Top AMD RDNA4 Part Could Offer RX 7900 XTX Performance at Half its Price and Lower Power

[3valatzy]

The 7800 XT is the 6700 XT's successor. AMD just bumped SKU tiers

I see. RX 6700 XT was launched for 480$ at the highest peak of the crisis - covid and mining boom. Its successor is launched even more expensive 500$.
That's not ok.

, but if you look at it objectively, it's really Navi 32 (and succeeds Navi 22). That it is approaching Navi 21 level of performance, even if not quite beating it, is indeed rather unremarkable, but it remains the 7800 XT is probably the most balanced product that AMD has on offer this generation. Navi 31 is scales extremely poorly and the fact AMD can shift it at lower prices is its sole redemption after failing to compete with AD102 and being barely on the level of the much leaner AD103 chip.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I see. RX 6700 XT was launched for 480$ at the highest peak of the crisis - covid and mining boom. Its successor is launched even more expensive 500$.
That's not ok.

That doesn't matter. AMD is a business, their sole objective as a business is to make money. Their loyalty and obligations lie with the shareholders, not the small people and they are not trying to cut us a friendly deal because they care about us. The 7800 XT may be an underwhelming performer if you have expectations of it that match that of a previous generation x800-tier product, but it succeeds at being Navi 22's successor and it's at the sweet spot market demand, and the market has clearly said that it wants this product and is willing to pay for it. It even manage to become the hyper value-conscious Europeans' darling, selling unusually well in that region. So unless NVIDIA starts a price war and begins to lower the RTX 4060 Ti's pricing aggressively to match, do not expect this card's price to be reduced in the future.

 

[Makaveli]

This is the same argument when AMD fans start to run on that the 7900 XTX WINS because it's 1% faster in raster against the 4080 Super and 4% faster than the 4080, all while omitting that it's 20% slower in RT. I must confess I often argue with these types for entertainment

This is kind of irrelevant in this thread about RDNA 4. And will just cause thread-crapping and off-topic post. Let's stay on topic.

 

[Dr. Dro]

This is kind of irrelevant in this thread about RDNA 4. And will just cause thread-crapping and off-topic post. Let's stay on topic.

No, it's very relevant alright, especially since the thread is about a lack of a high-end competitor to Blackwell. I'm about the pattern of argumentation.

 

[Makaveli]

No, it's very relevant alright, especially since the thread is about a lack of a high-end competitor to Blackwell. I'm about the pattern of argumentation.

Where does it say anything about Nvidia in the title of this thread?

 

[AusWolf]

I see. RX 6700 XT was launched for 480$ at the highest peak of the crisis - covid and mining boom. Its successor is launched even more expensive 500$.
That's not ok.

Because surely no other company on this planet has increased their prices in the last 2 years to stay profitable amidst the biggest inflation since 2008. Yeah, right...

If only a 5% price hike in the mid-range graphics card sector was my biggest problem these days...

 

[Dr. Dro]

Where does it say anything about Nvidia in the title of this thread?

Somewhere alongside the past ten pages of back and forth over the last week or so.

 

[AusWolf]

The 7800 XT is the 6700 XT's successor. AMD just bumped SKU tiers, but if you look at it objectively, it's really Navi 32 (and succeeds Navi 22). That it is approaching Navi 21 level of performance, even if not quite beating it, is indeed rather unremarkable, but it remains the 7800 XT is probably the most balanced product that AMD has on offer this generation. Navi 31 scales extremely poorly and the fact AMD can shift it at lower prices is its sole redemption after failing to compete with AD102 and being barely on the level of the much leaner AD103 chip.

(product) (silicon tier)
7900 XTX > 6900 XT (1)
7900 XT > 6800 XT (1)
7900 GRE > 6800 (1)
7800 XT > 6700 XT (2)
7700 XT > 6700 (2)
7600 > 6600 XT (3)
6500 XT, no RDNA 3 replacement yet (4)

I don't count 7600 XT because it's just a 16 GB 7600 and that's about it

This!

Looking at product names alone is foolish. One should look at specs, performance, power consumption and price. Then, one can see that the 7800 XT is the obvious upgrade over the 6700 XT, not the 6800 XT.

Edit: If one compares the 7800 XT to the 6800 XT (at launch), then it is obviously cheaper. If one compares it to the 6700 XT, then it is obviously faster. Take your pick.

