Disappointed by AMD

[Alatar]

This is a wild guess based on no truth whatsoever: but the price gap between the Titan and the 980 Ti makes my wonder if somebody at Nvidia knew what AMD had in store and cut the price on the Ti just because "they can." Sure it hurts the sales of the cash cow Titan, but what they are doing to AMD right now will be even more profitable.

I don't understand this argument at all. Do people not remember any of the previous generations?

Cut a couple of SMXs and massively reduce the price is the standard tactic that nvidia always goes with when it comes to the 2nd tier card made from the same GPU.

Always happens.

Happened this time too with the 980Ti, they cut two SMXs (sometimes it's one, sometimes two, sometimes three) and made the price/perf better. Standard procedure at a standard time at the standard Nvidia high end price of $649 that they always aim towards unless there's competition.

 

[Mako88]

I don't understand this argument at all. Do people not remember any of the previous generations?

Cut a couple of SMXs and massively reduce the price is the standard tactic that nvidia always goes with when it comes to the 2nd tier card made from the same GPU.

Always happens.

Happened this time too with the 980Ti, they cut two SMXs (sometimes it's one, sometimes two, sometimes three) and made the price/perf better. Standard procedure at a standard time at the standard Nvidia high end price of $649 that they always aim towards unless there's competition.

We're talking about PRICE guy, we obviously know all about the previous generations.

AMD and Nvidia were looking to increase prices this latest round, just as Nvidia did previously with the 780 Ti introduction, and Nvidia cut the price unexpectedly just to punish AMD's margins.

Keep up with the convo please.

 

[MattL]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l-7kFsqNjU

According to this reviewer, most games are faster on the 980ti . I feel stupid now waiting for this card that I was hoping to be at least 15 to 30% faster at the same price point or less than the 980ti. Not only does it not come with HDMI 2.0, it doesn't even come with 6 GB or more of HBM.

I'm sorry but why would you *ever* expect the Fury to be 15-30% faster "at the same price point or less" than any other card... That quite honestly makes no sense.

Also the reviews just barely came out, definitely should give it a bit time for voltage to be unlocked and over clocking to be properly tested.. because the Fury X is a water cooled card which means there's really only two benefits to that:

* Running at same/similar speeds but cooler and quieter, which depending on the benchmarks and reviewer you read it achieves this quite well

* Lots of overclocking headroom, which is yet to be seen

 

[Mako88]

I'm sorry but why would you *ever* expect the Fury to be 15-30% faster "at the same price point or less" than any other card... That quite honestly makes no sense.

Also the reviews just barely came out, definitely should give it a bit time for voltage to be unlocked and over clocking to be properly tested.. because the Fury X is a water cooled card which means there's really only two benefits to that:

* Running at same/similar speeds but cooler and quieter, which depending on the benchmarks and reviewer you read it achieves this quite well

* Lots of overclocking headroom, which is yet to be seen

Wrong on the OC headroom, unless you are ok with violating the card's warranty through a modded BIOS. I personally am fine with that, but I don't speak for others.

As it is stock, it's one of the worst overclockers we've ever seen, and AMD will not be releasing voltage mods to third party card vendors (they've already stated as such) so no hope "down the road".

 

[Pariah]

I don't understand this argument at all. Do people not remember any of the previous generations?

Cut a couple of SMXs and massively reduce the price is the standard tactic that nvidia always goes with when it comes to the 2nd tier card made from the same GPU.

Always happens.

Happened this time too with the 980Ti, they cut two SMXs (sometimes it's one, sometimes two, sometimes three) and made the price/perf better. Standard procedure at a standard time at the standard Nvidia high end price of $649 that they always aim towards unless there's competition.

It's not the methods the people are questioning, it's the timing and the price. Despite its hefty $650 price tag, many were at least slightly surprised the 980Ti was that cheap. That and it was released not even 3 months after the Titan X and just a couple weeks before the Fury X unveiling. That couldn't have been a coincidence. The timing and the price both indicate Nvidia was trying to kick AMD in the nuts when it would be most effective. Early returns show mission accomplished.

 

[MattL]

Wrong on the OC headroom, unless you are ok with violating the card's warranty through a modded BIOS. I personally am fine with that, but I don't speak for others.

As it is stock, it's one of the worst overclockers we've ever seen, and AMD will not be releasing voltage mods to third party card vendors (they've already stated as such) so no hope "down the road".

We'll see, also if you are doing serious overclocking you're going to violate your warranty anyways so honestly think that's a moot point. If with modded BIOS or not it turns out to be an overclocking monster then the potential will really be very different than now.

 

[Makaveli]

This article is spot on.

http://www.techpowerup.com/213828/a...rong-but-nvidia-got-its-gtx-980-ti-right.html

 

[Mako88]

We'll see, also if you are doing serious overclocking you're going to violate your warranty anyways so honestly think that's a moot point. If with modded BIOS or not it turns out to be an overclocking monster then the potential will really be very different than now.

Not a moot point when your primary competition can OC, with warranty, for +200-300MHz.

They really screwed up on that end, especially with the hype bragging about "what a great overclocker" the FX is...mindboggling.

This article is spot on.

http://www.techpowerup.com/213828/a...rong-but-nvidia-got-its-gtx-980-ti-right.html

Yes, good alternate view from the opposite side. Liked it.

 

[Enigmoid]

This article is spot on.

http://www.techpowerup.com/213828/a...rong-but-nvidia-got-its-gtx-980-ti-right.html

I would not say Nvidia won but AMD certainly f***ed up.

The problem with that article is it views the situation from a consumer perspective while failing to look at the high end market from a business point of view.

The point is from a business point of view that Fury simple has too high a BOM to be competitive against a $649 980 Ti. AMD f***ed up and launched a card which requires a very high price, far higher than any single GPU card in their history, to return acceptable profits. In other words they overextended and then Nvidia went for the nuts with a $649 980 Ti which AMD should have predicted (780 was $649, 780 Ti was $699) right from the start. Sure GM200 was cut down a lot less than GK100 but 28nm is so much more mature.

People on this forum tend to view things from a consumer perspective while companies operate under a business orientated light. For AMD, regardless of how Fiji performs or how many they sell, if the net cost of Fiji is negative (direct profits/losses, R&D that could have gone elsewhere, etc.) it is a failure from the company point of view and AMD loses.

The article fails to look at the professional market with a GDDR5 equipped Fiji with 16 GB vram that could have been sold at high margins, is pretty much impossible.

The article seems poorly written and makes a lot of poor assumptions. "GM200 was not expected to come out as early as it did based on historical data namely GK110". Hello...GK110 had yield problems which, with a very mature 28nm, no longer exist.

 

[Temuka]

Can someone explain me why idiots from amd sell 4gb 290x tri-x for 345$ and 8gb 390 for 330? What sense is in that? I'm really angry that prices didn't come low after 300 series arrived on market

 

[ShintaiDK]

Can someone explain me why idiots from amd sell 4gb 290x tri-x for 345$ and 8gb 390 for 330? What sense is in that? I'm really angry that prices didn't come low after 300 series arrived on market

290/290X isnt produced anymore.

Those that waited instead of getting a good deal before launch fooled themselves.

 

[Temuka]

290/290X isnt produced anymore.

Those that waited instead of getting a good deal before launch fooled themselves.

So what that it's not produced? 2 year old gpu for 345$ and 2 days old gpu which is better in any parameter,for 330$? I'm monitoring prices of tri-x since new year,there were no good deals,of course if you don't call good deal 300$ for 290x and 270$ for 290.

 

[shady28]

290/290X isnt produced anymore.

Those that waited instead of getting a good deal before launch fooled themselves.

Still see R9 290 4GB on Newegg for $240 AR. Lots of this type of card in the $260-$320 range.

R9 390 8GB (2x VRAM of the 290) ~ $340 no rebate.

It looks to me like it will be weeks if not months before the 290s clear out. In fact all of the R9/R7 2xx line appears to be in stock with heavy discounts.

Kinda crazy, I see R9 270X for $130 R9 270 for $125 and R7 265 for $99.

 

[Udgnim]

Can someone explain me why idiots from amd sell 4gb 290x tri-x for 345$ and 8gb 390 for 330? What sense is in that? I'm really angry that prices didn't come low after 300 series arrived on market

AMD isn't the one controlling the 290 / 290X prices unless you want to indirectly blame AMD by replacing them with 390 / 390X

 

[Temuka]

AMD isn't the one controlling the 290 / 290X prices unless you want to indirectly blame AMD by replacing them with 390 / 390X

Don't pick up the words please,you know what I meant... It doesn't matter amd,egg,amazon or my grandma are controlling prices,what matters is the real situation on market.
P.S I also love how people on ebay sell 2 year old tri-x-es for the price of almost new card

 

[railven]

This article is spot on.

http://www.techpowerup.com/213828/a...rong-but-nvidia-got-its-gtx-980-ti-right.html

The start of this article is terrible. Someone here claimed it looks at things from a consumer point of view. It doesn't even do that.

It claims AMD screwed up but Nvidia did it right, thus no one won? Does he not understand how you determine a victor? Even if you disagree with who won/lost him saying that "one team scored, the other didn't, but it's a tie game" is beyond asinine.

And why does he compare SLI/CFX setup to single card setups without citing the biggest drawback - profiles. "You can get similar 4K performance back then...well in games that had profiles and if they didn't you're basically stuck with one card." CFX is still broken in WoW. It runs horribly, even with AMD's supposed improvements. I sat here and tested CFX and even my GF said it didn't look like 60 FPS.

The conclusion is a retelling of the introduction with even more info lacking. Hawaii did not shake up things as much as he gives them credit to. If anything, we're seeing a similar price shake. Different is this time the x70 card was already $320 MSRP and the 980 card is already seeing $450 with rebates and deals. Much cheaper than when 780 dropped to $500 and 770 to $400 with 780 Ti slotting in at $700, all before AMD cards hit the stratosphere.

Saying a Hawaii card was $400 or $550 between 10/2013 and 04/2014 is rather misleading. I know because I eventually caved in waiting for reasonably priced custom cards. Cracked and bought my Lightning for $425 when R9 290's were still $500+.

 

[thehotsung8701A]

You feel concerned that if you upgrade to a GTX 980ti it won't be handle your resolution with good playable settings? I mean of course it won't be able to max out ever game with ever bell and whistle on. But any single high-end GPU I've ever owned never could. A single Pascal won't either. The fact is you get real close and have a very enjoyable play experience.


If your PC is as old as you say it is I'd buy something now and be blown away by the difference.

I can't buy an 980ti mate because Nvidia Surround is a hassle to use compare to Eyefinity. This is also from account of Nvidia fanboy. If i wasn't triple or planning to do triple monitor gaming, then I would buy a 980ti (first ti ever) without a doubt, but unfortunately gaming in 1440p is nice but it not the next step I want to take my gaming to.

 

[MagickMan]

We were told it overclocks well.

Bragging was going on.

It certainly should overclock well.

When voltages get unlocked, I think they will when drivers stabilize a little more, we may see some interesting numbers. Likely AMD was using a good deal more than what is available now.

 

[ocre]

I think AMD just used all the popular marketing terms they could think of when talking about fury X. The "overclock like no tomorrow" statement was just marketing fluff, it is obvious at this point. People seem to think that there will be this magic ability coming but it is just wishful thinking.

Look at it the statement in the context. They were talking up the Fury X using pretty much all the same talking points and buzz wording as the nvidia Maxwell launches. Stuff like: worlds fastest, overclocking, perf per watt, 2x perf per watt, etc, etc. It is apparent where they got all these talking points from. Even going as far as comparing their new launch with cards they had from 2 generations ago. These are all moves out of nvidia's playbook, pulled from various card launches. You have the gm204, gm206, and gm200.

Really, are there people who didnt see this?

The overclocking statement was just marketing fluff. They were singing the song people wanted to hear. They also released some charts that showed fury x stomping all over the 980ti with strange and obscure settings.

The truth is, you can overclock fury X 50-100mhz like there is no tomorrow. All without it getting loud or hot................

The voltage is locked on furyX. When Nvidia locked down their voltage, there was a massive uproar. I am just not buying the claim that the card is just too new for voltage control, that makes no sense. New cards launch all the time and this is a very unusual situation.
Right now, maxwell cards have very little over voltage capability, 87 mv.

AMD looks to be following suit.

Adding voltage control wouldnt take long at all. I think it is just what AMD wanted.
If there was some sort of oversight, once reviewers questioned it, they would have taken care of it immediately. This would have been resolved in a day or so. No way it is taking this long to add voltage control, AMD is just blocking it. For whatever reason.

That doesnt mean they wont have any control. But I seriously doubt that there will be this significant amount. It is what it is.

 

[LTC8K6]

When voltages get unlocked, I think they will when drivers stabilize a little more, we may see some interesting numbers. Likely AMD was using a good deal more than what is available now.

It's hard to believe that this will be the case.

AMD must have known where the card stood against the 980ti.

AMD must have known that overclocking was the key.

It's difficult to accept the idea that the card overclocks very well, but this was restricted at release due to driver instability.

AMD could simply have said, "We also have this beta driver, so you can see what sort of overclocks Fury can achieve. It's beta, so don't use it for anything but testing. We will release a more mature version soon."

 

[DeathReborn]

I think AMD learned their lessons from the Hawaii launch concerning the cooler but have made a whole new one. Back then the first reviews were all reference and the cooler tainted the card to this day, Fury reviews are tainted by the poor overclocking support.

AMD still need to work on the first impressions they give and making big overclocking claims then have virtually all the review cards extremely limited in that regard isn't a good way to start off.

 

[ocre]

Huh?

AMD held back voltage control and is waiting for a stable driver? Huh?

Waiting for stable drivers before unlocking the voltage lock?

Yeah, that seems far fetched. See, you can overclock right now. Overclock until it is unstable, that is possible right now. So......I do t get that logic

Voltage might help the unstable overclocks that people can get with Fiji right now. There is some other reason it is locked down. Could be something to do with the new memory controllers or hbm, they may be worried about something discovered from internal testing, or it may be just that AMD hasn't had time to proof and verify.

I think there is a reason and AMD locked down voltage control. It may be just until or it may be forever

 

[Abwx]

The point is from a business point of view that Fury simple has too high a BOM to be competitive against a $649 980 Ti.

Lol, when everything point to the contrary, but nevermind, any fud is good to be posted apparently...

 

[ShintaiDK]

Lol, when everything point to the contrary

Whats your rationale of this?

 

[Keysplayr]

The point is from a business point of view that Fury simple has too high a BOM to be competitive against a $649 980 Ti. AMD f***ed up and launched a card which requires a very high price, far higher than any single GPU card in their history, to return acceptable profits. In other words they overextended and then Nvidia went for the nuts with a $649 980 Ti which AMD should have predicted (780 was $649, 780 Ti was $699) right from the start. Sure GM200 was cut down a lot less than GK100 but 28nm is so much more mature.

Lol, when everything point to the contrary, but nevermind, any fud is good to be posted apparently...

Ok. Two things need to happen now.

1. Provide a BOM for both AMD FuryX and Nvidia 980Ti.
2. Provide credible reasoning why said BOMs for each allows, or prohibits said GPU from being competitive at a 649.00 price point.

Otherwise you guys will go round robin for eternity.