In terms of £ per FPS, this is the worst time I can remember to buy a GPU. How is it a card I bought 3 years ago is still competitive in terms of £/fps? Does this sound familiar? It used to be that you'd spend the same £250 every 2-3 years and get a 50-100% increase in FPS. Now if I spend the same I spent 3 years ago, I barely see any increase in power (970 to 1060 is a wash), which means I'm not buying, which only drives the prices UP. I don't think this is mining related, prices were still too high before the latest (eth) gold rush, but 1070 prices have leaped and it's gonna be a while (I remember the 290x rush, rinse and repeat) before they flood ebay.
-
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.
GPU's have stalled like CPU's
- Thread starter hedgey
- Start date
It's not just AMD though. Its retailers takin the pee. Espeically with mining. Then there is brexit which gave retailers an excuse to up prices slightly more than they should and let brexit take the blame because the pound is weak. Take away those things and i bet it wouldn't look so bad. Intel just took the pee for years and still are they wont change.
Nothing to do with that, its about the perception of the products and the company, that's driven by the community and tech journalists.
The HD 5870 was a very good card in comparison to the GTX 480 and yet AMD lost market share to nVidia
The HD 6970 was a good card vs the GTX 580, AMD continued to lose market-share
The HD 7970 was a good card vs the GTX 680, AMD continued to lose more market-share
The R9 290X was a good card vs the GTX Titan, more market-share was lost to nVidia
At this point AMD are out of money, they have no money left for R&D and with that they are all but absent from the GPU market.
AMD are not to blame for that, excessive nVidia fanboyism by this community and even some tech reviewers are.
AMD will never be competitive in the GPU space again until peoples mindset changes, actually it may already be too late.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2007
- Posts
- 3,221
Which affects anything priced in dollars or euro's like most consumer goods and many other imports.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,339
- Location
- Rollergirl
Honestly, there's at least a thread a week on this subject.
You bought a GPU three years ago and it's still relevant today, surely that's a good thing? Or are you looking for more FPS but the price of a bigger tier card is too much? Logic says it can't be too much for everyone else the shelves would be full.. and they're not.
AMD cant compete because it's not economically possible to manufacture a card that rivals what Nvidia offer in terms of price and performance... Unless you're looking to buy low end.
It's just how it is.
You bought a GPU three years ago and it's still relevant today, surely that's a good thing? Or are you looking for more FPS but the price of a bigger tier card is too much? Logic says it can't be too much for everyone else the shelves would be full.. and they're not.
AMD cant compete because it's not economically possible to manufacture a card that rivals what Nvidia offer in terms of price and performance... Unless you're looking to buy low end.
It's just how it is.
That was still under ATi branding.
Also how can you say NVIDIA fanboyism? People want performance. NVIDIA delivers, AMD does not.
Mining and the pound drop is mostly the problem.
Nvidia have still been making good progress in perf/watt and price/perf. Granted they upped the RRP for the 1070/1080/1080Ti by $50 compared to the 970,980,980Ti, but with exchanged rates worse than what we have been used to (ie at least 1.5 USD to GBP or more) that extra seems worse.
To put it in perspective, if we still had the same exchange rate that we had when the 970/980 came out and no mining nonsense, a 1070 would have been more like starting at ~£285 and in terms of conversion after VAT, only ~£35 more.
Unfortunately that $50 was probably added on simply because there was no competition for the 1070/1080 (and still isn't).
In reality, the RRP prices that Nvidia are setting really aren't that different to what they have alsways been.
I mean look at the 8000 series from 2007
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeForce-8800-Ultra-Review-Best-Just-Got-Better
8800 Ultra
$829+
8800 GTX 768MB
$599-649
8800 GTS 640MB
$399-499
8800 GTS 320MB
$299-329
8600 GTS 256MB
$199-229
8600 GT 256MB
$149-159
8500 GT
$89-129
8400 GS
OEM only
8300 GS
OEM only
7600 GS
$89
7300 GT
<$79
Nvidia have still been making good progress in perf/watt and price/perf. Granted they upped the RRP for the 1070/1080/1080Ti by $50 compared to the 970,980,980Ti, but with exchanged rates worse than what we have been used to (ie at least 1.5 USD to GBP or more) that extra seems worse.
To put it in perspective, if we still had the same exchange rate that we had when the 970/980 came out and no mining nonsense, a 1070 would have been more like starting at ~£285 and in terms of conversion after VAT, only ~£35 more.
Unfortunately that $50 was probably added on simply because there was no competition for the 1070/1080 (and still isn't).
In reality, the RRP prices that Nvidia are setting really aren't that different to what they have alsways been.
I mean look at the 8000 series from 2007
https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-GeForce-8800-Ultra-Review-Best-Just-Got-Better
8800 Ultra
$829+
8800 GTX 768MB
$599-649
8800 GTS 640MB
$399-499
8800 GTS 320MB
$299-329
8600 GTS 256MB
$199-229
8600 GT 256MB
$149-159
8500 GT
$89-129
8400 GS
OEM only
8300 GS
OEM only
7600 GS
$89
7300 GT
<$79
Miners are buying the cards at almost any price.
I don't think we can take that as evidence that all or even most gamers are happy with current prices.
Let's also not blame Brexit for this... both the 1080 and 1070 were released *before* the referendum, and showed that nV had priced all their Pascal cards a tier higher than Maxwell.
And finally you can eliminate the Brexit effect altogether by comparing the price in USD. 480 released as $239. Before the 390 release the 290 price had settled at $249, down from initial release of $399. The 390, despite being a re-brand, was bumped up to $329 on release.
The point is, even if you compare in USD, we've had the same perf for $249 since... let's see... Q4 2014. That's when the 290 was widely available at this price. Now the 480 is the same perf, give or take, for the same USD, 3 years later. USD prices have not been affected by Brexit
Some people say, "You can only compare release prices!!!!1 LOL", but the point is you could get 480 perf for 480 price in Q4 2014.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,505
- Location
- Dormanstown.
You're missing out all the bad parts.
The 5870 was perfect when it launched, excellent price, excellent performance, unless you wanted DX11. Same with the 5850. Only problem was stock. I'm sure AMD gained share with the 5870 versus Nvidia's 2XX as that was the Nvidia cards at the time, AMD were in a league of their own for months. Nvidia cards were better performers when they came out, but their launch was terrible, although as the generation continued the GTX470 probably became the stand out card.
Also, don't forget the driver problems the 5870 had such as the grey screen of death.
The 6970 came out after the GTX580 and was slower, although it had an excellent price point, this is where AMD lost the momentum they'd gained from the 5XXX and 4XXX.
7970 came out as the fastest card at the time, but the price was ridiculous, that was further compounded when the 7950 launched at like ~400 pound. Nvidia then launched the GTX680 at pretty much the same price as the 7950 and out performed 7970 on launch day, and when the GTX670 launched it was much better price/performance and Nvidia were killing it. I remember having a GTX680, for a reference card it was really quiet etc. As the generation went on the 7XXX obviously went on to be better though.
And the 290X had power/temperature/noise as negatives from the bat. Since the 290X AMD haven't exactly been great. The Fury X was hyped up and fell short and went EOL.
Right now 290X performance is all AMD is able to offer right now in bar the Frontier Edition. That's probably causing some issues. How can anyone buy from AMD when they're offering GPU performance from 2013?
You've just made my point. this ^^^ is the impression you have, you believe there is nothing more or less to what you just said.
All you know is negative detail about AMD's past GPU's but none of the good points, while remembering nVidia GPU's as only good, perfect.
You don't remember nVidia drivers killing their GPU's, you don't remember the GTX 480 used twice as much power as the 5870 and ran extremely hot, the 7970 was out before the GTX 680 and was extremely underclcoked, after nVidia launched the GTX 680 AMD simply released a higher clocked one which then beat it.
All you remember about the 290X was heat and noise when in fact the power consumption was similar to the GTX Titan while the 290X was faster, the only reason it ran at 92c and loud was because of its reference cooler.... Board parters made some very nice ones, you don't even remember those.
All you know is AMD bad.
nVidia can do no wrong.
Reality is very different. You're part of the problem
Last edited:
Truth is if AMD had a killer card they would sink Nvidia. They dont. How is that our problem. We dont make the cards. You have to make a card first before someone parts with their cash. Never heard such humbug in all my life ! 
No problem here, move along chip wrappers.
No problem here, move along chip wrappers.My r9 290 that I bought on release keeps up with the 480/580 and 1060 once overclocked. That's a four year old GPU keeping up with today's cards in the same price bracket, it's ridiculous. A £250-300 GPU should streets ahead after 4 years
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,505
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Considering I've only owned one GTX680 and every other GPU has been AMD I'd disagree.
You want to gloss over AMD's faults and focus on Nvidia, that's all you care about. You've not even read the post correctly. I wasn't making Nvidia sound perfect. Your post was pro AMD, ignoring the faults with those products you've praised.
Also, the 7970 was clocked at what AMD clocked it at, they could have clocked it at 1GHZ from the get go, they chose not to.
Last edited:
Or you bought a cracker of a card at the time which got so much negativity and overtime has got better with driver updates and performance has gotten better. Yea a 1060 from nvidia and the 290 today still hangs with the lads. Best money spent id say. Always seems to be negativity. My 290x was the best money ever spent. My mate wished he took my advice and bought a cheaper 290x than his 780ti now. The sapphire 290x Tri-X and Vapor-X was some of the top 290x and i always got similar performance to my mate when we compared game performance only to find over a year later i'm starting to take the lead. Which is why he wish he took my advise.
Yea my 980Ti was much better in performance but i felt as time went on i needed a upgrade. Probably because i jumped to 1440p when i got a 980ti however i never felt that with my 290x all the time i had it and i got a 980ti half a year before 1080 was due to come out lol.