Do AMD provide any benefit to the retail GPU segment.

[Nexus18]

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?

Does:

- cuda
- superior upscaler (across all res., across all presets and in uptake/games)
- superior recording/streaming capabilities
- better ray tracing performance
- DLDSR (amd has nothing anywhere close to this)

Mean nothing then and not warrant the extra cost?

Sorry I forget, raster the only important thing now....

 

[Bencher]

Does:

- cuda
- superior upscaler (across all res., across all presets and in uptake/games)
- superior recording/streaming capabilities
- better ray tracing performance
- DLDSR (amd has nothing anywhere close to this)

Mean nothing then and not warrant the extra cost then?

Sorry I forget, raster the only important thing now....

You forgot more VRAM - it does great in all these new games that hog the vram. The 6650xt just sinks like a rock

Nvidia finewine

 

[Nexus18]

You forgot more VRAM - it does great in all these new games that hog the vram. The 6650xt just sinks like a rock

Nvidia finewine

You forget though, it's not amd's fault for not providing their customer base with solutions that compete with what nvidia offer, it's all nvidia's fault! Damn them for selling features/hardware that people want to throw their money at......

 

[humbug]

You forgot more VRAM - it does great in all these new games that hog the vram. The 6650xt just sinks like a rock

Nvidia finewine

So does the 3070 and that's a $500 GPU.

 

[Bencher]

So does the 3070 and that's a $500 GPU.

Υοu were talking about the 6600 / 6650 compared to the 3060.

 

[IceWolf]

As far as I can see over the last few generations AMD has consistently messed up their launches. A few generations ago their reference coolers were bad and they were too hot, then they had driver problems and nothing at the top end (5700XT series), with terrible products lower down the 5000 stack which were mocked by reviewers.

Then they launched at too high a price at launch and were way behind on raytracing and upsampling (6000 series), despite having far better VRAM capacities. At the end of the pandemic, months/years later, their prices came down far below Nvidia's 3000 series and were a much better value purchase and started to sell better. The 6500X and non X were appalling at the price points at launch and the 6800XT was simply not as good an all rounder as the 3080.

Then move forward to the current 7000 series and they finally got raytracing performance to be better than the entire 3000 series from Nvidia, continued to provide better VRAM capacities (only 4080 and 4090 have a really decent amount on the green side) and yet priced their cards at the same cost per frame as the 4080 despite still being worse at raytracing and DLSS. The final nail in the coffin was the atrocious availability of the 7900XTX and XT at launch.

I am sure that like last gen they will slowly drop their prices until they become more competitive than Nvidia's cards but by then all the reviewers will already have made up their minds and people who wanted to buy one will have given up and gone green. They need to launch without bugs and in good volume whilst having a price that is 20% under Nvidia at the same price point. They won't win 50% market share overnight but can start to build it back.

 

[Eddie99]

the prospect of Nvidia owning the market without any competition whatsoever doesn't bear thinking about.

How would it be any different to now? Nvidia already set the price as high as they think they can get away with as though AMD doesn't exist. AMD doesn't do a thing to force them to lower prices, they just offer a negligible raster performance per dollar improvement, but worse overall performance per dollar factoring in power efficiency, DLSS etc.

 

[rare]

How would it be any different to now? Nvidia already set the price as high as they think they can get away with as though AMD doesn't exist.

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.

 

[humbug]

Υοu were talking about the 6600 / 6650 compared to the 3060.

So you would also argue the 3060 is right to be more expensive?

So what about the 3070, should that be cheaper than the 3060?

 

[Nexus18]

So you would also argue the 3060 is right to be more expensive?

So what about the 3070, should that be cheaper than the 3060?

Here's a question for you hum, do you think amd should be charging in the same bracket as nvidia when you look at the overall package i.e.

- cuda
- superior upscaler (across all res., across all presets and in uptake/games)
- superior recording/streaming capabilities
- better ray tracing performance
- DLDSR (amd has nothing anywhere close to this)

What exactly is amd offering to warrant their pricing when compared to nvidia?

 

[humbug]

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.

The idea that its AMD's job to make Nvidia cheaper is part of the problem, AMD playing along with that does not stop Nvidia getting ever more expensive.

Nvidia don't get any real criticism, its always AMD's fault for not playing their part to a satisfactory level.

 

[Eddie99]

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.

If they thought they could price it even higher they would have because they don't need to worry about AMD, if the 4080 was $1500 the 7900 XTX would've been $1300-$1400. The incentive to push the performance envelope higher is still there because they need to give people a reason to upgrade to newer gen cards.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

The way I see it is that it is so much to do with "mindshare" and it feels like at the minute AMD don't care, they're only developing GPU tech to help their APUs.

People say that AMD need to make competitive products in order to compete, which people respond with they have (or are) but they don't sell as well as Nvidia. I think the issue here is that people, quite possibly a lot of people on this forum, will look at reviews and weigh that up combined with their personal circumstances. Do they want raytracing, do they want more VRAM, have they had issues in the past with one brand, does their use case favour one brand over the other? But the vast majority of people probably won't, they'll buy on brand recognition. If all AMD are doing is giving similar performance for a similar price it gives those people zero reason to change from what they know. They'll probably see the choice as buying a GPU from a GPU company or buying a GPU from a CPU company. Maybe AMD should've kept the ATI branding for the GPU division so that people that don't dive into things as much don't get confused with thinking AMD is a CPU company. I think the masses need to see AMD producing comparable GPUs (performance and features) at a significantly reduced price or better GPUs at a comparable to give them reason to think about them. I mean that's basically what they did with Ryzen right? They didn't release 1st gen Ryzen and then overnight have the CPU marketshare they have now. It's something they have to do consistently until people are comfortable enough that you can release a £750 product that competes with a £570 Intel part.

Launches also need to be better. If it's hard to convince people to buy your product anyway releasing with virtually no stock is another way to push people to buy a rival product that has stock.

 

[Nexus18]

The idea that its AMD's job to make Nvidia cheaper is part of the problem, AMD playing along with that does not stop Nvidia getting ever more expensive.

Nvidia don't get any real criticism, its always AMD's fault for not playing their part to a satisfactory level.

According to the other thread that's because people don't feel amd is providing a worthwhile option to demand the price they set hence why it's not a Nvidia problem but an AMD problem, the sooner people like yourself and amd admit that, the better, only then can amd strive to do better.

 

[humbug]

Actually Gen 1 Ryzen exploded AMD's CPU sales, by second gen AMD were outselling Intel by anything up to a factor of 3X.

There were quite a few GPU's in AMD's line-up since the days of ATI that were as good or better than Nvidia equivalents for less money, right up to and including RDNA2, yet those cards never made any significant changes to AMD's marketshare, its been in steady decline ever sincce,
People argue well AMD never got it quite right for reason X or Y, even @Bencher doesn't believe the slower more expensive 3060 outweighs the 6600XT by 20:1 on Steam because it has more VRam.

No, its because its not an Nvidia card, that alone makes it worth at least 30% more, as many like repeating here "Nvidia are worth more" AMD will play along with that to some extent but they are never going to be 40% cheaper for similar cards.

 

[rare]

The incentive to push the performance envelope higher is still there because they need to give people a reason to upgrade to newer gen cards.

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.

 

[humbug]

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?

 

[Nexus18]

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?

You can't put a price on something when said company doesn't offer features to match what Nvidia have, simple as that.

What do you think a 6650xt should cost compared to a 3060?

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Actually Gen 1 Ryzen exploded AMD's CPU sales, by second gen AMD were outselling Intel by anything up to a factor of 3X.

Which is another way of saying that they didn't get the currently level of marketshare overnight...

There were quite a few GPU's in AMD's line-up since the days of ATI that were as good or better than Nvidia equivalents for less money, right up to and including RDNA2, yet those cards never made any significant changes to AMD's marketshare, its been in steady decline ever sincce,
People argue well AMD never got it quite right for reason X or Y, even @Bencher doesn't believe the slower more expensive 3060 outweighs the 6600XT by 20:1 on Steam because it has more VRam.

No, its because its not an Nvidia card, that alone makes it worth at least 30% more, as many like repeating here "Nvidia are worth more" AMD will play along with that to some extent but they are never going to be 40% cheaper for similar cards.

With all the features that Nvidia had? Ray tracing etc.? And are we talking about the top end cards? Cuz I suspect that's what people judge on, the top end, even if they're buying lowend or mid range.
And this is the point about mindshare. You have to get mindshare for the people that don't do much/any research to buy your product. All those games with the Nvidia logo on the box back in the day, that helped get mindshare. Having the best cards helps get mindshare. Word of mouth helps get mindshare.
Remember that the people on this forum and probably many forums around the world are fairly insignificant in terms of sales. We're not the ones AMD need to convince.

 

[humbug]

Which is another way of saying that they didn't get the currently level of marketshare overnight...


With all the features that Nvidia had? Ray tracing etc.? And are we talking about the top end cards? Cuz I suspect that's what people judge on, the top end, even if they're buying lowend or mid range.
And this is the point about mindshare. You have to get mindshare for the people that don't do much/any research to buy your product. All those games with the Nvidia logo on the box back in the day, that helped get mindshare. Having the best cards helps get mindshare. Word of mouth helps get mindshare.
Remember that the people on this forum and probably many forums around the world are fairly insignificant in terms of sales. We're not the ones AMD need to convince.

So you think AMD just need to get their logo out more,

That is a refreshing change from AMD need to be cheaper.