** The AMD Navi Thread **

[Poneros]

The issue is that people only think of the here and now. They want a good framerate in 2019 so buy the best GPU for that purpose. Then they loose out in 2 years because Nvidia have a bigger monopoly. It's human nature I guess.

Bro, I haven't bought an Nvidia card since the gts 250 450. And even that was only gotten as warranty replacement from the retailer for a 4850 which burned out. At best I had a voodoo 2 as an Nvidia card but not really. Don't be so quick to assume.

 

[FoxEye]

Bro, I haven't bought an Nvidia card since the gts 250. And even that was only gotten as warranty replacement from the retailer for a 4850 which burned out. At best I had a voodoo 2 as an Nvidia card but not really. Don't be so quick to assume.

My last 3 cards have been AMD, and I get called an nVidia shill by the AMD defence force You just can't criticise AMD here or you're in bed with JSH.

 

[Rroff]

Bro, I haven't bought an Nvidia card since the gts 250. And even that was only gotten as warranty replacement from the retailer for a 4850 which burned out. At best I had a voodoo 2 as an Nvidia card but not really. Don't be so quick to assume.

Its a shame 3dfx Interactive are no longer in business.

 

[Satchfanuk]

My last 3 cards have been AMD, and I get called an nVidia shill by the AMD defence force You just can't criticise AMD here or you're in bed with JSH.

There's a defence force for both sides, just look at the number of people defending 20 series pricing. The only reason I see time and again in this forum for AMD to bring a competitive card to the party is so people can buy Nvidia GPUs for less. They have zero interest in buying from AMD, regardless of performance. It's a sad truth.

 

[Grim5]

There's a defence force for both sides, just look at the number of people defending 20 series pricing. The only reason I see time and again in this forum for AMD to bring a competitive card to the party is so people can buy Nvidia GPUs for less. They have zero interest in buying from AMD, regardless of performance. It's a sad truth.

Not everyone - there was a time where money wasn't as easily available and so I would compare AMD and Nvidia and the last AMD card I owned was the 290x and before that the HD5870 - now at that time it was excellent value for money as it cost me about $500usd and it was cheaper than the Nvidia equivalent and there wasn't much in it by going Nvidia. Same again a couple years later when I picked up a 290x, it had launched just after the 780ti and had excellent performance and pricing so I saw no reason to go Nvidia unless I wanted phsyx and other gameworks stuff etc.

Time passes and since 2017 I've been with Nvidia with the 1080ti, then 2080ti - and the only reason for this is that I have more money and so I choose to buy a 4k screen and a 1440p 144hz screen. I then looked at what GPU's I need to drive these displays and the AMD hardware just wasn't competent enough for what I needed.

In summary, it seems when AMD and Nvidia's performance is very close then I tend to go with AMD to save money and when AMD isnt close to what I need then I go Nvidia - in the last 14 years I've owned 3 Nvidia GPUs and 2 AMD GPUs.

I've mentioned it before and I'll say it again - if AMD brings out a card that's faster than the 2080ti I'd probably grab one to support them as they'll then be giving me the performance I want. I'm inclined to head this direction anyway because TV's don't support gsync and when I move to 4k 120hz TV I need a freesync capable GPU

 

[BigBANGtheory]

If AMD brings out a GPU faster than 2080Ti at a sensible price (not at any price) I would in all honesty wait to see what Nvidia's response to that is and then make a pure and simple decision on price/perf ratio. It has to be this performance range first though because of 4K and a future desire for a VR HMD, the 1080 performance range is simply not enough for me and I'm already knocking on its door with an overclockable 980Ti. The R9 290X was a good GPU (until it failed in my case) what I need from AMD is that equivalent product not just in 2019 but asap, I'm happy to move between vendors for the right product and likewise I am critical of both for different reasons.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

If AMD brings out a GPU faster than 2080Ti at a sensible price (not at any price) I would in all honesty wait to see what Nvidia's response to that is and then make a pure and simple decision on price/perf ratio.

At the current rate of progress it will be 2024-2025 until a mid range AMD gpu (polaris/navi) reaches the level of performance of a 2080ti.

 

[subbytna]

make a pure and simple decision on price/perf ratio..

If you're making a price to performace choice then you'd go with AMD right now. You can't seriously say that 2000 series of GPUs' from Nvidia are value?

 

[D.P.]

If you're making a price to performace choice then you'd go with AMD right now. You can't seriously say that 2000 series of GPUs' from Nvidia are value?

Actually yes,
2080 is better the the VegaII https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_VII/30.html

2070 is better than the Vega64 https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_RTX_2070_AMP_Extreme/35.html

2060 is better than the Vega 56 https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_RTX_2060_Gaming_Z/34.html

1660 is better equal than 580: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Colorful/iGame_GTX_1660_Ultra/29.html


At best you can argue AMD and Nvidia have comparable price performance, AMD tend to give more vram which makes no difference until the game is too slow to play, and Nvidia offers RTX which is not well supported.

The 2 exceptions are; RX570 really pushes well above its weight. The 2080ti has a joke of a price but is at least untouched so the money gets you something tangible.

 

[ANDREW GREEN]

Actually yes,
2080 is better the the VegaII https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Radeon_VII/30.html

2070 is better than the Vega64 https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_RTX_2070_AMP_Extreme/35.html

2060 is better than the Vega 56 https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_RTX_2060_Gaming_Z/34.html

1660 is better equal than 580: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Colorful/iGame_GTX_1660_Ultra/29.html


At best you can argue AMD and Nvidia have comparable price performance, AMD tend to give more vram which makes no difference until the game is too slow to play, and Nvidia offers RTX which is not well supported.

The 2 exceptions are; RX570 really pushes well above its weight. The 2080ti has a joke of a price but is at least untouched so the money gets you something tangible.

Don't both Vega cards overclock by 15% essentially putting them on par with 2060/2070 once overclocked? And both are significantly cheaper. I appreciate that's an enthusisasts outlook.

 

[CuriousTomCat]

At best you can argue AMD and Nvidia have comparable price performance, AMD tend to give more vram which makes no difference until the game is too slow to play, and Nvidia offers RTX which is not well supported.

The 2 exceptions are; RX570 really pushes well above its weight. The 2080ti has a joke of a price but is at least untouched so the money gets you something tangible.

You could also argue that Nvidia have been raising their prices well above the rate of inflation. A 2080ti shouldn't cost anymore than £500. They have a monopoly so they can do what they like.

The high end Nvidia card used to cost £150.

Surely this process will reverse if people bought more AMD cards? GPU prices will spiral back down without a monopoly?

 

[D.P.]

You could also argue that Nvidia have been raising their prices well above the rate of inflation. A 2080ti shouldn't cost anymore than £500. They have a monopoly so they can do what they like.

The high end Nvidia card used to cost £150.

Surely this process will reverse if people bought more AMD cards? GPU prices will spiral back down without a monopoly?

There isn't currently a monopoly and there are many more market forces at play controlling prices. Quite simply people are happy to pay higher prices for GPUs. Moreover, R&D and production costs have increased well beyond inflation. Each new GPU architecture costs twice the R&D of the previous, each new fabrication node is costing over twice the previous per mm^2.


Additionally AMD, have shown no desire to be a budget brand any more. They have publicly stated they can't be seen as that and ultimately it will lead to complete failure for AMD if they tried.

IF AMD were truely competitive and had more market share then there might be a small price adjustment but I doubt it will be anywhere near as big as most people expect.

 

[D.P.]

Don't both Vega cards overclock by 15% essentially putting them on par with 2060/2070 once overclocked? And both are significantly cheaper. I appreciate that's an enthusisasts outlook.

Turing also overclock by similar amounts to that is irreverent, doubly so since no overclock is guaranteed and anyone doing voltage mods and overclocks are a tiny minority. Just because people on this forum like tweaking the Vega bios or whatever doesn't mean the whole gamer community knows or cares. Only out of the box performance counts.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

You could also argue that Nvidia have been raising their prices well above the rate of inflation. A 2080ti shouldn't cost anymore than £500. They have a monopoly so they can do what they like.

The high end Nvidia card used to cost £150.

Surely this process will reverse if people bought more AMD cards? GPU prices will spiral back down without a monopoly?

Why would the 2080ti ever be cheaper than a 1080ti ? the BOM is much higher alone, Massive die , new ram type, much more complex PCB with more pricey components, still should have been this side of £900 for sure and zero competition.

When as high end GPU ever £150?

 

[Besty]

The mobile market needing a shrunk, power efficient RX Vega 64 is just a temporary goal. I hope you don't expect that the RX Vega 64 level of performance will be the last and final.
Next will be an RTX 2080 Ti level of performance shrunk and power efficient in the mobiles. But that will probably happen with the help of 3nm process (after the current 7nm and the future 5nm).

But, I wouldn't rely on the mobiles for gaming, except if the gaming doesn't involve some light e-sports titles.

4K and 8K gaming on mobiles..... Good luck with that!

I don’t really need 4k or even 1440p on my laptop , 1080p and maybe some supersampling is fine. This is because you sit much closer to the screen.

What i do need is less heat and a much quieter experience.

I was going to upgrade my Alienware like i do almost every year and then realised you needed two PSU cables to power the 2019 refresh. It has given me pause for thought.

4.5ghz quad core cpu and GTX 1080 desktop perf at 7nm is what AMD need to deliver in a laptop.

 

[greatash]

Don't both Vega cards overclock by 15% essentially putting them on par with 2060/2070 once overclocked? And both are significantly cheaper. I appreciate that's an enthusisasts outlook.

Pretty much, V56 goes beyond stock v64 performance which is ahead of the 2060. With the extra vram and cheaper price its a no brainer to me.
The Nvidia cards dont gain as much from ocing since they already boost to near 2ghz out of the box. The Vega cards are power throttled down to 1400~mhz with high volts + relatively low memory clocks at stock which is why they gain so much from tweaking.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

If you're making a price to performace choice then you'd go with AMD right now. You can't seriously say that 2000 series of GPUs' from Nvidia are value?

No because you missed off the caveat, I need that performance to be above the 2000 series. Without that the decision is a No regardless of who the vendor is or the price, when the performance is there then its about price and AMD aren't even competing in that market space yet.

 

[Calin Banc]

You could also argue that Nvidia have been raising their prices well above the rate of inflation. A 2080ti shouldn't cost anymore than £500. They have a monopoly so they can do what they like.

The high end Nvidia card used to cost £150.

Surely this process will reverse if people bought more AMD cards? GPU prices will spiral back down without a monopoly?

HD4870- $299
HD4890- $249
HD5870- $399
HD7970- $549
R290X- $549
Fury X- $649
Vega 64 $500 + $700 for the liquid (which was AMD doing an NVIDIA, 'cause after the initial launch the prices went up!)
Vega VII $700

Prices are from Techpowerup database and show launch date prices.

As you can see AMD increased the price over time and will do what nVIDIA does if you give them the opportunity.

All players increase the price, because they can. nVIDIA has higher profits than never due to high prices and high sales, but people say: yeah, the increase in price is due to R&D and inflation!. I would understand that if the profits would have remained the same when volumes sold remained at the same price, but not in this case.

Anyway, the good part is that you can play even on the old r290 just about everything you what you want in 1080p, if you don't mind lowering settings. The bad part is that even a 2080ti can't really give you 4k@60fps if you want ot max out settings (never mind the RT stuff). If you're with the 1st crowd, you're in luck - doesn't matter much what both companies have for sale; a good card for you will be relatively cheap. If you're in the 2nd crow... good luck and get a 2nd job !

 

[Martini1991]

You could also argue that Nvidia have been raising their prices well above the rate of inflation. A 2080ti shouldn't cost anymore than £500. They have a monopoly so they can do what they like.

The high end Nvidia card used to cost £150.

Surely this process will reverse if people bought more AMD cards? GPU prices will spiral back down without a monopoly?

Forgetting of course about AMD's pricing.

 

[4K8KW10]

HD4870- $299
HD4890- $249
HD5870- $399
HD7970- $549
R290X- $549
Fury X- $649
Vega 64 $500 + $700 for the liquid (which was AMD doing an NVIDIA, 'cause after the initial launch the prices went up!)
Vega VII $700

Prices are from Techpowerup database and show launch date prices.

As you can see AMD increased the price over time and will do what nVIDIA does if you give them the opportunity.

All players increase the price, because they can. nVIDIA has higher profits than never due to high prices and high sales, but people say: yeah, the increase in price is due to R&D and inflation!. I would understand that if the profits would have remained the same when volumes sold remained at the same price, but not in this case.

Anyway, the good part is that you can play even on the old r290 just about everything you what you want in 1080p, if you don't mind lowering settings. The bad part is that even a 2080ti can't really give you 4k@60fps if you want ot max out settings (never mind the RT stuff). If you're with the 1st crowd, you're in luck - doesn't matter much what both companies have for sale; a good card for you will be relatively cheap. If you're in the 2nd crow... good luck and get a 2nd job !

HD 6970 - $369 https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-hd-6970.c258
R9 390X - $429 https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-r9-390x.c2663

In the case of HD 4890 and HD 5870 (249 and 399), AMD didn't increase the price because it could but because it was the only solution that made sense. Since the HD 4890 was already dead cheap. AMD couldn't just position HD 5870 at the same 199-249 price bracket, it would have been ridiculous.