Monday, May 13th 2024

AMD RDNA 5 a "Clean Sheet" Graphics Architecture, RDNA 4 Merely Corrects a Bug Over RDNA 3

AMD's future RDNA 5 graphics architecture will bear a "clean sheet" design, and may probably not even have the RDNA branding, says WJM47196, a source of AMD leaks on ChipHell. Two generations ahead of the current RDNA 3 architecture powering the Radeon RX 7000 series discrete GPUs, RDNA 5 could see AMD reimagine the GPU and its key components, much in the same way RDNA did over the former "Vega" architecture, bringing in a significant performance/watt jump, which AMD could build upon with its successful RDNA 2 powered Radeon RX 6000 series.

Performance per Watt is the biggest metric on which a generation of GPUs can be assessed, and analysts believe that RDNA 3 missed the mark with generational gains in performance/watt despite the switch to the advanced 5 nm EUV process from the 7 nm DUV. AMD's decision to disaggregate the GPU, with some of its components being built on the older 6 nm node may have also impacted the performance/watt curve. The leaker also makes a sensational claim that "Navi 31" was originally supposed to feature 192 MB of Infinity Cache, which would have meant 32 MB segments of it per memory cache die (MCD). The company instead went with 16 MB per MCD, or just 96 MB per GPU, which only get reduced as AMD segmented the RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 GRE by disabling one or two MCDs.
The upcoming RDNA 4 architecture will correct some of the glaring component level problems causing the performance/Watt curve to waver on RDNA 3; and the top RDNA 4 part could end up with performance comparable to the current RX 7900 series, while being from a segment lower, and a smaller GPU overall. In case you missed it, AMD will not make a big GPU that succeeds the "Navi 31" and "Navi 21" for the RDNA 4 generation, but rather focus on the performance segment, offering more bang for the buck well under the $800-mark, so it could claw back some market share from NVIDIA in the performance- mid-range, and mainstream product segments. While it remains to be seen if RDNA 5 will get AMD back into the enthusiast segment, it is expected to bring a significant gain in performance due to the re-architected design.

One rumored aspect of RDNA 4 that even this source agrees with, is that AMD is working to significantly improve its performance with ray tracing workloads, by redesigning its hardware. While RDNA 3 builds on the Ray Accelerator component AMD introduced with RDNA 2, with certain optimizations yielding a 50% generational improvement in ray testing and intersection performance; RDNA 4 could see AMD put more of the ray tracing workload through fixed-function accelerators, unburdening the shader engines. This significant improvement in ray tracing performance, performance/watt improvements at an architectural level, and the switch to a newer foundry node such as 4 nm or 3 nm, is how AMD ends up with a new generation on its hands.

AMD is expected to unveil RDNA 4 this year, and if we're lucky, we might see a teaser at the 2024 Computex, next month.
Sources: wjm47196 (ChipHell), VideoCardz
Add your own comment

139 Comments on AMD RDNA 5 a "Clean Sheet" Graphics Architecture, RDNA 4 Merely Corrects a Bug Over RDNA 3

#1
Wasteland
  • "AMD will not make a big GPU that succeeds the "Navi 31" and "Navi 21" for the RDNA 4 generation ..."
  • "but rather focus on the performance segment, offering more bang for the buck well under the $800-mark"
Launch MSRP of Navi 31 and Navi 21: $1,000 and $900, respectively.

I sure hope "well under $800" means WAY, WAY under, because otherwise, there isn't much of a distinction here. If that $800 number came from AMD, it sounds like they're hedging bets something fierce.
Posted on Reply
#2
Beginner Macro Device
btarunr50% generational improvement in ray testing
Ray tracing perhaps?
WastelandI sure hope "well under $800" means WAY, WAY under,
In reality, it's most likely about to be 650 to 750 USD. Almost 100% sure it's gonna be 700 sharp. Which doesn't bother per se, especially if bang per buck is on point.
Posted on Reply
#3
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Beginner Macro DeviceRay tracing perhaps?
Testing. Also, the full form of RT cores in NVIDIA GPUs is ray testing cores.
Posted on Reply
#4
Wasteland
$650-700 would be ok, and in this market I certainly wouldn't expect much lower. It's just amusing to me that AMD started out (months ago, IIRC) with a declaration that they're bowing out of the high end, and now they're hedging their bets to such a degree that they've left room to undercut their previous "high-end" price points by no more than $100. Looks like someone in corporate realized that, "Hey, wait a minute, Nvidia might go so crazy with prices that we can spin $800 as a value-oriented market segment!" lol
Posted on Reply
#5
Battler624
Beginner Macro DeviceRay tracing perhaps?


In reality, it's most likely about to be 650 to 750 USD. Almost 100% sure it's gonna be 700 sharp. Which doesn't bother per se, especially if bang per buck is on point.
799 is under $800.

Eitherway, I assume they will once again be similar in terms of Perf/$ VS nvidia
Posted on Reply
#6
Kirederf
Beginner Macro DeviceRay tracing perhaps?


In reality, it's most likely about to be 650 to 750 USD. Almost 100% sure it's gonna be 700 sharp. Which doesn't bother per se, especially if bang per buck is on point.
It has to be lower than that. If the top card is expected with "7900XT performance". The 7900XT can currently be bought for less than $799. So to have a good offer the new card needs to be cheaper or better performing, only some better RT performance won't be enough.. If it comes close to 7800XT pricing with 7900XTX performance and better RT, sound like a winner.
Posted on Reply
#7
Beginner Macro Device
KirederfIt has to be lower than that. If the top card is expected with "7900XT performance". The 7900XT can currently be bought for less than $799. So to have a good offer the new card needs to be cheaper or better performing, only some better RT performance won't be enough.. If it comes close to 7800XT pricing with 7900XTX performance and better RT, sound like a winner.
Well if a 700ish USD GPU ends up beating the whole Ada stack then why not.
Battler624Eitherway, I assume they will once again be similar in terms of Perf/$ VS nvidia
Me too.
Posted on Reply
#8
TumbleGeorge
How much should a graphics card cost if its GPU is mid-range? The prices you suggest seem absurd to me.
Posted on Reply
#9
Onasi
Speculation about the price is pointless as of now. It will all depend on how NV prices their mainstream offerings and what those are like in terms of performance. Once again, I doubt AMD will go extremely aggressive on the price.
TumbleGeorgeHow much should a graphics card cost if its GPU is mid-range? The prices you suggest seem absurd to me.
The term has shifted over the years, it seems, but the overall wisdom is that the mainstream, most widely appealing segment is 200-400 bucks. Anything above that is in the “GPU alone more expensive than an entire console” and as such is well into enthusiast territory. And above a 1000 we are in halo/prosumer land, whatever anyone says.
Posted on Reply
#10
Kirederf
Beginner Macro DeviceWell if a 700ish USD GPU ends up beating the whole Ada stack then why not.

Me too.
Sure, if it beats the ADA stack.. A $700 Radeon with RTX 4090 performance sounds very nice! But the current rumors tell a different story I'm afraid..
Posted on Reply
#11
TumbleGeorge
You should think of the rDNA 4 "flagship" as the rx 7800 xt on RT steroids. Given that despite the expected improvements in RT, it will likely struggle for the kind of performance that is in the space between the rtx 5060 and rtx 5070... The price would have to be really low to have any chance of success.
Posted on Reply
#12
SL2
I don't understand why some people expect a price war every now and then. Just look at history, it never happens these days, especially not at launch.
Posted on Reply
#13
Bwaze
If the Nvidia's 50X0 again offers decrease in price / performance, all bets are off. AMD has no intention of undercutting Nvidia's pricing, because they don't want to dedicate significant portion of their silicon - they are focusing on products with much higher profit margins. So we might see an increase in pricing compared to current products, without any new technology or performance uplift, just because they will follow Nvidia.
Posted on Reply
#14
AusWolf
What happened with the "7900 XT performance for 500 bucks" claim? Now it's "under 800"? What the heck?

RDNA 3 shaders with new ray accelerators sound fine to me, but let's get the price right first.

Edit: Also, talking about RDNA 5 even before RDNA 4 is announced doesn't suggest much good. It sounds almost like "RDNA 4 will be shit, but don't worry, folks, the one after that is a complete redesign".
Posted on Reply
#15
nguyen
Takes 2 years to fix the bug on RDNA3? sure sound like AMD is not focusing on Radeon at all
Posted on Reply
#16
Onasi
AusWolfEdit: Also, talking about RDNA 5 even before RDNA 4 is announced doesn't suggest much good. It sounds almost like "RDNA 4 will be shit, but don't worry, folks, the one after that is a complete redesign".
It does feel like a Rocket Lake “we just need to get something out for now” situation for them, yeah. Essentially an interim solution, although if priced well it can be not a bad thing. But as I mentioned, I don’t feel like a price war is in the cards.
Posted on Reply
#17
AusWolf
OnasiIt does feel like a Rocket Lake “we just need to get something out for now” situation for them, yeah. Essentially an interim solution, although if priced well it can be not a bad thing. But as I mentioned, I don’t feel like a price war is in the cards.
I do have a Rocket Lake CPU, and it's not that bad, so fingers crossed. :)
Posted on Reply
#18
TumbleGeorge
OnasiIt does feel like a Rocket Lake “we just need to get something out for now” situation for them, yeah. Essentially an interim solution, although if priced well it can be not a bad thing. But as I mentioned, I don’t feel like a price war is in the cards.
No one has mentioned war in this discussion. Something is worth what it can be sold for. If it produces only slightly more rays than the rtx 5060(which will probably cost $400), consumes 50% more electricity, and comes in at $700, no one will even consider buying the rx 8800.
Posted on Reply
#19
64K
TumbleGeorgeHow much should a graphics card cost if its GPU is mid-range? The prices you suggest seem absurd to me.
I break down GPUs into 3 categories. Entry level, midrange and high end based on their specs. To me a solid midrange GPU would be something like the 4070 Super. So that would be $600 for this generation. Upper midrange $800. Entry level would be around $300.

imo these prices are too high but unfortunately that is the state of GPUs today.
Posted on Reply
#20
Daven
nguyenTakes 2 years to fix the bug on RDNA3? sure sound like AMD is not focusing on Radeon at all
AMD could have had RDNA4 ready on the day after launching the RDNA3 but a company can’t just throw away a whole development cycle and we are on a two-year GPU cadence right now.

By the way ‘bug’ is the leakers word and shows how little he or she knows the technology.
Posted on Reply
#21
AusWolf
64KI break down GPUs into 3 categories. Entry level, midrange and high end based on their specs. To me a solid midrange GPU would be something like the 4070 Super. So that would be $600 for this generation. Upper midrange $800. Entry level would be around $300.

imo these prices are too high but unfortunately that is the state of GPUs today.
Yes, they're too high.

For me, there's 4 categories: entry level is $200 and below (3050, 6500 XT), midrange is up to $500 (4070, 7700 XT), high-end is up to $800 (4080, 7900 XT), and anything above is prosumer / enthusiast territory.
Posted on Reply
#22
Bwaze
64Kimo these prices are too high but unfortunately that is the state of GPUs today.
Unfortunately that isn't really "the state of GPU today", but the state of GPU 1. 5 years ago. So in late 2024, early 2025 you will first have to add 2 years of inflation, and only then start to apply "Jensen's law" (the price will not go down any more, Moore's dead)...
Posted on Reply
#23
64K
AusWolfYes, they're too high.

For me, there's 4 categories: entry level is $200 and below (3050, 6500 XT), midrange is up to $500 (4070, 7700 XT), high-end is up to $800 (4080, 7900 XT), and anything above is prosumer / enthusiast territory.
That was why I said for this generation concerning entry level. Also, the 4080 is minimum $1,000 if you can even find it at MSRP.
Posted on Reply
#24
AusWolf
64KThat was why I said for this generation concerning entry level. Also, the 4080 is minimum $1,000 if you can even find it at MSRP.
There's no entry level in this generation. As for the 4080, fair enough. It's weird that you can find the 4080 Super cheaper sometimes.
Posted on Reply
#25
Vya Domus
TumbleGeorgeHow much should a graphics card cost
The answer is whatever Nvidia says it should.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 23rd, 2024 15:19 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts