no matter how good employees you hire
if you give them almost no resources to work with, the result guaranteed to be abysmal.

This is good AMD news.

Go Tegra!

chaosmassiveno matter how good employees you hire
if you give them almost no resources to work with, the result guaranteed to be abysmal.

This news was accompanied by Lisa Sue stating they were increasing the Radeon Group's R&D budget. But yes, obviously your statement can't be true all the time. AMD did make Ryzen on a shoestring. Personnel is always more important than budget.

Hmmmmm. The hint im getting at here is that AMD possibly wants in on the mobile market.

I think both of these gentlemen are far more qualified than Raja.

FrustratedGarrettI think both of these gentlemen are far more qualified than Raja.

Oh yeah baby, the Wang is back! Hopefully this will result in some great stuff.

Now they have 2 scapegoats for future failures.

Seriously, what's with all the hate? So AMD hires some qualified people, great for AMD. Why do so many people here feel that they need to spew hate on that? Or do you all prefer that there's no competition so we end up paying the current prices for graphics cards from now on? I miss the "good old days" when there were multiple GPU makers and some actual competition. A monopoly would be a really, really bad thing, as even this duopoly isn't good enough.

I hope for a GPU with massively gimped blockchain compute capabilities that can still game.

FrustratedGarrettI think both of these gentlemen are far more qualified than Raja.

based on what?

Glad to hear this!

Nephilim666I hope for a GPU with massively gimped blockchain compute capabilities that can still game.

'Blockchain compute'... is that a new form of compute? *sigh*

I hope this will be an efficient move for AMD as we need competitive products from them on all levels

please give us a rational GPU prices :(

mipmip90please give us a rational GPU prices :(

Unfortunately...this has nothing to do with the GPU prices

TheLostSwedeSeriously, what's with all the hate? So AMD hires some qualified people, great for AMD. Why do so many people here feel that they need to spew hate on that? Or do you all prefer that there's no competition so we end up paying the current prices for graphics cards from now on? I miss the "good old days" when there were multiple GPU makers and some actual competition. A monopoly would be a really, really bad thing, as even this duopoly isn't good enough.

The hate? Of course there is hate when their crap decisions left the market to the monopoly you strongly are against. It's mostly due to the terrible PR, underwhelming performance of the products, long release dates, supply issues, the pig-headed move to stick to GF's crap factory/process, the hype-trains created based on off the charts statements, the awesome idea to leave the high end segment to run unopposed for more than an year, buying into ATI's business(which mind you they are still paying for now). Take your pick..... the list is big.... The only reason nVidia is doing what they do best (as in raking in the big bucks) is because AMD didn't just step back, they left the damn building. The "monopoly" we currently have is mostly due to AMD's failure to deliver (be it the product itself or the PR for one).

It's good to hear they got someone experienced on board. Now give them necessary resources to create outstanding GPU.

I NoThe hate? Of course there is hate when their crap decisions left the market to the monopoly you strongly are against.

The monopoly started long ago , when AMD actually had faster and more power efficient GPUs than Nvidia.

Look at market share and corresponding time frame before posting a wall of text which just isn't true.

Vya DomusThe monopoly started long ago , when AMD actually had faster and more efficient GPUs than Nvidia.

With terrible PR for the products. Case and point Apple could release Pet Rock 2.0 and call it iRock and it would still fly off the shelves. You could sell ice to esquimos with the right sales pitch. Hands down there was a time when AMD GPUs (well ATI at that point) were actually beating the living daylights out of nVidia.... but at the end of the day it's not always performance that sells a product.

AMD clearly had better products at one point (and occasionally they still do , ex: Polaris) and people still haven't bought them , with or without good PR (whatever that is supposed to mean). What are you even trying to say ? That PR/marketing is more important than good products ? If so then pardon my french , customers are absolute morons and deserve to be ripped off , what else is there to do ?

People wanted Nvidia , fair enough , now they get to enjoy overpriced second grade products while their top GPUs cost 3000$. Blame yourselves not AMD or even Nvidia , you get to vote with your wallet at the end of the day. If you dislike the monopoly and bought their cards , then congratulations , you actually approve of it.

Vya DomusAMD clearly had better products at one point (and occasionally they still do , ex: Polaris) and people still haven't bought them , with or without good PR (whatever that is supposed to mean).

Customers want Nvidia , fair enough , now they get to enjoy overpriced second grade products. Blame yourselves not AMD or even Nvidia , you get to vote with your wallet.

How's that helping AMD's case at this point in time? Their GPUs are grabbed by miners (which once the whole crypto bubble bursts will corner the gray market -> 2014 all over again when AMD had enough stock but no one to sell to). Good PR would translate to "Poor Volta" and actually come up with something that smashes it ... not just hype, on the same note would be "Fury X - the overclocker's dream". Another good idea would be not to pit your products in slides against the competition when you cannot deliver. Those would be the points that AMD missed. Voting with my wallet, why sure, here's a scenario, up until Ryzen came out last year what were your options for a laptop or for a workstation? Also what were your choices before Vega came out (late and totally targeting a segment that has been left untouched and is already saturated by the 1080/1070) for higher resolution gameplay? Sure the money is in the mainstream but if you leave 1 segment unattended for a period of time those things will flood the market, basically for each 1070/1080 sold for a whole year for nVidia, AMD sold 0 and we have only ourselves to blame for this too? What?


Edit: missed your edit. Not really, some people want performance which cannot be delivered at this point. If people want to game at 4k they won't just stick to the underdog. At the end of the day you get what you pay for that's true but at this point would you take VEGA over the 1080 Ti just to support AMD?

I NoHow's that helping AMD's case at this point in time? Their GPUs are grabbed by miners (which once the whole crypto bubble bursts will corner the gray market -> 2014 all over again when AMD had enough stock but no one to sell to). Good PR would translate to "Poor Volta" and actually come up with something that smashes it ... not just hype, on the same note would be "Fury X - the overclocker's dream". Another good idea would be not to pit your products in slides against the competition when you cannot deliver. Those would be the points that AMD missed. Voting with my wallet, why sure, here's a scenario, up until Ryzen came out last year what were your options for a laptop or for a workstation? Also what were your choices before Vega came out (late and totally targeting a segment that has been left untouched and is already saturated by the 1080/1070) for higher resolution gameplay? Sure the money is in the mainstream but if you leave 1 segment unattended for a period of time those things will flood the market, basically for each 1070/1080 sold for a whole year for nVidia, AMD sold 0 and we have only ourselves to blame for this too? What?

You just don't want to understand what I am describing.

All of this happened after AMD had very competitive products and they still couldn't get market share , people chose Nvidia long before Pascal arrived. Your complaints are a direct result of that. AMD simply does not have a insensitive anymore to go all out on consumer graphics knowing that it would not pay off in the end (as proven to have happen before). You think these companies are run by morons ? No , they do whatever they figure out it's best for them.

I Nobasically for each 1070/1080 sold for a whole year for nVidia, AMD sold 0 and we have only ourselves to blame for this too?

The blame lies 100% on those who have happily paid 700$ for what was a mid tier GPU. If people can't say no to getting ripped off even when there is no completion then , without question , they are at fault too.

I mean at which point are you going to stop , are you going to sell your house to buy an Nvidia card if this trend continues ? Is AMD really the only one that can control prices , customers really are that stupid ? No , they are not , the can easily say no even if AMD disappears of the face of the earth.

Anyone know these cats? Is this good news?

Vya DomusAMD clearly had better products at one point (and occasionally they still do , ex: Polaris) and people still haven't bought them , with or without good PR (whatever that is supposed to mean). What are you even trying to say ? That PR/marketing is more important than good products ? If so then pardon my french , customers are absolute morons and deserve to be ripped off , what else is there to do ?

People wanted Nvidia , fair enough , now they get to enjoy overpriced second grade products while their top GPUs cost 3000$. Blame yourselves not AMD or even Nvidia , you get to vote with your wallet at the end of the day. If you dislike the monopoly and bought their cards , then congratulations , you actually approve of it.

Indeed. I haven't bought a 1080 Ti because of this principle even though I have wanted one and easily had the money for it. I refuse to pay $1k for a graphics card. For comparison, in 9/2015, I paid $670 for my EVGA 980 Ti FTW card. The market has become absurd.

Update: Ok, so that was the last time I checked a couple months ago. The price has gone up even more; they are now priced at >$1250.

NO THANK YOU.

Vya DomusYou just don't want to understand what I am describing.

All of this happened after AMD had very competitive products and still couldn't get market share , people chose Nvidia long before Pascal arrived. Your complaints are a direct result of that. AMD simply does not have a insensitive anymore to go all out on consumer graphics knowing that it would still not be enough and it would not pay off in the end (as prove to happen before).



The blame lies 100% on those who have happily paid 700$ for what was a mid tier GPU. If people can't say no to getting ripped off even where there is no completion then , without questions , they are at fault too.

Erm... who said anything only about Pascal? Here's the deal. AMD had better products (and yes they still do as you said Polaris) Hawaii comes to mind those things were actually better than Kepler (still are). If you can't sell something that's better than what the competition has what can be the problem then? Hint: You have the marketing campaign of an unnamed thrift shop (this would translate as bad PR). If AMD doesn't have the "incentive" to actually be at least considered on all segments they might just well sell the heck out and let somebody that can handle this thing better (A.E. The only things that are stopping Intel right now to make GPUs are the patents from both nVidia and AMD that keep them on lock - the would have the resources to do something out of that hot pile of mess that used to be ATI, or Samsung maybe.

As for paying $700 for a GPU. Yep, myself included, not because I wanted to it was because I had wait for the competition to come up with something after a whole damn year and to my shock and awe, it was the same thing that was on already out on the market. This isn't a choice per say, and certainly isn't nVidia's fault for putting out a product to fit my needs. Don't mean to burst your bubble but if AMD's choice is not to compete in a segment is doing far worse damage to their market share than not being able to outsell the competition. The only thing people that bought into Pascal's high end are at fault is not being able to choose after a certain price-point due to lack of competition. It's not your or mine and any one else's fault that AMD refuses to leave a segment alone - It's not like AMD's on welfare and we have to support it. The current state of the market is there because nVidia had the right sales pitch and AMD didn't (look at the 960 which was sub 380/x performance which the latter ending up outsold ...in large numbers oh and the 960 was a bit more expensive as well - This is what good marketing can bring). Let's face it back in Hawaii days you would've at least gave those cards a look now you have what again? Oh and Hawaii sold (key word as in they actually sold something). Just my $0.02 on the matter.

The trend will continue as long as they have dominance. If they price a high end GPU at $5999.99 for the consumer market it won't sell much but it will sell. Somebody out there would buy it for the performance (hence why Titans which are a terrible price/perf buy... yet it's amazing they still sell). Basically if you want performance you pay for it (goes for both camps) and at this point AMD has nothing to hold against nVidia when it comes to high-end stuff let alone nVidia's budget for PR ... I won't even comment on R&D. And yes actually the competition can drive the price be it up or down. So... ehll yes it's on AMD for the MSRP values (right now ... erm... nevermind the pricing is a bad joke already - which at this point neither AMD or nVidia are at fault for) and for leaving so much leverage for nVidia to have on the high-end market.