Take it with a mountain of salt as usual, but it does synergize well with AMD's statements that the high end card would be an "nVidia killer", and the fact nVidia may be prepping a Super version of the 2080 Ti. However, given that this is just a tape-out means that, if it's true, they won't be on the shelves until at least August, which is about what everyone was expecting.
With CES so close AMD will no doubt say something, but one thing is certain: it will be -expensive-. Between gigantic die size, increasing memory costs, and premium segment means it'll be nudging $1000 in all likelihood. Something that isn't in the report but is also likely, the revised die will likely lead to 5x50 revision cards as AMD salvages only partially functional dies.
When the RX 5700 XT was showcased, I did some speculative crafting of what AMD could do in terms of the rest of the RX 5000-Series (Navi)
Now by my calculations AMD using the Largest Die they could (640mm) … would allow them to have up to 100 RCU.
Given that AMD Graphics Performance linearly improves with Compute Units and Clocks., we can actually quite easily speculate where such would fall in terms of performance; and should AMD ever make such a GPU, it would sit about 22 - 28% Faster than the RTX Titan (which keep in mind is an 800mm GPU).
This is assuming a "Game" Clock of 1500MHz., but another aspect is it would be a 450w Card (minimum).
Still you'd be looking at the better part of 26TF (FP32) Performance... so to say it would be a "Beast" would be an understatement.
Now if they're going to have a 505mm Variant., then I'd wager heavily that this will be the RX 5900 XT (80 RCU), RX 5900 (72 RCU) and RX 5800 XT (64 RCU)
(keep in mind that the RX 5600 XT currently rumoured to be in production is a 30 RCU Navi 10., so it's just a cut-down RX 5700)
And in terms of performance., well again if we assuming Game Clocks between 1500 - 1700MHz (which is likely) … then the RX 5900 XT will definitely be knocking on the door of an Overclocked RTX 2080 Ti in most games., and very comfortably beating it in those that the RX 5700 XT current performs a Tier above where it should.
If you look at which games those are, well many of them are "Next Gen" (DirectX 12 / Vulkan) Driven titles... which we're going to start seeing more of them appearing as standard over the next 12 months leading up to the 9th Gen Consoles.
I think people will make the biggest deal about the Power Consumption though... as we can expect it to be similar power draw to the RX Vega 56 and 64. The only thing I recall care about though, is that AMD don't shoot themselves in the foot with the pricing., like they have with both the RX 5700 and 5500 so far.
There's definitely A LOT of baited breath over the price of the RX 5600 XT., as while it'll be impressive performance; the issue is that with the "High End" RX 5500 XT being £240... and the "Low End" RX 5700 being £300; if they price it at £300 (which remember the MSRP of the RX 5700 is £320)., well that'll just not make sense to get the RX 5600 XT over an RX 5700... but the same is true the other way.
If the price it at a sensible £250 MSRP... then it just makes the RX 5500 look even worse value than it already is.
Frankly what I think they need to do is put their hands up and say "Sorry, we shouldn't have priced the RX 5500 where we did"; and offer a Free Game / Rebate to those who've already bought it; while reducing it's MSRP to £130 - £180.
It'd still be overpriced, but something more sane for the majority of the market. Then they can freely have the RX 5600 XT sit in the £200 - £300 price bracket.
The 2080 Ti custom editions are north of 300w, so if AMD is able to have comparable performance for 325-350w for the highest end model, I doubt there will be much said, but again it's going to have to be a sub 40dB card the way the 2080Ti is. The 5500 and 5700 series have higher power consumption than equal or higher performing nVidia cards, but the difference isn't as great as it was with Raja's Battlefield Earth that was Vega.
If the numbers are to be believed on the next generation XBOX, it's going to be a 56CU unit with 12Tflops of power, which would, on paper, make it as powerful as a 2080Ti, but that rating is fairly meaningless, as we know the Fury X has a higher Tflops rating than the RX 580 yet the RX 580 is faster, and as these cards are supposedly a new revision architecture, Navi 21, it likely won't be an apples to apples comparison. There's also the question as to how much of the card's compute power will be lost to ray tracing, since we know this Navi iteration will feature AMD's patented hybrid ray tracing solution, and how that method of ray tracing stacks up to nVidia's pure hardware Tensor core iteration. nVidia's pure hardware solution loses quite a bit unless DLSS is supported, even shown by nVidia themselves to bring the vaulted 2080Ti to its knees. With the next generation XBOX targeting 4k60 with ray tracing, one has to believe AMD's method is much more efficient, but it's still a large unknown.
The biggest thing you see against them is for sure the insane prices AMD attached to them, often ending up with a lower performing card which lacks features of their counterparts while drawing more power, or, in the case of the 5500XT, ends up with a card competing out of its bracket with the 2060 instead of the 1660S. The "good" thing is that nVidia attaches such a large price premium to the 2080Ti, and custom versions go for near the $2000 mark in the case of the EVGA Kingpin edition, that if they do the likely and price it at $1000, it'll actually be less for now, but again it's going to lack some features of the competition, namely ReShade, but end users will still get the shaft without any relief in sight.