AMD's new Radeon RX 3080 XT: RTX 2070 performance for $330?

[RejZoR]

19 minutes ago, leadeater said:

How? The devs didn't have RTX cards and you can't make a few hundred or thousand just for devs then forgo the TSMC fab line to someone else then hope you get that time when 'games are ready'. You sign a contract for hundreds of thousands made all in one go then supply the market to get the cards made and released.

 

It's extremely expensive per card to get engineering samples, Nvidia will not pay that cost just so devs can have them years in advance. Then what? Nvidia has to wait 2 years before developing RT and Tensor cores more because nobody has them so they have no idea how they are being used and where the limitations are?

I'm sure AAA game studios are waiting to buy cards at retail stores just like us gamers... If that's what you believe then believ that...

[leadeater]

11 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I'm sure AAA game studios are waiting to buy cards at retail stores just like us gamers... If that's what you believe then believ that...

I don't, they buy them through Nvidia like anyone else or through their system integrator like most companies. Neither of these supply channels are any different and only source from production supply.

 

But Nvidia will not make thousands of cards using the TSMC engineering sample process that's extremely expensive and low output just so devs can have cards they don't need that early.

 

Gen 1 of graphics technology is usually rather poor, that's not going to change. Without users with the hardware using it development is much slower, not only because your sample information is vastly smaller there is no technology race incentive between game development studios.

 

Chickens lay eggs, eggs don't lay eggs. You can technically say eggs lay eggs, only after the hatched chicken grows up and lays the egg. Good hardware Ray Tracing doesn't exist without Ray Tracing hardware, hardware does not exist without customers buying it.

 

Then there is the other factors like Windows not having the required update to even correctly support the new DX12 API layer for months and months after it should have. Not going to be doing any QA testing until after that point.

 

Edit:

And neither is Microsoft going to put large development resources in to a Windows feature 0.0001% users are going to use (developers years early). Unless it's going to be used by GA products they're not interested or Nvidia has to pay that cost, which they won't do either.

[That Franc]

I am not going to believe it, but I kinda want this to be true, because buying an Nvidia card right now is a massive ripoff

[Stefan Payne]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

How?

FPGA

Quote

The devs didn't have RTX cards and you can't make a few hundred or thousand just for devs

They don't need that.

They need the specs and an API, especially in early stages of the game.

The Card is only needed at the end of the stage, when everything is done.

Also they can either not include the code in the final/public builds and only use that internally or they can have it inactive.

 

But you know:
it just works! And then it just works, because it just works.

 

52 minutes ago, PacketMan said:

But, but, Nvidia is still the best for gaming right?!

Correct, especially Turing for Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands its an awesome choice. It also starts with nVidia the way its meant to be played!

 

And then you open the Inventory because you want a diferent lead delivery device - and it crashes. Allegedly that was fixed after 6-8 Months or so and now it, allegedly, randomly crashes with turing.

 

nVidia - the way it's meant to...

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

FPGA

Ah no an FPGA is not nor can be a GPU of Turing architecture nor be of any use here.

 

2 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

They don't need that.

They need the specs and an API, especially in early stages of the game.

The Card is only needed at the end of the stage, when everything is done.

The complaint was devs should have had the cards early, not mine. I made the exact same point. Devs just do not need the cards this early and the cost would be far too high as well.

 

Gen 1 graphics technology sucks, people just need to get over that and stop expecting more. It's never been a thing for anything, where did this expectation come from?

[Humbug]

10 hours ago, Cyracus said:

they copied intels i5,7,9 move

I am somewhat ok with the R3, R5, R7 etc because it honestly signals to the consumer that these are AMD's competing parts for the Intel i3, i5 and i7. However with this GPU naming scheme...

9 hours ago, Belgarathian said:

I really hope the render ends up being the final... Damn that's sexy.

 

Also... RX 3080 XT... Liking RX and XT, but where does the 30 come from. Are they trying to hoodwink Nvidia like they did Intel?

They are trying to hoodwink consumers into think that higher number RX 30xx series is automatically superior to the RTX 20xx series. There is huge chunk of non-tech savvy Nvidia customers who always buy the best geforce card that they can afford without any research, they are probably hoping to get some of those guys over with the higher number.

 

Yes the render looks cool, I will be pissed if they give us a crappy blower cooler and no 3rd party options at launch.

10 hours ago, RobFRaschke said:

Read it. Don't believe it. I'm not even certain that it'll paper launch at E3 frankly. If it does, great. I'm betting the RX 3080 top of the line is more between 2060 and 2070, around overclocked 2060 performance, and with a $350 MSRP, right in line with RTX 2060, but with some aggressive third party deals to make it the better value. AMD will not compete on the high end so long as they're bound by an iteration of the GCN architecture IMHO.

I am not certain of anything either. But even if we assume zero architectural improvements if it does have 56 CUs then it is logical that it will beat the RTX 2060 and compete with the RTX 2070; thanks to the higher clockspeeds enabled by the the 7nm process- just compare Radeon 7 clocks to Vega 64. Unless the article is wrong and it is a smaller part with less than 56 CUs.

10 hours ago, ouroesa said:

AMD does this every time they launch something. Over-hype the shit out of it so expectations are nice and high, then when it actually launches, it's nowhere near the hype and everyone is disappointed.

 

9 hours ago, Skiiwee29 said:

The hype and expectations are our fault, not AMDs. its the fan boys out there and garbage sites reporting incorrectly on information. 

Before the Vega launch I had a feeling it would be a disappointing product because AMD did not share any real benchmarks comparing it to Nvidia products. When they are confident they tend to show real numbers in a wide variety of games.

 

5 hours ago, leadeater said:

Radeon VII has 60 CUs and higher memory bandwidth, this is supposed to have 56 and slightly lower memory bandwidth so just on that spec information plus what Vega 20 can clock at I think such a card would be faster than V64. Either that's really good or it isn't going to be 56 CUs.

This 

[Skiiwee29]

1 minute ago, Humbug said:

 

Before the Vega launch I had a feeling it would be a disappointing product because AMD did not share any real benchmarks comparing it to Nvidia products. When they are confident they tend to show real numbers in a wide variety of games.

 

 

Yes, but the hype and talk around it was artificial and not actually produced by AMD, as my comment was directed at with the quoted remark in my post. 

[Humbug]

All that I'm hoping for in this launch is that it will make PC graphics a bit more affordable to the masses. We just cannot keep going in the current direction; more and more people will get pushed towards consoles and stadia etc. Even if we are stuck with RTX 2080 / Radeon 7 tier being expensive I trust that this will make the RTX 2070 and 2060 tiers a lot more affordable.

 

AMD's inability to deliver GPUs on time and execute on their roadmap, combined with Nvidia's ridiculous price escalations every generation is just bad for PC gaming. Sure the fat margins make Nvidia shareholders very happy but what's the end game? So far PC gaming has been doing really well as the rest of the PC market collapses. But if we keep pushing in this direction then PC gaming will collapse too and become a niche hobby.

[Trixanity]

11 minutes ago, Humbug said:

All that I'm hoping for in this launch is that it will make PC graphics a bit more affordable to the masses. We just cannot keep going in the current direction; more and more people will get pushed towards consoles and stadia etc. Even if we are stuck with RTX 2080 / Radeon 7 tier being expensive I trust that this will make the RTX 2070 and 2060 tiers a lot more affordable.

 

AMD's inability to deliver GPUs on time and execute on their roadmap, combined with Nvidia's ridiculous price escalations every generation is just bad for PC gaming. Sure the fat margins make Nvidia shareholders very happy but what's the end game? So far PC gaming has been doing really well as the rest of the PC market collapses. But if we keep pushing in this direction then PC gaming will collapse too and become a niche hobby.

We can only hope AMD can start executing on a yearly basis after they bury GCN. It's basically the biggest problem right now (other than carving out a new highly profitable market which they don't have the resources for either). They seem to have that down on the CPU side but it's proven to be impossible to fight a two front war when you're resource limited. 

[pas008]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Dude, RX480 rivaled GTX 980 when it was launched. A 300€ card rivaling 600€ card. What is so impossible about Navi doing the same lol?

well gtx980 and rx480 are almost 2 yrs difference so it should be similar to now

[Brooksie359]

7 hours ago, RejZoR said:

At this point, I'm wondering why not just repurpose Vega 56, get rid of expensive HBM2 on it and call it a day? Hell, Vega 56 cards already cost as low as 244€ ($273 and that's with European VAT included!). Old tech or not, the cards are still very much capable...

 

As for nay sayers, has everyone forgot what RX480 was to GTX980 at the time? It delivered basically the same performance at half the price. Why is everyone in absolute disbelief for this happening again? AMD is in much better financial position thanks to Ryzen than it was back in Maxwell 2 days.

 

The naming scheme, I agree... The chipsets situation is so bad even I as enthusiast often ain't sure if I'm thinking about Intel or AMD chipset thanks to confusingly similar naming schemes. There was no need to follow this idiocy again and mimic NVIDIA's naming scheme. I actually really liked the Vega 56 and 64 naming scheme. Names are nice, easy to remember. Navi 56 and 64 would sound nice too.

Without the fast HBM2 the vega 56 would not be nearly as fast due to memory bandwidth issues.

[ThePD]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Gen 1 graphics technology sucks, people just need to get over that and stop expecting more. It's never been a thing for anything, where did this expectation come from?

Think this came from peoples universal approval of the performance to price ratio of the 1080ti. So when they saw the dramatic price increase on the 2000 series they expected it to be a GPU just as great as the 1080ti. But they forget the products will have flaws and sometimes do not live up to our own internal expectations. That and gamers are some of the hardest people to please.

[That Franc]

Also, I don't understand the hate towards the naming scheme - if this turns out to be real, it will match the new Ryzen CPUs, so you can have a Ryzen 3000 series, and a Radeon 3000 series - which isn't all that bad. Besides, this will automatically screw up Nvidia's naming even more (if that's even possible), and I'm absolutely okay with that - more complaints from Linus about Nvidia naming is always good 

[Hellion]

9 hours ago, RejZoR said:

At this point, I'm wondering why not just repurpose Vega 56, get rid of expensive HBM2 on it and call it a day? Hell, Vega 56 cards already cost as low as 244€ ($273 and that's with European VAT included!). Old tech or not, the cards are still very much capable...

It's been well documented a million times over already that the vega architecture is based around HBM. You can't just remove them from the die and solder on GDDRX chips instead. It doesn't work that way.

[Mihle]

5 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

 

*fixed. there is no doubt Adored likes AMD and he has stated that he is Biased in favor of stuff that includes the use of chiplets and IF. 

 

people should learn to take what Adored presents as educated guesses based on rumours, nothing more, nothing less. 

 

Computex is so close right now that there honestly isnt much point in speculating performance on Zen 2, and we will probably get some sort of sneakpeak at computex regarding Navi. 

 

if Navi flops in high  performance desktopp, that is fine as long as it succeeds in consoles and laptops. 

Oh, wrong word use from me, sorry.

 

But yes.

[Princess Luna]

10 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

ripping off nvidia's naming scheme

This has been the one thing AMD has been disgusting about, they are completely ripping off both nVidia and Intel name scheming and confusing costumers across the board.

[thorhammerz]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

Gen 1 graphics technology sucks, people just need to get over that and stop expecting more. It's never been a thing for anything, where did this expectation come from?

Likely from the comparative performance (and price) of Pascal to the Maxwell and older cards.

 

Give certain demographics something nice for a change, and they'll throw a tantrum the next time around when reality doesn't sync up with their expectations.

[Neftex]

2 hours ago, Princess Luna said:

This has been the one thing AMD has been disgusting about, they are completely ripping off both nVidia and Intel name scheming and confusing costumers across the board.

i doubt anyone confuses INTEL and AMD, or even NVIDIA and AMD based on the stuff behind the brand name...

the confusion is applicable to something like motherboard chipsets b350 vs b360 from gigabyte? ye that i can see

but INTEL IX XXXX vs AMD RX XXXX

or GEFORCE RTX XXXX vs RADEON RX XXXX

[Drak3]

2 hours ago, Princess Luna said:

they are completely ripping off both nVidia and Intel name scheming

Even though it's just a tweak of their old schemes.

[RejZoR]

3 hours ago, Hellion said:

It's been well documented a million times over already that the vega architecture is based around HBM. You can't just remove them from the die and solder on GDDRX chips instead. It doesn't work that way.

It's always cheaper to redesign a chip and repurpose it than making it from scratch. So, replacing memory controller and bolting GDDR5X on it would work just as well. I see no reason why Vega 56 would be bandwidth or mem latency starved because of it.

[Neftex]

21 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

It's always cheaper to redesign a chip and repurpose it than making it from scratch. So, replacing memory controller and bolting GDDR5X on it would work just as well. I see no reason why Vega 56 would be bandwidth or mem latency starved because of it.

because youre gpu architecture engineer and know it would work well? ye if it was good idea they wouldve done it already... apparently it isnt

[RejZoR]

38 minutes ago, Neftex said:

because youre gpu architecture engineer and know it would work well? ye if it was good idea they wouldve done it already... apparently it isnt

If they were so great, why are they in absolute shitter? I guess they ain't that great...

[Humbug]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Everybody is exited about what exactly, the fact that AMD might target a card 2 steps down from the top tier? Pretty sure Vega 64 last generation was supposed to target the 1080 so we basically had 0 gains with Navi?

 

That sounds more like AMD Radeon to me: negligible performance gains across generation but instead of saying we ate shit, again, at least it's very cheap!

Navi is not going to set the world alight with performance. But the PC gaming industry has been getting poisoned by toxic graphics card pricing trends. What has been happening in recent years is really bad for our hobby. Gamers have not been able to purchase GPUs because of mining, gamers have not been able to afford GPUs, AMD has not been able to deliver on their roadmaps on time, and Nvidia is trying to push PC gaming towards a more elitist and expensive hobby with pricing escalations every generation.

 

It's critical that something is done now to stop this trend. Or else on the longterm people are going to be pushed towards alternatives like consoles and stadia. Personally right now I cannot justify upgrading my GPU even though i still have an R9 290.

 

 

CPU prices are good, RAM prices are dropping, SSD prices are better than ever, but this GPU pricing trend is gonna keep hurting us unless either Nvidia or AMD does something about it. The direction we are headed if allowed to continue will make PC gaming more niche. The current hope is Navi, I hope the initial launch can fix the pricing upto the RTX 2070 tier, and then once big Navi 20 launches hopefully the pricing all the way up to the RTX 2080 tier will be fixed... that's the hope.

[Misanthrope]

50 minutes ago, Humbug said:

Navi is not going to set the world alight with performance. But the PC gaming industry has been getting poisoned by toxic graphics card pricing trends. What has been happening in recent years is really bad for our hobby. Gamers have not been able to purchase GPUs because of mining, gamers have not been able to afford GPUs, AMD has not been able to deliver on their roadmaps on time, and Nvidia is trying to push PC gaming towards a more elitist and expensive hobby with pricing escalations every generation.

 

It's critical that something is done now to stop this trend. Or else on the longterm people are going to be pushed towards alternatives like consoles and stadia. Personally right now I cannot justify upgrading my GPU even though i still have an R9 290.

 

 

CPU prices are good, RAM prices are dropping, SSD prices are better than ever, but this GPU pricing trend is gonna keep hurting us unless either Nvidia or AMD does something about it. The direction we are headed if allowed to continue will make PC gaming more niche. The current hope is Navi, I hope the initial launch can fix the pricing upto the RTX 2070 tier, and then once big Navi 20 launches hopefully the pricing all the way up to the RTX 2080 tier will be fixed... that's the hope.

This is a pretty big misunderstanding on your part.

 

Here is the thing: people will not buy a product out of principle. No: a tiny, microscopic minority of modern day Unabombers will not impact products that can only be manufactured under the current modern global capitalist paradigm taking advantage of every single possible short cut and cost saving measure to give you the very max on performance while keeping the margins the highest they can be.

 

So not to digress: Yes I am well aware that Nvidia is manipulating pricing by pushing the prices up constantly without regards to actual market forces (Hint: That's what happens when you get closer and closer to a monopoly and every company wants competitors to die by any means necessary so how would you stop monopolies on a system that makes them the ultimate goal for any company?)

 

AMD is just not able to compete in the high end and as I stated many times before, the high end is absolutely necessary. No it is not the most profitable segment at all but people will want to bet for whomever has the performance crown. AMD has been far away from even competing for the max performance for several years and it's a situation that cannot go on on this market where games get more and more intensive, developers get sloppier (By necessity: they have to prioritize resources to already ridiculous undertakings that are AAA games) and other hardware vendors want to sell new technologies (Another hint: 1440p was never pushed for and we skipped to a tremendous strain by aiming for 4K instead because well, it's a bigger number and that's where overall tech decided we should go towards) so a card that matches the 2070 at 300 will sound awesome only to the ultra nerds like me or other members of these forums and nobody fucking else.

 

Average person might see the 300 card performing as good as the 600 card sure, but when they ask about the 1000+ cards they'll get a generic answer like "Oh that's more for hardcore gamers and people who want the best games at 4k" and just like that, the fact that they will not even see an AMD product at that 1000+ price bracket already tainted them.

 

This is why AMD keeps having better performance for the price and hasn't gained any market share back in like a decade.

[ThePD]

4 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD is just not able to compete in the high end and as I stated many times before, the high end is absolutely necessary. No it is not the most profitable segment at all but people will want to bet for whomever has the performance crown. AMD has been far away from even competing for the max performance for several years and it's a situation that cannot go on on this market where games get more and more intensive, developers get sloppier (By necessity: they have to prioritize resources to already ridiculous undertakings that are AAA games) and other hardware vendors want to sell new technologies (Another hint: 1440p was never pushed for and we skipped to a tremendous strain by aiming for 4K instead because well, it's a bigger number and that's where overall tech decided we should go towards) so a card that matches the 2070 at 300 will sound awesome only to the ultra nerds like me or other members of these forums and nobody fucking else.

 

Average person might see the 300 card performing as good as the 600 card sure, but when they ask about the 1000+ cards they'll get a generic answer like "Oh that's more for hardcore gamers and people who want the best games at 4k" and just like that, the fact that will not even see an AMD product at that 1000+ price bracket already tainted them.

 

This is why AMD keeps having better performance for the price and hasn't gained any market share back in like a decade.

This exactly. People will buy a more expensive product that performs worse than the competition at the drop of a hat because most people outside of the tech world don't know any better. There are people who bought 2080ti just for raytracing in BF5, a game they did not even know if they would like at the time, just because it was the most high end and had the most "shiney" features.