Monday, July 29th 2019

AMD Readies Larger 7nm "Navi 12" Silicon to Power Radeon RX 5800 Series?

AMD is developing a larger GPU based on its new "Navi" architecture to power a new high-end graphics card family, likely the Radeon RX 5800 series. The codename "Navi 12" is doing rounds on social media through familiar accounts that have high credibility with pre-launch news and rumors. The "Navi 10" silicon was designed to compete with NVIDIA's "TU106," as its "XT" and "Pro" variants outperform NVIDIA's original RTX 2060 and RTX 2070, forcing it to develop the RTX 20 Super series, by moving up specifications a notch.

Refreshing its $500 price-point was particularly costly for NVIDIA, as it was forced to tap into the 13.6 billion-transistor "TU104" silicon to carve out the RTX 2070 Super; while for the RTX 2060 Super, it had to spend 33 percent more on the memory chips. With the "Navi 12" silicon, AMD is probably looking to take a swing at NVIDIA's "TU104" silicon, which has been maxed out by the RTX 2080 Super, disrupting the company's $500-700 lineup once again, with its XT and Pro variants. There's also a remote possibility of "Navi 12" being an even bigger chip, targeting the "TU102."
Source: KOMACHI_ENSAKA (Twitter)
Add your own comment

128 Comments on AMD Readies Larger 7nm "Navi 12" Silicon to Power Radeon RX 5800 Series?

#26
kapone32
ShurikN, post: 4088736, member: 140585"
I was not aware you could run 16 gigs on 384 bit bus. For 16GB they can run either 256 or 512 bit. And the later seem unrealistic as it drives the price up. Thats for GDDR, HBM is a different story.
I was unaware that you could get 16 on a 256 bit. I think the price may be a non issue. I know if I could buy a card that is 30 to 40% faster than my Vega 64 for what I paid for my first Vega 64 I would have no issue. I do seriously wonder though how HBM2 would effect the performance of a Navi GPU.
Posted on Reply
#27
Vayra86
Imsochobo, post: 4088667, member: 66457"
as long as they go to wider memory bus and use 16gbps memory ic's it'll scale nicely
It doesn't scale linearly, and increasing bus widths... need I remind you of what that meant for AMD in the past? A dead end. The writing was already on the wall with the smaller Navi 10. And if they don't pump the clocks, performance will end up lacking.

That is why I'm more interested in actual performance than a bump in specs. History has a tendency to repeat. On paper the 2080ti and a potential Navi upgrade may seem equal, but we're still looking at a node difference to make it happen. Last time AMD used HBM to cover the gap (unsuccessfully) and now its 7nm; this will catch up on them fast.
Posted on Reply
#28
ShieldHead
Fanboys are really funny.
Since when do you care for a 50w tdp difference when there is (maybe??) performance to back that up?
Let's all just buy 1030's then
Posted on Reply
#29
Chrispy_
Historically, AMD's biggest dies have had codenames in multiples of 10; Polaris 10, 20, 30, Vega 10, 20 are all the largest dies of those particular architectures/generations.

Polaris 11, 12, and 21 were smaller dies, cut-down from 2304SP of the full Polaris chip to 1024 and 640SP

I don't think Navi 12 will be a larger chip - The halo market is vanishingly small and expensive to operate in. AMD are far more likely to be chasing the mass-market where 90% of sales are with a lower-TDP, cheaper-to-make chip that serves the $200 and lower market, as well as being laptop-friendly. I'm only guessing, but I think that *if* AMD make a larger Navi die, it'll be called Navi 20, or given an new codename altogether.
Posted on Reply
#30
iO
2080ti performance seems unrealistic and potential market for $1000+ cards is pretty small, so 48CU chip targeting TU104 would make more sense.
Those 20% more shaders and a less crappy cooler could put it right into 2080 territory IF Navi scales well.
Posted on Reply
#31
kapone32
Chrispy_, post: 4088757, member: 185623"
Historically, AMD's biggest dies have had codenames in multiples of 10; Polaris 10, 20, 30, Vega 10, 20 are all the largest dies of those particular architectures/generations.

