AMD RX 5700 Navi New arch

[GoldenLag]

hopefully there are aftermarket cards at launch. blowers blow, that is the reality here, while i kinda like the look of the card, its still a blower. 

 

 

performance is allright for the price they are charging. but i guess the truth right now people need to realize is: AMD isnt giving away stuff anymore, they will actually charge as much as they can for the product. that is the AMD today, and the AMD under Lisa Su. 

[Humbug]

9 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

performance is allright for the price they are charging. but i guess the truth right now people need to realize is: AMD isnt giving away stuff anymore, they will actually charge as much as they can for the product. that is the AMD today, and the AMD under Lisa Su. 

On the GPU front they have realized that even when they had a superior product at superior pricing most people still mindlessly bought Nvidia. So they have decided there is no point anymore and they may as well reap higher margins and settle for lower volume.

 

On the desktop CPU front it's different. Whenever they had a good product at a good price, whether it's Athlon XP, Athlon 64 or Ryzen the gamer and enthusiast market has rewarded them by buying it up. Now they are moving further upmarket too with more high end products. But they did the same with Athlon 64 too. The CPU market is healthier.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Humbug said:

??

Nvidia would not promote an RTX 2060 by comparing it to the Radeon 7 either. Products compete within price brackets.

 

Is your issue that they made a 40 CU part before going for the high end 64 CU version to challenge the top?

I don't have an issue with it's price or performance (need to see actual reviews before I care about that).   What I hate seeing is every card they release being only as good as  3rd or 4th tier down from a year ago (they are better this time though as it's actually only 9 months if they hurry up and get it to shelves without delay).

 

Don't you get sick of seeing AMD bring out a new product only for it to be another XX70 or below competitor?  There are literally three better performing GPU'S above that.

 

 

[leadeater]

55 minutes ago, JediFragger said:

WHAT!!!?? SORRY I CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER THE NOISE, WHAT!!???? EH????????

 

Yes I have one. Yes I limit the fan speed.

 

For reference I've also had Vega56/Vega64/1080Ti's/2080/2080Ti.

I mean it might be a bit noisy or you can hear it but damn, it's not a 290X. Keep complaints about noise in balance of relative differences of actual products. There's a huge difference between old AMD/ATI blowers and Radeon VII.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Humbug said:

On the GPU front they have realized that even when they had a superior product at superior pricing most people still mindlessly bought Nvidia. So they have decided there is no point anymore and they may as well reap higher margins and settle for lower volume.

 

On the desktop CPU front it's different. Whenever they had a good product at a good price, whether it's Athlon XP, Athlon 64 or Ryzen the gamer and enthusiast market has rewarded them by buying it up. Now they are moving further upmarket too with more high end products.

I Don't think Nvidia market share is due to mindless consumerism.  I think for the most part AMD got done in hard by HBM and mining. Then only had  the top end made worse by not being able to compete with the 1080/1080ti etc.

 

A lot of the people who bought 1050 and 1060 would have more likely bought a cheaper AMD part had they been available.

[Humbug]

1 hour ago, JediFragger said:

For reference I've also had Vega56/Vega64/1080Ti's/2080/2080Ti.

Why do you buy so many GPUs with similar performance? 

[Humbug]

11 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I don't have an issue with it's price or performance (need to see actual reviews before I care about that).   What I hate seeing is every card they release being only as good as  3rd or 4th tier down from a year ago (they are better this time though as it's actually only 9 months if they hurry up and get it to shelves without delay).

 

Don't you get sick of seeing AMD bring out a new product only for it to be another XX70 or below competitor?  There are literally three better performing GPU'S above that.

I don't have an issue with them comparing to it's competitor. But the problem is as you said that they are always late. The recent success of the CPU department is partly due to the successful implementation of their strategy of having leapfrogging design teams in order to iterate from Zen 1 to Zen 2 to Zen 3 etc... They are delivering consistently and predictably on new products, they set the trends now.

 

Whereas on the GPU front they are always chasing Nvidia. Always delays and always playing catch up and launching half way through Nvidia's generation. And when they do launch it is never a complete line up either. Never high end and mid range launching close together. They just don't execute reliably on their GPU roadmap. The products are always competitive but never trendsetting.

 

Hopefully with Lisa Su confirming they have been expanding the GPU design teams and the company's new found profitability things may change. 

[Humbug]

16 minutes ago, mr moose said:

A lot of the people who bought 1050 and 1060 would have more likely bought a cheaper AMD part had they been available.

I think most of them would have just bought geforce anyway. Talking about the average PC gamer here which is the majority of this market, not the people who hang out on tech forums.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Humbug said:

I think most of them would have just bought geforce anyway. Talking about the average PC gamer here which is the majority of this market, not the people who hang out on tech forums.

Most people buy either on recommendation or review.     I seem remember a lot of reviews tended to say the AMD cards represent a great deal, if you can get one at MSRP.

 

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/176724-amd-graphics-card-pricing-skyrockets-due-to-cryptocurrency-mining-could-kill-amds-gaming-efforts

 

remember when this happened?  That would go a very long way to explaining Nvidias market share, remember Nvidia weren't always expensive, but they have always had a performing product.

[Stefan Payne]

2 hours ago, Humbug said:

AMD has spent millions of dollars of R&D and countless engineering man-hours for the last few years to create this new architecture. That was the difficult part. What a shame after doing all that to sabotage your launch day reviews by having the cards run hotter and louder than Nvidia cards.

I doubt that, look at this:

 

They use a graphite Pad and Vapor Chamber.

And the heatsink looks pretty big and low air resistance + mostly open the Slot is.

And we all know that the Reviewers want to find something bad on AMD, so that they can say that nVIdia is better

Look at the "shitstorm" that reviewers got for saying that the 1650 at 150€ is a shitty product that makes no sense...

And people are inventing stuff to justify getting it.

2 hours ago, Humbug said:

Something that could easily be solved with a good cooler design. AMD does all the hard work and screws up the easy part. Gamers and enthusiasts do care about keeping their GPUs cool. Furthermore it often has a direct impact on performance as sustained boost clocks are tied to temperature. They have been criticized for this countless times but they do not learn.

I have the suspicion that its a demand for OEMs such as HP, DELL and co.

That is why they still use those shitty blowers because that's cheaper for the OEMs so that they can cheap out on fans and only supply the case with 1 fan, if at all...

And also they can use shittier CPU Coolers as well becuase it reduces the temperature inside the case as well...

 

 

2 hours ago, Humbug said:

My Sapphire R9 290 vapor-x is way cooler, quieter and noticeably faster than the reference model. AMD should be giving themselves every chance they can to make a great first impression. Rather than launching a blower cool and allowing Nvidia to respond before the after model cards show up months later. This launch is already late and they should have had enough time to get everything sorted with their partners or if they couldn't at least make sure the stock cooler was similar to the Radeon 7.

Yeah, I agree.

Especially with hostile media that wants to find something bad about your products so that they can recommend the Competition...

 

For us consumers the cooler seems easily replacable...

As the Backplate seems to cover the VRM and the Cooler only the CPU...

[Trixanity]

8 hours ago, Humbug said:

AMD are idiots, they can spend years and Big teams of engineers and  millions of dollars on R&D to create Navi painstakingly.

 

But they refused to do something as simple as creating a non blower stock cooler, which would have ensured the launch day reviews reported the card being cool and quiet, even when overclocking. They needed to come out swinging, not make consumers wait for more months while Nvidia responds.

The blower design is alleged to be for the benefit of system integrators. If that is the case, I don't see AMD switching cooler design until they get feedback to stop. AMD should have said something about AIB design availability as the rumors are that they're ready on launch day or shortly after but of course no confirmation was forthcoming. 

4 hours ago, Granular said:

A certain scottish bastard promised me a 2060 competitor at $200 and a 2070 competitor at $330.

I'M NEVER GETTING HYPED AGAIN!

Seriously, how is this even real? How do they make a 2060 competitor that costs more than the 2060 AND has a higher TDP despite the process shrink and not wasting die area on tensor/ray tracing cores? Why even release it?

The 2070 competitor costs a bit less, ok. But that too has a higher power draw, than the 12nm Nvidia GPU it competes with. There's not much of a reason for the 2070 to price match it, considering the efficiency advantage and that they have their RTX gimmick.

AMD should just scrap Radeon Technologies group and license Samsung's GPUs to use as integrated graphics with Zen. The only hope for anything good coming to the GPU market in the near future is Intel.

It isn't really much of a competition between the 5700 and 2060. AMD pretty much hinted at the 2060 just being the nearest and they had to compare it to something. The performance difference between them is bigger than between XT and 2070. 2060 is pretty gimped on multiple fronts including VRAM. The last part is funny because Samsung just scrapped their GPUs for RDNA so how do you figure that makes sense?

I wouldn't put too much stock in TDP considering GPU power consumption figures rarely follow the TDP if you look at benchmarks. Some are higher, some are lower and some are roughly similar. We'll see where these fall.

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

I mean it might be a bit noisy or you can hear it but damn, it's not a 290X. Keep complaints about noise in balance of relative differences of actual products. There's a huge difference between old AMD/ATI blowers and Radeon VII.

AMD claims that the noise is much reduced on the new blower design (although it also sounds like they're limiting RPMs to accomplish that - more specifically I heard 1800 RPM) and that it's measured at 43 db full tilt (I heard mid-to-high 50s for some of the older designs).

It does seem like they've pulled out a lot of new tricks to make this blower design work so I'm not sure if it's possible to do more with a blower design than they've done with this one. I'm not exactly an expert on cooler design so maybe someone else can chime in on that.

[cj09beira]

8 hours ago, Humbug said:

AMD are idiots, they can spend years and Big teams of engineers and  millions of dollars on R&D to create Navi painstakingly.

 

But they refused to do something as simple as creating a non blower stock cooler, which would have ensured the launch day reviews reported the card being cool and quiet, even when overclocking. They needed to come out swinging, not make consumers wait for more months while Nvidia responds.

their best bet would be to simply launch with aib cards, they would get less money in the first months but reviews would be much better so the long term sales would probably be much higher, and gamersnexus tested even in bad cases blowers still blow 

5 hours ago, Granular said:

A certain scottish bastard promised me a 2060 competitor at $200 and a 2070 competitor at $330.

I'M NEVER GETTING HYPED AGAIN!

Seriously, how is this even real? How do they make a 2060 competitor that costs more than the 2060 AND has a higher TDP despite the process shrink and not wasting die area on tensor/ray tracing cores? Why even release it?

The 2070 competitor costs a bit less, ok. But that too has a higher power draw, than the 12nm Nvidia GPU it competes with. There's not much of a reason for the 2070 to price match it, considering the efficiency advantage and that they have their RTX gimmick.

AMD should just scrap Radeon Technologies group and license Samsung's GPUs to use as integrated graphics with Zen. The only hope for anything good coming to the GPU market in the near future is Intel.

amd simply changed plans and went for gold, that card is still a 250mm² die with 256bit bus, thats not expensive to build, hopefully prices come down once super comes out 

[JediFragger]

3 hours ago, leadeater said:

it's not a 290X

True, and I had a pair of them! R7 is definitely louder than the 1080Ti though, which for me was the limit.

[JediFragger]

3 hours ago, Humbug said:

Why do you buy so many GPUs with similar performance? 

Because I can.

 

I swear crack would be a cheaper hobby

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, JediFragger said:

True, and I had a pair of them! R7 is definitely louder than the 1080Ti though, which for me was the limit.

Funny thing is I don't think I ever heard my 290X ref blowers, everything went straight on to water blocks. My 6970 blower card was terrible though.

[_Hustler_One_]

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

It isn't really much of a competition between the 5700 and 2060. AMD pretty much hinted at the 2060 just being the nearest and they had to compare it to something. The performance difference between them is bigger than between XT and 2070. 2060 is pretty gimped on multiple fronts including VRAM.

But honestly, I personally on behalf of average budget consumers would prefer the RX 5700 over RTX 2060 just because it has more VRAM and the TDP is better than Vega 56. It has longer use by its VRAM capacity than 2060 to receive many upcoming game updates which involves texture developments.

I don't even need Raytrashing at all..

 

One of the game I play is stuttering with 6Gb VRAM at 1080p max setting. I want the highest quality graphical with as highest fps as possible at 1080p without being overkill.

 

I found the RX 5700 is the one I need in the last 5 months which match my criteria. So this one will be a great deal for us the average consumers who never think/take any top tier GPUs into consideration to buy.

[Trixanity]

1 minute ago, _Hustler_One_ said:

But honestly, I personally on behalf of average budget consumers would prefer the RX 5700 over 2060 just because it has more VRAM and the TDP is better than Vega 56. It has longer use by its VRAM capacity than 2060 to receive many upcoming game updates which involves texture developments.

I don't even need Raytrashing at all..

 

One of the game I play is stuttering with 6Gb VRAM at 1080p max setting. I want the highest quality graphical with as highest fps as possible at 1080p without being too overkill.

 

I found the RX 5700 is the one I need in the last 5 months which match my criteria. So this one will be a great deal for us the average consumers

I wouldn't even call the VRAM difference to be about future proofing (not that you said that) but actually a necessity right now. There has been multiple games (not even new games) that I've heard of being bottlenecked by 6 GB VRAM. So (of course) depending on what you need, the 6 GB of VRAM might be a deal breaker from the get-go. 

 

My understanding of it is that it isn't even Nvidia screwing consumers over but it's a design limit of their architecture. From what I understand the memory controller, caches and (I think) SMs are structured in a way that when you disable/remove one you have to remove the others as well as they're linked. So when you want to make a GPU with X number of Y and in this case want to scale it down, you'll end up with a narrower memory bus and therefore you end up in a situation where it's capped at 6 GB. So either they'll have to rethink that design or they'll have to (if possible) buy VRAM chips with higher density but I think you might end up with a 12 GB card in that case and that would be weird. Of course someone with more intimate knowledge of Turing (or Nvidia's uarchs in general) may want to correct me if I'm wrong. If I recall it's the exact same (or a similar) problem that led to the famed GTX 970 with 3.5 GB VRAM at full speed and like 0.5 GB at 1/8th the speed.

 

I think the 5700 will be a neat card for a lot of consumers who need more than the 2060 can provide but AMD really do need to fill out the product stack. Two GPUs aren't enough, not by a long shot. The most important would be a card to compete above the 2080 and preferably a halo card around the 2080 Ti or higher. However it seems we could be waiting as much as another year for that.

 

A lot of people dismiss these because they're late to the party and they don't cost $200 but I honestly think they're positioned in a way that they fill in a spot in between two of Nvidia's most popular GPUs and in a way that gives consumers a reason to pick these over Nvidia's offerings. Not only that it fills in a performance gap if you look at the discrete GPU market as a singular entity versus the duopoly it is.

They're not incredible by any means but they're a sensible purchase. It's a logical choice to make.

[GoldenLag]

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

They use a graphite Pad and Vapor Chamber.

And the heatsink looks pretty big and low air resistance + mostly open the Slot is.

And we all know that the Reviewers want to find something bad on AMD, so that they can say that nVIdia is better

it might be a good blower, but its still a blower. and as good as some are, they still blow. 

[Stefan Payne]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

it might be a good blower, but its still a blower. and as good as some are, they still blow. 

True...

Can't change much about Physics...

[ACatWithThumbs]

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

Most people buy either on recommendation or review.     I seem remember a lot of reviews tended to say the AMD cards represent a great deal, if you can get one at MSRP.

 

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/176724-amd-graphics-card-pricing-skyrockets-due-to-cryptocurrency-mining-could-kill-amds-gaming-efforts

 

remember when this happened?  That would go a very long way to explaining Nvidias market share, remember Nvidia weren't always expensive, but they have always had a performing product.

Yep, and during Fermi and early Kepler days, AMD was extremely strong.
Many people bought the HD7970 and HD6970 over the 680 and 580, especially since they had more Vram at the same or better performance and price.

Their cards just haven't been competitive since 2013, either in price, performance, or they were too hot.

And AMD not having any high-end cards kills their entire marketing, everyone on youtube or twitch is using Nvidia and if you want to see game showcases they will always be on Nvidia.
People don't often think about this but the high-end market dictates the entire profile of the company and the perception on the lower end as well.

What we need is AMD to come back with a full line up like the 7000 series, so 6+ GPU's at once against Nvidia's entire lineup.
High-end models, mid-range, low-end and all need to be on par with Nvidia features wise and be competitive in price and performance.


 

[GoldenLag]

5 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

i have to admit: the blower cards look damn pretty though o_o

im tempted, but i wonder what Sapphire will bring. apperantly they are bringing Toxic cards back. 

 

 

i shouldnt buy anything, but ive got stock i can cash out.........

[leadeater]

19 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

it might be a good blower, but its still a blower. and as good as some are, they still blow. 

Spoiler

[Insert blower joke here]  

 

[GoldenLag]

Just now, leadeater said:

  Hide contents

[Insert blower joke here]  

 

Spoiler

yeah ill insert it allright

 

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Everyone doing the "AMD must be a charity" idiocy. No matter what AMD does, they need to basically give away shit because reasons. WHY? Sure, I'd be happy if they could sell one for 300 bucks and beat RTX 2080Ti, but if they offer same or better performance and charge same or slightly less, how is that bad? So, NVIDIA can charge ridiculous amount for anything and everyone will almost gladly even tip them for 200 extra bucks, but for AMD, they expect them to just hand out things. How ridiculous mentality is that? AMD is not a charity. They are a company just like NVIDIA. And just because they don't have top end card, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be entitled to earn fair share on products that they do have and are very much competitive. If they weren't and priced well, then sure. But from the looks of it, Radeon 5700 XT is very much competitive. And so is vanilla version. 

I don't get this "Nvidia are charging ridiculous amounts of money for their products" meme.

Often times when I look at price and performance of different AMD and Nvidia products they usually turn out to be roughly the same. I really don't get where this myth than Nvidia overcharges and AMD offer better price:performance comes from.

 

Sure, AMD products are often slightly cheaper, but they usually also perform slightly worse (overall, when comparing 30+ games and not just 3-4 cherry-picked ones) making the price:performance fairly similar.

[Humbug]

The other thing that will be interesting to watch is the driver maturation process. Vega, Polaris etc all gained performance in the following year after release. But this time the driver gains could potentially end up being even more significant over time, because of all the RDNA architectural changes opening up opportunities for new driver optimizations. 

 

41 minutes ago, _Hustler_One_ said:

But honestly, I personally on behalf of average budget consumers would prefer the RX 5700 over RTX 2060 just because it has more VRAM and the TDP is better than Vega 56. It has longer use by its VRAM capacity than 2060 to receive many upcoming game updates which involves texture developments.

I don't even need Raytrashing at all..

 

One of the game I play is stuttering with 6Gb VRAM at 1080p max setting. I want the highest quality graphical with as highest fps as possible at 1080p without being overkill.

 

I found the RX 5700 is the one I need in the last 5 months which match my criteria. So this one will be a great deal for us the average consumers who never think/take any top tier GPUs into consideration to buy.

Yep it looks like the RX 5700 vs RTX 2060 is going to be a no contest. Nvidia has to cut prices or use their new super cards to compete with the RX 5700. It will be best value Navi card for now. It will  actually perform very close to the RTX 2070 for a lot less money.