AusWolfWhatever Scan UK has on hand is not listed on their website.

It's weird, because all the GeForce 50-series is listed with a "notify me when available" button. They're also listed at Overclockers UK at placeholder prices.

Follow the reddit link in the news post.

It's not launched yet, this is just a leak posted by a Scan UK employee uploading a photo from their warehouse. The carton has the distributor, sender, recipient info and we even know it was flown by Emirates Skycargo From Hong Kong to Manchester.

Proof that the final retail product is sitting on retailer shelves in the UK ready to be shipped to customers as soon as AMD fires the starting gun.

HTCThe ONLY way AMD is EVER going to "make a dent" in nVidia's market share is if they start selling 5080 performance cards @ 5060Ti prices ... AND EVEN THEN there's no guarantee ...


Remember when Zen 1 launched and AMD were offering 8 cores / 16 threads @ roughly half the price of of 6950X (IIRC, i think that was Intel's "top dog" CPU, back then)?

They NEED to "shake up the market" just like that.

I think the true Nvidia fanboys will start considering AMD only when the price/performance is so good that Nvidia's FOMO-tier features can't compensate enough.
To me, those die-hard fans will likely change their mind only when both of the following are true:

• A $500 AMD card has significantly faster raytracing than a $500 Nvidia card, even though they never bother to enable RT anyway.

and

• A $500 AMD card running at native/100% resolution can beat a $500 Nvidia card using DLSS to boost the framerate.

That's the point when an Nvidia fan runs out of excuses like "but DLSS is better" and "but the RT performance of AMD sucks" and stuff like that.

Chrispy_I think the true Nvidia fanboys will start considering AMD only when the price/performance is so good that Nvidia's FOMO-tier features can't compensate enough.
To me, those die-hard fans will likely change their mind only when both of the following are true:

• A $500 AMD card has significantly faster raytracing than a $500 Nvidia card, even though they never bother to enable RT anyway.

and

• A $500 AMD card running at native/100% resolution can beat a $500 Nvidia card using DLSS to boost the framerate.

That's the point when an Nvidia fan runs out of excuses like "but DLSS is better" and "but the RT performance of AMD sucks" and stuff like that.

Forget about it. Diehard fans will always have a reason to buy one brand over the other. If there isn't one, they'll make one.

Yeah, there will always be a small minority that pledge devout allegiance no matter what, for some strange reason.

Perhaps diehard was the wrong phrase, because that's a miniscule, yet vocal and argumentative minority who aren't relevant to the wider picture. There's clearly a majority of the gaming population who continue to buy Nvidia cards even when there are plenty of examples in the last two generations where an AMD card at the same price as an Nvidia card outperforms it natively, without even needing to use DLSS - vloggers like HUB, DF, Daniel Owen often make this point painfully clear - yet people have bought into the Nvidia feature set marketing, like DLSS and RT are hard requirements, despite the overwhelming number of Nvidia buyers ending up with lower-tier cards like the 3060 Ti and 4060 that actually lack both the VRAM and computation speed to enable RT, whilst also requiring DLSS enabled at 1080p resolution, which looks like total garbage compared to native 1080p.

You could even argue that the 4070 falls into that category since people who initially bought one for $600+ were likely trying to run at 1440p high-refresh, and RT + DLSS quality in many of the RT-enabled 2023 titles on a 4070 would have been a blurry 50-75fps experience bumping into VRAM limitations now and again as well. The 4070 was the 'least bad' 40-series launch card from a pricing/value perspective, and it's still aged like milk over the last 18+ months.

The colour of envy

Chrispy_Yeah, there will always be a small minority that pledge devout allegiance no matter what, for some strange reason.

Perhaps diehard was the wrong phrase, because that's a miniscule, yet vocal and argumentative minority who aren't relevant to the wider picture. There's clearly a majority of the gaming population who continue to buy Nvidia cards even when there are plenty of examples in the last two generations where an AMD card at the same price as an Nvidia card outperforms it natively, without even needing to use DLSS - vloggers like HUB, DF, Daniel Owen often make this point painfully clear - yet people have bought into the Nvidia feature set marketing, like DLSS and RT are hard requirements, despite the overwhelming number of Nvidia buyers ending up with lower-tier cards like the 3060 and 4060 that actually lack both the VRAM and computation speed to enable RT, whilst also requiring DLSS enabled at 1080p resolution, which looks like total garbage compared to navite 1080p.

That's the magic of marketing, and reviewers drooling over those features like you couldn't live without them. That's what AMD is lacking. The only thing they have is solid products which won't sell themselves.

Products aren't AMD's problem. AMD's problem is the lack of "influencers" pissing their pants in joy when the CEO comes on stage and shows an annotation-free green bar that vaguely relates to some fake frames.

Zach_016600XT: $380 MSRP
7600: $270 MSRP (+10%, -110$)
Totally spot on comparison

Why do you lie ?

The 6600 XT is an outlier, because of covid, scalpers and economic recession.

Look at RX 5600 XT price: 279$, RX 7600 price: 279$.

Just release the damn cards at this point. I'm drooling...

BlaezaLiteJust release the damn cards at this point. I'm drooling...

* at the leaked price

If these things are 4070 Ti Super competitors, I doubt you'd be drooling at that price ;)

Chrispy_* at the leaked price

If these things are 4070 Ti Super competitors, I doubt you'd be drooling at that price ;)

If AMD's offerings were with THIS level of performance @ ... say ... $450, would the amount of drool increase?

I'm not expecting AMD to have a GPU to rival the performance of 5090, or even the 5080 ...

BUT ...

If they can rival the performance of GPU right below those, @ MASSIVELY INFERIOR prices, they can STILL put up a fight against nVidia and gain NOTICEABLE market share, depending on availability of their products.

JasBCI like this understated design

and a proper flow-through area. Has AMD finally made the pcb smaller?

leonavisand a proper flow-through area. Has AMD finally made the pcb smaller?

I think it's the AIBs that made the PCB smaller, not AMD. The reference AMD card looks similar to the 7900 XT(X) reference.

3valatzyWhy do you lie ?

The 6600 XT is an outlier, because of covid, scalpers and economic recession.

Look at RX 5600 XT price: 279$, RX 7600 price: 279$.

Not lying, I've said this already

Zach_01If we search every GPU on the last 2-3 gens we will find nice and lousy deals from both AMD and nVidia. It’s our responsibility to search for the best.
I admit that the last 5years are the worst in the GPU history but a lot happened during this period that did not help at all the situation.

I didn't try to paint a picture as a fact. Like this is what you get today...
Both AMD/nVidia had nice and lousy moments of offerings.

oxrufiioxoStrangest launch I can remember for a gpu...

Yeah... the guys been under some strong infuence of... uncertainty.

freeagentWhy does that look like someone's bathroom countertop?

Considering JHH used to get his cards out of oven... the proximity of the products to the... toilet, doesn't look like good promotion.

INSTG8RIt’s the weird core offset that keeps bugging me

Nothing new, but yeah, this doesn't look very nice. This might be non-issue now, but non-uniformity brings visual "discomfort".

Random_UserYeah... the guys been under some strong infuence of... uncertainty.

Considering JHH used to get his cards out of oven... the proximity of the products to the... toilet, doesn't look like good promotion.

Nothing new, but yeah, this doesn't look very nice. This might be non-issue now, but non-uniformity brings visual "discomfort".

All the leaks are pointing towards these cards being bad ass... Every time that happens for an AMD gpu they almosy always end up very underwhelming.

I hope that isn't the case but AMD is awefully quiet if they indeed have a killer product.

Those fan designs on the unboxed TUF 9700XT and the PRIME 9070 look visually appealing to me. The ASUS tax added onto the end of the price however will not

It would certainly be interesting to peak behind AMDs curtain right now. Whether people would agree with the whys of the situation is surely a matter of debate.

HTCIt seems you're both missing the point. It's not VS previous AMD cards: it's VS CURRENT (about to be released) nVidia cards.

AMD should offer @ least 4070 level performance for around $250.

I think that should be easily achievable. I mean nvidia has been stagnating on hardware for 2 generations, the 4070 should have been a 4060 and the 5070 is basically a 5060ti. In fact I think it's entirely reasonable to expect a 300$ AMD card to match the raster performance of a 5080 since nvidia has stagnated so hard.

Chrispy_Yes, but RDNA2 and RDNA3 were technically competitive enough with Nvidia, despite the miniscule fraction of their R&D budget.

They were not though. Competitive means that you have something the competition does not, so they can't dictate your prices. Neither RDNA 2 or 3 achieved that. Say hypothetically nvidia decided to price the 4080 at 249$ and the 4090 at 399$, amd is just out of business. That's not being competitive. The opposite isn't true, even if AMD priced their XTX for 249$, there would still be people buying nvidia cause they offered something that amd doesn't have (playable RT performance for example).

Chrispy_

• A $500 AMD card running at native/100% resolution can beat a $500 Nvidia card using DLSS to boost the framerate.

That's the point when an Nvidia fan runs out of excuses like "but DLSS is better" and "but the RT performance of AMD sucks" and stuff like that.

Not an nvidia fan but yes, if an amd card has the same RT performance while offering more raster performance to the point that it makes the performance gain of DLSS pointless, sign me up, im buying.

oxrufiioxoAll the leaks are pointing towards these cards being bad ass... Every time that happens for an AMD gpu they almosy always end up very underwhelming.

I hope that isn't the case but AMD is awefully quiet if they indeed have a killer product.

Except that it's usually AMD who messes it up for themselves with skewed benchmark data in the launch presentation. There was no launch presentation this time. Maybe they're letting the product speak for itself?

JustBenchingCompetitive means that you have something the competition does not

I disagree - price is a considerable factor, too. While a 4080 (Super) costs £950-1,000, you can have a 7900 XTX for £830 (at Scan UK). At that price difference, the benefits of the 4080 are questionable.

AusWolfI disagree - price is a considerable factor, too. While a 4080 (Super) costs £950-1,000, you can have a 7900 XTX for £830 (at Scan UK). At that price difference, the benefits of the 4080 are questionable.

Where I am, when I got the 7900XTX the avg 4080 prices were 30-40% more expensive than the avg 7900XTX.
So...

AusWolfI disagree - price is a considerable factor, too. While a 4080 (Super) costs £950-1,000, you can have a 7900 XTX for £830 (at Scan UK). At that price difference, the benefits of the 4080 are questionable.

That's a very shallow way of looking at it. Cause say I have a 3080, the 4080 gives me 30% more raster and 50% more rt for 950. The xtx gives me 30% more raster and the same rt for 830. Clearly the 4080 is a much better value.

JustBenchingeven if AMD priced their XTX for 249$, there would still be people buying nvidia cause they offered something that amd doesn't have (playable RT performance for example).

I get the point you're trying to make, but you've undermined your own argument with that example:

1. If the XTX was $249, people would buy it because Nvidia don't even offer a RT-capable card at $249.
2. The 7800XT and 4060Ti 16GB were both identically priced at $500 and the 7800XT has better RT performance than the 4060Ti (see chart below).
3. The 4060 Ti 16GB wasn't competitive because of its price. 30-series cards on sale and the 4060/4070 made it look like a terrible proposition.

Chrispy_I get the point you're trying to make, but you've undermined your own argument with that example:

1. If the XTX was $249, people would buy it because Nvidia don't even offer a RT-capable card at $249.
2. The 7800XT and 4060Ti 16GB were both identically priced at $500 and the 7800XT has better RT performance than the 4060Ti (see chart below).
3. The 4060 Ti 16GB wasn't competitive because of its price. 30-series cards on sale and the 4060/4070 made it look like a terrible proposition.

I wish it was the case that the 7800xt offered better RT performance than the 4060ti. It doesn't.

The point I was trying to make is that dropping prices in order to match the competitions entry level products doesn't make you competitive. If it did, then everything can be competitive, I can make a GPU myself and sell it for 1$. Does that mean im competing with nvidia now cause they don't offer GPUs for 1$?

I think they've tried to make the point, at least in word, that they are trying to meet the majority of gamers where they are, or will be over the course of a few years. How much sway the promise of the future has for those particular people?! Same logic presumably is being used for why they didn't stick 3D VCache on their new 9900 and 9950 X3D chips.

JustBenchingThat's a very shallow way of looking at it. Cause say I have a 3080, the 4080 gives me 30% more raster and 50% more rt for 950. The xtx gives me 30% more raster and the same rt for 830. Clearly the 4080 is a much better value.

Like I said, the value of the 4080 is questionable. If you find the price difference acceptable, then go for it. Personally, I don't. It doesn't make either of us right or wrong.

JustBenchingI wish it was the case that the 7800xt offered better RT performance than the 4060ti. It doesn't.

Seems to for me - using a 4060Ti in the living room and a 7800XT in the man-cave.

CP2077 Path tracing is about the same framerate on both, but to use it at playable framerates (50+) you need to turn on aggressive performance upscaling AND framegen, so it looks like total ass and the input lag is really really bad. Not unplayable, but definitely offputting enough that I don't think even 30fps console peasants would be okay with it.

This is one of those cases where you just don't use path tracing because it's well out of the reach of either GPU.

Chrispy_Seems to for me - using a 4060Ti in the living room and a 7800XT in the man-cave.

CP2077 Path tracing is about the same framerate on both, but to use it at playable framerates (50+) you need to turn on aggressive performance upscaling AND framegen, so it looks like total ass and the input lag is really really bad. Not unplayable, but definitely offputting enough that I don't think even 30fps console peasants would be okay with it.

This is one of those cases where you just don't use path tracing because it's well out of the reach of either GPU.

This is exactly why I find the "Nvidia has better RT" argument moot. Better or not, it's still crap (unless your remortgage your house to buy a new GPU, of course).