[SPON: Use "brokensilicon“ at CDKeyOffer to get Win 11 Pro for $23: www.cdkeyoffer... Win 10 Pro ($17): www.cdkeyoffer... Win10 Home ($15): www.cdkeyoffer... Office 2016 ($29): www.cdkeyoffer... Office 2019 ($48): www.cdkeyoffer... 25% software discount code: brokensilicon 3% OFF EVERYTHING discount code: dieshrink ]
Yeah, there are some niche cases where a 4090 or 5090 makes a measurable difference. High resolution / high field of view VR for example. But not many people are doing that, and the sort of people who are doing that are also spending 4-6k on headsets too, so a 2k 3D card isn't that big of a deal.
I just bought a 9800X3D, the absolute best CPU for gaming that money can buy right now. It was less than $500. I cannot justify spending $1000+ on a GPU at any performance level...
If there's something AMD keeps doing wrong is holding back with pricing and then lowering it, but then the damage's done with reviews. That shouldn't be the plan _again_
"AMD never misses the chance to miss a chance" On the bright side... I think they fired a bunch of people from the marketing department so perhaps some of the harm will be limited this time around.
Same here. My GPUs so far: Nvidia GT 240, GTX 660, GTX 1080 then an RX 6900 XT. All of these were upgrades with over 100% jumps in performance. Even though hardware is advancing slower nowadays, I will need at least an 80% jump for my next upgrade. There are so many games in my backlog that run well over 100 FPS with this card so I can easily wait for RTX 6000 and RX 9000
@@valentinvas6454 My limit's around 40-50% and even then, only when I'm noticing that games are stuttering or struggling at the settings I want to use. Back in the good old days it was a guarantee that ever generation would bring such gains, but now it's more a case of skipping generations. Unfortunately the manufacturers have also started playing really stupid games with over-segmentation of the market. Back in the early 2000s there was a high end, a mid range and a low end. Now Nvidia has a dozen parts including the ti's and the supers and good luck figuring out which one fits where in the stack, or if one of them has multiple ram types. I used to consistently buy the 'high end' parts but the segementation has become so aggressive that we now have 192 bit bus cards demanding premium prices.
@@RN1441 Yeah Unreal Engine 5 is also f*cking us over badly nowadays. I started to watch Threat Interactive videos and they are truly eye opening how inefficient it is. He would be an amazing guest on Broken Silicon one day. He seems like an immensely knowledgeable guy.
If AMD makes the 8800XT matches 7900XT/XTX raster + 4070 RT I don’t really see how this isn’t high end? It’s just not behemoth NVIDIA XX90 tier high end. It’ll have healthy VRAM as opposed to NVIDIA starving us of VRAM. It’s still going to be a huge win for consumers, myself included.
Nah it will "only" have 16 gb of VRAM, not 24 like the XTX. It will probably be more than enough for the majority of games tho so we don't need to worry
AMD need to get the price right out of the gate on their next launch, this high then drop strat is not a winner imo (doesn't do well for reviews either)
100% they tried that with rdna 3 and it sold poorly ! That would be a disaster. The 8800xt needs to be $499 or lower. Otherwise it's not exactly midrange anymore. I don't have high hopes when it comes to their decision making. I'll go a second hand 4080 if amd botch the pricing. I can imagine a lot of people will just go nvidia instead....then when they price drop it will be too late. Terrible strategy, people do watch reviews...if they're not priced well they'll show in the reviews
What AMD really needs to do is beat Nvidia on the high end just once and legitimize itself as a real contender. In truth it doesn't matter what they charge if they're seen as lower quality. We KNOW Nvidia is holding back, if AMD makes an equivalent high end card that goes toe to toe in frames and RT/AI capability then tops it in VRAM you have a clear winner. Take a loss on it to undercut Nvidia and you have a new trillion dollar company overnight.
@agodelianshock9422 they don't need to do that. The high end prices have got so out of control that most of people don't even care to look at them. Midrange is where its at. What they need to do is catch up on features, like ray tracing and upscaling quality etc. Which apparently they have done, we'll have to wait and see but for me upscaling was the most important thing they needed to improve
ati terascale exists amd: this is great, but i want gpgpus gcn exists. amd: No that sux, lets split it Up. cdna and rdna exists. amd: no that sux, lets unify. gcn: am i a joke to you?
If AMD put RT or RT arrays cores into & match the 5120 Shaders or the 6144 Shaders on Terascale you'd end up with a card with 256 R.O.Ps currently. GCN went down on shaders to R.O.Ps ratios. Raytracing biggest bottleneck is R.O.P's are used by three things RT cores/arrays Shaders & Texture units all at once unable to process at all the same time. It's always been bad design, because its a hybrid design to maintain compatibility for older shader models.
Honestly, I think if they went after a separated approach to try to squeeze out some more performance for rasterization, but now they are realizing that their unified approach was better all along.
@@Jimster481 All companies seem to make these unforced errors every few generations. Some of AMD's famous ones were things like Bulldozer where they tried to save on transistors per core and get high clocks, seemingly ignoring what Intel just went through with the netburst architecture failing hard. Intel meanwhile seems to be in love with heterogenous parts which just keep causing weird intermittent problems for them. Nvidia has had them in the past too, but just seem to have less than the other players.
I can't disagree more on the 500/600 dollar MSRP debut. If say HUB says the price/performance is middling on the supposed 8800xt because once the initial reviews are out then the hoopla is over. People will take the initial review that the product is middling and if Steve is standing up during the review then nothing, NVIDA will get same or better market share. If AMD wants to make a dent into the GPU market they have to start at $500 with the 8800XT then if it is a success THEN go up with the 8850XT at higher price not the other way around. Starting out at $600 will be a huge mistake. If 8800xt sales suck at $500 then sales will really suck at $600.
Luckily I think Battlemage will push AMD a little on the low end. A lot of consumers are kids or casual gamers that want a gaming PC for a price closer to a Playstation than a used car. $500 is a bit of a financial stretch for that market. It makes a reasonable mid range gaming PC at least $1,100 which isn't horrible but when a $500 console can game at 4K 60hz $1,100 can be hard to justify. You can do a piece here and a piece there and upgrade but that usually means selling used hardware to fund the upgrades and that's a depreciation hit at every upgrade so the long term cost gets pretty high. Of course a $2,000 GPU in a $3,500 PC is going to perform well but you triple the cost for the last 25% of performance and most games don't need that to be playable.
I'm waiting for the day when a $300 GPU can do 4k gaming with all the eye candy at around 100 fps average, 60 fps minimum. I don't care if it needs frame generation if the latency is still good. Pair that with a good variable refresh rate monitor that can keep up and then make sure the game developers don't see that as permission to make bloated games that run slow. That will make a $900 gaming PC, then add a $300 monitor or hook it up to a 4K monitor if it has variable refresh and good response.
@@exoticspeedefy7916 they sell to data centers for AI and companies that need GPU compute for simulations, also content creators for video rendering and rich people who like to flex with their gaming PC. Nvidia would drop making gaming GPUs in a second if it hurt their ability to sell data center type GPUs for $50,000. Beside R&D their cost is probably not much over $1,000 to build that data center GPU so they probably make as much money selling one data center GPU as they do selling 150 RTX4090. I think at this point they want to own the high end gaming matket for brand recognition, then they make design spin-offs to go down market but they don't go too low because low end cards can't have high margins. Intel is trying to make their mark but their technology isn't quite competitive so the cards they want to be up market get down market pricing. AMD lives in the middle and doesn't seem too upset with letting Nvidia have the high end or they wouldn't do stuff like cancel big RDNA4. It's like selling cars, race on Sunday: Sell on Monday. Nvidia has the halo so a lot of people will buy a lower cost Nvidia card even if it's value proposition isn't as good as a competing AMD or Intel GPU. It's also reputational which is why Intel CPUs sell better than AMD CPUs despite worse price/performance.
launch pricing is what caused the fumble with rdna 3. amd really really needs to learn this lesson for rdna 4 to succeed to its fullest potential. if these cards launch at $500 with the estimated performance, then they will do extremely well in reviews, and that will help push market share. if they launch at $600, then reviews will be more tepid
$499 is the maximum it should. Anymore than its not longer a midrange card. It will be hilarious if they try the same strategy again, rdna 3 failed. First impressions last, pricing it wrong will make people move onto something else...like a second hand 4080 for example. Will be interesting to see if amd price it correctly, I don't think they will. Another repeat of rdna 3 is my guess lol
@@SPSteve that would be bad. 8800XT is supposed to have 4070 level RT performance. 4070 was $600 MSRP. The new card needs to be below $500 to have a chance against last gen cards.
Yeah but dumb fucks will keep buying Nvidia no matter what it costs. If the 5070 costs $700 and the 5060 $500 while being slower than the 4060 Ti just like the 4060, 4060 Ti and 4070 couldn’t beat the tier above them, Nvidiots will buy.
They just need to deliver the 7900 XTX performance at half the price and they will kill it on sales, just release a 8800/8800XT/8800XTX then wait 6 months and drop the 8850 variant, just destroy nVidia at the performance per dollar point.
If wafers are limited it makes more sense to sell to data centers rather than gamers. People want AMD to give them the best bang for buck and expect AMD to make little profit. But AMD is looking for where they can make more profit.
Yes we are consumers we expect a good product for a good price and don’t care about them making big profit if they want that profit so bad they will loose it all at the end
I think the major reason they canceled RDNA4 big was AI. RDNA doesn’t do AI as well as CDNA or Nvidia Ampere or Lovelace, or even Intel Arc! Intel is able to boost their AI TOPS by using their igpu as well as the NPU for that total number. AMD would love their UDNA igpu to be multifaceted and boost their total TOPS so they can perhaps reach the same performance with a smaller NPU and the same level of Igpu they were going to include anyway. It saves die space and that matters a ton with these bleeding edge nodes. Currently RDNA doesn’t do much in the TOPS war so the NPU has to do all the heavy lifting on AMD’s size. As that requirement grows so too does the NPU unless the Igpu can step in and assist.
If 8800XT is 7900XT level of performance, IT CANNOT BE ABOVE 500! literally on black friday deals you could buy 7900XT for $600-$630, even if it's 10% better it still CANNOT be above 500! if AMD is serious about gaining market share they HAVE TO HAVE AGGRESSIVE PRICING! there is NO WAY I'm gonna pay anything above 500 USD for an 8800XT which is 16GB and is MAYBE a bit better than a 7900XT which has 20GB of memory. We have had this performance level since 3-4 years ago! Each generation, we would like to see 20% or more higher performance OR 20% or more lower price! 630-20%=$500. AMD would be shooting themselves in the foot pricing this thing anything above 500.
It is not 7900XT level… But if it is close, it will be just fine! Are you sure that it will have 16gb. I would expect 12Gb if it has 192bit memory bus… as it has been rumoured!
for the next gpu launch, AMD marketing team should just stay silent until launch day. They over hyped the 7000 series GPU but the product under performed and overpriced.
No one ever talks about the state of gaming right now. There are absolutely no games out or in the near future to justify a moronic 5900. Its the tryhard status chasers that buy that junk with no games to push it.
To editor:- appreciate "This isn't new" in the name but on the thumbnail you could say "clip" The writing in the name is so in the end, it doesn't show up on phone
This new style of uploading is getting annoying and there's no reason for this channel to be doing it, hopefully they realize most don't appreciate the bait and switch.
@@PaulJohn01 These videos are named cut down yields alternate techy way of saying clips you can just open the video read the name and not watch them and clips are good because not everyone has time for the full fat streams/podcasts. Think a little people. Also name is at the end so mobile people can read what the topic is about otherwise it would all seem the same lol also it just takes you an another tap to get out of the video after reading the title and your click and exit view doesn't even help the video it hurts it so he is not doing it for pure clickbait.
Not long ago mid range was Nvidia's xx60 gpus, at ~ $250, and AMD similar priced cards are we accepting now that the mid range is $500 ??? If we keep paying they will keep this nonsense
60 class nivida gpus was never considered mid range, that would be the 70 class. gtx 970 was considered a mid range gpu at the time. i bought one a few months after it released for $370, for reference that's ~$490 today. if you actually account for inflation the prices are more or less expected.
No! Midde low end is now $500! 5060 most likely will be $500, so that is new low end king… at least in sale numebers. 5070 will be $700.. and 5070ti that is the highend wil cost $799 to $899… and above that are the ”professional” GPUs aka 5080 at $1300 and 5090 at $2500. So $500 is the low end!
I am hoping RDNA4 comes into a few percentage points of an XTX, with good ray tracing, if so I'll buy one day one. An aggressive price would get people to impulse buy. I don't believe enthusiasts are being honest though, there's no price low enough for them when it comes to AMD. Not on any mass scale anyways. They just want price pressure on Nvidia GPUs but it's in AMD's favor to cultivate some good will for UDNA.
If AMD can give me something on par with something that's 4070-4080 class, 16 to 20GB of VRAM, and developers are using RoCM for Compute related tasks for something like Blender and Meshroom, I will consider that a massive win as a consumer.
I'd like to emphasize what you said on ROCm. People need to understand the importance of foundational software frameworks like ROCm. CUDA enables students to work on compute even on low-end GPUs, and that versatility is what let Nvidia win in this age of ML. AMD needs to fight in both fronts: GPU market share and software market share.
Neither AMD nor Nvidia are going to give us compelling deals with new releases anymore, they want profits over volume. UDNA will be an 800+ dollar midrange card. The most exciting thing in GPUs is not new cards, but used cards' prices dropping to actually attainable levels.
To get to the heart of the market, you need deals with the people who actually sell computers. Dell, HP, Asus, Acer, so on and so forth. The end. Should be obvious at this point. Maybe AMD marketing team is bad at their jobs.
AMD's entire marketing team should have been fired 10 times over. They would benefit greatly from a small, nuclear marketing team with leadership that has no upper/executive level management. The company would form a steering committee as their management and make marketing subordinate to all business units. I've implemented this process several times, it works.
You will not get deals with those people until your product is perceived as desirable by the market. They need to be desirable first. THEN we can talk about getting the big OEMs onboard.
I'm very much hoping that AMD continues its efforts to get 3rd party developers like Chaos Group and Pixar (Renderman) and SideFX (Karma) to support AMD GPUs. The larger memory configurations AMD offers would be a huge bonus for 3D rendering as well as for running high overhead VFX plugins like Sapphire.
600 - 700€ price, 7900XT/XTX level rasterization speed and vastly improved RT. As someone else already also said, that would be enough for me. I like to have a really good gaming PC, but I'm just never ready to put out like 1500€ for GPU... I'm glad, that somebody have that amount of money to throw at GPU, but I just cannot justify it.
That's too high. AMD shouldn't be matching last gen discounted prices. They should be cheaper. Anything above 500, AMD will shoot themselves in the toes.
@nightrook5732 That might be true. But still, is it going to happen? Doubt it, but maybe it's possible. If it was up to me, I would say that 600 - 700e should be the price of top of the line card...
@@miikasuominen3845 Remember what happened with the last gen? 6800x and others were available for cheaper prices and 7900XT/XTX got bad reviewed into oblivion because of their terrible price / performance ratio. Also, remember 8800XT is supposed to match RTX 4070 in RT performance. 4070 was $600 MSRP. Simply matching the last gen on MSRP to performance is not enough. The new generation has to surpass that, or it is pointless. Else we might as well get an RTX 4070.
@nightrook5732 Yeah, we know that. Nvidia don't care, they get biggest amount of their money from Ai and industry. They can and surely will, keep the price up. AMD has had the change to undercut price many, many times... They haven't and they have shot themselves in the foot earlier. They sure can do it this time too... I hope they won't, though. I have been boycotting Nvidia for so long, that I don't even remember what was my last card from them... But let's see what happen, it's not long time now...
Jensen said during an investor call that he wanted GPUs priced based on where consoles are priced and their equivalent performance. So he wanted the 4060Ti at the price of a PS5. That's your pricing gauge from now on.
I have an RTX 2060 6 GB and I want a new GPU but I'm not giving Nvidia any money. They keep raising the price but skimp on GDDR memory. RDNA 4 based GPU is gonna be my graphics card.
TBH people are still getting Nvidia because Nvidia is ~$50-70 more expensive in mid range and ~$100-140 in high end cards. And people are willing to give that extra premium because how good DLSS is compared to FSR. Also Cuda + Nvenc is also a good strong selling point. Very few people care about RT, if they can just make FSR as good as DLSS and keep the price difference as it is they are going to easily get their desired market shares.
AMD has never said it will concentrate mid range gpus. Only journalists says so. Amd said they will not do highEST-end gpus. They will do all others but not the alternative to 5090. So nothings new, really.
Is this the time where gamers finally revolt on NVIDIA? Either way Nvidia is going to make tons of money seeking GPUs to AI farms. Edit: Phone Auto Correct.
I mean AMD has yet to create something actually comparable to dlss fidelity wise. With all the new games ppl wanna play using frame gen as a crutch. Until they really figure out fsr it's kinda meh 💀
@Tennyson999 I don't disagree I'm not in favor of any upscaling I currently have a 7900xt myself since I prefer raw rasterization but if I was to get a new GPU for the features" it wouldn't be for FSR 💀
If the 8800xt is going to be $600 its going to flop. If they price it too high and then lower it later it will be too late, people will just go nvidia. I know I'd go a second hand 4080 when they drop in price instead of the 8800xt. They also need to have fsr 4 ready at launch otherwise its the second hand 4080 once again lol. Good luck to amd but what's the best they price it too high and fsr 4 isn't ready and the performance is less than we expected. I'd want close to 4080 raster performance. 4080s are already dropping in price second hand in Australia. Amd needs to be aggressive otherwise it will be a repeat of rdna 3
As I kept saying to all of my friends. I ain't giving over 1000$ for a GPU to do gaming on. I don't care even if it can do 8k DLAA 240 fps no FG alan wake 2 in path tracing. I just ain't f*cking giving over 1000$ for a single piece of PC part. Sure I can flex up to 1000$ if it's reasonable (imagine RTX 4090 for 999$) but I'd still think over it if 4080 was 550-599$. But I ain't bloody paying that much for a single PC part. If AMD doesn't release GPUs for decent amount of money 400-500$ with decent performance i'll really just be sticking to 500-700$ consoles. And yes I own RTX 3090 which I bought used for 800$.
I mean if you are a normal, sane human being yeah sure, giving more than a grand on a GPU for just gaming is beyond stupid. But if you have a lot of cash to burn, and I mean A LOT of cash, there is really no real reason to not go to the best of the best even if is an absurd amount of money.
@@sebastianandres6802 even if I had a big house GT911 GT3 RS and yearly sub license for nurburgring and a nice mini yacht for my cruising adventures I still wouldn't buy freakong 1500$ high end GPU. It just makes no sense. Even if I earned that much in an hour of work or a minute.... Some products just make no sense at certain price range...
I was a pure ATi/AMD user on my home machines between 95 and 2017 when the 1080 was just too good to ignore. Since then I've been looking for a reason to go back to team red, but both of the times I've built a new machine or upgraded the GPU in one, AMD has been busy fumbling hard. If they want to win hearts and minds they need to 1) Not debase their naming scheme by pretending they have a product that can even stand up to the 90 series, and 2) Not set prices that pretend they have positive brand value (it's negative relative to Nvidia) 3) Supply enough of them that people who want one can buy one...
I want 500$ MAX killer GPU that will take any game at 1440p I throw at it for next 5-8 years. I own a 3070ti as an ex nvidia fanboy and everytime I think about it that my 1070 had same amount of vram as my 3070ti I get sad about my decisions when chosing a gpu back then.
my 1070s still going strong. Refuse to buy any of Nvidias garbage because of the VRAM. Im putting together a new rig and reusing the 1070, CPU clock will be more than 1.5GHz faster, 200% more cores 400% more threads, 1,000% more cache, 300% more RAM, 500% faster RAM, 300% more hard drive space...and the best Nvidia can do is 25% more VRAM if I wanted to spend $1000
Part of me is wondering if this 8800XT ends up performing similar to a 4080 (which I think is very unlikely for both raster and RT given the apparantly die size of just 240mm^2) - would AMD regret not building a 500-600mm^2 monolithic die to try and make a couple of SKUS slot in between the enormous gap between the 5090 and 5080 and for cheaper. It won't take the performance crown - but does it need to? Just needs to make the rest of nVidia's lineup look like ther rip-off that is mostly is. I'd be quite interested in 4090+30-40% raster and 4090 + 10-20% RT for $999-1199 MSRP if they could do that as a top card - even if there were less/inferior software features , and I suspect quite a few others would also be too.
Nvidia is getting to the point where it has too much power and pretty much a monopoly in both the GPU and AI markets... It won't take much more to have this company be split into a few entities to break the monopoly... I feel it should already be split up.
the issue is starting off a "little" high in price and dialing it in hurts your reviews and that matters a lot when trying to pick up market share. NVIDIA has a reputation of expensive but good as well as 80% of the market so this has less impact.
Reviews means nothing. 3080 did have good msrp… You could not buy it in that price. It was actually much more expensive! The msrp is meaningles. The real price you have to pay is what means anything at all!
For AMD to get mind share they need to get loads of RX 8000 series into hands of people so they can hopefully experience FSR 4.0 getting to parity with DLSS once those people have the "Nvidia experience" but at lower price they will tell their friends and that should setup UDNA5 to be hot seller. If they manage to nail the price to performance on that too they can realistically hit the 40% market share and start to trade blows with Nvidia on software support that then also increasing the potential of those cards.
I hope once Stellar Blade comes to PC that my 5800X3D and RX 6800 combo be efficient as I game at 1440p if not i may have to lower the resolution I couldn't give two shits about RT or A.I raster performance is what I'm about.
I think they need to figure out a way to make high end chiplet based GPUs. Not something like their current cards but something that has like 2x120 CU. An absolute behemoth that could easily beat even the 6090 in the future.
Accelerating UDNA is fine in my books, but what about the dream of the MCM GPU? Will they do that with UDNA? Is it just something we should forget about?
9:54 this is where I disagree. I think AMD needs to aim low, truly get their name as a provider of excellent low-cost cards that play the games without trouble. No fuss no muss. Even if it means losing on some of their margins, in fact they need to concentrate for two generations minimum now, I'm providing excellent value, and only go higher if they can give a substantial increase over their competition. This means 500 not 600 dollars. And they should try and maintain that for the next generation too. No trying to play the market and see if they need to lower the price after they've introduced it at a too high a price. They should just simply aim for the lowest they can do so while providing the best experience possible and do that for a couple of generations. Not take a loss, just understand that they do not have The current market share to play any form of mixi maxi. There should be a case be made for them valuing in future development of the same exact hardware, something they have been doing during the last 10 to 15 years. This should continue, but currently for the next two generations they just need to bite the bullet, not take a loss, but not push past bare minimum necessary to make a profit on the product, with the idea that you're building market share, and experience, that can be put into the next product cycle. AMD needs to take a 5 to 10 year look ahead rather than one year or one quarter
I believe this strategy started with RV570 AKA X1950 Pro, although they also launched high-end R580+, later we saw them fall back on their value architecture like they did with 3870 and 4870, and I believe they also did with the RX 5700 XT, although it's less clear because their codenames no longer communicate if it's Value or not.
Afraid? AMD isn't afraid to take down Intel, but Lisa will never do anything that truly hurts her cousin. Name one time that she has. They have pulled back every time they had a chance to beat Nvidia.
With Nvidia's cards below xx90 getting only small performance uplifts, this is AMD's chance to grab that market. I hope they don't mess it up this time.
@@famousfighter2310It wasn't at first lmao. The 7900 XT was poorly priced/spec'd (even the XTX was, as well IMO). There was no 7800 XT for a while. There were lots of 6800 (XT) available that were better-valued.
@@famousfighter2310Power didn't improve much, my XTX is really quite power hungry and most disappointing is the RT performance if they'd gotten that improved to a higher degree that would have made more of a difference, especially in the high end.
Amd has their FPGA team and could go for custom tensor and other specific optimisations for AI and gaming and might add xdna3 on GPU for lower power consumption for AI background removal, noise removal etc.
I dont even need more than 3070😂 I totally agree with AMD going midrange and give us 4080 perf for $599 maybe? Amped up fsr4 and polish their software I might even consider B580 too if it goes down to $199 with Xess and framegen
I've been buying gpus since 3dfx voodoo. We have been totally shafted by both AMD and Nvidia for 5 years now. We are paying what used to be professional workstation prices for consumer cards.
If we see 7900 XTX performance with a 40-50% improvement in ray tracing, that would put a hypothetical 8800 XT on par with the 4080 Super / 4080 TI. And ahead in ray tracing. Should put the card above a hypothetical 5070 and close to a 5080 performance. Could be a fantastic purchase at $500. If instead we are at 7900 XT performance, with again a 40% -50% ray tracing boost, then the card will only be at par with the 5070, perhaps losing on average. Which will mean it is a good buy, but not a clear win. If ray tracing is only a 20-30% improvement, then AMD will just be keeping pace with the expected 5000 series improvement, and will still lose in RT against the Nvidia competitor.
Oh, I saw the video this is from. Still this is a good section to clip out. This is one of the big reasons I like AMD and have for over a quarter century (ugh, thats weird),lol. They have always had to innovate and be creative. They have to take risks, and they do, but they seem to offset them pretty well. I love their workmon APUs that are opening the PC Gaming world up to more people for as much money if not less than console. In fact right now with black friday/cyber monday , i priced a AMD 8700G system with 32GB of fast DDR5, MSI MicroAtx mobo, case, 750w psu, and ssd for $600± with multible configurations in that range. I want that to be a thing so that games are no longer held back by console market share flexing its control.
I still think latest great GPU release was RX 480. Everything after that was either too little like 580, or too expensive at launch like RX 5000 series and newer. They did get good later with price cuts tho, and im very happy with my RX 6800. So, what they are doing with RDNA 4 sounds good to me.
What makes sense to me is AMD manufactures just one GPU chip for the 8000 series with 2048 computer units (like the RX6600XT and 7600XT models) and use just one for the RX8600XT and two in a chiplet arrangement for the RX8800XT.
they did try that in last gen. It was not working well. Actually they did use chipled memory modules. In gpus chiplets still are pain in the ***… So not yet. Maybe in 10 years?
From a marketing standpoint I kinda disagree, you need a high end model, not to sell but to make the brand relevant and show on graphs. Most people don't buy a M3 but it's relevant for other models.
Nvidia's post-Maxwell offerings at anything other than the high end are a poor choice. RT games like Alan Wake 2 use the entire 16GB at 1440p... we are supposedly getting a 12GB 5070-a joke. 12GB makes it a 1080p card, or they shouldn't advertise it as RT capable.
I think the idea that these companies are purposefully developing "weaker" architectures is wrong. They don't pull their punches on the engineering, the pull the punches on the binning and implementation. They absolutely want to develop the best architecture and push it to it's limits. They just have to find the products the can mass produce at the best profit margin - if they have lots of competition, they make better products that are more expensive to manufacture, or they lower their prices to consumers. But I think the idea of "gloves off engineering" is a fallacy, when it's actually "gloves off production" that you are referring to.
AMD needs to take a book, never mind a page, from the Japanese car industry of the '60s and '70s. That's how you eat the luxury market up. Everybody wants a Mercedes, but they don't want the upkeep involved, they want a civic. So Honda and Toyota gave them the Corolla, Civic, with a smattering of things like an accord and a Camry. Then they both pushed, Toyota much more successfully, and in the case of Toyota created Lexus. By then the United States car industry was in a shambles and on its back foot. It was just the Germans who were doing everything possible to stay in that luxury position by giving entry into the mid levels. Or Fiat, look what they did, they were considered the laughing stock of all cars in the world never mind Europe. Where are they now?
@MooresLawIsDead it would be a 42% performance per watt increase, not bad. If they could get that down to 220W then that would be even better. (55% PPW increase). Nvidia is a decent bit more efficient than AMD, the 4080 draws 20W less than the 7900XT while being almost as fast as the 7900XTX, they’re like 12-16% better performance per watt. (Although the 4070 Ti super stands out as it has pretty bad efficiency compared to the rest of the lineup, about the same as 7900XT efficiency) Also don’t know why UA-cam keeps glitching when you reply to someone and it’s just an empty @ with no username, I have to manually type it in half the time. This didn’t use to happen
If AMD doesn't have a flagship card up their sleeve then why are most oems ending production of their current top end 7900 xtx's? There's likely a 7950 xtx around the corner to carry to the next generation.
I think it needs start < $500 for rx 7900 xt - 7900 xtx like card, $600 is still too high for mid-range if they so want to take market share seriously. If they need drop performance more to get that price segment I believe that's the right strategy. They shouldn't start at a high price and drop later, because then initial reviews will be poorly received and then will be a waste of time.
If the yields are so high for the presumptive 8800XT (I’d rather it be 8700XT tbh), I really don’t know what the big deal would have been to make a chip that was 50% larger, had a 24-bit bus and 24GB VRAM for around $1K again. A 40+% improvement over the 7900XTX and leaping clearly ahead of the 4090 would have been pretty solid in my eyes. Then have the cut-down version 20-bit 20GB that very well also edges past the 4090 but this time don’t price stupidly, make it $800 out of the gate.
The same way AMD is having tough time competing with a gpu only company like Nvidia. Nvidia will have a very tough time competing in cpu space against AMD. I doubt Nvidia can make a cpu that is even 75% of performance of 5800x3D.
AMD needs to solidify and keep well over 40% CPU market share in the consumer desktop and small form factor market segments to prepare for a price war in the discrete video card market if Nvidia decides to flood the mid to low range gaming segment with products priced below 600 dollars. I do see Nvidia trying to kill AMD with apparently loss leader GPU hardware that could be as good as RTX 5090 cards below 600 dollars in less than 5 years just to rough up AMD. Remember that Nvidia has a top line GTX 680 over 500 dollars in 2012, and by 2016 they released the GTX 1050ti for 130 dollars that performed more than 10% better for almost a quarter of the price. That could happen with a GPU product Nvidia might release less than 5 years from now by selling a top line product for around 2500 and then selling an equal or better video card for less than 600 dollars later at the same performance level.
by numbers in reviews the last best hpu from AMD was the R290x the 6900xt with mpt blew the 3090 in raster out of the water on open loop cooling the 7900xtx needed physical mods to overclock and here it could kiss a 4090 but not take the lead but nvidia if you look 3090 to 4090 70% and then to the 5090 maybe 70% then amd is about 70% 6900xt xtx 50% and rumored next gen 50% that will be a huger loss at the top they have to go back to go forward to play at the top.
Intel released a $250 GPU with 12GB VRAM and RTX 4060 (+10%) performance; what's your alibi AMD For jacking up the price at launch? In my country, RX 7800XT still cost $500 on Dec 24, and it's the XFX one that only has a 1-year warranty, see? Not every country is a US that adjusts the price very quickly if the price drops.
I just see Amd slap Nvidia in the butt as it did with Intel on cpu however they already have the patent for it for a powerfull gpu . Just don't see AMD being a Dracula a suck all the market in the way Intel did few years back .UDNA to integrate all the scalability into some more in way that helps both professional and gamers is a smart move should have done that before.
Rocking 3080 ti, acquired after crypto crash (bought new); more than happy to swich away from nvidia with next build when the gpu of choice will be cheaper and beat that performance
I've been seeing reports that 8800xt is around 275mm and pulling about 220-225w and if it's true and performance is rasterization 7900xtx and raytracing 4080s at 500 AMD has a winner with that... but we just have to wait and find out.
I agree. Nvidia's prices are just too much. I went all AMD a few years ago and I'm not really seeing much difference between Radeon and Nvidia. They may not be able to match an RTX4090, but they can give an alternative to RTX4080 and below. That being said, obviously if the price doesn't bother you, go Nvidia.
It's very strange that AMD hasn't made a significant move/dent in AI yet. Tensor chips are pretty straight forward to make as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong and TSMC is their equalizer and ram is dirt cheap (even if HBM3 might be overpriced for the moment) so there is huge opportunity to cut nvidia down by the knees. H100 is 40x overpriced. It was niche priced and they just kept those prices after it became huge volume and ram dropped to 1/4 in price. wtf is amd doing. similarly we need effing TPU in the graphics cards, I can see how they didn't think so 4 years ago but hello, AI is a thing now. It's obviously coming to games. Again, AMD has a golden opportunity to murder nvidia on the ram front because nitwits at nvidia figure we should get the same amount of ram the 3rd generation in a row despite AI being ultra mem hungry. AMD should launch a card that matches 5080 with at least 48GB ram. 48GB ram costs maybe 100$, the GPU might cost 120$ from TSMC 4nm. Sell the board for 800. They would murder nvidia
They need to beat Nvidia.... Especially if they ever want to be boughten by the masses. Everyone wants a piece of that high end Titan level tech and that's why people go for Nvidia. At the very minimum they have to match them both in rasterization and ray tracing and then beat them price-wise. If they don't do that they will never get any more market share in GPU. I've owned two AMD GPUs and I still went with the 4090.
[SPON: Use "brokensilicon“ at CDKeyOffer to get Win 11 Pro for $23: www.cdkeyoffer...
Win 10 Pro ($17): www.cdkeyoffer...
Win10 Home ($15): www.cdkeyoffer...
Office 2016 ($29): www.cdkeyoffer...
Office 2019 ($48): www.cdkeyoffer...
25% software discount code: brokensilicon 3% OFF EVERYTHING discount code: dieshrink ]
Stop with the bait and switch titles.
yeah - this is not shady at all. Nuh-uh.
I agree that $1000+ GPUs for gaming is absurd. I’m not upgrading until a “mid range” GPU can best my current gpu by 25-50%.
50% is generally what i want at minimum for a gpu upgrade
@@mariuspuiu9555 the part you both missed is: "For the same money".
correct
Yeah, there are some niche cases where a 4090 or 5090 makes a measurable difference. High resolution / high field of view VR for example.
But not many people are doing that, and the sort of people who are doing that are also spending 4-6k on headsets too, so a 2k 3D card isn't that big of a deal.
I just bought a 9800X3D, the absolute best CPU for gaming that money can buy right now. It was less than $500.
I cannot justify spending $1000+ on a GPU at any performance level...
If there's something AMD keeps doing wrong is holding back with pricing and then lowering it, but then the damage's done with reviews. That shouldn't be the plan _again_
But it will be…
I would Buy a RX8800XT for 350$
This. Some countries take the MSRP and use that as a minimum price until well past the next generation launches.
"AMD never misses the chance to miss a chance"
On the bright side... I think they fired a bunch of people from the marketing department so perhaps some of the harm will be limited this time around.
@@DeviatorBytesit should be $499 minimum, which I would buy.
If my GPU isn't dying, there is no way I'm buying a new one for 15% gains.
Same here. My GPUs so far: Nvidia GT 240, GTX 660, GTX 1080 then an RX 6900 XT. All of these were upgrades with over 100% jumps in performance. Even though hardware is advancing slower nowadays, I will need at least an 80% jump for my next upgrade. There are so many games in my backlog that run well over 100 FPS with this card so I can easily wait for RTX 6000 and RX 9000
@@valentinvas6454 My limit's around 40-50% and even then, only when I'm noticing that games are stuttering or struggling at the settings I want to use. Back in the good old days it was a guarantee that ever generation would bring such gains, but now it's more a case of skipping generations. Unfortunately the manufacturers have also started playing really stupid games with over-segmentation of the market. Back in the early 2000s there was a high end, a mid range and a low end. Now Nvidia has a dozen parts including the ti's and the supers and good luck figuring out which one fits where in the stack, or if one of them has multiple ram types. I used to consistently buy the 'high end' parts but the segementation has become so aggressive that we now have 192 bit bus cards demanding premium prices.
@@RN1441 Yeah Unreal Engine 5 is also f*cking us over badly nowadays. I started to watch Threat Interactive videos and they are truly eye opening how inefficient it is. He would be an amazing guest on Broken Silicon one day. He seems like an immensely knowledgeable guy.
If AMD makes the 8800XT matches 7900XT/XTX raster + 4070 RT I don’t really see how this isn’t high end? It’s just not behemoth NVIDIA XX90 tier high end. It’ll have healthy VRAM as opposed to NVIDIA starving us of VRAM.
It’s still going to be a huge win for consumers, myself included.
Thanks to Nvidia's "80 and 90 cards are only for professionals" RDNA4 is high end again.
Nah it will "only" have 16 gb of VRAM, not 24 like the XTX. It will probably be more than enough for the majority of games tho so we don't need to worry
it will not have above 16gb vram probably.
It will not be high end as the 5090 will be 60-80% faster.
You dont see it because you don't want to see it. High end last gen was always mid/mid-high of current gen.
AMD need to get the price right out of the gate on their next launch, this high then drop strat is not a winner imo (doesn't do well for reviews either)
100% they tried that with rdna 3 and it sold poorly ! That would be a disaster. The 8800xt needs to be $499 or lower. Otherwise it's not exactly midrange anymore. I don't have high hopes when it comes to their decision making. I'll go a second hand 4080 if amd botch the pricing. I can imagine a lot of people will just go nvidia instead....then when they price drop it will be too late. Terrible strategy, people do watch reviews...if they're not priced well they'll show in the reviews
Totally
What AMD really needs to do is beat Nvidia on the high end just once and legitimize itself as a real contender. In truth it doesn't matter what they charge if they're seen as lower quality. We KNOW Nvidia is holding back, if AMD makes an equivalent high end card that goes toe to toe in frames and RT/AI capability then tops it in VRAM you have a clear winner. Take a loss on it to undercut Nvidia and you have a new trillion dollar company overnight.
@agodelianshock9422 they don't need to do that. The high end prices have got so out of control that most of people don't even care to look at them. Midrange is where its at. What they need to do is catch up on features, like ray tracing and upscaling quality etc. Which apparently they have done, we'll have to wait and see but for me upscaling was the most important thing they needed to improve
also they doom 3rd world countries to high 2x msrp prices lol
ati terascale exists
amd: this is great, but i want gpgpus
gcn exists.
amd: No that sux, lets split it Up.
cdna and rdna exists.
amd: no that sux, lets unify.
gcn: am i a joke to you?
I was literally thinking the same thing 😅
If AMD put RT or RT arrays cores into & match the 5120 Shaders or the 6144 Shaders on Terascale you'd end up with a card with 256 R.O.Ps currently. GCN went down on shaders to R.O.Ps ratios. Raytracing biggest bottleneck is R.O.P's are used by three things RT cores/arrays Shaders & Texture units all at once unable to process at all the same time. It's always been bad design, because its a hybrid design to maintain compatibility for older shader models.
Ever since GCN AMD try to follow nvidia strategy. While it works for nvidia it did not for AMD.
Honestly, I think if they went after a separated approach to try to squeeze out some more performance for rasterization, but now they are realizing that their unified approach was better all along.
@@Jimster481 All companies seem to make these unforced errors every few generations. Some of AMD's famous ones were things like Bulldozer where they tried to save on transistors per core and get high clocks, seemingly ignoring what Intel just went through with the netburst architecture failing hard. Intel meanwhile seems to be in love with heterogenous parts which just keep causing weird intermittent problems for them. Nvidia has had them in the past too, but just seem to have less than the other players.
I can't disagree more on the 500/600 dollar MSRP debut. If say HUB says the price/performance is middling on the supposed 8800xt because once the initial reviews are out then the hoopla is over. People will take the initial review that the product is middling and if Steve is standing up during the review then nothing, NVIDA will get same or better market share. If AMD wants to make a dent into the GPU market they have to start at $500 with the 8800XT then if it is a success THEN go up with the 8850XT at higher price not the other way around. Starting out at $600 will be a huge mistake. If 8800xt sales suck at $500 then sales will really suck at $600.
If i see steve sitting down in a sofa im pre-ordering day0 xD
Luckily I think Battlemage will push AMD a little on the low end.
A lot of consumers are kids or casual gamers that want a gaming PC for a price closer to a Playstation than a used car. $500 is a bit of a financial stretch for that market. It makes a reasonable mid range gaming PC at least $1,100 which isn't horrible but when a $500 console can game at 4K 60hz $1,100 can be hard to justify.
You can do a piece here and a piece there and upgrade but that usually means selling used hardware to fund the upgrades and that's a depreciation hit at every upgrade so the long term cost gets pretty high.
Of course a $2,000 GPU in a $3,500 PC is going to perform well but you triple the cost for the last 25% of performance and most games don't need that to be playable.
I'm waiting for the day when a $300 GPU can do 4k gaming with all the eye candy at around 100 fps average, 60 fps minimum. I don't care if it needs frame generation if the latency is still good. Pair that with a good variable refresh rate monitor that can keep up and then make sure the game developers don't see that as permission to make bloated games that run slow.
That will make a $900 gaming PC, then add a $300 monitor or hook it up to a 4K monitor if it has variable refresh and good response.
@@beardoe6874 Monster Hunter disagree.
If that were the case NVIDIA would be broke. Yet they are out selling AMD, so someone I buying their high tier cards?
@@exoticspeedefy7916 they sell to data centers for AI and companies that need GPU compute for simulations, also content creators for video rendering and rich people who like to flex with their gaming PC.
Nvidia would drop making gaming GPUs in a second if it hurt their ability to sell data center type GPUs for $50,000. Beside R&D their cost is probably not much over $1,000 to build that data center GPU so they probably make as much money selling one data center GPU as they do selling 150 RTX4090.
I think at this point they want to own the high end gaming matket for brand recognition, then they make design spin-offs to go down market but they don't go too low because low end cards can't have high margins.
Intel is trying to make their mark but their technology isn't quite competitive so the cards they want to be up market get down market pricing.
AMD lives in the middle and doesn't seem too upset with letting Nvidia have the high end or they wouldn't do stuff like cancel big RDNA4.
It's like selling cars, race on Sunday: Sell on Monday. Nvidia has the halo so a lot of people will buy a lower cost Nvidia card even if it's value proposition isn't as good as a competing AMD or Intel GPU.
It's also reputational which is why Intel CPUs sell better than AMD CPUs despite worse price/performance.
launch pricing is what caused the fumble with rdna 3. amd really really needs to learn this lesson for rdna 4 to succeed to its fullest potential. if these cards launch at $500 with the estimated performance, then they will do extremely well in reviews, and that will help push market share. if they launch at $600, then reviews will be more tepid
$589 for 8800XT mark my words.
$499 is the maximum it should. Anymore than its not longer a midrange card. It will be hilarious if they try the same strategy again, rdna 3 failed. First impressions last, pricing it wrong will make people move onto something else...like a second hand 4080 for example. Will be interesting to see if amd price it correctly, I don't think they will. Another repeat of rdna 3 is my guess lol
The 8800XT sounds like a nice card if they can hit that
I bet AMD will set the price to $589 for 8800XT.
$519 for 8700XT.
If its over $499 it's no longer midrange. That would be a massive fail lol
@@SPSteve that would be bad. 8800XT is supposed to have 4070 level RT performance. 4070 was $600 MSRP. The new card needs to be below $500 to have a chance against last gen cards.
@@nightrook5732 I thought it was supposed to have 7900XTX raster performance
Yeah but dumb fucks will keep buying Nvidia no matter what it costs. If the 5070 costs $700 and the 5060 $500 while being slower than the 4060 Ti just like the 4060, 4060 Ti and 4070 couldn’t beat the tier above them, Nvidiots will buy.
They just need to deliver the 7900 XTX performance at half the price and they will kill it on sales, just release a 8800/8800XT/8800XTX then wait 6 months and drop the 8850 variant, just destroy nVidia at the performance per dollar point.
If wafers are limited it makes more sense to sell to data centers rather than gamers. People want AMD to give them the best bang for buck and expect AMD to make little profit. But AMD is looking for where they can make more profit.
Yes we are consumers we expect a good product for a good price and don’t care about them making big profit if they want that profit so bad they will loose it all at the end
I want my big AMD chip again.
HD6950/R9 290/Vega64/7900XTX owner.
Other than the R9 290, both of the other chips were overshadowed by their Nvidia counterpart :(
Just wait for one or two gens. The XTX will last for a while.
Wait for a generation.
I had R9 390 and Vega56. Great cards!
Sadly, Nvidia didn't offer any competition for them.
If you have a 7900xtx there's no point in upgrading whatsoever, you have a very fast gpu already. Wait for a generation or two and you're good to go
I think the major reason they canceled RDNA4 big was AI. RDNA doesn’t do AI as well as CDNA or Nvidia Ampere or Lovelace, or even Intel Arc! Intel is able to boost their AI TOPS by using their igpu as well as the NPU for that total number. AMD would love their UDNA igpu to be multifaceted and boost their total TOPS so they can perhaps reach the same performance with a smaller NPU and the same level of Igpu they were going to include anyway. It saves die space and that matters a ton with these bleeding edge nodes. Currently RDNA doesn’t do much in the TOPS war so the NPU has to do all the heavy lifting on AMD’s size. As that requirement grows so too does the NPU unless the Igpu can step in and assist.
If 8800XT is 7900XT level of performance, IT CANNOT BE ABOVE 500! literally on black friday deals you could buy 7900XT for $600-$630, even if it's 10% better it still CANNOT be above 500! if AMD is serious about gaining market share they HAVE TO HAVE AGGRESSIVE PRICING! there is NO WAY I'm gonna pay anything above 500 USD for an 8800XT which is 16GB and is MAYBE a bit better than a 7900XT which has 20GB of memory. We have had this performance level since 3-4 years ago! Each generation, we would like to see 20% or more higher performance OR 20% or more lower price! 630-20%=$500. AMD would be shooting themselves in the foot pricing this thing anything above 500.
It is not 7900XT level… But if it is close, it will be just fine!
Are you sure that it will have 16gb. I would expect 12Gb if it has 192bit memory bus… as it has been rumoured!
for the next gpu launch, AMD marketing team should just stay silent until launch day. They over hyped the 7000 series GPU but the product under performed and overpriced.
No one ever talks about the state of gaming right now. There are absolutely no games out or in the near future to justify a moronic 5900. Its the tryhard status chasers that buy that junk with no games to push it.
To editor:- appreciate "This isn't new" in the name but on the thumbnail you could say "clip"
The writing in the name is so in the end, it doesn't show up on phone
This new style of uploading is getting annoying and there's no reason for this channel to be doing it, hopefully they realize most don't appreciate the bait and switch.
@@PaulJohn01 These videos are named cut down yields alternate techy way of saying clips you can just open the video read the name and not watch them and clips are good because not everyone has time for the full fat streams/podcasts. Think a little people. Also name is at the end so mobile people can read what the topic is about otherwise it would all seem the same lol also it just takes you an another tap to get out of the video after reading the title and your click and exit view doesn't even help the video it hurts it so he is not doing it for pure clickbait.
They need to end the same raster, less ray tracing, less features, -10% price, tactics 💩
Not long ago mid range was Nvidia's xx60 gpus, at ~ $250, and AMD similar priced cards
are we accepting now that the mid range is $500 ???
If we keep paying they will keep this nonsense
Battlemage will be ~ $250 so I hope AMD will give us something as well.
@GreyDeathVaccine amazing! fingers crossed for Battlemage
60 class nivida gpus was never considered mid range, that would be the 70 class. gtx 970 was considered a mid range gpu at the time. i bought one a few months after it released for $370, for reference that's ~$490 today. if you actually account for inflation the prices are more or less expected.
@rocksfire4390 do you work for Nvidia?
No!
Midde low end is now $500!
5060 most likely will be $500, so that is new low end king… at least in sale numebers. 5070 will be $700.. and 5070ti that is the highend wil cost $799 to $899… and above that are the ”professional” GPUs aka 5080 at $1300 and 5090 at $2500.
So $500 is the low end!
I am hoping RDNA4 comes into a few percentage points of an XTX, with good ray tracing, if so I'll buy one day one. An aggressive price would get people to impulse buy. I don't believe enthusiasts are being honest though, there's no price low enough for them when it comes to AMD. Not on any mass scale anyways. They just want price pressure on Nvidia GPUs but it's in AMD's favor to cultivate some good will for UDNA.
Facts, no price low enough for enthusiasts who just want to buy a used 4080😂
It does not! If it get close 7900XT, it will be good enough! It will not be faster in anyway.
I just got an open box 7800xt for 200$
im jealous
😮
great deal! have fun with it!
Insane deal! Congratulations!
Where
If AMD beats 5070/ti range, esspecially if it has more VRAM then im down!
No… it does not beat 5070! But if the 5070 is $700… AMD can beat that in price if it is $500 to $600…
If AMD can give me something on par with something that's 4070-4080 class, 16 to 20GB of VRAM, and developers are using RoCM for Compute related tasks for something like Blender and Meshroom, I will consider that a massive win as a consumer.
I'd like to emphasize what you said on ROCm. People need to understand the importance of foundational software frameworks like ROCm. CUDA enables students to work on compute even on low-end GPUs, and that versatility is what let Nvidia win in this age of ML. AMD needs to fight in both fronts: GPU market share and software market share.
Neither AMD nor Nvidia are going to give us compelling deals with new releases anymore, they want profits over volume. UDNA will be an 800+ dollar midrange card. The most exciting thing in GPUs is not new cards, but used cards' prices dropping to actually attainable levels.
$449-$499 max!!! Anymore than that is a failure. We need a HD 4870 miracle again this time. I also hope they reduce the 7900XTX down to $600.
To get to the heart of the market, you need deals with the people who actually sell computers. Dell, HP, Asus, Acer, so on and so forth. The end.
Should be obvious at this point. Maybe AMD marketing team is bad at their jobs.
AMD's entire marketing team should have been fired 10 times over. They would benefit greatly from a small, nuclear marketing team with leadership that has no upper/executive level management. The company would form a steering committee as their management and make marketing subordinate to all business units. I've implemented this process several times, it works.
You will not get deals with those people until your product is perceived as desirable by the market. They need to be desirable first. THEN we can talk about getting the big OEMs onboard.
I'm very much hoping that AMD continues its efforts to get 3rd party developers like Chaos Group and Pixar (Renderman) and SideFX (Karma) to support AMD GPUs. The larger memory configurations AMD offers would be a huge bonus for 3D rendering as well as for running high overhead VFX plugins like Sapphire.
600 - 700€ price, 7900XT/XTX level rasterization speed and vastly improved RT.
As someone else already also said, that would be enough for me.
I like to have a really good gaming PC, but I'm just never ready to put out like 1500€ for GPU...
I'm glad, that somebody have that amount of money to throw at GPU, but I just cannot justify it.
That's too high. AMD shouldn't be matching last gen discounted prices. They should be cheaper. Anything above 500, AMD will shoot themselves in the toes.
@nightrook5732 That might be true. But still, is it going to happen? Doubt it, but maybe it's possible.
If it was up to me, I would say that 600 - 700e should be the price of top of the line card...
@@miikasuominen3845 Remember what happened with the last gen? 6800x and others were available for cheaper prices and 7900XT/XTX got bad reviewed into oblivion because of their terrible price / performance ratio.
Also, remember 8800XT is supposed to match RTX 4070 in RT performance. 4070 was $600 MSRP. Simply matching the last gen on MSRP to performance is not enough. The new generation has to surpass that, or it is pointless. Else we might as well get an RTX 4070.
@nightrook5732 Yeah, we know that. Nvidia don't care, they get biggest amount of their money from Ai and industry. They can and surely will, keep the price up.
AMD has had the change to undercut price many, many times...
They haven't and they have shot themselves in the foot earlier. They sure can do it this time too... I hope they won't, though.
I have been boycotting Nvidia for so long, that I don't even remember what was my last card from them...
But let's see what happen, it's not long time now...
i will pair the new RDNA 4 with my 9800X3D i dont pay 2k for a gpu they are nuts
Jensen said during an investor call that he wanted GPUs priced based on where consoles are priced and their equivalent performance. So he wanted the 4060Ti at the price of a PS5. That's your pricing gauge from now on.
I have an RTX 2060 6 GB and I want a new GPU but I'm not giving Nvidia any money. They keep raising the price but skimp on GDDR memory. RDNA 4 based GPU is gonna be my graphics card.
TBH people are still getting Nvidia because Nvidia is ~$50-70 more expensive in mid range and ~$100-140 in high end cards.
And people are willing to give that extra premium because how good DLSS is compared to FSR. Also Cuda + Nvenc is also a good strong selling point.
Very few people care about RT, if they can just make FSR as good as DLSS and keep the price difference as it is they are going to easily get their desired market shares.
AMD has never said it will concentrate mid range gpus. Only journalists says so. Amd said they will not do highEST-end gpus. They will do all others but not the alternative to 5090. So nothings new, really.
Yea i highly doubt they wont release a successor to 7900xtx , like why would u not?
AMDs Marketing Dept is their Achilles Heel, they never make the smart moves!!
Is this the time where gamers finally revolt on NVIDIA? Either way Nvidia is going to make tons of money seeking GPUs to AI farms.
Edit: Phone Auto Correct.
I mean AMD has yet to create something actually comparable to dlss fidelity wise. With all the new games ppl wanna play using frame gen as a crutch. Until they really figure out fsr it's kinda meh 💀
I honestly expect Nvidia to exit the gaming market within the next 5-10 years and move exclusively to AI, data centers, etc
@@Gh0styGames dlss still looks like ass
@Tennyson999 I don't disagree I'm not in favor of any upscaling I currently have a 7900xt myself since I prefer raw rasterization but if I was to get a new GPU for the features" it wouldn't be for FSR 💀
If the 8800xt is going to be $600 its going to flop. If they price it too high and then lower it later it will be too late, people will just go nvidia. I know I'd go a second hand 4080 when they drop in price instead of the 8800xt. They also need to have fsr 4 ready at launch otherwise its the second hand 4080 once again lol. Good luck to amd but what's the best they price it too high and fsr 4 isn't ready and the performance is less than we expected. I'd want close to 4080 raster performance. 4080s are already dropping in price second hand in Australia. Amd needs to be aggressive otherwise it will be a repeat of rdna 3
As I kept saying to all of my friends. I ain't giving over 1000$ for a GPU to do gaming on. I don't care even if it can do 8k DLAA 240 fps no FG alan wake 2 in path tracing.
I just ain't f*cking giving over 1000$ for a single piece of PC part. Sure I can flex up to 1000$ if it's reasonable (imagine RTX 4090 for 999$) but I'd still think over it if 4080 was 550-599$.
But I ain't bloody paying that much for a single PC part. If AMD doesn't release GPUs for decent amount of money 400-500$ with decent performance i'll really just be sticking to 500-700$ consoles.
And yes I own RTX 3090 which I bought used for 800$.
I mean if you are a normal, sane human being yeah sure, giving more than a grand on a GPU for just gaming is beyond stupid. But if you have a lot of cash to burn, and I mean A LOT of cash, there is really no real reason to not go to the best of the best even if is an absurd amount of money.
Yeah that pricing is completely fucked up. Just like 500€ mobos. It was unthinkable 20 years ago.
@@sebastianandres6802 even if I had a big house GT911 GT3 RS and yearly sub license for nurburgring and a nice mini yacht for my cruising adventures I still wouldn't buy freakong 1500$ high end GPU. It just makes no sense. Even if I earned that much in an hour of work or a minute....
Some products just make no sense at certain price range...
I was a pure ATi/AMD user on my home machines between 95 and 2017 when the 1080 was just too good to ignore. Since then I've been looking for a reason to go back to team red, but both of the times I've built a new machine or upgraded the GPU in one, AMD has been busy fumbling hard. If they want to win hearts and minds they need to 1) Not debase their naming scheme by pretending they have a product that can even stand up to the 90 series, and 2) Not set prices that pretend they have positive brand value (it's negative relative to Nvidia) 3) Supply enough of them that people who want one can buy one...
I want 500$ MAX killer GPU that will take any game at 1440p I throw at it for next 5-8 years. I own a 3070ti as an ex nvidia fanboy and everytime I think about it that my 1070 had same amount of vram as my 3070ti I get sad about my decisions when chosing a gpu back then.
7900GRE
my 1070s still going strong. Refuse to buy any of Nvidias garbage because of the VRAM. Im putting together a new rig and reusing the 1070, CPU clock will be more than 1.5GHz faster, 200% more cores 400% more threads, 1,000% more cache, 300% more RAM, 500% faster RAM, 300% more hard drive space...and the best Nvidia can do is 25% more VRAM if I wanted to spend $1000
5-8 years? Impossible. Devs will ramp up VRAM requirements in half that time.
Why doesn't AMD just release a card that WHOOPS the 5090 in Raster and let NGREEDia take the Ray/Path tracing Crown?...
Part of me is wondering if this 8800XT ends up performing similar to a 4080 (which I think is very unlikely for both raster and RT given the apparantly die size of just 240mm^2) - would AMD regret not building a 500-600mm^2 monolithic die to try and make a couple of SKUS slot in between the enormous gap between the 5090 and 5080 and for cheaper. It won't take the performance crown - but does it need to? Just needs to make the rest of nVidia's lineup look like ther rip-off that is mostly is.
I'd be quite interested in 4090+30-40% raster and 4090 + 10-20% RT for $999-1199 MSRP if they could do that as a top card - even if there were less/inferior software features , and I suspect quite a few others would also be too.
Nvidia is getting to the point where it has too much power and pretty much a monopoly in both the GPU and AI markets... It won't take much more to have this company be split into a few entities to break the monopoly... I feel it should already be split up.
the issue is starting off a "little" high in price and dialing it in hurts your reviews and that matters a lot when trying to pick up market share. NVIDIA has a reputation of expensive but good as well as 80% of the market so this has less impact.
Reviews means nothing. 3080 did have good msrp… You could not buy it in that price. It was actually much more expensive!
The msrp is meaningles. The real price you have to pay is what means anything at all!
@@haukikannel You could not buy ANYTHING at the MSRP that generation anyway... so not sure what your point is
I'll just sit on my 7800X3D/7900XTX rig for now..I'll drop Zen 6 and UDNA/60 series into my B650E board in a few years time.
Im excited to see udna. Im curious to see it on a apu too
8900 XT PLS XTX would be even better.
They plan the 8800xt to match the 4070ti with GDDR6 how? I wish it, but my hope aint that high.
For AMD to get mind share they need to get loads of RX 8000 series into hands of people so they can hopefully experience FSR 4.0 getting to parity with DLSS once those people have the "Nvidia experience" but at lower price they will tell their friends and that should setup UDNA5 to be hot seller. If they manage to nail the price to performance on that too they can realistically hit the 40% market share and start to trade blows with Nvidia on software support that then also increasing the potential of those cards.
I hope once Stellar Blade comes to PC that my 5800X3D and RX 6800 combo be efficient as I game at 1440p if not i may have to lower the resolution
I couldn't give two shits about RT or A.I raster performance is what I'm about.
I think they need to figure out a way to make high end chiplet based GPUs. Not something like their current cards but something that has like 2x120 CU. An absolute behemoth that could easily beat even the 6090 in the future.
This guest is a wizard. Probably one of Gandalf's descendants.
Gaydalf
Accelerating UDNA is fine in my books, but what about the dream of the MCM GPU? Will they do that with UDNA? Is it just something we should forget about?
99% of people don't need anything faster than a 4090... what they WANT is 4090 level performance at a much lower price.
I want better performance than 4090…
All I want is a Radeon card with equilevant perfomance to 4070 Ti Super with decent pricing. That would absolutely dominate the market.
9:54 this is where I disagree. I think AMD needs to aim low, truly get their name as a provider of excellent low-cost cards that play the games without trouble. No fuss no muss. Even if it means losing on some of their margins, in fact they need to concentrate for two generations minimum now, I'm providing excellent value, and only go higher if they can give a substantial increase over their competition. This means 500 not 600 dollars. And they should try and maintain that for the next generation too. No trying to play the market and see if they need to lower the price after they've introduced it at a too high a price. They should just simply aim for the lowest they can do so while providing the best experience possible and do that for a couple of generations. Not take a loss, just understand that they do not have The current market share to play any form of mixi maxi. There should be a case be made for them valuing in future development of the same exact hardware, something they have been doing during the last 10 to 15 years. This should continue, but currently for the next two generations they just need to bite the bullet, not take a loss, but not push past bare minimum necessary to make a profit on the product, with the idea that you're building market share, and experience, that can be put into the next product cycle. AMD needs to take a 5 to 10 year look ahead rather than one year or one quarter
I wish they could drop something like a 8900 XTX 4090 type performance and 4070ti super RT for 799.99 or even 899.99 would be amazing
We know neither NVIDIA nor AMD will make a high-end card below 900-1000$
They probably tried but maybe the architecture (RDNA 4) made it so that it doesn't make sense financially to move it forward so they backed down
I believe this strategy started with RV570 AKA X1950 Pro, although they also launched high-end R580+, later we saw them fall back on their value architecture like they did with 3870 and 4870, and I believe they also did with the RX 5700 XT, although it's less clear because their codenames no longer communicate if it's Value or not.
Afraid? AMD isn't afraid to take down Intel, but Lisa will never do anything that truly hurts her cousin. Name one time that she has. They have pulled back every time they had a chance to beat Nvidia.
With Nvidia's cards below xx90 getting only small performance uplifts, this is AMD's chance to grab that market. I hope they don't mess it up this time.
What exactly happened with RDNA 3 that AMD isnt happy with? At 12:32 he’s talking about RDNA 1 and 2 being great but 3 was kinda a flop?
Not a flop, just not quite the complete competitive homerun the previous gens were
@ oh ok sorry for taking you out of context. How come RDNA 3 didn’t do as well? Imo its a very good generation
@@famousfighter2310It wasn't at first lmao. The 7900 XT was poorly priced/spec'd (even the XTX was, as well IMO).
There was no 7800 XT for a while. There were lots of 6800 (XT) available that were better-valued.
@@famousfighter2310Power didn't improve much, my XTX is really quite power hungry and most disappointing is the RT performance if they'd gotten that improved to a higher degree that would have made more of a difference, especially in the high end.
Amd has their FPGA team and could go for custom tensor and other specific optimisations for AI and gaming and might add xdna3 on GPU for lower power consumption for AI background removal, noise removal etc.
I dont even need more than 3070😂
I totally agree with AMD going midrange and give us 4080 perf for $599 maybe?
Amped up fsr4 and polish their software
I might even consider B580 too if it goes down to $199 with Xess and framegen
I've been buying gpus since 3dfx voodoo. We have been totally shafted by both AMD and Nvidia for 5 years now. We are paying what used to be professional workstation prices for consumer cards.
Problem is Nvidia hiked the prices and people still paid them. Then Covid happened and people still paid them.... so naturally AMD would follow suit.
If we see 7900 XTX performance with a 40-50% improvement in ray tracing, that would put a hypothetical 8800 XT on par with the 4080 Super / 4080 TI. And ahead in ray tracing. Should put the card above a hypothetical 5070 and close to a 5080 performance.
Could be a fantastic purchase at $500.
If instead we are at 7900 XT performance, with again a 40% -50% ray tracing boost, then the card will only be at par with the 5070, perhaps losing on average. Which will mean it is a good buy, but not a clear win.
If ray tracing is only a 20-30% improvement, then AMD will just be keeping pace with the expected 5000 series improvement, and will still lose in RT against the Nvidia competitor.
Oh, I saw the video this is from. Still this is a good section to clip out. This is one of the big reasons I like AMD and have for over a quarter century (ugh, thats weird),lol. They have always had to innovate and be creative. They have to take risks, and they do, but they seem to offset them pretty well. I love their workmon APUs that are opening the PC Gaming world up to more people for as much money if not less than console. In fact right now with black friday/cyber monday , i priced a AMD 8700G system with 32GB of fast DDR5, MSI MicroAtx mobo, case, 750w psu, and ssd for $600± with multible configurations in that range. I want that to be a thing so that games are no longer held back by console market share flexing its control.
I still think latest great GPU release was RX 480. Everything after that was either too little like 580, or too expensive at launch like RX 5000 series and newer. They did get good later with price cuts tho, and im very happy with my RX 6800.
So, what they are doing with RDNA 4 sounds good to me.
What makes sense to me is AMD manufactures just one GPU chip for the 8000 series with 2048 computer units (like the RX6600XT and 7600XT models) and use just one for the RX8600XT and two in a chiplet arrangement for the RX8800XT.
they did try that in last gen. It was not working well. Actually they did use chipled memory modules. In gpus chiplets still are pain in the ***… So not yet. Maybe in 10 years?
From a marketing standpoint I kinda disagree, you need a high end model, not to sell but to make the brand relevant and show on graphs.
Most people don't buy a M3 but it's relevant for other models.
Nvidia's post-Maxwell offerings at anything other than the high end are a poor choice. RT games like Alan Wake 2 use the entire 16GB at 1440p... we are supposedly getting a 12GB 5070-a joke. 12GB makes it a 1080p card, or they shouldn't advertise it as RT capable.
AMD burnt me with the RX 7600.
I'm hoping Intel can step up and make me a believer
I think the idea that these companies are purposefully developing "weaker" architectures is wrong. They don't pull their punches on the engineering, the pull the punches on the binning and implementation. They absolutely want to develop the best architecture and push it to it's limits. They just have to find the products the can mass produce at the best profit margin - if they have lots of competition, they make better products that are more expensive to manufacture, or they lower their prices to consumers.
But I think the idea of "gloves off engineering" is a fallacy, when it's actually "gloves off production" that you are referring to.
I want to so single slot LP cards only powered by the PCIe slot grow in power. "High End" is boring.
AMD needs to take a book, never mind a page, from the Japanese car industry of the '60s and '70s. That's how you eat the luxury market up. Everybody wants a Mercedes, but they don't want the upkeep involved, they want a civic. So Honda and Toyota gave them the Corolla, Civic, with a smattering of things like an accord and a Camry. Then they both pushed, Toyota much more successfully, and in the case of Toyota created Lexus. By then the United States car industry was in a shambles and on its back foot. It was just the Germans who were doing everything possible to stay in that luxury position by giving entry into the mid levels. Or Fiat, look what they did, they were considered the laughing stock of all cars in the world never mind Europe. Where are they now?
AMD has money and resources now, a juggernaut that is just beginning to run
Premium cards are what I'm after and because mid tier hasn't incrementally improved enough over time my savings allow for the highest tier now.
If the 8800XT is 10% faster than the 7900XT, 30% faster in RT and uses 240W instead of 310W, that would be a great uplift.
That would be a monumental architectural uplift...
@MooresLawIsDead it would be a 42% performance per watt increase, not bad. If they could get that down to 220W then that would be even better. (55% PPW increase). Nvidia is a decent bit more efficient than AMD, the 4080 draws 20W less than the 7900XT while being almost as fast as the 7900XTX, they’re like 12-16% better performance per watt. (Although the 4070 Ti super stands out as it has pretty bad efficiency compared to the rest of the lineup, about the same as 7900XT efficiency)
Also don’t know why UA-cam keeps glitching when you reply to someone and it’s just an empty @ with no username, I have to manually type it in half the time. This didn’t use to happen
..and then a 5060 makes it not so desirable anymore.
If AMD doesn't have a flagship card up their sleeve then why are most oems ending production of their current top end 7900 xtx's? There's likely a 7950 xtx around the corner to carry to the next generation.
I think it needs start < $500 for rx 7900 xt - 7900 xtx like card, $600 is still too high for mid-range if they so want to take market share seriously. If they need drop performance more to get that price segment I believe that's the right strategy. They shouldn't start at a high price and drop later, because then initial reviews will be poorly received and then will be a waste of time.
If the yields are so high for the presumptive 8800XT (I’d rather it be 8700XT tbh), I really don’t know what the big deal would have been to make a chip that was 50% larger, had a 24-bit bus and 24GB VRAM for around $1K again. A 40+% improvement over the 7900XTX and leaping clearly ahead of the 4090 would have been pretty solid in my eyes. Then have the cut-down version 20-bit 20GB that very well also edges past the 4090 but this time don’t price stupidly, make it $800 out of the gate.
24 bit bus? Sounds a bit weak?
@ it wouldn’t have been about competing against Nvidia’s $2000+ card…it would just have been to offer something in the high-end
I could see amd making x3d gpu chips. That could be a huge performance boost that leads too something huge
Yeah no, AMD will probably be asking 700 or so for that gpu. Maybe 600
$589 at best 🙂
Nvidia can keep the overpriced GPUs
RX480/RX580 aren't bad at all even without the high-end. Console-like cards should sell fine.
I kinda wish AMD skipped or plugged leaks regarding UDNA altogether when RDNA 4 hasn't even launched yet.
When don't need top end graphics cards, only great price/performance products.
The same way AMD is having tough time competing with a gpu only company like Nvidia. Nvidia will have a very tough time competing in cpu space against AMD. I doubt Nvidia can make a cpu that is even 75% of performance of 5800x3D.
AMD needs to solidify and keep well over 40% CPU market share in the consumer desktop and small form factor market segments to prepare for a price war in the discrete video card market if Nvidia decides to flood the mid to low range gaming segment with products priced below 600 dollars. I do see Nvidia trying to kill AMD with apparently loss leader GPU hardware that could be as good as RTX 5090 cards below 600 dollars in less than 5 years just to rough up AMD. Remember that Nvidia has a top line GTX 680 over 500 dollars in 2012, and by 2016 they released the GTX 1050ti for 130 dollars that performed more than 10% better for almost a quarter of the price. That could happen with a GPU product Nvidia might release less than 5 years from now by selling a top line product for around 2500 and then selling an equal or better video card for less than 600 dollars later at the same performance level.
It needs better ray tracing than 4080 super to be attractive
by numbers in reviews the last best hpu from AMD was the R290x the 6900xt with mpt blew the 3090 in raster out of the water on open loop cooling the 7900xtx needed physical mods to overclock and here it could kiss a 4090 but not take the lead but nvidia if you look 3090 to 4090 70% and then to the 5090 maybe 70% then amd is about 70% 6900xt xtx 50% and rumored next gen 50% that will be a huger loss at the top they have to go back to go forward to play at the top.
Intel released a $250 GPU with 12GB VRAM and RTX 4060 (+10%) performance; what's your alibi AMD For jacking up the price at launch?
In my country, RX 7800XT still cost $500 on Dec 24, and it's the XFX one that only has a 1-year warranty, see? Not every country is a US that adjusts the price very quickly if the price drops.
I just see Amd slap Nvidia in the butt as it did with Intel on cpu however they already have the patent for it for a powerfull gpu . Just don't see AMD being a Dracula a suck all the market in the way Intel did few years back .UDNA to integrate all the scalability into some more in way that helps both professional and gamers is a smart move should have done that before.
Rocking 3080 ti, acquired after crypto crash (bought new); more than happy to swich away from nvidia with next build when the gpu of choice will be cheaper and beat that performance
Hey man I wanna ask is there a possibility of "Medusa Point" apu coming to desktop AM5????
It's DOA at $600.
When 5070 is $700? And 5060 $500…
$600 seems to be just right place in price vice…
I've been seeing reports that 8800xt is around 275mm and pulling about 220-225w and if it's true and performance is rasterization 7900xtx and raytracing 4080s at 500 AMD has a winner with that... but we just have to wait and find out.
I agree. Nvidia's prices are just too much. I went all AMD a few years ago and I'm not really seeing much difference between Radeon and Nvidia. They may not be able to match an RTX4090, but they can give an alternative to RTX4080 and below. That being said, obviously if the price doesn't bother you, go Nvidia.
It's very strange that AMD hasn't made a significant move/dent in AI yet. Tensor chips are pretty straight forward to make as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong and TSMC is their equalizer and ram is dirt cheap (even if HBM3 might be overpriced for the moment) so there is huge opportunity to cut nvidia down by the knees. H100 is 40x overpriced. It was niche priced and they just kept those prices after it became huge volume and ram dropped to 1/4 in price. wtf is amd doing. similarly we need effing TPU in the graphics cards, I can see how they didn't think so 4 years ago but hello, AI is a thing now. It's obviously coming to games. Again, AMD has a golden opportunity to murder nvidia on the ram front because nitwits at nvidia figure we should get the same amount of ram the 3rd generation in a row despite AI being ultra mem hungry. AMD should launch a card that matches 5080 with at least 48GB ram. 48GB ram costs maybe 100$, the GPU might cost 120$ from TSMC 4nm. Sell the board for 800. They would murder nvidia
They need to beat Nvidia.... Especially if they ever want to be boughten by the masses. Everyone wants a piece of that high end Titan level tech and that's why people go for Nvidia. At the very minimum they have to match them both in rasterization and ray tracing and then beat them price-wise. If they don't do that they will never get any more market share in GPU. I've owned two AMD GPUs and I still went with the 4090.