** The AMD Navi Thread **

[melmac]

The problem is the 2070 Super's $499 versus 5700XT $450 and looks to be better in pretty much every metric while OC'ing to 2080 performance.
While I dislike the price of both GPU's the 5700XT did offer better performance over a stock 2070. That's now no longer the case.

The 5700 at $380 versus the $400 2060 Super is even worse.

I just don't see any world in which people are going to be buying the 5700/5700XT over the Supers.

With this launch AMD will lose potential GPU buyers, like myself.

The 5700xt was faster than the 2070 based on AMD's slides. We can't be sure that will actually be the case when the cards are reviewed.

These cards aren't going to win them market share no matter what the price them at, unless they sell them at a loss and that's no good to AMD either.

Let's say they price the 5700xt at $375 and it's 2070 performance. What happens then? People have a choice between the 2060 super and the 5700xt.

Then people say, well, I can get Ray Tracing, similar performance with less power use and probably quieter cooler for $25 extra.

How many consumers would make the choice to buy the 5700xt over the 2060 super in that scenario, even at $25 cheaper? Not too many.

Do you genuinely believe that knocking $75 of the price of the cards will make that much of difference in the numbers of people buying AMD cards? I don't. IT might sway a few people on the fence, but, doubt it will change the numbers they will sell much at all.

 

[FoxEye]

The 5700xt was faster than the 2070 based on AMD's slides. We can't be sure that will actually be the case when the cards are reviewed.

These cards aren't going to win them market share no matter what the price them at, unless they sell them at a loss and that's no good to AMD either.

Let's say they price the 5700xt at $375 and it's 2070 performance. What happens then? People have a choice between the 2060 super and the 5700xt.

Then people say, well, I can get Ray Tracing, similar performance with less power use and probably quieter cooler for $25 extra.

How many consumers would make the choice to buy the 5700xt over the 2060 super in that scenario, even at $25 cheaper? Not too many.

Do you genuinely believe that knocking $75 of the price of the cards will make that much of difference in the numbers of people buying AMD cards? I don't. IT might sway a few people on the fence, but, doubt it will change the numbers they will sell much at all.

I wonder what the overlap is between people who buy £400 GPUs and people who don't research their purchases at all...

Essentially your arguments says that a certain number of people will buy them no matter how badly they fare against the competition... and that enough people exist who will buy them to make it more worthwhile than to cut prices.

I'm curious where all these GPU buyers who spend that amount and don't know what they're buying are coming from...

 

[melmac]

Yeah that's the thing. They're only "protecting their margin" if people are actually buying them... if not, there's no margin at all! Just pure losses...

Since they are less than 20% of the market, might as well make a profit on the small number of cards you do actually sell. At least they won't be losing both money and market share.

 

[melmac]

and that enough people exist who will buy them to make it more worthwhile than to cut prices..

What the hell are you talking about? I am not sure how you read my post and came up to the conclusion I quoted above.

There are people who buy AMD no matter what, just like there are people who buy Nvidia no matter what. And there are always people who buy without doing any research. And those few might be the only people who will buy the 5700 cards.

My questions were to Martini. And they are based on what we know about the performance of the 2060 Super and the 5700xt.

Does he think that selling the 5700xt $375 would make a big difference to the numbers sold when people can buy the 2060 Super at $399?

Because those people who do research their purchases will see that the performance is pretty similar, but the 2060 Super has Ray Tracing, uses less power and has a quieter cooler.

What price would AMD have to sell the 5700xt to make people choose it over the 2060 Super?

Nvidia has the market and the mindshare, even if the features and performance were the same, I bet most people would choose the Nvidia card even if it was $24 more expensive.

 

[Panos]

@melmac you try to make sense from Martini? He is bashing the 5700XT since the first moment AMD presented the card, before even we have meaningful reviews.
And he completely dismisses anyone saying that we should wait until Sunday to pass judgment, given that from current leaks, looks faster not only than the Vega 64, but the RVII also (or within 1-2fps).

 

[Zernath]

looks faster not only than the Vega 64, but the RVII also (or within 1-2fps).

At 4K or what? Because I have my doubts.

 

[Phixsator]

I wonder what the overlap is between people who buy £400 GPUs and people who don't research their purchases at all...

Essentially your arguments says that a certain number of people will buy them no matter how badly they fare against the competition... and that enough people exist who will buy them to make it more worthwhile than to cut prices.

I'm curious where all these GPU buyers who spend that amount and don't know what they're buying are coming from...

You'd be floored if you took a look on this very forum just to see how many have spent way more than 400 bucks on cards they knew nothing off, aka uninformed purchases, because shiny!

 

[Stanners]

Lets see them do it then.
Like I say, I'm not exactly sold on what to get.
Depending on what happens between now and Sunday I'm liable to get either a 5700XT/Radeon VII/2070 Super.[/QUOT

@melmac you try to make sense from Martini? He is bashing the 5700XT since the first moment AMD presented the card, before even we have meaningful reviews.
And he completely dismisses anyone saying that we should wait until Sunday to pass judgment, given that from current leaks, looks faster not only than the Vega 64, but the RVII also (or within 1-2fps).

Have you read the last couple of pages, you may want to apologise.

 

[Besty]

This generation Navi will be one of the most mass produced GPUs designs of all
time, if not the most mass produced. If it is not cost efficient to produce initially, it soon will be.

It is not a GPU which will set performance records although, as my calculations have laid out, if they hit their performance targets, the non-XT 5700 will be the best bang for buck out there.

 

[Martini1991]

@melmac you try to make sense from Martini? He is bashing the 5700XT since the first moment AMD presented the card, before even we have meaningful reviews.
And he completely dismisses anyone saying that we should wait until Sunday to pass judgment, given that from current leaks, looks faster not only than the Vega 64, but the RVII also (or within 1-2fps).

I've bashed the 5700XT price.
You're just hyping yourself up because you're biased.

 

[4K8KW10]

I've bashed the 5700XT price.
You're just hyping yourself up because you're biased.

The high price doesn't do any favours neither to AMD who will experience bad press and low sales, nor to the customers who are limited to stay away from the product.

 

[Martini1991]

The 5700xt was faster than the 2070 based on AMD's slides. We can't be sure that will actually be the case when the cards are reviewed.

These cards aren't going to win them market share no matter what the price them at, unless they sell them at a loss and that's no good to AMD either.

Let's say they price the 5700xt at $375 and it's 2070 performance. What happens then? People have a choice between the 2060 super and the 5700xt.

Then people say, well, I can get Ray Tracing, similar performance with less power use and probably quieter cooler for $25 extra.

How many consumers would make the choice to buy the 5700xt over the 2060 super in that scenario, even at $25 cheaper? Not too many.

Do you genuinely believe that knocking $75 of the price of the cards will make that much of difference in the numbers of people buying AMD cards? I don't. IT might sway a few people on the fence, but, doubt it will change the numbers they will sell much at all.

I just can't see Navi releasing as $380/449 as a good thing considering it's turning predominate AMD buyers like myself to potentially buying an Nvidia GPU.

It's also sounding like you're saying "AMD mays well just get the high price sales from the fanboys".
AMD just aren't going to win any mindshare with Navi. Which contradicts people calling it a starting point.

 

[Freddie1980]

This generation Navi will be one of the most mass produced GPUs designs of all
time, if not the most mass produced. If it is not cost efficient to produce initially, it soon will be.

It is not a GPU which will set performance records although, as my calculations have laid out, if they hit their performance targets, the non-XT 5700 will be the best bang for buck out there.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that after a year of launch the 5700 starts to bed in nearer to the £200 mark then £300 (this might be start to happened sooner then latter with the release of the Super cards from Nvidia) at which point it will be mass market because as it stands all AMD have done is replace Vega 56/64 performance with at similar prices.

 

[thenewoc]

I think the blowers are basically founders editions or in non marketing speak - gouging early adopters. When the custom cooler designs come I'd expect the prices to even out more as people will only pay so much so it depends how many they want to sell. I don't see them being able to charge premium for them against nVidia who will counter AMD's moves with the Supers.

 

[nashathedog]

Radeon vii is what... £650... So sure but you are not comparing like with like. Can get a 2080 for £600 . Sure the ram has use cases for some people but generally for gaming imo most would (and should) take the 2080 every time imo.

Hi, I chose the Radeon VII over the RTX 2080, There were 2 main reasons,

1, Although Nvidia's support for Freesync had started they claimed they'd found that there support of adaptive sync only worked correctly with 4 or 5 monitors & my monitor wasn't one of them, I didn't believe them when they said it only worked with a handful of monitors but why risk it when I know it works as advertised with AMD?

2, As a direct 1080ti performance replacement the RTX 2080 having less memory bothered me as I currently have a 3440x1440 monitor and when it's replaced it'll be with either a 4k or UW4k model so going forward I'll want & need more than 8gb's of memory as I find I'm already reaching close to 8gb's usage when I game with certain texture mods.

 

[vapor matt]

Hi, I chose the Radeon VII over the RTX 2080, There were 2 main reasons,

1, Although Nvidia's support for Freesync had started they claimed they'd found that there support of adaptive sync only worked correctly with 4 or 5 monitors & my monitor wasn't one of them, I didn't believe them when they said it only worked with a handful of monitors but why risk it when I know it works as advertised with AMD?

2, As a direct 1080ti performance replacement the RTX 2080 having less memory bothered me as I currently have a 3440x1440 monitor and when it's replaced it'll be with either a 4k or UW4k model so going forward I'll want & need more than 8gb's of memory as I find I'm already reaching close to 8gb's usage when I game with certain texture mods.

The VII is most under rated card, with all the ( its a cut down chip going around, so are all the cards under the titan RTX cut down versions ) The VII with its 16g of vram offers 2070s beating performance and matches the 2080 also an outstanding compute card it really is the one to go for outside of the 2080 super if the 2080s matches its price point which I dout. at 4k it performs nicely 1440p also.

 

[bigmike20vt]

I must admit i was dissapointed with the memory on the RTX2080 as well.... and is a large reason why i went for a 1080ti myself (the £90 price difference at the time also played a role!)

Since then driver improvements has meant the rtx2080 has gotten a little more performance improvements and i am not certain i would make the same decision today if i could <shrugs> to each their own i guess..... but after all the lambasting of nvidia on their pricing for AMD to essentially be charging just as much as nvidia but with imo a less interesting architecture I just could not buy into it myself.

full fat navi with Raytracing will be the next time i consider AMD i think. i really hope that gets AMD back punching at the high end with a comparable feature set (even if not the absolute top end) Prices will need to be something like however... I am not one of those who hate Nvidia for their pricing but give AMD a free pass for <reasons>

I totally forgot about freesync however (because my TV does not support Free or G sync) and that is a very good point.

 

[subbytna]

So would anyone agree with me in that, Nvidia has done an AMD in rebranding. The "2060 Super" is basically a rebrand of the old "Ti" naming. So instead of calling it a 2060Ti, they called it a "2060Super" same with the 2070

 

[bigmike20vt]

So would anyone agree with me in that, Nvidia has done an AMD in rebranding. The "2060 Super" is basically a rebrand of the old "Ti" naming. So instead of calling it a 2060Ti, they called it a "2060Super" same with the 2070

If the standard RTX2080 and RTX 2070 are continuing to be manufactured then sure, however if they are being deprecated by the "super" then not so much
That said, who really cares about the name? marketing people gotta justify their existence i guess.

i actually think having an RTX 2060 and an RTX 2060super is better than having 2 GTX 1060s but one being half decent and one being rather guff with half the memory but with the same name.

 

[Besty]

So would anyone agree with me in that, Nvidia has done an AMD in rebranding. The "2060 Super" is basically a rebrand of the old "Ti" naming. So instead of calling it a 2060Ti, they called it a "2060Super" same with the 2070

Personally, I don't have a problem with the Super naming as using Ti would indicate chip level changes across the board and confuse the market. I like the re-brand. Nvidia have always liked it a bit 'Cheesey'.

Because of Navi, Nvidia had no choice to do this re-brand an a mini-PR launch stunt.

Nvidia sales were already tanking, look at the 1 year share price vs. AMD, Nvidia are ones in the hurt locker in the short term at least, shame it has taken 5 years (and more) to get here. Vega and Polaris, not really exciting chips to me but (as you can tell) Navi is going to change the world by bringing GTX1080 performance to a global audience and not just in our little geek fandom.