• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Question 'Ampere'/Next-gen gaming uarch speculation thread

Page 83 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
O

Ottonomous

Senior member
How much is the Samsung 7nm EUV process expected to provide in terms of gains?
How will the RTX components be scaled/developed?
Any major architectural enhancements expected?
Will VRAM be bumped to 16/12/12 for the top three?
Will there be further fragmentation in the lineup? (Keeping turing at cheaper prices, while offering 'beefed up RTX' options at the top?)
Will the top card be capable of >4K60, at least 90?
Would Nvidia ever consider an HBM implementation in the gaming lineup?
Will Nvidia introduce new proprietary technologies again?

Sorry if imprudent/uncalled for, just interested in the forum member's thoughts.
 
Drivers would seem to be the most obvious culprit assuming it's a legitimate entry to begin with.

I'm not sure if I'd put much stock in this given how out of line with any reasonable expectations it is.
 
Mopetar said:
Drivers would seem to be the most obvious culprit assuming it's a legitimate entry to begin with.

I'm not sure if I'd put much stock in this given how out of line with any reasonable expectations it is.
Click to expand...
It's almost definitely legitimate. Just as you said, just driver weirdness. The VideoCardz article explains why they all think its the 3080 very well.
 
uzzi38 said:
It's almost definitely legitimate. Just as you said, just driver weirdness. The VideoCardz article explains why they all think its the 3080 very well.
Click to expand...

I think it is a real entry. Possibly also an engineering sample SKU that also may never release too 🙂
 
Glo. said:
HYPE TRAIN!

And they were saying AMD rumors are complete BS, here came the Nvidia fanboys on twitter/baidu...
Click to expand...

Maybe.....
Here is a performance chart from Chiphell. Completely difference source / person / area..... corroborating some of the prior stuff I posted last page.
It is my feeling that the 3070Ti will be trading with Big Navi.

The graph is vague, yes. But it is what it is and what we have for now. However, I think it isn't true as it is too early for it to be real.



111.png
 
Last edited:
Just like the 1080Ti 10GB...

Man, I never knew that thing died the day before launch, I thought Nvidia upped the spec long that. Kinda funny how TPU still has it in it's database.
 
uzzi38 said:
Just like the 1080Ti 10GB...

Man, I never knew that thing died the day before launch, I thought Nvidia upped the spec long that. Kinda funny how TPU still has it in it's database.
Click to expand...

Wow I forgot about that. Crazy last minute changes.

The whole 10GB Vs 20GB on the 3080 is going to play out now.
 
Konan said:
Maybe.....
Here is a performance chart from Chiphell. Completely difference source / person / area..... corroborating some of the prior stuff I posted last page.
It is my feeling that the 3070Ti will be trading with Big Navi.

The graph is vague, yes. But it is what it is and what we have for now. However, I think it isn't true as it is too early for it to be real.
.....
Click to expand...
Then your feeling how 3070Ti will trade blows with Big Navi is most likely wrong.
80CU Big Navi can hardly perform only on the level of 3070Ti which is just a bit faster than 2080Ti according to that graph. What's interesting in that graph is that Ampere has only a bit better perf/W than Turing without RT. Most likely this graph is not correct, but at least we can discuss something.
 
I don't think people who are making that graph even grasp how big IPC increase would Nvidia need to get for RTX 3070 with 40 SMs(2560 ALUs) to be faster than RTX 2080 Super with 48 SM's(3072 ALUs). Not to mention 48 SM GPU, to be faster than 72 SM GPU from Turing architecture...? KEK.

Remember. RTX 3080 is based on 102 die, and has 68 SM's. Next is 104 die, with 48 SM. And that is 3070 Ti.

Also the gap in performance between 48 SM and 68 SM GPU is way too small, which makes this graph even worse.
 
Glo. said:
Also the gap in performance between 48 SM and 68 SM GPU is way too small, which makes this graph even worse.
Click to expand...

Remember frequency. The mentioned frequency might be technically the set boost but it can go much higher than that in games. Chart at first glance doesn't seem that out of place but would need to look at it more detailed.
 
Glo. said:
I don't think people who are making that graph even grasp how big IPC increase would Nvidia need to get for RTX 3070 with 40 SMs(2560 ALUs) to be faster than RTX 2080 Super with 48 SM's(3072 ALUs). Not to mention 48 SM GPU, to be faster than 72 SM GPU from Turing architecture...? KEK.

Remember. RTX 3080 is based on 102 die, and has 68 SM's. Next is 104 die, with 48 SM. And that is 3070 Ti.

Also the gap in performance between 48 SM and 68 SM GPU is way too small, which makes this graph even worse.
Click to expand...
GA104 is rumored to have 48SMs by KatKorgi and 3072 Cuda cores. Add in IPC, frequency and FP32 performance changes.
Or like they said you take TSE scores and work back from that using the differences they say.... the chart looks plausible in places

Edit:

GA104 as per KatCorgi within 5% of 2080Ti it is right there what was said back from March in the thumbnail. And that could be just the plain old 3070 and not the Ti version that is also now rumored in a few places.
What has changed since then? Rumor apparently says with 16GB now to help with greater FP32 throughput and now we have GDDR6X confirmation.

1597597557991.png
 
Last edited:
TESKATLIPOKA said:
Then your feeling how 3070Ti will trade blows with Big Navi is most likely wrong.
80CU Big Navi can hardly perform only on the level of 3070Ti which is just a bit faster than 2080Ti according to that graph. What's interesting in that graph is that Ampere has only a bit better perf/W than Turing without RT. Most likely this graph is not correct, but at least we can discuss something.
Click to expand...

Well CoreTeks was pitching the BN performance at a little over the 2080Ti.

Nice point on the perf/w observation. Agree it is impossible for someone to know all the performance numbers at this point 100%.
 
jpiniero said:
Remember frequency. The mentioned frequency might be technically the set boost but it can go much higher than that in games. Chart at first glance doesn't seem that out of place but would need to look at it more detailed.
Click to expand...
2100 MHz is the core clock limit. It won't go past that.
 
Glo. said:
2100 MHz is the core clock limit. It won't go past that.
Click to expand...

That might be enough. Say the 3070 Ti FE actually hits that... same shader count as 2080 Super, and it's 20% faster. 9% frequency boost plus 10% IPC gain gets you pretty close.

Note I do not expect the 3070 Ti to be released any time soon. The 3070 was earlier rumored to be 2944 (same as 2080) but that could change.
 
Konan said:
GA104 is rumored to have 48SMs by KatKorgi and 3072 Cuda cores. Add in IPC, frequency and FP32 performance changes.
Click to expand...
FP32 performance changes? What's that supposed to mean? Isn't that actually better IPC?
GA104 has supposedly 3072 FP32 Cuda cores in 48SMs(64 Cuda per SM as with Turing). 2080Ti has 68SMs active so the difference is 42%. RTX 2080Ti FE has on average 1824Mhz so If I set the clockspeed for GA104 10-15% higher that would mean 2006-2098Mhz. It leaves 23-29% for better IPC to be on par with 2080Ti. A bit high in my opinion.
Personally I think RDNA2 will have higher clocks than Ampere. Why do I think so? Because Renoir IGP is capable of 2.4-2.5Ghz OC and that's on old Vega architecture and no Vega GPU was capable of that before. Let's not forget about PS5 GPU turbo clockspeed of 2.23Ghz.
 
Last edited:
TESKATLIPOKA said:
FP32 performance changes? What's that supposed to mean? Isn't that actually better IPC?
GA104 has supposedly 3072 FP32 Cuda cores in 48SMs(64 Cuda per SM as with Turing). 2080Ti has 68SMs active so the difference is 42%. RTX 2080Ti FE has on average 1824Mhz so If I set the clockspeed for GA104 10-15% higher that would mean 2006-2098Mhz. It leaves 23-29% for better IPC to be on par with 2080Ti. A bit high in my opinion.
Personally I think RDNA2 will have higher clocks than Ampere. Why do I think so? Because Renoir Vega IGP is capable of 2.4-2.5Ghz OC.
Click to expand...

2080 Ti might be memory bottlenecked.
 
Konan said:
Well the chart from Chiphell could be completely user made. That said a 3060 with a proposed 6GB on the same level as a 1080TI 11GB is interesting.
Click to expand...
It's very likely that graph is fake. I would be very surprised If RTX3060 had only 6GB Vram and such a card wouldn't be futureproof. Everyone remembers what happened with GTX 1060 3GB.
 
TESKATLIPOKA said:
In my opinion I don't think 2080Ti is bottlenecked and I don't believe 3070Ti has only 512GB/s If the performance is on par with 2080Ti.
Click to expand...

Well, that is assuming if there is no more room for improvement in terms of memory efficiency. While I don't think that graph is real, we would just need performance figures from 3070 and 3080 next month to guess where 3070ti will stand
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top