Monday, May 13th 2024

AMD RDNA 5 a "Clean Sheet" Graphics Architecture, RDNA 4 Merely Corrects a Bug Over RDNA 3

AMD's future RDNA 5 graphics architecture will bear a "clean sheet" design, and may probably not even have the RDNA branding, says WJM47196, a source of AMD leaks on ChipHell. Two generations ahead of the current RDNA 3 architecture powering the Radeon RX 7000 series discrete GPUs, RDNA 5 could see AMD reimagine the GPU and its key components, much in the same way RDNA did over the former "Vega" architecture, bringing in a significant performance/watt jump, which AMD could build upon with its successful RDNA 2 powered Radeon RX 6000 series.

Performance per Watt is the biggest metric on which a generation of GPUs can be assessed, and analysts believe that RDNA 3 missed the mark with generational gains in performance/watt despite the switch to the advanced 5 nm EUV process from the 7 nm DUV. AMD's decision to disaggregate the GPU, with some of its components being built on the older 6 nm node may have also impacted the performance/watt curve. The leaker also makes a sensational claim that "Navi 31" was originally supposed to feature 192 MB of Infinity Cache, which would have meant 32 MB segments of it per memory cache die (MCD). The company instead went with 16 MB per MCD, or just 96 MB per GPU, which only get reduced as AMD segmented the RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 GRE by disabling one or two MCDs.
The upcoming RDNA 4 architecture will correct some of the glaring component level problems causing the performance/Watt curve to waver on RDNA 3; and the top RDNA 4 part could end up with performance comparable to the current RX 7900 series, while being from a segment lower, and a smaller GPU overall. In case you missed it, AMD will not make a big GPU that succeeds the "Navi 31" and "Navi 21" for the RDNA 4 generation, but rather focus on the performance segment, offering more bang for the buck well under the $800-mark, so it could claw back some market share from NVIDIA in the performance- mid-range, and mainstream product segments. While it remains to be seen if RDNA 5 will get AMD back into the enthusiast segment, it is expected to bring a significant gain in performance due to the re-architected design.

One rumored aspect of RDNA 4 that even this source agrees with, is that AMD is working to significantly improve its performance with ray tracing workloads, by redesigning its hardware. While RDNA 3 builds on the Ray Accelerator component AMD introduced with RDNA 2, with certain optimizations yielding a 50% generational improvement in ray testing and intersection performance; RDNA 4 could see AMD put more of the ray tracing workload through fixed-function accelerators, unburdening the shader engines. This significant improvement in ray tracing performance, performance/watt improvements at an architectural level, and the switch to a newer foundry node such as 4 nm or 3 nm, is how AMD ends up with a new generation on its hands.

AMD is expected to unveil RDNA 4 this year, and if we're lucky, we might see a teaser at the 2024 Computex, next month.
Sources: wjm47196 (ChipHell), VideoCardz
Add your own comment

186 Comments on AMD RDNA 5 a "Clean Sheet" Graphics Architecture, RDNA 4 Merely Corrects a Bug Over RDNA 3

#176
Macro Device
3valatzythere are many people who don't want to put power hogs inside their cases.
That's why RX 7600 is the only viable solution.
4070 is pretty much unbeatable in this regard. Sure, might be closer to 10 W on idle but it still kicks ass. Want better, undervolt it. Not way out of budget, either.
Posted on Reply
#177
HD64G
3valatzyIf RDNA 4 is the last RDNA, then it's better to wait the next generation now.

RX 7900 GRE performance in the form of an RDNA 4 RX 9070 XT for $550 is DOA.
Do you know or just predict the performance of 9070XT being equal or about the same as 7900GRE? Nevertheless, I was for months now (more so recently with the latest info) almost sure it will be closer to 7900XTX than 7900XT in raster and better than those in RT. If sold at $500-550 it will sell like hot cakes imho.
Posted on Reply
#178
AusWolf
3valatzyYou forget one important circumstance - the power consumption - there are many people who don't want to put power hogs inside their cases.
That's why RX 7600 is the only viable solution.


www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-7600/38.html
Like I said, it all depends on one's circumstances. We could talk about every single individual's preferences on this planet, but it would be pointless.
Posted on Reply
#179
3valatzy
HD64GDo you know or just predict the performance of 9070XT being equal or about the same as 7900GRE? Nevertheless, I was for months now (more so recently with the latest info) almost sure it will be closer to 7900XTX than 7900XT in raster and better than those in RT. If sold at $500-550 it will sell like hot cakes imho.
With 16 GB of VRAM it will be memory starved. I don't expect a 16GB card to "fine wine" well like the 24GB counterparts.
Posted on Reply
#180
AusWolf
3valatzyWith 16 GB of VRAM it will be memory starved. I don't expect a 16GB card to "fine wine" well like the 24GB counterparts.
Only time will tell that, imo. My 6750 XT runs out of GPU grunt far before I could saturate the 12 GB VRAM in the games I play. I think 16 GB for the 9070 XT is fine.
Posted on Reply
#181
Krit
On RDNA 3 AV1 was looking worse than HEVC at the same bitrate. Hopefully it will be fixed in RDNA 4 That's very important.
Posted on Reply
#182
HD64G
3valatzyWith 16 GB of VRAM it will be memory starved. I don't expect a 16GB card to "fine wine" well like the 24GB counterparts.
Only on 4K with RT and that maybe in a few unoptimized games. For the price I wrote above, it will be a great product without any con.
Posted on Reply
#183
3valatzy
HD64GOnly on 4K with RT and that maybe in a few unoptimized games.
It's a third generation 16GB-only card and 4K is the bare minimum already. What about people wanting to upgrade to 5K, 6K or 8K? Are we going to recommend 720p gaming because AMD can't design a proper graphics card with more VRAM?
HD64GFor the price I wrote above, it will be a great product without any con.
I disagree. The price is overinflated for no reason. RX 6800 XT in 2020 launched at a similar price level, while today this should cost not more than 399$.
Posted on Reply
#184
AusWolf
3valatzyIt's a third generation 16GB-only card and 4K is the bare minimum already. What about people wanting to upgrade to 5K, 6K or 8K? Are we going to recommend 720p gaming because AMD can't design a proper graphics card with more VRAM?
The 9070 XT is not a 4k, 8k, 256643k card. If 4k is your bare minimum, get a 4090.
Posted on Reply
#185
3valatzy
AusWolfThe 9070 XT is not a 4k, 8k, 256643k card. If 4k is your bare minimum, get a 4090.
Just a few posts ago you were arguing that you can't see performance difference between RX 7900 XT and RTX 4090, unless there is an FPS counter on the screen. Am I wrong, maybe it was someone else?
If you follow techpowerup's most recent articles, you will see that the only monitor type which is covered is 4K. Doesn't it tell you anything ?

Wake up, it's 2025 already !
Posted on Reply
#186
AusWolf
3valatzyJust a few posts ago you were arguing that you can't see performance difference between RX 7900 XT and RTX 4090, unless there is an FPS counter on the screen. Am I wrong, maybe it was someone else?
If you follow techpowerup's most recent articles, you will see that the only monitor type which is covered is 4K. Doesn't it tell you anything ?

Wake up, it's 2025 already !
Must be someone else because I don't have a 7900 XT or a 4090, neither do I consider them the same class of product.

So just because it's 2025, my amazing 1440 UW monitor that I bought last year suddenly became shit, and you're telling me to buy a 4K one whether I want to, or have the money or not? Aren't you stepping a bit over the line here?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jan 27th, 2025 08:36 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts