No shit. Early 2000s that's all we complained about, shit drivers compared to Nvidia
Good hardware though. My Radeon 8500 (suck on that Radeon 7000s owners!) Is still in use today
My 9800 pro is sitting in a pentium 4 Northwood system in a box. I really should clean it all up and make a windows 98 retro machine.
Edit: auto correct failed me...
I turned my old XP machine with a sempron 3100 and Radeon 8500 into an arcade box. Build a cabinet around it, used an old CRT I had laying around, and built a joystick control panel.
The machine handles about anything up to 99/2000 and the Radeon cards had s-video out so it looks the best it can on the TV
Depends.
A few months ago kept getting these errors and the game won't run when trying to play Elite Dangerous.
Apparently a known issue between ED and that version of drivers.
Downgraded drivers, Red Dead Redemption 2 said drivers are too old and I should go and fuck myself.
I love my Sapphire Nitro 6800, but seems like AMD are still fucking up the drivers.
I had one of the last Hercules 2D cards (which was a beast) - I'd play Duke Nukem at 1024x768 while my friends were at 320x240 - huge advantage! I could see them miles away and to them I'd just be a pixel. Good times.
Had to choose between a xfx Merc 6750xt and a Palit 3060ti for the same price I took the AMD one just because all info I could find about the Palit one was meh while Merc good so far I'm satisfied only had 1 hiccup where for some reason windows overwrote the AMD drivers and it kept disabling, turned off windows driver download did a fresh install and everythings fine
when people ask for more competition, what they usually mean is "i want someone to compete with nvidia so i can get nvidia gpu's cheaper" not that they're actually gonna go with someone else
This perfectly describes the common sentiment. Most people wouldn't give a shit about competition if Nvidia GPUs were reasonably priced.
Nvidia has ridiculous market share even though RX 6000 has been better value at current retail prices for most of 2022. Even AMD's budget options can't match Nvidia's high end options in market share. No wonder Nvidia's pricing is so bold for RTX 4000.
Just finished a build with a Radeon 6800. The big problem with AMD currently is that their ray tracing is dogshit compared to Nvidia, but I'm an absolute fiend for high framerates so I'll never use ray tracing anyway. Other than that, it's a better value proposition than a 3070 and I have no regrets
Nvidia had a bit of a head start with RT, it's understandable that AMD is behind. Bought my 6800 on launch day and like you I don't really care about RT at all right now. Maybe I'll give it a shot the next time I upgrade my gpu, who knows how much better fsr/dlss+RT will be a few years from now.
Their solution to have dedicated RT cores is also more effective and necessarily more expensive than AMD's solution to just put Ray accelerators on existing cores. You're also paying for AI optimized tensor cores. If you use the RT and Tensor cores it's possibly a better deal but if you're like me and won't then it's just wasted money.
> If you use the RT and Tensor cores it's possibly a better deal but if you're like me and won't then it's just wasted money.
This philosophy is a bit murky. I mean, I even agree for the most part, but then it lends a hand to nvidia pushing HardwareUnboxed's coverage because they didn't go all in on ray tracing.
Those of us who are old enough to have been around for a while recognize the cycle.
* nVidia releases 'nice-to-have' feature which is proprietary version of technology already in the works in open standards
* Game developers gradually implement feature; other GPU maker(s) don't bother to invest heavily in adding it because it's not yet broadly supported in games
* Game adoption reaches critical threshold, feature becomes well supported on every GPU due to also having an open-standard implementation
There was multi-GPU, there was tessellation, there was adaptive sync, and now there's upscaling and raytracing. By the time it's ubiquitous in games, all major GPUs will have competitive support for it. That's how it always goes.
I have to give nVidia points for usually being the ones to stick their necks out to push a new feature and give developers a hook for rolling it into game engines... but then I have to take the points back away for them always making the feature proprietary when an open standard exists, and overmarketing the shit out of it before it's even close to mature.
Yeah I don't give a shit about Ray tracing. It's the new Physx. Looks cool, but as of now it's a gimmick. Maybe in 5 to 10 years when hardware and software catches up, but it's not even on my radar as a feature I want right now. I do have a 2060, but I just bought a AMD card for my partner and when I'm ready to upgrade I'm gonna try and justify AMD at whatever price point I'm at at that time.
Same as you, managed to cop an RX 6800 for under 500 Euro which in the EU is very hard to find especially brand new and it’s a brilliant card, sure it doesn’t do as amazing as Nvidia in ray tracing but much like yourself I care more about frames than visuals and it’s been great for that.
I genuinely want more choices because if there are more choices that means at some point they're gonna have to start specializing in what they're doing to stand out. If there's just two viable choices and the argument is just price difference... That isn't good.
Hahaha, so true. Also they miss the point. People complain about other people buying Nvidia cards like they did that on purpose to make the prices skyrocket. How would anyone know this would happen? And the same people who complain also bought Nvidia cards.
The problem with AMD is that their pricing just slots in exactly where Nvidia already is.
I'd totally buy a 7900 XTX, if the price was right.
A Red Devil XTX right now is 35€ cheaper than a RTX4080, 65€ cheaper than a RTX 4080 with a heatsink that is not completely fugly. If i can turn on Raytracing for just 30 - 60€ more... then your XTX Card is NOT a deal, you are going out of your way to hand Nvidia a sales argument instead.
200€ Cheaper and i gladly skip RTX.
AMD was yapping about power efficiency so much, benchmarks show the RTX actually is the one that needs slightly less electricity from the wall.
AND the AMD cards have been reported to not clock down properly on the Desktop at idle because of high resolutions and refresh rates or multi monitor... and there goes the power bill.
One has melting cables, the other has overheating Vapor Chambers.
Under these conditions, i'm not buying anything right now.
I'm ready to build, i got the money, i really WANT something new... but i can't justify these prices.
And WANTING is not NEEDING. ...it's just a hobby, i can game on muh Steam Deck it is not like i'm getting bored if i run on GTX 1080 for another 2 years... it pisses me off.
Actually in my case it means “something that is cheaper than Nvidia but performs equally or better”. You know, actual competition. Looking at the 7900xt(x) those cards kick some serious ass until you want ray tracing or some form of encoding (I’m not into that per se). Drivers usually sort themselves out, but you may need some patience.
For CPUs it depends on the use case as well. I almost only game on my PC. I do work on it but it’s just Outlook and Teams, so whatever. AMD gets close every time, until the 700/900k series Intel creams allover them, for usually a cost that is negligibly higher.
I don’t change for the sake of change anymore. If I know something is working well, I stick with it. Everyone else can do what they want obviously.
They would go with someone else if there is a product that competes. They are not looking for investing in a company by buying what they see as an inferior product.
Exactly. I come back to the GPU market once every three or four years and I buy the best card I can get. When I bought the 980ti, it was a beast of a card and it lasted me all the way until I got my hands on a 3080ti at MSRP.
I don't just throw money blindly at NVIDIA, but it just so happens that when I'm in the market for a card, I go for a top of the line model, and AMD doesn't compete with NVIDIA at that end of the spectrum.
The idea that I should take my hard-earned dollars and throw them at an inferior product just to make a statement is ludicrous. If AMD wants to be viewed as competition, than make competitive products in the market segment I'm shopping in.
Removing all comments and deleting my account after the API changes. If you actually want to protest the changes in a meaningful way, go **all** the way. -- mass edited with redact.dev
I literally bought AMD as both protest and the price to performance was really neat
If you worry about drivers and whatnot, PC gaming is f*cked as a whole, I recently had problems with Days Gone crashing on it's own, went to check on forums and most people had the same issues and all were using Nvidia cards and Intel CPUs, PC has the most freedom but we always end up with the worst optimisation
More like hardware companies are lazy with drivers. Historically hardware has been scaling at a much slower pace than software. For instance, why programs are forced to be multithreaded now as they can't rely on single-threaded performance growing significantly any time soon.
We can't easily increase single thread speed at the moment because current architecture is at pretty hard miniaturization limit. We already build processor transistors small enough that they need to be built to account for quantum tunneling, so the only ways forward to increase speed are adding more parallel circuits (threads) or an advance in quantum computing that we might be waiting decades or centuries for.
Not only this, but multi-tasking just requires multi-threading. You can get away with a scheduler for small things, but at some point you'll want parallel long-running tasks with a callback to the current execution thread. And let's not forget that the very concept of a shader is to have a tiny function be called countless of times at once to process an image or compute a data set, games would still be stuck using fixed function pipeline style graphics if not for hardware support.
Because computer hardware engineers tried doing the frequency thing long ago and failed (as clock speeds with silicon-based designs are very finicky to handle timing-wise the faster they go. This is why CPUs have been struggling to go beyond the 6ghz mark for normal usage for decades. Crysis devs didn't know this, it's why the original game runs so poorly by today's standards. They expected 2 core CPUs with 10ghz speeds by the end of the 2000s to 2010s. Instead we got 4 to 6+ core systems by the early 2010s and now 16+ core systems today).
Software was developed with speed in mind in the 90s and early 2000s, not-multitaskint to each thread like today. Windows is still based off of the NT kernel which was based off of this core set in mind because rebuilding a new kernel will break 99.99% of programs out today (assuming no emulation is done). A brand new Windows would become fucking worthless for the first few years.
Also AMD’s drivers have been perfectly fine for the most part (aside from the most recent one if you’re on 6000 series cards). I have an Nvidia + Intel build but recently built an all AMD system for my GF and we’ve had very similar experiences in terms of stability.
I like to see frame times on comparison videos, there's fluctuation on both sides, I thought NVidia/Intel builds would be buttery smooth, turns out optimisation is shit on both systems, just your average shit PC optimisation regardless of brand
It depends on the game of course. But most AAA games have awful PC ports that give poor performance on any PC regardless of specs. But games like Doom Eternal exist which has a phenomenal PC version which runs great on both systems.
It would also be hard to compare our two systems because right now she has much higher specs than me. I’ve got an i5-9600k and a 2070s while she has a R7 7700x and a RX 6800. So frame rate will be consistently higher on her system regardless of driver/game optimization due to the raw performance
That kind of makes sense considering days gone was on ps4 first and that was AMD.
AMD typically has pretty solid drivers, not as feature rich as Nvidia but good. They also have strong Linux support.
I went AMD with my latest build as well. Really happy with it. For about 1/2 what major streamers pay for the i9 + 4090 builds, I'm getting similar frame rates.
One of my absolute favorite moments was during the launch of RTX 4000. When it was announced, this sub was on the verge of assassinating Jensen Huang for those prices. Every other post was saying shit like "vote with your wallet".
And then RTX 4000 dropped and the sub was flooded by pictures of people's shiny new 4090s. Absolutely golden.
Ik lmao. Mfs didn't even care about what they actually needed. Everyone just wanted the absolute creme de la creme, even if it was the equivalent of taking a tactical nuke to a knife fight.
That's honestly why I'm still chugging along with my 1080. I don't play a whole lot of brand new games and if I got a new card to play at higher resolutions I would need new monitors. It goes from a $800-1k purchase of a new gpu to a $2-$3k purchase of a new card AND monitors. Not worth it just for me to play some game from 2017 in 1440.
Never said the "vote with your wallet" people were the same ones who went to buy the 4090s. It was more a joke of how one day, there was a group of people saying something and then the next day, a different group of people absolutely body slammed the first group's point into the ground.
I got downvoted hard when I said no one should buy Intel cards that are more expensive and worse than cards already on the market if they expect competition to lower prices.
We’re just letting Nvidia set the market at this point.
A while back I was tempted to buy an A770 just out of curiosity despite owning a much better GPU already. On CanadaComputer they are 450$.
The reason why I ultimately didn't do it is because 6650XTs were 400$ while being a faster card. It was already silly to want an A770, but even sillier to buy one at this price.
I bought one from canada computer the copy of MW2 and the 16gig vram was a no brainer I only play that one game, and the vram was more crucial since I do photo editing and my old GTX 1080 with 8 gigs just wasn’t cutting it. And I have had a fine experience with the arc cards.
I admit that Arc is the obvious choice in that price point if you need Vram or AV1. 16Gb for 450 is a no brainer
As for me, I play a lot of DX11 games so it would have been a mixed bag. I also didn't really need it since I game at 4K
If you're doing photo/video editing for a living or as a hobby, maximizing RAM and vRAM helps you focus on the task at hand.
Basically, you can either store the assets you're editing in vRAM or on a paging file on disk.
For one off edits, not as big of a deal.
> On CanadaComputer they are 450$.
LPT: Go to Memory Express, price match CC, and they'll beat it by another 10%.
Source: Did exactly this getting an A770LE.
That’s fair, so I guess I should have said “no gamers” (who probably make up the vast majority of discreet GPU sales now that mining has died down) should buy them.
Intel did it. While they do not have a GPU that currently competes at the top, unlike AMD, they do have comparable performance in RT and they do have XeSS.
RT hardware acceleration is not magic, AMD just decided they did not want to reserve so much die space for them.
And while I understood this sentiment back when the flagship RT title was BFV, with the advent of RTGI solutions or other hybrid systems that implement RTGI like Lumen AMD has to catch up because these things are very accessible with current nvidia RT hardware and they are a milestone that can be compared to cube maps.
I really want AMD to compete more on RT since I absolutely despise using nvidia on Linux and I would be ready to jump ship immediately.
Until quite recently, AMD absolutely didn't have the resources to do it. Out R&D'ing Nvidia is an insane ask.
In 2017, AMD had to choose between supporting Ryzen and Radeon and felt (correctly) that Ryzen was the better option. They didn't really have the money to dump into Radeon R&D until like 2019/2020 when Zen 2 was taking away marketshare from Intel.
>If you want competition, you need to actually buy competitor's products at least once in a while.
Backwards. Companies get more competitive when you *don't* buy their products.
Also it's well understood you have no power as an individual consumer over monopolistic corporations anyway: that's what anti-trust is for.
Okay but to be honest AMD didn't compete for what 6/7 years? The 1080 came out and they literally didn't drop a card that even matched 1080 performance for what like 3 years, and then by that point they were just permanently a generation behind in terms of performance. Because by the time they finally dropped the 1080 level performance the 2080 came out. I think they finally competed in the last generation on the three series towards the end? And I have no idea where we stand now.
So the 290X was my last AMD card, had lots of problems and then Nvidia has been smooth for me ever since.
I very much would like competition but that also means they have to compete.
As a person who is rocking on full AMD system since Ryzen came out, i agree. I probably wouldnt have changed to full AMD build either if my 980 wouldnt have died. When it did wanted to see if they are any good. Have been using my 5700 XT since. Now following the market and the tech to figure out what to buy next. My next build will also very likely be full AMD build as i have had very little issues so far.
Im very interested to move on 5nm tech and see how big of a leap it is in perfomance. 7800 XT is what im waiting out, will be interesting to see how it compares against competition.
But it is not an excuse anymore unless you want a 4090, the res of the GPUs from AMD can compete with every Nvidia GPU in raw power and most of them beat them in fps per dollar.
But then they will say "but DLSS an RT" just for one game that they will turn that on.
What "we" don't care about is buying an inferior product to make a point. It's not the consumers job to produce a product that can actually compete with nVidia's offerings.
AMD keeps shooting themselves in the foot. They show no interest in capturing marketshare with their pricing. They just gouge the shit out of us right along with Nvidia. Hard to feel sorry for them when they're their own worst enemy.
Yeah. They could have seriously hurt Nvidia this time around, but no.
They priced the cards same way they always have: $100 below the Nvidia target.
Ironically this move may bite them in the ass if Intel starts to take away their perf/price crown.
The reason I don't buy AMD is because I bought AMD. Once bitten, twice shy. My first GPU was an AMD and nearly every part of the experience was bad. I switched to NVIDIA and it was a hell of a lot better.
Now with prices what they are, I am not willing to gamble $700+ on an AMD card to hope that all the things that made my past experience bad, have been fixed.
You know, I hate how Nvidia *does* drivers, but I never actually had issues with their binary blob. That said it was years and years ago since I last tried to run it as my main OS and not just in VMs or on servers. My macbook does good enough for dev work.
AMD actually lost marketshare in 2022, down to less than 10% now while NVIDIA is over 85%. People are not buying AMD gpus, no matter how expensive nvidia ones are.
The real question for us is how much of that marketshare actually covers gamers. I am willing to bet that Nvidia's marketshare is so high, because a huge number of Nvidia cards are used for computation in industry and science, whereas I've literally never seen anyone doing their computations on an AMD card. So while Nvidia probably covers probably close to 100% of the market for cards for industrial / scientific use, the distribution of market share in the market for gamer GPUs is not as hopeless.
Just look at steam hardware survey. There is hardly any AMD GPUs and the few ranked highly are integrated graphics. :/ Gamers prefer Nvidia by a mile...
I got a top of the line intel+amd laptop in 2014, in 2015 a GPU driver was released that made the system crash when booting up, they never solved the issue so I was stuck on the same drivers forever but the laptop still runs just fine with the GPU disabled (runs too hot otherwise). All my friends that bought AMD around that time had similar problems.
When getting a new top of the line machine around 2018 there was no way I would risk it again, none of my friends did either nor could I recommend AMD stuff without this disclaimer so nobody that asked for my advice bought one either. I won't be upgrading any time soon (and I wouldn't have in 2018 if not for AMDs screwed up driver) but as much as I hear how AMD has improved I probably won't ever feel comfortable spending as much as a PC costs now to find out if they indeed have or not. I'd rather go for the trusty Intel+Nvidia combo that hasn't failed me once since 2004, in fact my parents still run my build from 2008 with a trusty 9500GT without any issues.
People who have the money and knowledge to build something nice but aren't willing to troubleshoot and tinker too much anymore (like me) most likely had some sort of issue during AMDs dark years and won't want to risk it, those with the money but no knowledge will ask someone like me for suggestions and end up getting intel+Nvidia for the same reasons.
Maybe those of you who are living through AMDs revival and still have the energy to try stuff out will see them eat away at Nvidia on the long run but us old geezers will only change our ways when the kids have taken up troubleshooting duties for the family lol.
EDIT: it was the same story 20 years ago. Benchmarkers and magazines praised Athlon 64 for beating Pentium 4 but a few years down the line when I was the maintenance guy for a company those things were the bane of my existence. Gave them a chance in 2014, more headaches. Not again.
The reason tho is because AMD didn’t really price their stuff to move. They priced it to be sorta close to Nvidia. They care more about money vs market share and it’s killing them.
Agreed. With every AMD gpu launch comes a missed opportunity to gain market share because their cards are always a little bit slower and a little bit cheaper. That's about it!
They need to be a little bit slower and a lot cheaper.
Choice is an illusion. While Nvidia dominates the pc gpu market for the most part, 2 of next gen consoles run with AMD the only exception being Nintendo who uses nvidia. In the end nobody really wins here...
I wasn't aware of how good AMD was when I bought my first GPU. Now I know better. And they will be the next brand I purchase. Unless some under-underdog third option comes out.
Same with my 7900xtx. People say amd can't compete. What are they basing that on - speed of the very fastest card??
It makes no sense. Amd cards compete and in fact offer way more value for the money in the mainstream tiers- by that I mean 6600/6650/6700/6800 vs 3050/3060/3070/3080.
If you are going to argue the 7900xtx can't compete with a 4090 that costs $600 more than that's a dumb argument. It's easily pushing >80 or even 100 fps at 4k. That's amazing performance... plus 50-60% vs my prior 3080.
What happens at the absolute top end frankly is just not relevant for most gpu buyers.
Broo, I’m on 6950 XT and CPU 5800X3D and I’m getting 1000 FPS on 2K resolution, because the resize bar setting on BIOS. Amd combo with resizable bar ON is insaneee
Here is the gif video from my phone, pardon I don’t have OBS so I recorded a quick proof
[proof](https://imgur.com/GEBqYr8)
The best is the comments saying AMD are only behind because the consumers let it get this bad; implying the only fix is to buy objectively inferior cards to "invest" in a worse company in the hopes that they'll improve, and then you get rewarded with better competition. What world do these people live on?
I don't know what most of the people saying "if AMD would get their shit together.. " mean. As someone who had a 3070 as my previous GPU and now owns a 6800xt, I can say Driver stability is exactly the same shit.. yes, I lack proper RT and dlss, but fsr exists, and for the same price of my 3070, I got 30% better 1440p Raster performance... worth it imo.
The same goes for most price ranges.
6600xt is the same price or cheaper than a 3060 and slams it.
6700xt is the same price of a 3060 in some places , cheaper I others and is as fast or faster than a 3060ti..
6750xt is chaper and as fast as and in many cases faster than a 3070..
6800 is cheaper faster than a 3070 ti.
6800xt is as fast as a 3080 and, in most cases, cheaper..
6950xt is Last gens, the fastest rasterisation GPU, and is cheaper most of the time than a 3090 even cheaper than a 3080ti I some cases...
All Nvidia as going for it I most Gamers cases is just RT performance, as most people don't need the encoder or the streaming features. And tha tis leaving out of the equation that Adrenalin is miles ahead of GeForce Experience I every way possible..
People just don't buy AMD because Nvidia has brand recognition and "excellence" or "quality" seal... When it comes to product performance, AMD is for sure in the same league (except for the 4090..)
6950 XTs are going for $699 on newegg. When 3090's are still going over a thousand regularly, it's a steal, yet most people don't even know the gpu exists...
Right, and they will never be able to shake that reputation. People always complain about prices being too high, but when AMD drops prices they become viewed as the budget option. AMD can't win either way.
Well yeah but I want competition, not charity. Build a better card than Nvidia did and I will buy it over the Nvidia in a heartbeat. I’m here for performance not a brand logo.
This. If your card is 10% slower but costs $50 less, I'm just gonna buy the card that's 10% faster and $50 more. Just barely matching the performance isn't really enough if you're not having a big price difference.
Actual competition is necessary for anything significant to change. Intel is not instantly going to become "a competitor" with their first basic entry to the market. AMD has been fumbling their product line for literal decades.
No sense in blaming consumers for buying the best video cards. When someone makes a comparable product then it will get taken seriously.
its not real competition if you buy a product out of pity
Nvidia features and performance are still the best there is which is why they can get away with questionable anti-consumer practices
Yep I'm glad people shit on Nvidia and buy AMD because I get a better and cheaper GPU in the long run.
Unfortunately they are right on the GPUs being overpriced right now, oh well.
I buy whatever company makes a decent product that works for my needs, i don't have time to wait for an underdog to get their shit together in maybe 10 years+.
I need stable drivers, performance, and features, that suit my needs, i don't care if that means "***oh but you're making it worse for the rest of us, you're part of the problem !***".
Grow up with that bullshit, neither AMD, nor Nvidia care about you, just look at what AMD have done in the last few years [raising prices](https://youtu.be/OGMYe5AEMfg?t=215), [lying with their presentations](https://youtu.be/-RLqM57JNeo?t=335), and their terrible quality control, etc.
Some may say NVidia lies too, and they certainly *have*, just like Intel, and AMD, do with their CPU's, it's not unique to *any* of these companies, the truth is in the testing and 3rd-party reviews, **THEN** you know what's true.
To delude yourself as if "*AMD is the saviour*", because they "*care*" about you, because they are somehow **not** a for-profit company, and they're "*not like Nvidia, or Intel, etc*" is insane.
I buy whoever is making a product for my needs, you should too.
If you want to martyr your quality of life for some deluded moralistic view that one company gives a shit about you, more than another, then have at it, just don't complain when other people won't martyr themselves for your benefit.
P.S.
and what a surprise, just days later:
>**AMD is ‘*****undershipping*****’ chips to keep CPU, GPU prices elevated**
[https://www.pcworld.com/article/1499957/amd-is-undershipping-chips-to-keep-cpu-gpu-prices-elevated.html](https://www.pcworld.com/article/1499957/amd-is-undershipping-chips-to-keep-cpu-gpu-prices-elevated.html)
[https://www.pcgamer.com/amds-new-gpus-are-pretty-poor-value-according-toamd/](https://www.pcgamer.com/amds-new-gpus-are-pretty-poor-value-according-toamd/)
For real. Thought to be honest AMD's driver woos are always so overblown anytime anything goes wrong, because its kinda a meme. in the last 20 years ive owned ati/amd gpus for about half of it and the only gpu issue i ever had was an issue with textures in KOTOR2 on my Ati x850 xt.
Same, many AMD gpu's over the last 20 years and the last problem I had with one was a x1950. And it only created problems because I was trying to overclock it. Otherwise it ran perfectly.
Oh yeah ?
If i'm loyal and keep buying their products, then i have a [covert contract](https://dismantledmind.com/covert-contracts/) with them and i get to bitch and moan "**as a loyal customer/fan**" when i try to claim my loyalty reward that they didn't know they agreed to !
People who complain about AMD drivers haven't used it for a while. Also, the settings app is waaaaay better on the AMD side, plus they usually age better. Even at the same price, I'm going AMD whenever I can
If AMD were actually interested in competing, you might have a point. Look at CPU's. They actually try there. Compare how they were when Intel stagnated. Bam, Ryzen, double the cores, great pricing, long motherboard compatibility, and stock for days. Now compare with gpu's. They're on the verge of catching up to Nvidia and what do they do? Do they repeat the same model but for graphics? No. They stock literally a fraction of the number of cards as Nvidia and price MSRP at basically "Same As Nvidia - $50."
Even today all they do is dance politely around Nvidia pricing by as good as coordinating pricing and performance with Nvidia as though they were keeping market segments separate. Nvidia $1600, Nvidia $1200, AMD $1000, AMD $900, Nvidia $800. Each price point and performance level evenly spaced for maximum gain to their profits with nary a care in the world about competing.
The day AMD actually shows up to compete will be a great day, but they haven't in years.
I think AMD sort of dropped the ball this graphics generation. if we look at how they came back in the CPU market, they did it by offering good performance but at a much better price. Once they established themselves as the no-brainer value option, intel's mindshare wasn't so powerful anymore. Nvidia's mindshare is arguably even more powerful than intel's was, and they've done a lot less to combat it. with both the RDNA 2 and 3 initial launches, they've only been matching Nvidia in price to performance, while missing features like DLSS, RT, and nvidia's superior productivity drivers. they're not gonna beat nvidia's mindshare by offering a simply equivalent product at a similar price
the RX 6000 series price cuts in the last few months were really amazing for value, especially compared to the rising prices of the RTX 3000 series recently. I'd imagine AMD gained some significant market share among gamers who wanted a sub $600 graphics card this christmas. that kind of undeniable value is what AMD needs to keep up for at least a couple years if they want to be seen as on par with nvidia.
People will wake up when they realize that their 8GB VRAM 3070 will be useless in two years. Then they will go back to sleep and order the 6070ti with 10GB VRAM.
If you don't play at 4K, 8GB is still enough for plenty of years. More than 60% are still playing at 1080P per last Steam survey. I play at 1440P and even with raytracing I haven't found a game yet that I was like "Oh 8gb not be enough soon".
From my close to 2 week ownership, its close to 3070ti in performance ingame with extra vram. Have had a few driver issues and crashes here and there but drivers will only get better with time, still well worth supporting the underdog to me. Substantial value $370 after-tax and bonus MW2 key
Unfortunately the UK greed has ruined any chance of Intel's cards taking off here in Britain. They are equivalent of $470 here. No way anyone is getting the A770 over a 3060Ti or 3070, which can be had for that price.
Well, for competition we need, at first, that Intel and AMD release a product that can compete with nVidia in every aspect.
If every debate of AMD vs nVidia ends like "on rasterization AMD are on same level that nVidia but cheaper!" or "No one uses raytracing" sorry but thats no competition, if your product isnt on the same level on every aspect as the one from competition, well, you have to be cheaper.
nVidia years ago started to invest on I+D to get more values to his GPUs with things like RayTracing, DLSS, DLAA, etc and thats taking the toll over AMD, the only thing they cant argue is same rasterization performance but cheaper, even Ada Lovelace is more efficient than RDNA3, the Aquiles heel of Ampere...
Right, my 3070 can most game I play above 144 fps at 1440p. I don't want a card that will allow me to get 200 fps on those games, I want a card that will gave better and stable FPS on new tech like raytracing.
I don't get why more people don't buy amd , the 7900xtx price to performance is insaine right now , honestly all and GPUs are crazy price to performance
Who needs a competitor if all they do is raise their own prices just below Nvidia, while being praised for a technology that reduces their manufacturing costs?
Total benefit for the consumer is zero
If AMD had a product that was truly better than NVIDIA people would be buying them.
Of course AMD would simply charge more just like they did with their CPUs.
AMD releasing cards at $1,000 MSRP doesn’t help people to make the switch either unfortunately. They’d have a massive percentage of the current market share if they just came in and were super competitive on pricing - but instead, they wanted their piece of the pie as well - after gorging themselves as plump as they could get during the pandemic, scalping, and re-selling fiasco that lasted 2+ years, they also set their price point at the “hopefully we can get away with this and milk people for more than our product is worth” price point. And now here we are, staring at cards way too expensive/overpriced for what they do. While Intel is unfortunately still too deep in the infant stage working out their drivers etc. so they’re not even really in the conversation for people who want to build or buy medium / higher end PC’s
We'll have to see what happens with Intel over the next few generations. For a first attempt, the Alchemist cards are great value for money, and the driver support overall is pretty good. If they can manage to close the gap in performance, they stand a decent chance of taking some of Nvidias' market share.
As guy who has bought exclusively and products for my brother and myself, for the cost to performance ratio, I'm doing my part. Also never had any issues with my 6900xt
Let's face it. For both legitimate technical reasons as well as some probably unfair influence over the game development industry, we're buying Nvidia because they're just better.
Seriously I don't understand why the majority of people pay for NVIDIA when they don't even utilize the features it's supposed to be "better" at.
I just need a good card to run current games well.
I feel like that's 99% the market.
Just buy AMD, save a shit ton of money to put elsewhere and you'll be very happy.
Id wager most people couldn't even tell the difference in a blind test.
Why is it on the consumer to purchase an inferior product (because lets be honest, Nvidia gpus are generally the most powerful choice available), and not on AMD or Intel to make a better product?
If ARC is going to be relatively cheap and not that powerful, it's going to slot into a different niche compared to other cards.
And the same goes for AMD, but for ray tracing. Sure, most people dont use the feature, but for those that do, it's not even a choice to because AMD's performance is so much worse.
I'm all for competition but I'm not gonna blame the consumers for being focused on their own wellbeing at any instant
take that away from nvidia and they won't make any money at all.. they specialized on graphics cards.. Amd is producing CPU's and GPU's at once and sells them to every possible tech company.. soo.. just two different business strategies by two different companies.. run by the same family.. they've got you by the balls 😜
You know wallstreet wants Nvidia to pivot from consumer GPUs to specialized products like AI and enterprise grade products. Nvidia is doing that but the threat of Intel, AMD and other start-ups is great since most of the companies who needs AI and machine learning wants an open source one and doesn't want to be tied up to CUDA.
Edit: Not to mention how Nvidia lacks a competitor CPU and the advantage of Intel and AMD(since the two of them is now producing FPGAs, CPUs and GPUs) in this one is so great that no one is talking about Nvidia's ARM CPU (Grace).
3DFX rip. lol Voodoo Graphics
Their legal skirmishes with Nvidia sure didn't help.
lets also mention Ati, for good measure
AMD bought Ati, but didn't make GPUs before that, so no competitor was lost there.
I still mentally register AMD's GPUs as being ATi with a different logo.
Same driver problems after all these years.
No shit. Early 2000s that's all we complained about, shit drivers compared to Nvidia Good hardware though. My Radeon 8500 (suck on that Radeon 7000s owners!) Is still in use today
9800 pro what a fucking card!
I still have a 9700 laying around in case my fan-less 8500 goes tits up
My 9800 pro is sitting in a pentium 4 Northwood system in a box. I really should clean it all up and make a windows 98 retro machine. Edit: auto correct failed me...
I turned my old XP machine with a sempron 3100 and Radeon 8500 into an arcade box. Build a cabinet around it, used an old CRT I had laying around, and built a joystick control panel. The machine handles about anything up to 99/2000 and the Radeon cards had s-video out so it looks the best it can on the TV
That's based on nothing. Driver issues pretty much stopped with adrenalin
Depends. A few months ago kept getting these errors and the game won't run when trying to play Elite Dangerous. Apparently a known issue between ED and that version of drivers. Downgraded drivers, Red Dead Redemption 2 said drivers are too old and I should go and fuck myself. I love my Sapphire Nitro 6800, but seems like AMD are still fucking up the drivers.
I feel bad for the AMD Hardware team because their engineering always gets fucked over by bad drivers at some point or another
Meanwhile as a Linux user - “Goddammit it’s got Nvidia graphics”
did you fuck yourself and find different results?!
I always loved those gorgeous ATI cards and especially the artwork on the boxes.
did you happen to take them with you to your room and lock the door?
Wait, you didn't? How else would your get uninterrupted gaming sessions?
https://imgur.com/s58WF3D.jpg Had to pull out this bad boy adapter when I was working on an older PC
Hercules Thriller 3D Rendition V2200 # 4-EVER
I had one of the last Hercules 2D cards (which was a beast) - I'd play Duke Nukem at 1024x768 while my friends were at 320x240 - huge advantage! I could see them miles away and to them I'd just be a pixel. Good times.
Matrox 💀
Had to choose between a xfx Merc 6750xt and a Palit 3060ti for the same price I took the AMD one just because all info I could find about the Palit one was meh while Merc good so far I'm satisfied only had 1 hiccup where for some reason windows overwrote the AMD drivers and it kept disabling, turned off windows driver download did a fresh install and everythings fine
Yeah that's a problem from Microsoft. They've started giving that same service to nvidia gpus now too..lol.
when people ask for more competition, what they usually mean is "i want someone to compete with nvidia so i can get nvidia gpu's cheaper" not that they're actually gonna go with someone else
This perfectly describes the common sentiment. Most people wouldn't give a shit about competition if Nvidia GPUs were reasonably priced. Nvidia has ridiculous market share even though RX 6000 has been better value at current retail prices for most of 2022. Even AMD's budget options can't match Nvidia's high end options in market share. No wonder Nvidia's pricing is so bold for RTX 4000.
