By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Norion said:
Pemalite said:

AMD just didn't have the resources to do a high-end GPU whilst building CDNA, UDNA, APU's and worrying about RDNA4, their GPU teams whilst capable are significantly smaller than nVidia.

In-saying that, the 9060XT 16GB, 9070 and 9070XT are all absolutely brilliant in terms of price/performance/features.
If next-gen is based on RDNA4, I would still be pretty content considering how capable that hardware is.

AMD does need to pivot back to it's small-core design philosophy that they had with Terascale 1 and Terascale 2, which pushed them ahead of nVidia in terms of price/power/performance. That was peak AMD Graphics.

Where did you hear about that? Not saying you're wrong, just that this is the first time I've heard this and yeah RDNA 4 is for sure one of AMD's better lineups in the past decade. They won't age quite as well as the RTX 50 series but the gap will be closer than RDNA 3 and the 40 series and way closer than RDNA 1 and the 20 series so hopefully the gap gets even smaller next time.

There is plenty of articles around with interviews with AMD where AMD forked Graphics Core Next into CDNA and RDNA in order to build micro/macro-optimizations for those different and specific workloads and market segments, but the engineering resources to maintain that has been an irksome area of contention.

https://overclock3d.net/news/gpu-displays/amd-plans-major-changes-for-radeon-with-united-udna-gpu-architecture-for-data-centers-and-gamers/

It's the same issue AMD had prior to 2015, where the GPU development team was part of the CPU development team to drive their Fusion (APU) initiative, sadly it meant a contention of limited resources which impacted all of AMD's engineering teams.

https://fortune.com/2015/09/09/amd-graphics-chip-split/




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite