Nvidia destroying PC gaming because they keep increasing prices.
GTX970-330usd
GTX1070-450usd
RTX2070-600usd
Nvidia destroying PC gaming because they keep increasing prices.How is nVidia "destryoing" PC gaming when they are the only one pushing it forward? AMD released a new GPU which can only match a 3 1/2 year old GTX1060.
Navi is outdated, has absolut no new features, doesnt advanced pc gaming or support functions like VRR-HDMI. It is a product for a dying console cycle. On the other hand nVidia put new features into the hands of developer to start designing engines for the future.
How is nVidia "destryoing" PC gaming when they are the only one pushing it forward? AMD released a new GPU which can only match a 3 1/2 year old GTX1060.
Navi is outdated, has absolut no new features, doesnt advanced pc gaming or support functions like VRR-HDMI. It is a product for a dying console cycle. On the other hand nVidia put new features into the hands of developer to start designing engines for the future.
MSI 5500XT 8GB msrp 240usd 1660super is 21%faster and cheaper LOL AMD
MSI Radeon RX 5500 XT Gaming X 8 GB Review
The MSI Radeon RX 5500 XT Gaming X features twice the VRAM of the 4 GB OEM model, which we found to make a surprising difference in games, even at 1080p. As expected, the card includes an extremely quiet cooler, idle-fan-stop, and a backplate.www.techpowerup.com
MSI 5500XT 8GB msrp 240usd 1660super is 21%faster and cheaper LOL AMD
MSI Radeon RX 5500 XT Gaming X 8 GB Review
The MSI Radeon RX 5500 XT Gaming X features twice the VRAM of the 4 GB OEM model, which we found to make a surprising difference in games, even at 1080p. As expected, the card includes an extremely quiet cooler, idle-fan-stop, and a backplate.www.techpowerup.com
Yea its ridiculous. They are also selling Polaris successor for $400 and everyone is eating it up like its a great deal. People will eat this up too cuz muh low power consumption.
I like TPU's Performance Summary. 5500XT 4GB Sapphire is within 1% of the 1650S AND the RX580 at 1080p and 1440p. It shows that at that price, it doesn't offer much benefit. But other reviews show that it may have an edge over 1650S. So at the very least, if AMD took the geometric mean of performance results we are seeing here, perhaps $10 more is truly justified if it's a little faster. But to gain mind-share, since they're the underdog, I'm not sure they can simply consider themselves an equal option and price themselves as such, hence the $399 5700 XT that smokes the 2060S at the same price, and beats the 2070 for less $$.RX5500XT reviews
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15206/the-amd-radeon-rx-5500-xt-review
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/msi-radeon-rx-5500-xt-gamingx-8gb-review,1.html
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/gigabyte-radeon-5500-xt-gaming-review,1.html
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/radeon-rx-5500-xt-review,1.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-5500-xt-pulse-4-gb/
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-radeon-rx-5500-xt-gaming-x-8-gb/
I think the big issue is in TPU's teardown, the 5500XT is using a lot more high-end, unnecessarily costly VRMs and other components. So I think with that decision, AMD can't really bring prices down. Nonetheless, at least it's competitive. I am pleasantly surprised that it is about 4% faster than the 5500 that TPU reviewed a couple of weeks ago.Here's the performance summary from HWUB. Like I said, at MSRP for both cards, AMD is basically pricing the 5500XT at the same value as the 1650S. The 1650S technically has a hair higher fps/$ but it's so close they are realistically the same. With that said, I know AMD doesn't want to be known as the value brand any more and I think it's wise for them not to be known as the 'budget' brand anymore but I do think in terms of mind share, they still need to lead in value compared to Nvidia to take any real market share. Of course they could be more supplied constraint at this point and not too concerned with retail sales at the moment and just want the highest margin they can get there while providing the bulk of their supply to OEMs. Will be interesting to see how the supply and price turn out over time.
Ryzen 3000 features one phone SoC sized 7nm compute chiplet die with a ton of SRAM and a dirt cheap 14nm IO die. The 7nm chiplet is used across the whole stack and even Epyc CPUs.Another overpriced garbage.This time they will sell rx460/560 successor for 170-200usd
btw rx560 launched at 99usd.
I really want to know who choose prices for GPU and CPU.Because that cant be same person.Why AMD can release faster cpus at almost half price vs intel but cant do same with GPUS?Its like they have deal with nvidia to keep prices high.
Anyway, people should forget about this garbage card until it maybe falls to a good price later (after Polaris stock is sold out). Navi 14 exists for mobile and OEMs, for us it’s a mere afterthought. Buy the 1650 Super or better yet, a cheap 580 in this price range, depending on your needs.
I think the big issue is in TPU's teardown, the 5500XT is using a lot more high-end, unnecessarily costly VRMs and other components. So I think with that decision, AMD can't really bring prices down. Nonetheless, at least it's competitive. I am pleasantly surprised that it is about 4% faster than the 5500 that TPU reviewed a couple of weeks ago.
Yeah its because amd doubled prices like nvidia with kepler.They moved whole stack one tier higher.5500XT should be priced like rx560 successor.But AMD doubled prices so we have rx580 performance 2 years later for same price.ITS DOA.Very disappointing launch. $199 for a card that should be atleast $20 less and don't even get me started on the 4gb model. There is no single reason to get a 4gb 5500XT for $170 as you can get a 580 8gb new for that price, that one should have been atleast $20 cheaper as well. I get AMD doesn't want to be the cheaper alternative but AMD is actually offering worse perf/$ than Nvidia with the 5500XT launch. Yes maybe you could find some solace in the fact you get Monster Hunter game bundled with the 5500XT but otherwise very disappointing launch.
Yeah, that scathing comment was mostly for the 8GB version. 4GB version might be an OK buy compared to a 1650S, but the 1650S is still slightly better value and slightly more efficient (?) from what I see. Polaris is better than both at the right price.If the 5500XT 4GB is a garbage card, then so is the 1650S. The cards are so close in price and performance that their value proposition is imperceptible in the real world. Granted, this assumes both are at MSRP and the average performance across a wide range of games. If one cards street price ends up much higher or lower than the other or there's a specific game or group of games you play where one card dominates, that would obvious change things. But in a general sense, they're equal.
Which will be after RDNA2, apparently. Nvidia will be seriously late to 7nm.Anandtech also has the card at reference speeds using less power than the 1650S. While that's a nice win for AMD, it is still kind of hard to swallow given they have somewhere between a half to full node advantage on the Nvidia card. Hopefully the second round of RDNA cards have much better efficiency or Nvidia will retake the efficiency crown by a mile when they are able to get their 7nm cards out.
Yes 4gb would have been ok if it was priced at like $140 but nobody who likes to play newest AAA games should get 4gb card now.I'm actually surprised. Based on Anandtechs review, their are very clear performance differences between 4GB and 8GB in many games even though the cards are identical in all other ways. I didn't think we had reached that point yet. At 1440p hell yes you need 8GB, but not 1080p. It's clear from this review that no, we have definitely exceeded 4GB at 1080p.
Based on these reviews, If I was buying one of these cards I would rule out any 4GB card and only get 6GB or higher.
Yes they have followed Nvidia's lead in regards to increasing the prices. Some people are trying to defend this by saying the 7nm process is twice as expensive or that the 5500XT uses expensive components, like the hell do i care about that, all I can see is the performance is disappointing considering the price. There is no generational improvement in performance since RX480 launch.Yeah its because amd doubled prices like nvidia with kepler.They moved whole stack one tier higher.5500XT should be priced like rx560 successor.But AMD doubled prices so we have rx580 performance 2 years later for same price.ITS DOA.
Yep, don't expect 7 nm Nvidia consumer GPUs anytime soon. We haven't even got all Turing refresh from top to bottom.Which will be after RDNA2, apparently. Nvidia will be seriously late to 7nm.
To be fair if you've got a 4gb card @ 1080p then you might have to turn down from ultra to high occasionally which will probably make no noticeable difference to graphics when you are playing the game. We're not in the enthusiast range here were ultra on everything all the time is required because epeen.I'm actually surprised. Based on Anandtechs review, their are very clear performance differences between 4GB and 8GB in many games even though the cards are identical in all other ways. I didn't think we had reached that point yet. At 1440p hell yes you need 8GB, but not 1080p. It's clear from this review that no, we have definitely exceeded 4GB at 1080p.
Based on these reviews, If I was buying one of these cards I would rule out any 4GB card and only get 6GB or higher.
Ive been telling this since RX5700XT launched, or should i say "RX690" acording to AMD slides?
AMD is price matching NV the rest is not their problem. AMD and Nvidia are going to destroy PC gaming if this bs is not stopped before PS5 launch.
Nvidia destroying PC gaming because they keep increasing prices.
GTX970-330usd
GTX1070-450usd
RTX2070-600usd