#AMD GRAPHICS CARDS 1080P#
#AMD GRAPHICS CARDS FULL#

If we add in all the other RDNA and RDNA 2 GPUs as reference points, the potential spread for performance-per-watt improvements will become even wider. A lower-tier RX 6700 XT uses 215W and averages 96 fps, 71 fps, and 39 fps, while the RX 5700 XT consumes 214W while delivering 74 fps, 53 fps, and 29 fps at those same resolutions.ĭo the math, and the 6900 XT provides a 22% to 50% improvement in performance per watt, while the 6700 XT only provides a 29% to 34% improvement.

#AMD GRAPHICS CARDS 1080P#

Let's give some concrete examples of how that played out.Īccording to our GPU benchmarks hierarchy, the RX 6900 XT consumes 308W of power while delivering 130 fps at 1080p ultra, 106 fps at 1440p ultra, and 63 fps at 4K ultra.

For example, RDNA 2 delivered 50% better performance per watt than RDNA. While that might seem reasonably specific, it leaves plenty of wiggle room. Names, core counts, and other aspects are all unconfirmed at present, and the only thing we know for certain is that AMD will use TSMC's N5 node for at least some of the chiplets.Īs we've seen with the past two generations of AMD hardware, AMD targets at least a 50% improvement in performance per watt with RDNA 3. There are plenty of question marks in the table for now frankly, we could put a question mark in nearly every cell and not feel too bad about it. That could be offset by higher throughput or other tweaks to the design. Real-world memory bandwidth will get a boost from the Infinity Cache, which for most models will decrease in size compared to RDNA 2.

Again, it might be more than that, but we expect AMD to stick with 'vanilla' GDDR6, and the supply of 18 Gbps chips seems reasonably plentiful. Total memory bandwidth on the top models should increase by 50% relative to the RX 6950 XT. Which does make us wonder if perhaps these rumored specs are inflated, or if real-world throughput will be lower. Even the mid-tier chip would have a potential 38.4 teraflops, nearly double what the RX 6900 XT currently delivers. With up to 12,288 GPU shaders each doing an FP32 FMA (Fused Multiply Accumulate) operation each cycle, that would potentially give the top model 61.4 teraflops of compute, and double that for FP16 workloads. We don't expect AMD to walk back clocks relative to RDNA 2, and it's possible we'll see even higher clocks - perhaps the first GPU to break 3.0 GHz? For now, a conservative estimate of 2.5 GHz provides a rough guess at total compute. Note that the smallest die, Navi 33, will retain the same monolithic design as current GPUs.Ĭlock speeds are mostly placeholders for now.

AMD will refer to the chips as the GCD (Graphics Chiplet Die) and MCD (Memory Chiplet Die), according to Angstronomics. AMD will also use GPU chiplets for the first time with RDNA 3, and the most credible sources indicate it will be breaking out the memory controllers and Infinity Cache from the main compute die. Logically, there will be multiple graphics card models using each GPU. We may eventually see a similar lineup from RX 7000, but we're only aware of three core GPUs at present: Navi 31, Navi 32, and Navi 33.

#AMD GRAPHICS CARDS FULL#

The existing RDNA 2 and RX 6000-series GPUs currently consist of four GPU designs spread out across a full dozen different graphics card models - and that's not counting integrated graphics solutions. AMD RDNA 3 GPU Specifications (Rumor and Speculation) Architecture

Amd graphics cards