Soldato
Nvidia offers GTX1070 level performance for £250 right now. AMD would at least need to get close to GTX1080 performance for similar money,to push people towards Navi.
-
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 **
- Thread starter subbytna
- Start date
This. Hopefully we will see close to, or around 1080ti/RTX 2080 performance for ~£300-£350.
Anything less and they may as well not even bother.
So basicly they will need to offer vega 64 performance which is what the leaks has been saying. Doesn't seem that unlikely to me either. 2080 performance i highly doubt however. Not from the first round of navi. But i would be happy to be proven wrong.
The only reason I think they would do such a thing is if the manufacturing costs requires it of them and hearing about 70%+ yield on 7nm i highly doubt that's going to be the case. I'm 99% certain that they will use the same mindset with their GPU division as they have with their CPU division(Ryzen). However that said.. 450 is still a lot cheaper than what the cheapest 2080 is selling for.
Soldato
Then nobody will buy it and AMD make a massive loss in not recouping R&D. It is that simple.
I hope so, I switched from Intel to Ryzen 2700X and have been very happy, only reason I haven’t swapped to AMD is because trying to power 34” 3440x1440 maxed out isn’t possible with AMD.
Soldato
But selling it "cheap" doesn't equate to a loss in profits. High volume, low margin can make far more money than low volume high margin.
If AMD can design, produce and distribute a card at RTX 2070 performance for £150 and sell it at £250, that is £100 pure profit on every single card sold. 66% markup on every card is hardly peanuts.I don't believe a word Gibbo says when he claims to have very tiny margins on graphics cards, but even if he dropped another £50 on top that is still £150 cheaper than the closest RTX 2070 and they will fly off the shelves.
Associate
Seriously if you where part of the marketing team at AMD you would have bancrupt them thinking and talking like that, If navi is anything like what you just said and I have highlighted your quote AMD would only have to undercut a RTX 2070 buy £ 50 and if Nvidia dropped there prices so could AMD and still do very well on profit
Soldato
No, because a mere £50 isn't incentive enough for the general consumer to buy AMD. The mindshare is against them, "everybody" sees them as the budget brand unable to deliver the same performance as Nvidia. So AMD have the audacity to only be £50 cheaper than Nvidia and not even offer ray tracing or DLSS? Nobody would buy it.Seriously if you where part of the marketing team at AMD you would have bancrupt them thinking and talking like that, If navi is anything like what you just said and I have highlighted your quote AMD would only have to undercut a RTX 2070 buy £ 50 and if Nvidia dropped there prices so could AMD and still do very well on profit
Or do you actually condone current pricing trends?
Associate
You clearly are just click baiting or you don't have a clue how maths work as for current pricing it is ludricous and the blame for that is clearly not AMD's fault, why would a company sell something that could be worth circular £350 for as you say " £250 " as this thread is all speculation but you still want to under value a maybe product. Which you or anybody else doesn't know the true performs yet!
Last edited:
Permabanned
But they do, For years people have been saying "AMD has an opportunity here where they can undercut Nvidia and grab a bigger market share" they say it before each release but it never happens, They said it with Fiji, then Polaris, then Vega and then with the VII but instead they matched the higher prices & no-one should really be surprised by that, they are a business. That's why people adding stock to so called leaks that we'll see 2080ti performance at sub £500 prices are kidding themselves & worse setting AMD up for a fall with the people that listen to them, It's never going to happen, at least not anytime soon.
Permabanned
And what is it possible with?
PUBG Played great on my 1080Ti, even better on my 2080Ti.
Soldato
Pray tell why do you have your panties in a bunch about a "maybe product" as you put it? By your own logic, who says Navi is even worth £350? Maybe I'm not "under valuing" it, perhaps you're "over valuing" it. Exactly as you point out, we just don't know. If you're going to attempt to find fault in my purely hypothetical discussion points then please do so with strong logic of your own.
Soldato
2080Ti performance for £500 is entirely possible. AMD actually producing a Navi card which reaches 2080 Ti performance is the crazy notion.
You do know that Radeon VII is a non-product, right? It's not sustainable and it was purely a PR stunt to take advantage of a massive balls up by Nvidia. And because of that, AMD have potentially shot themselves in a the foot a little, because the £650 price tag panders to the skewed market perceptions of what a GPU should cost, and the 16GB RAM sets a precedent that is not easily circumvented. Pricing it any lower would significantly impact the perception of future GPU products (not just Navi) because of the sheer amount of expensive VRAM on board.
So go on then, answer this: a Navi card comes out that matches RTX 2070 in raster performance and is priced only £50 cheaper. Would you buy it?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,715
Unless AMD undercut Nvidia by a large amount, people wouldn't but them. Case in point, the RX580 is faster and cheaper than a 1060. Yet the slower and more expensive 1060 has 15% market share while the RX580 only has 1%. Why? Because of the Nvidia brand.
Undercutting Nvidia by a small amount doesn't work. AMD need to undercut Nvidia by a HUGE amount to make a dent in the market. That's the very sad truth of the industry.
A lot of people dont even read reviews or benchmarks, they just buy Nvidia.
Because 120W vs 185W, even though sane people would still choose 8GB instead of 6GB VRAM, and higher image quality, of course, and better drivers for the Radeon.
That won't sell, they're 6+ months late and don't have the mindshare. The masses will always pay £50-100 more for the equivalent Nvidia card.
Anything other than 2060/56 performance at £200, 2070/64+ at £250+300 is a fail in my eyes.
They absolutely need to undercut by a significant amount just like ryzen, do you think ryzen would be selling so well if it just matched intel but for £50 cheaper? They almost matched single core but with double/triple the cores/threads for half the price
Last edited:
In games like Division 2 i have no issue powering 3200x1800 using a mix of high and ultra settings(mostly high) and staying above 60 usally more in the 70ish area actually with my vega 64 on air. So if Devs actually had the incentive/time/whatever reason they need to optimize for available hardware Vega is actually pretty capable. Don't take this as me saying Vega is perfect cause it certainly isn't but then again what GPU doesn't have a weak/weaker side?
Permabanned
I don't play PUBG but I've been running 3440x1440 with a Vega 64 or VII for over a year or so & they've both done a great job.
What if this what if that? Your argument is based on AMD not doing something AMD has done time & time again, like the question your argument relies on what if's not facts.
As an example look at the Fury X, just prior to it's release there was plenty of people like yourself talking about how AMD would undercut Nvidia to gain market share with the Fiji cards but it never happened.
Even though the Fury X couldn't match the 980ti's performance it released with the same $649 launch price meaning we got less for our money, less performance & less memory which people tried to excuse with the 4gb's of HBM is like 6gb's of GDDR5 claim. Fast forward to the Vega 64 & Koduri tried to make it look like the Vega 64 undercut the GTX1080 on release by making a very limited number of cards available at a lower price, once they were gone it was back to the real msrp. People still bought the Vega cards though so why would AMD decide to change how they approach pricing this time when they haven't any other time? Yes, It'd be great if they did but history tells us they won't unless there's something big working against the new architecture, & even then they might not so basing an argument on how they will this time is folly.