AMD Squeezes In More RDNA4 Changes For Linux 6.14 - Enables Cleaner Shader On GFX12

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • qarium
    Senior Member
    • Nov 2008
    • 3443

    #41
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    During the launch of RDNA 3, AMD explained their reason for retaining a single compute die is that the internal bandwidth requirements of a GPU are too high.
    And keep in mind that their lower-bandwidth solution was the MCD approach, which (in the form of 7900 XTX) has an aggregate bandwidth of 5.7 TB/s. So, if they say the GCD's internal bandwidth is too high to partition, I'll believe them.
    i think you are absolutly right here... its the slow GDDR6 they mitigate

    if they would switch to GDDR7 the performance increase would be that big that they no longer need these MCD cache chips...
    Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

    Comment

    • fintux
      Phoronix Member
      • Nov 2019
      • 53

      #42
      Originally posted by qarium View Post

      AMD has these halo products just see my AMD PRO W7900 with 48gb vram...

      just keep in mind AMD said they will backport FSR4.0 fpr the radeon 7000 series this means my PRO W7900 will run very good with FSR4.0..

      also think about the radeon 9070XT with 16gb vram its 100% sure the real halo product will be the AMD PRO W9070(XT) with 32gb vram or even a dual-gpu card. there is a posibility to avoid real multi-gpu rendering by doing frame generation and other FSR4.0 features on the second gpu.
      When I mentioned "consumer", that kind of hints that they will look into consumer-grade cards. In gaming, the workstation GPUs lose to the gaming GPUs in most cases. The ~$4000 W7900 and even more eye-watering ~$8000 RTX-6000 48 GB cards lose to RTX-4090 and RX-7900 XTX in gaming. For workstation use, such as rendering, AI etc. it may very well be a different case (I have not studied that topic too closely). But the average consumer is probably not even aware of these products. And in many professional use-cases, AMD has a big issue with not having CUDA.

      Personally I have an AMD GPU, because it was the best value for the money, and in mid-range cards, there's no point in paying extra for higher ray-tracing speed, as it is anyways basically unusable. But repeating, the average consumer doesn't really get excited by "best value", they get excited by having the same GPU brand as the streamers have, or the benchmarkers use.

      Comment

      • qarium
        Senior Member
        • Nov 2008
        • 3443

        #43
        Originally posted by fintux View Post
        When I mentioned "consumer", that kind of hints that they will look into consumer-grade cards. In gaming, the workstation GPUs lose to the gaming GPUs in most cases. The ~$4000 W7900 and even more eye-watering ~$8000 RTX-6000 48 GB cards lose to RTX-4090 and RX-7900 XTX in gaming.
        its a short term illusion to believe a 4090 beats a RTX6000 and a 7900XTX beats a w7900
        you only have this illusion because the games today are optimised to fit in 24GB vram
        but you of course do not buy such card for today instead you also buy it for the future
        and it become clear that future games will use more vram than 24gb for multiple reasons.
        as soon as a game features 32gb vram its pretty sure that a W7900 beats a 7900XTX

        to my knowlege near future games need more vram for 3 reasons: add raytracing need more vram, add FSR4/DLSS4 need more vram and AI driven NPC'S need more vram and of course games with higher texture resolution need more vram.

        so your idea that a 7900XTX beats a w7900 in such advance future games is nonsense.

        all you have is the illusion the 7900XTX is better because the games are optimised to not use more than 24GB vram.
        Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

        Comment

        • fintux
          Phoronix Member
          • Nov 2019
          • 53

          #44
          Originally posted by qarium View Post

          its a short term illusion to believe a 4090 beats a RTX6000 and a 7900XTX beats a w7900
          you only have this illusion because the games today are optimised to fit in 24GB vram
          but you of course do not buy such card for today instead you also buy it for the future
          and it become clear that future games will use more vram than 24gb for multiple reasons.
          as soon as a game features 32gb vram its pretty sure that a W7900 beats a 7900XTX

          to my knowlege near future games need more vram for 3 reasons: add raytracing need more vram, add FSR4/DLSS4 need more vram and AI driven NPC'S need more vram and of course games with higher texture resolution need more vram.

          so your idea that a 7900XTX beats a w7900 in such advance future games is nonsense.

          all you have is the illusion the 7900XTX is better because the games are optimised to not use more than 24GB vram.
          You are literally claiming that W7900 wins in gaming, and it is a halo product for the consumers, but it is just in the future games that don't yet exist. And then you go on to say that what I say is nonsense. The fact just is that Nvidia is leading the gaming benchmarks *now*, and that is what matters for the consumer.

          Comment

          • qarium
            Senior Member
            • Nov 2008
            • 3443

            #45
            Originally posted by fintux View Post
            You are literally claiming that W7900 wins in gaming, and it is a halo product for the consumers, but it is just in the future games that don't yet exist. And then you go on to say that what I say is nonsense. The fact just is that Nvidia is leading the gaming benchmarks *now*, and that is what matters for the consumer.
            exactly the future games who do not exist yet exactly.

            as soon as there are games who use more than 24gb vram the RTX4090 and also 7900xtx is doomed and the W7900 will win big.

            "And then you go on to say that what I say is nonsense."

            exactly its nonsense what you say because its 100% sure that these future games who will use more than 24gb vram will come. so your claim that the RTX4090 or 7900xTX is faster in games is nonsense its only faster in "OLD" games

            "The fact just is that Nvidia is leading the gaming benchmarks *now*, and that is what matters for the consumer."

            isn't it true that the RTX 5090 has 32 GiB GDDR7 vram and there are already games who optimise for that ?

            you do not want to believe that a 48gb vram card is a halo product but in 1-2 years you will think differently.

            for example the W7900 can run bigger AI models like the deepseek R1 with 70B parameters
            Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

            Comment

            • fintux
              Phoronix Member
              • Nov 2019
              • 53

              #46
              Originally posted by qarium View Post

              exactly the future games who do not exist yet exactly.

              as soon as there are games who use more than 24gb vram the RTX4090 and also 7900xtx is doomed and the W7900 will win big.
              So what past work station GPUs of the past then were good investments for today's gaming?

              Comment

              • qarium
                Senior Member
                • Nov 2008
                • 3443

                #47
                Originally posted by fintux View Post
                So what past work station GPUs of the past then were good investments for today's gaming?
                its just a smart gambling for me it was clear that 24gb vram was not enough.

                the RTX 5090 also shows that gaming cards will quickly pass the 24gb vram limit.

                also you switch topic first you asked for a halo product ( a halo product is never a good investment) now you ask for a good investment.

                a AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is at minimum 3350€

                ✔ Preisvergleich für AMD Radeon PRO W7900 ✔ Produktinfo ⇒ Modell: AMD Radeon PRO W7900 • Speicher: 48GB GDDR6 mit ECC-Modus, 384bit, 18Gbps, 2250MHz, 864GB/s • Tak… ✔ PCIe ✔ Testberichte ✔ Günstig kaufen


                ✔ Preisvergleich für NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition ✔ Bewertungen ✔ Produktinfo ⇒ Modell: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 • Speicher: 32GB GDDR7, 512bit, 28Gbps, 1750MHz, 1792GB/s • Takt Basis: 2… ✔ PCIe ✔ Testberichte ✔ Günstig kaufen


                a rtx5090 has a street price of over 5000€ i know the official price is more like 2400€

                so its simple if you want maximum performance in current games you maybe pick the 5090

                but if you want to do stuff what does not fit in 32gb vram (Blender projects easily hit that limit) then a w7900 is a good choice.

                also keep in mind a 7900XTX has no ECC ram but the w7900 has ECC ram...

                its pretty sure you will not go and buy a W7900 thats clear but keep in mind we are in the phoronix.com forum there are people like me who for the open-source driver support buy AMD and the nvidia 5090 you more or less agree to run closed-source drivers and big-closed-source-firmware and so one.

                in 1-2 years its clear your head will start spinning if you see games use MORE than 32gb vram for one simple reason game companies will put AI models in vram to make NPC's act smart and talkative

                such games will be much more fun to play because it turns stupid NPC's in a much more human like state.
                Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

                Comment

                • fintux
                  Phoronix Member
                  • Nov 2019
                  • 53

                  #48
                  Originally posted by qarium View Post
                  also you switch topic first you asked for a halo product ( a halo product is never a good investment) now you ask for a good investment.
                  I agree, though it was more of a bad phrasing. If a workstation GPU didn't beat the benchmarks against consumer cards of the time, and if it doesn't beat the current consumer cards, not only was it a bad investment for gaming, it wasn't a halo product. It was just future-proof. It would be a halo product if there weren't new, better-performing consumer cards launched after that.

                  a rtx5090 has a street price of over 5000€ i know the official price is more like 2400€

                  so its simple if you want maximum performance in current games you maybe pick the 5090

                  but if you want to do stuff what does not fit in 32gb vram (Blender projects easily hit that limit) then a w7900 is a good choice.

                  also keep in mind a 7900XTX has no ECC ram but the w7900 has ECC ram...
                  I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but I am talking about the average consumer/gamer here.

                  its pretty sure you will not go and buy a W7900 thats clear but keep in mind we are in the phoronix.com forum there are people like me who for the open-source driver support buy AMD and the nvidia 5090 you more or less agree to run closed-source drivers and big-closed-source-firmware and so one.
                  I also support AMD for their open-source drivers. I used to have GTX 970, and no matter what I did, I couldn't even get vsync work reliably in KDE. I have RX 6600XT now. And I also strongly oppose some of the shady business strategies Nvidia pursues.

                  But I wasn't, once again, talking about what is the best GPU choice for me or you, or even the best choice for the average gamer, but rather, how they think and why they mostly end up buying Nvidia.

                  in 1-2 years its clear your head will start spinning if you see games use MORE than 32gb vram for one simple reason game companies will put AI models in vram to make NPC's act smart and talkative

                  such games will be much more fun to play because it turns stupid NPC's in a much more human like state.
                  Well time will tell. But my bet is that any gaming studio that expects a large customer base and sets a requirement of OVER 32 GB VRAM in the following 1-2 years will be quite disappointed. What is your guess, how big percentage of gamers will have a GPU with over 32 GB after mere 12 months? And when do you think consoles will go above 32 GB VRAM?

                  Comment

                  • qarium
                    Senior Member
                    • Nov 2008
                    • 3443

                    #49
                    Originally posted by fintux View Post
                    I agree, though it was more of a bad phrasing. If a workstation GPU didn't beat the benchmarks against consumer cards of the time, and if it doesn't beat the current consumer cards, not only was it a bad investment for gaming, it wasn't a halo product. It was just future-proof. It would be a halo product if there weren't new, better-performing consumer cards launched after that.
                    "It was just future-proof"

                    this sounds good to me. i really do not care if you call a W7900 a halo product or just future-proof
                    fast is it is a better product than most people expect to be they will only disover this fact after games use 32gb vram or more.
                    your definition honestly sounds like a very small difference between a future-proof product and a halo product.

                    Originally posted by fintux View Post
                    I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but I am talking about the average consumer/gamer here.
                    you really do not know how a average consumer/gamer product the next 2 years look like
                    i mean just take a game who use 24gb vram and add a very small 7 billion parameter AI to it to make the NPCs to be more active and the result is you need a 32gb vram 5090 just for that or a 24gb card and a second graphic card just for the AI...

                    Originally posted by fintux View Post
                    I also support AMD for their open-source drivers. I used to have GTX 970, and no matter what I did, I couldn't even get vsync work reliably in KDE. I have RX 6600XT now. And I also strongly oppose some of the shady business strategies Nvidia pursues.
                    you are welcome. the 6600xT is very cheap card compared to my w7900 yes and i understand why most buy such cards.

                    Originally posted by fintux View Post
                    But I wasn't, once again, talking about what is the best GPU choice for me or you, or even the best choice for the average gamer, but rather, how they think and why they mostly end up buying Nvidia.
                    it looks like they mostly will continue buy nvidia... if you see the RTX5000 release

                    and consider the fact that the radeon 9070XT is a 7900GRE with 40% higher raytracing performance and FSR4.0 then its easy to tell that they will continue to buy nvidia.

                    all we can hope is that there will be a W9070 with 32gb vram to even be on part with the 5090 in the meaning of the AI model size you can run even it is much slower.

                    Originally posted by fintux View Post

                    Well time will tell. But my bet is that any gaming studio that expects a large customer base and sets a requirement of OVER 32 GB VRAM in the following 1-2 years will be quite disappointed.
                    in case of AI models for NPCs they could also use a second GPU for that or on notebooks use the dGPU and iGPU for that as second gpu...

                    32 or over 32GB vram or a second gpu for the AI is a much lager base for such a game than just say give me 32gb or more vram or notthing..

                    Originally posted by fintux View Post
                    ​​
                    What is your guess, how big percentage of gamers will have a GPU with over 32 GB after mere 12 months?
                    in case of AI models its 32gb vram or more than 32gb vram or a second gpu... the AI model really do not care if it runs on the main gpu or second GPU

                    Originally posted by fintux View Post
                    ​​And when do you think consoles will go above 32 GB VRAM?
                    the weakest consoles will hit the 32gb vram first like the "steam deck 2"

                    its also pretty sure the playstation6 will also have 32gb vram... the playstation 5 pro compared to playstation 5 did also go from 16gb to 18gb vram.. so 32gb vram for playstation 6 is pretty sure.

                    but you asked for "over 32 GB"

                    its pretty sure that no console will go over 32gb vram the next 2-3 years...



                    Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

                    Comment

                    • fintux
                      Phoronix Member
                      • Nov 2019
                      • 53

                      #50
                      Originally posted by qarium View Post

                      "It was just future-proof"

                      this sounds good to me. i really do not care if you call a W7900 a halo product or just future-proof
                      fast is it is a better product than most people expect to be they will only disover this fact after games use 32gb vram or more.
                      your definition honestly sounds like a very small difference between a future-proof product and a halo product.
                      What at least I mean by a halo product is a product that someone sees and says "I want that one" but cannot necessarily afford. It does not mean an objectively better product.

                      you really do not know how a average consumer/gamer product the next 2 years look like
                      i mean just take a game who use 24gb vram and add a very small 7 billion parameter AI to it to make the NPCs to be more active and the result is you need a 32gb vram 5090 just for that or a 24gb card and a second graphic card just for the AI...
                      Maybe the AI stuff will be executed on an NPU instead, using the system RAM? As a reminder, I have been talking about the way the average consumer/gamer thinks. Not what is best for them.

                      you are welcome. the 6600xT is very cheap card compared to my w7900 yes and i understand why most buy such cards.
                      I only game casually and not very much even that. Mostly I need the GPU for photo editing, and there 6600XT is good enough. But the way I ended up with that card is different from the average consumer. I had a budget and picked the card best suited for my needs. I did not buy it based on a halo product, but just the vest one fitting my budget.

                      it looks like they mostly will continue buy nvidia... if you see the RTX5000 release

                      and consider the fact that the radeon 9070XT is a 7900GRE with 40% higher raytracing performance and FSR4.0 then its easy to tell that they will continue to buy nvidia.
                      Yes, they will buy Nvidia but probably mostly the 5060 ones when those become available, and with those raytracing will probably be basically useless, at least without frame generation and/or upscaling.

                      in case of AI models its 32gb vram or more than 32gb vram or a second gpu... the AI model really do not care if it runs on the main gpu or second GPU
                      Or on the NPU that is becoming very common in laptops.

                      the weakest consoles will hit the 32gb vram first like the "steam deck 2"
                      I just don't think steam survey, for example, having GPUs above 32 VRAM in any significant amount in 2 years, let alone 1 year. Maybe after our discussion is done... And the game developers will have to take the market into account if they actually want to sell their games. Not saying +32GB won't benefit at all in any games that time, but the studios will not have much incentive to optimize for that case.

                      its also pretty sure the playstation6 will Also have 32gb vram... the playstation 5 pro compared to playstation 5 did also go from 16gb to 18gb vram.. so 32gb vram for playstation 6 is pretty sure.

                      but you asked for "over 32 GB"

                      its pretty sure that no console will go over 32gb vram the next 2-3 years...
                      By the way, PS5 has 16 GB of unified memory. PS5 has 16 GB GDDR6 RAM and 2 GB of system DRAM. My understanding is that the 2 GB is entirely dedicated to the system and 16 GB is still unified memory, but just that it is more graphics oriented now. The RAM isn't directly comparable with a PC, as the OS is much, much more lightweight and the system can stream textures directly from SSD to GPU, so it doesn't need to cache them in RAM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X