• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Is it me or is anyo9ne else not that excited about the 7900 release

555BUK said:
Porably >50% od Buldozer cpu's will end up within desktops, and 99% of 7970's sold will end up in gamers desktops.
Click to expand...

Probably, and I don't doubt it. AMD don't care do they? They're not expecting them to be great sellers either....if you wanna splash out then they'll take the cash! The 7800 and lower cards will be the ones designed for the majority of gamers, and enhanced bulldozer to go in the desktop for people who want that.
AMD are expecting the majority of people to move away from the typical desktop and more into thinner and lighter stuff, thus their fusion lines etc. The 7900's they want to go into hard core computing stuff. They are using the new 28 nm process on expensive parts first to get a hold on it before they release lower priced parts for the majority of people.
 
3dcandy said:
Bulldozer isn't a desktop cpu..period. These new cards aren't specifically for gamers either! Fermi was the same, took a few tweaks to make it as good as it is now, same with this brand new architecture...
Click to expand...

How has Fermi changed? It's still a hot, power-hungry beast that performs pretty much the same as it did at launch with the exception for some driver improvements.

The only thing that has improved is throttling controlled by drivers so that the cards don't overheat, new aftermarket coolers that deal with the heat output, prices slashed by 30-50% towards the end of its life-cycle and that's about it.
 
it's had architectural tweaks along the way, and of course the driver improvements have made it better...but yes it's still mainly the same. And, of course, it's built mainly for gpcpu more than gamers, just can perform well in games! That's what I'm getting at...the newest cards from both teams aren't designed foremost as gaming cards any more, there is plenty more money to be made by selling tesla cards and/or FireGL or whatever the new AMD cards will be branded. A side effect of that is they play games pretty well...Why do you think AMD spent years on this architecture and then clocked it at a pretty low speed? To fit into the systems for people who don't want to play the latest games and only have it validated to 300 watts. Fermi was exactly the same, and still is, hell you can overclock it to get another percentage fps but that's not why it was designed like it is...out and out designed to be great at gpcpu tasks. The 7000 series is more modular, just like bulldozer, they *should* be able to tweak it far easier than NV were able to, also have a new process to contend with etc. etc. They priced it (and retailers too) as high as they possibly could to get away with it. 6900 series are still selling well and when they come along with other versions, that will be the time to judge it, bit like the early GF100 etc. were changed to more consumer friendly beasts
 
sorry mate..fermi as a whole...
the OP was saying he was underwhelmed...I agree, but my point is that gamers aren't really who the card and architecture so far is aimed at. Any of you out there who believe that NV and AMD are looking after gamers with their new architectures and high end cards are sadly mistaken. Yes, they are faster than previous generations, but with the software companies hardly pushing boundaries with their console ports they don't need to push gaming cards. HTC and supercomputers, and giving the average high end guy a hell of a lot of computing power is what they're after. This card is about proving that AMD can make the fastest single card out there, can manage 28 nm, and that their new architecture works well so they can get drivers up to speed for when the mainstream cards are released, which is almost exactly what NV did with the whole fermi range.
 
Mr Krugga said:
That stacks it in a way better position in the US than it is here. But that's not AMD's fault...

I don't know what RRP you're talking about though, I haven't heard of the UK having any.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant $549 down to $479...not £.

Anyway, something is seriously wrong with the pricing with the new gen card. When (and if) Nvidia does release a GTX780, they would then see fit to stack their price on top of 7970 because it is faster...

Cards for £200 ish on the other hand gonna remain lack of procession, despite already passed 3 gens.

I recall people are saying the performance increase on graphic card has slowed down...it may be so for last gen, as it was still stucked on the 40nm process. But for the new gen that is not the case...reality is that both Nvidia and AMD are/will be trying to push "£300 performance card to the price range of £500". New generation is SUPPOSED to be faster than the previous gen card, but not at a cost of a higher premium. If people honestly believe 7970 is "priced right" at £450-£500, then back then on the 8800GTX launch Nvidia should have charged £600~£700 for it, not the same price as the previous top end card.
 
Last edited:
Mr Krugga said:
How many months are we talking?

Both 5800s and 6900s didn't drop in price for a long time after launch.

In fact some models cost more months in than they did when they were initially released, whether due to stock shortages, unfavourable exchange rates or lack of competition.

Even today the 6950s are more expensive than they were months ago, 5800s didn't drop a penny up for at least a year.
Click to expand...

yes but the 5800s and 6900s were not overpriced at launch. in fact they sold out instantly
 
MichaelM said:
The 580 launched with 1.5GB versions, no surprise there and if memory serves me it was not that much cheaper anyway.
Click to expand...

It was cheaper at $499 with some retailers having discounts not long after launch. You can get them for as low as $460 nowadays.

People did complain about the prices and still do today and yet these are the prices we're going to see on the second card from the AMD's lot.

It does not matter if the card had 1.5GB vRAM or more.
 
Last edited:
Mr Krugga said:
How many months are we talking?

Both 5800s and 6900s didn't drop in price for a long time after launch.

In fact some models cost more months in than they did when they were initially released, whether due to stock shortages, unfavourable exchange rates or lack of competition.

Even today the 6950s are more expensive than they were months ago, 5800s didn't drop a penny up for at least a year.

Yes, they are.
Click to expand...

If you recall, the 6950, 6970 and 6990 were blighted by silicon wafer shortage around Nov 2010-Feb 2011.
 
3dcandy said:
Bulldozer isn't a desktop cpu..period. These new cards aren't specifically for gamers either! Fermi was the same, took a few tweaks to make it as good as it is now, same with this brand new architecture...
Click to expand...

Well if it isn't a desktop CPU then it's aimed at workstations/servers. Intel has that covered too.

Wrong thread for this so i'll move on.


Mr Krugga said:
How many months are we talking?

Both 5800s and 6900s didn't drop in price for a long time after launch.

In fact some models cost more months in than they did when they were initially released, whether due to stock shortages, unfavourable exchange rates or lack of competition.

Even today the 6950s are more expensive than they were months ago, 5800s didn't drop a penny up for at least a year.
Click to expand...

Using: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5261/amd-radeon-hd-7970-review/22
and the cheapest versions of the cards on OcUK assuming no overclocking.

Overall
HD 6950: £180/33.4 = ~£5.40 per FPS **7th fastest**
GTX570 : £250/38.6 = ~£6.48 per FPS **5th fastest**
HD 6970: £250/38.1 = ~£6.56 per FPS **6th fastest**
HD 6990: £540/67.6 = ~£7.99 per FPS **1st fastest**
GTX580 : £360/44.0 = ~£8.18 per FPS **4th fastest**
HD 7970: £420/49.7 = ~£8.45 per FPS **3rd fastest**
GTX590 : £600/66.0 = ~£9.09 per FPS **2nd fastest**

GTX590 is clearly way overpriced, and so is the 580 to some extent.

7970 needs to drop to ~£370 (£7.44 per FPS) for it to fall inline relative to it's performance to dual GPU cards.

Single Die Cards only
HD 6950: £180/33.4 = ~£5.40 per FPS **5th fastest**
GTX570 : £250/38.6 = ~£6.48 per FPS **3rd fastest** - Although this is pretty tight with the 6970 - if the wind blows in the right direction they are basically the same.
HD 6970: £250/38.1 = ~£6.56 per FPS **4th fastest**
GTX580 : £360/44.0 = ~£8.18 per FPS **2nd fastest**
HD 7970: £420/49.7 = ~£8.45 per FPS **1st fastest**

However, when looking at single cards only, the price is strangely linear...

You want the best? You pay a premium I'm afraid...

The 5 and 6 series may not have dropped because A) They were/are chasing nvidia in terms of single die performance, B) they are actually relativety cheap as it is, C) The 5 series cards were similar performance to the 6-series cards.


Pure Guess: The 7950 will address some of the balance, it will fall in line at about the £350 mark at release with a ratio of around £7.50/FPS.
 
Last edited:
How bored do you have to be to get wound up about a gpu launch i mean seriously either buy one or don't but coming on a forum and starting a thread about how bad you feel it is isn't going to make a damn bit of difference. These cards offer a good improvement over the previous gen but you have to put some effort into finding the best overclock as it is clear these cards have been released with serious underclocking for a market amd is moving focus too whats hard to understand about that.

Gaming in the pc area right now is pathetic we get scraps from the console table who in their right mind would design or make a card solely with gaming in mind. Maybe when the next gen consoles are out both nv and amd will make a gaming gpu as a priority over other things as requirements will be higher. But until then games for the vast majority of us run just fine with older hardware while other sectors are asking for more and currently getting it.

Also get over bd for gods sake another product that yes you can buy and put in a desktop but this first bd chip is not and never was designed for that we all know that and in it's designed market from what i can see people are very happy with it. I think the biggest problem here is hardcore gamer's\enthusiasts do not like the fact they are no longer the centre of the tech universe other sectors have become both more important to the companys and far more profitable and companys have adjusted focus accordingly.

End of the day buy one or don't but please lets not have endless threads about the price or value of these cards last time i checked neither OcUK or any other retailor sent people out to force you to buy them.
 
To be fair, I haven't been that excited either, but the 3GB of VRAM is the attractive option for keeping things somewhat future-proof. However, 1.3GB of VRAM with my 570 hasn't really struggled much yet, (although it will inevitably) and for that reason it hasn't made me feel like I should desperately consider the 7970 - and the fact I only got my 570 in November.:D

Also, my 570 runs cooler than the 7970 even while overclocked - I'm using a Gigabyte SOC card which has a 3 fan cooler and I've never seen it hit much above 70c while overclocked. It also runs almost completely silent most of the time, and I doubt I'd go back to a card with one fan again and sounds like a hoover when you have to raise the fan speed. Another thing, the Nvidia drivers have been rock solid for me since getting my 570, whilst my 6870 had an endless list of issues in various games. AMD are getting better though, there's no denying and some people have had no problems at all, but for pure reliability for me Nvidia has been great driver wise - and no I'm not an Nvidia fan boy - I;ve bought an even amount of Nvidia and ATI cards over the years. I buy whichever suits my needs the most, and at present the AMD 7970 doesn't tick any of the boxes for me personally. If the prices come down and I see a decent cooler equipped with one, then I may sell up my 570, until then, no.
 
Concorde Rules said:
Well if it isn't a desktop CPU then it's aimed at workstations/servers. Intel has that covered too.

Wrong thread for this so i'll move on.




Using: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5261/amd-radeon-hd-7970-review/22
and the cheapest versions of the cards on OcUK assuming no overclocking.

Overall
HD 6950: £180/33.4 = ~£5.40 per FPS **7th fastest**
GTX570 : £250/38.6 = ~£6.48 per FPS **5th fastest**
HD 6970: £250/38.1 = ~£6.56 per FPS **6th fastest**
HD 6990: £540/67.6 = ~£7.99 per FPS **1st fastest**
GTX580 : £360/44.0 = ~£8.18 per FPS **4th fastest**
HD 7970: £420/49.7 = ~£8.45 per FPS **3rd fastest**
GTX590 : £600/66.0 = ~£9.09 per FPS **2nd fastest**

GTX590 is clearly way overpriced, and so is the 580 to some extent.

7970 needs to drop to ~£370 (£7.44 per FPS) for it to fall inline relative to it's performance to dual GPU cards.

Single Die Cards only
HD 6950: £180/33.4 = ~£5.40 per FPS **5th fastest**
GTX570 : £250/38.6 = ~£6.48 per FPS **3rd fastest** - Although this is pretty tight with the 6970 - if the wind blows in the right direction they are basically the same.
HD 6970: £250/38.1 = ~£6.56 per FPS **4th fastest**
GTX580 : £360/44.0 = ~£8.18 per FPS **2nd fastest**
HD 7970: £420/49.7 = ~£8.45 per FPS **1st fastest**

However, when looking at single cards only, the price is strangely linear...

You want the best? You pay a premium I'm afraid...

The 5 and 6 series may not have dropped because A) They were/are chasing nvidia in terms of single die performance, B) they are actually relativety cheap as it is, C) The 5 series cards were similar performance to the 6-series cards.


Pure Guess: The 7950 will address some of the balance, it will fall in line at about the £350 mark at release with a ratio of around £7.50/FPS.
Click to expand...
New technology usually offers higher performance at a lower price. For example, successive generations of the iPhone/iPad have offered more performance for the smae price. Tv's offer more perfomance (in terms IQ and fetures) for the same or lower price, even new cars offer more performance and features for the same (or very similar) price to models replaced. There are endless examples...

A top end graphics card is not really a new product that can establish at a new price point. It is simply an evolution of something now outdated, and as such should replace it at approximately the same prce level (give or take inflation, currency swigs etc). Perhaps I missed something, but I thought this card was a replacement for the 6970, which replaced the 5870, which replaced the 4890 etc...

Well, that my opinion anyway.
 
Radiation said:
It's not even like buying an expensive new card offers much now, improvements to graphical quality are getting less year after year and we're mostly playing console ports, wheres the value in another 50 fps when something a third of the price can play above 60?

If image quality was starting to improve towards ray tracing and movie effects it might be a worthwhile upgrade but instead progress has actually stagnated it seems.
Click to expand...

I game at 1920 by 1200 and find that the new games i play, my 5870 still handles them with ease so have not bothered to upgrade.
But only a few years ago i can remember putting in a new game and it bringing my top end graphics card to its knees, then i used to upgrade either to green or red.
I still cant believe i have my sapphire 5870 in my system, it seems like a lifetime in what i use to do, and i only payed £299 for it new at launch.
 
I'm not touching a GPU at that price, I don't mind paying out for an expensive GPU but not when the prices are obviously inflated, for example, my GTX570 costs more to buy now than it did 10 months ago, that's ridiculous, so obviously that means the 580's are more expensive than the 570's, and then because the new ATI cards are even faster they then have to be priced even more than the already inflated price of the 580's resulting in silly pricing, yes, the 7970 is priced fairly in relation to the price of the 580, it's a faster card, thus commands a higher price, but that doesn't mean it's an overall fair price, not when it's sitting on top of gpu's that are already arguably over priced.

Not even my day one 8800gtx cost as much as the cheapest 7970's and that was an astounding card that offered a massive improvement over it's previous generation and held it's crown for an age, these cards are rip off, I'm just criticising the 7970's, all the high end cards atm are way overpriced imo, I'm not sure why that's the case, perhaps someone can enlighten me.
 
Last edited:
555BUK said:
New technology usually offers higher performance at a lower price. For example, successive generations of the iPhone/iPad have offered more performance for the smae price. Tv's offer more perfomance (in terms IQ and fetures) for the same or lower price, even new cars offer more performance and features for the same (or very similar) price to models replaced. There are endless examples...

A top end graphics card is not really a new product that can establish at a new price point. It is simply an evolution of something now outdated, and as such should replace it at approximately the same prce level (give or take inflation, currency swigs etc). Perhaps I missed something, but I thought this card was a replacement for the 6970, which replaced the 5870, which replaced the 4890 etc...

Well, that my opinion anyway.
Click to expand...

That kind of model doesn't really work with GPUs, and to some extent CPUs.

However, it is the replacement for the 6970.

But the competitions cards are faster than the 6970 and cost more.

The 7970 is faster than the 580 and hence costs more than that.

I really can't see it dropping below what the GTX580 is, simply because it's faster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom