Radeon RX Vega GPUs are next to impossible to buy: Is AMD hitting pause or simply prioritizing...

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
It doesn't matter if it far behind, or close to the competition. It's behind and gamers also like to benchmark and show off where they spend $500-$700. So if they are not big fans of AMD, they will go with the Nvidia option. AMD knows that and as a company that tries to make money, it will not start giving away hardware at single digit, or zero, or even negative profit margins. They are not Intel to start throwing billions in an effort to maintain a market share, or get into a new market.

Vega was meant for professionals. Koduri probably was hoping to get 1.7GHz or more out of it, without first getting in the "extremely bad efficiency" territory. It couldn't be done, so it wasn't the gaming card many where hopping to be. Not being fast enough meant "1080 price range" not "1080 Ti price range". And that was the end of it. The only way to promote it was as a package with a Freesync monitor against an Nvidia card and the much more expensive GSync version of the same monitor.

As for Vega's technologies. Not going to happen. When you don't feel/want/need to sell cards to gamers, you don't throw money into Vega's specific technologies. At least not as much as you should. And even then, if Vega needs special programming to beat Nvidia GTX 1080 without Gameworks and stuff, that's bad. There where articles a few weeks ago about primitive shaders support getting canceled. Also if you see how badly RX 400 series and Fury cards are getting beaten from RX 500 series cards, it's obvious that AMD is starting to follow Nvidia's manual here." Optimize only for the latest series".

AMD will sell to miners and professionals because they don;t have to invest more money to do so. They can't sell to gamers and they aren't going to try selling to gamers because it is too expensive(low price for the cards, plenty of dollars to developers to optimize their games for GCN).

You are NOT going to believe this, but I am FULL AMD. Just prefer to be realistic when expressing an opinion. You have to realize that you own phrase "a Vega over a 1080" shows the problem. There is NO "Ti" in that phrase.

One more thing, then I will stop it, really xD You should look through some numbers before claiming the 580 is beating the fury (Not meant offensive btw. maybe you got other numbers than I did). In DX11 you are right in a few cases but in DX12 and Vulkan it's an entirely different story. http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_vega_64_8gb_review,13.html (might be a Vega review but they also got the 580 and Fury / X involved). The Fury / X is a good bit faster in nearly any szenario.
 

dj2017

Posts: 160   +168
One more thing, then I will stop it, really xD You should look through some numbers before claiming the 580 is beating the fury (Not meant offensive btw. maybe you got other numbers than I did). In DX11 you are right in a few cases but in DX12 and Vulkan it's an entirely different story. http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_vega_64_8gb_review,13.html (might be a Vega review but they also got the 580 and Fury / X involved). The Fury / X is a good bit faster in nearly any szenario.
580 shouldn't have been at the same territory as Fury in the first place. Then if you see the huge gap between 400 and 500 series in modern titles, like Destiny 2, maybe AMD is NOT enabling optimizations for all series of products. That makes me at least, wonder if the latest drivers show the true power of Fury cards.
Sniper Elite 4 is a one year old game optimized for AMD cards.It's not the rule, probably an exception in a world that is turning back to Nvidia.
 

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
580 shouldn't have been at the same territory as Fury in the first place. Then if you see the huge gap between 400 and 500 series in modern titles, like Destiny 2, maybe AMD is NOT enabling optimizations for all series of products. That makes me at least, wonder if the latest drivers show the true power of Fury cards.
Sniper Elite 4 is a one year old game optimized for AMD cards.It's not the rule, probably an exception in a world that is turning back to Nvidia.
I think you missed my point, you were ment to look through all DirectX12 Title not just SE4.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
I don't bother if you are AMD or Nvidia fan (but I don't doubt what you say), but I also believe that people wouldn't buy AMD cards if they were better.... (They refused to buy the 290x cards which stomped the 7xx series into the ground). And actually is Vega at 1080 Niveau no problem at all... as long as it isn't more expensive than the 1080 (which sadly is the case atm). Not everyone is looking for an enthusiast GPU, buying a Vega for UVP is fine for a lot of people I think. But to be honest, 1080ti and Titan xyz are the only enthusiast GPUs around at the moment because of the low usage of Vega features. 1080 and Vega are high end chips, and as far as I mind to remember there is even a bigger Vega chip on the way. Well, I actually start to get off topic again,the only thing I wanted to express with my previous post was to point out that it's not fair to brand RX Vega the slower card anyway since it has shown that it got the potential to get to 1080ti niveau for a 1080 UVP. I never wanted to pursue someone Vega would be better than a 1080ti or something similar. I am just tired of reading posts like Nividia card A/B/C/D is just faster than Vega because this kind of attitude is the reason why AMD won't stand a chance anyway. If the first argument about a new AMD GPU feature will be "won't be used anyway", developers don't even got a reason to implement it since we show that people don't want them to.... And primitive shader aren't canceled, the "driver2go" support is canceled. but that's the same as excpecting Nividia to implement Voxel Based Lighting on driver level... but primitive shaders will come as an API which actually should be fine since it is fine for most of the Nividia features.

And last but not least, I am totally fine with AMD making money with miners and professionals instead of wasting money on products which the retailers sell for double of the intended price. I totally see that AMD can get more out of the Frontier Editions due to their higher UVPs and honestly I think I would do the same in their situation.

The problem you are describing is that AMD is seen as a generic brand, it's what you buy if you can't afford Nvidia for most PC gamers. AMD really had the lead with the 4000 series, much more so than any time in it's history, and people still bought Nvidia. When Nvidia hasn't been able to put out the best product they would instead rely on advertising, game sponsorships, ect. PC gamers may not like it but they are susceptible to the same thing Beats headphone owners are, brand sells for sure.

You are right about primitive shaders, very few devs will bother implementing them simply because Nvidia rules the roost.
 

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
The problem you are describing is that AMD is seen as a generic brand, it's what you buy if you can't afford Nvidia for most PC gamers. AMD really had the lead with the 4000 series, much more so than any time in it's history, and people still bought Nvidia. When Nvidia hasn't been able to put out the best product they would instead rely on advertising, game sponsorships, ect. PC gamers may not like it but they are susceptible to the same thing Beats headphone owners are, brand sells for sure.

You are right about primitive shaders, very few devs will bother implementing them simply because Nvidia rules the roost.
Yeah, I pretty much hope that I am wrong since I am no fan of backstepping in tech because of brand recognition. Actually Ubi is partnering up with AMD as well as parts of Bethesda this year and I hope there will be more studios to do, furthermore I think to remember that I've read about the PS4 beeing capable of primitive shaders (but please don't nail me down on it). that might lead to a different outcome. By now I have to admit that I am pretty pessimistic about that happening... but seeingcit happen would really be amazing.
 

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
Lol, whatever pal. I understand that you are upset because AMD might not be acting in the best interest of its gaming consumers.

And whether AMD directly sell to retailers or not is irrelevant. This is you trying to deflect from my point, it’s splitting hairs. AMD have final control over the price of their chips right now, nobody else makes graphics silicon that can hash as efficicently as AMD. My point was that they would be foolish not to mark their prices up in the face of demand. Or in other words, it would be naive to assume they wouldn’t or that they can’t. Of course I have no doubt that you probably believe that AMD arent making any extra money out of this. Despite the fact that there is fishy stock shortages of Vega compared to frontier edition, not to mention the strong financial results AMD have just posted. You probably genuinely believe it’s all evil retailers putting the markups on the products and hoarding profits. Because your darling AMD would never try and capitalise on demand, especially if it trod on the toes of their relatively small gaming market share and gave them strong financial results.

Do I really need to remind you that AMD are a for profit limited corporation who have shareholders to please? They aren’t a gamers charity, these guys are out to make as much money as they can. And if they were stupid enough to ignore the massive opportunity of current serious demand for their products then if I were an investor I’d most certainly look elsewhere. And it certainly wouldn’t bode well for AMDs future.

When you are making false claims about who is raising prices, yes it does matter.

"AMD have final control over the price of their chips right now"

Once again, another completely false claim. There are redistributors, AIBs, and Retailers that all take a bite after AMD.

Your assumption that AMD is my "darling" couldn't be more funny. Vega sucked, I own a 1080 Ti, and AMD haven't been good in the GPU market since the 200 series, and that's just good, not top dog.

But please continue to shoot off names and assumptions to try to cover up obvious bias. It is amusing.
Just the fact that a1080ti is faster doesn't make Vega bad. Actually with such a claim you wuld imply that a 1080 is bad because it's not the upper end of the stack... Both are good GPUs... Vega is fine for it's UVP.
 

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
Lol, whatever pal. I understand that you are upset because AMD might not be acting in the best interest of its gaming consumers.

And whether AMD directly sell to retailers or not is irrelevant. This is you trying to deflect from my point, it’s splitting hairs. AMD have final control over the price of their chips right now, nobody else makes graphics silicon that can hash as efficicently as AMD. My point was that they would be foolish not to mark their prices up in the face of demand. Or in other words, it would be naive to assume they wouldn’t or that they can’t. Of course I have no doubt that you probably believe that AMD arent making any extra money out of this. Despite the fact that there is fishy stock shortages of Vega compared to frontier edition, not to mention the strong financial results AMD have just posted. You probably genuinely believe it’s all evil retailers putting the markups on the products and hoarding profits. Because your darling AMD would never try and capitalise on demand, especially if it trod on the toes of their relatively small gaming market share and gave them strong financial results.

Do I really need to remind you that AMD are a for profit limited corporation who have shareholders to please? They aren’t a gamers charity, these guys are out to make as much money as they can. And if they were stupid enough to ignore the massive opportunity of current serious demand for their products then if I were an investor I’d most certainly look elsewhere. And it certainly wouldn’t bode well for AMDs future.

When you are making false claims about who is raising prices, yes it does matter.

"AMD have final control over the price of their chips right now"

Once again, another completely false claim. There are redistributors, AIBs, and Retailers that all take a bite after AMD.

Your assumption that AMD is my "darling" couldn't be more funny. Vega sucked, I own a 1080 Ti, and AMD haven't been good in the GPU market since the 200 series, and that's just good, not top dog.

But please continue to shoot off names and assumptions to try to cover up obvious bias. It is amusing.
And btw. why on earth should a 499$ GPU outperform a 700$ GPU? Where is the relation? Where does this expectation come from?
 

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
No, you just insist on a different opinion and I have no problem with that. Don't worry.
I don't wanted to blame you for it, but since you only mentioned SE4, I assumed you hadn't read the rest ;) I see this as an interesting discussion not as an argument since your arguments are reasonable. But how you said, I share a different opinion^^
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,621   +2,382
Any miner with a dead GPU that can't wait for prices to stabilize.there fixed that.
most that have a GPU, have an older GPU for just such an occasion. but a miner needs that gpu back in service..now.

I am referring to gamers who said I was speaking about miners!

I had my 7970Ghz die on me and had to revert back to an old GTX 650 I had which was provided unplayable fps for all my games except starcraft 2.

Therefore I couldn't wait and picked up a RX 580.....

And I know others in the same boat so no you didn't fix anything in my previous statement thanks!
 

Boilerhog146

Posts: 642   +223
I am referring to gamers who said I was speaking about miners!

I had my 7970Ghz die on me and had to revert back to an old GTX 650 I had which was provided unplayable fps for all my games except starcraft 2.

Therefore I couldn't wait and picked up a RX 580.....

And I know others in the same boat so no you didn't fix anything in my previous statement thanks!

Thanks for proving my point ,you did have another GPU to fall back on ,to bad it wasn't a GTX 680. but that was your choice back then. and I doubt there are a whole lot of people in that position. I know no one in that boat.actually a friend is baking Radeons,but he is mining also.but also has backup GPU.while on RMA.
I also bet that many gamers that have a capable GPU or several as I do, would be doing a little mining with their unused cycles and idle time. though I don't because of the power situation here and I don't have the bandwidth, on a DSL connection, yup, phone line.
 
Last edited:

Boilerhog146

Posts: 642   +223
The problem you are describing is that AMD is seen as a generic brand, it's what you buy if you can't afford Nvidia for most PC gamers. AMD really had the lead with the 4000 series, much more so than any time in it's history, and people still bought Nvidia.

You are right about primitive shaders, very few devs will bother implementing them simply because Nvidia rules the roost.


ATI also ruled with the 3000 series, I'm not just your everyday fanbois, I have a pair of 3Dmark world record ,3870x2 , and a pair of the 4870x2 actually 3 one is artifacting badly. wanna talk about hot running cards ,I've supported both camps over the years. and will continue to do so.I'm looking to upgrade a pair of 5770's that have been modded and flashed to 6770's , they were refurbs bought on the cheap.. but I'll wait for the prices to come down. I won't buy baked /used .nor low to midrange,that's where I got the artifacting 4870x2, it started artifacting just weeks after I bought it with no warranty.so I bought another new one. on topic ,even way back then some models were hard to find, paper launches were common .
though that's not whats going on here.

I was going to put all those gpu in a rig and mine with them but I only work in the coalfired boiler/powerhouse, I don't own it,. we here don't own our Churchill falls, and we will never live long enough to pay off and own our Muskrat falls. you Enjoy all that cheap power you get down there in the U.S.OF A. we got this. ;(

I'm a gonna sue all your azzes, you melted my igloo," said the Eskimo".
 
Last edited:

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
And btw. why on earth should a 499$ GPU outperform a 700$ GPU? Where is the relation? Where does this expectation come from?

Given the die size, it should perform up to a 1080 Ti level. With Vega though, AMD decided to spend allot of that space on the HBCC, which does nothing for gaming. At $500 Vega is decent deal for gaming and an amazing deal for compute.

Just the fact that a1080ti is faster doesn't make Vega bad. Actually with such a claim you wuld imply that a 1080 is bad because it's not the upper end of the stack... Both are good GPUs... Vega is fine for it's UVP.

It's a year late and only competes with the 1070 Ti. It also draws a ton more power. I'm not comparing it only to the 1080 Ti, just in general. Vega works better at lower frequencies, AMD pushed it too hard at stock and that made the cards hot.
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,621   +2,382
Thanks for proving my point ,you did have another GPU to fall back on ,to bad it wasn't a GTX 680. but that was your choice back then. and I doubt there are a whole lot of people in that position. I know no one in that boat.actually a friend is baking Radeons,but he is mining also.but also has backup GPU.while on RMA.
I also bet that many gamers that have a capable GPU or several as I do, would be doing a little mining with their unused cycles and idle time. though I don't because of the power situation here and I don't have the bandwidth, on a DSL connection, yup, phone line.

The GTX650 was purchased at the time because I ran a Radeon + NV for physx. That is the only reason I had the second card most people don't have a back gpu to fall on.
 

Boilerhog146

Posts: 642   +223
That was still your choice at the time and has nothing to do with the shortage of radeons today. and many highend gamers DO have a backup GPU around if they have sense enough. I'm not talking the steam 750ti gamers .,the Enthusiast gamers. I don't just keep a backup GPU, I keep a pair in a whole backup system,ready to Rock&Roll
er you bought a GTX 650 just to have PhysX,? with your Radeon? I know it was possible , just not sure WHY?I played with it .,meh.wow, that was an old discussion.like dey ja vous ,right there.

NVidia fixed that in later driver, detect a Radeon and it wouldn't work. only a couple of drivers worked as I remember.,
I allways ran sli and let that run PhysX. . usually an NVidia sponsored title anyway.my BFGtech PhysX card by Ageia ,is still in an agp system with a 7800GS 3.6 ghz P4 565 me thinks ,on socket 775 Asus P5P800 deluxe.no problem to get a GPU back then.
 
Last edited:

Mango2Go

Posts: 11   +1
Given the die size, it should perform up to a 1080 Ti level. With Vega though, AMD decided to spend allot of that space on the HBCC, which does nothing for gaming. At $500 Vega is decent deal for gaming and an amazing deal for compute.



It's a year late and only competes with the 1070 Ti. It also draws a ton more power. I'm not comparing it only to the 1080 Ti, just in general. Vega works better at lower frequencies, AMD pushed it too hard at stock and that made the cards hot.
Well that Vega 64 has struggles keeping up with the 1070ti is not the rule: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1070_ti_review,12.html and on the other hand the 1080 struggles outperforming the Vega 56 Chip sometimes. They are pretty close to eachother. Some games favour AMD some Nvidia. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to ***** about your argument, I just wan't to say that both vendors have games where their GPUs struggle against the lower competition. And HBCC does nothing for gaming by now (okay 1 or 2 fps but that's negligible). But the Vega 64 chip is very competitive to the 1080 I think by all means but power consumption. And the temperatures are an issue of the damn AMD reference cooler which is really the worst cooling solution I know, but the aftermarket designs are doing ok actually as well as the liquid editions.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 2,071   +1,650
When you are making false claims about who is raising prices, yes it does matter.

"AMD have final control over the price of their chips right now"

Once again, another completely false claim. There are redistributors, AIBs, and Retailers that all take a bite after AMD.

Your assumption that AMD is my "darling" couldn't be more funny. Vega sucked, I own a 1080 Ti, and AMD haven't been good in the GPU market since the 200 series, and that's just good, not top dog.

But please continue to shoot off names and assumptions to try to cover up obvious bias. It is amusing.
All I said is that AMD are fools if they don’t increase prices in the face of demand, I didn’t say they definitely were. I also said you would be naive to think they wouldn’t do such a thing. You know because the people that work at AMD aren’t stupid!

Go on then, provide some evidence that AMD definitely haven’t made any extra money or raised their prices? You seem incredibly sure of yourself.

I’m guessing you’ve nothing.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
All I said is that AMD are fools if they don’t increase prices in the face of demand, I didn’t say they definitely were. I also said you would be naive to think they wouldn’t do such a thing. You know because the people that work at AMD aren’t stupid!

Go on then, provide some evidence that AMD definitely haven’t made any extra money or raised their prices? You seem incredibly sure of yourself.

I’m guessing you’ve nothing.

lol, and now you're talking to yourself? FYI I don't need to add anything, you've already backed off all the points I was debating. Now if you want to talk about AMD raising prices, there is a rumor that they started producing more founder's editions, which is kind of like a price increase.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 2,071   +1,650
lol, and now you're talking to yourself? FYI I don't need to add anything, you've already backed off all the points I was debating. Now if you want to talk about AMD raising prices, there is a rumor that they started producing more founder's editions, which is kind of like a price increase.
So what’s happened here in the end then is that I have suggested that AMD have raised their own prices and you threw a hissy fit. You don’t actually have any facts about Whether they have or not. Neither do I but at no point did I claim I do. I merely pointed out that it’s naive to believe a company wouldn’t capitalise on demand. I still think that’s it’s naive to believe AMD haven’t raised prices. I don’t know for certain if they have as much as you don’t know for certain that they haven’t. But clearly this viewpoint upsets you! I’m not sorry.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
So what’s happened here in the end then is that I have suggested that AMD have raised their own prices and you threw a hissy fit. You don’t actually have any facts about Whether they have or not. Neither do I but at no point did I claim I do. I merely pointed out that it’s naive to believe a company wouldn’t capitalise on demand. I still think that’s it’s naive to believe AMD haven’t raised prices. I don’t know for certain if they have as much as you don’t know for certain that they haven’t. But clearly this viewpoint upsets you! I’m not sorry.

"You don’t actually have any facts about Whether they have or not"

You are the one who suggested AMD raised their prices, not me. I pointed out the fact (yes that's right) that between AMD there are AIBs, Redistributors, and retailers that take a bite.

"Neither do I but at no point did I claim I do."

O'rly?

"You would have to be pretty Naive to believe that AMD haven’t jacked up the prices to retailers"

Your first sentence of your first comment. But no no no, you didn't really believe that, it was just the subject of each one of your replies for no reason /s

You clearly think that AMD has total control over it's pricing when in reality it can only control pricing to the companies it sells it's chips to. Since you likely don't know who that is, it's the AIBs. AMD sells it's chips to the AIBs and only has control of that pricing. It has zero control of the price after that and redistributors, retailers, and AIBs all need to make a profit on their end. In addition, AMD may be bound by contracts we know nothing about that locks them in to a certain price.

The best thing that AMD could do, as I pointed out in the rumor, would be for AMD to produce more frontier edition cards. Now before you heckle again, this is clearly a rumor, originally seen on gamer's nexus who polled AIBs on whether or not they were getting any regular Vega cards in anymore (the answer is no, they are not). But yes, excuse me for giving you a logical alternative to your point.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 2,071   +1,650
"You don’t actually have any facts about Whether they have or not"

You are the one who suggested AMD raised their prices, not me. I pointed out the fact (yes that's right) that between AMD there are AIBs, Redistributors, and retailers that take a bite.

"Neither do I but at no point did I claim I do."

O'rly?

"You would have to be pretty Naive to believe that AMD haven’t jacked up the prices to retailers"

Your first sentence of your first comment. But no no no, you didn't really believe that, it was just the subject of each one of your replies for no reason /s

You clearly think that AMD has total control over it's pricing when in reality it can only control pricing to the companies it sells it's chips to. Since you likely don't know who that is, it's the AIBs. AMD sells it's chips to the AIBs and only has control of that pricing. It has zero control of the price after that and redistributors, retailers, and AIBs all need to make a profit on their end. In addition, AMD may be bound by contracts we know nothing about that locks them in to a certain price.

The best thing that AMD could do, as I pointed out in the rumor, would be for AMD to produce more frontier edition cards. Now before you heckle again, this is clearly a rumor, originally seen on gamer's nexus who polled AIBs on whether or not they were getting any regular Vega cards in anymore (the answer is no, they are not). But yes, excuse me for giving you a logical alternative to your point.
AMD don’t have total control over their pricing. But it would be absurd to suggest they have no control.

At the end of the day, I still think it’s naive to think that AMD aren’t going to try and capitalise on this by raising prices or selling Vegas only as frontier edition, which is effectively the same or even worse than raising prices. If you think AMD arent doing this then I unfortunately do think you are a bit naive. Nobody knows exactly what’s going on but as the author of this article has suggested, things are a bit fishy.

Personally, I would buy a third party Vega 64 at MSRP, I would order it right now if I could find one. I have just acquired a FreeSync 4K 60hz monitor and feel that a 1080ti costs too much at MSRP to be as sensible a solution, as I see neither card as a card that will go the distance for 4K and will probably be replaced 2-3 years down the line. Until then I am stranded with a pair of 280x’s that dont run most titles let alone at reasonable frame rates at 4K. However, I am fully aware that I will potentially never get the chance to buy one purely because of the prices miners are willing to pay for them, even guised as “frontier edition” with a $1000 markup.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,469   +6,157
AMD don’t have total control over their pricing. But it would be absurd to suggest they have no control.

At the end of the day, I still think it’s naive to think that AMD aren’t going to try and capitalise on this by raising prices or selling Vegas only as frontier edition, which is effectively the same or even worse than raising prices. If you think AMD arent doing this then I unfortunately do think you are a bit naive. Nobody knows exactly what’s going on but as the author of this article has suggested, things are a bit fishy.

Personally, I would buy a third party Vega 64 at MSRP, I would order it right now if I could find one. I have just acquired a FreeSync 4K 60hz monitor and feel that a 1080ti costs too much at MSRP to be as sensible a solution, as I see neither card as a card that will go the distance for 4K and will probably be replaced 2-3 years down the line. Until then I am stranded with a pair of 280x’s that dont run most titles let alone at reasonable frame rates at 4K. However, I am fully aware that I will potentially never get the chance to buy one purely because of the prices miners are willing to pay for them, even guised as “frontier edition” with a $1000 markup.

That's agreeable. This card shortage sucks for everyone right now. We just have to hope that eventually the bubble will pop or that AMD/Nvidia do something to get them to gamers. Otherwise, it will hurt PC game sales if people can't get video cards to play them in the first place. A few months won't hurt much but a half year to a year? Yeah, that's bad.
 

pencea

Posts: 269   +233
Consider yourself lucky and desperate if you could buy a RX Vega 56 for 900USD.


No wonder why you get so defensive when I voiced my opinion about them Apple. I got the last words in all of it. Time to add you to the ignore list. :)
 

Kenrick

Posts: 631   +401
No wonder why you get so defensive when I voiced my opinion about them Apple. I got the last words in all of it. Time to add you to the ignore list. :)

Dude, your like a kid asking for sympathy when someone corrected you. Quoting me wont make you clean and right. You've got to make it a point why and what are you sulking about. . You're nothing worthy to be ignored if you keep looking at my past comments just because youve been quoted in one of the articles here kid.
 

flyboydale54

Posts: 31   +4
Oh, that is why the ole Supply and Demand Curves were taught in Micro Economics. Supply goes down, demand goes up, presto, Price is the unlimited limit. Solution, do not buy any graphics cards for a year, and see what happens to the prices then. They call it Dirt Cheap.