[Guru3d] AMD to Showcase Polaris June 1 at Computex 2016

[airfathaaaaa]

Umm how is it going to hit any nvidia owner in the face? They in market for new monitor, obvious choice gsync. No matter what you think, 120Hz+ is not going to be mainstream for desktop GPU for "masses".

the price difference is huge big enough to actually justify selling the nvidia card and getting an amd one...
no one in their right mind will give 250 (at some cases)more for a inferior monitor because it has gsync

also yeah some years ago people said 4k wont be here for the masses
or 1080p wont be mainstream for the masses
or or or or or or everytime someone claims such a thing they all get eventually wrong

 

[selni]

Yep, lacking support for Freesync is a major downside for Nvidia. They could have easily included it but want to lock you into their gsync adopter tax.

If GSync was superior they would offer both. Premium vs Budget. Since they know that gsync isn't worth the extra, they won't support Adaptive-Sync until they stop making money off of gsync or start losing too much market share.

There's still some things not implemented in freesync yet (borderless windowed mode for example - this is a nightmare to implement I'm sure and there's certainly some catches but this does work pretty well in gsync in most cases). Of course that's likely just software implementation and nothing to do with the module.

 

[Dribble]

New FreeSync monitors continue to show up.

LG now has a sub-$500 USD 4K IPS 27" FreeSync monitor. With GSync, you are lucky to get 1440p GSync TN at this price.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01CH9ZTI4...UTF8&colid=B7IJ7GEXZML5&coliid=I210UMBTX0Y656

There are also $250 USD 24" 1080p 144Hz FreeSync monitors with Async range from 30-144Hz
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0131PBN6U...olid=B7IJ7GEXZML5&coliid=I3TX85960YAN2J&psc=1

Soon it's going to be hard to compare NV vs. AMD without discussing this point head on. Sooner or later the masses will start moving away from 1080p 60Hz and the G-Sync monitor premium will hit them straight in the face.

What on earth has this got to do with the topic of this thread?

 

[tviceman]

I personally do not have a problem with paper launches. It gets all the relevant information out sooner than the product launch and shuts down silly season.

At this point, if AMD isn't a few weeks away from paper launching Polaris as of JUne 1 and they ARE NOT paper launching, then to me it is confirmation that they are either 4+ weeks out (bad news if actually 8+ weeks out) OR Polaris won't be competing with either gtx 1080 or 1070 in price and performance.

 

[raghu78]

I personally do not have a problem with paper launches. It gets all the relevant information out sooner than the product launch and shuts down silly season.

At this point, if AMD isn't a few weeks away from paper launching Polaris as of JUne 1 and they ARE NOT paper launching, then to me it is confirmation that they are either 4+ weeks out (bad news if actually 8+ weeks out) OR Polaris won't be competing with either gtx 1080 or 1070 in price and performance.

dude the most important thing about a GPU launch besides product performance and quality is supply volume and ramp. We are yet to see what kind of supply volume we see on GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 on launch date and the first few weeks/months after that . AMD needs to launch at a date when they have good supply volume to start and the ramp must be steep to cope with demand.

As or performance we can all keep guessing but what matters is the actual performance when reviews are up on launch day. How is the product received by the press ? AMD has to make sure they have a product which is well received without any quality issues like cooling, coil whine etc which hurts the product sales badly. AMD is in a bad situation and thus the Polaris launch is very critical for the long term recovery of their GPU business. So its best if AMD take their time but execute very well. I think we will see a late June or early July hard launch of Polaris. In the grand scheme of things being 4 weeks behind 1070 is not a problem. What matters is can AMD Polaris 10 compete with 1070 and whether they can offer better perf/$ and perf/watt than 1070. These factors along with actual supply volume will determine if AMD have a very successful product launch.

 

[CakeMonster]

There's still some things not implemented in freesync yet (borderless windowed mode for example - this is a nightmare to implement I'm sure and there's certainly some catches but this does work pretty well in gsync in most cases). Of course that's likely just software implementation and nothing to do with the module.

Justifying a monitor upgrade just got a lot harder. Thanks for saving me the money. *sync solutions are not mature enough for me yet in that case... I can't shell out for it and then have no idea whether it will work in any game on my preferred mode (borderless).

 

[guskline]

raghu78: You make an excellent point. That's what happened to me in my 5960x rig below last year.

I had 29 290s in CF but wanted to go to a single big card that nearly equaled them. Titan X came out first but the price tag was salty (I paid @$300 per 290 card so $600 to $700 was my range). At about the same time that Fury X was talked about (including Overclocker's dream) Nvidia dropped the "bomb" with the GTX 980 TI. I matched them up, looked at prices and opted for an aftermarket 980 TI. Availability was a SERIOUS problem for AMD, FuryX cards were rare as hens teeth while GTX980TIs kept coming into stock.

I also valued 6G Vram vs 4G HBM as a factor and didn't want a AIO cooler since I was custom water cooling.

When I look back at it, availability was the KEY factor.

Even 4 weeks behind a true GTX 1070 release will be a problem for AMD. If they are late, they better show the Polaris and what it can do or again they will be behind the proverbial 8 ball.

I agree with you on your parameters.

 

[maddie]

dude the most important thing about a GPU launch besides product performance and quality is supply volume and ramp. We are yet to see what kind of supply volume we see on GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 on launch date and the first few weeks/months after that . AMD needs to launch at a date when they have good supply volume to start and the ramp must be steep to cope with demand.

As or performance we can all keep guessing but what matters is the actual performance when reviews are up on launch day. How is the product received by the press ? AMD has to make sure they have a product which is well received without any quality issues like cooling, coil whine etc which hurts the product sales badly. AMD is in a bad situation and thus the Polaris launch is very critical for the long term recovery of their GPU business. So its best if AMD take their time but execute very well. I think we will see a late June or early July hard launch of Polaris. In the grand scheme of things being 4 weeks behind 1070 is not a problem. What matters is can AMD Polaris 10 compete with 1070 and whether they can offer better perf/$ and perf/watt than 1070. These factors along with actual supply volume will determine if AMD have a very successful product launch.

Obviously any partisan supporter will value their brand being released first for bragging rights.

Does this really matter a lot in the overall scheme of things?

It is ridiculous to expect any manufacturer to satisfy all potential demand in short periods of time. Do some expect all of the 1070 cards to ever be made to be sold in 1 month or even 6 months? All this talk of missing the market if slightly behind in time is pure FUD. Sure, you will get some additional sales if released before your competitor. Those who would never buy your product in any case, do not matter.. However, the main market is the general mass of buyers over the life of the product. That is where most of your sales will occur.

Too many project their unique situation and viewpoint onto the wider market and make the most outlandish predictions.

 

[raghu78]

Obviously any partisan supporter will value their brand being released first for bragging rights.

Does this really matter a lot in the overall scheme of things?

It is ridiculous to expect any manufacturer to satisfy all potential demand in short periods of time. Do some expect all of the 1070 cards to ever be made to be sold in 1 month or even 6 months? All this talk of missing the market if slightly behind in time is pure FUD. Sure, you will get some additional sales if released before your competitor. Those who would never buy your product in any case, do not matter.. However, the main market is the general mass of buyers over the life of the product. That is where most of your sales will occur.

Too many project their unique situation and viewpoint onto the wider market and make the most outlandish predictions.

exacty. The life of a GPU is generally 24 months. So to say launching a month later will hurt sales materially is ridiculous. Nvidia launched GTX 680 2+ months later and GTX 670 around 4 months after 7970/ HD 7950. But they came in with better perf than competiton (atleast at launch), lower price, lower power consumption and pretty much cleaned up sales. So imo Polaris will do fine even if they launch a month later as long as perf, perf/watt and perf/$ is better than competition. AMD needs to attack the high volume segmen which means GPUs sold below USD 400 (even 400 is a bit too much and its more like USD 350).

 

[Arachnotronic]

So imo Polaris will do fine even if they launch a month later as long as perf, perf/watt and perf/$ is better than competition.

Why do you think that it will have better performance, performance/watt, and performance/$ compared to the competition?

 

[ozzy702]

Why do you think that it will have better performance, performance/watt, and performance/$ compared to the competition?

History has shown that even with a better overall product AMD will sell less than NVIDIA. AMD essentially has to beat NVIDA in every metric possible to regain market share.

I'm done with NVIDIA at least until we see a history of their products aging better vs. AMD. SLI 570's and SLI 780's just didn't age well and cost more than I care to remember.

 

[tential]

What on earth has this got to do with the topic of this thread?

Althouhg RS did a bad job of explaining it, I think Polaris KEY strength is the ecosystem that AMD has. Polaris 10 + high end freesync monitor is still set to be cheaper than a GTX 1080.
Gsync's cost, especially in the midrange/low range of gamers really is a deterrent to going Nvidia.

If you're a mid range/ low end gamer, you simply aren't getting a Gsync monitor. Way too expensive.

If you're a midrange/low end gamer who has aMD hardware, freesync is far more in reach.

With P10s release, if AMD was smart, they would market the Ecosystem. Just like Nvidia does, instead of just P10.

 

[Kenmitch]

Althouhg RS did a bad job of explaining it, I think Polaris KEY strength is the ecosystem that AMD has. Polaris 10 + high end freesync monitor is still set to be cheaper than a GTX 1080.
Gsync's cost, especially in the midrange/low range of gamers really is a deterrent to going Nvidia.

If you're a mid range/ low end gamer, you simply aren't getting a Gsync monitor. Way too expensive.

If you're a midrange/low end gamer who has aMD hardware, freesync is far more in reach.

With P10s release, if AMD was smart, they would market the Ecosystem. Just like Nvidia does, instead of just P10.

Yep....Best way to do it. Ignore the silly high fps marketing and play the ecosystem card. Maybe throw in some historical performance figures.

No intentions of derailing....More of a PSA post.

On another note which is unrelated but somewhat useful at the same time. The 4K monitor he linked looks to be on sale at Bestbuy currently for $399.99 as of this posting.