News Forget Big Navi, AMD Might Be Preparing The Ultimate Navi

[spongiemaster]

1080Ti came out in March 2017 so not 4 years old, more like 3.25 years old.

Were you trying to be funny here, or making a serious response? Does shortening the time to 3.25 years actually make this any better?
Remember this?

January 1st, 2017, straight from AMD. Already past 3.5 years on this one and we're still waiting on "Poor Pascal." Going to be close to 4 by the time you can actually by big Navi.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Were you trying to be funny here, or making a serious response? Does shortening the time to 3.25 years actually make this any better?

When that is in response to "And yet they are yet to put out cards that can barely compete with the 4 year old 1080ti," then that extra 9 months does make a difference. It doesn't matter when Big Navi comes out, the 5700XT is able to keep up with the 1080Ti (about 6% slower) since it was release a YEAR ago. You are also making the case that the "mainstream" product can only compete with last generations "halo" product. Well that isn't a surprise at all. Remember the GTX 1070 could "only" compete with the 980 Ti from the previous generation same as the GTX 970 & 780Ti. Notice a trend here....

I actually do not remember that picture, however, that is marketing. As a compute card the Vega based cards are quite good, just power hungry. When it come to gaming, they are decent at gaming, but the power was a bigger issue.

 

[King_V]

I also don't see anyone here dredging up that the 1080 Ti came out on March 10 2017, almost 9 months after the 1080 (May 27, 2016).

The 5700 XT came out July 7, 2019. That would put it at only a little more than 2 years after the 1080 Ti.

Unless, of course, we're to believe that the "AMD is always bad crowd" would've kept silent had Big Navi come out 8-1/2 months or less after the 5700 XT; ie: within the Nvidia delay time frame.

 

[spongiemaster]

You are also making the case that the "mainstream" product can only compete with last generations "halo" product. Well that isn't a surprise at all. Remember the GTX 1070 could "only" compete with the 980 Ti from the previous generation same as the GTX 970 & 780Ti. Notice a trend here....

Not really. You're missing the point. 1080ti was not the halo card for Nvidia at any point. When it was released, it was already slower than Nvidia's actual halo card at the time, the 2nd Titan X, which was released August 2nd of 2016. That's less than a month away from being 4 years ago. With all the leaks on the Nvidia side currently, and dead silence on the AMD side, it certainly looks like the 3000 series will available for purchase before big Navi regardless of who announces first. With that in mind, let's list the cards each side has released that are faster than the 1080ti the 1st day big Navi will be available to purchase:

Nvidia:
2nd Titan X
Titan Xp
RTX 2080
RTX 2080ti
RTX 2080 Super
RTX 3080
RTX 3080ti/RTX 3090? whatever it ends up being called

AMD:
-

We're looking at likely 7 cards that Nvidia has released in the last 4 years faster than the 1080ti before AMD releases number one. That's what people are bashing AMD for. In over 3 years, AMD has been unable to release a gaming card at any price that is faster than the 1080ti.

 

[spongiemaster]

I also don't see anyone here dredging up that the 1080 Ti came out on March 10 2017, almost 9 months after the 1080 (May 27, 2016).

Why would they? See above. Titan X was released just over 2 months after the 1080. AMD still hasn't caught that card almost 4 years later.

 

[jeremyj_83]

Not really. You're missing the point. 1080ti was not the halo card for Nvidia at any point. When it was released, it was already slower than Nvidia's actual halo card at the time, the 2nd Titan X, which was released August 2nd of 2016. That's less than a month away from being 4 years ago. With all the leaks on the Nvidia side currently, and dead silence on the AMD side, it certainly looks like the 3000 series will available for purchase before big Navi regardless of who announces first. With that in mind, let's list the cards each side has released that are faster than the 1080ti the 1st day big Navi will be available to purchase:

Nvidia:
2nd Titan X
Titan Xp
RTX 2080
RTX 2080ti
RTX 2080 Super
RTX 3080
RTX 3080ti/RTX 3090? whatever it ends up being called

AMD:
-

We're looking at likely 7 cards that Nvidia has released in the last 4 years faster than the 1080ti before AMD releases number one. That's what people are bashing AMD for. In over 3 years, AMD has been unable to release a gaming card at any price that is faster than the 1080ti.

Titan when it was released was a prosumer card designed for people who needed the compute ability. "Titan will be a luxury product, geared towards a mix of low-end compute customers and ultra-enthusiasts who can justify buying a luxury product to get their hands on a GK110 video card." https://www.anandtech.com/show/6774/nvidias-geforce-gtx-titan-part-2-titans-performance-unveiled Yes that is a halo product but it is such low volume it doesn't matter. The x80Ti line is the generally considered each generations halo product.

Your list of cards that are faster right now than the 1080Ti is a bit off. The Titan X and 2080 trade blows to the point that it is a wash.

 

[spongiemaster]

Titan when it was released was a prosumer card designed for people who needed the compute ability. "Titan will be a luxury product, geared towards a mix of low-end compute customers and ultra-enthusiasts who can justify buying a luxury product to get their hands on a GK110 video card."

That was only true for the original Titan. By the time we made it to Pascal based Titan it was gaming only.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html

"Once upon a time, the Titan name represented prosumer-level functionality. In addition to great gaming performance, Nvidia’s original Titan boasted theoretical FP64 processing power on par with the company’s Quadro and Tesla cards via GK110. That changed from Maxwell onward, where double-precision fell to 1/32 the rate of peak FP32 performance. Half-precision in the Pascal generation is even worse: you get a 1/64 rate of FP16 compared to FP32."

RTX 2080 was faster on average at launch, it has pulled away even more with 2 years of driver developments. There no question which is faster. 2nd Titan X is closer, but still faster on average. AMD does not have a card faster than the Titan X, and won't within 4 years of that card's release. You're really grasping for straws here.

 

[jeremyj_83]

That was only true for the original Titan. By the time we made it to Pascal based Titan it was gaming only.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-xp,5066-14.html

"Once upon a time, the Titan name represented prosumer-level functionality. In addition to great gaming performance, Nvidia’s original Titan boasted theoretical FP64 processing power on par with the company’s Quadro and Tesla cards via GK110. That changed from Maxwell onward, where double-precision fell to 1/32 the rate of peak FP32 performance. Half-precision in the Pascal generation is even worse: you get a 1/64 rate of FP16 compared to FP32."

RTX 2080 was faster on average at launch, it has pulled away even more with 2 years of driver developments. There no question which is faster. 2nd Titan X is closer, but still faster on average. AMD does not have a card faster than the Titan X, and won't within 4 years of that card's release. You're really grasping for straws here.

I'm not grasping at straws here, that is you by saying that the 1080Ti isn't a halo product.
1080Ti vs 2080 the difference between them except for Shadow War 2 & Wolfenstein is a wash. That is based on the games available at launch. 2 years sure drivers have helped the 2080 pull away, but that wasn't what you said. You said "With that in mind, let's list the cards each side has released that are faster than the 1080ti the 1st day" then when it was obvious you were wrong you brought in the extraneous solution of 2 years of driver updates.
Here is the Titan XP review it includes the 1080Ti & Titan X. Notice how the 1080Ti and Titan X just trade blows, once again that means it is a wash.

 

[King_V]

Now now @jeremyj_83 . . you're interfering with his ability to try and say "OMG AMD SUX NVIDIA RULES!"

 

[spongiemaster]

I'm not grasping at straws here, that is you by saying that the 1080Ti isn't a halo product.
1080Ti vs 2080 the difference between them except for Shadow War 2 & Wolfenstein is a wash. That is based on the games available at launch. 2 years sure drivers have helped the 2080 pull away, but that wasn't what you said. You said "With that in mind, let's list the cards each side has released that are faster than the 1080ti the 1st day" then when it was obvious you were wrong you brought in the extraneous solution of 2 years of driver updates.
Here is the Titan XP review it includes the 1080Ti & Titan X. Notice how the 1080Ti and Titan X just trade blows, once again that means it is a wash.

What are you talking about? Is the 5600XT AMD's midrange halo card? Only the top card is the halo one, and that has been a Titan ever since its initial release. I don't understand the argument you're trying to make about the 2080. If you want to claim the Titan XP isn't faster, I'm not going to bother arguing that. Now you're down to 6 cards faster instead of 7. Awesome job AMD.

Your choice of counterpoints makes it clear you are missing the forest for the trees. AMD has been completely incompetent in the high end. Their inability to beat a 4 year old Nvidia card is why we no longer have a $600 xx80ti card and are now stuck hoping to see no increases from the $1200-1400 2080ti for the 3080ti. Down range where there is competition, Nvidia has a different model for practically every $10 bracket from $150 to $300. It doesn't matter which company you prefer, AMD's pathetic "high end" cards are hurting the wallets of all gamers.

 

[jeremyj_83]

What are you talking about? Is the 5600XT AMD's midrange halo card? Only the top card is the halo one, and that has been a Titan ever since its initial release. I don't understand the argument you're trying to make about the 2080. If you want to claim the Titan XP isn't faster, I'm not going to bother arguing that. Now you're down to 6 cards faster instead of 7. Awesome job AMD.

Your choice of counterpoints makes it clear you are missing the forest for the trees. AMD has been completely incompetent in the high end. Their inability to beat a 4 year old Nvidia card is why we no longer have a $600 xx80ti card and are now stuck hoping to see no increases from the $1200-1400 2080ti for the 3080ti. Down range where there is competition, Nvidia has a different model for practically every $10 bracket from $150 to $300. It doesn't matter which company you prefer, AMD's pathetic "high end" cards are hurting the wallets of all gamers.

I'm not missing the point but I am done arguing with someone who has no argument. All of your "counter arguments" are quickly disputed by benchmarks. The only actual good point you have made is about the crazy cost of the Ti cards. You are correct that not having competition at that end does allow for nVidia to charge whatever they want. However, if you remember back in the HD 4870 days the 4870 was a card with great performance for the $300 market. It wasn't faster than the GTX 280, but its price competed in the GTX 260 market. The 5700XT is a competitor in the sub $400 market. It provides excellent price/performance for what you are getting. In a sense the 5700/XT is what caused nVidia to release the Super line because they wouldn't have anything that could compete on the price/performance ratio without them. It looks bad when your $800 RTX 2080 is only 6-7% faster than the $400 5700XT.

 

[King_V]

I'm not missing the point but I am done arguing with someone who has no argument. All of your "counter arguments" are quickly disputed by benchmarks. The only actual good point you have made is about the crazy cost of the Ti cards. You are correct that not having competition at that end does allow for nVidia to charge whatever they want.

And yet, @spongiemaster is arguing that this extra cost is somehow AMD's fault?

It doesn't matter which company you prefer, AMD's pathetic "high end" cards are hurting the wallets of all gamers.

In a sense the 5700/XT is what caused nVidia to release the Super line because they wouldn't have anything that could compete on the price/performance ratio without them. It looks bad when your $800 RTX 2080 is only 6-7% faster than the $400 5700XT.

^^^ this.

 

[spongiemaster]

I'm not missing the point but I am done arguing with someone who has no argument. All of your "counter arguments" are quickly disputed by benchmarks. The only actual good point you have made is about the crazy cost of the Ti cards. You are correct that not having competition at that end does allow for nVidia to charge whatever they want. However, if you remember back in the HD 4870 days the 4870 was a card with great performance for the $300 market. It wasn't faster than the GTX 280, but its price competed in the GTX 260 market. The 5700XT is a competitor in the sub $400 market. It provides excellent price/performance for what you are getting. In a sense the 5700/XT is what caused nVidia to release the Super line because they wouldn't have anything that could compete on the price/performance ratio without them. It looks bad when your $800 RTX 2080 is only 6-7% faster than the $400 5700XT.

Comparing the 2080 to the 5700 xt is apples to oranges, even if we ignore the 2080 was released a year earlier and had been replaced by the $700 Super by the time the 5700xt hit shelves. If big Navi has true hardware ray tracing as is expected, people are going to be disappointed with the price performance if they're expecting it to stay in line or even improve on the 5000 series. Nvidia decided to maintain their 60%+ margins with the RTX line and just passed all the costs on to the consumer. AMD has historically been more accepting of much lower margins, but they aren't going to just eat the development costs of ray tracing and additional die space necessary for it. I would not be surprised if AMD's top card is around $1000 which could still end up having better price/performance than the 3000 RTX line.

 

[King_V]

Comparing the 2080 to the 5700 xt is apples to oranges, even if we ignore the 2080 was released a year earlier and had been replaced by the $700 Super by the time the 5700xt hit shelves. If big Navi has true hardware ray tracing as is expected, people are going to be disappointed with the price performance if they're expecting it to stay in line or even improve on the 5000 series. Nvidia decided to maintain their 60%+ margins with the RTX line and just passed all the costs on to the consumer. AMD has historically been more accepting of much lower margins, but they aren't going to just eat the development costs of ray tracing and additional die space necessary for it. I would not be surprised if AMD's top card is around $1000 which could still end up having better price/performance than the 3000 RTX line.

• Comparing the 2080 to the 5700XT is NOT comparing apples to oranges, as their performance, as already pointed out, is very close.
• The release of the 2080 Super did NOT actually make the 2080 any cheaper. Yes, the 2080 Super performs better, maybe 10% better, 15% at most. It certainly does NOT justify costing 175% of what a 5700XT costs.
• Why are people going to be disappointed in Big Navi's ray-tracing performance? Based on what evidence?
• Why do you think Big Navi's performance will simply stay in line with the 5000 series?
• Based on what metrics are you assuming that AMD's top card with Big Navi is around $1000.
• I'm glad you're FINALLY actually talking about Big Navi, but almost everything your saying is speculation through your own biases. You spent most of your effort in this thread complaining about AMD's existing cards.
• I'm not sure exactly what you're saying at the very end there. Why would it be a problem if AMD's top card, even if it was around $1000 (for which you provide ZERO evidence) offered BETTER price/performance than the RTX 3000 line?

 

[vinay2070]

We're also having a 'debate' with someone who's engaged in hyperbole from the get-go, with the waiting "almost 6 years now" statement. Further, constant moving around of the goal posts, and somehow is so pro-Nvidia/anti-AMD that they think DLSS2 looks better than native resolution rendering.

Someone who basically just came into a thread regarding an article about the pending Big Navi/Ultimate Navi so that they could bash AMD, and encourage people to go for a more expensive price/performance option.

The feeling is mutual! I find people defending AMD for no reasons. Atleast in my case I own a 3700X/GTX1080 to show I am not a fanboi And nothing in my system has more expensive or has bad price/performance hardware

The reason why I even commented in the first place is due to the frustruation in waiting for Big Navi and giving up on it long ago. Read that again if you want to! Some people want to wait. Let em.

 

[King_V]

The feeling is mutual! I find people defending AMD for no reasons. Atleast in my case I own a 3700X/GTX1080 to show I am not a fanboi And nothing in my system has more expensive or has bad price/performance hardware

The reason why I even commented in the first place is due to the frustruation in waiting for Big Navi and giving up on it long ago. Read that again if you want to! Some people want to wait. Let em.

What is this alleged struggle of yours? Were you this impatient for the RTX 20- series cards?

I think thou doth protest too much. At least I haven't needed to engage in extreme hyperbole or moving of the goalposts. And, the mutual feeling is projection - a very "I know you are, but what am I?" play.

Fun fact: one of the biggest attackers of AMD's Ryzen CPUs on these boards owned a Ryzen CPU. So, you can be an Nvidia fanboy, even if you own an AMD CPU.

So, you are EXTREMELY impatient - at least, when it comes to AMD video cards.

Now tell us, exactly HOW long have you been forced to suffer and wait for Big Navi? When was it announced? Were you there on the same day it was first announced? Did they give you a hard release date that the rest of us don't know about?


And now - why was it so difficult to stick to the point of the article rather than go on an attack on AMD?

 

[digitalgriffin]

Correct. I just recently upgraded to a AOC 34CUG2x ultrawide monitor (coming from a ASUS 1080p monitor the AOC is SOO much better at gaming) and using a Radeon VII which is a BEAST of a GPU (plus I do use it for other things than gaming which I have no buyers remorse here) so I am set for a while GPU wise but others do not.. Time for AMD to really really think big for gaming. 2k is climbing the charts to becoming the main for casual gaming and 4k is not far beind (for those who have the $$ for 4k monitors). Unfortunately we now live in a time that it might cost more for a GPU than it has in the past but AMD should give a GPU that is worthy, not just one to pass the time.

Amd needs a serious win. They have momentum up now and they need that to carry them.

They have been 2nd place for too long.
Hawaii
Gcn rx480
Gcn rx580
Vega 50/64
Radeon vii.
Navi

I can understand Lisa Su's frustration. It isn't that they didn't make good products. They often offered better value. But they lost mind share and i think the semi custom business (game console) didn't carry over mind share.

Inknow im being an armchair exec here but I would be cutting deals with MS and Sony to prominently show that AMD Navi everywhere including boot screens.

If they can make the fastest they can charge what they want. Its the image of the fastest. Do you thing a chiron is really worth $3,000,000 in parts labor and research…And if Nvidia goes into a price war they can afford some losses because its <1% of market at the top.

I wish them luck.

 

[digitalgriffin]

When that is in response to "And yet they are yet to put out cards that can barely compete with the 4 year old 1080ti," then that extra 9 months does make a difference. It doesn't matter when Big Navi comes out, the 5700XT is able to keep up with the 1080Ti (about 6% slower) since it was release a YEAR ago. You are also making the case that the "mainstream" product can only compete with last generations "halo" product. Well that isn't a surprise at all. Remember the GTX 1070 could "only" compete with the 980 Ti from the previous generation same as the GTX 970 & 780Ti. Notice a trend here....

I actually do not remember that picture, however, that is marketing. As a compute card the Vega based cards are quite good, just power hungry. When it come to gaming, they are decent at gaming, but the power was a bigger issue.

Graphics have stagnated. Even a 2080 cost more and barely beats a 1080ti.

Yet you have a rx5700xt for $400 and its close to a 1080ti. And a 1080ti cost how much? Like $750?

So yes you can knock AMD for barely competing with a 1080/1080ti. But nvidia hasn't done you any favors either. Not even a reach around with their pricing hikes.

Hope for competition unless you like taking it in the rear (wallet)