AMD Announces the Radeon VII Graphics Card: Beats GeForce RTX 2080

[xenocide]

HBM is expensive and 16GB is overkill. I would rather see it ship with 8GB and a lower price. Can someone point me to a benchmark of a game using more than 8GB of vram?

Most don't, and a lot that do basically just dump textures into the VRAM in anticipation of them being needed (e.g. Black Ops III). As a frame of reference, The Witcher 3 can run great at 4K maxed out while using less than 3GB of VRAM. So this idea that cards are crippled by VRAM just doesn't have a lot of basis in reality. 6-8GB is probably the sweet spot, so shipping a card with 16GB of HBM just seems like overkill.

 

[efikkan]

Turing (and pricing) have been known since September. AMD had plenty of time to plan this

That doesn't make you wrong an the Navi front though. I mean, AMD has announced their plans for CPUs till Q2 or Q3. If they said nothing about GPUs, it's likely nothing is planned.

Sure.
My point is that if they had Navi 10 ready now or very soon, they wouldn't have done this. My assumption is that Navi 10 would be a little faster and much cheaper to produce (less fp64 and possibly GDDR6), and therefore conclude that it's not coming soon.

 

[Renald]

These cards aren't supposed to out at H2 ?

 

[erocker]

These cards aren't supposed to out at H2 ?

Navi is. This is a die shrunk Vega.

 

[ShurikN]

Navi is. This is a die shrunk Vega.

we dont know when and in what config Navi is coming
Which was probably the biggest disappointment from this key note. Lack of Navi info.
A shrunken Vega is cool and all, but it's still a Vega, uArch not designed for gaming at all. The numbers AMD pulled with VII are trough pure brute force of the chip. Which can only get them so far.

 

[btarunr]

These cards aren't supposed to out at H2 ?

You can buy one of these on 7th Feb.

 

[TheOne]

2080 equivalent with the same MSRP, cant say I didn't see this coming, I'm not looking forward to seeing Ryzen's pricing.

 

[cucker tarlson]

nice!
16gb hbm2 at 2080 price,no rtx though.I'd be in a pickle trying to choose,and that says a lot of good about the amd's card.

 

[M2B]

I don't think it's gonna beat the 1080Ti, look at the specs, 3840 Shaders at 1.8GHz translates into 13.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance which is 10% higher than Vega 64 and that doesn't necessarily mean 10% of Real-World performance increase.
But considering the huge memory bandwidth increase I think it will end up being 15-18% faster than Vega 64 at 4K which is not enough to beat a 1080Ti.

 

[hat]

nice!
16gb hbm2 at 2080 price,no rtx though.I'd be in a pickle trying to choose,and that says a lot of good about the amd's card.

Might be a bit too early to say that. It might not be "RTX", but isn't ray tracing supposed to be a standard option with DX12?

I don't think it's gonna beat the 1080Ti, look at the specs, 3840 Shaders at 1.8GHz translates into 13.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance which is 10% higher than Vega 64 and that doesn't necessarily mean 10% percent of Real-World performance increase.
But considering the huge memory bandwidth increase I think it will be end up being 15-18% faster than Vega 64 at 4K which is not enough to beat a 1080Ti.

I believe I've read comments theorizing that Vega was starved for memory bandwidth. More memory bandwidth might well mean more performance. As far as I know, nVidia has some kind of hacky compression that helps cards with lower bandwidth perform better, but AMD doesn't.

 

[Vayra86]

If they can compete with a 2080 at a lower price, I can only say its a win - a small one, but a win nonetheless.

You have to keep in mind that AMD is doing this with minimal R&D expenses, versus Nvidia that is blowing millions on Turing. A shrink here, a little tweak there, and they can stall for another year. This already looks a lot better than Vega did at the time. A timely release schedule, a simple - open! - air cooler that is supposed to be silent, and a healthy + zippy VRAM department. The only caveat is the power consumption - we think.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

This is steaming hot out of my ass, but Radeon VII could trigger an RTX 2090 and RTX 2090 Ti (full TU104 and full TU102 with 12 GB). AMD is probably saving the 64 CU ASIC for that. Right now it can compete and harvest just fine with 60 CU.

4 CUs aren't going to make much of a difference in performance though (6.7% at best). If they had an 80-96 CU waiting in the wings, then sure.

