Possible Radeon 390X / 390 and 380X Spec / Benchmark (do not hotlink images!!!!!!)

Martini1991 · 26 May 2015 at 14:49

Nutella33 said:
Yes because they will have the other price points covered as well, that's entirely my point, They are fine if they compete at all of the tiers. All "highest performance parts" are priced artificially to limit appeal. look at the 295x2's - 650 quid. Nvidia have made profits by creating and competing in this tier so it makes sense for AMD challenge that. They arn't in comparable situations but they are in the same buyers market.

If someone has 450 quid (previous top tier) and AMD beat the 980 at that price point the person isnt going to say "well I cant buy the top 700 quid amd part, I wont give them my money at all", A release higher up doesn't affect the majority buying at the lower tiers.

The 700 quid market is entirely different to the 450 quid market. Its not "I must have the top card or nothing" for most, whilst those that do have that attitude they are willing to pay that extra money for it so the extra tier doesn't matter to them.

I don't argue with the logic. But it doesn't apply in AMD's case, they're not in a position where they can produce a throwaway performance card. AMD are in a position of weakness.

ubersonic · 26 May 2015 at 15:11

Nutella33 said:
We can see from nvidia the mark up for that tier is superb so whilst most will probably buy the lower tiers and thats where the core will be, the elite should be a money spinner for AMD and thus good for business even if sold in smaller batch numbers. It certainly hasn't hurt nvidia.

Yeah, It's not like the HD7990 and FX9590 weren't flops at their original price points, oh.

Mtom · 26 May 2015 at 15:19

Orangey said:
AMD don't seem to understand the holistic approach that enabled NV to sell the Titans.

If it really is $850 those drivers had better be impeccable and all the value-add softwares had better not come with any of the usual caveats.

Interesting context...titanx being 1000$ makes it immune to the latest nv driver problems (driver not responding)that many guys reporting?

I don't think so...and as a non cf user i never had any problems with amd drivers, but thats an old discussion don't start it again.

Nutella33 · 26 May 2015 at 15:23

ubersonic said:
Yeah, It's not like the HD7990 and FX9590 weren't flops at their original price points, oh.

that'll be because they didn't compete with the performance offered at the price point they were introduced at. presuming that's not the case with the 3xx series it doesn't really apply.

Martinit said:
they're not in a position where they can produce a throwaway performance card.

Its profit margins and annual profits that are the problem, not market share solely. The lower end can compete for market share but that doesnt preclude a performance card can bring back high mark ups and thus profit. These things are not exclusive even in a company which has lost market share.

It wouldn't make business sense for AMD to just perform at low end tiers which have the worst margins when they are doing badly. Thats a race to the bottom and something they have already done as much as possible by slashing the 2xx series prices. If they have confidence in their products performance they will compete with it at every level of the market.

orangey said:
AMD don't seem to understand the holistic approach that enabled NV to sell the Titans.

If it really is $850 those drivers had better be impeccable and all the value-add softwares had better not come with any of the usual caveats.

I agree, its not a certain gamble but its one they have to take imo. That said providing its a single card and not a crossfire monstrosity, the drivers arnt bad (just need to regain their regularity) and things like freesync are maturing enough to provide that "holistic" approach.

Orangey · 26 May 2015 at 15:26

AMD don't have the reality-distortion field and bought-off reviewers though. You need these things if you're pushing into a higher price bracket.

ubersonic · 26 May 2015 at 15:27

Nutella33 said:
that'll be because they didn't compete with the performance offered at the price point they were introduced at.

The FX-9 was a joke through and through, however the HD7990 competed with and usually beat both the GTX690 it was priced against and the GTX Titan it also found itself dominated by.

Martini1991 · 26 May 2015 at 15:27

AMD pushing for an elite tier card in a different price bracket is going to fail. It'd be a mistake to do it, certainly not a gamble worth taking. A gamble worth taking is an elite tier performance card at a lower price to try and get more sales, and more money through that.

mmj_uk · 26 May 2015 at 15:28

Martini1991 said:
I don't argue with the logic. But it doesn't apply in AMD's case, they're not in a position where they can produce a throwaway performance card. AMD are in a position of weakness.

If the rest of their line-up is strong then I don't see what hurt it will to have a premium part on offer, will people buy it though? it's a bit of a risky investment given AMD's current standing, they could be bust or bought out inside the next 24mths and driver support could cease altogether.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 26 May 2015 at 15:29

We don't know the performance yet??

If it were to be faster than a Titan X or matched it and cost £599.99,it would be more expensive than any other single GPU card AMD made for years,but still be £200 cheaper than a Titan X.

£599.99 would not be upper tier pricing for Nvidia,but for AMD it would be.

Edit!!

Plus we don't know how good the supply of HBM is ATM either.

Mtom · 26 May 2015 at 15:32

Martini1991 said:
I don't argue with the logic. But it doesn't apply in AMD's case, they're not in a position where they can produce a throwaway performance card. AMD are in a position of weakness.

I hope that competing in higher tiers/prices means amd finished with the cheaper but not that perfect stuff, and moves to the (bit) more expensive but better direction.

Example:if they release the 290x at 50$ higher price but with a whisper quiet cooler, the last two years would be different.

humbug · 26 May 2015 at 15:33

Martini1991 said:
AMD pushing for an elite tier card in a different price bracket is going to fail. It'd be a mistake to do it, certainly not a gamble worth taking. A gamble worth taking is an elite tier performance card at a lower price to try and get more sales, and more money through that.

Going so cheap that your margins are squeezed is just bad business, if you sell 5 items @ £100 with £10 Profit each and only 3 Items @ £120 but with a £20 Profit each then its better to sell less.

Undercutting Nvidia by significant margins doesn't work anyway.

AMD need to find their market value, that doesn't necessarily mean undercutting Nvidia.

mmj_uk · 26 May 2015 at 15:35

Nutella33 said:
It wouldn't make business sense for AMD to just perform at low end tiers which have the worst margins when they are doing badly. Thats a race to the bottom and something they have already done as much as possible by slashing the 2xx series prices. If they have confidence in their products performance they will compete with it at every level of the market.

There's plenty of profits at the bottom too, particularly with the kind of volumes cards are sold at. The trouble for AMD is that they are having to sell expensive to manufacture products at little more than cost price just to compete, whereas you've got Intel and NVidia both selling comparatively cheaper to produce products at massive profit margins due to all the advantages they have outside of simply performance.

Ayahuasca · 26 May 2015 at 15:35

Hopefully they have people working for them that are a lot more clued up than us forum monkeys on how to regain market share.

It sounds easy in principle but when your competition is dominating it's far from that.

Mtom · 26 May 2015 at 15:35

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
We don't know the performance yet??

If it were to be faster than a Titan X or matched it and cost £599.99,it would be more expensive than any other single GPU card AMD made for years,but still be £200 cheaper than a Titan X.

£599.99 would not be upper tier pricing for Nvidia,but for AMD it would be.

Edit!!

Plus we don't know how good the supply of HBM is ATM either.

Actually i exect just this scenario. I'm positive it will have TX performance, and priced around the 980ti.

Martini1991 · 26 May 2015 at 15:37

Mtom said:
Actually i exect just this scenario. I'm positive it will have TX performance, and priced around the 980ti.

But isn't this type of scenario what AMD already does? The 290X is every bit as capable as a 970 performance wise, it's cheaper. What's selling better? It's not the 290X.

pete910 · 26 May 2015 at 15:41

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
We don't know the performance yet??

If it were to be faster than a Titan X or matched it and cost £599.99,it would be more expensive than any other single GPU card AMD made for years,but still be £200 cheaper than a Titan X.

£599.99 would not be upper tier pricing for Nvidia,but for AMD it would be.

Edit!!

Plus we don't know how good the supply of HBM is ATM either.

True, they could also throw a curve ball and do a 16gig(HBM 2) variant of it later as their halo product If the GPU grunt is there that is.

Ayahuasca · 26 May 2015 at 15:41

It's not just price/performance that's needed, where's the incentive for all the nVidia users on the TX, 980ti (release is imminent apparently), 980's and even 970's to switch?

That's how you regain market share by snatching them from your competition.

Unless performance is godlike and the price is incredible then most will just stay put.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 26 May 2015 at 15:41

Martini1991 said:
But isn't this type of scenario what AMD already does? The 290X is every bit as capable as a 970 performance wise, it's cheaper. What's selling better? It's not the 290X.

Maybe because its an older part,which does not have the selling point of DX12??

Shrugs.

humbug · 26 May 2015 at 15:42

I think AMD should match Nvidia on Price per performance for a while, forget about market share, see what that does to their income, thats what really matters.

They have tried everything but that ^^^^

ubersonic · 26 May 2015 at 15:43

Martini1991 said:
AMD pushing for an elite tier card in a different price bracket is going to fail. It'd be a mistake to do it, certainly not a gamble worth taking. A gamble worth taking is an elite tier performance card at a lower price to try and get more sales, and more money through that.

This x100

Everybody has their own opinion on AMD/ATi's "best GPU series", mine is the Radeon 9x00 series. The 9700 beat the Ti4600 and cost 25% less, the 9500 did the same to the ti4200, the vicious undercutting turned what would have been a bitter defeat for Nvidia into a massacre, especially as their FX series that arrived to battle the 9700 sounded like a vacuum cleaner and then got beat by the cheaper 9800.

That generation didn't just hand ATi their first win over Nvidia in years, it improved their stock tenfold in customers eyes and they shifted so many units (for the time) they were still living off the success two generations later.

This is exactly what they need to do today.