Image: AMD

AMD has shared a new article titled “advancing performance-per-watt to benefit gamers” ahead of NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 40 Series reveal, stating that its next-gen graphics architecture, RDNA 3, is on track to deliver “50 percent better performance per watt” than RDNA 2. The new architecture will enable “top-of-the-line gaming performance,” with Radeon RX 7000 Series graphics cards and other GPU products coming in “cool, quiet, and energy-conscious designs,” according to the company.

Image: AMD

From AMD:

Looking ahead, we’re continuing our push for more efficient gaming with AMD RDNA 3 architecture. As the first AMD graphics architecture to leverage the 5nm process and our chiplet packaging technology, AMD RDNA 3 is on track to deliver an estimated 50 percent better performance per watt than AMD RDNA 2 architecture – truly bringing top-of-the-line gaming performance to gamers in cool, quiet, and energy-conscious designs.

Contributing to this energy-conscious design, AMD RDNA 3 refines the AMD RDNA 2 adaptive power management technology to set workload-specific operating points, ensuring each component of the GPU uses only the power it requires for optimal performance. The new architecture also introduces a new generation of AMD Infinity Cache, projected to offer even higher-density, lower-power caches to reduce the power needs of graphics memory, helping to cement AMD RDNA 3 and Radeon graphics as a true leader in efficiency.

We’re thrilled with the improvements we’re making with AMD RDNA 3 and its predecessors, and we believe there’s even more to be pulled from our architectures and advanced process technologies, delivering unmatched performance per watt across the stack as we continue our push for better gaming.

Some of the faster Radeon RX 7000 Series graphics cards will be able to hit clock speeds as high as 4 GHz, if a recent tweet from @9550pro is to be believed. AMD is expected to launch the first of these products later this year.

Go to thread

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.

13 comments

  1. Lets say AMD is 90-95% performance with their top tier cards to NV, but uses less power, costs less, doesn't require a new power connector or PSU. I'd say thats a huge success.
  2. Lets say AMD is 90-95% performance with their top tier cards to NV, but uses less power, costs less, doesn't require a new power connector or PSU. I'd say thats a huge success.
    Exactly. This is the right approach now a days.
    The 500w gpus, and 1200w power supplies to drive them are absurd, and becoming even more so. Hopefully rumors are wrong, and nvidia has equal or less than powet consumption than 3000/series.
  3. Lets say AMD is 90-95% performance with their top tier cards to NV, but uses less power, costs less, doesn't require a new power connector or PSU. I'd say thats a huge success.
    That describes a lot of generations lately, and yet AMD falls further and further behind.

    The reasons are always the same too: "DLSS", "but raytracing!", "drivers", etc.
  4. Exactly. This is the right approach now a days.
    The 500w gpus, and 1200w power supplies to drive them are absurd, and becoming even more so. Hopefully rumors are wrong, and nvidia has equal or less than powet consumption than 3000/series.
    We may know more tomorrow.
  5. That describes a lot of generations lately, and yet AMD falls further and further behind.
    Sorry I have to disagree amd has been on point with the 6000 series cards and price competitive at every tier sub 1500. I don't see them as falling further behind. They caught up and made it a race. Now to see if thst was just a lucky sprint or if they can stay neck and neck.
  6. I don't see them as falling further behind.
    January 2019

    GPU


    • NVIDIA : 74%
    • AMD : 15.3%
    • INTEL : 10.6%

    August 2022

    GPU


    • NVIDIA : 76.21%
    • AMD : 14.67%
    • INTEL : 9.92%

    I don't disagree with anything else you say - 6000 series was good, and very competitive, and priced extremely aggressively, particularly at the high end. AMD made some goofball marketing moves (Mash F5 harder), but they did a lot of things right. When I speak of falling behind, I mean marketshare: It hasn't lead to them gaining any ground at all.
  7. I'd venture to say that AMD lost marketshare when they couldn't get inventory in to the hands of retailers when it mattered. They missed the boat. Hopefully they actually deliver 7000 series so people can buy them.
  8. I'd venture to say that AMD lost marketshare when they couldn't get inventory in to the hands of retailers when it mattered. They missed the boat. Hopefully they actually deliver 7000 series so people can buy them.
    I agree with this - early on they really struggled with inventory issues on the 6000 series. The 6800/6900 were rock stars, but they never really came out with a compelling lower tier affordable parts either: I know that 6700-6400 parts exist, but I never really saw much of them, other than the laughing stock that the 6500/6400 were, and with the exception of those two very poorly reviewed parts, it left a huge hole in the lineup with the 6600 just shy of $400 MSRP.

    AMD did seem to rebound faster on inventory - 6900 and 6800 cards did seem to get inventory and prices returning to sanity sooner than nVidia offerings. Part of that could just be that a lot of people will hold out waiting on nVidia cards though.

    To be fair, no one really had anything affordable / lower tier this last generation. nVidia responded by re-releasing the 1660 and 2060s, and the prices on those were crazy

    But the place where you really make up marketshare is exactly in that range: 8 of the top 10 GPUs on the Steam Hardware Survey fall squarely in that exact demographic and make up nearly 1/3 of all GPU installs -- and none of them are AMD
  9. I agree with this - early on they really struggled with inventory issues on the 6000 series. The 6800/6900 were rock stars, but they never really came out with a compelling lower tier affordable parts either: I know that 6700-6400 parts exist, but I never really saw much of them, other than the laughing stock that the 6500/6400 were, and with the exception of those two very poorly reviewed parts, it left a huge hole in the lineup with the 6600 just shy of $400 MSRP.

    AMD did seem to rebound faster on inventory - 6900 and 6800 cards did seem to get inventory and prices returning to sanity sooner than nVidia offerings. Part of that could just be that a lot of people will hold out waiting on nVidia cards though.

    To be fair, no one really had anything affordable / lower tier this last generation. nVidia responded by re-releasing the 1660 and 2060s, and the prices on those were crazy

    But the place where you really make up marketshare is exactly in that range: 8 of the top 10 GPUs on the Steam Hardware Survey fall squarely in that exact demographic and make up nearly 1/3 of all GPU installs -- and none of them are AMD
    That's true. Mid-range cards make up the bulk of what is being used by gamers. 3090's and 6900XT's are fine and dandy, but most people aren't going to pay those prices.

    If AMD would release a performer in the $300-500 range they'd have a winner. Heck, rebadge the current 6900XT as the 7600XT and sell it for $400-500. It's a fast card and they'd sell a ton of them.
  10. rebadge the current 6900XT as the 7600XT and sell it for $400-500

    That is supposed to be Navi 33. Originally rumored to launch next month, but now postponed to next year
  11. That is supposed to be Navi 33. Originally rumored to launch next month, but now postponed to next year
    If it were me I'd still rebadge the 6900XT as the 7600XT. When Navi 33 is ready, if it's better than the 6900XT, then badge it as 7650XT.

    They'd be stupid not to get something out in the mid-range from the start.

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment