<stupid childish ranting>
And this is why NVIDIA is winning and will continue to win. Because while fanboys like you cry on forums about how NVIDIA is "evil", consumers are buying NVIDIA GPUs, not AMD ones. The market has spoken, it's telling you you're wrong, the fact you refuse to admit that is your problem and nobody cares.
Does anyone really want to see history repeated by AMD going back to trying to fully compete on a two-front war again?
AMD's problem is that they are actually really, really,
really bad at competing. Not because of cashflow, but because they just fail abysmally at it whenever there's actual competition. Honestly I think it's because they have the same mindset as their fanboys, that their product is inherently superior and therefore somehow
deserving of being purchased over their competitors', with the result that when the market chooses differently, AMD sits in the corner sucking its thumb and wondering "what happen?" instead of
doing something about it.
Their CPUs are going the same way. Zen 1 through 3 were massive triumphant curbstomps, but then they released Zen 4 which is very much meh and expected the market to react the same way as it did to the previous generation, and surprise surprise the market didn't. And instead of taking proactive measures to fix this with Zen 5 (like, I dunno,
making its IO not a steaming pile of shit) AMD just shrugged and decided to release "Zen 4 but a little bit faster" as Zen 5, and the market has responded with an even bigger meh,
and AMD still doesn't understand why.
This isn't rocket science, this is
business 101: add new features to drive new sales! But instead we have some clock speed bumps and bolted-on USB4 that should have been integrated into the previous generation Zen 4 CPU, but they contracted with ASmedia who is always late, so instead it's a discrete and thus more expensive chipset that also consumes CPU lanes, thus Zen 5 is actually worse off in terms of connectivity than its predecessor which is literally insane. Meanwhile its competitor Intel, despite going through some serious internal fuckery, is able to deliver a CPU with two integrated USB4 ports like it's nothing,
which is how things should be. Like, Intel is on its fucking knees and it's still able to do a better job of IO than AMD who should be riding high, what does that tell you?
I dunno man; I've just about come to the conclusion that AMD actually
wants to fail. Nothing else adequately explains its inability to capitalise on its successes and build momentum from them, or fight back from its failures. Regardless of how smart their engineers are, their management just seems perpetually clueless,
and there never seems to be any attempt to fix this.
@AusWolf
Because, inflation and market situation aside, the costs of development and manufacturing are rising exponentially, not linearly. Especially for really big dense chips, which GPUs are. It isn’t a complete coincidence that the price increases are coinciding with lithography switching to ever more expensive and complex EUV machines. Of course, if market realities been different, the increases to MSRP might have been lower. But it would have crept up all the same regardless. NVidia isn’t exactly lying about their sky-high RnD costs and TSMC is not lying either about each new manufacturing step up being more and more expensive and time consuming.
This, so much this. Very few people, even so-called technology enthusiasts, seem to realise just how hard of a brick wall silicon lithography has hit. It used to be that every year or two we'd get a full node halving which means 4x the transistors for the same area, now we're lucky if we drop by a single nanometer. EUV is slower and smaller node sizes have inherently higher defect rates too... basically it's a perfect storm.
