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

#51
sumludus
RavenasYou're talking about people with money to spend on high graphics card, and then claiming AMD is screwing the consumer by selling high end graphics cards. Are you focusing on the correct market segment?

Why does AMD have to cave on pricing because Nvidia cards are selling or are unavailable?
I'm not saying AMD is screwing anyone. I'm saying releasing a halo product during a supply shortage is tone deaf. This SKU would be out of reach for the vast majority of consumers in regular times, and would serve as nothing but a way for AMD to pat themselves on the back for retaking the performance crown. But given the historic levels of pent up demand for AMD products, this seems like a self inflicted thumb to the eye as far as PR goes by catering to the well-to-do consumers over the mainstream.

I also didn't say anything about pricing, clearly the market lets them charge whatever they want. But right now AMD doesn't have a product MSRP'd at $300 to challenge the 3060. There are many more customers at that end of the spectrum needing to upgrade from a prior generation than there are customers looking for yet another 6900 or 3090 to not be able to choose from due to product scarcity.
Posted on Reply
#52
Ravenas
sumludusI'm not saying AMD is screwing anyone. I'm saying releasing a halo product during a supply shortage is tone deaf. This SKU would be out of reach for the vast majority of consumers in regular times, and would serve as nothing but a way for AMD to pat themselves on the back for retaking the performance crown. But given the historic levels of pent up demand for AMD products, this seems like a self inflicted thumb to the eye as far as PR goes by catering to the well-to-do consumers over the mainstream.

I also didn't say anything about pricing, clearly the market lets them charge whatever they want. But right now AMD doesn't have a product MSRP'd at $300 to challenge the 3060. There are many more customers at that end of the spectrum needing to upgrade from a prior generation than there are customers looking for yet another 6900 or 3090 to not be able to choose from due to product scarcity.
How is this a shortage?

www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=6900+xt&N=8000%204131

Should AMD just sit back and watch nvidia release 3090 super?

You go from talking about releasing top tier products, to transitioning back to complaining about lack of 3060 and 6600 xt MSRP cards. I'm not sure where you are going with this point? Stock isn't going to improve until TSMC catches up to demand. AMD could release 5 more variants of 6600 and nvidia could release 5 more variants of 3060, but the supply would still not change at TSMC. Your comment really makes no sense.

Just comment that you are upset with not MSRP cards being available, rather than making comments that provide no logic.
Posted on Reply
#53
Minus Infinity
Maybe make it 320 bit and give it 20GB, it's starving at 4K. It's why the 6900XT gets swamped at 4K yet crushes the 3090 at 1440p. Infinity cache is not enough. Maybe they'll double the cache.
Posted on Reply
#54
Isaac`
wolfWell, these statements all seem like personal truths rather than speaking for everyone. We may be a minority, but there are quite a few of us that enable and enjoy RT effects.
and then there are people that realise moest the time shaders look better then actual rtx and run nicer to
cough Minecraft Cough
Posted on Reply
#55
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
Isaac`and then there are people that realise moest the time shaders look better then actual rtx and run nicer to
Whatever you say dude, personal preference is king. Don't like it? be my guest, but in answer to "who cares about RT?" - we exist.
Posted on Reply
#56
matar
The battle for helms deep is over the battle for middle earth is about to begin ---> (Rx6900XTX vs RTX 3090 Super)
Posted on Reply
#57
ratirt
wolfWhatever you say dude, personal preference is king. Don't like it? be my guest, but in answer to "who cares about RT?" - we exist.
You can always justify your thoughts and others by switching from RT is great to personal preference. I mean you can, it is your right but really?
RT is great but the hardware is not there to support it. You have a glimpse of RT and you have already fallen in love with it. Just like a teenager falls in love with a first girl who kissed him.
RT is a great move forward no doubt but it is still the hardware limitation and it will take a while before it doesn't cause a slideshow in games.
Posted on Reply
#58
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
ratirtRT is great but the hardware is not there to support it.
See this is a point where I disagree, it's very enjoyable in the here and now with appropriate hardware combinations and settings choices, which in some cases for me are all dials to 11. @3440x1440 I can enjoy Metro @ 70-120fps, Control at 80-100 fps and Doom Eternal at 144fps locked, all maxed out. Some may discount reconstruction / upscaling technology as being a crutch, but when I have to nitpick stills to tell the difference, and the RT effects themselves make a large difference, the 'tradeoff' there is a no-brainer to me. Conversely it's also been shown that an RTX2060 is capable of 1080p60 RT games, in one case (DOOM Eternal) 1080p 'high refresh' ~90+ fps