 

[JimminyCrumpet]

It is finally going to have proper tensor cores, not the half assed matrix cores in the 7xxx series.

Examining AMD’s RDNA 4 Changes in LLVM

As 2024 continues on, because time never stops, AMD has been working on their upcoming RDNA 4 architecture. Part of this involves supporting open source projects like LLVM. If done right, merging t…

chipsandcheese.com

Nah, unless it's a change they haven't added the code for yet. The WMMA instructions just use the scheduler cores.
I'd assume that if AMD added matrix cores to RDNA they'd use the design that's already in CDNA2 / 3; the presence of those is indicated by FeatureMAIInsts in the gfx9 MI FeatureSet in AMDGPU.td.

gfx12 doesn't have this feature or derive from the single featureset that does and there'd be no real point in implementing it differently when pretty much everything else relevant is shared between the ISAs.

 

[Makaveli]

Nah, unless it's a change they haven't added the code for yet. The WMMA instructions just use the scheduler cores.
I'd assume that if AMD added matrix cores to RDNA they'd use the design that's already in CDNA2 / 3; the presence of those is indicated by FeatureMAIInsts in the gfx9 MI FeatureSet in AMDGPU.td.

gfx12 doesn't have this feature or derive from the single featureset that does and there'd be no real point in implementing it differently when pretty much everything else relevant is shared between the ISAs.

I think RDNA 5 is when we finally get RT hardware added on the Radeon side.

So that will most likely go RDNA 3 to 5 just like i'm doing Zen 3 to Zen 5

 

[Patriot]

Nah, unless it's a change they haven't added the code for yet. The WMMA instructions just use the scheduler cores.
I'd assume that if AMD added matrix cores to RDNA they'd use the design that's already in CDNA2 / 3; the presence of those is indicated by FeatureMAIInsts in the gfx9 MI FeatureSet in AMDGPU.td.

gfx12 doesn't have this feature or derive from the single featureset that does and there'd be no real point in implementing it differently when pretty much everything else relevant is shared between the ISAs.

Not entirely true.
GFX11 has AI acceleration.
but the modes it supports is both more and less limited than CDNA1. better bfloat16, CNDA1 supports it at halfspeed, RDNA3 at equal vs fp16... but then int8 receives no doubling in performance on RDNA3, but it does on CDNA.
There are also 2 WMMA instructions... WMMA and rocmWMMA, the first will use accelerators if they exist, the 2nd requires them.
RDNA3 supports both instructions.

How to accelerate AI applications on RDNA 3 using WMMA

This blog is a quick how-to guide for using the WMMA feature with our RDNA 3 GPU architecture using a Hello World example.

gpuopen.com

GitHub - ROCm/rocWMMA: rocWMMA

rocWMMA. Contribute to ROCm/rocWMMA development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

 

[TeamMe]

If you can afford to spend more than $500 you buy Nvidia anyway. Smart move by AMD. You are the discount brand.

I spend about 950USD but I would never buy nVidia. They (nVidia) have too much market share and if that continues, it would be worse for me in the long run. I currently have a 6900XT and can see myself getting an 8900XT...

 

[3valatzy]

This is the same argument when AMD fans start to run on that the 7900 XTX WINS because it's 1% faster in raster against the 4080 Super and 4% faster than the 4080, all while omitting that it's 20% slower in RT. I must confess I often argue with these types for entertainment



The 7800 XT is the 6700 XT's successor. AMD just bumped SKU tiers, but if you look at it objectively, it's really Navi 32 (and succeeds Navi 22). That it is approaching Navi 21 level of performance, even if not quite beating it, is indeed rather unremarkable, but it remains the 7800 XT is probably the most balanced product that AMD has on offer this generation. Navi 31 scales extremely poorly and the fact AMD can shift it at lower prices is its sole redemption after failing to compete with AD102 and being barely on the level of the much leaner AD103 chip.

(product) (silicon tier)
7900 XTX > 6900 XT (1)
7900 XT > 6800 XT (1)
7900 GRE > 6800 (1)
7800 XT > 6700 XT (2)
7700 XT > 6700 (2)
7600 > 6600 XT (3)
6500 XT, no RDNA 3 replacement yet (4)

I don't count 7600 XT because it's just a 16 GB 7600 and that's about it

This!

Looking at product names alone is foolish. One should look at specs, performance, power consumption and price. Then, one can see that the 7800 XT is the obvious upgrade over the 6700 XT, not the 6800 XT.

Edit: If one compares the 7800 XT to the 6800 XT (at launch), then it is obviously cheaper. If one compares it to the 6700 XT, then it is obviously faster. Take your pick.

Let's take a look at the performance:

6900 XT +47% -> 7900 XTX
6800 XT +36% -> 7900 XT
6700 XT +48% -> 7800 XТ
6700 +42% -> 7700 XT
6600 XT +10% -> 7600

Speaking of RX 6600 XT and RX 7600, they are essentially same thing with quite small feature set updates.
Navi 33 is a direct rebrand of Navi 23 which is a direct rebrand of Navi 10.
Navi 10, 23 and 33 is basically same thing.

2019 Navi 10 251 sq. mm, 10.3B transistors, TSMC N7
2021 Navi 23 237 sq. mm, 11B transistors, TSMC N7
2023 Navi 33 204 sq. mm, 13.3B transistors, TSMC N7+ (aka N6)

I spend about 950USD but I would never buy nVidia. They (nVidia) have too much market share and if that continues, it would be worse for me in the long run. I currently have a 6900XT and can see myself getting an 8900XT...

8900 won't be a worthy upgrade over your 6900 XT. Maybe the power consumption, but you can underclock and undervolt your card without losing performance now, don't wait for the Navi 48-based small 8900 XT.

 

[TeamMe]

Let's take a look at the performance:

6900 XT +47% -> 7900 XTX
6800 XT +36% -> 7900 XT
6700 XT +48% -> 7800 XТ
6700 +42% -> 7700 XT
6600 XT +10% -> 7600

Speaking of RX 6600 XT and RX 7600, they are essentially same thing with quite small feature set updates.
Navi 33 is a direct rebrand of Navi 23 which is a direct rebrand of Navi 10.
Navi 10, 23 and 33 is basically same thing.

2019 Navi 10 251 sq. mm, 10.3B transistors, TSMC N7
2021 Navi 23 237 sq. mm, 11B transistors, TSMC N7
2023 Navi 33 204 sq. mm, 13.3B transistors, TSMC N7+ (aka N6)



8900 won't be a worthy upgrade over your 6900 XT. Maybe the power consumption, but you can underclock and undervolt your card without losing performance now, don't wait for the Navi 48-based small 8900 XT.

May be 8900XTX...

 

[AusWolf]

Let's take a look at the performance:

6900 XT +47% -> 7900 XTX
6800 XT +36% -> 7900 XT
6700 XT +48% -> 7800 XТ
6700 +42% -> 7700 XT
6600 XT +10% -> 7600

Speaking of RX 6600 XT and RX 7600, they are essentially same thing with quite small feature set updates.
Navi 33 is a direct rebrand of Navi 23 which is a direct rebrand of Navi 10.
Navi 10, 23 and 33 is basically same thing.

2019 Navi 10 251 sq. mm, 10.3B transistors, TSMC N7
2021 Navi 23 237 sq. mm, 11B transistors, TSMC N7
2023 Navi 33 204 sq. mm, 13.3B transistors, TSMC N7+ (aka N6)

Except that I wasn't talking about the 7600. You're deflecting the point.

 

[3valatzy]

Except that I wasn't talking about the 7600. You're deflecting the point.

Except that I wasn't writing about what you think I was.

The guy said:

7600 > 6600 XT (3)

You replied:

Looking at product names alone is foolish. One should look at specs, performance, power consumption and price.

So, it is not right to claim that 7600 is a successor for RX 6600 XT, when in fact it is nothing more than a little improved overclocked version on a "plus" TSMC process.

May be 8900XTX...

Maybe the NeXT gen afterwards with RDNA 1.5. That will probably be a Radeon with a new branding scheme if we follow the HD 7970 -> R9 290X evolution.

 

[AusWolf]

Except that I wasn't writing about what you think I was.

The guy said:



You replied:



So, it is not right to claim that 7600 is a successor for RX 6600 XT, when in fact it is nothing more than a little improved overclocked version on a "plus" TSMC process.

My claim was that the 7800 XT is the successor of the 6700 XT, not the 6800 XT as the name would suggest. What other GPU was used in the quoted post is of no significance.

 

[tfdsaf]

I don't think ATi Technologies is better under AMD with its own strange priorities which say that ATi is somewhere third-forth priority and is not important.
The best for us, the customers, is if AMD sells the Radeon IP to another company, let it be someone very rich whose only priority is to develop consumer graphics cards.

AMD is doing amazing in the compute department and AI department. They are selling expensive workstation and AI GPU's that have 1000% margins. They just don't need to fight tooth and nail against Nvidia in the desktop space.

AMD are also doing amazing with their custom soc's for xbox and playstation as well as car GPU's, so the gpu division has been a major success for them in the past 5 years.

 

[Dr. Dro]

So, it is not right to claim that 7600 is a successor for RX 6600 XT, when in fact it is nothing more than a little improved overclocked version on a "plus" TSMC process.

It is perfectly right: RX 6600 XT is Navi 23 fully enabled, and RX 7600 is Navi 33 fully enabled. This is a simple objective fact, generationally they fit in the exact same bracket with relatively the exact same relative configuration. The aforementioned percentages are the bare minimum expected for a full generational leap.

Performance has to increase generation over generation or you're advocating for stalling the performance tiers and then just introducing more and more price tiers above to get that benefit. Isn't that why people call Nvidia "nGreedia" after all?

 

[3valatzy]

It is perfectly right: RX 6600 XT is Navi 23 fully enabled, and RX 7600 is Navi 33 fully enabled. This is a simple objective fact, generationally they fit in the exact same bracket with relatively the exact same relative configuration. The aforementioned percentages are the bare minimum expected for a full generational leap.

Performance has to increase generation over generation or you're advocating for stalling the performance tiers and then just introducing more and more price tiers above to get that benefit. Isn't that why people call Nvidia "nGreedia" after all?

RX 7600 is a successor for RX 6500 XT.

 

[kapone32]

So there is no AMD 6600 card to compare to the 7600?

 

[3valatzy]

So there is no AMD 6600 card to compare to the 7600?

25% more performance for 25% more money?! Both are widely available at the same time. No, one is not a successor for the other.
Previously the normal generational uplifts were likely 40, 50 and in some cases 60%.
So yeah, given that the 6500 XT is a rebrand of the previous 5500 XT which offers the RX 480 performance from year 2016.
This is 8 years gone by...

 

[Dr. Dro]

RX 7600 is a successor for RX 6500 XT.

No, it's not. It's a full tier up, just like the 6600 XT. The 6500 XT is Navi 24. There is no RDNA 3 equivalent available yet, and it is likely there will not be one at all. The 6500 XT was released out of a need to get any GPU in the market. It's a bad product and it has always been, fundamentally flawed because Navi 24 was designed first and foremost to be paired with Rembrandt APUs on laptops, which is why you can see that they completely lack video encoding support, have a hard limit of 2 displays (which were originally intended for laptop panel + HDMI out), etc.

The RX 6400 somewhat "justified" its existence despite being even worse because it remained relatively affordable even during the worst of the crisis, and it was a low profile, single slot, slot powered GPU, the first in a very long time (since the GT 1030).

 

[kapone32]

No, it's not. It's a full tier up, just like the 6600 XT. The 6500 XT is Navi 24. There is no RDNA 3 equivalent available yet, and it is likely there will not be one at all. The 6500 XT was released out of a need to get any GPU in the market. It's a bad product and it has always been, fundamentally flawed because Navi 24 was designed first and foremost to be paired with Rembrandt APUs on laptops, which is why you can see that they completely lack video encoding support, have a hard limit of 2 displays (which were originally intended for laptop panel + HDMI out), etc.

The RX 6400 somewhat "justified" its existence despite being even worse because it remained relatively affordable even during the worst of the crisis, and it was a low profile, single slot, slot powered GPU, the first in a very long time (since the GT 1030).

Depends what you used it for. There is a reason they use the 6500XT in APU reviews.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Depends what you used it for. There is a reason they use the 6500XT in APU reviews.

Probably the worst idea you can have, it's known to be extra sensitive to PCIe bandwidth since it's limited to just 4 lanes. Raven, Picasso, Renoir and Cezanne are all limited to gen 3, which will hurt its already bad performance even further.