AMD RDNA3 Second-largest Navi 32 and Third-largest Navi 33 Shader Counts Leaked

[btarunr]

The unified shader (stream processor) counts of AMD's upcoming second- and third-largest GPUs based on the RDNA3 graphics architecture, have been leaked in some ROCm code, discovered by Kepler_L2 on Twitter. The "performance.hpp" file references "Navi 32" with a compute unit count of 60, and the "Navi 33" with 32 compute units. We know from the "Navi 31" specifications that an RDNA3 compute unit still amounts to 64 stream processors (although with significant IPC uplifts over the RDNA2 stream processor due to dual-instruction issue-rate).

60 compute units would give the "Navi 32" silicon a stream processor count of 3,840, a 50% numerical increase over the 2,560 of its predecessor, the "Navi 22," powering graphics cards such as the Radeon RX 6750 XT. Meanwhile, the 32 CU count of the "Navi 33" amounts to 2,048 stream processors, which is numerically unchanged from that of the "Navi 23" powering the RX 6650 XT. The new RDNA3 compute unit has significant changes over RDNA2, besides the dual-issue stream processors—it gets second-generation Ray Accelerators, and two AI accelerators for matrix-multiplication.



No other specs of the "Navi 32" and "Navi 33" are known at this point. If AMD is sticking with the chiplet design for the "Navi 32," it could feature a similar design to the "Navi 31," with a 5 nm GCD that has these 60 RDNA3 compute units; and either three or four 6 nm MCDs, depending on whether AMD decides to give it a 192-bit or 256-bit wide GDDR6 memory interface. It remains to be seen if the chiplet design carries on to even the smaller GPUs such as the "Navi 33." There's also no word on when AMD launches the rest of its Radeon RX 7000-series graphics card lineup. The RX 7900 series sees a December 2022 debut.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[watzupken]

I feel if Navi 32 appears with 60 CU, it is a good step up from the 40 CU with the existing 6700 series. This is as many CUs as the RX 6800, which I feel should have been the RX 6700 XT this generation. The CU cut from Navi 21 to 22 is too steep, i.e. 50%, which really kills performance. So much so that AMD had to launch the RX 6700 XT with a much higher clockspeed to try and keep up with the RTX 3070.

 

[WhoDecidedThat]

There were rumours a while back that Navi 32 would use 5nm GCD + 6nm MCD and Navi 33 will be a monolithic die built entirely on 6nm.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

There were rumours a while back that Navi 32 would use 5nm GCD + 6nm MCD and Navi 33 will be a monolithic die built entirely on 6nm.

Hopefully it'll be cheaper as well, so far the new GPUs launched are very expensive (around 100% increase).

 

[AusWolf]

Hopefully it'll be cheaper as well, so far the new GPUs launched are very expensive (around 100% increase).

Only from Nvidia, though. The 7900 XTX will have an MSRP of $999 which is the same as the 6900 XT had at launch. We'll have to see about real world pricing, but I'm optimistic. This is AMD's big chance to cut under Nvidia.

 

[fancucker]

The immense gap between N32 and N33 is worrying, how will they address it?

 

[ymdhis]

The immense gap between N32 and N33 is worrying, how will they address it?

Those are maximum theoretical shader counts, obviously they will cut out certain parts to create different SKUs. Either depending on yields, or if they have good yields, laser or driver lock them out, or maybe just not include. So the 3840 shader chip may have a 3584 shader, a 3072 shader, and a 2560 shader version, for example for radeon 7800 xt, 7800, 7700 xt, 7700 etc.

 

[konga]

So much for the full Navi 33 rivaling Navi 21. I always thought that was extremely far-fetched.

The 7900 XTX is supposedly 60% faster than the 6950 XT while having only 20% more stream processors (6144 vs 5120). This makes it 33% faster per stream processor. If we carry over this same logic when comparing Navi 33 to 23 (which is not a given, considering 33 might be 6nm monolithic), then it would land somewhere between the 6750 XT and 6800 in performance, or roughly on par with the 3070.

 

[btk2k2]

The immense gap between N32 and N33 is worrying, how will they address it?

Full N32 will go in the 7800XT with 4 MCDs

Cut N32 will go in the 7700XT with 3 MCDs.

Not sure if the cut will be 2WGPS per SE for 48CUs, 3SEs and 96 ROPs or if AMD will cut an entire SE out for 40CUs and 64 ROPs.

It will depend on 3 things IMO. 1) How much do AMD need to push full N32 to hit the desired gen on gen gain over the 6800XT. 2) do they plan on making a 7800 available and 3) what is the lowest TBP required to hit the 7700XT performance target.

Given we are talking about a 200mm^2 die I expect yields to be excellent which means a 7800 part may not be needed unless AMD are really pushing the 7800XT bin and they might.

 

[HD64G]

I can see the N32 surpassing 3GHz very easily since even an RX6750XT reaches 2.7GHz at stock and the slide in the drivers reach 2.95GHz. Point is that this arch's efficiency would make those GPUs much greater for notebooks.

 

[Punkenjoy]

Full N32 will go in the 7800XT with 4 MCDs

Cut N32 will go in the 7700XT with 3 MCDs.

Not sure if the cut will be 2WGPS per SE for 48CUs, 3SEs and 96 ROPs or if AMD will cut an entire SE out for 40CUs and 64 ROPs.

It will depend on 3 things IMO. 1) How much do AMD need to push full N32 to hit the desired gen on gen gain over the 6800XT. 2) do they plan on making a 7800 available and 3) what is the lowest TBP required to hit the 7700XT performance target.

Given we are talking about a 200mm^2 die I expect yields to be excellent which means a 7800 part may not be needed unless AMD are really pushing the 7800XT bin and they might.

The key here will be how high they can clock N32. In the slide above, AMD claim 17.4% higher performance per clock for each CU. 6800 XT have 16.6% more CU. So at clock for clock, they should have relativelly the same performance.

To make a 7800XT really worthwhile (except the Extra RT perf), i think they should clock it to at least 2.75 GHz to get about 20-25% more performance. If it's more well, the better it.


But also, the important factor will be the cost. If they offer a 2.50 GHz N32 at 600$, it could maybe make sense.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

Only from Nvidia, though. The 7900 XTX will have an MSRP of $999 which is the same as the 6900 XT had at launch. We'll have to see about real world pricing, but I'm optimistic. This is AMD's big chance to cut under Nvidia.

USD is still very strong, if they base their price on the 999$ in other markets, they'll be as bad as nVidia. There is still hope as Microsoft doesn't sell their consoles based on USD, but each market has its own price.

 

[spnidel]

So much for the full Navi 33 rivaling Navi 21. I always thought that was extremely far-fetched.

The 7900 XTX is supposedly 60% faster than the 6950 XT while having only 20% more stream processors (6144 vs 5120). This makes it 33% faster per stream processor. If we carry over this same logic when comparing Navi 33 to 23 (which is not a given, considering 33 might be 6nm monolithic), then it would land somewhere between the 6750 XT and 6800 in performance, or roughly on par with the 3070.

...that's literally rivaling navi 21

 

[john_]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

 

[medi01]

AMD's market share going under 10%.

Dubious. Fails to pass a basic sanity check.

Q3 gaming revenue of NV and AMD was on par, although AMD's includes console business.

Around 5 million consoles are sold each quarter, how much that would be off 1.6 billion revenue? Even if AMD gets 200 for each chip, it leaves us with 600 million vs 1.6 billion.

Even purely from revenue perspective that is 28% vs 72%.

On top of it, NV's cards are way pricier.

People seems to care ALSO about RT performance

Surely, hordes of Steam users who bought 3050Ti over cheaper and faster 6600 are playing with "RT on"...

 

[Hofnaerrchen]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

RT still is far from being a feature that every game comes with. Almost all of the releases not being AAA do not come with the feature and most AAA/AA titles that are MP only come with very limited RT features - for a good reason. Software Devs want to sell as much copies as possible and limiting access by adding a feature that still hits performance massively or requires expensive hardware is not viable. Unless we see usable RT-performance in 150-200 bucks cards the feature is a nice addition that - in my opinion - you do not need to have fun. Luckily lighting, shadows and reflexions look very good these days without the need for RT, thanks to optimization and experience with non-RT game-engines. Why do you think nVIDIA, AMD and intel all have hardware support for upscaling technologies on their newest chips: Simply because hardware still is far to week for RT to be the gamechanger it was announced to be with RTX 2000.

 

[AusWolf]

USD is still very strong, if they base their price on the 999$ in other markets, they'll be as bad as nVidia. There is still hope as Microsoft doesn't sell their consoles based on USD, but each market has its own price.

They won't be as bad because Nvidia cards have higher MSRPs in USD to begin with.

 

[Redwoodz]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

Says who, you? Neither company is selling cards right now because no one needs the extra performance, they just were able to finally afford the 6 and 3 series from the bitcoin era. You believe everything the marketers tell you?

 

[Zareek]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

Funny, I bought a 3060ti because of the RT performance gap. I still have yet to play a game with RT. I certainly have some buyer's remorse between dealing with the craptastic GeForce Experience and just the knowledge that I added to the greed machine.

 

[Mysteoa]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

How do you know AMD didn't focus on RT? There are so many factors that you can't know the performance in advance. It's AMD second gen of RT and 3rd of Nvidia and according to rumors, it will be better than 3000 series. It wasn't expected for 4000 series to have that big of a RT boost. Chiplet GPU was more important than RT this gen for AMD.

 

[ratirt]

RT this RT that jeez. People always quote this marketing bullshit forgetting, in order to play a game in any way reasonable resolution with a reasonable RT level and performance on a newer game you need a card that costs at least $1500. Still people use RT as a main factor in sales. Those who purchase solely for RT have gobbled the bullshit marking is feeding them. Still, you wont even see the difference at first glance or when you play if you have RT on or not judging by the image quality. Judging by the FPS with a card for $2k you will know you have RT on though.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

Actually they humiliated nVidia, nVidia is wasting huge silicon on RT cores yet their latest RTX4XXX still suffer similarly to the previous generation.
AMD took a reasonable approach, as few games support RT, and no GPU is capable of it properly even nVidia themselves say so, hence DLSS.
Why nVidia is leader is more due to their huge budget, they can spend huge amounts in marketing (you are a proof of their marketing effectiveness, so are lots of so called reviewers), they have reasonably good drivers for some time now, while AMD was nearly bankrupt (thanks to Intel's bribes).

 

[spnidel]

AMD made a huge mistake not focusing on RayTracing performance this generation. We can already see people buying Nvidia cards, no matter what and AMD's market share going under 10%. Who could have predict this, even just 6-12 months ago? People seems to care ALSO about RT performance and prefer to buy a card, even a more expensive one, that will give them 100 fps is raster and 30 in RT, over a card that will give them 150 fps on raster but just 15 fps on RT. Navi 32 and especially Navi 33 will be failing miserably in RT, considering the lower count of raytracing accelerators. We might be seeing consumers buying even RTX 3000 series cards over RX 7000 models and AMD dropping prices much sooner than expected.

no joke you sound like a paid shill

 

[john_]

Dubious. Fails to pass a basic sanity check.

RT still is far from being a feature that every game comes with.

Says who, you?

I still have yet to play a game with RT.

Chiplet GPU was more important than RT this gen for AMD.

Actually they humiliated nVidia, nVidia is wasting huge silicon on RT cores yet their latest RTX4XXX still suffer similarly to the previous generation.

no joke you sound like a paid shill

I like your replies and those laughing smiles as reactions to my post. Hope you are right, but we see Nvidia increasing prices while AMD is throwing them of the cliff. While we can talk about my sanity, or if I am an Nvidia payed shill, the way companies are pricing their hardware this period, combined with the JPR numbers in their latest report, are strong indications that things are far from good for AMD in retail.

