Author, kudos for posting hard truths. AMD has good marketing, better then intel and Nvidia. But they don’t have the best products to back it up. Consider that AMD has had to almost give away its CPUs. Free games, free cooler, cheap price. For an inferior chip. U Intel is still at the top of all gaming benchmarks. People have to rationalize buying amd ” well, it’s only ten fps less””we’ll it’s a good value “”we’ll, Intel and Nvidia are evil boogeymen companies that are evil !”
AMD has sold gamers on slow clock speeds and bad memory bandwidth in exchanges for moar cores and threads!!! And yet a & $180 six core six thread Intel outperforms every Ryzen chip in gaming and since the Intel price cuts, AMD has nothing left then marketing and budget gamers fan boys to keep them going.
You've got a really weird notion of "almost give away its CPUs". The cheapest of AMD's third gen Ryzen CPUs that currently dominate the enthusiast market is $180. For the third gen Threadripper parts that dominate the HEDT market, the cheapest is $1400.
Yeah, AMD had to sharply discount some of their CPUs several years ago in order to sell them. But that's not the case today. AMD just had their highest quarterly revenue ever, even though console sales were down and their coming flood of sales from Ryzen Mobile 4000 series and EPYC Rome mostly hasn't kicked in yet.
That Core i5-9400F that you left unnamed but seem to be referring to gets smoked by a Ryzen 5 3600 for about the same price. Singled-threaded performance will at least be close, but once you push a lot of cores, the AMD CPU will win by a lot.
Intel does still have the best single-threaded performance if you're willing to buy one of their top few mainstream consumer parts (basically, a $370 Core i7-9700KF or better), but not by a very large margin. And even that is likely to go away later this year when Zen 3 arrives.
Course you picked the six core Intel chip that gets beaten by Ryzen. Another biased AMD koolaid drinking cult members. I was referring to the 9600K which overclocked beats the Ryzen 9 3900 in gaming at half the Price!!! You can’t even over clock the Ryzen 3rd gen because they are already over volted and pushed to their limits! They run hot and loud, just like Radeon. They had to do that to show a performance gain other wise people while be saying “7nm” is pointless. Which it is. when your 7 nm chip can’t compete with larger, then it’s just marketing bullshit. Gets your numbers and facts straight you’re making yourself look foolish. $370 9700KF? Wtf are you babbling about? Save your AMD cult member ramblings for your AMD circle jerk on Reddit. No downvote button here!
You cited a "$180 six core six thread Intel" before, which is why I chose the only Intel CPU that fit that description. The Core i5-9600K isn't a $180 CPU. It's $240. And if you're willing to spend over $200, you can get a Ryzen 5 3600X for $205 that will about match the Core i5-9600K in single-threaded performance, beat it soundly in heavily-threaded, and use considerably less power either way.
You seem to be pushing outdated information, as it's not 2012 anymore. At least at load, AMD's 7 nm CPUs are considerably more energy efficient than Intel's higher end these days under just about any reasonable workload. The way that the top end Coffee Lake CPUs are able to clock so high is by ignoring the nominal TDP and burning a ton of power. And while AMD's CPUs tend to be clocked pretty close to their limits, that's true of the top end Coffee Lake CPUs, too.
A second opinion piece in two days! Congrats Poorna.
Regardless, feel free to pay the stupidity tax for nVidia. They give you marginal(all things considered) benefits for huge jumps in price. I...wouldn't, but...to each his own.
Also, it's just a series x600 card ; a lower mid tier. Though, it's where most of purchases lie, truth be told. Wouldn't worry about ATi ; after their parent has done punching Intel's teeth out( ), we'll get back to Vega - R7 - Toxic editions and kick nVidia's butt. </div>
Tell me what AMD offers that will give me the same performance as my 2080ti and I'll admit I paid a stupidity tax...
A second opinion piece in two days! Congrats Poorna.
Regardless, feel free to pay the stupidity tax for nVidia. They give you marginal(all things considered) benefits for huge jumps in price. I...wouldn't, but...to each his own.
Also, it's just a series x600 card ; a lower mid tier. Though, it's where most of purchases lie, truth be told. Wouldn't worry about ATi ; after their parent has done punching Intel's teeth out( ), we'll get back to Vega - R7 - Toxic editions and kick nVidia's butt.
Tell me what AMD offers that will give me the same performance as my 2080ti and I'll admit I paid a stupidity tax...
Telling people you own a 2080ti is the same as admitting you paid the stupidity tax. So GG.
I hate to be "that guy" but your bullshit lie that the 5700xt is equal to the radeon vii is wholly inaccurate and I blame youtube personalities for not knowing how to properly test pc hardware.
I own a 1080ti, radeon vii, and 5700xt. When testing each gpu in the same rig odd things occur, especially since they dont match mainstream reviews.
Firstly, the radeon vii eats the 1080ti for breakfast. The r7 is slightly faster. In fact, my r7 gets 2080 performance, while the 1080ti is more akin to the 2070super. A buddy of mine custom liquid cooled his r7 and with heavy oc, it runs 2080 super performance levels. the 5700xt however, is more akin to the 1080ti, as it only gets 2070 super performance. slightly behind the r7 and 2080. now if you custom water cool the 5700xt and heavy oc, yes, it becomes a radeon vii/2080. but almost no one is doing that. (handfull maybe?).
At the end of the day, AMD dis not canabalize anything.
The r7 from my sources was never meant to stick around. You forget Raja Koduri no longer runs AMDs gpu division, he was FIRED and is now at Intel. Raja hates big chips. Polaris, small chip, Vega, small chip, First Navi release, small chip. Over and over small chip. Now at Intel, HE'S MAKING SMALL CHIPS!!!! he's obsessed with small chips and doesn't care for top tier performance. That's why Lisa Su fired him.... he doesnt fit her goals of technological domination..... so back to the RadeonVII.... it was a test. Lisa Su wanted to know 100% that if she released a large die gpu, that fans would buy it.... The R7 sold out 3 times because AMD wasnt actually planning to make it an official long supported card. Sure that's bad news for people like me who bought one. Maybe in the future I will flash it with mi50 bios. But Lisa needed to KNOW people would buy a large chip GPU that wasn't cheap. As i said selling out 3 times told her all she needed to know. Soon after we heard the rumor of "the nvidia killers" and more recent leaks suggest its TWICE the size of a 5700xt.... that means about 80cu's which is just ridiculous in terms of horsepower.
Now if we take the 5700xt, its akin to 2070 super as I said. Now take two 5770xt or in this easy ideal comparison two 2070 super. Play a game that has crossfire/sli support. This dual gpu setup will outperform a single 2080ti in that scenario. Now a single gpu will ALWAYS scale better than dual gpus for a variety of reasons. Which means the double size Navi has the potential to BEAT the 2080ti, not just match it.
Now onto Nvidia. We know from AMD that 14nm to 7nm, you either get 20% more performance at same power, or half power at same performance compared to last generation. However, Nvidia is currently on 12nm, so that 20% performance increase is more akin to 15% most likely less. So a 2080ti in 7nm will be MAX 15% faster. Throw in architecture improvements and we are looking at 25% max performance increase. This does NOT factor in the idea that nvidia could make larger chips to add more performance (aka more cores).
It is VERY possible that big navi, will not only beat the 2080ti, but it could be close to the next 3080ti card in terms of performance. especially if this big navi is using RDNA2 instead of the 5700xt RDNA1.....
Firstly, the radeon vii eats the 1080ti for breakfast. The r7 is slightly faster. In fact, my r7 gets 2080 performance, while the 1080ti is more akin to the 2070super. A buddy of mine custom liquid cooled his r7 and with heavy oc, it runs 2080 super performance levels. the 5700xt however, is more akin to the 1080ti, as it only gets 2070 super performance. slightly behind the r7 and 2080. now if you custom water cool the 5700xt and heavy oc, yes, it becomes a radeon vii/2080. but almost no one is doing that. (handfull maybe?).
1080 TI is slightly faster than Radeon VII. 2070 super about as fast as 1080 TI, so 1080 TI is still really good card. RTX 2080 slightly faster than 2070 Super or 1080 Ti, but the performance difference between them is really small. Radeon 5700 XT is a bit slower than any of the other cards.
Now onto Nvidia. We know from AMD that 14nm to 7nm, you either get 20% more performance at same power, or half power at same performance compared to last generation. However, Nvidia is currently on 12nm, so that 20% performance increase is more akin to 15% most likely less. So a 2080ti in 7nm will be MAX 15% faster. Throw in architecture improvements and we are looking at 25% max performance increase. This does NOT factor in the idea that nvidia could make larger chips to add more performance (aka more cores).
It is VERY possible that big navi, will not only beat the 2080ti, but it could be close to the next 3080ti card in terms of performance. especially if this big navi is using RDNA2 instead of the 5700xt RDNA1.....
We don't know what NVidia will be getting from node change because they will likely be going straight to 7nm EUV fabrication, which is better than AMD's current 7nm.
With that said, last time NVidia did both large node change and large architecture change we had GTX 10xx -generation gaining 50% against GTX 9xx -generation cards. Nvidia is unlikely to gain that much from next generation change, but they can still potentially gain a lot.
Tell me what AMD offers that will give me the same performance as my 2080ti and I'll admit I paid a stupidity tax...
Stupidity might be considered buying NVidia's RTX Titan at about 8 times the cost of AMD's RX 5700 XT for about a 4.3% gain in performance.
At least a 2080ti gets you a gain of about 3.6% for only c. 4 times the cost.
Stupidity is performance numbers on your post. 2080 TI is maybe 40-50% faster than RX 5700 XT, and RTX Titan is faster still.
How silly of me to miss those benchmarks that suggest 40-50%. You absolutely must post them.
I did check Anandtech which compared 5700 cards to 2060 Super Reference. The 2060 was a tiny bit faster in GTA but quite a lot slower on Strange Brigade.
but I couldn't find a direct comparison with the Ti - which is faster than the 2060 they tested of course. Of course the tests showed that - as is often the case - performance is game dependent and also manufacturer dependent.
so back to the RadeonVII.... it was a test. Lisa Su wanted to know 100% that if she released a large die gpu, that fans would buy it.... The R7 sold out 3 times because AMD wasnt actually planning to make it an official long supported card. Sure that's bad news for people like me who bought one. Maybe in the future I will flash it with mi50 bios. But Lisa needed to KNOW people would buy a large chip GPU that wasn't cheap.
There's a whole lot wrong with your post, but I think that's the densest part of it. For starters, the Vega 20 die of the Radeon VII isn't huge. It's 331 mm^2. For comparison, the Vega 10 die of the Radeon RX Vega 64 is 486 mm^2. What constitutes the threshold for a "huge" GPU die is opinion, but my reckoning is that it's 500 mm^2 and up.
Second, while it was a test part, it wasn't in the sense that you think. AMD decided that their lead product on 7 nm would be essentially a straight die shrink of something that they had built before. That way, you don't get things going wrong with a new architecture and other things going wrong with a new process node all at once. You use a known architecture so that you're really just debugging the process node. A decently large die also exposes problems that a tiny die wouldn't. Whatever AMD found that went wrong could quickly be folded into improved designs for third gen Ryzen and Navi.
As a bonus, it was the one 7 nm chip that AMD launched last year that didn't actually need to be good. They desperately needed Zen 2 cores to be good, and also really needed Navi to be good. But Vega 20 was never going to sell in large volumes whether it was good or not, making it the perfect part to risk wrecking if they hit unexpected problems with the process node.
As for flashing it with a Radeon Instinct MI50 BIOS, good luck with that. The driver situation for Radeon Instinct cards is a disaster. As best as I can tell, absolutely no graphics API is supported at all. Even for compute, which is the point of the cards, driver support is far from great.
Tell me what AMD offers that will give me the same performance as my 2080ti and I'll admit I paid a stupidity tax...
Stupidity might be considered buying NVidia's RTX Titan at about 8 times the cost of AMD's RX 5700 XT for about a 4.3% gain in performance.
At least a 2080ti gets you a gain of about 3.6% for only c. 4 times the cost.
Stupidity is performance numbers on your post. 2080 TI is maybe 40-50% faster than RX 5700 XT, and RTX Titan is faster still.
How silly of me to miss those benchmarks that suggest 40-50%. You absolutely must post them.
I did check Anandtech which compared 5700 cards to 2060 Super Reference. The 2060 was a tiny bit faster in GTA but quite a lot slower on Strange Brigade.
but I couldn't find a direct comparison with the Ti - which is faster than the 2060 they tested of course. Of course the tests showed that - as is often the case - performance is game dependent and also manufacturer dependent.
According to that RTX 2080 TI compared to RX 5700 XT on 4K graphics is:
58% faster on Shadow of War
72% faster on Rainbow Six Siege
55% faster on Metro Exodus
42% faster on Far Cry New Dawn
46% faster on Shadow of The Tomb Raider
Your mistake with that Tom's Hardware hierarchy chart is that they're running two tests in 1080p and one test in 2K, using Intel's CPU from 2017. Best modern GPUs are good enough that on those settings and system they're running against CPU limitations, and hence that chart has a collection of 7 different GPUs on the top all within 5% of each other.
This entire article is hilarious.
Do I seriously have to remind you that AMD has 25% the R&D budget as Intel & Nvidia. And STILL AMD managed to surpass Intel. And is quite literally right behind Nvidia. Possibly surpassing them this year. MORE importantly! AMD is competing both in the GPU & CPU space so that R&D budget is even split further.
Sorry Pooma, but when you compare budgets your article reads more like a joke than something I could ever take seriously. THANK God AMD caught up because the price gouging from Intel & Nvidia for the last decade was getting ridiculous.
I switch to team red last year with the 5700 XT & 3900X. And it is a custom rig I know I will not need to upgrade any time soon.
I'm not going to buy Nvidia's top of the line GPU, because what is the point? An overpriced GPU for 1 year? Oh but wait I also need to buy an overpriced G-Sync Monitor too.
AMD just confirm loads more graphics cards for 2020. If this article was written last August 2019 I'd understand, but to write it now just seems.... sad or at least paid for.
Regardless not the first time you've been critical of AMD for ridiculous reasons, doubt it will be the last.
Comments
You seem to be pushing outdated information, as it's not 2012 anymore. At least at load, AMD's 7 nm CPUs are considerably more energy efficient than Intel's higher end these days under just about any reasonable workload. The way that the top end Coffee Lake CPUs are able to clock so high is by ignoring the nominal TDP and burning a ton of power. And while AMD's CPUs tend to be clocked pretty close to their limits, that's true of the top end Coffee Lake CPUs, too.
Tell me what AMD offers that will give me the same performance as my 2080ti and I'll admit I paid a stupidity tax...
Telling people you own a 2080ti is the same as admitting you paid the stupidity tax. So GG.
Stupidity might be considered buying NVidia's RTX Titan at about 8 times the cost of AMD's RX 5700 XT for about a 4.3% gain in performance.
At least a 2080ti gets you a gain of about 3.6% for only c. 4 times the cost.
I own a 1080ti, radeon vii, and 5700xt. When testing each gpu in the same rig odd things occur, especially since they dont match mainstream reviews.
Firstly, the radeon vii eats the 1080ti for breakfast. The r7 is slightly faster. In fact, my r7 gets 2080 performance, while the 1080ti is more akin to the 2070super. A buddy of mine custom liquid cooled his r7 and with heavy oc, it runs 2080 super performance levels. the 5700xt however, is more akin to the 1080ti, as it only gets 2070 super performance. slightly behind the r7 and 2080. now if you custom water cool the 5700xt and heavy oc, yes, it becomes a radeon vii/2080. but almost no one is doing that. (handfull maybe?).
At the end of the day, AMD dis not canabalize anything.
The r7 from my sources was never meant to stick around. You forget Raja Koduri no longer runs AMDs gpu division, he was FIRED and is now at Intel. Raja hates big chips. Polaris, small chip, Vega, small chip, First Navi release, small chip. Over and over small chip. Now at Intel, HE'S MAKING SMALL CHIPS!!!! he's obsessed with small chips and doesn't care for top tier performance. That's why Lisa Su fired him.... he doesnt fit her goals of technological domination..... so back to the RadeonVII.... it was a test. Lisa Su wanted to know 100% that if she released a large die gpu, that fans would buy it.... The R7 sold out 3 times because AMD wasnt actually planning to make it an official long supported card. Sure that's bad news for people like me who bought one. Maybe in the future I will flash it with mi50 bios. But Lisa needed to KNOW people would buy a large chip GPU that wasn't cheap. As i said selling out 3 times told her all she needed to know. Soon after we heard the rumor of "the nvidia killers" and more recent leaks suggest its TWICE the size of a 5700xt.... that means about 80cu's which is just ridiculous in terms of horsepower.
Now if we take the 5700xt, its akin to 2070 super as I said. Now take two 5770xt or in this easy ideal comparison two 2070 super. Play a game that has crossfire/sli support. This dual gpu setup will outperform a single 2080ti in that scenario. Now a single gpu will ALWAYS scale better than dual gpus for a variety of reasons. Which means the double size Navi has the potential to BEAT the 2080ti, not just match it.
Now onto Nvidia. We know from AMD that 14nm to 7nm, you either get 20% more performance at same power, or half power at same performance compared to last generation. However, Nvidia is currently on 12nm, so that 20% performance increase is more akin to 15% most likely less. So a 2080ti in 7nm will be MAX 15% faster. Throw in architecture improvements and we are looking at 25% max performance increase. This does NOT factor in the idea that nvidia could make larger chips to add more performance (aka more cores).
It is VERY possible that big navi, will not only beat the 2080ti, but it could be close to the next 3080ti card in terms of performance. especially if this big navi is using RDNA2 instead of the 5700xt RDNA1.....
If all mainstream reviews agree on something and you don't get same results, then the problem is at your end.
We don't know what NVidia will be getting from node change because they will likely be going straight to 7nm EUV fabrication, which is better than AMD's current 7nm.
With that said, last time NVidia did both large node change and large architecture change we had GTX 10xx -generation gaining 50% against GTX 9xx -generation cards. Nvidia is unlikely to gain that much from next generation change, but they can still potentially gain a lot.
How silly of me to miss those benchmarks that suggest 40-50%. You absolutely must post them.
I did check Anandtech which compared 5700 cards to 2060 Super Reference. The 2060 was a tiny bit faster in GTA but quite a lot slower on Strange Brigade.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15094/in-the-lab-asrock-radeon-rx-5700-xt-taichi-x-8g-oc-graphics-card
but I couldn't find a direct comparison with the Ti - which is faster than the 2060 they tested of course. Of course the tests showed that - as is often the case - performance is game dependent and also manufacturer dependent.
So I just went with the summary provided by:
https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html
If only those Tomshardware people had seen your benchmarks they could have avoided looking so stupid.
Second, while it was a test part, it wasn't in the sense that you think. AMD decided that their lead product on 7 nm would be essentially a straight die shrink of something that they had built before. That way, you don't get things going wrong with a new architecture and other things going wrong with a new process node all at once. You use a known architecture so that you're really just debugging the process node. A decently large die also exposes problems that a tiny die wouldn't. Whatever AMD found that went wrong could quickly be folded into improved designs for third gen Ryzen and Navi.
As a bonus, it was the one 7 nm chip that AMD launched last year that didn't actually need to be good. They desperately needed Zen 2 cores to be good, and also really needed Navi to be good. But Vega 20 was never going to sell in large volumes whether it was good or not, making it the perfect part to risk wrecking if they hit unexpected problems with the process node.
As for flashing it with a Radeon Instinct MI50 BIOS, good luck with that. The driver situation for Radeon Instinct cards is a disaster. As best as I can tell, absolutely no graphics API is supported at all. Even for compute, which is the point of the cards, driver support is far from great.
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_5700_and_5700_xt_review,1.html
According to that RTX 2080 Ti compared to RX 5700 XT on 4K graphics is:
Or Tweaktown review:
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/9049/amd-radeon-rx-5700-xt-step-right-direction/index11.html
According to that RTX 2080 TI compared to RX 5700 XT on 4K graphics is:
Your mistake with that Tom's Hardware hierarchy chart is that they're running two tests in 1080p and one test in 2K, using Intel's CPU from 2017. Best modern GPUs are good enough that on those settings and system they're running against CPU limitations, and hence that chart has a collection of 7 different GPUs on the top all within 5% of each other.
Sorry Pooma, but when you compare budgets your article reads more like a joke than something I could ever take seriously. THANK God AMD caught up because the price gouging from Intel & Nvidia for the last decade was getting ridiculous.
I switch to team red last year with the 5700 XT & 3900X. And it is a custom rig I know I will not need to upgrade any time soon.
I'm not going to buy Nvidia's top of the line GPU, because what is the point? An overpriced GPU for 1 year? Oh but wait I also need to buy an overpriced G-Sync Monitor too.
AMD just confirm loads more graphics cards for 2020. If this article was written last August 2019 I'd understand, but to write it now just seems.... sad or at least paid for.
Regardless not the first time you've been critical of AMD for ridiculous reasons, doubt it will be the last.