• 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 **

Zeed said:
It's legit been Posted by reviewer we know on my Polish forums.
Click to expand...

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
 
Martini1991 said:
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
Click to expand...
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:
Martini1991 said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
TheRealDeal said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
Martini1991 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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:
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.
 
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
 
Zernath said:
The real question is this, even if they undercut the competition, will people stop throwing money at Nvidia?
Click to expand...

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.
 
ICDP said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom