I could swear the 6850, 6870 and 6950 were all produced by AMD.
Apparently the only card produced by AMD is the 7970.
This is getting to be too much now:
AMD's "Small-Die" Strategy
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556/2
Now, for the most part this commitment was there as there was impressive performance/value at these segments.
Go premiums!
Sorry but GTX285 was at $399 not $300 when HD5870 was launched. HD5870 at launch time was faster and cheaper than GTX285.
Conclusion
The easiest kind of product for us to write about is the kind that’s clearly superior to its competition. The hardest kind to write about is the kind that’s stuck in the middle. For the 5870, we have the latter case.
Let’s be clear here: the 5870 is the single fastest single-GPU card we have tested, by a wide margin. Looking at its performance in today’s games, as a $379 card it makes the GTX 285 at its current prices ($300+) completely irrelevant. The price difference isn’t enough to make up for the performance difference, and NVIDIA also has to contend with the 5850, which should perform near the GTX 285 but at a price of $259. As is often the case with a new generation of cards, we’re going to see a shakeup here in the market as NVIDIA in particular needs to adjust to these new cards.
Conclusion
One thing that’s very clear in these benchmarks is that as things currently stand, the 5850 has made the GTX 285 irrelevant (again). The 5850 is anywhere between 9% and 16% faster depending on the resolution, cheaper by at least $35 as of Tuesday morning (with everything besides a single BFG model going for +$70 or more), and features DirectX11. The 5850 is a card that manages to – if at times barely – outclass the GTX285 in performance. If you’ve been waiting for a price shakeup, this is what you’ve been waiting for.
See, AMD keeps redefining the price/performance, but now it is redefining the high-end segment, instead of the mid-range/low high-end segment.
But why was the GTX-285, well, so cheap? It was of what AMD did by being so disruptive and bold with the HD 4870. It disrupted and did shake and redefined pricing and actual price-points for not only AMD customers but for nVidia customers.
It was so bold and disruptive it had after effects and lasted for many, many years where both AMD and nVidia gamers found incredible amounts of price/performance.
We shall see what AMD redefined when Kepler is out.
But why was the GTX-285, well, so cheap? It was of what AMD did by being so disruptive and bold with the HD 4870. It disrupted and did shake and redefined pricing and actual price-points for not only AMD customers but for nVidia customers.
It was so bold and disruptive it had after effects and lasted for many, many years where both AMD and nVidia gamers found incredible amounts of price/performance.
I guess they should have priced it higher, you know, because that's how things should be.
Let's see 650 dollars was the market price and nVidia's competition -- AMD sells for 299 MSRP. Maybe AMD was really committed to the sweet spot strategy after all, hehe! Or maybe committed in an institution for selling them so cheap from all the pro-premium views!
Is all these posts about this point to say AMD is a business and it tries to do what (or what the people there think, bar some secret agendas) is in its best interests?
That AMD 4870 wasn't priced at $300 because AMD love all of us so dearly but because AMD needed to do something to regain marketshare and to change the view that NVIDIA was the superior choice regarding to GPUs?
You just broken my heart...
On the other hand, the strategy of going for smaller chips instead of 500mm² seem to have been working, allowing AMD to regain market and mind share, reaching to the market first and selling tiny chips for more than much bigger chips...
Is all these posts about this point to say AMD is a business and it tries to do what (or what the people there think, bar some secret agendas) is in its best interests?
That AMD 4870 wasn't priced at $300 because AMD love all of us so dearly but because AMD needed to do something to regain marketshare and to change the view that NVIDIA was the superior choice regarding to GPUs?
You just broken my heart...
On the other hand, the strategy of going for smaller chips instead of 500mm² seem to have been working, allowing AMD to regain market and mind share, reaching to the market first and selling tiny chips for more than much bigger chips...
nVidia has over a 60 percent desktop discrete advantage, according to Mercury Research -- do you believe premium pricing is going to help AMD?
Summary: Its okay for nvidia to charge ridiculous prices but its not okay for AMD to charge high prices.
Oh yeah, GTX 480 wasn't much faster than the 5870, and the gtx 480 was panned by many critics for being a power guzzling dustbuster. I recall many reviewers hated it despite the performance. 450W for a single card? No thanks. So was the price for GTX 480 justified?
Can you just stop ? You're really stretching your arguments and are borderline smearing AMD because you really love NV. We get it. Sheesh. Not that there's anything wrong with loving NV...I love them on Mondays, thursdays and Saturdays. And today isn't Saturday
Can you just stop? You're really stretching your arguments and are borderline smearing AMD because you really love nvidia.
who cares.
Summary: Its okay for nvidia to charge ridiculous prices but its not okay for AMD to charge high prices.
Oh yeah, GTX 480 wasn't much faster than the 5870, and the gtx 480 was panned by many critics for being a power guzzling dustbuster. I recall many reviewers hated it despite the performance. 450W for a single card? No thanks. So was the price for GTX 480 justified?
I don't remember the sheer amount of vocal gamers defending premium pricing though.
The system in my sig total doesn't use 450w while gaming. Not sure where you got the 480 using 450w?
I'm telling you, selective memory is such a curse around here.
Just go dig up the GTX 480 launch and then the GTX 580 launch. Suddenly everyone on your side of the fence supported premiums. I recall someone's defense was that the GTX 580 had a Vapor chamber cooler, this it added to the price. Haha.
I didn't though. But as long as one is happy with their choice - that is all that matters. Was more concerned with how the GTX 470 compared to the HD 5870 and 5850.
AMD expected the GTX 280/260 to perform better.Let's see 650 dollars was the market price and nVidia's competition -- AMD sells for 299 MSRP. Maybe AMD was really committed to the sweet spot strategy after all, hehe! Or maybe committed in an institution for selling them so cheap from all the pro-premium views!
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2679/10The Radeon HD 4870 was targeted to be faster than the 9800 GTX, which again would make a lot of sense since this was ATI’s $300 part and the GTX was NVIDIA’s. What ATI didn’t expect was for the 4870 to do so well against the GeForce GTX 260. When NVIDIA finally launched the GeForce GTX 280/260 ATI looked at the results and let out a collective “wait a minute”. It worked out perfectly, not only did ATI hit the competitive points it wanted to but thanks to GT200 performance being lower than ATI expected and the RV770 doing better than expected, ATI now had a $300 card that was competitive with NVIDIA’s brand new $400 GTX 260.
I didn't though. But as long as one is happy with their choice - that is all that matters. Was more concerned with how the GTX 470 compared to the HD 5870 and 5850.
I can respect your stance on prices. Really, I can -- I don't like paying high prices either. It just seems you're applying a double standard, because NV has pretty much done the same thing in the past on parts that weren't great performance leaps forward. GTX 480 was roughly 10-20% faster, but commanded a huge premium IIRC.