• 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.

Do AMD provide any benefit to the retail GPU segment.

humbug said:
I have a question for anyone brave enough to attempt an answer...

RX 6650XT £270
RTX 3060 £320

What do you think the RX 6650XT would have to cost to ratio the RTX 3060 1:1 for sales?
Click to expand...
For a start: don't release an XX50 series card. AMD has too much product segmentation. They need to rather reduce prices on their base cards after 6 months than releasing more confusion into their product stack. Nvidia manages to use the Ti moniker clearly as in-between cards, but this also works as their cards are so far apart price wise. Once AMD inevitably drops their prices their cards all bunch up together and the names all blur into one. The XT and XTX is another perfect example.

Secondly: If an average customer is looking for a GPU they will by default buy Nvidia as they have been market leader for years, advertise well and innovate features which are talked about in the media/tech or gaming websites. In order to buy another brand they need to hear that is it convincingly better in all fields / ridiculously better outside of raytracing that it is worth buying. If the rasterisation performance was equal to the 3060 they would need to price it at 30% less so approx £230 (not £50 less). They would also need to have top end cards and low end cards so people hear that the ENTIRE series is better value than Nvidia rather than just "they are a bit better at this, worse at that and have more VRAM"
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
I have a question for anyone brave enough to attempt an answer...

RX 6650XT £270
RTX 3060 £320

What do you think the RX 6650XT would have to cost to ratio the RTX 3060 1:1 for sales?
Click to expand...
Well, there are people who - even if the AMD card was free - wouldn't get it. For example, pro's using cuda cores. There are other people (for example me), that AMD would need to be around 50% faster in raster performance to pay the same amount of money as nvidia is asking, cause I'll be forced to play native instead of using DLSS. Since im always using DLSS, the 6650xt for my use case would be slower than the 3060, with less vram - of course the 3060 would be worth the 50 extra pounds / euros.

What I find fascinating is that - me and people like me - would buy the best card for the money, currently we think nvidia is the best that's why we are buying it.. It's people like you that leave me puzzled, cause you think amd is making better cards, yet you keep buying nvidia. Yesterday darujhistan (or whatever his name) was arguing how much better the 6700xt is over the 3060ti. Yet he bought a 3060ti. WHAT???
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
So you think AMD just need to get their logo out more,

That is a refreshing change from AMD need to be cheaper.
Click to expand...
I've already said said they either need to be cheaper for the same performance or equal for better performance.

It's not Nvidia's job to make AMD more popular, their job it to make Nvidia more popular. Therefore we can say that's it's AMD job to make AMD more popular.

The current situation is one of AMD/ATIs own making, it's nobody's fault but theirs and nobody owes them anything.
 
humbug said:
£230?
To have to be £100 cheaper on a £300 GPU.... i would give up at that point and leave you all too it. I've got consoles to sell.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is that they usually drop to 30% lower after 6 months (outside of the pandemic shortages). Look at the HWU new and second hand GPU price comparison videos from the last 8 months. The problem is that they try to go just under Nvidia at launch, get mauled in the reviews, lose mindshare for that series and then get ignored later when their cards really are better value.

This is what I find frustrating as I would like AMD to go back to their glory days of the 9700/9800pro, or even the 5750 era when 2 of their cards beat the Nvidia top end using Crossfire. But they seem to stumble every single launch somehow. The 7900XT for example would have been amazing at just £100 less (£800 instead of £900) were it called a 6800XT. The 7900XTX should have been the 7900XT and needed to also be £50 less at £950(to separate it from the superior 4080) and in stock.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
So you would prescribe to the idea that despite the 6650XT being 15% faster in raster than a 3060 its right that it is 20% more expensive?
Click to expand...
The price can differ more or less based on the model and store you're buying from. Can be also less than 20% or to about none.

And yes, I'll take the 3060 12GB over the 6650xt. Even more so since the AMD card is PCIe 4 at only 8x.

Also worth mentioning, 3060 was good at mining, so of course will sell A LOT MORE based on that. Once mining is over and at least part of the miners sell their cards, those will end up in gaming rigs, ergo boost to Steam numbers.
 
rare said:
No they don’t. Intel didn’t for years with their CPU’s.

Nvidia can give you 15% uplift or something with no competition and that would be that. Literally zero incentive for them to push the boundaries. People will still upgrade.
Click to expand...
When CPUs were stagnant I didn't upgrade my Haswell system for 6 years. They're not really comparable though because gaming is only a small part of the CPU market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNA
IceWolf said:
The funny thing is that they usually drop to 30% lower after 6 months (outside of the pandemic shortages). Look at the HWU new and second hand GPU price comparison videos from the last 8 months. The problem is that they try to go just under Nvidia at launch, get mauled in the reviews, lose mindshare for that series and then get ignored later when their cards really are better value.
Click to expand...
And that's the downside to AMD's "fine wine" approach, aka "it takes us 18 months to get the drivers right". Nvidia don't have fine wine because they do a better job on release so there's less performance to find because they weren't inept enough to miss so much the first time. Thus when reviews come out their cards generally perform well (other than a few bugs and stuff) because the drivers are in a decent state. If all reviews for products came out 18 months after release imagine how much better AMD would look. But who's gonna wait 18 months to buy new tech?

And this is the group of people that do look at reviews before buying. AMD not even trying to win those people over. This can lead to word of mouth.
 
Calin Banc said:
The price can differ more or less based on the model and store you're buying from. Can be also less than 20% or to about none.

And yes, I'll take the 3060 12GB over the 6650xt. Even more so since the AMD card is PCIe 4 at only 8x.

Also worth mentioning, 3060 was good at mining, so of course will sell A LOT MORE based on that. Once mining is over and at least part of the miners sell their cards, those will end up in gaming rigs, ergo boost to Steam numbers.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah. The 4x PCI-E debacle was a great example of damaging the whole product stack's reputation with a pointless cost cutting measure on the budget cards.

Nvidia does it too at times with the 8Gb on the 3070 or the new 3060 with less RAM but they are not the ones struggling to sell cards.
 
Bencher said:
Lot's of people are saying the 4080 should have been a 699€ card. So...why didn't AMD price the 7900XTX at 699 and call it a day?
Click to expand...

Yes it should have been. Look at the success of the 3080 in terms of generational leap and value for money.

And yes, AMD should be AMD, not try to be an Nvidia clone always trailing their releases and copying their price points.

I agree with those saying AMD are the ones to blame here, they need to trailblaze their own vision not copy nvidias.
 
rare said:
You say that, but Nvidia with no competition at all would be disastrous. You would change your mind quite quickly IMO!
Click to expand...
Neah, AMD is not providing competition ATM. Prices are high as they can be: once they sell lower class GPUs as higher class ones, plus add extra dolar on top of that. Priceses should be at least 50% lower than they are.

The last inovation that AMD brought to market was Mantle - although it could have already be in development, just that AMD launched it sooner - just like RT and nVIDIA.

Every other thing was more along the lines of "here's something interesting, good luck finding devs to implement this as we won't bother with it!". So no loss in terms of competition or inovation - even consoles are holding back gaming due to their weak hardware (current gen is somewhat of an exception).
danlightbulb said:
That's fine, but why then do developers make games that can't be played on max settings? What is the point in that? They should make games that max out the hardware but no further...Or they should make hardware that stretches the games. I don't see much point in making games that the hardware can't play.
Click to expand...
Why do gamers have the compulsion to set everything to max?
rare said:
Because they would set it even higher, especially at the more mid to lower range. There would also be absolutely zero incentive for them to push the performance envelope. Why bother making a card like the 4090 with the huge gap it has over the 3090 if there is zero competitor product like a 7900 XTX that will appear in every review alongside it.

Have people not been paying attention to Nvidia over the years? With zero competition they will give you what is absolutely best for Nvidia, it would be an opportunity for them to maximise profitability even further and minimise big jumps in performance.
Click to expand...
If no performance gains through next gen cards, then no need for me to upgrade and devs to push graphics. Is ironic, but the end user will actually benefit from this (somewhat).
 
Calin Banc said:
Neah, AMD is not providing competition ATM. Prices are high as they can be: once they sell lower class GPUs as higher class ones, plus add extra dolar on top of that. Priceses should be at least 50% lower than they are.
Click to expand...

The 7900xtx /xt are decent competition compared to a 4080 or a 4070ti. Prices should be lower across the board, but I don’t see why a 7900xtx should be 50% cheaper than a 4080 when it provides a comparable level of performance (outside RT, but even the RT is very usable).

People want AMD to provide a better product than the equivalent and at a substantially cheaper price than Nvidia. I don’t think it’s realistic to be honest.
 
rare said:
The 7900xtx /xt are decent competition compared to a 4080 or a 4070ti. Prices should be lower across the board, but I don’t see why a 7900xtx should be 50% cheaper than a 4080 when it provides a comparable level of performance (outside RT, but even the RT is very usable).

People want AMD to provide a better product than the equivalent and at a substantially cheaper price than Nvidia. I don’t think it’s realistic to be honest.
Click to expand...
Of course is 50% for Nvidia. I'm not even talking about AMD since they are unable to offer what I need.
 
rare said:
The 7900xtx /xt are decent competition compared to a 4080 or a 4070ti. Prices should be lower across the board, but I don’t see why a 7900xtx should be 50% cheaper than a 4080 when it provides a comparable level of performance (outside RT, but even the RT is very usable).

People want AMD to provide a better product than the equivalent and at a substantially cheaper price than Nvidia. I don’t think it’s realistic to be honest.
Click to expand...
But if AMD provide basically the same performance, with equal or less features or about the same price, what reason do people have for choosing an unknown brand over Nvidia?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom