# AMD to Slash Radeon RX 5700 "Navi" Series Prices Ahead of Launch: $399 & $349



## btarunr (Jul 5, 2019)

NVIDIA attempted to torpedo the Radeon RX 5700 "Navi" series graphics card launch with the introduction of its $499 GeForce RTX 2070 Super and $399 RTX 2060 Super. AMD claimed that its upcoming Radeon RX 5700 XT outperformed the original RTX 2070, while its smaller sibling, the RX 5700 outperforms the original RTX 2060. In its E3-2019 reveal, AMD disclosed launch prices of the RX 5700 XT and the RX 5700 to be USD $449 and $379, respectively. The RTX Super launch jeopardizes this, and so, according to VideoCardz, AMD is revising its launch prices. 

The Radeon RX 5700 XT now reportedly launches at just $399, while the Radeon RX 5700 is priced at $349. The RX 5700 XT is claimed to beat the original RTX 2070, while the $399 RTX 2060 Super is slower than the RTX 2070. On the other hand, the RX 5700, which was claimed to beat the $349 original RTX 2060, is now price-matched with it, unless NVIDIA comes up with price-cuts. Older reports suggested that with the advent of the RTX Super series, NVIDIA would retire the RTX 2060 and RTX 2070, after the market digests inventories left in the channel. AMD's latest move is sure to disturb that digestion.

*Update Jul 6th*: This has been confirmed officially by AMD here.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?

Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 5, 2019)

Wow I just alluded to this in another post


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

A price drop BEFORE launch? Looks like the new super cards have worked their magic and done consumers a favour.


----------



## Raendor (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.



5700 is faster than original 2060, but not super. it’s even stated in the article. And where did the power consumption claim come from?



Fluffmeister said:


> A price drop BEFORE launch? Looks like the new super cards have worked their magic and done consumers a favour.



Indeed. Amd fans should thank NVIDIA for better priced navi, although it’s still carrying over the lackluster gcn legacy.


----------



## atavax (Jul 5, 2019)

The main thing that bugs me with the Navi cards is the single fan blower. They're loud and don't cool effectively. It makes it really hard to justify buying them.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

Raendor said:


> 5700 is faster than original 2060, but not super.


In the leak it is faster then super (as expected).







What was not expected, is that it consumes less power.







Raendor said:


> it’s even stated in the article.


Which article?



Raendor said:


> lackluster gcn legacy.


Oh, carry on, never mind.


----------



## Valantar (Jul 5, 2019)

While waiting for reviews is always the sensible thing to do, this sure looks like a promising move. The Navi 10 die isn't huge, and GDDR6 isn't all that expensive, so this should still be a feasible price with decent margins for AMD (certainly better than Nvidia's margins with their gargantuan Turing silicon, even if it's made on a cheaper node), all the while returning some normalcy to the price-performance development in the GPU space (which, to be fair, Nvidia already gave a push in the right direction with the Super cards). Not the biggest cuts by any means, but a welcome one.

I'm still on the fence whether an XT will replace my ageing Fury X or if I'll hold off for a potential 5800-series - I suppse we'll see.


----------



## atavax (Jul 5, 2019)

Raendor said:


> Indeed. Amd fanboys should thank NVIDIA for better priced navi, although it’s still carrying over the lackluster gcn legacy.



And NVIDIA fans should thank AMD for the SUPER series... Really, it seems like the first time in awhile NVIDIA has done something because of AMD's cards. Probably because this gen has been selling so poorly for NVIDIA. Hopefully with the success of Ryzen, AMD will have the funds to apply more pressure to NVIDIA in the not too distant future.


----------



## Valantar (Jul 5, 2019)

atavax said:


> The main thing that bugs me with the Navi cards is the single fan blower. They're loud and don't cool effectively. It makes it really hard to justify buying them.


There shouldn't be a very long wait for partner cards with new coolers - these aren't tricky HBM-equipped cards, so adapting existing dual or triple fan cooler designs should be quite trivial.


----------



## SIGSEGV (Jul 5, 2019)

@bugs :   

rtx milking family.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

atavax said:


> Really, it seems like the first time in awhile NVIDIA has done something because of AMD's cards.


1070 TI card came out because of Vega-s.


----------



## Markosz (Jul 5, 2019)

Lol, a few days and RTX 2060S will be back at $350.


----------



## Dammeron (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.


Dear AMD, please DROP prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT, so that whole market can revert to the times before GPU cryptomining.

IF we can get a card, that is a only a bit below RTX 2070 Super, but priced 20% lower, that is a really good deal.


----------



## I No (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.




- 5700 is not faster than 2060 Super
- If they would've kept the current pricing they would be DOA
- There is no reason for Vega owners to upgrade to Navi since they're basically the same performance wise, making Navi already a tough sell.
- Congrats to AMD for these cards tho, they further cannibalized into that abomination that is RVII
- the 5% less power is hardly an advantage seeing that it's 7nm vs nvidia's inferior node, it's still by all means a power-hog, It's still GCN no matter how much lipstick they put on that pig.
- I really hope they let AIB's put custom cooling solutions on NAVI, their reference cards while looking ok-ish are hot and loud


But alas at least there are options for mid-range.... oh wait that's how it was for the past 3 years now... AMD needs to start competing for the high-end asap, they are funneling potential customers to nvidia with each new gen even if they keep saying that the money is in the mid-range that didn't work out so well for RTG since the RX 480 was out, now that Freesync works with nvidia's line-up it's actually even harder for AMD to make a strong selling point. At the end of the day it's RTG's work at it's finest, release a card, the competition is trashing them, price cut.


----------



## nguyen (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> In the leak it is faster then super (as expected).
> 
> What was not expected, is that it consumes less power.
> 
> ...



Cherry picking much ?



I would like to see 5700 perform close to RTX 2070 or 5700XT perform close to Radeon VII, at the end of the days everyone is looking at price to performance first, bundle can come later.


----------



## Manoa (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> It's still GCN no matter how much lipstick they put on that pig.



hold on, I thought that AMD stated is not GCN ?!
what's going on ?



Valantar said:


> I'm still on the fence whether an XT will replace my ageing Fury X or if I'll hold off for a potential 5800-series - I suppse we'll see.



don't do it man all the cards are suckx, you whant the 750mm navi the arcturus it the future


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 5, 2019)

Manoa said:


> hold on, I thought that AMD stated is not GCN ?!
> what's going on ?



Random dude on a forum said no, what do you mean ? That trumps anything stated by a company, that's how this works.


----------



## jonup (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> In the leak it is faster then super (as expected).
> 
> View attachment 126200
> 
> ...



Whatever scumbag place that publishes NDA product reviews, you took this results from, is as trustworthy as their results. 2070 is much, much closer to the performance of 2060super than 2070 super. Every F-ing review, including the ones on TPU, confirms that. Here are actual trustworthy scores from Fire Strike Ultra to get a more accurate idea of the Nvidia performance.








						GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER and 2070 SUPER review
					

The teaser was no joke, NVIDIA today launches the first two cards in their new Super series. We review the GeForce RTX 2060 and 2070 SUPER and check out if they are actually that, super that is.... DX11: 3DMark FireStrike (Ultra)




					www.guru3d.com
				



Before you spill any further garbage, my last Nvidia card was GTX 280, so don't bother accusing me of fanboyism. The only fanboy here is you.


----------



## Valantar (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> - 5700 is not faster than 2060 Super


We don't know either way. Leaks are leaks (i.e. unreliable), so we really ought to wait that one out. Still, making factual statements ("is"/"isn't") based on a rumor is a bad idea.


I No said:


> - If they would've kept the current pricing they would be DOA


Perhaps a bit strongly worded, but the price drop is needed IMO, yes. They priced them to undercut cards that are now either cheaper or discontinued and replaced with 10% faster models.


I No said:


> - There is no reason for Vega owners to upgrade to Navi since they're basically the same performance wise, making Navi already a tough sell.


There isn't supposed to be. Vega was launched as a high-end option, this launches as a mid-range option. Equal performance for less money. No upgrade path for Vega yet, but it's coming.


I No said:


> - the 5% less power is hardly an advantage seeing that it's 7nm vs nvidia's inferior node, it's still by all means a power-hog, It's still GCN no matter how much lipstick they put on that pig.


The 7nm advantage is definitely notable, but considering the disadvantage AMD has been at on roughly equal nodes, this is nonetheless an improvement (if the leaked numbers are true) - the improvement from 7nm isn't _that _big. Also, RDNA isn't GCN. People keep parroting that, but it's completely false. There have been plenty of in-depth and detailed explanations of the low-level changes between the two, which are significant. RDNA still supports the GCN ISA, but the architecture works in significantly different ways.



I No said:


> But alas at least there are options for mid-range.... oh wait that's how it was for the past 3 years now... AMD needs to start competing for the high-end asap, they are funneling potential customers to nvidia with each new gen even if they keep saying that the money is in the mid-range that didn't work out so well for RTG since the RX 480 was out, now that Freesync works with nvidia's line-up it's actually even harder for AMD to make a strong selling point. At the end of the day it's RTG's work at it's finest, release a card, the competition is trashing them, price cut.


The difference is that there's a pretty clear scaling path going forward this time. Vega's improvements over Polaris didn't pan out for gaming (unlike compute), which is why that route stalled - they had still made Vega, a large and expensive die, and had to live with it - scaling up Polaris to 64 CUs (the GCN max) for a marginally cheaper high-end option would have cost way more than it was worth. Polaris 10/20/30 are roughly the same size as Navi 10, which is around half of Vega 10. In other words, there's plenty of room for a larger Navi die above this - and it'll no doubt be coming some place down the road. Launching a higher volume part earlier makes sense economically, even if it lacks the flagship marketing effect of an ultra-high-end option. The changes in RDNA compared to GCN should remove the 64CU max limit, so I wouldn't be surprised if we saw something like an 80CU Navi part within the next year (when 7nm has become a bit cheaper and larger dies have better yields).



Manoa said:


> hold on, I thought that AMD stated is not GCN ?!
> what's going on ?


People regurgitating misleading bullshit. RDNA is significantly changed from GCN, and is not a GCN variant. There's been plenty of in-depth public explanation of this.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> I really hope they let AIB's put custom cooling solutions on NAVI, their reference cards while looking ok-ish are hot and loud


That is a strike from your side man.  
The 7nm is just out. Give it a go bro, don't stamp on it just yet. Let AMD try at least. What's it to you if it fails if you won’t be buying it anyway.
Navi consumes less power than RTX equivalent cards, which means it will run cooler. 5% is not that low if you ask me. We been seeing Intel going year after year for 2-3% performance wise and likes of you would still call it great. Hypocritical from your side a bit.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 5, 2019)

I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> In the leak it is faster then super (as expected).
> 
> View attachment 126200
> 
> ...



In every other leaked game and benchmark from that source, the 2070S is ahead. In vulkan and DX12.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

the54thvoid said:


> 2070S is


2070s eh?


medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than *2060 Super*





jonup said:


> spill any further garbage


Dude.
It's not you.
It's nVidia.
You shouldn't feel pain in the butt when reading stuff about it.
Chill.



nguyen said:


> I would like to see 5700 perform close to RTX 2070


Because?
It competes with 2060S/non-s, and should perform accordingly.


----------



## I No (Jul 5, 2019)

@Vya Domus

Yeah sure,








						The architecture behind AMD's RDNA and Navi GPUs
					

Featuring the Radeon 5700 and 5700 XT, priced from $379 and $449, available July 7.




					hexus.net
				




It's neither full CGN nor full RDNA (that would be interesting to look at when the new gen is out in 2020). 



Vya Domus said:


> I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.



Because they need market share and they don't have a product that can blow the competition out of the water. To put it short if it can't perform better, make sure it's cheaper.


----------



## Manu_PT (Jul 5, 2019)

I see too much bla bla bla here. AMD lowered the prices for one reason only. They aren´t as good as people think and will be inferior to Nvidia previously comparable offers. As simple as that. I´m on this industry for almost 2 decades. You can find the excuses you want. Slashing prices on a non released product is never good. See you in 2 days on the reviews.


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 5, 2019)

People are so quick to jump on either band wagon. I will say it again if the 5700XT is just as fast as a Vega 64 with 1/2 the stream processors (according to AMD). It is a commendable jump in performance vs Polaris even though pricing is not even close to Polaris. The 2060 super and 2070 super are cards that are faster than the previous gen (sort of ) period. As there are no reviews for the NAVI cards comments like "GCN rebrand" "faster than X or Y card" "Consumes less power" are all just guesses.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> 5700 is not faster than 2060 Super


It is.












the54thvoid said:


> 2070S is ahead. In vulkan and DX12.








I No said:


> - If they would've kept the current pricing they would be DOA


Only in minds living in green reality distortion field* who won't buy them even after price drop anyhow*, so why should AMD even give a flying f*ck about them? Just let Huang have them.


----------



## HenrySomeone (Jul 5, 2019)

LMAO, well it's the only thing left for them to do after Nvidia's Super bombing run, otherwise only the most hardcore and deluded fanboys would even consider getting one over 2060s/2070s, but even so, I expect sales to be poor and prices to drop some more not to long from now. Still, with 2080Ti basically being required for smooth rtx experience, they might be somewhat relevant until Ampere next year, after which they'll be in BIG trouble once again...


----------



## s3thra (Jul 5, 2019)

Fluffmeister said:


> A price drop BEFORE launch? Looks like the new super cards have worked their magic and done consumers a favour.


Moral of this story: competition is GOOD!


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 5, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.



The money in GPUs is in the mid range. The high end is for enthusiasts or people with more money than sense.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> It's neither full CGN nor full RDNA (that would be interesting to look at when the new gen is out in 2020).


It is "full RDNA" according to the only source that could possibly confirm what MICRO ARCHITECTURE the card is using.
CGN as instruction set is not going anywhere, the same applies to stuff used by nVidia (which is older) or Intel (times older).



I No said:


> To put it short if it can't perform better, make sure it's cheaper.


570 performed TIMES better, still was outsold by terrible 1050/1050Ti/1650.
AMD needs to give up on technologically clueless, dropping price doesn't help.


----------



## I No (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> It is.
> 
> View attachment 126219View attachment 126221View attachment 126222
> 
> ...





That's well within the margins of error.
Quick to pull that trigger aren't you? If it turns out to be better sure as hell i'll buy into 5700XT or the 5700 if it fits my needs, now let me as you this if you would have to choose between 2070S and 5700XT what would you get?


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

s3thra said:


> Moral of this story: competition is GOOD!


Could as well be a 2 step move.

I don't think faux leaks by AdoredTV, that claimed 5700 is slow and power hungry, exactly the opposite of what it actually is, were accidental.
Two 8 pin ports on a 180w card look like a distracting maneuver.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> It's neither full CGN nor full RDNA



It's not "full RDNA " ? What the hell does that even mean. Where's the full RDNA ?

This subject is severely out of your scope of understanding mate.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> That's well within the margins of error.


Yeah. It only counts if AMD card is slower. Oh wait.



I No said:


> if you would have to choose between 2070S and 5700XT what would you get?


That's an easy question: even if nVidia would be the only provider of PC GPUs, I'd rather quit PC gaming, than buy from this disgusting company.



I No said:


> If it turns out to be better sure as hell i'll buy into 5700XT or the 5700


Oh, please, whom are you kidding, fanboi? People who make such purchases do not spout FUD.


----------



## I No (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> It is "full RDNA" according to the only source that could possibly confirm what MICRO ARCHITECTURE the card is using.
> CGN as instruction set is not going anywhere, the same applies to stuff used by nVidia (which is older) or Intel (times older).
> 
> 
> ...



The only reason those sold better is because 99% of the laptops have those chips while jack all have the 570. And last time I checked OEM still outsells DYI.


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> It is "full RDNA" according to the only source that could possibly confirm what MICRO ARCHITECTURE the card is using.
> CGN as instruction set is not going anywhere, the same applies to stuff used by nVidia (which is older) or Intel (times older).
> 
> 
> ...



The power of propaganda


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> The only reason those sold better is because 99% of the laptops have those chips


No. And stop making shit up.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> The only reason those sold better is because 99% of the laptops have those chips while jack all have the 570. And last time I checked OEM still outsells DYI.


yes and now the laptops will have 5700xt and non-xt due to the lower power consumption and very decent performance.  It is simple.


----------



## Manoa (Jul 5, 2019)

*Vya*

he meens to say it only 250mm he whant the 750mm xD

I No said:
if you would have to choose between 2070S and 5700XT what would you get?

I would choise the 2070S, even if I hate nvidea: the "14nm" process is stronger than the "7nm" so the card will life longer becuase biger walls, and also the patterns are better (mybe ? I don't know)
but besides this 2 reasons, in any other reason the 5700XT is better, if the 5700XT have long warranty to make sure thare is not broken walls from the "7nm" then it's no problem to buy the 5700XT
but I don't wanne buy any of them, they all suckx, I whant 150 fps 3840x2160 so that when I put mods I would get around 120  mybe arcturus will give me it


----------



## Mr.Mopar392 (Jul 5, 2019)

atavax said:


> The main thing that bugs me with the Navi cards is the single fan blower. They're loud and don't cool effectively. It makes it really hard to justify buying them.



sorry some of us watercool our cards, i'm glad amd have a reference design, you don't of to buy it now, just wait for aftermarket design.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Jul 5, 2019)

Don't really agree the possible price drop, but I ALWAYS agree with more competitive prices!


----------



## londiste (Jul 5, 2019)

Valantar said:


> the improvement from 7nm isn't _that _big.


Consider Vega 64 and Radeon VII.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

ratirt said:


> yes and now the laptops will have 5700xt and non-xt due to the lower power consumption and very decent performance.  It is simple.


Laptop have Vega 6/8/10 which is somewhere around MX130/150 for more than a year by now.


----------



## I No (Jul 5, 2019)

ratirt said:


> yes and now the laptops will have 5700xt and non-xt due to the lower power consumption and very decent performance.  It is simple.




Good, this is what competition is supposed to be, options.


@medi01


You sir are not rooting for competition, I'm sorry, you're just blinded by some irrational hate towards a company that doesn't care about your opinion, matter of fact neither does AMD, unless you've been living under a rock for at least 2 decades, AMD and NVIDIA and INTEL and everybody's goal is to create vast amounts of profit regardless of the means. Let them kill each other and you as a consumer you rake in the benefits, lower prices, better support, you name it. There is no moral high-ground to be had here and if there is it doesn't concern you as an end user.


----------



## Nkd (Jul 5, 2019)

Manu_PT said:


> I see too much bla bla bla here. AMD lowered the prices for one reason only. They aren´t as good as people think and will be inferior to Nvidia previously comparable offers. As simple as that. I´m on this industry for almost 2 decades. You can find the excuses you want. Slashing prices on a non released product is never good. See you in 2 days on the reviews.



This right here is how people with brand loyalty think. Exactly this! I wish AMD never dropped prices lol. They got good products performing close to nvidia range and 100 below 2070s now, but somehow they will never have a good product. This thinking is the reason nvidia will keep raping your wallet. I am sure you are happy with that haha.


----------



## Darmok N Jalad (Jul 5, 2019)

This really sums up the point of the 5700. Based on the 7nm and standard memory, it has to be much cheaper to manufacture than Vega 56/64 and VII. They can afford to price it aggressively and still make a profit. And no doubt AMD expected an NVIDIA response and had a price cut in the wings. This is how GPU launches used to work!


----------



## Nkd (Jul 5, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> People are so quick to jump on either band wagon. I will say it again if the 5700XT is just as fast as a Vega 64 with 1/2 the stream processors (according to AMD). It is a commendable jump in performance vs Polaris even though pricing is not even close to Polaris. The 2060 super and 2070 super are cards that are faster than the previous gen (sort of ) period. As there are no reviews for the NAVI cards comments like "GCN rebrand" "faster than X or Y card" "Consumes less power" are all just guesses.



ridiculous. Stop reading that slide. Look at the leaked benches. its beating vega 64 handsomely. Stop going by that screenshot you see on the internet. Even real it seems like a typo. Do you really think it beats 2070 but it only beats vega 64 with half the stream processors? Its simply logic, use it. That is like saying vega 64 with all stream processors is faster then 2070 by 30%, which ain't true lol.



Darmok N Jalad said:


> This really sums up the point of the 5700. Based on the 7nm and standard memory, it has to be much cheaper to manufacture than Vega 56/64 and VII. They can afford to price it aggressively and still make a profit. And no doubt AMD expected an NVIDIA response and had a price cut in the wings. This is how GPU launches used to work!



Ofcourse, I think they wanted nvidia to price it above them. I have said it so many times it seemed like that price had a price cut built in already looking how nvidia will price their cards. I think 499.99 is the lowest nvidia will go because they have a much bigger die and its likely already eating in to their margins. While AMD might be at 75% margins easy at 399.99.


----------



## Manoa (Jul 5, 2019)

with all the attention on 2000 vs 5000, thare is one thing that I would like you guys to notice: take a look at 5700XT vs 1080 Ti 
I know thare is a chance that this resoults isn't real, but interesting thing if it is


----------



## Hardware Geek (Jul 5, 2019)

AMD just flipped the bird to Nvidia. Zen 2 is far more important to the long term health of the company and they have secured the next generation of consoles plus Mac pro. I really don't think that they care about the PC gamer nearly as much with those revenue streams already secured. If they can pull off a decent mid tier graphics card that's sells halfway well, that's icing.


----------



## I No (Jul 5, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> It's not "full RDNA " ? What the hell does that even mean. Where's the full RDNA ?
> 
> This subject is severely out of your scope of understanding mate.



Just read the damn article mate, ignore my "scope of understating"


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

Manoa said:


> with all the attention on 2000 vs 5000, thare is one thing that I would like you guys to notice: take a look at 5700XT vs 1080 Ti


In that area, it's more important when to expect 5800 and 5900.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> Just read the damn article mate, ignore my "scope of understating"



The one that explains in great detail how you are wrong and this isn't GCN ?

I just want to know where's the full RDNA and how that compares to the half RDNA that we have now.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 5, 2019)

Im sorry but this just goes for both sides:

"the Radeon RX 5700 XT now reportedly launches at *just* $399, while the Radeon RX 5700 is priced at $349"

400 bucks, just...400 bucks, its still imo too much.

It imo SHOULD be 350 dollars and 250/300 dollars for the non XT.
(same for the Nvidia cards, it all should come down like 100/150 dollars)


----------



## unikin (Jul 5, 2019)

What is AMD thinking offering us +$350 GPUs with blowers in 2019? If GPU doesn't have semi passive fan mode, I wouldn't get it even if it free.


----------



## Valantar (Jul 5, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.


Because they're behind Nvidia in terms of mindshare (read: all the gamers who have no idea what they're talking about "know" that Nvidia "is better"), and have to make some sort of argument to trump that. It's the curse of the underdog: matching the competition (or even beating them outright) is rarely enough to "win".


londiste said:


> Consider Vega 64 and Radeon VII.


Exactly. The VII drops average gaming power by about 10% while increasing average real-world clocks by about 15%. While by no means insignificant, that's not exactly a night-and-day difference (even accounting for the 5-10W draw of the two extra stacks of HBM2).


----------



## rvalencia (Jul 5, 2019)

I No said:


> - 5700 is not faster than 2060 Super
> - If they would've kept the current pricing they would be DOA
> - There is no reason for Vega owners to upgrade to Navi since they're basically the same performance wise, making Navi already a tough sell.
> - Congrats to AMD for these cards tho, they further cannibalized into that abomination that is RVII
> ...


NAVI has wave32 compute 

GCN has wave64 compute

NV CUDA has wave 32 compute.

NAVI is not GCN.


----------



## Mr.Mopar392 (Jul 5, 2019)

unikin said:


> What is AMD thinking offering us +$350 GPUs with blowers in 2019? If GPU doesn't have semi passive fan mode, I wouldn't get it even if it free.


nvidia cards are ugly, amd design is better imo,  some us watercool our cards so it's not on issue! their is always aftermarket if you don't like reference.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 5, 2019)

Also something noteworthy in that leaked review is that the drivers were not launch ones, overclocking for example was not working.




ZoneDymo said:


> Im sorry but this just goes for both sides:
> 
> "the Radeon RX 5700 XT now reportedly launches at *just* $399, while the Radeon RX 5700 is priced at $349"
> 
> ...


Agreed. The 5700 product stack would look much better at $400-$350-$300. Navi 10 is Polaris successor after all.


----------



## londiste (Jul 5, 2019)

unikin said:


> Exactly. The VII drops average gaming power by about 10% while increasing average real-world clocks by about 15%. While by no means insignificant, that's not exactly a night-and-day difference (even accounting for the 5-10W draw of the two extra stacks of HBM2).


That is a 30% perf/W difference.


----------



## unikin (Jul 5, 2019)

RTX 2060 = GTX 1060 3GB      $350 from $200  
RTX 2060S = GTX 1060 6GB    $400 from $250
RX 5700 = RX570                       $350 from $200
RX 5700XT = RX580                  $400 from $250 
RX 5700XT/SE = RX590            $450 from $290 

You see the the price fixing pattern here? A total rip-off.
DO NOT BUY ANY OF THEM or next gen mid range GPUs will cost north of $450.
AMD and NVidia have joint forces to rob us blind!


----------



## z1n0x (Jul 5, 2019)

The comment section is breathtaking.
The fanboy wars are quite amusing to watch, should be a TV series.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Jul 5, 2019)

unikin said:


> RTX 2060 = GTX 1060 3GB      $350 from $200
> RTX 2060S = GTX 1060 6GB    $400 from $250
> RX 5700 = RX570                       $350 from $200
> RX 5700XT = RX580                  $400 from $250
> ...



That's effectively normal in an oligopoly type situation (or duopoly in this case).  Companies can always claim higher development costs to explain disproportionately rising prices to any regulators (whatever regulators mean anymore).


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

unikin said:


> What is AMD thinking offering us +$350 GPUs with blowers in 2019? If GPU doesn't have semi passive fan mode, I wouldn't get it even if it free.


Get on with the blowers already. AIB's will soon roll out own models.


----------



## gridracedriver (Jul 5, 2019)

I was getting bored and then:


----------



## unikin (Jul 5, 2019)

yakk said:


> That's effectively normal in an oligopoly type situation (or duopoly in this case).  Companies can always claim higher development costs to explain disproportionately rising prices to any regulators (whatever regulators mean anymore).



It's only normal in the absence of antitrust laws in US. Look what happened to DDR and SSD prices when China intervened. The same should happen in US but it won't because US legislative and executive branch have no cojones to stand against corporate donor class interests.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

gridracedriver said:


> I was getting bored and then:



And then decided to fake the figures. In your benches 5700 is barely faster than 2060 non super, a far cry from what we have seen so far.


----------



## catulitechup (Jul 5, 2019)

SUPER*™* effect


----------



## Hardware Geek (Jul 5, 2019)

Regulators is a very generous and frankly inaccurate way to describe them.


----------



## gridracedriver (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> And then decided to fake the figures. In your benches 5700 is barely faster than 2060 non super, a far cry from what we have seen so far.


it's not my fault on TPU the averages are lower than on other sites 
if I had done the same fake media on hardware upgrade bench's, for example, it would have been paired with the 2060super


----------



## Nkd (Jul 5, 2019)

unikin said:


> What is AMD thinking offering us +$350 GPUs with blowers in 2019? If GPU doesn't have semi passive fan mode, I wouldn't get it even if it free.



there is a thing called after market cards. You know. lol They can probably be had at 420-450 for decent one.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Jul 5, 2019)

unikin said:


> It's only normal in the absence of antitrust laws in US. Look what happened to DDR and SSD prices when China intervened. The same should happen in US but it won't because US legislative and executive branch have no cojones to stand against corporate donor class interests.



Yup, a portion of those profits do get distributed, or donated, to other beneficiary parties.  Many systems, starting with the U.S. are built to work this way, which is what is meant by "normal".


----------



## Eskimonster (Jul 5, 2019)

Intel starts with lowering prizes, then Nvidia screws all RTX folks with Super, and now even before launch AMD is lowering prizes.
I feel the 570x mobo is a way overprized product now, i like it less and less.


----------



## unikin (Jul 5, 2019)

The only decent buy right now are RX570/580 for 1080p and Vega 56 for 1440p gaming (priced at $120/150 and $260).
2-3 years old GPUs still ruling price/performance chart. Current gaming dGPU market is beyond F...ED UP.


----------



## nguyen (Jul 5, 2019)

Eskimonster said:


> Intel starts with lowering prizes, then Nvidia screws all RTX folks with Super, and now even before launch AMD is lowering prizes.
> I feel the 570x mobo is a way overprized product now, i like it less and less.



2070 and 2080 were bad buy from the start so I guess Nvidia is screwing the tiniest amount of customers here lol. Anyways it's just the way of progress, GTX 1080 were selling for 650usd then reduced to 500usd in less than a year. Rarely you would get something like the 1080Ti where the price/perf is so good for a highest end product.


----------



## umdterps71 (Jul 5, 2019)

This is actually important for me as I was looking at the 2070 super... now will probably lean towards the 5700 xt.


----------



## Dristun (Jul 5, 2019)

This is great news if true.
Definitely wouldn't get a reference blower because of the noise but it would be really interesting to see where Sapphire's Nitro lands pricewise — though it really needs to comfortably beat 2060S in most games to be viable, especially considering Nvidia's bundle of Control and Youngblood is way more attractive than 3 months of game pass, and that's without that continuing conversation about whether a ticket for some basic DXR @1080p is worth it.

And, I hate to break it to some people, but that magic 260$ vega56 doesn't exist in many markets. Here in Russia even the Airboost is hovering around 310-320$ while 1660ti and 2060 are often available *below* their msrp at 265$ and 330$ respectively for Palit's single-cooler SKUs.


----------



## ppn (Jul 5, 2019)

and you would still pay 399 for something that costs 199. the only thing to lean for is the RTX die shrink and boycott everything until then. regardless of the price, even 999 is ok. for 500 sqmm chip., cmon you are wasting thousands of productive hours per year in front of the PC gaming and are somehow contemplating saving 99$ on a video card. the money is gone deal with it. the time is gone. but you saved measely 99$. great.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 5, 2019)

Most sane people:

Yay better pricing! Win for us consumers!




Meanwhile here is what a tool says:



medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> *Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT*.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.


----------



## Amite (Jul 5, 2019)

I want to see some Triple Crossfire - - for old times sake :}


----------



## Razrback16 (Jul 5, 2019)

Amite said:


> I want to see some Triple Crossfire - - for old times sake :}



Question - I haven't ran AMD cards for probably 6-8 years, so I am curious - do all AMD cards support multi gpu these days? I haven't kept up on their architecture with regard to multi gpu support. 

Thanks.


----------



## dicktracy (Jul 5, 2019)

Panic mode


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 5, 2019)

Eskimonster said:


> I feel the 570x mobo is a way overprized product now, i like it less and less.


Lol what?! 
No one's forcing you to buy them. X470 exists and works.


----------



## TesterAnon (Jul 5, 2019)

Still sounds expensive since they are blower GPUs.


----------



## Valantar (Jul 5, 2019)

londiste said:


> That is a 30% perf/W difference.


Except voltage/frequency scaling is entirely non-linear, let alone comparable across different process nodes. And besides, even if we're talking about a 30% perf/W improvement from the node alone, the Vega 64 scored 56% perf/W compared to the RTX 2070FE, yet now AMD is supposedly slightly ahead? If that turns out to be true, they've made some major architectural efficiency strides since Vega. That would be a major feather in RDNA's cap.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 5, 2019)

xkm1948 said:


> Yay better pricing! Win for us consumers!


There are consumers who want cheaper AMD cards, to buy cheaper AMD cards. For those AMD bundles would work.
Then there are consumers who want cheaper AMD cards, to buy cheaper nVidia cards. Those are welcome to vote with their wallet instead, or bend over again, whatever works best.
.


----------



## windwhirl (Jul 5, 2019)

Amite said:


> I want to see some Triple Crossfire - - for old times sake :}





Razrback16 said:


> Question - I haven't ran AMD cards for probably 6-8 years, so I am curious - do all AMD cards support multi gpu these days? I haven't kept up on their architecture with regard to multi gpu support.
> 
> Thanks.



Triple CrossFireX is still supported, I think, as long as AMD keeps making the required profiles. But it's only for DX11 and older.

DX12 software requires mGPU support to be built into the code. If the developer won't support it, then there is little you can do.


----------



## Razrback16 (Jul 5, 2019)

windwhirl said:


> Triple CrossFireX is still supported, I think, as long as AMD keeps making the required profiles. But it's only for DX11 and older.
> 
> DX12 software requires mGPU support to be built into the code. If the developer won't support it, then there is little you can do.



Gotcha, thanks much for the response.


----------



## raptori (Jul 5, 2019)

Finally the time has come when an upgrade will give me double the fps without stepping into crazy prices of high end cards, I'll be waiting for the reviews on July 7th.


----------



## Manoa (Jul 5, 2019)

multi card is bad, you get 3x delay from input per frame for a 2x increase in number of frames and that only in the good case of 2 cards, I don't know how mutch worse it is on 3 cards
directx 12 and vulkan have several multi card modes, some games like ashes singularity use one of them but it's the wrong one they are using, so far I think no game uses the one mode that is important :x


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jul 5, 2019)

AMD can't catch a break, having to lower their prices before they even release their new products?

That's a vicious cycle they need to break, can't continue trying to simply catch up, who here remembers when they would be the ones pulling the rug from under Nvidia with cards that defied what people could expect for their price bracket?

Cards like the 9700 Pro, the X800XT, the 7970, and the 290X, those were all faster than the best Nvidia had at the time, and at reasonable prices.

I know it's not easy to come up with an architectural change that can be revolutionary, with graphic cards being such complex beasts, but settling for 2nd best will always hurt the bottom line.

They have to aim straight to the top, and sink Nvidia's flagship, remember when the R9 290X was released for almost half the price as a Titan? I sure as hell remember, that was a day one purchase for me, and actually the last AMD cards I ever bought.

They need to find that mojo again, or we'll be caught up in this never ending cycle of paying crazy high prices for top of the line Nvidia cards because there's nothing to compete with them.

And yes, I know I sunk over $1.3k for my Nvidia card, but I would've happily paid less than that if AMD had anything that offered the same or higher level of performance like they did in the past.

Make it happen again AMD, and you'll win me and a hell lot more costumers over again, bring back the glory days of great Ati and great AMD cards.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Jul 5, 2019)

I really don't like HW boundles, they interfere with the whole point of the freedom and modular ecosystem of the PC platform.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 5, 2019)

15th Warlock said:


> AMD can't catch a break, having to lower their prices before they even release their new products?
> 
> That's a vicious cycle they need to break, can't continue trying to simply catch up, who here remembers when they would be the ones pulling the rug from under Nvidia with cards that defied what people could expect for their price bracket?
> 
> ...



9700Pro was good. X800 lost on the feature support side as well as performance.

Good GPU needs good GPU design talent as well as healthy R&D budget. It will happen in the future. RDNA is a good direction. You just need to wait.


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 5, 2019)

*AMDs Scott Herkelman Twitter*



> Jebaited


----------



## Turmania (Jul 5, 2019)

Just wait till and reviews pop up on the 7th...then we all have crystal picture where everyone is at. For now just enjoy price drops. Don't fear it embrace it


----------



## HisDivineOrder (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> There are consumers who want cheaper AMD cards, to buy cheaper AMD cards. For those AMD bundles would work.
> Then there are consumers who want cheaper AMD cards, to buy cheaper nVidia cards. Those are welcome to vote with their wallet instead, or bend over again, whatever works best.
> .



You act like bundles are the same as saved money.  They're not.  Often, they're a waste.  I don't think anything approaching 100% of people who buy an AMD card enjoy or use the bundle.  And with AMD and nVidia both trying their damnedest to keep people from recouping the bundle's resale value by locking people into bundles they may not necessarily want...

...your argument doesn't really hold up.  If you get a turd in a box with compliments from AMD, that doesn't mean you got a deal on your GPU at MSRP.  It means you got a turd in a box that isn't worth... 

No, bundles do not make up for higher MSRP's.  If you want AMD to go out of business in GPU's, keep arguing for them not to beat the price of the competition that's ahead in the gimmicks and close enough to the same in performance to make the gimmicks matter again.  AMD's the guy coming late to the party.  Of course, he's got to lose some money to get back in the groove...


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 5, 2019)

Lol the Pre-emptive Strike Back. @Vya Domus what was that again about changing the game and not playing the value game?

What's next, Nvidia? Some sanity perhaps? Now thát would be SUPER.



medi01 said:


> There are consumers who want cheaper AMD cards, to buy cheaper AMD cards. For those AMD bundles would work.
> Then there are consumers who want cheaper AMD cards, to buy cheaper nVidia cards. Those are welcome to vote with their wallet instead, or bend over again, whatever works best.
> .



I don't know about those bundles man, I never managed to buy dinner with them or pay rent. And mommy taught me not to take candy from strangers, especially if its free 

That said, you're not wrong about this! This is actually how it works in most people's minds. People do buy the cheapest product that gives the highest performance/does the job best. That explains the current market share very well, and its good to recognize that.



15th Warlock said:


> AMD can't catch a break, having to lower their prices before they even release their new products?
> 
> That's a vicious cycle they need to break, can't continue trying to simply catch up, who here remembers when they would be the ones pulling the rug from under Nvidia with cards that defied what people could expect for their price bracket?
> 
> ...



Its unfortunately a vicious cycle half the internet warned them for when they told us they were going to 'dominate the midrange' with Polaris... and I think they really knew this was going to happen, GPU division had to keep running and it had to cost as little as possible. This is the result.


----------



## HenrySomeone (Jul 5, 2019)

15th Warlock said:


> AMD can't catch a break, having to lower their prices before they even release their new products?
> 
> That's a vicious cycle they need to break, can't continue trying to simply catch up, who here remembers when they would be the ones pulling the rug from under Nvidia with cards that defied what people could expect for their price bracket?
> 
> Cards like the 9700 Pro, the X800XT, the 7970, and the 290X, those were all faster than the best Nvidia had at the time, and at reasonable prices.


Only the 9700 Pro was faster for a noteworthy amount of time, not even being beaten by the 5800 ultra 6 months later, all others were equal (X800Xt + lacking Shader model 3.0) or just released slightly ahead; 7970 was beaten bloody just 2 months later by the 680 and 290x wasn't even faster than the then almost year old 780 when both were OCed, not to even mention the Titan and the 780TI just 2 weeks later. AMD has been nothing but a follower for more than a decade now (a very poor one in the last 5 years)


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 5, 2019)

xkm1948 said:


> 9700Pro was good. X800 lost on the feature support side as well as performance.
> 
> Good GPU needs good GPU design talent as well as healthy R&D budget. It will happen in the future. RDNA is a good direction. You just need to wait.



Inclined to agree. Too bad its yet another waiting game.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 5, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Lol the Pre-emptive Strike Back. @Vya Domus what was that again about changing the game and not playing the value game?



400$ still isn't cheap for a chip of this class.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 5, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> 400$ still isn't cheap for a chip of this class.



Sure, but that wasn't what you said. But we needn't dwell on it further.

Let this be the confirmation for you that the market reality is the ONLY reality. Any company can talk, market and promote its ass off, but normal competition does work and it always works the exact same way. It causes price drops. The market is my crystal ball... you can predict many things in tech by just looking at what would be viable. Remember Turing... we're already looking at several value propositions today with the 2060 vanilla and the recent 2070 SUPER, both cards pushing the perf/dollar ahead and neither of them Turing launch cards.

Just wait a liiiiitle bit longer boys. It will only get better. Let that lack of sale mature a bit for green & red.


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 5, 2019)

Razrback16 said:


> Question - I haven't ran AMD cards for probably 6-8 years, so I am curious - do all AMD cards support multi gpu these days? I haven't kept up on their architecture with regard to multi gpu support.
> 
> Thanks.



Multi-GPU is dead. Don't waste your time on it.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 5, 2019)

Competition is good!  Now if we could only get some competition from AMD in anything beyond the mid-range...


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jul 5, 2019)

HenrySomeone said:


> Only the 9700 Pro was faster for a noteworthy amount of time, not even being beaten by the 5800 ultra 6 months later, all others were equal (X800Xt + lacking Shader model 3.0) or just released slightly ahead; 7970 was beaten bloody just 2 months later by the 680 and 290x wasn't even faster than the then almost year old 780 when both were OCed, not to even mention the Titan and the 780TI just 2 weeks later. AMD has been nothing but a follower for more than a decade now (a very poor one in the last 5 years)



No, the Titan came before the 290X, at almost double the price, I know this because I had a Titan SLI rig at the time.

Back then AMD kept Nvidia on its toes, even the 680 was a reactionary measured to counteract the 7970 for $50 less, I know too cuz I had a quad 680 setup at the time.

The point is, back then, both Nvidia and AMD kept going back a forth in both terms of pricing and performance through their whole product stack.

Now that AMD is not competitive at the high end, Nvidia can price their cards as they please and still hold the performance crown.

Competition is good for all costumers.


----------



## B-Real (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.


It's quite weird you ask AMD not to lower prices. Never seen one guy do that before.  It's always welcomed to see price reduction anywhere, including PC hardware. 

Anyway, there is a Polish leak of the RX5700 and XT benchmarks.









						Radeon RX 5700 series review leaks out at Polish website
					

The Radeon RX 5700 series is due for release in a few days. That did not stop Polish website Benchmark dot pl yesterday from showing their content online. The content has been taken offline later in t...




					www.guru3d.com
				




Actually the RX5700 seem to be performing very close to the RTX 2060 Super, which would be great for $50 less. The $100 cheaper RX5700 XT also seems a much better price/performance option. But I agree, a 1 or 2 game bundle would be so much better than a 3 month Game Pass.



Fluffmeister said:


> A price drop BEFORE launch? Looks like the new super cards have worked their magic and done consumers a favour.


+


Raendor said:


> Indeed. Amd fanboys should thank NVIDIA for better priced navi, although it’s still carrying over the lackluster gcn legacy.



Yeah, the Super release wasn't because NV had about 49% decrease in GPU sales since RTX released.



I No said:


> But alas at least there are options for mid-range.... oh wait that's how it was for the past 3 years now... AMD needs to start competing for the high-end asap, they are funneling potential customers to nvidia with each new gen even if they keep saying that the money is in the mid-range that didn't work out so well for RTG since the RX 480 was out, now that Freesync works with nvidia's line-up it's actually even harder for AMD to make a strong selling point. At the end of the day it's RTG's work at it's finest, release a card, the competition is trashing them, price cut.


Why the hack would AMD need that? Have you checked GPU sales? Maybe 5-10% of gamers have cards like 1080 or above. They need to provide better valued mid and mid-high range cards consistently. Of course it would be nice if they could compete with NV in the high-end too. Maybe one day. They did it with Ryzen, it will come in the GPU market too.


----------



## Totally (Jul 5, 2019)

medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.



Wat?


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 5, 2019)

B-Real said:


> Yeah, the Super release wasn't because NV had about 49% decrease in GPU sales since RTX released.



Got a source for that? Damn.


----------



## B-Real (Jul 5, 2019)

Manu_PT said:


> I see too much bla bla bla here. AMD lowered the prices for one reason only. They aren´t as good as people think and will be inferior to Nvidia previously comparable offers. As simple as that. I´m on this industry for almost 2 decades. You can find the excuses you want. Slashing prices on a non released product is never good. See you in 2 days on the reviews.





			https://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=news&action=file&id=32793
		


I don't see that. RX5700 seems to perform similar to the RTX 2060 Super.



Vayra86 said:


> Got a source for that? Damn.


45%, sorry. 








						NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 and GeForce RTX 2070 Sales Lower Than Expected, Gaming Revenue Down 45% - Crypto and Excess Channel Inventory Also To Blame
					

NVIDIA has released their financials for Q4 FY2019 which report a huge decline in gaming revenue and poor sales of GeForce RTX 20 cards.




					wccftech.com


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Got a source for that? Damn.



Sounds more like a mining hangover to me, but both B-Real and medi01 tend to froth at the mouth when it comes to their beloved and their most hated.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 5, 2019)

B-Real said:


> https://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=news&action=file&id=32793
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Damn.



Fluffmeister said:


> Sounds more like a mining hangover to me, but both B-Real and medi01 tend to froth at the mouth when it comes to their beloved and their most hated.



Not to me. We had mining prior to 2018 as well. Its part of it, sure. But not this magnitude of part. This is a combination of many factors and RTX Is certainly one of them as it doesn't pick up yet. This drop coincides with Pascal cards going EOL.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

They had an excess of Pascal stock, the link you read very quick says so.

God bless mining.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 5, 2019)

Fluffmeister said:


> They had an excess of Pascal stock, the link you read very quick says so.
> 
> God bless mining.



Its a WCCFTech link. They just copy paste the news pieces leading up to this and make a story. But sure, it is also the official statement, so I guess that is true and RTX is a smash hit


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 5, 2019)

They had an excess of Pascal cards so people didn't buy ... anything ?


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Its a WCCFTech link. They just copy paste the news pieces leading up to this and make a story. But sure, it is also the official statement, so I guess that is true and RTX is a smash hit



They are doing okay in the grand scheme of things:









						Steam Hardware Survey: Intel, Nvidia continue to grow share
					

And Windows 10 showed a healthy user share increase of 2.78 per cent in June.




					hexus.net
				




It should be noted Steam is used buy gamers, pallets of Radeons went to Iceland to mine.



Vya Domus said:


> They had an excess of Pascal cards so people didn't buy ... anything ?



Pascal had been around for ages, people want new stuff, hence the excitement over Navi performing the same as Turing. It's not rocket science you dick head.


----------



## plonk420 (Jul 5, 2019)

surprised nobody linked this yet (amd employee/higher up)


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1146827961162711045


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

plonk420 said:


> surprised nobody linked this yet (amd employee/higher up)
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1146827961162711045



Xzibit did, he'll be upset you missed it.


----------



## plonk420 (Jul 5, 2019)

ah, seems i scrolled a bit too fast. was expecting more people to be quoting it


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 5, 2019)

Baited... lol.

If only AMD spent more time focusing on high- end products and more efficient  products to compete and complete (gpu) lineups instead of claiming to bait Nvidia and pulling the rug out. Their marketing is ridiculous.

So....a bit cheaper than, a bit slower than (super), uses more power than, currently louder than. Where can i preorder?!


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

plonk420 said:


> ah, seems i scrolled a bit too fast. was expecting more people to be quoting it



Don't worry about it mate, there is very little worth reading.


----------



## Sithaer (Jul 5, 2019)

I welcome this price drop since I was already interested in the 5700 card as an upgrade from my RX 570 later this year. 'November/December most likely'

RTX 2060S is also an option but from the look of it,it will be way overpriced in my country 'like most hardware' so this MSRP doesn't mean much in my case so I will have to wait and see which will have the better price/perf ratio here.

Not really a fanboy,I had both AMD/Nvidia over the years,I just pick the one better for my budget/needs.

Don't care about the blower cards either,will wait for the 'proper' models to show up.


----------



## HenrySomeone (Jul 5, 2019)

15th Warlock said:


> No, the Titan came before the 290X, at almost double the price, I know this because I had a Titan SLI rig at the time.
> 
> Back then AMD kept Nvidia on its toes, even the 680 was a reactionary measured to counteract the 7970 for $50 less, I know too cuz I had a quad 680 setup at the time.
> 
> ...


Yes, I know Titan came way before, maybe I didn't express myself clearly enough - two weeks later was refering to 780Ti only. But I wouldn't say AMD kept Nvidia on their toes by 2012 at all, since the lackluster performance of the 7970 (only 15% better than by then more than a year old gtx 580) enabled Nvidia to tackle it with 104 class silicon instead of the top-of-the-line 110. Essentially they could have released what later came to be 780Ti in early 2012 as the 680, but they decided to withhold it and start working on Maxwell early while AMD was forced to keep releasing the best they could come up with right away. This way the green team started to always be one step in front, having an immediate answer to anything AMD launched right away and with years this one step became two and by now probably three. Without some major cataclysmic event on their end I don't expect AMD to ever properly catch up again even if it might occasionally seem that they are closing in.


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 5, 2019)

Looks like its official

*AMD Radeon (Twitter)*


----------



## efikkan (Jul 5, 2019)

So competition works, everyone should be happy


----------



## HenrySomeone (Jul 5, 2019)

They don't have a choice unless they want most of their cards to languish on the shelves for months and then be forced to discount them even more. That said, I still think prices will drop lower than this before the end of the year.


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 5, 2019)

HenrySomeone said:


> *They don't have a choice unless they want most of their cards to languish on the shelves for months and then be forced to discount them even more.* That said, I still think prices will drop lower than this before the end of the year.



That didn't stop Nvidia. Their last quarter report has their sales turnaround at 140 days. A 3 day improvement over the last quarter and over 120% of its normal.  Their payment window is also up 50%.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Jul 5, 2019)

Nice to see some competition on price.  Waiting for reviews to confirm if there will be competition on performance.


----------



## Manoa (Jul 5, 2019)

something I don't understand....
whay this ? and whay now ?
I meen: AMD could have made RDNA on "14nm++++++++" right ? it would be mutch cheeper no ? yields would be high price would be very low becuase even Global Foundaries have it right ? so whay not make RDNA on 14+++++ at 1000mm2 ? it would be (rough estimate) around as effective as a "7nm" 750mm no ? sutch a thing would wipe the florr with nvidea I think 
nvidea didn't cared that mutch about temperature when they made the fermi (know as thermi)


----------



## Metroid (Jul 5, 2019)

Dammeron said:


> Dear AMD, please DROP prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT, so that whole market can revert to the times before GPU cryptomining.
> 
> IF we can get a card, that is a only a bit below RTX 2070 Super, but priced 20% lower, that is a really good deal.



Can AMD make sure it will sustain hungry miners if that comes to happen? last time nvidia cards were the only ones left and most nvidia cards were sold out too.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 5, 2019)

Manoa said:


> something I don't understand....
> whay this ? and whay now ?
> I meen: AMD could have made RDNA on "14nm++++++++" right ? it would be mutch cheeper no ? yields would be high price would be very low becuase even Global Foundaries have it right ? so whay not make RDNA on 14+++++ at 1000mm2 ? it would be (rough estimate) around as effective as a "7nm" 750mm no ? sutch a thing would wipe the florr with nvidea I think



Global Foundries were part of early "real men have fabs" days. That boat sailed a long time ago for AMD.

AMD need 7nm to be competitive at the bare minimum, it's certainly never going to let them wipe the floor with Nvidia, it just helps them keep up at the moment.


----------



## efikkan (Jul 5, 2019)

Manoa said:


> something I don't understand....
> whay this ? and whay now ?
> I meen: AMD could have made RDNA on "14nm++++++++" right ? it would be mutch cheeper no ? yields would be high price would be very low becuase even Global Foundaries have it right ? so whay not make RDNA on 14+++++ at 1000mm2 ? it would be (rough estimate) around as effective as a "7nm" 750mm no ? sutch a thing would wipe the florr with nvidea I think
> nvidea didn't cared that mutch about temperature when they made the fermi (know as thermi)


AMD is so far behind in efficiency they need every bit of help they can get, even if the gains are not huge.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jul 6, 2019)

HenrySomeone said:


> Yes, I know Titan came way before, maybe I didn't express myself clearly enough - two weeks later was refering to 780Ti only. But I wouldn't say AMD kept Nvidia on their toes by 2012 at all, since the lackluster performance of the 7970 (only 15% better than more than a year old gtx 580) enabled Nvidia to tackle it with 104 class silicon instead of the top of the line 110. Essentially they could have released what later came to be 780Ti in early 2012 as the 680, but they decided to withhold it and start working on Maxwell early while AMD was forced to keep releasing the best they could come up with right away. This way the green team started to always be one step in front, having an immediate answer to anything AMD launched right away and with years this one step became two and by now probably three. Without some major cataclysmic event on their end I don't expect AMD to ever properly catch up again even if it might temporarily seem that they are closing in.



Yes, the 680 upset the balance by being cheaper and faster than the 7970, and then the 290x upset the balance by being cheaper and faster than the Titan or 780, so Nvidia had to release the 780Ti and Titan Black cards.

And that's not even mentioning dual GPU monsters like the 7990 or the 295X, which remained as the fastest single cards throughout this whole period of time. (Please don't mention the Titan Z, I think we can all agree that abomination of a card should have never been released, especially at $3K}

Look, we can go back and forth grasping at straws about how things went back then, but that's entirely besides the point of my original post, the point being that at least AMD was gunning for the flagship cards back then, and in some cases beating Nvidia and forcing them to innovate and also lower prices.

Look at what we have now, the legacy of Raja, always releasing mid range cards and never really going for the top, and what has that brought us?

Nvidia sat at the top of the stack for almost two years with Pascal, and from the looks of it, history is about to repeat itself with Turing, and Ampere is set continue that dominance, but at what price?

Nothing AMD has done in the past few years has approached the level of competition they had at the top of their game, and so we have to deal with $1200 flagship cards that don't really need any updates in both performance or pricing cuz nothing compares to them. And yes, I know Titan broke the $1K limit years ago, but that's an entirely different market segment.

Can't you agree that a more agresive AMD, one that was actually fighting for the top performance spot, would be a good thing for all of us?

Let's not go in circular arguments about cards that actually competed against each other on equal footing, at least back then we had that, now we don't even have any competition at all at the top performance level...


----------



## HenrySomeone (Jul 6, 2019)

Of course it would be a good thing but it just won't happen, at least not by AMD. Nvidia's years of strategic planning, solid execution and perhaps even more importantly, learning from their mistakes, have brought them into a basically untouchable position where noone can realistically hope to tackle them at the top spot with any measurable success. I mean, let's just look at Navi; yes, in theory AMD could try and produce a "monster" size die that might be able to take on the 2080Ti, but with probably horrible yields, warehouse-heater-like consumption and virtually no profit margin, while still lacking ray traycing, resulting in dismal sales and further reduction of income for the already beleaguered RTG.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 6, 2019)

HenrySomeone said:


> Of course it would be a good thing but it just won't happen, at least not by AMD. Nvidia's years of strategic planning, solid execution and perhaps even more importantly, learning from their mistakes, have brought them into a basically untouchable position where noone can realistically hope to tackle them at the top spot with any measurable success. I mean, let's just look at Navi; yes, in theory AMD could try and produce a "monster" size die that might be able to take on the 2080Ti, but with probably horrible yields, warehouse-heater-like consumption and virtually no profit margin, while still lacking ray traycing, resulting in dismal sales and further reduction of income for the already beleaguered RTG.



These strategic shifts do take a lot of time to mature, especially for companies with a long history in the business. They have a long chain of distributors and parties to cater to and those have expectations. And chip design just doesn't come quickly or cheaply. I am still missing a long term outlook for AMD that really makes sense, it looks a lot like they will just trail the high end a generation or so for the near future. Beyond that its anyone's guess, really.


----------



## Manoa (Jul 6, 2019)

the problem is by the time yields on "7nm" is high nvidea will also make 7-cards, nvidea know that 7 is expencive and yields bad so they don't wanne waste on it now, especialy that they don't need to, so they do the same thing as they did with the 2000 on 14: waith until it ready and then make cards on it

I think this says something interesting: for AMD to prove the RDNA is good, they will have to comparred to same-size nvidea, but that don't exist yet.
how can we compare this 250mm to the 2000 cards ? or should it be compared to 1660 ti ? or just by number of transistors ? do you think RDNA can beat turing 1:1 ?



> Nvidia's years of strategic planning, solid execution and perhaps even more importantly, learning from their mistakes, have brought them into a basically untouchable position where noone can realistically hope to tackle them at the top spot with any measurable success


realy ?





yhe sure no one can tackle them, except us


----------



## Metroid (Jul 6, 2019)

Xzibit said:


> Looks like its official
> 
> *AMD Radeon (Twitter)*



I was about to post this, good i found you posted it. So it's official. Good mive by amd, the super rtx 2060 review I stated my opinion that amd should have kept the $349 and after a day or so amd did it ehhe, here is what I said.



Metroid said:


> The super rtx 2060 would be the best choice if Nvidia had increased its price to $350 or left at $340, $400 was a bad move. Looking at the competition, the rx 5700 at $380 is supposed to be 10% faster than the rtx 2060, which would fall in line x super rtx 2060, the super rtx 2060 will in theory at moment be 3% faster than the rx 5700 and will cost 6% more money.
> 
> On the other side, the super rtx 2070 at $499 is supposed to be 10% faster than the rx 5700xt and cost 12% more money.
> 
> What I see here is, AMD x Nvidia has never been so close in price performance market segmentation like this in years. It will be your choice to decide what to get, both are pretty much equally priced and matched.



Nvidia will have to cut prices too and that will be placing the super rtx 2060 to where the rtx 2060 belonged to $349 or so.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> uses more power than


Except it doesn't


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 6, 2019)

ShurikN said:


> Except it doesn't


QFP. 

If you're lucky it will be he same as the super... 

We'll talk again Sunday.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 6, 2019)

medi01 said:


> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.


Dear AMD,

Kindly ignore this suggestion.

Thank You!


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> QFP.
> 
> If you're lucky it will be he same as the super...
> 
> We'll talk again Sunday.



You reviewing too this round. I remember seeing your screen name as reviewer somewhere


----------



## Aerpoweron (Jul 6, 2019)

I think it is more likely AMD pushed Nvidia to release the super series with there current lineup. So Super is out, and AMD can get some positive news when they lower the prices just before release. Remember, a lot of people were not happy with the AMD prices when they were first shown.

On the latest Gamer Nexus video, it was said that the Super Cards were expected be released after the AMD GPU launches.

Just some interesting strategy playing behind the scenes, which is good for the customer 

On the 7nm Process for AMD. AMD historically was faster to transition to a newer node, with all the risks and benefits involved. Nvidia usually was slower to transition, because they are very good at optimizing on the current process node. Both strategies work. Both come with advantages and disadvantage.


----------



## Anymal (Jul 6, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.


We noticed!


----------



## medi01 (Jul 6, 2019)

B-Real said:


> Actually the RX5700 seem to be performing very close to the RTX 2060 Super, which would be great for $50 less. The $100 cheaper RX5700 XT also seems a much better price/performance option. But I agree, a 1 or 2 game bundle would be so much better than a 3 month Game Pass.


I meant all AMD hardware bundle: Ryzen 3xxxx + RX 5700 + (maybe) some mobo.



HisDivineOrder said:


> No, bundles do not make up for higher MSRP's. If you want AMD to go out of business in GPU's, keep arguing for them not to beat the price of the competition that's ahead in the gimmicks and close enough to the same in performance to make the gimmicks matter again. AMD's the guy coming late to the party. Of course, he's got to lose some money to get back in the groove...


That is exactly the point.
AMD can reduce price for people actually buying AMD hardware, without engaging in price wars .


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 6, 2019)

Anymal said:


> We noticed!



That's a good first step, now waiting for a sensible explanation.


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 6, 2019)

With these new prices, Navi's are the better buy if you don't want ray tracing (to tank your performance for negligible graphical enhancement).


----------



## B-Real (Jul 6, 2019)

Fluffmeister said:


> Sounds more like a mining hangover to me, but both B-Real and medi01 tend to froth at the mouth when it comes to their beloved and their most hated.


Yeyeye, tell that to NV too. LOL


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 6, 2019)

Manoa said:


> the problem is by the time yields on "7nm" is high nvidea will also make 7-cards, nvidea know that 7 is expencive and yields bad so they don't wanne waste on it now, especialy that they don't need to, so they do the same thing as they did with the 2000 on 14: waith until it ready and then make cards on it
> 
> I think this says something interesting: for AMD to prove the RDNA is good, they will have to comparred to same-size nvidea, but that don't exist yet.
> how can we compare this 250mm to the 2000 cards ? or should it be compared to 1660 ti ? or just by number of transistors ? do you think RDNA can beat turing 1:1 ?
> ...



You did miss a good part of that graph though

I'm more of a fan of the big picture and perspective





Recovery is setting in and a new trend upwards can be detected. This also nicely shows that the stock price was in desperate need of correction, look at how it compares to just a few years ago.


----------



## Amite (Jul 6, 2019)

Razrback16 said:


> Question - I haven't ran AMD cards for probably 6-8 years, so I am curious - do all AMD cards support multi gpu these days? I haven't kept up on their architecture with regard to multi gpu support.
> 
> Thanks.


Yes they Cross Fire  but it tends to bring on frustration in gaming - it really doesn't pay to fool with it. Sorry to see it fade been doing Crossfire since the ATI 850s even had a triple Fury X.


----------



## Totally (Jul 6, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.



All things equal people would just buy Nvidia anyway. To justify their purchase they'd dredge up an excuse from the bottom of a barrel of silly reasons. E.g. AMD has terrible drivers, SLI is better though no intention to do so but wants the option available just in case. Insert gimmick here.



Vayra86 said:


> You did miss a good part of that graph though
> 
> I'm more of a fan of the big picture and perspective
> 
> ...



S&P is like that as a whole.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 6, 2019)

Totally said:


> All things equal people would just buy Nvidia anyway. To justify their purchase they'd dredge up an excuse from the bottom of a barrel of silly reasons. E.g. AMD has terrible drivers, SLI is better though no intention to do so but wants the option available just in case. Insert gimmick here.
> 
> 
> 
> S&P is like that as a whole.


if not that (seriously, not that) more power consumption.... more noise out of non aib cards.... no RT capability (for what little that is worth.. it is worth something).

Be fair!


----------



## medi01 (Jul 6, 2019)

Xzibit said:


> That didn't stop Nvidia. Their last quarter report has their sales turnaround at 140 days. A 3 day improvement over the last quarter and over 120% of its normal.  Their payment window is also up 50%.


Source?



Manoa said:


> I meen: AMD could have made RDNA on "14nm++++++++" right ? it would be mutch cheeper no ?


On 14nm chip would be the same size as 2070Super/2080, 500+ mm^2. I doubt it would be cheaper.
Besides, AMD was always first to embrace new process node.


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 6, 2019)

medi01 said:


> Source?



*Nvidia own financial reports*


----------



## HenrySomeone (Jul 7, 2019)

Vya Domus said:


> I never really understood why AMD is always mandated to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.


Because they are never truly equivalent; if they perform the same, they consume more and are louder, if they consume about the same, they are slower, if they are just as quiet, they are large and bulky and if nothing else, they lack features (like RTX which although not fully relevant yet, is a thing that is here to stay)


----------



## Vya Domus (Jul 7, 2019)

HenrySomeone said:


> they are large and bulky



"Large and bulky", that's a new one.  

AMD's two slot rectangle is bulkier than Nvidia's two slot rectangle ? Ya'll never cease to amaze me.



HenrySomeone said:


> like RTX which although not fully relevant yet, is a thing that is here to stay



Not often do you hear that something irrelevant is here to stay when by definition being irrelevant contradicts that. You're pushing yourself too hard with these nonsensical claims, you could have just stopped at the good ol' "hot and loud" and remain in line with the meme. I certainly think ray-tracing is here to stay but you just had to put it in particularity stupid green-tinted way. And for the record, RTX isn't a feature, it's a platform that supports features like DXR.

If you like ray-tracing, you better hope stuff like DXR remains relevant, not RTX which is inconsequential here. 

I will repeat my question though, the gist of it seems to have been lost : 





> I never really understood why AMD is *always mandated *to put a lower price on their cards compared to the equivalent products from Nvidia.



Did you just seriously tried to argue why some random company is *always* supposed to price something in a specific way ? That guy above talking about the lengths some of you would go to come up with stuff sure wasn't kidding. There's obviously no rational answer to that question but I sure as hell knew some of you would try nonetheless.


----------



## brutlern (Jul 7, 2019)

medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.



"DO NOT drop prices" ???? Are you high? Video card prices are through the roof already and getting more and more expensive each year. Nvidia can charge whatever they want because there is no competition. If AMD brings the competition, but does not drop prices, Nvidia still doesn't have to drop prices either and we, the consumers, get the shaft, regardless of whether there is or isn't competition. Prices have to drop or we'll end up having to start paying $1000 for 1080p 60fps.


----------



## medi01 (Jul 7, 2019)

brutlern said:


> Nvidia can charge whatever they want because there is no competition.


That's more of a mantra, than reality.
570 is there, but masses buy 1050/1050Ti/1650.



brutlern said:


> If AMD brings the competition, but does not drop prices, Nvidia still doesn't have to drop prices eithe


Yeah!
And why should AMD care about people buying green, pretty please?

Discounts should ideally affect only people actually buying AMD stuff, and let Huang continue kamasutra with team green bentovers, no direct price war, 60% margins is not enough, let him get to 80%, I'll thoroughly enjoy it.


----------



## neomoco (Jul 7, 2019)

All this talk of pricing on new gpus , but has anyone noticed the real competition and the number one reason to not buy new gpu-s is from Used gtx 1070 and 1070 ti , wich are about  20%  slower  but half price starting at 180$ (i found a few with 2 years warranty left) sold by the hundreds by the ex-miners. Or radeon 580 8gb selling for 100$ and still having decent performance.  ??????


----------



## ArchStupid (Jul 7, 2019)

medi01 said:


> So, 5700 is faster than 2060 Super, consumes less power and costs 5% less, but still needs "price fixing" eh? Because of that DXR, that works in less than 1% of the titles and weven where it does, most users disable it on 2060?
> 
> Dear AMD, please DO NOT drop prices on already reasonably priced 5700 and 5700XT.
> Instead, make attractive bundles for users going all AMD.



Imagine what level of delusional fanboyism is required to actually want the company to NOT drop prices.
Holy shit.


----------



## Chomiq (Jul 7, 2019)

Yeah, clearly some sort of price war actually making a comeback to the GPU market is a bad thing for consumers


----------



## medi01 (Jul 7, 2019)

Chomiq said:


> Yeah, clearly some sort of price war actually making a comeback to the GPU market is a bad thing for consumers



I thought it wasn't hard to understand, but apparently it is.
I'm literally asking AMD to NOT do anything for those who are NOT consumers of its products.




neomoco said:


> All this talk of pricing on new gpus , but has anyone noticed the real competition and the number one reason to not buy new gpu-s is from Used gtx 1070 and 1070 ti , wich are about  20%  slower  but half price starting at 180$ (i found a few with 2 years warranty left) sold by the hundreds by the ex-miners. Or radeon 580 8gb selling for 100$ and still having decent performance.  ??????


This might be the best second line defence  after "buh mah RT".


----------



## Chomiq (Jul 7, 2019)

medi01 said:


> I thought it wasn't hard to understand, but apparently it is.
> I'm literally asking AMD to NOT do anything for those who are NOT consumers of its products.


AMD has already shown that it doesn't really care about cpu+gpu bundles, since they are always locked to specific regions and due to this are limited in availability. The money is in the single component market and that's the where AMD offerings will battle Nvidia most of the time.
The thing that you mention, the "attractive bundles for users going all AMD" is basically "team red" fanboy bundle and we all know that's not where majority of consumers' based at.


----------



## brutlern (Jul 7, 2019)

medi01 said:


> I'm literally asking AMD to NOT do anything for those who are NOT consumers of its products.



That's not how business works. The idea is to draw people away from the green team and join the red team. Proper business practice is to figure out how to get the consumers who are not buying your stuff to start buying your stuff.


----------



## windwhirl (Jul 7, 2019)

Razrback16 said:


> Gotcha, thanks much for the response.



Forget what I said. AMD clarified that they dropped support for CrossFire with Navi... Only DX12 and Vulkan mGPU is supported.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 7, 2019)

ShurikN said:


> Except it doesn't


It's Sunday... did you read the review??? 

You'll find the xt using 12% more power for gaming and peak gaming!! It uses mkre power tha. The super too... and is ~10% slower.

Better efficiency than last gen, yes. Better than turing, nope.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 7, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> It's Sunday... did you read the review???
> 
> You'll find the xt using 12% more power for gaming and peak gaming!! It uses mkre power tha. The super too... and is ~10% slower.
> 
> Better efficiency than last gen, yes. Better than turing, nope.


I did, did you?
5700, 5% more performance than 2060 and the same amount of power during gaming.
Good day and goodbye.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 7, 2019)

ShurikN said:


> I did, did you?
> 5700, 5% more performance than 2060 and the same amount of power during gaming.
> Good day and goodbye.


Pretty sure I said the xt... (I did).

And also sure this is a 57xx thread...

Looks like the XT is pushing out of the efficiency envelope... this card not so much.


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 8, 2019)

Anyone who says these cards are overpriced is incorrect. If this was 2012 I would agree but a $400 MSRP (available on Amazon.com) that beats the Vega 64 (still $1000 in Canada) and competes with the 2070 Super and consumes less power than both. I even saw that in F1 2018 it keeps up with the 2080TI (Hardware Unboxed review). I paid almost $700 for my first Vega 64 just as a reference point. This means to me that AMD is definitely back in the GPU space. Not that they weren't before but cards that are as fast as Nvidia's current line up but cheaper is like Ryzen vs Intel. I have no doubt that there will be more powerful GPUs coming down the pipeline from AMD. Everything that was "bad" about AMD cards has been resolved (power draw) (clock speeds) and GCN.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 8, 2019)

They are competing in the mid-range and down... that's about it though. They have nothing for the 2080 or 2080 Ti.

Power draw is better, but not where Nvidia is yet. Remember, these really go against he Super cards and by price, the 2060S uses a lot less power  (~35W difference, 184W compared to 219W) and falls 5% short of 5700xt performance. The 2070S uses ~9W less than the 5700xt and is 9% faster (for $100 more - but price isn't the point in this power context).  

Its clear the 5700xt is getting outside of the sweetspot whereas the 5700 sits in it, however.


----------



## kapone32 (Jul 8, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> They are competing in the mid-range and down... that's about it though. They have nothing for the 2080 or 2080 Ti.
> 
> Power draw is better, but not where Nvidia is yet. Remember, these really go against he Super cards and by price, the 2060S uses a lot less power  (~35W difference, 184W compared to 219W) and falls 5% short of 5700xt performance. The 2070S uses ~9W less than the 5700xt and is 9% faster (for $100 more - but price isn't the point in this power context).
> 
> Its clear the 5700xt is getting outside of the sweetspot whereas the 5700 sits in it, however.



9 watts is nothing compared to the difference between Vega. Even the 35 watt difference is nothing really. That is also the max. I don't know of a GPU that pulls full power all the time either. The 5700XT is a Polaris upgrade that is actually tangible vs the 590 and it is a high end card as it is faster than the Vega 64 which is in no way a mid range card. There is no way that the 2070S (2070 is $700 in Canada)is a mid range card. Even though the 2080 and 2080TI or Super (when it is released) are double the cost in some cases it does not make the other cards mid range. For me a mid range card is the 570, 580 or 1660, 1660TI even the 2060 (not the S).


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 8, 2019)

35W is a 19% difference... I would consider that significant. Not on your power bill, but in heat that needs mitigated. Surely the AIB cards will do a better job than the blower, but it is something to consider. Some also like to be green.

That was not the 'max' that was the gaming 'average' I took the values from. 

The 5700xt I wouldn't consider high-end, just like I don't consider the 2070 to be high end. THat tops the midrange lineup... (2060/2070). There is still the 1660 and 1660 Ti (or whatever they have that is non RTX) for budget. So GTX 16xx cards (budget), RTX 2060/2070 (mid-range) RTX 2080/2080Ti (high end).


----------

