Despite Frank Azor's Dismissal, Whispers of a 32 GB Radeon RX 9070 XTX Resurface

[Ultron1337]

I wouldn't pay $1000 just to run 30B-parameter models. But if the base 9070 XT was $800 (and I was in the market for a gaming card), and the 32GB edition $1000, then yeah, I'd pony up another $200 for the extra memory for AI applications.

Exactly, same!

 

[leonavis]

AMD should change their nomenclature for gpu name scheme.

True. Needs more X.

 

[Sir Beregond]

You can go and buy an RTX 5070 at $549 MSRP but $700 real price when it comes out, or an RTX 5070 Ti at $750 MSRP but over $900 real street price after the very few cards at MSRP get sold out.

AMD sees Nvidia lying with their MSRPs and pretends to be more honest by putting higher MSRPs from the start.

Nvidia might do for the first time, what AMD is doing for years, but in a different way. Nvidia was always keeping prices steady, while AMD was starting with high prices, but was lowering them month after month. Nvidia puts a low MSRP this time to do the same, but restricts supply to push prices much higher to have the option to present future price reductions as initial high demand that will go back down to MSRP with the help of higher supply in the future. Nvidia wants to avoid price reductions to be associated with low demand, but get associated with higher supply.


Because you wouldn't be able to buy the 5070 Ti at it's MSRP. Or at least very few will be the lucky ones.

My theory is what I post here, in this post, as a reply to Sir Beregond.

It doesn't matter what the real street price is from a marketing win standpoint. AMD has been doing the "Nvidia MSRP minus $50" strategy for years now. It doesn't work. $599 and $699 is going to look as dumb as $999 and $899 did for the 7900 XTX and XT when they launched.

And if we want to talk profit margins, they got room to work with. 7800 XT is a $499 product. 7900 GRE is a $549 product. As the midrange of RDNA3, these new RDNA4 cards are directly replacing these in the stack. The naming is "9070", not "9080" or "9090". At $699 and $599 the market is just going to say "Look how much AMD jacked up their prices to mirror what Nvidia does".

No. They gotta be more aggressive than that.

 

[Krit]

probably with slim to no profit margin or even a loss in the beginning, hoping to start producing profits later when materials get cheaper.

From where are you getting this information ? I'm just curious.

Nvidia could probably sell RTX 5070 at $549 and still have profits.

Very bizarre thinking from your side! What makes you think that nvidia is not making profit on a RTX 5070 for 549$ ? It's barely a mid range gpu with tiny die size and only 12gb of vram. On paper technically this definitely is the worst **70 Class gpu ever released in terms of raw performance. Technically RTX 5070 = RTX 3060 it's not a **70 class gpu at all! Look at die size even RTX 2060 has way bigger gpu die size than RTX 5070

RTX 2060 Die Size 445 mm² (349$)
RTX 3060 Die Size 276 mm² (329$)
RTX 5070 Die Size 263 mm² (probably will be 649$ actual street price) **60 class gpu for a **70 class price (only true iditos will buy those gpus)

 

[john_]

And yes, the 5070 Ti would be pretty good at $700, thank you.

You want a 5070 Ti for $700? Good luck with that.

From where are you getting this information ? I'm just curious.

Someone posted that Radeon group "enjoys" a 9% profit margin. If you have information that contradicts what I read, you are free to post it.

Very bizarre thinking from your side! What makes you think that nvidia is not making profit on a RTX 5070 for 549$ ? It's barely a mid range gpu with tiny die size and only 12gb of vram. On paper technically this definitely is the worst **70 Class gpu ever released in terms of raw performance. Technically RTX 5070 = RTX 3060 it's not a **70 class gpu at all! Look at die size even RTX 2060 has way bigger gpu die size than RTX 5070

RTX 2060 Die Size 445 mm² (349$)
RTX 3060 Die Size 276 mm² (329$)
RTX 5070 Die Size 263 mm² (probably will be 649$ actual street price) **60 class gpu for a **70 class price (only true idits will buy those gpus)

I think I implied the opposite, that Nvidia can make profits at that price. And it's not just the die size. TSMC will offer lower prices to Nvidia than AMD, because Nvidia gets more wafers than AMD from TSMC. Also, even if we ignore all those reasons you posted and assume that Nvidia only makes the same profit margin as AMD, considering Nvidia sells 9 times more GPUs, it means that it can make 9 times more profit than AMD.

It doesn't matter what the real street price is from a marketing win standpoint. AMD has been doing the "Nvidia MSRP minus $50" strategy for years now. It doesn't work. $599 and $699 is going to look as dumb as $999 and $899 did for the 7900 XTX and XT when they launched.

And if we want to talk profit margins, they got room to work with. 7800 XT is a $499 product. 7900 GRE is a $549 product. As the midrange of RDNA3, these new RDNA4 cards are directly replacing these in the stack. The naming is "9070", not "9080" or "9090". At $699 and $599 the market is just going to say "Look how much AMD jacked up their prices to mirror what Nvidia does".

No. They gotta be more aggressive than that.

I don't agree with everything you say, but I totally agree with that last line. But none of us is in the position to know if they have a reason not being aggressive or if they are just stupid. Maybe they don't have enough wafers to cover a huge demand that will be the result of lower prices, or they don't want to start a price war with Nvidia, because they know they will lose. Or maybe they are greedy and keep walking in Nvidia's rhythm, because it suits them seeing GPU prices going up. Because GPU prices going up means higher prices also for APUs and AMD is the manufacturer of choice for APUs.

 

[Krit]

I think I implied the opposite, that Nvidia can make profits at that price.

They are making a big profit even at 549$ let alone 649$ what probably will be closer to a real price.

 

[wNotyarD]

Azor's trying to be a comedian, isn't he?

 

[Makaveli]

Azor's trying to be a comedian, isn't he?
View attachment 385253

lol its par the course far too many people taking tweets and youtube video's as facts.

I would do the same thing in his position to muddy the waters.

 

[LabRat 891]

Azor's trying to be a comedian, isn't he?
View attachment 385253

I sense that was born out of frustration.

Literal 1st party source dispelling a rumor, and people won't stop...? That'd be irritating.

That said, I'm on the side of the rumor.
Radeon AI 7 470 32GB, when?

 

[TPUnique]

I sense that was born out of frustration.

Literal 1st party source dispelling a rumor, and people won't stop...? That'd be irritating.

AMD's fault for being incompetent (once again)

That same 1st party invited journos at CES for a presentation of their GPUs... then reneged on their plan, and shut their trap until a few days ago.

And now they're pissed that people are trying to fill in the void, which they themselves created ?

Deport Azor to the Açores already.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

320?? That takes me back to when Nvidia was kinda weird and they had an 320MB 8800GTS (G80)

 

[Rover4444]

You want a 5070 Ti for $700? Good luck with that.

AMD wants people to buy a 9070 XT for $700? Good luck with that.

Someone posted that Radeon group "enjoys" a 9% profit margin. If you have information that contradicts what I read, you are free to post it.

It comes from their slides. Go ahead and read the part where it says their operatng margin for gaming is down "Primarily due to lower revenue" and tell us how they're gonna sell more cards for higher prices when their market share is lower than it's ever been.

They don't go into the margins for every single one of their cards either, so don't just assume they're selling each of their cards for 9% more than what they cost to manufacture, it doesn't work like that.

 

[john_]

It comes from their slides. Go ahead and read the part where it says their operatng margin for gaming is down "Primarily due to lower revenue" and tell us how they're gonna sell more cards for higher prices when their market share is lower than it's ever been.

The above is from your link. The phrase "Primarily due to lower revenue" can NOT be found in the page you provided.

They don't go into the margins for every single one of their cards either, so don't just assume they're selling each of their cards for 9% more than what they cost to manufacture, it doesn't work like that.

Obviously they don't but I will assume the same way you assume. Or do you have hard evidence about the profit margin of each GPU? It doesn't work the way you assume.

 

[Sir Beregond]

Well, just my opinion, AMD would be stupid to just do "Nvidia price -$50" again for the 9070 XT. They have so far done nothing but lose market share with that "strategy". When its just a difference of $50, people choose Nvidia.

Unless FSR4 somehow leap frogs them way ahead of DLSS by a wide margin, their RT performance catches up to current gen (similarly priced tier), where they can claim a win in features and performance, $50 hasn't been enough the sway the market to their side. It's a bad move.

As for the 9070 non-XT, $600 is $50 more than the 5070. That would be insta DOA imo because people will compare it to the 5070 at $550 MSRP and it again becomes a game of performance AND features. No doubt with 16GB VRAM its better than the 5070 in that regards, but again its going to come down to FSR4, RT performance, etc.

The biggest complaint many have levied on AMD Radeon Division the past couple generations is that they have been content to just slot into Nvidia's pricing structure. What they need to do if they really want to re-capture the mainstream is be aggressive in resetting what the mainstream is. $700 and $600 aint it.

 

[Rover4444]

View attachment 385326

The above is from your link. The phrase "Primarily due to lower revenue" can NOT be found in the page you provided.


Obviously they don't but I will assume the same way you assume. Or do you have hard evidence about the profit margin of each GPU? It doesn't work the way you assume.

Bro...

 

[john_]

Bro...

OK, haven't checked the PDF version, only what was on the pretty analytic report on that page.
Operating income suffered more than revenue, but then again was there going to be any income with people having the mentality of "AMD sell cheaper or I am not buying"? I mean 50 millions operating income is pretty low. They might have ended with a loss, even with higher revenue, when people ask for cheaper cards and the tech press like Hardware Unboxed also put video titles promoting that mentality to the public towards AMD. On the other hand people are ready to use their wallets when Nvidia comes out with fake MSRPs and channels like Hardware Unboxed avoid asking for cheaper cards when it is Nvidia, just say to their audience to wait for supply to get better or indirectly imply to just deal with it by paying the higher price.

 

[Rover4444]

OK, haven't checked the PDF version, only what was on the pretty analytic report on that page.
Operating income suffered more than revenue, but then again was there going to be any income with people having the mentality of "AMD sell cheaper or I am not buying"? I mean 50 millions operating income is pretty low. They might have ended with a loss, even with higher revenue, when people ask for cheaper cards and the tech press like Hardware Unboxed also put video titles promoting that mentality to the public towards AMD. On the other hand people are ready to use their wallets when Nvidia comes out with fake MSRPs and channels like Hardware Unboxed avoid asking for cheaper cards when it is Nvidia, just say to their audience to wait for supply to get better or indirectly imply to just deal with it by paying the higher price.

NVIDIA commands the market. AMD literally does have to sell cheaper for people to buy it. Retailers had to cut the prices of the 7900 XTX and 7900 XT by $100 and $200 respectively just to sell them the last twelve months, while the 7800 XT stayed at or near MSRP for it's lifetime because it was priced well out the gate. If you want to argue that AMD is losing money by pricing their cards too low, then those cards are the loss leaders, not the 7800 XT.

The 9070 XT (AKA: 8800 XT) should price itself at the same price as the 7800 XT not only because it costs the same to produce, but to actually gain their market share back (which is their stated goal this generation). If they try doing what they did with the 7900 XT/XTX with the 9070s and price them at $600 and $700, then it's DOA, full stop, don't know how many times I and other people have to say it. Fanboy about AMD and hate on NVIDIA and the people who buy their cards all you want, that's the market reality.

It's funny that you bring up Hardware Unboxed as a pro-NVIDIA example by the way because people usually rag on them as being too pro-AMD. Tech reviewers just can't catch a break.

 

[john_]

NVIDIA commands the market. AMD literally does have to sell cheaper for people to buy it. Retailers had to cut the prices of the 7900 XTX and 7900 XT by $100 and $200 respectively just to sell them the last twelve months, while the 7800 XT stayed at or near MSRP for it's lifetime because it was priced well out the gate. If you want to argue that AMD is losing money by pricing their cards too low, then those cards are the loss leaders, not the 7800 XT.

The 9070 XT (AKA: 8800 XT) should price itself at the same price as the 7800 XT not only because it costs the same to produce, but to actually gain their market share back (which is their stated goal this generation). If they try doing what they did with the 7900 XT/XTX with the 9070s and price them at $600 and $700, then it's DOA, full stop, don't know how many times I and other people have to say it. Fanboy about AMD and hate on NVIDIA and the people who buy their cards all you want, that's the market reality.

It's funny that you bring up Hardware Unboxed as a pro-NVIDIA example by the way because people usually rag on them as being too pro-AMD. Tech reviewers just can't catch a break.

AMD sells cheaper, but the public is educated to buy the sticker. RTX 3050 sells better than RX 6600.
AMD started 7900XT and 7900XTX at $800 and $900, because of RX 4800's price of $1200. They probably also expecting people to not care about RT performance, meaning RX 7900XTX was looking as a much cheaper and excellent alternative to the 4080. What they did wrong was to play the same game as Nvidia for the 7900XT pricing. Nvidia put a stupidly high price to the 4080 to drive people to buy the 4090. AMD thought that doing the same with the 7900XT will drive people to 7900XTX. Unfortunately the RT performance was pushed by tech sites as important, so both AMD cards where looking expensive for their price. People where considering them as not future proof because of "low" RT performance.

7800XT was priced right because Nvidia had nothing to offer under $500. If there was a 4070 at $450, you would be saying to me now that the 7800XT had also a very bad MSRP. And if you compare the 7800XT to the 6800XT, it was indeed a stagnation. 7700XT pricing was as bad as 7900XT pricing. 7700XT should had a $399 MSRP.

The 9070XT, we were hearing rumors of $500 MSRP plus or minus $50. But AMD probably learned that Nvidia will do a paper launch and artificially drive pricing up by $200 or more, so they decided to wait. Now, could they have a profit at $500? We can speculate. Were they going to be selling cards at zero profits or even loss to just remain in the market and now they see that they can avoid it? Again the best we can do is speculate. We can choose our favorite scenario as the most probable and call the other one as wrong, fantasy, wishful thinking, damage control, what ever, but the best thing we can do is speculate.

Hardware Unboxed was Pro AMD until 2 years ago. Then it started delaying videos for the Intel fiasco, started doing damage control for anything bad Nvidia, started promoting DLSS as the holy grail of graphics and started putting too many times the word "scum" on videos about AMD. They go where the wind takes them. They might have objective charts, but they don't have objective conclusions. If they change again in 2-3 years and start looking again like AMD Unboxed, quote me and you will see that I will not hesitate to tell you "Yes, now they are pro AMD".

 

[Sir Beregond]

NVIDIA commands the market. AMD literally does have to sell cheaper for people to buy it. Retailers had to cut the prices of the 7900 XTX and 7900 XT by $100 and $200 respectively just to sell them the last twelve months, while the 7800 XT stayed at or near MSRP for it's lifetime because it was priced well out the gate. If you want to argue that AMD is losing money by pricing their cards too low, then those cards are the loss leaders, not the 7800 XT.

The 9070 XT (AKA: 8800 XT) should price itself at the same price as the 7800 XT not only because it costs the same to produce, but to actually gain their market share back (which is their stated goal this generation). If they try doing what they did with the 7900 XT/XTX with the 9070s and price them at $600 and $700, then it's DOA, full stop, don't know how many times I and other people have to say it. Fanboy about AMD and hate on NVIDIA and the people who buy their cards all you want, that's the market reality.

It's funny that you bring up Hardware Unboxed as a pro-NVIDIA example by the way because people usually rag on them as being too pro-AMD. Tech reviewers just can't catch a break.

This. I'm not necessarily thinking the 9070 XT needs to be $499 considering there will also be a 9060 series, but people need to realize. AMD can compete on performance and features and if they are behind on both, then the remaining thing to compete on, is price.

So AMD already said they are not competing in the high end and that RDNA4 is supposed to be for the mainstream, with a stated goal of gaining back marketshare in that segment. OK. Features...FSR4 sounds good from preliminary rumors. Will it be as good as DLSS, or new transformer models? That remains to be seen.

Lastly, price. Nvidia MSRP -$50 has been tried to death the past 2 gens and all that's gotten AMD is losing marketshare. That is not enough. If AMD are telling the truth about their stated goal with RDNA4, then they need to be aggressive enough to command dominance in the mainstream such that they can also reset what the mainstream is from a pricing perspective. Nvidia want you to think $750+ for mid-range is ok. AMD can either agree with Nvidia and do a BS -$50 again which gains them nothing. Or they can be real and actually disrupt the market.

We'll see what they choose. They can either be truthful to their stated goal, or be liars and lose the rest of their marketshare.

 

[john_]

This. I'm not necessarily thinking the 9070 XT needs to be $499 considering there will also be a 9060 series, but people need to realize. AMD can compete on performance and features and if they are behind on both, then the remaining thing to compete on, is price.

People are buying RTX 3050 over RX 6600.

So AMD already said they are not competing in the high end and that RDNA4 is supposed to be for the mainstream, with a stated goal of gaining back marketshare in that segment. OK. Features...FSR4 sounds good from preliminary rumors. Will it be as good as DLSS, or new transformer models? That remains to be seen.

This is the main problem. People want from AMD to win in all categories. If they don't, they have to be cheaper. Nvidia on the other hand is coming out with a paper launch and what it seems fake MSRPs and they don't have the obligation to do anything. They get a free pass.

Lastly, price. Nvidia MSRP -$50 has been tried to death the past 2 gens and all that's gotten AMD is losing marketshare. That is not enough. If AMD are telling the truth about their stated goal with RDNA4, then they need to be aggressive enough to command dominance in the mainstream such that they can also reset what the mainstream is from a pricing perspective. Nvidia want you to think $750+ for mid-range is ok. AMD can either agree with Nvidia and do a BS -$50 again which gains them nothing. Or they can be real and actually disrupt the market.

Again, RTX 3050 vs RX 6600. RTX 4060 16GBs vs RX 7700. People don't care if AMD is cheaper in some cases both cheaper and faster. As long as AMD witness this mentality, they have no reason to financially commit suicide by throwing a gazillion of supply of cheap GPUs in the market when people keep buying the sticker. I keep throwing the RTX 3050 vs RX 6600 argument and most people in the end talk about drivers and stuff or ignore it. In the latest Steam survey, RTX 3050 is at 2.93% and RX 6600 at 0.84%. If those percentages where the opposite, then yes, AMD are stupid, incompetent and probably clueless. But when people buy the sticker, why we ask AMD to drop prices to levels that probably will harm their business?
If the real street price of RTX 5070 ends up at $700 and if RX 9070 comes at $599, it will be faster and cheaper by $100. If the real price of RTX 5070 Ti ends up at $900 and RX 9070 XT comes at $700, it could be almost as fast if not faster than the 5070 Ti and at $200 less. You think people will buy AMD? No. They will find all the excuses in the world to attack AMD for their REAL MSRPs and rush to pay $100-$200-$400-$1000 over the fake MSRPs to Nvidia while accusing AIBs, retailers, scalpers AND AMD, for Nvidia's pricing. This is the current mentality.

 

[Sir Beregond]

They get a free pass

They do? Not with me they don't.

People are buying RTX 3050 over RX 6600.

RTX 4060 16GBs vs RX 7700.

There's a $20 difference in MSRP between the 7700 and 4060 Ti 16GB. You think $20 is gonna woo the market? Yeah 7700 is the much stronger raster card, but again comes down to DLSS vs FSR. RT less a factor here. So again comes down to price.

As for 3050 vs 6600...yeah can't help you there. 3050 is a joke of a card.

 

[Rover4444]

People are buying RTX 3050 over RX 6600.


This is the main problem. People want from AMD to win in all categories. If they don't, they have to be cheaper. Nvidia on the other hand is coming out with a paper launch and what it seems fake MSRPs and they don't have the obligation to do anything. They get a free pass.


Again, RTX 3050 vs RX 6600. RTX 4060 16GBs vs RX 7700. People don't care if AMD is cheaper in some cases both cheaper and faster. As long as AMD witness this mentality, they have no reason to financially commit suicide by throwing a gazillion of supply of cheap GPUs in the market when people keep buying the sticker. I keep throwing the RTX 3050 vs RX 6600 argument and most people in the end talk about drivers and stuff or ignore it. In the latest Steam survey, RTX 3050 is at 2.93% and RX 6600 at 0.84%. If those percentages where the opposite, then yes, AMD are stupid, incompetent and probably clueless. But when people buy the sticker, why we ask AMD to drop prices to levels that probably will harm their business?
If the real street price of RTX 5070 ends up at $700 and if RX 9070 comes at $599, it will be faster and cheaper by $100. If the real price of RTX 5070 Ti ends up at $900 and RX 9070 XT comes at $700, it could be almost as fast if not faster than the 5070 Ti and at $200 less. You think people will buy AMD? No. They will find all the excuses in the world to attack AMD for their REAL MSRPs and rush to pay $100-$200-$400-$1000 over the fake MSRPs to Nvidia while accusing AIBs, retailers, scalpers AND AMD, for Nvidia's pricing. This is the current mentality.

If AMD releases the 9070s for $599 and $699 I will buy twenty billion NVIDIA and Intel GPUs at scalper prices out of spite. Just shut down and use all your wafers for Ryzen at this point, because AMD deserves to fail at that price. And this is coming from an AMD fanboy, by the way.

NVIDIA gets a free pass because they own the market. They release a $50,000 GPU, you buy it and a leather jacket for $90,000 and whisper, "Thank you, NVIDIA" while your house burns down from a 12VHPWR cable because they bothered to let you have stock after selling 99.999% of it directly to datacenter at $999,999 each.

Anybody who tries to out-NVIDIA NVIDIA by selling their GPUs for 9001% over cost will fail because NVIDIA simply has mastery over "the way you're meant to be played." At $599 (real price $999 after they copy NVIDIA) and $699 (real price $1099 after they copy NVIDIA), AMD will NEVER have their Ryzen moment with RDOA 4. Never!

 

[john_]

They do? Not with me they don't.


There's a $20 difference in MSRP between the 7700 and 4060 Ti 16GB. You think $20 is gonna woo the market? Yeah 7700 is the much stronger raster card, but again comes down to DLSS vs FSR. RT less a factor here. So again comes down to price.

As for 3050 vs 6600...yeah can't help you there. 3050 is a joke of a card.

You have no reply for the 3050 vs 6600 question and when having to compared the 7700 with the 4060 you talk about DLSS. In my opinion, Nvidia will get a free pass from you no matter what they do.

The 3050 vs 6600 example shows that the public buys the sticker. Using DLSS as an argument again shows that people, people who insist that they would NOT give a free pass to Nvidia, still they will buy the sticker.

If AMD releases the 9070s for $599 and $699 I will buy twenty billion NVIDIA and Intel GPUs at scalper prices out of spite. Just shut down and use all your wafers for Ryzen at this point, because AMD deserves to fail at that price. And this is coming from an AMD fanboy, by the way.

NVIDIA gets a free pass because they own the market. They release a $50,000 GPU, you buy it and a leather jacket for $90,000 and whisper, "Thank you, NVIDIA" while your house burns down from a 12VHPWR cable because they bothered to let you have stock after selling 99.999% of it directly to datacenter at $999,999 each.

Anybody who tries to out-NVIDIA NVIDIA by selling their GPUs for 9001% over cost will fail because NVIDIA simply has mastery over "the way you're meant to be played." At $599 (real price $999 after they copy NVIDIA) and $699 (real price $1099 after they copy NVIDIA), AMD will NEVER have their Ryzen moment with RDOA 4. Never!

If AMD fanboys think like this, AMD will go bankrupt by 1st of March.
Anyway....OK....

 

[Sir Beregond]

You have no reply for the 3050 vs 6600 question and when having to compared the 7700 with the 4060 you talk about DLSS. In my opinion, Nvidia will get a free pass from you no matter what they do.

What are you talking about? People who know me, know I am regularly critical of Nvidia. What kind of "free pass" am I giving them?

AMD has 10% market share give or take. I don't know why so many here think they don't have to do anything aggressive to actually move that needle back. If the point is rather that "they don't want to", then sure.

 

[john_]

What are you talking about? People who know me, know I am regularly critical of Nvidia. What kind of "free pass" am I giving them?

AMD has 10% market share give or take. I don't know why so many here think they don't have to do anything aggressive to actually move that needle back. If the point is rather that "they don't want to", then sure.

You expect AMD to be competitive and much cheaper in every category. I gave you two examples. One in the $200 range where AMD is better and cheaper and people buy the Nvidia sticker. You didn't say something positive for AMD there. You didn't acknowledge that AMD already did what most people ask from them to do, only to see the public turning their backs to AMD, only to see the public to keep paying the sticker. And RX 6600 is probably the only AMD card that even Nvidia friendly tech press admits that is by far the better options at $200. And the $150 - $300 category, probably represents a big part of the discrete GPU business. And people keep buying the sticker and you have NOTHING possitive to say about AMD here. Only that you have NO COMMENT on why people keep buying the sticker.
Then when talking about 7700 vs 4060, you throw me DLSS as an excuse. Again you will find an excuse to recoment Nvidia.
Well, sorry, but AMD will NEVER be good enough for you and you will keep giving Nvidia a free pass with your wallet. And if you are regurarly critical of Nvidia, it seems that you will be always and probably even 10 times more critical of AMD.

Waiting for Intel to save the GPU market, because from AMD people only expect them to "be cheaper, to force Nvidia to lower prices, so they can buy cheaper Nvidia".


To tell you the truth I love AMD not being the victim anymore of those who consider AMD only as a tool to force Nvidia to lower prices, so they can buy cheaper Nvidia. In 20 years period, these last 5 years where the only years where those moking Radeon as the cheap, low quality secondary option with bad features and bad drivers, that they would never ever consider buying, had to put their hands deeper in their pockets to pay the Nvidia tax. And as long as AMD can use it's wafers from TSMC for more profitable products, being at 10% of the discrete GPU market probably isn't that bad. Maybe when consumers really get angry towards Nvidia and stop giving them free pass with their wallets, maybe then AMD and Intel can really push products in the market. But until that time comes, a x070 product will probably already be at $1000 MSRP, $1200 street price.

Good day.

P.S. AMD gave you Frame Generation, Nvidia didn't.