*** The AMD RDNA 4 Rumour Mill ***

[humbug]

Boycott the game!

Seriously though, AMD really need to get the finger out. 90% Nvidia cards on the market ffs. AMD should be aiming for at least 30%.

And please don't tell me it is because people like me keep buying Nvidia cards. It is AMD's job to make cards and price them correctly to make me buy them.

I gave up on supporting the so called underdog years ago when they started falling behind yet still wanting to charge silly moneys like Nvidia.

I agree DLSS is better than FSR, for sure it is, its not enough for me to pay £600 for a 12GB GPU that is a bit less crap at RT than a 16GB GPU costing £480.

 

[Firegod]

Still baffles me this pricing thing people are so hung up about it. I just don't get why certain people have a hard time paying the price for a GPU, when Nvidia can charge top whack for gimped cards (£800/£900) or £2k for a halo card and people are like yeah take my money I don't care. Surely, the cost of building and developing a GPU is the same for Nvidia and AMD. It's not like it costs Nvidia £500 for RAM whereas AMD get the RAM for £50. So I fail to understand why people think AMD have to sell their cards cheaper. People can happily spend £300 on a motherboard, £400 on a CPU, £1k on an OLED gaming monitor but then whinge when they have to pay £600 for a GPU. I get that obviously the price has to be justified by performance. I get that. But AMD cards are not rubbish like some people want you to believe, they perform well have solid software, and FSR3.1 and AMFM2 do a good job and hopefully FSR4 will build upon that. Only weakness I see with AMD is RT. But that's just me. I personally don't think AMD are charging "top" dollar. I know a lot will disagree which is fine.

 

[humbug]

Still baffles me this pricing thing people are so hung up about it. I just don't get why certain people have a hard time paying the price for a GPU, when Nvidia can charge top whack for gimped cards (£800/£900) or £2k for a halo card and people are like yeah take my money I don't care. Surely, the cost of building and developing a GPU is the same for Nvidia and AMD. It's not like it costs Nvidia £500 for RAM whereas AMD get the RAM for £50. So I fail to understand why people think AMD have to sell their cards cheaper. People can happily spend £300 on a motherboard, £400 on a CPU, £1k on an OLED gaming monitor but then whinge when they have to pay £600 for a GPU. I get that obviously the price has to be justified by performance. I get that. But AMD cards are not rubbish like some people want you to believe, they perform well have solid software, and FSR3.1 and AMFM2 do a good job and hopefully FSR4 will build upon that. Only weakness I see with AMD is RT. But that's just me. I personally don't think AMD are charging "top" dollar. I know a lot will disagree which is fine.

Thing is mostly they are cheaper...

7900 XTX: £780
4080 Super: £1000

7900 XT: £600
4070 Ti: £770

7900 GRE: £570 < over priced i agreed
4070 Super: £570

7800 XT: £450
4070: £500

7700 XT: £360
4060 Ti 16GB: £420
4060 Ti: £320

The last two are difficult to place given that the 4070 is only 10% faster than the 7700 XT while it is 20% faster than the 4060 ti, given that and the 12GB on both the 4070 and 7700 XT i would put the 7700 XT much more a competitor to the 4070, in which case its £140 more expensive.

They are cheaper, and yet Nvidia outsell AMD 9:1, the 7700 XT is near 30% cheaper than the 4070, the 7900 XTX 25% cheaper than the 4080 S, the 7900 XT also 25% cheaper than the 4070 Ti, but its not enough, no where near enough, see the difficulty AMD have in competing? People keep saying to gain marketshare they need to be cheaper, how much cheaper, 30% isn't enough, 50%? 60%? 70%? if its costing you money for every GPU you sell just stop as its suicide.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Well Turing came along and it shifted to "but ray tracing".

However now its been 6 years and not many great games to speak of, people are now questioning if its really feasible especially in the lower end.

 

[humbug]

Well Turing came along and it shifted to "but ray tracing".

However now its been 6 years and not many great games to speak of, people are now questioning if its really feasible especially in the lower end.

It isn't and it never will be as Nvidia use it as a marketing tool for £2000 GPU's, the RT just keeps getting cranked and putting it out of reach of mortals because the more you have to pay to get RT that makes a visual difference at reasonable FPS the more money Nvidia make.

Its why RT 4070 vs 7800 XT had no bearing on my decision, at levels where the 4070 is faster it is also unusable, just a bit less crap than on the 7800 XT and at levels that are usable they are actually very similar in performance.

 

[kieran_read]

Still baffles me this pricing thing people are so hung up about it. I just don't get why certain people have a hard time paying the price for a GPU, when Nvidia can charge top whack for gimped cards (£800/£900) or £2k for a halo card and people are like yeah take my money I don't care. Surely, the cost of building and developing a GPU is the same for Nvidia and AMD. It's not like it costs Nvidia £500 for RAM whereas AMD get the RAM for £50. So I fail to understand why people think AMD have to sell their cards cheaper. People can happily spend £300 on a motherboard, £400 on a CPU, £1k on an OLED gaming monitor but then whinge when they have to pay £600 for a GPU. I get that obviously the price has to be justified by performance. I get that. But AMD cards are not rubbish like some people want you to believe, they perform well have solid software, and FSR3.1 and AMFM2 do a good job and hopefully FSR4 will build upon that. Only weakness I see with AMD is RT. But that's just me. I personally don't think AMD are charging "top" dollar. I know a lot will disagree which is fine.

For me it's that both companies are over charging.

Tech over time gets cheaper, that's the rule everywhere apart from GPUs, TVs get bigger, better and cheaper each generation. RAM gets cheaper, CPUs get cheaper that's the general rule, GPUs though are being released way higher than they should be, they get little price movement over 2 years, then when there's loads of stock at the end of the generation they release the next generation even more expensive so they can keep selling the old cards at the same price. (Supers are still being sold near full RRP to this day, AMD are cheaper now)

I don't think people are as much hung up about price, but more that AMD are pricing comparatively to Nvidia who people already think are too expensive. They want AMD to be cheaper in the same way they want Nvidia to be cheaper, I do think people get a little more hung up on AMD than Nvidia, I suspect this is just general acceptance that as Nvidia are dominating the market they wont change, so they focus more on AMD.

It's a weird focus, because for some people they don't like AMD because they're not Nvidia, but they want them to be cheaper not so they will buy AMD, but so Nvidia will be cheaper so they can then buy them.

I was so down this generation to upgrade then the price came out and I tagged out went over what I was willing to spend. January I will get something, ill have to suck up inflated prices if I must, mostly because I suspect the Trump Tariffs will push prices up for us, not because we have to pay them, but Nvidia will want the extra money. It's the case of get something January or realistically wait 5-6 years longer for the tariffs to be removed and my 1080ti will not last that long.

Thing is mostly they are cheaper...

7900 XTX: £780
4080 Super: £1000

7900 XT: £600
4070 Ti: £770

7900 GRE: £570 < over priced i agreed
4070 Super: £570

7800 XT: £450
4070: £500

7700 XT: £360
4060 Ti 16GB: £420
4060 Ti: £320

The last two are difficult to place given that the 4070 is only 10% faster than the 7700 XT while it is 20% faster than the 4060 ti, given that and the 12GB on both the 4070 and 7700 XT i would put the 7700 XT much more a competitor to the 4070, in which case its £140 more expensive.

They are cheaper, and yet Nvidia outsell AMD 9:1, the 7700 XT is near 30% cheaper than the 4070, the 7900 XTX 25% cheaper than the 4080 S, the 7900 XT also 25% cheaper than the 4070 Ti, but its not enough, no where near enough, see the difficulty AMD have in competing? People keep saying to gain marketshare they need to be cheaper, how much cheaper, 30% isn't enough, 50%? 60%? 70%? if its costing you money for every GPU you sell just stop as its suicide.

I don't think this is a fair comparison, they're only cheaper because they're clearing stock for January. When the XTX launched it was the same price wish some models being more expensive than some Nvidia 4080s.

I agree now AMD have amazing value, heck i'd have a XTX if it launched at that price, but not we're so close to January I'm going to wait for CES and see what's what.

The problem you have is you have to wait until the cards are near End of Life to get that value. I've been checking prices now and again and prior to the most recent prices, the lowest I saw a entry model XTX was I think £880, don't get more wrong a good price compared to Nvidia, (still too high for that tier of card) however at the same time I saw the lowest 4080S for £950.

Now when are you saying Nvidia are outselling AMD 9 to 1 are you talking about now at these prices? Or in general for this generation? Because if you're talking about the generation as whole, the prices have been pretty close overall.

 

[Phixsator]

If the 8800XT is better than my old 6950XT with lower power draw and better RT I'm in. Just pricing that could spoil the party

if it aint better then its basically a rehash of a 7800XT with perhaps better RT. I would classify that as a humongus fail unless the price is 300. PS: you didn't specify how much better

 

[welshrat]

It isn't and it never will be as Nvidia use it as a marketing tool for £2000 GPU's, the RT just keeps getting cranked and putting it out of reach of mortals because the more you have to pay to get RT that makes a visual difference at reasonable FPS the more money Nvidia make.

Its why RT 4070 vs 7800 XT had no bearing on my decision, at levels where the 4070 is faster it is also unusable, just a bit less crap than on the 7800 XT and at levels that are usable they are actually very similar in performance.

Thing is when RT isn't path tracing rdna3 performs pretty well. I played Indiana Jones today on my 7900gre at 1440p with everything at ultra and the FPS was 60 or above. I really have no complaints. It will be a few gens before PT RT is accessible to most and I am happy to wait that out. I have no interest in paying 1k+ for a GPU.

 

[gpuerrilla]

I don't think people are as much hung up about price, but more that AMD are pricing comparatively to Nvidia who people already think are too expensive. They want AMD to be cheaper in the same way they want Nvidia to be cheaper, I do think people get a little more hung up on AMD than Nvidia, I suspect this is just general acceptance that as Nvidia are dominating the market they wont change, so they focus more on AMD.

It's a weird focus, because for some people they don't like AMD because they're not Nvidia, but they want them to be cheaper not so they will buy AMD, but so Nvidia will be cheaper so they can then buy them.

Yes. We touch on this (regularly) but its reality.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

I can't blame AMD for all but giving up in the consumer market (with their new unified architecture). The writing does seem to be on the wall and I don't think AMD are doing poorly because the 7000 series were bad, I think they lost this war a long time ago and now they're just stubbornly refusing to die. It's over because of their small marketshare which goes back a long time. I really don't think there's much they can do at this point, it'll either take a Ryzen moment or a big fumble from Nvidia or maybe both.

Outside of forums like these and the more technically minded I believe (based on nothing but a hunch) that most people see the GPU market like this:

4090 = best graphics cards -> Nvidia make the 4090 = Nvidia make the best graphics cards
7900XTX != best graphics cards -> AMD make the 7900XTX = AMD don't make the best graphics cards

So without spending time being a geeky geek and looking up info on graphics cards like a loser, are you gonna buy a graphics card by the people the make the best graphics cards or the people that don't (given there's maybe a 10% price difference)?

I really do think there are people that think ANY Nvidia GPU is better than ANY AMD GPU because of this brand recognition.

I think we're the sort of people that would probably do research on anything we're going to buy because we're sort of at home on the internet. I'm not sure that's what the internet is to everyone else.

So I don't think it'll matter how good the 8000 series is at RT or raster a lot of people have already decided they'll be getting an Nvidia graphics card.
I do wonder how much call these is for RT in workstation cards and how that will impact the RT performance of the UNDA cards. Also how will this architecture affect the next console APUs?

 

[Troezar]

if it aint better then its basically a rehash of a 7800XT with perhaps better RT. I would classify that as a humongus fail unless the price is 300. PS: you didn't specify how much better

The how much better depends on the price, the more it costs the better it will need to be

 

[kieran_read]

I can't blame AMD for all but giving up in the consumer market (with their new unified architecture). The writing does seem to be on the wall and I don't think AMD are doing poorly because the 7000 series were bad, I think they lost this war a long time ago and now they're just stubbornly refusing to die. It's over because of their small marketshare which goes back a long time. I really don't think there's much they can do at this point, it'll either take a Ryzen moment or a big fumble from Nvidia or maybe both.

Outside of forums like these and the more technically minded I believe (based on nothing but a hunch) that most people see the GPU market like this:

4090 = best graphics cards -> Nvidia make the 4090 = Nvidia make the best graphics cards
7900XTX != best graphics cards -> AMD make the 7900XTX = AMD don't make the best graphics cards

So without spending time being a geeky geek and looking up info on graphics cards like a loser, are you gonna buy a graphics card by the people the make the best graphics cards or the people that don't (given there's maybe a 10% price difference)?

I really do think there are people that think ANY Nvidia GPU is better than ANY AMD GPU because of this brand recognition.

I think we're the sort of people that would probably do research on anything we're going to buy because we're sort of at home on the internet. I'm not sure that's what the internet is to everyone else.

So I don't think it'll matter how good the 8000 series is at RT or raster a lot of people have already decided they'll be getting an Nvidia graphics card.
I do wonder how much call these is for RT in workstation cards and how that will impact the RT performance of the UNDA cards. Also how will this architecture affect the next console APUs?

That's true but AMD's problem is they haven't learnt from Ryzen, they went in all guns blazing offering a worse product (GEN1) albeit still very good I got the 1700 personally but it was significantly cheaper that made people look stupid if they bought Intel. People were so in in the hands of Intel in the same way people are with Nvidia, but because the offer so so good in comparison it won people over, they then kept buying and they won so much market share, profit and were able to continuously improve.

If you look at the AMD GPUs excluding the 4090 they are competitive in every tier of GPUs both in price and performance end that only gets closer and closer the lower down the stack towards the entry cards you get as at that level the better RT on Nvidia is irrelevant because they both run at unplayable rates.

What AMD should have done was gone in all guns blazing with the 7000 series with the goal of getting market share, this would have helped their revenue, their market share, it would have destroyed old myths such as how so many people avoid AMD because of drivers that are no longer really an issue and perform pretty well. Not only would it have got them the "Good Guy AMD" that they had with the early gen Ryzens, it would have brought more people on board who wouldn't have considered them before. It's crazy to me how they didn't do this.

Just imagine how it would have gone down if AMD launched at the current prices 7900XTX @£800, 7900XT @£600 7800XT @£450 for example. The fact they can sell them now at this price means they could have from the start.

They would have absolutely ran away with this generation, the problem is companies want to sell 1 card at 1000 to make 200 profit, rather than sell 10 cards with lower margins and make 200 profit. Even though the end result is the same.

Everything you said was true, but it was also true with Intel vs AMD when it came to CPUs before Ryzen, and they changed that thought process, the problem is AMD hasn't taken the same approach with GPUs. Let Nvidia charge through the roof, that's how you turn customers against them and bring them to your side.

They chased the wrong horse, the market leader and not the customer.

 

[TNA]

I agree DLSS is better than FSR, for sure it is, its not enough for me to pay £600 for a 12GB GPU that is a bit less crap at RT than a 16GB GPU costing £480.

How many games has me having 12GB impacted me this gen? I barely need one hand to count. The two that did were because FG pushed it over the edge.

DLSS on the other hand is in most games i play and you can pop in the latest version in and benefit from that too.

Then you have better RT and FG on top of that. Not to mention easier to sell on and less depreciation (in my experience).

When vram becomes an issue for me I can just simply upgrade and have a new toy to play with. Not like I enjoy having less vram, but I value the superior features I mentioned above more.

AMD can keep charging stupid prices like Nvidia does and they can keep enjoying 10% or soon less market share if they **** up their next gen pricing.

Pricing matters no matter what people say.

 

[JediFragger]

AMD can keep charging stupid prices like Nvidia does and they can keep enjoying 10% or soon less market share if they **** up their next gen pricing.

Funny part is, they're probably even a lot worse than 10% in the oem/laptop/prebuilt market!

 

[tommybhoy]

People only complain that AMD should be cheaper so they can hold out for Nv to drop prices, here's my example:

7900XTX launches Dec 2023@$1000-but 'it's too expensive' compared to the $1200 4080.

'AMD Should be cheaper'

When the AIB retailer scalping dies down I bought my XTX Pulse for £999 in May 2023, about 4-6 weeks later price then bounces about for a while going as low as £900 before levelling out at £959-but it's went as much as £279 lower than the 4080 but generally £200 cheaper most if not all of the time.

'AMD Should be cheaper'

Since launch Nv's reduced the 4080 FE iirc by £20 to £1179, on the whole, hardly any ones buying either.

'AMD Should be cheaper'

JANUARY 2024 4080S arrives at $200 less-where the XTX has been sitting and the 4080 starts selling, the only performance difference is the 4080 now has an S for Sale slapped on the end of it, they're now moving out the door.

And we still hear?

'AMD Should be cheaper'



AMD literally forced everything under the 4090 a price drop and everyone who wanted Nv but wouldn't pay, jump on board without realising they've missed half it's worth of generational performance and still despite AMD shifting price again, all we hear is

'AMD Should be cheaper'....

Moral of the story, most Nv users are full of BS on the 'cheaper' excuse, they are never going AMD, because they want to stay Nv and they only want competition to make their Nv purchase happen.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Everything you said was true, but it was also true with Intel vs AMD when it came to CPUs before Ryzen, and they changed that thought process, the problem is AMD hasn't taken the same approach with GPUs. Let Nvidia charge through the roof, that's how you turn customers against them and bring them to your side.

The other important factor I feel was that prior to this Intel had been releasing the smallest of small upgrades from the 2000 up to about the 7000 series. It was only with the 8000 series that the mainstream CPUs got 6 cores. So I think enthusiasts were getting fed up with Intel, which made Ryzen's job easier. I don't think the same can be said of Nvidia, at least not at the high end.

 

[mahius]

I really do think there are people that think ANY Nvidia GPU is better than ANY AMD GPU because of this brand recognition.

There's additional factors including OEMs not bothering with AMD options, for those who buy pre-built. For the average non-enthusiast, some of them don't even know AMD GPUs exist.
Heck, whats funnier, is that there's plenty of places around the world where AMD GPUs aren't even available to buy.

I looked around various computer shops on my holiday in Thailand a few months back. I don't think I saw a single AMD GPU on the shelf. I wouldn't be surprised if those customers had never heard of AMD GPUs.

And before anyone asks, no the prices of GPUs were not cheaper over there. Priced about the same as here. Even some clothing brands like M&S and Uniqlo are priced the same as they are here.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

Moral of the story, most Nv users are full of BS on the 'cheaper' excuse, they are never going AMD, because they want to stay Nv and they only want competition to make their Nv purchase happen.

Isn't this true of pretty much everything? People don't want monopolies because it raises the prices. People want lower prices.
AMD need to make themselves attractive to provide competition. If they're not releasing top hardware or top software solutions they have to compete some other way. It's hard to justify charging 90% of the cost when you don't have the hardware, you don't have the software and you don't have the mindshare. You need to attract people somehow, what else have AMD got?
Also it wouldn't matter if the people saying this bought AMD as it's such a small percentage of the market. AMD need to sell to the masses that aren't going to be interested in excuses or putting in effort to tweak it to make it better than stock.

Also I said in my last post that a lot of people probably don't do too much research they just go with the name they know, which I think is true, but what if they did do some research and looked at some of the launch reviews? It so often seems on launch that AMD's drivers and software aren't quite there yet. Yes in 12 month's the "Fine Wine" has kicked in and the software side of things is where it should've been at launch, but reviewers don't go back and re-edit the videos to include that.

 

[Grim5]

Funny thing is if Intel had high performance GPUs and I decided I want to switch from Nvidia, I'm more likely to try an Intel than AMD

 

[TNA]

People only complain that AMD should be cheaper so they can hold out for Nv to drop prices, here's my example:

7900XTX launches Dec 2023@$1000-but 'it's too expensive' compared to the $1200 4080.

'AMD Should be cheaper'

When the AIB retailer scalping dies down I bought my XTX Pulse for £999 in May 2023, about 4-6 weeks later price then bounces about for a while going as low as £900 before levelling out at £959-but it's went as much as £279 lower than the 4080 but generally £200 cheaper most if not all of the time.

'AMD Should be cheaper'

Since launch Nv's reduced the 4080 FE iirc by £20 to £1179, on the whole, hardly any ones buying either.

'AMD Should be cheaper'

JANUARY 2024 4080S arrives at $200 less-where the XTX has been sitting and the 4080 starts selling, the only performance difference is the 4080 now has an S for Sale slapped on the end of it, they're now moving out the door.

And we still hear?

'AMD Should be cheaper'



AMD literally forced everything under the 4090 a price drop and everyone who wanted Nv but wouldn't pay, jump on board without realising they've missed half it's worth of generational performance and still despite AMD shifting price again, all we hear is

'AMD Should be cheaper'....

Moral of the story, most Nv users are full of BS on the 'cheaper' excuse, they are never going AMD, because they want to stay Nv and they only want competition to make their Nv purchase happen.

That is because the 7900xtx was never a £1000 card. Should have been £800 on release and the same goes for the 4080!

Can't believe what you said is used as a defence point for AMD.

Market share doesn't lie. I have had loads of AMD cards as you very well know, yet I don't see them as an option no more. There is a reason and AMD's market share shows this.

But feel free to pay whatever AMD asks.