When Will AMD Launch the RX 7700 and RX 7800?

AMD Navi 32 GPUs are still missing
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware / AMD)
20

AMD published a blog yesterday highlighting the importance of having sufficient VRAM for 1440p gaming. The short summary is that it suggests you need 12GB or 16GB to get the most out of 1440p gaming. It's an interesting take, because we still don't have AMD RDNA 3 architecture GPUs with 12GB or 16GB of VRAM. We're specifically talking about the Navi 32-based parts, the RX 7800 (XT) and RX 7700 (XT), which at this point are long overdue, leaving the previous generation parts to vie for a place on the best graphics cards.

There are reasons for AMD to not launch another series of GPUs yet, of course. Like the absolute bloodbath that's taking place in sales of dedicated graphics cards right now — the last quarter saw the lowest number of units sold in decades. Ouch.

Previous generation AMD RX 6000-series GPUs are still sitting in warehouses and on retail shelves, even at greatly discounted prices. It's all reminiscent of the RX 500-series parts sitting around at rock bottom prices back in 2018–2019, and in fact that surplus wasn't resolved until the 2020 GPU shortages finally wiped out stock of every GPU.

At the same time, AMD would have ordered wafers and planned for the launch of new Navi 32 GPUs well over a year ago. There are probably chips sitting around, just waiting for a perceived good time to launch. AMD can try to play the waiting game, but, at some point, it's going to need to push out the new generation Navi 32 GPUs.

Currently, AMD has the RX 7900 XTX and RX 7900 XT, originally priced at $999 and $899 but now selling for around $950 and $780. The next step down for the RX 7000-series is a massive plunge all the way down to the RX 7600 and its $269 launch price. Everything in between and even below the RX 7600 is still being serviced by previous generation parts — one of the biggest complaints about the RX 7600 was that it only matched the existing RX 6650 XT in performance while costing $40 extra.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Jarred Walton
Senior Editor

Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge '3D decelerators' to today's GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.

  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    Have to disagree with that, I want to see the RX 7800 16GB at $500-$599, and judging by the cliff GPU sales fell off of, I'm not the only one tired of these prices.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    I'll offer another theory: they could be stocking up the mid-range chips for FirePro cards with a lot of VRAM in order to "promote" AMD with the AI crowd. Seeing how their latest drivers specifically called out AI workloads improvements in SDiff and such, I'd imagine it's not a far fetched theory. This also includes the big strides with ROCm.

    They would still sell those for more money and, probably, sell everything to the Prosumer and Professional markets before their CDNA cards are ready for workstations (IIRC).

    Do I like this? Generally speaking, not really. I still have my Vega64 plowing through games just fine and the 6900XT for VR, so I'm not really bothered by current and, possibly, next gen, but I do mind "the trends" I guess.

    Anyway, we'll see how this one pans out rather soon!

    Regards.
    Reply
  • "The MCD sizes aren't exactly the same either, so we could easily be off on the Navi 32 GCD size by 5% or so"

    IMO, since the Navi 32 chiplet design features the GCD in the center measuring around 200mm2, each of the four MCDs measures around 37.5mm2, so that should round up to around 350mm2.

    For comparison, the Navi 31 GCD measures 304.35mm2, and the whole chip with MCDs included has an area of 529.34mm2. So we are looking at a -34% smaller die size for the Navi 32 GPU.

    Also, Navi 32 should feature up to 60 Compute Units, or 3840 Stream Processors, on a 256-bit memory bus interface.
    Reply
  • jackt
    I knew that! They released the mid level cards so late that now the next gen is close ! And weeks before the ram price drop!
    Reply
  • MooseMuffin
    My baseless guess is the additional complexity involved in the chiplet design means they can't hit the prices they need to hit to be competitive.
    Reply
  • salgado18
    I get your point, Jared. But RDNA3 has the same efficiency as RDNA2 (look at 7600 vs 6600 XT), with very few new features, same ray tracing. RTX 4000 improved on every feature, brought new ones, and even almost doubled efficiency. To me, Nvidia won this round. If the Radeon cards are the same, we might as well buy what we have today (be it 6- or 7-series), or wait for the next gen. The mid-range Radeons just don't matter much anymore.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    Alvar Miles Udell said:
    Have to disagree with that, I want to see the RX 7800 16GB at $500-$599, and judging by the cliff GPU sales fell off of, I'm not the only one tired of these prices.
    Disagree with what? Sounds like you just agreed with wanting to see “RDNA 3 upgrades in the $400–$600 range.”

    Which we probably will, given 7900 XT is selling at $780. Knock off 4GB VRAM and use a smaller GCD and 7800 for $600 (maybe less) is certainly viable. 7700 with 12GB will hopefully land at $400.
    Reply
  • Sleepy_Hollowed
    Soon, I hope.
    Reply
  • sherhi
    -Fran- said:
    I'll offer another theory: they could be stocking up the mid-range chips for FirePro cards with a lot of VRAM in order to "promote" AMD with the AI crowd. Seeing how their latest drivers specifically called out AI workloads improvements in SDiff and such, I'd imagine it's not a far fetched theory. This also includes the big strides with ROCm.

    They would still sell those for more money and, probably, sell everything to the Prosumer and Professional markets before their CDNA cards are ready for workstations (IIRC).

    Do I like this? Generally speaking, not really. I still have my Vega64 plowing through games just fine and the 6900XT for VR, so I'm not really bothered by current and, possibly, next gen, but I do mind "the trends" I guess.

    Anyway, we'll see how this one pans out rather soon!

    Regards.
    Could be the case but how many times did we expect them to make some serious leap ahead of competition only to fail miserably? Ryzen 7000 was praised to oblivion, with headlines and clickbait titles on YouTube screaming "Intel is in trouble", same thing happened to 7000 GPU lineup "Nvidia is in trouble"...Maybe they are waiting with full stock and based on final performance and market reaction they will go one way or the other and most likely, sadly, fail no matter which way they go (if you don't know where you are sailing no wind is favourable).
    jackt said:
    I knew that! They released the mid level cards so late that now the next gen is close ! And weeks before the ram price drop!
    In my country those cards offered interesting value, like 6700 was often cheaper than 6600XT or even 6650XT, which was sometimes cheaper than 6600XT...but does anyone know why are they doing midgen refresh while still producing regular models? Or has there been a mountain of regular models in stock up to this day? If not how is it possible to have refreshed model (for example 6650XT from may 2022) still mixed up with regular model (6600XT from August 2021) even 1 year after its release?
    MooseMuffin said:
    My baseless guess is the additional complexity involved in the chiplet design means they can't hit the prices they need to hit to be competitive.
    Maybe it has nothing to do with complexity but rather finding out their architecture is not really competitive in this generation, combined with plenty of old cards available almost everywhere and Nvidia doing Nvidia things, they just play a waiting game, keeping old cards higher and earning whats left to earn. Why would they push new cards out, cannibalise their own products and god forbid maybe start a price war in duopoly? Nobody (out of those 2 relevant players) wants that.
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    Disagree with what? Sounds like you just agreed with wanting to see “RDNA 3 upgrades in the $400–$600 range.”

    Which we probably will, given 7900 XT is selling at $780. Knock off 4GB VRAM and use a smaller GCD and 7800 for $600 (maybe less) is certainly viable. 7700 with 12GB will hopefully land at $400.
    I'll offer different perspective maybe 🤔 Catcher in the rye was replaced by Harry Potter when it comes to most common book(s) children read (ask any literature teacher) and finally somewhat solid Harry Potter game is released and whoa oh my oh my, it eats even more than 12 gigs of vram, sometimes even on 1080p. Do you want 450-500€ GPU, replace the old one, maybe it fits, maybe it doesn't, maybe you have time to research all those cards I don't know...or you prefer a 500€ console to plug and play with no issues whatsoever? This Nvidia's push towards average GPU price qual to console price is a trap. 600usd (720€) for 1440p 16gb GPU? Is that supposed to be a good deal or something? :D
    Reply
  • sherhi
    salgado18 said:
    I get your point, Jared. But RDNA3 has the same efficiency as RDNA2 (look at 7600 vs 6600 XT), with very few new features, same ray tracing. RTX 4000 improved on every feature, brought new ones, and even almost doubled efficiency. To me, Nvidia won this round. If the Radeon cards are the same, we might as well buy what we have today (be it 6- or 7-series), or wait for the next gen. The mid-range Radeons just don't matter much anymore.
    Kind of true but 7600 Vs 6600 does offer reasonable performance increase, if it translates into even 7600XT Vs 6600XT then 7600XT could be interesting (if prices go waaaay down obviously).
    Reply