Caporegime
Its not...
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card
Order Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card now online and benefit from fast delivery.
www.overclockers.co.uk
-
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.
Its not...
www.overclockers.co.uk
Cite? Or are you including development costs?
Its not...
It is if you look elsewhere; otherwise it's equal cheapest.
Caporegime
If you can find the A770 cheaper else where you can do the same for the 7600 XT.
Its not the cheapest 16GB card and its overpriced, Steve Walton (HUB) really hated on the RX 7600 XT for being grossly overpriced at $330, hated on it to the point of absurdity, which is actually only £315 with VAT.
Last edited:
Soldato
But not at £330 right? i can think of a serval cards that are way better for between £300 and £400.
its far too expensive.
Intel ARC A770 Phantom Gaming 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card
Order Intel ARC A770 Phantom Gaming 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card now online and benefit from fast delivery.
I bought mine used from a well known trade in store, it came with a 2 year warranty for just over £200. Honestly I can't complain at all, it's really capable.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,980
This is just upto 2022, the chips used are massive in comparison to AMD/Nvidia and costs are high. No doubt they've lost billions upon billions so far, which tbf was to be expected trying to break a duopoly.
Caporegime
Sure, and for £200, yeah its a good card for that.
The last thing we need is another GPU vendor who thinks they are worth it just because of the branding, which they don't even have that.
How much does it cost to manufacture an A770? I very much doubt that Intel are selling them at a loss. Development costs are a wholly different matter.
Caporegime
At a guess... $80 for the core manufactured, package assembled and shipped to board partners, VRam $20, Cooler $20, PCB components and assembly $50, so $170 BOM cost.
Intel want a profit, board partners want a profit, the supplier wants a profit, the retailer wants a profit, if they each take 10% of the BOM cost that takes it to about $240, I think that's a conservative estimate but no, they are not making a loss, not at £330 they aren't.
With a $3.5 bn initial development cost, a $100 profit (not a conservative estimate) they would have to sell 350 million of them to make their money back, i think they said they made 2 million of them? And they are still in stock.
ATI going bust selling faster GPU's than Nvidia for much less was nothing to do with BOM costs, they still sold them for more than they cost to make, what Nvidia did was simply wait them out, wait long enough for ATI to run out of money to R&D new GPU's.
This is how AMD know "selling better GPU's for half as much as Nvidia" is not a good long term strategy, they bailed ATI out. Jog on Steve Walton, you're an aussie idiot.
Intel want a profit, board partners want a profit, the supplier wants a profit, the retailer wants a profit, if they each take 10% of the BOM cost that takes it to about $240, I think that's a conservative estimate but no, they are not making a loss, not at £330 they aren't.
With a $3.5 bn initial development cost, a $100 profit (not a conservative estimate) they would have to sell 350 million of them to make their money back, i think they said they made 2 million of them? And they are still in stock.
ATI going bust selling faster GPU's than Nvidia for much less was nothing to do with BOM costs, they still sold them for more than they cost to make, what Nvidia did was simply wait them out, wait long enough for ATI to run out of money to R&D new GPU's.
This is how AMD know "selling better GPU's for half as much as Nvidia" is not a good long term strategy, they bailed ATI out. Jog on Steve Walton, you're an aussie idiot.
Last edited:
I think you mean 35 million units if Intel are making $100 on each board. But $80 seems a lot for the core GPU.
Caporegime
I stand corrected ^^^
Soldato
Recently put a 5700X3D in to the parts PC, and alongside the A770 it's nice.
Gaming performance is good, as much as many would believe otherwise. The performance with koboldcpp and Llama3 with no messing about has been great.
Finally about to look in to Intel IPEX-LLM to see exactly what this card can do. I've never wanted to do it before as it looked like a hassle, but I've been using LLMs a lot more recently for spicing up lesson plans and faster is always better.
Edit: The documentation here is very easy to follow. The speed from a Llama3b 8b Q8_0 model is seriously impressive. Just need to find out how to interact with it in a better place than a CMD window...
Gaming performance is good, as much as many would believe otherwise. The performance with koboldcpp and Llama3 with no messing about has been great.
Finally about to look in to Intel IPEX-LLM to see exactly what this card can do. I've never wanted to do it before as it looked like a hassle, but I've been using LLMs a lot more recently for spicing up lesson plans and faster is always better.
Edit: The documentation here is very easy to follow. The speed from a Llama3b 8b Q8_0 model is seriously impressive. Just need to find out how to interact with it in a better place than a CMD window...
Last edited:
Also worth noting that you can get a 6800 for 369.Its not...
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card
Order Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 PCI-Express Graphics Card now online and benefit from fast delivery.
Associate
I know you'll hate this but if Intel have better upscaling tech than AMD (which they do even now) and possibly better RT they will be charging "the going rate". Be interesting how close they get to Nvidia's mid range cards in performance/features and see what they can "get away with".
Caporegime
If Intel can comand Nvidia pricing because they have near as good upscaling tech then frankly we deserve to be priced out of this segment.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 1,042
Anyone ever used a laptop with
Intel® Arc™ Graphics?
probably won't be using it for gaming, but curious to see if it's passable for less demanding games at least.
Intel® Arc™ Graphics?
probably won't be using it for gaming, but curious to see if it's passable for less demanding games at least.
Apparently new drivers are up, v5448
www.intel.com
Intel® Arc™ & Iris® Xe Graphics - Windows*
This download installs Intel® Graphics Driver 31.0.101.5448 (WHQL Certified) for Intel® Arc™ A-Series Graphics, Intel® Iris® Xe Graphics, and Intel® Core™ Ultra Processors with Intel® Arc™ Graphics.
www.intel.com
Last edited:
Soldato
I did install them, but the only game I've played on desktop recently has been V Rising, which already ran great. Unsurprisingly, it still ran great after this update.
It says they add support for Hades 2, but that's probably not one I'll jump on during early access.
It says they add support for Hades 2, but that's probably not one I'll jump on during early access.
ReBAR support in Vulkan is being fixed in the next beta driver 5518: