AMD's flagship RX 7900 XTX GPUs discovered to integrate A0 silicon revision affected by serious hardware issues

[Redaktion]

The problematic A0 silicon revision was apparently the reason why AMD delayed the launch of the flagship RDNA 3 GPUs by almost a year. Despite this, AMD still launched the RX 7900 cards with this stepping that is exhibiting high GPU clock variability, power draw issues and disabled shader prefetch instructions.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-s-flagship-RX-7900-XTX-GPUs-discovered-to-integrate-A0-silicon-revision-affected-by-serious-hardware-issues.674766.0.html

[Chiccozman]

You guys are kidding right? AMD releasing a buggy gpu? Come on, this can't be true.

[RobertJasiek]

It would not be the first die with major bugs. Recall Pentium division...

[Russel]

Knowingly releasing a buggy product...
Reminds me of Intel's meltdown issue..
But this is worse...
Let's just skip this year's gpus, both nvidia and amd are upto no good.

[Bernstein]

This is a bunch of nothing.

An Nvidia employee said:

f*** off, they don't know what they are talking about.
Nvidia has been shipping a0 forever

Gpu competition has made it that so you have to make a0 shippable

[vertigo]

From doing some additional reading on this, it appears this is not only conjecture at best, and very likely NOT the case, but if it is true, it's not really a big deal, nor something unique to AMD or GPUs. This feels like a very poorly "researched" article, and by that I mean the author read a Twitter post, took it at face value, and regurgitated it without any additional research or insight.

[Riscy]

400 amps, somehow I don't think so, more like 400W.

[Bogdan Solca]

From doing some additional reading on this, it appears this is not only conjecture at best, and very likely NOT the case, but if it is true, it's not really a big deal, nor something unique to AMD or GPUs. This feels like a very poorly "researched" article, and by that I mean the author read a Twitter post, took it at face value, and regurgitated it without any additional research or insight.

Surely all the reviews out there that clearly show clock variations and high power draws are just pure conjecture. The Twitter thread even links to some of those reviews with examples.

[Bogdan Solca]

400 amps, somehow I don't think so, more like 400W.

Amps multiplied by Volts equals Watts.

[Tingle]

They just need to cut £200 off the XTX price.

[vertigo]

From doing some additional reading on this, it appears this is not only conjecture at best, and very likely NOT the case, but if it is true, it's not really a big deal, nor something unique to AMD or GPUs. This feels like a very poorly "researched" article, and by that I mean the author read a Twitter post, took it at face value, and regurgitated it without any additional research or insight.

Surely all the reviews out there that clearly show clock variations and high power draws are just pure conjecture. The Twitter thread even links to some of those reviews with examples.

The two aren't necessarily directly related. I'm not disputing the performance and power draw issues. I'm simply saying that the source of this article, from what I've seen, is not proof that AMD is shipping A0 retail units, and even if they are, a) that's not necessarily the reason for the issues, and b) even if it is, it's not like people don't know what they're getting, assuming they're smart enough to wait a few days for reviews. Regardless, this article takes questionable info and makes it out to be much worse than it is, or at least that's my understanding from looking elsewhere besides just here and a Twitter post.

[GraShropp]

There are errata for every processor and GPU ever released.
No new hardware release or revision for that matter, escapes it.

[James D]

This story isn't even remotely accurate.

[Orangejulius]

400 amps, somehow I don't think so, more like 400W.

Yes, 200 Amps is typical service for a US house, with some older homes having 100 Amp service or less.

If the card consumed 200 Amps, it would promptly explode. It's pretty clear the correct answer is 400 Watts. I'm sure they'll fix this typo.

[vertigo]

400 amps, somehow I don't think so, more like 400W.

Yes, 200 Amps is typical service for a US house, with some older homes having 100 Amp service or less.

If the card consumed 200 Amps, it would promptly explode. It's pretty clear the correct answer is 400 Watts. I'm sure they'll fix this typo.

You guys need to learn at least a little about electricity before making statements like this. Power (Watts) = Current (Amps) X Voltage (Volts). At 1V, 400W=400A. That does NOT mean it's pulling 200A from the outlet. Power draw is wattage, not amperage, and it's drawing 400A @ 1V which, again, is 400W. A typical circuit is 15 or 20A, which is at 110-120V (US, different elsewhere), so 1725-2300W @115V. This is far above the 400W draw of this card. So no, it's not a typo, and there's nothing for them to fix. It's easy as P=IE.