News AMD RDNA 3 Lineup Concludes With RX 7800 XT, RX 7700 XT

[Admin]

AMD's Scott Herkelman has confirmed that there won't be new RDNA 3 ASICs for the Radeon RX 7000 series after the Radeon RX 7800 XT and Radeon RX 7700 XT.

AMD RDNA 3 Lineup Concludes With RX 7800 XT, RX 7700 XT : Read more

 

[baboma]

>Scott Herkelman, senior vice president and general manager of the Graphics Business Unit at AMD, made a surprising statement, revealing that no more RDNA 3 ASICs will come after the RX 7800 XT and 7700 XT.

Watching the Twitter video, Herkelman leaves open the possibility of new products based on existing ASICs--"we may have some different versions, but they're not a new ASIC."

Regardless, his statement is as expected, very much in line with everything AMD has done with the RDNA3 launch--that AMD is basically treading water, launching just enough to cover the minimum market needs and no more, from products to pricing to price/perf. As said elsewhere, it's a surprise that AMD allows a big gap between 7600's $270 and 7700's $450. And if AMD is content to leave that gap unaddressed, it only speaks to how little it cares about gaming gfx at the moment.

Which makes sense. Seeing people bickering about $50 more or less in GPU prices only highlights how low margin the gaming GPU market is, in contrast to AI where cards are sold for tens of thousands. The contrast is stark.

I would not be surprised if the vendors keep the present line-up for 2024 and just go with a minor refresh, focusing most of their efforts on AI accelerators.

 

[Giroro]

Which makes sense. Seeing people bickering about $50 more or less in GPU prices only highlights how low margin the gaming GPU market is, in contrast to AI where cards are sold for tens of thousands. The contrast is stark.

To be clear, gaming GPUs enjoy extremely high margins compared to basically any other consumer electronics, and most retail products of any kind (but only for the GPU maker, board partners and retailers get screwed). The margins are most comparable to "audiophile" sound systems.
It's just an order of magnitude lower margins when compared to the laughably obscene margins those GPUs could instead make when unlocked and sold to big business.

Or those are the margins for Nvidia at least, because their GPU compute is a real monopoly with zero competitors. AMD isn't even trying to win that space.

 

[Rico Ismail]

AMD's Scott Herkelman has confirmed that there won't be new RDNA 3 ASICs for the Radeon RX 7000 series after the Radeon RX 7800 XT and Radeon RX 7700 XT.

AMD RDNA 3 Lineup Concludes With RX 7800 XT, RX 7700 XT : Read more

Why not using Samsung 3nm mbcfeet/gaafet for GCD? Because finfet is likely not suitable with smaller than 4nm node because high leakage current and trouble to meet performance target. Also Samsung have been working with large GPU die such as 8nm RTX 30 series. So RDNA 4 and up will be gaafet/mbcfet one step forward finfet with four gate transistor


With 4nm 128 bit GDDR7 MCD / GDDR6X stacked with 7nm 64MB L3 v-chace due to high ddr7 latency. 4nm wafer with 1.6 price increase over 6nm but 1.8 times transistor density so price per transistor is decrease.


Then Makes 3nm gaafet/mbcfeet Samsung GCD which can connect to both 4nm 128bit GDDR7/GDDR6X stacked with 7nm 64MB or old 64bit GDDR6 MCD with 16MB cache. With this GCD you can makes :


#1. 10240(20480) rdna4 cores GCD build with Samsung 3nm gaafet + 4x128bit GDDR7/GDDR6X MCD = RX 8900 XTX 256MB chace 32GB GDDR7/GDDR6X


#2. 10240(20480) cores + 8x64bit GDDR6 = RX 8900 XT 128MB chace 512 bit 32GB GDDR6


#3. 10240(20480) cores + 7x64bit old GDDR6 = RX 8800 XT 448 bit 28GB GDDR6 112MB chace


#4. 10240(20480) cores + 6*64 bit MCD = 384 bit RX 8800 24 GB GDDR6 96MB chace


#5. 9216(18432) cores + 5*64 bit MCD = 320 bit 20GB GDDR6 RX 8700XT 80MB chace


#6. 10280(20480) cores + 2* 128 bit MCD = RX8900M XT 16GB GDDR7/6X (128 MB chace)


#7. 10280(20480) cores + 4*64 bit old MCD = RX 8900M 16GB GDDR6 (64 MB chace)


One GCD
One new stacked chace 128 bit MCD
One old 6 MCD
(7) Seven Radeon Model
Many radeon choices
Just don't disable too many cores to make performance for money boost, only cut MCD and memory to make them slower

 

[Brakheart]

How is a 450 dollars gpu "mid-range", exactly?

 

[thisisaname]

@$449 the 7700 is a waste of silicon, the 7800 is not much better.

 

[RedBear87]

As said elsewhere, it's a surprise that AMD allows a big gap between 7600's $270 and 7700's $450. And if AMD is content to leave that gap unaddressed, it only speaks to how little it cares about gaming gfx at the moment.

Personally I would look at the RX 6700 XT and the 6750 XT, which are selling respectively for as low as $330 and $350 on newegg atm. The pricing of the RX 7000 series is probably influenced directly by the remaining stock of RX 6000 GPUs that they still haven't managed to sell. The fact that they're even releasing, albeit limited to China/OEM, a new RDNA2 card in that segment, the RX 6750 GRE, is telling.

 

[baboma]

>To be clear, gaming GPUs enjoy extremely high margins compared to basically any other consumer electronics

Yes, I was speaking in relative terms vs AI wares. I'm not privvy to what gaming GPUs' margins are, but I'd imagine being in a duopoly has its advantages.

OTOH, there's the matter of volume. Again, I don't have empirical numbers, but I don't see the retail market for DIY desktop PC GPUs to be significant in number of units moved, and we know that that market, along with PC market as a whole, is shrinking.

[I'm excluding GPUs for mobile/laptop for above, as I don't follow that. But as with PCs in general, it's a mature market, not prone to growth.]

In any case, we've already seen AMD's response, and it's very much the same as Nvidia's, ie ramping up efforts for AI, while doing the minimum needed for gaming gfx.

One thing of note is how AMD also emulates Nvidia's pricing strategy of flattening the value curve. In previous gens, the midrange has higher price/perf ratio than the high- and low-end, and tend to be the sweet spot for value buyers. This gen's price/perf for both AMD & Nvidia are largely the same throughout their line-ups. There is no more sweet spot. I think this is what riled people up the most, that their favored buying choice is no longer viable.

>Or those are the margins for Nvidia at least, because their GPU compute is a real monopoly with zero competitors. AMD isn't even trying to win that space.

It's precisely those crazy margins that motivate competition. Yes, Nvidia is in the catbird seat for now. But nobody like paying crazy prices, and competition will cut into its share. It's not a matter of if, but how soon and how much. Nvidia's moat (CUDA) is not insurmountable.


>Personally I would look at the RX 6700 XT and the 6750 XT, which are selling respectively for as low as $330 and $350 on newegg atm. The pricing of the RX 7000 series is probably influenced directly by the remaining stock of RX 6000 GPUs that they still haven't managed to sell.

I don't think existing 6000 stocks will last that long to fill the gaps in the 7000 line. Back-to-school is almost over, so the next buying wave is for BF/Xmas. We'll see if the above cards (along with 6600) will still be available by then.

 

[Flosster]

There is a VERY big gap in the price of the $269 RX 7600 and the $449 RX 7700 XT, big enough for definitely 1 more product SKU, possibly 2. Too bad there won't be a 12GB, 192-bit RX 7700 at under 225W for between $350-$400.

 

[RedBear87]

I don't think existing 6000 stocks will last that long to fill the gaps in the 7000 line. Back-to-school is almost over, so the next buying wave is for BF/Xmas. We'll see if the above cards (along with 6600) will still be available by then.

Eventually they might adjust prices to compensate, the 7900 XT is already selling for $100 less than MSRP, after all.

 

[Gauche Cockney]

7000 series are rather disappointing at current price
presumably 6700xt and 6750xt will be the new generation of 480/580

 

[daworstplaya]

Is it me or are this generation AMD GPUs horribly named. I feel the correct naming convention would have been as listed below. I know know, the naming means nothing and it's about what performance tier the product is. But I bet a lot of us would prefer the logic with less extra letters attached at the end of the numbers. Additionally if introduced at the MSRPs listed next to them, AMD would have had glowing reviews and probably captured a lot of market share with initial launches. I'm of the opinion mind share of gamers matters a lot in terms of future market share.

RX 7900 XTX = RX 7900 XT ($899)
RX 7900 XT = RX 7900 ($749)
RX 7900 GRE = RX 7800 XT ($649)
RX 7800 XT = RX 7800 ($499)
RX 7700 XT = RX 7700 XT ($399)
RX 7600 = RX 7600 ($250)

 

[denysknertser3]

There is a VERY big gap in the price of the $269 RX 7600 and the $449 RX 7700 XT, big enough for definitely 1 more product SKU, possibly 2. Too bad there won't be a 12GB, 192-bit RX 7700 at under 225W for between $350-$400.

It really matter of take the decision to upgrade mine graphics card.
However, still observing the reviews to know the real scenario and performance