Image: AMD

A user on r/AMD has shared alleged data pertaining to AMD’s Navi 22 or Navi 23 GPU, “Navy Flounder.” Following a bit of simple math, the parameters allude to a lower-ranged Radeon RX 6000 Series graphics card that features 40 Compute Units and 2560 stream processors. This happens to be a perfect match for AMD’s current flagship, the Radeon RX 5700 XT.

There’s a disparity in memory specifications, however. While the Radeon RX 5700 XT (and its Anniversary variant) sports a 256-bit memory interface, the Navy Flounder will supposedly swim with a lesser, 192-bit one.

“The number of CUs can be found by multiplying the first three values (so 40 for Navy Flounder),” stblr noted. “Another interesting value is gc_num_tccs, which is the number of texture channel caches and is generally related to the memory bus width (for Navy Flounder it would mean 192-bit), though there are exceptions.”

There are plenty of puzzle pieces missing, but we’d like to think that AMD’s RDNA 2 GPUs will offer surprising performance gains over the current lineup. The company will tell us a lot more during its Radeon event, which is slated for October 28.

ParameterNavi 10Navi 14Navi 12Sienna CichlidNavy Flounder
gc_num_se21242
gc_num_cu_per_sh1012101010
gc_num_sh_per_se22222
gc_num_rb_per_se88844
gc_num_tccs168161612
gc_num_gprs10241024102410241024
gc_num_max_gs_thds3232323232
gc_gs_table_depth3232323232
gc_gsprim_buff_depth17921792179217921792
gc_double_offchip_lds_buffer1024512102410241024
gc_wave_size3232323232
gc_max_waves_per_simd2020201616
gc_lds_size6464646464
num_sc_per_sh11111
num_packer_per_sc22244

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

Join the Conversation

12 Comments

  1. The memory would point to a configuration of six 16Gb chips, which would mean standard GDDR6. No return of HBM in consumer cards, it seems.

  2. [QUOTE=”Armenius, post: 18819, member: 180″]
    The memory would point to a configuration of six 16Gb chips, which would mean standard GDDR6. No return of HBM in consumer cards, it seems.
    [/QUOTE]

    HBM did nothing for AMD except increase productions costs. Not a lot of bang for the buck with HBM, yet.

  3. [QUOTE=”Riccochet, post: 18826, member: 4″]
    HBM did nothing for AMD except increase productions costs. Not a lot of bang for the buck with HBM, yet.
    [/QUOTE]

    Gotta agree with that. Maybe it was the architecture holding it back, but sure didn’t feel like HBM brought much to the table.

  4. [QUOTE=”Riccochet, post: 18826, member: 4″]
    HBM did nothing for AMD except increase productions costs. Not a lot of bang for the buck with HBM, yet.
    [/QUOTE]
    I really like the idea of HBM, but it’s a bit of a catch 22 in terms of implementation.

    It’s really, really effective for smaller dies and can provide cooling and power benefits, but as die size increases, so does the size of the interposer, and yields of the combined part suffer more.

    Really big dies, more HBM stacks, even larger interposers… just don’t make sense until you can charge Quadro and Tesla prices it seems.

  5. Feels funny to call the 5700XT “Flagship”, since it’s just a mid-tier card, but I suppose that is technically accurate.

  6. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 18859, member: 96″]
    Feels funny to call the 5700XT “Flagship”, since it’s just a mid-tier card, but I suppose that is technically accurate.
    [/QUOTE]
    Could throw in the Radeon VII, since it’s a hair faster and has twice the VRAM?

  7. [QUOTE=”Riccochet, post: 18826, member: 4″]
    HBM did nothing for AMD except increase productions costs. Not a lot of bang for the buck with HBM, yet.
    [/QUOTE]
    I was reading that 16GB of HBM2 is down to $120. That is a lot cheaper than GDDR6X is right now, and around the same cost of GDDR6. I have not seen anything recently about HBM3, but it was supposed to be in mass production sometime this year.

  8. [QUOTE=”LazyGamer, post: 18861, member: 1367″]
    Could throw in the Radeon VII, since it’s a hair faster and has twice the VRAM?
    [/QUOTE]
    We’re all trying to forget that one, even AMD themselves are.

  9. [QUOTE=”Auer, post: 18884, member: 225″]
    We’re all trying to forget that one, even AMD themselves are.
    [/QUOTE]
    It was mostly just late, IIRC. It’s within the margin of error with the 1080Ti and 5700XT in games, and the same cost (well, MSRP) as the 1080Ti, so in terms of VRAM capacity and raw compute performance, it was a good deal.
    [QUOTE=”Riccochet, post: 18895, member: 4″]
    what good is having 16GB of HBM if you can’t use it?
    [/QUOTE]
    Not for games, but if your software could actually use the compute resources?

    And not a slouch for games, if not particularly exceptional.

    Of course this is all in relation to the ‘flagship GPU’ idea. The Radeon VII (and Vega 56 / 64 before) is more of a ‘mini Titan’-style GPU. More focused on compute than gaming.

    Also, Big Navi is, I think, AMDs first real departure from using their high-end compute parts for gaming. Nvidia had previously stopped doing this, and it’s one of the reasons that AMD has struggled to compete for headline gaming performance over the years.

  10. Remember, though, the purported “50% per watt” performance uplift. Either this new-and-improved “5700XT” will be *massively* more efficient, *or* (more likely) it will be significantly more powerful at the same power level as the last-gen part.

  11. [QUOTE=”Schattenjaeger, post: 18983, member: 1404″]
    Remember, though, the purported “50% per watt” performance uplift. Either this new-and-improved “5700XT” will be *massively* more efficient, *or* (more likely) it will be significantly more powerful at the same power level as the last-gen part.
    [/QUOTE]
    We need a rumored benchmark to back up these rumors.

Leave a comment