[Rumor, Tweaktown] AMD to launch next-gen Navi graphics cards at E3

[Shivansps]

Why does the number of CU's matter? Thats like being annoyed that a CPU with X number of transistors cost Y amount. A single CU in Navi does not equal a CU in Polaris, or Tonga, or Hawaii, or Tahiti, etc etc. Overall performance is all that should matter.

Thats a fair point, to me it matters because we have Vega and Polaris as a comparison, altrought they are of a diferent arch.

 

[JDG1980]

If Navi 40 CU (2560 cores) equals GeForce RTX 2070 (2304), then Navi 20 CU (1280) wouldn't equal GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (1536), or even 1660 (1408). Navi 20 CU would be somewhere between GeForce GTX 1650 [Ti] (896 or 1024) and 1660.

AMD's slide deck lists 10 gaming benchmarks, and averaging them out puts the RX 5700 XT 11% ahead of the RTX 2070. Now, it's certainly possible that this is a best-case scenario and that in practice the cards will be on par, or Navi will fall a little bit short. But if these benchmarks are accurate, then it implies per-shader performance that almost exactly equals Turing (with the Navi SKU having 11% more CUs, and 11% more performance).

 

[JDG1980]

Tell me, why should we care about a node advantage in terms of us being enthusiasts that use these cards to play video games on? Had AMD or NVIDIA not told you one card was 7nm and one card was 12nm, you would have no way of even knowing this. Where is the problem? We are talking about +-10% in power efficiency.....

NVIDIA isn't even going to release 7nm cards until some time in 2020, so as of right now they don't exist. Once 5700XT hits the market that is simply the best AMD can do in efficiency (among other factors), and NVIDIA's 2070 will be the best that it can do.

We should care because it indicates the relative strength of the architectures. If AMD does catch up on perf/watt (and it looks like they're going to be a lot closer than before despite the ridiculous factory overclocks), it's only due to having that node advantage. As soon as Nvidia releases Ampere, AMD is going to once again have a massive disadvantage in perf/watt. That's the problem - AMD needs an architecture that is as good or better than Nvidia's, not one that's just nearly as good or one that's competitive only because they managed to get the jump on Nvidia on 7nm.

 

[beginner99]

Tell me, why should we care about a node advantage in terms of us being enthusiasts that use these cards to play video games on? Had AMD or NVIDIA not told you one card was 7nm and one card was 12nm, you would have no way of even knowing this. Where is the problem?

We care because of Moore's law. New node used to mean more performance for same $. And in contrast to what most people state Moores law is as an economic background, eg. making performance cheaper. We are seeing a complete fail in this happening in the GPU space in the last 5-10 years. The economic aspect of Moore's law in GPUs has been dead for a while or else a 2080 TI would cost around $600. That is why we should care.

Currently the 1660 TI seems to be the only barely reasonable deal in US at least (not where I live, they cost $350). From my point of view I would barley get 50% over a $250 290x for $350 1660 Ti 4.5 years latter. So 50% more performance for 40% higher price. isn't exactly a great deal that makes me long for an update. And this is the reason I wisely choose a new 1080p display 3 years ago over 2k/4k. To not have to overspend on GPUs.

 

[Head1985]

5700xt timespy score.Little slower than 2070FE
https://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-5700xt-time-spy-leak-matches-geforce-rtx-2070/

 

[Det0x]

Some PR-talk about NAVI, Radeon Anti-Lag and Radeon Image Sharpening




Radeon Anti-Lag works on all previous GCN cards

 

[Stuka87]

5700xt timespy score.Little slower than 2070FE
https://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-5700xt-time-spy-leak-matches-geforce-rtx-2070/

AMD cards are normally a noticeable amount slower than nVidia in time spy, so that might mean in games that the 5700XT is faster than the 2070, per AMD's benchmarks.

 

[linkgoron]

5700xt timespy score.Little slower than 2070FE
https://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-5700xt-time-spy-leak-matches-geforce-rtx-2070/

WCCF are comparing a 8700k+5700XT result to an 9900k @ 5Ghz+2070FE result.

For example, in the below score (8700k stock, so at @ 4.3Ghz) the 2070 gets a score of 8404, which is lower than the comparable 5700XT result, which was 8719 (note that the below score has 32GB of memory vs 16GB in the 5700XT, if that makes a difference).
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/5171719

 

[lobz]

WCCF are comparing a 8700k+5700XT result to an 9900k @ 5Ghz+2070FE result.

For example, in the below score (8700k stock, so at @ 4.3Ghz) the 2070 gets a score of 8404, which is lower than the comparable 5700XT result, which was 8719 (note that the below score has 32GB of memory vs 16GB in the 5700XT, if that makes a difference).
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/5171719

also, the 2070FE is a $599 card

 

[Stuka87]

WCCF are comparing a 8700k+5700XT result to an 9900k @ 5Ghz+2070FE result.

For example, in the below score (8700k stock, so at @ 4.3Ghz) the 2070 gets a score of 8404, which is lower than the comparable 5700XT result, which was 8719 (note that the below score has 32GB of memory vs 16GB in the 5700XT, if that makes a difference).
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/5171719

Nice catch. The CPU will hands down make a difference.

 

[AtenRa]

I think they are comparing the graphics score not total score

 

[Head1985]

Yeah its graphics score.BTW funny how people start defending 5700xt when it looks slower than 2070 like ITS 600usd 2070 and its "only" 8700k.LOL.
Both cards are overprices crap 2070 is one of the worst GPU ever made in price/performance ratio vs previous generations and 5700xt is not much better.

 

[linkgoron]

Yeah its graphics score.BTW funny how people start defending 5700xt when it looks slower than 2070 like ITS 600usd 2070 and its "only" 8700k.LOL.
Both cards are overprices crap 2070 is one of the worst GPU ever made in price/performance ratio vs previous generations and 5700xt is not much better.

I'm not defending anything, just comparing the score between two equal systems. You can check my posting history, I'm not defending the 5700XT pricing at all. I've been vocal about the fact that the 5700XT is overpriced.

 

[Mopetar]

$250 gpu with just 20CU? what happened with the gpu market for god sake, that should be the next gen APU or just a little more, not a $250 card. Concidentaly, thats the only way to justify that a 40CU gpu is $450, charging crazy amounts for something that should be entry level.

It really goes back to the mining boom where prices got completely out of whack for well over a year. Both NVidia and AMD seem to be trying to tiptoe around the fact that the boom is over and everyone would very much like to get back to normal prices.

I hope that they both sell poorly because while the newest cards do offer more performance, the value just isn't there at all.

 

[fleshconsumed]

I have quite a few older games in my collection to finish. That's what I'll be doing for the next year or two. Hopefully the prices will return to sanity by then.

 

[Dribble]

Yeah its graphics score.BTW funny how people start defending 5700xt when it looks slower than 2070 like ITS 600usd 2070 and its "only" 8700k.LOL.
Both cards are overprices crap 2070 is one of the worst GPU ever made in price/performance ratio vs previous generations and 5700xt is not much better.

People are still buying them - looking at steam 0.95% of people use 2070's making it the most popular new card - to put that in perspective the only AMD card with higher use is the 580 at 1.25% and that's been out for several years and is a much cheaper card.

The 2060/70 and 1660Ti also do very well in the growth charts (although still behind the 1070). The only modern AMD card really growing is the 580, even the 570 with it's fire sale prices is not selling well. I don't see why Nvidia would drop prices if their cards are selling, and their only real competitor is barely relevant when it comes to sales.

 

[Head1985]

People are still buying them - looking at steam 0.95% of people use 2070's making it the most popular new card - to put that in perspective the only AMD card with higher use is the 580 at 1.25% and that's been out for several years and is a much cheaper card.

The 2060/70 and 1660Ti also do very well in the growth charts (although still behind the 1070). The only modern AMD card really growing is the 580, even the 570 with it's fire sale prices is not selling well. I don't see why Nvidia would drop prices if their cards are selling, and their only real competitor is barely relevant when it comes to sales.

Compare 2070 to 970 no 2070 dont sell well.Even 1070 was pretty poor and sells very bad vs GTX 970 and its still way way better than crap 2070.
970 was like 20% on steam
1070 is 4%
2070 is 0.95%

 

[DrMrLordX]

Radeon Anti-Lag works on all previous GCN cards

Good news! Not really Navi-specific but it still helps the AMD graphics ecosystem.

also, the 2070FE is a $599 card

Pretty sure 2070FE is typically slower than custom 2070s?

