• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Info Top 15 Most Used GPU by Steam Hardware Survey 2004-2019

Status
Not open for further replies.
570/580 are competitive with the 1050 ti/1060, its the latter's lower TDP that gives it more representation in OEM and laptop products.

Navi's focus on the midrange to lower high-perf range (1660 - 2070) is understanble for volume sales.
 
GCN has been plenty competitive, people just don't want to buy AMD.

NV's brand is just too beef at this point and it's been a long time since they've had an across the board fail ( FX 5xxx series).
 
Dribble said:
A video about steam surveys, I thought we weren't allowed to mention them around here and every thread gets locked because they must be biased against AMD or something.....
Click to expand...

If AMD wins, its allowed. If NV wins, nothing conclusive can be taken from the information, since the survey is flawed for reasons.

Disclaimer: I owned an HD 4870 and HD 4890. I miss ATI Sort of wish the "hidden" agenda Raja had of selling RTG to Intel had worked! I'd have swarmed over their products like locusts! LIKE! LOCUSTS!
 
railven said:
If AMD wins, its allowed. If NV wins, nothing conclusive can be taken from the information, since the survey is flawed for reasons.

Disclaimer: I owned an HD 4870 and HD 4890. I miss ATI Sort of wish the "hidden" agenda Raja had of selling RTG to Intel had worked! I'd have swarmed over their products like locusts! LIKE! LOCUSTS!
Click to expand...

Yup, spot on and I've owned 4850, 4870, 4890, 7950, 7970, 390, 480s, 580s.
 
While I have owned other cards other then Nvidia before, I never had an AMD dGPU and don't recall any from ATI. While I have used only Nvidia since late 2000, I am considering buying AMD the next time I upgrade.

AMD has decent performance for its price tags. And the drivers are FOSS.
 
AMD needs to realise that GPU power consumption matters.. They can no longer continue to offer 200/250 Watt TDP cards when the other team is offering the same performance at 100-120Watts.

They need to take care of this at the process level and selecting optimal voltages for GPUs (Not just leaving it for users to figure it out and implement)

Also, should offer something discrete on the mobile front as well.. They announced that Vega Mobile Discrete GPU Wayy back in early 2018 (with low Z height etc). Have yet to come across Laptops sporting it..

10-11CU IGP won't suffice..
 
DrMrLordX said:
Somewhat. They still have closed drivers that allow you to extract all the functionality of your hardware that you don't necessarily get using the amdgpu driver stack. They used to call it amdgpu-pro, now it's "Radeon Software for Linux Driver".

For example, it was only recently discovered that amdgpu drivers would allow you to increase power limit:

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-4.20-Increase-AMD-GPU-TDP
Click to expand...
OK but I will be strongly inclined to keep the power limit to where it is at. And I sure hope that AMD's future dGPUs can match Nvidia's lower power consumption and TDP.
 
right now apart from the cheaper 570s it's hard to justify any AMD card on perf/$ and when you add power efficiency to the equation...

AMD or "RTG" is in desperate need of a new architecture, and repeating the Polaris strategy I don't think is viable anymore,

this next couple of years will be very interesting, to see how well they will do with the consoles chip, Navi and how well Intel is going to do with their GPUs.
 
Why are people saying AMD needs a new architecture? AMD has only developed a brand new architecture what, 3 times in the last 20 years? VLIW5, VLIW4, GCN.

nVidia has had the same number of architectures. The last ground up new architecture was when Kepler came out, which was the same time that GCN came out.

Every GPU since those launches has been an iterative improvement on the previous version. NO ground up new architectures.

What AMD suffered from was poor funding, and really poor marketing. nVidia however has very good marketing, and lots of money. So they were able to pay off lots of game producers to use their technology (GameWorks), and not allow for AMD to optimize drivers before launch. So initial benchmarks always sucked for AMD, but got much better over time. nVidia has very good marketing. Just look at DLSS, the average person thinks its amazing. But those that know what it is, just shake their heads. Thats what good marketing does.

AMD needs Navi to be good yes, but they also need some proper marketing, which they have sorely lacked for many of the years in the above video.
 
Stuka87 said:
Why are people saying AMD needs a new architecture? AMD has only developed a brand new architecture what, 3 times in the last 20 years? VLIW5, VLIW4, GCN.
Click to expand...
Because their cards have gone backwards in performance/economy/etc since GCN came out vs their direct competitor - at one point AMD was ahead in hardware.

Stuka87 said:
nVidia has had the same number of architectures. The last ground up new architecture was when Kepler came out, which was the same time that GCN came out.
Click to expand...
A lot more has changed in Nvidia's architectures since Kepler then has to GCN since it came out, that's why Nvidia is much further ahead then it was then when they were about even.

Stuka87 said:
What AMD suffered from was poor funding, and really poor marketing. nVidia however has very good marketing, and lots of money. So they were able to pay off lots of game producers to use their technology (GameWorks), and not allow for AMD to optimize drivers before launch. So initial benchmarks always sucked for AMD, but got much better over time. nVidia has very good marketing. Just look at DLSS, the average person thinks its amazing. But those that know what it is, just shake their heads. Thats what good marketing does.
Click to expand...
AMD has suffered from lack of development, due to lack of funds. As I understand it they moved a lot of GPU development out to China after GCN came out I guess because it was much cheaper. That clearly hit development hard, especially compared to Nvidia who have been able to throw more and more money into R&D since Kepler/GCN 1 days.

They've also always suffered from weak software support - Nvidia decided to invest hard in software back before CUDA was released seeing it was key to selling stuff. AMD has never done that and they've suffered for it.

As for marketing, well tbh they don't do that badly given their limited budget - if it was that bad then all the tech forums would be anti AMD, but they are in fact pro-AMD and anti-Nvidia as a general rule.
 
Last edited:
Dribble said:
Because their cards have gone backwards in performance/economy/etc since GCN came out vs their direct competitor - at one point AMD was ahead in hardware.


A lot more has changed in Nvidia's architectures since Kepler then has to GCN since it came out, that's why Nvidia is much further ahead then it was then when they were about even.


AMD has suffered from lack of development, due to lack of funds. As I understand it they moved a lot of GPU development out to China after GCN came out I guess because it was much cheaper. That clearly hit development hard, especially compared to Nvidia who have been able to throw more and more money into R&D since Kepler/GCN 1 days.

They've also always suffered from weak software support - Nvidia decided to invest hard in software back before CUDA was released seeing it was key to selling stuff. AMD has never done that and they've suffered for it.

As for marketing, well tbh they don't do that badly given their limited budget - if it was that bad then all the tech forums would be anti AMD, but they are in fact pro-AMD and anti-Nvidia as a general rule.
Click to expand...
Here you are giving the solution. No architecture has stayed stagnant at the lowest level. There is a constant revising, and AMD has lagged behind Nvidia in evolving the basic architecture, mainly because of inadequate funding.

In other words, we don't know how much more they can get out of GCN. Saying that a fundamentally new architecture is needed is simply unknown and pure guesswork by any non-insider.
 
Stuka87 said:
Why are people saying AMD needs a new architecture? AMD has only developed a brand new architecture what, 3 times in the last 20 years? VLIW5, VLIW4, GCN.

nVidia has had the same number of architectures. The last ground up new architecture was when Kepler came out, which was the same time that GCN came out.

Every GPU since those launches has been an iterative improvement on the previous version. NO ground up new architectures.

What AMD suffered from was poor funding, and really poor marketing. nVidia however has very good marketing, and lots of money. So they were able to pay off lots of game producers to use their technology (GameWorks), and not allow for AMD to optimize drivers before launch. So initial benchmarks always sucked for AMD, but got much better over time. nVidia has very good marketing. Just look at DLSS, the average person thinks its amazing. But those that know what it is, just shake their heads. Thats what good marketing does.

AMD needs Navi to be good yes, but they also need some proper marketing, which they have sorely lacked for many of the years in the above video.
Click to expand...
I would say 2, as VLIW 4 was pretty much an evolution of VLIW5.
 
These steam survey threads are not true representative surveys
of people who actually own video cards..

Every other one has been locked and this one too.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top