News [WCCFTech] AMD to reveal Navi GPU at Computex (partial rumor)

[Hitman928]

https://wccftech.com/amd-ceo-computex-2019-keynote-ryzen-3000-cpu-and-radeon-rx-navi-gpu/

Lisa Su has been invited to give Computex's first ever official keynote address, however, the specific details of her keynote are not officially known.

 

[Yotsugi]

https://www.computextaipei.com.tw/e...d=6994382A4DFCD609&totalCount=35&currentRow=1

Its not only official, it's in the very first press-release.

 

[Stuka87]

AMD typically uses Computex to release GPU's, so would make sense.

 

[Hitman928]

https://www.computextaipei.com.tw/e...d=6994382A4DFCD609&totalCount=35&currentRow=1

Its not only official, it's in the very first press-release.

The partial rumor is the added details in the WCCFTech link that aren't in the press release or officially announced.

 

[Yotsugi]

AMD typically uses Computex to release GPU's, so would make sense.

No-no, that one here will be a uArch disclosure, not a launch.
Gamescom is the RX Navi launch.

Unless Lisa surprises me, which she tends to.

 

[Stuka87]

No-no, that one here will be a uArch disclosure, not a launch.
Gamescom is the RX Navi launch.

Unless Lisa surprises me, which she tends to.

It could be Gamescon, they have used that too. But as I recall Polaris was Computex, Vega was GamesCon I think.

 

[Yotsugi]

It could be Gamescon, they have used that too. But as I recall Polaris was Computex, Vega was GamesCon I think.

Vega10 was SIGGRAPH if my memory serves me right (it does).
Tbf, they can launch Pro Navi boards on SIGGRAPH, too.
nV did it with Turing.

 

[Guru]

Well the CPU reveal is 100% true, it's pretty much guaranteed, though its uncertain if they actually reveal Navi at computex. I mean we are likely to find out some more details about it, chances are they will talk about it to some degree, they are not just going to ignore it and don't say anything, but the question is, is it revealing some minor details about it, or is it a fully fledged reveal?

The GPU's are supposed to come sometime late Q2 2019, so a reveal is possible.

 

[Yotsugi]

Well the CPU reveal is 100% true, it's pretty much guaranteed, though its uncertain if they actually reveal Navi at computex. I mean we are likely to find out some more details about it, chances are they will take about it to some degree, they are not just going to ignore it and don't say anything, but the question is, is it revealing some minor details about it, or is it a fully fledged reveal?

The GPU's are supposed to come sometime late Q2 2019, so a reveal is possible.

It's a uArch disclosure at the very least.

 

[Head1985]

So they will talk a little about navi and launch will be at gamescon probably month later.
Vs 1660TI its 6 months late.
VS rtx 2060 its almost 9 months late.
AMD is really behind, but atleast its better than vega 64 and radeon7.Vega 64 was 1.5year late and offered same performance as 1080 for same money.
Radeon7 is 2years late than 1080TI with again same performance for same money.
So atleast something positive

 

[Yotsugi]

So they will talk a little about navi

A full uArch disclosure isn't that.

Vs 1660TI its 6 months late.
VS rtx 2060 its almost 9 months late.

Oh boy.

 

[ozzy702]

I'm very interested to see how Navi on 7nm performs. I really hope it's not going to be another late to the game AMD disappointment. Hopefully we see a massive improvement in performance/watt and there are some compelling 70 watt options.

 

[Yotsugi]

I really hope it's not going to be another late to the game AMD disappointment

It is, for it'll leave the kids around the world wallowing in misery because nV won't drop the prices.

Hopefully we see a massive improvement in performance/watt and there are some compelling 70 watt options

The smaller one is 75W IIRC.

 

[ozzy702]

It is, for it'll leave the kids around the world wallowing in misery because nV won't drop the prices.

The smaller one is 75W IIRC.

I think that will be the sweet spot for sales this generation. Actual 1080p gaming performance without the need for a PCIE connector and with possible small form configurations should sell well. The 1050TI sold well and it doesn't even have solid performance @ 1080p.

 

[Yotsugi]

I think that will be the sweet spot for sales this generation

The middle one is also plenty fast, should be decent too.

The 1050TI sold well and it doesn't even have solid performance @ 1080p

1050Ti sold well because it was featured in a LOT of laptops.
I doubt smaller Navi will be even remotely close in design win count department.

 

[tajoh111]

The middle one is also plenty fast, should be decent too.

1050Ti sold well because it was featured in a LOT of laptops.
I doubt smaller Navi will be even remotely close in design win count department.

Your latter point is not to be estimated.

The gaming laptop market in 2018 was worth 12 billion dollars.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Gamin...-billion-in-the-past-five-years.415335.0.html

Considering the pricing of Nvidia GPU's and better bins are going into laptop chips, I could easily see 15% of this 12 billion dollars going to laptop GPU's.

Considering how rare AMD discrete GPU's there are, this could be 1.8 billion dollars going mostly to Nvidia which is a huge portion of their consumer revenue.

The GTX 1050 ti is a very popular GPU found in laptops because the TDP is perfect for laptops. This is why performance per watt matters so much in todays market.

The gaming laptop market is exploding in growth much higher than the desktop market.

https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/gaming-laptop-market-5153

If AMD continues to ignore performance per watt, they will miss this 22 billion dollar market(by 2023).

In 2013, the market was only worth 1 billion dollars so it mattered even less in the Fermi days. But with todays 12 billion dollar valuation of the market and 2023 22 billion dollar valuation, we could look at the laptop market representing 50-60 percent of the overall discrete market in the future.

If AMD 75 watt navi simply matches the gtx 1050 ti, Nvidia will simply undercut AMD to laptop makers and without a game bundle in this market, it will not be successful considering how much stronger Nvidia as a brand when it comes to selling laptops.

It would be a big mistake if AMD continues to ignore performance per watt because it will lock them out of the laptop market.

 

[Yotsugi]

If AMD continues to ignore performance per watt

Their current focus is perf density, so that they will.

It would be a big mistake if AMD continues to ignore performance per watt because it will lock them out of the laptop market.

They're the God's chosen wielders of holy blessing that is an actually good x86 core.
They're gonna do well in laptops either way.

 

[Stuka87]

Your latter point is not to be estimated.

The gaming laptop market in 2018 was worth 12 billion dollars.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Gamin...-billion-in-the-past-five-years.415335.0.html

Considering the pricing of Nvidia GPU's and better bins are going into laptop chips, I could easily see 15% of this 12 billion dollars going to laptop GPU's.

Considering how rare AMD discrete GPU's there are, this could be 1.8 billion dollars going mostly to Nvidia which is a huge portion of their consumer revenue.

The GTX 1050 ti is a very popular GPU found in laptops because the TDP is perfect for laptops. This is why performance per watt matters so much in todays market.

The gaming laptop market is exploding in growth much higher than the desktop market.

https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/gaming-laptop-market-5153

If AMD continues to ignore performance per watt, they will miss this 22 billion dollar market(by 2023).

In 2013, the market was only worth 1 billion dollars so it mattered even less in the Fermi days. But with todays 12 billion dollar valuation of the market and 2023 22 billion dollar valuation, we could look at the laptop market representing 50-60 percent of the overall discrete market in the future.

If AMD 75 watt navi simply matches the gtx 1050 ti, Nvidia will simply undercut AMD to laptop makers and without a game bundle in this market, it will not be successful considering how much stronger Nvidia as a brand when it comes to selling laptops.

If

It would be a big mistake if AMD continues to ignore performance per watt because it will lock them out of the laptop market.

You are forgetting that the VAST majority of laptops have Intel or AMD GPU's in them in the form of onboard graphics. Every AMD laptop has an AMD GPU, every Intel laptop has an Intel GPU. Most do not have discrete GPU's, and of those that do, many are MacBook pro's which use only AMD. That market is a pretty small piece over the overall laptop market.

As for Perf:Watt, I still think this really only matters to reviewers and GPU enthusiast. And even then it only matters because of nVidia's marketing. The majority of people care either about Priceerformance, or Brand (Meaning they will only buy nVidia or only buy AMD).

 

[tajoh111]

You are forgetting that the VAST majority of laptops have Intel or AMD GPU's in them in the form of onboard graphics. Every AMD laptop has an AMD GPU, every Intel laptop has an Intel GPU. Most do not have discrete GPU's, and of those that do, many are MacBook pro's which use only AMD. That market is a pretty small piece over the overall laptop market.

As for Perf:Watt, I still think this really only matters to reviewers and GPU enthusiast. And even then it only matters because of nVidia's marketing. The majority of people care either about Priceerformance, or Brand (Meaning they will only buy nVidia or only buy AMD).

LAPTOP MARKET IS an entirely different market that's worth even more money and encompasses gaming market. Gaming laptops is a subsection of laptop market with 162 million laptops sold in 2018 which translates into 60 - 70 billion dollars. And if it's pure marketshare even when included integrated, Nvidia is ahead of AMD. Gaming laptops don't included integrated otherwise the above 12 billion dollar figure would be 60-70 billion.

Performance per watt absolutely matters in laptops and is the most important factor for inclusion in a laptop. Laptop designs are build entirely on their thermal dissipation and battery drain. Higher TDP, meants a beefier cooling system, meaning a larger laptop. With the emphasis on todays market going towards thinner and lighter laptops, inefficient/hotter design simply don't have as much of a place anymore.

Without the gaming bundle to sell AMD GPU's in laptops having an AMD GPU, AMD has to rely on performance and battery life which are are not in their favor which is based on their performance per watt.

Don't be an ostrich and bury your head in the sand and think performance per watt doesn't matter because AMD is deficient in it in the laptop market. Performance is the single most important element for laptops because it decides what kind of laptop your GPU's can go into. If they are not attractive options, laptops makers won't even use your chips which gets your out of the market entirely.

 

[Stuka87]

Don't be an ostrich and bury your head in the sand and think performance per watt doesn't matter because AMD is deficient in it in the laptop market. Performance is the single most important element for laptops because it decides what kind of laptop your GPU's can go into. If they are not attractive options, laptops makers won't even use your chips which gets your out of the market entirely.

My comment on Perf:Watt was not in relation to laptops. Its in relation to discrete GPU's in the desktop market.

 

[IntelUser2000]

You are forgetting that the VAST majority of laptops have Intel or AMD GPU's in them in the form of onboard graphics.

Gaming laptops are the ones where manufacturers make money on. Low end is to recoup investment and revenue, high end markets like gaming is where they make profits.

My comment on Perf:Watt was not in relation to laptops. Its in relation to discrete GPU's in the desktop market.

He was talking about laptops and you replied to that, did you not?

Why do you think perf/watt doesn't matter on the desktop? Graphics card TDP is limited to 300W for a reason. Modern CPUs/GPUs are bound by thermals/power consumption for performance.

AMD had to resort to using expensive, difficult to manufacture HBM stack on Vega and Fury X likely because without it, they'd be even more behind Nvidia in perf/watt. Perf/watt translates into extra performance.

 

[Stuka87]

Gaming laptops are the ones where manufacturers make money on. Low end is to recoup investment and revenue, high end markets like gaming is where they make profits.



He was talking about laptops and you replied to that, did you not?

Why do you think perf/watt doesn't matter on the desktop? Graphics card TDP is limited to 300W for a reason. Modern CPUs/GPUs are bound by thermals/power consumption for performance.

AMD had to resort to using expensive, difficult to manufacture HBM stack on Vega and Fury X likely because without it, they'd be even more behind Nvidia in perf/watt. Perf/watt translates into extra performance.

AMD didn't co-develop HBM because of power consumption, they did it because of the huge amounts of bandwidth that it offers, and for the much smaller packaging which would also allow them to play memory on an APU die one day after manufacturing prices went down.

Yes, GPU TDP is limited to 300W (There have been cards to go past it), but that doesn't have any bearing on Perf:Watt. Perf:Watt just says how much performance you have for a given amount of power consumption. This only became a 'thing' when nVidia switched from a large die design (Fermi) down to a small die design (Kepler) while at the same time AMD did the opposite and came out with Tahiti which was a big die with tons of compute power. Yes, overall power consumption can matter. But Perf:Watt won't make a game play faster, its a talking point for all intents and purposes. A GTX 1060 and RX480/580 are extremely close in performance, they trade blows depending on the game. The 1060 uses a bit less power (depending on the version of the card obviously). But using less power won't make the game run faster. Yes inadequate case cooling can limit performance, but that can happen with any card regardless of power consumption.

I do not see AMD going after Perf:Watt with Navi desktop cards. The reason is money. All AMD cards currently have their voltages set way high. Why? So they can salvage every last GPU die without having to individually bin every single one. AMD could easily match nVidia on Perf:Watt *IF* they set voltages to an optimal level. And if they keep gaining market share, maybe they will get to a place financially where they can afford to do that. But I honestly do not think this will be the generation for that to happen. But, maybe I will be wrong. But if not, we can still undervolt the cards manually using Wattman. Which as a note, I totally think AMD developed this software with this in mind. Sure its handy for overclocking and over volting. But the majority of enthusiast with AMD cards undervolt, often while overclocking at the same time.

 

[AtenRa]

Perf/watt translates into extra performance.

Not always.

 

[Yotsugi]

Not always.

Depends on many factors, really.
Either way Navi isn't focused on perf@W.

AMD could easily match nVidia on Perf:Watt *IF* they set voltages to an optimal level

That's a no.
Also everything GFX10 comes with a new SMU and you'll see why.

 

[AtenRa]

Either way Navi isn't focused on perf@W.

And you know that how ???