Both cards are overprices crap

Gonna have to agree with you there. The tech ain't bad per se, but the prices . . .

I have quite a few older games in my collection to finish. That's what I'll be doing for the next year or two. Hopefully the prices will return to sanity by then.

Good luck! More like, buy overpriced cards, but half as often. Good job nVidia/AMD!

Compare 2070 to 970 no 2070 dont sell well.Even 1070 was pretty poor and sells very bad vs GTX 970 and its still way way better than crap 2070.
970 was like 20% on steam
1070 is 4%
2070 is 0.95%

Careful. Quoting Steam surveys around here will get you flamed.

I would expect 2070s to sell badly, nevertheless.

 

[Krteq]

Radeon Anti-Lag works on all previous GCN cards

Hmm, I'm curious if it's just lowered count of pre-rendered frames or if there is some "secret sauce" behind

 

[lobz]

Pretty sure 2070FE is typically slower than custom 2070s?

It was actually just shy of 100 MHz higher clocked by NVIDIA than the stock specifications, so no.

 

[Thala]

Pretty sure 2070FE is typically slower than custom 2070s?

Most OC partner cards are quite a bit faster. They are scoring like 1000 points higher in Timespy gfx score, which is more than 10%. The best of course is, that the partner cards are quite a bit cheaper than the FE too

 

[DrMrLordX]

It was actually just shy of 100 MHz higher clocked by NVIDIA than the stock specifications, so no.

. . . what?

Most OC partner cards are quite a bit faster. They are scoring like 1000 points higher in Timespy gfx score, which is more than 10%. The best of course is, that the partner cards are quite a bit cheaper than the FE too

That's what I thought.

 

[lobz]

. . . what?

unlike the 1000 series FE cards, the RTX FE cards have higher clock, in this case the 2070 FE has 90MHz higher clocks than stock 2070 in addition to the higher price that FE always meant, so the FE cards this time around are generally faster than the stock base models. Other AIB versioins can still be faster of course, but the cheapest base 2070 is slower by 90 MHz than the FE.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-eu/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2070/

 

[DrMrLordX]

unlike the 1000 series FE cards, the RTX FE cards have higher clock, in this case the 2070 FE has 90MHz higher clocks than stock 2070 in addition to the higher price that FE always meant, so the FE cards this time around are generally faster than the stock base models. Other AIB versioins can still be faster of course, but the cheapest base 2070 is slower by 90 MHz than the FE.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-eu/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2070/

90 MHz higher boost, but identical base. There appear to be about as many 2070s out there that are as fast/faster than the 2070 Founder's Edition as there are those that run slower:

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=425&sort=-boost&page=1

Including this one, which is (thanks to heavy rebates) notably cheaper than the 2070FE:

https://www.newegg.com/asus-geforce..._re=Asus_2070_strix_oc-_-14-126-270-_-Product

So my point still stands . . . just because the 2070FE is a $599 card doesn't mean it's $599 fast. It doesn't much affect any comparison between that card and the 5700XT.

 

[Thala]

90 MHz higher boost, but identical base. There appear to be about as many 2070s out there that are as fast/faster than the 2070 Founder's Edition as there are those that run slower:

https://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=425&sort=-boost&page=1

Including this one, which is (thanks to heavy rebates) notably cheaper than the 2070FE:

https://www.newegg.com/asus-geforce-rtx-2070-rog-strix-rtx2070-8g-gaming/p/N82E16814126270?Description=Asus 2070 strix oc&cm_re=Asus_2070_strix_oc-_-14-126-270-_-Product

So my point still stands . . . just because the 2070FE is a $599 card doesn't mean it's $599 fast. It doesn't much affect any comparison between that card and the 5700XT.

Just to give you an example from my RTX2070 Zotac AMP Extreme. When starting TimeSpy it starts at 2025MHz@40° and ends at 1950MHz@80°. Apparently Frequency and Voltage going down as the temperature increases. TimeSpy gfx score is around 9700+ with a relatively slow i7 6700k@4GHz - thats with factory frequency-voltage curve.
I am sure you will get a similar performant RTX2070 for around 450,- if you look around a bit.