They’d have to actually spend chip real estate on DL/RT.
So far they’ve been talking about using DL for gameplay instead of graphics. So no dedicated tensor units.
And their RT has been mostly just there to keep up with NV feature wise. They did enhance it somewhat in RDNA3 apparently. But NV isn’t waiting for them either.
Second gen AMD HW ray-tracing still has a worse performance impact than Intel first gen HW ray-tracing. No need to talk about Nvidia here, as they are miles ahead. Either AMD is not willing to expend more resources on RT or they aren’t able to improve performance.
AMD’s RT hardware is intrinsically tied to the texture unit, which was probably a good decision at the start since Nvidia kinda caught them with their pants down and they needed something fast to implement (especially with consoles looming overhead, wouldn’t want the entire generation to lack any form of RT).
Now, though, I think it’s giving them a lot of problems because it’s really not a scalable design. I hope they eventually implement a proper dedicated unit like Nvidia and Intel have.
I doubt they were surprised at all. Isn’t RDNA3 very similar to RDNA2? They could have fixed it there, and they decided on minor improvements instead.
Wasn’t RDNA2 designed with Sony and Microsoft having an input on its features? I’m sure Sony and MS knew what was coming from Nvidia years in advance. I think Mark Cerny said developers even wanted a 16 core originally, and they were talked out of it, because they had die area restrictions. RT hardware area on those consoles probably would have equaled an extra 8 CPU cores in area if they wanted Nvidia-like RT. All just seems like cost optimization to me.
I mistook 6700XT specs, thinking it was comparison to 7800XT with 60CU but the actual comparison is 6800 vs 7800XT.
That being said
7600 is 20% faster in Alan wake, 10% more in Cyberpunk than 6600XT with same CU count at 1080p
7800XT is 37% faster than 6800 at 1440p in Alan Wake, no 6800 in Cyberpunk, you would have to infer based on 6700XT, which shows good 35% improvements 7800XT vs 6800, with an inference of 6800 being 20% faster than 6700XT like in Alan Wake with same 60CU
Microsoft told Digital Foundry that they had locked the specs of the Xbox Series consoles in 2016. In 2016 they knew the console would have an SSD, RT capabilities etc.
Well, sure the application specific IP is always going to be more performant. But on a pinch, shader ALUs can do tensor processing just fine. But without a proper software stack, the presence of tensor cores is irrelevant ;-)
They’d have to actually spend chip real estate on DL/RT.
So far they’ve been talking about using DL for gameplay instead of graphics. So no dedicated tensor units.
And their RT has been mostly just there to keep up with NV feature wise. They did enhance it somewhat in RDNA3 apparently. But NV isn’t waiting for them either.
Second gen AMD HW ray-tracing still has a worse performance impact than Intel first gen HW ray-tracing. No need to talk about Nvidia here, as they are miles ahead. Either AMD is not willing to expend more resources on RT or they aren’t able to improve performance.
AMD’s RT hardware is intrinsically tied to the texture unit, which was probably a good decision at the start since Nvidia kinda caught them with their pants down and they needed something fast to implement (especially with consoles looming overhead, wouldn’t want the entire generation to lack any form of RT).
Now, though, I think it’s giving them a lot of problems because it’s really not a scalable design. I hope they eventually implement a proper dedicated unit like Nvidia and Intel have.
I am pretty sure they already have something in the pipeline, its just that it can take half a decade from low level concept to customer sales…
I doubt they were surprised at all. Isn’t RDNA3 very similar to RDNA2? They could have fixed it there, and they decided on minor improvements instead.
Wasn’t RDNA2 designed with Sony and Microsoft having an input on its features? I’m sure Sony and MS knew what was coming from Nvidia years in advance. I think Mark Cerny said developers even wanted a 16 core originally, and they were talked out of it, because they had die area restrictions. RT hardware area on those consoles probably would have equaled an extra 8 CPU cores in area if they wanted Nvidia-like RT. All just seems like cost optimization to me.
RDNA3 is up to 60% faster than RDNA2 equivalent in epath tracing
Isn’t that only because RDNA3 is available with that many more CUs? Afaik the per-unit and per-clock RT performance of RDNA3 is barely ahead of RDNA2.
I mistook 6700XT specs, thinking it was comparison to 7800XT with 60CU but the actual comparison is 6800 vs 7800XT.
That being said
7600 is 20% faster in Alan wake, 10% more in Cyberpunk than 6600XT with same CU count at 1080p
7800XT is 37% faster than 6800 at 1440p in Alan Wake, no 6800 in Cyberpunk, you would have to infer based on 6700XT, which shows good 35% improvements 7800XT vs 6800, with an inference of 6800 being 20% faster than 6700XT like in Alan Wake with same 60CU
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/alan-wake-2-performance-benchmark/7.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/cyberpunk-2077-phantom-liberty-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/6.html
Microsoft told Digital Foundry that they had locked the specs of the Xbox Series consoles in 2016. In 2016 they knew the console would have an SSD, RT capabilities etc.
They could already have in mind the next console
Can they make dedicated tensor to units or is that patented?
They don’t even need to make dedicated tensor units, since programmable shaders already have the necessary ALU functionality.
The main issue for AMD is their software, not their hardware per se.
Nah, throughput of tensor cores is far to high to compete against
Well, sure the application specific IP is always going to be more performant. But on a pinch, shader ALUs can do tensor processing just fine. But without a proper software stack, the presence of tensor cores is irrelevant ;-)