• 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.

** The AMD Navi Thread **

Permabanned
Joined
15 Oct 2011
Posts
6,311
Location
Nottingham Carlton
The Super results are worse comparatively to the none super cards that I've seen from all the reviews I saw.

Will see what Sunday brings but that doesn't really fill me with confidence of its performance lol
Well never said hes Best Reviewer me call him Mr Thermal paste after he made video about how 2 paste :D


Check the epic way of TC application :D
https://youtu.be/h5sL-LQlUsY?t=159
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
10,049
The Super results are worse comparatively to the none super cards that I've seen from all the reviews I saw.

Will see what Sunday brings but that doesn't really fill me with confidence of its performance lol

Why? apart from one game it's closer than i thought it would be. Wolfenstein for whatever reason looks really bad though. Farcry 5 has it almost equal with a Super, around 8% off in SOTTR, faster in Firestrike and slower in timespy. Also uses less power than the Nvidia rivals for a change and should be cheaper to boot. Obviously need to see more reviews and games to make a better judgement but it's not so bad. The 1080p results had it closer again.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Sep 2009
Posts
30,097
Location
Dormanstown.
Why? apart from one game it's closer than i thought it would be. Wolfenstein for whatever reason looks really bad though. Farcry 5 has it almost equal with a Super, around 8% off in SOTTR, faster in Firestrike and slower in timespy. Also uses less power than the Nvidia rivals for a change and should be cheaper to boot. Obviously need to see more reviews and games to make a better judgement but it's not so bad. The 1080p results had it closer again.

The 2070 Super looks weaker than it has in every review I've seen compared to the 2070.

5700XT is also closer to 2070 performance than expected too.

If the performance is true it gives little hope of a price adjustment.

I fully expect a 5700XT to be between a 2070 and Super though. Pretty much in the middle. But with different percentage differences.

If a 5700XT is that close to a 2070 Super and does clock well then I'll be tempted
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
10,049
The 2070 Super looks weaker than it has in every review I've seen compared to the 2070.

5700XT is also closer to 2070 performance than expected too.

If the performance is true it gives little hope of a price adjustment.

It actually looks more like the 2070fe is faster than it is in other reviews. Look how close it is to the 1080ti. Sunday will paint a much better picture. Also looking about those wolfenstein results look really far off from other reviews.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
9 Jan 2019
Posts
885
I suspect the posh edition of the 5700xt will be near enough identical to the 2070 super in performance, the normal 5700xt about 5-7% lower.

Which is pretty much fine to be honest, still could do with a price correction on both AMD and Nvidias side though but we aint gunna see that.
 
Associate
Joined
9 Jan 2019
Posts
885
Navi drivers are almost certainly a bit greean at the moment, not like vega where most of the performance tuning had been squeezed out of GCN by its release date.
I wouldnt be surprised to see the jumps in performance we used to see the first couple of months of Navi's release - how much.. no idea but 5-10% would put pressure on the already close 2070s
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Dec 2011
Posts
5,419
Location
Belfast
The real question is this, even if they undercut the competition, will people stop throwing money at Nvidia?

It's not about undercutting to tempt customers, it's about undercutting because they are slower than the competition. Just because Nvidia have pushed prices to idiotic levels for mid range GPUs doesn't mean AMD should follow suit. They are getting greedy.

We are at a point were both Nvidia and AMD are charging $450 - $500 for mid range now.
 
Associate
Joined
22 Feb 2019
Posts
1,310
Location
Ost Angelnen
It's not about undercutting to tempt customers, it's about undercutting because they are slower than the competition. Just because Nvidia have pushed prices to idiotic levels for mid range GPUs doesn't mean AMD should follow suit. They are getting greedy.

We are at a point were both Nvidia and AMD are charging $450 - $500 for mid range now.

AMD shouldn't follow suit, you are right about that, but they are looking at Nvidia's successful gouging and obviously thinking that they should give it a go themselves.

As for being slower, we'll see once the real bench-marking takes place, by consumers and not reviewers with questionable loyalties.
 
Back
Top Bottom