• 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.

What will be AMD'S next Move?

Page 26 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
desprado said:
Well u can see the fps drop for R9 290 in Ryse compare to GTX 980.AMD really need to fix it cpu usage issues on their upcoming GPUS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNbcsfG-uYo#t=36
Click to expand...

xW7v35t.png


:hmm:
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
If you listen to the video the guy says that it's some issue with that specific level.

And funnily enough it's also the exact same level where pcghw did their ryse testing that showed AMD cards crushing NV ones. Apparently it's not representative of the entire game at all.
 
Alatar said:
If you listen to the video the guy says that it's some issue with that specific level.

And funnily enough it's also the exact same level where pcghw did their ryse testing that showed AMD cards crushing NV ones. Apparently it's not representative of the entire game at all.
Click to expand...

you hope. Right now Ryse is running better on the R9 290 series cards especially with SSAA. lets wait for more reviews and further driver enhancements to conclude if Nvidia has indeed closed the gap.
 
Alatar said:
If you listen to the video the guy says that it's some issue with that specific level.

And funnily enough it's also the exact same level where pcghw did their ryse testing that showed AMD cards crushing NV ones. Apparently it's not representative of the entire game at all.
Click to expand...
So defensive.

This kind of comment does not appear when Nvidia wins in rubish benchmarks like gamegpu.ru 20 seconds tests.
 
DooKey said:
I smell a thread about to close for all the usual reasons.......
Click to expand...

I think vacations would be better than closing threads all the time. Just a thought. It's painful to read and some of the posters histories would be repulsive to look at. /ot

The real question is why was the CEO basically replaced overnight, and when and how will AMD compete with the 970/980 or is the unofficial price cut going to simply become official.
 
wand3r3r said:
I think vacations would be better than closing threads all the time. Just a thought. It's painful to read and some of the posters histories would be repulsive to look at. /ot

The real question is why was the CEO basically replaced overnight, and when and how will AMD compete with the 970/980 or is the unofficial price cut going to simply become official.
Click to expand...
I think we all know the reason and it is just matter of time that they prove us right.
 
I haven't used AMD stuff in several years, but do not want to see them go out of business.

I think ATI should break away from AMD if at all possible.
 
If AMD disappears, the same people who want to see them fail will deal with $650-750 video cards from here on out. Be careful what you wish for...
 
Teizo said:
I haven't used AMD stuff in several years, but do not want to see them go out of business.

I think ATI should break away from AMD if at all possible.
Click to expand...

As an avid Nvidia Fan I also really want a strong AMD/ATI. If anything I would like AMD to come back hard with the 390x series and really start taking Nvidia to task... If AMD was more competitive we wouldn't have mid range cards at flagship prices right now, nor would we be putting up with Nvidia's Perf/Watt marketing BS.

As for breaking away from AMD, I cant say whether that would help, but AMD does seem pretty bad at PR.
 
SperglordActual said:
As an avid Nvidia Fan I also really want a strong AMD/ATI. If anything I would like AMD to come back hard with the 390x series and really start taking Nvidia to task... If AMD was more competitive we wouldn't have mid range cards at flagship prices right now, nor would we be putting up with Nvidia's Perf/Watt marketing BS.

As for breaking away from AMD, I cant say whether that would help, but AMD does seem pretty bad at PR.
Click to expand...

It's getting really old hearing people say it's AMD's fault that Nvidia has high video card pricing. AMD has always been competitive in performance and usually at a lower price than Nvidia. But that still doesn't stop Nvidia from coming out with $1,000 Titans or $3,000 Titan Z's because they know that Nvidia fans are willing to pay it.
 
Venomous said:
If AMD disappears, the same people who want to see them fail will deal with $650-750 video cards from here on out. Be careful what you wish for...
Click to expand...

More like $1,000+ since we already are getting those prices for awhile now.

The 970 has been counter to the trend of NV pricing to rip off consumers, and why? Because AMD has gained some marketshare recently with great pricing on their range.

Without strong competition, we as gamers are all losers. I don't get the anti-AMD hate, it seems as if these individuals are major NV shareholders or something.. otherwise if they are just simple gamers/consumers, it makes no sense.
 
Creig said:
It's getting really old hearing people say it's AMD's fault that Nvidia has high video card pricing. AMD has always been competitive in performance and usually at a lower price than Nvidia. But that still doesn't stop Nvidia from coming out with $1,000 Titans or $3,000 Titan Z's because they know that Nvidia fans are willing to pay it.
Click to expand...

