Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, morphine, SecretSquirrel
superjawes wrote:Well they did need to say something. If it was entirely silent, the internet would start buzzing with conspiracy theories.
I'm sure it still will, but better to set the conversation than to just let it run wild.
Prestige Worldwide wrote:But in my mind, an AMD card should be priced lower than nVidia, because to an enthusiast like myself, they still have some mindshare to make up for. They still have a reputation of having bad drivers (whether the drivers are actually bad at this point is debatable), anybody who follows hardware news or rumours knows about the frametime problems. I'm sure that's not an issue for most GPU buyers who don't follow these things at closely, if at all. They probably just see the Never Settle bundle and think "FREE GAMES, AMD R0X0RZ!"
Waco wrote:It does scream a bit of jumping the gun...or they just got a *very* nice offer from Nvidia in terms of long-term pricing deals.
cynan wrote:Valve's Steambox speccs don't include anything AMD either..
Prestige Worldwide wrote:This is true. I wanted to pick at one thing though:A $700 GPU becoming a regular occurrence is not good for anybody.
Prestige Worldwide wrote:No. See here.I miss the AMD that released the 4870 for $299 1 week after the GTX 280 launched at $649 and the GTX 260 launched at $399. They delivered performance as good as the GTX 280 for $350 LESS.
clone wrote:are AMD's linux drivers solid yet? ...Why should they include anything other than Nvidia?
Fighterpilot wrote:I'm expecting Radeon R9 290X to retail for under $600.
clone wrote:so you consider GTX 780 and Titan to both be ridiculous?i hope it is anything more is just ridiculous
tbc I agree anything over $600 seems steep but I'm curious, I'm a little more of the opinion that $500+ taxes is where it all should be at the most.
Fighterpilot wrote:Yeah, but AMD can't afford to do that. R9-290X is a huge, massive chip, with an unbelievably complicated board design, and I wouldn't be surprised if even at $699 their margins on it are not super great. AMD is not in a great situation financially right now, and they need as much as they can make off these cards.They have a unique opportunity to pull a "4870" here and have R9 290X retail at $499 ish.
That would really energize the market and AMD would win a lot of 'hearts and minds" again while giving a big shock to NVidia like they experienced with the way over priced GTX260
shortly after the launch of Evergreen RV770.
clone wrote:selling cards for free is not a "unique opportunity", worse as proven by the "HD 4870" their is next to no long term benefit.They have a unique opportunity to pull a "4870" here and have R9 290X retail at $499 ish.
That would really energize the market and AMD would win a lot of 'hearts and minds" again while giving a big shock to NVidia like they experienced with the way over priced GTX260
shortly after the launch of Evergreen RV770.
AMD launched a DX 11 product a year ahead of Nvidia with the HD 5870 series and what did it get them post "winning hearts and minds" with HD 4870.... nothing more, worse for them they couldn't sell their DX 11 cards at the premiums that used to be asked because they'd devalued the entire segment.which makes their opinion worthless.They do not hide their partnership with Nvidia:
selling cards for free is not a "unique opportunity",
clone wrote:remember, they lost how much on each and every card sold because they slashed the price, they then lost how much on each and every next gen card because of the devaluation of the brand vs how little they made off a cppl extra points of marketshare over and above what they historically had.
mdk77777 wrote:A big AMD fan here...but Titian beating seems like a reach.
The benchmarks show it neck and neck...hardly beating.
Titian is of course a very limited niche product.
The real competition is the GTX 780 at $660
Yes, beating the GTX 780 would be nice...but not at $729...