Leak claims that AMD's Navi 44 GPU package is 31% smaller than Navi 33
Small yet mighty?
According to a post by @olrak29_on X (formerly Twitter), the package size of AMD's upcoming Navi 44 GPU, which will supposedly power the Radeon RX 8600 series, has been leaked. While the package size does not reflect the die size, it is claimed to be around 31% smaller than Navi 33, the smallest GPU in the Navi 3X family.
Olrak shared the alleged package size of Navi 44, the budget-oriented GPU in the Navi 4X series. For the uninitiated, AMD's Radeon 8000 series will adopt an approach similar to the Radeon 5000 line-up, wherein AMD will not target the high-end market. Set to arrive in 2025, the Radeon 8000 family will be based on 2 GPUs, Navi 48 and Navi 44. For context, RDNA3 (Radeon RX 7000) featured 3 GPUs: Navi 31, Navi 32, and Navi 33.
Package sizes:Navi 23: 35 x 35mmNavi 44: 29 x 29 mmOctober 14, 2024
Remember that one of the key changes with Navi 44 and RDNA 4 compared to the prior generation Navi 33 GPU is that AMD likely uses a newer 5nm-class process node. Navi 24 used TSMC N6, packing 13.3 billion transistors into a 204 mm^2 die size. We don't have the die size for Navi 44, but if it uses a 5nm-class node like N5 or N4P, we can expect nearly a doubling in transistor density.
As a related example, AMD's Zen 3 CCD used TSMC N7 and measured 83.7 mm^2 with 4.15 billion transistors, while Zen 4 shifted to TSMC N5 and packed 6.5 billion transistors into a 70 mm^2 die. Transistor density on those CPUs went from 49.6 MT/mm^2 (millions of transistors per square mm) to 92.9 MT/mm^2, and we would expect relatively similar scaling on the GPU side of things. In other words, a small package or even die size doesn't mean Navi 44 can't deliver a decent performance uplift compared to the current generation.
The Navi 44 GPU leak refers to a package size (not die size) of 29mm x 29mm, which comes out to be 840 mm2. Navi 33 (which powers the RX 7600 series), on the flip side, comes in at 35mm x 35mm or 1230 mm2. We should remind readers that when we talk about the package, it includes not just the die but the surrounding metallic frame and other structural materials.
There is still the possibility that AMD could make the actual package smaller while retaining the same die size, but that is merely speculation for now.
All things considered, it is seemingly clear that AMD will not compete against Nvidia for high-end GPUs. But AMD seems willing to deliver the best bang for the buck with its next generation of GPUs, possibly in an attempt to restore its dwindling GPU market share.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.
-
das_stig Maybe AMD looked at the numbers and said screw fighting with NV at the top end, most users are at 1080/1440, we give them the FPS, visuals, low power and price. Better to sell 50million chips at $400 with a 20% margin than 5million at $1000 with a 5% margin.Reply
Yes, I don't know the true sales and margin numbers, just an random example. -
setx
Sadly, AMD arrived at that conclusion in a very different way: why sell extremely limited top chips to poor gamers when they can charge many times more when selling to datacenters.das_stig said:Maybe AMD looked at the numbers and said screw fighting with NV at the top end, most users are at 1080/1440, we give them the FPS, visuals, low power and price. -
magbarn AMD lost market share when they decided to adopt Nvidia's pricing model. They have to sell cheaper for the same raster performance as they're lacking all the bells and whistles. If the 7900XTX was sold as the 7900XT and priced at $800 to smoke the 4070Ti and the 7900XT was sold as the 7800XT for $600 and so on down the product stack they would've grabbed serious market share.Reply -
Mattzun Why would AMD build a gaming GPU that people only want because it could cause NVidia to lower their prices?Reply
There are LOTS of posts from people who say they want competitive AMD high end cards to exist but admit that they will never buy one.
If AMD can make cheap low end parts in market segments that NVidia is not competing in, it MAY get more market share.
Even this is questionable - people are buying truly horrible low end NVidia cards instead of FAR superior AMD cards now.
If AMD has some success with reasonably priced low and mid range cards and makes chiplets work for AI cards, we may see chiplet based high end cards in a couple of years. -
cusbrar2
The issue is that you have to have mind share to sell any GPUs at all... an area were AMD is very weak.das_stig said:Maybe AMD looked at the numbers and said screw fighting with NV at the top end, most users are at 1080/1440, we give them the FPS, visuals, low power and price. Better to sell 50million chips at $400 with a 20% margin than 5million at $1000 with a 5% margin.
Yes, I don't know the true sales and margin numbers, just an random example.
Strix Halo might be a way around that if it enables laptops that can be more versatile that the competition (eg loading 96GB worth of LLMs), that's an easy no brainer 2k drop for many people, maybe more if they market them to the business elite segment that wants to run AI models on the go.
Nvidia is selling their GPUS with probably $1500 in margin each... so the logic that you cannot get that pie is nonsense.Its the piece of pie you MUST get to get any traction at all in the consumer workstation and gaming segments.
The logic that margins are bad they may as well give up is the same thing that lead to bulldozer... as well as the failure of Sun Micro and several other companies. There is no reason AMD cannot succeed in this segment as well as HPC and that is something they must crack of they want to meet market cap projections.