fleshconsumed
Diamond Member
- Feb 21, 2002
- 5,943
- 1,259
- 136
I know everyone is excited about big NAVI, but does anyone know if there is going to be RDNA2 replacement for 5700XT this fall?
I mean the slide clearly mentions increasing clockspeed and mentions reduced logic complexity and switching power as well. Unless you're still talking about the fake 2.7ghz number, RDNA2 is 100% going to see better clock speeds.Nope, we know both consoles clocks/CUs, no RDNA1 gpu could reach those numbers... even if it were ported to 5nm, it doesn't add up.
Some people in AMD know but what we have is rumors at best. I suspect rdna1 will simply move down the stack, others have said it will be replaced completely due to the given code name of chips we have for rdna2 meanign there would be no logical place in the price structure for navi10.I know everyone is excited about big NAVI, but does anyone know if there is going to be RDNA2 replacement for 5700XT this fall?
15% IPC increase, 25% clock speed increase, 10% lower power draw, including all of those improvements.I mean the slide clearly mentions increasing clockspeed and mentions reduced logic complexity and switching power as well. Unless you're still talking about the fake 2.7ghz number, RDNA2 is 100% going to see better clock speeds.View attachment 23170
AMD has the incredible flexibility to react to what Nvidia offers. And they can use Navi 10 as even RX 6500 and 6500 XT, and put the Navi 23 dies in RX 6600 and 6700 Series SKUs.Some people in AMD know but what we have is rumors at best. I suspect rdna1 will simply move down the stack, others have said it will be replaced completely due to the given code name of chips we have for rdna2 meanign there would be no logical place in the price structure for navi10.
Why would they do that? Die size still matters.AMD has the incredible flexibility to react to what Nvidia offers. And they can use Navi 10 as even RX 6500 and 6500 XT, and put the Navi 23 dies in RX 6600 and 6700 Series SKUs.
Because they don't have smaller GPU in RDNA2 lineup?Why would they do that
Why would they do that? Die size still matters.
Appears is correct. Selling a 250 die at a much lower cost than a 240 die??? Uncharacteristic.Because they don't have smaller GPU in RDNA2 lineup?
N23 appears to be the smallest one, with 240 mm2.
Even if that 240 mm2 die has higher performance than that 250 mm2 die?Appears is correct. Selling a 250 die at a much lower cost than a 240 die??? Uncharacteristic.
A higher cost product in a lower price higher volume segment? If you say so.Even if that 240 mm2 die has higher performance than that 250 mm2 die?
Is it really that uncharacteristic? Or illogical?
Polaris series?A higher cost product in a lower price higher volume segment? If you say so.
Polaris isn't on the same process. If the 240mm die is cheaper to make which we can assume, then it's logical to use a more cutdown version of that die instead of a older uarch bigger die. And since they are on the same 7nm process unless I missed something, then I have to agree with maddie that econimically it makes no sense to keep selling navi10.Polaris series?
232 mm2 dies at the cost of 130$.
I used P10 example to show that even if the die is large, it still can be used for entry level products, with entry level prices.Polaris isn't on the same process. If the 240mm die is cheaper to make which we can assume, then it's logical to use a more cutdown version of that die instead of a older uarch bigger die. And since they are on the same 7nm process unless I missed something, then I have to agree with maddie that econimically it makes no sense to keep selling navi10.
If That GPU can compete with Nvidia's RTX 3050 Ti, and with RTX 3060(to some degree), why AMD would lower margin on higher performing Navi 23 GPU, and put it to compete with those GPUs?Navi 10 is all payed for as far as R&D goes. I don't see there being any reason for selling it for cheaper than it is currently being sold for as a lower end 6500 XT or something.
Poor comparison. You're not accounting for the identical process lines. Is 7nm now a buyers market? If there is any strong demand for 7nm wafers then what you propose is not really a good idea.I used P10 example to show that even if the die is large, it still can be used for entry level products, with entry level prices.
Its all about the margin. You still will be able to get margin on the N10 GPU as a X500 SKU, especially if it will come with 6 GB GDDR6, instead of all 8 memory chips.Poor comparison. You're not accounting for the identical process lines. Is 7nm now a buyers market? If there is any strong demand for 7nm wafers then what you propose is not really a good idea.
If the Navi23 die is cheaper to make than Navi10 die which given the die sizes of 240 vs 250mm probably means yes this is the case, then selling a more expensive die at a lower price makes 0 economical sense. Better to cut-down the Navi23 die to navi10 performance level and sell that cheaper. Your margin will still be higher because the die is cheaper. As added bonus the cheaper SKU also gets all the newest video decode/encode features.why not go for it, from AMD's perspective in competitive landscape?
It makes zero sense to cut down cheaper die(N23) to Navi 10 performance levels, because that UNDERCUTS the price margin.If the Navi23 die is cheaper to make than Navi10 die which given the die sizes of 240 vs 250mm probably means yes this is the case, then selling a more expensive die at a lower price makes 0 economical sense. Better to cut-down the Navi23 die to navi10 performance level and sell that cheaper. Your margin will still be higher because the die is cheaper. As added bonus the cheaper SKU also gets all the newest video decode/encode features.
Now I can admit that if the die sizes are that close and due to the fact that OEMs could simply update the model name and leave the manufacturing the same in a total cost for the card, yes selling a 5700(xt) as a lower 6000-series model could make sense.
Nice picking prices to suit your argument. One rule of what ifs, GIGO.It makes zero sense to cut down cheaper die(N23) to Navi 10 performance levels, because that UNDERCUTS the price margin.
If the manufacturing cost of N10 die is 100$ for RX 5700 XT performance levels and manufacturing cost for N23 die is 98$ for RTX 2080 Super levels, by cutting down N23 to RTX 5700 XT levels you effectively LOSE MORE MONEY, that you could have earned if you would not do this.
Price margin on N23 will be higher because of its performance, than it will be for N10 when Nvidia will release their entry level products.
Remember, the die sizes are marignally different. So the manufacturing costs will be marginally different as well. Yes N23 MAY BE cheaper to make. But will it be meaningful difference?
When it goes for calculating price margin - yes it will be meaningful, because that way selling cheaper die for more will earn you more money than if you would sell more of the cheaper die, at lower price margins!
What did you attatched yourself to the specific prices? Its just analogy, and example.Nice picking prices to suit your argument. One rule of what ifs, GIGO.
Where'd you get that chart? I've been looking for something like that for a while.At this point, it is a matter of whether N23 has taped out and if the silicon is ready. If not AMD would rebrand Navi10 to cover the lower performance tier.
Otherwise no point in fabbing a 251mm2 die which can be outperformed by a 240mm2 die on two largely similar processes with simliar costs and using almost 90% common equipment.
P10 existed for a while due to being cheaper to manufcature and WSA to some extent.
Since AMD already ported RDNA2 on N7(P) for the consoles it wouldn't be much of a challenge to repeat for N23. Much of the work is done.
- Designing around the same libraries and tool kits
- Porting design to N7(P) PDK
- Synthesis, timing analysis and simulations largely the same.
- For similar Navi2x design, it would be a matter of configuration of the blocks, redo the floor plan and place and route and other small backend steps
Still there are costs and effort involved but nowhere near porting to a new PDK and new libraries and the functional blocks have already been designed, so it is about ROI whether it makes business sense. If there is money to be gained they will do it.
I prepared a sample workflow using older design flow, but still generically OK.
View attachment 23192
One can always choose an imaginary number to achieve a desired outcome. You're constructing a strawman like scenario to support your view, that's all. The bigger picture deals with facts not assumptions.What did you attatched yourself to the specific prices? Its just analogy, and example.
Look beyond the numbers, to see the bigger picture.
And on what did you based your assumption that smaller die size is cheaper to make, then, in the first place, hmmm?One can always choose an imaginary number to achieve a desired outcome. You're constructing a strawman like scenario to support your view, that's all. The bigger picture deals with facts not assumptions.