People are swallowing the RayTracing marketing, with the same ease that they are swallowing the total numbers of cores marketing with Intel's hybrid CPUs. The end result is people buying RTX 3050 to see RayTracing effects and 13th gen CPUs, because they offer more cores than 7000 CPU models at a lower price. P cores, E cores, who cares. For the average Joe they are just cores. AMD is losing for the first time in the last 5-6 years in both CPU and GPU retail market, because the competition is offering competitive products backed up by superior marketing. If they where increasing their RT performance significantly with RX 7000 series, I mean like 2.5-3 times, they would be negating Nvidia's strongest marketing card. They didn't and until they come up with FSR 3.0, Nvidia will be happily selling framerates to the masses with DLSS 3.0, even in raster. Even if FSR 3.0 does come soon, AMD's options while having one strong advantage, they also have a big disadvantage. The advantage of course is that they are open, more easily to be adopted by developers. The disadvantage is that they are somewhat inferior solutions, because they do not use custom hardware and they are reactions to Nvidia's announcements, meaning Nvidia programmers have much more time in advance to optimize their features. This is enough for the tech press to keep repeating in every review that "DLSS is superior", making AMD's options look in every way inferior. This is something that Nvidia tried to achieve first with PhysX, but failed. Today they are succeeding.

 

[Hofnaerrchen]

I like your replies and those laughing smiles as reactions to my post. Hope you are right, but we see Nvidia increasing prices while AMD is throwing them of the cliff. While we can talk about my sanity, or if I am an Nvidia payed shill, the way companies are pricing their hardware this period, combined with the JPR numbers in their latest report, are strong indications that things are far from good for AMD in retail.

People are swallowing the RayTracing marketing, with the same ease that they are swallowing the total numbers of cores marketing with Intel's hybrid CPUs. The end result is people buying RTX 3050 to see RayTracing effects and 13th gen CPUs, because they offer more cores than 7000 CPU models at a lower price. P cores, E cores, who cares. For the average Joe they are just cores. AMD is losing for the first time in the last 5-6 years in both CPU and GPU retail market, because the competition is offering competitive products backed up by superior marketing. If they where increasing their RT performance significantly with RX 7000 series, I mean like 2.5-3 times, they would be negating Nvidia's strongest marketing card. They didn't and until they come up with FSR 3.0, Nvidia will be happily selling framerates to the masses with DLSS 3.0, even in raster. Even if FSR 3.0 does come soon, AMD's options while having one strong advantage, they also have a big disadvantage. The advantage of course is that they are open, more easily to be adopted by developers. The disadvantage is that they are somewhat inferior solutions, because they do not use custom hardware and they are reactions to Nvidia's announcements, meaning Nvidia programmers have much more time in advance to optimize their features. This is enough for the tech press to keep repeating in every review that "DLSS is superior", making AMD's options look in every way inferior. This is something that Nvidia tried to achieve first with PhysX, but failed. Today they are succeeding.

I highly doubt that the reason AMD is not selling as good as the company wants to (actually also true for intel and nVIDIA) is based on the performance of their chips. There are some very simple reasons right now the computer market is shrinking: World wide economics are moving towards a recesion (people don't spend on luxury products when there are headlines like "heat or eat") while we have a major conflict going on in Europe, China not having figured out how to cope with CoVid after almost 3 years by now and in the case of AMD the new platform just was/still is to expensive... oh wait... isn't that exactly the same thing with RTX 4000? Apart from that and I think someone mentioned that before: Why buy new (overprized) GPUs or CPUs when the last generations (yes not only the last one) still offer enough performance in most instances. Features like DLSS, FSR and XeSS prolong the lifetime of a product - which is good for customers, more money to heat AND eat.