• 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.

Intel to Cut Prices of its Desktop Processors by 15% in Response to Ryzen 3000

4K8KW10 said:
But it made the ATi's products much worse... cough-Vega-cough, cough-Polaris-cough, etc, etc. Rebrands, even some years like 2014 when there were no GPU releases, at all :eek:
Click to expand...

You really don’t know the situation ATI was in. You might want to rethink that. AMD was going to buy Nvidia the offer was accepted and the deal was very close to going through before AMD pulled out and went ahead with ATI. ATI was struggling at that time and the sale helped both companies.

It’s probably worth mentioning that Vega and Polaris are very strong chips. Both ranges offer some standout cards.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
The first AMD GPU after they bought ATI was the HD 4870, that or its successors the HD 5870, HD 6970, HD 7970, R9 290X, Fury-X, Polaris/Vega/Navi are bad GPU's, not one of them.

ATI was in the dumps before AMD bought them.
Click to expand...

Radeon X850XT built on the same 130nm node as GeForce 6800 Ultra put it to shame. See:

2s9as5h.png


5kmzpj.png


6rskfd.png


2i7uxqs.png


u37u9.png


30mokk4.png

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-x850-xt-pe-agp/
 
4K8KW10 said:
But why did AMD keep the same 8-thread Bulldozer from 2011 till 2017?!
Click to expand...

They didn't, AMD designed Zen from scratch. 100% new technology.

It's Intel who have been modifying, updating, tweeking, adjusting, revamping, refining an already existing archecture since 1995. Hense all the security holes.
muon said:
Isn't the 9900K losing against the 3800X?

Also the 9700K will get destroyed by the 3700X.

So still too expensive.
Click to expand...

Too expensive for enthusiasts who see benchmarks but we only make up a small percentage of the market. The rest of the world have been seeing Intel adverts on the TV for 25 years and wont know any different. A lot have never even heard of AMD. Some people walk into the shop where I work and look for the Intel badge because people they know have been recommending Intel for years etc. It's decades old advise that people have heard and it sticks. AMD could be 10 times quicker and it wont matter to this large area of the market. A lot of large busineses only buy Intel as well.
 
CuriousTomCat said:
They didn't, AMD designed Zen from scratch. 100% new technology.

It's Intel who have been modifying, updating, tweeking, adjusting, revamping, refining an already existing archecture since 1995. Hense all the security holes.


Too expensive for enthusiasts who see benchmarks but we only make up a small percentage of the market. The rest of the world have been seeing Intel adverts on the TV for 25 years and wont know any different. A lot have never even heard of AMD. Some people walk into the shop where I work and look for the Intel badge because people they know have been recommending Intel for years etc. It's decades old advise that people have heard and it sticks. AMD could be 10 times quicker and it wont matter to this large area of the market. A lot of large busineses only buy Intel as well.
Click to expand...
I think pricing hasn't helped too. reflecting a worse performing part often. When people see a lower spec/worse CPU at a lower price, they'll I think often go for the most expensive one if not on a tight budget. AMD products of the past have often looked cheap too, even if the underlying product was actually pretty good. Personally, I had a few issues with AMD products in the past so was reluctant to go there again. So when you put it all together many will simply go with Intel, the company with a longer history of higher performance. I think that's changing however, catching the competition but pricing accordingly too. I myself tried a 1950X a few years ago for a year or so and was pretty impressed.

The "Intel inside" was always quite catchy in TV commercials and many I'm sure still remember the tune. Intel marketing have been very good in the past.

I think AMD today is a massively improved company with Lisa Su at the helm and may get over the "Intel inside "hurdle :)
 
Definitely an interesting time for PC components. If all Intel have got is to reduce prices that says volumes. Of course were still waiting for benches and reviews. I do lots of work alongside gaming on my mainstream rig and the multicore benefit is what interests me most.
 
DarrenM343 said:
The "Intel inside" was always quite catchy in TV commercials and many I'm sure still remember the tune. Intel marketing have been very good in the past.

I think AMD today is a massively improved company with Lisa Su at the helm and may get over the "Intel inside "hurdle :)
Click to expand...

Its back though havn't you seen the TV adverts from the purple shirt guys? Ding ding ding ding! You know Intel must be feeling rattled once that jingle starts playing at the start of ads again.
 
jigger said:
I’m not sure why you think that important, but maybe read about what was going with direct X in that situation.
Click to expand...

He also picked out all the high res benchmarks where the 850 was miles ahead, ignored the ones where the nVidia card did OK or was faster and at the more normal resolutions people were using the cards for it was a different story. Not to say the 850 doesn't put in a good showing there but he is again cherry picking from the actual data.
 
Rroff said:
He also picked out all the high res benchmarks where the 850 was miles ahead, ignored the ones where the nVidia card did OK or was faster and at the more normal resolutions people were using the cards for it was a different story. Not to say the 850 doesn't put in a good showing there but he is again cherry picking from the actual data.
Click to expand...

Back then, 1600x1200 was a very used resolution. This highest possible settings just show what the cards are really capable of. 1024x768 might have been CPU-limited, driver-overhead-limited or simply, as always, the Radeons don't bother to show their true performance there. Also, there is anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering where the nvidia cards look extremely badly.
 
4K8KW10 said:
I don't like the Vega 56 or Vega 64 because they are supposed to be faster than GTX 1080 Ti but actually they are lagging quite a bit behind.
Click to expand...
I've just been researching the V56 for my son and updated reviews for 2019 put it just behind a stock 1080 in most games and equalling it in some.
 
Dervious said:
"Hello Sky/Mobile Phone Company/Insurance Company etc, it's Dervious here, I wish to cancel my contract".

"OK, Why is that sir ?".

"Your quote is too expensive".

"OK sir, how about we ask you for less money then ?".
Click to expand...
It always amazes me how many people blindly accept the first quote. I always every year ring up and say the quote is to expensive and every year they have gone. "how about we ask you for less money then" and I get a cheaper price. Everything from Virgin to insurance.
 
Last edited:
So strange to see one half of the market doing very well, bringing out new products and a potential price war about to take place, and then on the other side to the graphics market we see a complete mess filled with overpriced products and minimal performance increases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom