Monday, December 2nd 2024

AMD Radeon RX 8800 XT RDNA 4 Enters Mass-production This Month: Rumor

by
btarunr
 Discuss (213 Comments)
Apparently, AMD's next-generation gaming graphics card is closer to launch than anyone in the media expected, with mass-production of the so-called Radeon RX 8800 XT poised to begin later this month, if sources on ChipHell are to be believed. The RX 8800 XT will be the fastest product from AMD's next-generation, and will be part of the performance segment, succeeding the current RX 7800 XT. There will not be an enthusiast-segment product in this generation, as AMD looks to consolidate in key market segments with the most sales. The RX 8800 XT will be powered by AMD's next-generation RDNA 4 graphics architecture.

There are some spicy claims related to the RX 8800 XT being made. Apparently, the card will rival the current GeForce RTX 4080 or RTX 4080 SUPER in ray tracing performance, which would mean a massive 45% increase in RT performance over even the current flagship RX 7900 XTX. Meanwhile, the power and thermal footprint of the GPU is expected to reduce with the switch to a newer foundry process, with the RX 8800 XT expected to have 25% lower board power than the RX 7900 XTX. Unlike the "Navi 31" and "Navi 32" powering the RX 7900 series and RX 7800 XT, respectively, the "Navi 48" driving the RX 8800 XT is expected to be a monolithic chip built entirely on a new process node. If we were to guess, this could very well be TSMC N4P, a node AMD is using for everything from its "Zen 5" chiplets to its "Strix Point" mobile processors.
Sources: ChipHell, Wccftech, VideoCardz

Related News

Add your own comment

213 Comments on AMD Radeon RX 8800 XT RDNA 4 Enters Mass-production This Month: Rumor

#201
AcE
DaemonForcefor upcoming games where RT is a required technology just to run them. If this is really the case, raster is no longer going to be the elephant in the room for AAA games. RT is NOT the new pixel shader, it is the next DX/Vulkan/Other feature that precludes entry level gamers.
Raster is the "elephant" for people who cant afford cards over 500$, they will always struggle for performance, RT? Isn't even an option for them. No, RT is still just extra luxury and we are far from a time where it's more than that, still.
DaemonForceGlad they at least didn't force motion blur into everything or I would have gotten out ages ago.
Didn't they? Motion blur is in every AAA game, and often enough forced, maybe not always.
wheresmycarhat there lies the problem... i'm not hoping for a 8800XT for ~£800, i'm hoping for a newer Gen card levelling up to the performance of a 4080 super/7900 XTX for ~£800
I don't know why you're forcing those 800 bucks when you will soon probably have it for about 500-600, so I'd say you're good, as long as you don't want more than that perf level.
Posted on Reply
#202
Dawora
john_The consumer will google that and end up with many posts saying "AMD drivers are trash, FSR is trash, only buy Nvidia cards" and will go and buy the Nvidia card.
But that also true
Amd is okay ofc better than intel by miles atm
but Nvidia is still superior in everyway, maybe cost more but u get what u pay for.
Posted on Reply
#203
wheresmycar
AcEI don't know why you're forcing those 800 bucks when you will soon probably have it for about 500-600, so I'd say you're good, as long as you don't want more than that perf level.
Reading/decoding deficiency?
Daworabut Nvidia is still superior in everyway, maybe cost more but u get what u pay for.
Yep! No shame in saying it... Although AMD cards have come a long way and make for a viable alternative (respect!!), I still prefer Nvidia cards, primarily for their superior efficiency and seamless compatibility with my dedicated G-SYNC panel (+superior perf/quality encoding which I do occasionally put to use). Efficiency gets least mention nowadays with 'features' taking the limelight, for me efficiency is the real winner for nV. As for "you get what you pay for" - not always! I prefer Native settings at 1440p so the rest of the features don't impress me. RT is too taxing for the mainstream buyer, upscalers often fall short at 1080p/1440p and while FG boosts frame rates, its just AI interpolating between real frames which can lead to input latency, artifacts, and prediction errors. Where a feature introduces latency, adding additional layers of tweaks (eg. Nv Reflex) just feels like embracing greater levels of complexity just to keep things running smoothly, which varies on a game-to-game basis. In short, we're compelled to pay more for features which are not everyone's cup of tea (in its current form). Also no shame in saying, as much i still fancy going green, 80-class pricing has been a joke! Not happy with having to settle with mid-tier XX70s.
Posted on Reply
#205
RJARRRPCGP
I don't even have high hopes on 24.12.1 being better than 24.10.1 on the RX 6750 XT.

It will be interesting, if it can boost Cyberpunk 2077 performance.
wheresmycarReading/decoding deficiency?



Yep! No shame in saying it... Although AMD cards have come a long way and make for a viable alternative (respect!!), I still prefer Nvidia cards, primarily for their superior efficiency and seamless compatibility with my dedicated G-SYNC panel (+superior perf/quality encoding which I do occasionally put to use). Efficiency gets least mention nowadays with 'features' taking the limelight, for me efficiency is the real winner for nV. As for "you get what you pay for" - not always! I prefer Native settings at 1440p so the rest of the features don't impress me. RT is too taxing for the mainstream buyer, upscalers often fall short at 1080p/1440p and while FG boosts frame rates, its just AI interpolating between real frames which can lead to input latency, artifacts, and prediction errors. Where a feature introduces latency, adding additional layers of tweaks (eg. Nv Reflex) just feels like embracing greater levels of complexity just to keep things running smoothly, which varies on a game-to-game basis. In short, we're compelled to pay more for features which are not everyone's cup of tea (in its current form). Also no shame in saying, as much i still fancy going green, 80-class pricing has been a joke! Not happy with having to settle with mid-tier XX70s.
As much as I want to root for the GeForce team right now, I went to the Radeon team in 2022 and the Arc team in 2023.

Looks like if my RX 6750 XT is behind, then maybe my Sparkle Titan Arc A770 16 GB could come to the rescue.
Posted on Reply
#206
AcE
wheresmycarReading/decoding deficiency?
Or you're simply making no sense. I'm going with this.
TomorrowThere we go. The world lives on: www.techpowerup.com/329530/amd-software-adrenalin-edition-24-12-1-whql-released
Who in their right mind really expected AMD to stop bringing drivers? That's doomerism and paranoia.
RJARRRPCGPI don't even have high hopes on 24.12.1 being better than 24.10.1 on the RX 6750 XT.
Only in the games that were optimised, otherwise it should be about the same.
RJARRRPCGPIt will be interesting, if it can boost Cyberpunk 2077 performance.
Why should it? Game is old, already maxed out with optimisations.
Posted on Reply
#208
ModEl4
Best case scenario with the following assumptions:
2750Mhz core clock, 128RBs, 4096 cores, 256bit bus/20Gbps memory clock:
Raster = RTX 4070 Ti Super
Raytracing= RTX 4070 Ti Super -10% ( and I highly doubt that it will be that fast in raytracing, the +45% increased performance vs 7900XTX is in a theoretical level : 2X performance per core (4096 vs 6144) =1.33X vs the clock difference (probably in real terms will be something like +10% faster vs RX 7900XT in raytracing)
If it reach that kind of performance we are looking at $549? (If let's say RTX 5070 brings only 10% uplift vs RTX 4070 Super and stays at the same price $599, RX 8800XT will be slower in raytracing vs RTX 5070 in the intending resolution for this category (1440p) even in the most optimistic scenario for 8800XT regarding raytracing.
The prediction about 4080 performance level is ridiculous, the original poster should have thought twice before posting it!
Posted on Reply
#209
Dawora
ModEl4Best case scenario with the following assumptions:
2750Mhz core clock, 128RBs, 4096 cores, 256bit bus/20Gbps memory clock:
Raster = RTX 4070 Ti Super
Raytracing= RTX 4070 Ti Super -10% ( and I highly doubt that it will be that fast in raytracing, the +45% increased performance vs 7900XTX is in a theoretical level : 2X performance per core (4096 vs 6144) =1.33X vs the clock difference (probably in real terms will be something like +10% faster vs RX 7900XT in raytracing)
If it reach that kind of performance we are looking at $549? (If let's say RTX 5070 brings only 10% uplift vs RTX 4070 Super and stays at the same price $599, RX 8800XT will be slower in raytracing vs RTX 5070 in the intending resolution for this category (1440p) even in the most optimistic scenario for 8800XT regarding raytracing.
The prediction about 4080 performance level is ridiculous, the original poster should have thought twice before posting it!
"Lets say 5070 is 10% uplift vs 4070S"

U can just OC 4070S and get that 10% uplift, so 4070s=5070 is kinda stupid, right? why even release 5070 then?

5070 can be even 5-10% faster than 4080
Posted on Reply
#210
ModEl4
Dawora"Lets say 5070 is 10% uplift vs 4070S"

U can just OC 4070S and get that 10% uplift, so 4070s=5070 is kinda stupid, right? why even release 5070 then?

5070 can be even 5-10% faster than 4080
I'm not suggesting that 5070 will be 10% faster than 4070s, I just say that even if it's only 10% faster in raster, even in this case RX8800XT will be slower in 1440p raytracing which is the intending resolution for 5070 , so no chance launching higher than $549 despite RX8800XT reaching potentially 4070Ti super in raster (in this hypothetical best case scenario that I examined)
If you think that 5070 will be 5-10% faster than 4080 you are setting yourself for disappointment, even 5070Ti will struggle to reach this level (at least in raster, in raytracing will see what nv will bring) if the specs that leaked are true.
Posted on Reply
#211
Tomorrow
ModEl4Best case scenario with the following assumptions:
2750Mhz core clock, 128RBs, 4096 cores, 256bit bus/20Gbps memory clock:
Raster = RTX 4070 Ti Super
Raytracing= RTX 4070 Ti Super -10% ( and I highly doubt that it will be that fast in raytracing, the +45% increased performance vs 7900XTX is in a theoretical level : 2X performance per core (4096 vs 6144) =1.33X vs the clock difference (probably in real terms will be something like +10% faster vs RX 7900XT in raytracing)
If it reach that kind of performance we are looking at $549? (If let's say RTX 5070 brings only 10% uplift vs RTX 4070 Super and stays at the same price $599, RX 8800XT will be slower in raytracing vs RTX 5070 in the intending resolution for this category (1440p) even in the most optimistic scenario for 8800XT regarding raytracing.
The prediction about 4080 performance level is ridiculous, the original poster should have thought twice before posting it!
Good analysis. Just to add that while CU's and such are known with high degree of certainty before the launch the clock speeds are not so easy to guess.
Maybe it's 2750 like you calculated. Could also be below 2500 to save power or be over 3000 if they manage it somehow.

Overall i agree. It could be around RTX 4070 Ti Super perf and 549 so slightly cheaper than 5070. I very much doubt it will reach 4080S perf in any metric. Maybe not quite even reach 7900XT perf.
Posted on Reply
#212
AcE
ModEl4Best case scenario with the following assumptions:
2750Mhz core clock, 128RBs, 4096 cores, 256bit bus/20Gbps memory clock:
Raster = RTX 4070 Ti Super
Raytracing= RTX 4070 Ti Super
This is not a best case scenario, this is a average case scenario. Best case would be 7900 XTX performance in raster and 4080 RT performance. Also I expect *at least* 7900 XT performance in raster, otherwise they can skip the whole GPU / generation if it has no meaningful jump in performance.
Posted on Reply
#213
Dawora
ModEl4I'm not suggesting that 5070 will be 10% faster than 4070s, I just say that even if it's only 10% faster in raster, even in this case RX8800XT will be slower in 1440p raytracing which is the intending resolution for 5070 , so no chance launching higher than $549 despite RX8800XT reaching potentially 4070Ti super in raster (in this hypothetical best case scenario that I examined)
If you think that 5070 will be 5-10% faster than 4080 you are setting yourself for disappointment, even 5070Ti will struggle to reach this level (at least in raster, in raytracing will see what nv will bring) if the specs that leaked are true.
Okay i understand now what u meaning..

But for Rtx5070

Avg fps TPU 1440p
Rtx4070 is 27.4% faster than Rtx3070
Rtx4070Ti is 21% faster than Rtx4070

i say by looking specs, bandwith and posible higher corelocks +IPC
Rtx5070 is around 27-30% faster than Rtx4070
so its about 10%-13% slower than Rtx4080

Thats from using all the spects atm we have.

But also, there might be something we dont know yet so im not suprised if 5070 is close to 4080
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 11th, 2024 21:13 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts