AMD Announces The Radeon RX 6700 XT For $479

[leipero]

600mm² chip is not a problem AMD does 750mm² chips...
if you make it 600 instead of 500mm² then you can also put in a infinity cache of 128mb
by this even if the ram only have 512mb/s it will perform much faster than that because of infinity cache.

your solution in the fear of bad reputation because of the high power consumsion it to make no chip so your brand name does not get PR hit.

maybe the solution is to make a new brand name means new company lizense the RDNA2 architextur to this company and make the 12nm/gddr5 card. in this way no one can claim it is AMDs fault if the power consumtion it to high.

No one is saying it's a problem, the question is, how much does it cost. 6900/6800XT have 520mm² chips, what is the cost of 750mm² ones? We know the cost of 6800/6900XT.

No, "my" solution is that it's better to postpone the solution than to use a bad solution that will bring bad press and harm the brand reputation.

That last solution could be something to look up, but, I don't have numbers in order to calculate if it's possible (again, what is the cost of producing 600mm² chip at 12nm including board design and components?), and I'm not so sure about long term conditions for such solution.

[Anarchy]

Good luck finding enough land to meet demand. Once you go offshore with the turbines, the cost increases by 4x

Nuclear beats everything in efficiency and cost for the amount of land.

The downside is that it requires a butt-ton of water and produces ionizing radiation.

The cheapest, most consistent, and least "bad for the planet" is hydroelectric.

The downside is that no one is gonna either give you money to build or allow you to build or even consider creating an exploratory project to build a new nuclear power plant. you can't even find anyone who will take the risk of insuring you; your only choice is a nation state with enough money and politicians willing to risk it. In 2021, you can count these countries on one hand. Even France has plans to slowly move away from nuclear power over the next few decades.

And despite their inherent disadvantage, renewables have continued to be developed, unlike nuclear power, huge amounts of money into r&d are still being poured into them, and this has resulted in that each generation of renewable tech is better, more efficient and cheaper than the previous one. This trend is only going to speed up in the upcoming decades.

So, yeah. We are really arguing about a problem that has already solved itself. Despite its huge advantage over everything else, nuclear power just didn't take off. It really didn't. There's still a possibility that nuclear will be used in one form or another in the future, there is definitely space for it, and maybe the next-gen reactors will be cheap and safe, but that's to be seen.

p.s. btw, do you know what the real efficiency of nuclear power is? you can find the number yourself, but it is far far smaller than the efficiency of even the shittiest wind turbines. it doesn't matter here. the vast amount of energy produced during nuclear fission is lost. we capture only a tiny fraction of it.

[Anarchy]

This is the biggest load of BS I did read in a while, first:

https://www.world-nuclear.org/getmedia/46e1d33a-6d6a-43cd-b306-fb43fc61f901/world-electricity-production-2020.png.aspx

Second:

https://www.world-nuclear.org/getmedia/3dc88f1f-7e31-4d94-a805-55ab9edb7b66/nuclear-electricity-production-2020.png.aspx

Do you see Africa (Yellowish orange) here?

And third:

https://www.world-nuclear.org/getmedia/5a271271-0a0d-4790-a5dd-4ddea8e768bc/nuclear-generation-by-country-2020.png.aspx

Source:

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/nuclear-power-in-the-world-today.aspx

The only obvious downside of nuclear is radiation and dangerous nuclear waste that is hard to store (and keep stored).

The only OBVIOUS downside of nuclear is radiation and dangerous nuclear waste that is hard to store (and keep stored)

mmm. yeah obviously. let me cite something from Greenpeace as well. let's ignore everything else, it's not like you can find it on "world-nuclear.org" lmao

here's some food for thought.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/nuclear-giant-westinghouse-files-for-bankruptcy-after-costs-skyrocketed/

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/11/economics-working-against-coal-as-cost-of-wind-solar-power-drops/

[Anarchy]

I don't know if you can understand German, but if you trust NGO sources on this topic, you are mislead. Here is a peer-review of such a study: https://www.kernd.de/kernd-wAssets/d...ers_Musahl.pdf (in German).

The average market price realized by German nuclear power plants is estimated at between 3-5 Cents per kWh (of value in 2019). This is the same range as the most modern PV/wind costs (which do not take the grid extensions and upgrades needed into account).

I will be misled when Germany builds its new nuclear power plant. I'm serious. Build them. No ifs buts or maybes. Just build them. I'll wait.


There is also this, straight from your wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:N...ting_costs.png
It shows the cost of nuclear derived by several independent studies. Nuclear is the costliest and that's without waste disposal. And if you dig a bit more, you'll find that the costs to build new nuclear are also not going down. It would have been very nice if that was true, but it's not.

Anyway, I'm out. You can argue about energy policy until the cows come home. It won't change a bit because these decisions are made by people with power and money. I can't go back in time and make your nuclear power safe and cheap. Now it's too late for it.

[lyamc]

ok you dont like it. fine. but i have to deal with reality. and my reality is tight now i do not do mining so i can not follow your advice.

even not if you are 100% or even 1000% right.

I didn’t tell you to start mining, I said if you ARE mining you are doing it poorly by not optimizing the performance of your cards

Also, no one can be 1000% right, that’s impossible

[ms178]

I will be misled when Germany builds its new nuclear power plant. I'm serious. Build them. No ifs buts or maybes. Just build them. I'll wait.


There is also this, straight from your wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:N...ting_costs.png
It shows the cost of nuclear derived by several independent studies. Nuclear is the costliest and that's without waste disposal. And if you dig a bit more, you'll find that the costs to build new nuclear are also not going down. It would have been very nice if that was true, but it's not.

Anyway, I'm out. You can argue about energy policy until the cows come home. It won't change a bit because these decisions are made by people with power and money. I can't go back in time and make your nuclear power safe and cheap. Now it's too late for it.

The graph you cited is showing historical data, these don't reflect the costs of newer reactor types. Ever heard of building modular reactors? These are a big reasearch topic right now which should help to drop construction costs significantly. But let's wait and see. I still think that we in Germany could shift course, it is never too late for that - and eventually people will get angry if other countries build these and enjoy the benefits of it while we have to pay significantly more and are getting less. You cannot brainwash people forever if the facts point into a different direction. And if they are right and I am wrong, I'll be the first to admit it. After all I am just advocating for these because I think it is the most cost effective and environmental-friendly option we have right now.

[leipero]

qarium
At this point you are just making fun of it, but on the serious side, your idea with another brand isn't a bad one, the thing is, I'm still convinced that 600mm² chip graphic card would cost too much even on 12nm in order to be a possible solution.

The only OBVIOUS downside of nuclear is radiation and dangerous nuclear waste that is hard to store (and keep stored)

mmm. yeah obviously. let me cite something from Greenpeace as well. let's ignore everything else, it's not like you can find it on "world-nuclear.org" lmao

here's some food for thought.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/nuclear-giant-westinghouse-files-for-bankruptcy-after-costs-skyrocketed/

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/11/economics-working-against-coal-as-cost-of-wind-solar-power-drops/

Do you think those numbers provided are inaccturate? My response was to the statement that nuclear is dead, it's clearly not, those articles from arstechnica are from March 2017, in that second article from 2017 it says (talking about batteries) “Industry participants expect costs to decrease significantly over the next five years, driven by scale and related cost savings, improved standardization, and technological improvements”, it's march 2021, none of that actually happened. What is clear to me (or anyone really) is that lithium-ion based batteries are not adequate for the job, even if we assume significant improvements.

When we cite something, it's much better to cite source directly than citing messenger of the messenger of the source. Either way, first article was talking about one company in the US without going in depth why they were over budget, it's in no way representative of nuclear energy companies in general, even tho. in the very article company claimed that nuclear is "very profitable". Considering the fact it's one company in question, and the company that doesn't deal with nuclear only, in fact, they have wide range of areas they work, it's next to useless.

[lyamc]

yes it is mathematically impossible but i am 100% sure you are 1000% right.

next time i do mining i will do it exactly as you said.

I don’t care what you do with your computer. Just stop spewing your garbage all over the forums.

let me cite something from Greenpeace as well

Ah yes, my favourite source for unbiased news. My second favourite is Fuelwar! /s

The USA has 60 nuclear power plants, and that’s supplying 20% of all energy production.

That’s more than all renewables (hydro, wind, solar, geothermal) put together.

The land issue is no joke. People gotta eat, and this land being used for solar farms is taking away from what could be farmland.

Land is a finite resource that only increases in value as time goes on, and like ms178 said, putting solar panels on everyone’s roof, from the utility company’s perspective, is a nightmare.

In order to accomplish what you’re talking about, we’d have to switch from our 60Hz AC to DC. Take a look into HVDC.

Now I’ve already wasted enough time with Qarid’s stupid answers, but I suggest you consider this: if it was as easy to just use renewables like you claim, then solar/wind farms would be the new bitcoin mining.

They aren’t. Reality is more complicated then this idea you have in your head.

[lyamc]

Lithium-Iron battery is used for such usercases for example my battery system is lithium iron.
it has the lowest price per KWH you can but and also it can not explode and it can not burn.

so your so called prolem is already solvet by lithium-iron batteries

it also need 65% less Lithium and there are versions who do not even use cobald metall,

Lithium batteries (including variants like lithium iron) are not the lowest price per kWh. They are the highest energy density for the weight with the best overall durability with recharge and discharge cycles.

The most inexpensive are things like:

Pumping water up (storing potential energy)

Molten metal/salt batteries

It’s quite unfortunate that you omit the reasons why you don’t see Lithium Iron in phones, laptops, and cars if they’re so good. Since I’m tired of explaining everything, why don’t you enlighten us: why is this wonderful battery tech not in anything else?

[leipero]

qarium I never said people don't buy such cards, what I said and what you are missing (either on purpose or you simply do not give enough time to read what other people write) is the question if it's cost effective to create such a huge die on any fabrication in order to justify the price with given TDP, in other words "Will that graphic card be cheaper enough to be even considered as an option?", and reality is = it probably would not.

Lithium-Iron batteries are just a type of lithium-Ion batteries. It solves nothing, and good luck refreshing (changing) those things in bulk due to the extremely poor recharge cycle rate (highest, but still far off of what's needed it's not even funny), only to produce such batteries in bulk, all the time, would make much bigger carbon footprint than coal even, let alone gas or something more nature friendly. The fact of the matter is, as of now, and for the foreseeable future, that's a fantasy, even when talking just about simplified picture as we do here, without involving things lyamc and others mentioned.