AMD Debuts Radeon RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 Powered by RDNA 4, and FSR 4

[cfenton]

Thing is, it sure looks like what people (not necessarily you) want is for an AMD GPU to be an Nvidia GPU, just for 30% less.

Why wouldn't we want that? Nvidia has the feature set lead with RT and DLSS. You might not care about those things, but lots of people do. I personally don't care that much about RT, but DLSS is a great feature and it's better than FSR, especially in motion. If AMD can't compete on features, then they need to compete on price and 10% isn't enough to make up for the lacking features. If they match raster performance, but continue to trail in features, they can't expect many sales unless they are significantly cheaper.

 

[Dr. Dro]

At this point it's clear, being pro consumer is not paying off for AMD, even in the form of positive mindshare.

They were never pro-consumer. They were always favorable to their own interests and nothing more.

 

[Hecate91]

Yet it was ok when dlss 3.whatever required a 40 series.

At this point it's clear, being pro consumer is not paying off for AMD, even in the form of positive mindshare.

The reactions are as expected, its fine when Nvidia does it, but when AMD does it they're anti-consumer.

just seems like both care less about the bread and butter that created their brands which is PC gamers and dGPU's

More so Nvidia than AMD, Nvidia has the profits and marketshare to sell both to consumers and business for AI. Nvidia got to where they are off the backs of gamers, yet has mostly ignored their gamer customers unless they pay up for an xx90 card. I think it's understandable AMD wants to target consoles and APU's over dGPU, especially when everyone buys Nvidia regardless of AMD pricing their dGPU's lower.

 

[Dr. Dro]

The reactions are as expected, its fine when Nvidia does it, but when AMD does it they're anti-consumer.

More so Nvidia than AMD, Nvidia has the profits and marketshare to sell both to consumers and business for AI. I think it's understandable AMD wants to target consoles and APU's over dGPU, especially when everyone buys Nvidia regardless of AMD pricing their dGPU's lower.

Don't spin this around, if it's anti-consumer when Nvidia does it, warranting years of rhetoric and scorn, it's anti-consumer when AMD does it. Where is all the outrage of AMD going back on their word and "betraying the trust of the loyal Radeon customer"? It's simple, really, it's pure hypocrisy. You people never once cared for it being closed source software, you only ever cared that it was better and you couldn't use it.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

They were never pro-consumer. They were always favorable to their own interests and nothing more.

idk the 4870 felt pro consumer at the time and the 7970 with 50% more vram than it's direct competitor felt pretty nice. Even Nvidia use to be more pro consumer when thier 70 class would either match or beat the previous flagship.


The difference is neither of them actually care about us they definitely aren't our friends but that doesn't mean they haven't done pro consumer things... Ryzen was pretty pro consumer for a while....

 

[Visible Noise]

This post by Ian Cutress was a bit insightful, and made it clear that AMD is indeed waiting for Nvidia to reveal their pricing so that they can properly position their stack:

Where Was RDNA4 at AMD’s Keynote?

Timing is Everything

morethanmoore.substack.com

It's not like a company owns any favors to customers, but rather they'll just follow the money.

Michael from TechPowerUp asked about the top priorities for RDNA4 were. David gave a top 3:

1. Improving performance in the areas that gamers care about most - ray tracing, ML Ops for FSR4 and ML Super Resolution

But….But…. Nobody cares about those. I read it here in every article about video cards.

/s

 

[Dr. Dro]

idk the 4870 felt pro consumer at the time and the 7970 with 50% more vram than it's direct competitor felt pretty nice. Even Nvidia use to be more pro consumer when thier 70 class would either match or beat the previous flagship.

The difference is neither of them actually care about us they definitely aren't our friends but that doesn't mean they haven't done pro consumer things... Ryzen was pretty pro consumer for a while....

Those cards were just under the heat of competition. And they had their merits which made them successful products.

And the CPU question... yes, for a while, until Intel chips lost momentum and they started charging $300 for a 6 core Ryzen 5. Then the 12400F happened and suddenly even motherboards that had "technical limitations" supported it all right quick alongside a nice price cut.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

They were never pro-consumer. They were always favorable to their own interests and nothing more.

Regardless of who gets the benefit, I will choose FSR over DLSS because it supports all GPUs and that's just one sample that it's conveniently ignored.

 

[Hecate91]

Don't spin this around, if it's anti-consumer when Nvidia does it, warranting years of rhetoric and scorn, it's anti-consumer when AMD does it. Where is all the outrage of AMD going back on their word and "betraying the trust of the loyal Radeon customer"? It's simple, really, it's pure hypocrisy. You people never once cared for it being closed source software, you only ever cared that it was better and you couldn't use it.

I'm not spinning anything, just stating the facts of how people, including yourself, are reacting to a feature only being on the latest card. I'm not going to judge anything before these cards launch and will wait and see what FSR4 is before being negative about it. But I'm sure the media will crap on it while continuing to insist DLSS is better while showing 10X zoomed still images. However I really couldn't care less about some AI whatever bullshit upscaling, I don't use or care about any version of upscaling.
The majority of consumers and reviewers aren't reacting with scorn or disdain, but instead hype up features and criticize the competition for not somehow supporting a proprietary feature.
I cared about the software being closed source and voted with my wallet.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I'm not spinning anything, just stating the facts of how people, including yourself, are reacting to a feature only being on the latest card. I'm not going to judge anything before these cards launch and will wait and see what FSR4 is before being negative about it. But I'm sure the media will crap on it while continuing to insist DLSS is better while showing 10X zoomed still images. However I really couldn't care less about some AI whatever bullshit upscaling, I don't use or care about any version of upscaling.
The majority of consumers and reviewers aren't reacting with scorn or disdain, but instead hype up features and criticize the competition for not somehow supporting a proprietary feature.
I cared about the software being closed source and voted with my wallet.

I think if this improves to the point that it's equal or better than DLSS they'll be fine but if it still sucks especially at 1440p and below while needing dedicated hardware they'll have some problems... The PS5 pro implementation has been pretty mixed so far even being worse than FSR at times so only time will tell.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I think if this improves to the point that it's equal or better than DLSS they'll be fine but if it still sucks especially at 1440p and below while needing dedicated hardware they'll have some problems... The PS5 pro implementation has been pretty mixed so far even being worse than FSR at times so only time will tell.

My thoughts exactly. I'm not offended by them closing it, in fact I wish them the best with improving their products. That has always been the case.

 

[Marcus L]

I think if this improves to the point that it's equal or better than DLSS they'll be fine but if it still sucks especially at 1440p and below while needing dedicated hardware they'll have some problems... The PS5 pro implementation has been pretty mixed so far even being worse than FSR at times so only time will tell.

Who is using DLSS/FSR at 1440p or BELOW? you should not have to use upscaling at 1080p/1440p (debatable) if you need to then you are using a budget/entry range GPU 4060/7600 and should be tuning the game settings accordingly, thinking you can run Ultra settings in 2024+ games with a entry level GPU is wishful thinking, this is why they should do different performance options in games when benchmarking GPU's, if I buy the bottom of the rung GPU from AMD/NV I am not going to think I can run the latest 2024/UE5 titles at ultra presets which brings even the best high end GPU's to their knees

 

[oxrufiioxo]

My thoughts exactly. I'm not offended by them closing it, in fact I wish them the best with improving their products. That has always been the case.

Yeah I just hope they continue to improve FSR upscaling on RDNA3 and older or at least trying to.... 20 series has gotten updates to the upscaling portion of DLSS for 6 years now.....

Who is using DLSS/FSR at 1440p or BELOW? you should not have to use upscaling at 1080p/1440p (debatable) if you need to then you are using a budget/entry range GPU 4060/7600

If i could only afford a 4070/7800XT how I game I would need it at 1080p...

Blanket statements are never a good thing everyone games differently.

 

[RedelZaVedno]

There is just no comparison. DLSS, especially 3.8, is way better than FSR3. I play a lot of flat games in VR via Praydog's UEVR injector. I mostly play at 3160x3160p*2 resolution so upscaling is a must on my poor 4070TIS and DLSS hands down beats FSR every time if it's implemented as intended (not like EA/Codemasters' incompetent devs implement it). While DLSS has some artefacting but is generaly acceptable tradeoff in quality mode, FSR looks like shit no matter the settings. But I'd love to see FSR4 offer the same quality so we'd have more options.

 

[AusWolf]

I wouldn’t say that this can be used as an indictment, really, that I usually see it used as. The “people” want GPUs to be cheaper. It’s an understandable want. They also see AMD as a second place player, a distant second at that, which is objectively true. As such, they of course make the observation that, theoretically, if AMD wants to be competitive they would need a similar product to NV, but priced lower since they don’t have the luxury of a market leader premium. Not saying it’s a good approach these “people” are taking, but it’s a mostly logical one. So yes, the DO indeed want Radeon to be a cheaper NV GPU. I mean, of course they do. What else can or should they be, waffle makers?

No, it's not logical. A GPU costs so much to make and offers so much performance. Why should it be cheaper than the competing product?

 

[Marcus L]

The expectation is to buy a low tier GPU and run the latest 2024/5 games at ultra settings, I mean how fucking entitled have people become to think this should be a right? you buy a low tier GPU and you run games at med settings, it's not rocket science

Oh you have a low end GPU and a high end 1440p/4K monitor and you're upset you can't run games at ultra preset, it's quite frankly retarded

 

[freeagent]

Assuming that's honest, then you are a minority

So negative.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

So negative.

Realistic and honest, there's a difference.

 

[Scattergrunt]

Yeah.. I know how you feel. The day we lost ATi to AMD.

I'm not a AMD fan personally (I wouldn't call myself a fan of anything, besides competition), but I do enjoy my underdogs. This is my WWF / WWE of the modern day. Mankind vs The Undertaker.

Realistic and honest, there's a difference.

Don't get lost in the sauce there..

 

[freeagent]

'm not a AMD fan personally (I wouldn't call myself a fan of anything, besides competition), but I do enjoy my underdogs. This is my WWF / WWE of the modern day. Mankind vs The Undertaker.

I have no problem running AMD hardware, have been on and off for 23 years

Just like I would have no problem running Intel hardware.

I think ATi was in trouble anyways, just like AMD was, so they saved each other.

 

[SMH777]

but was it really though?

two reasons for this:
=
1. They didn't want to get mogged by Nvidia immediately
2. They are playing chicken with Nvidia when it comes to the pricing of their GPUs

If you wanna be really biased you could say something like,

"At the last minute it finally dawned on AMD that (Nvidia - 10%) was probably not the best way to announce the pricing on their GPUs.

 

[Scattergrunt]

I have no problem running AMD hardware, have been on and off for 23 years

Just like I would have no problem running Intel hardware.

Certainly agreed. My hardware choice just comes down to price and what I like in features. Mostly price.

 

[Onasi]

No, it's not logical. A GPU costs so much to make and offers so much performance. Why should it be cheaper than the competing product?

Again, perception matters and for majority it makes no sense for a “second rate” player to ask for the same price point as the leader. I agree it might not be “fair” and whatever, but this IS the majority perception. You say it’s not logical, but for them - it is. And it’s absolutely showing in Radeons ever dwindling market share. Getting outraged on behalf of AMD does not help them, unfortunately.

 

[freeagent]

Certainly agreed. My hardware choice just comes down to price and what I like in features. Mostly price.

A few guys here helped me piece together the original bones of this system, coming from Z77 I had no idea, and it looked like 10th gen sucked, 11th gen was still a year away I think. Its been good to me.

A GPU costs so much to make and offers so much performance.

Does it though? If you have the infrastructure laid, supply chain at the ready, they really don't cost much. Heck sell X amount and it pays for the hardware that built it, for the guys on the software end, and with a little profit on top, or a lot of profit depending on how efficient your operation is..

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I'll admit to not taking full inventory of to whom my comment applied, but you I believe. What galls me (an owner of multiple cards from both camps, plus an ARC card) is the amount of negativity every AMD launch article generates. It's like 80%* of commenters want them to fail.

*Hyperbole, don't @ me

I think most of that comes from a consistent decade of coming up short. In the last decade, there was precisely once AMD was competitive, and that was the RX 6000s. The last time that was true was 2013 with the 290x.

We always hear about all the "improvements" that AMD is making yet they never seem to pan out, and people get fed up with an underdog that doesnt seem to ever get ahead. Even the Cubs managed to win the world cup a few times.

High end buyers are going to buy from Nvidia anyway, why waste R&D on cards the media and everyone will just bash on?

AMD could have all the confidence in a presentation, doesn't mean s%^& if people will just go "eww it doesn't compete with nvidia it doesn't have DLSS hard pass AMD is dead".
I think AMD needs to keep quiet about their GPU's especially if they have something competitive, they can't win a price war against Nvidia.

As opposed to AMD with significant discounts losing money and still in a distant second place. The only reason a majority of people in this thread want AMD to compete is so they can hope Nvidia cards will be cheaper, but they won't be.

Have a source for this?

Hey look it's another one. RX 6800xt/6900XT/7900XT/X cards were impossible to get for months after launch. Surely that wasnt because they didnt make any, right?

Keep telling yourself that.

I want AMD to compete so I don't have to keep spending on Nvidia.

Try not to sound so defeated. AMD is doing ok, they are pulling their balls together.

Right now its David vs Goliath, and Dave's socially awkward, mildly autistic cousin Irwin.

I want david to get that slingshot round off but he's gotta actually load it first.