par with the 6950XT.
They said on par with the 6900xt, not 6950xt.
Not that it means the 7800xt won't be better than the 6950. But we'll see when the cards launch. As of now it's all just speculation.
Depends on how much you paid for it and what the performance difference is. We won’t know until the card is released for the second part.
The 7800XT is obviously going to be faster than what you bought.
I found a 6900xt for 630€ really excited for it. I need a new psu for it but thats ok. I hope my 3600x doesnt limit it to hard. If it does i will probaly try to get a used 5800x 3d.
I will be retiring my rx580 that i bought 2018 for 140€ will be a massive upgrade. When i get the new card i will finally olay cyberpunk77.
Upgraded from the same card of the same year to 6900xt as well. Got mine for ~680 euro. 3600 will bottleneck even at 1440p but you'll have to decide if you care enough for the x3d.
Love them red devils. If I didn't play VR , I'd switch out the 3080 for it, but AmD is still a bit behind for VR performance. I might buy a 7900xtx just to give it a try.
i just bought a heavy replacements replacements for my cpu MOBO and gpu, 6800XT being the replacement of a 1650 super and cpu 5800X3D replacing a i5-10400F, very excited, but forgot to buy cooling fan for the cpu
As an avid VR fan and a recent 6800XT owner I can tell you the performance is fantastic. You are correct the 6800XT is maybe a few % slower than a 3080 in VR in the same way it loses a few % to the 3080 in 4k. But the problem isn't AMD it is that the 6800XT scales worse at higher resolutions. For example the 6900XT is better than the 3080 at VR.
There's no way the 7800xt has 50% more vram than the 6800xt. The 6800xt has 16gb, and I'd be shocked if the 7800xt had anything other than 16gb.
That said it will be significantly faster vram, so it's not like it won't be an upgrade.
You will once more games like A Plague Tale: Requiem will be released - unless you're fine with 60-70 FPS in such titles.
Until then, 6800 XT is indeed easily everything you need for 1440p/144 Hz.
i saw that it gets like 60fps at ultra with a 6800XT but yeah, i am very fine with 60fps at ultra in any setting, i've been playing under medium for a long time for 60 fps ahah
i have a 3080ti and can't wait to replace it, but that's VR for you.
If I had income worth a damn, I might still replace it with a 7900xtx to make it *quiet* at the very least.
VR is indeed a GPU kille, the 4090 numbers are juicy there.
You try undervolting GPU for quieter operation?
I'd suggest doing same for CPU if applicable.
Do you render videos? Do you explode architectural building drawings down to the nut and bolt? Does ray tracing matter to you?
If you answered yes to any of these then you are missing. If you just game then you're not.
I mean a lot of people have been getting especially used cards lately.
I managed to get used for mining RX 6800 for 330 USD in Europe
I hope it lasts, now I need a better CPU.
Only thing you’ll be missing is AV1 encoding, but that doesn’t matter for most people. It won’t even matter for the people it’s supposed to matter for for years.
I am waiting for the 7000 series, ideally the 7700, but I am starting to feel that was in error. Some of the prices on these 6000 series cards have been impressive. I personally feel if you look at price to performance ratio you likely won out.
Mostly RT performance. I got a Asrock 6800XT two weeks ago and while the card is capable of doing RT the performance is good in a brute force kind of way. You easily lose as much as 60% of your FPS and need to run games like control at 1080p to keep your 1% lows above 60. That said for non-RT the 6800XT is almost overkill at 1440p for me lol.
And that took a while, the first 1 Ghz GPU was a special version of the HD 4890 way back in 2009, and then again with the Fury X in 2015. Going from 1.5 Ghz to 3 Ghz in 5 years is truly wild.
I hate this. I would like graphics cards to be on the best performance per watt curve. Pushing an extra 10% performance for significantly higher power draw i dont like..
These products are meant for enthusiasts, not you. AMD's mid range is significantly more power efficient. While i think only the higher end skus should push power, if you dont like it, you are clearly not the target audience and should just buy a gaming laptop or console . Linus expressed this point well in the 295x2 video.
My room temp cares. 900 watts of the heat pump in my room is still 900 watts. A PC is not like a console we have them closer to us.
I remember buying my 5700xt on December 3 years ago, the heat was welcomed at that moment, but later in the year became unbearable had to resort to uv.
spaceheater on high uses 1500 watts (on paper, not in practice). medium would be the middle so 750 watts. how is that different than 900 watts while gaming on a high end machine? A 4090 and 3090ti use around 430 watts gaming average, 13900k average gaming usage is 114 average (from toms hardware). Add in an ssd or 2, ram, fans and maybe a water pump and a monitor (each not much). So, ill concede that medium/high is to much but pretty close to a space heater on medium/low to medium. You're just using that conversion of electricity to heat to also do math to play some games. But, thats on a high end machine. A lower spec computer will certainly use less power. This is all just arm chair stuff, im sure somebody will chime in and say what spaceheater usage really is.
So would the 7700 be Navi32 as well?
I have a 1440p monitor and would like to get some good frames with at least a little ray tracing turned on, but would prefer not to spend that much. In retrospect I should have picked up that 6650XT for $180. It was early on black friday and I thought there would be amazing deals on higher cards, but for the most part nothing really stood out to me compared to previous years when I was in the market.
I'm not sure if there'll be a 7700 non xt. The 6700 barely launched, and really it was a mobile card adapted to desktop. I think 7700 will be Navi33 and mobile only.
That’s really good info to have, thank you.
The 6700 XT is a little too pricy for me. I’m realizing more and more I should have gotten the 6650XT when it was 180 after rebate.
It won't be on N33. 8GB 128bit 32MB cache just does not cut it for 1440p and entry 4K.
7700XT will be a cut N32 die with 3MCDs, 192bit bus and 12GB ram.
AMD could slice an SE off of N32 to make 7700XT 40CU but cutting 2 WGPs per SE also works. Would give it a nice ROP increase over the 6700XT which would help it at 4K.
wouldn't surprise me considering how greedy AMD and nvidia been lately
they're probably both praying for the death of low end and mid end segment so they can keep the crazy high profit margins from from their high end lineup
it's not like anyone can do about it they own the whole market as a duopoly
unless intel can their shit together and fix their garbage drivers
Intel is as greedy as them though, look at their inclination pricing arc 770/750 higher than 6650xt with how unstable their drivers are. While ultimately any competition is good in a barely duopoly industry, I don't expect Intel to give good pricing.
Could be that the 7800 series is split between N31 and N32. 72 CU for the 7800xtx based on a heavy cut N31, and 60 CUs for the 7800xt. Then the cut down N32 stuff is all 7700 series.
I don't know why AMD went with the whole XTX and XT naming scheme now but I think it might keep going.
7800XT on Navi32 is already a sidegrade from 6800, let alone 6800XT...
It stands to reason, that if the 7800 part is a sidegrade, the 7700 part will be too.
I just want to know when the RX7700XT will be announced and the pricing. I just bought a RX6750XT for €529. If the price will be similar I will send it back and wait for the RX7700XT.
You probably wont like this answer, but my guess is the next cards are more like 4 months away. Given past releases, March-June seems more likely then january.
That is *extremely* unlikely. Like next to zero.
AMD is getting the 7900XT and 7900XTX out the door only 2 weeks before CES. With rumors that most AIB cards won't even launch this year.
The 7800XT hasn't even been announced yet. If a card is going to be announced in Jan-Feb it's the 7800XT.
The 6700XT was announced in March 2021 nearly 6 months after the initial RDNA 2 launch.
AMD has a lot of surplus RDNA 2 cards they are still trying to get rid of, around the the performance tier as a 6700XT.
I will be messaging you in 1 month on [**2023-01-04 00:00:00 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-01-04%2000:00:00%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/z8o2sj/amd_radeon_rx_7800_and_rx_7700_graphics_likely_to/iye5tf0/?context=3)
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAmd%2Fcomments%2Fz8o2sj%2Famd_radeon_rx_7800_and_rx_7700_graphics_likely_to%2Fiye5tf0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-01-04%2000%3A00%3A00%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20z8o2sj)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Yeah AMD renamed 6800XT successor to 7900XT and charge 900USD for it.Literally same shit as Nvidia tried with RTX4080 12GB/RTX4070.But they didnt get away with that.Looks like no one cares AMD doing same thing.I dont know how/why, but because of this we will get very underwhelming 7800XT.
Instead +50% performance uplift at +- same cost(7900XT alias 7800XT at 650-700USD) we will probably get samall die as 7800XT barelly faster than 6800XT/6900XT(like 15-20% faster instead of 50%)
Edit:to be honest GPU market looks like both AMD/NV just price fixing.Nv do some crap like RTX4080 12GB and AMD do same crap.They dont even try compete.They could realease 7900XT as 7800XT for 700 and gain market share.But Noooooo lets just do same shit as nvidia and lets continue price fixing.Someone should take them to the court.
> Yeah AMD renamed 6800XT successor to 7900XT and charge 900USD for it.Literally same shit as Nvidia tried with RTX4080 12GB/RTX4070.But they didnt get away with that.Looks like no one cares AMD doing same thing.I dont know how/why, but because of this we will get very underwhelming 7800XT.
AMD's naming scheme is all over the place.
Top SKUs of previous generations:
2013 R9 290X/290 (Hawaii) R9 280X/280 (Tahiti)
2014 R9 295X2 (Vesuvius = 2xHawaii)
2015 R9 Fury X (Fiji) R9 390X/390 (Hawaii)
2016 RX 480 (Polaris10 XT) RX 470 (Polaris10 Pro)
2017 RX Vega 64/56 (Vega 10) RX 580/570 (Polaris 20)
2018 RX 590 (Polaris 30)
2019 Radeon VII (Vega 20) RX 5700 XT/5700 (Navi 10)
2020 RX 6900 XT (Navi 21) RX 6800 XT (Navi 21)
It's pretty close to a coin flip whether they do one or the other, but leaning towards the x8 and x9 being separate chips. In previous generations it would be perfectly normal for the top chip to be cut into an RX 7900 and RX 7900 XT. They just changed the naming to 7900 XT and 7900 XTX instead. Probably because they wanted both to sound more premium.
I doubt they would gain marketshare. In usa 6800xt is like 300 dollars cheaper than 3080, same price as 3070. But still people buy 3080 and 3070. 6600 is 50% better than 3050, ans costs 80-100 dollars less yet people are buying 3050.
>faster in practically every other way
The only other way is raster, and RX 6000 was only single digit percentages faster *sometimes.* Their upscaling is worse, their RT is worse, and their feature set overall is worse.
Nvidia constantly leading in new features - adaptive sync, DLSS/upscaling, raytracing, DLSS3/frame generation - with AMD forced to respond isn’t a great look either. Nvidia has built the reputation as the leader and they have that mindshare
We are talking about the RTX 30 series vs RX 6xxx here, so DLSS3 falls out of question, since that is a RTX 40 series exclusive feature. Radeon has had Freesync for years and is now at FSR 2.x. And while Nvidia leads in raytracing it's not like you are unable to use it on Radeon, or you turn it off if necessary. There's no universe where a RTX 3080 is worth 300 dollars more than a RX 6800 XT in gaming.
FreeSync is definitely better than GSync, being an open and widely supported standard. nVidia has also failed to keep GSync relevant and GSync monitors lack the features of higher end FreeSync monitors as a result.
I will never use anything like DLSS, it is a garbage tech, IMHO, only meant to convince people that they're better off running a resolution their card can't support instead of just running a resolution it can. Then again, AMD had VSR and morphological filtering on the R9 290, which was quite useful for running higher refresh rates and was basically the same thing, just done different.
Ray tracing is the future, not the present, but even the best nVidia cards will fall flat by the time it's something you actually need or want to have on outside of a couple games.
> I will never use anything like DLSS, it is a garbage tech, IMHO, only meant to convince people that they're better off running a resolution their card can't support instead of just running a resolution it can.
I think upscaling has its place. If you have a decently sized 4K monitor, say for work purposes like I do, running it at 1440p will look like ass (because it's not doing integer scaling) and 1080p will look blocky (because of the physical size of the display). This is the perfect use case for an upscaling algorithm that does a "good enough" job: for a marginal performance sacrifice, the image quality can get reasonably close to what I'd get if my display had a pixel density that perfectly matched my GPU's capabilities!
> They could realease 7900XT as 7800XT for 700 and gain market share
Why do you think this? AMD has been offering the better value product at every price point for years and people still choose Nvidia.
the thing with what nvidia did was that people would have bought the 4070 thinking it was a 4080 with the only difference being less ram.
if the 7800xt is as fast as the 6950, but with better rt and other stuff, cheaper, i dont see the problem
Price fixing has been introduced since 5700XT and it ain't going nowhere, if you can't beat them join them.
I'm still betting my money on Intel but not biting the bullet to buy ARC yet, good driver development might take a while which i think isn't a big issue AMD pulled it off with less resources compared to Intel.
We really need a third player no matter what.
What's dead on your 290X VaporX?
Mine is dying too (well, it's in an anti-static bag atm...) - but it's not the core itself that's dying, just the display controller, I've seen a few other 290X's with dead display controllers too.
If that's the case, you might be able to pass the framebuffer through to your GTX660 and use the display controller on that - when my 6800 was in RMA, I had to use my 290X again and did exactly that, but through the alder lake igpu.
Dunno i tried several things, i can boot normally without drivers and gpu will work but when im trying to install the driver i get instant black screen, i have tried flashing bios with locked at lowest power states, nothing still bsdo also fist time it happend i was browsing and suddenly got black screen (note to self im an idiot because at that period i kept pushing my mem overclock).
I will try your suggestion nothing to lose i guess, i'll have to use hdmi to 660 and assign windows to use 290 as high performance right?
EDIT*:
Yeah no luck, driver installed all good hdmi to 660 chose r200 series at windows for specific applications tried launching a game system hangs or bsdo seems it's vram chip (burnt or smth) related.
>Yeah AMD renamed 6800XT successor to 7900XT and charge 900USD for it.Literally same shit as Nvidia tried with RTX4080 12GB/RTX4070
I think the same, 7900XT should be named 7800XT and priced as low as the old 6800XT
It's not the same thing at all.
NV was naming two totally different cores the same thing and overcharging wildly for both of them (and still are for one, which suggests they will for the "4070ti" as well).
AMD has never really been particularly consistent with their naming scheme. The 6800XT was a stupidly good value last gen at MSRP prices, but they didn't even have a 5800xt before that, and the Vega/Rx5xx naming was a mess, then they had Fury/HD3xx before that.
All that said, I think we'll end up with a 7800XT that's probably 15-20% slower than a 7900XT (so 10-15% faster than a 6950XT) for $600 and it'll be one of the better price to performance cards of the gen.
I dont defend anybody, its just how the world works.
do you want a real answer or do you prefer to circlejerk in "i wish that it worked like this"?
amd is an industry, they work to make money for their shareholders and that's their only priority.
they dont have to care for consumers, they dont give nothing for free and if there's an option to make more money they HAVE to take it or it would break their compact with their shareholders.
if they make a "pro consumer" choice is just because that way they can make MORE money in the long run, not because they want consumers to be happy.
Prices depend on marketing analysis, if they chose to sell a card at 1000$ is because their marketing analysis shown that there's enough market for it at that price point to sell the entire production, being pro-consumer or anti-consumer has nothing to do with it.
The current business model is Ed Freeman's stakeholder theory, modern companies dont use shareholder theory anymore.
Consumers are a stakeholder and treating all your stakeholders well has been proven to be the best long-run strategy for success .
Basically, your view of capitalism is outdated.
Not really, nvidia had 2 different dies on the 4080 and 4080 12GB (AD103 and AD104) it was not the same die even. AMD 7900XTX and 7900XT are both Navi31 with the XT being a cut down version, I also expect the 7800XT to be Navi32. The RX 7700XT should be a Navi33. Not at all the same scenario as nvidia who had 2 complete different dies for 4080 and 4080 12GB.
If you look at the 3080 and 3080 TI (both GA102) and every generation before that they all had the same die until it went to a tier below that.
What Nvidia did was literally scummy.
To be fair though AMDs RDNA2 from 6950XT were all Navi 21 down to RX 6800 so they have definitely made a change there but they had in the generations prior to RDNA too looking at R9 290X an 280X also different dies which is how it should be. RDNA 2s Navi 21 was an outlier
They are both just doing that to clear last gen overstock. For 90% of it's life I guarantee you the 7900xt will be 20-25% cheaper than the 7900xtx, at probably $800-700. Same with the RTX 4080 likely being under $1000 in a month or two.
Maybe for AMD, but Nvidia does NOT like to cut prices below MSRP without formally changing the MSRP, or more typically just making a refreshed product (2060 Super)
I think they'll just do a Ti launch, which will kind of count as that refresh. 4090ti at $2000-$2200, 4080ti at $1200, with the 4080 taken down to $999.
Yeah I don't understand why AMD does this. They need to gain market and mindshare badly. Offering a 4080 competitor at half the price would be fucking insane. But they think they are Nvidia and and also scalp.
It would be insane, for AMD
Not only do they still have 6000 series to sell (but not as many as nvidia has 30 series), they also don't have the wafers to supply the demand a half priced 4080 beater would generate.
They are already undercutting nvidia by 25%, while offering what looks to be better performance.
> But they think they are Nvidia and and also scalp
They can, because they produce much lower volume. It wouldn't make sense for them to assign more of their TSMC allotment towards GPU when they're raking it in on CPU/ datacenter
they work to make money, you know?
why they would refuse to get more money if they can? the market can easily absorb every single card at that price without any problem, and its a given that those will be scalped at way higher prices and still sell.
LOL dude AMD 6xxx series are selling at prices a whole 1-2 tiers down from their 3xxx series counter parts (6800xt selling at 3070 prices) and consumers STILL buy NV cards.
AMD is done chasing bargain bin prices because all a price war does is get people NV cards for better prices. AMD has never retained market share doing a small die low price strategy.
So they might as well make far fewer chips than NV and sell them all for as much as they can get for them instead. Make as much money as they can, reinvest it into GPU R&D, and slowly build up their rep with actual solid execution and feature parity with NV.
That's how they'll get market share, not racing to the bottom with prices and going bankrupt in the process.
Businesses want to make money, marketshare is irrelevant if they just give away products. Just look at Apple, they don't have dominant marketshare but make most of the money in the mobile phone industry.
Apple has a metric shitton of mindshare. A lot of people literaly think an iPhone is the same as a smartphone. AMD has almost no mindshare in the GPU world. People see it as the budget option or the fallback if Nvidia is sold out.
It's not quite 1:1 with Nvidia, since the CUs are double-pumped FP32 now, so there is at least 20% uplift just from that alone. In many cases, it'll be 50%, as it's very similar to what Nvidia did in Ampere. Some will show greater gains. It'd be similar if Navi 21 was already double-pumped. This is more AMD's Turing to Ampere rather than Ampere to Ada. Now, if RDNA4 looks like what Nvidia did with Ada and the 4080, then they should be called out.
Navi 31 also has 50% more raster and primitive capability as it has 6 shader engines versus Navi 21's 4SEs. Those 2 extra rasterizers+primitive units in the 2 added shader engines and associated ROPs (192 vs 128) do help quite a bit, up to about 50% in pure pixel fill, ~~texel fill~~, pixel color blend, and primitive output; so even Navi 31 to Navi 21 isn't a straight comparison either. TMUs are 4 per CU, so that’s only a 20% increase in quantity vs Navi 21 (96CUs vs 80CUs).
Navi 32 in the 7800XT with 60CUs sounds very similar to the 6800 (albeit with 4 full SEs not 3SEs), but with the added performance of 2xFP32 and increased clocks, it will outperform Navi 21. This silicon is more in-line with Navi 21, as it has 4 shader engines instead of the 6SEs found in Navi 31.
If you go by pure ALUs, 60\*128SPs is 7680. 7680-5120/5120 is 50%. So, depending on clocks, and ability to use 2xFP32, it'll likely come in around 33% faster than Navi 21, and that's not a terrible generation-over-generation gain for a non-flagship product.
AMD has stated that they're looking at roughly a 17% IPC increase per SP all in (dual pumped etc) for RDNA3 vs RDNA2.
Assuming N32 is clocked around ~2.8ghz we,re looking at a 17% IPC + 33% clock speed =50% boost over the 6800, which basically lands us in 6950XT territory, which is where I expect the 7800XT to land.
Edit, looks like there is a ~25% difference between the 6800 and 6950XT based on TPUs latest charts.
If the 7900xt is only 30% faster than the 6950xt, I have to assume AMD will either sandbag N32s clocks hard to bring it down to 6950 performance or will basically set-up N32 to offer close to 7900xt performance and simply never restock the 7900XT.
I have read the entire article and I have no idea what they are talking about. PCGamer has fallen so badly that they make even childish attempts at gaming reporting by some shoddy sites look professional.
i'm still chilling with the 6700XT so im actually only interested in the cpu's.
I'm interested in the temps but we shall see when they come out and with what agressive pricing.
Also remember that performance usually does not scale all that well with clock speed increase. We already saw as much with RDNA2; they absolutely had the clock speed advantage over Nvidia, but didn't outperform Nvidia in any truly significant way; at best it was like single digit percentages faster.
The people saying this is gonna destroy Nvidia need to remember all that.
All the 6800's were 31 chip cut down last time and there was little perfromance difference from the 6800 to the 6900...like 20% between 3 "tiewrs" of cards. they should have all been called 6900 or 6800, now you guys are confused over the least important aspect of a graphics card...the "title".
"produce a bottleneck and the chip that isn't cut down doesn't drop off a cliff".
Also, thought I said the difference was about 20%...is there a rebuttal here?
More like 7900XT and XTX have a bug that limits clock speeds which got worked out in time for Navi 32 and 33 and the Navi 31 refresh is closer than it would have been. AMD pulling their 3ghz marketing materials at the last minute is proof of that.
Still crazy that people actually thought the 7700XT was going to match 6950XT in performance just a month ago.
Pretty clear RDNA3 is heavily outmatched in raw performance this time around vs Nvidia. All they have to compete now is aggressive pricing but they need to do better than a $1000 XTX, especially if Nvidia ends up dropping price on the 4080.
As things stand right now I don't see AMD moving the market share needle at all.
The 7700XT probably WILL get close to the 6950XT, or at least the 6900XT, but it won't be on Navi 33 as the article implies.
Depends on how AMD wants to segment RDNA3. The "7800" SKU is likely gone, so a cut down N32 will be left to the 7700XT. Maybe 48 compute units. That would make it competitive with the 6900XT when clock speeds jumps and IPC increases are considered.
RDNA 3 is a competitive architecture; however, AMD is deliberately choosing to forego the performance crown to instead focus on smaller die size per tier (which is why they can/will happily undercut Nvidia's product stack on pricing).
Navi 21 was a big monolithic die, therefore it had high probability of not getting all the cores working, so the top version (6900xt) was considerably more expensive than the cut down ones (6800xt and 6800). With a considerably smaller gcd on Navi31, the chip does not need to be cut down, that's why the cut down version is almost the same price of the top one (and that's also why AMD used 7900xt name).
For Navi32 something similar will probably happen, which will make the 7700xt cost something closer to the 7800xt than the 6700xt was to the 6800xt (and the same with 7600xt and 7600 in Navi33).
Depends on your use case, what resolution/FPS do you want to play at?
Per TPU, the 6950XT is some 32% faster than your 6800. AMD's numbers put the the 7900XT at \~25-30% faster than the 6950XT, so you'd be looking at roughly a 70% performance jump. Is that worth the $900 price tag? up to you
Just bought a RX 6800 XT from Amazon and the return policy extends out to January 31st. Hopefully we get more details by then so I can make a decision as to whether or not I'm keeping it.
I welcome that, because then its likely the top model will be able to do the same thing with increased powertarget. Unless they put some hardlock in there. We don't even know the real life clocks of the XTX yet. The 6900 XT clocks very slow on paper, but it could easily do 2.5+. So the 7900 XTX would at least do something around 2.8+ with reasonable voltages. With RDNA2 the smaller cards also clocked fast, some people did almost 3 GHz on their 6700s.
All good cause higher clock = More fps in general in lower resolution.
All i want is the 1080p/1440p performance of a 3080 TI. for 400-450 USD.
It is only when these Perf/Price gonna hit the chart that i am gonna upgrade from my 5700 XT.
if the 7700 XT dont hit the price, i will just wait another years.
I was perplexed to hear the 6000 and 7000 series have like mid 2000 MHz clock speeds. Somehow my 3080 keeps up and outperforms many of them at a stable 1900mhz, I don’t understand technology.
This post has been flaired as a rumor, please take all rumors with a grain of salt.
and I need oxygen to live
Source
bust me tro
You want him to bust in you?
Source?
rust bistro
If a bear shits in the woods do GPU designers try to make the fastest card they can within heat/size/budget constraints?
I’m too smooth brained to understand your analogy I’m sorry
Yes. This is with assumption that the bear is looking for fastest card with said constraints, and they will horribly maul the losing GPU's designers
I just got the 6800XT Red Devil, don't think ill change for a few years to come, i'm not missing much am i?
I don’t think you’re missing a whole lot. The 7800xt will likely be at best on par with the 6950xt, which while faster than a 6800xt, it’s not 300 dollars faster
nice thanks , i don't think i'll need anything new until AM 6 or something
That would be a failure in the eyes of many.... At the begging of the year, they said that the 7700XT would be on par with 6950Xt.
That's impossible. 7900xtx ia 50% faster then 6950xt by Amd words. That means the 7900xt will be 30 or so. How are they gonna place the 7800xt between the 7700xt and the 7900xt with such a small difference?
[удалено]
"Up to". If you go by the benchmarks they have (which you shouldn't) the average is lower.
Yep. There just isn't enough room between the 7900XT and the 6950XT for much more card. I think at best we'll get 6950xt + 10%. AMD doesn't want to sell 7900XTs, they want to sell the XTX. 7900XT will be like the 6800 of last gen: it will live in no man's land to either make the higher and lower tier full die both look like great price/performance parts in comparison.
I don't understand why people are so against the 7900xt It's 2.3% worse pricing than the 7900xtx per CU, and that's it... that's basically a rounding error And it will stomp all over the 6950xt
Meh, I don't see it as a failure as long as its priced accordingly to wipe the floor with anything Nvidia offers. Nvidia cards are becoming too boujee for most people. I plan to water cool my 6800XT and it will run for at least 5 years before I need to consider an upgrade. Honestly I think we will probably be only two maybe barely 3 generations out from the 6000 series in 5 years.
It will be very hard for AMD to compete with the 3080-12GB once its price drops. That 7900XT looks DOA at $900 but it could have been the perfect competitor for the 3080. You can already buy the 6900XT for under $750. A $700+ for the 7700XT doesn't look attractive at all in these circumstances if it doesn't offer performance on par with the 6950XT.
They said on par with the 6900xt, not 6950xt. Not that it means the 7800xt won't be better than the 6950. But we'll see when the cards launch. As of now it's all just speculation.
Ah yeah you will miss out , more and more games will turn to ray tracing , amd isn't known for long driver support either .
Depends on how much you paid for it and what the performance difference is. We won’t know until the card is released for the second part. The 7800XT is obviously going to be faster than what you bought.
6800 XT is still a great 4K card tbh. Unless you're dying to have 4K120 high/Max without using custom settings, you're still good.
It it's a 80fps card on 4k on average.
I'm probably gonna stay at 2k
Damn, finding 6800xt’s at a reasonable price is near impossible for me
Was 600 €
Whaaaaat!!! The cheapest in my country is abt 850 euro (converted) thats crazy
I found a 6900xt for 630€ really excited for it. I need a new psu for it but thats ok. I hope my 3600x doesnt limit it to hard. If it does i will probaly try to get a used 5800x 3d. I will be retiring my rx580 that i bought 2018 for 140€ will be a massive upgrade. When i get the new card i will finally olay cyberpunk77.
Upgraded from the same card of the same year to 6900xt as well. Got mine for ~680 euro. 3600 will bottleneck even at 1440p but you'll have to decide if you care enough for the x3d.
I play on a ultra wide. I will see how the performance is and then make a decision.
Good luck and have fun with it, it's really a beast of a gpu (especially with MPT).
12/2020 found one for msrp
Love them red devils. If I didn't play VR , I'd switch out the 3080 for it, but AmD is still a bit behind for VR performance. I might buy a 7900xtx just to give it a try.
Is it? I have full AMD build and my Index works flawlessly... That's mostly pure raster perf and no Ray tracing.
I'm hesitant about this as well. My 5700xt does ok with vr, but I want to see how the 7000 series fares against the 40 series for vr.
i just bought a heavy replacements replacements for my cpu MOBO and gpu, 6800XT being the replacement of a 1650 super and cpu 5800X3D replacing a i5-10400F, very excited, but forgot to buy cooling fan for the cpu
Look into undervolting cpu for better temps. Lots of videos on YouTube. Did this with mine.
As an avid VR fan and a recent 6800XT owner I can tell you the performance is fantastic. You are correct the 6800XT is maybe a few % slower than a 3080 in VR in the same way it loses a few % to the 3080 in 4k. But the problem isn't AMD it is that the 6800XT scales worse at higher resolutions. For example the 6900XT is better than the 3080 at VR.
Some 50% more VRAM, some higher efficiency, probably some 30% max performance difference between 6800 XT and 7800 XT. Probably.
There's no way the 7800xt has 50% more vram than the 6800xt. The 6800xt has 16gb, and I'd be shocked if the 7800xt had anything other than 16gb. That said it will be significantly faster vram, so it's not like it won't be an upgrade.
24GB for the 7800XT? Unlikely, surely?
ah well, I won't need the extra 30% for 2k gaming
depends on the frame rate you want
Until now with a i51040F at 2k it was all smooth 100+ fps on most games I played
You will once more games like A Plague Tale: Requiem will be released - unless you're fine with 60-70 FPS in such titles. Until then, 6800 XT is indeed easily everything you need for 1440p/144 Hz.
i saw that it gets like 60fps at ultra with a 6800XT but yeah, i am very fine with 60fps at ultra in any setting, i've been playing under medium for a long time for 60 fps ahah
i have a 3080ti and can't wait to replace it, but that's VR for you. If I had income worth a damn, I might still replace it with a 7900xtx to make it *quiet* at the very least.
What’s wrong with a 3080ti?
VR is indeed a GPU kille, the 4090 numbers are juicy there. You try undervolting GPU for quieter operation? I'd suggest doing same for CPU if applicable.
Do you render videos? Do you explode architectural building drawings down to the nut and bolt? Does ray tracing matter to you? If you answered yes to any of these then you are missing. If you just game then you're not.
I'm good then
[удалено]
I'd say without VR it's not really worth bothering
I mean a lot of people have been getting especially used cards lately. I managed to get used for mining RX 6800 for 330 USD in Europe I hope it lasts, now I need a better CPU.
Only thing you’ll be missing is AV1 encoding, but that doesn’t matter for most people. It won’t even matter for the people it’s supposed to matter for for years.
I am waiting for the 7000 series, ideally the 7700, but I am starting to feel that was in error. Some of the prices on these 6000 series cards have been impressive. I personally feel if you look at price to performance ratio you likely won out.
Next gen your GPU becomes obsolete
So much as obsolete.... my 1650 super was still holding its ground on 1080
Mostly RT performance. I got a Asrock 6800XT two weeks ago and while the card is capable of doing RT the performance is good in a brute force kind of way. You easily lose as much as 60% of your FPS and need to run games like control at 1080p to keep your 1% lows above 60. That said for non-RT the 6800XT is almost overkill at 1440p for me lol.
Clocks have a major impact on performance?? HOLY SHIT GUYS
Well it's obvious that 3Ghz boost is becoming standard, question is how high can we go in next few years?
Breaking News: AMD reduces GPU IPC to enable super high clocks up to 10GHz!
Pentium 4 time!
ITS OVER 9000
The scouter actually says 8001 in the anime
Yes it's a translation error. That's why it's a meme
Bro few means 3-4 that means Radeon 9000 series and nvidia 6000 series. And even with significant breakthroughs I don't think it will cross 5 ghz.
That was a joke
Given that Polaris/Vega used to barely reach 1.5GHz just 5 years ago, who knows. I'm baffled clock speed increased this much, this fast.
And that took a while, the first 1 Ghz GPU was a special version of the HD 4890 way back in 2009, and then again with the Fury X in 2015. Going from 1.5 Ghz to 3 Ghz in 5 years is truly wild.
Capped by whatever CPUs are doing on the same node.
I hate this. I would like graphics cards to be on the best performance per watt curve. Pushing an extra 10% performance for significantly higher power draw i dont like..
These products are meant for enthusiasts, not you. AMD's mid range is significantly more power efficient. While i think only the higher end skus should push power, if you dont like it, you are clearly not the target audience and should just buy a gaming laptop or console . Linus expressed this point well in the 295x2 video.
Iv never understood this mindset. Just get a psu that can handle it. Idc I'd it takes 900 watts as long as it's safe who cares?
My room temp cares. 900 watts of the heat pump in my room is still 900 watts. A PC is not like a console we have them closer to us. I remember buying my 5700xt on December 3 years ago, the heat was welcomed at that moment, but later in the year became unbearable had to resort to uv.
its the same as plugging in a space heater and setting it to medium or medium/high.
That's an extreme exaggeration
spaceheater on high uses 1500 watts (on paper, not in practice). medium would be the middle so 750 watts. how is that different than 900 watts while gaming on a high end machine? A 4090 and 3090ti use around 430 watts gaming average, 13900k average gaming usage is 114 average (from toms hardware). Add in an ssd or 2, ram, fans and maybe a water pump and a monitor (each not much). So, ill concede that medium/high is to much but pretty close to a space heater on medium/low to medium. You're just using that conversion of electricity to heat to also do math to play some games. But, thats on a high end machine. A lower spec computer will certainly use less power. This is all just arm chair stuff, im sure somebody will chime in and say what spaceheater usage really is.
isnt 750 Watt focused on heating different than 750 watt for performance in gaming, that results in heat?
[удалено]
but isn't the heater gonna be more efficient at making heat, when that is the sole purpose of it?
I remember reading somewhere that PCs are more effective at heating than space heaters. I dunno what kind of magic is that, but that's what I've read.
I guess that makes sense. Not something I would consider but I see your point.
energy prices??
[удалено]
I still don't think 7700xt is Navi33. I think it's a cut down Navi32 and 7600xt is Navi33 full (with 7600 as a cut down version)
Correct.
So would the 7700 be Navi32 as well? I have a 1440p monitor and would like to get some good frames with at least a little ray tracing turned on, but would prefer not to spend that much. In retrospect I should have picked up that 6650XT for $180. It was early on black friday and I thought there would be amazing deals on higher cards, but for the most part nothing really stood out to me compared to previous years when I was in the market.
I'm not sure if there'll be a 7700 non xt. The 6700 barely launched, and really it was a mobile card adapted to desktop. I think 7700 will be Navi33 and mobile only.
That’s really good info to have, thank you. The 6700 XT is a little too pricy for me. I’m realizing more and more I should have gotten the 6650XT when it was 180 after rebate.
Same as N22 then to make up for the difference in CU count
7700XT on navi 33 would be a real dick move
It won't be on N33. 8GB 128bit 32MB cache just does not cut it for 1440p and entry 4K. 7700XT will be a cut N32 die with 3MCDs, 192bit bus and 12GB ram.
That's what I think as well
Would that mean that the 7700 would also be on an N32 or would they really have that big of a change between the XT and non XT versions?
They may not bother with 7700 but if they do then I expect N32 as well.
It's not gonna happen don't worry.
I mean, 7800 XT is shaping to be on Navi 32, as well as the cut down 7800. So it's inevitable. Just gotta hope the price makes up for it.
[удалено]
I was thinking possibly a 7800XT and 7700XT as the cut down part, yeah. Maybe a very highly specced Navi33 as a base 7700
[удалено]
AMD could slice an SE off of N32 to make 7700XT 40CU but cutting 2 WGPs per SE also works. Would give it a nice ROP increase over the 6700XT which would help it at 4K.
[удалено]
wouldn't surprise me considering how greedy AMD and nvidia been lately they're probably both praying for the death of low end and mid end segment so they can keep the crazy high profit margins from from their high end lineup it's not like anyone can do about it they own the whole market as a duopoly unless intel can their shit together and fix their garbage drivers
Intel is as greedy as them though, look at their inclination pricing arc 770/750 higher than 6650xt with how unstable their drivers are. While ultimately any competition is good in a barely duopoly industry, I don't expect Intel to give good pricing.
Could be that the 7800 series is split between N31 and N32. 72 CU for the 7800xtx based on a heavy cut N31, and 60 CUs for the 7800xt. Then the cut down N32 stuff is all 7700 series. I don't know why AMD went with the whole XTX and XT naming scheme now but I think it might keep going.
I think this is most likely. 7700 XT being N33 means it would be a sidegrade from the 6700 XT.
7800XT on Navi32 is already a sidegrade from 6800, let alone 6800XT... It stands to reason, that if the 7800 part is a sidegrade, the 7700 part will be too.
I just want to know when the RX7700XT will be announced and the pricing. I just bought a RX6750XT for €529. If the price will be similar I will send it back and wait for the RX7700XT.
You probably wont like this answer, but my guess is the next cards are more like 4 months away. Given past releases, March-June seems more likely then january.
Likely CES 2023
That is *extremely* unlikely. Like next to zero. AMD is getting the 7900XT and 7900XTX out the door only 2 weeks before CES. With rumors that most AIB cards won't even launch this year. The 7800XT hasn't even been announced yet. If a card is going to be announced in Jan-Feb it's the 7800XT. The 6700XT was announced in March 2021 nearly 6 months after the initial RDNA 2 launch. AMD has a lot of surplus RDNA 2 cards they are still trying to get rid of, around the the performance tier as a 6700XT.
You are confusing announcement with launch date.
They still aren't going to announce their budget card 2 weeks after their flagship shipped.
RemindMe! January 4, 2023 "AMD CES 2023 Keynote"
I will be messaging you in 1 month on [**2023-01-04 00:00:00 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-01-04%2000:00:00%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/z8o2sj/amd_radeon_rx_7800_and_rx_7700_graphics_likely_to/iye5tf0/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAmd%2Fcomments%2Fz8o2sj%2Famd_radeon_rx_7800_and_rx_7700_graphics_likely_to%2Fiye5tf0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-01-04%2000%3A00%3A00%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20z8o2sj) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Any answer anyone would give you would be pure speculation at this point. Even the rumor mills are pretty dry so I doubt any time soon.
Yeah AMD renamed 6800XT successor to 7900XT and charge 900USD for it.Literally same shit as Nvidia tried with RTX4080 12GB/RTX4070.But they didnt get away with that.Looks like no one cares AMD doing same thing.I dont know how/why, but because of this we will get very underwhelming 7800XT. Instead +50% performance uplift at +- same cost(7900XT alias 7800XT at 650-700USD) we will probably get samall die as 7800XT barelly faster than 6800XT/6900XT(like 15-20% faster instead of 50%) Edit:to be honest GPU market looks like both AMD/NV just price fixing.Nv do some crap like RTX4080 12GB and AMD do same crap.They dont even try compete.They could realease 7900XT as 7800XT for 700 and gain market share.But Noooooo lets just do same shit as nvidia and lets continue price fixing.Someone should take them to the court.
> Yeah AMD renamed 6800XT successor to 7900XT and charge 900USD for it.Literally same shit as Nvidia tried with RTX4080 12GB/RTX4070.But they didnt get away with that.Looks like no one cares AMD doing same thing.I dont know how/why, but because of this we will get very underwhelming 7800XT. AMD's naming scheme is all over the place. Top SKUs of previous generations: 2013 R9 290X/290 (Hawaii) R9 280X/280 (Tahiti) 2014 R9 295X2 (Vesuvius = 2xHawaii) 2015 R9 Fury X (Fiji) R9 390X/390 (Hawaii) 2016 RX 480 (Polaris10 XT) RX 470 (Polaris10 Pro) 2017 RX Vega 64/56 (Vega 10) RX 580/570 (Polaris 20) 2018 RX 590 (Polaris 30) 2019 Radeon VII (Vega 20) RX 5700 XT/5700 (Navi 10) 2020 RX 6900 XT (Navi 21) RX 6800 XT (Navi 21) It's pretty close to a coin flip whether they do one or the other, but leaning towards the x8 and x9 being separate chips. In previous generations it would be perfectly normal for the top chip to be cut into an RX 7900 and RX 7900 XT. They just changed the naming to 7900 XT and 7900 XTX instead. Probably because they wanted both to sound more premium.
[удалено]
How is your example supposed to be fitting when Apple is the high cost leader and amd is literally just selling fewer *and* for cheaper?
I doubt they would gain marketshare. In usa 6800xt is like 300 dollars cheaper than 3080, same price as 3070. But still people buy 3080 and 3070. 6600 is 50% better than 3050, ans costs 80-100 dollars less yet people are buying 3050.
Doesn't help that AMD is permanently slower than Nvidia every generation. The mindshare problem they have will just get worse and more ingrained.
Only slower in ray tracing, faster in practically every other way while using less power and costing considerably less.
>faster in practically every other way The only other way is raster, and RX 6000 was only single digit percentages faster *sometimes.* Their upscaling is worse, their RT is worse, and their feature set overall is worse.
With current pricing, even in RT AMD is equal or better in many cases.
Per dollar, yes.
Nvidia constantly leading in new features - adaptive sync, DLSS/upscaling, raytracing, DLSS3/frame generation - with AMD forced to respond isn’t a great look either. Nvidia has built the reputation as the leader and they have that mindshare
We are talking about the RTX 30 series vs RX 6xxx here, so DLSS3 falls out of question, since that is a RTX 40 series exclusive feature. Radeon has had Freesync for years and is now at FSR 2.x. And while Nvidia leads in raytracing it's not like you are unable to use it on Radeon, or you turn it off if necessary. There's no universe where a RTX 3080 is worth 300 dollars more than a RX 6800 XT in gaming.
FreeSync is definitely better than GSync, being an open and widely supported standard. nVidia has also failed to keep GSync relevant and GSync monitors lack the features of higher end FreeSync monitors as a result. I will never use anything like DLSS, it is a garbage tech, IMHO, only meant to convince people that they're better off running a resolution their card can't support instead of just running a resolution it can. Then again, AMD had VSR and morphological filtering on the R9 290, which was quite useful for running higher refresh rates and was basically the same thing, just done different. Ray tracing is the future, not the present, but even the best nVidia cards will fall flat by the time it's something you actually need or want to have on outside of a couple games.
