• 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.

Dark days, AMD share price at lowest ever.

Davedree said:
I agree drivers and respin of grenada 390 looks ok for people like me still on.a 7950.
but you are missing one important factor out,
Hawaii has an outdated uvd engine in comparison to nvidia,

1.it draws considerably more power than a maxwell when decoding blu-ray/ xbmc 1080p mkv's etc.
2.the uvd 4.2 engine has no support for h.264 4kp60 video encoding, or even h.265.
3.no itx option
Click to expand...

 
humbug said:
Nvidia also do rebrands and gain market share with them.
The 390 is a rebrand but that doesn't stop it being a solid card,
Click to expand...

Most (if not all) rebrands up until now have been to fill in gaps in a new lineup at a lower price point than before, with 390X AMD have basically put it in the exact same position and in addition slapped a big price premium on it.

AMD might as well have just left their entire lineup as it was and released Fury by itself, it's clear that they were wanting to be seen to be doing something big even though they've not really done anything of any significance (aside from releasing Fury).
 
humbug said:
I have a feeling Intel/Nvidia are waiting for AMD to go bust so they can pick over the carcass for IP.

I hope if it comes to that AMD give themselves away (if must) to someone like Microsoft before it does happen.

With Intel and Nvidia the sole CPU / GPU vendors and owning all the IP its very bad news for us and the industry, AMD's IP portfolio must be keept away from them if nothing else.
Click to expand...

AMD have massive debts so they can't give themselves away :p Besides investors, they have shareholders too.

I do wonder what would happen to the pace of progress of CPUs/GPUs if AMD went under.

The one real problem with capitalist societies is that progress is not valued above profit. As a society, this can only surely be holding us back. Corporations are not shy about sitting on massive piles of cash, and drip-feeding new products as it suits them.
 
FoxEye said:
AMD have massive debts so they can't give themselves away :p Besides investors, they have shareholders too.

I do wonder what would happen to the pace of progress of CPUs/GPUs if AMD went under.

The one real problem with capitalist societies is that progress is not valued above profit. As a society, this can only surely be holding us back. Corporations are not shy about sitting on massive piles of cash, and drip-feeding new products as it suits them.
Click to expand...

Look at Apple :) perfect example of drip feeding technology, but things are slowly changing.
 
mmj_uk said:
Most (if not all) rebrands up until now have been to fill in gaps in a new lineup at a lower price point than before, with 390X AMD have basically put it in the exact same position and in addition slapped a big price premium on it.

AMD might as well have just left their entire lineup as it was and released Fury by itself, it's clear that they were wanting to be seen to be doing something big even though they've not really done anything of any significance (aside from releasing Fury).
Click to expand...

i have said this my self (Frustrated 290 owner here) by the same token Nvidia don't have anything either, where do i go there? a GTX 970?

I have already been through all this, what i'm talking about here is something different, its not about me, its about the 390/X being competitive with the GTX 970/80.
 
mmj_uk said:
Most (if not all) rebrands up until now have been to fill in gaps in a new lineup at a lower price point than before, with 390X AMD have basically put it in the exact same position and in addition slapped a big price premium on it.

AMD might as well have just left their entire lineup as it was and released Fury by itself, it's clear that they were wanting to be seen to be doing something big even though they've not really done anything of any significance (aside from releasing Fury).
Click to expand...

Big price premium? Just no. It's pointless saying lies just to try and make a point for youself.

There were no 290X 8GB that were cheaper than £300-£320 on OCUK or the other big uk retailers before the 390x launch.

Infact this was pretty much the only 290X 8GB you could buy in the last few months on OCUK:

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-359-SP&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752

It's currently £300, so it's come down a little in price.

Then the 390X/390 came out with much better cooling solutions, much faster memory and cooler running/lower voltage binned GPU's. It's worth the £20-£40 extra IMO.
 
Dave2150 said:
Big price premium? Just no. It's pointless saying lies just to try and make a point for youself.

There were no 290X 8GB that were cheaper than £300-£320 on OCUK or the other big uk retailers before the 390x launch.

Infact this was pretty much the only 290X 8GB you could buy in the last few months on OCUK:

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-359-SP&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752

It's currently £300, so it's come down a little in price.

Then the 390X/390 came out with much better cooling solutions, much faster memory and cooler running/lower voltage binned GPU's. It's worth the £20-£40 extra IMO.
Click to expand...

You're ignoring that a pure 290X performance part now no longer exists (Except for the last of the stock, and they're all higher priced), and buying into a 290X performance card now costs more. Given a 290X was 220 quid.
I spent 250 quid on my 290X ages and ages and ages ago.
You can't buy that end performance anymore unless you want to spend 330. That's a backwards step.
 
Last edited:
Dave2150 said:
Big price premium? Just no. It's pointless saying lies just to try and make a point for youself.

There were no 290X 8GB that were cheaper than £300-£320 on OCUK or the other big uk retailers before the 390x launch.

Infact this was pretty much the only 290X 8GB you could buy in the last few months on OCUK:

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-359-SP&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1752

It's currently £300, so it's come down a little in price.

Then the 390X/390 came out with much better cooling solutions, much faster memory and cooler running/lower voltage binned GPU's. It's worth the £20-£40 extra IMO.
Click to expand...

The 290X 8GB has been below £300 many times before and you've kind of proved my point with that link.. how is that partners can still sell 290X 8GB for less than £300 but not the 390X? AMD have given the same chip a new name and put a premium on it simple as that really.

Reference coolers are usually more expensive to make than aftermarket coolers as well.

edit: fixed.
 
Last edited:
Yeah 8GB or not its still just a Hawaii, having said that they are "a better revision"

1500Mhz + Memory was rare on a 290/X let alone out of the box, a lot of them struggled to get past 1100Mhz on the core.

If you look at the 390/X reviews they are all around 1150 to 1200Mhz overclocks in AMD's CCC Overdrive, thats higher than most 290/X with extra volts.

So it is a "refresh" its not a "rebrand"

This guys on the ball with it.


Still, apart from better overclocking Hawaii Owners aren't gaining much and it is pricy, i would like them to do a 4GB 390X for around £270.
 
bru said:
So it just your way of looking at it. OK fine np.



This is something that gets me and its not just directed at you Andy, but everyone that thinks the same way. Performance difference to what exactly, every 970 benched, or reviewed has had this memory configuration. It is not a case of NVidia suddenly changed things to make it worse, it was always like this. ALL they did was mislead everyone with the specs, which was a despicable thing to do and they have no excuse. But the cards themselves haven't changed at all.
Click to expand...

Compared with a 980 - the 970 is right up there compared to the complete chip, so in practical terms whatever they did with the memory it doesn't make much difference between the 970 and 980, I didn't say it was a problem, if you bought a 970 on launch day based on benchmarks then those results never changed

I'm not sure what you're accusing me of, but I'm not guilty of it whatever it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom