A mysterious new AMD Radeon GPU has beaten the RTX 2080 Ti

[Nms Barry]

You made one HUGE mistake with your logic... YES THEY ARE!!

Picture someone you know of "average" intelligence and think about how dumb they are... now realize that HALF THE WORLD IS DUMBER THAN THEM!!

I said that the cause of people only cares about fps remark.
When someone buys a GPU they look at its looks, fps, cooling capability, power consumption, stability, features, etc.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I said that the cause of people only cares about fps remark.
When someone buys a GPU they look at its looks, fps, cooling capability, power consumption, stability, features, etc.

Alas, I wish that was true... but the majority of people DON'T do that... they simply buy whatever is available at the time... or buy what the salesperson suggests.... or whatever is bundled with their PC...

Again, people are NOT smart. They are selfish, lazy and dumb!

 

[OptimumSlinky]

Amd has been overcharging or same pricing for slower products for a long time in gpu products.
Don't get where the AMD OFFERS PRICE CHAMPION GPUS came from!?
When their products don't sell they just discount them as time goes.
Fury x vs 980 ti - Slower and gimped product that got even slower than rx 580 as time passed but priced same as nvidia part
Vega 64 vs Gtx 1080 - Priced higher + weaker + inferior overall
Radeon 7 vs gtx 1080 ti - Same price + slower + bad drivers + 2 years late.
Rx 5700 xt vs rtx 2060 super- You can get nvidia good part for $380+ whereas a good rx 5700 xt costs $440+. Rx version also has extremely bad drivers and feature set + consumes more power + has 1-3% oc headroom vs 8-10% of nvidia part.
970 vs 290x- $330 vs $550 - weaker + heat factory+ 1-5% oc headroom vs 15-20% of maxwell + even finewine joke could not save it. Still slower.
Rx 5500 xt vs gtx 1650 super- Same repeat.
And many more.
I have seen very few times in last decade where AMD priced their same or faster products vs nvidia competitively. They either ask same or more for slower products.
Rx 5700 xt and 5700 was the exception but as reported by most rx users they rather have 10% less fps for an overall better product vs rtx 2060 ans 2060 super.

The 7970 would like a word.

Couple things:
1. Vega prices were abnormally high due to low supply, high demand, and the crypto boom. Vega was still a dud as a gaming architecture, but street prices had nothing to do with MSRP.
2. Not sure where you're getting this RX 5700 consumes more power than the RTX 2060. Most tests, including TechSpots, show them roughly equivalent while gaming. Additionally, OC headroom is not "positive" per se. And the RX 5700 feature set was so "bad" that nVidia did a GFE update to add several of those same features.
3. The RX 580 now trades blows with the 1070 in some games, and is actively faster than the 1060 (

). So, yeah, AMD has issues with drivers out of the gate, but ultimately, AMD GPUs have longer lifespans than nVidia equivalents.

 

[Nms Barry]

The 7970 would like a word.

Couple things:
1. Vega prices were abnormally high due to low supply, high demand, and the crypto boom. Vega was still a dud as a gaming architecture, but street prices had nothing to do with MSRP.
2. Not sure where you're getting this RX 5700 consumes more power than the RTX 2060. Most tests, including TechSpots, show them roughly equivalent while gaming. Additionally, OC headroom is not "positive" per se. And the RX 5700 feature set was so "bad" that nVidia did a GFE update to add several of those same features.
3. The RX 580 now trades blows with the 1070 in some games, and is actively faster than the 1060 (

). So, yeah, AMD has issues with drivers out of the gate, but ultimately, AMD GPUs have longer lifespans than nVidia equivalents.

1- It was over priced for what ever it offered like most(not all) amd gpus.
2- I said RX 5700 xt vs Rtx 2060 super .
3- 1060 also trade blows with fury x? So, what does that mean? I said in one of replies amd fanboys/ amd stock holders cherry pick 4-6 games that favour amd and put videos on them on youtube to misguide people. No one buys $$$ gpus to play 4-6 games.
4- Amd gpus have longer lifespan is false even proven by techspot. Nvidia had only one such bad case that was 700 series. Also amd is using Same architecture for a decade GCN. Wait till RDNA becomes wide spread, all gcn gpus will lose support.
Gtx 970 still faster 290. 980 still faster than 290x.
Gtx 1070 Ti still faster vega 56
Gtx 1080 still faster vs vega 64
Gtx 1080 ti still faster vs Radeon 7
That's why all of love steve's 30+ game bechmarks. Which shows what a gpu is truly capable.
22 games average 580 on average produced 20 fps less than gtx 1070.

EVGA GeForce GTX 1650 Super SC Ultra Review

EVGA's GeForce GTX 1650 Super SC Ultra is priced at NVIDIA MSRP, yet offers all the important extras. It comes with a dual-fan cooler that achieves excellent temperatures and has idle-fan-stop capability. A factory overclock is included, too, and EVGA even managed to squeeze in a metal backplate.

www.techpowerup.com

11 new games average- 1060 producing 58 fps average vs 54 of rx 580.

Best graphics cards in 2024: the GPUs I recommend for every budget

Our picks of the most powerful gaming GPUs and the ones that provide the best bang for your buck.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[Shadowboxer]

The 7970 would like a word.

Couple things:
1. Vega prices were abnormally high due to low supply, high demand, and the crypto boom. Vega was still a dud as a gaming architecture, but street prices had nothing to do with MSRP.
2. Not sure where you're getting this RX 5700 consumes more power than the RTX 2060. Most tests, including TechSpots, show them roughly equivalent while gaming. Additionally, OC headroom is not "positive" per se. And the RX 5700 feature set was so "bad" that nVidia did a GFE update to add several of those same features.
3. The RX 580 now trades blows with the 1070 in some games, and is actively faster than the 1060 (

). So, yeah, AMD has issues with drivers out of the gate, but ultimately, AMD GPUs have longer lifespans than nVidia equivalents.

That’s not true at all, Nvidia offer driver support for GeForce for far longer than AMD do with Radeon. I think you’re confusing longevity with improvements, with GCN it took developers and AMD a lot longer to get the most out of the GPU so we would see larger improvements over time coming from AMD drivers as the driver team get better at getting the most out of the cards. Some people call it Finewine, personally I’d call it unfinished at launch.

I do hear that Navi and it’s drivers is far more optimised (ahem) at launch. I’m sure fanboys will lament the death of “finewine” however ?‍.

 

[Nms Barry]

That’s not true at all, Nvidia offer driver support for GeForce for far longer than AMD do with Radeon. I think you’re confusing longevity with improvements, with GCN it took developers and AMD a lot longer to get the most out of the GPU so we would see larger improvements over time coming from AMD drivers as the driver team get better at getting the most out of the cards. Some people call it Finewine, personally I’d call it unfinished at launch.

I do hear that Navi and it’s drivers is far more optimised (ahem) at launch. I’m sure fanboys will lament the death of “finewine” however ?‍.

Releasing unfinished products then saying it is finewine two years later when it finally catches up ?‍. But everything changes in technology space within 2 years.

 

[Evernessince]

People are not stupid. Otherwise, AMD GPU department would have 75% discrete GPU market hold and nvidia would have 25% now.
When someone buys a product they look at the overall quality of it.
Rx 580 is overclocked rx 480 that came near 4 years ago.
GTx 1650 super came this year.
Nvidia part uses 100+ watts less than amd part. Has more features, is more stable, is more cooler.
Amd will push RDNA more now and leave out GCN as time passes. Buying a 4 year old gpu today as new is beyond human reasoning.

Given that your opinion on what constitutes a smart choice is very debatable, it seems your definition of what is stupid is crafted to fit your narrative.

"
GTx 1650 super came this year.
Nvidia part uses 100+ watts less than amd part. Has more features, is more stable, is more cooler.
"

1. Actually the RX 580 has more features. The 1650 Super doesn't even do ray tracing, which was Nvidia's only gimmick over AMD cards. You forget that AMD allows all of it's new features like integer scaling, the new version of chill, radeon image sharpening, ect on most of it's cards, unlike Nvidia which only supports the latest generation. A year from now the RX 580 will still be receiving new features will the GTX 1650 super will not.

2. More stable? Where are the forum posts about RX 580s being unstable as a widespread issue? I think you are mistaken, the drivers for that card are very well fleshed out right now.

3. The RX 580 is on par with the 1650 super and can be had for $80. That's HALF the price of the 1650. I can see plenty of reasons to save $80 for the same performance.

It makes sense to get a 1650 super if power is expensive in your area or you are building a small PC. Otherwise the RX 580 is still the value king.

 

[Markoni35]

Wait until S3 releases a new graphics card, called S4. With 32 MB RAM.

 

[Evernessince]

That’s not true at all, Nvidia offer driver support for GeForce for far longer than AMD do with Radeon. I think you’re confusing longevity with improvements, with GCN it took developers and AMD a lot longer to get the most out of the GPU so we would see larger improvements over time coming from AMD drivers as the driver team get better at getting the most out of the cards. Some people call it Finewine, personally I’d call it unfinished at launch.

I do hear that Navi and it’s drivers is far more optimised (ahem) at launch. I’m sure fanboys will lament the death of “finewine” however ?‍.

Is that why AMD released Integer scaling for all it's GCN and Navi cards while Nvidia only did it for turing?

Just looking at features, Nvidia rarely adds new features to old cards. On the otherhand AMD often adds new features to old cards. FreeSync? Mantle? Radeon Chill? All of AMD's new software additions are supported by a large swath of AMD cards.

FYI the RX 580 and 1060 both launch about on par with each other. Today, the RX 580 is the better card.

 

[urbanman2004]

I really hope this is an AMD GPU under the hood.

 

[DadDanko]

Great, more exotic PC hardware nobody can afford to buy. I am just ecstatic!

 

[Nms Barry]

Given that your opinion on what constitutes a smart choice is very debatable, it seems your definition of what is stupid is crafted to fit your narrative.

"
GTx 1650 super came this year.
Nvidia part uses 100+ watts less than amd part. Has more features, is more stable, is more cooler.
"

1. Actually the RX 580 has more features. The 1650 Super doesn't even do ray tracing, which was Nvidia's only gimmick over AMD cards. You forget that AMD allows all of it's new features like integer scaling, the new version of chill, radeon image sharpening, ect on most of it's cards, unlike Nvidia which only supports the latest generation. A year from now the RX 580 will still be receiving new features will the GTX 1650 super will not.

2. More stable? Where are the forum posts about RX 580s being unstable as a widespread issue? I think you are mistaken, the drivers for that card are very well fleshed out right now.

3. The RX 580 is on par with the 1650 super and can be had for $80. That's HALF the price of the 1650. I can see plenty of reasons to save $80 for the same performance.

It makes sense to get a 1650 super if power is expensive in your area or you are building a small PC. Otherwise the RX 580 is still the value king.

I am not gonna prove everyone wrong with facts. I don't work full time for that.
I respect your opinion. But Buying 4 year old gcn gpu today when amd moved to new architecture is not a good idea. Last time amd moved to gcn, we know very well what happened to before gcn gpus.

 

[Rays1074]

Yay I knew it's a clickbait before clicking. Now it's rubber-stamped.

NVidia could use a reality check, but frankly unless AMD pulls truly some platinum plated rabbit out of the hat it won't happen. Probably Greens never released "2080Ti Super Xtra Add Two more Words after these" ;D in anticipation of something that possibly AMD was cooking. As things stand now there is not even shred of evidence AMD has anything reasonably capable of beating 2080Ti not to mention Titan.

And let's not kid ourselves. If tomorrow AMD released something to compete with 2080Ti, Nvidia will slash prices by 50% on Ti and Titan only to drown AMD in their own "silicon-blood" and keep the market status quo intact. Greens have mountains of $$$ to burn and sell at dumping prices if they so desire. AMD Radeon division is on 5th life support line - until very recently they basically recycled Polaris for a decade... and Vega was/is hardly a success story compared to Pascal which was probably best architecture in nVidia history so far.

Maybe the dumbest comment on here. Nvidia has never slashed prices, no matter what. They don't need to, their legion of mouth breathing fan boys will buy whatever they put out, regardless of price.

 

[cliffordcooley]

their legion of mouth breathing fan boys will buy whatever they put out, regardless of price.

That holds true for both sides. So what is your point?

 

[Evernessince]

I am not gonna prove everyone wrong with facts. I don't work full time for that.
I respect your opinion. But Buying 4 year old gcn gpu today when amd moved to new architecture is not a good idea. Last time amd moved to gcn, we know very well what happened to before gcn gpus.

Given that AMD's latest 4000 series laptop chips run off GCN , I've got a feeling that GCN will be supported for some time to come. Also, GCN is much older then 4 years. It first started with the 7000 series and the 7970. That's 9 years of support and counting. The 7970 is still receiving new features like integer scaling, pretty insane.

 

[Nms Barry]

Given that AMD's latest 4000 series laptop chips run off GCN , I've got a feeling that GCN will be supported for some time to come. Also, GCN is much older then 4 years. It first started with the 7000 series and the 7970. That's 9 years of support and counting. The 7970 is still receiving new features like integer scaling, pretty insane.

GCN is decade-old near. Hmm. You could be right.
I said that cause, he said about rx 580 being best value.
But rx 580 is oc rebrand of rx 480 that came in 2016.
Buying 2016 gpu in 2020 when much better overall product is available for cheaper does not make any sense. $180 580 vs $160 gtx 1650 super.
Now, if you get cheap used that is another discussion.

 

[Nms Barry]

Maybe the dumbest comment on here. Nvidia has never slashed prices, no matter what. They don't need to, their legion of mouth breathing fan boys will buy whatever they put out, regardless of price.

Nvidia does not have a crazy active fanbase like amd.
People buy nvidia cause they are overall better.
If amd is overall better everyone of them will switch to amd.

 

[Shadowboxer]

Maybe the dumbest comment on here. Nvidia has never slashed prices, no matter what. They don't need to, their legion of mouth breathing fan boys will buy whatever they put out, regardless of price.

Yeah I also heard people who buy Nvidia cards are incapable of thinking for themselves. It’s actually all a part of the neo-liberal conspiracy to keep AMDs market share low. It definitely doesn’t have anything to do with the fact that Nvidia tend to make stronger cards that have more reliable driver support than AMD.

 

[Robertrogue]

I will have to interject here. I love the one side vs other side. I think everyone is in the "homer" line. You are either on the Green bandwagon or the Red. I haven't built a new system in 8 years. Saved close to 10k in cold hard cash not chasing the "best of the best". If Intel and AMD lay down the gauntlet and actually put Green to the task we will all win!! Do people actually know that the cost to produce a GPU is pennies on the dollar? Keep feeding the beast and they will keep coming back for more. I appreciate saving my cold cash, it doesn't fall from the skies and seems to disappear faster than last year's GPU specs.

 

[Shadowboxer]

I will have to interject here. I love the one side vs other side. I think everyone is in the "homer" line. You are either on the Green bandwagon or the Red. I haven't built a new system in 8 years. Saved close to 10k in cold hard cash not chasing the "best of the best". If Intel and AMD lay down the gauntlet and actually put Green to the task we will all win!! Do people actually know that the cost to produce a GPU is pennies on the dollar? Keep feeding the beast and they will keep coming back for more. I appreciate saving my cold cash, it doesn't fall from the skies and seems to disappear faster than last year's GPU specs.

I couldn’t agree more, which is why it bothers me that people are criticising Nvidia. Nvidia are the ones making decent hardware across the board at the moment, AMD are only challenging them in certain areas. If AMD were able to produce more competitive parts - particularly in the high end then we would see competition and consumer victories etc. The same thing happened in CPUs, AMD effectively disappeared from the market and everyone blamed Intel for the stagnation that ensued. Then look what happened as soon as AMD started competing again, prices started to come down and core counts went up almost immediately. AMDs absence caused this stagnation.

If AMD or Intel could challenge Nvidia's top cards then those prices would come down. However in the meantime as long as Nvidia have customers for their cards at their high prices then they won’t get cheaper. A lot of people are saying Nvidia are overpricing, I disagree I think they are simply unchallenged. If there was a competing product for less then people could legitimately claim Nvidia’s parts are overpriced.

 

[Evernessince]

GCN is decade-old near. Hmm. You could be right.
I said that cause, he said about rx 580 being best value.
But rx 580 is oc rebrand of rx 480 that came in 2016.
Buying 2016 gpu in 2020 when much better overall product is available for cheaper does not make any sense. $180 580 vs $160 gtx 1650 super.
Now, if you get cheap used that is another discussion.

The RX 580 isn't in production anymore so the pricing in stores is much higher then you should be paying.

There are metric tons of them on eBay for anywhere from $65 - $120. Most are in the $85 range. ASUS and MSI offer a transferable warranty, meaning you can get a card that is covered.

I bought 2 RX 580s in 2018 as christmas gifts to friends and another in 2019 for the same reason. They love them and I got them for $85 plus 10% cash back from eBay's annual christmas promotion.

 

[Irata]

I couldn’t agree more, which is why it bothers me that people are criticising Nvidia. Nvidia are the ones making decent hardware across the board at the moment, AMD are only challenging them in certain areas. If AMD were able to produce more competitive parts - particularly in the high end then we would see competition and consumer victories etc. The same thing happened in CPUs, AMD effectively disappeared from the market and everyone blamed Intel for the stagnation that ensued. Then look what happened as soon as AMD started competing again, prices started to come down and core counts went up almost immediately. AMDs absence caused this stagnation.

If AMD or Intel could challenge Nvidia's top cards then those prices would come down. However in the meantime as long as Nvidia have customers for their cards at their high prices then they won’t get cheaper. A lot of people are saying Nvidia are overpricing, I disagree I think they are simply unchallenged. If there was a competing product for less then people could legitimately claim Nvidia’s parts are overpriced.

While I generally agree that competition brings better products at lower prices, there is one flaw in your reasoning:

So Intel stagnated with their products offering little new because AMD could not compete ("AMD's absence caused this stagnation" ), however nVidia, while not being challenged - particularly on the high end - managed to not stagnate and instead continuously improve their products.

The next point is that competition only works if customers are willing to give the challenger a chance. If the only reason you welcome competition is because it lowers the price on the product you'd have bought anyhow, then guess what will happen to competition after a little while. Companies are in this to make earn money and investing in new / better tech without actually selling enough products = losing money.

Now if you're a big company with deep pockets, you can afford to lose money with some products for a while if you are confident that this will pay off long term. The smaller players whose income mostly depends on one or a few products does not have this luxury.