-
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.
Radeon VII
- Thread starter DragonQ
- Start date
Yesd, it is just a stop gap card because they have nothing to respond to nvidia with. Navi is too far out, and even Navi likely wont compete at the high end.
They have no choice, they have no GPU available to compete. The Vega7 likely costs $700 to produce , only made feasible as a product because i is using salvaged chips. Healthy margins would put his card at over $1000.
It is just a PR stunt to tide things over, try and keep some hardcore AMD gamers on board.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,657
I am glad to see I am not the only one dissapointed (but not surprised) by the new radeon 7
its performance is probably going to be on a par with the RTX 2080 - beating in some, losing in others and a tie in most - in traditional games
price is looking to be on a par with RTX 2080
BUT...... No RTX, No DLSS and it still uses a fccuk ton of power and therefore needs a chunky PSU......
The only thing it has over the RTX 2080 is the 16gb of ram... which may be a big deal, or may not be.....
over all, trying to put biases aside (I really do want to want to buy AMD) i honestly cant see a reason to buy this over an RTX 2080 for gaming... the ace in its sleeve may have been Freesync but now nvidia is looking to support Async (and therefore freesync) then that advantage may be gone now too.
I know more performance was never going to be on the cards, AMD seem to have gone as all in on the performance as they could..... and therefore that is why the power requirements is looking to still be so high.
but for gaming i cant help but feel they would have been better going for GDDR6 and offering 2 versions 8gb and 16gb. From what i have read about HBM2 and its prices, had they created a 16GB GDDR 6 card it could have been $100 cheaper, and an 8GB one maybe even $150 - $200 less.
still..... it IS a step up from Vega 64 and may help reign in RTX 2080 prices... but i am not that hopeful.
An 8GB GDDR6 Radeon 7 with similar RTX 2080 performance but for $499 / £450-£499 or 16gb for $549 / £500-£550 is a card i could see making nvidia pause! (it would have made me think twice about going nvidia)
its performance is probably going to be on a par with the RTX 2080 - beating in some, losing in others and a tie in most - in traditional games
price is looking to be on a par with RTX 2080
BUT...... No RTX, No DLSS and it still uses a fccuk ton of power and therefore needs a chunky PSU......
The only thing it has over the RTX 2080 is the 16gb of ram... which may be a big deal, or may not be.....
over all, trying to put biases aside (I really do want to want to buy AMD) i honestly cant see a reason to buy this over an RTX 2080 for gaming... the ace in its sleeve may have been Freesync but now nvidia is looking to support Async (and therefore freesync) then that advantage may be gone now too.
I know more performance was never going to be on the cards, AMD seem to have gone as all in on the performance as they could..... and therefore that is why the power requirements is looking to still be so high.
but for gaming i cant help but feel they would have been better going for GDDR6 and offering 2 versions 8gb and 16gb. From what i have read about HBM2 and its prices, had they created a 16GB GDDR 6 card it could have been $100 cheaper, and an 8GB one maybe even $150 - $200 less.
still..... it IS a step up from Vega 64 and may help reign in RTX 2080 prices... but i am not that hopeful.
An 8GB GDDR6 Radeon 7 with similar RTX 2080 performance but for $499 / £450-£499 or 16gb for $549 / £500-£550 is a card i could see making nvidia pause! (it would have made me think twice about going nvidia)
Yes! Thank you for this.
I just read all 14 pages of posts and I will start by quoting this post..makes total sense 'the stopgap part..not Navi'
I believe as well, that this is simply a 'filler' or 'stopgap' card and that the Radeon VII exists for the following reasons:
1.) To release the world's first 7nm Consumer GPU.
2.) To extract the most (and final bit of) performance out of the end-of-life cycle of GCN.
3.) To recoup the costs of Mi50 chips.
4.) To further support the continued development of HBM as a viable option
5.) 16Gb of VRAM was probably chosen for Reason 3 here, but also to counter Nvidia's RTX
At least IMHO.
But on a side-note, I cannot understand the reasoning (but I'd be wililng to try to understand if they would explain further) behind those who say "you get similar 2080 performance for the same price..should be $100 cheaper" or "why would you ever choose this card over the 2080".
Why should AMD be cheaper when releasing similar performance as the competition? (this is unfortunately what some became accustomed to over the years..in some cases)..meh :/
To me it makes sense for those who do not care for Raytracing and want a GPU for gaming, but need a GPU for Graphics Accelerated Applications...like GPU Render in Blender or other tools (we saw an example in this will this OpenCL performance improvement which was 60%, which puts it abot 2080Ti levels, I believe).
So this card has it's place...and now all they need is to improve the GPU Architecture with Navi, and they already have worked out the Memory Bandwidth constraints/limitations with HBM2.
Then for cut-down versions, release one with GDDR6.
Point is..this car has it's place, definitely.
Anyways...wondering how this will OC, and if that HBM2 has any OC headroom as well.
Yeah, I don't get it either mate. Won't catch me defending their pricing, it is ludicrous!
Navi delay likely. They thought if we don't make this we won't have a new product on the market for nearly a year otherwise perhaps.
Bring on 2020 PS5 here I come
The graphic card industry is becoming a joke.
Completely agree. Will be garbing a PS5 and then will likely not upgrade graphics cards as often after that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
While that may be the case, but it looks as though the whole graphic industry (except for the 2080ti) is still stucked in 2016/2017 in the year of 2019...
It is probably the worst case of performance stagnation we have had in years...
It's going the same way as the CPU market which has barely progressed in about 8 years. Only thing that's really changing is the price going up...
Intel have been selling 1-3% performance increases (sometimes none) for years.
AMD are changing that with Zen 2, don't you worry about that
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
Yea waiting for that.AMD are changing that with Zen 2, don't you worry about that
Grab a 8/16t or 12/24t cores Zen 2 platform and one would be well-sorted for years to come (for gaming at the very least).
Meanwhile, Intel is desperately trying to glue their processors together to make CPUs with "more cores"
Indeed. Cannot wait to see the reviews and gaming performance. This is their 3rd Ryzen, hopefully gaming performance will be up there. Want to see it at least match 9900K for gaming performance, but if slightly slower, I am fine with that as you get the better price/more cores to compensate. Plus I am on 4K so the difference will be what, 1fps?
I'm baffled to why AMD decided to follow Nvidia's price plan. Especially with the latest freesync news. I'm good with not buying a new gpu for the next couple of years, are nvidia and amd ok with not selling any? Resist the temptation guys or buy used.
Bring on 2020 PS5 here I come
The graphic card industry is becoming a joke.
I already bought myself an Xbox One X for Christmas. Never thought i would turn to consoles, but the gpu market has gone absurd. No price/perf progress for years now. Nvidia are just taking the ****, and AMD just keep releasing the same performance we have had for ages with Nvidia...but for the same price.
Total rubbish
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
Jono m8 you should know better and fight off the urge and hold-off jumping over to console at least until next gen.I already bought myself an Xbox One X for Christmas. Never thought i would turn to consoles, but the gpu market has gone absurd. No price/perf progress for years now. Nvidia are just taking the ****, and AMD just keep releasing the same performance we have had for ages with Nvidia...but for the same price.
Total rubbish
The current gen consoles is severely poor for online-multiplayer games with lots of players, due to the slow Jaguar CPU being a turd and a huge bottleneck, and it struggle to stay above 30fps let alone 60fps...
Well, I said this but I myself got a PS4 Pro and a Switch as well, but I don't use them for multi-platform games though but for playing the exclusives.
Lol. So true.
PS5 will get a lot of PC gamers attention I think (I know I am getting one for sure). With 120Hz VRR OLED TVs with proper HDR it will be an easy choice. Nvidia better price their 3000 series much more competitively or they will see number of sales plummet.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,657
because the nvidia card has Ray Tracing and DLSS.
now you may argue that ray tracing is not quite there yet... BUT surely given a choice of having it or not you would have it .
and DLSS is an unknown entity right now but, IF it takes off that will be huge, so again, better to have it than not.
and finally, the nvidia card uses a lot less power, and therefore can get away with a lesser psu.
now maybe none of the above is a show stopper for you, but surely you can see that they are advantages and therefore as the AMD card does not have them then imo the price needs to reflect it.
When nvidia launched at the prices they did their defence was that RTX is a new expensive tech but they took a LOT of flak for it. Are you really saying that AMD have released st those prices, and without DLSS or Ray Tracing it is now ok?
Note i am only talking about from a gaming perspective, there may be other non gaming reasons to get an AMD gpu.
Reading about, it looks like for gaming, the 16GB of VRAM will be redundant for the next year or so. By that time, most high end gamers who buy the 700+ GPUs will be looking to upgrade given the next gen consoles should land and push up requiremnets in general.
Can't help but feel AMD missed out with the price tag. As everyone's noted, 2 years late with a product with competes with the 1080ti.
Now consumers are forced into the question:
1. Is ray tracing/DXR/DLSS going to be more useful in the future
Or
2. Is having 16GB VRAM on a Radeon 7 going to be useful
If I was buying now, I'd probably still edge towards the 2080. I might have a bit of bias because I have a 2080 but I can't help but feel underwhelmed. I was honestly expecting AMD to release maybe Q3 of this year with a 2080ti competitor at maybe 100-200 less of the 2080ti to push nvidia to release but it looks like NVIDIA will continue to boss this GPU era with their crap pricing.
Can't help but feel AMD missed out with the price tag. As everyone's noted, 2 years late with a product with competes with the 1080ti.
Now consumers are forced into the question:
1. Is ray tracing/DXR/DLSS going to be more useful in the future
Or
2. Is having 16GB VRAM on a Radeon 7 going to be useful
If I was buying now, I'd probably still edge towards the 2080. I might have a bit of bias because I have a 2080 but I can't help but feel underwhelmed. I was honestly expecting AMD to release maybe Q3 of this year with a 2080ti competitor at maybe 100-200 less of the 2080ti to push nvidia to release but it looks like NVIDIA will continue to boss this GPU era with their crap pricing.