AMD's new Radeon RX 3080 XT: RTX 2070 performance for $330?

[Trixanity]

51 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It launched performing within bulls spit of Intel's best and actually performing better in some work loads that it can be considered top performing.  And you are forgetting that TR and Epyc are part of the Ryzen release.  That is why the whole line started to sell well.  It is also why AMD stocks went up, AMD enjoyed investor confidence.

 

A simple look at AMD's financials before during and after Ryzen release shows us this clearly.

Yes, investor confidence trickles down to gamers buying graphics cards. I also check the stock market before making a purchase. It's super helpful. 

 

Doubtful that server chips sell desktop chips. Top of the line desktop chips sell budget desktop chips to some degree but server chips don't. 

 

You still don't account for the fact that the only time AMD/ATI had a bigger market share was in the X800 days (that's 14 years ago, buddy - and before that it was still Nvidia) and that was against the abysmal 6000 series. Other than that, anytime AMD had the lead (even by significant margins) it at best gave them a few percentage points of market share but not nearly enough to surpass. Even the 290X walked all over Nvidia yet no market share to show for it. It's only after Maxwell launched that Nvidia has had any long term performance dominance. Of course that's still almost five years of no competition in the ultra high end but still doesn't sell your ideas.

 

Not to mention all the staggered releases making it virtually impossible to show a correlation in sales. TR launched 6 months after - how did it boost desktop sales from the future before it was even announced? Something doesn't add up here.

 

[Master Disaster]

Oh boy, so many young whipper snappers here.

 

The XT is a throwback to a legendary card from a long time ago...

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/sapphire-9800-xt.b243

 

At a time when Nvidia were dominating the GPU market AMD dropped this thing, it performed similarly but was way cheaper and to top it off, they even got a Valve Half Life 2 partnership with 9800 Pro and XT models saying "Perfect for Half Life 2" right on the boxes. Some boxes even had Gordan and Alyx on them.

[Trixanity]

34 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Oh boy, so many young whipper snappers here.

 

The XT is a throwback to a legendary card from a long time ago...

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/sapphire-9800-xt.b243

 

At a time when Nvidia were dominating the GPU market AMD dropped this thing, it performed similarly but was way cheaper and to top it off, they even got a Valve Half Life 2 partnership with 9800 Pro and XT models saying "Perfect for Half Life 2" right on the boxes. Some boxes even had Gordan and Alyx on them.

Odd that they made the partnership that early. Half-Life 2 launched a year after the 9800. X800 launched in between actually. I do remember the "ATI - Valve's preferred graphics partner", or something along those lines, in the game promotions though.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, Neftex said:

performance wasnt as close in the top end as youre trying to say. im not forgetting threadripper because it still wasnt clearly better performing than intel, it was just better price/performance.

The benchmarks are all there for everyone to see.   They were close enough in most cases.

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

Yes, investor confidence trickles down to gamers buying graphics cards. I also check the stock market before making a purchase. It's super helpful. 

What has that got to do with what I said?

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

Doubtful that server chips sell desktop chips. Top of the line desktop chips sell budget desktop chips to some degree but server chips don't. 

Having top performing chips sell product.   If you think these chips have no bearing in consumers sales then why do the i9's and xeons get mentioned so much?

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

You still don't account for the fact that the only time AMD/ATI had a bigger market share was in the X800 days (that's 14 years ago, buddy - and before that it was still Nvidia) and that was against the abysmal 6000 series. Other than that, anytime AMD had the lead (even by significant margins) it at best gave them a few percentage points of market share but not nearly enough to surpass. Even the 290X walked all over Nvidia yet no market share to show for it. It's only after Maxwell launched that Nvidia has had any long term performance dominance. Of course that's still almost five years of no competition in the ultra high end but still doesn't sell your ideas.

 

Not too sure what you think you are proving here.  Fact of the matter is top end products help all your sales.  Pointing to minor anomalies doesn't really change this.

 

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

Not to mention all the staggered releases making it virtually impossible to show a correlation in sales. TR launched 6 months after - how did it boost desktop sales from the future before it was even announced? Something doesn't add up here.

 

If you don't want to believe me that's fine, but you can hardly argue when AMD has a 7 year period of almost nothing (5 of those years on the brink of bankruptcy) then within 6 months of launching ryzen is back in the black and stocks are 10 times higher than they were at the start of 2016.   And this trend is seen all over many industries.   I don't know why it is so hard to accept something so observable.

[Neftex]

11 minutes ago, mr moose said:

The benchmarks are all there for everyone to see.   They were close enough in most cases.

its not the top end benchmarks that are selling the rest of the lineup. 2990x isnt the reason people are buying 2600. the price/performance of the 2600 compared to intel in the same price category is what sells them.

[mr moose]

11 minutes ago, Neftex said:

its not the top end benchmarks that are selling the rest of the lineup. 2990x isnt the reason people are buying 2600. the price/performance of the 2600 compared to intel in the same price category is what sells them.

righto.

[Trixanity]

43 minutes ago, mr moose said:

The benchmarks are all there for everyone to see.   They were close enough in most cases.

What has that got to do with what I said?

Having top performing chips sell product.   If you think these chips have no bearing in consumers sales then why do the i9's and xeons get mentioned so much?

 

Not too sure what you think you are proving here.  Fact of the matter is top end products help all your sales.  Pointing to minor anomalies doesn't really change this.

 

If you don't want to believe me that's fine, but you can hardly argue when AMD has a 7 year period of almost nothing (5 of those years on the brink of bankruptcy) then within 6 months of launching ryzen is back in the black and stocks are 10 times higher than they were at the start of 2016.   And this trend is seen all over many industries.   I don't know why it is so hard to accept something so observable.

Minor anomalies? Nvidia have moved more units for like 20 years. With a single outlier where they moved less. That's the actual anomaly; that Radeons sold in bigger quantities. There have been multiple instances of Radeon cards being the fastest and no sales to back it up. There have been multiple instances of shit GeForce cards and only once has it really cost them any significant sales (the aforementioned 6000 series). 

 

How often do you see Xeons mentioned in consumer marketing and the community at large? It sometimes gets casually mentioned - often as a reference to what's happening in adjacent markets but very rarely is there any direct relation. And the i9s exist as consumer SKUs so it would be weird if it didn't get mentioned. Having a halo SKU in a i9 9900K certainly boosts the value of the Core brand. I haven't said anything to dispute that. I have however disputed that halo products is either the only factor moving lesser models or the most significant factor since we have evidence to suggest that the halo products get undermined by other factors outside of absolute performance. For example Nvidia wisely floated the power consumption data to undermine Hawaii. Worked wonders.

 

The reason AMD was in the red is that the CPU business is their main business and it was bleeding badly (started with the launch of Core 2 and went completely off the rails with Bulldozer). At the same time their other big venture is graphics which has always been behind on sales and it started to bleed too. A decade of bad business decisions does that to you (including buying ATI for double the market value whilst being on a downward trend financially). When there is no business savvy and your product R&D drives off a cliff, there simply isn't much you can do other than start flipping assets left and right to stay afloat. Which they did. That's how they even survived.

 

Ryzen was a compelling product but only in a few instances of core count advantage. The most compelling aspect was good performance at a very affordable price (sometimes half the price as you moved up the stack). Why would you buy a more expensive Intel when you got more value at AMD? You needed parallel workloads for productivity to really get the most value. Otherwise if you want absolute performance it's Intel all the way. I even had to make that recommendation for people who wants high frame rate gaming. 

[pas008]

2 hours ago, Neftex said:

its not the top end benchmarks that are selling the rest of the lineup. 2990x isnt the reason people are buying 2600. the price/performance of the 2600 compared to intel in the same price category is what sells them.

 

lol the 1800x did best streaming cpu available at the time its why intel countered quickly with 8700k then later 9900k

the market changed for gaming and streaming or more multitasking or core utilizing

 

[Neftex]

44 minutes ago, pas008 said:

 

lol the 1800x did best streaming cpu available at the time its why intel countered quickly with 8700k then later 9900k

the market changed for gaming and streaming or more multitasking or core utilizing

 

price/performance maybe, not actually the best performance

[pas008]

1 minute ago, Neftex said:

price/performance maybe, not actually the best performance

what are you talking about gaming and streaming multitasking

1800x

offered better stream quality at the cost of few fps which is a big deal for any streamer not to mention ability to multitask along side that too

people are streaming everything now days the market has changed to this

 

[Neftex]

1 minute ago, pas008 said:

what are you talking about gaming and streaming multitasking

1800x

offered better stream quality at the cost of few fps which is a big deal for any streamer not to mention ability to multitask along side that too

people are streaming everything now days the market has changed to this

 

do you actually think intel didnt have anything better performing for that kind of workload? HEDT? or even some xeon? again, 1800x maybe made sense price/performance but thats not what were talking about here... were talking best performance

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, Neftex said:

do you actually think intel didnt have anything better performing for that kind of workload? HEDT? or even some xeon? again, 1800x maybe made sense price/performance but thats not what were talking about here... were talking best performance

hedt isnt mainstream where system builders sell the most

facepalm

[Neftex]

1 minute ago, pas008 said:

hedt isnt mainstream where system builders sell the most

facepalm

read the rest of the discussion before you start randomly replying

[pas008]

Just now, Neftex said:

read the rest of the discussion before you start randomly replying

yes we are talking about flagship halo products which gets sales from mainstream consumers

 

system builders count for majority of those sales

[Neftex]

@pas008 and you come in here saying 1800x was the best cpu for streaming which isnt true.

 

intel had the best performing gaming cpu

intel had the best performing multithread cpu

intel even had the best combination for game streaming in one

 

so dont tell me the 1800x is the best halo product that sold the rest of the lineup. only reason the lineup sold was price/performance, not some top performance crown.

[Master Disaster]

4 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Odd that they made the partnership that early. Half-Life 2 launched a year after the 9800. X800 launched in between actually. I do remember the "ATI - Valve's preferred graphics partner", or something along those lines, in the game promotions though.

Oh you might be correct, it might have been the X800 that had the HL2 partnership.

[79wjd]

7 minutes ago, Neftex said:

@pas008 and you come in here saying 1800x was the best cpu for streaming which isnt true.

 

intel had the best performing gaming cpu

intel had the best performing multithread cpu

intel even had the best combination for game streaming in one

 

so dont tell me the 1800x is the best halo product that sold the rest of the lineup. only reason the lineup sold was price/performance, not some top performance crown.

Being within spitting distance of a Halo product with such a massive price cut effectively makes it a Halo product.

 

AMD Radeon, however is FAR FAR away from offering anything close to Halo performance.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Neftex said:

so dont tell me the 1800x is the best halo product that sold the rest of the lineup. only reason the lineup sold was price/performance, not some top performance crown.

The 1700X was the halo product, best overall performer in the mainstream lineup.

[pas008]

4 minutes ago, Neftex said:

@pas008 and you come in here saying 1800x was the best cpu for streaming which isnt true.

 

intel had the best performing gaming cpu

intel had the best performing multithread cpu

intel even had the best combination for game streaming in one

 

so dont tell me the 1800x is the best halo product that sold the rest of the lineup. only reason the lineup sold was price/performance, not some top performance crown.

mainstream which system builders use

which sell the most

 

7700k best gaming

1800x best multithreaded by far over 7700k

1800x best for the stream which streamers will sacrifice small fps for the stream, point of streaming is to get viewers lol

 

 

[Neftex]

8 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

Being within spitting distance of a Halo with such a massive price cut effectively makes it a Halo product.

 

AMD Radeon, however is FAR FAR away from offering anything close to Halo performance.

thats my point, its the price/performance that decides. you dont need better performing halo product, you dont have to aim to be better than competitors top end. you have to price accordingly and youre fine. and for that reason i would consider navi success even if it doesnt have performance crown, but beats the rest of nvidia lineup in price/performance

[Neftex]

9 minutes ago, pas008 said:

mainstream which system builders use

which sell the most

 

7700k best gaming

1800x best multithreaded by far over 7700k

1800x best for the stream which streamers will sacrifice small fps for the stream, point of streaming is to get viewers lol

 

 

calling 1800x mainstream when the workload its actually good at isnt mainstream and its not good in the real mainstream workload? compare it by workload and intel had the crown there

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, Neftex said:

thats my point, its the price/performance that decides. you dont need better performing halo product, you dont have to aim to be better than competitors top end. you have to price accordingly and youre fine. and for that reason i would consider navi success even if it doesnt have performance crown, but beats the rest of nvidia lineup in price/performance

You don't have to be the BEST, but you have to be competitive with the best. That's why Zen has been such a success -- in some cases it's the best, while in others it's practically the same but significantly cheaper. Halo products still sell the stack and Zen is effectively a Halo product as it's so close to Intel while being much cheaper.

 

AMD Radeon has literally nothing even remotely close to a 2080ti.

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, Neftex said:

calling 1800x mainstream when the workload its actually good at isnt mainstream and its not good in the "mainstream" workload? compare it by workload and intel had the crown there

its a mainstream product its not targeted towards professionals like tr and extreme users

 

facepalm again

[Neftex]

1 minute ago, pas008 said:

its a mainstream product its not targeted towards professionals like tr and extreme users

 

facepalm again

difference between the targets is what? the price and workload the 1800x is good at... facepalm indeed

[pas008]

1 minute ago, Neftex said:

difference between the targets is what? the price and workload the 1800x is good at... facepalm indeed

yes their halo/flagship product vs intels 7700k

it was better in almost everything except pure gaming and single threaded tasks

which won the hearts of many which does trickle down to lesser end products

which system builders finally started to use amd cpus in more model numbers

which results in sales