Rumor: NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 3000 video cards launch delayed to September

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Mar 30, 2020.

  1. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,785
    Likes Received:
    2,037
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    They don't have plans for 10nm with their main GPUs - even the original 10nm rumor stated it was both companies. Nvidia has been telling both investors and media ,TSMC and 7nm. Stop using rumors when the company is saying the opposite. Stop using rumors at all - this is why I hate rumors. People forget what's rumor and what's real like two months after the rumor is posted.

    Also AMD isn't using 7nm EUV for RDNA2.

    The rest of this post - idk.. the 15% improved IPC is just a guess on your part - maybe it's true but then you're just ignoring any potential gains Nvidia has with Ampere. I'm not even sure you're right about RDNA1 being equal (I know you're wrong for FP16/INT8/INT4).

    Everyone knew what the Xbox Series X performance was going to be - Microsoft stated for over two years now they wanted double the Xbox One X aka 12tflops. RDNA1 has been on the market for a year. There was multiple posts on Guru3D putting two and two together and speculating the performance. You're telling me Nvidia's engineers - with decades of experience, with the spec/engineering samples/etc on 7nm from TSMC, and a guess that AMD would improve anything over RDNA1, they couldn't do what you just did? They needed the console to see it? And now you're telling me they are delaying their launch a few months - to do what exactly? The rumor was Nvidia was going to announce their cards at GDC - launch sometime after. So at best, if this rumor is even true, they delayed their cards by a couple months. It's not enough time to do anything, even if somehow RDNA2 surprised them. (I highly doubt it did, it didn't surprise me, it didn't surprise you, I doubt it surprised Nvidia).

    The economy across the world is garbage right now. I'm not spending any money, no one I know is spending any money - most people I know don't even have jobs. The pandemic is 100% why they delayed the cards, if they even did delay them.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2020
    yasamoka and HandR like this.
  2. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,600
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    amd has been on a smaller process before and still lost.

    its less about the process size and more what you're doing with it.

    but i'm 100% in the camp where Ampere is on 7nm EUV.
     
  3. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,335
    Likes Received:
    2,464
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    You have missed the point. I hope it was not intentional. Not about freaking TFLOPs on some particular chip in XBOX/PS. It could have been 2 or 50.
    It is about transistor count and clock at which given performance is achieved. Secondly, have you seen size of XBOX's new chip?
    Maybe check it to transistor density for RDNA1 GPUs on 7nm and Zen2 on 7nm. Density seems to be quite higher.

    If we ignored that transistor budget per CU went likely up from RDNA1 to RDNA2 due to DX-R implementation, and 4/8-bit operations and took just RDNA1, 56CUs in GPU would end up having entire area of XBOX's chip alone... leaving 80mm^2 Zen2 part floating in open with all extra things that are usually not in GPU, but MS requested for I/O.
    One has to stop and take a look at transistor density. You have 8C/16T Zen2 which is roughly 4B transistors. GPU that would have around 14.5B transistors if it was RDNA1. That's without counting in I/O die that Zen 2 has separate.

    Minimum, you would be looking at 18.5B transistors in 360mm^2... ~51M/mm^2. (Ignoring all the I/O or additional transistors for improvements.)
    Zen2 ... 48M/mm^2.
    RDNA1 ... 41M/mm^2.
    Realistically, with all transistors counted in, you are looking at more transistors in that area or AMD doing changes that result in fewer transistors per CU while delivering all those new features.

    Or you can go and take other route around it. Taking given 15.3B transistors (which is likely just GPU) and think that it is entire chip with CPU included. Then remove CPU part and i/o which comes with it. What transistor budget would remain for GPU with 56CUs? How does it compare to RDNA1? That would not tell story of any IPC improvement, but it would say that AMD can deliver around 56CUs at same transistor expense as RX 5700 XT.

    Would you take a while to extrapolate with tiny 15% IPC improvements, known reachable (and stable) clock of 10% higher and suddenly 35% higher count of CUs at same transistor budget?

    From my point of view, XBOX's chip either uses at minimal 25% higher transistor density than RDNA1 GPU. Or its CPU and GPU delivered all included improvements while reducing transistor budget drastically.

    As you can see, I took very mild route with everything. Stated only 15% IPC improvement while AMD said that RDNA2 is to deliver around same improvement over RDNA1, as RDNA1 had over GCN. I stated mere 10% higher sustainable stable clock over RDNA1. And went with more denser manufacturing process instead of taking official transistor count on face value and saying that AMD has really scary improvements and removed a lot of transistors in process.

    So, what would it look like if we took bad route from nVidia's point of view? 25% higher performance at same clock per CU than RDNA1. 15~20% smaller CUs. 15% higher clock. And not yet known if AMD will use EUV for desktop GPUs.

    Are you getting the pattern? I say best case scenario for nVidia, that AMD already used all things available. And you kind of feel it is scary and want to disprove it. But disproving makes underlying technology much better.
    I am pretty sure nVidia had their hands on sample consoles and know what to expect from desktops. And I am pretty sure that with RDNA2, people will start looking at AMD's GPUs same way as they are looking on their CPUs now.
    - - - -
    On other hand, who cares if nVidia delays their GPUs by half a year. This time it does not matter. People will have excellent alternative.
     
  4. Khronikos

    Khronikos Master Guru

    Messages:
    862
    Likes Received:
    92
    GPU:
    EVGA SC2 1080ti
    Yeah, there is literally no way in hell any major exclusives for PS5 will see a release on PC within 2 years even. I'd say people are looking at possibly a 3-5 year window and only for certain ones if they really need the PS5 to rev up. MLB needed to go for overall sales, and Dreams probably should too for sales and growth.

    Horizon will be around 3.5 years when it comes.

    They are not going to even approach harming their brand for sure. It's honestly good MLB comes over. That game needs mods.
     

  5. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,329
    Likes Received:
    178
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    Time of 2yrs wait isn't a problem at all. However, I think you're under-estimating the financial burden that's pushed Sony to do it in the first place. By the time PS5 comes out the world is going to be a different place than in the PS4 generation. Sony is going to need to change their business strategy, the writing is already on the wall. You're going to be surprised what happens.
     
  6. Khronikos

    Khronikos Master Guru

    Messages:
    862
    Likes Received:
    92
    GPU:
    EVGA SC2 1080ti
    I don't think I will be surprised at all. I don't see any major issues with their financial burdens. Sony's number one priority is keeping people on PSN and subbed, this is where all the money is. That means you need exclusives.
     
  7. Fediuld

    Fediuld Member Guru

    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    94
    GPU:
    AMD 5700XT AE
    You forgot what PS4 exclusive is? Only Horizon was PS4 exclusive, the rest were released on windows the same day.
     
  8. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,329
    Likes Received:
    178
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    This isn't youtube-land. Do some research before posting.
     
  9. RavenMaster

    RavenMaster Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    115
    GPU:
    1x RTX 2080Ti FE
    I just wanna connect my C9 OLED to a graphics card that has a HDMI 2.1 socket so i can finally switch my settings to 4K 120hz in beautiful 4:4:4 HDR.

    Club3D and Realtek were supposed to be releasing a Displayport 1.4 to HDMI 2.1 adapter but they keep on pushing back the release date. At this rate Nvidia will get there first and there will be no need for the adapter.
     
  10. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,626
    Likes Received:
    930
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    The only reason I could see for NVidia delaying a launch, would be if the launch was planned months in advance..... In this case, the launch would have had to have been planned before COVID-19 started infecting people in China. I doubt NVidia plans product launches quite that far ahead, so I don't see a launch delay at all. And if we look back at the RTX launch, it was what? August/September? Seems that time frame would probably work out best for a product launch with all of the "back to school" sales for people in the US.

    There's no reason for NVidia to get their hands on samples of the new XBox or PS, since they're not involved in the development of either console nor any software that will run on either console.
     

  11. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,335
    Likes Received:
    2,464
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Same way as people with no special resources to use for obtaining samples get their hands on unreleased GPUs/CPUs/Consoles?
    I am pretty sure, that in case like this following applies: "Where there's a will, there's a way."
     
  12. wavetrex

    wavetrex Master Guru

    Messages:
    966
    Likes Received:
    584
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX1080 AMP!
    I keep looking at prices for RTX 2060 Super, RX 5700XT, RTX 2070 Super .... but unfortunately none of them are enticing enough to replace my GTX 1080.

    Both 2060 S and 5700 XT are "somewhat" cheaper, but they barely beat GTX 1080 by a few percent in most older games, and only really new games with engines designed for the new tech show 20%+ better performance.

    2070 S is indeed faster in all areas, so it is an actual upgrade, but the cheapest here is 520 Euro, with the large majority of models over 550. It feels like a lot of money for not a that much extra performance (best case scenario 40%).

    ---
    All that while the "-80" class GeForce cards are way out of my "acceptable" price range...

    So really hoping the new gen comes this year with better performance/$, because my "old" 1080 is starting to get physically tired (noisy VRMs and not so good anymore fans). If it breaks completely before 3000 series or new Navi, I'll have to buy one of these overpriced cards that exist now... :-(
     
    Exodite likes this.

Share This Page