It's all pretty depressing and I'm waiting to see what AMD brings, I have around £800 to spend and I expect 4080 16gb + 20% performance for it, if no one can deliver that then I'll either skip the gen entirely or even spend £1700 on a 4090 and skip the next gen as that would work out the same as spending £850 over 2 gens while I'd still likely get better performance than a 5080 would end up offering and for much cheaper than the cost of a 4080+5080 or AMD equivalents.
-
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.
RDNA 3 rumours Q3/4 2022
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
- Status
AMD is never going to increase market share and make people consider them instead of Nvidia until one of the two happens:
- they bring out an equally good product with matching features from NV and performance at a much lower price and get themselves out of the ‘always second choice’ stage. They need to make people want to buy their products even if that means lower margins for a gen or two.
- they bring out a crazy good product at equal or slightly higher price than NV that demolishes it in RT/raster/features
Until that happens, no matter what the fanboys like to think or tell themselves, AMD will always be stuck in a rut, always second choice for anyone who isn’t a fanboy. Their current tactic of ‘slightly cheaper but also slightly worse’ is garbage. No they’re not a charity but if they want a piece of the pie they need to change the minds of almost everyone and make them not only consider their products but WANT them.
Sadly i don’t see this ever happening, so… it’s always gonna be the same **** every gen.
- they bring out an equally good product with matching features from NV and performance at a much lower price and get themselves out of the ‘always second choice’ stage. They need to make people want to buy their products even if that means lower margins for a gen or two.
- they bring out a crazy good product at equal or slightly higher price than NV that demolishes it in RT/raster/features
Until that happens, no matter what the fanboys like to think or tell themselves, AMD will always be stuck in a rut, always second choice for anyone who isn’t a fanboy. Their current tactic of ‘slightly cheaper but also slightly worse’ is garbage. No they’re not a charity but if they want a piece of the pie they need to change the minds of almost everyone and make them not only consider their products but WANT them.
Sadly i don’t see this ever happening, so… it’s always gonna be the same **** every gen.
Last edited:
Associate
They probably won't be producing much to make a dent in market share, it's a vicious cycle
Last edited:
You have some utterly unrealistic expectation that AMD offer the same as Nvidia at a much cheaper price, or the bring out something substantially better for the same price.
Even when AMD have been as good or arguably better, I bet you still thought "not good enough".
You and people like you are not their target market.
Caporegime
Maybe they figure only those with money to burn will be buying GPU's in this climate, so might as well over charge them to make up for losses of those who aren't.
Soldato
I said AMD cant get away with knocking $50 off the price off of an NVIDIA card (if they don't have the RTX, DLSS3, CUDA, NVENC). Not asking for charity, asking for reality and tbh they have the production costs to offer some of that. If they want to price premium, then they need to get ahead of the curve on features and they just aren't there. The products last gen were really good but under weird circumstances and market prices kind of shook down correctly eventually; would hope for more realism this time around.
Caporegime
Almost no one is talking about the fact that with DLSS 3 Nvidia are injecting frames that aren't real between frames that are, in that way they bring the frame rate counter up with an added input latency cost (because they are not real frames) of 60 to 90ms, that latency is one frame in every 10 to 15 real frames, some tests are as high as 180ms, that's 1 in every 5 frames.
Its cheating, plain and simple cheating, just imagine AMD did this, the whole internet would blow up over it.
Its cheating, plain and simple cheating, just imagine AMD did this, the whole internet would blow up over it.
Last edited:
Soldato
Have you tried it? How is it cheating? It's just double/triple buffering with a made up frame inbetween. You can turn it off if you dont like it, and if you are that sensitive to input latency you probably will. Most good reviews test with it off and the card is still a monster.
People neglect or forget the part where 6700, 6800 and 6800XT for example offered equally tangible benefits over their Nvidia counterparts.
RT not as good but a lot more VRAM
Don't offer DLSS but give better raster performance price for price
So it wasn't simply a case of slightly less cost for less features. It was a few less features, more raster performance and more VRAM for less money. Some people would and did see having more performance on the majority of cases, or more VRAM a lot more beneficial than having RT or DLSS.
So what you deem as must have features might mean didly squat to someone else.
RT not as good but a lot more VRAM
Don't offer DLSS but give better raster performance price for price
So it wasn't simply a case of slightly less cost for less features. It was a few less features, more raster performance and more VRAM for less money. Some people would and did see having more performance on the majority of cases, or more VRAM a lot more beneficial than having RT or DLSS.
So what you deem as must have features might mean didly squat to someone else.
Last edited:
If NV disclosed how DLSS 3 works, how is it cheating? It's just an option to improve performance (with lower quality) if needed, just like FSR. If they do something under the hood that reduces quality to boost performance without saying anything, that's cheating.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,488
You might have a valid point if rasterization performance wasn't 60% up on previous gen cards without even using DLSS 3.
AMD will add that to FSR because it's fairly easy to implement and others have done it in the past.
Caporegime
I wouldn't use it, its injecting stuff in to the scene that isn't there.
Or, they could that with the Navi 31 and even more with the Navi 31 + 3D stacked cache version, while leaving the rest of the stack at far saner prices.
And if they have designed the IOD cleverly they could even offer a dual stacked version.
I think they already hinted that + 3D stacking doesn't perform that much faster but the big spenders might be willing to pay a few $100s more for 1-3% gains.
Last edited:
And you are? You’re already buying their products even if they’re inferior.
Think my opinion and those like me matter more if they want to expand their user base and mindshare.
I’m also not a charity.. who knew? Not gonna buy just to ‘help them out’
Last edited:
Caporegime
The problem is that they also risk PC gamers moving to consoles increasingly too. Now,it wouldn't affect AMD as much because they make the SOCs for the consoles,but still I would suspect they make more margins on dGPUs. However,for Nvidia it would be much worse for them. But either way I blame Nvidia,because they are pricing their dGPUs poorly this generation.AMD can still charge a decent amount and still be much better value.
Last edited:
I'm an RTX 3080 owner because I personally found it to be a better VFM compared to the 6800 XT. I had the opportunity to get either at MSRP or close to it and went for the 3080. So I don't buy AMD products unless they give me VFM.
I also bought a 6700XT because at the time I felt it was superior to the equivalently priced 3070 due to the 12 vs 8 GB VRAM. RT and DLSS did not come close to making the 3070 a better choice, because I was purchasing a GPU I plan to use in a 2nd system for a number of years and I feel that 8GB VRAM was just not VFM.
So I am happy to purchase either Nvidia or AMD. What I will not do is put up utterly ridiculous demands that AMD provide me with a much cheaper GPU with much better performance than Nvidia.
Stop deluding yourself that you have "reasonable" demands and big bad AMD just refuses to meet them.
Associate
yeah AMD is not even in a position to do anything of that sort, its not a question of could, more in the realm of impossibility.. they are only going to follow the market leader, happens often in various industries
As 4090 and high price prove today, there's enough people who do not care one bit about the pricing for it to not matter much. AMD tried the "be cheaper and just as good or better" in the past, didn't work for them. I don't believe they will go the same way again. Now it's features and performance which matter the most apparently, at least with enthusiast's market.
Soldato
Honestly, I dont care at my price point if I want to hit 60FPS at 1440p with good visual quality. Whomever gets me that for less money is where i'll go unless the other has better features. My job is not to pause the screen and take a magnifiying glass at it. Next time team Red or team Green tweet that they are a fanboy of me then i'll fanboy back, but in the meantime if my current GPU is struggling i'll get whatever the best in the budget is. That 4090 is an sbsolute banger, but it's not for me.
Last edited:
- Status