By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Shaunodon 1 day ago
Edit Thread
Pemalite said:
Darc Requiem said:

People can't have it both ways. You can't want AMD to produce a comparable upscaler to Nvidia's, which requires dedicated hardware to run, and expect it to work on architectures without that hardware.  Bear in mind, I'm a 7900XTX owner so this affects me. RDNA2 was never going to being to run FSR4 and RDNA3 was a long shot. RDNA3 has AI accelerators but based on the avialable info, their performance lags behind RDNA4. IIRC, @Pemalite you may know this for sure, the AI accelerators for RDNA3 run off the shaders like the Ray Accelerators. They aren't separate dedicated hardware. If I'm correct, that would mean even if they could get it to run on RDNA3 the performance hit may not be worth it. I hope I'm wrong about this, but I wasn't expected a ML upscaler from AMD to run on their older hardware.

As for the pricing, the 9070XT pricing is good. I think $550 would have been a homerun but $600 is a good price. The 9070 pricing is another story. It's too close to the XT's price. With the XT at $600, the non-XT should be $500.

Correct. The A.I Acceleration on RDNA3/2/1 are all done on the shader pipelines.
So whenever you do A.I tasks on those GPU's it takes away from Ray Tracing, it takes away from Rasterization, you are consuming cache, you are consuming resources, you will always have some contention.

nVidia did manage to get around this somewhat with Turing by allowing concurrent FP and INT operations on a CUDA core, but it just makes the core larger and less efficient overall as it's a jack of all trades, master of none with a duplication of some parts of the pipeline, so it's better to just have an optimized core dedicated to the task instead.
AMD Tried the VLIW approach.

All those issues goes away with RDNA4.

There is technically zero reason why FSR4 couldn't be "back-ported" to older RDNA and non-AMD hardware by translating it to bfloat, but the performance hit would not be worth the effort outside of just trying to maintain compatibility.

***************

The pricing of the 9070XT is good, it could have been an extra $50-$100 cheaper, but I am sure that will happen in a couple of months anyway... But we won't get those MSRP prices at retail, not a dog chance in hell.
The vanilla 9070 needed to be $499 to be a real win.

Depending where the 9070XT and 9070 falls in terms of retailer price here in Australia, it will definitely be my next GPU next month to tie me over for the next couple of years.
It's "good enough" from a performance perspective.

AMD wasn't allowed to screw up the 9070XT/9070 launch from a pricing point and they haven't for the most part, now hopefully they can claw back some marketshare and apply pressure to nVidia.

AMD also has the potential for better pricing in the long term...
The Navi 48 for the 9070XT chip will house 53.9 billion transistors in a 356.5 mm^2 die.
Nvidia's GB203 for 5070 Ti contains 45.6 billion transistors in a 378 mm^2 die.

AMD has the smaller and potentially equivalent/faster chip with cheaper RAM and is likely a fair bit cheaper to manufacture compared to the 5070Ti. (Just need real benchmarks to see how the cards fall).

Doing my first full new build after over 10 years (I delayed a few years after buying a new smart TV). Nvidia was always a no-brainer for graphics cards (when I built this PC so was Intel for CPUs), but my God the market is like an alternate reality. $2000 NZD on average for a 5070 Ti. I'm pretty sure that was the price of a Titan way back when, and the 5070 Ti is a mid-range card with minimal improvements. Absurd.

With the supposed MSRP of 9070 XT $100 USD less than a PS5 Pro which generally goes for around $1300 NZD, if I can simply get the 9070 XT for that or lower and not worry about cables burning they will have me. Unfortunately way down here we're destined to be an afterthought even if AMD manages to come through everywhere else.

If the 9070 XT is also averaging near $2000 I'm just going to pay the extra for a 5080. I really only wanted to spend $4000 ideally for the overall build and maybe go to $5000 for a higher card if they seemed better value, but now that's closer to $6000 or $10000 if you want a flagship burn-your-savings graphics card. Yes, mainstream PC builds have hit 5 figures in our country.

The prices all make me want to vomit, but my PC is inching towards Death's door every day so I can't really avoid it. Maybe I can just pray to make it another year or so since I don't need a PC for modern gaming right now. I just don't see when the market will actually improve.

People can blame bad guy Nvidia all they like, and there's no excusing them. I just don't see much difference from this current scenario and the original launch of XSX and PS5 during Covid, with it being a scalper's haven and retailers marking up prices with a bunch of useless junk no one wanted. But that didn't stop the demand for the producs raging forward and consumers lapping them all up for years. The consumers are at least as culpable for feeding into the greed of Nvidia and these other multi-corps. They wouldn't keep pushing for these anti-consumer practices if they didn't believe they could get away with them. Only the consumers can prove them wrong, so it's on them now.