AMD Confirms new 7nm Radeon GPUs launching in 2018
33 replies, posted
https://wccftech.com/amd-confirms-new-7nm-radeon-graphics-cards-launching-in-2018/
Earlier this week the company confirmed in a press release, and later President and CEO Dr. Su confirmed in an interview with Marketwatch, that AMD is on track to launch the world’s first 7nm graphics cards this year. While the world’s first 7nm CPUs, built on the company’s next generation Zen 2 x86 64-bit core, are on track to be on-shelves next year.
“AMD’s next major milestone is the introduction of our upcoming 7nm product portfolio, including the initial products with our second generation “Zen 2” CPU core and our new “Navi” GPU architecture. We have already taped out multiple 7nm products at TSMC, including our first 7nm GPU planned to launch later this year and our first 7nm server CPU that we plan to launch in 2019″
Whilst the company hasn’t disclosed detailed specifications relating to the new GPU we could reasonably expect around one terabyte/s of memory bandwidth, higher clock speeds and significantly better power efficiency thanks to TSMC’s leading-edge 7nm process technology, which has reportedly enabled the company to extract an unbelievable 20.9 TFLOPS of graphics compute out of 7nm Vega, according to one source. If true, it would make it the world’s first 20 TFLOPS GPU.
I hope this means AMD will be competitive in the market again. Even though I've been with nvidia for a long time, it's mostly because they have better drivers and gameworks
I hope this is making some guy at NVIDIA flip their desk right now. Their new line up of cards are outrageously priced.
7nm Vega, nothing to see here folks.
They can hype it up all they want, but it'll still have the same architectural flaws as 14nm Vega.
I wanted to know and looked it up: the 2080 is on 12nm so amd will have a bit of a lead when it launches higher end cards after on 7nm.
wat, the issue with Vega was because it hopped on the 14nm train right after the 1080ti was announced. Vegas weren't bad cards, just there wasn't a point when nvidia was rocking it with the 1080ti that came out right before for slightly more money with 30% increase in performance. 7nm can be a game changer considering the RTX is sitting at 12nm while costing a literal arm and a leg for the extra RTX and AA cores. That's unless the RTX can do normal gaming even better.
Before anyone gets excited, these are professional/server cards, nothing is known about the upcoming gaming GPUs yet.
Yeah I thought Lisa Su said no gaming GPUs this year. The 7nm is for instinct and radeon pro in 2018.
So just some server/workstation cards and its 7nm VEGA.
Not that exciting to be honest.
I really hope the 7nm will help them with power consumption and heat at least.
VEGA was terrible in that regard, sure it was cheaper but what you saved in money is what you would loose in energy cost over a year or two actually.
Vega being shit has literally nothing to do with the manufacturing node.
The front-end is a massive bottleneck that prevents scaling, and a bunch of NCU-specific functionality has failed to materialize.
No primitive shaders, and RPM requires game developer support to get performance benefits.
DSBR also isn't enabled for all titles, just ones that have been tested to work with it.
Next interesting part from AMD will be Navi-based. They'll be forced to change their architecture just because they (and Nvidia) are going for chiplet designs, so the opportunity for improvements will be there.
If the consumer release is faster than my 1080 I'll switch, and only because I want FreeSync.
This is cool, but remember that there's no consistent measurement for feature size. What AMD call 7nm intel would call something else, so it's definitely better than AMDs 14nm but you can't compare it with, say, intel or Nvidia, without having a careful look at how they're defining it.
the figure would put it 25% ahead of NVIDIA’s most powerful GPU yet, the 754mm² monster Turing GPU.
I'll believe it when I see it. AMD blew it big time with Vega. I hope they can deliver on this but I'm doubtful.
IIRC the 16, 14 and 12nm nodes from TSMC and GloFo are basically the same thing with minor tweaks to improve performance, while Intel calls theirs 14nm++++ or whatever.
7nm TSMC is supposed to be comparable to Intel's 10nm. Regardless of what it's called, it'll be a generational leap that's going to allow the transistor counts to double or so once again and improve clockspeeds in addition to that. We've been long overdue for another proper jump in performance anyway. I mean it's impressive just how much Nvidia is able to squeeze out of older manufacturing processes, but they're building huge dies to get there.
Ah, i don't really know what fabs people use, so if that's the case then that's pretty good news for AMD. Don't get me wrong, this is really good news.
I had a terrible experience with AMD cards the first time I choose it for my build back in 2014. 2 R9 280X in Crossfire and guess what? Both cards were fucked right out of the box. Cant even run a recent release game at 1080p medium settings without the drivers crashing. Tried using only just 1 card, nope, both still had the same exact issue.
I swapped to a GTX 1060 back in 2016, and it's wonderful being able to actually play a game that isnt released any earlier than 2011 at 1080p high settings.
No wonder my computer repair guy said AMD stands for All Must Die.
Sounds like you just got bad card(s), something NV you can just as well get with NV. I think this whole 'AMD has trash drivers' thing is overblown and often misattributed.
AMD hasn't had shit drivers really since the ATi days. While there have been ups and downs (CCC sucked ass), it's pretty much been uphill since GCN came out.
If the later consumer variants with the cut down specs and features come anywhere close to the RTX 2000 series, I'll be surprised.
AMD has been kinda content with just matching NVIDIA a couple years down the line with lower prices, to just suddenly make a massive leap will have to come with some caveats.
The issue with Vega is that there’s basically no scaling between the Vega 56 and 64. There’s a bottleneck in the architecture that basically means AMD can’t do proper scaling before they design a new one. Until then all you’ll really get is clock speed increases, a department in which Vega didn’t even do well (or as well as AMD had hoped, at least). Maybe the new node will provide more impressive clock speed increases, but there’s no way AMD really becomes competitive with more than he 1080 (and I doubt the node will make them more than on-par power wise).
AMD needs to get off Vega as soon as possible, but obviously years of R&D neglection has taken its toll on them. Nvidia literally spends twice as much (or thereabouts) as AMD has been spending on GPU and CPU (and whatever else) development for the last five years. Not really AMD’s “fault”, there just hasn’t been enough money to go around with bulldozer being a big fat failure.
Yeah, I know AMD has solid drivers but having two cards fail on me simultaneously just left a really bad taste in my mouth.
Uh, they did get away with it. The first three runs are entirely sold just from preorders. Basically they were in the black on RTX in the first hour of availability.
Vega 7 is basically going to have to cost about 40% less and be at LEAST 50% more powerful to even make a dent in nvidia's current earning portfolio, much less bring them to the table to 'compete', nad because it's Vega 7 none of that is going to happen because they literally hit the engineering wall on throughput already. Vega was simply put, an architectual mistake for consumer SKUs. Tiny Vega will have a raw throughput upgrade and that's it, and that's not enough to even scratch at nividia's current share.
Vega 20*
RTG naming schemes are a mess.
But this product isn't aimed at consumers at all, it's poised for the high-margin data center space.
Which is well enough, 4 stacks of 8-high Aquabolt is cash money.
I love vega, faster than the 1080s when undervolted (and using less power), it's very cool.
By the way the next set of AMD cards are not going to be going against the 1080, they're replacements for the mid and low range.
Uhm, could I get some actual benchmarks on that?
Reminder that the Vega 56 is an extremely good card that's easy to recommend at MSRP, sitting neatly between the 1070 and 1070Ti. Issue is, it's never been less than $100 above MSRP so it's never been a good value in its entire lifetime. It can also be overclocked and generally fucked with to an insane degree, Gamers Nexus overclocked it to handily outperform a stock Vega 64 somehow.
Vega 64 actually sucks dick.
AMD cards in general just respond better with performance gains when you undervolt. Its fucking hilarious.
Holy shit I never knew about this. Googling around corroborates with benchmarks from reddit (admittedly from r/amd, but still a good supportive source). Fucking amazing.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.