Arm most likely placeholders .... 6gb memory on the 6700xt would be a big foul especially since the 3060 rumors indicate nvidia moved the 60s to 8gb ram.

MonstroMart:

Why? Outside of the drivers issues the 5700XT did not disappoint at all. I mean it's very damn close to a 2700 Super and in Canada it's actually less expensive than the 2060 Super. If you are looking for a 300-500$ GPU upgrade then there's no reason to expect AMD to disappoint when looking at the 5700XT unless the drivers issues are back but for now my 5700XT has been stable since last spring.

In Linux, the 5700XT can sometimes outperform the 2080Ti, though it's usually just barely trailing behind the 2080. These GPUs have a lot of potential. If RDNA2 has a modest IPC lift, the 6700XT ought to be faster even without boosted clock speeds. So, I think it's safe to say the 6900XT, with the IPC and clock boost, ought to have roughly double the performance of the 5700XT. That means with proper drivers, this should be a direct competitor to the 3080, which wasn't quite double the speed of the 2080 Ti.

Venix:

Arm most likely placeholders .... 6gb memory on the 6700xt would be a big foul especially since the 3060 rumors indicate nvidia moved the 60s to 8gb ram.

Yeah, I think 6GB would make the most sense for the 6500XT. That's pretty much as low as you want to go for 1080p gaming.

MonstroMart:

Why? Outside of the drivers issues the 5700XT did not disappoint at all. I mean it's very damn close to a 2700 Super and in Canada it's actually less expensive than the 2060 Super. If you are looking for a 300-500$ GPU upgrade then there's no reason to expect AMD to disappoint when looking at the 5700XT unless the drivers issues are back but for now my 5700XT has been stable since last spring.

exactly, i built a a modest system to a friend last year with a 3600x and an 5700xt and he games in 1440p over 100 fps all the time, and yeah the 5700xt was around 500 $ here in canada thats 200 $ less that the 2070S, big win for people on a budget, especially that rtx is a no go anyway with a 2070 if you want high fps

Well... just like AMD did show how high the clock will be set at consoles... and we all know that the second waves of the 7nm probably will be the best... I think the RX 6900XT (the best chips) will hit 2.200 - 2300mhz out of the box.... this will be very nice and will give a nice juice at the market. I cant believe that there is persons that believes that AMD wont even beat the 2080ti performance... come on guys... this is past! Prepare yourself to the real battle of 6900XT 2.3GHZ 16GB vs 3080 10Gb... "the wars already began"

Fediuld:

How? 6900XT is TWICE the size and with 30% higher clock, than the 5700XT!

Um...What? According to this 6900 XT is twice as many cores, with a smaller clock (base, anyways), where exactly are you getting your information? All of this is speculation, so far though, this looks underwhelming, but also not surprising. It's really right where i expect it to be, as i haven't tried to overhype the 6000 series as some on this forum have been trying to do.

Fediuld:

You forgot +30% higher clock speeds for the 6900XT and +45% for the 6700/6800 over the 5700XT

^ Example...yourself. How about we all wait for them to be released rather then overhyping something just because you're excited? When has that every been good? lol

tunejunky:

my opinion is the 6900xt will end up being equivalent with the 3080, but at a drastically lower price (although expensive for AMD)

In all honesty it's a strange opinion. RX 5700 XT is a 251mm2 die with an original MSRP of $500, lowered to $400 before release. RTX 3080 is a 628.4mm2 die with an MSRP for $699 RX 6700 XT should be replacing the 5700 XT bracket, and be likely a similar die size, this is what is rumored. It'll likely cost the same as a 5700 XT, $400ish on release unless AMD is planning on shifting around their entire product stack pricing, which is possible. My predictions: RX 6700 XT 251mm2 die (rumored) $400-500 RX 6800 XT 340mm2 die (rumored) $500-600 RX 6900 XT 505mm2 die (rumored) $600-800 Even if it's $600 and i highly doubt it'll be less then that (not saying i wouldn't be glad if it was, that'd be great) That's a $100 shaving, there's nothing about $100 shaving that speaks "drastically lower price" unless your definition of drastically is far different then, well, the general populous I fully expect the 6900 XT to be the same price as the 3080, maybe $50 less, loose to it in most titles, but sell well simply because of the added vram that won't actually help it in the long run just makes it more expensive then it needs to be. And i won't be surprised if it's more expensive then the 3080 because of the needless amount of ram. But i don't expect it to be. Ofcourse, AMD could surprise me, but i'm not gonna hold out on the idea that AMD will surprise me when they wanted the 5700 XT to go for $500 and only lowered it cause they had to.

Borys:

Well... just like AMD did show how high the clock will be set at consoles... and we all know that the second waves of the 7nm probably will be the best... I think the RX 6900XT (the best chips) will hit 2.200 - 2300mhz out of the box

I really just can't wrap my head around statements like this. "We know how a customized architecture PS5 with 36 CUs can reach 2.23Ghz, therefore, a much larger one can obviously hit the same, or better!" One, what about custom do people seriously not understand? And two, top end products almost never have the highest frequencies, often the lower end products have higher frequencies because they are capable of getting there, unlike the higher end ones. This isn't always the case but i just can't wrap my head around looking at a PS5 and its high frequency but low CUs and somehow coming to the conclusion that higher CUs will get the same frequencies, especially since we already know that the xbox series x already has a higher CU count, and lower frequency, like is typically understood how it goes. The only time this standard isn't kept is when: 1: The frequency ceiling of an architecture is hit and realistically doesn't matter how well cooled it is for the most part, you can only go so high, therefore all products will very similar in frequency, and just higher core counts/larger die Or 2: When a company artificially lowers lower end products frequencies, even though they could definitely get to those frequencies, being a smaller die, lower wattage, lower heat issues, etc.

Aura89:

Um...What? According to this 6700 XT is twice as many cores, with a smaller clock (base, anyways), where exactly are you getting your information? All of this is speculation, so far though, this looks underwhelming, but also not surprising. It's really right where i expect it to be, as i haven't tried to overhype the 6000 series as some on this forum have been trying to do. ^ Example...yourself. How about we all wait for them to be released rather then overhyping something just because you're excited? When has that every been good? lol

Keep up with the news mate. https://wccftech.com/amd-navi-21-22-and-23-massive-technical-specification-leaked/ https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-RX-6000-series-Up-to-80-CUs-with-a-256-bit-memory-interface-128-MB-of-Infinity-Cache-a-300-W-TDP-and-PlayStation-5-GPU-clock-speeds.494558.0.html 6900XT 2.2Ghz boost clock, the rest 2.5Ghz. And WE KNEW over 6 months now that these gpus will be over 2.3Ghz from 3 places. a) They are on N7P process not N7. (not to confuse with N7+) b) Carney said so numerous times, on PS5 presentations. Mentioning the arc and process allowed for much higher speeds than 2.35Ghz of the PS5. c) MS saying they kept the clocks very low to keep power consumption and temps low hence went with a big chip.

I'm very interested to hear how much the dedicated Ray Tracing hardware takes up of the die size of the 6900xt.

Depends on performance levels of the 6900xt, If it's within 5%-10% of the 3080 expect MSRP of $649. If it's faster then might be much as $749 especially if it's right behind 3090 on performance. AMD would say look 3090 performance at half the price.

I don't expect AMD to beat the 3090 or even the 3080 (I won't even bring RT in the discussion), but if they only have to offer a GPU that performs better than the RTX 3070 and is maybe cheaper, that IS overhyping.Because it was AMD, not the fans, that said they would compete in the hi end segment. And when you say compete, performance, not perf/price ratio, in insinuated. Yes I know AMD is a perf/price ratio winner, I've always bought AMD cards (5700 XT now, RX 480 before that, HD 4850 before that), but that's not what AMD said. And a GPU that performs better than the 3070 but significantly worse than the 3080, at a much better price doesn't cut it. On the other hand, this specs could well be plain wrong, or RDNA 2 gets a hell of a good improvement compared to RDNA.

Maddness:

I'm very interested to hear how much the dedicated Ray Tracing hardware takes up of the die size of the 6900xt.

All of it. Each dual CU can do either normal texture or RT. Depends the application how much RT is needed. If the application doesn't use RT the whole GPU is used on normal textures. bellow is the RDNA2 as found on Navi 2x, Xbox X/S series and PS5. https://www.techpowerup.com/img/m7WjdguDI7kJLI8C.jpg

itpro:

Question is how and why. Even if it is close to 3090 and the XTX beats 3090, they have less features, less supported software and bad driver reputation. It should easily win nvidia's performance/watt ratio which is truly bad, but AMD should make money, I am waiting with realism and anxiety here.

On paper it already beats the 3090, it's not going to actually run at 1.5GHz (I expect a minimum of 2.2GHz reference), and has a lot of features you don't know about... ray tracing included, and with a DLSS equivalent in the works. The bad driver reputation is largely over-exaggerated nonsense by fanboys, and coming from me that means a lot. Few people have actually experienced AMD's BS Radeon driver issues more than I have, and I can say with full confidence nVidia have done nearly as bad. If the rumoured $600 USD price tag, undercutting nVidia by $100, turns out to be true... this could be a win for AMD unless their drivers/support and potential lack of a DLSS equivalent being out in time screws things for them. If the wild rumour of price cuts to $550 or even $500 to kick nVidia in their overpriced and overhyped nuts turns out to be true... that'd have to be a win. Too really take a stab at nVidia and make people buy a 6900XT instead of a 3080 I really believe they need to make it $550 or less, even at $100 lower than a 3080, while being faster, a lot of people are going to buy nVidia instead because they don't trust AMD's Radeon group and/or are fanboys. The nVidia fanbase border on Apple territory with their aggressive worship of their corporate overlords. Edit: Apparently I like leaving sentences incomplete... for great justice or something, I don't know.

And the hype war restart... lol Let the CPU to be reviewed in here (as an exemple) before said that it will be beter or worse than another GPU. about the bandwith remember the GTX960/950... bandwith were tiny, but it was compensated by using comp. and it was really great in it's time... Never take the Hype train, only fact matter and right now, we have only an incomplete preview of spec.

This is all probably a bunch of BS, people just playing the guess game and making headlines. I don't believe AMD will beat 3080 in performance, but I believe it can beat it by price and finally start a war. Fury and Vega were failures, RDNA is the beginning of a long road to catch up. I think they will, eventually, not this generation.

What's the price difference between a Ryzen 3800XT and a I7 10700? I don't think AMD is gonna go cheap with their GPU's unless they are slower than their Nvidia equivalents. Anyone waiting for a $500 "3080 Killer" is going to be disappointed.

Neo Cyrus:

On paper it already beats the 3090, it's not going to actually run at 1.5GHz (I expect a minimum of 2.2GHz reference), and has a lot of features you don't know about... ray tracing included, and with a DLSS equivalent in the works. The bad driver reputation is largely over-exaggerated nonsense by fanboys, and coming from me that means a lot. Few people have actually experienced AMD's BS Radeon driver issues more than I have, and I can say with full confidence nVidia have done nearly as bad. If the rumoured $600 USD price tag, undercutting nVidia by $100, turns out to be true... this could be a win for AMD unless their drivers/support and potential lack of a DLSS equivalent being out in time screws things for them. If the wild rumour of price cuts to $550 or even $500 to kick nVidia in their overpriced and overhyped nuts turns out to be true... that'd have to be a win. Too really take a stab at nVidia and make people buy a 6900XT instead of a 3080 I really believe they need to make it $550 or less, even at $100 lower than a 3080, while being faster, a lot of people are going to buy nVidia instead because they don't trust AMD's Radeon group and/or are fanboys. The nVidia fanbase border on Apple territory with their aggressive worship of their corporate overlords. Edit: Apparently I like leaving sentences incomplete... for great justice or something, I don't know.

Most people stick to a brand that they are familiar with and hasn't given them any major issues. Why switch from one to the other if things keep working for you? $100 price difference is nothing for peace of mind, and that's what drives a lot of consumers who arent enthusiasts or in a GPU cult.

my bet is 650$ big navi and 550$ the cut "flounders"

AuerX:

Most people stick to a brand that they are familiar with and hasn't given them any major issues. Why switch from one to the other if things keep working for you?

To get the most for your money. There's a lot of us who will stray from comfort to get the most we can for our money ESPECIALLY when it comes to GPUs in the Jensen Huang age of "Frack you, we're doubling prices this gen, even though we already doubled it recently, pay me".

AuerX:

$100 price difference is nothing for peace of mind, and that's what drives a lot of consumers who arent enthusiasts or in a GPU cult.

I'm well aware, that's why I really hope AMD aim for $500 USD to try to claw back some of the market share.

ninja750:

my bet is 650$ big navi and 550$ the cut "flounders"

If they decide on those prices they're legitimately retarded. I'd buy nVidia just to spite them if they did that. You can't launch months after your opponent with nearly the same price while having less features out of the gate (I don't think they'll have their version of DLSS ready any time soon) and a bad reputation. The best case scenario sounds like it'll be an Oct 11 paper launch, assuming no more delays. That means between the scalping bots (which AMD will do absolutely NOTHING about no matter what they claim) and low volume to begin with (IDGAF if Lisa herself flies to my home to assure me they will have stock, they absolutely will not) you'll be lucky to have the honour to shit out your hard earned cash for one by the end of November. I can't repeat this enough: You can't be that many months behind your opponent, have a shit reputation, and even have your own fans angry at you, then ask for nearly the same price. That's just retarded. If they launch it at $650 USD and not have something to match DLSS I really might just say fuck it and buy a 3080, even if it performs lower without DLSS. AMD need to know very clearly they can't position themselves as seller of borderline luxury goods if they can't match features and are months late. And that's in my case where I care a lot about RAM for outside of gaming, I'm super pissed at the cheapass 10GBs on the 3080 while they're charging so much they could deliver 30GB if they wanted and still make a profit. AMD are taking so long to launch that nVidia might have the 20GB 3080 on shelves by the time there's real stock of the 6900XT in late November or December.

wow what a wall of bullshite above me!

6GB makes no sense to me, didn't they(AMD) said that some time ago, or something similar; also less RAM than the 5700XT

Picolete:

6GB makes no sense to me, didn't they(AMD) said that some time ago, or something similar; also less RAM than the 5700XT

You don't need more than 6GB for 1080p and if the price is right it will make sense. https://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/89/much-vram-need-1080p-1440p-4k/index.html