Apparently Nobody Can Get it Right - AMD RX 7600 Launch is ALSO a FAIL

[xAcid9]

31 minutes ago, QuantumSingularity said:

With the RTX 4000 series launches i noticed that Nvidia basically turned into Apple. It's doesn't matter what crap they put out, it doesn't matter how stupidly overpriced it is, it doesn't matter that there are better options out there - there are always people who are ready to sell their mom to buy "the latest and greatest" and worship the brand. AMD in that aspect became more like Samsung - replicate what Apple does, only innovate a bit more and make it a better value. I really hope Intel will be the Huawei brand that will emerge out of the blue with a product that slaps them both SO HARD, that the US government has to impose a ban to save their glorified iPod.

 Nvidia turned into Apple when they released the 1st Titan a decade ago. 

[WallacEngineering]

29 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

 Nvidia turned into Apple when they released the 1st Titan a decade ago. 

 

Has it really been a decade already?

 

Damn, I feel old now lol

[xAcid9]

12 minutes ago, WallacEngineering said:

Has it really been a decade already?

Damn, I feel old now lol

IKR.

 

[WallacEngineering]

6 hours ago, DeerDK said:

When you say less than 10% improvement, are you looking at the 6600 xt or the 6600? Or even the 6650 xt?

IIRC the improvement over the non xt variant is more valid, so the final verdict may have to wait until we know what slots in above it. If we get a 7600xt and 7700 priced a bit above or pressing the 7600 down in price.

The 4060ti got curbstomped for not providing significant consistent improvement over the 3060ti.

 

Actually you do have a point here and ya IDK why but people are comparing it to the 6650-XT mostly and thats why it seems so bad in performance.

 

Earlier in the comments I told someone else that it wasn't quite a 1-to-1 comparison because we still need the 7600-XT edition at least to make that comparison fair, and then the 7650-XT edition to truly make it 1-to-1.

 

Although the 50 part is nowhere near as important, considering the 50 versions are just overclocked with higher power budget.

 

Come to think of it, why IS everybody comparing it to the 6650-XT? Even the reviewers are doing that. I mean its still certainly not a great release and it also certainly doesn't have enough VRAM.

 

Perhaps it is being compared to the 6650-XT because of the price, at least that much would make sense. Also because RDNA3 is supposed to be a new architecture, with IPC improvements and such, but when compared to the 6650-XT which has the same exact number of cores and similar boost clocks, it hardly wins at all.

 

But again, Ill say this launch wasn't as much of a failure as the RTX 4060-Ti because of the price and it actually has some improvement over the old RX 6600 Non-XT.

 

With the 4060/Ti, ur essentially paying $400 for NOTHING if you already have a 3060/Ti. That is kind of a massive slap in the face if you ask me.

[WallacEngineering]

On 5/24/2023 at 8:07 AM, xAcid9 said:

Where is the generational improvement? Only in AV1 encoding support and better overclocking potential? 

 

Ya know, come to think of it, I don't think GPUs really get many IPC improvements in general.

 

Think about it - the MAIN reason GPU performance goes up every generation is because the transistor node shrinks and they can fit in more cores.

 

All GPUs do this. Its why the RTX 4090 now has over 16,000 cuda cores, thats the real reason its such a monster.

 

Im sure there is SOME sort of IPC improvement on a GPU over generations but considering Nvidia Cuda Cores and AMD Shader Cores are such specialized cores and aren't general compute units, it becomes easy to see how GPUs just wouldn't be able to make leaps in IPC the way CPUs do.

 

This would also explain why the new RX 7600 is only slightly faster than the RX 6650-XT, considering they have the same number of cores and similar boost clocks.

 

The only reason the RTX 4070 provides a decent uplift over the last-gen RTX 3070 is pretty much massively higher clock speeds combined with slight IPC improvement.

 

So really then, the RX 7650-XT will easily outclass its last-gen counterpart simply because it will have a good amount more Shader cores than last-gen, seeing as how the RX 7600 Non-XT now matches the RX 6650-XT in core count.

[Mark Kaine]

Stopped reading at "Steve"...

[starsmine]

5 hours ago, WallacEngineering said:

This would also explain why the new RX 7600 is only slightly faster than the RX 6650-XT, considering they have the same number of cores and similar boost clocks.

as far as I can tell, the avg clocks of the rx 7600 is LOWER then the avg clocks of the 6650XT. But not by a whole lot

[WallacEngineering]

4 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

Stopped reading at "Steve"...

 

So you do realize that Steve from GN is the most technical and most accurate Computer Hardware YouTube Channel on planet Earth right?

 

He doesn't just make claims, he proves his findings - in every single review.

 

Its not like the nickname "Tech Jesus" just comes from his hair style - LOL

[WallacEngineering]

1 hour ago, starsmine said:

as far as I can tell, the avg clocks of the rx 7600 is LOWER then the avg clocks of the 6650XT. But not by a whole lot

Agreed, although it does seem to be more of the base clock. The Boost clock is super similar but the base clock is actually quite a bit lower - which is a bit strange but whatever - offering a wider variety of clock speeds isn't a bad thing I guess.

[Paul17]

Why is the OP shocked?   They thought AMD is a 'better' company than Nvidia?     Both are trash and overcharge on their hardware.   I am open to buying new and I believe it's a hassle but the only reason I'd buy new is because I want to upgrade 'now' instead of later.   My last 3 gpu purchases - not very open - is one used, a new card and then upgraded to a used card.   

[WallacEngineering]

7 hours ago, Paul17 said:

Why is the OP shocked?   They thought AMD is a 'better' company than Nvidia?     Both are trash and overcharge on their hardware.   I am open to buying new and I believe it's a hassle but the only reason I'd buy new is because I want to upgrade 'now' instead of later.   My last 3 gpu purchases - not very open - is one used, a new card and then upgraded to a used card.   

 

I also made a thread about the RTX 4060-Ti dumpster fire, and nah I don't really think AMD is better than Nvidia - well other than VRAM.

 

Or at least we all THOUGHT VRAM LOL

[leadeater]

On 5/25/2023 at 2:30 PM, xAcid9 said:

Yet none of these RDNA3 improvement shown on 7600

The first two actually require the game to implement them, it's not something that just happens because the architecture supports it and the drivers. The last slide I'm not sure about but probably also the case for at least some of it.

 

And the IPC is actually there, the FP32 performance is about double and you can see that on games that are shader compute heavy that don't spill out of the Infinity Cache too much and hit the memory interface a lot. COD:MWII 1080p for example where it's ~20% faster, 1440p it drops to 7% faster, comparing to the 6650 XT for both.

 

The texture and pixel fill rates are basically identical to the 6650 XT and the memory bandwidth may as well be called identical with the same amount of Infinity Cache at near same bandwidth, also with a reduced TDP. It's a more powerful GPU core strangled by multiple different factors, it's not really an RDNA3 architecture problem, just poor design engineering decisions again like Nvidia.