 

[M2B]

I believe I've read comments theorizing that Vega was starved for memory bandwidth. More memory bandwidth might well mean more performance. As far as I know, nVidia has some kind of hacky compression that helps cards with lower bandwidth perform better, but AMD doesn't.

I still think that's not enough to beat a 1080Ti. We'll see.

 

[Nephilim666]

Let's hope Navi is a clever and efficient chip with all the tricks nvidia uses to get more performance out of a technically inferior chip. Don't care about raytracing yet.

For now I'll just add another radiator to my loop and push my Vega 64 to 1750/1050. I have solar power so watts aren't a big issue.

 

[SN2716057]

Oh very exiting...but I'll wait for the reviews.

 

[erocker]

we dont know when and in what config Navi is coming
Which was probably the biggest disappointment from this key note. Lack of Navi info.
A shrunken Vega is cool and all, but it's still a Vega, uArch not designed for gaming at all. The numbers AMD pulled with VII are trough pure brute force of the chip. Which can only get them so far.

This is clearly a stop-gap GPU. Nobody really expected anything from AMD in regards to Graphics until the end of the year. There will be Navi info once they're done trying to sell whatever the hell this is. This card is DOA at its price... low effort.

 

[Rahmat Sofyan]

It looks like they basically took AMD Radeon Instinct MI50 add active cooling and increase core/memory frequencies. That's it.

Great value for video content creators and computing, not so great for gaming. It's FP64 performance 6.7 TFLOPs is on pair with Titan V (costing $3K). This is not a true gaming card.

If true power draw will be around 300W. Vega 64 deja vu all over again

it's look like almost 100% same like MI50, so maybe yes Vega VII indeed a MI50 with display output and added fan ..

not really excited about RTG progress so far, but still I'm happy with my RX570 .

Maybe RTG tend to give up on high end GPU with nvidia in term of power efficiency right now, until they change masively entire structure.

lets hope Navi can bring major changes..

Ryzen still made a really good progress and I bet what weve seen on the demo was a Ryzen 5 vs i9 9900K or at least not the greatest next Ryzen..

 

[Deleted member 50521]

This is steaming hot out of my ass, but Radeon VII could trigger an RTX 2090 and RTX 2090 Ti (full TU104 and full TU102 with 12 GB). AMD is probably saving the 64 CU ASIC for that. Right now it can compete and harvest just fine with 60 CU.

A more logical explanation maybe the yield issues of 7nm. 7nm is VERY new and there may simply not be enough working full GPU dies for a 64CU.

Also Radeon 7 is still GCN. Judging by the gap between Vega56 and 64, 4CU would only bring abysmal performance improvement.

Don’t hype AMD, they don’t need hype.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Indeed, with the apparently awful overpriced 2060 giving their top consumer part a bloody nose, AMD had to show something.

 

[efikkan]

Just like the RX 590, this seems very much like a "backup plan", and kind of similar to Intel's Coffee Lake refresh.

 

[Xzibit]

$699 with 3 bundled unreleased games ?

 

[ColdPlay]

wow, if this is real and at that price, its a winwin for everyone of us

 

[jallenlabs]

Ooh. A "gamer friendly" triple fan cooler design! Lol.

 

[MrGenius]

Ooh. A "gamer friendly" triple fan cooler design! Lol.

It ain't by much. But, giving credit where credit is due, that is another aspect where it has the 2080 FE beat too.

 

[15th Warlock]

It has about the same performance as the 2080, matching its price, with no ray tracing support?

I was hoping AMD would bring about a real threat to Nvidia's inflated prices, it's not the case...

I know this is because of the amount of HBM on this card, but they have a new Fab process, which means they can carve more GPUs out of the silicon wafer, and yet they chose to keep the CU count smaller (or equal in a future XT version?) than Vega 64, when they could've increased sheer rasterizing performance by taking advantage of the smaller node, while beating 2080 to a pulp and matching or surpassing the 2080 Ti? I mean, I get they're not beting on ray tracing, that's reasonable, but why not push the rasterizing envelope then?

Idk, same performance at same price, more memory, less features... It's gonna be an uphill battle.

An ideal scenario in my opinion would've been: Vega VII, with 50% more CUs due to ability to cram more transistors in a smaller space, and a lower price than 2080 by matching its 8GB buffer, now that would've made Nvidia shit their pants...

Idk, maybe next year