Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 13-03-19, 01:56 PM
WYP's Avatar
WYP WYP is offline
News Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 14,609
AMD Radeon Navi Launch Timeframe Leaked - Releases After 3rd Gen Ryzen

Expect Navi to release after 3rd Gen Ryzen.



Read more about AMD's leaked Radeon Navi launch window.

__________________
_______________________________
Twitter - @WYP_PC
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13-03-19, 02:10 PM
tgrech tgrech is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 729
Yeah in theory they could launch with ~40CU (~RX580 equiv) parts as the highest Navi offering which should be tiny and fairly cheap on 7nm, not much larger than a Zen2 chiplet, while offering around Vega56 levels of performance from clock speed gains alone in theory & the same memory bandwidth on a 256-bit bus with 16Gbps GDRR6. Presumably a 128-bit die with ~20CUs will come with it as with Polaris' launch for the lower end of the market around the same time(And for mobile dGPUs particularly Apples lineup including iMacs), and hopefully "Scalability" means they've broke past the 64CU practical core scaling limit of past architectures so they will have something beyond a ~60 CU model eventually, possibly keeping HBM for an ~80CU variant to top off a 4-die line up more akin to NVidia's since Kepler.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 13-03-19, 02:23 PM
ET3D ET3D is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgrech View Post
~40CU, not much larger than a Zen2 chiplet

No way. The Zen 2 chiplet is ~80 mm2. Polaris 10 is 232 mm2. Even if 7nm scales it down 2x, it will not be under 100 mm2. When considering the extra complexity of the architecture and that the physical interfaces (GDDR6) don't scale down well, it will probably be much larger than 100 mm2.


Or, from the other direction, look at Vega 20, at 331 mm2 7nm. That's 64 CU. For 40 CU, if it scaled down linearly (which it won't, because the CUs aren't the only thing on the chip), it will be 207 mm2. It's definitely not out of the question that Navi is designed to have smaller CUs and otherwise save some space, but still, under 100 mm2 seems very unlikely for a 40 CU chip.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 13-03-19, 03:09 PM
DaveLTX DaveLTX is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by ET3D View Post
No way. The Zen 2 chiplet is ~80 mm2. Polaris 10 is 232 mm2. Even if 7nm scales it down 2x, it will not be under 100 mm2. When considering the extra complexity of the architecture and that the physical interfaces (GDDR6) don't scale down well, it will probably be much larger than 100 mm2.


Or, from the other direction, look at Vega 20, at 331 mm2 7nm. That's 64 CU. For 40 CU, if it scaled down linearly (which it won't, because the CUs aren't the only thing on the chip), it will be 207 mm2. It's definitely not out of the question that Navi is designed to have smaller CUs and otherwise save some space, but still, under 100 mm2 seems very unlikely for a 40 CU chip.
To be fair, Navi doesn't follow GCN much if at all, it's something like Super SIMD with instructions that enable the whole GPU to be capable of tensor operations. At least that's what I've seen with the patent for Navi.

And Vega 20 has DOUBLE the ROPs and double the compute hardware compared to Vega 10 so yea the scaling is non existent. And also it has double the HBM2 controllers so yes, it got far more complex.
Navi according to what's in the wild allegedly has half the compute performance of a vega 64 while almost matching it in graphical performance
which makes sense given it's headed for a console
Also, GDDR6 isn't really more complex to implement and what really killed the big vegas have been the use of HBM2.

Alas Vega 20 was also kind of smacked together as a last resort to test the 7nm node so it doesn't really reap the benefits of 7nm.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 13-03-19, 04:07 PM
tgrech tgrech is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by ET3D View Post
No way. The Zen 2 chiplet is ~80 mm2. Polaris 10 is 232 mm2. Even if 7nm scales it down 2x, it will not be under 100 mm2. When considering the extra complexity of the architecture and that the physical interfaces (GDDR6) don't scale down well, it will probably be much larger than 100 mm2.


