AMD forgot a lot of their customers

[Marine-RX179]

How hard can it be for AMD to release a high end kick ass gaming GPU at a reasonable price point??

As easy as digging their own grave.

I mean people seem to see it as the law of nature that AMD must release comparable performance graphic card to Nvidia at significant lower price, despite their graphic card tend to cost more to produce. Nvidia has far greater profit margin due to skimming on hardware part cost but rely heavily on optimisation instead (one of the main reason why their graphic cards performance tanks for new games released after EOL, as their driver/software team packed their bags and move onto the new generation/architecture).

With Nvidia pushed their price of the 1080 to £580+, and people are somehow expecting AMD to release something similar performance, but price at £400~. With AMD managed to do that, they still loses to Nvidia business wise, as their profit margin is far lesser than Nvidia's, while Nvidia is laughing all the way to bank.

 

[jjgreenwood]

Who knows, perhaps small vega will launch in October in decent quantities and be 30% faster than 1080. They won't seem that silly if that happens.

 

[JanM]

I suspect a lot of lessons learned in polaris are being used in a larger die

That made me LOL AMD never learn from past experience if anything they get worse. hahaha

 

[chaparral]

Maybe AMD are putting most there time & funds , R&D etc into making the GPU's for Consoles now..

 

[Orangey]

They simply don't have the resources and there is more economic pressure than ever on fabless companies. Being squeezed out from both ends.

The 480 was supposed to turn the tide, we'll have to wait and see the next jon peddie report. If it didn't grab them enough share back they will have some serious decisions to make. Although I fear we have seen this scenario time and time again in the tech world.

 

[melmac]

For years now, AMD have tried to go toe to toe with Nvidia at the higher end of the Market. This strategy has lead them to an all time low in marketshare. Even when they had a card that competed well it failed. Because most people didn't actually want to buy the AMD cards, they wanted AMD competing so they could buy their Nvidia cards cheaper.

Now AMD might have bad management, but, even the worse management in the world could see that constantly doing the same thing and expecting a different result was madness.

So instead of doing the same thing, they changed up and aimed their sights at the largest market. And that's what Polaris 10 and 11 are, mainstream and entry level cards.

That isn't any good for most people on tech forums, as most people on forums like this have higher end cards. I am sure AMD will release higher end cards later on in the year, probably around October in time for the holiday market when people are spending more money. In the meantime, I am sure they will probably prefer to sell 1000 480's in a day then worry about the small number of customers on forums who might buy Nvidia's high end cards now.

 

[Telecaster]

290 and 390 owners don't really NEED an upgrade though do they? The 480 is very obviously aimed at people still on 5XXX 6XXX and 7XXX series cards, for whom a GPU upgrade is a once every 3/4/5 year thing and not something they do every 6/12 months.

It always seems like it's the Nv gang that are chasing the constant shiny, I don't see AMD owners like that, they just want a card that will work for 5 years at a reasonable £/performance ratio.

 

[Orangey]

I wonder if this will go the same way as the same thread on Charlie's forums, tearing themselves apart with witch-hunting:

http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9215

Just sad. People need to realise AMD aren't going to come out and say "we ran out of money, this is the end". One day you will just wake up and read they folded or were bought and unfortunately the symptoms are showing more and more.

 

[siriq111]

I suspect AMD may have a problem getting a high end part out - if you look at he 480 they've pushed that silicon hard, there's little headroom for overclocking, it runs hot and their cooler is noisey. That's for 2014 performance. They need twice as much performance to get a high end part, maybe their 14nm isn't upto this yet. We've already seen win the last gen that FuryX was hot, had a unreliable liquid cooler and didn't clock well - if Vega is the same it'll be a similarly under selling card.

The 1070 uses less power than the 480 and gives a good 50% or more performance.

It's weird they've chosen not to keep the previous gen high end chips available though in the mean time as well. AMDa portfolio is looking pretty bare.

AMD is having problem with the poorly designed PCB with voltage regulators etc. Once it will be redesigned it would be lot better. Personally , always wait for AIB cards . First revisions from both vendor , most likely suffer with minor problems.

 

[Phreaky]

AMD releases at the low end first, everybody complains. Nvidia releases at the high end first, nobody gives a ****.

Go figure.

 

[Gregster]

Intel Vs AMD spring to mind?

 

[FoxEye]

For years now, AMD have tried to go toe to toe with Nvidia at the higher end of the Market. This strategy has lead them to an all time low in marketshare. Even when they had a card that competed well it failed. Because most people didn't actually want to buy the AMD cards, they wanted AMD competing so they could buy their Nvidia cards cheaper.

Oft repeated, but is it even true?

Their marketshare plummetted fairly recently iirc, after they kept either releasing only rebranded cards, or failed experiment cards at prices well above normal.

When they had decent cards vs the competition, sure they might not have had 50/50 marketshare, but they weren't at the all-time low they faced since the Fury and 300 series release.

The 300 series was a particular disappointment for everybody who actually wanted to buy an AMD card. There was nothing new in the whole range. Even price/perf stayed stagnant.

Do you really want to blame consumers for AMD's fortunes? Confidence in them is low for a reason. In the last couple years they've done nothing of real note, and made many terrible decisions.

Coupled with that their marketing is frankly shocking for a multi-billion pound company. Their events have been awful, their dissemination of information has often been confusing and generally poor.

Blaming consumers for AMD's ills is a little unfair.

 

[Seanspeed]

AMD releases at the low end first, everybody complains. Nvidia releases at the high end first, nobody gives a ****.

Go figure.

You're on a board meant largely for PC hardware enthusiasts. Obviously there's going to be a significant percent of people here who already have 290-level hardware or better and were hoping the long wait for 14/16nm would bring them new, exciting cards to upgrade to. Turns out that AMD did not bring that, which has disappointed some. It seems entirely reasonable to me. With the lower price bracket market, it's always easy enough to discount one or two year old higher class cards to fit in the range until proper replacements come out.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Oft repeated, but is it even true?

Their marketshare plummetted fairly recently iirc, after they kept either releasing only rebranded cards, or failed experiment cards at prices well above normal.

When they had decent cards vs the competition, sure they might not have had 50/50 marketshare, but they weren't at the all-time low they faced since the Fury and 300 series release.

The 300 series was a particular disappointment for everybody who actually wanted to buy an AMD card. There was nothing new in the whole range. Even price/perf stayed stagnant.

Do you really want to blame consumers for AMD's fortunes? Confidence in them is low for a reason. In the last couple years they've done nothing of real note, and made many terrible decisions.

Coupled with that their marketing is frankly shocking for a multi-billion pound company. Their events have been awful, their dissemination of information has often been confusing and generally poor.

Blaming consumers for AMD's ills is a little unfair.

Actually those re-brands along with decent gains in drivers have seen AMD gain some share back. It's still not pretty but going up is a start.

http://www.pcper.com/news/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Gains-Market-Share-Q116-Discrete-GPUs

Apart from the high end gtx980ti, Amd were a pretty good buy at all price points as they were cheaper and faster mainly.

 

[HarryBizzle]

I share you thoughts and as I said in another thread, I can't believe they spent years developing Polaris and only came up with a 480, Surely there must be something else

Pretty sure that's how we all felt when Blunder of the Century (Bulldozer) rolled around.

 

[fs123]

I think many on here see the 480 as underwhelming is because of the price post brexit. It's selling well in the US where it is actually very cheap. The 480 increased performance by about 50% from the old 380 which is around the same performance improvement Nvidia got with the 1070 over the 970.

Once AMD release a true 390/390X successor we should see it match up with the 1070/80. Hopefully they don't wait until next year to release the 490.

 

[Echo9er]

I fully understand where the OP is coming from but you have to look at the bigger picture, nvidia control a massive portion of the gpu market, it they don't try and stay competitive and regain some of z market then they will be pushed out which will then lead to nvidia having a free run of prices as there will be no competition what's so ever and we will all get royally shafted. So as much as I can see your point of veiw I think it's something that needs to happen for amd to stay relevant in this section of the market which I turn keeps costs down a little bit.

 

[Poneros]

The amount of stupidity and entitlement in this thread is incredible. How can you look at a card named 480 and think you're gonna get a 390/fury replacement? Do you also look at the menu at the restaurant and wonder why the steak doesn't have a picture of ice cream next to it? smh

 

[Padraig]

I suspect AMD may have a problem getting a high end part out - if you look at he 480 they've pushed that silicon hard, there's little headroom for overclocking, it runs hot and their cooler is noisey..

While the reference design is deffo not that good for keeping temps down i have not heard any reviewers or people talk badly about the noise of it infact im pretty sure linus techy tips said it was quiet at stock clocks. And also theres more room than we have had before for overclocking the 290s and 390s as far as i know on air can only be pushed 50 to a 70 ish mhz max?

 

[FoxEye]

The amount of stupidity and entitlement in this thread is incredible. How can you look at a card named 480 and think you're gonna get a 390/fury replacement? Do you also look at the menu at the restaurant and wonder why the steak doesn't have a picture of ice cream next to it? smh

Since you've been really assy about it, how about we examine your logic.

It's called the 480. OK, so what should its performance be relative to the 390? Should it be better, worse, or about the same?

That's right. There's no answer. The name is almost meaningless.

Shall we also take the time to remember that AMD and indeed nVidia have changed their naming scheme multiple times?

Example: do you remember the 6870? Tell me, just by the name alone, was it a replacement for the 5870?

Now let's stop with the "it's a 480 so it was never going to be better than a 390" nonsense.