Dr Su will present Zen 2 and Navi at Computex 2019 (May 27th)

[mr moose]

Just now, Humbug said:

Having said that....

 

Yes they want to make money, but companies are also made out of people. Those people have thoughts, opinions and values just like us. Even though they want to make money. Let's list down a few companies...

 

EA

Valve

CD Projekt Red

Epic

Apple

 

Now all of the above like to make money for sure. But all of them also have different cultures, policies, structures and people. They all have different ways of dealing with suppliers, partners, customers are they have different things which they are willing and not willing to do.

CD project red I have no experience with, the rest have all been guilty anti consumer practices before.  Given the chance I dare say that most of them would again too.  How well they manage their PR and their position in the market is about the only dictator of how hard they will drive their consumer base.  AMD can't afford to piss anyone off, hence why they have bent over backwards for apple and will make deals to sell to the consoles (although I do believe their embedded GPU option is superior to a discrete GPU  for what the consoles are trying to achieve). 

 

It just numbs me to see people put their head in the sand and pretend that AMD wouldn't do that if the roles were reversed.  

[Humbug]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

CD project red I have no experience with, the rest have all been guilty anti consumer practices before.  Given the chance I dare say that most of them would again too.  How well they manage their PR and their position in the market is about the only dictator of how hard they will drive their consumer base.  AMD can't afford to piss anyone off, hence why they have bent over backwards for apple and will make deals to sell to the consoles (although I do believe their embedded GPU option is superior to a discrete GPU  for what the consoles are trying to achieve).  

What you are essentially saying above is that all companies are the same.
Which can only be true if all people are the same. 

 

Again not talking about AMD here, let's say they are evil... my above point still stands.

 

Notice I didn't try to classify who was good or evil on that list. The point is they are different. They have all done various good and bad things over the years, but they are not the same.

[Stefan Payne]

Exactly, the Company

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

AMD can't afford to piss anyone off,

Nobody can really.

Because in the long term that will come and bite them in the ass.

 

What do you think will happen if AMD gains strength in the next couple of years and gets some of the market back and then Intel enters it and also gets a good portion of the market. Both have equal or superior products. But allow their partners a bigger margin.

Do you really think under those circumstances anyone would still like to work with nVidia??
Or rather drop them like a hot potato, given the chance?

[Stefan Payne]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It just numbs me to see people put their head in the sand and pretend that AMD wouldn't do that if the roles were reversed.  

I don't see any reason to believe that would be the case right now.

Because the Company Culture is a different one between those...

 

 

Not everyone steals technology from the Competition and pushes that to the market, even if they don't make money off of it, just to look better.

Not every Company forces their Partners to drop competing products under the "Gaming" Brand.

Not every comapny tries to wall off their products.

 

Seems like you are trying to justify bad behaviour from certain companys.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, Humbug said:

What you are essentially saying above is that all companies are the same.
Which can only be true if all people are the same. 

 

Again not talking about AMD here, let's say they are evil... my above point still stands.

 

Notice I didn't try to classify who was good or evil on that list. The point is they are different. They have all done various good and bad things over the years, but they are not the same.

Not being the same is not the problem, it's the similarities that is,  when you have someone pontificating that one company would not sell out their customers given the chance is fooling themselves.  Every successful company I can think of has done that or is doing that and it only stands to reason if one hasen't it is only because they haven;t had the opportunity yet.

 

6 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Exactly, the Company

Nobody can really.

Nvidia and Intel can right now.  Even apple is doing a pretty bang up job of pissing people off with little financial consequence.

6 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Because in the long term that will come and bite them in the ass.

people have short memories and money talks.

 

6 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

What do you think will happen if AMD gains strength in the next couple of years and gets some of the market back and then Intel enters it and also gets a good portion of the market. Both have equal or superior products. But allow their partners a bigger margin.

 

What are you trying to get at here?  If AMD start doing well but only have equal shares in the market then we will have a truly competitive market and prices will come down and investment will go up.

6 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Do you really think under those circumstances anyone would still like to work with nVidia??
Or rather drop them like a hot potato, given the chance?

Again not sure what your point is, mine is that NVIDIA can do as they please because not only do they have the market, but they have the top products and the industry position to capitalise on them.  They know whats around the corner, that's why I said they are making money while they can.

3 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

I don't see any reason to believe that would be the case right now.

Because the Company Culture is a different one between those...

 

 

Not everyone steals technology from the Competition and pushes that to the market, even if they don't make money off of it, just to look better.

Not every Company forces their Partners to drop competing products under the "Gaming" Brand.

Not every comapny tries to wall off their products.

 

Seems like you are trying to justify bad behaviour from certain companys.

Not everyone makes shit up about a company just because they hate them.

[Master Disaster]

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

No they wouldn't.

That's something you tell yourself to justify your purchases while there is nothing to back that up.

[Citation Needed]

 

If we go back to the last time AMD were competitive you'll find AMD cards cost either the same or more.

 

One example, 2008, top of the line.

 

Nvidia 9800 GX2 - $500

AMD 4870 X2 - $550

 

You being naive if you think for a second AMD wouldn't be doing exactly what Nvidia is now if they were in this position.

 

AMD only adopted the good guy approach because they lost and it was all they had to market themselves with.

[Stefan Payne]

18 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

One example, 2008, top of the line.

 

Nvidia 9800 GX2 - $500

AMD 4870 X2 - $550

That are dual GPU Cards.

Why you bring up Dual GPU Cards???

 

Besides that, you're comparing the Wrong cards!

The Competition to the 9800GX2 was the HD3870x2, not the 4870x2, that came later and competed with the nVidia 200 series.

The 8 Series Competition was the AMD 2k Series, the 9 Series was more the 3000 series, wich came rather quickly after the not so great 2900...

The 4870 was a year or so later - and the Competition Card was the 295 with the shrunk down GT200b, wich was IIRC manufactured in 55nm instead of 65nm for the GT200...

 

And well, here a Price for a random 3870x2:

https://geizhals.eu/jetway-radeon-hd-3870-x2-x38x2-en-1gq-a310140.html

 

9800GX2:

https://geizhals.eu/jetway-radeon-hd-3870-x2-x38x2-en-1gq-a310140.html

 

4870X2 - wich starts in around 2009...

https://geizhals.eu/xfx-radeon-hd-4870-x2-hd-487a-cdf9-a398748.html

 

 

Also, here in Europe, it was just around 400€:

https://geizhals.de/msi-r4870x2-t2d2g-oc-a357577.html

 

The 'normal' 4870 was around 200€
https://geizhals.de/club-3d-radeon-hd-4870-ati-design-cgax-4872dd-a344814.html

 

Some 250€:

https://geizhals.de/asus-eah4870-dk-htdi-512md5-c1cm20-j0uay00z-a370898.html

 

And it kept up with the 280 at the time, despite the "small die".

 

And now lets look at the GTX 280, granted it had a 512bit Memory Interface (wich was crippled by the 260 and later 275):

https://geizhals.eu/xfx-geforce-gtx-280-640m-xt-gx-280n-zde9-a344932.html

Started at 550€, later at around 400€.

 

A fact, when ATi at the time bashed nVidia left and right, here:

https://geizhals.eu/club-3d-radeon-9700-a44526.html -> ~300€ or so, started

 

The lower clocked 9700 was a bit cheaper:

https://geizhals.eu/sapphire-atlantis-radeon-9700-a41451.html

 

The nVidia Competition:

https://geizhals.eu/msi-ms-8904-fx5800-td8x-a48307.html <- started at ~450€ or so, dropped to ~400€ or so.

https://geizhals.eu/albatron-fx5800u-a56515.html <- same, around 400€

https://geizhals.eu/msi-ms-8904-fx5800-td8x-a48307.html <- still around 400€

 

the Successor, the FX5900 wasn't much cheaper:

https://geizhals.eu/msi-fx5900sp-vtd256-ms-8929-060-a65051.html

 

So yeah, even when ATi at the time was on top, their prices was rather agressive and reasonable, while it was nVidia who tried to bring the Prices up all the time.

[CiBi]

3 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

[Citation Needed]

 

If we go back to the last time AMD were competitive you'll find AMD cards cost either the same or more.

 

One example, 2008, top of the line.

 

Nvidia 9800 GX2 - $500

AMD 4870 X2 - $550

 

You being naive if you think for a second AMD wouldn't be doing exactly what Nvidia is now if they were in this position.

 

AMD only adopted the good guy approach because they lost and it was all they had to market themselves with.

To be completely fair that was ATi and not AMD, not that I'm saying AMD wouldn't have done that.

[thorhammerz]

3 hours ago, CiBi said:

To be completely fair that was ATi and not AMD, not that I'm saying AMD wouldn't have done that.

AMD is a business (and a publicly traded one at that). They will do what is best for their stakeholders, first and foremost.

 

If increasing prices on products becomes a viable business strategy (as a side note, Ryzen 3000 release prices will likely be some ~$20-$50 higher than the release prices of their older Ryzen 2000 products at each segment), they most certainly will.

[Mira Yurizaki]

55 minutes ago, CiBi said:

To be completely fair that was ATi and not AMD, not that I'm saying AMD wouldn't have done that.

ATI was acquired by AMD in 2006, before the 4870X2 was even on the table.

 

If you want something further, AMD launched the HD 7970 for $550. A few months later, the GTX 680 came out for $500, and it went toe-to-toe with it. I believe AMD dropped the price of the 7970 shortly after. This was the last time AMD was first to the "next generation," if you will, of GPUs.

[CiBi]

12 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

ATI was acquired by AMD in 2006, before the 4870X2 was even on the table.

 

If you want something further, AMD launched the HD 7970 for $550. A few months later, the GTX 680 came out for $500, and it went toe-to-toe with it. I believe AMD dropped the price of the 7970 shortly after. This was the last time AMD was first to the "next generation," if you will, of GPUs.

Ow my bad, didn't know it had been that long. And as I said, I never contested that AMD would do the same XD

[Mira Yurizaki]

GPU history aside, let's take a look at the last time AMD was basically top dog. In particular before Intel released the Core 2. AMD launched the Athlon X2 5000+, which was the top-end "consumer grade" model at $696 (EDIT: Note I'm considering the FX lineup, as separate, since it was aimed at the HEDT market) (https://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/feature-amd-athlon-64-x2-5000-and-fx-62, https://www.cnet.com/reviews/amd-athlon-64-x2-5000-plus-review/) Shortly after that, Intel released the Core 2 Duo. The E6600 was about half the cost and performed just as good. AMD started aggressively slashing prices afterwards. And even then, its $459 processor back in February 2007 was about the same performance as the C2D E6600 (https://www.anandtech.com/show/2177)

 

I mean, I'll give the fanboys the benefit of the doubt that AMD was led by a different management team back then, unlike NVIDIA who's still headed by its founder. Though the same argument can't be said about Intel, who had 3 different CEOs between 2000 and 2018, with 2005-2013 headed by one of them.

Edited April 21, 2019 by Mira Yurizaki

[thorhammerz]

 

1 hour ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

I mean, I'll give the fanboys the benefit of the doubt that AMD was led by a different management team back then

:

9 hours ago, mr moose said:

people have short memories and money talks.

[Mira Yurizaki]

7 minutes ago, thorhammerz said:

:

The point is that a different CEO can lead to a change in how the company tries to do things.

 

Well, aside from the point that a publicly traded company exists solely to appeal to its shareholders (which the CEOs are usually)

[Jito463]

2 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

AMD launched the Athlon X2 5000+, which was the top-end "consumer grade" model at $696

I remember the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ launching at $999 (I "saved money" by buying the 4400+ at only $499).

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1676

[Mira Yurizaki]

9 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

I remember the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ launching at $999 (I "saved money" by buying the 4400+ at only $499).

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1676

Jeebus. I thought the FX series was the only one that commanded that price range.

[Jito463]

18 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

I thought the FX series was the only one that commanded that price range.

It wasn't long after they launched that prices dropped dramatically, but launch price was exorbitantly high.

[Cash091]

Really hoping we get 2080Ti level of performance or better at a $650-700 price point. I have SLI 980's and I really want to move to a single card solution.  Thing is, I don't want to sacrifice performance when both cards are being used. 

 

Currently, the only options I have are the 1080/2070 which match SLI 980, 1080Ti/2080 which give me a nice boost, but cost a lot, and the 2080Ti which gives me a great boost but at an INSANE price point. Now, each one of these would be a great boost when SLI is not supported... but I want a boost with and without SLI. 

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Jeebus. I thought the FX series was the only one that commanded that price range.

AMD actually was the first CPU maker to have a $1000 MSRP product (consumer), not Intel.

 

Edit:

Quote

The FX-57 is very expensive and comes in at a whopping $1031 (in quantities of 1000 from AMD). While this is the fastest processor on the market, let's take a look at the benchmarks to see how much we get for the money.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1722

 

That's the old single core Athlon 64 for anyone that doesn't know.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

AMD actually was the first CPU maker to have a $1000 MSRP product (consumer), not Intel.

Which one was that? I thought Intel was first with the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. The FX-51 that it was supposed to compete with launched at ~$700 or something.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

AMD actually was the first CPU maker to have a $1000 MSRP product (consumer), not Intel.

 

Edit:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1722

 

That's the old single core Athlon 64 for anyone that doesn't know.

Shoosh you,  if people find out there is nothing intrinsically special about specific companies the petty shit digs might stop.

 

 

For the thread in general,  I buy what ever performs the best for my dollar at the time of purchase.  That's it. In the last 20-30 years Intel, AMD, NVIDIA, Cyrix, via and Voodoo (God rest their souls) have all traded blows for the best performing/price at all levels.   That is why over the last 20 years I have had systems with all brands in them.   The only deviation from this MO is my most  recent project (which funnily enough is a ryzen build), because I had the motherboard left over from another project and hence it will be determined by the best Ryzen at the time and not by the best of all the CPU's at the time.

[Jito463]

18 minutes ago, mr moose said:

That is why over the last 20 years I have had systems with all brands in them.

The thing is, one can have a brand preference without going overboard and expecting everyone else to feel the same (such as a certain example in this thread).  In my 27 years of computer experience - save for my Commodore 64/VIC 20/Amiga 2000 - every single CPU I've ever personally owned has been AMD (unless you count my Asus ZenFone 2 with the Intel Atom).

 

That said, I feel comfortable in pointing out the flaws of AMD as a company - and even flaws of the products - because my choice of hardware doesn't mean I automatically give a pass to the company which produces it.  Similar to how I prefer Coca-Cola for those occasions when I drink pop, but there's decisions (in the political arena) that the parent company makes which causes my blood to boil at times.

 

Sadly, some people automatically view criticism of something they like as criticism of themselves, which leads to overzealous responses.

[COTG]

4 hours ago, Cash091 said:

Really hoping we get 2080Ti level of performance or better at a $650-700 price point. I have SLI 980's and I really want to move to a single card solution.  Thing is, I don't want to sacrifice performance when both cards are being used. 

  

Currently, the only options I have are the 1080/2070 which match SLI 980, 1080Ti/2080 which give me a nice boost, but cost a lot, and the 2080Ti which gives me a great boost but at an INSANE price point. Now, each one of these would be a great boost when SLI is not supported... but I want a boost with and without SLI. 

yea not gonna happen

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Jito463 said:

The thing is, one can have a brand preference without going overboard and expecting everyone else to feel the same (such as a certain example in this thread).  In my 27 years of computer experience - save for my Commodore 64/VIC 20/Amiga 2000 - every single CPU I've ever personally owned has been AMD (unless you count my Asus ZenFone 2 with the Intel Atom).

 

That said, I feel comfortable in pointing out the flaws of AMD as a company - and even flaws of the products - because my choice of hardware doesn't mean I automatically give a pass to the company which produces it.  Similar to how I prefer Coca-Cola for those occasions when I drink pop, but there's decisions (in the political arena) that the parent company makes which causes my blood to boil at times.

 

Sadly, some people automatically view criticism of something they like as criticism of themselves, which leads to overzealous responses.

I just referred to my PC history as evidence of my unbiased approach to any brand.

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 hours ago, COTG said:

yea not gonna happen

Worse yet, AMD sees NVIDIA's pricing as justification for charging higher than what people expect.