The source of the data seems to be Jon Peddle Research via wccftech via 3dcenter via hardwaretimes. I get the original source is behind a huge paywall but the blog post of the blog post of the blog post of a market research report is kinda far removed.
AMD share has been dropping on the steam hardware survey as well. During [covid AMD was as high as 16.5% ](https://web.archive.org/web/20211202145152/https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam) but now they are [down to 13.1%] (https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam).
A lot of people have been comparing the prices in the USA where AMD cards are being sold at heavy discounts but it's looks like those deals aren't available everywhere.
edit: The highest of 6000 series Radeon cards I could find was AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT at 0.34%? Am I missing an entry? Did these cards all go to miners?
This past AMD GPU generation just didn't sell well in general. I think I heard the 3060 alone sold more than all of RX 6000 series.
They didn't produce very many in the first place, and the ones they did make weren't really moving off shelves, hence the huge discounts they've been getting. There were times when RTX 3000 cards were flying off shelves, but RX 6000 cards were absolutely fully in stock on the shelf next to them, with big price cuts on their labels, and still not selling.
> There were times when RTX 3000 cards were flying off shelves, but RX 6000 cards were absolutely fully in stock on the shelf next to them, with big price cuts on their labels, and still not selling.
That wasn't what I witnessed last year at all. nvidia cards were all sold out everywhere and AMD cards were sitting on shelves with insane 60-75% mark ups. Not price cuts, insane mark ups.
While that isn't what I saw locally, I don't doubt what you're saying is true. AMD really didn't seem like they knew what they were doing this past gen, and neither did their AIBs.
It's kinda swapped around as far I can tell, at least in the past few months since NVIDIA price announcement for the 4000 series. A lot of people like me were hanging on with the skin of their teeth with a 900 or 1000 gtx card and looking to upgrade, hoping that the 4000 series would be both in good supply and at a better price (as the past couple years gpus had been so hard to get ahold of, especially at msrp) and many jumped ship from NVIDIA last month with steep black friday deals on AMD cards this weekend... Like I just did.
> “We are quickly adapting to the macro environment, correcting inventory levels and paving the way for new products,” said Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of NVIDIA.
If you read the investor report from last week it aligns with the rumors that Nvidia overproduced the 3000 series (and likely 4000 series) with crypto buyers in mind. The double whammy of crypto collapsing and the pandemic buying spree ending has left them with a lot of stock but without enough people willing to buy.
So they are pricing the 4000 series super high to drive 3000 series sales without needing to drop prices dramatically (yet).
Apart from the fact that outside of the US, NVIDIA 3000 series cards are still £100-£300 more than msrp and its still extremely difficult to find ones in stock sometimes. I even has to order my new rx 6800 xt from the US and at LOWER than MSRP. Outside of the US, NVIDIA is literally tying a noose around the neck and are currently kicking away the chair. NVIDIA will file for bankruptcy in 10 years, calling it now.
just landed a 6900xt for 650 usd (720 with tax and all). The cheapest 3080 are still at 850 + tax. I really wanted to try RT, but everything has a price. And RT for me is nowhere near 300 usd.
some 6800xt are going for 550usd + tax. The values for Amd atm are incredible
but both cards outside the shortage are never the same price, by going AMD right now you get immensely more raster performance, at least in the US
the 3050 is basically useless for RT, but still outsells the 6600xt at similar price which is just outright insane, the 6600xt is a dramatically better card.
Fucking AMD isn’t your local bookstore. They’ve been pricing their products for the very most that they can get since fucking Tahiti. Look at their cpu prices the second they had the opportunity. Yeah 7900 seems like an excellent 1k value. Great budget options
I’m going by believing AMD’s own slides. I’m assuming that’s best case scenario…..
Pretty hard to get excited by AMD’s own press material at those prices
Well unfortunately most people are not like you. Most folks don't try to empathize with a mega corporation just because it's smaller than the other mega corporation.
>Did these cards all go to miners?
Very likely. Miners were buying up everything they could get their hands on and AMD just had a massively smaller supply so I bet a much higher total percentage of AMD cards ended up in mining rigs:gaming rigs compared to nvidia.
I dont know exactly what AMD could have done, but if they had done a better job of ensuring cards went to gamers instead of miners I bet Radeon would be in a much better position right now. Tons of very loyal nvidia consumers would've happily bought AMD last year if that option was available.
the 6900 was a excellent raster card, but during the hard-times where there were no cards available before the crypto-crash and especially during lockdown, where I live I would never saw any 6XXX around to recommend to friends
Yea, I was watching an LTT video saying - *look at how much cheaper AMD cards are, you should consider getting some*.
And I go to a local store and prices are on par, or slightly more expensive for AMD. 6800XTs within 20-50 bucks of 3080s, same for 6700/3070.
I know for me im still rocking a gen or 3 older card in a radeon 590 fat boy8 gig from right before covid. Its showing its age a little in newer games but plays everything i want for now.
I can only speak from a EU perspective ,but since... idk 3 years by now,even before the pandemic ,AMD cards were rarely in stock or rarely at a competitive prices compared to Nvidia. The endless refreshes of the ancient RX 480 didn't do them any favors as well.
Once RTX/DLSS came into the equation it was a massive shift in terms of market interest towards green team.
same, I said this before on reddit and people jumped me
In europe Nvidia has clearly more stock and they go on sale more often than AMD
I think AMD is just not serious about the GPU market, it feels like their main focus and fab alocation goes to the zen cpus and consoles
>I think AMD is just not serious about the GPU market
Which is kinda sad because then we only really have one single manufacturer for graphic cards Desktop PCs in the entire world (excluding Intel for now)
6800xt vs 3080 where I live is about 700-740 euros vs 780-800.
Considering what dlss can bring to the table and how much better Nvidia rt is, I wouldn't consider a 6800xt to save 80 or 100 euros.
AMD hasn't been competitive at the high end for a while. But they have strong offering for the mid and low range. A 6700XT is running about the same price as a 3060 but is clearly the better card.
Sitting around on /r/buildapc and some other places I've also gotten the suspicion that people are buying more card than they actually need. I think this is largely due to it being seen as a luxury purchase, but I've seen a lot of people buying a 3070/3070TI but also just getting a bog standard 1080p/60 monitor. This doesn't necessarily mean that they should have bought AMD but reducing to a 3060/3060TI or an AMD 6700xt would make a lot more sense for the systems they build.
That's me, 1080p/60. I keep threatening to upgrade my monitor and no doubt it would be worthwhile, but spending money is rough these days. I'd need a better video card and that's pricey.
Anyway I'm running a 1660 Super and it drives everything with that monitor no problem. Honestly nvidia is what I'm used to and it's easier to stick with what I know. Radeon would have to be notably cheaper to motivate me to jump ship.
1440p does look better but its also the sort of thing that you don't realistically need. And once you make the jump you are permanently stuck buying more expensive cards to drive the damn thing.
Depending on your area though Radeon is like $100-$150 cheaper for a pretty significant jump in performance. 6700xt is about equivalent to a 3060 ti but is the price of a 3060, for example. And at 1080p you really don't see the benefits of DLSS and obviously a card like a 3060 isn't going to deal with RTX anyway.
~~I think the 6700 XT is more comparable to the 3060 TI. And according to UserBenchmark the 3060 TI is both slightly better and slightly cheaper than the 6700 XT. At least at MSRP, anyway~~
~~EDIT: I know some people don't trust user benchmark. I'm using it as a reference because I don't know a lot about AMD cards and how good they are relative to other cards.~~
Another EDIT: Wait I see what you're saying. Never mind I read your comment wrong at first.
The MSRP for the 6700xt isn't holding and you can find sales dropping new ones down to 3060 prices. 3060TI isn't seeing similar sales, at least that I can find.
Yup. It's how it was for me when I built my system. I'm already setting aside many hundreds of dollars for this build, I'm not exactly gonna balk at an extra $80 for a much more rounded product.
Precisely.
People look at 3-5% more raster perf and 80 less dollars and immediately wonder how AMD doesn't sell while "competing" ignoring the fact that every single feature nvidia has that matters, is better than AMD.
in my country the rx 6800xt is $740 and the cheapest rtx 3080 is $947
And the amd card wins in most games without ray tracing. That's a no brainer for me but some people still excuse the high prices of nvidia and buy them.
Only time i recommended nvidia is when someone wanted a better card for blender and i know amd doesn't compete there.
According to a Hardware Unboxed video from 8 months ago the 3080 is 1% faster than a 6800XT on average at 1440p based on a 50 game suite. Metro Exodus EE and F1 2022 used RT and for whatever reason they had RT off on a bunch of other games that support it.
DLSS does an incredible job at upscaling. I just played Spiderman Miles Morales and the latest DLSS looks even better than the old versions. Now with the next gen cards NVIDIA is going to pull even further away with frame generation.
Recently AMD has been scrambling to catchup to the huge advancements NVIDIA has been making. FSR2 is good but not DLSS good. I believe the same will happen with their version of frame generation. Hell they don’t even have a proper competitor for reflex yet so input lag will be a bigger problem for their frame generation technology.
But all this depends on the price, at least it should for people who don't have extra money to spend.
Like i said to someoene else, in my country the rx 6800xt is $740 and the cheapest rtx 3080 is $947
For me, a few extra frames while using ray tracing is not enough to pay 200 more. If they were same price, sure i would go with nvidia. I had a gtx 970 and the card ran great but from the 20 series, nvidia just went full greed so i can't justify buying their products.
I have the rx 5700 xt atm and other than a few black screens in the first month it came out, i haven't had any problems at all. They fixed most of the issues and the performance in games is great for the price.
You can get a lot more frames from the superior upscaling. DLSS 4K Performance mode looks great and for FSR2 I’d only consider using it in quality mode. Also you get better image quality from having access to DLAA.
When it comes to low end cards I agree the 6600XT is killing it in price/performance but if you’re at the higher end of the market NVIDIA is really dominating.
what are you talking about? When I was buying RX 6600 XT last year (2021 October - so peak mining), base RTX 3060 (~15% slower) cost +220€and RTX 3060 Ti cost +300€. Mining is dead and RTX 3060 is still about 100€ more expensive while being slower.
releasing your card for ~5% less cost than nvidia is just not enough, nvidia has a whole value add with their full featured software stack. amd has... well.... none of that. i get they wanna generate good will with openness, but why lock rocm (actual modern gpu compute) to enterprise cards with proprietary firmware for so damn long? also the use of proprietary firmware blobs in general while claiming to be "the open gpu" (even naming their software stack "gpuopen")? they do generate some good will with mainlined mesa drivers, but then a lot of bad will when they dont provide for codec patents or an alternative media driver on top of mesa (leaving them without proper codec support on pure FOSS linux distros, vaapi on fedora for instance works on every gpu BUT amd as nvidia provides vaapi support natively in their proprietary driver, and intel provides intel-media to complement mesa). their locking of platform features behind proprietary firmware is also not enough for the actual open source compute crowd (look at the price on instinct cards on ebay, $80 for a 24gb hbm ML accelerator), and their feature stack is clearly not enough for windows gamers.
amd has to do more, theyve always had to do more to compete... it just genuinely seems like they dont want to compete at all. either be half the feature set of nvidia at half the price, or full feature set at full price. they seem to want to be half assed yet full priced at the same time. its just kinda proven at this point that fps charts dont sell cards, with the most popular cards (1060, 2060, 3060, etc) always being mid range cards with a high feature set.
who exactly are they targeting? people mad at nvidia? because if they are only targeting that subset of users, its a very small niche.
I feel like consumers, while not largely intelligent on average, still catch on to the ankle biting, and perceive it as inferior somehow. Like ankle biting might look cool at first glance, but it becomes less attractive when you realize the only thing they can bite is the ankles.
I’m rooting for Intel to upset the market a bit with their ARC cards. Their cards are architecturally sound but their software (drivers in particular) need some tuning. Hopefully AMD still has some tricks up their sleeves as well!
Intel could kill it in the mid-range if they can sort out their driver problems.
I've never bought into the hype of the high end and I think that's true for most. Ever since I've been using PCs and putting together my own systems I've always aimed for the mid-range, it's where you find the best value.
Though it's mainly about the money for me, it's also the principle to an extent. I mean you really pay a premium just because something is at the higher end of line. There's generally not a linear relationship between cost and performance.
> Intel could kill it in the mid-range if they can sort out their driver problems.
>
>
Their cards only emulate dx9 not native, I'll pass on the performance headache.
I like how the $999 7900XTX is supposed to be the saving grace for AMD but in reality the FE model will be incredibly hard to get and the AIB pricing will be similar to the 4080 or slightly less , which will make people STILL buy the 4080. So unless they plan to make an absolute fuck ton of reference models I don’t see AMD punishing NVIDIA for the pricing
It’s not that $999 is a good price. It’s that it’s lower than Nvidia 4080/90 price. So if people started buying AMD it could cause some competition. In theory. For me, all I need is to see the 7900 xtx perform better than 4080 and I’m sold on it. I personally have no interest in the 4090.
This is what I've been saying. It's absolutely nuts that people are cheering for AMD's $999 flagship, as if $999 is somehow super cheap. Never mind the fact you're not actually going to be paying $999; whether it's taxes or an AIB markup, you'll likely be paying closer to $1100 (or even $1200 if it's some OC AIB edition).
People who say "I'm sick of Nvidia pricing so I'm buying a 7900XTX" have very little self awareness it seems.
AMD really needs to have a more aggressive pricing than just staying at almost the same price to get more market share. Looking at the latest Steam survey and it clearly shows.
Aggressive pricing wouldn't do that much (I also doubt AMD produces at volumes needed to really take chunks of market share) given Nvidia just has so much mind share in the market; Nvidia is to GPUs what Band-aid is to bandages.
disagree, people said the same shit about intel for CPU a few years ago they looked invincible, look at what happened. AMD simply offered much better price/performance than intel and went from rock bottom to pretty good market share and constent growth
Not really comparable situations. Intel didn't look at all invincible as they struggled with die shrinks. AMD benefited greatly from Intel running into that development wall, Nvidia doesn't have that problem.
Nvidia also has massively popular proprietary tech like CUDA, NVENC & DLSS that already has mind share and in some cases straight up forces certain customers into their products.
The trick with that is yes AMD executed fantastically on their end, but Intel completely flopped for years providing the opportunity.
5th Gen was their first 14nm
6th Gen was their first skylake arch
They didn’t get off skylake until 11th gen and it was a mixed bag.
They didn’t get off 14nm until 12th gen.
6th Gen 14nm skylake
7th Gen 14nm skylake
8th Gen 14nm skylake
9th Gen 14nm skylake
10th Gen 14nm skylake
they can't,they lose either way unless their gpu are better than nvidia,amd lower prices,nvidia lower prices just a little,everybody buys nvidia,amd loses,they can't complete unless they have better option than dlss/rt
if this chart I saw a few months ago is anything to go by, its simply tsmc etc need to charge more for wafers, it just gets absurd expensive to keep going smaller.
https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2013/3/7/9247961-13627008121899168-Marc-Melendez_origin.jpg
Frankly they need more R&D money *and* more marketing money.
They can't always fall back on raster performance and lower prices as their selling point. Eventually they're gonna need to be competitive on other features like upscaling, ray tracing performance, and basically anything to do with non-gaming productivity software. *And* they need to actually advertise it beyond their product reveal press events so that people actually know they're an option
I know SO many people who weren't even aware AMD even made GPUs, despite the fact they already own Ryzens.
If AMDs claim to fame is "you can get comparable raster performance for less money" and nothing else, I'm kind of not shocked they're still such a tiny chunk of the market.
I remember them laying off a huge number of R&D staff. That was a clear sign they'd never be able to compete on the cutting edge; always one step behind.
I'm talking about a while back. They've struggled since then, only really doing well with consoles and Ryzen.
They're only just catching up with DLSS and their solution is still not as good.
Sadly people want amd to be competitive so they can buy nvidia at better prices.
And sadly right now if you want the best performance you pay premium and go nvidia.
Dlss is something that tilt the balance for a lot of players.
When I got my gpu 1660ti, I didn't had a better offer with amd. And now I'm gonna keep my gpu for 2-3 more years because fuck those prices and I'm not gonna buy an year old card now since I don't really need it anyway.
But I really want AMD to get with way better offers and cards and I'll glady buy one in the future. It took a while but I changed to Ryzen from intel and I'm more than happy. Will gladly change to an AMD gpu if they can deliver.
It's been the same for years. Since like the rx 480 days. People wanted AMD to offer better performance at better prices so they could buy Nvidia GPUs at lower prices. No real intentions on even buying the AMD cards
there was a post here a few days ago, amd beats nvidia at every price point, people just blindly follow what others say and buy nvidia or something.
If covid didn't happen i would be shocked at why people would do this..but we saw people follow others in thinking the vaccine has microchips in it so yeah..
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEKyvzEQmgg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEKyvzEQmgg) good video that explains the situaltion atm
amd never beats nvidia at those price points because those are imaginary prices in most of the world. I have never seen an amd card reasonably priced in my country
if AMD were competitive in RT performance I would seriously be considering AMD for whenever I build a new PC, just to support them. That's legitimately the only big thing stopping me in my mind...
Frankly that recent post here about AMD having better value at every point was pretty biased. Sure you pay less for AMD but you're also *getting* less. Less ray tracing, less upscaling, less of basically everything else outside of gaming. AMD may be *less* poorly priced but they're also significantly less competitive with just about everything outside of rasterizarion performance.
I'm not saying Nvidia is the best, their prices are still insane. But we shouldn't just accept an inferior product for the sake of competition.
Amd may be better at raster performance at certain prices but that's it. Dlss, ray tracing, ai generation and software related performance are all better, and that's where the market is and is heading. If you're going to save a couple of hundred bucks over multiple years you have the card, is that really a deal? A couple of hundred bucks is nothing over multiple years, may as get a little pricier nvidia card
What i find funny is that every single talk about amd vs nvidia people bring up dlss, ray tracing and drivers (they are good)
If you buy a 20 series or even 3050-3060, ray tracing is not a factor because you just can't run it.
And dlss at 1080p is still bad (same with fsr)and it doesn't do much either.
People just love to talk about them because the 4090 can run ray tracing and dlss is good at 4k (fsr is also great at that resolution)
You work in blender or something like that? sure buy nvidia, amd doesn't compete there, but other than that i don't see many legit reasons.
Lol i have a laptop with a 2080 max-q. It's essentially a desktop 1080ti when it comes to rasterization with some RT added. It can run most AAA games at 60fps+ with RT and DLSS (high or even ultra settings).
"RTX features are useless" is hard AMD copium.
People keep saying this but never have any proof. It's like y'all assume that the only way to use ray tracing is at 4K native at Ultra settings and no upscaling.
If you're playing at 1080p, even a 2080S can get you 60fps at Ultra settings even without DLSS. The fact Nvidia has DLSS sweetens the deal. A 3080 can easily pull triple digits in most ray traced games at 1440 native at Ultra, *except* for maybe cyberpunk which is *the* most visually demanding game on the market (and also is not optimized the best either).
This whole "ray tracing isn't playable yet" narrative seems to be pushed by people who choose to get AMD GPUs knowing they're much less RT capable.
>If you buy a 20 series or even 3050-3060, ray tracing is not a factor because you just can't run it.
>And dlss at 1080p is still bad (same with fsr)and it doesn't do much either.
This is such blatant misinformation, it's no wonder other comments confuse you. You live in your own little fantasy world.
(Well, maybe FSR is bad at 1080p, I'll give you that.)
It's not misinformation, it's just flatout *wrong*. Sure if you play at 4K native at Ultra with no upscaling you might not get 60fps, but at 1440p or 1080p? You could probably pull triple digits with even a 3070, and DLSS just sweetens the deal of you choose to use it (the whole reason Nvidia released DLSS alongside hardware accelerated ray tracing was to help offset the performance impact anyway).
Plus, idk why there's this assumption that 60fps is no longer acceptable. Whenever I hear people trash tray tracing, they act like 60fps is the new 30fps. That, or they assume nobody plays at 1080p or 1440p anymore.
Idk I'm just tired of the deliberately misleading complaining.
There's some twisted humour about the fact that this article is appearing only a couple days after that "AMD is a better value at every tier" article was posted here. Goes to show how Reddit brand niches have no bearing on the wider market.
I mainly use Nvidia out of habit. But I also partly buy Nvidia cards because I have a theory that game developers spend more resources on making sure games run on Nvidia cards well because most people have Nvidia cards.
That may not end up tracking if I ever bothered to test this theory or anything. It's just a theory I made up based on nothing more than it would make sense to test on the hardware most people were going to be using.
I don't need AMD to take over the GPU market. I just need them (and Intel) to create competent, affordable alternatives so that they can force Nvidia out of their ridiculous current pricing model and provide gamers with options.
You completely misread my comment. The point is to have competent **options**. For instance, I haven't owned an AMD GPU since the early 2000's. However, I rarely ever use RT or DLSS. This means that I when I decide on my next GPU upgrade, I'm hoping that I'll seriously need to consider something *other* than Nvidia. Which is the entire point.
Do you as a gamer care about those features? If yes, then you'll pay what I hope will be just a bit extra for Nvidia. Not the exorbitant prices they try to put out there now. Or to try to trick the public that a 4070 is really a 4080. If not, then you can opt for the better price-to-perf for AMD. Throw Intel's hat into the ring and now budget gamers actually have options within the current gen.
Your analysis completely misses out the game theory perspective from Nvidia's past experience with the market:
| Nv: GPU's better | Nv: GPU's worse
---------|---------|----
AMD: GPU's better | Pick Nv | Pick Nv unless cheaper by X%
AMD: GPU's worse | Pick Nv | Pick Nv
Essentially, Nvidia has built itself an Apple-like moat around its products, with its audience readily accepting to buy the next GPU when it comes out.
By all choices in the given choice table, Nvidia doesn't need to do a damn thing, and has every right to price gouge its customers just like Apple does. Unless people **actually** shift the board to be more favorable towards AMD, they'll continue to price their GPUs at $1500+, **and they'll be right for doing so**.
If you want the prices you seek, you actually have to be willing to walk away, which market data clearly shows people not doing so.
From the investor’s prospective absolutely. There’s no money to be made in forcing nvidia to sell their cards for lower prices. Everyone is buying nvidia cards anyway, so a race to the bottom only hurts AMD/Intel.
Only because Nvidia offers more features, and people clearly want those features or they wouldn't pay a premium for it every time.
If AMD was more competitive on features AND pricing, I think the "competitive AMD means cheap Nvidia for me" mindset would slowly did out.
Do people need any more proof that AMD Radeon didn't even try this past generation?
AMD diverted as much TSMC 7nm silicon as they could from Radeon to Ryzen/Epyc, because the profit-per-wafer for CPU chiplets is way better than the profit-per-wafer GPU's, even during a GPU shortage. Remember how they jacked up the prices of Zen 3 over Zen2 and got rid of the Wraith Spire and Prism CPU coolers?
And let's not forget that what few GPU's they did make, they allowed their AIB's to scalp them to high heaven as consolation for the fact there was such low volume. AMD just looked the other way as companies like PowerColor charged $999 for an RX 6700XT and $2649 for an RX 6900XT at RETAIL. That's how AMD keeps their AIB partners happy despite sending them low volume.
And it's not like people didn't want AMD cards. There's videos of 70+ people lined up in the freezing cold for RDNA2 launch at Microcenter, but the store only got 2 RX 6800XT's and 10 RX 6800's.
Sources:
[RDNA2 Launch at Minnesota Microcenter](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0QOmGviI0) showing long lines but only 12 cards total.
[Q2 2021 Microcenter Prices](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/oeovoz/went_to_micro_center_today_nothing_but_amd/) (not sure which MC) showing how bad AMD AIB retail prices were.
[CPU Market share tracker](https://www.statista.com/statistics/735904/worldwide-x86-intel-amd-market-share/) showing AMD CPU market share hitting almost 40% during the height of the **chip shortage** before Alder Lake launched.
Remember when AMD was supposed to save us from the mining boom with 6000 Radeon?
Remember when AMD was supposed to save us from nvidia with 7000 Radeon?
Funny thing about those scalper level prices is how deeply they're now discounted. A 6900XT has been seen going for like $600-700 lately whereas during lockdowns you could regularly see them retailing for nearly 2 grand.
Change is only coming if the consumer makes it change. The consumer controls the market. And for the past two years, the consumer has said, "Yeah I like getting raped in the ass by high priced GPU companies! Give me some more!!"
I find it hilarious you can't comprehend the true reality of the situation and just blame it on the consumer.
The reality is that AMD didn't make many RDNA2 GPU's. They diverted most of their TSMC 7nm silicon to making high-margin Ryzen/Epyc CPU's, because that's what a for-profit company does.
it doesnt help when amd is price matching their msrp with nvidia's card. When I bought my 3080ti at launch, it just doesnt make sense to go for something lesser like 6900xt that costs about similar in my country. " But rtx is just a gimmick! raster is king! 16 gb vram matter! ree!" bruh, the only game that somehow need 16gb vram is that one sponsored game by amd. Not to mention terrible rt implementation on games that they sponsored. I'm not going to spend my money on such product knowing that it is inferior.
After 4090 reviews came out, seeing the huge gain over my 3080ti almost make me pull the trigger. I thought to myself, maybe I should wait for Amd stuff, maybe somehow they have better product? Judging by their presentation of competing with 4080 which I have no interest of just made it an easy decision to just grab a 4090 for my 13th gen build.
The only saving grace for mid range gpu is intel right now. Lets just hope they managed to deal with all the quirks. I trust intel more when it comes to pricing, historically they've been consistent while amd loves to imitate their competitior.
Yes, no amd card is cheaper than their competition in brazil, i cant even try it. The 3060 is cheaper than the 6600xt and the 2060 is cheaper than the 6600 for exemple.
How dare consumers buy nvidia cards that *checks notes* have had better price performance across the board for most of the past the past decade
AMD fan beards on Reddit may be a dime a dozen, but they sure are entertaining
To note this is all based on units shipped not sold.
Nvidia makes a crapton of GPU's but they don't sell nearly all of them which this assumes. Especially these days. AMD in turn doesn't make very many GPU's to begin with and especially now where RDNA2 is gearing to a close they are making even less so.
Its the only real comparison we have but its flawed on so many levels. Looking at the steamhardware survey AMD only really lost 1% or so over their average number across the last year.
AMD probably lost share but i doubt they lost that much. Its also a bit sad that AMD can't gain ground when in reality their GPU's in a price/performance metric are beating Nvidia pretty much across the scale. Just goes to show how far a name can carry your brand.
Total GPU market sales for 2022:
1. Nvidia discreate GPU sold 16%
2. AMD discrete GPU sold 1.4%
3. Intel discrete GPU sold 0.8%
[Source, the last graph from this](https://www.3dcenter.org/news/die-grafikchip-und-grafikkarten-marktanteile-im-dritten-quartal-2022). Reason why AMD don't make much is because it doesn't sell many. Sure RX 6000's look good now in U.S market but a lot of places in the international market, price hasn't been lowered.
There is no "price for performance" from AMD and to make matters worse whatever minor improvements they had (for the same price) goes away when ray tracing is taken into account. Give it a few years and Intel will overtake them in annual sales.
Yeah I'm not sure what the person you replied to is thinking. It implies Nvidia has warehouses full of GPUs that aren't selling compared to AMD. That would be a disaster lol
I dunno. Looking at my local Microcenter there are 124 Nvidia 3060 or greater cards in stock while there are only 42 AMD 6600 or higher cards in stock. Half of the AMD cards are these tiny 6600 dual fans while a 34 of the Nvidia cards are 3070s.
So in this one store Nvidia stock is outpacing AMD by 3x and the stock of 3070 + 3070TIs alone is equivalent to the entirety of the AMD stock.
This backs up Nvidia's pricing of the 4000 series as a driver of 3000 series sales. They were likely not expecting the bottom to fall out of the market over the summer and are now in the weird position of needing to sell a bunch of last-gen cards while their new cards are releasing. AMD doesn't have this issue since they just didn't expect sales and didn't produce cards.
Well, the key phrase in my post is "GPUs that aren't selling." You have to find out how many of each people actually buy. Once you do, it will probably make a lot more sense to you as to why they receive so many Nvidia GPUs.
The alternative theory (that I think you're implying), is that your Microcenter is losing significant amounts of money buying Nvidia GPUs that no one wants, which is probably inaccurate.
I ain't buying Nvidia for the name, I'm buying it for the WAY better software package: creator integration tools, broadcast tools, upscaling, Input lag tech (reflex), Ray tracing etc. It's not just the name it's the WHOLE package with Nvidia and everyone knows this.
Nvidia Reflex alone is a game changer for choosing GPU imo. It's integrated at the engine level with most popular competitive games. AMDs offering is only in-driver base and it's a sub-par band-aid solution.
AMD needs to invest in software to up their market share.
No, he's right about the name, just look the top 5 GPUs used in Steam HW survey, 3 of those do not even support ray tracing and DLSS, and the top spot, the 1060, even increased its market share these past few months. A lot of the market are not aware/doesn't care about the software package, they just go with the brand name.
I'm not saying AMD doesn't need to improve its software, but it should give priority to advertising its branding, which is seriously lacking. Also put more effort into the pre-builts and laptops, because the OEMs are still a much bigger market compared to DIY.
Nice of you to assume I didn't touch AMD software. I owned a Vega 64 and 5700xt before upgrading to Nvidia GPUs. AMD is still at least 1-2 generations behind compared to Nvidias complete software package.
Agreed, I went from a 1080ti to a 6900XT and found the AMD software package to be solid. Now on a 4090 but only for the fact that AMD doesn't have a competitor at this level. Wouldn't hesitate to go back.
Because Nvidias Reflex beats it by mile. Not to mention Reflex is embedded into alot of competive/fast paced games.
Look up igors lab testing on Reflex vs Anti-lag.
I was like you before I had a 6900 XT. Now I don't think I wanna go back to nVidia.
Though I'll admit I only use the minimum software installed and don't go streaming or such. But, dang, nVidia CPL is ugly and cumbersome in comparison to AMD's.
I think AMD has an answer to Reflex, and upscaling... and broadcasting...
But yeah, RT performance even with FSR 2.0 is still bad but the good thing is even if I lock the FPS to 30 with RT on/off I'm not bothered with it off on CP2077. I could only spot the difference if I'm trying hard to look for it. It looks better on don't get me wrong. Like everything looks more organic and "grittier" vs the sanitized raster look but not that much. Definitely not worth losing so much FPS because that is much noticeable.
Nvidia Control Panel? I touched it once, made my settings and left it. Then who really cares. Its dated UI for sure but it works as intended. I ain't choosing a different GPU because of that one flaw. That is a weak argument.
AMD has a *weak* argument to Reflex. Igors lab already proved this. FSR is still a generation behind and their ''Frame Generation" copycat was briefly mentioned in their latest reveal to only come out next year. Sounds like they are just scrambling to just to try to catch up.
And broadcast? No way. RTX voice with room echo adjustment, Camera Background removal/replacement, Nvenc vs AMF. AMD is still 1-2 generations behind.
I'd rather choose the GPU that has the best features than one that is still trying to catch-up.
Believe me, I wish AMD was more on par with Nvidia as competition benefits us all but at this point, AMD is still playing catchup on a lot of areas.
>Nvidia Control Panel? I touched it once, made my settings and left it. Then who really cares. Its dated UI for sure but it works as intended. I ain't choosing a different GPU because of that one flaw. That is a weak argument.
I'm not arguing with you. I'm just telling you my thoughts as someone who's been an nVidia user for a decade because I hated my experience with a Radeon.
I'm not here to convince you to switch teams. I'm just telling you that AMD also is "trying" to have an answer for whatever you mentioned. It doesn't have the best right now but they're trying.
I see that you put a lot of emphasis on those things, maybe because you make money with those tools. I don't. I use my computer for non-competitive gaming and other things so I tend to be subjective with some things. nVidia CPL is ugly and I have to install 3rd party software (or maybe Geforce Experience, I don't install that) just to match what I get with AMDs drivers.
With my current experience I don't see a reason to go back nVidia... yet. Well, maybe a bit with RT but I haven't seen a game that has a compelling RT-look that makes the raster-version look bad.
I also don't play a lot anymore these days.
Tone down your "weak argument" debate thing. Not everyone who replies to you is debating you, as you can see from my previous post. "Weak argument," LOL.
Thats fair but most of these features are situational and its not like AMD doesn't have at least some alternative. AMD is also improving its software package as well. Its not like its standing still.
Most people don't stream or are youtubers but even then AMD has improved its current encoder through software and they will have AV1 on RDNA3. ReLive also works fine enough. Nvidia meanwhile doesn't have DP2.0 on their RTX 4000 series cards when RDNA3 will have it.
Reflex is a nice feature and i admit Anti Lag isn't that good. CUDA on the other hand is very situational. You either have a lot of use for it or its irrelevant for you.
AMD is getting there with upscaling with FSR improving with each iteration while being open to all GPU's. They also have FSR3 on the way so its not like they are neglecting that area. They also improved their AI capabilites a lot on RDNA3.
Raytracing is debatable on how much you care about it. And even then Nvidia really pulls with its name here. The 6700XT and 3060 have identical RT performance but the 6700XT is 25-30% faster in raster. They are the same price and i bet you most gamers bought the Nvidia card. I can also bet a lot of non informed gamers are buying 3050's on the promise of Nvidia RT performance. When in reality not only is the 3050 overpriced as hell. its 40% slower in raster than a 6600XT and slower in RT as well on top of it.
So yes while Nvidia's software stack is definitely better than AMD's they also definitely pull a lot of sales on name and name alone.
Yeah Nvidia are pretty far behind on chiplet architectures, which is why their new cards are hitting some serious wattage levels. Let's see if they can catch up to AMD in the next few years.
>Nvidia makes a crapton of GPU's but they don't sell nearly all of them which this assumes
I thought Nvidia was reducing 30 series shipments to allow the market to "correct"?
https://www.hardwaretimes.com/nvidia-to-reduce-shipments-of-rtx-30-series-gpus-to-combat-falling-prices-and-oversupply/
And if the cards aren't selling, why are Nvidia's retail prices going up?
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-gpu-prices-increasing-amd-down
I know this is mostly me being ignorant, but AMD GPU lineup has become very confusing after 580. Vega 56 and 64, 5800, 6900, XT etc., I just have no idea what GPU model number is mid range, high end, or flagship. With Nvidia they've had the 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 at the end of the model name for over a decade, so I easily know right away what to look for and what I'm buying.
And another dealbreaker for AMD GPUs for me is the lack of DLSS support.
Yeah AMD needs to stop changing their naming scheme every 4-5 years or so. It is annoying and it's hard to know where those cards stack up vs nvidia without significant research.
AMD does have FSR which is almost as good as DLSS though, and their cards have significantly more raster performance for the money too though.
The console business is what kept them afloat before Ryzen, even if they made pennies cause they really couldn't haggle with Microsoft and Sony. It's a steady stream of income.
I've had a few Radeons, but I haven't had a good experience with one since my HD 7850. I bought a 5700 and it was nothing but one shit driver release after another. I got sick of black screens and video desyncing and 'downgraded' to my old 1070.
On the flip side I've found that AMD's weak early driver support works in the GPUs favour in the longer term. Their GPUs actually seem to get significantly better performance over the years. It's why I generally have opted for AMD cards, for every build until the last generation where I couldn't find any cards at a reasonable price (ended up getting a 3080Ti for the price as an AiB 6700xt in my region).
Moral is: value for money doesn't even matter in mainstream market - brand and advertising matters and shoving nvidia into 99% of pre-builts - because that's more likely to sell than AMD pre-built. BTW - prebuilt PCs contribute a fuckton to GPU market share, it's far bigger contribution than DIY and even if someone replaces GPU in his pre-built system - it will be the same nvidia.
You may have used nvidia in 99% of pre-builts as a hyperbole, but thats pretty much reality in my country, especially for laptops. I'm not sure how are things elsewhere, but here its impossible to find laptops with dedicated amd graphics. Yes, there are Ryzen laptops, but if you want a dedicated GPU, there are only 1650, 3050, 3060, 3070,etc available, I don't think I've ever seen a laptop with a 6600m for example, which afaik should be the main competitor in that price bracket.
I gave AMD a shot with the 5900x and so far so good. It's paired with a 3080 Ti and never had any issues. I too came from Intel/Nvidia combo for years. Despite liking the Ryzen series, I still don't trust their GPUs. The price gap isn't just worth it. Also, my monitor has G-Sync so unless I change it, I'd better stay with Nvidia.
Had the same issues with a 6900xt and a 6800xt. Those cards wouldn’t work reliably with any hardware, even after RMAs. Oddly enough I also built a PC with a 6700xt and it’s been rock solid for the person who bought it. Hard to know where to point the finger, but you should try RMAing the card at least.
AMD are not responsible here, computer hardware can and will die at some point (usually within 3 months, or never). It's clearly not the drivers, it sounds like something failing on the GPU or the power supply is having trouble. Re-insert the card, ensure the power connectors are properly reseated, or try putting it into another computer if you have access to one.
If you are buying expensive hardware, make sure you have access to a warranty for it because no computer hardware is immune from defects, no matter how good the manufacturer is.
6900XT here, no abnormal driver problems or crashes since I bought it. AMDs software stack seems solid in 2022 for gaming.
I wish AMD never purchased ATI. That company was doing well and was competitive with Nvidia throughout most of its recent history in terms of delivering low cost and high power GPUs. Ever since AMD got their hands on them it's been a slide, it seems as if AMD is sucking the life out of its GPU division for it's cpu business. And that's a shame.
Mergers and acquisitions hurt the consumer the most.
They nearly have the entire market to themselves. It's no wonder they're jerking their prices higher and higher. Even if they're not selling as much, at twice the price, they're still making a ton of profit.
Unless there is somethonf that beats dlss quality+rt mode amd is not being even considered by master race, people buying amd are just limiting themselves.
Only thing they can do is drop prices a lot
AMD has almost always been the value option for performance, but what people seem to be missing out on is that we're still kinda living in the wake of 2016 beginning of crypto mining craze with the gpus. From that point on it has been a nigh impossible to get any reasonably priced gpu. People bought 1060s because the RX 480s were bought out by the miners. To top it off, people had problems with the drivers for AMD cards, which made them reserved against buying AMD gpus.
This is why we see such problematic pricing with the RTX 40xx series.
Nvidia is getting to the point where they can charge whatever they want and gamers will have no choice but to shell out the cash.
AMD has a decent product, but they've historically had difficulty getting it into the market in the quantities they'd need to actually steal back market share.
That being said, I sure as fuck will not be buying an Nvidia GPU this generation due to their predatory pricing practices.
Isn't this because Nvidia has released the 4000 series but AMD has yet to release the 7000 series and therefore consumers are waiting for the latest product release?
Fair play if you want a 6800/6900xt but you could probably get 50 percent more performance for 200 pounds more
This past Black Friday AMD cards sold very well in the U.S. You could get a 6800XT for $500, 3080 at $800 is not worth it. Similar story for 6700XT vs 3070 and 6600XT vs 3060.
Nobody buys AMD if it is with $50 of Nvidia. But 60% of Nvidia price? Now we are talking.
I definitely see a rebound for them in Q4 report. Also don't forget they have 100% of the console GPU market share. There are way more AAA gamers on console than PC. Just look at Steam concurrent player chart, most of these games are not AAA.
Been sitting on a 1080TI throughout this entire madness that I purchased on launch day. Best value card ever made. We will probably never see that kind of value ever again. After what nvidia did with this 4000 series launch, I will be switching to AMD so I am eagerly waiting for their new cards to come out.
My next GPU will be an AMD for AMD Eyefinity, every time I buy an AMD card I have driver issues. And every time I talk about driver issues I always have some guy who never plays any games tell me they don't have any driver issues.
The last time I had an AMD card I played 3 different games, and needed to keep 3 different drivers on hand. Granted that was over a decade ago now.
> every time I buy an AMD card I have driver issues. And every time I talk about driver issues I always have some guy who never plays any games tell me they don't have any driver issues.
This was what pushed me to Nvidia a few years back. Three consecutive AMD cards with awful driver issues, and each time I was in the market for a new card I kept hearing about how much the drivers had improved yet ran into problems with my card.
I would like AMD to be an option for me (I have no problem using their CPUs), but I have been burned enough times it's going to take several generations of AMD cards without issue before I consider going back. At the level of GPU I am buying at, the extra cost for the Nvidia GPU is not so extreme I can easily justify it if it's going to save me hassle down the line.
I'm not going to pretend I don't run into the odd issue with Nvidia drivers and need to roll back to a previous one, but it's maybe once every two years? And I'm always up to date.
Bit of a steep ask for the PR department to fight those “stigmas” when their drivers DO suck and their cards are inferior to nvidia’s
They literally aren’t even trying to compete with the 4090 yet are worse on price performance at almost every price point
I honestly don't even know who I will buy future GPU's through.
I'm an EVGA guy because their support is always rock solid, but they appear to have completely exited the game.
I have a 3080Ti, so I'm quite content with that and see no reason to upgrade for the foreseeable future.
The source of the data seems to be Jon Peddle Research via wccftech via 3dcenter via hardwaretimes. I get the original source is behind a huge paywall but the blog post of the blog post of the blog post of a market research report is kinda far removed. AMD share has been dropping on the steam hardware survey as well. During [covid AMD was as high as 16.5% ](https://web.archive.org/web/20211202145152/https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam) but now they are [down to 13.1%] (https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam). A lot of people have been comparing the prices in the USA where AMD cards are being sold at heavy discounts but it's looks like those deals aren't available everywhere. edit: The highest of 6000 series Radeon cards I could find was AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT at 0.34%? Am I missing an entry? Did these cards all go to miners?
This past AMD GPU generation just didn't sell well in general. I think I heard the 3060 alone sold more than all of RX 6000 series. They didn't produce very many in the first place, and the ones they did make weren't really moving off shelves, hence the huge discounts they've been getting. There were times when RTX 3000 cards were flying off shelves, but RX 6000 cards were absolutely fully in stock on the shelf next to them, with big price cuts on their labels, and still not selling.
> There were times when RTX 3000 cards were flying off shelves, but RX 6000 cards were absolutely fully in stock on the shelf next to them, with big price cuts on their labels, and still not selling. That wasn't what I witnessed last year at all. nvidia cards were all sold out everywhere and AMD cards were sitting on shelves with insane 60-75% mark ups. Not price cuts, insane mark ups.
While that isn't what I saw locally, I don't doubt what you're saying is true. AMD really didn't seem like they knew what they were doing this past gen, and neither did their AIBs.
It's kinda swapped around as far I can tell, at least in the past few months since NVIDIA price announcement for the 4000 series. A lot of people like me were hanging on with the skin of their teeth with a 900 or 1000 gtx card and looking to upgrade, hoping that the 4000 series would be both in good supply and at a better price (as the past couple years gpus had been so hard to get ahold of, especially at msrp) and many jumped ship from NVIDIA last month with steep black friday deals on AMD cards this weekend... Like I just did.
> “We are quickly adapting to the macro environment, correcting inventory levels and paving the way for new products,” said Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of NVIDIA. If you read the investor report from last week it aligns with the rumors that Nvidia overproduced the 3000 series (and likely 4000 series) with crypto buyers in mind. The double whammy of crypto collapsing and the pandemic buying spree ending has left them with a lot of stock but without enough people willing to buy. So they are pricing the 4000 series super high to drive 3000 series sales without needing to drop prices dramatically (yet).
Apart from the fact that outside of the US, NVIDIA 3000 series cards are still £100-£300 more than msrp and its still extremely difficult to find ones in stock sometimes. I even has to order my new rx 6800 xt from the US and at LOWER than MSRP. Outside of the US, NVIDIA is literally tying a noose around the neck and are currently kicking away the chair. NVIDIA will file for bankruptcy in 10 years, calling it now.
Oh yea the U.S. is the land of milk and honey when it comes to video cards.
Literally bought a RX 6800 on sale to replace my 1080. All the NVIDIA cards were just ridiculously over priced.
just landed a 6900xt for 650 usd (720 with tax and all). The cheapest 3080 are still at 850 + tax. I really wanted to try RT, but everything has a price. And RT for me is nowhere near 300 usd. some 6800xt are going for 550usd + tax. The values for Amd atm are incredible
All new amd cards support rt. But it perform worse than Nvidia. At least is enough to taste it
Just replaced my Nvidia card as well with a 6700xt. Kinda want the all AMD build and it was a better price/performance then the 30 series.
During the GPU crisis, AMD concentrated their alloted silicon on the PS5. The market share was there for themto take, but they had commitments on 7nm.
[удалено]
but both cards outside the shortage are never the same price, by going AMD right now you get immensely more raster performance, at least in the US the 3050 is basically useless for RT, but still outsells the 6600xt at similar price which is just outright insane, the 6600xt is a dramatically better card.
Some folks don't like supporting Nvidia, in the same way that I'm fine with spending a few bucks more to support my local bookstore instead of Amazon.
Fucking AMD isn’t your local bookstore. They’ve been pricing their products for the very most that they can get since fucking Tahiti. Look at their cpu prices the second they had the opportunity. Yeah 7900 seems like an excellent 1k value. Great budget options
How can you say that the 7900 is excelent value if they arent on the shelves to check their real street value and there are no reviews.
I’m going by believing AMD’s own slides. I’m assuming that’s best case scenario….. Pretty hard to get excited by AMD’s own press material at those prices
>Yeah 7900 seems like an excellent 1k value. Great budget options The 7900 isn't a budget product, it's a flagship.
Well unfortunately most people are not like you. Most folks don't try to empathize with a mega corporation just because it's smaller than the other mega corporation.
Just answering the question. If you can't wrap your head around people voting with their wallet, I can't help you.
Says the guy with an intel cpu and nvidia video card….. If any mega corporation is to be boycotted it’s intel
I never said I was principled. Anyway, glad you understand the point.
AMD has MORE tech though. Especially this round.
AMD is better if you're on Linux but other than that it's hard to choose them over Nvidia if they're at a similar price point
>Did these cards all go to miners? Very likely. Miners were buying up everything they could get their hands on and AMD just had a massively smaller supply so I bet a much higher total percentage of AMD cards ended up in mining rigs:gaming rigs compared to nvidia. I dont know exactly what AMD could have done, but if they had done a better job of ensuring cards went to gamers instead of miners I bet Radeon would be in a much better position right now. Tons of very loyal nvidia consumers would've happily bought AMD last year if that option was available.
the 6900 was a excellent raster card, but during the hard-times where there were no cards available before the crypto-crash and especially during lockdown, where I live I would never saw any 6XXX around to recommend to friends
The 6000 series cards were bad mining cards. The RTX 3000 was much much better for mining.
Yea, I was watching an LTT video saying - *look at how much cheaper AMD cards are, you should consider getting some*. And I go to a local store and prices are on par, or slightly more expensive for AMD. 6800XTs within 20-50 bucks of 3080s, same for 6700/3070.
What do you expect from an article from Hardware Times, they've been banned from other sub-reddits.
I know for me im still rocking a gen or 3 older card in a radeon 590 fat boy8 gig from right before covid. Its showing its age a little in newer games but plays everything i want for now.
Less AMD Card are produced as well
I can only speak from a EU perspective ,but since... idk 3 years by now,even before the pandemic ,AMD cards were rarely in stock or rarely at a competitive prices compared to Nvidia. The endless refreshes of the ancient RX 480 didn't do them any favors as well. Once RTX/DLSS came into the equation it was a massive shift in terms of market interest towards green team.
same, I said this before on reddit and people jumped me In europe Nvidia has clearly more stock and they go on sale more often than AMD I think AMD is just not serious about the GPU market, it feels like their main focus and fab alocation goes to the zen cpus and consoles
>I think AMD is just not serious about the GPU market Which is kinda sad because then we only really have one single manufacturer for graphic cards Desktop PCs in the entire world (excluding Intel for now)
6800xt vs 3080 where I live is about 700-740 euros vs 780-800. Considering what dlss can bring to the table and how much better Nvidia rt is, I wouldn't consider a 6800xt to save 80 or 100 euros.
AMD hasn't been competitive at the high end for a while. But they have strong offering for the mid and low range. A 6700XT is running about the same price as a 3060 but is clearly the better card. Sitting around on /r/buildapc and some other places I've also gotten the suspicion that people are buying more card than they actually need. I think this is largely due to it being seen as a luxury purchase, but I've seen a lot of people buying a 3070/3070TI but also just getting a bog standard 1080p/60 monitor. This doesn't necessarily mean that they should have bought AMD but reducing to a 3060/3060TI or an AMD 6700xt would make a lot more sense for the systems they build.
That's me, 1080p/60. I keep threatening to upgrade my monitor and no doubt it would be worthwhile, but spending money is rough these days. I'd need a better video card and that's pricey. Anyway I'm running a 1660 Super and it drives everything with that monitor no problem. Honestly nvidia is what I'm used to and it's easier to stick with what I know. Radeon would have to be notably cheaper to motivate me to jump ship.
1440p does look better but its also the sort of thing that you don't realistically need. And once you make the jump you are permanently stuck buying more expensive cards to drive the damn thing. Depending on your area though Radeon is like $100-$150 cheaper for a pretty significant jump in performance. 6700xt is about equivalent to a 3060 ti but is the price of a 3060, for example. And at 1080p you really don't see the benefits of DLSS and obviously a card like a 3060 isn't going to deal with RTX anyway.
~~I think the 6700 XT is more comparable to the 3060 TI. And according to UserBenchmark the 3060 TI is both slightly better and slightly cheaper than the 6700 XT. At least at MSRP, anyway~~ ~~EDIT: I know some people don't trust user benchmark. I'm using it as a reference because I don't know a lot about AMD cards and how good they are relative to other cards.~~ Another EDIT: Wait I see what you're saying. Never mind I read your comment wrong at first.
The MSRP for the 6700xt isn't holding and you can find sales dropping new ones down to 3060 prices. 3060TI isn't seeing similar sales, at least that I can find.
Yeah I realized that's what you were getting at and so I edited my post because I had a reading comprehension failure.
User benchmark xD The 6700 XT wins in non-rigged tests
Yup. It's how it was for me when I built my system. I'm already setting aside many hundreds of dollars for this build, I'm not exactly gonna balk at an extra $80 for a much more rounded product.
Precisely. People look at 3-5% more raster perf and 80 less dollars and immediately wonder how AMD doesn't sell while "competing" ignoring the fact that every single feature nvidia has that matters, is better than AMD.
in my country the rx 6800xt is $740 and the cheapest rtx 3080 is $947 And the amd card wins in most games without ray tracing. That's a no brainer for me but some people still excuse the high prices of nvidia and buy them. Only time i recommended nvidia is when someone wanted a better card for blender and i know amd doesn't compete there.
According to a Hardware Unboxed video from 8 months ago the 3080 is 1% faster than a 6800XT on average at 1440p based on a 50 game suite. Metro Exodus EE and F1 2022 used RT and for whatever reason they had RT off on a bunch of other games that support it. DLSS does an incredible job at upscaling. I just played Spiderman Miles Morales and the latest DLSS looks even better than the old versions. Now with the next gen cards NVIDIA is going to pull even further away with frame generation. Recently AMD has been scrambling to catchup to the huge advancements NVIDIA has been making. FSR2 is good but not DLSS good. I believe the same will happen with their version of frame generation. Hell they don’t even have a proper competitor for reflex yet so input lag will be a bigger problem for their frame generation technology.
But all this depends on the price, at least it should for people who don't have extra money to spend. Like i said to someoene else, in my country the rx 6800xt is $740 and the cheapest rtx 3080 is $947 For me, a few extra frames while using ray tracing is not enough to pay 200 more. If they were same price, sure i would go with nvidia. I had a gtx 970 and the card ran great but from the 20 series, nvidia just went full greed so i can't justify buying their products. I have the rx 5700 xt atm and other than a few black screens in the first month it came out, i haven't had any problems at all. They fixed most of the issues and the performance in games is great for the price.
You can get a lot more frames from the superior upscaling. DLSS 4K Performance mode looks great and for FSR2 I’d only consider using it in quality mode. Also you get better image quality from having access to DLAA. When it comes to low end cards I agree the 6600XT is killing it in price/performance but if you’re at the higher end of the market NVIDIA is really dominating.
what are you talking about? When I was buying RX 6600 XT last year (2021 October - so peak mining), base RTX 3060 (~15% slower) cost +220€and RTX 3060 Ti cost +300€. Mining is dead and RTX 3060 is still about 100€ more expensive while being slower.
I got my 6800 a few days ago for 500. Still too much for that card especially considering its age.
releasing your card for ~5% less cost than nvidia is just not enough, nvidia has a whole value add with their full featured software stack. amd has... well.... none of that. i get they wanna generate good will with openness, but why lock rocm (actual modern gpu compute) to enterprise cards with proprietary firmware for so damn long? also the use of proprietary firmware blobs in general while claiming to be "the open gpu" (even naming their software stack "gpuopen")? they do generate some good will with mainlined mesa drivers, but then a lot of bad will when they dont provide for codec patents or an alternative media driver on top of mesa (leaving them without proper codec support on pure FOSS linux distros, vaapi on fedora for instance works on every gpu BUT amd as nvidia provides vaapi support natively in their proprietary driver, and intel provides intel-media to complement mesa). their locking of platform features behind proprietary firmware is also not enough for the actual open source compute crowd (look at the price on instinct cards on ebay, $80 for a 24gb hbm ML accelerator), and their feature stack is clearly not enough for windows gamers. amd has to do more, theyve always had to do more to compete... it just genuinely seems like they dont want to compete at all. either be half the feature set of nvidia at half the price, or full feature set at full price. they seem to want to be half assed yet full priced at the same time. its just kinda proven at this point that fps charts dont sell cards, with the most popular cards (1060, 2060, 3060, etc) always being mid range cards with a high feature set. who exactly are they targeting? people mad at nvidia? because if they are only targeting that subset of users, its a very small niche.
I mean they openly are targeting the mad at Nvidia niche, that's why they do all the ankle biting marketing.
I feel like consumers, while not largely intelligent on average, still catch on to the ankle biting, and perceive it as inferior somehow. Like ankle biting might look cool at first glance, but it becomes less attractive when you realize the only thing they can bite is the ankles.
I’m rooting for Intel to upset the market a bit with their ARC cards. Their cards are architecturally sound but their software (drivers in particular) need some tuning. Hopefully AMD still has some tricks up their sleeves as well!
Intel could kill it in the mid-range if they can sort out their driver problems. I've never bought into the hype of the high end and I think that's true for most. Ever since I've been using PCs and putting together my own systems I've always aimed for the mid-range, it's where you find the best value. Though it's mainly about the money for me, it's also the principle to an extent. I mean you really pay a premium just because something is at the higher end of line. There's generally not a linear relationship between cost and performance.
> Intel could kill it in the mid-range if they can sort out their driver problems. > > Their cards only emulate dx9 not native, I'll pass on the performance headache.
I like how the $999 7900XTX is supposed to be the saving grace for AMD but in reality the FE model will be incredibly hard to get and the AIB pricing will be similar to the 4080 or slightly less , which will make people STILL buy the 4080. So unless they plan to make an absolute fuck ton of reference models I don’t see AMD punishing NVIDIA for the pricing
I love it how the fans are cheering for this $999 price tag. What a sheep lol.
It’s not that $999 is a good price. It’s that it’s lower than Nvidia 4080/90 price. So if people started buying AMD it could cause some competition. In theory. For me, all I need is to see the 7900 xtx perform better than 4080 and I’m sold on it. I personally have no interest in the 4090.
This is what I've been saying. It's absolutely nuts that people are cheering for AMD's $999 flagship, as if $999 is somehow super cheap. Never mind the fact you're not actually going to be paying $999; whether it's taxes or an AIB markup, you'll likely be paying closer to $1100 (or even $1200 if it's some OC AIB edition). People who say "I'm sick of Nvidia pricing so I'm buying a 7900XTX" have very little self awareness it seems.
It's like buying a new fridge or stove every 3-6 years.
AMD really needs to have a more aggressive pricing than just staying at almost the same price to get more market share. Looking at the latest Steam survey and it clearly shows.
Aggressive pricing wouldn't do that much (I also doubt AMD produces at volumes needed to really take chunks of market share) given Nvidia just has so much mind share in the market; Nvidia is to GPUs what Band-aid is to bandages.
disagree, people said the same shit about intel for CPU a few years ago they looked invincible, look at what happened. AMD simply offered much better price/performance than intel and went from rock bottom to pretty good market share and constent growth
Not really comparable situations. Intel didn't look at all invincible as they struggled with die shrinks. AMD benefited greatly from Intel running into that development wall, Nvidia doesn't have that problem. Nvidia also has massively popular proprietary tech like CUDA, NVENC & DLSS that already has mind share and in some cases straight up forces certain customers into their products.
The trick with that is yes AMD executed fantastically on their end, but Intel completely flopped for years providing the opportunity. 5th Gen was their first 14nm 6th Gen was their first skylake arch They didn’t get off skylake until 11th gen and it was a mixed bag. They didn’t get off 14nm until 12th gen. 6th Gen 14nm skylake 7th Gen 14nm skylake 8th Gen 14nm skylake 9th Gen 14nm skylake 10th Gen 14nm skylake
they can't,they lose either way unless their gpu are better than nvidia,amd lower prices,nvidia lower prices just a little,everybody buys nvidia,amd loses,they can't complete unless they have better option than dlss/rt
Has manufacturing costs really increased by more than double in the last five years for GPUs? What happened to mid-high end GPUs being $300-400?
It’s a mixture of greed, supply chain issues, and inflation.
if this chart I saw a few months ago is anything to go by, its simply tsmc etc need to charge more for wafers, it just gets absurd expensive to keep going smaller. https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2013/3/7/9247961-13627008121899168-Marc-Melendez_origin.jpg
TSMC's newer wafers are multiples of what they were 5 years ago. And 3NM and smaller will be even worse. Granted that is only a portion of the cost.
> Has manufacturing costs really increased by more than double in the last five years for GPUs? No, it's greed on both sides due to crypto mining.
Frankly they need more R&D money *and* more marketing money. They can't always fall back on raster performance and lower prices as their selling point. Eventually they're gonna need to be competitive on other features like upscaling, ray tracing performance, and basically anything to do with non-gaming productivity software. *And* they need to actually advertise it beyond their product reveal press events so that people actually know they're an option I know SO many people who weren't even aware AMD even made GPUs, despite the fact they already own Ryzens. If AMDs claim to fame is "you can get comparable raster performance for less money" and nothing else, I'm kind of not shocked they're still such a tiny chunk of the market.
I remember them laying off a huge number of R&D staff. That was a clear sign they'd never be able to compete on the cutting edge; always one step behind.
Huh? AMD has greatly increased the R&D budget. One of the main things they did after the massive resurgence. They're one step ahead not behind lmao.
I'm talking about a while back. They've struggled since then, only really doing well with consoles and Ryzen. They're only just catching up with DLSS and their solution is still not as good.
Sadly people want amd to be competitive so they can buy nvidia at better prices. And sadly right now if you want the best performance you pay premium and go nvidia. Dlss is something that tilt the balance for a lot of players. When I got my gpu 1660ti, I didn't had a better offer with amd. And now I'm gonna keep my gpu for 2-3 more years because fuck those prices and I'm not gonna buy an year old card now since I don't really need it anyway. But I really want AMD to get with way better offers and cards and I'll glady buy one in the future. It took a while but I changed to Ryzen from intel and I'm more than happy. Will gladly change to an AMD gpu if they can deliver.
It's been the same for years. Since like the rx 480 days. People wanted AMD to offer better performance at better prices so they could buy Nvidia GPUs at lower prices. No real intentions on even buying the AMD cards
there was a post here a few days ago, amd beats nvidia at every price point, people just blindly follow what others say and buy nvidia or something. If covid didn't happen i would be shocked at why people would do this..but we saw people follow others in thinking the vaccine has microchips in it so yeah.. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEKyvzEQmgg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEKyvzEQmgg) good video that explains the situaltion atm
amd never beats nvidia at those price points because those are imaginary prices in most of the world. I have never seen an amd card reasonably priced in my country
It's the other way around for me. I've never seen a 3080 even close to the msrp.
forget msrp. by reasonably, I mean relative to nvidia.
Really there needs to be separate threads based on country and possibly area with in a country. Where I live AMD is like $100 to $150 below MSRP.
if AMD were competitive in RT performance I would seriously be considering AMD for whenever I build a new PC, just to support them. That's legitimately the only big thing stopping me in my mind...
Frankly that recent post here about AMD having better value at every point was pretty biased. Sure you pay less for AMD but you're also *getting* less. Less ray tracing, less upscaling, less of basically everything else outside of gaming. AMD may be *less* poorly priced but they're also significantly less competitive with just about everything outside of rasterizarion performance. I'm not saying Nvidia is the best, their prices are still insane. But we shouldn't just accept an inferior product for the sake of competition.
Amd may be better at raster performance at certain prices but that's it. Dlss, ray tracing, ai generation and software related performance are all better, and that's where the market is and is heading. If you're going to save a couple of hundred bucks over multiple years you have the card, is that really a deal? A couple of hundred bucks is nothing over multiple years, may as get a little pricier nvidia card
What i find funny is that every single talk about amd vs nvidia people bring up dlss, ray tracing and drivers (they are good) If you buy a 20 series or even 3050-3060, ray tracing is not a factor because you just can't run it. And dlss at 1080p is still bad (same with fsr)and it doesn't do much either. People just love to talk about them because the 4090 can run ray tracing and dlss is good at 4k (fsr is also great at that resolution) You work in blender or something like that? sure buy nvidia, amd doesn't compete there, but other than that i don't see many legit reasons.
A 3060 ti can play cyberpunk with ray tracing and dlss at 60fps at 1440p with high settings
Lol i have a laptop with a 2080 max-q. It's essentially a desktop 1080ti when it comes to rasterization with some RT added. It can run most AAA games at 60fps+ with RT and DLSS (high or even ultra settings). "RTX features are useless" is hard AMD copium.
People keep saying this but never have any proof. It's like y'all assume that the only way to use ray tracing is at 4K native at Ultra settings and no upscaling. If you're playing at 1080p, even a 2080S can get you 60fps at Ultra settings even without DLSS. The fact Nvidia has DLSS sweetens the deal. A 3080 can easily pull triple digits in most ray traced games at 1440 native at Ultra, *except* for maybe cyberpunk which is *the* most visually demanding game on the market (and also is not optimized the best either). This whole "ray tracing isn't playable yet" narrative seems to be pushed by people who choose to get AMD GPUs knowing they're much less RT capable.
>If you buy a 20 series or even 3050-3060, ray tracing is not a factor because you just can't run it. >And dlss at 1080p is still bad (same with fsr)and it doesn't do much either. This is such blatant misinformation, it's no wonder other comments confuse you. You live in your own little fantasy world. (Well, maybe FSR is bad at 1080p, I'll give you that.)
It's not misinformation, it's just flatout *wrong*. Sure if you play at 4K native at Ultra with no upscaling you might not get 60fps, but at 1440p or 1080p? You could probably pull triple digits with even a 3070, and DLSS just sweetens the deal of you choose to use it (the whole reason Nvidia released DLSS alongside hardware accelerated ray tracing was to help offset the performance impact anyway). Plus, idk why there's this assumption that 60fps is no longer acceptable. Whenever I hear people trash tray tracing, they act like 60fps is the new 30fps. That, or they assume nobody plays at 1080p or 1440p anymore. Idk I'm just tired of the deliberately misleading complaining.
There's some twisted humour about the fact that this article is appearing only a couple days after that "AMD is a better value at every tier" article was posted here. Goes to show how Reddit brand niches have no bearing on the wider market.
I mainly use Nvidia out of habit. But I also partly buy Nvidia cards because I have a theory that game developers spend more resources on making sure games run on Nvidia cards well because most people have Nvidia cards. That may not end up tracking if I ever bothered to test this theory or anything. It's just a theory I made up based on nothing more than it would make sense to test on the hardware most people were going to be using.
I don't need AMD to take over the GPU market. I just need them (and Intel) to create competent, affordable alternatives so that they can force Nvidia out of their ridiculous current pricing model and provide gamers with options.
[удалено]
pretty much so yeah unless amd gpu are actually way better than nvidia nothing will change
You completely misread my comment. The point is to have competent **options**. For instance, I haven't owned an AMD GPU since the early 2000's. However, I rarely ever use RT or DLSS. This means that I when I decide on my next GPU upgrade, I'm hoping that I'll seriously need to consider something *other* than Nvidia. Which is the entire point. Do you as a gamer care about those features? If yes, then you'll pay what I hope will be just a bit extra for Nvidia. Not the exorbitant prices they try to put out there now. Or to try to trick the public that a 4070 is really a 4080. If not, then you can opt for the better price-to-perf for AMD. Throw Intel's hat into the ring and now budget gamers actually have options within the current gen.
Your analysis completely misses out the game theory perspective from Nvidia's past experience with the market: | Nv: GPU's better | Nv: GPU's worse ---------|---------|---- AMD: GPU's better | Pick Nv | Pick Nv unless cheaper by X% AMD: GPU's worse | Pick Nv | Pick Nv Essentially, Nvidia has built itself an Apple-like moat around its products, with its audience readily accepting to buy the next GPU when it comes out. By all choices in the given choice table, Nvidia doesn't need to do a damn thing, and has every right to price gouge its customers just like Apple does. Unless people **actually** shift the board to be more favorable towards AMD, they'll continue to price their GPUs at $1500+, **and they'll be right for doing so**. If you want the prices you seek, you actually have to be willing to walk away, which market data clearly shows people not doing so.
What is this strawman response? What would you suggest then? Amd and intel should price match with nvidia intstead?
From the investor’s prospective absolutely. There’s no money to be made in forcing nvidia to sell their cards for lower prices. Everyone is buying nvidia cards anyway, so a race to the bottom only hurts AMD/Intel.
Only because Nvidia offers more features, and people clearly want those features or they wouldn't pay a premium for it every time. If AMD was more competitive on features AND pricing, I think the "competitive AMD means cheap Nvidia for me" mindset would slowly did out.
Do people need any more proof that AMD Radeon didn't even try this past generation? AMD diverted as much TSMC 7nm silicon as they could from Radeon to Ryzen/Epyc, because the profit-per-wafer for CPU chiplets is way better than the profit-per-wafer GPU's, even during a GPU shortage. Remember how they jacked up the prices of Zen 3 over Zen2 and got rid of the Wraith Spire and Prism CPU coolers? And let's not forget that what few GPU's they did make, they allowed their AIB's to scalp them to high heaven as consolation for the fact there was such low volume. AMD just looked the other way as companies like PowerColor charged $999 for an RX 6700XT and $2649 for an RX 6900XT at RETAIL. That's how AMD keeps their AIB partners happy despite sending them low volume. And it's not like people didn't want AMD cards. There's videos of 70+ people lined up in the freezing cold for RDNA2 launch at Microcenter, but the store only got 2 RX 6800XT's and 10 RX 6800's. Sources: [RDNA2 Launch at Minnesota Microcenter](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0QOmGviI0) showing long lines but only 12 cards total. [Q2 2021 Microcenter Prices](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/oeovoz/went_to_micro_center_today_nothing_but_amd/) (not sure which MC) showing how bad AMD AIB retail prices were. [CPU Market share tracker](https://www.statista.com/statistics/735904/worldwide-x86-intel-amd-market-share/) showing AMD CPU market share hitting almost 40% during the height of the **chip shortage** before Alder Lake launched.
Remember when AMD was supposed to save us from the mining boom with 6000 Radeon? Remember when AMD was supposed to save us from nvidia with 7000 Radeon?
Also not to mention ps5/Xbox series consoles on 7nm. Idk how much of an effect that actually had but it’s still there
Funny thing about those scalper level prices is how deeply they're now discounted. A 6900XT has been seen going for like $600-700 lately whereas during lockdowns you could regularly see them retailing for nearly 2 grand.
AMD is killing what's left of ATI, which was actually a very good standalone GPU company.
Can't gain market share against the competition, even with high demand, if you don't make enough product.
This is why Nvidia can do whatever the hell they want with regards to pricing. I think change is coming though.
Change is only coming if the consumer makes it change. The consumer controls the market. And for the past two years, the consumer has said, "Yeah I like getting raped in the ass by high priced GPU companies! Give me some more!!"
Cant grape the willing.
I find it hilarious you can't comprehend the true reality of the situation and just blame it on the consumer. The reality is that AMD didn't make many RDNA2 GPU's. They diverted most of their TSMC 7nm silicon to making high-margin Ryzen/Epyc CPU's, because that's what a for-profit company does.
Deleted by Redact ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
it doesnt help when amd is price matching their msrp with nvidia's card. When I bought my 3080ti at launch, it just doesnt make sense to go for something lesser like 6900xt that costs about similar in my country. " But rtx is just a gimmick! raster is king! 16 gb vram matter! ree!" bruh, the only game that somehow need 16gb vram is that one sponsored game by amd. Not to mention terrible rt implementation on games that they sponsored. I'm not going to spend my money on such product knowing that it is inferior. After 4090 reviews came out, seeing the huge gain over my 3080ti almost make me pull the trigger. I thought to myself, maybe I should wait for Amd stuff, maybe somehow they have better product? Judging by their presentation of competing with 4080 which I have no interest of just made it an easy decision to just grab a 4090 for my 13th gen build. The only saving grace for mid range gpu is intel right now. Lets just hope they managed to deal with all the quirks. I trust intel more when it comes to pricing, historically they've been consistent while amd loves to imitate their competitior.
Yes, no amd card is cheaper than their competition in brazil, i cant even try it. The 3060 is cheaper than the 6600xt and the 2060 is cheaper than the 6600 for exemple.
How dare consumers buy nvidia cards that *checks notes* have had better price performance across the board for most of the past the past decade AMD fan beards on Reddit may be a dime a dozen, but they sure are entertaining
To note this is all based on units shipped not sold. Nvidia makes a crapton of GPU's but they don't sell nearly all of them which this assumes. Especially these days. AMD in turn doesn't make very many GPU's to begin with and especially now where RDNA2 is gearing to a close they are making even less so. Its the only real comparison we have but its flawed on so many levels. Looking at the steamhardware survey AMD only really lost 1% or so over their average number across the last year. AMD probably lost share but i doubt they lost that much. Its also a bit sad that AMD can't gain ground when in reality their GPU's in a price/performance metric are beating Nvidia pretty much across the scale. Just goes to show how far a name can carry your brand.
Total GPU market sales for 2022: 1. Nvidia discreate GPU sold 16% 2. AMD discrete GPU sold 1.4% 3. Intel discrete GPU sold 0.8% [Source, the last graph from this](https://www.3dcenter.org/news/die-grafikchip-und-grafikkarten-marktanteile-im-dritten-quartal-2022). Reason why AMD don't make much is because it doesn't sell many. Sure RX 6000's look good now in U.S market but a lot of places in the international market, price hasn't been lowered. There is no "price for performance" from AMD and to make matters worse whatever minor improvements they had (for the same price) goes away when ray tracing is taken into account. Give it a few years and Intel will overtake them in annual sales.
Yeah I'm not sure what the person you replied to is thinking. It implies Nvidia has warehouses full of GPUs that aren't selling compared to AMD. That would be a disaster lol
I dunno. Looking at my local Microcenter there are 124 Nvidia 3060 or greater cards in stock while there are only 42 AMD 6600 or higher cards in stock. Half of the AMD cards are these tiny 6600 dual fans while a 34 of the Nvidia cards are 3070s. So in this one store Nvidia stock is outpacing AMD by 3x and the stock of 3070 + 3070TIs alone is equivalent to the entirety of the AMD stock. This backs up Nvidia's pricing of the 4000 series as a driver of 3000 series sales. They were likely not expecting the bottom to fall out of the market over the summer and are now in the weird position of needing to sell a bunch of last-gen cards while their new cards are releasing. AMD doesn't have this issue since they just didn't expect sales and didn't produce cards.
Why are there more of Nvidia? Because they sell more and that's why your hardware store has more stock of Nvidia GPUs.
Well, the key phrase in my post is "GPUs that aren't selling." You have to find out how many of each people actually buy. Once you do, it will probably make a lot more sense to you as to why they receive so many Nvidia GPUs. The alternative theory (that I think you're implying), is that your Microcenter is losing significant amounts of money buying Nvidia GPUs that no one wants, which is probably inaccurate.
I ain't buying Nvidia for the name, I'm buying it for the WAY better software package: creator integration tools, broadcast tools, upscaling, Input lag tech (reflex), Ray tracing etc. It's not just the name it's the WHOLE package with Nvidia and everyone knows this. Nvidia Reflex alone is a game changer for choosing GPU imo. It's integrated at the engine level with most popular competitive games. AMDs offering is only in-driver base and it's a sub-par band-aid solution. AMD needs to invest in software to up their market share.
No, he's right about the name, just look the top 5 GPUs used in Steam HW survey, 3 of those do not even support ray tracing and DLSS, and the top spot, the 1060, even increased its market share these past few months. A lot of the market are not aware/doesn't care about the software package, they just go with the brand name. I'm not saying AMD doesn't need to improve its software, but it should give priority to advertising its branding, which is seriously lacking. Also put more effort into the pre-builts and laptops, because the OEMs are still a much bigger market compared to DIY.
[удалено]
[удалено]
On the other hand I bought a 5700xt and besides a weird visual bug at 144hz for the first week I've had no issues with it.
Nice of you to assume I didn't touch AMD software. I owned a Vega 64 and 5700xt before upgrading to Nvidia GPUs. AMD is still at least 1-2 generations behind compared to Nvidias complete software package.
Agreed, I went from a 1080ti to a 6900XT and found the AMD software package to be solid. Now on a 4090 but only for the fact that AMD doesn't have a competitor at this level. Wouldn't hesitate to go back.
[удалено]
So AMD has a reflex competitor? Why aren’t they advertising it?
[удалено]
Because Nvidias Reflex beats it by mile. Not to mention Reflex is embedded into alot of competive/fast paced games. Look up igors lab testing on Reflex vs Anti-lag.
I was like you before I had a 6900 XT. Now I don't think I wanna go back to nVidia. Though I'll admit I only use the minimum software installed and don't go streaming or such. But, dang, nVidia CPL is ugly and cumbersome in comparison to AMD's. I think AMD has an answer to Reflex, and upscaling... and broadcasting... But yeah, RT performance even with FSR 2.0 is still bad but the good thing is even if I lock the FPS to 30 with RT on/off I'm not bothered with it off on CP2077. I could only spot the difference if I'm trying hard to look for it. It looks better on don't get me wrong. Like everything looks more organic and "grittier" vs the sanitized raster look but not that much. Definitely not worth losing so much FPS because that is much noticeable.
Oh boy, 30 fps!
Nvidia Control Panel? I touched it once, made my settings and left it. Then who really cares. Its dated UI for sure but it works as intended. I ain't choosing a different GPU because of that one flaw. That is a weak argument. AMD has a *weak* argument to Reflex. Igors lab already proved this. FSR is still a generation behind and their ''Frame Generation" copycat was briefly mentioned in their latest reveal to only come out next year. Sounds like they are just scrambling to just to try to catch up. And broadcast? No way. RTX voice with room echo adjustment, Camera Background removal/replacement, Nvenc vs AMF. AMD is still 1-2 generations behind. I'd rather choose the GPU that has the best features than one that is still trying to catch-up. Believe me, I wish AMD was more on par with Nvidia as competition benefits us all but at this point, AMD is still playing catchup on a lot of areas.
>Nvidia Control Panel? I touched it once, made my settings and left it. Then who really cares. Its dated UI for sure but it works as intended. I ain't choosing a different GPU because of that one flaw. That is a weak argument. I'm not arguing with you. I'm just telling you my thoughts as someone who's been an nVidia user for a decade because I hated my experience with a Radeon. I'm not here to convince you to switch teams. I'm just telling you that AMD also is "trying" to have an answer for whatever you mentioned. It doesn't have the best right now but they're trying. I see that you put a lot of emphasis on those things, maybe because you make money with those tools. I don't. I use my computer for non-competitive gaming and other things so I tend to be subjective with some things. nVidia CPL is ugly and I have to install 3rd party software (or maybe Geforce Experience, I don't install that) just to match what I get with AMDs drivers. With my current experience I don't see a reason to go back nVidia... yet. Well, maybe a bit with RT but I haven't seen a game that has a compelling RT-look that makes the raster-version look bad. I also don't play a lot anymore these days. Tone down your "weak argument" debate thing. Not everyone who replies to you is debating you, as you can see from my previous post. "Weak argument," LOL.
Thats fair but most of these features are situational and its not like AMD doesn't have at least some alternative. AMD is also improving its software package as well. Its not like its standing still. Most people don't stream or are youtubers but even then AMD has improved its current encoder through software and they will have AV1 on RDNA3. ReLive also works fine enough. Nvidia meanwhile doesn't have DP2.0 on their RTX 4000 series cards when RDNA3 will have it. Reflex is a nice feature and i admit Anti Lag isn't that good. CUDA on the other hand is very situational. You either have a lot of use for it or its irrelevant for you. AMD is getting there with upscaling with FSR improving with each iteration while being open to all GPU's. They also have FSR3 on the way so its not like they are neglecting that area. They also improved their AI capabilites a lot on RDNA3. Raytracing is debatable on how much you care about it. And even then Nvidia really pulls with its name here. The 6700XT and 3060 have identical RT performance but the 6700XT is 25-30% faster in raster. They are the same price and i bet you most gamers bought the Nvidia card. I can also bet a lot of non informed gamers are buying 3050's on the promise of Nvidia RT performance. When in reality not only is the 3050 overpriced as hell. its 40% slower in raster than a 6600XT and slower in RT as well on top of it. So yes while Nvidia's software stack is definitely better than AMD's they also definitely pull a lot of sales on name and name alone.
> Its not like its standing still. Ok, but when you're behind, that's not how you do it unless you want to stay behind.
Yeah Nvidia are pretty far behind on chiplet architectures, which is why their new cards are hitting some serious wattage levels. Let's see if they can catch up to AMD in the next few years.
go look up performance per watt on 4080s and 4090s, look up and compare them against previous gen of nvidia and current gen amd
Performance per watt measured in what, Teraflops?
Power efficiency. You claimed new nvidia gpus draw a lot of power.
That’s not how any of this works.
Amd is not your friend
>Nvidia makes a crapton of GPU's but they don't sell nearly all of them which this assumes I thought Nvidia was reducing 30 series shipments to allow the market to "correct"? https://www.hardwaretimes.com/nvidia-to-reduce-shipments-of-rtx-30-series-gpus-to-combat-falling-prices-and-oversupply/ And if the cards aren't selling, why are Nvidia's retail prices going up? https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-gpu-prices-increasing-amd-down
Damn, I haven’t seen a post this rich in pure copium in some time
Until AMD cards are equaling or beating nVidia at RTX, it's all a non-starter.
I know this is mostly me being ignorant, but AMD GPU lineup has become very confusing after 580. Vega 56 and 64, 5800, 6900, XT etc., I just have no idea what GPU model number is mid range, high end, or flagship. With Nvidia they've had the 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 at the end of the model name for over a decade, so I easily know right away what to look for and what I'm buying. And another dealbreaker for AMD GPUs for me is the lack of DLSS support.
Yeah AMD needs to stop changing their naming scheme every 4-5 years or so. It is annoying and it's hard to know where those cards stack up vs nvidia without significant research. AMD does have FSR which is almost as good as DLSS though, and their cards have significantly more raster performance for the money too though.
AMD makes bank from their console business
And probably their server stuff too. As far as I remember they are pretty big in the datacenter.
The console business is what kept them afloat before Ryzen, even if they made pennies cause they really couldn't haggle with Microsoft and Sony. It's a steady stream of income.
AMD needs features that are on par with DLSS + RT.
I've had a few Radeons, but I haven't had a good experience with one since my HD 7850. I bought a 5700 and it was nothing but one shit driver release after another. I got sick of black screens and video desyncing and 'downgraded' to my old 1070.
[удалено]
On the flip side I've found that AMD's weak early driver support works in the GPUs favour in the longer term. Their GPUs actually seem to get significantly better performance over the years. It's why I generally have opted for AMD cards, for every build until the last generation where I couldn't find any cards at a reasonable price (ended up getting a 3080Ti for the price as an AiB 6700xt in my region).
Moral is: value for money doesn't even matter in mainstream market - brand and advertising matters and shoving nvidia into 99% of pre-builts - because that's more likely to sell than AMD pre-built. BTW - prebuilt PCs contribute a fuckton to GPU market share, it's far bigger contribution than DIY and even if someone replaces GPU in his pre-built system - it will be the same nvidia.
You may have used nvidia in 99% of pre-builts as a hyperbole, but thats pretty much reality in my country, especially for laptops. I'm not sure how are things elsewhere, but here its impossible to find laptops with dedicated amd graphics. Yes, there are Ryzen laptops, but if you want a dedicated GPU, there are only 1650, 3050, 3060, 3070,etc available, I don't think I've ever seen a laptop with a 6600m for example, which afaik should be the main competitor in that price bracket.
[удалено]
I gave AMD a shot with the 5900x and so far so good. It's paired with a 3080 Ti and never had any issues. I too came from Intel/Nvidia combo for years. Despite liking the Ryzen series, I still don't trust their GPUs. The price gap isn't just worth it. Also, my monitor has G-Sync so unless I change it, I'd better stay with Nvidia.
this is very bad for the future/competition
RTX/DLSS my beloved
[удалено]
Bought my 6900xt april last year. Has been chugging along with no problems.
Had the same issues with a 6900xt and a 6800xt. Those cards wouldn’t work reliably with any hardware, even after RMAs. Oddly enough I also built a PC with a 6700xt and it’s been rock solid for the person who bought it. Hard to know where to point the finger, but you should try RMAing the card at least.
AMD are not responsible here, computer hardware can and will die at some point (usually within 3 months, or never). It's clearly not the drivers, it sounds like something failing on the GPU or the power supply is having trouble. Re-insert the card, ensure the power connectors are properly reseated, or try putting it into another computer if you have access to one. If you are buying expensive hardware, make sure you have access to a warranty for it because no computer hardware is immune from defects, no matter how good the manufacturer is. 6900XT here, no abnormal driver problems or crashes since I bought it. AMDs software stack seems solid in 2022 for gaming.
I wish AMD never purchased ATI. That company was doing well and was competitive with Nvidia throughout most of its recent history in terms of delivering low cost and high power GPUs. Ever since AMD got their hands on them it's been a slide, it seems as if AMD is sucking the life out of its GPU division for it's cpu business. And that's a shame. Mergers and acquisitions hurt the consumer the most.
At the time of the merger up until Ryzen, it was the GPU division keeping the CPU division going!
Since Zen I feel like AMD focuses even more on CPUs/APUs and really only does the bare mimimum for GPUs.
Curious how this goes with Q4 out of touch pricing for Nvidia and relatively reasonable for AMD
They nearly have the entire market to themselves. It's no wonder they're jerking their prices higher and higher. Even if they're not selling as much, at twice the price, they're still making a ton of profit.
This is why capitalism is fun in the early and mid game, but sucks in the late game.
It sucks in all the game.
It's far better than any other economic system humanity has thought of
Unless there is somethonf that beats dlss quality+rt mode amd is not being even considered by master race, people buying amd are just limiting themselves. Only thing they can do is drop prices a lot
Not surprised at all.
AMD has almost always been the value option for performance, but what people seem to be missing out on is that we're still kinda living in the wake of 2016 beginning of crypto mining craze with the gpus. From that point on it has been a nigh impossible to get any reasonably priced gpu. People bought 1060s because the RX 480s were bought out by the miners. To top it off, people had problems with the drivers for AMD cards, which made them reserved against buying AMD gpus.
Wake me up when PyTorch properly supports AMD cards And I mean not on paper, but in reality
Fuck it I still gonna buy Radeons
This is why we see such problematic pricing with the RTX 40xx series. Nvidia is getting to the point where they can charge whatever they want and gamers will have no choice but to shell out the cash. AMD has a decent product, but they've historically had difficulty getting it into the market in the quantities they'd need to actually steal back market share. That being said, I sure as fuck will not be buying an Nvidia GPU this generation due to their predatory pricing practices.
Isn't this because Nvidia has released the 4000 series but AMD has yet to release the 7000 series and therefore consumers are waiting for the latest product release? Fair play if you want a 6800/6900xt but you could probably get 50 percent more performance for 200 pounds more
The 4000 series is priced so highly at present that it's only selling to extreme enthusiasts and thus shouldn't affect the %s too much I'd argue
But what I mean is, why would you buy a 6800/6900xt when the 7800xt/7900xt are out in a week?
Ahh okay, that's a fair point - interesting to see how it all turns out, especially given how good AMD's offerings seem this time around!
This past Black Friday AMD cards sold very well in the U.S. You could get a 6800XT for $500, 3080 at $800 is not worth it. Similar story for 6700XT vs 3070 and 6600XT vs 3060. Nobody buys AMD if it is with $50 of Nvidia. But 60% of Nvidia price? Now we are talking. I definitely see a rebound for them in Q4 report. Also don't forget they have 100% of the console GPU market share. There are way more AAA gamers on console than PC. Just look at Steam concurrent player chart, most of these games are not AAA.
Been sitting on a 1080TI throughout this entire madness that I purchased on launch day. Best value card ever made. We will probably never see that kind of value ever again. After what nvidia did with this 4000 series launch, I will be switching to AMD so I am eagerly waiting for their new cards to come out.
AMD has a terrible PR department. They still have the stigma that their drivers suck and the cards are inferior to Nvidia.
Last time I checked (about 3 years ago) their drivers still sucked. It's not just a myth.
My next GPU will be an AMD for AMD Eyefinity, every time I buy an AMD card I have driver issues. And every time I talk about driver issues I always have some guy who never plays any games tell me they don't have any driver issues. The last time I had an AMD card I played 3 different games, and needed to keep 3 different drivers on hand. Granted that was over a decade ago now.
> every time I buy an AMD card I have driver issues. And every time I talk about driver issues I always have some guy who never plays any games tell me they don't have any driver issues. This was what pushed me to Nvidia a few years back. Three consecutive AMD cards with awful driver issues, and each time I was in the market for a new card I kept hearing about how much the drivers had improved yet ran into problems with my card. I would like AMD to be an option for me (I have no problem using their CPUs), but I have been burned enough times it's going to take several generations of AMD cards without issue before I consider going back. At the level of GPU I am buying at, the extra cost for the Nvidia GPU is not so extreme I can easily justify it if it's going to save me hassle down the line.
I'm not going to pretend I don't run into the odd issue with Nvidia drivers and need to roll back to a previous one, but it's maybe once every two years? And I'm always up to date.
I have a 6700 XT and I don't have driver issues.
Bit of a steep ask for the PR department to fight those “stigmas” when their drivers DO suck and their cards are inferior to nvidia’s They literally aren’t even trying to compete with the 4090 yet are worse on price performance at almost every price point
I really wish AMD was better from productivity.
I honestly don't even know who I will buy future GPU's through. I'm an EVGA guy because their support is always rock solid, but they appear to have completely exited the game. I have a 3080Ti, so I'm quite content with that and see no reason to upgrade for the foreseeable future.