# AMD Cuts Prices of R9 290 Series and R9 280 Series Even Further



## btarunr (Oct 8, 2014)

AMD cut prices of its Radeon R9 290 series and R9 280 series graphics cards further down from last month's price-cuts. The cuts see the company's flagship single-GPU product, the Radeon R9 290X, drop from $449, down to $399, an $150 overall drop, from its launch price of $549. The Radeon R9 290, on the other hand, has its price cut to $299, from its launch price of $399. The drop in price of the R9 290 is squeezing AMD's sub-$300 lineup like never before. The R9 280X is down to $270, just $30 less than the R9 290. The R9 285, which launched barely two months ago, has its price squeezed to $229, just $10 more than NVIDIA's GTX 760. If you're in the market for a graphics card with about $250 in hand, you're now open to a ton of options, including ramen for a week, in exchange for the $329 GeForce GTX 970.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## GhostRyder (Oct 8, 2014)

This is going to be very nice to consumers, now if only the lightning would get down low enough.


----------



## Sakurai (Oct 8, 2014)

Don't even bother AMD, nVidia has already won.


----------



## Patriot (Oct 8, 2014)

Sakurai said:


> Don't even bother AMD, nVidia has already won.



Depends when the 390x shows up.


----------



## gigantor21 (Oct 8, 2014)

...nah, I'm good. I'll just get the 970 instead. I prefer beef lo mein over ramen anyway.


----------



## manofthem (Oct 8, 2014)

Gotta love price cuts! 

But even at these price cuts, I'd take a GTX 970 over an R9 290 for the few dollars more.




Sakurai said:


> Don't even bother AMD, nVidia has already won.





Spoiler


----------



## Steevo (Oct 8, 2014)

The 970 is still too close to make most of those a good option. AMD fucked up bad with Tonga unless they have a diamond in a goats ass hidden in there somewhere.


----------



## Arjai (Oct 8, 2014)

Steevo said:


> The 970 is still too close to make most of those a good option. AMD fucked up bad with Tonga unless they have a diamond in a goats ass hidden in there somewhere.


Hmmm, I'm having trouble determining which is less likely. A diamond in a goat's ass, A goat owning an ass, Someone hiding a Goat somewhere or, Has AMD fucked up?


----------



## Nordic (Oct 8, 2014)

I personally think the 290x would be compelling at $350. I can only imagine the sale prices though when they have too much stock.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 8, 2014)

When something that is on par to *outperform a R9 290X*, *consume less than an R9 280X* and cost 330$ - *you know you are screwed*.

*Don't* try to sugarcoat it - even if the R9 290X would magically cost 300$, most *smart* users will add the 30$ needed to get a *dramatically more efficient product*.

There's pretty much nothing AMD can do right now to beat the viability of a GTX 970 purchase. That's a simple fact.

Soon, a small brother to the GTX 970 will arrive and do the same thing for the *whole mid-range segment*.

People who insist on getting a radeon card might have to wait for another round of new cards.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 8, 2014)

Sakurai said:


> Don't even bother AMD, nVidia has already won.



Won what? Edging a 1 generation old technology? What a shocker... Brag about winning when AMD releases 390X, so you at least compare apples to apples...

@Dj-ElectriC
I wish i could get a GTX 970 for 330 USD. Cheapest you can get here in EU are basically 400 USD...


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 8, 2014)

This could go relatively to pretty much everywhere, with some minor changes here and there. once the GTX 900 cards will actually arrive in most shops, things will get more stable.
Where i live, the cheapest GTX 970 cost 450$


----------



## gregyong (Oct 8, 2014)

Patriot said:


> Depends when the 390x shows up.


The R9 390s are not showing up until Q1 2015 according to an AMD Rep that I know.
Nothing to back me up on this statement, cause revealing it would mean her loosing her job, but pretty sure AMD is not launching this year.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Oct 8, 2014)

Over the last few years Nvidia has fixed every issue that made this guy an ATI fanboi....so I'm thinking like with my CPU I'm about to jump ship....prices need to drop another 15% methinks...


----------



## Naito (Oct 8, 2014)

RejZoR said:


> Won what? Edging a 1 generation old technology? What a shocker... Brag about winning when AMD releases 390X, so you at least compare apples to apples...



Well people did the same when the R9-290/290X edged out Nvidias already aging Keplers. AMD is behind, Nvidia will just counter the 390X with something much more powerful down the track, if need be. Don't get me wrong, I want AMD to compete, I want them to still be around in the future, but at least use your commonsense.


----------



## techy1 (Oct 8, 2014)

this is good news for everybody (even for fanboys that only do hate). njvidia made 290x price look like a joke... amd reacted and now 290x is finally priced right... I hope with 390x AMD will make GTX 980 price look like a joke. (a hope - for all of us... yea - even you -  mr "fanboy" from whatever camp you are)

If there was not these two companies, but only one:
1) if there would be only AMD, then it would still hold 550$ price tag to 290x and probably rebrand it for anoter year for the same price or boost some clock and add price.
2) if there would be only nVidia, then it gtx 970 would be called something like "GTX 980ti" and would cost 600$+ and GTX 980 would be called some kind of Titan and would cost 1000+$ and if there would be GTX 980 TI then it would be called "TITAN MEGATRON ZZZ" (or whatever) and on its price tag would be writen: "one human kidney or your daughters virginity"


----------



## erocker (Oct 8, 2014)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> When something that is on par to *outperform a R9 290X*, *consume less than an R9 280X* and cost 330$ - *you know you are screwed*.
> 
> *Don't* try to sugarcoat it - even if the R9 290X would magically cost 300$, most *smart* users will add the 30$ needed to get a *dramatically more efficient product*.
> 
> ...



For 300 bucks I'd get the 290x. Comes with 3 free games. Though If a GTX 970 game with a couple games, I'd probably go for that...  Bah, nothing is really interesting me currently for GPU's.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 8, 2014)

To each their own, i guess. If i plan on using this card for two years at least, i'd say goodbye to the games (witch i might never even play) as well as to immense amounts of heat when i game.


----------



## majevica (Oct 8, 2014)

yeah baby i can see cheap r290 toxic or vapour-x in my rig soon maybe vapor-x because i like its color scheme better i like this very very


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 8, 2014)

majevica said:


> yeah baby i can see cheap r290 toxic or vapour-x in my rig soon maybe vapor-x because i like its color scheme better i like this very very



The vaporX takes up 3 slots if you dont have any other expansion cards then go for it.

I find it very funny how everyone goes insane when Amd does succeed/Falter and when they do price cuts... Yet when Nvidia falters or does price cuts no one harps on them.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 8, 2014)

techy1 said:


> this is good news for everybody (even for fanboys that only do hate). njvidia made 290x price look like a joke... amd reacted and now 290x is finally priced right... I hope with 390x AMD will make GTX 980 price look like a joke. (a hope - for all of us... yea - even you -  mr "fanboy" from whatever camp you are)


As said before if and when amd announces  390x likely nvidia will have a chip to counter it and price drop the card.



erocker said:


> For 300 bucks I'd get the 290x. Comes with 3 free games. Though If a GTX 970 game with a couple games, I'd probably go for that...  Bah, nothing is really interesting me currently for GPU's.


290x is 400$, and most games on amd's list of games are old games last i looked only couple ones from THIS YEAR.


----------



## RCoon (Oct 8, 2014)

Sakurai said:


> Don't even bother AMD, nVidia has already won.










erocker said:


> Bah, nothing is really interesting me currently for GPU's.



Nothing in any hardware related sector is particularly interesting me. Processors are barely better than sandy, GPU's have only just gotten better after god knows how many years, and every other hardware section is at a standstill bar RAM, and DDR4 has a nonexistant following besides those so desperate to upgrade to Haswell-E


----------



## pr0fessor (Oct 8, 2014)

I wonder how long it takes until here in switzerland and EU these cards cost 300-350 dollars. I think it will be called, on special offer.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 8, 2014)

RejZoR said:


> Won what? Edging a 1 generation old technology? What a shocker... Brag about winning when AMD releases 390X, so you at least compare apples to apples...


The bigger picture is that for the first time in a number of GPU generations, AMD goes into the holiday season without a new range of SKUs, and with Nvidia poised to capitalize on that fact. The issue isn't the lack of immediate sales, but the loss of revenue and its effect on AMD's balance sheet and it's impact on R&D budget down the line. If Bermuda arrives in Q1 then that only partially offsets the losses because 1. Q1 is traditionally a slow sales quarter, and 2. How many people would upgrade (assuming it is) again from the cards they bought just a few months before?


eidairaman1 said:


> I find it very funny how everyone goes insane when Amd does succeed/Falter and when they do price cuts... Yet when Nvidia falters or does price cuts no one harps on them.


