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

[MeatFeastMan]

Just now, Trik'Stari said:

But can they actually deliver? Will they have decent numbers available on launch, and will the market actually buy the crap out of it?

Well the plan to overcome the 'I'm buying Nvidia because it's Nvidia and I don't like AMD GPU's even though I've never used them because I've been brainwashed' mentality is to pair Zen2 with Navi as bundles. That should improve sales because if Zen2 does overtake Intel, it'll sell like mad. It may not improve sales massively, but it'll help for future gpu releases.

[RejZoR]

25 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

But can they actually deliver? Will they have decent numbers available on launch, and will the market actually buy the crap out of it?

Why wouldn't they? Just rewind things back to RX480 days. Gamers wanted them, but couldn't get them because of stupid miners. If they nail similar price/performance, they'll sell. Hell, RX580 is still incredible value (and results) even today. If AMD captures that, they'll sell. Polaris proved that you don't need to be "king of the hill" to make sales where it matters. Of course it's nice if you have the bragging rights, but still.

[Trik'Stari]

31 minutes ago, MeatFeastMan said:

Well the plan to overcome the 'I'm buying Nvidia because it's Nvidia and I don't like AMD GPU's even though I've never used them because I've been brainwashed' mentality is to pair Zen2 with Navi as bundles. That should improve sales because if Zen2 does overtake Intel, it'll sell like mad. It may not improve sales massively, but it'll help for future gpu releases.

The bigger problem I see is that misnomer itself.

 

I haven't bought an AMD gpu because they have yet to offer something that it would make sense for me to buy. They have nothing that challenges the 1080ti. Now this, which IIRC would be on par with a 1080ti. And back when I upgraded from a 970, I could either go with a 1080ti or something that.... wasn't as powerful.

 

I just think this whole "we're focusing on the lower end of the market" is a mistake. It's very easy to look at them and go "well they aren't even trying, so it must not be that good anyways".

 

The irony is, every PC gamer I know and work with are using AMD CPU's and Nvidia GPU's. I'm the only one using Intel because AMD took too freaking long to just release Ryzen.

 

3 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Why wouldn't they? Just rewind things back to RX480 days. Gamers wanted them, but couldn't get them because of stupid miners. If they nail similar price/performance, they'll sell. Hell, RX580 is still incredible value (and results) even today. If AMD captures that, they'll sell. Polaris proved that you don't need to be "king of the hill" to make sales where it matters. Of course it's nice if you have the bragging rights, but still.

 

The Steam Hardware Survey disagrees. Sure it might be making sales, but nowhere near Nvidia's higher offerings.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

[Skiiwee29]

55 minutes ago, Sauron said:

It's better than GTX 1650 though

This factually correct, yes. 

[RejZoR]

3 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

The bigger problem I see is that misnomer itself.

 

I haven't bought an AMD gpu because they have yet to offer something that it would make sense for me to buy. They have nothing that challenges the 1080ti. Now this, which IIRC would be on par with a 1080ti. And back when I upgraded from a 970, I could either go with a 1080ti or something that.... wasn't as powerful.

 

I just think this whole "we're focusing on the lower end of the market" is a mistake. It's very easy to look at them and go "well they aren't even trying, so it must not be that good anyways".

 

The irony is, every PC gamer I know and work with are using AMD CPU's and Nvidia GPU's. I'm the only one using Intel because AMD took too freaking long to just release Ryzen.

 

 

The Steam Hardware Survey disagrees.

 

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Gee, where did most RX480 cards end up? Mining rigs. Of course gamers don't have them if they couldn't buy them. GTX 1060 on the other hand was shit for mining which is why gamers could buy them and still have them. 1+1 dude... As well as general perception by idiots who buy a brand because some 8x more expensive model dictates what they pick at the budget level. Which is about as dumb as normies not buying Pirelli car tires when Pirelli had issues with tires in F1. Because that's totally relevant to one or the other product.

 

Who gives a damn what challenges (or doesn't) GTX 1080Ti or RTX 2080Ti when you're looking for a 250€ card. It's totally irrelevant to you or anyone else. But people are generally dumb so I understand why they think this way. Probably same people who buy crappiest Core i3 for 80€ because Intel is the king with 9900K for 500€... LOL

[Humbug]

2 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

I just think this whole "we're focusing on the lower end of the market" is a mistake. It's very easy to look at them and go "well they aren't even trying, so it must not be that good anyways".

This is something that gets said as an excuse when a company is not doing well in a particular area. For example when AMD only had bulldozer CPUs they used to go around saying that all the mainstream CPUs have more than enough horsepower and that the days of focusing on high end CPUs were gone. Now they won't say that because they do have high end CPUs.

 

AMD's problem right now in the GPU space is that they cannot execute on their roadmap properly.

 

Every product is either

-badly delayed

OR

-slightly misses the performance targets

OR

they cannot get enough supply out to gamers. 

OR

too expensive to produce

 

Vega was supposed to come out at the start of 2017, and Navi was supposed to come out at the start of 2018. They just don't execute properly on their roadmap, unlike the CPU division.

[Humbug]

At launch prices Vega was a disappointment, it only got more compelling later. Then we heard stories about how that was because the majority of engineers were moved towards the Navi project, and that Raja Koduri was unhappy that Navi was getting all the R&D focus.

 

LOL after all that it will be funny if Navi disappoints too. There will be no excuse this time...

AMD has been working on Navi for so long, and then the launch too was pushed back pretty late. So they really should have a pristine launch. i.e. great supply, great drivers, full feature set enabled, availability of fancy 3rd party models etc...

[TechyBen]

Intel "Lets rename out brands using stupid numbers... like a RTX 2080!"

AMD "Hold my beer... RX 3080 is out new model number!!!".

[Troll face.jpg]

 

Oh, how I hate brands/companies and their marketing/naming schemes. 

[RejZoR]

Navi wasn't pushed back since it was never officially announced. And AMD had this schedule of summer/autumn releases for quite some time now. And so does NVIDIA. The really odd one was GTX 1080Ti launch in April iirc. Then again it was a weird card to begin with (not for being bad but exceptionally good).

[mr moose]

27 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

I just think this whole "we're focusing on the lower end of the market" is a mistake. It's very easy to look at them and go "well they aren't even trying, so it must not be that good anyways".

 

AMD never "focused" on the lower end.  That's just a fallacy some people used to excuse their inability to compete at the top end.

[RejZoR]

No it's not. Polaris was well targeted product for segment with the most sales that worked well with AMD's financial situation. It's no secret and I also see no reason why AMD keeps getting bashed for it by idiots who buy cheap cards and brag on "heritage" of the top of the line models which they never owned or even used themselves. It's hilarious.

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, Humbug said:

At launch prices Vega was a disappointment, it only got more compelling later. Then we heard stories about how that was because the majority of engineers were moved towards the Navi project, and that Raja Koduri was unhappy that Navi was getting all the R&D focus.

 

LOL after all that it will be funny if Navi disappoints too. There will be no excuse this time...

AMD has been working on Navi for so long, and then the launch too was pushed back pretty late. So they really should have a pristine launch. i.e. great supply, great drivers, full feature set enabled, availability of fancy 3rd party models etc...

I don't really care if the launch is average with supply or the odd driver issue or something like that, so long as the product is actually a decent and competitive.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

No it's not. Polaris was well targeted product for segment with the most sales that worked well with AMD's financial situation. It's no secret and I also see no reason why AMD keeps getting bashed for it by idiots who buy cheap cards and brag on "heritage" of the top of the line models which they never owned or even used themselves. It's hilarious.

you believe some funny things.

[RejZoR]

Same could be said for you... AMD was in financial trouble. That was no secret. Them focusing on segment that requires the least risk, least R&D and almost garantees profit, how is that "stupid"? So they didn't get a crown for having the fastest card. Who gives a shit, really.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

Who gives a shit, really.

Everyone clinging to the fantasy about AMD aiming low on purpose.   Otherwise why would they bother saying anything?

 

 

 

[Humbug]

41 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Navi wasn't pushed back since it was never officially announced. And AMD had this schedule of summer/autumn releases for quite some time now. And so does NVIDIA. The really odd one was GTX 1080Ti launch in April iirc. Then again it was a weird card to begin with (not for being bad but exceptionally good).

Technically true but it's pretty obvious that there were internal delays, just that the launch day was not out publicly.

 

This was the roadmap shown in 2016 at the Capsaicin event. This was officially shown by AMD. Vega at the start of 2017, Navi at the start of 2018. So both Vega and Navi were later than AMD planned.

 

There is also the below which was a leaked internal version, so take it with a grain of salt as it was never released officially by AMD, however it matches the above.

 

 

30 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I don't really care if the launch is average with supply or the odd driver issue or something like that, so long as the product is actually a decent and competitive.

Me neither, Radeon 7 had a couple of driver issues at launch but now it's running perfectly. My point was that this time every department at AMD should have had loads of time to get it right at launch... Unlike the Radeon 7 which was a last minute thing when they realized how expensive the RTX 2080 is.

 

I understand that Navi will get faster over time, drivers always improve over time for a new architecture. But they should have stability and all the features working at launch including overclocking and all the fancy stuff in the control panel like FRTC, chill etc...

[RejZoR]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Everyone clinging to the fantasy about AMD aiming low on purpose.   Otherwise why would they bother saying anything?

 

 

 

Dude, now you're just straight up delusional. You're not happy when they aren't achieving certain numbers with high end and you're not happy when they literally aim at certain segment and are actually very competitive at it. You also don't like them either pretending or being honest. What do you even want? Like, LOL...

 

@Humbug

II frankly never take roadmaps as "things set in stone". Chronologically, yes and for that it's correct, but release times, not really. It even says that it can be subject to change. It sucks if you're planning purchases based on that, but one should learn pretty quickly not to believe these too much as far as release schedules go...

[mr moose]

Just now, RejZoR said:

Dude, now you're just straight up delusional. You're not happy when they aren't achieving certain numbers with high end and you're not happy when they literally aim at certain segment and are actually very competitive at it. You also don't like them either pretending or being honest. What do you even want? Like, LOL...

I would like it if you could spend a little bit more time trying to understand the industry and basic business and less time trying to convince everyone that your assumptions are true.  Trying to have a discussion on these topics when people like yourself keep posting some of the most inane assumptions about the industry is getting difficult.

 

Also the fact you resort to insults is a sure sign you are not here for genuine discussion but are either too invested in your opinion or are only here for an argument.

 

 

[RejZoR]

Oh, sorry mister perfect genius. I guess AMD released Polaris because it loves losing money and having no presence on the market at all. Got it.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Oh, sorry mister perfect genius. I guess AMD released Polaris because it loves losing money and having no presence on the market at all. Got it.

very mature.    I'm guessing your early teenage years by your responses and lack of understanding.

 

If that's the case then it is no wonder you don't believe anyone.   For your information, no company aims low,  no company wastes time and resource being average, it's not good for retaining shareholders,  investors, public image, sales the whole lot.  Polaris was the best they could do.  End of story. 

 

 

 

[Humbug]

28 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

 

@Humbug

II frankly never take roadmaps as "things set in stone". Chronologically, yes and for that it's correct, but release times, not really. It even says that it can be subject to change. It sucks if you're planning purchases based on that, but one should learn pretty quickly not to believe these too much as far as release schedules go...

I didn't plan purchases. I just take it as evidence that AMD has not been meeting their internal deadlines of planned product releases, i.e. failing to execute on their roadmap. Honestly that's very easy to believe... 

 

Do you think AMD ever planned to take more than a year to produce competitors for the GTX 1070 and 1080. No, they wanted it out sooner as shown in the roadmap, but got late... Same with Navi.

[Neftex]

17 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If that's the case then it is no wonder you don't believe anyone.   For your information, no company aims low,  no company wastes time and resource being average, it's not good for retaining shareholders,  investors, public image, sales the whole lot.  Polaris was the best they could do.  End of story.

youre wrong on that one. many companies dont aim for the top. they aim where they can be the most profitable

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Neftex said:

youre wrong on that one. many companies dont aim for the top. they aim where they can be the most profitable

Not quite,  they aim for the best then fill out the rest of the market accordingly.  product design (especially in GPU and CPU tech) is a top down venture.  They design the best they can and then produce cut down versions to sell in the lower markets. AMD did not intentional gimp their own product solely to sell in the middle market. 

[Neftex]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Not quite,  they aim for the best then fill out the rest of the market accordingly.  product design (especially in GPU and CPU tech) is a top down venture.  They design the best they can and then produce cut down versions to sell in the lower markets. AMD did not intentional gimp their own product solely to sell in the middle market. 

they dont produce the best they can, they produce what makes them the most profit. do you think NVIDIA cant make better gpu because of technology or because it doesnt make sense financially?

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, Neftex said:

they dont produce the best they can, they produce what makes them the most profit. do you think NVIDIA cant make better gpu because of technology or because it doesnt make sense financially?

Your not taking into account sales in all markets, R+D expenditure and  scale-ability of product through out each market segment.

If a company only designs and makes 1 product for their best selling market, then they lose out on every other market plus they are not developing the leading edge tech that can scale down through each market segments over time.  It is a waste of resources for any company to make a mediocre product because next year they have to start from scratch and make another one, if they make the best they can and it sits at the top of the market, then they can scale that back several times and fill the rest of the market. 

 

It's is just bad business to intentionally make mediocre products unless you want to be known as the budget option with budget performance. And never considered when someone wants top performance.

 

EDIT: and if you don't think this is true then why do you think they are persisting with vega and Navi?  why would Intel and nvidia be still spending up big producing the best they can if the budget market was all they needed?  it's not, AMD are only there because that's the best they could do int the situation.