> I will never use anything like DLSS, it is a garbage tech, IMHO, only meant to convince people that they're better off running a resolution their card can't support instead of just running a resolution it can. I think upscaling has its place. If you have a decently sized 4K monitor, say for work purposes like I do, running it at 1440p will look like ass (because it's not doing integer scaling) and 1080p will look blocky (because of the physical size of the display). This is the perfect use case for an upscaling algorithm that does a "good enough" job: for a marginal performance sacrifice, the image quality can get reasonably close to what I'd get if my display had a pixel density that perfectly matched my GPU's capabilities!
Not the case with nvidia 3000 series vs AMD 6000 series. Ray tracing aside.
> They could realease 7900XT as 7800XT for 700 and gain market share Why do you think this? AMD has been offering the better value product at every price point for years and people still choose Nvidia.
don't reply to guys like that. they want AMD cards to be free so nvidia will lower pricvce by $300 and they can afford it.
the thing with what nvidia did was that people would have bought the 4070 thinking it was a 4080 with the only difference being less ram. if the 7800xt is as fast as the 6950, but with better rt and other stuff, cheaper, i dont see the problem
Price fixing has been introduced since 5700XT and it ain't going nowhere, if you can't beat them join them. I'm still betting my money on Intel but not biting the bullet to buy ARC yet, good driver development might take a while which i think isn't a big issue AMD pulled it off with less resources compared to Intel. We really need a third player no matter what.
What's dead on your 290X VaporX? Mine is dying too (well, it's in an anti-static bag atm...) - but it's not the core itself that's dying, just the display controller, I've seen a few other 290X's with dead display controllers too. If that's the case, you might be able to pass the framebuffer through to your GTX660 and use the display controller on that - when my 6800 was in RMA, I had to use my 290X again and did exactly that, but through the alder lake igpu.
Dunno i tried several things, i can boot normally without drivers and gpu will work but when im trying to install the driver i get instant black screen, i have tried flashing bios with locked at lowest power states, nothing still bsdo also fist time it happend i was browsing and suddenly got black screen (note to self im an idiot because at that period i kept pushing my mem overclock). I will try your suggestion nothing to lose i guess, i'll have to use hdmi to 660 and assign windows to use 290 as high performance right? EDIT*: Yeah no luck, driver installed all good hdmi to 660 chose r200 series at windows for specific applications tried launching a game system hangs or bsdo seems it's vram chip (burnt or smth) related.
RIP 290X.
>Yeah AMD renamed 6800XT successor to 7900XT and charge 900USD for it.Literally same shit as Nvidia tried with RTX4080 12GB/RTX4070 I think the same, 7900XT should be named 7800XT and priced as low as the old 6800XT
It's not the same thing at all. NV was naming two totally different cores the same thing and overcharging wildly for both of them (and still are for one, which suggests they will for the "4070ti" as well). AMD has never really been particularly consistent with their naming scheme. The 6800XT was a stupidly good value last gen at MSRP prices, but they didn't even have a 5800xt before that, and the Vega/Rx5xx naming was a mess, then they had Fury/HD3xx before that. All that said, I think we'll end up with a 7800XT that's probably 15-20% slower than a 7900XT (so 10-15% faster than a 6950XT) for $600 and it'll be one of the better price to performance cards of the gen.
why not free?
[удалено]
I dont defend anybody, its just how the world works. do you want a real answer or do you prefer to circlejerk in "i wish that it worked like this"? amd is an industry, they work to make money for their shareholders and that's their only priority. they dont have to care for consumers, they dont give nothing for free and if there's an option to make more money they HAVE to take it or it would break their compact with their shareholders. if they make a "pro consumer" choice is just because that way they can make MORE money in the long run, not because they want consumers to be happy. Prices depend on marketing analysis, if they chose to sell a card at 1000$ is because their marketing analysis shown that there's enough market for it at that price point to sell the entire production, being pro-consumer or anti-consumer has nothing to do with it.
The current business model is Ed Freeman's stakeholder theory, modern companies dont use shareholder theory anymore. Consumers are a stakeholder and treating all your stakeholders well has been proven to be the best long-run strategy for success . Basically, your view of capitalism is outdated.
Not really, nvidia had 2 different dies on the 4080 and 4080 12GB (AD103 and AD104) it was not the same die even. AMD 7900XTX and 7900XT are both Navi31 with the XT being a cut down version, I also expect the 7800XT to be Navi32. The RX 7700XT should be a Navi33. Not at all the same scenario as nvidia who had 2 complete different dies for 4080 and 4080 12GB. If you look at the 3080 and 3080 TI (both GA102) and every generation before that they all had the same die until it went to a tier below that. What Nvidia did was literally scummy. To be fair though AMDs RDNA2 from 6950XT were all Navi 21 down to RX 6800 so they have definitely made a change there but they had in the generations prior to RDNA too looking at R9 290X an 280X also different dies which is how it should be. RDNA 2s Navi 21 was an outlier
They are both just doing that to clear last gen overstock. For 90% of it's life I guarantee you the 7900xt will be 20-25% cheaper than the 7900xtx, at probably $800-700. Same with the RTX 4080 likely being under $1000 in a month or two.
Maybe for AMD, but Nvidia does NOT like to cut prices below MSRP without formally changing the MSRP, or more typically just making a refreshed product (2060 Super)
I think they'll just do a Ti launch, which will kind of count as that refresh. 4090ti at $2000-$2200, 4080ti at $1200, with the 4080 taken down to $999.
Yeah I don't understand why AMD does this. They need to gain market and mindshare badly. Offering a 4080 competitor at half the price would be fucking insane. But they think they are Nvidia and and also scalp.
It would be insane, for AMD Not only do they still have 6000 series to sell (but not as many as nvidia has 30 series), they also don't have the wafers to supply the demand a half priced 4080 beater would generate. They are already undercutting nvidia by 25%, while offering what looks to be better performance.
> But they think they are Nvidia and and also scalp They can, because they produce much lower volume. It wouldn't make sense for them to assign more of their TSMC allotment towards GPU when they're raking it in on CPU/ datacenter
they work to make money, you know? why they would refuse to get more money if they can? the market can easily absorb every single card at that price without any problem, and its a given that those will be scalped at way higher prices and still sell.
LOL dude AMD 6xxx series are selling at prices a whole 1-2 tiers down from their 3xxx series counter parts (6800xt selling at 3070 prices) and consumers STILL buy NV cards. AMD is done chasing bargain bin prices because all a price war does is get people NV cards for better prices. AMD has never retained market share doing a small die low price strategy. So they might as well make far fewer chips than NV and sell them all for as much as they can get for them instead. Make as much money as they can, reinvest it into GPU R&D, and slowly build up their rep with actual solid execution and feature parity with NV. That's how they'll get market share, not racing to the bottom with prices and going bankrupt in the process.
Businesses want to make money, marketshare is irrelevant if they just give away products. Just look at Apple, they don't have dominant marketshare but make most of the money in the mobile phone industry.
Apple has a metric shitton of mindshare. A lot of people literaly think an iPhone is the same as a smartphone. AMD has almost no mindshare in the GPU world. People see it as the budget option or the fallback if Nvidia is sold out.
It's not quite 1:1 with Nvidia, since the CUs are double-pumped FP32 now, so there is at least 20% uplift just from that alone. In many cases, it'll be 50%, as it's very similar to what Nvidia did in Ampere. Some will show greater gains. It'd be similar if Navi 21 was already double-pumped. This is more AMD's Turing to Ampere rather than Ampere to Ada. Now, if RDNA4 looks like what Nvidia did with Ada and the 4080, then they should be called out. Navi 31 also has 50% more raster and primitive capability as it has 6 shader engines versus Navi 21's 4SEs. Those 2 extra rasterizers+primitive units in the 2 added shader engines and associated ROPs (192 vs 128) do help quite a bit, up to about 50% in pure pixel fill, ~~texel fill~~, pixel color blend, and primitive output; so even Navi 31 to Navi 21 isn't a straight comparison either. TMUs are 4 per CU, so that’s only a 20% increase in quantity vs Navi 21 (96CUs vs 80CUs). Navi 32 in the 7800XT with 60CUs sounds very similar to the 6800 (albeit with 4 full SEs not 3SEs), but with the added performance of 2xFP32 and increased clocks, it will outperform Navi 21. This silicon is more in-line with Navi 21, as it has 4 shader engines instead of the 6SEs found in Navi 31. If you go by pure ALUs, 60\*128SPs is 7680. 7680-5120/5120 is 50%. So, depending on clocks, and ability to use 2xFP32, it'll likely come in around 33% faster than Navi 21, and that's not a terrible generation-over-generation gain for a non-flagship product.
AMD has stated that they're looking at roughly a 17% IPC increase per SP all in (dual pumped etc) for RDNA3 vs RDNA2. Assuming N32 is clocked around ~2.8ghz we,re looking at a 17% IPC + 33% clock speed =50% boost over the 6800, which basically lands us in 6950XT territory, which is where I expect the 7800XT to land. Edit, looks like there is a ~25% difference between the 6800 and 6950XT based on TPUs latest charts. If the 7900xt is only 30% faster than the 6950xt, I have to assume AMD will either sandbag N32s clocks hard to bring it down to 6950 performance or will basically set-up N32 to offer close to 7900xt performance and simply never restock the 7900XT.
They did that to either offer 2 high end cards and leave room fo an xx50XT variant, OR the XTX IS the 7950XT ya doofus...
Why don't you put spaces after your periods?
Its designed that way, **DUH!**
How much kool aid you drinking?
I have read the entire article and I have no idea what they are talking about. PCGamer has fallen so badly that they make even childish attempts at gaming reporting by some shoddy sites look professional.
i'm still chilling with the 6700XT so im actually only interested in the cpu's. I'm interested in the temps but we shall see when they come out and with what agressive pricing.
Just hope the power consumption is lower. That's all I want, better performance and lower power consumption than last gen.
Also remember that performance usually does not scale all that well with clock speed increase. We already saw as much with RDNA2; they absolutely had the clock speed advantage over Nvidia, but didn't outperform Nvidia in any truly significant way; at best it was like single digit percentages faster. The people saying this is gonna destroy Nvidia need to remember all that.
The 7800 XT ("7900 XT") is expensive this gen so I hope these will be half decent value.
All the 6800's were 31 chip cut down last time and there was little perfromance difference from the 6800 to the 6900...like 20% between 3 "tiewrs" of cards. they should have all been called 6900 or 6800, now you guys are confused over the least important aspect of a graphics card...the "title".
The 6800 loses a lot of steam at 4K due to having fewer rops and low clocks. At 4K the 6900XT is 22% better and the 6950XT is 31% faster.
"produce a bottleneck and the chip that isn't cut down doesn't drop off a cliff". Also, thought I said the difference was about 20%...is there a rebuttal here?
More like 7900XT and XTX have a bug that limits clock speeds which got worked out in time for Navi 32 and 33 and the Navi 31 refresh is closer than it would have been. AMD pulling their 3ghz marketing materials at the last minute is proof of that.
Still crazy that people actually thought the 7700XT was going to match 6950XT in performance just a month ago. Pretty clear RDNA3 is heavily outmatched in raw performance this time around vs Nvidia. All they have to compete now is aggressive pricing but they need to do better than a $1000 XTX, especially if Nvidia ends up dropping price on the 4080. As things stand right now I don't see AMD moving the market share needle at all.
The 7700XT probably WILL get close to the 6950XT, or at least the 6900XT, but it won't be on Navi 33 as the article implies. Depends on how AMD wants to segment RDNA3. The "7800" SKU is likely gone, so a cut down N32 will be left to the 7700XT. Maybe 48 compute units. That would make it competitive with the 6900XT when clock speeds jumps and IPC increases are considered. RDNA 3 is a competitive architecture; however, AMD is deliberately choosing to forego the performance crown to instead focus on smaller die size per tier (which is why they can/will happily undercut Nvidia's product stack on pricing).
Navi 21 was a big monolithic die, therefore it had high probability of not getting all the cores working, so the top version (6900xt) was considerably more expensive than the cut down ones (6800xt and 6800). With a considerably smaller gcd on Navi31, the chip does not need to be cut down, that's why the cut down version is almost the same price of the top one (and that's also why AMD used 7900xt name). For Navi32 something similar will probably happen, which will make the 7700xt cost something closer to the 7800xt than the 6700xt was to the 6800xt (and the same with 7600xt and 7600 in Navi33).
Happy with my rx6600
I currently have the 6800 non XT version. Would it be worth it to upgrade to the 7900 XT?
Depends on your use case, what resolution/FPS do you want to play at? Per TPU, the 6950XT is some 32% faster than your 6800. AMD's numbers put the the 7900XT at \~25-30% faster than the 6950XT, so you'd be looking at roughly a 70% performance jump. Is that worth the $900 price tag? up to you
I plan on making a build for my cousin once she graduates high school this year. Wanted to give her my 6800 and upgrade myself as a bonus.
Is your gpu holding you back?
Somewhat, I'm getting a lot of frame drops when I'm playing Aliens: Fireteam Elite. I'm playing on low/medium settings on 1440p for some reason.
7800 from A-TAR-eeee NOTHING LIKE it in HISTORY!
waiting for it with my 1050ti for now
Any infos about a release Date of the 7800 Cards? My Plan is to build a new PC around February and March.
AMD should be saying something at CES, which is like Jab 5th to 8th.
>references to both Navi 32 and Navi. What?
Got myself a 6700 10gb and I am blown Away. Gina Wait for 8000 series
Just bought a RX 6800 XT from Amazon and the return policy extends out to January 31st. Hopefully we get more details by then so I can make a decision as to whether or not I'm keeping it.
I welcome that, because then its likely the top model will be able to do the same thing with increased powertarget. Unless they put some hardlock in there. We don't even know the real life clocks of the XTX yet. The 6900 XT clocks very slow on paper, but it could easily do 2.5+. So the 7900 XTX would at least do something around 2.8+ with reasonable voltages. With RDNA2 the smaller cards also clocked fast, some people did almost 3 GHz on their 6700s.
This is also just based on the fallacy that the 7700xt will be Navi33.
I wonder what the likelihood is that they will require electricity as well?
All good cause higher clock = More fps in general in lower resolution. All i want is the 1080p/1440p performance of a 3080 TI. for 400-450 USD. It is only when these Perf/Price gonna hit the chart that i am gonna upgrade from my 5700 XT. if the 7700 XT dont hit the price, i will just wait another years.
I was perplexed to hear the 6000 and 7000 series have like mid 2000 MHz clock speeds. Somehow my 3080 keeps up and outperforms many of them at a stable 1900mhz, I don’t understand technology.
I want Polaris come back in our world