A pricing and availability update on the Radeon RX 6600 XT and how the GPU market is shaping...

Scorpus

Posts: 2,040   +234
Staff member
Why it matters: The AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT has been on the market for just under a week now and we have a much better idea of how pricing and availability is shaking up after the card hit stores a day after our review. At launch, AMD made some bold promises around availability, now we’ll be following up on those to see if AMD has actually delivered on what they said.

This matters because last time -- when they launched the Radeon RX 6800 and 6800 XT -- AMD got us on a phone call and spent some time telling us how these GPUs, which were out of stock and overpriced at the time, would be available from board partners at the MSRP in 4 to 8 weeks. That didn't turn out to be true, or at least a huge miscalculation of their own product’s supply as even today those GPUs aren’t available at the MSRP or regularly in stock at any price.

Before we take a look at how the 6600 XT actually ended up in the market, we should clarify the claims that AMD made to us. This time we didn’t get any firm guarantees on timelines for availability, but AMD did say that cards would be available at the MSRP on launch day, and that supply would be decent enough to hopefully give a large portion of gamers an opportunity to purchase one. It seems that several other reviewers received similar messages from AMD and we also heard from retailers that supply of 6600 XTs was indeed looking reasonable.

Availability at launch

So were AMD’s claims about being able to buy an MSRP 6600 XT at launch true? Well, for the most part. At least for a period of time on launch day. In Australia, for example, GPU shoppers were able to purchase an RX 6600 XT from PowerColor at our local MSRP of $590 AUD for several hours from the evening prior to the following morning. This was unlike most other GPU launches in recent memory, where cards would sell out virtually instantly, and MSRP cards would not be in stock for any reasonable amount of time.

We also heard multiple reports from users around the globe that availability was similar in their region, and multiple news outlets were covering the launch lauding the fact that new GPUs were being sold at reasonable prices with reasonable stock. In the United States, on launch day, it sounds like Microcenter as one example had PowerColor Fighter and Gigabyte Eagle models in stock at the $380 MSRP if you were willing to purchase one in store, while Newegg also sold some of these GPUs online, though it was through their Shuffle allocation system, along with many other cards of varying prices.

That was launch day though, which is only part of the story. It’s all well and good to have a few cards available at MSRP on the day of release, but a bigger achievement is hitting the MSRP on a consistent basis moving forward. After all, a theme of these launches has been to release cards at the MSRP on a limited time basis to fulfill any launch promises, before jacking up the price for every other model. So how is the stock situation looking right now?

Honestly, not too bad in most regions. Here in Australia at multiple retailers you can still buy an RX 6600 XT, you’ll just have to pay at least $100 AUD over the MSRP -- which sounds like a large price inflation, but at ~20% over the $580 AUD MSRP, that’s significantly lower for in-stock GPUs compared to other models. For example, if you want an RTX 3060 or RTX 3060 Ti, you’ll need to spend at least $1,100, a massive $400 jump on the 6600 XT, which makes AMD’s offering a comparatively good deal.

In the UK, at Overclockers.co.uk, they are reporting stock for cards like the Sapphire Pulse 6600 XT at a price tag of 380 pounds, which is a 15% price hike on the MSRP of 330 pounds, along with a few other similar models like the PowerColor Fighter and Sapphire Nitro+. Again, we’re talking about several days after launch, and only seeing a modest price inflation on the MSRP.

In other regions like Germany it’s much harder to buy a 6600 XT with basically all models out of stock at major retailers like Mindfactory and Caseking, so there does appear to be some regional discrepancies. Taking another random European country as an example we have Sweden at local retailer Inet and it’s a bit different again, several models still in stock with prices as low as 5200 krona, which is a similar markup versus MSRP as other countries (noting that Sweden unfortunately gets rolled on local pricing as we’ve been told by local enthusiasts).

The US is unfortunately another case where stock has quickly evaporated from most retail stores. Places like Newegg are still sending their stock to the Shuffle, so it remains unavailable to purchase on demand like in other regions, regardless of price. You’ll see the dreaded "out of stock" bundles on their website right now, and while you may have some luck at Microcenter if you have one near where you live, several days after launch, I wouldn’t class it as "easy to purchase" if you want a Radeon 6600 XT in the USA.

That can give you an outlook of how stock is shaping up at this very moment, and like with many prior GPU launches, it does vary from region to region. At least today, if you live in one of the lucky countries with stock, if you wanted to buy a 6600 XT, it's possible with price inflation roughly 15 to 20 percent above the MSRP -- which in USD would put the current retail price around the $450 mark.

The reason why there are cards still in stock in some regions is down to a couple of reasons. Speaking to retailers we are hearing a clear trend: board partners simply had a larger than usual amount of 6600 XT cards to sell. One retailer told us their launch allocation for just one model of the 6600 XT was larger than all launch allocation for Nvidia’s RTX 3060 Ti, 3070, 3080 and 3090 GPUs combined. Stock levels have been described to us as generous considering the current state of the GPU market, and I think that's surprised some of these retailers which have allowed stock to remain on shelves for longer than usual.

More expensive models, price correction expected

There are bad news to share about pricing going forward though. While AMD said that cards will be available at the MSRP at launch, which does appear to have happened for at least a period after launch, it doesn’t sound like you’ll be able to easily find MSRP 6600 XTs in the future.

Retailers have told us that the base model cards you’ve seen at MSRP -- the PowerColor Fighter being one example -- are not expected to be restocked in any significant quantities or at all. The sentiment is that these “MSRP” cards were effectively a promotional price for launch day.

The sentiment is that these “MSRP” cards were effectively a promotional price for launch day.

We’ve been told the vast majority of expected future supply is being allocated to higher priced models, not necessarily the most premium 6600 XTs, but the next tier above the base model. Things like the PowerColor Hellhound and Red Devil, the Gigabyte Gaming OC, the Asus Dual… these are the cards that are most likely to be seen moving forward, with prices to match.

The good news is that availability for these mid-priced cards is looking pretty good in the future. I’ve heard of several more generous resupplies coming in the next few weeks, but that does appear to be at the expense of MSRP models. This is just based on our discussions with local retailers. But the expectation is that you should be able to buy an RX 6600 XT like AMD promised, but it won’t be at the MSRP, it’ll be at a modest markup above that price point. One retailer described this higher-than-MSRP retail price as the “real MSRP” based on expected future shipments.

As a quick summary, 6600 XT supply is looking decent at least for the short term, pricing is looking not great but okay, and AMD appears to be delivering on this occasion, though the reality of the situation isn’t as rosy as suggested.

But is it any good?

The Radeon RX 6600 XT received a rather harsh 60/100 score in our review, but now that we know more about availability and street pricing, how does this affect our recommendation for the 6600 XT? We were certainly unimpressed with the MSRP, and said it was effectively a 5700 XT for 5700 XT pricing. But, you can’t buy the 5700 XT at its launch price anymore -- not even close -- so where do things stand right now?

In most regions, the RX 6600 XT is by far the best value GPU you can buy from retail shelves. In Australia we’re looking at prices starting at $700 which is inflated, but the nearest cards from Nvidia are the RTX 3060 and RTX 3060 Ti which surprisingly both go for around $1,100. In the case of the 3060 Ti, that means the Nvidia alternative is 57% more expensive for 20% more performance at 1440p, plus additional features like DLSS and superior ray tracing. That’s far from a great value, and with similar margins seen in other regions, it’s hard to justify the Nvidia option.

AMD’s own 6700 XT looks like poor value compared to the 6600 XT. In Australia, you’re faced with about a 60% price increase to go from the 6600 XT to the 6700 XT, for just a 30% improvement to performance at 1440p. Radeon RX 6700 XT prices have been increasing at retail for a few months now from what used to be a very attractive price point, but that’s no longer the case with the 6600 XT in the picture.

There’s no doubting that right now, the 6600 XT is the best value GPU you can currently purchase. But… it’s still hard to recommend, isn’t it?

I mean, all these comparisons are basically comparing one poo sandwich to another poo sandwich, and that’s not the sort of sandwich I personally enjoy. Saying that one GPU is better value than another in this market doesn’t mean a whole lot when almost every single card you can purchase is terrible, atrocious value. Where the 6600 XT ends up is basically being the least worst option, rather than a “best” value sort of product.

And that’s because in a normal market with normal prices, it would be very hard to recommend a 6600 XT, when you'd pretty comfortably choose to buy the $400 GeForce RTX 3060 Ti instead. So it’s hard not to feel ripped off in some way purchasing a 6600 XT at a price above the already mediocre MSRP. And I think this is why we’re seeing 6600 XTs sit on shelves at above MSRP prices in some regions, and why retailers are reporting “underwhelming” sales to us.

What's next?

Beyond that, I think there are several other factors at play. First, how many people out there are looking to upgrade to a 6600 XT that provides cost per frame that is no better than the RX 5700 XT that launched in 2019?

Radeon 5700 XT owners have no incentive to upgrade. Or if you already own anything better than an RTX 2060 Super, the performance gain isn’t significant enough. Even owners of the RTX 2060, you’re looking at a 30% performance increase in the best case at 1080p, which isn’t a large enough gain to tempt an upgrade right now.

To bother moving up to a 6600 XT you’d have to at least be an owner of something like a GTX 1660 Ti or an RX 590, or ideally an even lower end or older card, that’s going to give you that ~50% performance improvement that typically justifies an upgrade. This would in a lot of cases mean moving up a price tier, if you’d previously been a 1660 Ti or GTX 1060 buyer you’d be used to spending $250-300 on a GPU, now you’re facing spending at least $450 on an upgrade which is beyond the price range of mainstream customers.

The second factor is something we discussed in the Radeon RX 6600 XT review. High-end GPUs are still selling out at ridiculous prices because high-end buyers have the cash to spend and in some instances will just pay whatever it takes to get the level of performance they need, whereas more mainstream buyers are more patient and on the lookout for good deals.

AMD made a huge blunder advertising the 6600 XT as a 1080p GPU.

Another element that may have contributed to the flat reception of the 6600 XT is AMD’s marketing. AMD made a huge blunder advertising the 6600 XT as a 1080p GPU. 1080p is a resolution for entry-level gamers, it’s old school news, it’s outdated outside of competitive gaming. Even if the card is actually decent at 1440p -- and the 6600 XT is faster than an RTX 2070 at 1440p, so it’s no slouch -- advertising a $380 GPU (+ inflation) as a 1080p gaming card is quickly going to turn buyers away.

The 6600 XT doesn’t make sense as an upgrade for many current GPU owners, especially those that already passed on this value proposition in prior years. It was released too late into a mid-range market that has become comfortable to waiting for the best value, and on top of that, it was advertised as a 1080p card in a price range where consumers expect better.

Right now we can only recommend the RX 6600 XT if you are desperate for a GPU, because to be fair it is the best value you can get on today's market. But if you’ve already got a half decent GPU, it might make sense to just keep those settings turned down a bit and keep waiting as you have been for months now until something great value pops up.

To get a much stronger recommendation, the RX 6600 XT needs to be priced at no more than $300 MSRP, ideally slightly lower, and then with the current ~20% price inflation, an actual retail price of $360 would be easier to digest. The GPU would offer greater value card in its own right, and much better than highly inflated competitors, but as it stands right now, it simply doesn’t feel like it's the winner AMD was hoping for.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
AMD ended up in a funny situation here: Technically they did not lie, the card had more models on the initial launch.

But it still feels disingenuous to the point of lying if you ask me: it feels like them saying "We have 100 times more cards available for this launch!" by having 100 cards instead of 0 as before. I mean sure, you did, but it was still nowhere near enough for the MSRP to mean anything at all so still far behind the demand (And yes: AMD can predict demand and if they couldn't before they can now and no, I won't be taking any questions or objections to this and would auto-ignore arguments defending AMD's supposed inability to predict demand)
 

theruck

Posts: 426   +248
The ASRock model costs 724 USD at my vendor in EU. so end user price will be like $800 minimum. available at 6.9.2021. what a scam
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,797   +1,410
In the U.K. we add 20% VAT to all purchases so selling for £380 would mean we are getting the card below MSRP. But if you look around there are only 1 or 2 models selling for £380. Most of them are £400+ which is more in line with MSRP.

Personally I think if you need a gaming PC desperately then buy it. It might be Radeon but it’s better than nothing at all.
 

NightAntilli

Posts: 787   +994
"The sentiment is that these “MSRP” cards were effectively a promotional price for launch day."

I find it interesting that this was mentioned. nVidia was clearly doing this for pretty much the full 3000 series, but barely anyone mentioned it.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,805   +3,033
"The sentiment is that these “MSRP” cards were effectively a promotional price for launch day."

I find it interesting that this was mentioned. nVidia was clearly doing this for pretty much the full 3000 series, but barely anyone mentioned it.

And in fact, reviews were still based on official msrp even though they are clearly unicorns.

AMD ended up in a funny situation here: Technically they did not lie, the card had more models on the initial launch.

But it still feels disingenuous to the point of lying if you ask me: it feels like them saying "We have 100 times more cards available for this launch!" by having 100 cards instead of 0 as before. I mean sure, you did, but it was still nowhere near enough for the MSRP to mean anything at all so still far behind the demand.

If you have 30-60 minutes after launch (vs 3-6 seconds) to get a card at msrp that‘s a big improvement. Not great, but better.

In other regions like Germany it’s much harder to buy a 6600 XT with basically all models out of stock at major retailers like Mindfactory and Caseking

Mindfactory is out but thy must have had a large number of cards and they did have the best prices. Alternate is out, as well but Notebooksbilliger still has some models in stock.

If someone absolutely needs a new GPU, the 6600XT is still the least expensive option and not even more expensive than OKish last gen cards.

So in terms of sh1t sandwiches, if you must eat one it‘s better to have the Chihuahua model than the Rottweiler one.




 

Kosmoz

Posts: 459   +808
AMD ended up in a funny situation here: Technically they did not lie, the card had more models on the initial launch.

But it still feels disingenuous to the point of lying if you ask me: it feels like them saying "We have 100 times more cards available for this launch!" by having 100 cards instead of 0 as before. I mean sure, you did, but it was still nowhere near enough for the MSRP to mean anything at all so still far behind the demand (And yes: AMD can predict demand and if they couldn't before they can now and no, I won't be taking any questions or objections to this and would auto-ignore arguments defending AMD's supposed inability to predict demand)
What exactly would you have done if you were CEO of AMD?
You do know how "big" AMD is vs Intel and nvidia, right?
And you do know they made contracts years before this (situation) to supply Sony and MS with millions of consoles (over 15mil by now combined)?
You do know they also prioritize CPUs before GPUs on a limited TSMC waffer allocation, right?

So what exactly did you in a position of AMD CEO could have done better?
Make the MSRP $300?

Ok, but it would have made little difference or none in the availability part. The fact is that after 1 week after launch it would have been double anyway. So they made it a higher MSRP because the street price would have eneded there no matter the MSRP...

They make more money now selling at $380 (and to AIBs) when the stores sell it at $700+, than if it were $300 and the stores would have sold it at $700+, anyway.
The ASRock model costs 724 USD at my vendor in EU. so end user price will be like $800 minimum. available at 6.9.2021. what a scam
And the 3060 is between $50 to $100 more, in the same shops...
And 3060Ti is north of +$200...
What a scam? Sure, but blame both nvidia and AMD, not just AMD.
Then blame the pandemic, scalpers, miners and crypto, components shortages, higher shipping costs, inflation, etc.
I don't like it either and it sux, but it's not just one factor alone to blame here...

I find it interesting that this was mentioned. nVidia was clearly doing this for pretty much the full 3000 series, but barely anyone mentioned it.
Exactly.
If you have 30-60 minutes after launch (vs 3-6 seconds) to get a card at msrp that‘s a big improvement. Not great, but better.
In a lot of shops around the world it was actually at MSRP for a whole day or even more than 24 hours.
That's a real improvement from the previous launches of Radeon 6000 series.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
What exactly would you have done if you were CEO of AMD?
Not launch the RDNA 2.0 right next to Ryzen 3 and a set of 2 new consoles at the same time: not trying to chew on 3x as much as you can handle under normal circumstances anyway as it was pretty clearly far too many products if there was no pandemic, no miner craze, nothing external just the simultaneous launch of every. Single. Product line they handle at the same time was a terrible decision aimed at impressing share holders while lying to the consumers and the public about availability.

As for this particular launch? Yeah: Launch at 300 MSRP or not launch at all if you cannot guarantee that price period. They are not hurting for money it's not necessary that they keep launching products at the worst possible time if things are not in the cards. She just has a timeline and sticks to it hell or high water proposefully ignoring the manufacturing and distribution challenges that plague her company.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
If you have 30-60 minutes after launch (vs 3-6 seconds) to get a card at msrp that‘s a big improvement. Not great, but better.
I wouldn't call it "Not great" either if the MSRP is already super high for the performance AND most of the retailers that had 3-6 seconds where nowhere near that MSRP.
 

BSim500

Posts: 868   +2,018
Still a hard pass. I often LOL at some of the past "Turing was a ripoff" comments when for me going from a £149 1050Ti to a £159 GTX 1660 (normal price £180-£200) mean paying +7-33% more money for approx +80% performance gain for 1080p. I'm not doing the opposite and spending +150% more money for +50% performance gain (GTX 1660 to RX 6600XT), just because people are trying too hard to normalize a screwed up market as "it's the only option". I'll just skip another generation and wait it out until sanity returns.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
I'll just skip another generation and wait it out until sanity returns.
Ditto. My take is get a 5600g now and add in a GPU in a generation or even 2.

For sure you'll notice the performance difference as the 5600g but most people who really want to game something have at least 20 to 30 years of excellent games to choose from, just on Steam. Most of them at like 1 to 5 USD when on sale.

I seriously doubt people go through even a fraction of the stuff they already have through past purchases and bundles and it's a far better proposition than to support something like a 6600 xt at this point.

In fact even modern AAA games could use some re-evaluation so they improve on something other than graphic quality if they see people not bothering with either the expensive, shorter, simpler and highly exploitative modern games or the artificial and intentional pricing manipulation of the GPU market to even play them.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,805   +3,033
I wouldn't call it "Not great" either if the MSRP is already super high for the performance AND most of the retailers that had 3-6 seconds where nowhere near that MSRP.
3-6 seconds was not the 6600XT launch. I checked some German retailers out of interest and even Techspot confirm this for Australia in their article (prices are in Australian $ btw). Availability at or near msrp was for longer.

Had I wanted one at msrp I could easily have bought it at msrp, however I am not spending €379. This is very different from e.g. the 3060Ti or 6700XT launch. Never mind the 3060 launch as I did not even see token models at that price at most retailers. Mindfactory and Alternate hat them at €500+ afair.

But: If for whatever reason you need to buy a GPU, it‘s the ‚best‘ / least bad deal out there. The market is as it is.

And looking at msrp when you cannot get other products at that price is pointless. They don‘t exist right now and I‘m still unsure if we‘ll see certain SKU at that price.
 
Last edited:

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
3-6 seconds was not the 6600XT launch. I checked some German retailers out of interest and even Techspot confirm this for Australia in their article (prices are in Australian $ btw). Availability at or near msrp was for longer.

Had I wanted one at msrp I could easily have bought it at msrp, however I am not spending €379. This is very different from e.g. the 3060Ti or 6700XT launch. Never mind the 3060 launch as I did not even see token models at that price at most retailers. Mindfactory and Alternate hat them at €500+ afair.

But: If for whatever reason you need to buy a GPU, it‘s the ‚best‘ / least bad deal out there. The market is as it is.

And looking at msrp when you cannot get other products at that price is pointless. They don‘t exist right now and I‘m still unsure if we‘ll see certain SKU at that price.
I think that the only reason we're seeing this is deceptively simple: AMD send equal number of cards to most territories.

This means that on places with very high demand and very high acquisitive value for people there (400 USD is easier to swallow if you make 2000 or 3000 per month average vs 100-200 per month on say, parts Latin America or Asia) it was a glass of water thrown into a pool of demand. But if you throw in that same glass of water to a small ant well, you've got a luxurious pool by comparison.

Which again it still means that technically, AMD did not lie and did have sufficient stock ready to meet demand at launch...But they missed a giant block letter disclaimer saying "RESTRICTIONS MAY APPLY BASED ON LOCATION"
 

Kosmoz

Posts: 459   +808
Not launch the RDNA 2.0 right next to Ryzen 3 and a set of 2 new consoles at the same time: not trying to chew on 3x as much as you can handle under normal circumstances anyway as it was pretty clearly far too many products if there was no pandemic, no miner craze, nothing external just the simultaneous launch of every. Single. Product line they handle at the same time was a terrible decision aimed at impressing share holders while lying to the consumers and the public about availability.
And that is why you're not the CEO of AMD.

Are you for real? Do you even imagine what **** storm and negative press and the WW3 would have started if AMD delayed their high end GPU comeback by X months? Just to have more supply?

Pffft, you have no clue what you're talking about. They were already late vs Ampere and years late vs nvidia in top end in general...

There is no alternative life in which doing what you said would have been better, at all. Stop posting nonsense please. Stick with nvidia (because they "care about gamers"), you clearly don't need AMD, so it should not matter to you what they do...
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,797   +1,410
As for this particular launch? Yeah: Launch at 300 MSRP or not launch at all if you cannot guarantee that price period. They are not hurting for money it's not necessary that they keep launching products at the worst possible time if things are not in the cards.

Lmao were you born yesterday? AMD is a US tech corporation who’s only goal is to make money. Choosing not to launch products because you can’t guarantee the price will be low would be the stupidest business decision I’ve ever heard. AMD don’t exist to deliver cheap graphics cards to the poor. They exist to make billions of dollars in profit, something they are very good at doing recently. If anything AMD will be falling over themselves to get cards out. Look at this 6600XT, they are able to make 3-4 6600XTs instead of one 6800XT, meaning AMD make far more money selling this part than the 6800XT. And this $380 MSRP is about as high as AMD can get away with! AMD clearly launched the 6600XT to maximise profits on its limited TSMC capacity, to extract the highest possible amount of money and deliver the bare minimum to the consumer base. Just like all the other US tech corporations do..
 

BSim500

Posts: 868   +2,018
In fact even modern AAA games could use some re-evaluation so they improve on something other than graphic quality if they see people not bothering with either the expensive, shorter, simpler and highly exploitative modern games or the artificial and intentional pricing manipulation of the GPU market to even play them.
Agree 100% with that. Looking back over the past 5 years, by far the games I've enjoyed the most have been actually new Overwhelmingly Positive stuff like Divinity Original Sins, Cuphead, Frostpunk, Dusk, Supraland, Shadow Tactics Blades of the Shogun, etc, rather than the "safe IP creativity" of "Far Cry 3: Texture Pack 7" or Assassins Creed 34. They need me to want to spend £400 on a new GPU a lot more than I actually need to "upgrade" to play actually enjoyable PC games...

And yeah, it's not until you replay some old Lithtech engine stuff where even in NOLF1 there were enemies that flipped over a table and fired from behind it alternating from 80% to 100% cover (whilst 20 years later they now considerately stand nice and still for you out in the open like the kind bullet sponges they are), that you realize how much of the "sparkly bits" in modern games driving the GPU rat race has come at the expense of 20 years worth of missing better AI, not an "enhancement" to it...
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
And that is why you're not the CEO of AMD.

You're right: I would never be in business just to maximize profits for my share holders: that's how we've got mass spread oppression and suffering, not to mention catastrophic and at least confirmed to be partially-irreversible climate change: CEO Mentality of "Lying is ok if it brings money in, not just some money, ALL of the money"

You cannot make a strict business point of view to me because I fundamentally disagree with how Western Societies work.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,805   +3,033
You're right: I would never be in business just to maximize profits for my share holders: that's how we've got mass spread oppression and suffering, not to mention catastrophic and at least confirmed to be partially-irreversible climate change: CEO Mentality of "Lying is ok if it brings money in, not just some money, ALL of the money"

You cannot make a strict business point of view to me because I fundamentally disagree with how Western Societies work.
Sadly, customers overwhelmingly support this. In fact, it seems like they demand it.

Every time I hear people say ‚my favorite company is the best, they have the highest profits and margins‘ I‘m ready to puke. That‘s the way the world works sadly.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,300   +2,545
Sadly, customers overwhelmingly support this. In fact, it seems like they demand it.

Every time I hear people say ‚my favorite company is the best, they have the highest profits and margins‘ I‘m ready to puke. That‘s the way the world works sadly.
I don't think they explicitly support it (Mostly because statistically, none of them directly benefit anyway) but it's more of what Mark Fisher described as Capitalist Realism: it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism, simply because of how thoroughly indoctrinated most people are at this point.
 

Kosmoz

Posts: 459   +808
You're right: I would never be in business just to maximize profits for my share holders: that's how we've got mass spread oppression and suffering, not to mention catastrophic and at least confirmed to be partially-irreversible climate change: CEO Mentality of "Lying is ok if it brings money in, not just some money, ALL of the money"

You cannot make a strict business point of view to me because I fundamentally disagree with how Western Societies work.
I can agree with that. But I don't agree with blaming one company and not the other(s) too.

I also don't agree, when one company is the lesser evil proven by facts to be made the bigger evil by misinformation, simping or shilling - whatever the case may be.

In this case is simple, although still a corporation and with mistakes and greed, AMD vs both nvidia and Intel is the lesser evil, with less mistakes (at least in the past years) than the other two.

I will always choose the lesser evil, because in this world there is no inherent good or perfect good. So until AMD turns into the bigger evil, yeah I'll praise them where praise is due and criticize them where issues are found.
I'm not blind to their issues, I just see more good than bad and the opposite in nvidia and Intel, more bad than good (doesn't mean there isn't good in them at all either). Again based on facts, not feelings.

Maybe in a few years AMD will make so many mistakes that will prove them to be the bigger evil (or not), who knows, but until then this is the reality.

It's futile to dream of a perfect utopia. Reality is far from that and it will never be.
 

Lounds

Posts: 951   +857
The RX 6600 XT is great for AMD shareholders, crap for gamers.

I'd be interested in how the RX 6600 XT holds up for VR gaming specifically Half Life Alyx on a Quest 2. I wanted to buy one but was afraid I'd regret not holding out for a price dip on the 3060ti.
 

m3tavision

Posts: 684   +450
Not launch the RDNA 2.0 right next to Ryzen 3 and a set of 2 new consoles at the same time: not trying to chew on 3x as much as you can handle under normal circumstances anyway as it was pretty clearly far too many products if there was no pandemic, no miner craze, nothing external just the simultaneous launch of every. Single. Product line they handle at the same time was a terrible decision aimed at impressing share holders while lying to the consumers and the public about availability.

As for this particular launch? Yeah: Launch at 300 MSRP or not launch at all if you cannot guarantee that price period. They are not hurting for money it's not necessary that they keep launching products at the worst possible time if things are not in the cards. She just has a timeline and sticks to it hell or high water proposefully ignoring the manufacturing and distribution challenges that plague her company.


That is your myopic take on it, based on only what you know, not what AMD has told the rest of us. Nobody here cares if you invest in AMD headspace, or if you have listened to what AMD (Dr SU) has said, or done. Just don't attempt to narrate history, based on ignorance.


Because AMD's roadmap has been obvious, for years. As We were told over a YEAR AGO, that Radeon teams were working in parallel and using/leapfrogging IP and that rdna3 was being engineered alongside rdna2.

Even before the pandemic, it was hinted at that rdna2 would have a short life, because rdna3 was about leveraging smaller dies with higher freq, for greater economy scale and leveraging that.

AMD also negotiated their contracts, 14 months in advance for TSMC's 5nm node.


It is sad, you do not understand tick-tock or AMD's cadence, or even why nVidia is bust trying to engineer their own 100% gaming architecture... and not using hand-me-down architecture from server farms.. and trying hard to use "rtx" marketing to push proprietary left-overs, on gaming community.

I use to buy EVGA, and the writing is on the wall. Time are changing...
 

nnguy2

Posts: 330   +657
Not sure why Techspot dings AMD so hard (60/100) for price and availability while Nividia gets 70/100 for pretty much the same situation.
 

b3rdm4n

Posts: 49   +44
Tim's points really make a lot of sense, best value in a garbage market doesn't really make it a good purchase, just the least-worst purchase rn. 1080p marketing, waves of cards enough over MSRP to make the card still seem like poor value. It was probably the smartest move for AMD as a company right now, certainly not the best for gamers who eagerly wanted this product at or below 300 USD. Company is gonna company I guess. They've had the benefit, like usual, of arriving late to the party and thus we hoped and to an extent expected better.
 

Bobbydpue

Posts: 232   +153
"The sentiment is that these “MSRP” cards were effectively a promotional price for launch day."

I find it interesting that this was mentioned. nVidia was clearly doing this for pretty much the full 3000 series, but barely anyone mentioned it.
NVIDIA was still selling their FE cards at or very close to MSRP so no NVIDIA wasn't doing that for their 3000 series. These cards aren't directly from AMD so the promotional price might not be the same as the Vega launch when AMD admitted to paying vendors to sell at the advertised price AMD also didn't use the term MSRP for the Vega launch, either.