Humbug

AMD has also already confirmed that RDNA can be adapted for either GDDR6 or HBM...

I always picked IPS panels over the faster TN panels for this reason. I prefer that my games look beautiful with good colours. Now that IPS and VA panels have got faster though I am ready to switch to 120/144Hz and get that fluidity without sacrificing good colours.

What applications are you using? On windows AMD has neglected the openGL drivers and focused on directX and Vulkan. On Mac Apple's regressive attitude does not allow AMD to provide good openGL support. So Linux is the only place where AMD has properly invested in openGL and provides good performant drivers. Ya these GPUs will have to compete with next gen Nvidia. The target is not merely the 2080ti. They will easily hit 2080ti performance, it's not even a question. The RDNA architecture with only 40 compute units is almost as fast as GCN based Radeon 7 which has 50% more compute units. And this is only the first iteration of RDNA which is a hybrid with GCN stuff. Even if the efficiency gains are small in the upcoming second gen RDNA parts they can lower clock speeds to keep power down since they are going wide for more performance. The real question is how it will compete with next gen Nvidia GPUs, that's the target. Nvidia will have gains too over the 2080ti.

It's not about steam. On PC we don't want any store asking any developer to sign contracts giving up the rights to sell their games anywhere they choose. After the exclusivity deal fell through I am disappointed that the Epic store outright refused to let them sell their game simultaneously while also being on other platforms. We should be encouraging devs to sell in many places...

All set for big Navi lol. Probably $1000 GPU which I will admire on YouTube.

LOL as I expected AMD's marketing is going to take advantage of the continuous stream of security vulnerabilities that Intel Xeons have been found to be vulnerable to. Without directly calling Intel out they are harping on security more than the performance wins. ? lots of stuff such as below on their website. see more at... https://www.amd.com/en/processors/epyc-7002-series

I guess Intel's 10nm shows that clearly. We may someday get to a point where we are forced to use slightly older nodes for the highest most expensive performance parts. Yep final clockspeed is always a function of architecture and process, both matter. For example moving from 14nm to 7nm created bigger percentage clock speed jumps for GCN GPUs than it did for ryzen CPUs.

Do we have any reliable sources claiming that 7nm EUV will enable further clockspeeds jumps? I thought that going forward it's gonna be a battle just to maintain current clockspeeds.

Intel will have to rely on their strong industry partnerships and longterm relationships with Dell, HP etc to minimize the server market share change that happens in the next two years. They have to make sure that the big vendors do not offer or promote too many AMD models. AMD has a superior product now, how it sells depends on whether the vendors and system integraters recommend them to customers. Anandtech ?

Well they would still be competitive, because Nvidia currently has worse price/performance in this segment. But ya they would not sell as well...

We have enough data to speculate on worst case scenarios, although not enough to make proper performance predictions. Even if it scales as badly as GCN you can look at the performance difference between a 38 CU GCN part and a 64 CU GCN part. i.e. comparing a RX 590 to a Vega 64 you have a 45% performance difference at 1440p. (Choose these two as they have similar clockspeeds). Then take the 38 CU RDNA part, the RX 5700 and add 45% performance on top of that to simulate a 64 CU RDNA part. You have RTX 2080ti performance at 1440p. And in the games that you don't it's still a lot closer to the 2080ti than it is to the 2080 super. This is the worst case scenario assuming no scaling improvements from GCN to RDNA.

These new Navi cards despite their high performance use very small dies and few numbers of compute units, plus no expensive HBM memory. Combined that with the fact that Nvidia's lineup was overpriced compared to previous GPU generations. It has allowed AMD and their partners to maintain very good margins on these new Navi cards. They have a lot of room to further cut prices and still make lots of money, this was not the case with Vega. As with most launches AMD engineers were probably scrambling and tweaking things at the last moment to get everything ready for launch. So they were not able to send the representative engineering samples early enough to their board partners, who probably needed a few months to design and test their variants. This is what was sucky about the launch. Nobody would have complained about the blower cooler if there were other options available at launch.

The higher Navi cards will do a lot more than compete with existing super cards. Remember the RX 5700xt has only 40 CUs. And the RX 5700 has only 36 CUs, which is the same as Polaris, yet it outperforms a vega 64 which has 64 CUs! So a bigger 64 CU Navi GPU will easily beat the RTX 2080 super. It will have to compete with the 2080 ti plus next gen Nvidia. Probably next gen Nvidia as I don't see AMD releasing this within the next few months. Also Now with the older gcn bottlenecks being shaken off the GPUs should continue to scale performance well by going wide which means AMD does not need to push high clockspeeds in order to get higher performance, this is important as it will enable them to keep TDP within control.

Sometimes you just don't find the CPU comparisons you are looking for elsewhere. With enthusiast and desktop gaming products it's easy, but for less flashy and more obscure laptop CPUs when you want to compare two parts you don't always have hardware unboxed etc running benchmarks. So people google stuff and find that this is one of the few sources...

The issue is that people always google stuff such as i7 7700k vs R7 3700x. The first google result you get when comparing CPUs head to head such as this is userbenchmark, so it is actively misleading thousands of people every day. Remember most people only google this stuff when they need to purchase something, so they are not tech savvy like we are to drill down through the numbers and make sense of it all. Is it possible to contact google and have them consider if they want to have a misleading source as their first search result? I myself have often come across this website when searching for comparisons on various laptop CPUs, because most of the tech channels that we follow do not test laptop CPUs.

Tried it on both Linux and windows, same issue.

I seem to have a faulty Western Digital Elements external hard drive. I have tried it on a few different PCs, no luck. The device itself is detected by the OS It is powering up and windows even allows me to eject the USB device as usual However no volume appears in file manager for me to browse When I open disk management I get the following message. "You must initialize a disk before logical disk manager can access it" And it asks me to select a partition style, either MBR or GPT. At this point I always click cancel, because I don't want it to partition or format my disk as I guess that will erase my data. Any ideas?

Performance will not be lower from a used card. As long as it is in working condition frame-rate will be the same.

Kudos to Epic, always good to see devs give back to the ecosystem. Valve supports lots of open source projects with continuous funding on a monthly basis. They have enabled many part time developers to go into full time work in a particular area. Including graphics card drivers, virtual reality and the Vulkan API tools/debuggers which are now used by lots of game developers. That's just off the top of my head. Also companies like LunarG exist because of Valve's funding. What they do is way bigger than a one time contribution and a press release...

Get a 5700xt. New architecture looks great, is already fast and will only get quicker. Price/perf unmatched.

Wouldn't be surprised. The new RDNA architecture is really sweet and makes the Radeon 7 look kind bad in comparison, for gaming. RDNA is able to do so much more with so much less. AMD should revamp their gaming lineup with it top to bottom asap.

Personally much more looking forward to big Navi rather than dual GPUs. The RDNA architecture is showing great potential with cards having the same number of compute units as Polaris now performing like Vega 64. Which was never remotely possible on gcn, even if they had hit these clockspeeds. So once they make big GPUs with 60+ compute units it's gonna be exciting. On the other hand I find it hard to look forward to dual GPUs bevause we are relying on Nvidia and AMD creating SLI/crossfire drover profiles and game devs for whom this is the lowest priority.

Ya. Don't complain. just buy it

You are including server parts? Thought the discussion was consumer parts.

This time AMD has enough supply and big enough margins to compete though. I don't mean to outsell Nvidia (obviously not) but they can cut prices if they need to and also keep the channel stocked. With Vega it was too expensive to produce, and the limited HBM 2.0 supply meant that they could not keep up with demand.