Tuesday, August 31st 2021

AMD Reportedly Readying RX 6900 XTX, Bringing the Battle to NVIDIA RTX 3090

Graphics cards may be on their way to becoming unicorns that you can only pay for after finding the proverbial pot of gold from under a rainbow, but that doesn't mean AMD and NVIDIA will slow down their competition any time soon - especially in this market, there's a huge profit to be made. And AMD may just be finally readying their true halo product - a graphics card that aims to beat NVIDIA's RTX 3090 across the board. Twitter user CyberPunkCat shared an alleged AMD slide showcasing a new, overpowered RX 6900 XTX graphics card. AMD's naming scheme for their RX 6900 series may be slightly confusing nowadays: the original RX 6900 XT carries the Navi 21 XTX die, and AMD has recently released a higher-performance version of that Navi 21 chip in the form of the Navi 21 XTXH - which power the liquid-cooled versions of the RX 6900 XT, with higher overall clocks than the original GPU release. However, there hasn't been a change in the RX 6900 XT nomenclature - but this new slide suggests otherwise.

If the leaked slide is real (keep your NaCl ready, as always), it appears that the RX 6900 XTX might pair both the higher-performance Navi 21 XTXH chip with higher memory speeds. While both Navi 21 XT and Navi 21 XTXH both make use of 16 Gbps GDDR6 memory, the slide indicates that the RX 6900 XTX will feature 18 Gbps memory speeds, exploring another avenue for increased performance. This decision would bring an increase in maximum theoretical memory subsystem bandwidth from the 512 Gbps in the RX 6900 XT up to 576 Gbps - a 13% increase, which would not translate into a proportional increase in final performance. However, considering how our own reviews show that AMD's RX 6900 XT with the Navi 21 XTXH silicon is already between one and three percent faster than NVIDIA's RTX 3090, even a slight, 5% performance increase over that cards' performance means that AMD might be able to claim the performance crown for the mainstream market. It's been a while since that happened, hasn't it?
Sources: CyberPunkCat @ Twitter, via Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

106 Comments on AMD Reportedly Readying RX 6900 XTX, Bringing the Battle to NVIDIA RTX 3090

#2
londiste
However, considering how our own reviews show that AMD's RX 6900 XT with the Navi 21 XTXH silicon is already between one and three percent faster than NVIDIA's RTX 3090, even a slight, 5% performance increase over that cards' performance means that AMD might be able to claim the performance crown for the mainstream market. It's been a while since that happened, hasn't it?
Navi 21 XTXH is more marketing than anything. From reviews and tests, the XTXH-based cards have GPUs that are binned for high frequency capability. OC Formula in TPU review is between 1-5% faster than 3090 but at the same time its Gaming power consumption ends up being 10% higher (compared to 3090 that is not exactly efficent).

Pretty sure Nvidia can answer that with a 3090 at higher TDP and it'll end up faster at 4K (and a bit slower at 1440p/1080p as with the entire RDNA2 vs Ampere range) with a similar power consumption figures at that.
ratirtI think the 18Gbps was already achieved with the XTXH chip. or am I wrong? For some reason the 18Gbps mem speed is nothing new.
Have we actually seen 18Gbps memory on any cards? Rumors and announcements have been there but all the reviewed cards so far have been 16Gbps.
Posted on Reply
#3
medi01
Battle of Unobtaniums
Posted on Reply
#4
Fabio Bologna
Thing is the crown will only be for rasterization performance ATM.
The Ray-tracing capabilities would still lag behind a fair bit... unfortunately I may add...

And anyway nobody will be able to afford one, so...
Posted on Reply
#5
P4-630
medi01Battle of Unobtaniums
And who cares.
Posted on Reply
#6
ZoneDymo
sigh.....pointless......who cares
Posted on Reply
#7
Tomorrow
londisteNavi 21 XTXH is more marketing than anything. From reviews and tests, the XTXH-based cards have GPUs that are binned for high frequency capability. OC Formula in TPU review is between 1-5% faster than 3090 but at the same time its Gaming power consumption ends up being 10% higher (compared to 3090 that is not exactly efficent).

Pretty sure Nvidia can answer that with a 3090 at higher TDP and it'll end up faster at 4K (and a bit slower at 1440p/1080p as with the entire RDNA2 vs Ampere range) with a similar power consumption figures at that.

Have we actually seen 18Gbps memory on any cards? Rumors and announcements have been there but all the reviewed cards so far have been 16Gbps.
I doubt that people who buy these top end cards care about the fact that it's only single-digit percentage faster than 3090 or how much of it is marketing. Fastest is Fastest. That's what matters to buyers in this segment.

Also the OC formula is still more efficient than 3090. That's because in that review the 3090 numbers are for the FE not aftermarket models. If we are comparing one aftermarket models then it should be compared to another aftermarket 3090. Nvidia users would cry bloody murder if someone used 6900XT reference power numbers and compared them to aftermarket 3090.
Aftermarket 3090's consume significantly more power. For example the MSI Suprim X consumes 436W in average gaming and 474W in peak gaming. Where as the OC Formula consumes 391W.

Nvidia will answer with 3090 Super that will likely have a 450W TDP. Most likely over 500W in AIB models. The same way that 6900XT is already at the limit the 3090 too can't be pushed too much further.

Liquid cooled OEM 6900XT's did already come with 18Gbps. This was confirmed with a GPU-Z screenshot tho the card was not disassembled. Im guessing AMD is not sampling the 18Gbps OEM variant to the press and no reviewer is willing to spend 4000+ to buy an OEM system that contains it.

Tho if this news is true we will see a retail variant soon.
Posted on Reply
#8
Solid State Soul ( SSS )
AMD couldn't make enough RX 6000 series cards as it is, forcing AIBs to heavily increase margins, which is why they are more expensive now, releasing more SKUs under this conditions aint helping
Posted on Reply
#9
ratirt
londisteHave we actually seen 18Gbps memory on any cards? Rumors and announcements have been there but all the reviewed cards so far have been 16Gbps.
You know, there is a difference between a rumor and an announcement. Rumor can become an announcement but it cant go other way.
Still it turned out to be true and it is not a new thing for me. The reviews will come in time for sure.
Maingear is offering these cards in a pre-build systems I think.
maingear.com/6900xtlc/#buy-now
Posted on Reply
#10
lowrider_05
There is no 18Gbps Memory, the XTXH LC uses the same memory chips as on my OCF and i just flashed the LC bios when it was added to the VGA Bios Database and got the same 18Gbps to work. when you compare the bioses than you will see, that AMD just raised the Mem voltage from 1.35 to 1.4 Volts and the Memsoc from 850 to 900 MV.

TPU BIOS Link
Posted on Reply
#11
nguyen
The 6900XT LC with 18Gbps has already been reviewed by PCgameshardware, TL;DR:
_Use 350W stock, same as 3090 FE
_Beat 3090 at 1080p by 4%, tie at 1440p
_Lose to 3090 by 2% at 3440x1440 and 5% at 4K
Posted on Reply
#12
Richards
Solid State Soul ( SSS )AMD couldn't make enough RX 6000 series cards as it is, forcing AIBs to heavily increase margins, which is why they are more expensive now, releasing more SKUs under this conditions aint helping
Tsmc is not providing enough chips to and... plus the yields have to be right in order to get high clocks on the rx 6900 chip which are 55% going by ps5 yields
Posted on Reply
#13
docnorth
Unfortunately @Raevenlord nailed it already, 6900 XTX will be the ultimate HALO product of this generation. AMD still seems very unwilling to "sacrifice" 7nm silicon for GPU's, because it's way more profitable to build and sell CPU's. It will be oxymoron to have so competitive GPU's but lower market share.
Posted on Reply
#14
Tomorrow
lowrider_05There is no 18Gbps Memory, the XTXH LC uses the same memory chips as on my OCF and i just flashed the LC bios when it was added to the VGA Bios Database and got the same 18Gbps to work. when you compare the bioses than you will see, that AMD just raised the Mem voltage from 1.35 to 1.4 Volts and the Memsoc from 850 to 900 MV.

TPU BIOS Link
AMD does not use overclocked VRAM on their own cards. If the GPU-Z screenshot shows 18Gbps then it's stock 18Gbps because that is what the chips are specified to run at. Sure - internally they might run at higher voltage but that by Samsung's design. Ofcourse your card runs 18Gbps because there is enough headroom in 16Gbps chips to do those clocks. However this does not prove the the LC variant uses the same 16Gbps chips. That's because validating overclocked VRAM is a QC nightmare. I believe 5600XT was stuck with that. That is why most AIB's avoid memory OC on their models.
Posted on Reply
#15
lowrider_05
everyone with a existing XTXH card can get this LC Bios on their cards and have the 18Gbps memory (BE AWARE OF THE RISK)!

Just compare the LC Bios Memory to the regular XTXH Bios Memory, they are the SAME Number!

XTXH
AMD LC
TomorrowAMD does not use overclocked VRAM on their own cards. If the GPU-Z screenshot shows 18Gbps then it's stock 18Gbps because that is what the chips are specified to run at. Sure - internally they might run at higher voltage but that by Samsung's design. Ofcourse your card runs 18Gbps because there is enough headroom in 16Gbps chips to do those clocks. However this does not prove the the LC variant uses the same 16Gbps chips. That's because validating overclocked VRAM is a QC nightmare. I believe 5600XT was stuck with that. That is why most AIB's avoid memory OC on their models.
Here is a Screenshot of my card running the LC Bios with up to 2370Mhz Speed on the Memory, with the Stock bios i could only get 2160Mhz max.
Posted on Reply
#16
nguyen
lowrider_05everyone with a existing XTXH card can get this LC Bios on their cards and have the 18Gbps memory (BE AWARE OF THE RISK)!

Just compare the LC Bios Memory to the regular XTXH Bios Memory, they are the SAME Number!

XTXH
AMD LC


Here is a Screenshot of my card running the LC Bios with up to 2370Mhz Speed on the Memory, with the Stock bios i could only get 2160Mhz max.
Wow, 580W ASIC power, that means the total board power is ~650W, score is not that impressive though.
Posted on Reply
#17
Chomiq
Looking forward to not being able to afford another GPU.
Posted on Reply
#18
londiste
TomorrowAMD does not use overclocked VRAM on their own cards.
There is no 18Gbps GDDR6 by spec.
TomorrowAlso the OC formula is still more efficient than 3090. That's because in that review the 3090 numbers are for the FE not aftermarket models. If we are comparing one aftermarket models then it should be compared to another aftermarket 3090.
Link in the article. 1-3% faster than FE, gaming power consumption +36W (~10%) compared to same 3090 FE.
Posted on Reply
#19
kruk
The slide might belong to already released XTXH GPU. 3DCenter says:
The 24.93 TFLops points (perfectly) to the boost clock of 6900XT "Liquid Cooling". This card is sometimes reported as "18 Gbps" instead of the real 18.5 Gbps. So, maybe just an old slide - back in the days, when AMD was unsure for how to release this LC card?
[MEDIA=twitter]1432543667063963650[/MEDIA]
Also VideoCardz:
AIB source has never heard of XTX SKU.
[MEDIA=twitter]1432615090994524162[/MEDIA]
Posted on Reply
#20
lowrider_05
nguyenWow, 580W ASIC power, that means the total board power is ~650W, score is not that impressive though.
It was just to test the Memory, score was not even with an allowed driver.

here I tried, the Nr. 21 Spot in the Firestrike Ultra HOF with just Watercooling, no dice or LN2
FIRE STRIKE ULTRA Score: 16 249

HOF NR. 21

Edit: oh yes and with the LC BIOS i got the Best Score of all 5900X+6900XT combos: 3D Mark Result Browser
Posted on Reply
#21
Ravenas
EDITED: I see 18gbps now versus 16gbps. Interested in seeing the performance versus the XTXH card I already own.
Posted on Reply
#22
Makaveli
londisteNavi 21 XTXH is more marketing than anything. From reviews and tests, the XTXH-based cards have GPUs that are binned for high frequency capability. OC Formula in TPU review is between 1-5% faster than 3090 but at the same time its Gaming power consumption ends up being 10% higher (compared to 3090 that is not exactly efficent).

Pretty sure Nvidia can answer that with a 3090 at higher TDP and it'll end up faster at 4K (and a bit slower at 1440p/1080p as with the entire RDNA2 vs Ampere range) with a similar power consumption figures at that.

Have we actually seen 18Gbps memory on any cards? Rumors and announcements have been there but all the reviewed cards so far have been 16Gbps.
I thought I saw a news report of a possible 3090ti with 400 Watt TDP so they already have something coming to challenge this.
Posted on Reply
#23
Xex360
Pointless instead of securing more silicon for their appealing cards (6800) they wate silicon on this junk and worse on the gameless Xbox and PS5.
Posted on Reply
#24
Viilutaja
Fabio BolognaThing is the crown will only be for rasterization performance ATM.
The Ray-tracing capabilities would still lag behind a fair bit... unfortunately I may add...

And anyway nobody will be able to afford one, so...
Who actually cares about RayTracing? If it's not PathTraced entirely, it can't be really spotted. Unless it's like a very slow paced game where You have time to look around and "smell the roses".
I played Raytracing turned on in CyberPunk, Metro Enhanced version... wouldn't care less about RT. Have RTX2080S.
Posted on Reply
#25
nguyen
ViilutajaWho actually cares about RayTracing? If it's not PathTraced entirely, it can't be really spotted. Unless it's like a very slow paced game where You have time to look around and "smell the roses".
I played Raytracing turned on in CyberPunk, Metro Enhanced version... wouldn't care less about RT. Have RTX2080S.
LOL, fully path traced for what? that would just throw away of 20 years of progress in rasterization.
DXR is the best of both world, use rasterization and Ray Trace where they are strongest (meaning Global Illumination, Reflections, Lightning and Shadows are best ray traced, the rest are rasterized).

if you didn't care about RT, why would you play Metro Exodus EE, that game requires an RT capable GPU to even run you know.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Copyright © 2004-2021 www.techpowerup.com. All rights reserved.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners.