AMD cuts Radeon R9 290X price amid GTX 970 "issues"

[Scorpus]

Update: AMD tells us that the official price of the R9 290X has not been discounted. Any price reduction can be attributed to board partners or retailers.

As you've probably heard by now, Nvidia is having a few issues with their GeForce GTX 970 graphics card. In response, some board partners have lowered the price of the card's main competitor, the Radeon R9 290X, in an attempt to get prospective GTX 970 buyers jumping on to Team Red instead.

Previously retailing for around $330-350, the R9 290X can now be purchased for the very attractive price of $299, with a mail-in rebate cutting that by a further $20 to $279. Thanks to this price cut, the R9 290X is now $30-50 cheaper than the GTX 970, making it a great choice considering the performance of both cards is very similar.

The adjustment to the R9 290X's price hasn't had much of an affect on other products in AMD's line-up. The R9 290 is still available for $270, the R9 280X for $240, and the R9 285 for $210. Most cards at this end of the product line are eligible for a $20 mail-in rebate, further reducing the price.

Meanwhile the problems keep on flowing in for Nvidia and the GTX 970. After the discovery of the memory allocation issue and slow performance in the graphics card's last 0.5 GB of VRAM, some users are requesting and successfully getting refunds for their $330 product. This is despite the card still generally providing great gaming performance for the price.

And for anyone planning on refunding their GTX 970, AMD has a gentle reminder for you:

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/59576-amd-cuts-radeon-r9-290x-price-amid-gtx.html

 

[cliffordcooley]

Meaning AMD could have been selling the card cheaper this whole time.

AMD needs to stand more firmly in their business decisions. Changing prices on a whim every time the wind blows, shows lack of confidence in their product to sell itself.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

Meaning AMD could have been selling the card cheaper this whole time.

AMD needs to stand more firmly in their business decisions. Changing prices on a whim every time the wind blows, shows lack of confidence in their product to sell itself.

AMD & nVidia can sell all their products at half price and still make money but there's nothing like cashing in on your enemy's misfortune. These guys control the market, they can charge whatever they like.

 

[cliffordcooley]

These guys control the market, they can charge whatever they like.

More like nVidia (as well as Intel) is controlling the market and AMD is going along for the ride.

 

[Footlong]

These guys control the market, they can charge whatever they like.

More like nVidia (as well as Intel) is controlling the market and AMD is going along for the ride.

True that!
AMD still has a chance in the GPU market. I mean both Sony and Microsoft trusted AMD in their console gen. This means AMD can do great things. As for the card (R9 290X) I would not buy that card. It is cheaper than nVdidia (is it N or n?), but it is much more power hungry. This means the Nvidia solution while being more expensive can pay for itself up in the long run.

 

[Jad Chaar]

Meaning AMD could have been selling the card cheaper this whole time.

AMD needs to stand more firmly in their business decisions. Changing prices on a whim every time the wind blows, shows lack of confidence in their product to sell itself.

Good point but I think this particular move makes sense.

 

[amstech]

AMD needs to stand more firmly in their business decisions. Changing prices on a whim every time the wind blows, shows lack of confidence in their product to sell itself.

I think it has more to do with AMD just trying to stay alive/keep products off shelves.
I love AMD and still use a 720 X3 in my HTPC, but if it weren't for AMD hardware being used in PS4's/X1's that company would be in tough shape. Or not what the hell do I know.

 

[JohnCB]

Meaning AMD could have been selling the card cheaper this whole time.

AMD needs to stand more firmly in their business decisions. Changing prices on a whim every time the wind blows, shows lack of confidence in their product to sell itself.

I disagree. I think this is more of an enticing opportunity for AMD to sway some NVidia loyalists. The timing is perfect as some people are disillusioned with the memory issue & how it was publicly handled and presented. AMD meanwhile is saying "oh hey, you guys, come over here, check out our super awesome card and if you trade in your 970 we'll give you a great deal".

Smart business move.

 

[madboyv1]

If it was not for the prevalent trend of being hotter and require more power, I'd consider an R290x. Or two, or three... but yeah that's a gentle and subtle reminder from AMD ha ha ha...

 

[mrtraver]

Bravo! I have owned many more NVidia GPUs than AMD, but I like AMD to stay relevant and keep NVidia honest. Competition is good for the consumer, and at this point AMD needs every boost it can get.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

More like nVidia (as well as Intel) is controlling the market and AMD is going along for the ride.

What you say is true but I was actually referring to discreet card manufacturers. I think Intel is the the largest GPU maker in the world but they really have no influence on the price of discreet GPU's.

 

[supyo]

I had been a loyal AMD/ATI customer since 2000 but I've had six AMD/ATI cards die on me over the past 8 years. Two 7850's just up and died after barely a year of use and before that a 4770, a 4870, & two X1600's.

In that same time frame I had purchased about 6 or 7 nvidia cards for various builds and never had any issues.

Now I know it could very well be the card manufacturer and dumb luck at fault but I have switched to nvidia exclusively. Six dead cards in 8 years is a lot, especially when I had zero nvidia cards die on me in the same time frame.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

True that!
AMD still has a chance in the GPU market. I mean both Sony and Microsoft trusted AMD in their console gen. This means AMD can do great things. As for the card (R9 290X) I would not buy that card. It is cheaper than nVdidia (is it N or n?), but it is much more power hungry. This means the Nvidia solution while being more expensive can pay for itself up in the long run.

It used to be nVidia but I see Nvidia more often used nowadays. Nintendo use AMD graphics as well.
Yes the 290X is more power hungry but you'd have to use the 970 for decades to recoup the cost.
There's nothing wrong with the performance of the 970, all AMD is doing is rubbing Nvidia's noses in their marketing mess.

 

[Guest]

I have been gaming since 1996 - owned Nvidia cards and ATI/AMD cards. Never had a ATI/AMD or Nvidia card fail. But, my friend has has an Nvidia card fail on him.

 

[Lionvibez]

Meaning AMD could have been selling the card cheaper this whole time.

AMD needs to stand more firmly in their business decisions. Changing prices on a whim every time the wind blows, shows lack of confidence in their product to sell itself.

That is not how a profitable business works.

They will sell it at whatever the market will pay for it. These companies are out for profit not to give you a good deal. And changing prices because of a competitor is nothing new that's how the industry works, if you don't adjust to whats going on in the market you will get left behind.Or end up with a warehouse full of product you can't sell. Not to mention both NV and AMD are publicly traded companies and have to answer to share holders.

 

[Lionvibez]

I had been a loyal AMD/ATI customer since 2000 but I've had six AMD/ATI cards die on me over the past 8 years. Two 7850's just up and died after barely a year of use and before that a 4770, a 4870, & two X1600's.

In that same time frame I had purchased about 6 or 7 nvidia cards for various builds and never had any issues.

Now I know it could very well be the card manufacturer and dumb luck at fault but I have switched to nvidia exclusively. Six dead cards in 8 years is a lot, especially when I had zero nvidia cards die on me in the same time frame.

What is this really suppose to mean I've never lost a card nv or amd in any system I've owned or built for 15 years now.

My point anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much.

 

[cliffordcooley]

That is not how a profitable business works.

That is not how some businesses (apparently AMD) work. AMD could do the same thing with giving temporary discounts. They don't have to seem wishy washy with their business decisions. Makes me wonder what else they are wishy washy on, not just their pricing.

I don't see nVidia continually changing their rates on a moments notice. They know their product will sell and stand firm on their pricing. I don't see Intel continually crashing their CPU pricing because of AMD. But then I wasn't watching competition during Intel's sub par performance days either.

 

[hahahanoobs]

4GB MEANS 4GB.

Touche AMD, touche.

 

[Jack Meoffski]

290x is a great card!

 

[Guest]

Jeezzzz stop being such a but*h**t nVidia fanperson, nVidia infringed the law when they incurred in false advertising, AMD is just cashing on the opportunity. These are companies, not persons, there's no need to be such a sore loser when one makes a mistake and other capitalizes on it.

 

[EEatGDL]

Honestly, I would have preferred a counter-attack based on a product launch instead of dropping the price of an old, inefficient product.

 

[cliffordcooley]

These are companies, not persons, there's no need to be such a sore loser when one makes a mistake and other capitalizes on it.

Seriously, that is the angle you want to play? AMD could have capitalized on this without the need to drop prices. Dropping prices did nothing to smear nVidia's screw up. AMD dropping prices, tells me that nVidia even with the screw up is still selling their cards.

 

[Guest]

"Honestly, I would have preferred a counter-attack based on a product launch instead of dropping the price of an old, inefficient product."

Which is wishful thinking. There is no product for AMD to launch except their 300-series (380x) which is not ready to be released out of nowhere just because Nvidia made the wrong move. You can call the R9 290/290X inefficient for it's power use but at $279 it is far from inefficient from the price/performance perspective. If anything an 'old' product still performing well means good instead of bad.

I don't understand people that need 'new' when 'old' is still good if not better.

'Ew that AAA is a little over 1 years old, I want the NNN that is 1 year younger more expensive and a little better'

 

[EEatGDL]

It used to be nVidia but I see Nvidia more often used nowadays. Nintendo use AMD graphics as well.
Yes the 290X is more power hungry but you'd have to use the 970 for decades to recoup the cost.
There's nothing wrong with the performance of the 970, all AMD is doing is rubbing Nvidia's noses in their marketing mess.

Well, it depends. Where I live (specifically my city zone) electricity is very expensive (3 times as much as other zones within the same city). With my same gaming habits, just with the savings on the power bills, a 970 would fully paid itself in an estimated time of 14 months -supposing I don't sell the current one (670).

4GB MEANS 4GB.

Touche AMD, touche.

I disagree with AMD marketing now, the 4GB in the 970 are addressable and physically exist. There's no memory swapping or other technique to "see" more memory than really available. Is just that someone expects to have the same bandwidth throughout the whole addressable space, but AMD's marketing has a worse understanding now on the topic than NVIDIA's when they published the first specs.

 

[Guest]

Ive been into PC GAMING since the 90s, my voodoo 1 and voodo 2 never failed on me, my tnt ultra 32mb never failed, y geforce 256 ddr did not fail, had 3 radeon ddr 1st gen cards and one failed due to me modding it rest where great, than had a 8500 and never failed even though I modded it, then a 9700pro aso no issues and it was a heavily modded and OCd card. Then a x1800 no issues, had a 1900xt gread card used it tons also no issues, then came a 9800gtx in SLI no less which helped me finish crysis and made me get CM 850 watt power supply, also no issues, a pair of gtx 260 OC followed and also no issues, than went back to ATI with a paid of 5850s and thos e are still going strong today as a couple of my friends have them and use them for flight sims and they still work fine. Then a paid o HIS 6970s also no issues, sold to some friends ket one in a secondary rig for friends to play BF4 and other games when they come over..also no problem...Pair of 7970s and good so far....best bang for buck when I got them, got a290x when they came out....very nice single solution though expensive, just got a second one of ebay to xfire, gotit for 200 bucks and how I regret not sticking with my 7970s longer....but hey thats part of this you win some and you loose some..overall go with what you like and can afford ive benn happy with AMD over the years as also nvidia which reside in my MSi gaming laptop....I se no harm in competition, its good for all of us, and fast I fast no matter who you side with, in the end we just want to play our games without hassle and no hiccups, in the en 10fps is neglegible if we are all over 60fps in whichever res you play on...just my 2 cents