News AMD RDNA 4 GPUs will allegedly be rebranded RX 9000 — A mixture of new RDNA 3/RDNA 4 mobile GPUs and an RX 7000 refresh is expected to arrive at CES

[Admin]

Reports suggest that AMD is readjusting the naming scheme of its Radeon GPUs.

AMD RDNA 4 GPUs will allegedly be rebranded RX 9000 — A mixture of new RDNA 3/RDNA 4 mobile GPUs and an RX 7000 refresh is expected to arrive at CES : Read more

 

[YSCCC]

Hum... usually when a brand switch it's naming scheme to something else out of tradition signals a high chance that the actual product competitivness is in danger... not a good look

 

[MessyRook09]

Too many numbers and letters. Brain does not compute

 

[bourgeoisdude]

I get switching to 9000 series to match with Ryzen...but why switch to 90x0 for models instead of 9x00? Makes no sense, especially when naming has to change next cycle anyway due to numbering running out.

 

[jlake3]

Hum... usually when a brand switch it's naming scheme to something else out of tradition signals a high chance that the actual product competitivness is in danger... not a good look

Counterpoint: With AMD graphics, it feels like it can go either way?

Going from Radeon HD to R7/R9, the R9 290 hot and power hungry but turned in pretty good performance if I recall... but everything down the stack was rebranded GCN and kinda stale. Then they went from R7/R9 to RX, and the RX 480 and RX 580 went down as legendary midrange cards. Then they stuck "RX Vega" on top, which struggled... before pivoting away from the 3-digit naming and instead of RX 600 going with RX 5000, which was pretty solid.

 

[usertests]

I'm concerned an RNDA3 refresh could delay better RDNA4 Navi44 low-end cards. But if they are priced lower, that could be good too.

 

[waltc3]

A convoluted bit of confused marketing guff, I do believe...😉 With patience, all will be made clear!...😉

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

I mean it (naming) could be worse, remember when:

 

[Notton]

My guess is they didn't want to have an awkward moment with the RX 9700 XT's poor price/performance when compared to the legendary ATi 9700 Pro. (Although you can argue the 9700 non-pro was a better deal if you got the software locked version)

 

[artk2219]

My guess is they didn't want to have an awkward moment with the RX 9700 XT's poor price/performance when compared to the legendary ATi 9700 Pro. (Although you can argue the 9700 non-pro was a better deal if you got the software locked version)

That is a bit of a call back, but I don't think that's the main reason. I think it's mainly to help consolidate all the different efforts into one "new" naming scheme where they aren't hamstrung with the baggage that came from the previous scheme. It also means they can either start at 1 or 10 when they release "udna" based chips in the future. Making it like a fresh start for the unified architecture after cdna and rdna.

 

[ilukey77]

I get switching to 9000 series to match with Ryzen...but why switch to 90x0 for models instead of 9x00? Makes no sense, especially when naming has to change next cycle anyway due to numbering running out.

seems a bit silly Unless Nvidia has the naming rights upto the 80x0 ..

That said im not sure what AMDs play is on this red gaming tech is reporting though there leaks they will do 9040 9050 9060 and 9070 ..

So is it to trick customers into buying AMD ( doesnt seem likely for anyone switched on )

Does it mean the best card in the new AMD line up will match with the 5070 ??

because if you want to go down that numbering scheme people by default ( myself included ) will be asking so if Nvidia do the 5070 is AMDs 9070 going to be its direct competition ???

I mean if i was going to start taking Nvidia's naming scheme i would name my competition to directly compete with the last digits so my high end ( obviously AMD is not doing high end ) but 9090 9080 9070 and so it would line up with Nvidia's stuff !!

 

[stuff and nonesense]

RX x0x0 is too close to RTX x0x0.

I guess if AMD make the first gen of this naming scheme 90x0 they will be hoping for bigger number better number relative to Nvidia in the minds of potential customers.

To validate a comparison they AMD need to maintain their generational improvements in raster and they need to effectively jump 2 generations from the RX 7x00 series to gain some degree of parity with Nvidia, one gen to catch up, the second gen to be able to try to fight with whatever Nvidia release with the 50x0 parts.

A 9070 is going to have to be close to a 5070 otherwise people will buy, read the test results on line and there will be a huge backlash if the parts are not comparable.

If this is accurate it could be AMD’s worst marketing mistake, period.

 

[ilukey77]

RX x0x0 is too close to RTX x0x0.

I guess if AMD make the first gen of this naming scheme 90x0 they will be hoping for bigger number better number relative to Nvidia in the minds of potential customers.

To validate a comparison they AMD need to maintain their generational improvements in raster and they need to effectively jump 2 generations from the RX 7x00 series to gain some degree of parity with Nvidia, one gen to catch up, the second gen to be able to try to fight with whatever Nvidia release with the 50x0 parts.

A 9070 is going to have to be close to a 5070 otherwise people will buy, read the test results on line and there will be a huge backlash if the parts are not comparable.

If this is accurate it could be AMD’s worst marketing mistake, period.

silly though at least AMD NEEDS to come close to the 5080

Nvidia can have their 5090 overpriced destroy everything card ..

But AMD needs still needs that 4080 competitor !!

 

[stuff and nonesense]

silly though at least AMD NEEDS to come close to the 5080

Nvidia can have their 5090 overpriced destroy everything card ..

But AMD needs still needs that 4080 competitor !!

I agree. I was simply suggesting that an AMD 9070 has to jump a long way from a 7800/7700 to get a degree of parity with a 5070 in ray tracing. It’s not just a single generation leap, that would give near parity with the 4070.