AMD May Not Be Trying To Compete With Nvidia

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Price to performance should be important, but in reality other factors matter more. People who buy value or budget cards are typically not enthusiasts and don't check reviews that much. They just hear that "GTX 980 Ti is awesome" and jump on a 960 because that must be a bit awesome too, but cheaper. 

 

Also, the 750 Ti should be well ahead of the R7 360, since it's generally a little better than the 260X, which is the big brother of the 260 and 360. The latter compete with the basic 750.

only a high end 750Ti with a good GPU-Boost beats a 260X.

750Ti is generally tied or slightly ahead of the 260, the 260X is 10-12% faster then a 260, and thus beats the 750Ti, the 265 is even faster then a 260X and the 370 is basically a mildly overclocked 265.

[FirstArmada]

"You can find 980 Ti cards for $599. Fury X being around $629. Not only is it cheaper, but more powerful to boot."

 

Once again sorry not aware of US prices , prices here in Canada are as depicted @VagabondWraith

 

Edited April 28, 2016 by FirstArmada
Forgot Quote

[Belgarathian]

6 minutes ago, FirstArmada said:

 

Ahh i see it now but that doesn't quite relate to the AMD master plan video and what he talks about in their it doesn't matter if Nvidia can make a competitive GPU at that price point they will also be forking a bunch of money on optimization it would make much more sense for them to just stick to the market sector they have be excelling in and only fork out the cash to optimize those cards 

 

secondly it would also cost a bunch of money to refine 28nm lithography to the point were it preforms to a 1st gen 14nm product once again even if they did or could sooner or later they would have to advance to the next fabrication node

Both Nvidia and RTG/AMD are moving to new nodes if memory serves me correctly. I'd be willing to push that a step further and say that a lot of the mid to low tier cards for both sides will be rebranded 28nm chips on an improved process for better power efficiency, and higher yields (similar to what RTG did with the 300 series).

[alamox]

1 hour ago, FirstArmada said:

 

Source : Ars Technica and Adored TV (Same person to decipher AMD's master plan) 

 

TL:DR basically saying that Nvidia and AMD will no longer be competing in the same market sectors

 

 

i think you are just phrasing it wrong, they will compete on high end segment, just not with the first line up, and it doesnt come as a surprise, AMD was clear since day one, that polaris is low/mid, and vega top end coming later, the only difference here is that AMD with 20% market share, they needed to grab more OEMs and mobile to buff up their market share, and nvidia with like 60%, their priority is different, need to stay on top of performance for the image.

 

[FirstArmada]

5 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Price to performance should be important, but in reality other factors matter more. People who buy value or budget cards are typically not enthusiasts and don't check reviews that much. They just hear that "GTX 980 Ti is awesome" and jump on a 960 because that must be a bit awesome too, but cheaper. 

 

Also, the 750 Ti should be well ahead of the R7 360, since it's generally a little better than the 260X, which is the big brother of the 260 and 360. The latter compete with the basic 750.

 

my HTPC has a 360 and although it sounds like a jet engine it preforms about the same and better in some cases then my friends 750 Ti who has a 4790K @ 4.4 Ghz over my 4770 non k so CPU bottle neck doesn't seem to be the issue 

[FirstArmada]

5 minutes ago, alamox said:

i think you are just phrasing it wrong, they will compete on high end segment, just not with the first line up, and it doesnt come as a surprise, AMD was clear since day one, that polaris is low/mid, and vega top end coming later, the only difference here is that AMD with 20% market share, they needed to grab more OEMs and mobile to buff up their market share, and nvidia with like 60%, their priority is different, need to stay on top of performance for the image.

 

Quite possible or as mentiond earlier Vega could be another card or two that doesn't compete with Nvidia but instead another card in between what Nvidia offers much like the Fury X is now at least in Canada it is about a 100$ cheaper then a 980 Ti , but i guess we wont know until we get closer to its launch 

[VagabondWraith]

Regardless of this banter (good or bad), I REALLY REALLY hope AMD (please AMD, I'm begging you) releases a product... say a 490X that can rival an nVidia card at the same performance bracket for a bit less money. I would really love to buy an AMD product and support them with my money if they deliver. I've always wanted to get say a Sapphire R9 490X and a nice FreeSync monitor. It would be cheaper and I could still experience great gaming for $200-300 dollars cheaper than nVidia.

 

My only problem is... nVidia continues their GameWorks barrage and I'm left with an underperforming card because of it. If you already have an nVidia card you're good to go. It's unfortunate a buying decision comes down to a businesses' tactics.

[FirstArmada]

28 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

Regardless of this banter (good or bad), I REALLY REALLY hope AMD (please AMD, I'm begging you) releases a product... say a 490X that can rival an nVidia card at the same performance bracket for a bit less money. I would really love to buy an AMD product and support them with my money if they deliver. I've always wanted to get say a Sapphire R9 490X and a nice FreeSync monitor. It would be cheaper and I could still experience great gaming for $200-300 dollars cheaper than nVidia.

 

My only problem is... nVidia continues their GameWorks barrage and I'm left with an underperforming card because of it. If you already have an nVidia card you're good to go. It's unfortunate a buying decision comes down to a businesses' tactics.

I too would love to buy an AMD card over Nvidia's mostly due to their business practices etc if they can deliver.

 

Although if this does happen maybe Nvidia will learn they cant continue on the track they are currently heading and it will knock some sense into them 

 

Im assuming you haven't watched the AMD master plan video but if it is true the tables will turn on Nvidia and console port performance on Nvidia cards will be horrible worse then AMD performance on GimpWorks titles 

[ivan134]

19 minutes ago, FirstArmada said:

I too would love to buy an AMD card over Nvidia's mostly due to their business practices etc if they can deliver.

 

Although if this does happen maybe Nvidia will learn they cant continue on the track they are currently heading and it will knock some sense into them 

 

Im assuming you haven't watched the AMD master plan video but if it is true the tables will turn on Nvidia and console port performance on Nvidia cards will be horrible worse then AMD performance on GimpWorks titles 

While he has some good educated guesses, nothing he said is set in stone. The "master plan" hinges on Nvidia not fixing their multi GPU issues and also having to upgrade their consoles so soon not leaving a bad taste in the mouths of console gamers and being willing to fork out more money for a new consoles even if it does have better performance than what they currently have. Neither of these things are set it stone so don't get too hung up on his word.

[Doobeedoo]

It's just random talk..

[byalexandr]

No AMD! Fuck the mobile market, focus on high end desktop cards. I want a powerful Polaris card

[FirstArmada]

17 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

It's just random talk..

What....

 

Did you even read the Ars Technica article or watch any of the videos i linked ?

[ApolloFury]

1 hour ago, byalexandr said:

No AMD! Fuck the mobile market, focus on high end desktop cards. I want a powerful Polaris card

Polaris isn't meant to be high-end cards, that is Vega.

[SurvivorNVL]

I can't imagine this happening.  At all.  You don't just give up a portion of the market, unless you have a flop like Bulldozer.( :> )  Anyway.  The point being is that AMD will never stop focusing on the high end market, and nVidia could never stop focusing on the low and mid-range markets(980 and downward), that's where all the real money is in the GPU(gaming GPU) community, anyway.  The high-end is a small portion.  Data-center wise, I am sure AMD and nVidia will be on par in the future once CUDA is implemented in Firepros, but I just can't imagine either of them not wanting or trying to compete on all fronts when it comes to consumer / enthusiast GPUs.  

Also - habanero sauce completes my chicken.

[ApolloFury]

As a game developer I will be highly disappointed if we stop getting high-end products that supports open-standards such as GPUOpen or FreenSync.

[grayperview]

We are only in the early stages of the "master plan" what AMD have done is paved the way with mantel for multiple GPU's on a single chip (to tired to phrase it properly) the custom chips for the consoles may lead the way in a couple of years having two or three energy efficient GPU's on the same chip,  as the video says the yields on the "big" GPU's is getting less and less and more expensive to manufacture, it makes sense to make "smaller" multiple GPU's with much higher yields at a lower cost.....

 

Sorry lost track of what the point is i am trying to make....but AMD getting in on all the consoles, has potentially seen the sew up the gaming market for the next 10 years, and it's only a matter of time before they dominate the PC market as well, as developers will be used to working with AMD hardware on the consoles when games come to PC it will be a lot easier to port the game over to the AMD hardware than Nvidia....we are already starting to see this in DX12 

 

Over the next few year unless its a Nvidia game, you're going to see games running better on AMD than Nvidia, purely because of AMD's domination of the console market.

[Master Disaster]

7 hours ago, FirstArmada said:

I too didnt believe it at first watch the AMD master plan series made complete sense to me after watching that its the only logical next step for AMD if they want to get back market share with out forking out tons of cash on marketing 

Except for the fact that this week they announced the Fury Pro Duo, seems like an odd move for a company who are "giving up on the high end sector" don't you think?

[Lethal Seraph]

So it's safe to assume now that we're expecting to get shanked in the rear by nvidia, like the gtx970 3.5vram at the same time mid-tier cards starting at $650?

[Sakkura]

7 hours ago, Prysin said:

only a high end 750Ti with a good GPU-Boost beats a 260X.

750Ti is generally tied or slightly ahead of the 260, the 260X is 10-12% faster then a 260, and thus beats the 750Ti, the 265 is even faster then a 260X and the 370 is basically a mildly overclocked 265.

No. A standard GTX 750 Ti performs between a 260X/7790 and a 370/265/7850. The GTX 750 performs about like a 260X/7790.

[ShadowCaptain]

AMD don;t want to compete wit Nvidia at the high end

 

But Im sure Nvidia want to compete with AMD at the low end

there is no way they cannot compete 

[Doobeedoo]

8 hours ago, FirstArmada said:

What....

 

Did you even read the Ars Technica article or watch any of the videos i linked ?

I did. Saying AMD won't compete on high end makes no sense. Polaris is a good start and Vega is to come soon. Friendly bashing for edvertising new high end products may come later again. Cause that's fun. 

 

Don't flame if any errors, i'm on phone. (and i hate it).

[Revinval]

So has no one talked about the fact that Nvidia also hasn't focused on their pascal? Both companies know that they can't make "big" chips until 2017 hence Nvidia not only not showing a pascal card but also focusing on their "BIG" pascal with HBM2 and the amazing release date of 2017. You are simply a fanboy if you think either company is immune to this issue. Both are going to make strides in power efficiency and overall performance. Simply put we have to wait and see because everyone is shiting on AMD right now for releasing information Nvidia is free from any questions it seems odd to me. If this was any other field with far less fanboyism I think people might see that fact. 

 

TLDR: Both GPU companies can't make the huge chips we are used to hence neither is saying they are but AMD has simply been more upfront about it with Nvidia not releasing/saying much at events outside of BIG pascal in 2017. 

[byalexandr]

7 hours ago, ApolloFury said:

Polaris isn't meant to be high-end cards, that is Vega.

Well they need to bring it sooner, the earlier they kick Nvidia's ass the better.

[Notional]

What a moronic thing to claim!

 

Will Polaris compete with big Pascal? No of course not. AMD's Vega however will. Both Vega and Big Pascal will launch around the same time and will both sport HBM2, so they will very much compete.

This is just a question of NVidia naming their entire architecture Pascal, where AMD has split it with Polaris and Vega.

[captain cactus]

We need a 3rd player on the market. Kinda like Green team, Red team and a Yellow team or something.