Discussion RDNA 5 / UDNA (CDNA Next) speculation

Page 82 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Kepler_L2

Golden Member
Sep 6, 2020
1,060
4,556
136
It's very frustrating. And RDNA 5 seems to only amplify this.

RDNA 2 was a brief moment of hope that AMD had the IP and momentum to actually compete for the halo. Then RDNA 3 happened lol.

@Kepler_L2
Any info on RDNA 5 Render Backend? Still RB+ or something more chonk?
AFAIK they did a gfx11 style cutting of fixed-function stuff to move more towards compute.
 

Tangopiper

Junior Member
Nov 11, 2025
15
16
36
sorry pal, 'fun' is an evil word and is banned at AMD.
Touché

Clocks are not universal across workloads doe.
And neither are shaders - especially when you have occupancy issues! But yeah, I'm not saying N31 would have beaten the 4090, but definitely gotten close. Not that it would matter - NV had a 4090 Ti sitting on a shelf just waiting to go.

AFAIK they did a gfx11 style cutting of fixed-function stuff to move more towards compute.
Interesting. I considered this but wasn't sure just how drastic a change RDNA 5 was going to be. Thank you for the input.

I wonder if NVIDIA are going to pull their thumb out and do something drastic with Rubin, or it's just 3nm Blackwell with new Tensor and RT IP, plus fixed regressions. Do we have a Rubin thread?
 

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,511
5,985
136
It's so factually wrong RDNA5 generation has zero purpose-built dGFX parts.
They're at zerodies level of competing with NV.
RDNA2 had 4 dies. RDNA3 3 dies. RDNA4 2 dies.
RDNA5 brings us a novel solution of having literally zero dies built around competing in dGFX. yay.
I mean it looks like Nvidia aren't shipping any new GPUs until at least 2027, so we're seeing the same novel solution on both sides

(Fuck AI)