The AMD RDNA 2 graphics card line will launch this fall, ahead of the release of PS5 and Xbox Series X, which use cards from the same architecture.
Wonder how much they're going to cost.
My guess is $300 - $600. $300 - $400 would be equivalent to the PS5, however, with all CUs activated and a slightly higher clock speed 12.28 TF, and the Series X equivalent around with all CUs activated around $500 - $600 with a higher clock speed so around 14.34 TF. And then of course there's big Navi which depending on if its 64CU or 80 CUs as rumored $600 - $1,000, and 16.38 TFs or 20 TFs.
Thats not going to happen amd cant increase cu cores that much its the reason they have been behind Nvida so badly the last several years they cant get the cu core counts up high enough.
They haven't been badly behind NVIDIA They've been around 10% less IPC performance compared to NVIDIA. They already had 56CU and 64CU with Vega, and based on the Series X, they have already hit 56CU for Navi 2.0, which was designed to be more efficient in performance per watt, add more CUs, add RayTracing, and increase IPC bringing making it a bit better than the RTX 2000 series tier for tier. The only GPU that's question would be the 80 CU version, but that rumor came from the alleged leaks that the Big Navi is supposed to be 2x as powerful as a 5700 XT which is 40 CUs (40x20 = 80), and the higher clock would make up the performance difference otherwise it can be 64 CUs with a clock speed over 2.2 GHz which cound be around 2x the performance with better software / driver support.
@ABizzel1 Sadly im sure Amd will let us down again on the gpu side i miss ATI they would never have let things get this bad. AMD wont have anything to match the 3000 series im sure of it Nvidia has been just releasing just enough to stay ahead they have far more powerful gpus they just sit on waiting for amd to do something. Nvidia said years ago they are 3 generations ahead of Amd at all times the could just blow them out of the water at anytime but its a waste of money to put out that much powerful Gpu's for no reason.
In performance I think they'll be competitive. The RX 5700 XT is already competitive with the 2070s, RTX 2080, and RTX 2080s, and it cost less than all of those GPUs. The 2080's are better in nearly all titles by around 20% more performance, but they're not worth nearly 2x the price either, and the 2080 ti isn't worth 3x the price averaging around 30% - 50% more performance. So taking the 5700 XT, increasing the IPC by a rumored 10%, increasing the clock speeds by around 20% (possibly higher), and adding more cores for higher-end cards, means the 6000 series will be better than what NVIDIA launched with the RTX 2000 series and should be competitive with the RTX 3000 series in raw performance and price. The problem AMD faces is in Ray Tracing where their solution is likely to be on par with the RTX 2000 series maybe a tad better, but NVIDIA's new solution is rumored to be 3x - 4x better than their last gen.
R7 265 (2GB, US$165 at launch) arguably on par with PS4 GPU (8GB). For the GPU on par with PS5/XSX, my guess is US$300-US$450 with 4/8GB VRAM.
GPUs have risen in price this gen, at least with Nvidia on the higher end side. For example my 980Ti in 2015 was £500 something, but less than 600. Now you're looking at double that for the 2080Ti. Last i heard is Nvidia wanted to lower prices of the top parts, but that could mean little when they cost so much now. Middle of the road cards will be best price/performance, as you'll likely be looking at 2-3x the cost of a 3070 (example) to go to a 3080Ti which will probably be about 40% better. 3070/3080 at least in the Nvidia range will most likely be best in terms of cost, though for people running 4k screens that may be an issue as they might require more power from a 3080Ti if playing a demanding game. Those using 1440p and high refresh rates should be fine with a 3070/3080 and whatever the rough AMD equivalents are.
Do you feel we might see successors to RX 5500 XT and RX 5600 XT soon?
mastaleep, looks as if those cards came out months after the main ones, so they may do similarly again with the new gen.
Interesting. and i thought consoles would have RDNA 2.0 tech exclusively for at least a few months. turns out PC's going to have it months before. technically the next gen starts as soon as this architecture launches. even though ray-trace gaming started years ago. but at least now it will be official from AMD and for the consumer level.
Next gen doesn’t start until next gen games release
define "next gen games".
"define "next gen games"." 1 billion polygons + 1080p 30 fps ray-traced. or last gen at 4k 60fps. or faster loading screens and sharper textures.
@ tech - define "next gen games". some say 4k 60fps, or ray-tracing and more polygons. while others say faster loading times and sharper textures. all of which PC has being doing some years ago. i guess the point is to start seeing these games run on next gen hardware.
@BlizardXD "define "next gen games"." 1 billion polygons + 1080p 30 fps ray-traced. or last gen at 4k 60fps. or faster loading screens and sharper textures. So you mean exactly what PC already has in some games?
@ Tech5 Tough term to lock down. I'd reckon games that have an SSD as a minimum requirement ?
@ Tech5 A next gen game is a game that includes every one of the following: A) Runs above native 1080p resolution like 1440p. 1440p @ 30 fps makes the cut. B) The game does not compensate running at such high res. by reducing the LOD. C) Little to no noticeable loading times ever. D) More organic/fun gameplay thanks to the removal of previously necessary gameplay abruptions or divergences which used to serve as loading times in disguise. The fact that these gameplay abruptions are never actually a part of the developers' original vision is a major win because now we can actually render our dreams and visions closer to their original conceptions respectively.
AMD has been saying their GPUS would be out this year for the longest, so best case scenario the consoles would have had 1 month on the GPUs
@Tech5 'define "next gen games".' Games that cant be fully realized on current gen hardware. It doesn't matter if next gen hardware comes out. If it can easily run on current consoles/hardware then it isn't really next gen.
"If it can easily run on current consoles/hardware then it isn't really next gen." So nothing Microsoft releases for Xbox Series X will be "next gen" for over a year after its launch?
@RazzerRedux Even those games will have features that can't be fully realized on current gen. Like ray tracing.
So... Microsoft should hire Nvidia's marketing? Gameplay sizzle reels with "Next-Gen On"/"Next-Gen Off"
I don't think there will be any progress made from a technical standpoint from here on out on current-gen hardware. The Last of Us 2 will probably become the technical showcase. Either that, doom eternal or cyberpunk 2077. The jaguar CPU's slow frequency has been maxed out.
Next Gen started when the RTX 2080 Super launched, but it will be interesting to see if RDNA2 lives up to the promise, and whether we see the kinds of black and blue screen problems that have plagued the RX 5700XT. Currently, a 9.06 Tflop RTX 2070 Super out-performs a 9.75 Tflop RX 5700XT, and it does it handily. The question is, will RDNA2 catch up to Nvidia when it comes to similar Tflop performance.
"a 9.06 Tflop RTX 2070 Super out-performs a 9.75 Tflop RX 5700XT, and it does it handily" Not really. They are pretty close. https://youtu.be/ZmlRzGhdWd...
It is close, but it's no cigar, especially when the 5700 XT is 690 Gflops more powerful, but gets beat @ 1440p by 7% on average, and doesn't have dedicated ray tracing cores, or DLSS 2.0. DLSS gives massive performace gains, and since DLSS 2.0, it actually produces images close to native resolutions. I was waiting and hoping that AMD would deliver with RDNA, and while it has most certainly brought much needed competition to the GPU space, its still playing 2nd fiddle to Nvidia in the PC space. Nvidia is so far ahead, that i'm starting to wonder if the company is being run by space aliens. Give me a call when Lise Su starts wearing a leather jacket.
No,Series X and PS5 use a custom Soc with RDNA2 theres no market Soc that equals them.
they are specifically referring to the graphics architecture. RDNA 2.0. just as the article states - "The AMD RDNA 2 graphics card line will launch this fall, ahead of the release of PS5 and Xbox Series X, which use cards from the same architecture."
They use custom SOC as in, taking the Desktop equivalent, cutting 4 CUs from it to make sure production yields are good, reduce clock speeds, and make minor tweaks here and there. There will be a 40 CU RDNA 2 GPU which the PS5 will be based on, and a 56 CU RDNA 2 GPU which is what the Series X will be based on.
It is called The Big Navi in gaming circles - and it is all set to release in September. Plans can still change by the way.
They have (for the first time in a long time) a legitimate shot at battling for the performance crown with Nvidia (ampere) so it's in their interest to get them out the door first to snap up as many customers eagerly waiting for their "next gen" GPUs upgrade (I'm one of them).
Fishy don't you want to wait and see if Nvidia tops them? I mean you'll be feeling silly if you shell out twice for a gpu
Yeah absolutely, I certainly will be waiting until both are revealed so I can make an educated purchase. My 1080ti still does the job so no immediate need to upgrade. But you know there will be plenty of people either waiting to upgrade or waiting to build a new system that will just jump on the first next gen GPU available and Big Navi has more hype than any previous AMD GPU in recent times.
Ah ok. The way prices are it's hard for me to justify buying a gaming PC when ps5 will get the job done for the most part. I get PC has better performance but I don't want to pay two to four times more
No they wont the new Nvida cards are getting at least a 40 percent increase amd was already 30 percent behind already. Its unfortunate for amd but after they sold their fabs they can be spied on. Workers for the Chinese factory and ex NVIDIA employees said years ago Nvida would have the new amd cards in house and testing them long before AMD launches thats why amd can never catch nvidia.
I think you'll be surprised, everyone is expecting a much closer contest this time around.
@Fishy Fingers Not really Nvidia said several years ago they are 3 generations ahead of AMD at all times they always have 3 generations of gpu they could release at any time but since they dont have any competition why release a gpu with that much power for no reason.
anubusgold, Thats probably the stupidest thing I've read on N4G.
"Not really Nvidia said several years ago they are 3 generations ahead of AMD at all times they always have 3 generations of gpu they could release at any time" No...they do not.
@Fishy Fingers Well that just shows how stupid you are every time amd releases a card Nvidia drops their cards a month to two weeks before them. They know exactly what amd is going release and always have hardware in que to beat them the stupid one is you. You cant turn around hardware that fast you have to have plans way ahead of time.
keep in mind nvidia's current gpus are 12nm and are still faster and more power efficient than amd's 7nm gpus that are out right now.
Im only going to buy the PS5 if it has a killer launch game, cause im going to buy a new rdna 2 gpu card its going to work nice with my 3700x. PS PC still the master race already on that next gen level years ago.
If you bought the PS4, when did you buy? And what about Xbox One?
"So, what does this mean for prospective next-gen buyers? Will the Big Navi tell us anything about the cards powering PS5 and Xbox Series X? Well, yes and no. The Navi 2 will not necessarily be representative of the graphics performance of next-gen consoles, simply because it will likely be way more powerful. " Yep. PC will easily retain its crown on the graphical performance front.
lets see if they make ssd's standard for video games on pc. that will either make or break them.
They will, but it will take some time. Once the big publishers include SSD in minimum system requirements, everyone else will follow.
MS has already brought over its DirectStorage APIs which will help to remove some of the bottlenecks included with PC SSD.
@phoenixwing SSD's have been standard on pc for years people only use slow hardrives for mass storage. Every pc for the past 10 years uses a SSD for the boot drive only really poor people uses a regular hardrive to boot from these days. Even the crappy 125Gb SSD are used for the boot drive on the cheapest pc's they cost 20 dollars and your pc will boot up in 9 seconds even on those crappy things just save your games to a normal drive you will get slower load times but it doesnt effect gameplay. When BF3 first came out they had to put players in a wait zone because the SSD players would load in fast and steal all the tanks and planes before the regular harddrive people loaded in and the match would have started already lol.
bros before hoes
PCMR rejoicing and celebrating
Not worried about price, budget conscious gamers will not be left out as usual.
Hoping at least one of then will be offered for $499.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.