• 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.

** The AMD Navi Thread **

Panos said:
Yet Turing replaced Pascal at twice the cost,similar to pascal replaced maxwell at twice the cost....
Click to expand...

The bigger question is, is this a warranted increase in price or just gouging (from both sides). I've long said that the standard of living in the West is going to drop off. Low interest rates, slow rise in wages, shrinkflation (less goods for the same money), large reliance on credit, large personal debts, high cost of housing, rising production costs in China, Green taxes etc.

I expect luxury goods will become more unaffordable in the West, as they are in much of the rest of the world, to the average consumer. The rich(er) will always be able to afford them.
 
Grim5 said:
So on the anniversary $500usd card, AMD forgot to change the name on the fan shroud - and now we know that before the switch - this card was called the RX690 and the 5700 called the RX680

The RX590 was $279usd on launch
The RX690 *cough* 5700 xt is up to $500usd on launch
Click to expand...

It proves that AMD are just as willing to overcharge as anyone else. I've said before that they've sat watching Nvidia prices soar and they want their piece of the pie. The lack of competition allowed Nvidia to jack prices up & they're unlikely to come down again, especially now that PC gamings become so popular.

What annoys me most is that it looks like AMD are going to ignore the fact that RTX has extra features and roughly price match RTX cards based on pure performance, Ray Tracing may not offer a lot today but that's not the point.
 
bru said:
Although I understand what your saying and you might very well be correct, I reckon if AMD could have put 2GHZ on their slides they would have.
Even the cherry picked cream of the crop anniversary card only does 1980MHz, you think that AMD would have missed the chance to put 2GHz if they could have with a slight overclock.
Click to expand...

After what Raj Koduri did with Vega & the backlash AMD's still trying to repair consumer trust in Radeon so like you I don't think they'd of missed the chance to put 2000mhz on the cards if they could achieve that, We saw a complete reversal of claimed core clocks after Koduri lost his job, An example under Raj Koduri was where we were told the Vega 64 had a base clock (1600) that we struggled to achieve, With the VII Lisa Su stood on stage & stated that the VII core clock goes up to 1800mhz which they all do out of the box. It'll be interesting to see what headroom there is with the Anniversary edition, I'm sure some will do 2000mhz but if they all could as you said it would be in the stats.
 
Grim5 said:
I believe you are both wrong. If you go back and look at the specs again, the boost speed you get in reality out of the box is whats called the "game clock".
You'll also notice that the game clock is much lower than the maximum clocks - with some tweaks and better cooling I believe you will be able to get the card to sustain it's peak clocks.

Navi clocks now function a bit like Nvidias - just adding better cooling to your gpu gets you significant extra performance

Take a look at the 50th edition specs.
Average game clock of 1830mhz - maximum peak of 1980mhz.

This card will hit 1980mhz as soon as it comes under load, and then as the tempretures go up it drops down to 1830mhz+- and sits there.
So with water cooling it should sustain 1980mhz and thats before trying to overclock.

If my theory is correct, putting the 5700xt under water should by itself get you an extra 150mhz and that's before overclocking

3vd3oc5s.ij3.jpg
Click to expand...
Amd will hold back around 10%, to allow Aib's to differentiate from a reference board with out the box settings, and this will come with higher prices than the reference design.

You're right about the boost behaviour and it should clock higher than Radeon VII, due to the front end changes. I'm actually hopeful that overclocking will actually scale with reasonable performance gains. I'm not sure such a card is worth watercooling though, if it had more Cu's then I could see the point.
 
What I see there will be moans against AMD if makes a £450 RTX2080 killer or a £600 RTX2080ti killer, by the same people who justify the RTX2080 and 2080ti pricing last 9 months.
 
Panos said:
What I see there will be moans against AMD if makes a £450 RTX2080 killer or a £600 RTX2080ti killer, by the same people who justify the RTX2080 and 2080ti pricing last 9 months.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why people make up stuff like this.
AMD don't have a 2080 killer at £450.
If people did complain at a GTX2080 killer for £450, then they're the problem. But since that situation isn't reality, it's all in your head.
 
Martini1991 said:
I don't understand why people make up stuff like this.
AMD don't have a 2080 killer at £450.
If people did complain at a GTX2080 killer for £450, then they're the problem. But since that situation isn't reality, it's all in your head.
Click to expand...

I am generalising, for the time being.
 
Panos said:
I am generalising, for the time being.
Click to expand...

No you are not. You are making up things that simply wouldn't happen.

I would be surprised if anyone complained about a £450 card that beats the 2080 decently .

Unfortunately, the reality is that it is looking like AMD will release a 2070 competitor (not a "killer") for about £450..
 
bru said:
Although I understand what your saying and you might very well be correct, I reckon if AMD could have put 2GHZ on their slides they would have.
Even the cherry picked cream of the crop anniversary card only does 1980MHz, you think that AMD would have missed the chance to put 2GHz if they could have with a slight overclock.
Click to expand...

AMD have never done that though. They always have left untapped potential in their cards. Look at the 7970/7950 launch, the cards were easily capable of hitting 1Ghz and beyond. But, for whatever reason, they released the cards running at 925Mhz.
 
melmac said:
AMD have never done that though. They always have left untapped potential in their cards. Look at the 7970/7950 launch, the cards were easily capable of hitting 1Ghz and beyond. But, for whatever reason, they released the cards running at 925Mhz.
Click to expand...

The 7950/7970 are outliers really, the amount of overclocking on them was unheard of at the time and it's unheard of now.

Although I get your point. If AMD cared about milestones they'd have ran them easily at 1GHZ. I just don't think there's many similarities in most launches and the 7950/7970.
 
Jono8 said:
No you are not. You are making up things that simply wouldn't happen.

I would be surprised if anyone complained about a £450 card that beats the 2080 decently .

Unfortunately, the reality is that it is looking like AMD will release a 2070 competitor (not a "killer") for about £450..
Click to expand...
I’d buy it it in a heartbeat if it did exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom