Dark days, AMD share price at lowest ever.

[Razor Time]

EDIT: I'm honestly beginning to wonder if there are people positioned within AMD to purposefully hold the company back given some of the execution of late its almost like its intentionally done to stop them ever actually being truly competitive. Or they should just fire some people (though I'll fully admit its a lot easier to be critical looking in than making good decisions from inside the box).

I've been saying this for a long while. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be true.

 

[Dave2150]

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.

The 290X reference cooler is regarded as being total crap - do you know that most of them had load temperatures of 95°C and sounded like a jet aircraft? Surely you know this, it's been so well discussed on these forums.

I think your maybe thinking of NVIDIA reference coolers - the metal ones etc. 290X reference cooler was plastic, looked crap and sounded like a jet. Hardly an expensive cooler.

The 390X has faster memory - the vast majority of 290x's cannot clock the memory that high, it also has double the memory, runs far cooler and is far quieter. It's worth the extra IMO.

 

[AthlonXP1800]

"Back in 2006 AMD paid $5.60 billion to buy ATI, now AMD is worth only $1.53 billion."

AMD was not really worth $1.53bn.

AMD shares ended at $1.79 after stock closed is now worth $1.39bn.

Spoiler

When it hit new 52 week low at $1.74 AMD was worth $1.35bn.

Imagine AMD stock will plunge further in the coming weeks and months, think we will see price at $1.50 soon worth $1.1bn and if price will hit $1 then it will be worth pathetic $778M.

 

[eddyr]

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.

It's just a pointless technicality, you could go on for ever back and forth! Your're acknowledging the operational constraints while bru the physical description of there being a physical 256bit wide bus existing, at least part way, that is capable of data transfer.
I agree, practically, 224+32 is the more useful way to think of the configuration.

 

[mmj_uk]

They could've probably just fitted GTX970 with 3.5GB on a 224bit bus which nobody would have complained about given the cards price relative to GTX980, the fact is though the way they did it is better than that.

That 'slow' 0.5GB still miles faster than going over the PCI-E bus and nobody was complaining about performance before the news broke but I can see why people felt cheated.

 

[Poneros]

The 290X reference cooler is regarded as being total crap - do you know that most of them had load temperatures of 95°C and sounded like a jet aircraft? Surely you know this, it's been so well discussed on these forums.

I think your maybe thinking of NVIDIA reference coolers - the metal ones etc. 290X reference cooler was plastic, looked crap and sounded like a jet. Hardly an expensive cooler.

The 390X has faster memory - the vast majority of 290x's cannot clock the memory that high, it also has double the memory, runs far cooler and is far quieter. It's worth the extra IMO.

What you're saying is that for you it's worth paying 100 extra (or half of a 290x at one point) for less than 10% performance difference & 4 gb vram you'll never use?

 

[eddyr]

They could've probably just fitted GTX970 with 3.5GB on a 224bit bus which nobody would have complained about given the cards price relative to GTX980, the fact is though the way they did it is better than that.

That 'slow' 0.5GB still miles faster than going over the PCI-E bus and nobody was complaining about performance before the news broke but I can see why people felt cheated.

I think it is quite elegant engineering. Why not retain use downstream from a non-functioning subsystem. It's just naughty Nvidia, slap wrist, for not mentioning it in any way and thinking that was alright when features such as bus width are used as a marketing/selling point.
Personally, something isn't a problem until it's a problem. If they can manage the configuration so that it isn't and is also beneficial compared to being a 3.5GB card then it is good job.

 

[arc@css]

i would like them to do a 4GB 390X for around £270.

+1

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Its kind of weird that AMD is only selling a cut down Tonga with a 256 bit memory bus for desktop. I wonder if a fully enabled Tonga would have been too close to a R9 290??

 

[D.P.]

AMD was not really worth $1.53bn.

AMD shares ended at $1.79 after stock closed is now worth $1.39bn.

Spoiler

When it hit new 52 week low at $1.74 AMD was worth $1.35bn.

Imagine AMD stock will plunge further in the coming weeks and months, think we will see price at $1.50 soon worth $1.1bn and if price will hit $1 then it will be worth pathetic $778M.

At about that point I believe they have to declare bankruptcy because they owe creditors something like $750m.

 

[mmj_uk]

So what's going to keep them ticking over until Zen? are the console contracts going to be enough? their current CPU's sure aren't selling and Fury only appears to have boosted 980Ti sales. 390X is never going to sell as well as 290X did at its current price.

 

[MasterOC]

No, that was the other issue, it isn't a 256bit card, its a 224-bit card with a separate 32bit 512mb crossbar and the 32bit cant be actively used at the same time as the 224bit part.
That is obviously the cost of using that design and the parts they had to cut to get salvaged cores.

Thing is, at single card and 1080p (which is probably 90% of the 970's sales) it made no difference, so they should have just been upfront from the beginning. And ultimately the 970 is still the best selling gpu in the last 3 years

Thankyou this was the point I was trying to make . It couldn't have been a 4gb card on a 256bit bus

 

[Insanties_birth]

What you're saying is that for you it's worth paying 100 extra (or half of a 290x at one point) for less than 10% performance difference & 4 gb vram you'll never use?

when we had people justifying the price of titan x cards after the 980ti came just a month or two after with 1 or 3% difference for more than £200 difference? Doesn't sound that crazy when you see the grass is 'greener' on the other side

Considering it had better cooling that was at least something a bit more worthwhile too but either way, up to people what they think is worth it.

 

[andybird123]

It's just a pointless technicality, you could go on for ever back and forth! Your're acknowledging the operational constraints while bru the physical description of there being a physical 256bit wide bus existing, at least part way, that is capable of data transfer.
I agree, practically, 224+32 is the more useful way to think of the configuration.

It started because Martini asked why they couldn't just release a 256bit/4GB card... I was trying to explain physically how it was that losing a GPC (made up of 3 SMM's) affected the memory layout - hence mentioning 224bit/3.5gb as that is effectively how the card works with intensive memory loads such as gaming, with a sort of 32bit 512mb cache bolted on the end, which they've now optimised to take up the 400-600mb that the OS usually eats up for no good reason, it's an intelligent use of a salvaged core.

The 970 is still a fantastic card for its price point, nothing I've said is a criticism.

 

[nashathedog]

The 290X reference cooler is regarded as being total crap - do you know that most of them had load temperatures of 95°C and sounded like a jet aircraft? Surely you know this, it's been so well discussed on these forums.

I think your maybe thinking of NVIDIA reference coolers - the metal ones etc. 290X reference cooler was plastic, looked crap and sounded like a jet. Hardly an expensive cooler.

The 390X has faster memory - the vast majority of 290x's cannot clock the memory that high, it also has double the memory, runs far cooler and is far quieter. It's worth the extra IMO.

It is a better version but it's not worth much more, Now we get the same driver improvements (You know, the ones AMD purposely held back from the 200 series for a few weeks so the 300 cards would look that much better in all the release reviews) my 290x performs pretty close on matching clocks. As for the memory speed up, what does that do for gamers? I never seem to get any sort of improvement in fps when overclocking my ram. So while the faster ram may help in some situations it's not the norm meaning the only real improvements are the fact that you can now get 8 gb 390's and the Grenada version appears to run cooler because after the companies saw how rubbish a lot of the aftermarket coolers ran on the 200 series they've replaced them with better ones.

 

[Klunt Bumskrint]

If AMD were an employee they would have been fired ages ago.

 

[TwsT]

I actually don't care. Mainly because if they do go bankrupt I get to LOL at people whining that Nvidia haven't done anything for ages, how prices are ridiculous etc.

Amazing how many people called for AMD's head over Bulldozer yet are now crying because Intel CPUs have shot up in price and have hit a brick wall, one Intel CBA pushing past.

You don't know what you got 'til it's gone.

Fully understand, I will care but only because it will suck in the long run.

I've used both in the past and will pick and choose to suit in the future however I suspect with my 5930k I won't be upgrading for a very long time unless something revolutionary occurs.

 

[FoxEye]

So what's going to keep them ticking over until Zen? are the console contracts going to be enough? their current CPU's sure aren't selling and Fury only appears to have boosted 980Ti sales. 390X is never going to sell as well as 290X did at its current price.

There's always the next thing on the horizon that will turn AMD around, and it keeps not happening.

We all hope Zen will be amazing, but if recent history is anything to go by... Lots of expectations on Keller's shoulders - I wonder if he can deliver.

 

[Gregster]

I really can see this launch being a crippler for AMD and hurt them in the long run. Even the hardcore AMD fans here haven't bought a Fury/Fury X, so that tells me what they think of the launch. From my perspective, if you want to see them survive, it is no good whinging and whining from the sidelines and buy the products so they can invest in the future. If not, Nvidia being the only choice for GPU and Intel being the only choice for CPU will be a sad day and some really bad drip fed increments.

 

[ALXAndy]

Fully understand, I will care but only because it will suck in the long run.

I've used both in the past and will pick and choose to suit in the future however I suspect with my 5930k I won't be upgrading for a very long time unless something revolutionary occurs.

Oh sure, for those with any brain matter of course it will suck in the long run. You know? those like us who can actually envision the future with just one dominant company?

If people would see the bigger picture (like Greg for example, who bought a Fury X) and stop ****ging off AMD and actually buy something they make then we would be OK.

But that's not the game is it? the game is to buy Intel/Nvidia and then take to the forums like a woman with sand in her vagina and make it your life's work to make sure that anything you didn't buy and anything you don't have gets nailed to a cross and crucified.

Fury and Fury X for example. Great 4k cards, mission accomplished. But no, people can't just say "Well they're great 4k cards" no, no no no. They have to slaughter them over pump noise, heat, power consumption, the fact they are 2% slower than the 980ti, the lower VRAM count etc etc.

It's like some sort of sick twisted game.

The thing is the rest of the world doesn't work like that. We drive a Mini One for example (my lady wife and I) and that's a Mini. It's pants, it's not terribly fast and it certainly ain't no Zonda or Ferrari. But the world sees that car as sensible and fully fit for purpose.

AMD on the other hand? unless they beat Nvidia by about ten thousand percent they are always rubbish, always bad. And it's that sort of attitude that will eventually put a company out of business. I've always said that word of mouth is the most important aspect of any business succeeding or not. And man, you come on here and the mouth says "AMD are doomed, AMD are rubbish" and so on.

I've really had to walk away from this forum of late. I've not posted or read anywhere near what I used to because I just can't stand the amount of BS and rubbish you need to wade through. It's like some twisted (pardon the pun dude) witch hunt.