-
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 RDNA 4 Rumour Mill ***
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
I thought this was happening Friday lunchtime.
Been mentioned many times. But granted this is a very busy thread lol.
I wasn't looking for a new card as such but am following this.
It's far more entertaining than the Easternders 40th Anniversary (not that I've watched it!).
I have tried to keep up with this thread and i understand the focus is on 9070's.
Have you watched it? Be honest!
Looking at the Nvidia offerings and the potential AMD offerings I might skip this generation. Lately I only play Fallout 76 and we all know it can run on potato. But then I'm still on a 1080 display. Once I change that to a 4k display (TV couch gamer) I can then see if I can justify a new GPU for 1440p. Price wise, anything could happen within 6 to 12 months. Gibbo has the knack for specials with Sapphire for AMD GPU's.
I feel pretty sure thinking about the pc market in general these days, even if AMD MSRP is decent for the 9070s and there's plenty of stock the board partners/ retailers will just gauge the price to whatever they can get away with. The market in the GPU space feels broken, Nvidia are clearly prioritising their non gaming customers and AMD even if they try to do the right thing can't control the price after they have sold the chips.
And this is why AMD will price higher than expected. If the market is going to dictate high prices, and retailers (and AIBs) will continue to be uppity and add their own scalper fee, then why would AMD allow that money to just go away from them? If 9070xt will cost £800 street no matter what, why let retailers and AIBs take that cut? And why does it matter anyways what AMD sets RRP at, if it's just going to cose hundreds more retail?
As many of us have been saying for months, with this launch and nV's, MSRP/RRP matters very little in a market like this. Maybe it matters for mindshare, but it matters very little in a practical sense. Heck, they could set it at £1000 for 9070xt and it will still sell for £800 because that's what the rest of the supply chain will be able to sell it at.
The only way to affect street price is to control availability through high stock levels. If AMD have the inventory then retailers have less opportunity to scalp prices.
The 5000 series scalping is because stock levels are shockingly bad with only a handful being delivered monthly. Yet Nvidia will try to convince everyone “it’s high demand”.
We have known for almost a month what the performance was going to be like and that the prices were going to be between $500 and $700, because that is where Nvidia have priced their own xx70 series. All we need to know now is if AMD are going for a more aggressive price, or the usual 10% less crap.
The 5000 series scalping is because stock levels are shockingly bad with only a handful being delivered monthly. Yet Nvidia will try to convince everyone “it’s high demand”.
We have known for almost a month what the performance was going to be like and that the prices were going to be between $500 and $700, because that is where Nvidia have priced their own xx70 series. All we need to know now is if AMD are going for a more aggressive price, or the usual 10% less crap.
Last edited:
Indeed, yet it will be AMD that get the bad press because their new cards aren’t 600£.
Goes to show why predictions on prices are such a waste of time, as he says it's 48hrs from launch and there's still debate going on within AMD, even to the extent of asking reviewers, on what the prices should be.
IMO the 9060 XT needs to be 6950XT performance or the very least 6900XT performance.
It absolutely does matter though.
People are paying too much attention to this silly unwarranted hype surrounding these new releases.
Stock will mount up and spring/summer will come and demand will likely drop right down. At that point sensible RRPs will be a good thing.
I’m not in the market for an AMD card but going from 6900 / 7900 to 9060 etc with various Xs at the end is just such a jarring set of sequential labelling. I can’t intuitively tell which card succeeds which without looking it up.
Like, what happened to the 8000s? Is 9060 the first in a big line up leading to 9900 at the top?
^ no need to answer as I could easily look it up, but just seems an odd way to go about it.
Like, what happened to the 8000s? Is 9060 the first in a big line up leading to 9900 at the top?
^ no need to answer as I could easily look it up, but just seems an odd way to go about it.
Last edited:
the whole driver thing is rubbish occasionally have a driver issue but I had as many on Nvidia the last one I bought the system used to go to sleep then the monitor would not wake up that was frustrating
but dont preach it from the rooftops with vague Driver concern grumbles
Yeah it is a bit of a winding path.
Nvidia just took the other option of keeping the same naming structure but just dropping performance down a tier or so each generation.
Oh and then within a generation keeping the same name for a card but reducing it's specs.
Bit of a mess all round really.
Because the markets also dictate lower prices and if retailers (and AIBs) price things too high they'll be waiting a long time to get their money back.
Retailers and AIBs don't simply get given GPUs and get told that once they're sold they have to send $X to AMD. Retailers and AIBs buy GPUs from AMD, sometimes in significant quantity and at significant cost, and they don't get to see that money again until they sell those GPUs.
When Gibbo listed the names of 15 graphics cards the other day let's say they've bought 100 units of each at £500 per unit that's £750k they've now got tied up in products sitting on a shelf, £750k that they'll see no return on until they've sold them. (that's just an example).
What prices "should" be is an entirely aspirational thought. People are still stuck in 2016 when it actually mattered where MSRP/RRP was set. AMD knows there's a truckload of fat and gravy the market will bear -- why leave that to the feeders at the bottom of the chain?
I'd love for the 9070xt to actually cost £600 retail, but AMD has little control here. Further, they've indicated clearly they don't care about control in this respect by neither producing an MBA, nor are they doing direct sales. Had they wanted to actually set a retail price, they would control the chain to snap AIBs and resellers back. nV does this in a sense, but for them, their direct sales exist to maintain the illusion of MSRP actually existing.
All this is why I find the reports so hilarious that AMD reps are asking reviewers what they should price at -- a total PR stunt to buy goodwill amd maintain some illusion of control. This would be like me asking astronomers what color the planet Jupiter should be.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,107
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
If they hit the post of the open goal, we all know in a few months when the price creeps down and settles, that is what the release price should have been (just like the 7000 series). Will be monitoring these UK retailers on launch though to see what margins they are taking.
For the reasons i explained in the post above ^this^ post.
You've obviously got a strong opinion on the subject and i suspect no amount of reasoning will change your mind so I'll leave you to it.
This is the thing - AMD has nowhere near Nvidia production capacity as TSMC and their main source of income are CPU and enterprise. Radeon department is needed for consoles development but selling graphics cards not their priority for sure. It's likely they don't even have capacity to gain much of the market even if they gave them away for free. In other words, higher pricing might be on purpose to match what actual production capacity they have.