So they were going to price higher and now the delay is because they're trying to figure out how to get the cost down?

I'm curious if they've intentionally communicated such a high price in an attempt to stop leaks as everyone would think this is so outrageous it cannot be true.
Not saying Gplay is lying, but perhaps he's been fed wrong information.

Edit: For clarification, I still think AMD got caught with their pants down by Nvidia but I don't think AMD was seriously considering pricing the cards like that.
I'd say it's more likely that they were considering like 650$ MSRP and now have to lower it to about 550$ to remain somewhat price competitive.
Could be a 5Head play in an attempt to obfuscate the actual originally planned price.

NostrasI'm curious if they've intentionally communicated such a high price in an attempt to stop leaks as everyone would think this is so outrageous it cannot be true.
Not saying Gplay is lying, but perhaps he's been fed wrong information.

Yes, and thanks to nvidia's false marketing, spoon feeding information to its customers saying the 5070 will offer 4090 levels of performance, they are all gonna flock to get one, potentially leaving the 9070/XT with decent inventory in march, at a lower price.

I repair GPU's for a living, and what really caught my eye is that GPU core so close to the PCI-e area. This is going to be a re-ball king, as the PCI-e is where most of the physical stress occurs due to mounting, sag, and vibrations. I hope this is just a PowerColor thing, and not a common practice with this series. Have they not learned anything from warranty repairs? But then again, they probably just reflow the core and call it good.

Interventionwhat really caught my eye is that GPU core so close to the PCI-e area. I hope this is just a PowerColor thing, and not a common practice with this series.

Knight47

Oh no :banghead: Well, unless they are using a new magical solder that does not crack as easily as the lead-free stuff they're using, cracked solder joints under the GPU will be common and a bad deal for the end user. 63/37 should be default for BGA, at least. I would be perfectly fine with the rest of the circuit board being Sn99.3 Cu0.7. But everyone wants to go green.

I wonder if there was a miscommunication at some point, given that $749/$899 Bulgarian Lav is almost exactly $400/480. Conversion rate is 54%.

I say that as by all other accounts, that's the rumored (base) pricing. Not to say it's true, but it makes sense.

The only way what is implied works is if nVIDIA would have priced GTX50 like original GTX40 (in terms of 80/70ti/70).
That was never going to happen imho, given it's same node and original 4080 and below pricing was not received well.

Perhaps AMD thought the stack would be priced based on the value of 24GB of GDDR7 for 5080, which is possible, but according to my math even at $1000 that still likely leaves >70% typical margin.
With 16GB nVIDIA is making an absolute killing on 5080, but also may let them price the cards more 'competitively' while still making a killing. Also, not destroy every partner they still have left.

FWIW, nVIDIA typical margin is >70% while AMD's is >40%. Both CEO's have been commended for this fact.
IMHO, the market doesn't like AMD having over a 50% margin, 60% at most, nor (as they correctly summized with interviews at CES) does it want a $1000 card from them. ~$800 yes, but only if good value.
Where-as for nVIDIA the sky is the limit, especially given their willingness to use less ram (compared to compute capability) where-as AMD will not, but will sell their cards based on compute OR current RT.
Whichever is higher.

It's why I feel like AMD should be aiming to beat the cut-down 80 every generation (with OC to ~ stock 80), not just value;with a weird stack where we know both cards will over-all be better than 70.
I personally think they would have been better off with a higher-clocked 7168sp card at <$550 to beat 5070 in value/OCing and a 24Gbps card priced between 5070/5070Ti, but I'm not their marketing team.
Instead we get a card that probably literally replaces the 7800xt/gre for cheaper, and a </~ 7900xt for cheaper (less ram, but it's fine given performance).
This puts them in the pickle of a 3.2+/24gbps card being worth less relatively; say $600 instead of $650...but they may still price in toward the moon. Then nobody will buy it instead of the cheaper cards.
I think had they released something higher-clocked right-away the market will have loved it as that's really the max perf applicable to 16GB and have made 5070ti/5080 look ridiculous...
.... same as 12GB 5070 will vs whatever.

Instead we'll probably end up with cheaper/better value alternatives to 5070/5070ti and who knows if they'll ever actually release the 5070ti/5080 competitor.

I can't get over how weird it is if 9070xt is indeed using 20gbps ram, although I will grant the >20gbps ootb OC model hints they may be using something better...
....given greater than stock memory oc is almost-never allowed.
It literally makes no sense (versus overclocking a 9070 or 7800xt) if 20gbps. It appears like something created by marketing to look good versus 5070 stock and a stock 5070ti (when overclocked).
9070 better value ~5070 when OC.
That said, If that's what you're after (more than the limitation of 5070/12GB and/or cheaper) or without the fluff/anemic ram of of 5080 (whichever your view), I don't think these cards will be a bad deal.
It's cool that AMD is likely going to market a very good price, and to some people that may be more important, but to me I would've liked them to put up a fight (even if slightly more expensive).
Appears pretty obvious they need to clear stock of N31...but that's not our problem. I also think 7800xt was a very good card that's tough to follow-up on 4/5nm, but that's also not our problem.

I don't know why AMD does this (I mean, cheaper is good...but they want margin and people want better-performing cards ootb...and the stock clocks don't mesh with this). There is a better way.
I could imagine a 11520sp/256-bit/24GB card on 3nm with a ~/<$500 BOM (so if price ever drops to $700 there's still a 40% margin) competing with a full ($1000) OR beating a cut-down 6080 (~$750-800?).
If nVIDIA targets slightly better performance (12288sp+?), AMD would be a better value. If nVIDIA targets similar performance, AMD would be a MUCH better value.
If nVIDIA tries to make the 6080 better than really needed for the tier and 6070ti worse (<11520sp/24GB, as is the case with current Ti models), AMD would be the better alternative.

( I also think this design makes sense for a PS6 [but with denser libraries bc Playstations run around threshold voltage/lowest yield clock to save power/die space and keep cost down).

To me, for AMD, this is the way.

The part that makes me laugh is when people realize the PS6 will probably be just over the maximum potential of N48 and perhaps often use more than 16GB of ram on avg (a limitation of 5080).
Current PS5 pro uses a ~15000/3000mhz split for GPU/CPU memory. If PS6 uses a 27000/5000mhz split (32GB @ 32gbps), the PS6 could have a ~4ghz(+) cpu ('c' cores?) and up to 60TF on the GPU.
That would equate to 11264sp (or 5632sp if you're 'that guy'/Cerney) at 3nm threshold voltage/clocks (2664-2671mhz), ~60TF (for power/yields), while the extra bw to the cpu would be similar to v-cache.
27gbps is faster than any N48 could muster. 60TF likely faster than the core could handle, (that'd be close to ~3700mhz), even with a ton of voltage. But, ofc, similar compute/RT to a 5080.
I think this is the design they'll go for because if Cerney is the type of guy I think he is; he'll know 11264 (potentially 88 of 90 CUs) is an efficiency wet dream. I think we both think like that (as absolute nerds).
Also, 32gbps will likely be cheap as I don't think many 3nm cards will use it, while yields/pricing should be favorable given all companies can and will make it (on older process lines).
Hell, you see 28gbps OC to 34gbps (and gated). That's likely bc next-gen will likely use 36gbps and higher on the PC market.
I also think a 18gpu/14GB split makes the most sense as allocation (given current game usage in those areas), perhaps with a expanded subsystem for the os (4GB?),
but it's always possible < 32GB could be available to devs.


That's why I think this generation is a cash-grab...all-around. Hold onto your 4090's though.

The potential of a 192-bit 18GB high-clocked design will probably mesh well versus the PS6 (low-clocked 256-bit design),
where-as a high-clocked 256-bit/24GB design would match a 4090 for 'acceptable' enthusiast pricing, lasting a long time.
It's possible they may avoid these designs on 3nm, taking the over/under so people will keep buying graphics cards in future generations...
but I would hope at least one company shoots for the goal and good efficiency/pricing.
N48 and GB203 (16GB) do not match either of these criteria, and why I give them a pass.
I do like the potential pricing/value on the low-end (6070 vanilla) and maxing out the potential of 16GB on the high-end...if good price.
I just think the days of 16GB being enough for anything anything over vanilla 1440p (w/o RT/FG/upscaling to 4k etc) are numbered. Obviously not everyone cares about that, but I think enough do/should.

7900Xt is priced about the same as 4070 Super. And 20% higher the regular 4070, which is where 5070 slots in. so 9070Xt must be 30% faster than 7800XT. I didn't get why is it such a surprise and what is the hold up. And why does AMD have to lower the price unless it's slower than a 4070 super. Did they really buy the Jensen's fake frames statement that 5070 equals 4090. Well in That case i want a $250 9070 and half height slot at that, which is facilitated by the GPU placement near the slot.

alwaysstsI wonder if there was a miscommunication at some point, given that $749/$899 Bulgarian Lav is almost exactly $400/480. Conversion rate is 54%.

It's not $749/$899 Bulgarian Lav, he said over 2000 Bulgarian Lav for the XT, it's $749/$899 American dollars without tax. Just watch the video with subtitles.

Knight47It's not $749/$899 Bulgarian Lav, he said over 2000 Bulgarian Lav for the XT, it's $749/$899 American dollars without tax. Just watch the video with subtitles.

@TumbleGeorge can you confirm this.

The guy also acts as a sort of tech influencer(but is just big mouth) on YouTube and other platforms. He mostly posts news, including about hardware he has brought in for sale in his store. There are currently no offers, but I don't follow this store often and I don't rule out that there were and they were deleted after AMD postponed the start of sales.

He simply expressed his confusion that the 9070 XT or even the NonXT replaces 7900 XTX at 899 euro or 1800 BGN (tied to the EUR in 1.95:1 ratio).

That nerd calls himself "DonBrutar"? Funny guy

2000BGN for 9070XT is ~ 1007euro but this is with 20% VAT. w/o tax is about 806euro. iirc there is also 20% tariff so this means before entering EU 9070XT should cost ~645euro
math for 9070 is similar
1800BGN -> ~906euro, w/o VAT 725euro, before tariff 580euro
that is with exact exchange rates for currencies and if the stated prices in BGN are final prices buyer will pay (with shop interest included)

edit:
and video ends with conclusion 7000 is best price/performance and you can buy it now so line up and give us your money so we can sell out old stuff before new one comes :rolleyes:

ne6togadno2000BGN for 9070XT is ~ 1055euro but this is with 20% VAT. w/o tax is about 844euro. iirc there is also 20% tariff so this means before entering EU 9070XT should cost ~675euro
math for 9070 is similar
1800BGN -> ~906euro, w/o VAT 725euro, before tariff 580euro

If you wish to trace prices back to begine of sales of 7000 generation in our country, will found that prices started much higher than MSPR+VAT+normal retail margins. I remember prices up to 3000-3060 leva for rx 7900 xtx or maybe more for models which are no longer listed on pazaruvaj.com, but I also remember higher prices for a short time.
Ps. I mentioned normal shops not individual scalper persons

TumbleGeorgeIf you wish to trace prices back to begine of sales of 7000 generation in our country, will found that prices started much higher than MSPR+VAT+normal retail margins. I remember prices up to 3000-3060 leva for rx 7900 xtx or maybe more for models which are no longer listed on pazaruvaj.com, but I also remember higher prices for a short time.
Ps. I mentioned normal shops not individual scalper persons

for 7000 series there was price hike due to inventory shortages at the beginning and those hikes were presented in all markets.
here the question is how amd's 9070 msrp can be deduced from stated in the video prices. i dont think in the video he would state price that is not final retail price so his stated prices 2000/1800BGN should include retailer margins. what i have calculated 675/580 euro is also with that retailer margin included.
i am not sure if there was tariff for import of electronics in bulk. i am sure for individual pieces that there is non. but if am wrong about tariff and amd's msrp was 799euro (or 779?) for 9070xt and ~699 for 9070 (0% tariff) than amd's decision to delay 9070 launch till they figure how they can match nvidia's prices makes much more sense.

ne6togadnofor 7000 series there was price hike due to inventory shortages at the beginning and those hikes were presented in all markets.
here the question is how amd's 9070 msrp can be deduced from stated in the video prices. i dont think in the video he would state price that is not final retail price so his stated prices 2000/1800BGN should include retailer margins. what i have calculated 675/580 euro is also with that retailer margin included.
i am not sure if there was tariff for import of electronics in bulk. i am sure for individual pieces that there is non. but if am wrong about tariff and amd's msrp was 799euro (or 779?) for 9070xt and ~699 for 9070 (0% tariff) than amd's decision to delay 9070 launch till they figure how they can match nvidia's prices makes much more sense.

We can do all sorts of calculations and guesses. In some cases, we may even hit the price at which the retailer himself received a given component from the regional wholesale dealer. Let me confirm one thing. Cards cost retailers a price that is far below MSPR so that they can apply the local tax and a markup sufficient to make a good profit. When retailers sell more expensively than MSPR, it means that they have imposed a markup above the intended one because they are brutally (or Brutarly) greedy.

Called this exactly since mid 2024 with the leaks that AMD will be retreating from "high-end" focusing on "mid-range".

What AMD means: Our GPUs will be mid-range in terms of specs and performance, they will still be priced as high end.