Tuesday, September 22nd 2020

AMD Radeon "Navy Flounder" Features 40CU, 192-bit GDDR6 Memory

AMD uses offbeat codenames such as the "Great Horned Owl," "Sienna Cichlid" and "Navy Flounder" to identify sources of leaks internally. One such upcoming product, codenamed "Navy Flounder," is shaping up to be a possible successor to the RX 5500 XT, the company's 1080p segment-leading product. According to ROCm compute code fished out by stblr on Reddit, this GPU is configured with 40 compute units, a step up from 14 on the RX 5500 XT, and retains a 192-bit wide GDDR6 memory interface.

Assuming the RDNA2 compute unit on next-gen Radeon RX graphics processors has the same number of stream processors per CU, we're looking at 2,560 stream processors for the "Navy Flounder," compared to 80 on "Sienna Cichlid." The 192-bit wide memory interface allows a high degree of segmentation for AMD's product managers for graphics cards under the $250-mark.
Sources: VideoCardz, stblr (Reddit)
Add your own comment

135 Comments on AMD Radeon "Navy Flounder" Features 40CU, 192-bit GDDR6 Memory

#1
Vya Domus
192 bit ? I hope that means 12 GB.
Posted on Reply
#2
dj-electric
Vya Domus
192 bit ? I hope that means 12 GB.
yeahno, this sub 300$ card gonna have 6GB of video memory
Posted on Reply
#3
Caring1
dj-electric
yeahno, this sub 300$ card gonna have 6GB of video memory
It's AMD, they do 4GB or 8GB and up.
Posted on Reply
#5
Vya Domus
dj-electric
yeahno, this sub 300$ card gonna have 6GB of video memory
Yeah no, 12GB means about 120$, totally realistic even for a 300$ card.

Both Navi 21 and 22 are likely on 256 bits with 16 GB. You really think they'd have such a discrepancy between them and Navi 23 ?
Posted on Reply
#6
Mark Little
Caring1
It's AMD, they do 4GB or 8GB and up.
The 5600XT has 6 GB and costs $280ish.
Posted on Reply
#7
Valantar
Not to mention that 12GB of VRAM for a GPU in this segment would be a complete and utter waste. The 192-bit bus is likely going to hold it back (I mean, it has the same CU count as the 5700 XT...), but if this is actually what replaces the 5500 XT? We're suddenly looking at some real exciting lower midrange/entry level GPUs again. Also, if the entry level is moving from 22 to 40 CUs ... a) what does that mean for the high end? And b) what does that mean for power consumption? Are they actually managing 40 CUs and a 192-bit bus at something like the 120-130W of the 5500 XT?

Bring it on.
Posted on Reply
#8
BoboOOZ
Valantar
Not to mention that 12GB of VRAM for a GPU in this segment would be a complete and utter waste.
This is basically an improved 5700XT (higher IPC, better efficiency). 12GB doesn't look like a waste if you look at it this way, 6 would be definitely crippling.
Valantar
The 192-bit bus is likely going to hold it back (I mean, it has the same CU count as the 5700 XT...), but if this is actually what replaces the 5500 XT? We're suddenly looking at some real exciting lower midrange/entry level GPUs again. Also, if the entry level is moving from 22 to 40 CUs ... a) what does that mean for the high end? And b) what does that mean for power consumption? Are they actually managing 40 CUs and a 192-bit bus at something like the 120-130W of the 5500 XT?

Bring it on.
We know nothing solid about AMD sizing at this point, it's just smoke and mirrors. there's no point worrying too much about bus sizes. As for TDP, 150W should be reasonably easy to obtain and will compete just fine with Nvidia.
Posted on Reply
#9
Sykobee
Might be destined for a 6GB 6500XT (32CU) and 6GB 6600 and 6/12GB 6600XT (36/40 CU)?
Posted on Reply
#10
OGoc
So much speculation but ball park it we can: assume 7nm+ has 10% better performance per watt than 7nm and RDNA2 has 5% IPC improvement.

75 Watt equivalent to 1650 (PCIe)
150 Watt equivalent to 5600XT (6-pin + PCIe)
225 Watt equivalent to 2080 (8-pin + PCIe)
300 Watt equivalent to 3070 (6-pin + 8-pin + PCIe)
375 Watt equivalent to 3080 (2x 8-pin + PCIe)
Posted on Reply
#11
BoboOOZ
OGoc
So much speculation but ball park it we can: assume 7nm+ has 10% better performance per watt than 7nm and RDNA2 has 5% IPC improvement.
AMD target is 50% perf per watt improvement, and rumors are they achieved 60%.
Posted on Reply
#12
Mark Little
OGoc
So much speculation but ball park it we can: assume 7nm+ has 10% better performance per watt than 7nm and RDNA2 has 5% IPC improvement.

75 Watt equivalent to 1650 (PCIe)
150 Watt equivalent to 5600XT (6-pin + PCIe)
225 Watt equivalent to 2080 (8-pin + PCIe)
300 Watt equivalent to 3070 (6-pin + 8-pin + PCIe)
375 Watt equivalent to 3080 (2x 8-pin + PCIe)
Man, you are way off. Its a new architecture so die process improvement is not the only factor.
Posted on Reply
#13
Assimilator
Vya Domus
Yeah no, 12GB means about 120$, totally realistic even for a 300$ card.

Both Navi 21 and 22 are likely on 256 bits with 16 GB. You really think they'd have such a discrepancy between them and Navi 23 ?
Why on Earth would you think that AMD is going to launch 16GB cards, when NVIDIA is sticking with 8GB? The answer is, they aren't. And as such this card, as a replacement for 5600, will have 6GB.
Mark Little
Man, you are way off. Its a new architecture so die process improvement is not the only factor.
No, it's a new version of RDNA.
Posted on Reply
#14
Vya Domus
Assimilator
Why on Earth would you think that AMD is going to launch 16GB cards, when NVIDIA is sticking with 8GB? The answer is, they aren't. And as such this card, as a replacement for 5600, will have 6GB.
Huh ?

In case you may have forgotten Nvidia isn't "sticking with 8GB", they also have 10 and 24 GB cards not to mention the leaks about even more higher capacity upcoming cards. Navi 21 is a large die >=500 mm^2 likely similar in performance with a 3080 and I can guarantee you it's going to have 16 GB of VRAM.
Assimilator
And as such this card, as a replacement for 5600, will have 6GB.
No one says it's a replacement for 5600 and even if it were no one says that it must have 6GB. This card is going to be noticeably faster than a 5700XT if it has 40CUs, can you imagine how stupid it would be for it to have less memory ?
Posted on Reply
#15
OGoc
BoboOOZ
AMD target is 50% perf per watt improvement, and rumors are they achieved 60%.
Voltage and performance don't scale linearly. 50% increase in PPW applies to low end cards and only to a part of the total board's power consumption. 5700XT is only 8% higher PPW than VEGA VII at 4K (TPU PPW graphs) even though AMD marketing claims RDNA as 50% better PPW.

The GPU silicon uses about 30-50% of card's total power (use GPUz to find your core's power draw vs the total board draw).
Posted on Reply
#16
Xex360
I hope AMD will have a real launch with RDNA2, nVidia milked people too much with their RTX20xx and now with the paper launch and fake MSRP for the 3080.
Posted on Reply
#17
BoboOOZ
OGoc
Voltage and performance don't scale linearly.
Of course not, and that rule is applicable to cards from all generations.

Anyways, the question is, where did you pull your 10% number? it doesn't seem to include any architecture improvement, or that is most likely a big issue.
Posted on Reply
#18
Vya Domus
OGoc
Voltage and performance don't scale linearly. 50% increase in PPW applies to low end cards and only to a part of the total board's power consumption. 5700XT is only 8% higher PPW than VEGA VII at 4K (TPU PPW graphs) even though AMD marketing claims RDNA as 50% better PPW.
AMD claimed 50% better PPW compared to non 7nm GPUs not against Radeon VII.
Posted on Reply
#19
sergionography
I highly doubt this is a successor for 5500xt. This is most likely the 6700xt and will maybe have a cut down 6600xt version. 2560 cores that's 5700xt level. Add to it the 50% efficiency improvement then you get to either clock it up or drive power down. Most likely amd will clock it up to 2300+ and get a good 20% to 40% performance improvement if we also account for ipc improvement since primitive shaders will be activated in RDNA2. In other words, this gpu would be the 3060 and 3060ti competitor
Posted on Reply
#20
dragontamer5788
40 CUs is a pretty substantial mid-range card. PS5 is RDNA2 with 44 CUs, and XBSX is 52. The memory bandwidth would be a better indicator to the level of performance they're aiming at.
Assimilator
Why on Earth would you think that AMD is going to launch 16GB cards, when NVIDIA is sticking with 8GB? The answer is, they aren't. And as such this card, as a replacement for 5600, will have 6GB.
AMD is weird. The 5500 XT had 8GB versions released (but also cheaper 4GB versions). I honestly could see 8GB GDDR6 being offered for low-end cards from AMD and 16GB from the high end.

I agree with you that 6GBs for the low/mid range would be the sweet spot. Also, given the 192-bit bus, I think 6GBs is most likely, but AMD could very well deliver 12GB versions of the card for kicks.
Posted on Reply
#21
iuliug
RX 5500 XT has a 128 bit bus.
Bus wise this should be a 5600XT replacement with 4 more CU's and Navi2 improvements.
AMD will not release it with 6 GB Vram as they said gfx cards will less than 8 GB are not future proof.
Posted on Reply
#22
OGoc
Vya Domus
AMD claimed 50% better PPW compared to non 7nm GPUs not against Radeon VII.
True. My mistake
Posted on Reply
#23
Vayra86
Mark Little
Man, you are way off. Its a new architecture so die process improvement is not the only factor.
Correct, AMD might come out with a totally not optimized product because its new, it might be negative IPC for all we know.

The assumption it'll be higher and not just much bigger is unfounded, especially considering AMD's history over the last five years. If they deliver, fantastic. But to bet on it at this point... myyeah
Posted on Reply
#24
pavl3
I say it'll have 9 GB of RAM. :cool:
Seriously though I wonder if they sped up the HSR any on the "RDNA" cards or is it still at pathetic HD 7970 rate... Perhaps one could test it with Archmark benchmark...
Posted on Reply
#25
sergionography
dragontamer5788
40 CUs is a pretty substantial mid-range card. PS5 is RDNA2 with 44 CUs, and XBSX is 52. The memory bandwidth would be a better indicator to the level of performance they're aiming at.



AMD is weird. The 5500 XT had 8GB versions released (but also cheaper 4GB versions). I honestly could see 8GB GDDR6 being offered for low-end cards from AMD and 16GB from the high end.

I agree with you that 6GBs for the low/mid range would be the sweet spot. Also, given the 192-bit bus, I think 6GBs is most likely, but AMD could very well deliver 12GB versions of the card for kicks.
Ps5 has 36CU not 44. And since you mentioned ps5 think of this, ps5 tdp is 175w while also including 8 zen2 cores and gpu being clocked at 2250mhz in top. I think RDNA2 is looking pretty good in terms of efficiency
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment