AMD Navi 20 GPU Allegedly Supports Ray Tracing & Enhanced GCN Architecture - May Be Faster Than RTX 2080 Ti

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, alex75871 said:

Has AMD graphics ever lived up to the hype?

About 10 years ago they did.   It's been a slow trip downhill since. 

 

 

[Neftex]

1 hour ago, IceRAR said:

Since when is AMD/Radeon interested in Ray Tracing ? Last time i hurd, all of them wore saying (including hard core fans) :

current RT cards are just marketing, theres just few games with it and the performance is terrible

 

sure if raytracing cards and non raytracing cards of same rasterization performance are the same price, you choose the rt card to get "bonus feature".

but if there was lets say GTX 2080 (without raytracing) with significantly lower price that performs same as RTX 2080 in rasterization?

[dalekphalm]

3 hours ago, alex75871 said:

Has AMD graphics ever lived up to the hype?

You must not remember when GCN 1 came out (Radeon 7000 series). 

 

That GPU architecture lived up to - and surpassed all hype. It truly was AMD’s last kickass top-to-bottom GPU architecture. 

 

They've made good stuff since then, but they haven’t reached the same heights as with Radeon 7000. 

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

About 10 years ago they did.   It's been a slow trip downhill since. 

7 years (Jan 2012), technically. 

[leadeater]

43 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

You must not remember when GCN 1 came out (Radeon 7000 series). 

The 5870 was also pretty kick ass too, X800 & X1800/X1900 were great as well. Right now I'm stuck on crossfire 290X, actually stuck because anything better costs more than what I paid for them by a lot and anything reasonable is the same performance. AMD really is burning all the bridges with their previous high end buyers because they have done nothing in that area or the attempts have been actually not that good i.e. Radeon VII has no crossfire support (yes I actually care about that).

[bmichaels556]

I think it's possible, since AMD has had Navi on the horizon for YEARS now. In all honesty, I think Radeon VII was just a productivity card that they used as a holdover until they could finally get their "real" gaming product out. I can only hope.

 

To be honest, I couldn't care less about them matching the 2080Ti. If they could hit that rumored GTX 1080 or Ti performance for $250 to $300, they would SLAUGHTER the mainstream market... And if it somehow managed to support Ray Tracing? Holy crap. 

 

But then, Radeon VII can't even keep up as a gaming card, so who knows. The only thing we can HOPE is that Radeon VII was JUST a shrink of Vega, and that a brand new architecture along with that shrink, will lead to big percentage gains. But maybe someone can educate me further on that, since I'm certainly no expert.

[dalekphalm]

32 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The 5870 was also pretty kick ass too, X800 & X1800/X1900 were great as well. Right now I'm stuck on crossfire 290X, actually stuck because anything better costs more than what I paid for them by a lot and anything reasonable is the same performance. AMD really is burning all the bridges with their previous high end buyers because they have done nothing in that area or the attempts have been actually not that good i.e. Radeon VII has no crossfire support (yes I actually care about that).

Oh indeed, both the HD 5000 and HD 6000 series were good - though the 6000 was more of an incremental improvement over 5000 IIRC.

 

AMD has had plenty of awesome GPU's over the years. Go back even farther to the ATI days and they were killing it left and right with epic products like the All-in-wonder 9500 GPU/Capture Card (that series in general, the R300 architecture - was kickass). The x800 and x1800 series were also good.

 

My first ground-up build where I chose all the parts was built using the ATI x700 Pro (I wanted any of the x800 or x850 cards, but the x700 Pro was the best one the vendor sold).

 

My actual original ground-up build was done using parts my dad bought and chose (we had some rough guidelines, but I think for the most part he let the sales person give him suggestions) - that system was running an Athlon XP 2700 (unfortunately, not one of the coveted Barton chips that would OC like mad).

 

Kids, the Athlon XP CPU's were built using 0.13 micrometer process nodes (that's 130 nanometers). That means that the transistors in this CPU are literally 10 times larger than the transistors in the current gen Ryzen CPU's.

[Drak3]

2 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

You must not remember when GCN 1 came out (Radeon 7000 series). 

While not right when they came out, the higher end R9 2XX cards held up to the hype a tad down the road.

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

While not right when they came out, the higher end R9 2XX cards held up to the hype a tad down the road.

True indeed. They were decent when first released, but over time and with driver maturity, they saw a marked performance increase over time.

[PlayStation 2]

Sounds cool in theory until you realize that AMD makes a lot of empty statements.

The Fury X was supposed to be a monster overclocker... then people realized that they could only get about 50MHz out of their cards.

The 590 was supposed to kill the 1060... but it only made its own dumbass price bracket that shouldn't exist.

[Drak3]

34 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

The Fury X was supposed to be a monster overclocker... then people realized that they could only get about 50MHz out of their cards.

On the original vBIOS. Overclocking improved quite a bit with subsequent vBIOSes.

[GoldenLag]

1 hour ago, handymanshandle said:

The 590 was supposed to kill the 1060... but it only made its own dumbass price bracket that shouldn't exist.

It (for the time being) costs the same as a 1060 6GB (213$ vs 219$). It was more that it didnt make sense to buy over an rx 580 which costs less than a 1060 6GB.

1 hour ago, handymanshandle said:

Sounds cool in theory until you realize that AMD makes a lot of empty statements.

Well its wccf tech. Take it with the world's supply of salt. 

2 hours ago, bmichaels556 said:

To be honest, I couldn't care less about them matching the 2080Ti. If they could hit that rumored GTX 1080 or Ti performance for $250 to $300, they would SLAUGHTER the mainstream market... And if it somehow managed to support Ray Tracing? Holy crap. 

Going by the current market. AMD could launch  the unbelievable performance provided by wccftech (that is 99% false) and it still wouldnt really change what people are gonna buy. 

 

While a 300$ card (1080/2070 perf) would be amazing, the mindshare difference would make it so it wouldnt sell as well as one would thing.

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

You must not remember when GCN 1 came out (Radeon 7000 series). 

 

That GPU architecture lived up to - and surpassed all hype. It truly was AMD’s last kickass top-to-bottom GPU architecture. 

 

They've made good stuff since then, but they haven’t reached the same heights as with Radeon 7000. 

7 years (Jan 2012), technically. 

Anywhere in that vicinity give or take is fair enough, we all have a slightly different version of acceptable in that context.

[CarlBar]

10 hours ago, IceRAR said:

Since when is AMD/Radeon interested in Ray Tracing ? Last time i hurd, all of them wore saying (including hard core fans) :

 

 

AMD have never said that. What they said, (accurately), is that ray tracing will never really be fully worth it until the entire product stack from entry level up has RT support. Once that Happens i'd expect game devs to drop support for non-RT methods of doing RT stuff like a hot potato.

[cj09beira]

9 hours ago, handymanshandle said:

Sounds cool in theory until you realize that AMD makes a lot of empty statements.

The Fury X was supposed to be a monster overclocker... then people realized that they could only get about 50MHz out of their cards.

The 590 was supposed to kill the 1060... but it only made its own dumbass price bracket that shouldn't exist.

that happened because amd had 580 stock that needed go be sold, so they could not release the card at the price they wanted 

[dalekphalm]

9 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

AMD have never said that. What they said, (accurately), is that ray tracing will never really be fully worth it until the entire product stack from entry level up has RT support. Once that Happens i'd expect game devs to drop support for non-RT methods of doing RT stuff like a hot potato.

Indeed. Until Ray Tracing is just another part of any modern game engine, and all "gaming grade" GPU's can handle RT, it won't catch on as mainstream.

 

I do hope this comes sooner rather than later though.

[Stefan Payne]

44 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

I do hope this comes sooner rather than later though.

Isn't it already here for the most part?!

Just that the Leatherjacked had a tantrum and shouted it out and claimed it for them, although its already in use here and there...

[dalekphalm]

35 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Isn't it already here for the most part?!

 

No. At least, not yet. Not until two things happen:

1. The majority of AAA games release with RT of some kind (cross platform, not just RTX compatible). We're getting there, with a lot of announced titles having RT support

2. The entire stack of gaming cards has official RT support - that means all the way down to entry level GTX 1050's, etc.

 

By this time next year, both might well be solved, especially if the entire Navi stack can do it. But we're not quite there yet.

35 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Just that the Leatherjacked had a tantrum and shouted it out and claimed it for them, although its already in use here and there...

Well, Jensen doesn't like attention on his competitors... He gets real upset when AMD has good press.