More AMD Brain Drain [BSN]

[AnandThenMan]

AMD's marketing budget is what, $10/year? So actually they are getting great bang for the buck there.

 

[Siberian]

AMD definitely needs to step up their marketing. That Borderlands 2 PhsyX video from nVidia and - I wouldn't be surprised if that ended up as an actual commercial on TV.

Physx is a gaming feature not available on AMD. That's not marketing, it's a better product.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Even with a larger market share, you don't hear about bad drivers for Nvidia as often as you do with AMD/ATI with less cards out there overall. Both have issues and they always will. Some have more. I haven't used AMD/ATI since 5870 so I really can only go by what I read here and at other forums/articles.

I'm not sure if you're being serious here, but when is the last time an AMD driver blew cards up? How about nVidia?

A few minor bugs here and there is expected from any software company. Software causing hardware failure is a serious QA failure.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Physx is a gaming feature not available on AMD. That's not marketing, it's a better product.

I'm sure Gearbox could've just gone with DirectCompute and made sure both Nvidia and AMD users could experience such effects which would've been a smarter move, and not alienating any of their prospective PC customers.

 

[Jaydip]

Why would NV do that?it would be stupid.Regarding "PC customers", I feel lucky when i get a "good" pc game these days,so no complains here.I am looking for the dark souls,have you seen it?it looks trash.But I will get it as good pc games are getting rare and rare.Another in the line is Aciii which is already delayed for pc.

 

[RussianSensation]

Why would NV do that?it would be stupid.Regarding "PC customers", I feel lucky when i get a "good" pc game these days,so no complains here.I am looking for the dark souls,have you seen it?it looks trash.But I will get it as good pc games are getting rare and rare.Another in the line is Aciii which is already delayed for pc.

I am not happy with how that port is going so far.

 

[Jaydip]

Neither am i,but i have heard its pretty hardcore

 

[blastingcap]

Who could find the damned 5850s? They launched with a MSRP of $250~, and sold out instantly within about two hours of the launch. After several months, you could actually find some in stock priced at $350+. I didn't track the 5870 prices as well as it was never a logical choice over the 5850, but it was basically just as bad.

I bought a 5850 about 2 weeks after launch at launch prices. 2 weeks, not 2 hours.

This is the second time tonight I've read revisionist history, such as the guy in the 660Ti review thread saying AMD has "always" done better at high-rez than AMD. What. The. Heck. GTX 285 > HD 4890, even the GTX 480 did better than 5870 at high-rez if only because of the extra VRAM. (And no that was not the only reason. Obviously.)

NV drivers ARE better than AMDs... for multi-GPU. Otherwise they are basically tied.

 

[zaydq]

I've flopped back and forth between nvidia, ati, and now amd and I've seen driver quircks with both. i will say i hate CCC's layout.

 

[RussianSensation]

I bought a 5850 about 2 weeks after launch at launch prices. 2 weeks, not 2 hours.

AMD shipped 6 million HD5000 series cards around the time GTX470/480 launched. It was fairly easy to buy a 5850/5870 (FAR easier than to buy a 680 for the first month). The 5850 was a sub-$300 card and overclocked to 5870 speeds. The value and the performance was there for 6 months ahead of NV.

 

[Hypertag]

AMD shipped 6 million HD5000 series cards around the time GTX470/480 launched. It was fairly easy to buy a 5850/5870 (FAR easier than to buy a 680 for the first month). The 5850 was a sub-$300 card and overclocked to 5870 speeds. The value and the performance was there for 6 months ahead of NV.

Yes, it was quite easy to buy it a few weeks after launch. However, the price you could buy it at was $350. It was still around $300 after the GTX 460 made the card irrelevant.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2037824

 

[RussianSensation]

That thread is from Jan.

You seem to have a distorted recollection of history at that point. HD5850 launched on September 23, 2009 and GTX460 didn't launch until July 12, 2012, or 10 months later. Somehow you missing the fact that the 5850 was the single best card in its price range for 10 months is odd to say the least.

For 6 months since launch, the 5850 beat GTX285 in every way imaginable (power, performance, DX11, overclocking headroom) while costing less or similar, and undercut GTX470's price when that card launched. The HD5850 was the indisputed best card in the $270-325 space for at least 6 months until $350 GTX470 launched and then it was the fastest card at the $260-300 price range from the time GTX470 launched to the time 460 launched. That means 6 months of no competition, and 4 months of barely any competition from a $50-80 higher priced 470.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Yes, it was quite easy to buy it a few weeks after launch. However, the price you could buy it at was $350. It was still around $300 after the GTX 460 made the card irrelevant.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2037824

My HD 5850 was on sale for $290 at Fry's Electronics when I got it December 2009

 

[PCboy]

100%. People were upset at AMD's credibility that 7970 GE was 1 month late but 7970 GE is a 7970 refresh product. Where is the GTX680 refresh? 7970 GE ended up launching with 3 free games and at $450-470, better than the $499 MSRP and no games promised. GTX660Ti is 7 months late, not a big deal? GTX660/GTX650/Ti nowhere to be found until September/October? That's literally almost 9 months late. We are talking about tech here not car launches every 5-6 years. If AMD was 6-9 months late with its HD7000 roll-out, it'd be steamrolled in market share. NV is 6-9 months late, nothing happens -- people just save their cash until NV releases their cards and refuse to buy AMD.

Don't forget the superstar 850mhz GTX460 overclocking and beyond to reach HD5870 in some cases. HD7950 overclocking to GTX680 speeds? Not much noise on that front....double standard?

It doesn't matter though because if AMD goes bankrupt, those $830+ 8800GTX Ultra prices will be back in no time. We'll see how people dance then.

QFT. They dished so much hate on AMD/ATi when the 7970 was priced so high as if they've already forgotten what kind of absurd prices we've seen back during the Geforce 2/Geforce 3 Ultra days. Then I realized most of the people defending Nvidia's practices don't even buy their flagships... they always settle for mid-range. But suddenly, when a new offering comes out from the red team that dominates, it's all-out defensive mode to justify their purchase.

 

[SolMiester]

I am still perplexed as to why this AMD DRIVERS BAD I HEARD IT ONCE thing persists with so much stubbornness.

How about 7mths+ before CF worked on eyefinity with anything but the release drivers?

 

[2is]

Yet despite the current AMD GPU lineup being arguably superior (certainly more complete), most reviewers, end users, retails salespeople etc. recommend Nvidia. The marketshare numbers back this up. Perhaps the engineers themselves are fed up with fighting a losing battle and are moving on, I don't know can only speculate.

AMD needs to be bought out by someone with deep pockets that can pony up the coin for proper marketing. The products themselves are great, mindshare is a disaster.

I doubt any of these engineers looked at market share and resigned based off that.

 

[Siberian]

I doubt any of these engineers looked at market share and resigned based off that.

It's silly to say that marketing is the only reason AMD is failing. These engineers have first hand knowledge of what is going on. I bet we all find out soon what is happening.

 

[SolMiester]

I'm not sure if you're being serious here, but when is the last time an AMD driver blew cards up? How about nVidia?

A few minor bugs here and there is expected from any software company. Software causing hardware failure is a serious QA failure.

I have yet to hear about users who blew up their cards after downloading those drivers.......and if damaged, were unhappy with the replaced product!

 

[2is]

I have yet to hear about users who blew up their cards after downloading those drivers.......and if damaged, were unhappy with the replaced product!

That may be true, but you avoided the question.

 

[SolMiester]

That may be true, but you avoided the question.

Question, the NV drivers were removed after the possibility they could blow up cards, but I never heard of anyone getting caught out?!

 

[RussianSensation]

It's silly to say that marketing is the only reason AMD is failing. These engineers have first hand knowledge of what is going on. I bet we all find out soon what is happening.

So Fermi was a failure then?

It shares all these characteristics with HD7900 series:

- It consumed more power than the competitor's cards at similar price levels
- It was faster than the competitor at similar price levels and faster in overclocked states
- It had more VRAM than the competitor
- It performed better at the then next generation graphical feature (tessellation vs. DirectCompute global lighting model/contact hardening shadows for GCN)
- It had class leading GPGPU compute performance

That sounds a LOT like HD7000 series.

Sure, Fermi was 10-15% faster, but Fermi was 6 months late and GCN was 3-6 months ahead of Kepler's desktop line-up. Your logic that AMD's graphics are failing is very much exactly the same reason Fermi failed...except Fermi didn't fail at all. It sold well. So please explain again why GCN cards are failing?

 

[n0x1ous]

So Fermi was a failure then?

It shares all these characteristics with HD7900 series:

- It consumed more power than the competitor's cards at similar price levels
- It was faster than the competitor at similar price levels and faster in overclocked states
- It had more VRAM than the competitor
- It performed better at the then next generation graphical feature (tessellation vs. DirectCompute global lighting model/contact hardening shadows for GCN)
- It had class leading GPGPU compute performance

That sounds a LOT like HD7000 series.

Sure, Fermi was 10-15% faster, but Fermi was 6 months late and GCN was 3-6 months ahead of Kepler's desktop line-up. Your logic that AMD's graphics are failing is very much exactly the same reason Fermi failed...except Fermi didn't fail at all. It sold well. So please explain again why GCN cards are failing?

I think the 7900 series are really good products. I know it has been said time and time again that nvidia's marketing is vastly superior.

Does anyone put any stock in the killing of off the ATI name? ATI's brand was viewed positively in my opinion, but AMD brand not so much.

AMD CPU's always viewed as budget or second rate (which they have been except for Athlon/Athlon X2) I think it was a mistake particularly for average consumers who may have had a more positive opinion of the ATI brand. Now they see AMD and probably don't know that its actually ATI and think ATI went out of business etc etc......I dunno know. didn't seem like a good move. Probably should changed the name of the whole company to ATI!

 

[blastingcap]

I think the 7900 series are really good products. I know it has been said time and time again that nvidia's marketing is vastly superior.

Does anyone put any stock in the killing of off the ATI name? ATI's brand was viewed positively in my opinion, but AMD brand not so much.

AMD CPU's always viewed as budget or second rate (which they have been except for Athlon/Athlon X2) I think it was a mistake particularly for average consumers who may have had a more positive opinion of the ATI brand. Now they see AMD and probably don't know that its actually ATI and think ATI went out of business etc etc......I dunno know. didn't seem like a good move. Probably should changed the name of the whole company to ATI!

I agree with the above, except changing the whole company to ATI would destroy whatever was left of brand equity in that case.

Also, OCZ should have changed its name after the SandForce FW debacles. It wouldn't fool enthusiasts, but it might help them get a fresh start with the many people who automatically reject anything with the OCZ brand now.

 

[exar333]

There is a lot of nit-picking here on AT for 5-10% in performance differences between products that cost with ~$50 of each other. These arguments are getting pretty silly.

For the first 6 months of the year, there was really no competition to the 7970 or 7950, but they were expensive. When the GTX 680/670 came out, there were competitive choices and the 670 was probably the best buy from the top-tier. After the recent price drops, it's tough to beat the 7950 which offers a lot more in terms of OC ability and VRAM vs. the 660ti at pretty much the same price.

You can't really go wrong with any 680/670/7970/7950 purchase right now. Pick the best one for you, and stop trashing the other choices!

 

[blastingcap]

You can't really go wrong with any 680/670/7970/7950 purchase right now. Pick the best one for you, and stop trashing the other choices!

Nobody is trashing anything, just talking about bang for the buck aka price/performance ratios. The 670 oc's to within a few % of the 680; same with the 7950 vs 7970. Yet the 680/7970 cost significantly more than 5% extra.

The whole "they are all the same" thing is something I associate with people who favor one side, whose side is getting beat, so they try to do a boxing clinch and claim that all cards are tied.

That said, prices vary and even within the same family there is great variation among custom and reference cards, so I would agree that the picture is muddled by that.