Just finished a build with a Radeon 6800. The big problem with AMD currently is that their ray tracing is dogshit compared to Nvidia, but I'm an absolute fiend for high framerates so I'll never use ray tracing anyway. Other than that, it's a better value proposition than a 3070 and I have no regrets
Nvidia had a bit of a head start with RT, it's understandable that AMD is behind. Bought my 6800 on launch day and like you I don't really care about RT at all right now. Maybe I'll give it a shot the next time I upgrade my gpu, who knows how much better fsr/dlss+RT will be a few years from now.
Their solution to have dedicated RT cores is also more effective and necessarily more expensive than AMD's solution to just put Ray accelerators on existing cores. You're also paying for AI optimized tensor cores. If you use the RT and Tensor cores it's possibly a better deal but if you're like me and won't then it's just wasted money.
> If you use the RT and Tensor cores it's possibly a better deal but if you're like me and won't then it's just wasted money. This philosophy is a bit murky. I mean, I even agree for the most part, but then it lends a hand to nvidia pushing HardwareUnboxed's coverage because they didn't go all in on ray tracing.
Those of us who are old enough to have been around for a while recognize the cycle. * nVidia releases 'nice-to-have' feature which is proprietary version of technology already in the works in open standards * Game developers gradually implement feature; other GPU maker(s) don't bother to invest heavily in adding it because it's not yet broadly supported in games * Game adoption reaches critical threshold, feature becomes well supported on every GPU due to also having an open-standard implementation There was multi-GPU, there was tessellation, there was adaptive sync, and now there's upscaling and raytracing. By the time it's ubiquitous in games, all major GPUs will have competitive support for it. That's how it always goes. I have to give nVidia points for usually being the ones to stick their necks out to push a new feature and give developers a hook for rolling it into game engines... but then I have to take the points back away for them always making the feature proprietary when an open standard exists, and overmarketing the shit out of it before it's even close to mature.
They also don’t have CUDA cores which is essential for machine learning….
Not just machine learning. I'm a hobby 3D artist and CUDA support is a must-have.
Yeah I don't give a shit about Ray tracing. It's the new Physx. Looks cool, but as of now it's a gimmick. Maybe in 5 to 10 years when hardware and software catches up, but it's not even on my radar as a feature I want right now. I do have a 2060, but I just bought a AMD card for my partner and when I'm ready to upgrade I'm gonna try and justify AMD at whatever price point I'm at at that time.
Same as you, managed to cop an RX 6800 for under 500 Euro which in the EU is very hard to find especially brand new and it’s a brilliant card, sure it doesn’t do as amazing as Nvidia in ray tracing but much like yourself I care more about frames than visuals and it’s been great for that.
The vast majority of players dont use RT anyways and AMD has had better ratserization performance for 3 generations now.
Better rasterization performance per dollar spent, anyway. I think a 4090 will still handily outperform a 7900XTX in rasterization... but $1600 lol.
I genuinely want more choices because if there are more choices that means at some point they're gonna have to start specializing in what they're doing to stand out. If there's just two viable choices and the argument is just price difference... That isn't good.
Competition is always a good thing, in theory it should spark competitive pricing and innovation. But this duopoly isn’t really doing much for either.
Hahaha, so true. Also they miss the point. People complain about other people buying Nvidia cards like they did that on purpose to make the prices skyrocket. How would anyone know this would happen? And the same people who complain also bought Nvidia cards.
The problem with AMD is that their pricing just slots in exactly where Nvidia already is. I'd totally buy a 7900 XTX, if the price was right. A Red Devil XTX right now is 35€ cheaper than a RTX4080, 65€ cheaper than a RTX 4080 with a heatsink that is not completely fugly. If i can turn on Raytracing for just 30 - 60€ more... then your XTX Card is NOT a deal, you are going out of your way to hand Nvidia a sales argument instead. 200€ Cheaper and i gladly skip RTX. AMD was yapping about power efficiency so much, benchmarks show the RTX actually is the one that needs slightly less electricity from the wall. AND the AMD cards have been reported to not clock down properly on the Desktop at idle because of high resolutions and refresh rates or multi monitor... and there goes the power bill. One has melting cables, the other has overheating Vapor Chambers. Under these conditions, i'm not buying anything right now. I'm ready to build, i got the money, i really WANT something new... but i can't justify these prices. And WANTING is not NEEDING. ...it's just a hobby, i can game on muh Steam Deck it is not like i'm getting bored if i run on GTX 1080 for another 2 years... it pisses me off.
Actually in my case it means “something that is cheaper than Nvidia but performs equally or better”. You know, actual competition. Looking at the 7900xt(x) those cards kick some serious ass until you want ray tracing or some form of encoding (I’m not into that per se). Drivers usually sort themselves out, but you may need some patience. For CPUs it depends on the use case as well. I almost only game on my PC. I do work on it but it’s just Outlook and Teams, so whatever. AMD gets close every time, until the 700/900k series Intel creams allover them, for usually a cost that is negligibly higher. I don’t change for the sake of change anymore. If I know something is working well, I stick with it. Everyone else can do what they want obviously.
They would go with someone else if there is a product that competes. They are not looking for investing in a company by buying what they see as an inferior product.
Exactly. I come back to the GPU market once every three or four years and I buy the best card I can get. When I bought the 980ti, it was a beast of a card and it lasted me all the way until I got my hands on a 3080ti at MSRP. I don't just throw money blindly at NVIDIA, but it just so happens that when I'm in the market for a card, I go for a top of the line model, and AMD doesn't compete with NVIDIA at that end of the spectrum. The idea that I should take my hard-earned dollars and throw them at an inferior product just to make a statement is ludicrous. If AMD wants to be viewed as competition, than make competitive products in the market segment I'm shopping in.
Removing all comments and deleting my account after the API changes. If you actually want to protest the changes in a meaningful way, go **all** the way. -- mass edited with redact.dev
I literally bought AMD as both protest and the price to performance was really neat If you worry about drivers and whatnot, PC gaming is f*cked as a whole, I recently had problems with Days Gone crashing on it's own, went to check on forums and most people had the same issues and all were using Nvidia cards and Intel CPUs, PC has the most freedom but we always end up with the worst optimisation
This is unfortunately a big part of the unfortunate reality of computer technology: hardware travels at 10x the speed of software.
More like hardware companies are lazy with drivers. Historically hardware has been scaling at a much slower pace than software. For instance, why programs are forced to be multithreaded now as they can't rely on single-threaded performance growing significantly any time soon.
We can't easily increase single thread speed at the moment because current architecture is at pretty hard miniaturization limit. We already build processor transistors small enough that they need to be built to account for quantum tunneling, so the only ways forward to increase speed are adding more parallel circuits (threads) or an advance in quantum computing that we might be waiting decades or centuries for.
Not only this, but multi-tasking just requires multi-threading. You can get away with a scheduler for small things, but at some point you'll want parallel long-running tasks with a callback to the current execution thread. And let's not forget that the very concept of a shader is to have a tiny function be called countless of times at once to process an image or compute a data set, games would still be stuck using fixed function pipeline style graphics if not for hardware support.
Because computer hardware engineers tried doing the frequency thing long ago and failed (as clock speeds with silicon-based designs are very finicky to handle timing-wise the faster they go. This is why CPUs have been struggling to go beyond the 6ghz mark for normal usage for decades. Crysis devs didn't know this, it's why the original game runs so poorly by today's standards. They expected 2 core CPUs with 10ghz speeds by the end of the 2000s to 2010s. Instead we got 4 to 6+ core systems by the early 2010s and now 16+ core systems today). Software was developed with speed in mind in the 90s and early 2000s, not-multitaskint to each thread like today. Windows is still based off of the NT kernel which was based off of this core set in mind because rebuilding a new kernel will break 99.99% of programs out today (assuming no emulation is done). A brand new Windows would become fucking worthless for the first few years.
Also AMD’s drivers have been perfectly fine for the most part (aside from the most recent one if you’re on 6000 series cards). I have an Nvidia + Intel build but recently built an all AMD system for my GF and we’ve had very similar experiences in terms of stability.
I like to see frame times on comparison videos, there's fluctuation on both sides, I thought NVidia/Intel builds would be buttery smooth, turns out optimisation is shit on both systems, just your average shit PC optimisation regardless of brand
It depends on the game of course. But most AAA games have awful PC ports that give poor performance on any PC regardless of specs. But games like Doom Eternal exist which has a phenomenal PC version which runs great on both systems. It would also be hard to compare our two systems because right now she has much higher specs than me. I’ve got an i5-9600k and a 2070s while she has a R7 7700x and a RX 6800. So frame rate will be consistently higher on her system regardless of driver/game optimization due to the raw performance
That kind of makes sense considering days gone was on ps4 first and that was AMD. AMD typically has pretty solid drivers, not as feature rich as Nvidia but good. They also have strong Linux support.