Really? Were you away during the whole GTX 480/470/465 era? I seem to remember a whole orchestra's worth of harping....or how about the GTX 590 Fireworks Edition? How about Nvidia undercutting the Titan with the GTX 780? How about Titan Z ? Plenty of harping there.


----------



## Naito (Oct 8, 2014)

Reader said:


> Do not COMPARE the products like IDIOTS.
> If it does the job then prefer the AFFORDABLE ONE!



I personally think it would be quite idiotic not to compare products. Besides, if you were not to compare, how would you know which one best fits your need or, as you put it, does the job you want it to do? Even if the products in question were the same price, one may be more suitable or more affordable throughout its life.


----------



## dj-electric (Oct 8, 2014)

The problem is these days that "go with the cheapest" became such a strong internet thing, that people won't stop for a few minutes to think "hmm... maybe putting an extra 10-20$ here will benifit me in the long-run". I agree, sometimes it's those small investments that make the experience much better.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 8, 2014)

People really fall into the "holidays" bullshit? I buy my cards when i feel like it, not when holidays are due. In fact i bought most of them in springs and early summers. Maybe it has something to do with prices as well. Then again i always push my existing hardware to very limits so i don't really feel the pressure of buying new stuff for the sake of gaming smooth. Currently playing Alien:Isolation on HD7950 which is highly overclocked and it works super smooth at 1080p using max possible settings.


----------



## RCoon (Oct 8, 2014)

RejZoR said:


> I buy my cards when i feel like it, not when holidays are due



Lots of people get monies at christmas and lots of people feel the urge to spend during the holiday season. Just because you don't doesn't mean everyone else doesn't!


----------



## The Von Matrices (Oct 8, 2014)

An official announcement of price cuts is pointless since the retail prices are already significantly cheaper than the new MSRPs.  For example you can get a 290X for $359.99 after MIR or a 290 for $269.99 after MIR.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 8, 2014)

290X for 285 EUR. I wish...


----------



## Assimilator (Oct 8, 2014)

Exactly as W1zz predicted in his review of the 9x0 Maxwells. But still not enough.


----------



## THE_EGG (Oct 8, 2014)

I hope this filters into Australia - they are still overpriced here.



The Von Matrices said:


> An official announcement of price cuts is pointless since the retail prices are already significantly cheaper than the new MSRPs.  For example you can get a 290X for $359.99 after MIR or a 290 for $269.99 after MIR.



Mah gawd I'm jelly. R9 290x cards here are still around the $600 for a cheap one (some are around the $800 mark), 290 cards are $450-$550. :'( Heck, even the GTX 970 is $500-$550.


----------



## Ja.KooLit (Oct 8, 2014)

the cut down prizes only affect US. I dont know about europe though, but here in Asia, especially here in korea, price of 290x and 290 are still above 500$. So hooray for US costumers but "meh" for korea


----------



## Drac (Oct 8, 2014)

I will get a GTX 960, I wont buy a 270X, 285 or 280X, the price cut is not enough,  the 960 GTX will be more expensive but will probably consume much less power and produce less heat. 
280X should be arround 200 € to start considering it as an option for my future GPU, and here in Spain (and in many places of europe) they normally fix 1 $=1 € when atleast the change 1$ = 1.2 €, so 200 € for a 280X is not likely going to happen anytime soon.


----------



## Lionheart (Oct 8, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> The vaporX takes up 3 slots if you dont have any other expansion cards then go for it.
> 
> I find it very funny how everyone goes insane when Amd does succeed/Falter and when they do price cuts... Yet when Nvidia falters or does price cuts no one harps on them.



Yeah this site is disgustingly attracting the annoying fanboys


----------



## RCoon (Oct 8, 2014)

Lionheart said:


> Yeah this site is disgustingly attracting the annoying fanboys



Let's not detract from the discussion, we don't need another thread going south that way  Often best to avoid using that word too!


----------



## buildzoid (Oct 8, 2014)

Drac said:


> I will get a GTX 960, I wont buy a 270X, 285 or 280X, the price cut is not enough,  the 960 GTX will be more expensive but will probably consume much less power and produce less heat.
> 280X should be arround 200 € to start considering it as an option for my future GPU, and here in Spain (and in many places of europe) they normally fix 1 $=1 € when atleast the change 1$ = 1.2 €, so 200 € for a 280X is not likely going to happen anytime soon.


EU has 21% tax so 1 to 1 dollar and euro prices typically take care of the tax.


----------



## Champ (Oct 8, 2014)

I still feel if you are a 4k gamer, 290x is the way to go.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 8, 2014)

Assimilator said:


> Exactly as W1zz predicted in his review of the 9x0 Maxwells. But still not enough.


Pretty much anyone that seen performance of 980 and 970 could easily called the price drop. AMD really had no choice but to.



Champ said:


> I still feel if you are a 4k gamer, 290x is the way to go.


Yea for few people that will spend the cash to do it. I bet Nvidia probably slap wider memory bus on the card when they shrink it.

edit: looked up 4k panels which they at 500$ range for cheaper panels but that is still a lot for a monitor that requires a lot of gpu even at this time to get decent fps. But at 28inch monitor IMO 4k is kinda pointless on that small of a display really needs to be bigger to really get best outta it. Would say at 28inch area, a 1440p monitor is good middle ground and you are not stuck at 60hz as only option or even god forbid 30hz.



Drac said:


> I will get a GTX 960, I wont buy a 270X, 285 or 280X, the price cut is not enough,  the 960 GTX will be more expensive but will probably consume much less power and produce less heat.
> 280X should be arround 200 € to start considering it as an option for my future GPU, and here in Spain (and in many places of europe) they normally fix 1 $=1 € when atleast the change 1$ = 1.2 €, so 200 € for a 280X is not likely going to happen anytime soon.



I would guess if there is a 960, probably be priced 200-250$ with a TDP of 100-125watts.


----------



## Lopez0101 (Oct 8, 2014)

I keep taking them for the team and helping out my fellow hardware peeps by getting AMD so Nvidia has somebody around to try and keep them semi-honest.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 8, 2014)

To my surprise, R9-290X for under 300 EUR just surfaced in EU. And it's with a big 3 fan cooler (Sapphire). For 300 with such cooler it's not really a bad option considering most decent GTX 970 cost 350+ EUR...


----------



## jabbadap (Oct 8, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> EU has 21% tax so 1 to 1 dollar and euro prices typically take care of the tax.



There are different VAT in different countries in eu. In germany it's 19% and in here Finland it's 24%. So usually finns buys their computer parts from germany(EU free trade policy).


----------



## jabbadap (Oct 8, 2014)

RejZoR said:


> To my surprise, R9-290X for under 300 EUR just surfaced in EU. And it's with a big 3 fan cooler (Sapphire). For 300 with such cooler it's not really a bad option considering most decent GTX 970 cost 350+ EUR...



Well yeah it's good time to purchase graphics card, great prices from both camps:
amd:
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1440_R9+280X#xf_top
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1440_R9+290#xf_top
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1440_R9+290X#xf_top

nvidia:
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1439_GTX+770#xf_top
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1439_GTX+780#xf_top
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1439_GTX+970#xf_top
http://geizhals.de/?cat=gra16_512&xf=1439_GTX+780+Ti#xf_top


----------



## Sasqui (Oct 8, 2014)

Is it just me, or do people just have a short memory?  Titan was priced at $1000 and the 290x at $550.  AMD was eating their lunch for a while, particularly with mining.

So, here we are with a 180 degree. The 290x is still a great card but NVidia upped the game.  AMD is buying time while they work on a counterstrike.  Let's hope its good.


----------



## ironwolf (Oct 8, 2014)

I hope this help drop the price of used cards quickly.


----------



## Tonduluboy (Oct 8, 2014)

In my country the 290x price is not going down, the price remain the same since the launching...
Even thou if it really going down to $399, the GTX 970 zotac is cheaper selling at $367.

I will only buy 290x if they beat GTX970 price by at least $50!


----------



## Sasqui (Oct 8, 2014)

Tonduluboy said:


> In my country the 290x price is not going down, the price remain the same since the launching...
> Even thou if it really going down to $399, the GTX 970 zotac is cheaper selling at $367.
> 
> I will only buy 290x if they beat GTX970 price by at least $50!



That makes sense.  Used 290xs have dropped to $200-$250 on eBay so it's almost a no brained if money is a big consideration


----------



## Nabarun (Oct 8, 2014)

Look at these prices.
*290x*  - 47999 INR / *781.743* US Dollar
*970* -  27900 INR/ *454.564* US Dollar
I don't know what to say.


----------



## 64K (Oct 8, 2014)

Nabarun said:


> Look at these prices.
> *290x*  - 47999 INR / *781.743* US Dollar
> *970* -  27900 INR/ *454.564* US Dollar
> I don't know what to say.



Good lord! 

Is it just that all hardware is high in India?


----------



## Nabarun (Oct 8, 2014)

64K said:


> Good lord!
> 
> Is it just that all hardware is high in India?


Yep!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 8, 2014)

Weve reached a saturation point. Ive come to notice when i worked for att uverse all people that had a pc were old pos prebuilts of 95-vista, i only seen 1 gamer. Other than that its been pos ipads/phones.





RCoon said:


> Nothing in any hardware related sector is particularly interesting me. Processors are barely better than sandy, GPU's have only just gotten better after god knows how many years, and every other hardware section is at a standstill bar RAM, and DDR4 has a nonexistant following besides those so desperate to upgrade to Haswell-E


----------



## THE_EGG (Oct 8, 2014)

Nabarun said:


> Look at these prices.
> *290x*  - 47999 INR / *781.743* US Dollar
> *970* -  27900 INR/ *454.564* US Dollar
> I don't know what to say.


LOL pretty much the same as in Australia...I'm surprised it costs similar money in India as it does in Australia though.


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 8, 2014)

Nice!


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 8, 2014)

Assimilator said:


> Exactly as W1zz predicted in his review of the 9x0 Maxwells. But still not enough.



Yes, these price drops are not enough. If AMD wants to sell their not so much appreciated by the majority products, they need to make even more appealing offers and deals.

970 is still a best buy at $330.

R9 290X needs to be $250-290 in order to sell, with R9 290 ~ the 200 dollar mark and 280X/280 ~ 170/140.


----------



## GhostRyder (Oct 8, 2014)

I think people are acting like something is very different this round compared to normal.  The only major difference this round is that the new top range cards do not completely blow away the previous generation cards by a much more noticeable margin than in recent history.  Considering last round where Kepler was more powerful and better at power consumption by a decent margin than its predecessor Fermi this is nothing beyond the normality in this day and age.  The fact is the market every year changes with new cards and new products that generally get more efficient and powerful as time moves on (Well every other year mostly for efficiency when architectures change).  AMD has not said they do not have anything ready for a release before holiday season and even if they do not while Nvidia chose to stick with the same die AMD chose to shrink which obviously meant more time was needed before a release.

The R9 and R7 lineup are changing to match the market, but saying that the 290X needs to be way below the 970 is not true as the 290X overall is still a bit more powerful.  It needs to be close to its price and well below the 980 which it is at least below the 980 (I would hoping for 350) but its pricing along with the rest of the lineup is decent enough to where everyone can get something nice from both sides for a reasonable price which I feel people should not be complaining about.

All this has done is bring high end gaming into a more affordable realm for everyone!


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 8, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> ...saying that the 290X needs to be way below the 970 is not true as the 290X overall is still a bit more powerful....



Man, you mean literally it is more powerful, requires a lot more energy to run, and occupies more space in one's case... 

It doesn't deserve its price tag because virtually you have performance compared in the range of possible statistical error.

R9 290X and its architectural efficiency suck badly compared to anything Maxwell.


----------



## GhostRyder (Oct 8, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> R9 290X and its architectural efficiency suck badly compared to anything Maxwell.


Was Kepler architecturally inefficient?  How about Fermi, VLIW, GCN 1.0, etc...They are all old cards that were great in the years they were released.  Some of the competitors might have been a bit better in performance or power in a generation to generation comparison. Right now were comparing a previous generation architecture to a new generation architecture.  It would have been like saying when the HD 7970 came out that Fermi was completely inefficient because GCN used less power than Fermi and gave better performance.  It was a new generation so that was just expected...

GCN 1.1 is not as efficient as Maxwell in the same way Kepler is not.  Its a new generation and was more than expected by everyone to be much more efficient...


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 8, 2014)

R9 290X is no longer that great. AMD needs to price accordingly and ONLY WHEN they have a new efficient architecture, it would be fair to charge as much as they wish. All right?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 8, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> R9 290X is no longer that great. AMD needs to price accordingly and ONLY WHEN they have a new efficient architecture, it would be fair to charge as much as they wish. All right?


u=b3@bh0r53/dr0k3nR3(0rb


----------



## GhostRyder (Oct 8, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> R9 290X is no longer that great. AMD needs to price accordingly and ONLY WHEN they have a new efficient architecture, it would be fair to charge as much as they wish. All right?


Its true its not that great when comparing to the new generation cards from Nvidia, that much is apparent.  However I do not believe the pricing they have listed is something I would consider "As much as they wish".  They might need to drop the 290X another notch, but that is about it.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Oct 8, 2014)

People thinking the 290 needs to be 200$ need to dream on. People are going to by what they like. Do you think someone who has always bought Toyota is going to suddenly swap to GM because they offered a product with better fuel economy and more Horse Power? Of course not. From the brand exclusives like sapphire to the hydravision to eyefinity to specific prefabbed custom cooler options to the fact it says Radeon on it, there are many reasons people buy AMD. Sure Nvidia might have something to match in all areas, but these buyers are accustomed to how things work with AMD. 

In fact price cuts that come out well after the product was release rarely come in response to performance drops. AMD is purging inventory to make way for the next gen. It's nice for people like me who were thinking of picking up a second card on the cheap this holiday season, but I seriously doubt the 970 is the driving factor here. It's not like AMD or Nvidia sell direct. When then want to clear distribution channels for the next round they have to offer incentives months in advanced to try to get consumers to clear the items off retailer/etailer shelves/warehouses. 

So sure I'd love to see the 290 new in box for 200$, it's just not going to happen.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 8, 2014)

Interesting:

AMD are NOT cutting the prices - it's the partners.

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/75613-amd-cutting-price-radeon-r9-290-r9-290x-gpus/


----------



## yogurt_21 (Oct 8, 2014)

it's interesting for XFX to drop prices on its own without manufacturers incentives. I wonder if they were sitting on a pile of inventory due to the bitcoin mining boom going bust. That would explain why they wouldn't simply wait for the incentives. They want more time at lower prices to purge it all out.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 8, 2014)

the54thvoid said:


> Interesting:
> 
> AMD are NOT cutting the prices - it's the partners.
> 
> http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/75613-amd-cutting-price-radeon-r9-290-r9-290x-gpus/


Not too surprising. The vendors offering the deepest price cuts are XFX and HIS ( also Sapphire locally to me) who also happen to be AMD-only vendors. Unlike Asus, MSI, and Gigabyte they don't have much in the way of options when it comes to alternative graphics revenue streams.
I see XFX and HIS are currently offering the three cheapest 290X models on Newegg at the moment (MIR included).  Nice to see Asus sticking to its guns and not budging on the Ares III pricing - way to make a statement.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Oct 8, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> Not too surprising. The vendors offering the deepest price cuts are XFX and HIS ( also Sapphire locally to me) who also happen to be AMD-only vendors. Unlike Asus, MSI, and Gigabyte they don't have much in the way of options when it comes to alternative graphics revenue streams.
> I see XFX and HIS are currently offering the three cheapest 290X models on Newegg at the moment (MIR included).  Nice to see Asus sticking to its guns and not budging on the Ares III pricing - way to make a statement.



Definitely not ideal for the AMD only partners, bet they'd love to have a GTX 970 in their inventory.

But then nV can only dream of having a gaming scientist.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Oct 8, 2014)

yogurt_21 said:


> it's interesting for XFX to drop prices on its own without manufacturers incentives. I wonder if they were sitting on a pile of inventory due to the bitcoin mining boom going bust. That would explain why they wouldn't simply wait for the incentives. They want more time at lower prices to purge it all out.



Earlier this year retailers reduced down stock levels to "normal" levels, AMD's 1Q PR said it as much.  I see it as a win for AMD and for consumers, which ain't bad.


----------



## Drac (Oct 8, 2014)

I have been swapping between AMD and NV since I have memory, the most important thing for me is the price/performance and the second one is  performance/power consumption ratio. I  want to invest my money in the best possible way and for now, the GTX 970 is the best deal unless there is a second price cut before xmas, and I think that's not likely going to happen.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Oct 8, 2014)

yogurt_21 said:


> People thinking the 290 needs to be 200$ need to dream on. People are going to by what they like. Do you think someone who has always bought Toyota is going to suddenly swap to GM because they offered a product with better fuel economy and more Horse Power? Of course not. From the brand exclusives like sapphire to the hydravision to eyefinity to specific prefabbed custom cooler options to the fact it says Radeon on it, there are many reasons people buy AMD. Sure Nvidia might have something to match in all areas, but these buyers are accustomed to how things work with AMD.
> 
> In fact price cuts that come out well after the product was release rarely come in response to performance drops. AMD is purging inventory to make way for the next gen. It's nice for people like me who were thinking of picking up a second card on the cheap this holiday season, but I seriously doubt the 970 is the driving factor here. It's not like AMD or Nvidia sell direct. When then want to clear distribution channels for the next round they have to offer incentives months in advanced to try to get consumers to clear the items off retailer/etailer shelves/warehouses.
> 
> So sure I'd love to see the 290 new in box for 200$, it's just not going to happen.


The problem with your argument is that you're assuming the market is mostly comprised of people who are die-hard fans of a company when in reality they are a very small proportion of the market.  Sure, there are people who will stick with a company whatever the price or features are, but those people are overrepresented in enthusiast forums.   The vast majority of people will buy whatever works for them and is priced the best.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 8, 2014)

Fluffmeister said:


> But then nV can only dream of having a gaming scientist.


LOL. Yep, no one ever accused Huddy of being modest.


The Von Matrices said:


> The problem with your argument is that you're assuming the market is mostly comprised of people who are die-hard fans of a company when in reality they are a very small proportion of the market.


Made miniscule by the fact that the consumer add-in board market is relatively small anyway compared to OEM contracts, and OEMs love bullet points, feature lists, and new models.


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 8, 2014)

AMD has stated these price cuts are not permanent but part of an Promotion so get em while you can and sell them to us less fortunates who live outside of the US as we'll never see those prices ever


----------



## midnightoil (Oct 8, 2014)

Naito said:


> Well people did the same when the R9-290/290X edged out Nvidias already aging Keplers. AMD is behind, *Nvidia will just counter the 390X with something much more powerful down the track, if need be*. Don't get me wrong, I want AMD to compete, I want them to still be around in the future, but at least use your commonsense.




That ain't going to happen.  3xx will be on 20nm and have HBM memory.  It should blow NVIDIA away at every price point and in every metric, and do the same to the 20nm version of Maxwell, which will appear at some point in 2015.

NVIDIA have no answer until ~Q2 2016 until their own cards with HBM will be ready (if they aren't delayed).

NVIDIA backed the wrong horse in stacked memory.  HBC looked looked bad from the start and it was no surprise that NVIDIA dropped it last year, forcing them to scrap the entire 2015 series of GPUs and institute major changes to subsequent families.  They're now pushed into licensing HBM from AMD/Hynix, who co-developed it.

They desperately need to have a good Q4 '14, because for the whole of '15 they're going to be nowhere near any performance crowns, and have to very heavily discount in order to sell.

As far as the market currently stands, AMD 285 and NVIDIA 970 are clearly the bargains.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Oct 8, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> The problem with your argument is that you're assuming the market is mostly comprised of people who are die-hard fans of a company when in reality they are a very small proportion of the market.  Sure, there are people who will stick with a company whatever the price or features are, but those people are overrepresented in enthusiast forums.   The vast majority of people will buy *whatever works for them* and is priced the best.



you supported my argument in your rebuttal


----------



## The Von Matrices (Oct 8, 2014)

yogurt_21 said:


> you supported my argument in your rebuttal


It's not the same argument.  You are arguing that most people will stick with a company no matter what because they have had success with that company in the past.  I am arguing that as long as the product has the features they need (i.e. it works for their usage case) then they will pick a product based upon other factors, one of the most important being price.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Oct 8, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> It's not the same argument.  You are arguing that most people will stick with a company no matter what because they have had success with that company in the past.  I am arguing that as long as the product has the features they need (i.e. it works for their usage case) then they will pick a product based upon other factors, one of the most important being price.



Actually it is the same argument. There wasn't a "no matter what" to my argument. Perhaps in your head there was, but not in the post nor in my intent. There are a variety of factors at play here. One of which is the fact that there are currently only 2 variants of 970's in stock on the egg atm. Both are above the 330$ price range. The cheapest 290 is the same as mine, huge but a nice quiet cooler that works wonderfully it's 60$ cheaper (before MIR for an additional 20$) includes the gold amd bundle of 3 free games as well as 2 more free games Alien Isolation and Star Citizen. Alien Isolation is an additional 50$ value all by itself. The max the extra's plus price discount are worth is 200$ (assuming the games in the gold package are 20$ a piece and you send in the MIR, 60 + 20 + 50 + 20 + 20 + 20 + star citizen)

The 970 also comes with a nice cooler, but other than that it's bundle is a 5$ promotional gift card. So extras + price = 5$ on newegg. 

The 970 is 11% faster at 1080p according to TPU reviews, and 7% faster at higher resolutions. It is also a bit more energy efficient, but not exactly a fermi to Kepler jump. 

If you see that as worthwhile over the 290, then by all means go for it. I hate to tell you though than any reasonable person will likely decide the other way considering all it includes. This is especially true for fanboys.


----------



## vega22 (Oct 8, 2014)

RCoon said:


> Nothing in any hardware related sector is particularly interesting me. Processors are barely better than sandy, GPU's have only just gotten better after god knows how many years, and every other hardware section is at a standstill bar RAM, and DDR4 has a nonexistant following besides those so desperate to upgrade to Haswell-E



stackable flash and its knock on effect to system and data storage is about as exciting as i see anything getting atm...how fucked up is that!!!!


----------



## The Von Matrices (Oct 9, 2014)

yogurt_21 said:


> Actually it is the same argument. There wasn't a "no matter what" to my argument. Perhaps in your head there was, but not in the post nor in my intent. There are a variety of factors at play here. One of which is the fact that there are currently only 2 variants of 970's in stock on the egg atm. Both are above the 330$ price range. The cheapest 290 is the same as mine, huge but a nice quiet cooler that works wonderfully it's 60$ cheaper (before MIR for an additional 20$) includes the gold amd bundle of 3 free games as well as 2 more free games Alien Isolation and Star Citizen. Alien Isolation is an additional 50$ value all by itself. The max the extra's plus price discount are worth is 200$ (assuming the games in the gold package are 20$ a piece and you send in the MIR, 60 + 20 + 50 + 20 + 20 + 20 + star citizen)
> 
> The 970 also comes with a nice cooler, but other than that it's bundle is a 5$ promotional gift card. So extras + price = 5$ on newegg.
> 
> ...


I see where the issue lies.  You are arguing that the 290 is a good value when it is $60-$80 cheaper than the 970, an argument for which I completely agree.  The 290 is not a good value at or above $300, the price listed in the original post and the one I thought you were talking about.  In addition, while you are correct in that the reference GTX 970s are out of stock, you also should consider that the higher priced GTX 970 you mentioned is the EVGA SC, which is 6% more expensive for 5% more performance, pretty much a wash in price/performance.

AMD loves to throw in bundled accessories like games, but just adding their retail value and saying you save that much in the bundle is not representative of the way the market works.  The number of people who actually were going to buy all five games at retail and saved money by buying the bundle is likely zero.  The majority of people who are swayed by the bundle pricing will do so for only one of the games; at that point the rest are a bonus worth a few dollars at best.  I personally loved when AMD came out with the 290X BF4 bundle.  You had a choice to get a $60 game bundled or to skip the game and save $30.  This is the way cards should be sold; it's too bad that offer was a one-time affair.


----------



## JBVertexx (Oct 9, 2014)

Bunch of nonsense in this thread.  I thought there might be some useful insights here.  But this, unfortunately, reads like a a bunch of mindless fan-boys arguing back and forth and offering absolutely zero intellectual value to the conversation.


----------



## ManofGod (Oct 9, 2014)

Naito said:


> Well people did the same when the R9-290/290X edged out Nvidias already aging Keplers. AMD is behind, Nvidia will just counter the 390X with something much more powerful down the track, if need be. Don't get me wrong, I want AMD to compete, I want them to still be around in the future, but at least use your commonsense.



You can thank AMD for these competitive prices because otherwise, your precious 970 would be closer to $550. I would think also the 980 would have been $699. Oh well, guess NVidia is the do no wrong good guy now.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Oct 9, 2014)

wow.... the resell market prob just went from the toilet at Taco Bell to the the sewers of New York city...... Not that many would take the chance on a previous miner card.  Might just pick one up for giggles.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 9, 2014)

JBVertexx said:


> Bunch of nonsense in this thread.  I thought there might be some useful insights here.  But this, unfortunately, reads like a a bunch of mindless fan-boys arguing back and forth and offering absolutely zero intellectual value to the conversation.



You certainly didnt either so theres the door


----------



## Naito (Oct 9, 2014)

ManofGod said:


> You can thank AMD for these competitive prices because otherwise, your precious 970 would be closer to $550. I would think also the 980 would have been $699. Oh well, guess NVidia is the do no wrong good guy now.



The prices are already like that in AU anyway. This isn't real competition, it is an illusion. Nvidia only seems to be releasing their mid-range GPUs (GK104, GM204) when a change of architecture occurs. Nvidia knows that AMD can't compete head to head with top-tier cards, so they'll cash in on marked-up mid-tier GPUs. Months later AMD will bring out something that competes with Nvidias latest offering, then Nvidia will release something that will flatten it. It happened with the HD7970s; they could compete with the mid-tier Keplers (GK104) and even beat them with them in most cases with the Tahiti XT2, but Nvidia just released the GK110s that thrashed them. Months later, AMD could only just compete with the 290/290X series with a GPU that was essentially 11 months old (first seen in May 2012 as Telsa K20, released November that same year) . The cycle has now repeated again; Nvidia released mid-tier Maxwell that perform better than AMDs latest top-tier GPUs. So if anything, you can thank Nvidia by not releasing their top-tier GPUs and absolutely destroying AMDs offerings (there could be some sort of 'Gentleman's Agreement' going on here... we may never know). Fabrication ramp-up delays may have prevented them from doing it with the Keplers (or more likely after seeing the initial Tahiti performance, saw it wasn't cost effective scale up production so early), but a matured 28nm node wouldn't stop them now. The fact is AMD is behind with their architecture, but who can blame them? They obviously don't have the budget Nvidia has.


----------



## THE_EGG (Oct 9, 2014)

ManofGod said:


> You can thank AMD for these competitive prices because otherwise, your precious 970 would be closer to $550. I would think also the 980 would have been $699. Oh well, guess NVidia is the do no wrong good guy now.


 GTX 970s already are $500-$570 here in Australia, GTX 980 being $750-$900. Australia is renowned for having overpriced products though. I'm just hoping that the AMD price cuts will filter into Australia because when AMD ordered prices to be decreased (after the mining boom, I think the order was placed back in May?), Australian prices did not decrease. In fact most 280 and 290 series cards have remained at the same price level since around March/April this year. The discounts that were given to the GTX 760s and the 770, 780 and 780 Ti being discontinued have not changed prices in any of my local stores. Only one store in Australia I know of has actually decreased the price of _a _780 Ti. I'm just super hopeful that these cuts will filter down or flow into Australian retail outlets because the prices are just too god damn high, even buying from Newegg and paying for international express shipping is WAY cheaper than buying locally which is also hurting Australian businesses and thus the economy.


----------



## Lopez0101 (Oct 9, 2014)

Well, if your retail businesses are anything like your ISPs they need to stop being so damn greedy.


----------



## Big_Vulture (Oct 9, 2014)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> When something that is on par to *outperform a R9 290X*, *consume less than an R9 280X* and cost 330$ - *you know you are screwed*.
> 
> *Don't* try to sugarcoat it - even if the R9 290X would magically cost 300$, most *smart* users will add the 30$ needed to get a *dramatically more efficient product*.



That is well sad, in my opinion 290X should go around $250 to just consider instead the much more efficient 970 Geforce.


----------



## techy1 (Oct 9, 2014)

Big_Vulture said:


> That is well sad, in my opinion 290X should go around $250 to just consider instead the much more efficient 970 Geforce.



I do not think that efficiency is something that can run games smooth... esspecially on 4k... wee need more horsepower, cuz monitors are there and games are waiting... but I am still doomed to play on 1080p - on witch I can run everythin maxed out with my HD 5870!!! why would I care to upgrade GPU on 1080p??  For the Efficiency ???? few tenths of watts saving... if I care of my planet ( more watts of electricity = more CO2) - I  leave my car at home for just one day - and save more on CO2 than years of in-efficient old-ass GPU gaming. I hope AMD will ignore this hippie trend of false efficiency and give us raw power with 390x, but then again - AMD wands cash and will suply what market demands and if the "Efficiency" is in - then that is what sells


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 9, 2014)

techy1 said:


> wee need more horsepower



Your whole post sounds like a desperate AMD fanboy...

I'm sure that when nvidia launches the 300 W Maxwell card that trashes R9 290X, you'll sing another song.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Oct 9, 2014)

gregyong said:


> The R9 390s are not showing up until Q1 2015 according to an AMD Rep that I know.
> Nothing to back me up on this statement, cause revealing it would mean her loosing her job, but pretty sure AMD is not launching this year.


And then, 1 week later, nVidia will counteract with the GTX 980 Ti ending the competition once again.


----------



## techy1 (Oct 9, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Your whole post sounds like a desperate AMD fanboy...
> 
> I'm sure that when nvidia launches the 300 W Maxwell card that trashes R9 290X, you'll sing another song.



not true (me being amd fanboy)... but I am fanboy of 4K... sadly, like any kind of  fanboys - I can just circlejerk around my favorite subject and never attain it... or do you think that the newest cards can run anything on 4K smoothly and there is no "need more horsepower"????  I hope NVidia will put out that 300w Maxwell - that will be my next card (finally - a single GPU that can run anything on 4K @60), tough I fear AMD will have nothing to compete with that and so NVidia  will ask for it 1k$+ 
And 100% I am fanboy of competition -  look how nVidia made happy many of AMD fanboys - 290x costs now 330$ would not be there a competition - it still would hold 550$ starting price tag


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 9, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Your whole post sounds like a desperate AMD fanboy...
> 
> I'm sure that when nvidia launches the 300 W Maxwell card that trashes R9 290X, you'll sing another song.



Speaking of being a fanboy...


----------



## N3M3515 (Oct 9, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Yes, these price drops are not enough. If AMD wants to sell their not so much appreciated by the majority products, they need to make even more appealing offers and deals.
> 
> 970 is still a best buy at $330.
> 
> R9 290X needs to be $250-290 in order to sell, with R9 290 ~ the 200 dollar mark and 280X/280 ~ 170/140.



330?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx 970&name=Desktop Graphics Cards&Order=PRICE&Pagesize=20&isdeptsrh=1

Not even one...........the only 970 found in newegg costs 380


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 9, 2014)

N3M3515 said:


> 330?
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx 970&name=Desktop Graphics Cards&Order=PRICE&Pagesize=20&isdeptsrh=1
> 
> Not even one...........the only 970 found in newegg costs 380


Well that's about as disingenuous as it gets, considering the vast number of 970's retail below that price (but are out of stock), and is likely the SOLE reason the $380 remains in stock....and BTW, it is just a matter of signing up for an email alert at EVGA or any number of etail outlets to obtain a card at MSRP (or below) provided you're quick enough while the cards demand outstrips supply.
You add little or nothing to a discussion by presenting such a skewed analysis.


----------



## N3M3515 (Oct 10, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> Well that's about as disingenuous as it gets, considering the vast number of 970's retail below that price (but are out of stock), and is likely the SOLE reason the $380 remains in stock....and BTW, it is just a matter of signing up for an email alert at EVGA or any number of etail outlets to obtain a card at MSRP (or below) provided you're quick enough while the cards demand outstrips supply.
> You add little or nothing to a discussion by presenting such a skewed analysis.



It's not skewed, and it's not an analisys, it's just a fact, one can not blah blah blah about a card being so cheap when you can't even get one.
When they are in stock in all stores, then you can say they are cheap AND available.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 10, 2014)

N3M3515 said:


> It's not skewed, and it's not an analisys, it's just a fact, one can not blah blah blah about a card being so cheap when you can't even get one.
> When they are in stock in all stores, then you can say they are cheap AND available.


Well, it took me all of 10 seconds to find the EVGA card in stock at TigerDirect. I'll screencap and timestamp it since you'll no doubt wait until it goes out of stock to reply.


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 10, 2014)

N3M3515 said:


> 330?
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx 970&name=Desktop Graphics Cards&Order=PRICE&Pagesize=20&isdeptsrh=1
> 
> Not even one...........the only 970 found in newegg costs 380



As of right now you can't even buy one at newegg as they're all out of stock so who gives a shit what price they are you can't get anyways


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 10, 2014)

Athlonite said:


> As of right now you can't even buy one at newegg as they're all out of stock so who gives a shit what price they are you can't get anyways


Don't have that problem locally. Plenty of GTX 970's available (bear in mind that the prices are NZD and includes a 15% goods and services tax). R9 290X prices included as a price point comparison.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 11, 2014)

This stupid discussion is getting ridiculous. And not only this but they also delete opinions. 



Athlonite said:


> As of right now you can't even buy one at newegg as they're all out of stock so who gives a shit what price they are you can't get anyways



I honestly feel about all those who give a damn shit about a technologically inferior product which is at the same time even more expensive.

You can wait a little bit and get the better deal.

It is indeed time for AMD to go somewhere and do something meaningful because they haven't done for years.


----------



## Lopez0101 (Oct 11, 2014)

Not sure how long "years" is, but they have indeed done something meaningful and not all that long ago. Like, for instance, keeping pricing somewhat in check.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 11, 2014)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> When something that is on par to *outperform a R9 290X*, *consume less than an R9 280X* and cost 330$ - *you know you are screwed*.
> 
> *Don't* try to sugarcoat it - even if the R9 290X would magically cost 300$, most *smart* users will add the 30$ needed to get a *dramatically more efficient product*.
> 
> ...



^^^THIS^^^

AMD has to pull a Rabbit out of their hat soon, or drop prices down into Jack-Sh*t territory.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 11, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> do something meaningful because they haven't done for years.



Like you other than being a cavedweller


----------



## 64K (Oct 11, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> This stupid discussion is getting ridiculous. And not only this but they also delete opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Only a short while ago the R9 290 was the best bang for the buck card. Now it's the GTX 970. I'm not sure why you dislike AMD so much that you spam every thread that you can with anti-AMD posts but imo it's good that there is competition between Nvidia and AMD.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 11, 2014)

64K said:


> Only a short while ago the R9 290 was the best bang for the buck card. Now it's the GTX 970. I'm not sure why you dislike AMD so much that you spam every thread that you can with anti-AMD posts but imo it's good that there is competition between Nvidia and AMD.


True. Whether by design or circumstances, Nvidia and AMD seem to have a staggered release cycle. With both taking turns at having a clear run at the consumer space they both get a bite of the cherry rather than a head-to-head confrontation. A conspiracy theorist might think that this isn't by accident.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 11, 2014)

64K said:


> Only a short while ago the R9 290 was the best bang for the buck card.



Nope, this I am understanding now from you. I have never considered the 290 anything special neither performance wise nor market position wise.

The GTX 970 is the real deal which shakes the market, before it it had been an annoying stagnation.

Why this relentless criticism to AMD? Why not?


----------



## Lopez0101 (Oct 11, 2014)

So, the 290/290X coming out to market, with near parity with the 780/780Ti for significantly less money didn't shake up the market and further cement Nvidia's position of having overpriced products? You can't honestly say that the low pricing of the 970 and 980, which beat Nvidia's previous generation of products, has nothing to do with AMD's earlier price-to-performance ratio.


----------



## Steevo (Oct 11, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> True. Whether by design or circumstances, Nvidia and AMD seem to have a staggered release cycle. With both taking turns at having a clear run at the consumer space they both get a bite of the cherry rather than a head-to-head confrontation. A conspiracy theorist might think that this isn't by accident.


It wasn't long ago that ATI and Nvidia were in hot water for conspiring to keep prices high, and once they were investigated the prices dropped almost as if by magic.

http://www.techpowerup.com/65970/at...the-us-class-action-slapped-against-them.html


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 11, 2014)

Both of these companies have been on top of the dog-pile many times. So many times before, that it's old news when it happens again.
I'm looking for the best bang for the buck (what I can afford) that is available when I'm ready to buy new GPUs. 
The last time that was a EVGA GTX-760 4GB ACX card. 
The time before that, it was a pair of R9-280X OC cards that are being used in crossfire.

My Radeon products (the 280X cards and an old XFX-6870 Black) are running fine for me. The gaming is pretty sweet too.
Likewise, the GTX 760 is a good gamer.

I just sold a pair of GTX-680 cards to make way for a pair of GTX-970s as soon as a matched pair of them is available to buy.

To be honest, if either company wants total loyalty, they're gonna have to buy a Dog. I'm in it for myself.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 11, 2014)

Lopez0101 said:


> So, the 290/290X coming out to market, with near parity with the 780/780Ti for significantly less money didn't shake up the market and further cement Nvidia's position of having overpriced products? You can't honestly say that the low pricing of the 970 and 980, which beat Nvidia's previous generation of products, has nothing to do with AMD's earlier price-to-performance ratio.



All reviews i seen when 290(x) came out after about 5 minutes would drop 20% of its performance cause it would hit its max temp and throttle. Wouldn't call that parity really.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 11, 2014)

arbiter said:


> All reviews i seen when 290(x) came out after about 5 minutes would drop 20% of its performance cause it would hit its max temp and throttle. Wouldn't call that parity really.



Agreed, they were space heaters. But AMD partner built GPUs with better cooling built in were not. They cool better, and don't throttle back unless you have 'crappy-bo-bappy' case airflow.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 11, 2014)

RealNeil said:


> Agreed, they were space heaters. But AMD partner built GPUs with better cooling built in were not. They cool better, and don't throttle back unless you have 'crappy-bo-bappy' case airflow.


Which kinds of begs the question why AMD don't allow custom vendor designs on launch day. The past few AMD card releases have featured mostly top notch performance only marred by noise and temps (and associated throttling) - it also only allows a single SKU per model to be reviewed. With vendor boards available on launch day from Nvidia you see a reviews of a whole slew of variations of the same card for days and weeks after the cards hits the channel - i.e. a much more sustained marketing effort at the beginning of the products lifecycle, and a maximization of the GPUs potential ( factory OC, cooling, aesthetics). Seems like a much better utilization of opportunity IMO


----------



## 64K (Oct 11, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> Which kinds of begs the question why AMD don't allow custom vendor designs on launch day. The past few AMD card releases have featured mostly top notch performance only marred by noise and temps (and associated throttling) - it also only allows a single SKU per model to be reviewed. With vendor boards available on launch day from Nvidia you see a reviews of a whole slew of variations of the same card for days and weeks after the cards hits the channel - i.e. a much more sustained marketing effort at the beginning of the products lifecycle, and a maximization of the GPUs potential ( factory OC, cooling, aesthetics). Seems like a much better utilization of opportunity IMO



Nvidia doesn't allow their partners to make custom coolers either on some of their cards. GTX Titan/ Titan Black/ Titan Z.


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 11, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> Which kinds of begs the question why AMD don't allow custom vendor designs on launch day. The past few AMD card releases have featured mostly top notch performance only marred by noise and temps (and associated throttling) - it also only allows a single SKU per model to be reviewed. With vendor boards available on launch day from Nvidia you see a reviews of a whole slew of variations of the same card for days and weeks after the cards hits the channel - i.e. a much more sustained marketing effort at the beginning of the products lifecycle, and a maximization of the GPUs potential ( factory OC, cooling, aesthetics). Seems like a much better utilization of opportunity IMO




I to believe that AMD just need to give vendors a GPU and it's requirements and just say have at it guys buggar this reference design builds save that production money for increased RnD


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 11, 2014)

The 280 & 290 releases were skewed by the Bitcoin mining phenomenon's price bloat. 
They initially released them at a halfway decent price, but once they were determined to mine so well, the incredible demand for them shot their prices into the stratosphere.
AMD, nor their partners were complaining about this.

The fact that they kept the initial release of their product to themselves was probably based on financial considerations. They made a lot of money.


----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 11, 2014)

64K said:


> Nvidia doesn't allow their partners to make custom coolers either on some of their cards. GTX Titan/ Titan Black/ Titan Z.


I think you'll find that they are the exception that proves the rule. I'd argue that the need for custom designs on launch day is more desirable from high volume SKUs rather than the more esoteric (and higher priced) models*. AMD were quite happy to allow vendors to push out custom R9 285's on launch day, so why not 290's and 290X's ?
If you think that the stock blower/shroud was the best design to showcase Hawaii's abilities then all well and good. Personally I don't.

* The same metric holds up across both vendors. Neither FirePro, Quadro, or Tesla feature any custom designs.


RealNeil said:


> The fact that they kept the initial release of their product to themselves was probably based on financial considerations. They made a lot of money.


I've never actually seen an analysis of whether AMD and PC Partner (AMD's OEM card manufacturer) have any special relationship of profit sharing, although I wouldn't rule it out. PC Partner and the other big AMD-only OEM/ODM, TUL Corp seem to have some unwritten hand-in-glove arrangements.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 11, 2014)

RealNeil said:


> Agreed, they were space heaters. But AMD partner built GPUs with better cooling built in were not. They cool better, and don't throttle back unless you have 'crappy-bo-bappy' case airflow.



Yea but took what 3-4 months before those cards reared up on the market.


----------



## RealNeil (Oct 11, 2014)

arbiter said:


> Yea but took what 3-4 months before those cards reared up on the market.



And all the while AMD was making a lot of money. Just like they wanted to,...........


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 12, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Nope, this I am understanding now from you. I have never considered the 290 anything special neither performance wise nor market position wise.
> 
> The GTX 970 is the real deal which shakes the market, before it it had been an annoying stagnation.
> 
> Why this relentless criticism to AMD? Why not?



Omg whats this, nv isnt as great as everyone claims

http://forums.evga.com/m/tm.aspx?m=2222444&p=1



arbiter said:


> All reviews i seen when 290(x) came out after about 5 minutes would drop 20% of its performance cause it would hit its max temp and throttle. Wouldn't call that parity really.



Speaking of throttling

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/solved-issues-with-gtx-970-by-flashing-bios.206196/unread


----------



## Naito (Oct 12, 2014)

Speaking of throttling

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/solved-issues-with-gtx-970-by-flashing-bios.206196/unread[/QUOTE]

OP said it could have possibly been due to his own error of not connecting 24pin power cable to the motherboard. It seems unlikely that this could cause a BIOS failure, but a flash did fix it.



HumanSmoke said:


> Whether by design or circumstances, Nvidia and AMD seem to have a staggered release cycle. With both taking turns at having a clear run at the consumer space they both get a bite of the cherry rather than a head-to-head confrontation. A conspiracy theorist might think that this isn't by accident.



This.

The following section may be a bit disjointed as I wrote this late at night trying to process the staggered launch of the chips, the reviews, the performance, and my own observations at the time. Please bear with me if you can.

AMDs (then ATI) last decent lead over Nvidia, was during 2006, with an architecture born from a time before AMDs acquisition of ATI. The (R400) X8** series and the later R5*0 X19** series, saw many successes against Nvidia (Geforce 6000 and 7000 series, respectively) and ultimately won the fixed-pipeline/fixed-shader battle. To end ATIs reign of 2006, Nvidia released the (G80) 8800 GTX. The X1950XTX still managed to trade punches with the hot and noisy G80, but ultimately lost out in performance, particularly when optimizations for the newer GPGPU architecture came about. 


Come May 2007, ATI releases the abysmal (R600) HD 2900 XT; this was hot, noisy and performed worse, in most cases, than the prior R5*0 architecture. Nvidia fixes the G80s issues and releases the (G92) 8800GT that same year in October with ATI quickly releasing their (RV670) HD 3870 to fix the horror which was the R600. The HD3870 was not powerful enough to topple Nvidia's G80s or the later G92s, so ATI, perhaps with a hint of desperation, releases dual-GPU cards to try and take performance crown. To their credit, the HD 3870 at least corrected most the issues with the HD 2900XT. To add further insult to ATIs failings, simply refreshed the G92 for the Geforce 9000 series, possibly enjoying decent profit.


Mid 2008 comes around and Nvidia releases their new (GT200) GTX 280 just before ATI releases a decent answer to the G92/G80, the (RV770) HD4870. Unfortunately, while the HD4870 finally took the lead from the G92s, it could not match the GT200s so, again, ATI relied on dual-GPU cards to hassle Nvidia latest offerings. This can't be cheap for them to do.


2009 sees some refreshing from both sides with the RV790 and GT200b appearing. By the end of 2009, ATI releases their new TerraScale2-based (Cypress XT) HD 5870.


We had to wait till the beginning of 2010 to see Nvidia's next architecture: the Fermi-based (GF100) GTX 480. While the Fermi took the outright performance title, it came at a cost; the GPU was hot and noisy and to make matter worse, not that much faster than ATIs latest offerings (or less so, if you consider the dual-GPU cards). This was the first time in a long while ATI/AMD had released something that was arguably better than what Nvidia could offer. To try and recover from their embarrassment, Nvidia releases the (GF110) GTX 580 at the tail end of 2010, possibly with the added pressure from AMDs latest Barts XT chips. Luckily for Nvidias sake, December saw AMDs (Cayman XT) HD6970s flop (to a degree); the VLIW4 architecture and performance would simply not scale as expected.


2012 is the year something major occurs; it's the first time, even with a staggered launch, that the companies don't go head to head with the best the architecture can offer. January sees AMD release the (Tahiti XT) HD7970, but in response, Nvidia only releases their mid-tier Kepler GK104 as the GTX 680. As I have stated before, the GK110 was revealed the same month of the GK104 release and was released November the same year.
So back to the original argument; while there was always a staggered launch, it wasn't until the last few generations did something like the Kepler v Tahiti occur. A mid-tier GPU going against a top-tier GPU with the same or better performance (until Tahiti XT2 atleast). This meant Nvidia, rather than fully destroying AMDs offerings with the release of the GK110, enjoyed large profits on a marked up mid-tier GPU whilst keeping an illusion of competition. History has now repeated itself with the release of the Maxwells. Is this Nvidia being kind to AMD? Or are they just looking to fool the consumer and enjoy larger profits with a marked-up chip? Price and performance has always conveniently slotted between the two brands, even when such a difference in architecture performance occurs.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 12, 2014)

The chip they launched isnt a major perf increase from the 780ti


----------



## bubbleawsome (Oct 12, 2014)

One positive is that 7970s are now almost into the sub $100 used market. Tri 7970s (maybe dual) will push any game you want even on eyefinity surround. I doubt surround gaming has ever been so cheap.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 12, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> Omg whats this, nv isnt as great as everyone claims
> http://forums.evga.com/m/tm.aspx?m=2222444&p=1
> Speaking of throttling
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/solved-issues-with-gtx-970-by-flashing-bios.206196/unread





Naito said:


> Speaking of throttling
> OP said it could have possibly been due to his own error of not connecting 24pin power cable to the motherboard. It seems unlikely that this could cause a BIOS failure, but a flash did fix it.



That happens on how many 970 cards, handful? How many of 290(x) ref cards throttled unless you ran the at vacum cleaner noise level? that would be All of them. AMD clearly screwed up with using that reference cooler and most reviewers slammed them for it and rightfully so.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 12, 2014)

480/580 aswell


----------



## bpgt64 (Oct 12, 2014)




----------



## HumanSmoke (Oct 12, 2014)

bpgt64 said:


>


Way less titanic than that...








eidairaman1 said:


> The chip they launched isnt a major perf increase from the 780ti


It's actually remarkable that a 398mm² gets anywhere close to a 551mm² GK110 using the same process node and same basic architecture. If you hadn't noticed GM 204 is a GK 104 replacement, not GK 110 since the 780 Ti's MSRP was $100 above that of the 980. The new Tonga Pro R9 285 fares even worse against Tahiti based 280 by comparison - and I'd note that I don't see anyone saying a second tier Tonga GPU is supposed to be an upgrade over the older Hawaii-based cards.


----------



## Naito (Oct 13, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> The chip they launched isnt a major perf increase from the 780ti



No, but as HumanSmoke just mentioned, it's impressive that they are getting similar performance from a smaller die on the same, matured node. You can't forget that GM204 is a mid-tier chip that is as fast as the top-tier GK110.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 13, 2014)

Naito said:


> No, but as HumanSmoke just mentioned, it's impressive that they are getting similar performance from a smaller die on the same, matured node. You can't forget that GM204 is a mid-tier chip that is as fast as the top-tier GK110.


 

Normally they dont stay on a node and i think both should...


----------



## bpgt64 (Oct 13, 2014)

You can tell the video compression there doing is enabling 4k shadowplay.  It's soon much smoother recording now...


----------



## xvi (Oct 14, 2014)




----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 14, 2014)

Naito said:


> The following section may be a bit disjointed as I wrote this late at night trying to process the staggered launch of the chips, the reviews, the performance, and my own observations at the time. Please bear with me if you can.
> 
> AMDs (then ATI) last decent lead over Nvidia, was during 2006, with an architecture born from a time before AMDs acquisition of ATI. The (R400) X8** series and the later R5*0 X19** series, saw many successes against Nvidia (Geforce 6000 and 7000 series, respectively) and ultimately won the fixed-pipeline/fixed-shader battle. To end ATIs reign of 2006, Nvidia released the (G80) 8800 GTX. The X1950XTX still managed to trade punches with the hot and noisy G80, but ultimately lost out in performance, particularly when optimizations for the newer GPGPU architecture came about.
> 
> ...



Very good post.


----------



## Nabarun (Oct 14, 2014)

WTF is going on ???


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 15, 2014)

arbiter said:


> That happens on how many 970 cards, handful? How many of 290(x) ref cards throttled unless you ran the at vacum cleaner noise level? that would be All of them. AMD clearly screwed up with using that reference cooler and most reviewers slammed them for it and rightfully so.



Just like this: 

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/205648/unread


----------



## Sony Xperia S (Oct 15, 2014)

Nabarun said:


> WTF is going on ???



Sheep happens. 

You can buy the HIS iPower Radeon R9 290X now for 340 $ after 20 $ rebate card.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161457


----------



## Wolf32 (Oct 30, 2014)

Whats crazy is two AMD R9 290x in crossfire are still faster and smoother in the new games like Watch Dog and other new titles then the GTX 900's in SLI. So if you are running the high resolutions the AMD cards are still better. In single match ups the GTX cards are faster but when running two together the AMD's crossfire comes out ahead. The 900 GTX's win the power usage battle but when using more then one the 900 GTX's lose in dual mode and higher resolution because SLI needs to be upgraded. Check out the *Hardocp* review on 980 GTX in SLI vs the 290X in crossfire. go to their site look for yourself. Sure the AMD's use more power but who cares if they deliver better performance in the higher resolutions like 4k. I more interested in the performance and SLI appears to be broken in higher resolution which I play in. I got the 980 GTX because it was suppose to be better and it is in single card setup but in dual its not.


----------



## Nabarun (Oct 30, 2014)

Wolf32 said:


> Whats crazy is two AMD R9 290x in crossfire are still faster and smoother in the new games like Watch Dog and other new titles then the GTX 900's in SLI. So if you are running the high resolutions the AMD cards are still better. In single match ups the GTX cards are faster but when running two together the AMD's crossfire comes out ahead. The 900 GTX's win the power usage battle but when using more then one the 900 GTX's lose in dual mode and higher resolution because SLI needs to be upgraded. Check out the *Hardocp* review on 980 GTX in SLI vs the 290X in crossfire. go to their site look for yourself. Sure the AMD's use more power but who cares if they deliver better performance in the higher resolutions like 4k. I more interested in the performance and SLI appears to be broken in higher resolution which I play in. I got the 980 GTX because it was suppose to be better and it is in single card setup but in dual its not.}


WTF man! I hope my friends aren't gonna waste much words on this. AMD suscks. I wish they didn't. But they do.


----------



## arbiter (Oct 30, 2014)

Wolf32 said:


> Whats crazy is two AMD R9 290x in crossfire are still faster and smoother in the new games like Watch Dog and other new titles then the GTX 900's in SLI. So if you are running the high resolutions the AMD cards are still better. In single match ups the GTX cards are faster but when running two together the AMD's crossfire comes out ahead. The 900 GTX's win the power usage battle but when using more then one the 900 GTX's lose in dual mode and higher resolution because SLI needs to be upgraded. Check out the *Hardocp* review on 980 GTX in SLI vs the 290X in crossfire. go to their site look for yourself. Sure the AMD's use more power but who cares if they deliver better performance in the higher resolutions like 4k. I more interested in the performance and SLI appears to be broken in higher resolution which I play in. I got the 980 GTX because it was suppose to be better and it is in single card setup but in dual its not.



Yea AMD cards still win, but they have 2x the memory path and on top of that 2x the power consumption as well.  But if you are using a 1440p monitor, even TPU reviewed gtx970's in SLI and they were beating a matching or beating 295x2. Being new gpu arch probably could fix a lot of things with driver updates.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_970_SLI/





Don't care how you cut that, 300 watt's is a lot.


----------



## 64K (Oct 30, 2014)

arbiter said:


> Yea AMD cards still win, but they have 2x the memory path and on top of that 2x the power consumption as well.  But if you are using a 1440p monitor, even TPU reviewed gtx970's in SLI and they were beating a matching or beating 295x2. Being new gpu arch probably could fix a lot of things with driver updates.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_970_SLI/
> 
> ...



It seems like a lot and I guess it depends on where you live and how expensive electricity is but here in the USA the average is 12 cents per kWh. If you game for 20 hours a week that extra 300 watts would cost $3.12 per month. That's not a lot really.


----------



## Wolf32 (Oct 31, 2014)

When it comes to gaming its about the FPS not how much power it uses. The AMD at 4k still holds the upper hand and that's what I'm after. Nvidia needs to fix SLI it does not work as well as Crossfire and if you read the article you would see it will not be fixed until NVidia changes SLI like AMD did Crossfire in the hardware. NVidia has a great card but they still have it handicapped on the memory side with the small bus.  They either do not have enough memory or they make the bus too small, Nvidia needs to correct this then they would have a great card. Look I have a 980 GTX card but after seeing this test it looks like I went the wrong way since I will be playing at 4k. I would have been better off with AMD's crossfire performance wise. I'm not concerned about how many watts they use but how many FPS they do and how constant those frames are produced and AMD has the better cards in that regard. Two R9 290X's will cost hundreds less then two 980 GTX's and that savings will cover any extra cost in electricity. And I would also have better performance to boot at the higher resolutions then what NVidia provides. read this http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...x_980_sli_4k_video_card_review/5#.VFMy2ul0y88


----------



## arbiter (Oct 31, 2014)

Wolf32 said:


> Nvidia needs to fix SLI it does not work as well as Crossfire and if you read the article you would see it will not be fixed until NVidia changes SLI like AMD did Crossfire in the hardware.



What do they need to fix in hardware?


----------



## Wolf32 (Oct 31, 2014)

SLI hardware part just read the article it will tell you about it. 

*Frame Rate Consistency and Scaling*
We experienced something with SLI we aren't use to at 4K gaming. We experienced some inconsistent frames, some low efficiency and poor SLI scaling. We were used to seeing this on AMD GPUs until AMD fixed their issues. AMD implemented a technology called Frame Pacing, and ultimately went the hardware route with XDMA on the AMD Radeon R9 290/X.
At the end of the day, what we find is that GeForce GTX 980 SLI performance is left wanting at 4K, not because Maxwell isn't fast, but because the current implementation of SLI is more inconsistent and less efficient compared to AMD's XDMA technology on the AMD Radeon R9 290X. This is a case of aging SLI actually hindering very capable GPUs. SLI needs an upgrade, it needs to evolve.
We do not think the true potential of the GeForce GTX 980 GPUs are being exploited with current 4K SLI gaming. It is being held back from its full potential. If GTX 980 could be fully and efficiently tapped, two GTX 980 GPUs have the potential to offer a better gameplay experience.
AMD hit NVIDIA hard with this new XDMA technology. Everyone was expecting NVIDIA would strike back with Maxwell by offering its own evolved SLI technology. However, it did not for this generation. That may end up biting NVIDIA in the butt as far as 4K gaming goes in the future.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...x_980_sli_4k_video_card_review/9#.VFNXfOl0y88


----------



## Tonduluboy (Nov 3, 2014)

64K said:


> It seems like a lot and I guess it depends on where you live and how expensive electricity is but here in the USA the average is 12 cents per kWh. If you game for 20 hours a week that extra 300 watts would cost $3.12 per month. That's not a lot really.



In my country the average is 28 cents per kWh... I've 2 kids. They are gaming around 4 hours a day 2 hours each, the extra watts is costing me $10 a month... or $120 a year... let say the lifespan of the card is 3 years before i upgrade into a new one... the 3 yrs cost of extra electricity is $360 ( i can buy new one GTX 970 )


----------



## eidairaman1 (Nov 3, 2014)

Tonduluboy said:


> In my country the average is 28 cents per kWh... I've 2 kids. They are gaming around 4 hours a day 2 hours each, the extra watts is costing me $10 a month... or $120 a year... let say the lifespan of the card is 3 years before i upgrade into a new one... the 3 yrs cost of extra electricity is $360 ( i can buy new one GTX 970 )



What country? What standard of currency


----------



## arbiter (Nov 4, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> What country? What standard of currency



According to his location thing on a ID tag, Malaysia.

There are places in the US that pay more then that for kwh. Avg is 13 cents as of Augest. Not counting Alaska and Hawaii which are ones that are highest. Some areas are 17-20cents.

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_6_a


----------



## Tonduluboy (Nov 4, 2014)

In my country where average income is USD$1000-1500 monthly, a lot of people especially living in the city paying $100 per month for electricty alone. That 10% of monthly income.  
So any GPU using less power is welcome.
The 290x Shappire Trix OC recently on sale for $325 in my location, way cheaper compare to its introduction price at $615. The gaming performance of this card is on par with gigabyte G1 gtx 970 ( 970 slightly expensive than 290x) but 970 using wayyyy less power consumption. So for me, i will choose any card with less power consumption coz in the long run i will save a lot $$$ on electricity bill.


----------

