RDNA 3?

[Magellan3s]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Thanks for the insight. Yes, gpuowl on Radeon VII is near or at max memory bandwidth which is why Radeon VII Pro benchmarks are not much faster than a Radeon VII.

The 7900 xtx has a 3.5 TB/s "infinity cache" bandwidth. How that performance relates to GPUOWL I am not sure. I will post results as soon as I get my hands on one!

https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-7...ted-at-amazon/

[Xyzzy]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comment...be_pleasantly/

[M344587487]

Embargo has ended as of a few hours ago. Mostly looked at Phoronix's coverage so far it seems okay, lackluster for gaming (at least on windows, possible driver issues) and some glitches on the eariest supported Linux kernels, with the type of compute we're interested in TBD. Anyone buying in the next months to use on Linux will likely need to manually add the firmware files and everyone should commit to using the latest kernel whenever one gets released for at least a year IMO. If an early adopter is in a benchmarking mood it would be interesting to know the process to install and results of rusticl vs rocm's opencl implementation (if rusticl works for our tools at all, AFAIK no one's tested).

https://www.phoronix.com/review/rx79...x7900xtx-linux

If gaming performance is below par on windows that may be good for us price-wise in the long run, assuming compute performance is solid.

[xx005fs]

Judging by this review (https://babeltechreviews.com/hellhou...50-games-vr/6/) that ran AIDA64 GPGPU something went horribly wrong with RDNA3, as the double precision performance and effective bandwidth of the 7900XTX are both lower than the 6900XT and the 4090. The single precision performance is also extremely low for the CU count and clockspeed it has. Hopefully it's a driver issue not a hardware issue, and someone with a card can benchmark it to confirm the findings.

[M344587487]

Hopefully it's a driver issue although the tested ratio of ~30.25 is suspicious as it's close to 1:32, if that's what it is then DP is half the 1:16 we've come to expect from AMD which would be a bummer. Other ratio's are much closer to the theoretical so 30.25 seems low even if the cards ratio is 1:32 (an optimised 1:32 card looks like it should be more like ~31.7 in practice), so it could just be a driver issue. The memory read/write being worse than the 6900xt is clearly wrong which is another source of doubt.

I don't know about single precision performance being low, it's about 40% better than the 6900XT which is roughly how much better the 7900xtx is at games/raster. That may or may not be a relevant correlation.

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by M344587487

Hopefully it's a driver issue although the tested ratio of ~30.25 is suspicious as it's close to 1:32, if that's what it is then DP is half the 1:16 we've come to expect from AMD which would be a bummer. Other ratio's are much closer to the theoretical so 30.25 seems low even if the cards ratio is 1:32 (an optimised 1:32 card looks like it should be more like ~31.7 in practice), so it could just be a driver issue. The memory read/write being worse than the 6900xt is clearly wrong which is another source of doubt.

I don't know about single precision performance being low, it's about 40% better than the 6900XT which is roughly how much better the 7900xtx is at games/raster. That may or may not be a relevant correlation.

Wikichip has it as 1/16th. DP is 2918/2016 GFLOPS compared to 2688 of the Radeon VII. Bandwidth is 960/800 GB/s, at little under the Radeon VII's 1024 GB/s.

[xx005fs]

Originally Posted by M344587487

Hopefully it's a driver issue although the tested ratio of ~30.25 is suspicious as it's close to 1:32, if that's what it is then DP is half the 1:16 we've come to expect from AMD which would be a bummer. Other ratio's are much closer to the theoretical so 30.25 seems low even if the cards ratio is 1:32 (an optimised 1:32 card looks like it should be more like ~31.7 in practice), so it could just be a driver issue. The memory read/write being worse than the 6900xt is clearly wrong which is another source of doubt.

I don't know about single precision performance being low, it's about 40% better than the 6900XT which is roughly how much better the 7900xtx is at games/raster. That may or may not be a relevant correlation.

FP32 is advertised to be 61TFLOPs peak on AMD's website, and that's definitely too low no matter how you look at it, it should've been at least faster than a 4080. As for memory read/write being slower than 6900XT it could be due to the smaller infinity cache, but most likely still due to driver issues. So far the card's not looking great but we also don't have any real world PRP or TF runs done on it. Guess we'll just have to wait and hopefully someone can pick one up and test it.

[axn]

Originally Posted by xx005fs

FP32 is advertised to be 61TFLOPs peak on AMD's website, and that's definitely too low no matter how you look at it, it should've been at least faster than a 4080.

4080 is 49 TFLOPS, so what's the problem?

[James Heinrich]

Originally Posted by xx005fs

wait and hopefully someone can pick one up and test it.

Was just in my local computer store. They had all sorts of customers lined up at opening to pick up a 7900 XTX. And zero stock to sell.
Loads of 4080s on the shelf though, not-selling, and RTX 30x0 and RX 6xxx too.

[Mark Rose]

Wendell at Level1Techs will often run open source software benchmarks for people.

Just ask in the forum: https://forum.level1techs.com/

[Magellan3s]

Sadly, I wasn't able to pick one up. I had one in my cart and I was ready to pull the trigger but it was a bestbuy purcahse and that would mean driving 5 hours round trip to pick up the card.