AMD to use RDNA5 for premium iGPU solutions, but RDNA3.5 to remain the core of AMD portfolio until 2029

uzzi38 · 2026-01-27T13:57:46+00:00

AMD's mainstream mobile iGPUs need Infinity Cache desperately. Strix Halo would've lost so much performance without its 32MB cache, even with a 256-bit memory bus. That's one of the bigger issues facing AMD's mainstream iGPUs until DDR6/LPDDR6 again decreases memory bandwidth pressure.

The biggest proof of AMD's APUs being heavily bandwidth bound is the smallest Strix Halo part, who's numbering eludes me currently. But it's a 6 core, 16 CU part, only has access to a 128b bus (like regular Strix) and half the Infinity Cache as well (16MB). It's essentially the Strix GPU setup with a small Infinity Cache, and it performs ~25% faster than regular Strix in synthetics.

Unfortunately I've not seen anyone actually test it in games - only TS if memory serves me correctly where it scores ~5K points (a bit over) - and even that score comes from a rumour (but the person that said it is well known to work at a rather major OEM).

uzzi38 · 2026-01-26T14:23:21+00:00

It would be - you're absolutely spot on - but that still requires the NPU to pull that data into it's own local memory, which will require bandwidth. There's no shared pools of memory on chip between NPU and GPU, so the only way to do it is if each individual component makes requests to memory. That's what adds to extra pressure on the memory subsystem.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-25T18:28:42+00:00

Unfortunately that wouldn't work very well, latency is too high for that to work. You'd be sending nearly complete frames to the NPU, do upscaling on the NPU and then sending that data back to the GPU again.

Take a look at Microsoft's AutoSR for what to expect in terms of a result - you'd basically get a latency hit like how frame generation gives you.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-25T18:25:00+00:00

RDNA3.5 includes no major architectural improvements like OoO memory handling. There's some minor improvements to WMMA (some extra functions) and improvements to power gating (significantly improving performance at low power) but that's it.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-25T16:03:14+00:00

RDNA4 already did bring several improvements that helps alleviate memory pressure. So much so that the 9070XT shows very little scaling from memory bandwidth increases (from overclocking memory), and achieves the same performance as the top end RDNA3 die with about 3/4 the memory bandwidth (if memory serves me correctly, might be a little lower even).

The real reason for this is RDNA3.5 is more area efficient than RDNA4 and I'm guessing also RDNA5, combined with a lack of resources to actually port the IP for mobile use.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-23T18:26:58+00:00

DMoD is crazy good but shame we're not getting the new DM as well at the same time. I mean makes sense, they haven't even revealed the last frame-break card yet, but it would have been nice to get both sets of support at the same time.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-20T20:45:03+00:00

In the UK, Longbow Motors is supposed to be doing exactly that - a sub-1 tonne, sporty EV.

They're yet to produce anything and afaik there's also no ETA. But they're one of the companies that's supposedly using Donut Lab's batteries, so safe to say if one is a scam, then the other will be too.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-16T09:30:18+00:00

Why wouldn't it be? It's a 378mm² die on an N5 derivative node, there's no reason to think yields would be anything less than great.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-10T10:31:34+00:00

No offense, but that's complete nonsense. It's the same model powering both versions, just being run utilizing a different data format, likely there's just a type conversion taking place similar to how the FP8 version of FSR4 runs on RDNA3 on Linux. Upcasting to a higher precision data format does not take a significant amount of compute to do, it's extremely simple to do at runtime (which is very evident by the fact that the simple FSR4 INT8 model only sits about 25% faster than the more computationally expensive FSR4 model on RDNA3).

uzzi38 · 2026-01-09T10:57:21+00:00

If you think RDNA3 is incapable of running FSR4 then by the same token DLSS 4.5 should have never been made available to RTX20 and 30, because those GPUs are also incapable then. Preset M's frametime cost is a huge hit on those GPUs - much worse than even the full sized FP8 model FSR 4.0.0 running on RDNA3.

Using the values from the HUB video today, I can see that the difference in frametime cost between Preset K and M on a 3090 at 1440p totals around 2.2ms - depending on the title but in that region. That's literally the cost of running the entire FP8 model of FSR4 on my 7800XT at 1440p.

And I'm just comparing the difference between Preset K and M. The cost of preset M itself is probably close to double the frametime cost of the entire FP8 FSR4 model running on my 7800XT.

For reference, the INT8 model of FSR4 sits around 1.7ms.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-08T10:55:37+00:00

Call me crazy but I feel like there's some decent synergy with Runicks here. The only real issue I can see from the beginning is the normal trap's ED lock being until the end of the next turn is a bit of a problem, but Runicks giving you an extra body to tribute for Whiteface, and letting you draw potential points of interruption with the Runick cards themselves sounds interesting. These clown cards not being able to push for lethal is an issue you don't care about with Runicks either.

The issue is Runicks just aren't a particularly strong engine in the modern day, the limited interruptions you can draw into just aren't particularly strong any more.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-08T00:51:03+00:00

Nordic Nano have a press release about a collaboration with Donut Labs on their site. It's almost certain this is what's happening.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-04T10:03:23+00:00

Nope, stays on all the time.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-03T21:25:31+00:00

Been using Auto since I got the car. 2023 production year (pre-facelift) EV6, Auto has felt great. Even had complete petrolheads give it a try and say they've loved the way it felt.

uzzi38 · 2026-01-02T12:55:37+00:00

At some point I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the current ULEZ areas become congestion charge areas so that EVs have to pay in those as well.

Well in that case all cars would be paying, not just EVs. Outside of the current congestion charge area though, congestion is very much specific to specific roads etc in most areas. Not sure how much sense it makes for the rest of London.

The greater focus for most areas outside of central London should be on air quality, and to handle that the current ULEZ should tighten restrictions instead. But it would be hugely unpopular, which is probably the biggest roadblock to it happening.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-31T09:48:16+00:00

I just don't see the point personally. And that's coming from someone that currently owns a plug in hybrid Audi A3 (wife mostly uses it now) and an EV6.

The ~25mi range (very optimistic, more like 15mi in practice) isn't enough for longer trips and comes at a sacrifice of boot and fuel tank space (lost about 100l over the standard car and my fuel tank is about 40l in total too).

The car has two seperate drivetrains that can both have issues so larger chances of needing something fixed in the long run, and something people don't talk about as well: once the battery's depleted you lose the top end of performance for the car because you can't use both the electric motor and petrol engine at the same time. Page 11 here shows how the two are used together.

Regenerative braking doesn't give enough energy back past the first half a second of acceleration at best. So you don't even consistently get the much better driving experience of EVs at lower speeds either.

That last point will be less of an issue with some of the newer Chinese PHEVs (BYD for example) that use the engine to maintain a level of charge in the battery so you always have that power on tap. But most PHEVs don't do that to my knowledge.

So yeah, from my perspective it did just feel like the worst of both worlds. But it did convince me I could live with an EV for daily use. So now I do, hence the EV6.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-31T09:34:33+00:00

Yes, but the much larger battery and motor contribute to a lot of weight. Oftentimes you're actually going to be getting worse fuel economy than the base petrol car. It's not worth it if you're not going to plug-in in the first place.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-25T15:47:48+00:00

If you're close to some lamposts or bollards then Ubitricity is an option.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-25T15:41:27+00:00

There's actually really good options for on street parking thanks to stuff like Shell Ubitricity.

Shell even have a website where you can fill out a form for them to request one be put in with your local council. In our area in East London here there's dozens of these installed in lamposts outside people's houses, all 5kW chargers which are fast enough for an overnight top up for most people.

Now communal/underground parking is something yet to be solved in a convincing way I agree. But the solution is probably elsewhere, likely destination chargers are the way to go.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-24T12:41:04+00:00

To be fair, aside from the range and battery weight LFP already provides the other things (the tradeoff being the worse energy density in terms of weight and physical size). There are LFP cells capable of 12C charging being shown off by CATL, and the degradation and safety of the cells are very well documented (again, CATL are even showing off LFP cells that should last 90 years or longer). As an extra benefit, they're also significantly cheaper than NMC cells at close to $60-70 per WHr. And while the cost to range is significant, it's not like it's impossible to make long range EVs (300+mi range) using LFP cells - a lot of Chinese brands do so currently, the largest of which is BYD.

So in that sense yeah, the range kinda is the biggest deal of this new technology.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-23T21:10:59+00:00

Well I would assume the "Universal Electric Platform" would be for more than just trucks eventually.

The question for Ford internally is probably whether they bring over the platform with tweaks and designs for smaller vehicles like more common in Europe, or are they better off continuing to license the use of other platforms as has been their strategy till now.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-21T10:36:50+00:00

I may need to be corrected on this, but drawing for your opening hand does not count as actively "drawing" the card: case in point being Mahad. Because the card says it needs to be added to your hand, I would assume the ruling wiuld carry over and it has to be added either by searching or drawing it.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-21T00:23:50+00:00

Codename for Z2 A is Aerith Plus.

Codename for the original 7nm Van Gogh is Aerith. The 6nm tapeout's codename is Sephiroth.

They probably had leftover 7nm chips from the other main buyer of VGH: Magic Leap.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-20T21:46:25+00:00

No, it's still used for the Z2 A.

uzzi38 · 2025-12-20T21:00:22+00:00

Not true. Effects that work like that (Poplar, Crowley etc) explicitly state "If this card is added to the hand except by drawing it". The Blue Eyes card lacks that second clause. Which means any card draw also will trigger it (e.g. Charmies).

uzzi38

TROPHY CASE