Or, from the other direction, look at Vega 20, at 331 mm2 7nm. That's 64 CU. For 40 CU, if it scaled down linearly (which it won't, because the CUs aren't the only thing on the chip), it will be 207 mm2. It's definitely not out of the question that Navi is designed to have smaller CUs and otherwise save some space, but still, under 100 mm2 seems very unlikely for a 40 CU chip.
Zen1 used a 213mm^2 die(About same size as Polaris10), Zen2 uses a ~80mm^2 chiplet, and while they've obviously taken a lot of the uncore off the chiplet entirely here they've also likely increased execution unit count inside the core, I think around 100mm^2 is certainly possible given there is a trend of breaking up the cores a little more now to ensure they keep well fed when they scale to large counts, plus CPU dies are heavily taken up with SRAM which isn't always known to be a great scaler, but either way CPUs and GPUs won't scale to the same degree with 7nm and historically GPUs have scaled quite well.
I don't think we can take Vega20 as a good indicator of 7nm scailing because besides the architecture not being particularly well optimised for the node, they doubled up the memory controller & added a lot of new AI orientated instructions & buffed up relevant units. Navi can reach Vega1 levels of theoretical memory performance while maintaining Polaris' memory controller bit width by using upto 16Gbps GDDR6 instead of the upto 8Gbps GDDR5 on Polaris.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 13-03-19, 07:48 PM
Piskeante Piskeante is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 50
Let's talk about performance.

RX 680 (top of the line, supposed) will compete with RTX 2060.
RX 670 will compete with GTX 1660ti
RX 660 will compete with GTX 1660

Vega VII is competing against RTX 2080. AMD has no competition against RTX 2080ti. As for the replacement of VEGA 56 (VEGA 64 is actually VEGA VII), performance will be RTX 2070.

That's my prediction. Points in favour, will be that 7nm process will be very power efficent, and probably cheaper than Nvidia counterpart.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 13-03-19, 08:29 PM
tgrech tgrech is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 729
Personally I'd expect the RX680 to drop in quite neatly between the (Relatively close together and both using same silicon) RTX2060 & RTX2070 cards(Bandwidth wise we can expect something that lines up well with RTX2070), with an RX670 dropping in between the RTX2060 & GTX1660Ti. An RX660 would likely be a far bigger jump than the closely packed Turing line up allows with a drop straight down to half bus width & core count more likely, I think likely delivering performance between GTX1650 & GTX1660.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 13-03-19, 08:34 PM
AlienALX's Avatar
AlienALX AlienALX is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piskeante View Post
Let's talk about performance.

RX 680 (top of the line, supposed) will compete with RTX 2060.
RX 670 will compete with GTX 1660ti
RX 660 will compete with GTX 1660

Vega VII is competing against RTX 2080. AMD has no competition against RTX 2080ti. As for the replacement of VEGA 56 (VEGA 64 is actually VEGA VII), performance will be RTX 2070.

That's my prediction. Points in favour, will be that 7nm process will be very power efficent, and probably cheaper than Nvidia counterpart.
AMD will not compete with 2080ti now or any time soon. They simply don't have Nvidia's budget or resources. People need to understand this. Nvidia are years ahead, and that gap will only increase as time passes unless AMD decide to risk their entire company on a GPU.

Personally I don't think it's worth it. So long as they can make "a" GPU that is reasonable and keep improving Zen then I would be a happy bunny.
__________________
"Those really high 20 series prices are just place holders"



Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 13-03-19, 08:43 PM
tgrech tgrech is offline
OC3D Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 729
I don't think we should rule out an eventual Navi based RTX2080Ti competitor(Given we're comparing a 7nm card against a 14nm card), the 2080Ti is pretty much exactly 50% larger(Core count/die size) than the RTX2080. VegaII is a 331mm^2 die, so if they were able to scale Vega up to ~500mm^2 on 7nm they'd already have an RTX2080Ti competitor, AMD's big dies are usually 500-550mm^2 which is still far smaller than the RTX2080Ti's 775mm^2.
VegaII's die size is closest to the GTX1660Ti's of the Turing line up.

Of course, with 7nm yields so young and VegaII so close and there still not being an obvious economic choice for memory for such a card it's likely such a model wouldn't come in until around Spring next year.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 13-03-19, 09:26 PM
ET3D ET3D is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveLTX View Post
And Vega 20 has DOUBLE the ROPs and double the compute hardware compared to Vega 10

No, it doesn't. It has the exact same number of ROPs, and I'm not sure what you mean by 'double the compute hardware'. It has the same number of CUs, and they are pretty similar.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT. The time now is 04:52 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.