A mysterious new AMD Radeon GPU has beaten the RTX 2080 Ti

RobJoy

TS Rookie
That premise about AMD mobile part with integrated GPU,.... the benchmark should actually post the name of the GPU being tested not just GPU inside the system.

This is easily tested tho. Run benchmark on any laptop that has integrated AMD GPU and a discrete GPU,.... report what it says in the benchmark.
 

Squid Surprise

TS Evangelist
That premise about AMD mobile part with integrated GPU,.... the benchmark should actually post the name of the GPU being tested not just GPU inside the system.

This is easily tested tho. Run benchmark on any laptop that has integrated AMD GPU and a discrete GPU,.... report what it says in the benchmark.
Well, hard to do if the GPU DOESN'T EXIST YET!

I suspect you missed the entire point of this...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadowboxer

Nms Barry

TS Rookie
If AMD builds a GPU that can match or beat the 2080 Ti, it will likely be priced similarly to the 2080 Ti unfortunately.

We've seen with the 5700 XT, 5600 XT that AMD is not undercutting price on GPUs the same way it did on CPUs. The 2600 XT matches a 1660 Ti? Cool, $280 just like the 1660 Ti.

Anyone thinking that AMD is going to build a 2080 Ti killer and sell it for $600-$700 is dreaming; that ship sailed long ago and that era is over sadly.
Amd has been overcharging or same pricing for slower products for a long time in gpu products.
Don't get where the AMD OFFERS PRICE CHAMPION GPUS came from!?
When their products don't sell they just discount them as time goes.
Fury x vs 980 ti - Slower and gimped product that got even slower than rx 580 as time passed but priced same as nvidia part
Vega 64 vs Gtx 1080 - Priced higher + weaker + inferior overall
Radeon 7 vs gtx 1080 ti - Same price + slower + bad drivers + 2 years late.
Rx 5700 xt vs rtx 2060 super- You can get nvidia good part for $380+ whereas a good rx 5700 xt costs $440+. Rx version also has extremely bad drivers and feature set + consumes more power + has 1-3% oc headroom vs 8-10% of nvidia part.
970 vs 290x- $330 vs $550 - weaker + heat factory+ 1-5% oc headroom vs 15-20% of maxwell + even finewine joke could not save it. Still slower.
Rx 5500 xt vs gtx 1650 super- Same repeat.
And many more.
I have seen very few times in last decade where AMD priced their same or faster products vs nvidia competitively. They either ask same or more for slower products.
Rx 5700 xt and 5700 was the exception but as reported by most rx users they rather have 10% less fps for an overall better product vs rtx 2060 ans 2060 super.
 

Puiu

TS Evangelist
Amd has been overcharging or same pricing for slower products for a long time in gpu products.
Don't get where the AMD OFFERS PRICE CHAMPION GPUS came from!?
When their products don't sell they just discount them as time goes.
Fury x vs 980 ti - Slower and gimped product that got even slower than rx 580 as time passed but priced same as nvidia part
Vega 64 vs Gtx 1080 - Priced higher + weaker + inferior overall
Radeon 7 vs gtx 1080 ti - Same price + slower + bad drivers + 2 years late.
Rx 5700 xt vs rtx 2060 super- You can get nvidia good part for $380+ whereas a good rx 5700 xt costs $440+. Rx version also has extremely bad drivers and feature set + consumes more power + has 1-3% oc headroom vs 8-10% of nvidia part.
970 vs 290x- $330 vs $550 - weaker + heat factory+ 1-5% oc headroom vs 15-20% of maxwell + even finewine joke could not save it. Still slower.
Rx 5500 xt vs gtx 1650 super- Same repeat.
And many more.
I have seen very few times in last decade where AMD priced their same or faster products vs nvidia competitively. They either ask same or more for slower products.
Rx 5700 xt and 5700 was the exception but as reported by most rx users they rather have 10% less fps for an overall better product vs rtx 2060 ans 2060 super.
I think you are confusing some things. AMD has always had good value GPUs, especially in the mainstream market.

As for some of your prices, you have many wrong. For example the GTX 1080 was 600$ when AMD launched Vega 64. As for Vega 56, it has always been a good value GPU, period. The RX 580 was better priced than the 1060 and it is also faster (do I need to mention the 470/570 ?).

Another example where you try to skew the numbers just because it doesn't "fit" your agenda: today I see several 5700 XT cards at 380-390$ on newegg. Saying that it costs 440+ is just a fat lie.

Street prices will always vary, but you seem to be stuck in the bitcoin era where all GPUs had insane prices and you don't know what the street prices have been in the past 1-2 years.

At least try to not be so obvious in your bias and use things that can't be fact checked easily. Otherwise you just end up loosing face with a simple google search.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lew Zealand

Lionvibez

TS Evangelist
16 months too late.
We have a few 2080 Ti since September 2018 and we use them daily in our indie VFX studio. We made a lot of money with these cards since when we buy it. It's just laughable that AMD have a prototype card that is barely faster 16 months later.
Therefore the real difference is that AMD GPU performance/$ on professional creative software is just bad. We have to wait until when to see AMD understanding that the high-end GPU are mainly for creators and not for gamers ???
NB: all our WS use AMD Threadripper CPU than don't call me a fan boy please.
AMD understand this clearly.

Its why they have GPU's for that market segment.

Confused by your post you are using a gaming gpu in your Production environment then complaining that AMD doesn't make anything for this market.

My gut tells me you wouldn't be purchasing there options anyways.
 

Nms Barry

TS Rookie
I think you are confusing some things. AMD has always had good value GPUs, especially in the mainstream market.
As for some of your prices, you have many wrong. For example the GTX 1080 was 600$ when AMD launched Vega 64. As for Vega 56, it has always been a good value GPU, period. The RX 580 was better priced than the 1060 and it is also faster (do I need to mention the 470/570 ?).

Another example where you try to skew the numbers just becuase it doesn't "fit" your agenda: today I see several 5700 XT cards at 380-390$ on newegg.

Street prices will always vary, but you seem to be stuck in the bitcoin era where all GPUs had insane prices and you don't know what the street prices have been in the past 1-2 years.

At least try to not be obvious and use things that can't be fact checked easily. Otherwise you end up loosing face with just a simple google search.
You did not prove my statements wrong at all. Just mixed the words.
Prove what I have said wrong overall historically.
Rx 480 was slower vs Gtx 1060 - priced same + consumed more power + produced more heat + unstable drivers. It took amd two years and overclocked rx 480 rebrand known as rx 580 to finally beat gtx 1060 stock by 1-3%. Same goes for rx 470 vs gtx 1060 3gb.
Vega 64 was slower and overall inferior product but priced higher.
Vega 56 is was a competitive product but lost to GTx 1070 ti.
You proved my point with Newegg rx 5700 xt prices. As they are not selling and driver problems are too much. AMd is discounting them.
 

Lionvibez

TS Evangelist
You did not prove my statements wrong at all. Just mixed the words.
Prove what I have said wrong overall historically.
Rx 480 was slower vs Gtx 1060 - priced same + consumed more power + produced more heat + unstable drivers. It took amd two years and overclocked rx 480 rebrand known as rx 580 to finally beat gtx 1060 stock by 1-3%. Same goes for rx 470 vs gtx 1060 3gb.
Vega 64 was slower and overall inferior product but priced higher.
Vega 56 is was a competitive product but lost to GTx 1070 ti.
You proved my point with Newegg rx 5700 xt prices. As they are not selling and driver problems are too much. AMd is discounting them.
What driver problems?
 

Puiu

TS Evangelist
You did not prove my statements wrong at all. Just mixed the words.
Prove what I have said wrong overall historically.
Rx 480 was slower vs Gtx 1060 - priced same + consumed more power + produced more heat + unstable drivers. It took amd two years and overclocked rx 480 rebrand known as rx 580 to finally beat gtx 1060 stock by 1-3%. Same goes for rx 470 vs gtx 1060 3gb.
Vega 64 was slower and overall inferior product but priced higher.
Vega 56 is was a competitive product but lost to GTx 1070 ti.
You proved my point with Newegg rx 5700 xt prices. As they are not selling and driver problems are too much. AMd is discounting them.
A quote from the 1060 6GB review here on techspot: "The RX 480 4GB easily wins the cost per frame battle." -- yes, it was better than the 480 8GB, especially since very soon after these cards were released the bitcoin craze started and prices went up and up for AMD products because of how good they were at such compute tasks.

The 580 was recommended because after prices settled it was much cheaper not because it had a small advantage in FPS. Local prices and stocks dictated the market anyway.

As for the 5700/5700XT not selling... what? They are usually in top 10 of amazon (.com) products (with the RX 580 being no.1 right now) Amd has today 9 cards in top 20 with Nvidia having 11.

FYI Vega 64 launched with an MSRP of 500$ in a period where you could rarely find a 1080 under 600$. It wasn't a good product, but lets not try to twist facts here, albeit I also I agree it wasn't worth the purchase.
 

CharmsD

TS Enthusiast
TechSpot Elite
What driver problems?
Adrenaline. Driver Problems. Here are a few, suggest using DDU to UNinstall the program..
  • Known issues have expanded with some new bugs being found:
    Known Issues

    • Switching between borderless and fullscreen in some games when Performance Overlay is enabled and Radeon FreeSync is enabled may cause stuttering.
    • Some Vulkan® gaming applications may crash when performing a task switch with Radeon Image Sharpening enabled.
    • Applying DirectML media filters to media in Radeon Software Gallery may cause video memory to fail to be released once completed. A system restart will resolve this issue.
    • Integer Scaling may cause some video content to show flicker when the display resolution is set to less than native resolution.
    • Removing a game profile from Radeon Software may cause Radeon FreeSync and/or Virtual Super Resolution to become enabled.
    • Radeon ReLive may appear to be missing or not available to install on some Radeon R9 380 series and Radeon R9 285 series graphics products.
    • Performance Metrics Overlay may appear to lock frame rate at 60 fps when performing a task switch in or out of a game.
    • Battlefield™ V may experience an application hang when changing settings in game with Radeon Boost enabled on Radeon RX 5700 series graphics products.
    • Performing a resolution change while Radeon Software overlay is open may cause an application hang or TDR.
    • Enabling Radeon Image Sharpening on HDR enabled displays may cause colors to become washed out.
    • Performing Upscale on a large resolution video or screenshot may fail to apply and cause an error message.
    AMD Link Known Issues

    • Tuning: In some cases when changing from Preset to Automatic, settings don’t apply or will cycle back to the original setting.
    • Media: Playback of videos may reset if the device changes orientation during playback.
    • Media: Corruption may occur when playing back media while using the 1Mbps bitrate setting.
    • Gaming: Under certain conditions Now Playing changes back to Desktop or the last played game instead of displaying the currently streaming game.
    • Gaming: Streaming may stop if device is left idle for an extended period of time.
 

Nms Barry

TS Rookie
A quote from the 1060 6GB review here on techspot: "The RX 480 4GB easily wins the cost per frame battle." -- yes, it was better than the 480 8GB, especially since very soon after these cards were released the bitcoin craze started and prices went up and up for AMD products because of how good they were at such compute tasks.

The 580 was recommended because after prices settled it was much cheaper not because it had a small advantage in FPS. Local prices and stocks dictated the market anyway.

As for the 5700/5700XT not selling... what? They are usually in top 10 of amazon (.com) products (with the RX 580 being no.1 right now) Amd has today 9 cards in top 20 with Nvidia having 11.

FYI Vega 64 launched with an MSRP of 500$ in a period where you could rarely find a 1080 under 600$. It wasn't a good product, but lets not try to twist facts here, albeit I also I agree it wasn't worth the purchase.
Thanks for agreeing. Amazon.com is not the whole world.
Rx 580 is inferior product vs the same priced GTx 1650 super. But lot's of amd fanboys and amd stock holders are active on tech sites + have their own youtube channels where they pick 4-6 games that prefer amd and use them to misguide people. Otherwise even according to techspot that spot should belong to gtx 1650 super.
 

CharmsD

TS Enthusiast
TechSpot Elite
I never backed out of anything. You might want to re-read that comment. I also don't see the value of your replies here.
What? All you do is attack posters; other person -"intel ok" you - "sic/murder/death/kill"
I just showed the purpose the site's article was intended to support totally differs from the argument posited.

You just got it wrong.


You seem to be trying to bait off-topic conversation.
Pot. Meet. Kettle.

Take a nap.
 

amstech

IT Overlord
Amd has been overcharging or same pricing for slower products for a long time in gpu products.
Don't get where the AMD OFFERS PRICE CHAMPION GPUS came from!?
When their products don't sell they just discount them as time goes.
Fury x vs 980 ti - Slower and gimped product that got even slower than rx 580 as time passed but priced same as nvidia part
Vega 64 vs Gtx 1080 - Priced higher + weaker + inferior overall
Radeon 7 vs gtx 1080 ti - Same price + slower + bad drivers + 2 years late.
Rx 5700 xt vs rtx 2060 super- You can get nvidia good part for $380+ whereas a good rx 5700 xt costs $440+. Rx version also has extremely bad drivers and feature set + consumes more power + has 1-3% oc headroom vs 8-10% of nvidia part.
970 vs 290x- $330 vs $550 - weaker + heat factory+ 1-5% oc headroom vs 15-20% of maxwell + even finewine joke could not save it. Still slower.
Rx 5500 xt vs gtx 1650 super- Same repeat.
And many more.
I have seen very few times in last decade where AMD priced their same or faster products vs nvidia competitively. They either ask same or more for slower products.
Rx 5700 xt and 5700 was the exception but as reported by most rx users they rather have 10% less fps for an overall better product vs rtx 2060 ans 2060 super.
Holy crap, the truth!
Is it on this website!

As far as the GPU its a 3DFX Voodoo 9 9000. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nms Barry

Evernessince

TS Evangelist
If AMD builds a GPU that can match or beat the 2080 Ti, it will likely be priced similarly to the 2080 Ti unfortunately.

We've seen with the 5700 XT, 5600 XT that AMD is not undercutting price on GPUs the same way it did on CPUs. The 2600 XT matches a 1660 Ti? Cool, $280 just like the 1660 Ti.

Anyone thinking that AMD is going to build a 2080 Ti killer and sell it for $600-$700 is dreaming; that ship sailed long ago and that era is over sadly.
If the days of flagship GPUs being $600 - $700 are gone I guess I'm never buying a top end GPU again. I know I'm not the only one either.

What? All you do is attack posters; other person -"intel ok" you - "sic/murder/death/kill"
I just showed the purpose the site's article was intended to support totally differs from the argument posited.

You just got it wrong.




Pot. Meet. Kettle.

Take a nap.
This is what denial looks like.
 

Ravalo

TS Addict
You proved my point with Newegg rx 5700 xt prices. As they are not selling and driver problems are too much. AMd is discounting them.
I have a ryzen 7 3700x/rx 5700 xt and its the first time that most problems come from the monitor and not from the drivers themselves (monitor takes too long to display the game or doesnt display it at all until I alt+tab to desktop) since I dont have any artifacting or BSOD problems, then again I might’ve gotten lucky since my r7 3700x actually hits 4.397 ghz regularly

I was actually going to buy an nvidia card but the pc was at 1050$ on cyber monday and most intel/nvidia or amd/nvidia were around 1200$ and came with a 2060 super or regular 2060/2070
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nms Barry

itomeshi

TS Rookie
To add to the author's theory: Given that Intel has no CPUs with PCI Express 4.0, it would make sense for NVidia to pair a new card with a Ryzen CPU to eke out a little more performance.

On the other hand, it would be REALLY weird for NVidia to have access to an engineering sample of the new Ryzen mobile chips, unless a board partner (like MSI, EVGA, Gigabyte, Asus, etc.) is doing the testing here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadowboxer

kmo911

TS Booster
1 st they must prove they can get pcie 3 4 5 6 speed and fix those x570 mb bugs. im soon going over to play on asus prime z370-p. amd has so buggy drivers that it crashes every 5 th minute. I dont sdstate they are BAD. only buggy driver with x 570 pcie 3.0 4.0 speed. https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/23684547 atleast 164% on the middle. amd driver are sooo buggy. go for nxt gen nvidia or plead amd to check out how to not to do IT.
 

Irata

TS Maniac
To add to the author's theory: Given that Intel has no CPUs with PCI Express 4.0, it would make sense for NVidia to pair a new card with a Ryzen CPU to eke out a little more performance.

On the other hand, it would be REALLY weird for NVidia to have access to an engineering sample of the new Ryzen mobile chips, unless a board partner (like MSI, EVGA, Gigabyte, Asus, etc.) is doing the testing here.
You mean as opposed to just walking into a Best Buy and getting a Ryzen 3000 + X570 mainboard combo?

Oh, and the Ryzen 4000 mobile APU only support PCIe 3, not 4 afaik, so that would make even less sense.
Perhaps there are engineering samples of the Ryzen 4000 APU that do support PCIe 4 but again, why not just buy a freely available Ryzen 3000 that is what their customers would have.

Since this is a low power 8C/16T Ryzen 2 coupled with pretty powerful graphics - this sounds a lot like the upcoming Playstation / XBox specs.... maybe it's a test / dev system for that ?
 

Puiu

TS Evangelist
Thanks for agreeing. Amazon.com is not the whole world.
Rx 580 is inferior product vs the same priced GTx 1650 super. But lot's of amd fanboys and amd stock holders are active on tech sites + have their own youtube channels where they pick 4-6 games that prefer amd and use them to misguide people. Otherwise even according to techspot that spot should belong to gtx 1650 super.
It's not on top lists of just Amazon and it's not "fanboys" that buy them. The 580 has the same performance as the 1650 Super so people will just buy whichever is cheaper at the time. And believe it or not, ppl do want to have 8GB of RAM even at that price point (more so than power efficiency). The 5500XT 4GB version wouldn't have been criticised by reviewers so much and I tend to agree with them, games are starting to have bigger and bigger assets which are eating into the VRAM.

But hey, after I pretty much destroyed all of your arguments with numbers, all you are left with is the 1650 Super which is an actually a good product that Nvidia managed to price well (they learned a lot after the disaster that was the vanilla 1650 :D ).
 

Nms Barry

TS Rookie
It's not on top lists of just Amazon and it's not "fanboys" that buy them. The 580 has the same performance as the 1650 Super so people will just buy whichever is cheaper at the time. And believe it or not, ppl do want to have 8GB of RAM even at that price point (more so than power efficiency). The 5500XT 4GB version wouldn't have been criticised by reviewers so much and I tend to agree with them, games are starting to have bigger and bigger assets which are eating into the VRAM.

But hey, after I pretty much destroyed all of your arguments with numbers, all you are left with is the 1650 Super which is an actually a good product that Nvidia managed to price well (they learned a lot after the disaster that was the vanilla 1650 :D ).
Lol, what are you talking about?
You did not prove anything wrong.
You just showed more proof in favor of my reply.
People are not stupid. Otherwise, AMD GPU department would have 75% discrete GPU market hold and nvidia would have 25% now.
When someone buys a product they look at the overall quality of it.
Rx 580 is overclocked rx 480 that came near 4 years ago.
GTx 1650 super came this year.
Nvidia part uses 100+ watts less than amd part. Has more features, is more stable, is more cooler.
Amd will push RDNA more now and leave out GCN as time passes. Buying a 4 year old gpu today as new is beyond human reasoning.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Shadowboxer