I have peered into the barrel and have seen what resides at the bottom. I go away impressed at how well AMD can scrape at it during the annual rebadge effort. 64-bit GDDR5 is bad enough, I really hope there isn't a 64-bit DDR3 version. That'd be in the neighborhood of 14 GB/s of video memory bandwidth. I've been there a number of years ago and it was an unhappy place.
There's a large national computer parts chain store near where I live and they charge the same amount of money for the RX 550 and 560 as the 570, so no one buys anything except the 570. All these "video cards" are so low end no one carries them anyways, oem only. Would be nice to see a 10 CU unit Navi part to completely replace every one of these cards, as they are all pointless and basically cost the same to manufacture as a 10 CU part anyways.
This is the *Lexa* variant at 103mm2 or roughly 600 per wafer. It uses the GCN 4.0 arch, has UVD 6.x, 50w (or less), and is 'highly binned' for desktop, mobile and an entry-level pro card. The Polaris XL or '570' is 232 mm²
The AMD Raven Ridge Ryzen APUs with Vega graphics have 'Unified Video Decoder' 7.2 (or, 'Video Core Next' - VCN 1.0) NOT to be confused with the 7nm Radeon Instinct pro cards (and 'VII' desktop) with UVD 7.2/VCN 1.0 Vega.
It was tough going to UVD from Avivo, and now 'VCN.' The next-gen Navi 'Lite' APU at 7nm/Zen2 with the new 'VCN 2.0' will likely arrive in Q2-20 . . .
I have no idea what you are trying to say. A 10 CU Navi part would be 70-80mm2 or so, a very cheap and low end GPU that should replace all these useless outdated products imo. $99 or less.
A 64-bit GDDR5 Radeon 630 would probably be a step up over Vega 10 in Ryzen 2700u/3700u notebooks too... Those parts tend to be bandwidth starved on dual-channel DDR4 2400mhz.
I doubt they can do that, they need every wafer on 7nm they can get out of Tsmc to fill the channel with EPYC and Ryzen right now, I'd say Navi is probably secondary for the moment. AMD makes much more money / wafer on chiplets that can go into EPYC's and judging from the reception they will be able to sell every part they can produce for a long time. I wouldn't be surprised if the availability of 5700 and 5700XT will be scarce for a while.
If the price of the wafer increases by more than the die size saving from a new process, a small old-tech refresh costs more than making a similar spec part on the old process. Especially when you don't have to do any design/etc work since it already exists.
" a 10 CU unit Navi part to completely replace every one of these cards" I completely agree. Of course it's a safe bet that will be the case in a few years unless we get common enough "igpus" that kill of this market segment. I assume AMD design/manufacturing is not flexible enough nor a strong will to do so at the moment. (Though I assume oem will keep it around a while longer than needed because its easier to up sell two sprite things than charging extra from a random spec on cpu spec sheet for the layperson)
Amen to that, for those like me waiting and sitting on older stuff and want MORE than what RX 57/80 offer up, but not wanting to shell out the nasty pricing as they are.
something with 256bit (or even 192) but so little chance of mem bottleneck (as would run out of "horsepower" first) with as you mentioned something along line of a tuned/cut down Vega/Navi frankenstein (why the hell not)
The performance and pricing gap between acceptable "at the moment" and "will be for near future" is quite large, unacceptably so, we should not really be relying on use/3rd hand sales just to get "ok price" on things that really are costing under $100 per unit (many times, much less)
just to rinse and repeat a short time later, because of way they "force" business practise, though I see In/Nv doing so, far more "despicably"
anyways...64bit "needs to die" unless is soldered on mobo only, beyond that, minimum 128bit or higher minimum as otherwise they end up getting trash performance for many "mundane things" as well as more often than should be, the AIB or at least the sellers jack the price of them beyond the pre-determined "cannot be higher than this price point"
Almost a quarter as bad as a DDR3 GTX 1030, which Nvidia failed to properly label and did sell to the average customer. The AMD cards here can't even be purchased by regular people so there is zero harm to anyone. Let's not also forget the two different models of MX150's, which once again Nvidia failed to disclose the significant differences between and the binned RTX 2070 cards where the binned part was sold for more.
I find comments like this funny, because you are sitting here complaining about an OEM only product line that will have zero impact on yourself and it's certain that OEMs will check the specs before ordering thousands. On the other hand Nvidia rebrands and mislabels cards more then once a year and because they are the market leader tons of PC gamers get dueped but I guess that's not a problem eh?
These GPUs will be bought by many regular people when they buy a laptop. I don't blame AMD and Nvidia for meeting OEM demand, I just wish the OEMs demanded a bit more!
I mean, the "harm" is that it makes performance comparisons more difficult for average customers. There's got to be a few people who think "discrete graphics > embedded" and then "6xx > 5xx" and so they might choose a newer laptop model... that actually has an older GPU. I get why AMD's donig this - it probably makes the OEMs happy - but it's really confusing. (On the other hand... at this point, you basically need a fairly large spreadsheet to explain GPU hierarchies to someone. Oh, yeah, well, the Vega 56 is faster than the RX 580, but slower than the 5700... oh, but the VII is faster than both. The 1080 is going to be faster than the 1660, but the 2060 is faster and newer..." etc.)
While I'm not shocked that someone with irrational brand loyalty was triggered by my comment, I am disappointed.
Since you're seemingly incapable of buying a clue for yourself, here's one for free - Criticism of a company's products does not imply mindless, slobbering brand loyalty to said company's competitor. Now calm yourself down and maybe next time, move your brain's gear selector to something other than neutral before hammering all over your keyboard in frothy-mouthed, rabid anger.
Nv does their best to hide the little details, far far more than AMD really tries to do, than they also saddle more crud in there as well as not "support" their consumers with the "very best" considering they always want the very highest pricing, they not start at "tolerable" Nah they slap a G or Nv on it and so want X extra
They aren't pretending it's new and they aren't selling them to regular customers. If you read the article it specifically stated that OEMs asks for new cards yearly, rebrand or not.
There's a big damn difference between this and the BS Nvidia plays like selling two different versions of a card under the same name. IE 1030 DDR3 vs 1030 GDDR5 and MX150 (which has two variants with significant differences).
It doesn't really say anything about small Navi. The cards listed above are ultra low end and designed for low end desktops / laptops. AMD / Nvidia don't typically release these chips along with their desktop chips so a refresh of them doesn't really affect their regular desktop products. The naming scheme should be an indication of that, if they were designed to replace Navi low end they would be given a name in the RX 5000 family.
Navi14 based 24CU, 128bit card (probably with only 4GB) should be coming out this year, but it may be aimed apple, mobile, and 75W builds first. At this point, AMD partners are still releasing new RX590 cards (which is fine, because these can be cheap).
This is poor. I know it must be expensive to create multiple versions of the same die, and GCN 1 isn't that different from 4, but even I am getting sick of seeing Öland. At least AMD lowered the second number in the part name.
The GCN 4 parts probably perform similarly to Vega 8 which is their saving grace, but can AMD get Navi into laptops within the next year? That's what most people are likely to want to see, not just for the performance uplift but for the vast improvement in efficiency.
"64-bit, eh? Party like it's 1993." — A person who bought the Atari Jaguar.
I shudder when recalling the Nvidia FX 5200 with its 64-bit interface as well. Funny how the letters F and X together always signals a low-performance turkey.
Even in laptops the memory bus should be 128 bits at minimum. It's almost 2020. Maybe in Chromebooks it's acceptable to go down to 64. Maybe.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
27 Comments
Back to Article
PeachNCream - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
I have peered into the barrel and have seen what resides at the bottom. I go away impressed at how well AMD can scrape at it during the annual rebadge effort. 64-bit GDDR5 is bad enough, I really hope there isn't a 64-bit DDR3 version. That'd be in the neighborhood of 14 GB/s of video memory bandwidth. I've been there a number of years ago and it was an unhappy place.Alistair - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
There's a large national computer parts chain store near where I live and they charge the same amount of money for the RX 550 and 560 as the 570, so no one buys anything except the 570. All these "video cards" are so low end no one carries them anyways, oem only. Would be nice to see a 10 CU unit Navi part to completely replace every one of these cards, as they are all pointless and basically cost the same to manufacture as a 10 CU part anyways.Smell This - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
Yeah . . . No
This is the *Lexa* variant at 103mm2 or roughly 600 per wafer. It uses the GCN 4.0 arch, has UVD 6.x, 50w (or less), and is 'highly binned' for desktop, mobile and an entry-level pro card. The Polaris XL or '570' is 232 mm²
The AMD Raven Ridge Ryzen APUs with Vega graphics have 'Unified Video Decoder' 7.2 (or, 'Video Core Next' - VCN 1.0) NOT to be confused with the 7nm Radeon Instinct pro cards (and 'VII' desktop) with UVD 7.2/VCN 1.0 Vega.
It was tough going to UVD from Avivo, and now 'VCN.' The next-gen Navi 'Lite' APU at 7nm/Zen2 with the new 'VCN 2.0' will likely arrive in Q2-20 . . .
on a chiplet ;-)
Alistair - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
I have no idea what you are trying to say. A 10 CU Navi part would be 70-80mm2 or so, a very cheap and low end GPU that should replace all these useless outdated products imo. $99 or less.StevoLincolnite - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
A 64-bit GDDR5 Radeon 630 would probably be a step up over Vega 10 in Ryzen 2700u/3700u notebooks too... Those parts tend to be bandwidth starved on dual-channel DDR4 2400mhz.Boy 28nm is getting long in the tooth though.
Dragonstongue - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
at least is VERY well known, likely extremely great yield as well as amazingly low cost to produce (great margins, though have to sell many)Staying on known process has many benefit, ask Intel LMAO
Zoolook13 - Thursday, August 15, 2019 - link
I doubt they can do that, they need every wafer on 7nm they can get out of Tsmc to fill the channel with EPYC and Ryzen right now, I'd say Navi is probably secondary for the moment.AMD makes much more money / wafer on chiplets that can go into EPYC's and judging from the reception they will be able to sell every part they can produce for a long time.
I wouldn't be surprised if the availability of 5700 and 5700XT will be scarce for a while.
Lonyo - Friday, August 16, 2019 - link
If the price of the wafer increases by more than the die size saving from a new process, a small old-tech refresh costs more than making a similar spec part on the old process. Especially when you don't have to do any design/etc work since it already exists.Wafers are getting expensive at a high rate.
Skeptical123 - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
" a 10 CU unit Navi part to completely replace every one of these cards" I completely agree. Of course it's a safe bet that will be the case in a few years unless we get common enough "igpus" that kill of this market segment. I assume AMD design/manufacturing is not flexible enough nor a strong will to do so at the moment. (Though I assume oem will keep it around a while longer than needed because its easier to up sell two sprite things than charging extra from a random spec on cpu spec sheet for the layperson)Dragonstongue - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
Amen to that, for those like me waiting and sitting on older stuff and want MORE than what RX 57/80 offer up, but not wanting to shell out the nasty pricing as they are.something with 256bit (or even 192) but so little chance of mem bottleneck (as would run out of "horsepower" first) with as you mentioned something along line of a tuned/cut down Vega/Navi frankenstein (why the hell not)
The performance and pricing gap between acceptable "at the moment" and "will be for near future" is quite large, unacceptably so, we should not really be relying on use/3rd hand sales just to get "ok price" on things that really are costing under $100 per unit (many times, much less)
just to rinse and repeat a short time later, because of way they "force" business practise, though I see In/Nv doing so, far more "despicably"
anyways...64bit "needs to die" unless is soldered on mobo only, beyond that, minimum 128bit or higher minimum as otherwise they end up getting trash performance for many "mundane things" as well as more often than should be, the AIB or at least the sellers jack the price of them beyond the pre-determined "cannot be higher than this price point"
evernessince - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
Almost a quarter as bad as a DDR3 GTX 1030, which Nvidia failed to properly label and did sell to the average customer. The AMD cards here can't even be purchased by regular people so there is zero harm to anyone. Let's not also forget the two different models of MX150's, which once again Nvidia failed to disclose the significant differences between and the binned RTX 2070 cards where the binned part was sold for more.I find comments like this funny, because you are sitting here complaining about an OEM only product line that will have zero impact on yourself and it's certain that OEMs will check the specs before ordering thousands. On the other hand Nvidia rebrands and mislabels cards more then once a year and because they are the market leader tons of PC gamers get dueped but I guess that's not a problem eh?
playtech1 - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
These GPUs will be bought by many regular people when they buy a laptop. I don't blame AMD and Nvidia for meeting OEM demand, I just wish the OEMs demanded a bit more!sing_electric - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
I mean, the "harm" is that it makes performance comparisons more difficult for average customers. There's got to be a few people who think "discrete graphics > embedded" and then "6xx > 5xx" and so they might choose a newer laptop model... that actually has an older GPU. I get why AMD's donig this - it probably makes the OEMs happy - but it's really confusing. (On the other hand... at this point, you basically need a fairly large spreadsheet to explain GPU hierarchies to someone. Oh, yeah, well, the Vega 56 is faster than the RX 580, but slower than the 5700... oh, but the VII is faster than both. The 1080 is going to be faster than the 1660, but the 2060 is faster and newer..." etc.)PeachNCream - Thursday, August 15, 2019 - link
While I'm not shocked that someone with irrational brand loyalty was triggered by my comment, I am disappointed.Since you're seemingly incapable of buying a clue for yourself, here's one for free - Criticism of a company's products does not imply mindless, slobbering brand loyalty to said company's competitor. Now calm yourself down and maybe next time, move your brain's gear selector to something other than neutral before hammering all over your keyboard in frothy-mouthed, rabid anger.
Lew Zealand - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
The Radeon 540X/630 is still about 2x the speed of Intel's fastest Iris Plus iGPUs so there's still a little bit of value left there.olafgarten - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
So... add 90 to each model number and it's brand new?Good Job AMD! (Not that Nvidia doesn't do the same)
plewis00 - Tuesday, August 13, 2019 - link
At least AMD renamed them so you know. After nVidia’s ‘GT 1030’ shenanigans I’d struggle to trust them again for low-end plug in cards.Dragonstongue - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
Nv does their best to hide the little details, far far more than AMD really tries to do, than they also saddle more crud in there as well as not "support" their consumers with the "very best" considering they always want the very highest pricing, they not start at "tolerable"Nah they slap a G or Nv on it and so want X extra
"The way we play you"(tm) by Ngreedia lool
evernessince - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
They aren't pretending it's new and they aren't selling them to regular customers. If you read the article it specifically stated that OEMs asks for new cards yearly, rebrand or not.There's a big damn difference between this and the BS Nvidia plays like selling two different versions of a card under the same name. IE 1030 DDR3 vs 1030 GDDR5 and MX150 (which has two variants with significant differences).
haukionkannel - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
Does this mean that small Navi does not come out 2019?evernessince - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
It doesn't really say anything about small Navi. The cards listed above are ultra low end and designed for low end desktops / laptops. AMD / Nvidia don't typically release these chips along with their desktop chips so a refresh of them doesn't really affect their regular desktop products. The naming scheme should be an indication of that, if they were designed to replace Navi low end they would be given a name in the RX 5000 family.neblogai - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
Navi14 based 24CU, 128bit card (probably with only 4GB) should be coming out this year, but it may be aimed apple, mobile, and 75W builds first. At this point, AMD partners are still releasing new RX590 cards (which is fine, because these can be cheap).scineram - Thursday, August 15, 2019 - link
How do we know Navi1 is 24CU? It was my lower end guess.silverblue - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
This is poor. I know it must be expensive to create multiple versions of the same die, and GCN 1 isn't that different from 4, but even I am getting sick of seeing Öland. At least AMD lowered the second number in the part name.The GCN 4 parts probably perform similarly to Vega 8 which is their saving grace, but can AMD get Navi into laptops within the next year? That's what most people are likely to want to see, not just for the performance uplift but for the vast improvement in efficiency.
scineram - Thursday, August 15, 2019 - link
Navi14 might go into gaming laptops.Oxford Guy - Friday, August 16, 2019 - link
"64-bit, eh? Party like it's 1993." — A person who bought the Atari Jaguar.I shudder when recalling the Nvidia FX 5200 with its 64-bit interface as well. Funny how the letters F and X together always signals a low-performance turkey.
Even in laptops the memory bus should be 128 bits at minimum. It's almost 2020. Maybe in Chromebooks it's acceptable to go down to 64. Maybe.