It would be very strange if this were 32 on the ROPs (Doubt it) it should be 64

Anyways this is a 6700XT thats had some defective yields. I think 10GB is silly, I see this being a OEM (Dell/HP) card.

www.sapphiretech.com/en/news

partially defective memory controllers ig.
makes perfect sense tbh

I wonder if the naming is a sign of things to come. I could see the 7000 series released w/o the RX moniker. (Especially since the 7970 was so well received [and rebranded]).

LabRat 891I wonder if the naming is a sign of things to come. I could see the 7000 series released w/o the RX moniker. (Especially since the 7970 was so well received [and rebranded]).

I see R11 instead of RXI

I wonder how many suckers will get caught out by marketing and think they are are getting a RX6700XT.

Why not RX? Even the 6400 got that branding. I can agree with losing a totally pointless prefix from model names, but it's a little odd within the same generation.

Guys the successor to the Radeon 6700 is already out!
www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-hd-6790.c283
=P

Must cost no higher than $199. All Radeon graphics cards' MSRPs must get updates to lower values.

Where will they put it in the densely populated, anyways, product stack?
98%, 100%, 112%... maybe 105% the performance but what is the point?


AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database

ARFMust cost no higher than $199. All Radeon graphics cards' MSRPs must get updates to lower values.

Where will they put it in the densely populated, anyways, product stack?
98%, 100%, 112%... maybe 105% the performance but what is the point?


AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database

That's 3D performance you're comparing. The 6700 is not an RX card, so it can't do 3D. :D

eidairaman1I think 10GB is silly

So did everyone else, but that didn't stop Nvidia from doing it.

eidairaman1It would be very strange if this were 32 on the ROPs (Doubt it) it should be 64

Anyways this is a 6700XT thats had some defective yields. I think 10GB is silly, I see this being a OEM (Dell/HP) card.

www.sapphiretech.com/en/news

Isn't the number of ROPs closely connected to the memory bus? If so, this card should either have a 160-bit bus, or 9 GB VRAM. Or is it just Nvidia that does that?

Scratch that, I see we only know the number of TMUs. I guess I'm a bit tired after a night shift. :ohwell: But then, 12/10= 1.2... 64/1.2= 53.333333... that's how many ROPs we have. :roll:

This is great, I'm all for dropping meaningless redundant suffixes/prefixes. IMO next generation could discard all that and just be Radeon 7900, 7800, 7700 and so on.

trsttteThis is great, I'm all for dropping meaningless redundant suffixes/prefixes. IMO next generation could discard all that and just be Radeon 7900, 7800, 7700 and so on.

I can't wait until we get to the Radeon 9700! :D

AusWolfThat's 3D performance you're comparing. The 6700 is not an RX card, so it can't do 3D. :D

Err, what can it do?

ARFErr, what can it do?

Um... it has a video decoder... I guess? :roll:

Or maybe it can do 3D. Maybe it's as fast as a 6600 XT. But it will definitely consume MOAR POWAH! :rockout:

progsteGuys the successor to the Radeon 6700 is already out!
www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-hd-6790.c283
=P

Quickly call MLID! He totally missed this

I must say the lack of X'es doesn't instill confidence in this product.

Vayra86Quickly call MLID! He totally missed this

I must say the lack of X'es doesn't instill confidence in this product.

No X'es, true... but at least it has a 9 in it.

I figure it'll be about 107% relative performance if ROPs remain 64 like the others which would make sense. That means it could be priced and positioned between the 6650XT and 6700XT along with memory capacity and TDP between the two. It pretty much steps in and better addresses what the 6650XT doesn't. It's based on Navi 22 however so idk how that will work out, but if their salvaging semi defective chips in this manner anyway it's a net positive. I can't imagine it'll have it'll have a long production run unless defects to turn into these parts is higher than I think and I can't imagine they take good chips to cripple intentionally into these SKU's then again maybe if there is a cost angle to it in regard to all the other components involved like memory and PCB design.

ARFMust cost no higher than $199. All Radeon graphics cards' MSRPs must get updates to lower values.

Where will they put it in the densely populated, anyways, product stack?
98%, 100%, 112%... maybe 105% the performance but what is the point?


AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database

interesting

another laptop gpu coming to desktop like 6500xt
www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-6700m.c3775

xXSurvivoranother laptop gpu coming to desktop like 6500xt
www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-6700m.c3775

You have that backwards, it's a desktop GPU that was cutdown and power limited to fit in laptops, and now is being cutdown also for the desktop.

Maybe with the 6x50 refresh they didn't get enough silicon to qualify for the slight spec bump or they want to fill shelfs with more products, who knows.

AusWolfIsn't the number of ROPs closely connected to the memory bus? If so, this card should either have a 160-bit bus, or 9 GB VRAM. Or is it just Nvidia that does that?

Scratch that, I see we only know the number of TMUs. I guess I'm a bit tired after a night shift. :ohwell: But then, 12/10= 1.2... 64/1.2= 53.333333... that's how many ROPs we have. :roll:

SPs are 2304, TMUs are 144, Rops should be 64 and not 32.

Notice how they match up to a RX590 outside of the ROP count?

I really suspect this to be an OEM part

This is an interesting card. The lack of "RX" is really weird, but it kind of makes sense -- I saw this 36 CU 160-bit variant listed before the 6700 XT launch and it was labeled as a "GL" variant of Navi 22, meaning intended for professional GPUs, not Radeon RX. Though apparently this configuration has also made its way into some laptops. Wonder if there'll be any explanation.

It's clear it's a straight linear design change between 6650XT and 6700XT with cuts to everything aside from the ROPs from a partially functional 6700XT Navi 22 chip. There is nothing to be confused about with it the ROPs don't need to be cut so they won't be especially where it's positioned. AMD hasn't cut ROPs too much on RNDA2 overall except for wider staggered performance tiers to then differentiate further around.

The one product SKU gap that I think AMD didn't cover is something above the 6500XT with a wider memory bus and 6GB VRAM that has more CU/SP/TMUs. It would probably require a partially defective Navi 23 chip for that purpose and would end up having 24 CU's to best position itself in between. Still I don't think it'll happen since yields for lower end parts are better and simply crippling them intentionally is pure nonsensical in general.

I think if anything AMD should aim to fill that gap with RDNA3 quickly and if it's on a newer node with a bit quicker memory speeds it can probably match or beat a 6500XT or 6400XT on performance and efficiency. The 6500XT shouldn't be too hard to beat on performance per watt for a chip like that being introduced, but I wouldn't doubt it could closely match a 6400XT on power draw with performance between the 6500XT and RX 6600. It could probably even trade blows with the RX 6600 in RTRT titles if it has a bit more hardware dedicated to that. They need to do better on the encode/decode support this time. I think it would be nice if it had a input for video capture too myself Being able to driver level FSR on a capture input would be really cool for example applying FSR to a console or another video card's output and doing it all at 75w TDP would be amazing perfect card to insert into a x4 slot if just about any PC.

AusWolfWhy not RX? Even the 6400 got that branding. I can agree with losing a totally pointless prefix from model names, but it's a little odd within the same generation.

It is an RX card, it was an error on sapphire's part: www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-clarifies-sapphire-6700-mixup