AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT and RX 7700 XT Reference Design Pictured

[ARF]

Everybody seems to be hung up on the fact that AMD is a distant second, but that doesn't mean they're not making a profit. It's a smaller company than Nvidia, after all. Dominating a market isn't everything.

It's not even about dominating. It is about staying afloat instead of leaving the DIY graphics market, which is a possibility at any time now.
And... if AMD is a smaller company, why does it try to compete on many more fronts than nvidia - CPUs, consoles, etc.?

 

[AusWolf]

It's not even about dominating. It is about staying afloat instead of leaving the DIY graphics market, which is a possibility at any time now.
And... if AMD is a smaller company, why does it try to compete on many more fronts than nvidia - CPUs, consoles, etc.?

Because that's what they do?

Why would they leave the whole market just for being behind on sales numbers alone?

 

[ARF]

Because that's what they do?

Why would they leave the whole market just for being behind on sales numbers alone?

Have you got any actual numbers about the sales? Do they actually sell?
And what about the cancelled RDNA 4 projects? How will they break even with smaller and less diverse product stack in the coming years?
No one is going to buy Radeon, except a few die-hard loyalists.

 

[AusWolf]

Have you got any actual numbers about the sales? Do they actually sell?
And what about the cancelled RDNA 4 projects? How will they break even with smaller and less diverse product stack in the coming years?
No one is going to buy Radeon, except a few die-hard loyalists.

Fewer products, smaller investment costs, they can run lean and clean. They've come back before, I'm not afraid that they will again. Overspending on a product that's bound to fail would be a lot worse.

Let's say you and I own two companies selling the same thing for a similar price. My company employs 10 people and we sell 200 units a month. Yours employs 10,000 people and you sell 200,000 units a month. Doesn't that mean that we're at an equal profit? (If we disregard the fact that you probably need a much larger depot to run the business)

 

[ARF]

@AusWolf

What do you think about RX 7800 XT and RX 7700 XT?
Comment on what I wrote:

Radeon RX 7800 XT with its 3840 shaders is actually a downgrade from RX 6800 XT with as many as 4608 shaders - this is 768 shaders LESS and almost 20% LESS.
Radeon RX 7700 XT with its miserable 12 GB VRAM is also not good enough, no matter how much they beefed the specs elsewhere.

 

[Mawkzin]

I'm wondering if this cooler design is gonna be enough considering that the reference 6750 XT has three fans that are already barely adequate.

I disagree, I have the MSI 6750XT MECH 2X with just 2 fans and it's okay under full load.

 

[john_]

But profits is not the most important. Now AMD has a more improtant task - to stay relevant in the graphics business, and this can only be achieved by good marketing strategy, and gaining more market/mind share.


I think AMD run out of ideas, everything they do is wrong these days.

Radeon RX 7800 XT with its 3840 shaders is actually a downgrade from RX 6800 XT with as many as 4608 shaders - this is 768 shaders LESS and almost 20% LESS.
Radeon RX 7700 XT with its miserable 12 GB VRAM is also not good enough, no matter how much they beefed the specs elsewhere.

Both cards should be DOA as we speak

In AMD's case, profits are the most important this period and they know that they can't win gamers with RDNA3, so I doubt they will try. Maybe with RDNA 3.5 or 4. Right now they need profits, because all this spending in AI and GPUs, will probably have a negative impact in AMD's (and Intel's) server income in this and the next quarter. They also had lowered the prices of Zen 4 CPUs significantly from the day of AM5 introduction, so they are not getting what they where hoping from that market either. They need all the money they can get to have enough cash to secure wafers to improve CDNA as much as possible and produce it in quantities that matter, to hope to make money next year. I think I am going to regret it not selling all of my AMD shares at the current $100 price. It looks THAT bad.

They can't market a product with the "7800XT" name at a price lower than that of "6800XT" price. It will look strange to the eyes of the random uninformed buyer. And that's the target audience. They can drop the price AFTER ALL the 6800XT/6800 quantity is gone from the market. Not to mention that a bad price on 7800XT might help move 6800XT/6800 cards faster. People who intent to pay AMD and NOT Nvidia for their next card, might be persuaded to buy a 6800XT, if they see an inferior 7800XT at the same or slightly higher price. AMD might play the AI card in their marketing if RDNA3 is better than RDNA2 in that area(I think it is?), to try to justify the extra price. AV1 and latest display connectivity will also be used. Also, OEMs aren't buying retail. AMD might be selling 7800XT at a higher price than 6800XT to the individual consumer, like me or you, but a big OEM could be buying an 7800XT at a lower price than a 6800XT.

7700XT at a price at $400, will be advertised as having "50% more VRAM than the 8GB 4600 Ti", at the same price while beating 4060 Ti in many cases (where RT is not heavily used or not used at all). 7700 XT is not DOA in any case. Probably the only one out of those two that might make any sense. Except if it's specs are much lower than those expected.

 

[Macro Device]

7700XT at a price at $400, will be advertised as having "50% more VRAM than the 8GB 4600 Ti", at the same price while beating 4060 Ti in many cases (where RT is not heavily used or not used at all). 7700 XT is not DOA in any case. Probably the only one out of those two that might make any sense. Except if it's specs are much lower than those expected.

For $400, it's neither great nor is it terrible. For any substantial discount (e.g. $370), it'll be anything but DoA.

 

[AusWolf]

Radeon RX 7800 XT with its 3840 shaders is actually a downgrade from RX 6800 XT with as many as 4608 shaders - this is 768 shaders LESS and almost 20% LESS.

I can't comment on a GPU that isn't even out, yet, purely based on its shader count. In short: we'll see. Also, pricing will be crucial.

Radeon RX 7700 XT with its miserable 12 GB VRAM is also not good enough, no matter how much they beefed the specs elsewhere.

I disagree. 12 GB is fine in 99% of use cases. VRAM requirements are mostly blown up by the media and forum goers.

 

[Squared]

AMD and Nvidia are pretty close in performance, power efficiency, and marketing consistency (or lack thereof) this generation. AMD didn't advance as much this generation as Nvidia did but they're probably saving a bit of money on the chiplet architecture. Both have a lot of models named beyond their performance. (Like the 7900XTX, 4060 Ti, and so on. And remember the RTX 4080 12GB fiasco?) The pricing is partly set by the consumer. Evidently they're selling enough today to maintain today's prices.

 

[john_]

View attachment 310612

For $400, it's neither great nor is it terrible. For any substantial discount (e.g. $370), it'll be anything but DoA.

Looking at AMD's numbers and then at TPUs numbers and ignoring RT, 7700 XT looks a little faster than RX 6800. Could they have fixed something in RDNA3?

Looking at RT, 7700 XT might be equal to 6800.

So, $499?

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

huh? my 7900 xt with medium oc beats a 4090 in ac valhalla and damn near matches it in shadow of tomb raider. i wouldn't call that very distant second place. at 1440p anyway.

Hmmm.....


HMMMMMMMMMM




Now, I'm not saying you're a liar, but.......

 

[Macro Device]

Could they have fixed something in RDNA3?

7700 XT's 54 CUs VS 60 CUs of 6800 is basically 90 percent.
So to match 6800's raw performance, you just need to get 11.5 percent more clock speed and it's easy peasy when it comes down to RDNA3. My wild guess there will be 3 or maybe 3+ GHz 7700 XTs which are faster than OC 6800 in every scenario despite having substantially less VRAM and VRAM bandwidth (18 GHz on a 192 bit bus resounding 432 GBps (VS 512 GBps in RX 6800)).
I also have to remind you the fact RX 6800 has the lowest core clock in the whole line-up. Nothing is slown down as much as 6800.

So, $499?

Complete robbery. This is borderline OK for 7800 XT which will NOT be feasible be it more than 500 bucks worth. For 7700 XT, $500 is as much of a robbery as it is in asking $500 for a 4060 Ti 16 GB.

$380 and $460 respectively are the highest adequate ratings for 7700 XT and 7800 XT respectively. Anything more will mean NO ONE buys them till there is no other option.

12 GB is fine in 99% of use cases

Yes but VRAM bandwidth is complete bollocks. 432 GBps is not quite great for 1080p, let alone 1440p.

 

[ARF]

I can't comment on a GPU that isn't even out, yet, purely based on its shader count. In short: we'll see. Also, pricing will be crucial.


I disagree. 12 GB is fine in 99% of use cases. VRAM requirements are mostly blown up by the media and forum goers.

In short you are more inclined to act like an AMD advocate than to criticise them for their misbehaviours?
12 GB is not ok except if you want to throw your card in the trash in a year or two when new titles that require more VRAM gets released.

Why Are Modern PC Games Using So Much VRAM?

With the best graphics cards now sporting more RAM than an average PC, we look at just why games are using ever more video memory to create...

www.techspot.com

 

[AusWolf]

In short you are more inclined to act like an AMD advocate than to criticise them for their misbehaviours?
12 GB is not ok except if you want to throw your card in the trash in a year or two when new titles that require more VRAM gets released.

I don't look at VRAM usage. I look at performance, which is fine.

And I don't advocate anything. I just judge every product based on what it is and what it does, and not on pre-release marketing material or raw tech details. As for the 7800 XT, we don't know anything, yet.

 

[john_]

Complete robbery. This is borderline OK for 7800 XT which will NOT be feasible be it more than 500 bucks worth. For 7700 XT, $500 is as much of a robbery as it is in asking $500 for a 4060 Ti 16 GB.

$380 and $460 respectively are the highest adequate ratings for 7700 XT and 7800 XT respectively. Anything more will mean NO ONE buys them till there is no other option.

They seem very close in specs, 54 (7700XT) vs 60 CUs(7800XT) and by putting a higher price than expected, not only will help 6000 series to sell better, but leaves room in the future for a 7700 not XT and a 7600 XT to slot between 7600 and 7700 XT. They can lower prices later. They do that, it's probably part of their marketing strategy. So, $499 for the 7700XT and $549 for the 7800XT.
Then again calling it 7700XT instead of 7800 non XT, could mean a price close to $450, or even lower, to $400. Then 7800XT should also come lower, at $500 because of the small performance gap.

 

[Vya Domus]

That's what I mean. The reference 6750 XT reaches 100 °C at stock (with no overclock).

And what I am saying is most of the higher end reference 6000 series cards would also hit close to 100C, AMD doesn't throttle their GPUs based on temperature in the same way Nvidia does, not much happens unless you actually hit TJmax.

 

[Assimilator]

12 GB is not ok except if you want to throw your card in the trash in a year or two when new titles that require more VRAM gets released.

12GB is more than okay. It's uneducable muppets like you who are incapable of understanding the difference between "allocated" and "used" that are the problem, despite the fact that W1zz mentions it in every GPU review he does.

 

[Frick]

Now, I'm not saying you're a liar, but.......

oh I was wrong, there are actually two games my 7900 xt matches a 4090 in at 1440p

thought it was just in valhalla but i was wrong source guru3d: my oc'd 7900 xt in same test, matches 4090 exactly, not bad for a $580 gpu, *puts a dollar bill in the fans of a 4090 on the store shelf* so sexy, but I don't need ya baby: @R-T-B if you can find a frog dancing gif, it would...

www.techpowerup.com

 

[ARF]

Something interesting.

Radeon RX 7700 XT 12GB (530$) claimed to be faster than RX 6800 XT 16GB:

AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Specs

AMD Navi 32, 2544 MHz, 3456 Cores, 216 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 12288 MB GDDR6, 2250 MHz, 192 bit

www.techpowerup.com

Radeon RX 7800 XT 16GB (580$) claimed to be slower than RX 6800 XT 16GB:

AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Specs

AMD Navi 32, 2430 MHz, 3840 Cores, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2438 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

 

[kapone32]

In AMD's case, profits are the most important this period and they know that they can't win gamers with RDNA3, so I doubt they will try. Maybe with RDNA 3.5 or 4. Right now they need profits, because all this spending in AI and GPUs, will probably have a negative impact in AMD's (and Intel's) server income in this and the next quarter. They also had lowered the prices of Zen 4 CPUs significantly from the day of AM5 introduction, so they are not getting what they where hoping from that market either. They need all the money they can get to have enough cash to secure wafers to improve CDNA as much as possible and produce it in quantities that matter, to hope to make money next year. I think I am going to regret it not selling all of my AMD shares at the current $100 price. It looks THAT bad.

They can't market a product with the "7800XT" name at a price lower than that of "6800XT" price. It will look strange to the eyes of the random uninformed buyer. And that's the target audience. They can drop the price AFTER ALL the 6800XT/6800 quantity is gone from the market. Not to mention that a bad price on 7800XT might help move 6800XT/6800 cards faster. People who intent to pay AMD and NOT Nvidia for their next card, might be persuaded to buy a 6800XT, if they see an inferior 7800XT at the same or slightly higher price. AMD might play the AI card in their marketing if RDNA3 is better than RDNA2 in that area(I think it is?), to try to justify the extra price. AV1 and latest display connectivity will also be used. Also, OEMs aren't buying retail. AMD might be selling 7800XT at a higher price than 6800XT to the individual consumer, like me or you, but a big OEM could be buying an 7800XT at a lower price than a 6800XT.

7700XT at a price at $400, will be advertised as having "50% more VRAM than the 8GB 4600 Ti", at the same price while beating 4060 Ti in many cases (where RT is not heavily used or not used at all). 7700 XT is not DOA in any case. Probably the only one out of those two that might make any sense. Except if it's specs are much lower than those expected.

Yep that's why some of the biggest Games are promoted with AMD by getting a Game key. Jedi Survivor was a Game you got with AMD and so is Starfield. As far as RT and DLSS is concerned Baldur's Gate is the hottest Game right now there is no Huge public outcry that it does not support DLSS. Even the new Starfield promotion shows their commitment.

We have no idea what the performance will be. How many chiplets does the 7800Xt have vs the single chip that is the 6800XT?

We are going to see something now as AMD is live streaming at Gamescom right now.

Well $499 for the 7800XT and 449 for the 7700XT. Now good but not bad

Something interesting.

Radeon RX 7700 XT 12GB (530$) claimed to be faster than RX 6800 XT 16GB:

View attachment 310634

AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Specs

AMD Navi 32, 2544 MHz, 3456 Cores, 216 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 12288 MB GDDR6, 2250 MHz, 192 bit

www.techpowerup.com

Radeon RX 7800 XT 16GB (580$) claimed to be slower than RX 6800 XT 16GB:

View attachment 310633

AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Specs

AMD Navi 32, 2430 MHz, 3840 Cores, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2438 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

You are quoting Euro prices.

AMD Just confirmed that FSR 3.0 will also support consoles and you know that means handhelds too. The thing is Frame generation is coming to all GPUs as well. It is coming sooner rather than later too.

 

[Frick]

You are quoting Euro prices.

I think it was about how the 7800XT is projected to be slower than the 6800XT and the 7700XT is projected to be faster than the 7800XT.

 

[Tek-Check]

If the RX 7800 XT also comes with this (ugly) dual cooler design, than AMD is basically admitting that the RX 7800 XT really is an RX 7700 XT.. The real RX 7800 XT is the RX 7900 GRE / XT..

This "real" card name is nonsense. 7800XT is 7800XT. It's the name of the card, no matter how you want to call it.
Performance tiers shifted both with AMD and Nvidia and that's another debate...
Dual fan design is fine and compact. AIBs can have their own design.
Reference cards are usually more compact, by choice.
This means that smaller and more neat builds are possible.

 

[AusWolf]

Something interesting.

Radeon RX 7700 XT 12GB (530$) claimed to be faster than RX 6800 XT 16GB:

View attachment 310634

AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Specs

AMD Navi 32, 2544 MHz, 3456 Cores, 216 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 12288 MB GDDR6, 2250 MHz, 192 bit

www.techpowerup.com

Radeon RX 7800 XT 16GB (580$) claimed to be slower than RX 6800 XT 16GB:

View attachment 310633

AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Specs

AMD Navi 32, 2430 MHz, 3840 Cores, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 16384 MB GDDR6, 2438 MHz, 256 bit

www.techpowerup.com

More claims? Is it really so hard to wait for some hard facts before making a judgement?

 

[HD64G]

Prices will be 450 and 500 for the cut-down 7700XT and the full-die 7800XT. Reviews when @W1zzard?