- Joined
- Dec 14, 2009
- Messages
- 13,158 (2.39/day)
- Location
- Glasgow - home of formal profanity
Processor | Ryzen 7800X3D |
---|---|
Motherboard | MSI MAG Mortar B650 (wifi) |
Cooling | be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 |
Memory | 32GB Kingston Fury |
Video Card(s) | Gainward RTX4070ti |
Storage | Seagate FireCuda 530 M.2 1TB / Samsumg 960 Pro M.2 512Gb |
Display(s) | LG 32" 165Hz 1440p GSYNC |
Case | Asus Prime AP201 |
Audio Device(s) | On Board |
Power Supply | be quiet! Pure POwer M12 850w Gold (ATX3.0) |
Software | W10 |
And, LAST, BUT NOT LEAST: this is a thread about RX 480. You were responding to:
Nobody expected next 600$ card to be 25% faster than previous gen card of the same price tier, wah
If you insist on using price as an argument, then your argument is invalid. Pricing is a reflection of what the market will pay. That is why AMD cards used to be so much cheaper than Nvidia. Comparing price tiers means Nano was the same (or better) than Fury X. Pricing was used to differentiate the product (Nano was niche). Likewise, Titan X is perfectly valid as a comparison as it was priced according to market demand (higher memory full core card).
You cannot use pricing as an indicator for what product is replacing what product. Pricing is a very transient concept. You can actually only use your logic because Nvidia decided to price it so much higher this time around because AMD have nothing to fight it with at the high end.
And, LAST, BUT NOT LEAST: this is a thread about RX 480.
So stop talking about Vega.