Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Thinks AMD's Radeon VII Is 'Underwhelming'

[nadhir.brighet]

To be brutally honest I agree with him, but at the same time the RTX cards were also pathetic, the performance they delivered weren't at all impressive given the price tag.
Back to AMD this Radeon 7 isn't impressive at all, instead of HBM they should've put normal GDDR6 plus much more CUs at least the same as Vega 64, 7nm feels underutilised.

 

[elroy.coltof]

Nadhir, what difference does it make to you what type of memory they use? Vega was designed with HBM2 in mind and GCN actually can use the extra bandwidth it offers.

I've had the chance to play BF V on a 2080Ti and to be honest, raytracing is a gimmick that adds absolutely nothing to gameplay right now, while lowering the resolution and frame rate significantly. You are better of buying a RTX 2080 and gaming at 1440p if you want high fps or when fps is not as important play at 4k, in both cases ignoring 4k. And that's exactly what you will be able to do with a Radeon VII too.

 

[fykusfire]

Is it just me, or does Lisa Su look like the female Jensen?

 

[fykusfire]

Is it just me or does Lisa Su look like the female Jensen?

 

[HyperMatrix]

Is it just me or does Lisa Su look like the female Jensen?

Jensen Huang is Lisa Su's uncle. Like actually. Not a joke. Which makes his behavior even more embarrassing.

 

[HyperMatrix]

Jensen is right that the card is underwhelming in terms of what a 7nm gpu with hbm2 memory should be able to achieve. What he's saying is that Nvidia cards on 14nm, with gddr6 memory, can outperform them. If they took that same RTX card, went from 14nm to 7nm, and upped to HBM2 memory, they could get around 75% higher performance out of their cards.

Where he's wrong is that despite that bit of info, this new card is just a stepping stone for AMD. This is just their old tech, on a new node. Once Navi hits, Nvidia's going to be in trouble. And the real disappointment this generation was the RTX launch. Really bad performance. Useless raytracing (you need 100+ gigarays/second for proper ray tracing implementation. currently it's just used in small amounts for reflections only. not used for lighting/shadows/etc...). DLSS isn't supported anywhere, and is apparently flawed in scenes with motion. And their pricing for the cards is astronomically high. Especially for a card that showed only a 25% generation over generation improvement. Despite them taking 2 years to come out with these new cards.

I was a hardcore Nvidia fanboy because of their performance dominance. I've been buying SLI every single generation since the gtx 580 came out. And yet, I'm completely skipping the RTX 2000 series cards. Because they're literal trash. And overpriced. I'm not about to pay $1200+ for a 25% improvement on a 2 year old video card. And I'm not alone. That's why NVidia stock is tanking. And I'm happy for it.

Jensen got greedy. And it's time for AMD to shine.

 

[kinggremlin]

In my opinion, the real issue with DLSS and RTX tech is that this isn't an open standard and instead it's proprietary akin to many other technologies Nvidia has released. There is little traction in the industry because it's a wait and see what other companies do game aside from the additional cost that may not reap any real long-term benefit; many developers/publishers are playing it safe. Nvidia wants to spearhead their implementation of AI driven anti-aliasing/ray tracing technology and reap the rewards because of their investment, both in cost and time to develop.

Your opinion is wrong because RTX isn't proprietary. It's the name of Nvidia hardware implementation of Microsoft's DXR. That's why we had to wait for MS to release its DXR patch for Windows 10 before anyone could test Nvidia's RTX capabilities. DirectX raytracing is obviously open for any company to use just like anything else in directX.

 

[HyperMatrix]

In my opinion, the real issue with DLSS and RTX tech is that this isn't an open standard and instead it's proprietary akin to many other technologies Nvidia has released. There is little traction in the industry because it's a wait and see what other companies do game aside from the additional cost that may not reap any real long-term benefit; many developers/publishers are playing it safe. Nvidia wants to spearhead their implementation of AI driven anti-aliasing/ray tracing technology and reap the rewards because of their investment, both in cost and time to develop.

Your opinion is wrong because RTX isn't proprietary. It's the name of Nvidia hardware implementation of Microsoft's DXR. That's why we had to wait for MS to release its DXR patch for Windows 10 before anyone could test Nvidia's RTX capabilities. DirectX raytracing is obviously open for any company to use just like anything else in directX.

I’m wrong....yet I never said anything about rtx being proprietary. I said it’s useless. Not about lack of software implementation. It’s that 10 gigarays/second is not enough for proper gaming level ray tracing. You need 100+ for that. Right now, 10 gigarays can barely handle limited level reflections at 1080p. And is not actually being used to create light/shadows/refractions.

There is nothing wrong with Nvidia’s implementation. It’s that 10 gigarays is crap. And they’re charging a premium for that crap feature. No one buys a $1200 card to play 1080p at 60fps. This isn’t 2012.

 

[kinggremlin]

In my opinion, the real issue with DLSS and RTX tech is that this isn't an open standard and instead it's proprietary akin to many other technologies Nvidia has released. There is little traction in the industry because it's a wait and see what other companies do game aside from the additional cost that may not reap any real long-term benefit; many developers/publishers are playing it safe. Nvidia wants to spearhead their implementation of AI driven anti-aliasing/ray tracing technology and reap the rewards because of their investment, both in cost and time to develop.

Your opinion is wrong because RTX isn't proprietary. It's the name of Nvidia hardware implementation of Microsoft's DXR. That's why we had to wait for MS to release its DXR patch for Windows 10 before anyone could test Nvidia's RTX capabilities. DirectX raytracing is obviously open for any company to use just like anything else in directX.

I’m wrong....yet I never said anything about rtx being proprietary. I said it’s useless. Not about lack of software implementation. It’s that 10 gigarays/second is not enough for proper gaming level ray tracing. You need 100+ for that. Right now, 10 gigarays can barely handle limited level reflections at 1080p. And is not actually being used to create light/shadows/refractions.

There is nothing wrong with Nvidia’s implementation. It’s that 10 gigarays is crap. And they’re charging a premium for that crap feature. No one buys a $1200 card to play 1080p at 60fps. This isn’t 2012.

Uhh...what? Unless you have a second account here under the name Wes006, I wasn't talking to you. So why are you responding to me like I did?

 

[HyperMatrix]

In my opinion, the real issue with DLSS and RTX tech is that this isn't an open standard and instead it's proprietary akin to many other technologies Nvidia has released. There is little traction in the industry because it's a wait and see what other companies do game aside from the additional cost that may not reap any real long-term benefit; many developers/publishers are playing it safe. Nvidia wants to spearhead their implementation of AI driven anti-aliasing/ray tracing technology and reap the rewards because of their investment, both in cost and time to develop.

Your opinion is wrong because RTX isn't proprietary. It's the name of Nvidia hardware implementation of Microsoft's DXR. That's why we had to wait for MS to release its DXR patch for Windows 10 before anyone could test Nvidia's RTX capabilities. DirectX raytracing is obviously open for any company to use just like anything else in directX.

I’m wrong....yet I never said anything about rtx being proprietary. I said it’s useless. Not about lack of software implementation. It’s that 10 gigarays/second is not enough for proper gaming level ray tracing. You need 100+ for that. Right now, 10 gigarays can barely handle limited level reflections at 1080p. And is not actually being used to create light/shadows/refractions.

There is nothing wrong with Nvidia’s implementation. It’s that 10 gigarays is crap. And they’re charging a premium for that crap feature. No one buys a $1200 card to play 1080p at 60fps. This isn’t 2012.

Uhh...what? Unless you have a second account here under the name Wes006, I wasn't talking to you. So why are you responding to me like I did?

Sorry mate. Got a reply notification. Apparently it was for the thread and not my comment.
Cheers.

 

[irfbhatt]

Very rude comment. He should better think about his own products)

 

[LordVile]

Obviously VII is bad. It doesn’t even have any RTX/Ops. We all know how important those are for playing the 1 game that supports ray tracing but only really on the 2080/Ti and definitely not at high res or refresh.

 

[Rob_54]

Huang was probably asked his opinion and gave his honest answer, that's all. The Radeon VII is underwhelming. New 7nm fab and yet it's still a higher TDP than its RTX 2080 competitor. Nvidia should feel smug. Ray tracing and to some extent DLSS are groundbreaking achievements that they should feel proud of. AMD need to push and innovate harder rather than relying on smaller fabs on old architecture.

 

[LordVile]

Not really a let down. Still matches the 2080 for probably 100 less. Plus RTX has had issues, ray tracing isn’t about to catch fire in popularity terms soon and if DLSS was so great we’d have more than what 2 titles with it.

It’s like PhysX. A good idea but Nvidia kill it by being tools about it.

 

[zachusaman]

"new graphics tech"
like what, real time raytracing?

more like, AMD isn't supporting our stupid gimmick technology even though we flipped the switch and allowed our idio- I mean customers to use freesync

The only underwhelming thing I see here is your stock prices, leathercoat man.

 

[LordVile]

Seems like Nvidia and Sony have a lot in common when it comes to features that can literally just be patched in with extremely low effort and cost.

Wonder why that could be...

 

[jimmysmitty]

Like Freesync is underwhelming... /sarcasm

Freesync is not. Its the implementation. Everyone talks about how cheap it is but when you want to get the same features GSYNC has you end up paying much closer to a GSYNC monitors price. The main difference between Freesync and GSYNC is the consistency. No matter what brand you buy all GSYNC monitors support the same features. Not true with Freesync.

However rumor has it that AMD is going to be a bit stricter with Freesync 2 which in my opinion is a good thing as it helps create a consistent experience across brands.

Certainly smells funny - Huang seems to be distracting from the fact their newly released cards are now officially behind on process. If the VII is underwhelming, what does that say about the 2080 considering they (at this point) seem to be direct competitors. Ray tracing is still in its infancy and until it’s widely adopted, it’s a ‘nice to have’ but certainly not a deal breaker. Only head to head reviews will settle this one.

AMD has their work cut out for them on the efficiency side of things, so it will be interesting to see how much 7nm might close the gap. I’m expecting performance to be competitive, price to be lower and power usage to be higher than Nvidia. The final price point will be the deal maker/breaker.

7nm will help but GCN is just a power hungry uArch. When it first launched it was fine. It was normal for the time. But they really need to push past GCN to something thats a better design. Its well past its prime.

Not really a let down. Still matches the 2080 for probably 100 less. Plus RTX has had issues, ray tracing isn’t about to catch fire in popularity terms soon and if DLSS was so great we’d have more than what 2 titles with it.

It’s like PhysX. A good idea but Nvidia kill it by being tools about it.

Except its not $100 less. AiB 2080s can be had for $699 so its going to be a hard sell.

Features take time to adopt. Ray Tracing will take off but it really needs more time.

And with or without nVidia PhysX would have been proprietary. It started off as an addin card. So if nVidia didn't buy them you still would have had to buy a card and use their drivers and software for it.

"new graphics tech"
like what, real time raytracing?

more like, AMD isn't supporting our stupid gimmick technology even though we flipped the switch and allowed our idio- I mean customers to use freesync

The only underwhelming thing I see here is your stock prices, leathercoat man.

Why does everyone say ray tracing is a gimmick and pushed by nVidia? AMD has talked about and shown it off as has Intel. Was Tesselation a gimmick? I assume HDR is just a gimmick? No?

How about this, one company pushes the latest and greatest then eventually the others jump on with full support. BTW AMD pushed support for Tesselation harder than nVidia did with better support in the beginning. Now the majority of games use it.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

NVidia: front a calm "it's underwhelming." Behind the scenes: "We're somewhat concerned... Not AMD -> Intel concerned though as we have nothing solid yet on Navi."

Yup, 7nm could be better... but I think it's a case of getting their feet wet, producing a stop-gap product to combat the current NVidia lineup.... Meanwhile Navi will probably take better advantage of the 7nm process and be more competitive... I wouldn't be surprised to see Navi later this year either. If the leaks can be believed in the slightest, we can take away that Navi is nearly ready, but not quite ready enough, for production.


It's a shame to hear freesync was so poorly implemented though... it shames the monitor manufacturers for not fully adhering to the standard. (Not 100% AMD's fault, although AMD could have strongly insisted.)

 

[King_V]

FreeSync doesn't work?

Pardon me, but what sort of drugs were involved to make that statement? Granted, I have experience with two different AMD cards and two different monitors, but it works very well.

It's a little strange hearing this griping, considering that Nvidia is ahead of the game... maybe some irritation that the GSync tax isn't doing as much as it should, and that the tactic might have pushed some to AMD where they might've gone to Nvidia cards, perhaps?

I don't know. This just seems a bit . . not really marketing gimmick-y, but outright bullshit. And why, when it's so easily proven otherwise?

 

[jimmysmitty]

FreeSync doesn't work?

Pardon me, but what sort of drugs were involved to make that statement? Granted, I have experience with two different AMD cards and two different monitors, but it works very well.

It's a little strange hearing this griping, considering that Nvidia is ahead of the game... maybe some irritation that the GSync tax isn't doing as much as it should, and that the tactic might have pushed some to AMD where they might've gone to Nvidia cards, perhaps?

I don't know. This just seems a bit . . not really marketing gimmick-y, but outright bullshit. And why, when it's so easily proven otherwise?

No one said Freesync doesn't work. What has been said is the implementation. Because nVidia controls GSYNC every GSYCN monitor has the exact same GSYNC features. Be it Asus, Samsung, Acer etc. However Freesync is a wider range and more open. This allows manufactures to produce cheaper Freesync monitors by ditching features.

For example all GSYNC monitors support the exact same refresh rate while you can get Freesync monitors that support low or high refresh rates.

 

[King_V]

FreeSync doesn't work?

Pardon me, but what sort of drugs were involved to make that statement? Granted, I have experience with two different AMD cards and two different monitors, but it works very well.

It's a little strange hearing this griping, considering that Nvidia is ahead of the game... maybe some irritation that the GSync tax isn't doing as much as it should, and that the tactic might have pushed some to AMD where they might've gone to Nvidia cards, perhaps?

I don't know. This just seems a bit . . not really marketing gimmick-y, but outright bullshit. And why, when it's so easily proven otherwise?

No one said Freesync doesn't work. What has been said is the implementation. Because nVidia controls GSYNC every GSYCN monitor has the exact same GSYNC features. Be it Asus, Samsung, Acer etc. However Freesync is a wider range and more open. This allows manufactures to produce cheaper Freesync monitors by ditching features.

For example all GSYNC monitors support the exact same refresh rate while you can get Freesync monitors that support low or high refresh rates.

Oh, I understand about the differing features.... but, going by the beginning of the article:

And that wasn't his only jab at AMD--Huang also said that Nvidia's G-Sync essentially has no competition because AMD's FreeSync doesn't work.

Neither claim would be particularly surprising to find on any message board where people support their preferred graphics technologies like sports fans cheer for their favorite teams. But it's at least a little surprising to hear Nvidia's chief executive dismiss the world's first 7nm gaming GPU and claim that most FreeSync monitors "do not even work with AMD’s graphics cards." The former is based on speculation; the latter is outright baffling.

Seems like Huang did say that FreeSync doesn't work.

 

[Wes006]

In my opinion, the real issue with DLSS and RTX tech is that this isn't an open standard and instead it's proprietary akin to many other technologies Nvidia has released. There is little traction in the industry because it's a wait and see what other companies do game aside from the additional cost that may not reap any real long-term benefit; many developers/publishers are playing it safe. Nvidia wants to spearhead their implementation of AI driven anti-aliasing/ray tracing technology and reap the rewards because of their investment, both in cost and time to develop.

Your opinion is wrong because RTX isn't proprietary. It's the name of Nvidia hardware implementation of Microsoft's DXR. That's why we had to wait for MS to release its DXR patch for Windows 10 before anyone could test Nvidia's RTX capabilities. DirectX raytracing is obviously open for any company to use just like anything else in directX.

Nvidia's GameWorks Ray Tracing SDK is a part of Nvidia OptiX and that is proprietary. The Nvidia RTX platform as a whole is proprietary. I was never referring to Microsoft DXR. Ray tracing development cost can be very high for something that may not pan out. Your refutation of my opinion is fundamentally flawed (Ignoratio Elenchi).

 

[metalcraft218]

Wow...the salt pile is huge! Anyone been reading the news about Nvidia's plight recently? Failing in the quarter? Stock going down? I can see why he's angry, but you can bet that when he tucks himself into bed at night, he's breaking out in cold sweats and losing sleep because of the huge mount of pressure from upstairs to get his act together. It's not AMD's fault you're failing, dude...turn the finger the other way...yep, right there. Can anyone here say "unprofessional"?

 

[metalcraft218]

Coming from this clown? Who's stocks are going down and having failed so hard in the quarter "worst quarter in Nvidia's company history" according to Tom's Hardware. He's acting like a big angry kid who got his sand castle knocked over. Then again, I believe Jensen got his ultimatum from his superiors am I correct? Nvidia may see a new and more deserving face representing them in the near future, and rightly so.

Here's your binky back, Jensen. No hope for growing up for you. #unprofessional

 

[King_V]

First off Huang showed himself to be an unprofessional DB. I have always liked Nvidia GPU's over AMD, however him saying this makes me want to not purchase nvidia's hardware because of that type of behavior; he seems to be displaying some sort insecurity to me. Way to go trying to appeal to consumers (sarcasm, cough cough).

Except that I've mostly been an ATI/AMD guy, this is how I feel. My most powerful card, between my son's computers and my own, is a GTX 1080. Whatever complaints I have about Nvidia, when it comes to power efficiency and higher performance (my 3840x1600 monitor made my old card struggle a lot), Nvidia has the lead, without a doubt.

That they then said they'd allow their cards to use FreeSync's adaptive refresh rate made got rid of one of my complaints about them. I was happy with Nvidia for doing this, particularly since my monitor is FreeSync. I figured that the next time I'd do an upgrade for myself or my son, time to go Team Green, if they could get their price/performance a bit better.

This attitude from Huang, though, makes me want to hold out for AMD to step up their game. I don't think I'd've been in the market for a new card anytime soon, and while Nvidia performance/efficiency had me looking their way, their support for FreeSync would definitely have made me more likely to choose them.

But this? They're ahead of AMD, and they come off with this attitude? It's a turn-off.