Polaris 10 starting @ $199 for ~$500 worth of GPU power (390x / 980 / Nano)? [WSJ]

[Bacon1]

Advanced Micro Devices Inc. is angling to lower the cost of virtual reality, targeting the field with a new line of graphics hardware priced at $199—half or less the cost of comparable products.

AMD said the first chips based on its new Polaris design are expected to arrive in graphics cards for personal computers at the end of June. The company aims to help push the starting cost of PCs that can deliver VR experiences as low as $799 from above $1,000.

Consumers also face the cost of the latest generation of VR headsets—$599 for the Oculus Rift from Facebook Inc. ’s Oculus VR unit, for example, or $799 for HTC Corp. ’s Vive.


But the need for a PC with an add-in card that includes a beefy 3-D graphics chip is another barrier that stands in the way of widespread adoption of VR. An online survey conducted in April by the Advanced Imaging Society found that 68% of respondents said VR equipment was too expensive.
“Less than 1% of PC users have systems that are capable of doing VR,” said Raja Koduri, senior vice president and chief architect of AMD’s Radeon technologies group. “The entry point is very, very high.”

AMD said its new Radeon RX cards, certified for use in VR by HTC and Oculus VR, deliver performance equivalent to that of $500 graphics cards used for VR.

Patrick Moorhead, an analyst with Moor Insights & Strategy briefed on AMD’s strategy, estimated that the current minimum price on cards comparable to AMD’s new models is $399. He said the $199 pricing comes as a surprise.
“It’s great for getting more people into VR,” said Kelt Reeves, president of Falcon Northwest Computer Systems Inc., a boutique maker of gaming PCs that serves the market.

AMD competes with Nvidia Corp. in the chips known as graphics processing units, or GPUs. Mercury Research estimates that Nvidia had 70.6% of shipments in the first quarter of 2016 to 29.4% for AMD, though the latter’s share is up three percentage points from the fourth quarter.

Standard practice in the GPU business has been to start new product lines with high-end cards that command hefty prices and profit margins. Mr. Koduri said AMD hoped that breaking from tradition by starting with a lower-cost model could have a bigger impact. For one thing, he said, computer retailers prefer to stock machines for less than $999.

Nvidia on May 7 introduced a new flagship model called the GTX 1080 at a $599 price tag that is expected to succeed a $1,000 model called the Titan X. Nvidia also introduced a $379 model called the GTX 1070, which is likely to be seen as competition to the new AMD model.

“It’s up to Nvidia to come up with a lower-priced card,” Mr. Moorhead said.
An Nvidia spokesman had no immediate comment.

AMD, based in Sunnyvale, Calif., plans to formally announce the new chips early Wednesday at the Computex trade show in Taiwan.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/amd-prices-3-d-cards-to-spur-virtual-reality-market-1464725394

 

[monstercameron]

is it just me or does this seem really sly?

think about how negatively a price drop is perceived, yet nvidia gets to sell the FE editions at a higher markup, compared to the standard edition that will be sold at a lower price..
.
that seems like a price drop of sorts to me...

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Patrick Moorhead, an analyst with Moor Insights & Strategy briefed on AMD’s strategy, estimated that the current minimum price on cards comparable to AMD’s new models is $399. He said the $199 pricing comes as a surprise.

Wow, if this is 390x performance for $200, this will be a hell of deal.

 

[Stuka87]

is it just me or does this seem really sly?

think about how negatively a price drop is perceived, yet nvidia gets to sell the FE editions at a higher markup, compared to the standard edition that will be sold at a lower price..
.
that seems like a price drop of sorts to me...

Why is it silly that a mid range card has a mid range price?

 

[ShintaiDK]

With GP106 being 249-279$, the lowest bin of Polaris 10 at 199$ sounds right. AMD isn't giving it away for pleasure, but because its what they can sell for.

 

[Bacon1]

With GP106 being 249-279$, the lowest bin of Polaris 10 at 199$ sounds right. AMD isn't giving it away for pleasure, but because its what they can sell for.

Why would you expect this to be the lowest batch?

They've said from the start they want to bring VR performance (290/970+) to the mass / increase TAM for VR.

980 / 390x for $200, 290/970 for $150 would do they very well.

 

[Armsdealer]

It's common sense. AMD *needs* a hit from a volume perspective to bring the fight to nVidia. People simply don't understand that when you lose 25% share in two years, you sacrifice all profits through one cycle to get it back at all costs.

I'll probably buy two assuming they have some VR enhancements. I intend to use for VR.

 

[Sweepr]

Why the VGAs in the title?

 

[crisium]

"deliver performance equivalent to that of $500 graphics cards used for VR."
"stimated that the current minimum price on cards comparable to AMD’s new models is $399."

$399 is 390X, $500 is Nano and 980.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why would you expect this to be the lowest batch?

Why would you not when Polaris 10 price starts at 199$? It could even be 4GB as well. 8GB on a 199$ card isn't leaving much left. The memory maker may be the one earning the most if that's the case.

They've said from the start they want to bring VR performance (290/970+) to the mass / increase TAM for VR.

980 / 390x for $200, 290/970 for $150 would do they very well.

You just have to price it lower than 970/290 to do that. A 249-279$ top bin GP106 does the same for example. If Polaris comes in at 199$ to 299$ perhaps. Then mission accomplished in the VR TAM area. But they better have a multi projection type feature

 

[Krteq]

But they better have a multi projection type feature

They already have

Try to educate yourself about GCN uarch features.

 

[monstercameron]

They already have

Try to educate yourself about GCN uarch features.

source?

 

[exar333]

"deliver performance equivalent to that of $500 graphics cards used for VR."
"stimated that the current minimum price on cards comparable to AMD’s new models is $399."

$399 is 390X, $500 is Nano and 980.

I am guessing they would most favorably use the 980 for pricing comparisons, as it was the 'least desirable' option from NV since the 980Ti was released. With the 970 below and the 980Ti above...

 

[Armsdealer]

Why would you not when Polaris 10 price starts at 199$? It could even be 4GB as well. 8GB on a 199$ card isn't leaving much left. The memory maker may be the one earning the most if that's the case.

Uh huh... And how much do you think 8gb of g5 costs exactly?

 

[exar333]

Why is it silly that a mid range card has a mid range price?

THIS.

Seems more and more clear that buying the best deal on the 290x at the last pricve cut in summer of last year ($230-250) was the best decision.

For new builders, or even OEMs building 'VR ready' machines, this will be a solid option though. AMD needs to work with OEMs and market this right. They have a great offering, especially if they can beat the 1060 out of the door.

It is one thing for the masses to pony-up an extra $75 for NV (they do) but choosing between a $199 and $379 (absolute cheapest 1070) is pretty steep.

 

[jpiniero]

The problem/fear is that the 1060, even severely cut further down from the 1070, will be performance competitive with the two Polaris models esp if it can clock very high. nVidia would of course have plenty of options to undercut AMD.

 

[Phynaz]

Why would you expect this to be the lowest batch?

They've said from the start they want to bring VR performance (290/970+) to the mass / increase TAM for VR.

980 / 390x for $200, 290/970 for $150 would do they very well.

Newsflash...AMD isn't a charity. What AMD really wants to do is make money. And they don't do that offering 390x performance for $200.

 

[Bacon1]

Why would you not when Polaris 10 price starts at 199$? It could even be 4GB as well. 8GB on a 199$ card isn't leaving much left. The memory maker may be the one earning the most if that's the case.



You just have to price it lower than 970/290 to do that. A 249-279$ top bin GP106 does the same for example. If Polaris comes in at 199$ to 299$ perhaps. Then mission accomplished in the VR TAM area. But they better have a multi projection type feature

So you are saying that $199 = 980 / Nano / 390x performance, so a $250-280 part would = 980 TI then? Or compete with the $370 1070?

Because the article specially says that $199 == current $500 gpus.

 

[piesquared]

The problem/fear is that the 1060, even severely cut further down from the 1070, will be performance competitive with the two Polaris models esp if it can clock very high. nVidia would of course have plenty of options to undercut AMD.

How would you suggest NV get the kind of volume needed for that price range out of scrap full GP104 dies?? On a process that is already limited in volume?

 

[dark zero]

And is only Polaris 10... so Polaris 11 would be sub 100 dollars... oh boy, poor 950.... it will be history... and if those guys can Crossfire... that would be nuts to watch.

 

[Bacon1]

Newsflash...AMD isn't a charity. What AMD really wants to do is make money. And they don't do that offering 390x performance for $200.

Read the article.

AMD said its new Radeon RX cards, certified for use in VR by HTC and Oculus VR, deliver performance equivalent to that of $500 graphics cards used for VR.

Patrick Moorhead, an analyst with Moor Insights & Strategy briefed on AMD’s strategy, estimated that the current minimum price on cards comparable to AMD’s new models is $399. He said the $199 pricing comes as a surprise.

 

[RussianSensation]

THIS.

Seems more and more clear that buying the best deal on the 290x at the last pricve cut in summer of last year ($230-250) was the best decision.

November 29, 2014.

Most of the world doesn't have access to these deals though. In Russia, a 980/390X sells for >$400 USD and 970/390 for >$300. If AMD brings that level of performance for $200, it'll sell out instantly.

Newsflash...AMD isn't a charity. What AMD really wants to do is make money. And they don't do that offering 390x performance for $200.

Nothing AMD ever does makes you happy so it's basically pointless to debate. If AMD released a card 50% faster than a 1080 for $99, you'd find something wrong with it. Now you are complaining about AMD's financials when they may release a 390X level of performance for $199? You let AMD worry about their finances; here is a consumer forum where it's GOOD for us when a certain level of GPU performance becomes way more affordable. If you feel good inside going to bed helping a company make $, Intel has $1723 6950X and NV has $699 1080 FE for sale.

 

[Stuka87]

So you are saying that $199 = 980 / Nano / 390x performance, so a $250-280 part would = 980 TI then? Or compete with the $370 1070?

Because the article specially says that $199 == current $500 gpus.

Yeah, to me it seems they are talking about full P10, not a cut down P10.

 

[USER8000]

Newsflash...AMD isn't a charity. What AMD really wants to do is make money. And they don't do that offering 390x performance for $200.

Yes,they will make money. The current parts at that price use a 365MM2 GPU,and Polaris 10 is only 232MM2 - Tonga is nearly 60% larger in size than Polaris 10. The R9 380 and R9 380X also required more power,meaning more expensive power delivery circuitry and more expensive cooling.

Hence,they will make more money.

People should be happy we will be getting R9 390X level performance at a lower price,as Nvidia will react by changing its pricing too,meaning better value for money all round.

Not sure why some people really want graphics cards pricing to be higher than lower - must be some weird sort of fetish. Each to their own,I suppose.

 

[Magee_MC]

Newsflash...AMD isn't a charity. What AMD really wants to do is make money. And they don't do that offering 390x performance for $200.

Maybe. Maybe not. A small profit multiplied by a very large volume is a decent profit, which is exactly where AMD wants to be. The more cards they sell, the smaller the amount that each chip counts against the design costs, and the lower the price that they have to sell it for to make a profit.