I hold no hope in them competing at the 4k price front for a long time.
Nobody ever said they would, not even AMD.
By the time they are competitive, we'll probably see 4k/60fps consoles.
Which, conveniently, will be powered by AMD.
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.
I hold no hope in them competing at the 4k price front for a long time.
By the time they are competitive, we'll probably see 4k/60fps consoles.
You mean like when they released the Vega 64 delivering the performance of a GTX1080 for the price of a GTX1080? Or when they released the Vega 56 delivering better performance than the GTX1070 for the price of the GTX1070? (prompting the launch of the GTX1070ti).AMD's pricing over the past generation of cards has hardly been competitive at the same price/performance ratio (apart from the 20 series).
They were only around the same price on launch, for so many units, then they shot right up.
but I wouldn't put my faith in a word from these sources if I was you, WCCF built their reader base by either making news up or using what others have made up knowing full well it had no real merit, as for the second site, Sentences like "AMD execs too to the YouTubes yesterday to discuss how the last twelve months of Zen has been ahead of the imminent launch of Ryzen 2" just don't read right, I presume they meant ''''AMD execs took to Youtube yesterday to discuss blah blah'''' but does that sound like something an exec would be doing? I'd put money on it being fake news, I'm not saying AMD aren't exploring the possibility just that sites like these use guesswork more than facts from genuine sources.
Anyone promoting xfire/sli likely hasn't used them... I was xfired on 7970s and then Fury X's because I was an early 4k adopter and there wasn't a single GPU solution to even come close to powering that - and even that experience wasn't exactly great.. to the point where I'm never using a multi-GPU set up again.
I thought the same thing when I found the links...
My internal biases are showing, sadly without being conscious of them. I was certain I had seen this in trustworthy print.
Oh well, as someone who works in and out of the semiconductor industry, I believe Lisa Su will wrangle something special out of Radeon in the next 4 years or so. She is too good at semiconductors and business to not succeed, despite the obvious issues she's has inherited.
Nobody ever said they would, not even AMD.
Which, conveniently, will be powered by AMD.
You mean like when they released the Vega 64 delivering the performance of a GTX1080 for the price of a GTX1080? Or when they released the Vega 56 delivering better performance than the GTX1070 for the price of the GTX1070? (prompting the launch of the GTX1070ti).
If peoples definition of "competitive" is 1080ti performance for 1080 money then it explains why AMD have the problems they do...
Isn't the whole topic about them releasing a 2080/2080ti equivalent...
No, the thread is about AMD competing in general. Of which they do already, but for some unless AMD can beat a 2080 Ti in the next 5 minutes they're automatically worthless.
I think if you arrive 6 months to 1 year later to the party; then yes, you should be a lot more competitive than matching your opposition or offering a very slight performance advantage.
Ah my mistake. There is a thread on here asking the hypothetical "If AMD released a 700£ 2080ti would you buy it".. I thought it was that thread.
Well feel free to give AMD your design expertise and spare tens of millions of dollars to sort out their financials and build them an Nvidia-crushing architecture. You are aware of the sorry state AMD have been in for years, yeah?
I'd rather just give Nvidia my money as they seem to be delivering a product which I want.
You actually want half-assed ray tracing, marginal performance uplift on the raster side for double the price? Fair enough, more power to you.
I personally want to game at 1080p glitch-free without selling a kidney. Which funnily enough is what AMD offer.
just don't think AMD are some holy angel that people seem to think they are on the GPU front. On the Processor front, sure they are.
So when Nvidia show up late and offer the same performance for a higher price that's cool, but when AMD show up late and offer equal/better performance for the same price you think that's terrible because they should be more competitive to force Nvidia to sell you stuff cheaper?I think if you arrive late to the party; then yes, you should be a lot more competitively priced product than your opposition or a product which performs much better.
So when Nvidia show up late and offer the same performance for a higher price that's cool, but when AMD show up late and offer equal/better performance for the same price you think that's terrible because they should be more competitive to force Nvidia to sell you stuff cheaper?![]()