Tqaulity
Member
Yep you're right. I was typing in a rush. I edited my original post.That's false though. The 7700 XT isn't less than 50% of the performance of the 7900 XT. It's around 60-65%. That's quite a bit above what you're suggesting.
Yep you're right. I was typing in a rush. I edited my original post.That's false though. The 7700 XT isn't less than 50% of the performance of the 7900 XT. It's around 60-65%. That's quite a bit above what you're suggesting.
Make Sony's purported 45% uplift make sense to me.Yep you're right. I was typing in a rush. I edited my original post.
To be clear, I'm not saying it won't only be 45% uplift. That's my point...first of all I (we) can't say anything concreate on these unconfirmed specs. But to your question, I can't make it make sense anymore than anyone else has been able to. There are several things about those leaked specs simply don't add up which is why I don't really trust them. One of them is the 45% number which doesn't match the other details in the leak. If it is only 45%, then the 60CU, 256bit bus, 576GB/s bandwidth, cache size increases and 16GB of RAM can't be right. If those are in fact the GPU config, then the 45% figure is either complete wrong or at least misinterpreted and taken out of context (I suspect the latter).Make Sony's purported 45% uplift make sense to me then.
That piddly (for a mid-gen upgrade) 45% uplift is why people (like me) say it will perform like a 7700XT (in raster).
To be clear, I'm not saying it won't only be 45% uplift. That's my point...first of all I (we) can't say anything concreate on these unconfirmed specs. But to your question, I can't make it make sense anymore than anyone else has been able to. There are several things about those leaked specs simply don't add up which is why I don't really trust them. One of them is the 45% number which doesn't match the other details in the leak. If it is only 45%, then the 60CU, 256bit bus, 576GB/s bandwidth, cache size increases and 16GB of RAM can't be right. If those are in fact the GPU config, then the 45% figure is either complete wrong or at least misinterpreted and taken out of context (I suspect the latter).
prolly not for a while tbh. the high end 30 cards still rip.Not sure the value is there to upgrade from a 3080. We'll see though!
4090 only for 100$7900XT performance should be 299 imo
True, plus with extra game optimization and PSSR I'm sure we gonna see some more "magic tricks"*Disclaimer: PS5 Pro specs are still only based on rumors until Sony makes an official announcement
Exactly. Everyone on here is still talking about the Pro being ~7700XT based on the (unconfirmed) leaked specs and it makes no sense. Everything about the leaked specs point to a card that is more powerful than a 7700XT (I've already broken this down on the PS5 Pro thread). The GPU config is most closely matched to a Navi48 and even with the 7% reduction in shaders and assuming a 10-20% reduction in clocks, that should still put it's performance between a 7800XT and 7900GRE (assuming the NAVI 48 is >= a 7900XT).
Keep in mind that a 7900XT is ~25-30% faster than a 7800XT and a 7800XT is ~20-25% faster than a 7700XT. In other words, a 7900XT is over 50% faster than 7700XT. Now in what world would Sony take a GPU and gimp it to the point of reducing it's performance by that much for yields and power limitations?! That has never happened in any console generation. 20%? Maybe. >30% not likely!
This.The problem is software killer apps and dev ecosystem for such software and tools.
Question is, how will AMD & Intel at least accomplish to dethrone 30-40% of the market share that NVIDIA has?This.
AMD and Intel aren't that far behind when it comes to hardware (well, Intel still have to build up their offering...). The main competitive edge that Nvidia have over others is their software stack. It's also how they manage to keep people (like myself) vendor locked. CUDA and the ecosystem around it just doesn't have a viable alternative. OpenCL is not even close, Metal is mainly being pushed by Apple and mostly only useful if you want to utilize their M chips. ROCm is also not even close. And Intel's OneAPI, at least so far, is just there so Intel can say that they're doing something.
Maybe the newly formed alliance between Qualcomm, Google, Intel and others to develop an open-source CUDA competitor will break Nvidia's stranglehold. Who knows.
Is it possible that the PS5 Pro would feature a tweaked version of that navi 48 (removing some stuff, adding other stuff)?AMD RDNA 4 "Radeon RX 8000" GPUs Reportedly Debut In 2025: Navi 48 At CES & Navi 44 In Q2
AMD is reportedly going to launch its next-gen RDNA 4 "Radeon RX 8000 GPUs, primarily the Navi 48 & Navi 44 chips, in the first half of 2025.wccftech.com
Tl:;dr:
- Navi 48 (top SKU) likely announced at CES in January, launching Q1, around 7900XT performance but lower power consumption for $500 or less
- Navi 44 (entry level) coming Q2
- high end/enthusiast tier is canceled, won’t have a high end GPU til RDNA5
The rumors I’ve heard are that the PS5 Pro specs were finalized a long time ago, so probably notIs it possible that the PS5 Pro would feature a tweaked version of that navi 48 (removing some stuff, adding other stuff)?
The only real way to do that would be to price their stuff aggressively and to keep up with CUDA. Monumental tasks but if they can get a lot of the industry behind one open standard, it might be possible.Question is, how will AMD & Intel at least accomplish to dethrone 30-40% of the market share that NVIDIA has?
Wouldn't work. For one, NVIDIA can respond in kind. For two, this has never really bore fruits every time it was attempted. AMD has always been seen as the budget brand and even when they priced their GPUs competitively, it didn't really help them. What they need is to release products that are competitive with NVIDIA in the same tiers, not inferior but cheaper cards.The only real way to do that would be to price their stuff aggressively and to keep up with CUDA. Monumental tasks but if they can get a lot of the industry behind one open standard, it might be possible.
Huh? That's what I meant, tho. With "pricing their stuff aggressively". Obviously that includes being on par hardware-wise, which is a realistic goal. The harder part is the software stack because this is where AMD are lacking quite severely. And if AMD can join the alliance set up by Intel, Google and Qualcomm, it might be possible to compete with Nvidia there as well.Wouldn't work. For one, NVIDIA can respond in kind. For two, this has never really bore fruits every time it was attempted. AMD has always been seen as the budget brand and even when they priced their GPUs competitively, it didn't really help them. What they need is to release products that are competitive with NVIDIA in the same tiers, not inferior but cheaper cards.
AMD didn't start stealing Intel's lunch until they released better CPUs again with Ryzen.
Sounds like another L for AMD. The only reason most people hope AMD lowers their prices is to force Nvidia to lower theirs, and then they’ll buy Nvidia anyway.
CUDA and the ecosystem around it just doesn't have a viable alternative. OpenCL is not even close, Metal is mainly being pushed by Apple and mostly only useful if you want to utilize their M chips. ROCm is also not even close.
It is astonishing what a company could do if it blocks other standards they should also actively develop with other companies (for years) when you can do their own thing and everybody uses it without questioning.CUDA and the ecosystem around it just doesn't have a viable alternative. OpenCL is not even close, Metal is mainly being pushed by Apple and mostly only useful if you want to utilize their M chips. ROCm is also not even close. And Intel's OneAPI, at least so far, is just there so Intel can say that they're doing something.
won't be for 400$, and 7900XT it's minimum perf, final based on clocksunless this is priced at $400
If it's xtx level for $600 that's a lot more interesting imo.won't be for 400$, and 7900XT it's minimum perf, final based on clocks