But it's more than $50 less, which is the figure that keeps getting bandied around.
-
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 RDNA 4 Rumour Mill ***
- Thread starter humbug
- Start date
Great point, that was an Apple-esque masterstroke by NV! Happy to see that fail
Was PhysX ever required by any games? Or would you just see fewer fancy effects if you didn't have an NV card or PPU?
100%. Very under-appreciated fact.
Supply constraint.
They have a limited supply of silicon wafers from TSMC, competing against Nvidia, Intel, Apple, Qualcomm etc. to try and get enough for CPU and GPU across server and consumer products. They're not going to sacrifice profits to gain share in a market where they are weak, when they could make a killing with the same silicon with other products.
Agreed. This is the kind of tone they need for their GPU showcase. Now that they've checked the shareholder AI boxes with their CES presentation, talk directly to us. Give us raster performance, without the obfuscation! And a good price!
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,157
- Location
- South Wales
It was useless IMO, looked good in some games but if it came to multiplayer it would be just stuff you could see, and it wouldn't have any effect on anything.
Half Life 2 did it right with Havok.. already in the game and was actually useful.
The RX580 was also what, the third refresh of 290x performance? It did well considering.
If they release something this time actually fast (I mean solid 1440p performance, not top tier fast) at an actually good price it might do them some favours this time around, especially if FSR4 is on point.
I liked his slant on RT as well. He clearly called out the RTX 2000s and said there was no value in those cards, but now there is value in competitive RT performance.
It was disappointing to not see much in their keynote, but it's starting to make a lot of sense now. They wanted to make this release as good as they possibly could. They know they're behind Nvidia and need to react to their movements. If they can do what they seem to be doing, and provide good gaming performance (without the AI circus that gamers don't care about), with an improved upscaler at a competitive price, then they will do well. They won't even need to undercut Nvidia by 50% or whatever it is that some seem to be demanding.
Last edited:
Agreed. It really is like a game of chess that they're playing. They have a strategy, but they also need to react to their (much more powerful) opponent's moves.
FSR4 looks like it will compete well with DLSS and AMD frame gen is good enough for most people. I would definitely take a 9070 over a 5070 if the price was lower and it offered better raw performance. Not bothered about CUDA since I don't use the card for rendering or work but if needed there is ZLUDA or ROCM.
It should also be noted that being $200 cheaper than a 4080 was hardly a big deal. Both were vastly overpriced and that is reflected in the price reductions both had.
The point I was making is that the "$50 cheaper" tagline is disingenuous.
Well the truth is it depends, I could point at the 7900 XT ridiculous price being $100 more expensive than the 4070 Ti.
My point is that neither AMD nor Nvidia had realistic pricing for the current gen cards on release.
Last edited:
I mean I'm not sure it's up for debate whether 200 is more than 50
People seem to have wildly different price expectations. For myself, if the 9070xt (for example) offers the same as the 5070ti and costs a fiver less, I'm going with the 9070xt.
The 7000 vs 4000 was far more nuanced, you're right. If you didn't use RT or upscaling, then the cheaper 7000 was better. If you did then it was up to the individual how much those features were worth - apparently more than $200 or $100 or $50
Yeah I am airing towards this now and I am pretty sure that it will be significantly cheaper than the ti. Building an AM5 build this year and was going to keep the gre but if reviews are good will go the whole hog. Easy offset against the business and can gift the gre to my other lad for his birthday in September. Just hope the sapphire nitro isn't too far north of 600.I mean I'm not sure it's up for debate whether 200 is more than 50
People seem to have wildly different price expectations. For myself, if the 9070xt (for example) offers the same as the 5070ti and costs a fiver less, I'm going with the 9070xt.
The 7000 vs 4000 was far more nuanced, you're right. If you didn't use RT or upscaling, then the cheaper 7000 was better. If you did then it was up to the individual how much those features were worth - apparently more than $200 or $100 or $50
Why are GPU releases so exciting and yet inevitably a letdown
Last edited:
Somebody asked about the Sapphire 9070/XT.. from that video you see the white GPU looks like it might be the Sapphire PURE considering Sapphire made a 7000 series PURE which Im sure was similar to the Pulse but this has 3 fans where I think the previous PURE GPU was 2 fan? Cant remember tbh.
Anyway for those that missed him handling the card, was hard to grab a decent angle with the 'PURE' lettering on it, but its there.
Is there any pictures around of the Sapphire RDNA4 cards yet?
EDIT.. LOL found this onVideocardz, Wccftech 
( https://wccftech.com/hands-on-several-amd-radeon-rx-9070-xt-rdna-4-custom-gpu-models/ ) how did I miss it 
The 'Sapphire' wording is sooo small!
Anyway for those that missed him handling the card, was hard to grab a decent angle with the 'PURE' lettering on it, but its there.
Is there any pictures around of the Sapphire RDNA4 cards yet?
EDIT.. LOL found this on
( https://wccftech.com/hands-on-several-amd-radeon-rx-9070-xt-rdna-4-custom-gpu-models/ ) how did I miss it The 'Sapphire' wording is sooo small!
Last edited:
As previously mentioned, there's no such thing as a bad GPU, just bad pricing. That said, I'd not touch an 8GB VRAM card in 2025 at any price.
The annoying thing with many refresh launches, is the cards are priced similar to the originals.
Refresh or not, the RX480/580 was sensational due to the sheer value it provided, giving 290X/390X performance for a fraction of the price.
I actually bought one as a bday gift, given how affordable they were. Good luck folks affording to give away mid-range GPUs for free nowadays.
If AMD feel like refreshing their cards... if priced a lot lower folks wouldn't complain.
Would anyone moan if they rebadged and re-released 7900XTX at £550?
Getting back to the upcoming cards, regarding AIB models, I noticed that the more budget Powercolour Hellhound is advertised with 0RPM mode.
I've not seen similar advertising on Sapphire cards, I'm guessing they never had such a mode on those?
I should probably watch some reviews of Sapphire RX7000 series to get an understanding.
Got a couple sapphire 6000 series pulse models, both have zero rpm mode fans. I guess they don't feel the need to should about it.
Last edited:
Yeah I'd be very surprised if it's near the 70ti, which will probably end up being £800 for an AIB. If the 9070xt competes with that and it comes out at under £600... Pandemonium.Yeah I am airing towards this now and I am pretty sure that it will be significantly cheaper than the ti. Building an AM5 build this year and was going to keep the gre but if reviews are good will go the whole hog. Easy offset against the business and can gift the gre to my other lad for his birthday in September. Just hope the sapphire nitro isn't too far north of 600.
Why are GPU releases so exciting and yet inevitably a letdown
Although some will still say it needs to be £350