True, though if AMD was dogging them they wouldn't have been able to get away with releasing the 980 like it was gods gift to computing. I have a feeling that this 6 month period would have been VERY different if AMD had an immediate and effective response to the 970/980 release.
 
Reread the OPs post. With the incredible pricing of the GTX970 vs its performance the reduction in pricing of AMD's 290/290x keeps them in the ballgame until their 300 series appears.

I am VERY pleased, overall, with the performance of my 2 R9 290s in CF and WC'd below. I bought them used for under $300 each, so even with the recent price drop, I'm satisfied.
 
Silverforce11 said:
More like $1,000+ since we already are getting those prices for awhile now.

The 970 has been counter to the trend of NV pricing to rip off consumers, and why? Because AMD has gained some marketshare recently with great pricing on their range.

Without strong competition, we as gamers are all losers. I don't get the anti-AMD hate, it seems as if these individuals are major NV shareholders or something.. otherwise if they are just simple gamers/consumers, it makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Being an owner of BOTH AMD and Nvidia cards, I can understand the "passion" expressed on this forum from time to time. For Example, I have a EVGA GTX 780 Classified that is watercooled and it is a stellar card. I would have gone SLI but the price of the second one was SO high (before the release of the GTX970/980) and the r9-290s were falling in price AND had 4 gigs vs 3 gigs vram. the choice was easy for me to move the Classified to another rig and use 2 of the R9 290s WC'd.

Is this decision a slap or rejection to Nvidia? No, just a financial decision of the overall best bang for the buck at the time. Had the GTX970 been released at the time and if I did not already own a R9 290, I might have made a different decision.

Bottom line, both the Nvidia and AMD high end cards are very fast.
 
Last edited:
Creig said:
It's getting really old hearing people say it's AMD's fault that Nvidia has high video card pricing. AMD has always been competitive in performance and usually at a lower price than Nvidia. But that still doesn't stop Nvidia from coming out with $1,000 Titans or $3,000 Titan Z's because they know that Nvidia fans are willing to pay it.
Click to expand...

What? AMD needed 8 months to compete with Titan.
They have been 8 months behind the GTX750TI to offer something in the same perf/watt league.
They have nothing against GTX970 and GTX980 and needed to cut prices to stay competive.

And yes, this all started with the 7970 for $549 whoch got beaten by a faster and cheaper GTX680 2 1/2 months later.
 
sontin said:
And yes, this all started with the 7970 for $549 whoch got beaten by a faster and cheaper GTX680 2 1/2 months later.
Click to expand...


If I remember correctly 7970 offered better perf/$ than the high-end offering from nv - gtx580. It also had more vram and most importantly better perf/W.
We had much pricier GPUs before 7970. Not so long ago, GTX280 much?

Its almost granted that a card released later will undercut the competition in some way. There are some exceptions, mostly on nv side (titanz is the biggest offender)

Going by your twisted logic:
NV can't compete with amd on double precision, and is yet to release something that can. Don't think maxwell with change a thing in that respect.
NV needed almost 1,5 years to match 7970 vram capacities.
NV needed 8 months to to offer perf/watt of hd7750.
NV is yet to integrate dedicated sound processing unit into their gpus.
etc, etc.
Goal shifting is pointless
 
Last edited:
sontin said:
What? AMD needed 8 months to compete with Titan.
They have been 8 months behind the GTX750TI to offer something in the same perf/watt league.
They have nothing against GTX970 and GTX980 and needed to cut prices to stay competive.

And yes, this all started with the 7970 for $549 whoch got beaten by a faster and cheaper GTX680 2 1/2 months later.
Click to expand...


8800 Ultra.

How long was the 7970 AMD's highest performing GPU? Is $550 historically a lot for a flagship GPU powered card (especially one that will be the flagship for at least another couple of years)? Not to mention, for ~10% more than Nvidia's best offering at the time, the GTX580 @ ~$500, you got twice the ram and a video card that was more than 10% faster. That means the 7970 was better bang for the buck at launch than Nvidia's highest end single GPU card was more than a year after it had launched (and despite this Nvidia didn't budge on prices, leaving them right where they were even though they were outgunned, at least price cuts mean competition, like we have now).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top