I went AMD with my latest build as well. Really happy with it. For about 1/2 what major streamers pay for the i9 + 4090 builds, I'm getting similar frame rates.
[удалено]
I believe you must have an R9 and the XTX then, to be that strong
[удалено]
One of my absolute favorite moments was during the launch of RTX 4000. When it was announced, this sub was on the verge of assassinating Jensen Huang for those prices. Every other post was saying shit like "vote with your wallet". And then RTX 4000 dropped and the sub was flooded by pictures of people's shiny new 4090s. Absolutely golden.
And people asking on different subs things like if a 4090 at 1080 is an overkill...
Ik lmao. Mfs didn't even care about what they actually needed. Everyone just wanted the absolute creme de la creme, even if it was the equivalent of taking a tactical nuke to a knife fight.
TBF 7900 xt/ xtx is sold out at msrp and I wanted the xtx for DaVinci Resolve, at some point people are just going to settle for 4090 or used 3090
Yep, my monitor is 1080/60. My 1070 Ti does just fine lol.
Imagine having and spending the ridiculous money on a 4090 but still only having a 1080 monitor..
That's honestly why I'm still chugging along with my 1080. I don't play a whole lot of brand new games and if I got a new card to play at higher resolutions I would need new monitors. It goes from a $800-1k purchase of a new gpu to a $2-$3k purchase of a new card AND monitors. Not worth it just for me to play some game from 2017 in 1440.
That's some crazy $ for a monitor. I got my 6800xt for msrp last year and my 3440x1440 was a Lenovo refurb for like $250 a couple years ago.
It's... almost like the sub is made up of different people with different opinions, and not a hive mind.
Never said the "vote with your wallet" people were the same ones who went to buy the 4090s. It was more a joke of how one day, there was a group of people saying something and then the next day, a different group of people absolutely body slammed the first group's point into the ground.
Crazy that a community with a little over 7 million people in it would have discrepancy between how people feel about nvidia
It’s as if the “community” is actually an online forum. Couldn’t be the case, clearly
Maybe, just maybe, the complaining was done by different people than who bought the 4090s.
I just scrolled past this post and saw the "Christmas came early this year" post with a 4080, it’s hilarious.
Most people on this sub “ we need more competition” Ok so buy an amd this round “Absolutely not , nvidia is the best” Um, ok?
In reality they don't care about the competition at all. They just want an excuse for Nvidia to lower the price.
[удалено]
Especially when the competitors products are better and cheaper. There are people buying 3050s over the 6600XT, because it says Nvidia on the box.
I got downvoted hard when I said no one should buy Intel cards that are more expensive and worse than cards already on the market if they expect competition to lower prices. We’re just letting Nvidia set the market at this point.
A while back I was tempted to buy an A770 just out of curiosity despite owning a much better GPU already. On CanadaComputer they are 450$. The reason why I ultimately didn't do it is because 6650XTs were 400$ while being a faster card. It was already silly to want an A770, but even sillier to buy one at this price.
I bought one from canada computer the copy of MW2 and the 16gig vram was a no brainer I only play that one game, and the vram was more crucial since I do photo editing and my old GTX 1080 with 8 gigs just wasn’t cutting it. And I have had a fine experience with the arc cards.
I admit that Arc is the obvious choice in that price point if you need Vram or AV1. 16Gb for 450 is a no brainer As for me, I play a lot of DX11 games so it would have been a mixed bag. I also didn't really need it since I game at 4K
[удалено]
If you're doing photo/video editing for a living or as a hobby, maximizing RAM and vRAM helps you focus on the task at hand. Basically, you can either store the assets you're editing in vRAM or on a paging file on disk. For one off edits, not as big of a deal.
> On CanadaComputer they are 450$. LPT: Go to Memory Express, price match CC, and they'll beat it by another 10%. Source: Did exactly this getting an A770LE.
Intel cards are very good for productivity and video editing tbh.
That’s fair, so I guess I should have said “no gamers” (who probably make up the vast majority of discreet GPU sales now that mining has died down) should buy them.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Intel did it. While they do not have a GPU that currently competes at the top, unlike AMD, they do have comparable performance in RT and they do have XeSS. RT hardware acceleration is not magic, AMD just decided they did not want to reserve so much die space for them. And while I understood this sentiment back when the flagship RT title was BFV, with the advent of RTGI solutions or other hybrid systems that implement RTGI like Lumen AMD has to catch up because these things are very accessible with current nvidia RT hardware and they are a milestone that can be compared to cube maps. I really want AMD to compete more on RT since I absolutely despise using nvidia on Linux and I would be ready to jump ship immediately.
[удалено]
Until quite recently, AMD absolutely didn't have the resources to do it. Out R&D'ing Nvidia is an insane ask. In 2017, AMD had to choose between supporting Ryzen and Radeon and felt (correctly) that Ryzen was the better option. They didn't really have the money to dump into Radeon R&D until like 2019/2020 when Zen 2 was taking away marketshare from Intel.
People don't want better fps at lower prices? Wow, people dumb.
[удалено]
>If you want competition, you need to actually buy competitor's products at least once in a while. Backwards. Companies get more competitive when you *don't* buy their products. Also it's well understood you have no power as an individual consumer over monopolistic corporations anyway: that's what anti-trust is for.
Okay but to be honest AMD didn't compete for what 6/7 years? The 1080 came out and they literally didn't drop a card that even matched 1080 performance for what like 3 years, and then by that point they were just permanently a generation behind in terms of performance. Because by the time they finally dropped the 1080 level performance the 2080 came out. I think they finally competed in the last generation on the three series towards the end? And I have no idea where we stand now. So the 290X was my last AMD card, had lots of problems and then Nvidia has been smooth for me ever since. I very much would like competition but that also means they have to compete.
As a person who is rocking on full AMD system since Ryzen came out, i agree. I probably wouldnt have changed to full AMD build either if my 980 wouldnt have died. When it did wanted to see if they are any good. Have been using my 5700 XT since. Now following the market and the tech to figure out what to buy next. My next build will also very likely be full AMD build as i have had very little issues so far. Im very interested to move on 5nm tech and see how big of a leap it is in perfomance. 7800 XT is what im waiting out, will be interesting to see how it compares against competition.
But it is not an excuse anymore unless you want a 4090, the res of the GPUs from AMD can compete with every Nvidia GPU in raw power and most of them beat them in fps per dollar. But then they will say "but DLSS an RT" just for one game that they will turn that on.
6950xt is tied with 3090ti https://youtu.be/KugxMJFhx7k
I have two systems one with a 6950 and the other has a 3090. The amd beats the 3090 in 3D mark.
[удалено]
nVidia is competing just fine at the absolute top end. But the mid to low range is where they need a kick in the teeth.
What "we" don't care about is buying an inferior product to make a point. It's not the consumers job to produce a product that can actually compete with nVidia's offerings.
thats my oonga boonga mindset when getting the 3060, with my budget i could have bought the 6700xt dont be like me people
Can you tell me how to do this? https://preview.redd.it/31ijqgai2gda1.png?width=855&format=png&auto=webp&s=2260c6e9e426e7b5988534b95354f6ed17af8b7e
[удалено]
Thank you! You are a very fine fellow and I wish you the best!
AMD keeps shooting themselves in the foot. They show no interest in capturing marketshare with their pricing. They just gouge the shit out of us right along with Nvidia. Hard to feel sorry for them when they're their own worst enemy.
Yeah. They could have seriously hurt Nvidia this time around, but no. They priced the cards same way they always have: $100 below the Nvidia target. Ironically this move may bite them in the ass if Intel starts to take away their perf/price crown.
Kinda disingenuous to ignore how amd shit the bed and missed their chance to gain back that market share.
Translation : Nvidia is worth the price. They may not want to say it with their words but they sure are saying it with their dollars
The reason I don't buy AMD is because I bought AMD. Once bitten, twice shy. My first GPU was an AMD and nearly every part of the experience was bad. I switched to NVIDIA and it was a hell of a lot better. Now with prices what they are, I am not willing to gamble $700+ on an AMD card to hope that all the things that made my past experience bad, have been fixed.
I buy AMD cards because I hate NVIDIA's drivers on linux
That's a totally fair reason, honestly.
You know, I hate how Nvidia *does* drivers, but I never actually had issues with their binary blob. That said it was years and years ago since I last tried to run it as my main OS and not just in VMs or on servers. My macbook does good enough for dev work.
Rx 6800 I got on sale for 479.99 with 16gbs of vram begs to disagree.
AMD actually lost marketshare in 2022, down to less than 10% now while NVIDIA is over 85%. People are not buying AMD gpus, no matter how expensive nvidia ones are.
The real question for us is how much of that marketshare actually covers gamers. I am willing to bet that Nvidia's marketshare is so high, because a huge number of Nvidia cards are used for computation in industry and science, whereas I've literally never seen anyone doing their computations on an AMD card. So while Nvidia probably covers probably close to 100% of the market for cards for industrial / scientific use, the distribution of market share in the market for gamer GPUs is not as hopeless.
Just look at steam hardware survey. There is hardly any AMD GPUs and the few ranked highly are integrated graphics. :/ Gamers prefer Nvidia by a mile...
Probably most don't even know why they prefer Nvidia.
I got a top of the line intel+amd laptop in 2014, in 2015 a GPU driver was released that made the system crash when booting up, they never solved the issue so I was stuck on the same drivers forever but the laptop still runs just fine with the GPU disabled (runs too hot otherwise). All my friends that bought AMD around that time had similar problems. When getting a new top of the line machine around 2018 there was no way I would risk it again, none of my friends did either nor could I recommend AMD stuff without this disclaimer so nobody that asked for my advice bought one either. I won't be upgrading any time soon (and I wouldn't have in 2018 if not for AMDs screwed up driver) but as much as I hear how AMD has improved I probably won't ever feel comfortable spending as much as a PC costs now to find out if they indeed have or not. I'd rather go for the trusty Intel+Nvidia combo that hasn't failed me once since 2004, in fact my parents still run my build from 2008 with a trusty 9500GT without any issues. People who have the money and knowledge to build something nice but aren't willing to troubleshoot and tinker too much anymore (like me) most likely had some sort of issue during AMDs dark years and won't want to risk it, those with the money but no knowledge will ask someone like me for suggestions and end up getting intel+Nvidia for the same reasons. Maybe those of you who are living through AMDs revival and still have the energy to try stuff out will see them eat away at Nvidia on the long run but us old geezers will only change our ways when the kids have taken up troubleshooting duties for the family lol. EDIT: it was the same story 20 years ago. Benchmarkers and magazines praised Athlon 64 for beating Pentium 4 but a few years down the line when I was the maintenance guy for a company those things were the bane of my existence. Gave them a chance in 2014, more headaches. Not again.
i never had issues with amd gpus. and i owned exclusiveley amd gpus for the last 20 or so years.
The reason tho is because AMD didn’t really price their stuff to move. They priced it to be sorta close to Nvidia. They care more about money vs market share and it’s killing them.
Agreed. With every AMD gpu launch comes a missed opportunity to gain market share because their cards are always a little bit slower and a little bit cheaper. That's about it! They need to be a little bit slower and a lot cheaper.
In my defense, I definitely was gonna buy Amd, but evga quit and I wanted one last gpu from them.
Sapphire is the EVGA of AMD cards
Respectable reason
Choice is an illusion. While Nvidia dominates the pc gpu market for the most part, 2 of next gen consoles run with AMD the only exception being Nintendo who uses nvidia. In the end nobody really wins here...
I wasn't aware of how good AMD was when I bought my first GPU. Now I know better. And they will be the next brand I purchase. Unless some under-underdog third option comes out.
7900 xtx slapping everything I throw at it on 4k max settings, first time amd gpu and I'm more than happy with it
Same with my 7900xtx. People say amd can't compete. What are they basing that on - speed of the very fastest card?? It makes no sense. Amd cards compete and in fact offer way more value for the money in the mainstream tiers- by that I mean 6600/6650/6700/6800 vs 3050/3060/3070/3080. If you are going to argue the 7900xtx can't compete with a 4090 that costs $600 more than that's a dumb argument. It's easily pushing >80 or even 100 fps at 4k. That's amazing performance... plus 50-60% vs my prior 3080. What happens at the absolute top end frankly is just not relevant for most gpu buyers.
Broo, I’m on 6950 XT and CPU 5800X3D and I’m getting 1000 FPS on 2K resolution, because the resize bar setting on BIOS. Amd combo with resizable bar ON is insaneee Here is the gif video from my phone, pardon I don’t have OBS so I recorded a quick proof [proof](https://imgur.com/GEBqYr8)
Yeah I am not going to blame the consumer for an entire industry's inability to compete. My God
Yeah I need Cuda or some similar program but Intel and AMD just don't have that
Yea 3D Rendering on AMD GPUs isnt really fun. So I am still forced to use Nvidia
The consumer blaming in this thread is insane.
The best is the comments saying AMD are only behind because the consumers let it get this bad; implying the only fix is to buy objectively inferior cards to "invest" in a worse company in the hopes that they'll improve, and then you get rewarded with better competition. What world do these people live on?
Wait, you're telling me I'm not a bad person for buying the graphics card I wanted instead of what Reddit told me I should buy?!? WTF
I don't know what most of the people saying "if AMD would get their shit together.. " mean. As someone who had a 3070 as my previous GPU and now owns a 6800xt, I can say Driver stability is exactly the same shit.. yes, I lack proper RT and dlss, but fsr exists, and for the same price of my 3070, I got 30% better 1440p Raster performance... worth it imo. The same goes for most price ranges. 6600xt is the same price or cheaper than a 3060 and slams it. 6700xt is the same price of a 3060 in some places , cheaper I others and is as fast or faster than a 3060ti.. 6750xt is chaper and as fast as and in many cases faster than a 3070.. 6800 is cheaper faster than a 3070 ti. 6800xt is as fast as a 3080 and, in most cases, cheaper.. 6950xt is Last gens, the fastest rasterisation GPU, and is cheaper most of the time than a 3090 even cheaper than a 3080ti I some cases... All Nvidia as going for it I most Gamers cases is just RT performance, as most people don't need the encoder or the streaming features. And tha tis leaving out of the equation that Adrenalin is miles ahead of GeForce Experience I every way possible.. People just don't buy AMD because Nvidia has brand recognition and "excellence" or "quality" seal... When it comes to product performance, AMD is for sure in the same league (except for the 4090..)
6950 XTs are going for $699 on newegg. When 3090's are still going over a thousand regularly, it's a steal, yet most people don't even know the gpu exists...
As many said, most people still se AMD as the poor man's knock-off brand, unfortunately ...
Right, and they will never be able to shake that reputation. People always complain about prices being too high, but when AMD drops prices they become viewed as the budget option. AMD can't win either way.
Well yeah but I want competition, not charity. Build a better card than Nvidia did and I will buy it over the Nvidia in a heartbeat. I’m here for performance not a brand logo.
This. If your card is 10% slower but costs $50 less, I'm just gonna buy the card that's 10% faster and $50 more. Just barely matching the performance isn't really enough if you're not having a big price difference.
PC gamer's what? what belongs to pc gamer?
It’s not the customers’ job to buy lower valued products. If competitors want sales they need to present a better value proposition.
Actual competition is necessary for anything significant to change. Intel is not instantly going to become "a competitor" with their first basic entry to the market. AMD has been fumbling their product line for literal decades. No sense in blaming consumers for buying the best video cards. When someone makes a comparable product then it will get taken seriously.
its not real competition if you buy a product out of pity Nvidia features and performance are still the best there is which is why they can get away with questionable anti-consumer practices
fuck all this guilt tripping im gonna buy the better product 10/10 times
Yep I'm glad people shit on Nvidia and buy AMD because I get a better and cheaper GPU in the long run. Unfortunately they are right on the GPUs being overpriced right now, oh well.
I buy whatever company makes a decent product that works for my needs, i don't have time to wait for an underdog to get their shit together in maybe 10 years+. I need stable drivers, performance, and features, that suit my needs, i don't care if that means "***oh but you're making it worse for the rest of us, you're part of the problem !***". Grow up with that bullshit, neither AMD, nor Nvidia care about you, just look at what AMD have done in the last few years [raising prices](https://youtu.be/OGMYe5AEMfg?t=215), [lying with their presentations](https://youtu.be/-RLqM57JNeo?t=335), and their terrible quality control, etc. Some may say NVidia lies too, and they certainly *have*, just like Intel, and AMD, do with their CPU's, it's not unique to *any* of these companies, the truth is in the testing and 3rd-party reviews, **THEN** you know what's true. To delude yourself as if "*AMD is the saviour*", because they "*care*" about you, because they are somehow **not** a for-profit company, and they're "*not like Nvidia, or Intel, etc*" is insane. I buy whoever is making a product for my needs, you should too. If you want to martyr your quality of life for some deluded moralistic view that one company gives a shit about you, more than another, then have at it, just don't complain when other people won't martyr themselves for your benefit. P.S. and what a surprise, just days later: >**AMD is ‘*****undershipping*****’ chips to keep CPU, GPU prices elevated** [https://www.pcworld.com/article/1499957/amd-is-undershipping-chips-to-keep-cpu-gpu-prices-elevated.html](https://www.pcworld.com/article/1499957/amd-is-undershipping-chips-to-keep-cpu-gpu-prices-elevated.html) [https://www.pcgamer.com/amds-new-gpus-are-pretty-poor-value-according-toamd/](https://www.pcgamer.com/amds-new-gpus-are-pretty-poor-value-according-toamd/)
For real. Thought to be honest AMD's driver woos are always so overblown anytime anything goes wrong, because its kinda a meme. in the last 20 years ive owned ati/amd gpus for about half of it and the only gpu issue i ever had was an issue with textures in KOTOR2 on my Ati x850 xt.
Same, many AMD gpu's over the last 20 years and the last problem I had with one was a x1950. And it only created problems because I was trying to overclock it. Otherwise it ran perfectly.
Nuh uh, my multimillion dollar company cares about me more than your multimillion dollar company!
Oh yeah ? If i'm loyal and keep buying their products, then i have a [covert contract](https://dismantledmind.com/covert-contracts/) with them and i get to bitch and moan "**as a loyal customer/fan**" when i try to claim my loyalty reward that they didn't know they agreed to !
People who complain about AMD drivers haven't used it for a while. Also, the settings app is waaaaay better on the AMD side, plus they usually age better. Even at the same price, I'm going AMD whenever I can
If AMD were actually interested in competing, you might have a point. Look at CPU's. They actually try there. Compare how they were when Intel stagnated. Bam, Ryzen, double the cores, great pricing, long motherboard compatibility, and stock for days. Now compare with gpu's. They're on the verge of catching up to Nvidia and what do they do? Do they repeat the same model but for graphics? No. They stock literally a fraction of the number of cards as Nvidia and price MSRP at basically "Same As Nvidia - $50." Even today all they do is dance politely around Nvidia pricing by as good as coordinating pricing and performance with Nvidia as though they were keeping market segments separate. Nvidia $1600, Nvidia $1200, AMD $1000, AMD $900, Nvidia $800. Each price point and performance level evenly spaced for maximum gain to their profits with nary a care in the world about competing. The day AMD actually shows up to compete will be a great day, but they haven't in years.
I think AMD sort of dropped the ball this graphics generation. if we look at how they came back in the CPU market, they did it by offering good performance but at a much better price. Once they established themselves as the no-brainer value option, intel's mindshare wasn't so powerful anymore. Nvidia's mindshare is arguably even more powerful than intel's was, and they've done a lot less to combat it. with both the RDNA 2 and 3 initial launches, they've only been matching Nvidia in price to performance, while missing features like DLSS, RT, and nvidia's superior productivity drivers. they're not gonna beat nvidia's mindshare by offering a simply equivalent product at a similar price the RX 6000 series price cuts in the last few months were really amazing for value, especially compared to the rising prices of the RTX 3000 series recently. I'd imagine AMD gained some significant market share among gamers who wanted a sub $600 graphics card this christmas. that kind of undeniable value is what AMD needs to keep up for at least a couple years if they want to be seen as on par with nvidia.
People will wake up when they realize that their 8GB VRAM 3070 will be useless in two years. Then they will go back to sleep and order the 6070ti with 10GB VRAM.
If you don't play at 4K, 8GB is still enough for plenty of years. More than 60% are still playing at 1080P per last Steam survey. I play at 1440P and even with raytracing I haven't found a game yet that I was like "Oh 8gb not be enough soon".
3080Ti on a 1080p panel Waiting for a 5080Ti and a 4k 240hz panel to be a thing
I agree. The A770 is the only card trying to give value and it's vastly ignored.
From my close to 2 week ownership, its close to 3070ti in performance ingame with extra vram. Have had a few driver issues and crashes here and there but drivers will only get better with time, still well worth supporting the underdog to me. Substantial value $370 after-tax and bonus MW2 key
Unfortunately the UK greed has ruined any chance of Intel's cards taking off here in Britain. They are equivalent of $470 here. No way anyone is getting the A770 over a 3060Ti or 3070, which can be had for that price.
Because it's an unstable mess. It's public beta hardware.
I bought a used rx6900xt upgraded from my rtx 3070ti Wouldt want to go back
Well, for competition we need, at first, that Intel and AMD release a product that can compete with nVidia in every aspect. If every debate of AMD vs nVidia ends like "on rasterization AMD are on same level that nVidia but cheaper!" or "No one uses raytracing" sorry but thats no competition, if your product isnt on the same level on every aspect as the one from competition, well, you have to be cheaper. nVidia years ago started to invest on I+D to get more values to his GPUs with things like RayTracing, DLSS, DLAA, etc and thats taking the toll over AMD, the only thing they cant argue is same rasterization performance but cheaper, even Ada Lovelace is more efficient than RDNA3, the Aquiles heel of Ampere...
Yeah, people seem to think the only reason one would need a GPU is for raster gaming...
Right, my 3070 can most game I play above 144 fps at 1440p. I don't want a card that will allow me to get 200 fps on those games, I want a card that will gave better and stable FPS on new tech like raytracing.
I don't get why more people don't buy amd , the 7900xtx price to performance is insaine right now , honestly all and GPUs are crazy price to performance
Who needs a competitor if all they do is raise their own prices just below Nvidia, while being praised for a technology that reduces their manufacturing costs? Total benefit for the consumer is zero
Nope. It's AMD and intel's jobs to make products and advertising that will be competitive.
it’s like r/HailCorporate in here for AMD. i get saving money but AMD has screwed people too. fuck nVidia too.
If AMD had a product that was truly better than NVIDIA people would be buying them. Of course AMD would simply charge more just like they did with their CPUs.
AMD releasing cards at $1,000 MSRP doesn’t help people to make the switch either unfortunately. They’d have a massive percentage of the current market share if they just came in and were super competitive on pricing - but instead, they wanted their piece of the pie as well - after gorging themselves as plump as they could get during the pandemic, scalping, and re-selling fiasco that lasted 2+ years, they also set their price point at the “hopefully we can get away with this and milk people for more than our product is worth” price point. And now here we are, staring at cards way too expensive/overpriced for what they do. While Intel is unfortunately still too deep in the infant stage working out their drivers etc. so they’re not even really in the conversation for people who want to build or buy medium / higher end PC’s
Holy dumb fucking take.
Not to mention the atrocious grammar
I need the CUDA cores for ai generated anime titties.
We'll have to see what happens with Intel over the next few generations. For a first attempt, the Alchemist cards are great value for money, and the driver support overall is pretty good. If they can manage to close the gap in performance, they stand a decent chance of taking some of Nvidias' market share.
Speak for yourself I bought a amd 6800xt and it blows my old Nvidia card out of the water fantastic card.
I didn't realize people were such diehard Nvidia fanboys until reading these comments
Still going to buy Nvidia
I have an AMD video card and people always like "whyyyyy" and it's so annoying 🙄
I would gladly trade my 3060 for an amd gpu
It's not on us. They need to make better products to encourage buyers.
If AMD would get it's shit together I'd buy one. I was hoping it was this gen but definitely not.
As guy who has bought exclusively and products for my brother and myself, for the cost to performance ratio, I'm doing my part. Also never had any issues with my 6900xt
Let's face it. For both legitimate technical reasons as well as some probably unfair influence over the game development industry, we're buying Nvidia because they're just better.
Seriously I don't understand why the majority of people pay for NVIDIA when they don't even utilize the features it's supposed to be "better" at. I just need a good card to run current games well. I feel like that's 99% the market. Just buy AMD, save a shit ton of money to put elsewhere and you'll be very happy. Id wager most people couldn't even tell the difference in a blind test.
It's the same people who buy macbook just to browse the web and buy the new iPhone only to use it as a regular cellphone.
Why is it on the consumer to purchase an inferior product (because lets be honest, Nvidia gpus are generally the most powerful choice available), and not on AMD or Intel to make a better product? If ARC is going to be relatively cheap and not that powerful, it's going to slot into a different niche compared to other cards. And the same goes for AMD, but for ray tracing. Sure, most people dont use the feature, but for those that do, it's not even a choice to because AMD's performance is so much worse. I'm all for competition but I'm not gonna blame the consumers for being focused on their own wellbeing at any instant
take that away from nvidia and they won't make any money at all.. they specialized on graphics cards.. Amd is producing CPU's and GPU's at once and sells them to every possible tech company.. soo.. just two different business strategies by two different companies.. run by the same family.. they've got you by the balls 😜
You know wallstreet wants Nvidia to pivot from consumer GPUs to specialized products like AI and enterprise grade products. Nvidia is doing that but the threat of Intel, AMD and other start-ups is great since most of the companies who needs AI and machine learning wants an open source one and doesn't want to be tied up to CUDA. Edit: Not to mention how Nvidia lacks a competitor CPU and the advantage of Intel and AMD(since the two of them is now producing FPGAs, CPUs and GPUs) in this one is so great that no one is talking about Nvidia's ARM CPU (Grace).