Polaris 11, 12, and 21 were smaller dies, cut-down from 2304SP of the full Polaris chip to 1024 and 640SP

I don't think Navi 12 will be a larger chip - The halo market is vanishingly small and expensive to operate in. AMD are far more likely to be chasing the mass-market where 90% of sales are with a lower-TDP, cheaper-to-make chip that serves the $200 and lower market, as well as being laptop-friendly.
The current Navi and before that Polaris already cover the market you are talking about. I am sure that there will be cut down cards to replace Polaris once the current stock is gone, but if you don't think AMD will not do it's best to at least catch if not surpass Nvidia's best GPU's with a "halo" release you may not be right.
Posted on Reply
#32
ShurikN
kapone32, post: 4088743, member: 181865"
I was unaware that you could get 16 on a 256 bit. I think the price may be a non issue. I know if I could buy a card that is 30 to 40% faster than my Vega 64 for what I paid for my first Vega 64 I would have no issue. I do seriously wonder though how HBM2 would effect the performance of a Navi GPU.
Titan RTX has 24GB on 384bit, so 16GB on 256 should be possible. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Posted on Reply
#33
Vya Domus
ShurikN, post: 4088760, member: 140585"
Titan RTX has 24GB on 384bit, so 16GB on 256 should be possible. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
You are right. Each chip requires a 32 bit bus, 384/32 = 12 meaning something like the Titan RTX is using 2 GB memory chips. Therfore 16 GB would need 8 chips or a 8*32 = 256 bit interface.

Not that I believe a large Navi would use something like this, AMD would definitely go for 12 GB on 384 bit for the extra bandwidth.
Posted on Reply
#34
ArchStupid
HwGeek, post: 4088604, member: 185585"
64CU Navi card can be sold for $999 for easy since it will be better then RTX 2080Ti, question is how much better should it be since in this price range the RTRT is more relevant since the 2080Ti can run games with RTX ON much better then the 2060/2070/2080.
AMD can use the current high pricing of the 2080Ti, we need to "thank" Nvidia for that :-(.
Holy delusional batman!
Posted on Reply
#35
kapone32
iO, post: 4088758, member: 107457"
2080ti performance seems unrealistic and potential market for $1000+ cards is pretty small, so 48CU chip targeting TU104 would make more sense.
Those 20% more shaders and a less crappy cooler could put it right into 2080 territory IF Navi scales well.
Well every tech reviewer on Youtube has one for testing. The 2080TI holds the 9 and 10 position on Amazon's top 10. It even outsells the 2080 according to that

ShurikN, post: 4088760, member: 140585"
Titan RTX has 24GB on 384bit, so 16GB on 256 should be possible. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Interesting that would be using 2GB modules per every 32 bits. So they could do 24GB on 384. Wow when I mentioned Tahiti it came with 3GB of DDR5
Posted on Reply
#36
Fleurious
Has AMD said which nVidia card this one will compete with for performance?
Posted on Reply
#37
HD64G
Navi with 56 and 64 can have HBM2 since they will be easily sold for $700-800 and the cores are much smaller-cheaper than the one in the 2080Ti. So, from the consumption aspect I don't think there will be any problem. Only thing wondering is the scaling vs the Navi 10. If it is close to 90%, even with lower clocks to increase the efficiency they will get close to the 2080Ti with the full core model.
Posted on Reply
#38
SIGSEGV
Manu_PT, post: 4088607, member: 168799"
300w incoming tho, I suspect, wich scares me
meh...
if it turns out able to compete 2080 Ti Super Mega Beyond Your Imagination Huang Edition in terms of price/performance why not?
/funny
Posted on Reply
#39
ShurikN
Vya Domus, post: 4088763, member: 169281"
Not that I believe a large Navi would use something like this, AMD would definitely go for 12 GB on 384 bit for the extra bandwidth.
Yup, I was thinking about that as well. 16GB is an overkill, and 8GB is a bit on the low side for a high end GPU like that.
Posted on Reply
#40
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
60 CU/12 GiB/~15 billion transistors which puts it in between TU104 and TU102 makes sense to me.

Problem is, we don't know if Navi is actually scalable like that. Navi 12 might just be 48 CU/8 GiB which would target TU104.
Posted on Reply
#41
efikkan
jigar2speed, post: 4088662, member: 103592"
Why Manu, why are you selectively scared ?
He/she have a reason to worry.
And when it comes to power consumption, the main concern for heat, noise, throttling etc. is average consumption, not peak consumption.

RX 5700 XT already consumes ~225W for 40 CUs/2560 SPs, that's going to increase a lot if AMD wants larger dies, or they have to sacrifice a lot of clock speed.
Posted on Reply
#42
Xaled
the54thvoid, post: 4088630, member: 79251"
As @Manu_PT says, at what power cost? Nvidia could likely remove power limiters and have hotter, hungrier, noisier cards too. But it's not what the industry wants. Everything is tending to lower power or higher performance at same power.
All what the consumers care about right now is lowering the prices. Nobody would really care about hotter hungrier noisier cards as long as they are not way behind the limits and nobody would care about cards that have the same performance for the same price

FordGT90Concept, post: 4088857, member: 60463"
60 CU/12 GiB/~15 billion transistors which puts it in between TU104 and TU102 makes sense to me.
This! with a price of TPU104 is all what AMD need to get back into competition. İf AMD succeeded the whole Nivida lineups prices will go down. Nvidia will pay the price for making million model-class just not to lower the prices
Posted on Reply
#43
Midland Dog
Manu_PT, post: 4088607, member: 168799"
300w incoming tho, I suspect, wich scares me
2nd card from amd to have a bigger tdp number than die size number scary?
Posted on Reply
#44
ShurikN
Xaled, post: 4088861, member: 158027"
All what the consumers care about right now is lowering the prices.
Amen to that
Posted on Reply
#45
nguyen
My bet Navi 12 is a 300W TDP card priced at 650usd come equipped with a CLC to compete with the RTX 2080Super
Posted on Reply
#46
Steevo
I'm going to guess it's a respin like the 1800 to 1900 was, 20+% more performance with better process understanding.
Posted on Reply
#47
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
That would be Navi 20, not Navi 12.

RX 480 = Polaris 10
RX 580 = Polaris 20
RX 590 = Polaris 30

Vega 64 = Vega 10
Radeon VII = Vega 20
Posted on Reply
#49
efikkan
Xaled, post: 4088861, member: 158027"
All what the consumers care about right now is lowering the prices. Nobody would really care about hotter hungrier noisier cards as long as they are not way behind the limits and nobody would care about cards that have the same performance for the same price
When you have two comparable alternatives, like RTX 2060 Super vs. RX 5700 XT, the majority of buyers will go for the one with the overall best deal. RTX 2060 Super costs the same, performs practically the same (especially if we consider partner cards), is more power efficient and much quieter, and the list goes on. For AMD to obtain market share, they need to offset their disadvantages with some equally attractive advantages; like significantly lower prices, 10-15% higher performance, or some useful "must-have" feature, etc. Otherwise RTX 2060 Super vs. RX 5700 XT will end up like GTX 1060 vs. RX 480/580 again; 9 out of 10 will go for the Nvidia option, not because they are fanboys, not because AMD's offer is terrible either, but simply because there is an obvious better offer.
Posted on Reply
#50
Vayra86
kapone32, post: 4088765, member: 181865"
Well every tech reviewer on Youtube has one for testing. The 2080TI holds the 9 and 10 position on Amazon's top 10. It even outsells the 2080 according to that
Still doesn't say a single thing. Amazon's top 10 of what, sold GPUs? And what % does the spot 9/10 hold? Its less than what the first 8 spots hold... :)

Here's a more realistic take on market shares over time



https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Ti/Rating/4027
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment