• 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.

Radeon RX 5950 XT, 5800 XT SKUs Submitted To EEC

Soldato
Joined
20 Apr 2004
Posts
4,365
Location
Oxford
Who said anything about an AMD card?
Now if consumers didn't buy the 2080 Ti at £1,200 Nvidia would have to lower the price.

I was thinking about this the Other day, with SLI being dead maybe a good chucnk of people who brought 2x1080ti for £650 each brought a single £1200 gpu. even if its was'nt a great upgrade option. As they would have brought 1200quids worth of card any aways if the cards where cheaper but sli was working?
 
Associate
Joined
19 Dec 2012
Posts
468
Sorry @EastCoastHandle , not gonna happen. Nobody bought ATI when they were superior to Nvidia, nobody bought Radeon when they were similar and cheaper to Nvidia, nobody buys Radeon now when they are superior and cheaper to Nvidia. So nobody is going to buy Intel. And because nobody will buy Intel or Radeon, Nvidia will continue to overcharge for their entire product stack because the retarded sheep just keep sucking down hard on that leather jacket.
I bought a Radeon fury x:p;)
 

bru

bru

Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2002
Posts
7,360
Location
kent
Yes. RT in Minecraft is big laugh. I don't even know why this type of game exists in the first place and what's its meaning with 1980 graphics?

Well it only one of the most popular games in the world. It would be like saying why do FPS battle royal games exist? Well that would be because people enjoy them.
As for 1980's graphics, yeah I don't think so.

https://www.eteknix.com/the-evolution-of-pc-gaming-graphics-1980-1989/


minecraft-rtx.jpg




Not to forget the modded side of things with 48,000 mods on curse forge as of august last year.:)
 
Man of Honour
Joined
21 May 2012
Posts
31,940
Location
Dalek flagship
Exactly!

I just hope they sort the drivers out, its frustrating seeing threads being created where long time Nvidia people have moved to AMD/Radeon and had endless problems.

Not much difference between NVidia and AMD drivers, they are both good.

Both vendors tend to have the same problem when using the very latest drivers, they don't always get it right first go.

Easy way to get around the above is to use older drivers that have been around a month or two and are more reliable.

The only problem with the above is if the latest driver is needed to run the latest game.
 
Associate
Joined
29 Jun 2016
Posts
2,149
Location
Up Norf
Not much difference between NVidia and AMD drivers, they are both good.

Both vendors tend to have the same problem when using the very latest drivers, they don't always get it right first go.

Easy way to get around the above is to use older drivers that have been around a month or two and are more reliable.

The only problem with the above is if the latest driver is needed to run the latest game.

Oh yeah definitely, personally i can only remember 1 issue with my AMD drivers within the last couple of years. For me the AMD drivers have been brilliant and i totally understand that there will be driver teething issues with new architecture.

but its still frustrating to see long time nvidia fans having issues with AMD cards.
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Posts
2,694
But it's taken the literal humiliation of Intel by Zen 2 for AMD to get noticed, and a large part of that humiliation has come from capitalising on Intel's lackadaisical arrogance. Nvidia are not doing an Intel, so it is a continually moving target for AMD to even match them, let alone surpass them, and resoundingly surpass them so even the most green-blinkered fanboi can't ignore it.

It took Ryzen about 3 generations to actually be real competitive and gain mind share, each one building on top of the other while having a good price at the time.
Radeon did not had that. After R290/x (whoever chose those default coolers for general customers and not only OEM was not in his right mind), there wasn't really a good card out there. Fury was meh, Vega was meh and let's not forget the promise of a $200 card with the 4xx gen which wasn't the case once more. Latest ones came at a steep price and only dropped due to nVIDIA's Supers. HD7870 was on a new node, around 352mm in area, $270. 5700xt at around 251mm in area and $399 (and it was actually supposed to be $449). Why would people get exited about AMD?!

All the features of those cards were barely used. BF4 was the major one for Mantle and that was about it, but how many were for True Audio? How many for all the other software that was put out there as open and AMD did kinda nothing for it to be in games, to be seen by gamers and enjoyed, building trust and brand recognition? Vega was sadly 12.5TF of wasted power (pun intended :D )...

And speaking of "humiliation", that is only in the Threadripper and server market, not desktop. Especially in gaming Intel is quite competitive with what he has. At least at this moment. If the prices of current 3xxx series were much lower, than yes, it would have been quite the beating.
 
Permabanned
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Posts
9,221
Location
Knowhere
I'm not expecting much from Intel's GPU's, i really hope they are good because #### we need the competition but GPU design is not easy and Nvidia, even AMD are so far advanced in dGPU's now no one, not even Intel are going to enter that market and be competitive right off the bat, hell the truth is Intel right now are way behind AMD in CPU design. Intel are not 'all that'

IMO Intel will introduce some cheap GPU's in the low to mid level that are a bit iffy but they will be cheap.

That makes sense, Set the bar low when Mr Koduri's at the helm, I wouldn't be surprised if on release we see Mr Koduri off on another long Sabbatical followed by a legal battle between I & A over intellectual property theft. :rolleyes:
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
17 Jun 2004
Posts
7,587
Location
Eastbourne , East Sussex.
It took Ryzen about 3 generations to actually be real competitive and gain mind share, each one building on top of the other while having a good price at the time.
Radeon did not had that. After R290/x (whoever chose those default coolers for general customers and not only OEM was not in his right mind), there wasn't really a good card out there. Fury was meh, Vega was meh and let's not forget the promise of a $200 card with the 4xx gen which wasn't the case once more. Latest ones came at a steep price and only dropped due to nVIDIA's Supers. HD7870 was on a new node, around 352mm in area, $270. 5700xt at around 251mm in area and $399 (and it was actually supposed to be $449). Why would people get exited about AMD?!

All the features of those cards were barely used. BF4 was the major one for Mantle and that was about it, but how many were for True Audio? How many for all the other software that was put out there as open and AMD did kinda nothing for it to be in games, to be seen by gamers and enjoyed, building trust and brand recognition? Vega was sadly 12.5TF of wasted power (pun intended :D )...

And speaking of "humiliation", that is only in the Threadripper and server market, not desktop. Especially in gaming Intel is quite competitive with what he has. At least at this moment. If the prices of current 3xxx series were much lower, than yes, it would have been quite the beating.


Except Ryzen 1700x was faster than the best Intel at the time of launch in multithreaded apps, ryzen 2700x improved that and ryzen 3 smashed intel in every cpu they make
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Posts
2,694
It lost in games, sometimes badly (Ryzen 3xxx is still a little behind in certain scenarios), while it won and lost some battles in other apps. Overall it was a step in the right direction and at a very competitive price if you were interested heavily in multithreaded apps that worked well on the AMD chip. 7700k should have been cheaper though and much better in games.

So 1700x, 8c/16t was $400, while Intel's 8c/16t was $1050 or $1650 for 10c/20t. 7700k was $350. In this case, even though it wasn't the best, you can't argue with getting performance that was very close with a product that was twice the price (even if you've went with 1800x), if the Ryzen performed well in your tasks.

Now if you look at 5700xt, at original price of $449, it's about the same with 2070 which was $480 and does not have RT. Is not better than nvidia at anything (Ryzen was at least in multithreading).

Sure, it was launched $400 vs. $480 for nvidia 2070 or $500 for 2070S, but is no where near the same as Ryzen was with Intel. It should have been around $250 vs $500 for 2070s (plus it lacks RT). 5700xt basically it gave you the option to buy AMD if you were in the market for a card around that price range and performance, but didn't really shook the competition as it was with Ryzen. It is a step in a good direction as well (compared to Vega), but a small one and it needs to be followed constantly with others, preferably bigger.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Posts
4,415
Location
Denmark
It lost in games, sometimes badly (Ryzen 3xxx is still a little behind in certain scenarios), while it won and lost some battles in other apps. Overall it was a step in the right direction and at a very competitive price if you were interested heavily in multithreaded apps that worked well on the AMD chip. 7700k should have been cheaper though and much better in games.

So 1700x, 8c/16t was $400, while Intel's 8c/16t was $1050 or $1650 for 10c/20t. 7700k was $350. In this case, even though it wasn't the best, you can't argue with getting performance that was very close with a product that was twice the price (even if you've went with 1800x), if the Ryzen performed well in your tasks.

Now if you look at 5700xt, at original price of $449, it's about the same with 2070 which was $480 and does not have RT. Is not better than nvidia at anything (Ryzen was at least in multithreading).

Sure, it was launched $400 vs. $480 for nvidia 2070 or $500 for 2070S, but is no where near the same as Ryzen was with Intel. It should have been around $250 vs $500 for 2070s (plus it lacks RT). 5700xt basically it gave you the option to buy AMD if you were in the market for a card around that price range and performance, but didn't really shook the competition as it was with Ryzen. It is a step in a good direction as well (compared to Vega), but a small one and it needs to be followed constantly with others, preferably bigger.

No, the 5700XT is beating the 2070 NON super and about the same as the 2070 SUPER staying within 2-5% when it looses except in some fringe cases. You seem to miss the bigger picture like so many others. RT is not relevant YET and when it becomes truly relevant and more than 1 game has a proper implementation of it the 2000 series will not be enough anymore. I can tell you that here in Denmark a good 3rd party 5700XT is 1000 DKK cheaper than the cheapest 2070 super with a poor cooler. Thats roughly 110-120 pounds less converted. I personally will not pay 110 pounds to enjoy framerate crippling effects thats only part of 3-5 games(im sorry but RT shadows can go **** ** ****) and be about equal in any other newer modern game. But if that is your cup of tea, have at it :) .
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Jun 2018
Posts
2,827
Sorry @EastCoastHandle , not gonna happen. Nobody bought ATI when they were superior to Nvidia, nobody bought Radeon when they were similar and cheaper to Nvidia, nobody buys Radeon now when they are superior and cheaper to Nvidia. So nobody is going to buy Intel. And because nobody will buy Intel or Radeon, Nvidia will continue to overcharge for their entire product stack because the retarded sheep just keep sucking down hard on that leather jacket.
The stakes are quite different now. It's not just gpu for gpu we are looking at moving forward. It's ecosystem vs ecosystem vs gpu once Intel gets up to speed. I have no doubt that both AMD/Intel want you only buying from them: CPU/GPU eycosystem.

If AMD and Intel will gradually build their brand name to be in people's heads at the same level with nVIDIA's, then they'll buy it. Just like they buy Ryzen.
Exactly

if AMD become more competitive with Radeon then i think people these days may take more notice due to the success of Ryzen.
Yup, very true

I bought a Radeon fury x:p;)
Fury owner as well :D
I remember this thread when I was lurker: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/radeon-fury-thread.18680267/
 
Soldato
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Posts
2,694
No, the 5700XT is beating the 2070 NON super and about the same as the 2070 SUPER staying within 2-5% when it looses except in some fringe cases. You seem to miss the bigger picture like so many others. RT is not relevant YET and when it becomes truly relevant and more than 1 game has a proper implementation of it the 2000 series will not be enough anymore. I can tell you that here in Denmark a good 3rd party 5700XT is 1000 DKK cheaper than the cheapest 2070 super with a poor cooler. Thats roughly 110-120 pounds less converted. I personally will not pay 110 pounds to enjoy framerate crippling effects thats only part of 3-5 games(im sorry but RT shadows can go **** ** ****) and be about equal in any other newer modern game. But if that is your cup of tea, have at it :) .

https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-radeo...nce/images/relative-performance_2560-1440.png

It's very close to the 2070S indeed and strictly from a performance point of view, I most likely consider them equal if I was on the market for one, AMD would have been the choice.

However, nVIDIA is still selling them, probably sells more than AMD does. RT may be a marketing thing (although it has its moments), but RT and PhysX are something extra that nVIDIA offers while AMD offers... nothing. In people's heads that is what matters, "it's a better, more advanced architecture". Ryzen offers something in some cases (multithreaded performance) while RDNA, so far, does not. Price could have been one thing to differentiate from nVIDIA sufficiently so people will notice it more.
 
Back
Top Bottom