RTX 4xxx / RX 7xxx speculation

AMD Radeon RX 7600S RDNA3 laptop GPU tested, 6% slower than RTX 4060 mobile without raytracing

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-rad...ted-6-slower-than-rtx-4060-without-raytracing

German tech site ComputerBase has one of the first reviews of the discrete RDNA3 graphics for laptops.

(From conlusion page: the 8gb 28 CU mobile gpu — full navi 33 has 32 CU — runs into VRAM limits when testing in 1080p & textures have to be dialled down)

Specs for 4060 mobile (full AD107) in link below: (approx half of 4070 desktop)

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-ad106-and-ad107-gpus-pictured
 
Wow so among other things here 1080p and 8GB of vram is not cutting it for high details. —Now 1080p 60 medium is totally in the realm of entry or budget gaming but I’m talking $100-150 bucks on a card like that these days or gtfo.
 
Marees said:
AMD Radeon RX 7600S RDNA3 laptop GPU tested, 6% slower than RTX 4060 mobile without raytracing

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-rad...ted-6-slower-than-rtx-4060-without-raytracing

German tech site ComputerBase has one of the first reviews of the discrete RDNA3 graphics for laptops.

(From conlusion page: the 8gb 28 CU mobile gpu — full navi 33 has 32 CU — runs into VRAM limits when testing in 1080p & textures have to be dialled down)

Specs for 4060 mobile (full AD107) in link below: (approx half of 4070 desktop)

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-ad106-and-ad107-gpus-pictured
Click to expand...
AMD is so behind on the laptop GPU side. I just do not understand it. They have the chiplet design, they have the power sipping chips...

It's just a crappy laptop market if you want AMD. The 7945HX is an awesome mobile CPU but it is married to (generally) pretty lame chassis (I tested the SCAR 17 7945HX / 4090 - friggin 300 nit screen, LOL!). The Intel stuff is great, but requires a lot of tuning to tame. The latest out there is disabling the E-cores while gaming for huge benefits. I need to test it out with ParkControl with my 13980HX.
 
sk3tch said:
AMD is so behind on the laptop GPU side. I just do not understand it. They have the chiplet design, they have the power sipping chips...

It's just a crappy laptop market if you want AMD. The 7945HX is an awesome mobile CPU but it is married to (generally) pretty lame chassis (I tested the SCAR 17 7945HX / 4090 - friggin 300 nit screen, LOL!). The Intel stuff is great, but requires a lot of tuning to tame. The latest out there is disabling the E-cores while gaming for huge benefits. I need to test it out with ParkControl with my 13980HX.
Click to expand...
You were helping me in the amd laptop thread when I was looking for a 14" laptop that could also run games.

The Asus G14 2022 amd 6900hs Radeon 6700S generally seemed very similar to the Asus G14 2021 amd 5800hs geforce 3060 (maybe the 6700s was barely faster than the 3060, not sure, wasn't very noticeable to me).

However what made me "downgrade" to the 3060 was terrible fortnite performance with the 6700s. Couldn't ever get it above 60fps (usually it hovered around 40) no matter what settings I changed. Some sort of driver bug or something, didn't see this problem in any other game. Tried updating the drivers, no luck. Besides that one bug I thought the 6700S seemed fine. Not sure if it's been fixed since ( at the time there were generally a lot of threads about 6000 series amd cards and really weird fortnite performance) .

I've been very satisfied with the Asus G14 amd 5800hs geforce 3060 laptop.
 
serpretetsky said:
You were helping me in the amd laptop thread when I was looking for a 14" laptop that could also run games.

The Asus G14 2022 amd 6900hs Radeon 6700S generally seemed very similar to the Asus G14 2021 amd 5800hs geforce 3060 (maybe the 6700s was barely faster than the 3060, not sure, wasn't very noticeable to me).

However what made me "downgrade" to the 3060 was terrible fortnite performance with the 6700s. Couldn't ever get it above 60fps (usually it hovered around 40) no matter what settings I changed. Some sort of driver bug or something, didn't see this problem in any other game. Tried updating the drivers, no luck. Besides that one bug I thought the 6700S seemed fine. Not sure if it's been fixed since ( at the time there were generally a lot of threads about 6000 series amd cards and really weird fortnite performance) .

I've been very satisfied with the Asus G14 amd 5800hs geforce 3060 laptop.
Click to expand...
Glad you got it sorted! I do know that they recently fixed things with their drivers in Fortnite - my 7900 XTX is awesome. But yes, last gen had a tough time until they cleaned things up.

Unfortunately, NVIDIA has made a big play for Fortnite in particular - the replay feature “built into” the game alone is huge. So they’re strong, as well!

I found the 13980HX (any 13xxxHX CPU) superior to the AMD 7945HX for Fortnite. Gotta make the call! Even though I’m all AMD on my desktops. :)

BTW - sold my Razer Blade 14 3080 Ti (which I loved) to get the "maximum" power that I could get and still be portable - so I got the ASUS ROG Strix SCAR 16 with the RTX 4090. It's big but not too big!
 
Last edited:
If it has to stay tethered to a power cord because it can't be used for very long without it.... IMHO, it's "too big"... at least to be called a "lap"top.
 
cjcox said:
If it has to stay tethered to a power cord because it can't be used for very long without it.... IMHO, it's "too big"... at least to be called a "lap"top.
Click to expand...
For sure. I get 2 hours easily out of the SCAR 16. Plenty for me when I have a work MBA M2 and my wife has an MBA M1.
 
Marees said:
Speculation from Igor:

AMD not confident of selling Navi 32 (7800xt/7700xt) for a profit. Might introduce Navi 33 (7600xt) first in computex.

NVIDIA stops supply of chips, the RTX 4060 Ti comes at the end of May/beginning of June and AMD shows the RX 7600 at Computex​


https://www.igorslab.de/en/nvidia-s...-amd-zeigt-zur-computex-wohl-kleinere-karten/
Click to expand...

Referencing the 4070 chip supply...Moore's Law is Dead also had the same information: Nvidia will choke the supply so that the boards can sell at $600.

That opens a BIG door for AMD's ~$600 gpus (with recent price cuts). The 4070 is a flop at $600.
 
I mean Nvidia makes like a gazillion bucks selling GPUs to enterprise and now with all the AI gravy train rolling in.. If we felt like gamers were left behind every crypto boom they are surely hosing them now. Pay or don’t play. We aren’t catering to the gamer market by bending the prices. It looks like a standoff between the gaming customers and Nvidia is on.
 
MLID Leak:

7600xt AIB sample benchmarked 11% faster than a 6650xt
If you are waiting for the Navi 33 then better to buy discounted 6700/6700xt/6750xt now

 
Marees said:
MLID Leak:

7600xt AIB sample benchmarked 11% faster than a 6650xt
If you are waiting for the Navi 33 then better to buy discounted 6700/6700xt/6750xt now

Click to expand...

If true, I agree. I mean, if 7xxx brought just a few more features, then it might make better sense. Otherwise, AMD is going head to head with themselves.

YMMV

Edit: Of course, eventually the stock of new and available 6xxx will dry up... and then we're in "nvidia land", that is, you won't have a choice (unless you go used).
 
Last edited:
AMD would be stupid to release the 7600 with less than 12GB, and they need to capitalize on the fact (or rumor) that NV will drop a 8GB 4060. Should be:
- 7900 24/20GB
- 7800 XT 20GB (non XT 16GB)
- 7700 XT 16GB (non XT 12GB)
- 7600 12GB
- 7500/7400 8GB
 
Since no 77xx series, put 16gb on the 7600 and cook Nvidia lower lineup. The extra memory and newer design hardware/features makes it buyable over AMD previous generation. At 8gb -> fail and might as well become a paper weight.
 
noko said:
Since no 77xx series, put 16gb on the 7600 and cook Nvidia lower lineup. The extra memory and newer design hardware/features makes it buyable over AMD previous generation. At 8gb -> fail and might as well become a paper weight.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more.
AMD did campaigning more memory matters so they shouldn't bother putting 8gb on their latest release.
 
Rumour: Nvidia to launch 16gb 4060 ti on top of 8gb 4060 ti.

Surely AMD will be forced to launch a 16gb version of 7600 xt (probably at $350)

Whenever AMD launches Navi 32 then there would also be a 16gb 7800xt/7800 for $650 to $500

That leaves a gap from $380 to $520 for a further cut down 7700xt. The easiest way to cut down navi 32 to a 7700xt would result in 192 bit bus & hence 12gb. It would be very curious if AMD ended up launching a 12gb 7700xt sandwiched between a 16gb 7800 @$500 & a 16gb 7600xt @$350


Marees said:
Rumour: besides the 4060 ti 8gb that will be launched in May, nvidia will also reveal 4060 ti 16gb to be launched in july

https://twitter.com/Zed__Wang/status/1655816776872017920?s=20
Click to expand...
 
Because Nvidia is cheap? Its a 128bit bus card too so ram configuration issues. The most interesting part will be the 16Gb 4060ti vs the 12GB 4070 tests in July or August.
 
Ranulfo said:
Because Nvidia is cheap? Its a 128bit bus card too so ram configuration issues. The most interesting part will be the 16Gb 4060ti vs the 12GB 4070 tests in July or August.
Click to expand...
Can't wait for the 4060 to actually beat a 4070 in some cases much like the 3060 12gb vs 3070. A higher card should never have performance trade offs vs lower. It's really silly.
 
They have chips they have to/want to move a certain amount of product on in a certain amount of time, especially now after Jensen took a pay hit for missing sales, so I'm sure they have that fire lit under them. But also still try to get as much money as possible, always. So I get the segmentation. Maybe they'll segment the 4050 too to go after both the 'cheap/premium' within that product range as well. Nvidia competes for its own customers, just maybe not the way one would like.
 
NightReaver said:
Can't wait for the 4060 to actually beat a 4070 in some cases much like the 3060 12gb vs 3070. A higher card should never have performance trade offs vs lower. It's really silly.
Click to expand...
It need to be relevant case, like 4060 12gb performing in a way that show that the 4070 would it have had 16gb would have had a nice solid 70fps avg instead of something lower than the 4060.

If it is some trivia-interesting case a 4070 could have play at 40-65 avg fps but can't because of lack of VRAM, it would not matter much because not many people would have chosen to play at 40-65 fps avg
 
Axman said:
8gb is basically planned obsolescence now. 16 will be the new 8 going forward. The question is, why 8gb? Besides the aforementioned...
Click to expand...
You are right.

If nvidia had planned ahead then we would have had only 4060 8gb & 4060 ti 16gb.

But now we have the unwanted 4060 ti 8gb. Going forward 1080p ultra gaming needs 12gb vram.

Nvidia were caught flat footed here. They were originally planning only a 8gb 4060ti but woke up & smelled the coffee too late. So now we have 2 4060 ti cards
 
Axman said:
8gb is basically planned obsolescence now. 16 will be the new 8 going forward. The question is, why 8gb? Besides the aforementioned...
Click to expand...
Apparently a lot of the bus affair is to be able to put them in laptop (outside the obvious saving money aspect) without any change and once those small bus are in place and the question become between 8 and 16gb or 12 and 24, it is a major step for their sku line, they probably got caught by surprise.

I really do not think it is a particular planned obsolesce, rising vram every gen would be the best way to do it, keeping it very similar from pascal to now is quite the reverse of forcing older card to be obsolete because they lack vram and the 4060 16gb seem to show that it is already an issue now, not one that they plan to make become one in 2025.
 
Last edited:
NightReaver said:
So desktop gets gimped bus because of laptop parts? Gee, thanks Nvidia.
Click to expand...
That something I heard on MLID a couple of times that it make the desktop to laptop transition more straightforward and cheaper for Nvidia and laptop maker, not sure how true it is.

When something is both cheaper to do and protect a pro line that sell at much higher price, there is not necessarily much need to search for many explanations or long time plan, one can speculate they thought GDDR7 with much more options for ram speed-quantity would have been ready and it was not and so on, but at the end of the day cheaper design could just be chosen to save money.
 
NightReaver said:
Amazing. They really have to dangle dlss3 over your head like jingle keys because why would you buy this vs any other card that can be had for $400 right now?

It's really not all that much better than a 3060, and you can get something like a 6800 for that price. (Edit, not quite. Still in the high 400s)
Click to expand...
There is no reason for the 8gb 4060 ti to exist (other than that Nvidia screwed up)

Customers should buy either 8gb 4060 or 16gb 4060 ti. If you can't wait 2 months then buy the 6800xt for $500 now.
 
Marees said:
There is no reason for the 8gb 4060 ti to exist (other than that Nvidia screwed up)

Customers should buy either 8gb 4060 or 16gb 4060 ti. If you can't wait 2 months then buy the 6800xt for $500 now.
Click to expand...
4060 ti will be much slower anyway. If you're just gaming buying a 4060 ti for 500 is absurd. 3070 gets dumped on by a 6800 let alone an xt
 
NightReaver said:
Can't wait for the 4060 to actually beat a 4070 in some cases much like the 3060 12gb vs 3070. A higher card should never have performance trade offs vs lower. It's really silly.
Click to expand...

I dont see that happening very often at this performance level. 8 GB was a hindrance a few times vs 12 GB of the 3060, but 16 GB will likely not offset the huge bandwidth deficit (288 GB vs 504 GB) and increased core count against the 12 GB 4070.

Charging $100 for the extra vram is rather clever upcharge.
 
NightReaver said:
xx60 card again with more vram than the xx70 card. Why.
Click to expand...
Whats so confusing about this? The 4070 is a 192 bit card. It can only be 12 GB or 24 GB. Since 24 GB would be an overkill, 12 GB was used. The 3060ti is a 128 bit card. It can only be 8 GB or 16 GB. Since 8 GB is to little (especially for the ultra settings whores) 16 GB was given an option.

I expect this question to pop up on you tube comments but I am always surprised to see it on a tech forum.

We didn't see this happening too much prior to gddr6 since manufactures typically gave more than enough vram, ie they could have released a 4 GB GTX 1070 and it would have done just fine in 95% of gaming scenarios but through cost savings likely not worth it.
 
vegeta535 said:
Other then the 4090 the entire 40 series is a turd.
Click to expand...
We used to give AMD crap for rebadging, but honestly, the lineup for nvidia would have been better as mostly a rebadge. Aside from the 4090 and the 4080, the 4070ti could have just been a 3090, the 4070 could have been a 20 GB 3080, the 4060ti could have been a 16 GB 3070ti, and the 4060 could have been 8 and 16 GB versions of the 3060ti all with improved clocks and reduced power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top