AMD Confirms Retreat from the Enthusiast GPU Segment, to Focus on Gaining Market-Share

[venturi]

None of this commentary makes any market or financial sense. Wordsmithing "we can't compete" into some lofty ideal about market share. Build a competitive card and deprecate into various price points, but don't make it sound like a business model, just say "we can't compete on performance with nvidia"

Shame, because nVidia could use some REAL competition, but don't make some BS statement for sheeple and expect everybody to nod in approval and accolades.

Nvidia isn't any better. example - DLSS = "run at a lower resolution" so that the hype about ray tracing is overlooked when the best card we got can't push 30fps with path tracing at 4k. Then nvidia kills of multi-gpu because the only way to achieve 4k. 144fps, path tracing is with another card, and multi-gpu DX12 and Vulkan drivers are then also deprecated.

Sometimes its tiring to be manipulated. Just stop

AMD, just say "we can't compete with nvidia at a technology level" but don't BS it with some market share line.


geeez

 

[OneMoar]

o LOOK AMD Admitting Defeat and Going home with their tail between their legs (again)

what is with this company and the constant Giveup-and-go-home

 

[Vayra86]

I agree, I personally never buy at launch or preorder, but cannot ignore the fact that when I received those games, that was indeed their prices. So that was their value at the moment.

Agreed.

As mentioned, day one launch price was that and thats when I got them, so fair is fair.

Sometimes that works, but will use one particular example, the Spider Man games have not come down in price. They do go on sale, but not "low" enough, considering their age.

Please see above.

Please see above.

It does, as stated, except perhaps with the 4090, but that was never the target.

According to some, not entirely the case and sometimes, even their own customers get shafted, just ask the proud owners of the 30xx series.

That is something that many people have already mentioned and debunked here and other threads. Personally, I have seen a couple and I mean literally a couple of times where I say wow, rt is nice. And then reality hits, not even the 4090 with dlss and frame gen is enough for some of those, so I dont think such prices are worth now.

Funny how power consumption only matters when I can be used against AMD. I speak about the other times when this comes up, like with the current intel CPUs, when magically, power consumption on a desktop doesnt matter. yes, potato - potatoe or how the saying goes.

Granted, they worked on that for a while and had the vision, but if you need it and there are alternatives, just not mature enough.

I wouldnt say its as a one sided but I get it.

Again, that matters when is convenient, for example, how many post in this thread alone are asking for lower prices?

Yet they were ok in accepting the price increase from the 3080 ($329) to the 4080 ($1100).

I'm willing to take the a slightly less "performant" tech if it helps a bigger userbase.

Principles, hence why I like AMD.

They went extra hard on Tegra 2 or whatever is called for the upcoming Switch 2, since AMD also did a big push with Nintendo so they would switch to AMD.

I love how I live rent free in your world.
Funny how people get triggered just because little ol'me doesnt like Ngreedia.

Understood and respected. Can see your POV, and part of it is also the reason I picked a 7900XT this time around. Still, even in doing so, I can totally see why Nvidia has the market share it does, and its not all bad and nefarious in my view, they've worked hard at their near monopoly and AMD has certainly not invested as much into the PC gamer. Lots of promises, lacking delivery, multiple times in the last decade.

 

[Zazigalka]

we're focusing on boosting sales numbers
how, you ask.
we'll offer fewer products.

I agree, I personally never buy at launch or preorder, but cannot ignore the fact that when I received those games, that was indeed their prices. So that was their value at the moment.

I don't get preorders either. games come as download codes, are people afraid they are going to run out of codes ? ridiculous.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

Understood and respected. Can see your POV, and part of it is also the reason I picked a 7900XT this time around. Still, even in doing so, I can totally see why Nvidia has the market share it does, and its not all bad and nefarious in my view, they've worked hard at their near monopoly and AMD has certainly not invested as much into the PC gamer. Lots of promises, lacking delivery, multiple times in the last decade.

I hate making excuses on behalf of a multibillion company, but do remember that they were really close to being dead and even though this was a long time ago (by now) it does takes time to rebuild.


Hell, I think that they are still paying their debt.

They went all out on Ryzen and it looks like they might be reworking Radeon in the same way. Plus, they placed their eggs on OpenCL and other open standards, which also backfired, so that also takes time to build up.

As mentioned, I think I heard that RDNA4 is simply a refresh if you will of RDNA3 and are placing more work in RDNA5.

So who knows at this point but meanwhile, I was happy with my 6900XT (sold) and now with my 7900xtx.

 

[AusWolf]

No, you got a 7900XTX for 800. The games aren't worth 170. They're freebies you otherwise would have never bought for that kind of money, let's keep it real.

Game bundles hardly represent value. Its just nice.

AMD will never win market share by selling game bundles either. The GPU behind it needs to be compelling, not the deal with the games.


I always love these fantasy comments. 'If AMD would - (insert impossible situation)' I would buy.

Meanwhile, the vast majority instead buys Nvidia at a higher $/FPS price point regardless. I've said it before when AMD focused on 'the mid range' and left the high end behind... Nobody wants to bet on the losing team - even the AMD rep up here in this article doubly confirms it, if you want dev support you need substantial market share, luckily AMD has the consoles and 90% of PC gaming with any focus on strong graphics, is ports. You're either playing for the top position, or you're not playing, quite simply because the mid range is already a known factor. Basically by saying you focus on midrange, you're saying 'next gen, you will see more of the same shit you can already buy today, with minor tweaks'. Well wow, where can I sign up...

Prediction: AMD isn't going to sell jack shit with this strategy for RDNA4, Nvidia will simply undercut them with a better deal, they barely have to make an effort to do so.


Given the average UE5 performance relative to older titles I'd be inclined to agree. There's a strong requirement and demand in the market for faster GPUs. I'm sure there is some architectural low hanging fruit for RDNA wrt Nanite and all, but yeah, I'd expect 7900XTX performance equivalent and then some if they want to keep playing. If they stall on 7900XT performance... this whole stack is DOA. Those people already bought a 4070 (S) or 4060ti at that point, or even a 7800XT.

Let's not forget that not everybody upgrades with every generation. With price-to-performance pretty much stagnating in the last 2-3 gens, it makes even less sense. Therefore, I don't think it would be reasonable to assume that RDNA 4 is targeted at RDNA 3 owners. More like RDNA 2 (6700 XT), or older.

 

[z1n0x]

You can hate on nGreedia all you want, but in the end of the day, they innovate, deliver top-notch products, marketing, supply and its rewarded with huge profits. And they keep moving full speed forward. Its not their fault AMD can't get their act together and keep up. Maybe, just maybe, AMD shouldn't have spent all those billions $ on share buybacks and pandering to Wall Street and instead used them to improve the company (Radeon Technologies Group, specifically) and its technology and products.

 

[R0H1T]

Does this mean we'll get 2 slot GPUs instead of these 3+ slot monstrosities?

No.

None of this commentary makes any market or financial sense. Wordsmithing "we can't compete" into some lofty ideal about market share. Build a competitive card and deprecate into various price points, but don't make it sound like a business model, just say "we can't compete on performance with nvidia"

Shame, because nVidia could use some REAL competition, but don't make some BS statement for sheeple and expect everybody to nod in approval and accolades.

Nvidia isn't any better. example - DLSS = "run at a lower resolution" so that the hype about ray tracing is overlooked when the best card we got can't push 30fps with path tracing at 4k. Then nvidia kills of multi-gpu because the only way to achieve 4k. 144fps, path tracing is with another card, and multi-gpu DX12 and Vulkan drivers are then also deprecated.

Sometimes its tiring to be manipulated. Just stop

AMD, just say "we can't compete with nvidia at a technology level" but don't BS it with some market share line.


geeez

They can't compete with a "luxury" brand, just like 90% of phone makers can't compete with Apple! AMD is the rock, albeit a puny one, standing between you and $5~10k "gaming" cards, and yes, that day may still be upon us!

Spoiler

 

[HairyLobsters]

I understand that the midrange is where most of the money is, and therefore, focusing there is a good idea, but how would releasing a high-end chip eat into it? Would it take the development time away from other projects?

Perhaps a bottom-up instead of top-down approach would be good. That is, instead of developing a big chip and cutting it up for lower tiers, maybe they could make a small and efficient midrange chip, and scale it up for high-end?

Sounds like they're focusing on their higher end chips being mostly for data centers.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

It was a halo card like the 4090. It can cost whatever, price is irrelevant in that segment. The actual high end 8800 GTX was actually reasonably priced.

The 8800 GTX was still a $600 product. Adjusted for inflation via garbage CPI calculator, that is $951.

Are we still going to insist that $1000 GPUs are unreasonable?

I like how you conveniently ignored my point about CPUs. Where are the 700 dollar i7/R7s? I don’t see them. Inflation isn’t supposed to be selective, right?

I9 14900ks is a $630 product. Normal 14900k is $550.

The I7 is no longer the top dog in the CPU lineup. The i7 now is the i5 of yesteryear.

Define “well”. From my understanding, the 4090 alone has sold more than the entire RDNA 3 product stack put together. AMD needs a massive win in the next generation or two to be an actual competitor. Console chips are a nice source of constant income, but it’s not enough and is very low-margin.

Well enough that they were sold out. In the 6800xts case, sold out for well over a year, and for the 7900 series, sold out for several months with stock not remaining stable until a year after launch.

Of course, AMD prioritized CPUs instead during this time. Which was a good business decision, but it also impacts GPU sales and marketshare.

Let's not forget that not everybody upgrades with every generation. With price-to-performance pretty much stagnating in the last 2-3 gens, it makes even less sense. Therefore, I don't think it would be reasonable to assume that RDNA 4 is targeted at RDNA 3 owners. More like RDNA 2 (6700 XT), or older.

Agreed. Even back in the day upgrading every gen was rare. You usually waited at least for one gen, if not 2. Same in the 2010s. Shares of evergreen 6000 series didnt drop off on steam when the 7000s came out, it was when the RX 200s and 300s released.

You can hate on nGreedia all you want, but in the end of the day, they innovate, deliver top-notch products, marketing, supply and its rewarded with huge profits. And they keep moving full speed forward. Its not their fault AMD can't get their act together and keep up. Maybe, just maybe, AMD shouldn't have spent all those billions $ on share buybacks and pandering to Wall Street and instead used them to improve the company (Radeon Technologies Group, specifically) and its technology and products.

Wait, you mean stock buybacks are....Le Bad? No, it HAS to be the nGREEDia mindshare! It cant be that AMD has been famously unstable in the GPU division for a long time.

 

[AusWolf]

Well enough that they were sold out. In the 6800xts case, sold out for well over a year, and for the 7900 series, sold out for several months with stock not remaining stable until a year after launch.

And that matters way more than market share. If my burger van sells 200 burgers a day, but completely sells out, who's to say it's not business booming? No burger van needs to compete with McDonald's sales numbers to stay afloat.

 

[RedelZaVedno]

This is extremely bad news for us enthusiasts. Without competition Ngreedia's prices will skyrocket. Prepare to pay at least $1499 for 5080 and $1999 for 5090

 

[csendesmark]

Somewhat understandable

According to the Steam hardware survey
You have to "go down" to the 16th place to see the first card which can be considered as a high-end.
This is not new, there are only a few exception - most of the money profit came on the mid to low tier cards.

This is extremely bad news for us enthusiasts. Without competition Ngreedia's prices will skyrocket. Prepare to pay at least $1499 for 5080 and $1999 for 5090

What?
When was the last time when nVidia had competition on the top tier graphics card market?

 

[AusWolf]

Somewhat understandable
View attachment 362660
According to the Steam hardware survey
You have to "go down" to the 16th place to see the first card which can be considered as a high-end.
This is not new, there are only a few exception - most of the money profit came on the mid to low tier cards.

Finally, someone gets it! Thank you.

 

[csendesmark]

Finally, someone gets it! Thank you.

Well I just old enough to remember when checked the graphics chip market share,
When intel owned like 50+% of the market with those s#@t integrated chips, and they made good money with the bare minimum R&D
I mean r&d, those chip's development does not warrant a capital "r&d"

 

[TheDeeGee]

This is all the times you said Ngreedia, in just this thread, we get it.. but isn't it a thread about AMD? Can we stay on topic?

Clearly an AMDiot.

 

[Luminescent]

I wonder how GPU reviews will look like, if AMD is essentially gone then what will channels like hardware unboxed do ? LCD/LED reviews ?
What sealed AMD's fate wasn't only their lack of vision, they could continue to steal ideas from Nvidia and offer the cheaper, inferior alternative but when AI boomed and Nvidia got showered with money they knew it's impossible to compete with 2 trillion dollars company.
Funny thing Jen Hsun actually said it was luck.

 

[Hxx]

if amd wants the market back to 50%
why not release a powerful gpu for the ps6 along side one for the pc segment and deliver great ray and path tracing
that way they maximize utilization of the wafers

It’s not that easy from a business perspective . Maybe the costs outweigh the profits for them . Plus nvidia is already several steps ahead and so they are fighting a losing battle on the high end . I’d rather have them spend resources where it makes most sense rather than pull an intel and shrug when problems pop up and end up firing a bunch of people. Besides if this decision helps their business in the short run they may revert back into high end later on

 

[jmgbjr]

No complaints here. If AMD can release a GPU for $500 with close to RTX 4080 performance, 16GB gddr6, and similar RT performance to what the PS5 Pro is claiming to offer, then win-win.

 

[Visible Noise]

The "Small Die" strategy flopped in the past, I guess they expect a different result from Small Die 2.0.

 

[evernessince]

Sounds reasonable to me.
Just because Jensen would love to sell a RTX 5090 Ti for 4000€ doesn't mean you have to play along. Considering the prices of GPUs nowadays... I welcome this decision.

Almost certainly AMD is lying here.

They did it because they are allocating as many chips as possible to AI, they just can't come out and say that because it would piss everyone off.

Average user:


Average Tech channel/site


Well, the market gets what it wished for.


Intel save us!!!!



Yes, I know, low quality post or trolling you will say. No. It's not.
It is just the reality of today's market. Users don't want to even consider a Radeon product, even when it is the best option for their budget and tech press is more aggressive towards AMD. AMD will look at the markets and target not only the one that gives them better margins, but also that market where buyers will acknowledge the advantages of it's products and will choose it over the competition. The market where buyers will buy based on their needs, not based on the sticker on the product. If AMD and more specifically the Radeon brand was receiving some love in the retail market and better AMD models at the same price range where outselling Nvidia models, AMD would have a reason to keep investing in gaming cards. Now they will limit their products in the market and they could be doing so, for as many generations they feel it is needed for consumers to stop drooling in front of an Nvidia logo. Many expect a repeat of the RDNA1 situation where AMD stayed only one generation without a high end model. Well, who can say that if people keep buying Nvidia hardware no matter what, RDNA5 will have an enthusiast model? And why should AMD build a high end model when people will keep finding excuses to buy the Nvidia sticker?

Hey don't forget the part where they don't buy the Intel GPU either. There's a large disconnect in the GPU market between what people say other's should buy vs what people actually buy, as evidenced by AMD's 12% marketshare. Even bulldozer had a 26% marketshare and I really really don't think current AMD cards are anywhere near as bad as bulldozer was.

 

[Vayra86]

Let's not forget that not everybody upgrades with every generation. With price-to-performance pretty much stagnating in the last 2-3 gens, it makes even less sense. Therefore, I don't think it would be reasonable to assume that RDNA 4 is targeted at RDNA 3 owners. More like RDNA 2 (6700 XT), or older.

Agreed, but if the top end of RDNA4 isn't moving forward much past the 7900XT, then how much movement is the 6700/6800XT crowd really waiting for? +20%? They can already buy a discounted 7900GRE or XT now...

Not exactly going to be earth shattering, its going to have to come from the improved featureset if anything then. And let's consider that. Even IF AMD gains perf/feature parity with RDNA4 on RT and FSR (probably too tall an order) and they release a 500 dollar GPU that performs like a 7900XT. If you had a 6800XT now, would you pay that? Again... its not really an earth shattering jump here, and if you really wanted RT, you'd have gone for Nvidia at this point.

I'm not convinced of AMD's rationale or strategy here. They're responding, roll for initiative: critical miss. The last time they focused on their midrange they came up 2 generations short of Nvidia which is what got us into the RTX mess in the first place. AMD managed to completely stall at Vega performance for what, 5-7 years? Also, look at Intel, fighting tooth and nail to get every bit of performance out of Xe so they can finally compete in the midrange. AMD has a high end segment position in spitting distance and says 'meh, whatever'. I can't even.

This is extremely bad news for us enthusiasts. Without competition Ngreedia's prices will skyrocket. Prepare to pay at least $1499 for 5080 and $1999 for 5090

Good riddance its about time you guys stopped paying over 1k for these temporary items. You have yourself and only yourself to blame for this, jumping on every new x90 like its candy

 

[R0H1T]

They did it because they are allocating as many chips as possible to AI, they just can't come out and say that because it would piss everyone off.

Even with that, they'll be delivering probably 10% of the Nvidia's GPU sales to enterprise/HPC markets!

Like who? The 10~12% people who likely care more for their wallets

 

[dir_d]

None of this commentary makes any market or financial sense. Wordsmithing "we can't compete" into some lofty ideal about market share. Build a competitive card and deprecate into various price points, but don't make it sound like a business model, just say "we can't compete on performance with nvidia"

Shame, because nVidia could use some REAL competition, but don't make some BS statement for sheeple and expect everybody to nod in approval and accolades.

Nvidia isn't any better. example - DLSS = "run at a lower resolution" so that the hype about ray tracing is overlooked when the best card we got can't push 30fps with path tracing at 4k. Then nvidia kills of multi-gpu because the only way to achieve 4k. 144fps, path tracing is with another card, and multi-gpu DX12 and Vulkan drivers are then also deprecated.

Sometimes its tiring to be manipulated. Just stop

AMD, just say "we can't compete with nvidia at a technology level" but don't BS it with some market share line.


geeez

I believe they can compete, and at every level but the ROI is not there. They need to build the software and confidence to get rid of the stigma they have. May i even dare say build an ecosystem around streaming/ML/encoding that Nvidia has on lock. How smart would it be for them to do that on the high end market instead of the general market. This is their chance to make some radical changes.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Not exactly going to be earth shattering, its going to have to come from the improved featureset if anything then. And let's consider that. Even IF AMD gains perf/feature parity with RDNA4 on RT and FSR (probably too tall an order) and they release a 500 dollar GPU that performs like a 7900XT. If you had a 6800XT now, would you pay that?

Your justification is precisely why AMD is doing this. Why would they bother with a high investment, high complexity project for a high-end board if most Radeon gamers are running previous generation midrangers, tend to be precisely from the slice of the market that is all too happy to settle "conscientious consumers", don't upgrade unless there are massive gains and would rather shun and dismiss new features and advanced functionality if it means they save a buck... the whole defense of the Radeon business at this point has centered against the fact that Nvidia pushes the envelope too hard and charges too much for their products, yet at the same time, software would not advance if the hardware wasn't there to back it up. Turing was the prime example of this, it was the first of the modern architecture GPUs and it was extremely expensive with very limited software availability at the time.

A quiet, efficient chip is the best upsell they can offer at this point in time. Best to use the wafers in high-margin businesses like Epyc, after all, Radeon's core audience doesn't really care about DLSS, RT, or even day one driver optimization...