The flip side of that coin being, the majority of RT capable hardware out there (consoles) having relatively weak capability will hopefully be a tailwind to clever innovation and optimisation to eek the most out of what we've got.
Posted on Reply
#59
ratirt
wolfSee this is a point where I disagree, it's very enjoyable in the here and now with appropriate hardware combinations and settings choices, which in some cases for me are all dials to 11. @3440x1440 I can enjoy Metro @ 70-120fps, Control at 80-100 fps and Doom Eternal at 144fps locked, all maxed out. Some may discount reconstruction / upscaling technology as being a crutch, but when I have to nitpick stills to tell the difference, and the RT effects themselves make a large difference, the 'tradeoff' there is a no-brainer to me. Conversely it's also been shown that an RTX2060 is capable of 1080p60 RT games, in one case (DOOM Eternal) 1080p 'high refresh' ~90+ fps

The flip side of that coin being, the majority of RT capable hardware out there (consoles) having relatively weak capability will hopefully be a tailwind to clever innovation and optimisation to eek the most out of what we've got.
You see, and that is where I and I think most people disagree. And that is a matter of preference. You still need to tweak. Lower resolution or details to achieve that FPS. You need to use DLSS or FSR now. It is not like flipping the switch for anti-aliasing and no fps impact and still, the RT doesn't change that much except some of the detail like reflections, or shadows.
You dont see the difference when you use DLSS and that is fine but you do see a huge difference when you switch RT on and it is worth the FPS hit? That my friend is preference but the fact is, hardware is struggling with RT. Most people dont want to use it cause they don't see a lot of difference in visual quality but they surely do see FPS impact. Low benefit for switching it on considering the FPS hit.
The games you have specified Control and Metro. Sure you can play with RT but as you said, you have to tweak it (sacrifice some details). All maxed out it will still dip below 60 or even 40 (Control) and you have a card for $1.5k or something like that.
Posted on Reply
#60
nguyen
ratirtYou see, and that is where I and I think most people disagree. And that is a matter of preference. You still need to tweak. Lower resolution or details to achieve that FPS. You need to use DLSS or FSR now. It is not like flipping the switch for anti-aliasing and no fps impact and still, the RT doesn't change that much except some of the detail like reflections, or shadows.
You dont see the difference when you use DLSS and that is fine but you do see a huge difference when you switch RT on and it is worth the FPS hit? That my friend is preference but the fact is, hardware is struggling with RT. Most people dont want to use it cause they don't see a lot of difference in visual quality but they surely do see FPS impact. Low benefit for switching it on considering the FPS hit.
The games you have specified Control and Metro. Sure you can play with RT but as you said, you have to tweak it (sacrifice some details). All maxed out it will still dip below 60 or even 40 (Control) and you have a card for $1.5k or something like that.
Great job trying justifying your purchase dude
Imagine you paying the same money as I did, only that I get a better gaming experience in 50% of the time and equal on the rest, then you just say you don't care about gaming experience anyways.

Let me guess, if you had played CP2077, do you need to sacrifice some rasterized settings in order to get 4K 60FPS? by your own definitition then rasterized performance of the 6900XT is not even there yet, much less RT performance.
Posted on Reply
#61
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
ratirtSure you can play with RT but as you said, you have to tweak it (sacrifice some details)
I don't follow, what am I sacrificing? Because from where I sit I am getting an uncompromising experience.
Posted on Reply
#62
nguyen
wolfI don't follow, what am I sacrificing? Because from where I sit I am getting an uncompromising experience.
I guess some people consider turning on DLSS a compromise, but Upscaling + CAS is not :kookoo:
Posted on Reply
#63
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
nguyenI guess some people consider turning on DLSS a compromise, but Upscaling + CAS is not :kookoo:
Well we just end up back at personal preference I guess. I can't deny people's personal truths about what they like or dislike about rendered images (especially in motion), but to deny me the same, or speak their truth as if they speak for the majority/all people is ill-considered.
Posted on Reply
#64
ratirt
nguyenGreat job trying justifying your purchase dude
Imagine you paying the same money as I did, only that I get a better gaming experience in 50% of the time, then you just say you don't care about gaming experience anyways.

Let me guess, if you had played CP2077, do you need to sacrifice some rasterized settings in order to get 4K 60FPS? by your own definitition then rasterized performance of the 6900XT is not even there yet, much less RT performance.
You got it wrong buddy. Im not justifying my purchase but instead talk about Ray Tracing hardware limitations. Nice try guessing by the way. Too bad you didnt get the gist but it kinda would seem you are justifying your purchase saying how much better it is than mine? :)
wolfI don't follow, what am I sacrificing? Because from where I sit I am getting an uncompromising experience.
Well, Control maxed out and ray traced on a 3080 will dip below 40FPS. So if you had stated you get 80-100FPS 4k RT ON you must have either sacrifice on detail or use DLSS if I'm correct.
Matter of preference, some people would not use either because for them it is not worth it due to the difference in visuals.
nguyenI guess some people consider turning on DLSS a compromise, but Upscaling + CAS is not
Yeah and some people are just being a douche. People am I right?
wolfWell we just end up back at personal preference I guess. I can't deny people's personal truths about what they like or dislike about rendered images (especially in motion), but to deny me the same, or speak their truth as if they speak for the majority/all people is ill-considered.
You speak of preference. Majority of people say clearly the RT is good but the hardware is not there yet.
Posted on Reply
#65
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
ratirtMajority of people say clearly the RT is good but the hardware is not there yet.
Source? From what I can tell it's far more that games with RT effects are so few and far between that people won't prioritize a given cards RT performance when choosing a product. For the games we have today, an appropriately paired RTX card and given resolution monitor that suits, handle it just fine.

Back to preferential, I don't consider DLSS a compromise because I prefer the output in all games I play with it vs without (antialiasing, reduced/non existent shimmering, fine detail).
Posted on Reply
#66
nguyen
ratirtYou got it wrong buddy. Im not justifying my purchase but instead talk about Ray Tracing hardware limitations. Nice try guessing by the way. Too bad you didnt get the gist but it kinda would seem you are justifying your purchase saying how much better it is than mine? :)

Well, Control maxed out and ray traced on a 3080 will dip below 40FPS. So if you had stated you get 80-100FPS 4k RT ON you must have either sacrifice on detail or use DLSS if I'm correct.
Matter of preference, some people would not use either because for them it is not worth it due to the difference in visuals.

Yeah and some people are just being a douche. People am I right?

You speak of preference. Majority of people say clearly the RT is good but the hardware is not there yet.
So 6900XT offers uncompromising rasterized performance in Control? hardly :roll:


I have never tried justifying my purchase, since it is the most uncompromising GPU currently available anyways (well until the 3090 Super). I have played all the latest AAA games with the best gaming experience allowed by current Rasterization + Ray Tracing hardware.
Posted on Reply
#67
ratirt
nguyenSo 6900XT offers uncompromising rasterized performance in Control? hardly :roll:


I have never tried justifying my purchase, since it is the most uncompromising GPU currently available anyways (well until the 3090 Super). I have played all the latest AAA games with the best gaming experience allowed by current Rasterization + Ray Tracing hardware.
What is your problem dude? Why you always have to prove that NV cards are better than AMD? What is wrong with you. It is not about the cards but the Ray Tracing hardware demands and that the games are not fully ray traced and yet the impact on FPS is huge in comparison to visuals you get.
And now you brag that you played all games with RT + rasterization? Who cares about what you play and what card you are using.
wolfSource? From what I can tell it's far more that games with RT effects are so few and far between that people won't prioritize a given cards RT performance when choosing a product. For the games we have today, an appropriately paired RTX card and given resolution monitor that suits, handle it just fine.

Back to preferential, I don't consider DLSS a compromise because I prefer the output in all games I play with it vs without (antialiasing, reduced/non existent shimmering, fine detail)
Source for what exactly? That the hardware for fully ray traced games we currently have is not enough?
Never said DLSS is a compromise. It is a great feature but that is not the point we are discussing here.
Ray tracing for today's available cards is too much and games are not fully ray traced due to hardware constraints. Visual gains to FPS drop is unjustified and using DLSS which is great, proves that the hardware can't keep up and the games are not even fully ray traced.
You can use RT still but it is a glimpse of what the RT API can do and the hardware cant keep up with it. That's my point.
Posted on Reply
#68
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
ratirtMajority of people say
ratirtSource for what exactly?
That first one, I can appreciate and respect an opinion I have heard/read before, but I'd call it a stretch to connect the dots and say majority of people think the hardware isn't there, if anything my limited exposure in the grand scheme would show that they find games with RT effects lacking in number and 'compellingness' of the RT effects.
ratirtYou can use RT still but it is a glimpse of what the RT API can do and the hardware cant keep up with it. That's my point.
Definitely a glimpse of what the RT API can do, no doubt. My point is in the here and now, if you have a decently RT capable card (with appropriately matched res/monitor), and play games with RT effects, you might just find it all very compelling, which is a sentiment that I know is shared by some.

I'm not sure that in today's market it would necessarily be a primary driver of my purchase, getting a card at my desired rast perf level @ or close to MSRP would be higher on the list, and it 100% was when I landed a 3080 at launch, but I've been pleasantly surprised in the RT domain.
Posted on Reply
#69
ratirt
wolfThat first one, I can appreciate and respect an opinion I have heard/read before, but I'd call it a stretch to connect the dots and say majority of people think the hardware isn't there, if anything my limited exposure in the grand scheme would show that they find games with RT effects lacking in number and 'compellingness' of the RT effects.
Well that is the point also. Do you have a source or proof that majority of people say what you claim to be correct? Of course not but the fact that RT hardware is insufficient and lacks is a fact. You can't demand a proof every time you disagree with someone. Don't get me wrong, RT hardware is improving but we are not there yet. The games are not fully ray traced for a reason and that has nothing to do with how many games has RT implementations.
wolfDefinitely a glimpse of what the RT API can do, no doubt. My point is in the here and now, if you have a decently RT capable card (with appropriately matched res/monitor), and play games with RT effects, you might just find it all very compelling, which is a sentiment that I know is shared by some.

I'm not sure that in today's market it would necessarily be a primary driver of my purchase, getting a card at my desired rast perf level @ or close to MSRP would be higher on the list, and it 100% was when I landed a 3080 at launch, but I've been pleasantly surprised in the RT domain.
Yes here and now but in a year or maybe two years this hardware will be obsolete if the RT games move forward. So again. RT is a nice feature and it would bring a lot but not today and the hardware we have now still lacks a lot and i think majority of people see that problem.
Posted on Reply
#70
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
ratirtWell that is the point also. Do you have a source or proof that majority of people say what you claim to be correct? Of course not but the fact that RT hardware is insufficient and lacks is a fact. You can't demand a proof every time you disagree with someone. Don't get me wrong, RT hardware is improving but we are not there yet. The games are not fully ray traced for a reason and that has nothing to do with how many games has RT implementations.
When something is stated such that it is a fact, like "Majority of people say", I am curious to know more, which is why I aim to be fairly precise in my speech and quantify my statements against myself or my limited exposure. Not a dig, I genuinely wanted to know if there have been community polls and such, it would also inform the way I discuss and... lets say 'debate' these sorts of things.
ratirtYes here and now but in a year or maybe two years this hardware will be obsolete if the RT games move forward. So again. RT is a nice feature and it would bring a lot but not today and the hardware we have now still lacks a lot and i think majority of people see that problem.
As soon as a new generation comes out hardware always becomes obsolete, future proofing is a myth, buy your hardware to do what you need it to do today, yet having said that;

I will absolutely not disagree that hardware RT needs to become more capable, by likely an order of magnitude or more in the long run (how long is a piece of string? how long would you like it to be?), and for sure it will. But I think the majority of people don't find the hardware lacking to be the foremost barrier to RT, I think the foremost barrier is adoption in games and effects used. Perhaps we are both right in our own ways, to varying extents.
Posted on Reply
#71
nguyen
ratirtWhat is your problem dude? Why you always have to prove that NV cards are better than AMD? What is wrong with you. It is not about the cards but the Ray Tracing hardware demands and that the games are not fully ray traced and yet the impact on FPS is huge in comparison to visuals you get.
And now you brag that you played all games with RT + rasterization? Who cares about what you play and what card you are using.

Ray tracing for today's available cards is too much and games are not fully ray traced due to hardware constraints. Visual gains to FPS drop is unjustified and using DLSS which is great, proves that the hardware can't keep up and the games are not even fully ray traced.
You can use RT still but it is a glimpse of what the RT API can do and the hardware cant keep up with it. That's my point.
Fully path trace is just stupid, there is a reason for Ray Trace rendering to fell out of favor decades ago (learn more here), Rasterization just offer better visual at lower performance cost.
Ray Tracing makes sense in area that Rasterization cannot do well, that is realistic Reflections, Global illumination, Emissive lighting and Shadows. So yeah DXR is the best of both world.

Sure the RT capability of RX6000 are a joke, but you are making general assumption that RT is not worth the perf trade off, certain not to all the people who own RTX3000 :D.

If I were to make an educated guess, RTX4000 will offer the same improvement to both Rasterization and RT compare to RTX3000, meaning the perf cost with RT ON will remain relatively constant between Turing, Ampere and Ada.



Even Intel acknowledged the importance of RT, that they have dedicated RT cores in their upcoming GPU
Posted on Reply
#72
ratirt
wolfWhen something is stated such that it is a fact, like "Majority of people say", I am curious to know more, which is why I aim to be fairly precise in my speech and quantify my statements against myself or my limited exposure. Not a dig, I genuinely wanted to know if there have been community polls and such, it would also inform the way I discuss and... lets say 'debate' these sorts of things.
How about a different approach.
Cyberpunk 2077 RT on DLSS on at 4k with 3090 high settings below 60 FPS. Now my question again is. Is the hardware for RT sufficient for games now, considering CB2077 is not fully ray traced? Now tell me, when people see this happening on a card for $3k they would still hold your side? If you expect me to find a link or a proof for 'MAJORITY OF PEOPLE' saying it, is as I've expressed it to be then you are mistaken. There is no link to majority of people saying this. Yet also the games are getting more demanding and devs put more RT features in games. 3090 will be obsolete in 2 years time if RT evolves they way you guys claim it will thus my conclusion. That is a top tier card you can currently get and still even DLSS can't keep the FPS above 60.
So here is my question for you, since you don't agree with my statement 'majority of people say RT is good but the hardware lacks', is the hardware we currently have enough for fully ray traced games? Because the games will get more demanding for sure on the RT side and rasterization side. And one more question, how do you want me to give you a link to 'majority of people say'? I think the conclusion is the one you seek not a link or a source to 'majority of people say'.
I see our friend @nguyen is breaking a thrust from laughing giving meaningless arguments. I sure hope the 3090 in a 2 years time will get better with RT when new, more demanding games come out. (sarcasm)
Posted on Reply
#73
nguyen
ratirtHow about a different approach.
Cyberpunk 2077 RT on DLSS on at 4k with 3090 high settings below 60 FPS. Now my question again is. Is the hardware for RT sufficient for games now, considering CB2077 is not fully ray traced? Now tell me, when people see this happening on a card for $3k they would still hold your side? If you expect me to find a link or a proof for 'MAJORITY OF PEOPLE' saying it, is as I've expressed it to be then you are mistaken. There is no link to majority of people saying this. Yet also the games are getting more demanding and devs put more RT features in games. 3090 will be obsolete in 2 years time if RT evolves they way you guys claim it will thus my conclusion. That is a top tier card you can currently get and still even DLSS can't keep the FPS above 60.
So here is my question for you, since you don't agree with my statement 'majority of people say RT is good but the hardware lacks', is the hardware we currently have enough for fully ray traced games? Because the games will get more demanding for sure on the RT side and rasterization side. And one more question, how do you want me to give you a link to 'majority of people say'? I think the conclusion is the one you seek not a link or a source to 'majority of people say'.
I see our friend @nguyen is breaking a thrust from laughing giving meaningless arguments. I sure hope the 3090 in a 2 years time will get better with RT when new, more demanding games come out. (sarcasm)
I'm sure getting my money worth gaming for 2 years on the 3090 compare to you though :roll:.
I'm pretty sure you will be getting RDNA3, so aren't you being hypocritical? or you are saying your 6900XT is too strong in rasterization that it won't be obsolete in a year :roll: ?

Edit: nice try finding that techtuber though, he is playing CP2077 with RT+DLSS for the best gaming experience, as opposed to no RT/DLSS. Playing CP2077 at 4K with RT+DLSS is next gen visual that money can buy atm.
Posted on Reply
#74
ratirt
nguyenI'm sure getting my money worth gaming for 2 years on the 3090 compare to you though :roll:.
I'm pretty sure you will be getting RDNA3, so aren't you being hypocritical? or you are saying your 6900XT is too strong in rasterization that it won't be obsolete in a year :roll: ?
Yes yes. Your 3090 is the best no worries bro :)

My 6900XT will do fine don't you worry. :)
Posted on Reply
#75
Vayra86
wolfQuite a few people, actually.
Quantify that :) You really can't. People buy the latest GPU so you don't even know if people who bought RTX even care. Its guesswork, yours as much as anyone else's.

I think its much more realistic to look at economic realities and actual content, both of which aren't rosy for RT.
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.