AMD to Launch GPU Codenamed Hawaii in Hawaii Sept 25

[Nomanor]

Lets get to the facts. If AMD releases a new GPU lineup this year, it will be on 28nm. If it matches Titan's performance, it will not be $500.

That is called being realistic.

7990 right now costs $650-$700
7990 beats Titan.

The new card must be significantly better than 7990 to justify a price higher than $500

 

[raghu78]

He posts prices to random things in all of his posts. I'm surprised he didn't link to some random card on Newegg.

Lets get to the facts. If AMD releases a new GPU lineup this year, it will be on 28nm. If it matches Titan's performance, it will not be $500.

That is called being realistic.

agreed on both counts . 28nm and around USD 600 (maybe USD 650 especially if it has performance on par with Titan). even at that price if they bundle BF4 they are going to sell very well and Nvidia will have to react.

 

[raghu78]

7990 right now costs $650-$700
7990 beats Titan.

The new card must be significantly better than 7990 to justify a price higher than $500

not at all. if anything single GPUs are still preferred at the high end. enthusiasts at the high end prefer a single GPU over a slightly faster CF/SLI solution for frametime consistency and smoothness. The other main reason being HD 9970 dual CF will scale very well and is going to be more consistent than HD 7970 tri CF / HD 7990 CF. scaling after 2 cards is inconsistent and in many cases the 4th card does not add much to perf at all.

 

[RussianSensation]

Performance-wise...duh. Do you always have to deviate from the current topic at hand? Seems you simply cannot control yourself.

You seem to live in a world where price is irrelevant. Your post implied that your Titan is near supposed Hawaii's performance which is just a tad faster. Ya, so what? You seem to have forgotten the other side of the coin - price. I said what if it costs nearly half of your Titan? You seem to have a serious problem understanding that people consider it a major improvement in the GPU landscape if a certain level of performance becomes available for a substantially lower price. For instance GTX760 for $250 delivering 95% of the performance of a 670/7970 is good for the GPU market. There is no point in talking about performance without looking at the price unless you are made of $. Most people who are buying GPUs for next gen games aren't going to be spending $650+ on a GPU. If more PC gamers start buying faster and faster GPUs, game developers will have more incentive to invest into next generation engines and introduce more advanced graphical effects. This is the result of a given level of GPU performance becoming accessible at lower price levels. So in 2016 we would hope the Titan's level of performance could be had in a $299 14nm Volta card. This is the very foundation of the entire GPU industry - price/performance must improve over time.

I mean that someone posted a benchmark result and I posted my comparison result. So it was purely about performance. You can discuss just performance, you know.

Ok and if someone posted a score of 7000 points and then told you that HD9970 card costs $10,000, you'd care? Price/performance improvements is what drives the GPU market. Without it the GPU industry would be wiped out. If tomorrow AMD released a card 20% faster than the Titan but priced it at $1,500, almost no one would care. 99.5% of the market cares about the price for a given level of performance. Discussing performance without price makes no sense unless you get GPUs for free or are loaded. I bet 99.5% of this forum would rather take a $549 card with Titan's performance than a card that costs $1000+ and is faster than the Titan.

Price is a result of the market condition. Titan's performance 10 months later is boring.

So if someone released a card with Titan's performance for $549 that would be boring to you? Price is a major factor in the GPU landscape. Otherwise GPU makers could just release faster card and keep raising prices. Let me guess you'd rather have a $1,500 card that's 25% faster than the Titan rather than a $549 card with Titan's performance? I guess if $549 vs. $999 is the "same" to you, then sure it's boring.

 

[ruhtraeel]

IMO the 9970 will carry a price tag of around 500-600.

It probably won't be as powerful as a 7990, and they might not release a dual-chip version if it's a big die card

I'd say it would max be 650, but that's pushing it.


I want the days of $300-$450 for top-end card prices back.

 

[Silverforce11]

@RS: You cant argue using logic such as price or terms such as "value" for a CONSUMER product against these NV loyalists, they love NV products regardless and to them, price isn't a factor, ever.

Warning issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[railven]

@RS: You cant argue using logic such as price or terms such as "value" for a CONSUMER product against these NV loyalists, they love NV products regardless and to them, price isn't a factor, ever.

Maybe they aren't paying these prices? :hmm:

Haha, all tinfoil-hatting aside, as an AMD "loyalist" if they try to price gouge me they will learn my wallet isn't easily pried open.

Unless someone wants to hook me up with AMD Test Driver or whatever it's called. I'd gladly praise a half priced (or better yet free) HD 9970

 

[RussianSensation]

@RS: You cant argue using logic such as price or terms such as "value" for a CONSUMER product against these NV loyalists, they love NV products regardless and to them, price isn't a factor, ever.

I've never seen so many NV users so butthurt the minute I mentioned that we could have a card that might cost $549 and deliver Titan's performance. Never in the world did I imagine that'll call that boring, etc. No wonder the GPU landscape pricing is changing. Why don't nV and AMD raise flagship GPU prices to $2,000, then on 14nm to $3,000? :hmm:

I find it ironic that the same posters who whined about HD7970's launch price are the same ones who have a problem with me discussing price/performance advancements in the industry. I guess when you pay 1,000 EURO/USD for the Titan, the idea that AMD may launch a card with similar performance for much less makes it seem like you wasted $. I bet the same posters also bought GTX280 for $650 on launch week and then kept quiet when AMD launched HD4890 for $260 9 months later with similar performance. If AMD improves price/performance on 9970 vs. Titan by a significant margin, it will force NV to respond with lower prices or release faster SKUs. In the end, most of us benefit, except Titan owners.

He posts prices to random things in all of his posts. I'm surprised he didn't link to some random card on Newegg.

Link? I didn't know all of you are suddenly millionaires that price is now irrelevant in GPU discussions. I'll tell you what if price was 100% irrelevant to people, what is the point of even being on a GPU forum? I could go out and buy 4 of the world's fastest GPUs based on 3-4 professional reviews and never post online. It is only logical that someone who makes $30-50K a month and could afford 4 Titans would care less about possible performance of HD9970 or otherwise. He/she would just wait for the launch date and then if the card was faster, sell the Titans and pick up 4x 9970s -- rinse and repeat for 20nm GPUs, 14nm GPUs, etc. Counter to that if HD9970 was somehow faster than the Titan but cost $1,000+, 99.5% of the market could care less.

The rest of us are interested in aspects such as price because talking about performance in the absence of price is a moot point unless GPUs are falling off a truck or you are a price inelastic consumer in which case you wouldn't waste much time reading specs as you would just buy the world's fastest GPU every x months they are released.

Since specs & performance of 9970 are unknowns, and so is the price, in a thread related to 9970 the discussion of both is relevant as we are all just speculating.

 

[sontin]

So if someone released a card with Titan's performance for $549 that would be boring to you? Price is a major factor in the GPU landscape. Otherwise GPU makers could just release faster card and keep raising prices. Let me guess you'd rather have a $1,500 card that's 25% faster than the Titan rather than a $549 card with Titan's performance? I guess if $549 vs. $999 is the "same" to you, then sure it's boring.

This makes absolutly no sense.
Going with this i should only buy a product with Titan's performance when it has a price tag below $100 or so.
So, give me a reason why anybody should buy Titan's performance for $549 when i can get it 10 months later for maybe $299? And 10 months later again for $150?

I had a chance to buy this kind of performance since end of february. If i had no problem with waiting then i do not need to go out and buy a AMD card with this performance level for $549.

 

[railven]

This makes absolutly no sense.
Going with this i should only buy a product with Titan's performance when it has a price tag below $100 or so.
So, give me a reason why anybody should buy Titan's performance for $549 when i can get it 10 months later for maybe $299? And 10 months later again for $150?

I had a chance to buy this kind of performance since end of february. If i had no problem with waiting then i do not need to go out and buy a AMD card with this performance level for $549.

But you could have bought more performance for the same price.

And then you'll argue something like single vs multi GPU, and I'll laugh because essentially you throw your performance argument out the window.

Just say prestige, no one can argue against that.

 

[AnandThenMan]

The Nvidia Prestige, they should use that. It will cost as much as a sports car but who cares, it will be green and mean and badass to the core.

 

[sontin]

There is no prestige with Titan. I wanted more performance in February. And neither a GTX680 nor a 7970GHz was able to deliver it.

So there was only two options: Wait or buy.

BTW: I could wait until July 2014 and can go with the same logic: More performance for $549.

In the end it means i should never buy a new card because sometimes there will something faster for the same price on the market...

 

[railven]

There is no prestige with Titan. I wanted more performance in February. And neither a GTX680 nor a 7970GHz was able to deliver it.

So there was only two options: Wait or buy.

BTW: I could wait until July 2014 and can go with the same logic: More performance for $549.

In the end it means i should never buy a new card because sometimes there will something faster for the same price on the market...

Of course there were options. Two 680s. Or GTX 690. They perform better than Titan. Remember, you are only arguing performance. Once you deviate and add a "but" you've pretty much removed performance as the only principle of your argument.

 

[sontin]

If i wanted a mGPU system i had bought one. Maybe you should think about this.

 

[railven]

If i wanted a mGPU system i had bought one. Maybe you should think about this.

So it wasn't just performance, was it?

 

[sontin]

So, now we assume that a mGPU is like a sGPU system?
I had mGPUs systems and i didn't want it anymore.

But then the question is: If you use a mGPU as an argument why should anybody wait for AMD when they could have bought a mGPU system with more performance for less money since months?

 

[SickBeast]

n/m I'm not getting involved in this.

 

[ruhtraeel]

There is no prestige with Titan. I wanted more performance in February. And neither a GTX680 nor a 7970GHz was able to deliver it.

So there was only two options: Wait or buy.

BTW: I could wait until July 2014 and can go with the same logic: More performance for $549.

In the end it means i should never buy a new card because sometimes there will something faster for the same price on the market...

Your argument there really assumes that nobody has any common sense. It's a pretty black and white picture that you're painting there

Obviously people will buy a card sooner or later, but when something is as blatantly overpriced as the Titan is (I'm obviously not the only one to think so), common sense dictates that they should wait for something inevitably coming out that is more worth it. Once something comes out that the person thinks is worth it, they get it, knowing that something will come out in the future that is faster for the same amount of money.


I'll say this, not many people actually need more performance in a 1-2 month window and can't wait another couple of months. I'll argue that the vast majority of Titan users don't actually need a Titan for its performance; they need it for the feeling. If you need that intrinsic feeling, then by all means, go buy it.
I know I can't bring myself to buy something lower than the top-end card, but I still have my limits. GTX 780/Titan is past that limit.

 

[RussianSensation]

This makes absolutly no sense.
Going with this i should only buy a product with Titan's performance when it has a price tag below $100 or so.
So, give me a reason why anybody should buy Titan's performance for $549 when i can get it 10 months later for maybe $299? And 10 months later again for $150?

Yes, that's called the GPU industry. GPUs get faster and/or cheaper over time. You seem to be living in a bubble desiring the GPU makers to only service your narrow point of view (i.e., $1000+ GPU market segment). No one said anything about wanting Titan's performance for $100 in 9970. Stop putting words in my mouth.

I had a chance to buy this kind of performance since end of february. If i had no problem with waiting then i do not need to go out and buy a AMD card with this performance level for $549.[/B]

Major facepalm. Did it ever occur to you that the card is not aimed at you or that maybe because other people don't want to spend $1,000 on a GPU? :whiste: Just because you are in the <0.5% of GPU gamers who is only looking to upgrade form the Titan because you would rather spend $1000 to have Titan's performance 10 months earlier than Titan's performance for $550 10 months later, that doesn't make HD9970 boring.

So how about you just wait for the next $1000+ GPU, while 99.5% of the rest of us are able to save $? In case you haven't been following the gaming trends of 2013, there are not many games that require $1,000 GPUs to max out. This is why it has been strategic to keep waiting as long as possible before games like Watch Dogs, Witcher 3 and so on launch late this year/early 2014 before upgrading. If you could care less about that and were more than willing to drop $1K on a GPU, please go ahead and enjoy it while the rest of the GPU industry moves forward on the price/performance curve as it has for the last 20 years.

In the end it means i should never buy a new card because sometimes there will something faster for the same price on the market...

No, that's not what it means. One could follow the GPU industry closely and choose to buy at more optimal times, like skipping the overpriced 280, 480/580 and Titans. Instead getting 4890, unlocked 6950 (or discounted 480 for $225) and 7970 overclocked (or maybe 760 overclocked). Whichever way you go NV or AMD, there are always cards that deliver 75-80% of the performance of the top card for a fraction of the price. The money saved from not wasting it on a Titan is then reinvested towards a next gen 20nm GPU. If you can easily afford $1,000 GPUs every 2 years, by all means. If you start adding up the cost of GPU upgrades over the last 15-20 years these cost add up to thousands of dollars if you keep buying only flagship NV cards. If to you a $150 GPU is the "same" as a $1000 GPU, then just say so. Otherwise you appear to be really ignorant of 99.5% of the GPU market.

 

[railven]

So, now we assume that a mGPU is like a sGPU system?
I had mGPUs systems and i didn't want it anymore.

And there is the "but." So it wasn't just performance. Which is understandable. Which sort of throws a wrench into anyone arguing "why does price matter?" Because people hold different opinions on "value." Glad we finished this circle

But then the question is: If you use a mGPU as an argument why should anybody wait for AMD when they could have bought a mGPU system with more performance for less money since months?

Same reason why you deemed mGPU not satisfactory. Bias, preference, point in time, hardware requirements, etc etc. Everyone has different metrics when buying a product or deeming its value.

Telling someone "you can't use price when I'm just discussing performance" is like me telling you 'why didn't you buy a GTX 690 when all you wanted was performance." It doesn't work. We all have exemptions.

 

[sontin]

Obviously people will buy a card sooner or later, but when something is as blatantly overpriced as the Titan is (I'm obviously not the only one to think so), common sense dictates that they should wait for something inevitably coming out that is more worth it. Once something comes out that the person thinks is worth it, they get it, knowing that something will come out in the future that is faster for the same amount of money.

If this person can wait 8 months i see no reason why he would go out and buy this kind of performance for $549. He can wait longer and save further money.

And do not forget: Titan costs so much because AMD needed at least 7 months to bring something new to the market. And here we end with my comment about market condition.

And there is the "but." So it wasn't just performance. Which is understandable. Which sort of throws a wrench into anyone arguing "why does price matter?" Because people hold different opinions on "value." Glad we finished this circle

Hm, so you are trolling, right? I think it's funny that we need to discuss the drawbacks of mGPU systems again. But then i guess you are not playing games and only use benchmarks.
Hm, who is the guy now which buy graphic cards for prestige?

Same reason why you deemed mGPU not satisfactory. Bias, preference, point in time, hardware requirements, etc etc. Everyone has different metrics when buying a product or deeming its value.

What? So now i need to life with all the problems which i got for going AFR because it gives me "the same performance"? But when i bought the fastest sGPU card i did it because of "Bias" and "prestige"?!
Your postings make no sense.

Telling someone "you can't use price when I'm just discussing performance" is like me telling you 'why didn't you buy a GTX 690 when all you wanted was performance." It doesn't work. We all have exemptions.

So, how good is you performance when there is no AFR profile? Or you have glitches? Or microstuttering?

 

[SickBeast]

mGPU is a waste of time IMO. I have dealt with it, both with AMD and nVidia hardware. I can see why sontin bought the Titan. The card is a very poor value but it does offer single GPU performance that remains untouched to this day. No one has a crystal ball to tell them when cards like the GTX 780 or the new Radeons will come out.

He is correct in stating that there is still no real "upgrade" for him. If he goes mGPU, he will have a whole pile of issues that he does not currently have which will make it a downgrade in many ways.

I really don't think you guys are being fair to him nor are you understanding his situation and reasoning.

 

[railven]

mGPU is a waste of time IMO. I have dealt with it, both with AMD and nVidia hardware. I can see why sontin bought the Titan. The card is a very poor value but it does offer single GPU performance that remains untouched to this day. No one has a crystal ball to tell them when cards like the GTX 780 or the new Radeons will come out.

He is correct in stating that there is still no real "upgrade" for him. If he goes mGPU, he will have a whole pile of issues that he does not currently have which will make it a downgrade in many ways.

I really don't think you guys are being fair to him nor are you understanding his situation and reasoning.

If his only argument remained performance, he is wrong. Once you add caveats can you even argue his position.

And really, one needs a crystal ball to fathom that the product will be replaced by something faster?

Why don't you just argue it's Nvidia/AMD's fault for not telling him they planned on making faster products, eventually.

 

[ruhtraeel]

mGPU is a waste of time IMO. I have dealt with it, both with AMD and nVidia hardware. I can see why sontin bought the Titan. The card is a very poor value but it does offer single GPU performance that remains untouched to this day. No one has a crystal ball to tell them when cards like the GTX 780 or the new Radeons will come out.

He is correct in stating that there is still no real "upgrade" for him. If he goes mGPU, he will have a whole pile of issues that he does not currently have which will make it a downgrade in many ways.

I really don't think you guys are being fair to him nor are you understanding his situation and reasoning.

I do understand his reasoning in the sense that he has his own values. Everything is subjective here in terms of value; objectively, I am also done with mGPU setups. Doesn't mean I would buy a Titan though, because like the vast majority of people here, I didn't have a 4 month window where I needed the fastest single GPU, even though it costed more than twice as much and delivered ~15-20% more performance. I could afford to wait

It's true that there's no real upgrade for him. If I were in his position, I wouldn't upgrade in a long long time just knowing that I threw $500 down the drain if I went to a faster card that costs less ($500). ($300 maybe, if the resale value of the Titan holds up at $200)

This doesn't change the numerous signs pointing to AMD's card that will not only have similar performance but cost substantially less.

 

[SickBeast]

This doesn't change the numerous signs pointing to AMD's card that will not only have similar performance but cost substantially less.

We don't know that yet. Bulldozer was supposed to blow an i7 out of the water and have improved IPC, confirmed by an AMD rep, and we all know how that turned out.

Never forget that this is AMD we are talking about. They are in "spin" mode right now as they have nothing to compete with nVidia at the high end and they will say anything that they can to defer people from buying a GTX 780 or a Titan.