AMD Cuts Prices of R9 290 Series and R9 280 Series Even Further

[HumanSmoke]

Only a short while ago the R9 290 was the best bang for the buck card. Now it's the GTX 970. I'm not sure why you dislike AMD so much that you spam every thread that you can with anti-AMD posts but imo it's good that there is competition between Nvidia and AMD.

True. Whether by design or circumstances, Nvidia and AMD seem to have a staggered release cycle. With both taking turns at having a clear run at the consumer space they both get a bite of the cherry rather than a head-to-head confrontation. A conspiracy theorist might think that this isn't by accident.

 

[Sony Xperia S]

Only a short while ago the R9 290 was the best bang for the buck card.

Nope, this I am understanding now from you. I have never considered the 290 anything special neither performance wise nor market position wise.

The GTX 970 is the real deal which shakes the market, before it it had been an annoying stagnation.

Why this relentless criticism to AMD? Why not?

 

[Lopez0101]

So, the 290/290X coming out to market, with near parity with the 780/780Ti for significantly less money didn't shake up the market and further cement Nvidia's position of having overpriced products? You can't honestly say that the low pricing of the 970 and 980, which beat Nvidia's previous generation of products, has nothing to do with AMD's earlier price-to-performance ratio.

 

[Steevo]

True. Whether by design or circumstances, Nvidia and AMD seem to have a staggered release cycle. With both taking turns at having a clear run at the consumer space they both get a bite of the cherry rather than a head-to-head confrontation. A conspiracy theorist might think that this isn't by accident.

It wasn't long ago that ATI and Nvidia were in hot water for conspiring to keep prices high, and once they were investigated the prices dropped almost as if by magic.

http://www.techpowerup.com/65970/at...the-us-class-action-slapped-against-them.html

 

[RealNeil]

Both of these companies have been on top of the dog-pile many times. So many times before, that it's old news when it happens again.
I'm looking for the best bang for the buck (what I can afford) that is available when I'm ready to buy new GPUs.
The last time that was a EVGA GTX-760 4GB ACX card.
The time before that, it was a pair of R9-280X OC cards that are being used in crossfire.

My Radeon products (the 280X cards and an old XFX-6870 Black) are running fine for me. The gaming is pretty sweet too.
Likewise, the GTX 760 is a good gamer.

I just sold a pair of GTX-680 cards to make way for a pair of GTX-970s as soon as a matched pair of them is available to buy.

To be honest, if either company wants total loyalty, they're gonna have to buy a Dog. I'm in it for myself.

 

[arbiter]

So, the 290/290X coming out to market, with near parity with the 780/780Ti for significantly less money didn't shake up the market and further cement Nvidia's position of having overpriced products? You can't honestly say that the low pricing of the 970 and 980, which beat Nvidia's previous generation of products, has nothing to do with AMD's earlier price-to-performance ratio.

All reviews i seen when 290(x) came out after about 5 minutes would drop 20% of its performance cause it would hit its max temp and throttle. Wouldn't call that parity really.

 

[RealNeil]

All reviews i seen when 290(x) came out after about 5 minutes would drop 20% of its performance cause it would hit its max temp and throttle. Wouldn't call that parity really.

Agreed, they were space heaters. But AMD partner built GPUs with better cooling built in were not. They cool better, and don't throttle back unless you have 'crappy-bo-bappy' case airflow.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Agreed, they were space heaters. But AMD partner built GPUs with better cooling built in were not. They cool better, and don't throttle back unless you have 'crappy-bo-bappy' case airflow.

Which kinds of begs the question why AMD don't allow custom vendor designs on launch day. The past few AMD card releases have featured mostly top notch performance only marred by noise and temps (and associated throttling) - it also only allows a single SKU per model to be reviewed. With vendor boards available on launch day from Nvidia you see a reviews of a whole slew of variations of the same card for days and weeks after the cards hits the channel - i.e. a much more sustained marketing effort at the beginning of the products lifecycle, and a maximization of the GPUs potential ( factory OC, cooling, aesthetics). Seems like a much better utilization of opportunity IMO

 

[64K]

Which kinds of begs the question why AMD don't allow custom vendor designs on launch day. The past few AMD card releases have featured mostly top notch performance only marred by noise and temps (and associated throttling) - it also only allows a single SKU per model to be reviewed. With vendor boards available on launch day from Nvidia you see a reviews of a whole slew of variations of the same card for days and weeks after the cards hits the channel - i.e. a much more sustained marketing effort at the beginning of the products lifecycle, and a maximization of the GPUs potential ( factory OC, cooling, aesthetics). Seems like a much better utilization of opportunity IMO

Nvidia doesn't allow their partners to make custom coolers either on some of their cards. GTX Titan/ Titan Black/ Titan Z.

 

[Athlonite]

Which kinds of begs the question why AMD don't allow custom vendor designs on launch day. The past few AMD card releases have featured mostly top notch performance only marred by noise and temps (and associated throttling) - it also only allows a single SKU per model to be reviewed. With vendor boards available on launch day from Nvidia you see a reviews of a whole slew of variations of the same card for days and weeks after the cards hits the channel - i.e. a much more sustained marketing effort at the beginning of the products lifecycle, and a maximization of the GPUs potential ( factory OC, cooling, aesthetics). Seems like a much better utilization of opportunity IMO

I to believe that AMD just need to give vendors a GPU and it's requirements and just say have at it guys buggar this reference design builds save that production money for increased RnD

 

[RealNeil]

The 280 & 290 releases were skewed by the Bitcoin mining phenomenon's price bloat.
They initially released them at a halfway decent price, but once they were determined to mine so well, the incredible demand for them shot their prices into the stratosphere.
AMD, nor their partners were complaining about this.

The fact that they kept the initial release of their product to themselves was probably based on financial considerations. They made a lot of money.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Nvidia doesn't allow their partners to make custom coolers either on some of their cards. GTX Titan/ Titan Black/ Titan Z.

I think you'll find that they are the exception that proves the rule. I'd argue that the need for custom designs on launch day is more desirable from high volume SKUs rather than the more esoteric (and higher priced) models*. AMD were quite happy to allow vendors to push out custom R9 285's on launch day, so why not 290's and 290X's ?
If you think that the stock blower/shroud was the best design to showcase Hawaii's abilities then all well and good. Personally I don't.

* The same metric holds up across both vendors. Neither FirePro, Quadro, or Tesla feature any custom designs.

The fact that they kept the initial release of their product to themselves was probably based on financial considerations. They made a lot of money.

I've never actually seen an analysis of whether AMD and PC Partner (AMD's OEM card manufacturer) have any special relationship of profit sharing, although I wouldn't rule it out. PC Partner and the other big AMD-only OEM/ODM, TUL Corp seem to have some unwritten hand-in-glove arrangements.

 

[arbiter]

Agreed, they were space heaters. But AMD partner built GPUs with better cooling built in were not. They cool better, and don't throttle back unless you have 'crappy-bo-bappy' case airflow.

Yea but took what 3-4 months before those cards reared up on the market.

 

[RealNeil]

Yea but took what 3-4 months before those cards reared up on the market.

And all the while AMD was making a lot of money. Just like they wanted to,...........

 

[eidairaman1]

Nope, this I am understanding now from you. I have never considered the 290 anything special neither performance wise nor market position wise.

The GTX 970 is the real deal which shakes the market, before it it had been an annoying stagnation.

Why this relentless criticism to AMD? Why not?

Omg whats this, nv isnt as great as everyone claims

http://forums.evga.com/m/tm.aspx?m=2222444&p=1

All reviews i seen when 290(x) came out after about 5 minutes would drop 20% of its performance cause it would hit its max temp and throttle. Wouldn't call that parity really.

Speaking of throttling

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/solved-issues-with-gtx-970-by-flashing-bios.206196/unread

 

[Naito]

Speaking of throttling

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/solved-issues-with-gtx-970-by-flashing-bios.206196/unread[/QUOTE]

OP said it could have possibly been due to his own error of not connecting 24pin power cable to the motherboard. It seems unlikely that this could cause a BIOS failure, but a flash did fix it.

Whether by design or circumstances, Nvidia and AMD seem to have a staggered release cycle. With both taking turns at having a clear run at the consumer space they both get a bite of the cherry rather than a head-to-head confrontation. A conspiracy theorist might think that this isn't by accident.

This.

The following section may be a bit disjointed as I wrote this late at night trying to process the staggered launch of the chips, the reviews, the performance, and my own observations at the time. Please bear with me if you can.

• AMDs (then ATI) last decent lead over Nvidia, was during 2006, with an architecture born from a time before AMDs acquisition of ATI. The (R400) X8** series and the later R5*0 X19** series, saw many successes against Nvidia (Geforce 6000 and 7000 series, respectively) and ultimately won the fixed-pipeline/fixed-shader battle. To end ATIs reign of 2006, Nvidia released the (G80) 8800 GTX. The X1950XTX still managed to trade punches with the hot and noisy G80, but ultimately lost out in performance, particularly when optimizations for the newer GPGPU architecture came about.
  
  
• Come May 2007, ATI releases the abysmal (R600) HD 2900 XT; this was hot, noisy and performed worse, in most cases, than the prior R5*0 architecture. Nvidia fixes the G80s issues and releases the (G92) 8800GT that same year in October with ATI quickly releasing their (RV670) HD 3870 to fix the horror which was the R600. The HD3870 was not powerful enough to topple Nvidia's G80s or the later G92s, so ATI, perhaps with a hint of desperation, releases dual-GPU cards to try and take performance crown. To their credit, the HD 3870 at least corrected most the issues with the HD 2900XT. To add further insult to ATIs failings, simply refreshed the G92 for the Geforce 9000 series, possibly enjoying decent profit.
  
  
• Mid 2008 comes around and Nvidia releases their new (GT200) GTX 280 just before ATI releases a decent answer to the G92/G80, the (RV770) HD4870. Unfortunately, while the HD4870 finally took the lead from the G92s, it could not match the GT200s so, again, ATI relied on dual-GPU cards to hassle Nvidia latest offerings. This can't be cheap for them to do.
  
  
• 2009 sees some refreshing from both sides with the RV790 and GT200b appearing. By the end of 2009, ATI releases their new TerraScale2-based (Cypress XT) HD 5870.
  
  
• We had to wait till the beginning of 2010 to see Nvidia's next architecture: the Fermi-based (GF100) GTX 480. While the Fermi took the outright performance title, it came at a cost; the GPU was hot and noisy and to make matter worse, not that much faster than ATIs latest offerings (or less so, if you consider the dual-GPU cards). This was the first time in a long while ATI/AMD had released something that was arguably better than what Nvidia could offer. To try and recover from their embarrassment, Nvidia releases the (GF110) GTX 580 at the tail end of 2010, possibly with the added pressure from AMDs latest Barts XT chips. Luckily for Nvidias sake, December saw AMDs (Cayman XT) HD6970s flop (to a degree); the VLIW4 architecture and performance would simply not scale as expected.
  
  
• 2012 is the year something major occurs; it's the first time, even with a staggered launch, that the companies don't go head to head with the best the architecture can offer. January sees AMD release the (Tahiti XT) HD7970, but in response, Nvidia only releases their mid-tier Kepler GK104 as the GTX 680. As I have stated before, the GK110 was revealed the same month of the GK104 release and was released November the same year.

So back to the original argument; while there was always a staggered launch, it wasn't until the last few generations did something like the Kepler v Tahiti occur. A mid-tier GPU going against a top-tier GPU with the same or better performance (until Tahiti XT2 atleast). This meant Nvidia, rather than fully destroying AMDs offerings with the release of the GK110, enjoyed large profits on a marked up mid-tier GPU whilst keeping an illusion of competition. History has now repeated itself with the release of the Maxwells. Is this Nvidia being kind to AMD? Or are they just looking to fool the consumer and enjoy larger profits with a marked-up chip? Price and performance has always conveniently slotted between the two brands, even when such a difference in architecture performance occurs.

 

[eidairaman1]

The chip they launched isnt a major perf increase from the 780ti

 

[bubbleawsome]

One positive is that 7970s are now almost into the sub $100 used market. Tri 7970s (maybe dual) will push any game you want even on eyefinity surround. I doubt surround gaming has ever been so cheap.

 

[arbiter]

Omg whats this, nv isnt as great as everyone claims
http://forums.evga.com/m/tm.aspx?m=2222444&p=1
Speaking of throttling
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/solved-issues-with-gtx-970-by-flashing-bios.206196/unread

Speaking of throttling
OP said it could have possibly been due to his own error of not connecting 24pin power cable to the motherboard. It seems unlikely that this could cause a BIOS failure, but a flash did fix it.

That happens on how many 970 cards, handful? How many of 290(x) ref cards throttled unless you ran the at vacum cleaner noise level? that would be All of them. AMD clearly screwed up with using that reference cooler and most reviewers slammed them for it and rightfully so.

 

[eidairaman1]

480/580 aswell

 

[bpgt64]

 

[HumanSmoke]

Way less titanic than that...

The chip they launched isnt a major perf increase from the 780ti

It's actually remarkable that a 398mm² gets anywhere close to a 551mm² GK110 using the same process node and same basic architecture. If you hadn't noticed GM 204 is a GK 104 replacement, not GK 110 since the 780 Ti's MSRP was $100 above that of the 980. The new Tonga Pro R9 285 fares even worse against Tahiti based 280 by comparison - and I'd note that I don't see anyone saying a second tier Tonga GPU is supposed to be an upgrade over the older Hawaii-based cards.

 

[Naito]

The chip they launched isnt a major perf increase from the 780ti

No, but as HumanSmoke just mentioned, it's impressive that they are getting similar performance from a smaller die on the same, matured node. You can't forget that GM204 is a mid-tier chip that is as fast as the top-tier GK110.

 

[eidairaman1]

No, but as HumanSmoke just mentioned, it's impressive that they are getting similar performance from a smaller die on the same, matured node. You can't forget that GM204 is a mid-tier chip that is as fast as the top-tier GK110.

Normally they dont stay on a node and i think both should...

 

[bpgt64]

You can tell the video compression there doing is enabling 4k shadowplay. It's soon much smoother recording now...