More AMD Brain Drain [BSN]

[MrK6]

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.

 

[blastingcap]

I wrote one post. You selectively quoted 2/3 of it in two separate quotes. I won't ask you to explain why you did that. Nor will I explain my post to you, because I think it's clear enough as it is. Sorry.

 

[tviceman]

I don't believe the exodus of high level AMD employees has anything to do with it's products or market share. My theory is it has more to do with the culture within AMD's company, or perhaps lack thereof. If there is a general feeling of negativity within a company, and especially among the different departments within a company (i.e. engineering is unhappy with how marketing pushes and portrays products, HR is unhappy with management for workforce reductions) then people will be more apt to work elsewhere, even for the same pay, if it means better / happier working conditions.

 

[MrK6]

I wrote one post. You selectively quoted 2/3 of it in two separate quotes. I won't ask you to explain why you did that. Nor will I explain my post to you, because I think it's clear enough as it is. Sorry.

You completely contradicted yourself in one post, and don't understand why I pointed it out? Is English not your first language? Or are you one of the partisan ones you described?

No personal attacks means just that: no personal attacks
-ViRGE

That's not a personal attack, it's a legitimate question. Followed by another legitimate question. Evidently everyone falls prey to hyperbole around here.

 

[blastingcap]

You completely contradicted yourself in one post, and don't understand why I pointed it out? Is English not your first language? Or are you one of the partisan ones you described?

Perhaps you should read more, starting with the terms of service for this forum regarding personal attacks. Then ruminate on how price/perf has two variables, not one. Next up for you: charm school.

 

[MrK6]

Perhaps you should read more, starting with the terms of service for this forum regarding personal attacks. Then ruminate on how price/perf has two variables, not one. Next up for you: charm school.

Asking you to clarify your post is not a personal attack (nice hyperbole). However, the above is.

 

[blastingcap]

Asking you to clarify your post is not a personal attack (nice hyperbole). However, the above is.

Feel free to ask yourself if there was any other way to say the same thing without sarcastically asking if English is my first language after years of both of us posting on this forum. I did not contradict myself; you misread and then proceeded to be quite the charmer with your writing. Merely pointing that out is not a personal attack.

 

[MrK6]

Feel free to ask yourself if there was any other way to say the same thing without sarcastically asking if English is my first language after years of both of us posting on this forum. I did not contradict myself; you misread and then proceeded to be quite the charmer with your writing. Merely pointing that out is not a personal attack.

There was nothing sarcastic about it. You don't troll (I don't think, I haven't been on this forum much lately), so I'm assuming there's some gross deficit in your communication repertoire for you to not see why your post was contradictory. Go read it again, I don't think you're communicating what you think you're trying to communicate. You said:

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.

Which is an argument many have made, including me, as to why top tier cards are a more wasteful purchase to most when they do so little to differentiate themselves from their immediate "inferiors." However, then you said:

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.

After you just stated they're all within a few percent of each other once we account for clocking adjustments. This is insignificant in normal usage. You contradicted yourself, and I was wondering why. I'm not sure why you took such offense to all the above, but it was unfortunate. Or maybe your avatar "blastingcap" is well-suited. In that case, touche. In either case, I'm not going to derail the thread further.

 

[blastingcap]

There was nothing sarcastic about it. You don't troll (I don't think, I haven't been on this forum much lately), so I'm assuming there's some gross deficit in your communication repertoire for you to not see why your post was contradictory. Go read it again, I don't think you're communicating what you think you're trying to communicate. You said:

Which is an argument many have made, including me, as to why top tier cards are a more wasteful purchase to most when they do so little to differentiate themselves from their immediate "inferiors." However, then you said:
After you just stated they're all within a few percent of each other once we account for clocking adjustments. This is insignificant in normal usage. You contradicted yourself, and I was wondering why. I'm not sure why you took such offense to all the above, but it was unfortunate. Or maybe your avatar "blastingcap" is well-suited. In that case, touche. In either case, I'm not going to derail the thread further.

There is a reason why I separated the sentences instead of keeping them in the same paragraph. Tell me with a straight face that you thought I was talking about 670 vs 680, or 7950 vs 7970, rather than 7950 vs 660 Ti (keep in mind what thread you are in), when I wrote this:

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.

In the sentence before that one, I only mentioned the 680/7970 because the other guy did and it was silly... yes they are similar performing, NO they are not similarly priced--just like how the 7950 and 660Ti are similarly priced (maybe even equally priced, soon enough: http://www.tweaktown.com/news/25383/amd_drops_prices_on_high_end_cards_again/index.html) but there is a significant performance gap once both are oc'd, with the 7950 having massive 40+% headroom compared to a paltry 5-15% (multiple reviews saw 5% oc's stable though to be fair memory oc matters more with the 660Ti so the actual speed improvement is more like 10-15% rather than 5%).

Listen. I didn't appreciate the selective quoting with just an emoticon (hypocritical for someone to do that while criticizing others for not being clear, don't you think?). I didn't think I had to spell it out for you but apparently I did. And I definitely didn't appreciate how quickly you descended into negativity. So apparently English is not my first language, I have a "gross deficit in [my] communication repertoire," and apparently even my avatar (or did you mean user name) is fair game to you, all because you misconstrued what I wrote. Whatever.

I wrote: "I wrote one post. You selectively quoted 2/3 of it in two separate quotes. I won't ask you to explain why you did that. Nor will I explain my post to you, because I think it's clear enough as it is. Sorry." Nothing particularly explosive about that--I didn't insult you or anything. I just didn't think my post needed further elaboration.

To which you responded: "You completely contradicted yourself in one post, and don't understand why I pointed it out? Is English not your first language? Or are you one of the partisan ones you described?"

Whoa, there.

I was polite and didn't insult you. You? ... No comment.

MrK6, Blastingcap; take it to PM. Do not continue with this bickering in this thread
-ViRGE

 

[Siberian]

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?

The 7000 series is struggling against NVIDIA's midrange chip. Honestly that has to make it the biggest chip failure in history. It's probably why these graphics people are leaving AMD.

 

[AnandThenMan]

The 7000 series is struggling against NVIDIA's midrange chip. Honestly that has to make it the biggest chip failure in history. It's probably why these graphics people are leaving AMD.

Posts like this are just sad....

 

[Keysplayr]

Posts like this are just sad....

I think it was his opinion. What you said was what you thought of him for having an opinion. Which is worse? :thumbsdown:

 

[AnandThenMan]

I think it was his opinion. What you said was what you thought of him for having an opinion. Which is worse? :thumbsdown:

Are you serious? Saying AMD has fielded "the biggest chip failure in history" with 7xxx is not an opinion it's trolling. And have you seen this other persons posts by any chance?

 

[2is]

I think it was his opinion. What you said was what you thought of him for having an opinion. Which is worse? :thumbsdown:

And worse still are people who don't actually know what an opinion looks like

 

[Keysplayr]

Are you serious? Saying AMD has fielded "the biggest chip failure in history" with 7xxx is not an opinion it's trolling. And have you seen this other persons posts by any chance?

It's trolling to you. That's about it. To me, and probably most others, it's an opinion. You don't have to like what people say about your preferred graphics card maker, but you have to let them. There lies the rub. AMDs 7970 was kind of a letdown. And when was the last time in history did a mid range card (intended or not) of one company best the top end of another, soundly? If you want to get history into this equation, well, I don't know of any other time. Do you? Not going to argue this any further with you, because this is just my opinion. You don't have to like it. OR you could like it. Whatever.

 

[AnandThenMan]

It's trolling to you. That's about it. To me, and probably most others, it's an opinion. You don't have to like what people say about your preferred graphics card maker, but you have to let them. There lies the rub.

Don't make excuses for trolling. If I said Kepler is the worst GPU of all time, that's trolling not an opinion and you know it. No one even remotely informed would say such a thing, same goes for the 7xxx series.

 

[Keysplayr]

Don't make excuses for trolling. If I said Kepler is the worst GPU of all time, that's trolling not an opinion and you know it. No one even remotely informed would say such a thing, same goes for the 7xxx series.

Nobody's trolling dude. Just saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

Did a 7870 best a GTX680? If it did, and you said Kepler was the worst GPU of all time, I might wait a beat before attacking and shouting troll. Just saying.

Just chill out a bit.

/fini

 

[blastingcap]

Nobody's trolling dude. Just saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

Did a 7870 best a GTX680? If it did, and you said Kepler was the worst GPU of all time, I might wait a beat before attacking and shouting troll. Just saying.

Just chill out a bit.

/fini

It's hyperbolic trolling or sarcastic humor depending on who the speaker is, but if the speaker has a history of such posts, then, well... defending trolling reduces your own credibility. I'll leave it at that.

 

[exar333]

I agree with RS's post a while back. The 7000 series is very much like the Fermi line-up. The gen was 'better' in that it had more potential (raw speed, GPGPU computation, and head-room for OC) but all that came at a price. In the case of both Fermi and 7000 series it was cost (although the 7000 series is much improved here recently) and power usage. There is NO way AMD is going to release a single-GPU 7970 clocked at 1300mhz that eats 300w+ and needs 2 8-pin aux power cables. It would be a BEAST but would run hot, loud, and potentially unstable with the voltage required. Can you OC to get there? Sure, if you get a good card and have good cooling.

At 'comfortable' power consumption, apples to apples, Kepler is a better card out of the box 680 vs 7970 or 670 vs 7950. With the 'ghz edition' and higher clocks on the 7950, I would say its pretty much a draw in both cases, with the winner going to the set of games out prefer. With the recent price cuts, both AMD offerings appear more attractive IMHo, unless the games you play really are on the NV side like BF3.

Neither Fermi or 7000-series are failures. They are fast, but need a lot of raw power to do it. The question is do you want, or it is reasonable in your case, to go the raw-power route or the more efficient route. You can't really go wrong, and none of the offerings I spoke of are 'drastically' priced differently like products we saw a few years back like the 4870 and gtx 285. Guys, we are talking less than a $75 here between the 7970/680 and less than $50 between the 670/7950. For enthusiatics, that's peanuts for a higher-end card. This isn't $100 vs. $175...

 

[KCfromNC]

And when was the last time in history did a mid range card (intended or not) of one company best the top end of another, soundly?

Yes, when indeed. Or has it ever happened? I guess if you couch rumor and innuendo as a question, you can get away with a lot.

 

[PCboy]

[redacted]

We're not even going to go down this route. Let dead subjects lie in rest as they should
-ViRGE

 

[RussianSensation]

The 7000 series is struggling against NVIDIA's midrange chip. Honestly that has to make it the biggest chip failure in history. It's probably why these graphics people are leaving AMD.

Oh really, so is that why $600 GTX660Ti SLI beats HD7970 GE by only 6% at 30 inch monitor resolution and at the same time HD7970 GE beats GTX680 in every enthusiast resolution? You must have erased that information from the Internet in your browser. Also, please let me know where I can buy a $500 GK110 GTX780. :thumbsup:

Must be awesome to spend $2,000 on GTX690 Quad-SLI setup for 3 monitors as well.

Average performance on 3x1080P monitors

$450 HD7970 GE = 31.5 fps
$1,000 GTX690 = 41.3 fps :thumbsdown:
$900 HD7970 GE Cross-fire = 56.5 fps
$2,000 GTX690 SLI = 61.4 fps :thumbsdown:

7-8 months later, 2 HD7970 GEs are also free with bitcoin mining on the side. Even if you don't bitcoin mine, HD7950 is way cheaper than a 670 and HD7970 GE undercuts GTX680 substantially.

AMDs 7970 was kind of a letdown. And when was the last time in history did a mid range card (intended or not) of one company best the top end of another, soundly?

And that's the problem. A lot of us here thought that GK104 is NV's mid-range chip but NV never delivered GK110 (yet). Now we are looking at $450 7970 GE Vapor-X that spanks everything other than $600/720 GTX680 MSI Lightning / EVGA Classy + EVBot.

Performance and Price/Performance speak for itself. It's too bad for NV that they held off GK110 and lost this generation for Single-GPU performance. This generation is so far going in history as NV winning performance/watt and losing performance/$ and absolute performance. They still have time to turn it around with GTX680 refresh or price drops until HD8000 series launches next year.

My trusted source that collects reviews all over the Internet and summarizes GPU performance when I am too lazy to look at specific reviews - Voodoo GPU Power.

HD7970 GE = 244 VP
GTX680 = 235 VP
HD7970 = 221 VP

 

[n0x1ous]

It's too bad for NV that they held off GK110 and lost this generation for Single-GPU performance. This generation is so far going in history as NV winning performance/watt and losing performance/$ and absolute performance. They still have time to turn it around with GTX680 refresh or price drops until HD8000 series launches next year.

Too bad for us, not too bad for Nvidia. They sell every GK104 they make and they'll sell every GK110 they make to HPC market for absurd profits. If things were different and HD7000 were dominating SALES they might have been more inclined to get GK110 to us sooner.

As far as absolute performance, they do have that with GTX 690

 

[zaydq]

Too bad for us, not too bad for Nvidia. They sell every GK104 they make and they'll sell every GK110 they make to HPC market for absurd profits. If things were different and HD7000 were dominating SALES they might have been more inclined to get GK110 to us sooner.

As far as absolute performance, they do have that with GTX 690

So... to all the fanboys, Nvidia just took their loyalists for a stroll?

I don't honestly think Nvidia could have had GK110 ready for this generation's market. Instead of losing hard to AMD they just went out with GK104.

-----------------

AMD's generation isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be. Russian posted, and proved, in multiple threads, AMD's 7970 GE is faster than the gtx 680 for less money, the 7970 Toxic/Vapor X is a tad bit slower than the GTX 680 lightning, but at a significantly cheaper cost.

AMD marketed at an insanely high price, with a terrible price/performance. BUT! AMD took advantage of the market, they took advantage of the fact that they beat the GTX 500 series, albeit not by margins expected, it was still a superior product.

We can all respect that Nvidia's offerings this generation are great. But give it to AMD for being able to take a seeminly inferior product, and successfully trade blows with their skus. The gtx 660ti came out with better than expected results in certain scenarios, and puts a reference 7950 to shame at its starting msrp. At current pricing, the 7950 and 660ti trade blows, with the general consensus that the 7950 is a small margin faster. Factor in overclocking, and good bye to the 660ti, the 670 and hello 680 speeds.

And, lets be real, majority of buyers of the enthusiast grade cards don't just run stock. (Before anybody nitpicks, this is an opinion, not a fact)

OC'd 670s and 680s would obviously beat a 7950... but at the 7950's new msrp, its still great bang for the buck.

 

[MrK6]

The problem is there is nothing wrong with the market this generation. People are fabricating "discrepancies" so they have something to argue about (which seems to be the point of this forum, really). The 7970 came out first, was noticeably faster than the GTX 580, and was priced accordingly. Once competition came out, prices readjusted across the board. This is how any market ideally works.

Now there's a wide-range of products across the board, with AMD's cards offering better bang-for-your-buck to the overclocker and NVIDIA's cards offering better power consumption numbers.