AMD RDNA 5 and Nvidia Rubin GPUs could both slip to late 2027 or 2028, board partners suggest

[Rapob]

Dude said the switch. Compare the switch to the ps5. PS blows switch out of the water. So much for that powerful Nvidia tech.

Nvidia is prioritizing their production lines to AI and downscaling their GPUs. Dont be upset at me about it, be upset at them. Pretty soon there wont be Nvidia GPUs to buy. Next thing you Nvidia borsa lickers will claim makes them superior is the AI data center bs.

You havent even used the AMD software suite, so your opinion and words about it are null and void. I have used both, and AMD just has a superior suite. It is actually customizable.

Nvidia is so good, then how come even the Steam Machine will be using AMD hardware? Maybe because Nvidia just isnt good enough.

Like I said before, just like with Apple products you can get standard overpriced equipment with some lame gimmicks, or you can get windows/linux based machines that are not as overpriced and you get more.

??? You compare a regular console vs a handheld - Switch 1 and 2 sold like 200 million units. Obviously there is buyers.

Nvidia faces no competition from AMD, hence why RTX 5000 is mediocre, they had no reason to push the envelope, even 5070 Ti beats 9070 XT which is AMDs fastestet offering this generation, they officialle left high-end GPU market after all.

Upset? I don't care, my RTX 4090 stomps on pretty much everything 4 years after getting it, AMD has nothing that even comes close - I am perfectly fine, trust me, my next GPU is RTX 6000 or RDNA 5 - UDNA, if AMD wakes up from their deep GPU slumber and begin to care for PC gamers in this market, Radeon 9000 was just as bad as RTX 5000 series, this gen is more like a refresh from last gen

Steam Machine uses AMD hardware because the most important metric was price, the APU was dirt cheap, the APU is mindboggling slow after all, 6C/12T but the 4C/8T is using Zen 4c cores, garbage, the GPU is barely on Radeon 7600 level, with 8GB VRAM

Nvidia sits at 80-85% gaming GPU marketshare without even trying, that is reality for you

Yeah I have tried AMD software plenty of times, have several systems with AMD CPU and AMD GPU + iGPU (2 laptops with AMD hardware too). I don't need to settle like most of you here.

Why are we talking about Steam Machine? That turd is god awful slow, while being priced at 1200-1400 dollars. It is DOA.

Nvidia N1X will beat this system with ease, you will see soon enough. Nvidia has far better peformance in the mobile segment than AMD. AMD is not even close here, Mobile 5090 absolutely destroys the best mobile dGPU AMD has.

Nvidia APUs incoming, ARM + RTX and Intel + RTX - AMD better wake up.

Steam Machine is no threat, won't sell well, it is so bad it hurts with a price that is extremely high for what you get.

Even Steam Deck only sold 4 million units over 4 years. Extremely poor sales compared to regular consoles and the Steam Machine will do MUCH WORSE, just wait.

 

[Rapob]

That is total BS. First, Nintendo had to underclock Tegra because it ran too hot. In other words, it was far from "perfect" solution, even on perf/watt section. Second, Tegra was over two years old when Switch launched. You claim custom chip would lose against two year old "off the shelf" solution?

Better explanation: Nintendo could not be sure about how well Switch will sell (See: Wii U) so using custom chip was risky solution.

Backwards compatibility. Nothing else here.

Custom might mean better but consoles are usually optimized to be cheap.

Backwards compatibility again. Nothing else is needed here for reasons.

FYI there are quite many handhelds that have much better specs than Switch 2. And they use AMD or Intel. What else than Switch 2 use Nvidia?

The only thing you need to understand is; AMD had nothing that even came close to Tegra in terms of performance per watt, hence why Nintendo wanted Nvidia. 200 millions units sold later, they still want Nvidia, now because of DLSS which is vastly better than FSR.

AMD still don't have anything that comes close in terms of perf/watt.

Any mobile APU runs dynamic clocks, stop being clueless, they have a temp target and runs accordingly, so does Steam Deck using an AMD APU. So does any handheld, even laptops and consoles.

Switch 2 is a console like PS, not a PC. A console needs exclusives, which is why Xbox don't sell and is dying.

You will soon see handhelds using Nvidia N1X, just wait. Insane perf/watt that Intel or AMD can't match, while having top tier upscaling and frame gen support. Nvidias feature set, is massively better than AMD and Intel. Support in actual games, massive too.

Yap Yap is all you can. Lets look at reality. Nvidia sits at 80-90% dGPU marketshare without even trying and people claim Nvidia left gamers behind, HAHAHA. Nvidia OWNS the high-end GPU market and AMD has nothing but low to mid-end stuff. Reality calls, Mr. AMD.

AMD makes GREAT CPUs. Best in class today. Their GPUs needs work still. They have low marketshare, lacking features, lacking support, even game developers don't care much for AMD GPU owners (more than Intel GPU owners tho).

9 out of 10 games released, runs better on Nvidia. Has DLSS/DLAA/Reflex. Why? Because developers use Nvidia themselves. Test and optimize with Nvidia. They want to focus on the GPUs that 85% of PC gamers are using: Nvidia. It is as simple as that.

AMD is struggling to even hit 10% dGPU marketshare. Better than Intels 1% tho. Nvidia sits at ~90% and just waiting for AMD to release a threat. Radeon 9000 was no threat. Neither was Radeon 7000. AMD has been sleeping for years in the GPU space.

Hopefully RDNA 5 - UDNA, will be worth talking about. If not, it is a fact that AMD don't care about gaming GPUs anymore. They are probably fine selling low to mid-end shite like Radeon 9000, while prioritizing CPU output at TSMC.

 

[HardReset]

The only thing you need to understand is; AMD had nothing that even came close to Tegra in terms of performance per watt, hence why Nintendo wanted Nvidia. 200 millions units sold later, they still want Nvidia, now because of DLSS which is vastly better than FSR.

Again, custom chips were also possibility for Switch. Care to explain why Switch 2 use custom chip?

AMD still don't have anything that comes close in terms of perf/watt.

Any mobile APU runs dynamic clocks, stop being clueless, they have a temp target and runs accordingly, so does Steam Deck using an AMD APU. So does any handheld, even laptops and consoles.

And for some reason majority of powerful handheld consoles use AMD. Some use Intel. Only one company is using Nvidia. Yeah, AMD is clear leader on handheld market, no-one except Nintendo wants Nvidia.

Switch 2 is a console like PS, not a PC. A console needs exclusives, which is why Xbox don't sell and is dying.

You will soon see handhelds using Nvidia N1X, just wait. Insane perf/watt that Intel or AMD can't match, while having top tier upscaling and frame gen support. Nvidias feature set, is massively better than AMD and Intel. Support in actual games, massive too.

N1X? Good luck using handheld with at over 40W TDP chipYou have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Rapob]

Again, custom chips were also possibility for Switch. Care to explain why Switch 2 use custom chip?

And for some reason majority of powerful handheld consoles use AMD. Some use Intel. Only one company is using Nvidia. Yeah, AMD is clear leader on handheld market, no-one except Nintendo wants Nvidia.

N1X? Good luck using handheld with at over 40W TDP chipYou have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

When talking gaming handhelds, Nintendo sits at 90% marketshare. Nvidia is used in 90% of handhelds. 200 milliion units sold.

Meanwhile, Steam Deck has 4 million units sold. Meh.

No handheld is powerful. It all about perf per watt. They all run dynamic clocks as a result. Balance between temp, perf and powerdraw.

AMD is used in many PC handhelds because its x86 and hence will run most PC games. Off the shelf APU, means easy, it is just a low-end PC.

ARM plays more and more PC games on Windows. Hence why Nvidia N1X launches now, instead of years ago. Nvidia will grab huge marketshare. AMD has to react fast, Zen 5 with RDNA 4 APUs needed asap. Those old Z1/Z2 APUs, with no FSR 4 support, won't cut it.

Windows 11 with Steam on top, will play most of the game-catalog. Far more games is playable this way, than Steam on Linux.

N1X can easily run at less than 40 watts. Diffence here is, the GPU is vastly more powerful than any other APU in the same TDP segment and it supports DLSS 4 and DLSS FG/MFG.

Switch 2 runs at like 20 watts when peaked.
Ryzen Z2 line can pull up to 35 watts. Default TDP is 28 watts.

Nvidia N1X will bring a day vs night performance and visual upgrade over these.
You for sure don't know anything about this market.

In a few weeks, you will see N1X take the crown in mobile gaming, soon after, they will dominate handheld PC gaming too. Unless AMD react fast. They can't wait till 2028 with Z3. They need Z3 asap. Zen 5 + RDNA 4 in a configurable 10-35 watt power envelope.

Or Nvidia will shut them down in this market, too.
Nvidia, the clear champ in the handheld gaming market. Nintendo begged Nvidia to use Tegra. Without Nvidia, there would be no Switch.

ARM is the future for mobile and handhelds. Mark my words. You will see in a few years. This is why AMD and Intel too, is testing ARM. Eventually they will go ARM, slowly but surely.

Even in the server market, ARM gains traction. Grabs more and more marketshare. Prediction is 30% ARM marketshare by 2030 in the enterprise market.

x86-64 eventually dies off. Phones, tablets, consoles, laptops, desktop, servers, all using ARM. Then software would be peak-optimized for ARM too. No porting needed. That is the future. You can call me Mr. Oracle.

Apple already did the switch to ARM. Massive succces.
Nvidia enters ARM CPU market now - You can expect success.

Phones, tablets, smartwatches, already using ARM and did for decades.

Next gen consoles, like PS6, is probably the last x86 lineup. Xbox Project Helix, is just a PC running Windows, so Xbox is no more really. Would be surprised if PS7 is not using ARM. Switch, ARM since day one. x86 never made sense.

 

[HardReset]

When talking gaming handhelds, Nintendo sits at 90% marketshare. Nvidia is used in 90% of handhelds. 200 milliion units sold.

Meanwhile, Steam Deck has 4 million units sold. Meh.

That just proves that anything Nintendo does sells. Nvidia just happens to be inside Nintendo.

Using your logic, Nvidia could take all handheld marketshare. However truth is no-one will buy Nvidia. People buy Nintendo, not Nvidia.

No handheld is powerful. It all about perf per watt. They all run dynamic clocks as a result. Balance between temp, perf and powerdraw.

AMD is used in many PC handhelds because its x86 and hence will run most PC games. Off the shelf APU, means easy, it is just a low-end PC.

ARM plays more and more PC games on Windows. Hence why Nvidia N1X launches now, instead of years ago. Nvidia will grab huge marketshare. AMD has to react fast, Zen 5 with RDNA 4 APUs needed asap. Those old Z1/Z2 APUs, with no FSR 4 support, won't cut it.

Nvidia launch now because they cannot do it earlier. AMD has nothing to worry about. N1X is obsolete when or if it finally arrives.

N1X can easily run at less than 40 watts. Diffence here is, the GPU is vastly more powerful than any other APU in the same TDP segment and it supports DLSS 4 and DLSS FG/MFG.

Switch 2 runs at like 20 watts when peaked.
Ryzen Z2 line can pull up to 35 watts. Default TDP is 28 watts.

Virtually anything can run lower than TDP settings but N1X will not be cheap and it barely makes sense to use mid end chip and then underclock it on low end levels. Too expensive.

Nvidia N1X will bring a day vs night performance and visual upgrade over these.
You for sure don't know anything about this market.

In a few weeks, you will see N1X take the crown in mobile gaming, soon after, they will dominate handheld PC gaming too. Unless AMD react fast. They can't wait till 2028 with Z3. They need Z3 asap. Zen 5 + RDNA 4 in a configurable 10-35 watt power envelope.

Keep on dreaming.

 

[Rapob]

That just proves that anything Nintendo does sells. Nvidia just happens to be inside Nintendo.

Using your logic, Nvidia could take all handheld marketshare. However truth is no-one will buy Nvidia. People buy Nintendo, not Nvidia.

Nvidia launch now because they cannot do it earlier. AMD has nothing to worry about. N1X is obsolete when or if it finally arrives.

Virtually anything can run lower than TDP settings but N1X will not be cheap and it barely makes sense to use mid end chip and then underclock it on low end levels. Too expensive.

Keep on dreaming.

Nvidia is inside Switch, because there were no alternative. AMD had nothing that even came close in terms of perf/watt. AMD also lacked good upscaling.

Nvidia N1X is better than anything AMD offers in the same power envelope. Has vastly better upscaling and frame gen with massive game support. Reality calls Mr. AMD.

Nvidia already has the desktop and mobile gaming crown. Soon, they have the APU gaming crown too. While dominating enterpriser GPU sales.

N1X comes soon, N2X next year, then N3X the year after. They will grab alot of marketshare. You will see.

Funny you think AMD is doing well in the low TDP segment. Even Intel is good here.

AMD struggles due to perf/watt.

9070 XT uses 100 watts more than 5070 TI and still loses, even in simple rasterization.

Intel Arc G3 Extreme Tested: This Is the PC Gaming Handheld Chip to Beat

With its "Panther Lake" Xe graphics cores, Intel's new G3 Series processors are purpose-built for PC gaming handhelds. I tested the flagship G3 Extreme chip inside MSI's spendy Claw 8 EX AI+. What type of frame rates can you expect?

uk.pcmag.com

Sadly Intels drivers mostly sucks and their upscaling, frame gen and support in games is mediocre as well.

Nvidia rules supreme overall.
AMD needs to wake up in the APU/GPU market.

I use AMD X3D CPU but on the GPU side, they have nothing I want to buy. Everything they offer is a massive downgrade.

RDNA 5 can't come soon enough, and then we will see how serious AMD is about the gaming GPU space. They sadly don't bother much, due to TSMC being their limitation. CPU output is more important. APUs and Enterprise GPUs comes right after that.

Gaming GPUs is the last thing AMD cares about these days. Sad but true.

I know its hard to be an AMD GPU fanboy. It's been some tough years. Lets hope their GPUs will be worth buying going forward. FSR 4 was a step in the right direction. Now they just need to offer better performance and better game support of said upscaler.

 

[Hecate91]

Nvidia is inside Switch, because there were no alternative. AMD had nothing that even came close in terms of perf/watt. AMD also lacked good upscaling.

Nvidia N1X is better than anything AMD offers in the same power envelope. Has vastly better upscaling and frame gen with massive game support. Reality calls Mr. AMD.

Nvidia already has the desktop and mobile gaming crown. Soon, they have the APU gaming crown too. While dominating enterpriser GPU sales.

N1X comes soon, N2X next year, then N3X the year after. They will grab alot of marketshare. You will see.

Funny you think AMD is doing well in the low TDP segment. Even Intel is good here.

AMD struggles due to perf/watt.

9070 XT uses 100 watts more than 5070 TI and still loses, even in simple rasterization.

Intel Arc G3 Extreme Tested: This Is the PC Gaming Handheld Chip to Beat

With its "Panther Lake" Xe graphics cores, Intel's new G3 Series processors are purpose-built for PC gaming handhelds. I tested the flagship G3 Extreme chip inside MSI's spendy Claw 8 EX AI+. What type of frame rates can you expect?

uk.pcmag.com

Sadly Intels drivers mostly sucks and their upscaling, frame gen and support in games is mediocre as well.

Nvidia rules supreme overall.
AMD needs to wake up in the APU/GPU market.

I use AMD X3D CPU but on the GPU side, they have nothing I want to buy. Everything they offer is a massive downgrade.

RDNA 5 can't come soon enough, and then we will see how serious AMD is about the gaming GPU space. They sadly don't bother much, due to TSMC being their limitation. CPU output is more important. APUs and Enterprise GPUs comes right after that.

Gaming GPUs is the last thing AMD cares about these days. Sad but true.

I know its hard to be an AMD GPU fanboy. It's been some tough years. Lets hope their GPUs will be worth buying going forward. FSR 4 was a step in the right direction. Now they just need to offer better performance and better game support of said upscaler.

The switch is using an old outdated Nvidia chip because it was cheaper, however hardware doesn't matter in consoles and people aren't buying a switch because it has Nvidia in it.
But it's sad that the switch requires upscaling from the start, if Nintendo would use better hardware, switch users wouldn't have to settle for such mediocre performance.

The N1X is a compromise in every way, it won't run anything but Windows on arm, you won't get full software compatibility, it has soldered memory, and it's going to be extremely expensive compared to any offerings from AMD. The price to performance will likely be terrible because it's not intended for gaming but the Nvidia fanboys will still buy it.
A 9070xt is $300 less than a 5070ti, power consumption matters very little on a high performance dedicated GPU, and not having a melted power connector or vibe coded drivers are worthy tradeoffs for a bit more power use.
The 9070xt competing is a good thing, you don't want Nvidia controlling the entire PC market, they have too much influence on the market as it is with causing the price of memory to go up over 4X over normal.

But it must be even tougher to be an Nvidia fanboy, given things like Nvidia not caring about gamers at all, reducing gaming GPU supply to prioritize AI GPU sales to datacenters, hiding gaming revenue completely, AI coded drivers, melting power connectors, cost of GPUs skyrocketing while not offering enough of a performance uplift over the 40 series, also while the jacket man sells you on software fake frames and fake resolution instead of more real performance for the money.

 

[DirtyDan]

You compare a regular console vs a handheld - Switch 1 and 2 sold like 200 million units. Obviously there is buyers.

Nvidia faces no competition from AMD, hence why RTX 5000 is mediocre, they had no reason to push the envelope, even 5070 Ti beats 9070 XT which is AMDs fastestet offering this generation, they officialle left high-end GPU market after all.

Upset? I don't care, my RTX 4090 stomps on pretty much everything 4 years after getting it, AMD has nothing that even comes close - I am perfectly fine, trust me, my next GPU is RTX 6000 or RDNA 5 - UDNA, if AMD wakes up from their deep GPU slumber and begin to care for PC gamers in this market, Radeon 9000 was just as bad as RTX 5000 series, this gen is more like a refresh from last gen

Steam Machine uses AMD hardware because the most important metric was price, the APU was dirt cheap, the APU is mindboggling slow after all, 6C/12T but the 4C/8T is using Zen 4c cores, garbage, the GPU is barely on Radeon 7600 level, with 8GB VRAM

Nvidia sits at 80-85% gaming GPU marketshare without even trying, that is reality for you

Yeah I have tried AMD software plenty of times, have several systems with AMD CPU and AMD GPU + iGPU (2 laptops with AMD hardware too). I don't need to settle like most of you here.

Why are we talking about Steam Machine? That turd is god awful slow, while being priced at 1200-1400 dollars. It is DOA.

Nvidia N1X will beat this system with ease, you will see soon enough. Nvidia has far better peformance in the mobile segment than AMD. AMD is not even close here, Mobile 5090 absolutely destroys the best mobile dGPU AMD has.

Nvidia APUs incoming, ARM + RTX and Intel + RTX - AMD better wake up.

Steam Machine is no threat, won't sell well, it is so bad it hurts with a price that is extremely high for what you get.

Even Steam Deck only sold 4 million units over 4 years. Extremely poor sales compared to regular consoles and the Steam Machine will do MUCH WORSE, just wait.

The name calling is not necessary.

Either way, Nvidia will be skipping out on consumer GPU sales since the money is in AI. We see that with the downsizing of current gen production for consumers.

Nvidia is so great, except they have a product that is virtually identical in raw performance for a price with no real justification for it.

Take away the BS software for either company. You are telling me you would go for a card that is ON AVERAGE $300+ USD more than a card that has the same performance but is less money? If your answer to that is yes, then you ma'am are the brain dead one. Not I.

Also, since you want to include previous Gen numbers. Lets also tally the ps4/xbox for last gen.

Sony reports 117M for the PS4, over 93M for the PS5.

Nintendo reports 155.92M for the switch 1, 19.86M for the switch 2.

Xbox only has estimates, but those numbers are 57.96M for the xbox one and 34.57M for the series X/S

Tally it all up, and AMD dominates gaming as a whole on the graphics side and it isnt even close.

With your parameters that YOU have laid out, last gen and this gen, AMD is in ~303.5 Million machines and Nvidia is in only 186.5 Million.

So again, it seems Nvidia is leaving the gaming space for AI data centers. I would too if I couldnt keep up.

 

[Rapob]

The name calling is not necessary.

Either way, Nvidia will be skipping out on consumer GPU sales since the money is in AI. We see that with the downsizing of current gen production for consumers.

Nvidia is so great, except they have a product that is virtually identical in raw performance for a price with no real justification for it.

Take away the BS software for either company. You are telling me you would go for a card that is ON AVERAGE $300+ USD more than a card that has the same performance but is less money? If your answer to that is yes, then you ma'am are the brain dead one. Not I.

Also, since you want to include previous Gen numbers. Lets also tally the ps4/xbox for last gen.

Sony reports 117M for the PS4, over 93M for the PS5.

Nintendo reports 155.92M for the switch 1, 19.86M for the switch 2.

Xbox only has estimates, but those numbers are 57.96M for the xbox one and 34.57M for the series X/S

Tally it all up, and AMD dominates gaming as a whole on the graphics side and it isnt even close.

With your parameters that YOU have laid out, last gen and this gen, AMD is in ~303.5 Million machines and Nvidia is in only 186.5 Million.

So again, it seems Nvidia is leaving the gaming space for AI data centers. I would too if I couldnt keep up.

How is Nvidia skipping consumer segment, while holding 85-90% of dGPU market? They sell far more gaming GPUs than AMD. They literally dominate the market.

The only reason Nvidia takes it slow, RTX 5000 is a sleeper generation (stop gap solution, due to no threat), is because AMD has nothing that pushes them to deliver better.
Nvidia have 3 cards that all beat AMDs best card. AMD should re-enter high-end segment and compete again. Nvidia even have cards from last gen that beat 9070 XT.

Lets hope that AMD RDNA5/UDNA can at least beat 6070 Ti next generation, hopefully they can compete with even 6080.

I fear tho, that AMD can't even beat 5000 SUPER refresh coming in early 2027, meaning 6-12 months headstart on sales, compared to RDNA5/UDNA with RTX 6000 coming late 2027 - early 2028, depends on what AMD delivers.

By raw performance, you talk about rasterization perf? This is 2026 not 2016. Things changed. GPU features outside of raster perf is crucial today. Upscaling, frame gen, RT perf and even Path Tracing perf matters for many. Many games force RT elements. You can't get around looking at the overall picture when buying a GPU today. AMD lacks massively on features and support of these in games, hence why they are cheaper.

However, Nvidia wins on rasterization perf too. AMD only wins on raster value. Slower and hence cheaper. Mostly cheaper due to lacking features.

If AMD was just as good, they would be priced on par with Nvidia. If AMD was better, they would be priced higher than Nvidia. That is not the case. AMD GPUs are cheaper for a reason. They are overall worse.

We saw this in the CPU market. AMD was the cheap alternative till Ryzen 3000/5000 then tables turned. Intel went into a deep slumber and AMD prices increased, now they are overall more expensive than Intel.

Because AMD CPUs are overall better today. Hence more expensive overall.

When it comes to GPUs, AMD is not better. AMD is lacking. AMD is therefore cheaper.
AMD don't focus on gaming GPUs. They have low sales, little magins etc. That is the reason why AMD don't bother much about gaming GPU market, where they don't even hold 10% in the dGPU space.

Console market, I don't even care about it. Handhelds, don't care either.
The winners here, are Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, not AMD. Not even Nvidia makes much dime on it either. Hence why they barely wanted to supply Nintendo with chips for Switch in the first place. Nintendo begged Nvidia to use Tegra.

AMD could fare much better in the gaming GPU market, if they bothered with it. They sadly don't. Cancelling the bigger RDNA 4 SKUs is a prime proof of this.

Why does AMD don't care? Because TSMC is their bottleneck and they earn more on CPUs, APUs and Enterprise GPUs, hence why allocation is used here.

Gaming GPUs for AMD: Lower margins. Waste of TSMC allocation.
And this is why AMD is "fine" with having around 10% dGPU marketshare.

Steam might say close to 20% but half of that is iGPUs. Intel has like 10% GPU marketshare on Steam too but 90% of that is iGPUs.

 

[Rapob]

The switch is using an old outdated Nvidia chip because it was cheaper, however hardware doesn't matter in consoles and people aren't buying a switch because it has Nvidia in it.
But it's sad that the switch requires upscaling from the start, if Nintendo would use better hardware, switch users wouldn't have to settle for such mediocre performance.

The N1X is a compromise in every way, it won't run anything but Windows on arm, you won't get full software compatibility, it has soldered memory, and it's going to be extremely expensive compared to any offerings from AMD. The price to performance will likely be terrible because it's not intended for gaming but the Nvidia fanboys will still buy it.
A 9070xt is $300 less than a 5070ti, power consumption matters very little on a high performance dedicated GPU, and not having a melted power connector or vibe coded drivers are worthy tradeoffs for a bit more power use.
The 9070xt competing is a good thing, you don't want Nvidia controlling the entire PC market, they have too much influence on the market as it is with causing the price of memory to go up over 4X over normal.

But it must be even tougher to be an Nvidia fanboy, given things like Nvidia not caring about gamers at all, reducing gaming GPU supply to prioritize AI GPU sales to datacenters, hiding gaming revenue completely, AI coded drivers, melting power connectors, cost of GPUs skyrocketing while not offering enough of a performance uplift over the 40 series, also while the jacket man sells you on software fake frames and fake resolution instead of more real performance for the money.

Switch is using Nvidia chip because nothing else on the market was able to deliver same perf per watt. This is fact. Both Nvidia and Nintendo officially talked about this.

Upscaling was a huge factor for Switch 2 as well. DLSS is far superior to FSR. Back when Switch 2 came out, FSR 4 was not a thing. FSR 3.x and older is horrible upscaling.

DLSS also works vastly better on low res than FSR. DLSS was the clear winner for Switch, which uses 720p-1080p. FSR 3.x and older pretty much don't work at 1440p or lower at all. Image quality is blurry, jittery with shimmering all over.

Hence why Nintendo wanted DLSS. AMD had nothing that even came close to Tegra, neither in performance per watt or in terms of features/upscaling.

Upscaling make perfect sense for a handheld where performance per watt is the most important metric.

Vibecoded drivers, haha. AMD had tons of driver ****ups in recent years. Just had one just last week.

AMD confirms Adrenalin 26.6.2 issue on Windows 10 with Radeon RX GPUs - VideoCardz.com

AMD is aware of the fact that some gamers are unable to use the most recent drivers.

videocardz.com

An ultra-rare Radeon driver bug is breaking PCs. This exotic fix revived mine

A rare bug in AMD's Adrenalin 23.2.2 driver for Radeon GPUs sent my PC spiraling into BSODs and total unresponsiveness after breaking Windows. But a funky troubleshooting fix revived it.

www.pcworld.com

AMD confirms major Windows 10 bug in its 26.6.2 GPU drivers - OC3D

AMD Software 26.6.2 is causing issues for Radeon GPU users on Windows 10. No FSR 4 upgrades for RDNA 3 users on Windows 10.

overclock3d.net

https://www.guru3d.com/story/amd-warns-of-potential-windows-corruption-when-updating-radeon-gpu-drivers/

AMD confirms 26.6.2 FSR driver breaks on many Windows PCs

AMD has confirmed a major driver issue that is affecting many users running Windows PCs with the latest 26.6.2 update.

www.neowin.net

Windows corruption sounds nice tho! Vibe coded crap too, or?

In reality, Nvidia has far better drivers than AMD still. Better features, better drivers, better performance across alpha/beta/early access titles (due to developer focus, 90% of their users use Nvidia GPU and most often, they use Nvidia too)

AMD GPUs age like milk these days. There is no Fine Wine anymore.
RDNA 1, 2 and 3 aged like rotten milk compared to RTX 2000, 3000 and 4000 series, that all had DLSS 4 support on day one.

Tough being a Nvidia fanboy? Not really, my 4 year old RTX 4090 destroys anything from AMD still, lets see if RDNA5/UDNA can beat my card in 1-2 years.

AMD don't even hold 10% dGPU marketshare and AMD don't even care about selling gaming GPUs, that is reality for you. TSMC is the bottleneck and AMDs margins on GPUs are extremely poor, just look up financial reports if in doubt.

RDNA5/UDNA could be a turning point, after FSR 4 now deliver decent upscaling. FSR 3.x and older is pure trash, which is why most AMD GPU owners hate upscaling. They never seen or tried actual good upscaling (or frame gen)

Sadly, AMD probably won't waste much time and money on gaining GPU marketshare. If they cared, they would not have cancelled the bigger RDNA4 SKUs.

AMD is CPU first. You can't expect a CPU company to deliver good GPUs. They use 90% of their R&D money on CPUs and APUs. They mostly continue with GPUs due to iGPU and APU progress.

In the last 5-10 years, AMDs gaming GPU sales have been poor and even miserable at times.

Don't call me fanboy just because your glasses are red.
I would be using AMD GPU in a heartbeat if they were the best offering. I have tons of AMD chips in my house.

My CPU is AMD X3D, because they rock. AMD leads the pack in the CPU segment.
AMD GPUs, not so much. Years behind.

 

[DirtyDan]

How is Nvidia skipping consumer segment, while holding 85-90% of dGPU market? They sell far more gaming GPUs than AMD. They literally dominate the market.

The only reason Nvidia takes it slow, RTX 5000 is a sleeper generation (stop gap solution, due to no threat), is because AMD has nothing that pushes them to deliver better.
Nvidia have 3 cards that all beat AMDs best card. AMD should re-enter high-end segment and compete again. Nvidia even have cards from last gen that beat 9070 XT.

Lets hope that AMD RDNA5/UDNA can at least beat 6070 Ti next generation, hopefully they can compete with even 6080.

I fear tho, that AMD can't even beat 5000 SUPER refresh coming in early 2027, meaning 6-12 months headstart on sales, compared to RDNA5/UDNA with RTX 6000 coming late 2027 - early 2028, depends on what AMD delivers.

By raw performance, you talk about rasterization perf? This is 2026 not 2016. Things changed. GPU features outside of raster perf is crucial today. Upscaling, frame gen, RT perf and even Path Tracing perf matters for many. Many games force RT elements. You can't get around looking at the overall picture when buying a GPU today. AMD lacks massively on features and support of these in games, hence why they are cheaper.

However, Nvidia wins on rasterization perf too. AMD only wins on raster value. Slower and hence cheaper. Mostly cheaper due to lacking features.

If AMD was just as good, they would be priced on par with Nvidia. If AMD was better, they would be priced higher than Nvidia. That is not the case. AMD GPUs are cheaper for a reason. They are overall worse.

We saw this in the CPU market. AMD was the cheap alternative till Ryzen 3000/5000 then tables turned. Intel went into a deep slumber and AMD prices increased, now they are overall more expensive than Intel.

Because AMD CPUs are overall better today. Hence more expensive overall.

When it comes to GPUs, AMD is not better. AMD is lacking. AMD is therefore cheaper.
AMD don't focus on gaming GPUs. They have low sales, little magins etc. That is the reason why AMD don't bother much about gaming GPU market, where they don't even hold 10% in the dGPU space.

Console market, I don't even care about it. Handhelds, don't care either.
The winners here, are Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, not AMD. Not even Nvidia makes much dime on it either. Hence why they barely wanted to supply Nintendo with chips for Switch in the first place. Nintendo begged Nvidia to use Tegra.

AMD could fare much better in the gaming GPU market, if they bothered with it. They sadly don't. Cancelling the bigger RDNA 4 SKUs is a prime proof of this.

Why does AMD don't care? Because TSMC is their bottleneck and they earn more on CPUs, APUs and Enterprise GPUs, hence why allocation is used here.

Gaming GPUs for AMD: Lower margins. Waste of TSMC allocation.
And this is why AMD is "fine" with having around 10% dGPU marketshare.

Steam might say close to 20% but half of that is iGPUs. Intel has like 10% GPU marketshare on Steam too but 90% of that is iGPUs.

Not the numbers I have. According to those, the 9070XT is just as good, if not better, than the 5070Ti all while far far cheaper.

And that is without any software to artificially boost numbers. So it is how powerful the card is itself. The 5070Ti being ~$400 more expensive yet it cant beat out a cheaper card unless it uses inflationary software? pathetic.