AMD to unveil Radeon RX 6000 GPUs on Oct 28

At long last, AMD has announced when it will unveil its RDNA 2 "Big Navi" Radeon RX 6000 GPUs: October 28. With any luck, they'll be competitive with nvidia's GeForce RTX 30- series up to the 3070 or 3080.

And as an aside, AMD has also announced that it will unveil Zen 3 Ryzen 4000 CPUs on October 8.

This fall, we're getting a new GPU generation from nvidia, a new GPU generation from AMD, a new CPU generation from AMD, a new Xbox generation, and a new Playstation generation. I'd say gamers are about to be spoiled rotten. (Now, if only Nintendo would announce a Switch Pro )

https://www.pcworld.com/article/357...adeon-rx-6000-gpus-are-coming-october-28.html

 

I don't have high hopes for AMD winning the performance crown, but if they get the RX6000 more power efficient than the RTX3000 the new mobile lineup could become very interesting this Spring.

 

It's safe to say this is an exciting time for gamers and technology in general. In fact, I can't remember the last time things got this heated.
There are some sketchy leaked benchmarks for Nvidia's RTX 3000 series, and though they look good, anyone with money to spend on hardware would probably serve themselves best by waiting for AMD's announcement.

Charles

 

yes this is a crazy time so many things going on at once.

 

I was 100% sure I was going to try to nab a 3080 on launch day. It might be for the best if that doesn't pan out, probably will end up having to wait until AMD releases their volley in that case anyway.

I still have my 2070, so I'm not super hurting, I'd just like to get it before Cyberpunk, but I know if I can't score one before then I'm going to play it anyway on the 2070.. I'd really rather not though..

 

My totally unsolicited advice is to wait for AMD's announcement, just in case it allows you to get a better deal in the long run

 

My thinking exactly basically in regards to Cyberpunk and RT enabled WoW xpac @ 4k. In the end, I'll still play both on whatever is in the box. I'd even limp along and play it on my laptop during that time if I was in between cards.

 

this is alot different than nvidias release but some leaked benchmarks show the rx6000 matching the 2080ti....but at what price

 

We can guess all we want.

Personally I'm not interested in 3090 levels of performance at >350w, but in power efficient performance that can seep down in mobile gpus.

 

I'd have to disagree with you on this point. More VRAM will be required for future games, that's a given. However I don't think we'll need as vast an increase as some are pitching. More VRAM is always welcome though as it does allow for future proofing.

According to the steam hardware survey, over 65% of users are playing games at 1080p still, myself included. This is a huge majority. Since most PC gamers use steam, I'd say it's pretty accurate to say most people are perfectly happy about 1080p. I can't say that with 100% certainty though as a lot of these people may want to go to 4K, but can't afford a GPU to drive that resolution in games. However, I do think it is safe to assume most people are content with 1080p. I don't know anyone personally who is interested in moving to 4K, much less 1440p. 4K gaming is not currently a good value proposition, so people will probably stay away from it until we get $200-$300 cards that can do 4K@60FPS.

If we assume 1080p will continue to be the de-facto standard for at least this generation and start seeing the mainstream transition to 4K next gen with the Hopper 4000 series cards, 8GB of VRAM should still be enough for at least the next 4 years if you only game at 1080p. This is just conjecture though. Anything is possible.

I personally am eyeing the 3070. I'd like a card for high framerate gaming at 1080p, which my 1060 cannot do in newer games. I do not plan on moving to 4K until a card that can do 4K@120FPS in newer games is released. I will not bother with 1440p since 4K looks better and I'd rather make a more drastic jump than an iterative one. I don't want to buy a monitor to replace my current one, which I just got about two years ago.

 

I'm with you on this one. New video cards like the 3080 are around constant 60 fps at 4K with the scaling trick, but still far from 120fps on the 1% low. The thing is all current benchmarks are "old gen" games, wait for the new PS5 games gen and the 3080 won't be able to push 4k to constant 60fps. So you have to lower the resolution to the non-native resolution of your screen and get the blurry image issue, and agghh it just doesn't worth it. I rather play at constant 120+ fps with a monitor of native 1080p, I honestly get a better experience at 1080p120+fps than at 4k60-fps... that's my opinion

 

I had to do some rather radical cleanup of this thread ...there was some good info, but it was mixed in with the back-and-forth comments.

Charles

 

As some of the hopefully-good-info that was discussed before the thread was cleaned up, @hfm and I were discussing how the RTX 3070 will likely be a strong contender for 4k60fps gaming, assuming you're okay with dialing down the settings a tad. And seeing as the visual differences between "ultra" and "high" settings tend to be minimal in most games, you likely won't be missing out on much visual detail versus having an RTX 3080 and cranking everything to max. And this isn't even considering the fantastic visual and performance upgrades using DLSS upscaling, which is a technology that will hopefully explode this generation.

The more I think about it, the less confident I feel that I will buy an AMD GPU. Even if AMD announces RX 6000 GPUs with similar native performance to nvidia's RTX 30- GPUs, it's unlikely that they'll be able to compete with the quality and performance enhancements brought by nvidia's DLSS. I'll still wait for the announcement - who knows, maybe AMD will surprise us with amazing AI upscaling that's competitive with DLSS. I doubt it, but we'll see.

 

I have my doubts as well, I am super prepared to be delighted though. nVidia needs the competition at the high end badly. The 3080 will fit my needs just fine though, so an option exists, if you can find one.

 

Well, AMD is clearly confident about RX 6000's launch, at least.



More details: AMD promises Big Navi launch won’t suffer the same problems that befell Nvidia’s RTX 3080 release

We'll see!

 

I'm not impressed with NV's DLSS 2.0.

In comparison between NV DLSS 2.0 and AMD Fidelity FX... slight edge seems to go to DLSS 2.0, but for the most part, I'd say they pretty much equal each other (in various places, Fidelity FX manages to better DLSS 2.0 - which to me seems rather ridiculous because you'd assume that AI training would produce FAR superior results... and yet, that's not the case) :
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/hri67n/death_stranding_dlss_20_vs_native_vs_fidelityfx/

Either way, DLSS is not something to pin your hopes in.
It would seem that (for now at least), whatever NV does using proprietary features, AMD does a good job in matching it with open-source (which tends to be platform agnostic).

At any rate, hw is seldom kept by people for longer than 4 or 5 years anyway. And by that time, both companies will probably come out with newer features that will (again) be comparable to each other and blow previous features out of the water.

As for questioning whether AMD can produce 3xxx levels of performance...
huh... it seems to me a lot of people online have adopted an attitude of 'AMD could never hope to compete with NV in the high end' before RDNA 2 is even out.

I'm curious... where on earth are people getting this information? It seems that its mostly based on personal opinion and rumors that hadn't been demonstrated to be accurate in the slightest.

Furthermore, why the obsession with the absolute high end?
Most people won't be getting those GPU's to begin with. The majority of people will be getting mid range GPU's and those that are a tier above that (higher end) taking up second place.

Absolute high end is more along the lines of a niche... unless of course AMD comes out with a GPU that matches or beats 3090 with a much lower price tag (which is possible... but AMD is not a charity either... so even if absolute high end RDNA 2 matches/exceeds 3090... chances are it probably won't be cheap - but who knows what kind of pricing AMD has in store - as of right now we have 0 confirmation on anything except rumors and a few Linux code leakages... which yes can be used as a point of possible extrapolation, but nothing to provide us with concrete performance analysis, all new features, etc. - at least until the GPU's are released and given proper 3rd party reviews).

 

I'm impressed with DLSS 2.0. Like you said, it's better than Fidelity FX. Both can get better over time, but there's more room for DLSS to grow as its AI continues to improve.

Moreover, people have good reason to suspect that AMD's cards will not be competitive with nvidia's offerings (re: past 10 years). And not just at the "absolute" high end (Titan/3090); AMD hasn't been competitive with nvidia's GTX/RTX xx70 cards either.

I have no brand loyalty. I'll buy whichever company's product is better. And I'm not discounting AMD; indeed, I'm hopeful they can compete both in terms of native performance and upscaling. But color me skeptical.

 

I said DLSS 2.0 'slightly' edges out FidelidyFX (there is a difference), and to be fair, to me, they both look pretty much the same (to the point where 'slightly edges out' is in the same realm of AMD and Intel CPU's being within a margin of error of each other in various benchmarks, or Intel having maybe 6% advantage in single threaded performance due to higher clocks - quantifiable? Yes. Relevant? Not in the slightest (especially when AMD's is more than good enough and the mentioned differences wouldn't be noticed anyway... its the same with DLSS and FidelityFX... who the heck is going to be able to tell the difference? You need to stand still for long periods to notice anything, and if DLSS is better in 'some' aspects it most noticeably comes with faults such as artifacting - same with AMD... both methods produce pretty much same results to the point where differences are minor at best and both come with minor trade-offs). They both come with pretty much the same performance enhancements (with FidelityFX coming out on top in various metrics even - AND, FidelityFX is hardware agnostic, whereas DLSS is not)... so like I said, I am NOT impressed with DLSS at all - if anything I find it pretenteous.
Its yet another attempt by NV to try and control the market like they did with CUDA by paying devs to specifically program software to take advantage of it as opposed to OpenCL (which is just as capable, and in some situations even more so, and doesn't even have any licensing fees).

It seems to me that AMD have managed to remain competitive in the GPU arena rather well... they produced both mid and high end products that match or exceed NV's for lower price... the only segment they hadn't competed in a while is the 'absolute high end'... and quite frankly, that segment is a niche in itself (a halo product) to the point where very very few people buy into... they just 'like' to look at the absolute top end and make grandiose deductions that just because NV currently has (even though this wasn't the case always) higher performing absolute high end GPU that ALL their gpu's are similarly good... when we know that's not the case.

 

Not really sure what the point is of emphasizing how "slight" the advantage of DLSS is over Fidelity FX. All other things equal, people want the best value for their dollar, no matter how slight (or "pretentious"). And all other things are not equal. Nvidia cards have consistently outperformed AMD cards in the previous several generations, and not just at the "absolute" top of the high end. I don't like it--I'd prefer competition--but the facts are what they are.

You clearly are on Team Red; I'm on Team Competition, because competition drives greater innovation and lower prices. Which means I'm rooting for AMD this time around, because I know they're the underdog. I'll also be rooting for Intel, should they ever get around to releasing Xe dGPUs.

If AMD can release something better than the 3080 or 3070 with DLSS and ray-tracing at a better price point, I'll happily buy it. I'm skeptical, but hopeful.

 

5700xt is on average 6% slower than a 2070 Super and faster than a 2070 and beating both on several benchmarks (while obviously slightly or greater losing on others).

Of course it loses to the 2080, 2080 Super and 2080ti, but to say it doesn't compete with the 2070 series isn't accurate.

 

I stand corrected on the 5700xt vs 2070. AMD has been closing the gap at the higher end, which makes me hopeful for a strong RDNA 2 lineup.

 

I hope so too. I have a 4k display due to arrive mid October to replace my dying 2560x1600 display and I'm looking for something to drive it (and then some) at a reasonable cost. Team Red and a 6900xt or Team Green and a 3080....doesn't matter to me.

 

Rumor mill is back for another spin with 2.3GHz+ game clock and 255W TGP. That TGP if so looking interesting. Can't wait for proper reviews to see how their stab at RT stands up.

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-nav...hz-game-clock-250w-tgp-and-16-gb-gddr6-memory

 

Agreed, I'm pretty excited to see how AMD pans out. If it's anything like their CPUs, we maybe in for something special.

This is intriguing too: "The big unknown is still the XTX variant. It all appears that Navi 21 XTX is AMD exclusive. It is possibly a higher clocked version with more CUs enabled, but AIbs have no further information at the moment."

and of course the comments section is a poo tossing riot as always...

 

Lol yeah.. nowhere near as bad as wccftech, but as usual comment sections on these sites are useless garbage.

EDIT: ugh just waded into the comment section there again (wccftech).. why I don't know. I just added their domain to my blocklist in my router, there's plenty of other sites that don't let pure garbage infiltrate their comment sections.

 

Holy crap. Was anyone expecting AMD to be announce cards competitive at all levels--even with the 3090? Still need to wait for independent reviews, but the news is amazing.

Not too keen on the 6800 price of $579 though. That's only $80 cheaper than the 6800XT, and $80 more expensive than the RTX 3070. Though if their presentation is to be believed, the 6800 will stomp all over the 2080TI, and by extension, the 3070. We'll see.

 

AMD may bring 295x2 like dual card with dual 6900 XT that might eat up lot of power when OC'ed. I just took a look Gamer Nexus video and they did highlight 6900XT scores were with Smart access + Rage mode.

 

It's nice to see AMD announce products that can finally compete with NVIDIA at the high end of the market. However, it is concerning that, while they mentioned DX12 Ultimate compatibility, they said nothing about ray tracing performance. You'd think that if they were at least competitive with team green, they would want to talk about it.

 

Agreed. The silence about RT perf or which games will even be compatible is a little telling, but I will await reviews. It definitely got me to consider not biting on it if EVGA sends me a note that my queue position for a 3080 is up before I can see some real objective comparative analysis against the 3000 series.

 

AMD said in the launch that Big Navi will indeed have ray tracing hardware acceleration so that should be ok, also consoles will be doing RT so AMD will figure it out to get decent RT or maybe a cheaper RT giving that consoles will be implementing RT for AMD hardware and Nvidia will have to translate that RT to the RTX architecture. What worries me more is the lack of DLSS. If no DLSS (equivalent) on AMD that would be a huge down in 4k performance compared to Nvidia, which would be a shame giving that AMD has great ideas in the hardware department but they lack in the software department. That direct access for the AMD CPU to the GPU memory should bring an interesting boost at 1080p/1440p so maybe you should wait for reviews and see what that combo has to offer.

 

Agree 100%. DLSS may be the deciding factor for me. I'm waiting to see what the reviews say.

 

DLSS is definitely a promising development but I’d need to see it implemented across the board rather than a handful of games to feel like it would weigh into enticing my purchase decision.
Personally not concerned with Ray tracing performance on either cards until having it turned on doesn’t nuke frames back to the dark ages.
Possibly we’re on the cusp of something very cool if the two get married together though.

For now good on AMD it seems. I’ve somewhat interested for the first time in a very long time.

 

AMD said they are working on DLSS alternative (Super Resolution I think its called), but it won't be implemented this year... I think its coming next year.

Also to keep in mind is the fact that support for DLSS 2.0 needs to be written into the game... and literally not many games have that support.

I don't think its a make or break decision.
FidelityFX does the job just fine for now... it gives same/similar performance uplifts like DLSS 2.0 and sharp images when it upscales them... admittedly though, it doesn't do anything AI related to reconstruct lost details... but in order to notice those details, you'd need to be standing still and heavily zoom in on the object... point is, it wouldn't be noticed most of the time when you're actually playing a game... and by the time it becomes overtly obvious, AMD will have its own open source version of DLSS out.

 

The leaked numbers showing very poor RT performance in the 6800xt versus the 3000 series might be why RT was not part of their presentation. Same reason AMD used Rage Mode and Smart Access Memory when comparing the 6900xt to the 3090.

Like Nvidia, you want your big reveal presented in the best light possible.

If RT isn’t a priority, the 6000 series suddenly becomes very viable

 

Man the RX 6800 at $580 looks pretty sweet, you get like a 10%+ more performance than the 2080 Ti, but also you get 5 GB more of VRAM GDDR6:



The RTX 3070 was a bit disappointing to me, it lose at most games to the 2080 Ti, and when both overclocked it lose by a wider margin. What I don't like from the chart above is you need to couple the RX 6800 with an AMD CPU to get smart access memory. I hope we get some 3rd party benchmarks with Intel CPUs to see how the RX 6800 performance in all scenarios

 

The 6800 XT ($680) beating the RTX 3090 ($1500) at 4K? Apparently yes, in some games with some hardware configuration:



Check AMD's site to see more benchs made by AMD off course.

https://www.amd.com/en/gaming/graphics-gaming-benchmarks

 

After playing WoW with RT on, I’ll be going for the best RT card. None of their benchmarks have RT on.

Here’s a good overall summary. Make sure to read the comments too:

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-dis...900xt-rx-6800xt-and-rx-6800-gaming-benchmarks

 

Just like the 3rd party reviews brought Nvidia crashing back to reality, so too will the 6000 series.

The way Jensen was all hopped up on how the 3070 beat the 2080ti was a bit of a stretch now that we're here and 3rd party reviewers have set the record straight. But at $499 it is more than close enough. I don't like the 8GB though.

Outside of the 3090 (which has horrific price : performance), I think Nvidia missed the mark with their memory amounts on all their cards. 3070 should have had 10GB, 3080 should have had 16GB.

Like @Papusan and I bandied about, a 3080ti is DEFINITELY coming @ $999 with at least 16GB.

I tend to judge cards (and now CPUs) out of the box as OCs vary and with smart boosting becoming mainstream, OC room will continue to shrink. That’s a blessing or a curse depending on your audience.

My personal opinion is that when 3rd party reviewers get a hold of the 6000 series, DLSS and especially RT is going to be Nvidia's saving grace and that when on a non AMD platform non DLSS/RT, the 3090 > 6900xt, 6800xt ~= 3080. With DLSS and especially RT enabled, the gap will widen in Nvidia's favor.


All is fair in competition and if coupling a 5000 series CPU with a 6000 card wins it all, so be it. In the end, all that matters is top performance tempered with those who factor in price : performance.

I have a 3090 and I have zero (non, nada, zilch) problems returning it / selling it and scooping up a 6900xt if it can match or beat a 3090's RT performance or even moving to a 5900/5950 + 6900xt and also jettisoning my (well 2nd of 3) 9900k + MB and
being left with a sole 9900ks in my laptop.

 

Same here (not about WoW, I hate MMOs, just RT in general), I'm definitely waiting for real world DXR benchmarks. Hopefully EVGA doesn't notify me that my queue spot is up for a 3080 before that, I would have a hard time letting it go. Just the simple fact that AMD included zero RT benchmarks in their presentation doesn't really bode well for that though. If they had something extremely competitive in that respect they would have said something to further entice people thinking about an nVidia card to hold off.

I don't think we'll need more than 8-10GB unless you want to use the absolute highest quality textures at 4K. Just about every game I've played I can't tell the difference between the ungodly size textures and one or two notches below that, and the vram savings is usually non-trivial going down a tad. I wonder what the cost differential between GDDR6 and GDDR6X is.

 

AMD popping off with "chartz" but completely avoiding the RT comparison has to mean Nvidia is wiping the floor with them in that department.

It would be smart to just get it out of the way now.

 

There's some new rumors on the typical sites that the RT performance is actually decent, but as usual the rumors could be correct but I'm not trusting them. You can't currently buy any of the cards anyway, it doesn't matter unless you like to argue with people and have some brand fanaticism. lol

 

https://videocardz.com/newz/alleged...nd-tomb-raider-with-dxr-performance-leaks-out

Leak warning as always, but 6000 series is the real deal. Looks like the real winner might be Nvidia DLSS.

Part of the fun before 3rd party reviewers drop the hammer of the lead up speculation is all the leaks and conjecture. I could do without the fanaticism too. In the end it's a piece of hardware you slam into a motherboard to make graphics go boom boom faster.


One of the posters below:




Such a great time for hardware right now with Nvidia and AMD so close along with AMD bringing the big boy heat to Intel too.

Basically, AMD is firing on all cylinders right now and it rocks for everybody. I can easily imagine a full team red buildout w/ a 5000 series CPU and 6000 GPU...then things might get weird between it and my laptop.

 

With 3080 Ti being 384-bit, that all but confirms it has 12GB.

 

If out of the box, I'd say that AMD's has the advantage using the Smart Access Memory + Rage Mode, that's essentially overclocking, and the lower the resolution the more advantage to AMD thanks to the Smart Access Memory.

Personally I don't care about DLSS because I'm going to be playing @1080p for a while so no need to DLSS for me. About RT let's wait and see what AMD has to offer there. Remember consoles will be using RT too, and consoles are AMD hardware based, so anything that a console can do, an AMD PC can also do it. So maybe AMD won't be doing so well in current RT titles but in future games AMD might drastically improve in RT performance.

I've been closely following eBay's auctions for video cards, and people is still paying nearly $600 for a 2080 Super. What's wrong with this people? In a couple of months a 2080 Super will worth less than $300. I wouldn't pay more than $600 for a 2080 Ti, and more than $450 for a 2080 Super. I just hope we all get better prices with this more competition that apparently AMD has brought to the game

 

What 3080 Ti?

AMD was in the previous consoles as well, didn't seem to make much difference, but I'm hoping things are a little different this time around. All things being equal both cards using DXR it'll just come down to who's RT implementation is better. I agree though, it's REALLY GOOD to see AMD in the thick of it, it's about time.

Also, saw a rumor that they ARE going to be talking about RT and Super Resolution before launch day.

 

Confirmed:
AMD's Frank Azor confirms Radeon RX 6000's ray tracing and super sampling info will be available in the run up to launch

 

We've gotten so used to "Oh look Intel won again" and "Nvidia is still superior" that it is really exciting times to see AMD dropping the hammer all over the place. I'm so glad I have a return window till end of January 2021 (or sell) so I can sit back and let it all unfold real time WHILE playing the WoW Xpac (drops Nov 23rd) and decide which direction I want to go.

I can't ask for more than that....choice without here and now compromise (IE struggling on my old 5700xt).

 

It seems like AMD 6000 series does pretty well at RT. These are RT performance leaks for the RX 6800 ($580):

 

Some leaked TS Extreme scores puts the 6800xt right in the same ballpark as the 3080 and the 6900xt (estimated) right in the same ballpark as the 3090.

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-on-par-with-rtx-3080/

 

A bit disappointed by those scores. Unless rage mode were off. For sure Smart Access Memory was off, because it needs a Ryzen 5000 series CPU to work. Smart Access Memory would bring a 5-10% jump in performance