• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Question Speculation: RDNA2 + CDNA Architectures thread

Page 224 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
3,296
1,844
136
Couple more items on the N23 6600XT:

First, it looks like its launching August 11th, so we can put that one on our calendar. Will be interested to see how this matches up to a 5700XT (if it does at all) and the scaling on 32mb of IC with a 128-bit bus.

This one is a little goofy since they're claiming dumb things with that Chinese benchmark, but some good pics on what the OEM edition of the card will look like. Would be nice if AIB partners did with AMD cards what they do with NV cards and go nuts on different board sizes and cooling configs, but that's the sort of self-fulfilling curse of being the "other brand" all the time I guess. Looks like we're getting 1 8 pin connector so folks are thinking we're looking at ~200-180w of board power here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and Mopetar

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
4,825
3,443
136
Looks like we're getting 1 8 pin connector so folks are thinking we're looking at ~200-180w of board power here.
Its a 150W GPU in worst case scenario.

130W was the target. If you want to know what is the power target for 6600 non-XT - look at mobile 6600M, and Radeon Pro W6600 - sub 100W GPUs.

Navi 23 is not going to be hovering around 200W of power drawn for whole board.

The GPU, in performance was designed to be around RTX 2080, non-Super, but much more efficient. If it will be around 2070 Super at 125W? Thats not bad.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
8,105
1,359
126
www.teamjuchems.com
Its a 150W GPU in worst case scenario.

130W was the target. If you want to know what is the power target for 6600 non-XT - look at mobile 6600M, and Radeon Pro W6600 - sub 100W GPUs.

Navi 23 is not going to be hovering around 200W of power drawn for whole board.

The GPU, in performance was designed to be around RTX 2080, non-Super, but much more efficient. If it will be around 2070 Super at 125W? Thats not bad.
I mean, if it will be a 2070S equivalent, it's going to be essentially at 5700xt levels of performance at 125W. That sounds great but I guess I'll wait to see it first.

That would also put it ahead of the 3060, which seems to trend right at 2060S performance levels. Which to be honest, had it been available at MSRP I don't know I would have been super upset with. I still think the 3060 and the 3080 are the cards that represent the "best" Ampere options if you could buy them at planned MSRP.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,119
2,939
136
Personally I think the 3060 Ti and the 3080 are the sweet spots, at least as far as the Nvidia cards are concerned. Frankly I'm not going to get too excited about this card either because it's just going to be another piece of unobtanium with the way things have been.
 

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
4,825
3,443
136

349$ for 6600 XT, and 299$ for 6600 non-XT.

299$ for a GPU that will trade blows with 3060 is not a bad deal. Most likely it will have the same 100W TBP as W6600 has.

6600XT should be 120-130W TBP, for up to 10% higher perf than 3060 12 GB.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
8,105
1,359
126
www.teamjuchems.com
Yeah, but what's the actual price going to be? MSRP is meaningless unless this thing sucks at mining.
This will be the true test of demand vs mining, IMO. Right now you can get 6700xts for what, $800? UNDER 2x MSRP!!!! WOOO!

If these things come out at ~$500 and just fly off the shelves when you can get "better" mining cards we'll know that people are picking up anything current, IMO. Mining or no mining.
 

TESKATLIPOKA

Senior member
May 1, 2020
441
425
96
Last edited:

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
3,296
1,844
136
So no 130W TBP, I knew It would have been too good to be true, but by limiting clocks you can get there no problem.
The other question is how high It is clocked for such high TBP.
2.9GHz would be great, but only 2.5-2.6GHz not so much.
- Yeah, at that board power it'll be interesting to see if its basically clocked to the moon.

6700XT with 40CU & 192bit/12GB RAM & 96MB IC is ~230w
6600XT with 32CU & 128bit/8GB RAM & 32MB IC is ~160w

So we're looking at 6600XT/6700XT with
80% of the CU,
66% of the bus width,
66% of the RAM,
33% of the IC,

has

70% of the TBP.

With that tiny Infinity Cache I suspect we're going to see "game clocks" of 2.7 to 2.85 to make those 32MB go a little farther than the number suggests. 2.9 might be acheivable on some OC editions, but with a higher TBP.

Wonder where this will all leave a potential 6700 non-xt config, if AMD even has plans to release one at this point.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
8,105
1,359
126
www.teamjuchems.com
- Yeah, at that board power it'll be interesting to see if its basically clocked to the moon.

6700XT with 40CU & 192bit/12GB RAM & 96MB IC is ~230w
6600XT with 32CU & 128bit/8GB RAM & 32MB IC is ~160w

So we're looking at 6600XT/6700XT with
80% of the CU,
66% of the bus width,
66% of the RAM,
33% of the IC,

has

70% of the TBP.

With that tiny Infinity Cache I suspect we're going to see "game clocks" of 2.7 to 2.85 to make those 32MB go a little farther than the number suggests. 2.9 might be acheivable on some OC editions, but with a higher TBP.

Wonder where this will all leave a potential 6700 non-xt config, if AMD even has plans to release one at this point.
To me it feels really optimistic for this to be at 70% of the total performance of the 6700xt. That large drop in IC has a lot to do with that.

I mean, it might hold up at 1080p pretty well (scaling at nearly 70% or maybe even better of the 6700xt) today but it seems to me that it might fall back in anything bandwidth dependent. 1440p is probably going to see a big fall back, it will be interesting to see where it lands amongst the 5600xt thru 5700xt.

FSR ftw, right? Just like DLSS for the "low end" Ampere? lol, 4K for everyone :D
 

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
4,825
3,443
136
To me it feels really optimistic for this to be at 70% of the total performance of the 6700xt. That large drop in IC has a lot to do with that.
It should be faster than RTX 2070 Super, which means the 6700 XT should be around 20% faster than 6600 XT.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
8,105
1,359
126
www.teamjuchems.com
It should be faster than RTX 2070 Super, which means the 6700 XT should be around 20% faster than 6600 XT.
With 70% of the power and 1/3rd of the infinity cache? And all the other lower specs that @GodisanAtheist detailed out? 80% would mean that it is more efficient per watt than 6700xt. I mean, it could be. I want to see it, especially with dramatically less IC.

And at what resolution? Like I said, *maybe* at 1080p but I will be really skeptical at any resolutions above that.

2070S is greater than 5700XT performance, generally. I guess we'll see. I am doubtful. Would love to be wrong.
 

Glo.

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2015
4,825
3,443
136
With 70% of the power and 1/3rd of the infinity cache? And all the other lower specs that @GodisanAtheist detailed out? 80% would mean that it is more efficient per watt than 6700xt. I mean, it could be. I want to see it, especially with dramatically less IC.

And at what resolution? Like I said, *maybe* at 1080p but I will be really skeptical at any resolutions above that.

2070S is greater than 5700XT performance, generally. I guess we'll see. I am doubtful. Would love to be wrong.
It has 80% of CUs of 6700XT. And should have higher clock speeds.
 

uzzi38

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2019
1,763
3,511
106
With 70% of the power and 1/3rd of the infinity cache? And all the other lower specs that @GodisanAtheist detailed out? 80% would mean that it is more efficient per watt than 6700xt. I mean, it could be. I want to see it, especially with dramatically less IC.

And at what resolution? Like I said, *maybe* at 1080p but I will be really skeptical at any resolutions above that.

2070S is greater than 5700XT performance, generally. I guess we'll see. I am doubtful. Would love to be wrong.
I've heard 3060<6600XT<3060Ti from the same person who told me 160W TBP a couple of days ago. Nothing more specific than that, but that's really enough to say it would also be 2070 Super + if true.

Lets see if it holds up. I think launch is soon anyway.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,939
2,285
136

Videocardz has the official specs. Officially the MSRP is $379 but there is no reference model so don't count on anything being available at that price.
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
3,296
1,844
136

Videocardz has the official specs. Officially the MSRP is $379 but there is no reference model so don't count on anything being available at that price.
-Wow that's a much lower game clock than I was anticipating for the power draw of the card, but about the right performance (maybe a smidge higher, figured it would be neck and neck with 3060).

I like that ASRock is taking the time to release a single fan"ITX" version of the card, while those triple fan monsters on a 160W card will forever perplex me.

Its like someone has a stack of 6900xt coolers sitting around and they say "**** it, slap em on a 6600XT, call it the Ultra Turbo Top Kek edition and sell it for $800".
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,119
2,939
136
I'd have to dig back through the thread to find it, but there was a graph from an AMD presentation showing infinity cache hit rates at various resolutions. I recall that 1080p wasn't very demanding so this card might perform well there, but it's definitely going to hit a wall above that.

I doubt it's as close to the Ti as the price would suggest, but MSRP is meaningless right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay and Tlh97

ASK THE COMMUNITY