Disconcerting news...

I don't really care if they put out a slower card at this point as long as they don't jump on the bandwagon of thinking they can charge almost a grand for their latest card :rolleyes:

They need to put out a card like the 9700 Pro AGP, where you can spend ~$300, buy one card, and have what amounts to the fastest GPU solution available.
 
Just wanted to point out:

From the article -

Update: Our sources close to AMD have reported that any reports of performance issues at this time are pointless. We have concrete confirmation that the GPU will launch at E3 – so we have something to look forward to very soon and will get a chance to see its final performance as well.

 
I read the original article that didn't have the update in it. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
It's a WCCF article. Seriously op, you might as well quote an article from the inquirer. :rolleyes:
 
GotNoRice said:
I don't really care if they put out a slower card at this point as long as they don't jump on the bandwagon of thinking they can charge almost a grand for their latest card :rolleyes:

They need to put out a card like the 9700 Pro AGP, where you can spend ~$300, buy one card, and have what amounts to the fastest GPU solution available.
Click to expand...
That's never going to happen. It costs way more money to design and build these GPUs than it did 13 years ago. Plus inflation since that time.
 
Crimson said:
It's a WCCF article. Seriously op, you might as well quote an article from the inquirer. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Considering that WCC got the 980ti correct a few months before it came out, I will trust the source. Yes they get stuff wrong sometimes, but recently they seem to be correct than wrong...
 
There busy as fuck seeing how much of a factory overclock they can work in before the cards become to hot and unstable:D...Should at very least trade blows with 980ti
 
1126.gif
 
dang...HBM and all that jazz one would think it would be much faster. awaiting the reviews
 
the source isnt wcctech, its hardwareluxx, they are just qoting.
 
primetime said:
They're busy as fuck seeing how much of a factory overclock they can work in before the cards become too hot and unstable:D... It should at the very least trade blows with the 980ti
Click to expand...

FTFY

And yes, I am being a grammar Nazi today.

Factory overclock?

Aren't "factory overclocks" anything a 3rd party mfg goes over what the stock OEM cards run at?

In other words, it will not be "overclocked" in it's OEM form.
 
With the 980 Ti releasing at $649 and the 980 being reduced to $499, that is an awful lot of ground to operate in for AMD. If they can make a card that is faster than the 980, but slower than the 980 Ti, as may currently be the case, they could price it between the two, couldn't they? The market for high-end GPUs gets pretty small when you get above the $500 price-point as far as I have seen.
 
The Cobra said:
Considering that WCC got the 980ti correct a few months before it came out, I will trust the source. Yes they get stuff wrong sometimes, but recently they seem to be correct than wrong...
Click to expand...
WCCFTech said that MSRP of the 980 Ti was confirmed to be $799 last week. I'll post what I said in another thread:

"[WCCFTech] posts any rumor they hear hoping that one of them will be true so they get to say they were first with the information. It's like throwing darts blindfolded and hoping one of them will hit the bullseye."
 
MrCaffeineX said:
With the 980 Ti releasing at $649 and the 980 being reduced to $499, that is an awful lot of ground to operate in for AMD. If they can make a card that is faster than the 980, but slower than the 980 Ti, as may currently be the case, they could price it between the two, couldn't they? The market for high-end GPUs gets pretty small when you get above the $500 price-point as far as I have seen.
Click to expand...

I do not know how crazy high-end GPU consumers are now, but what is even more insane than buying a GTX 980 at current prices, is buying a card higher than the 980 and still not going ahead and getting a Titan X. If you're wasting that much money paying for smaller increases in performance, you should just go all the way already. Not to mention noise/heat considerations. If AMD is struggling to get these high-end cards performing remotely close to Nvidia's 9-month old cards, I can only imagine what kind of compromises they are being forced to do in terms of heat/noise, especially since their last-gen cards were noticeably more hot/noisy than Nvidia's latest.

If there is any resemblance of sanity left in the market, their top card will be dead in the water regardless of price if it cannot surpass the Titan X or it is not priced on par with the regular 980.
 
GearChoices said:
If you're wasting that much money paying for smaller increases in performance, you should just go all the way already.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you've been paying attention recently. The Titan X is noticeably faster than the 980. The 980 Ti is nearly the same performance as the Titan X, but with 6GB of RAM and a $350 cheaper MSRP. There's certainly enough of a performance increase over the 980 to justify the 980 Ti. But there's very little reason to justify a Titan X.
 
gigatexal said:
dang...HBM and all that jazz one would think it would be much faster. awaiting the reviews
Click to expand...

I wouldn't take any of these rumors, good or bad, seriously.

That said, I think it should be noted that memory bandwidth is just a part of the picture. Regardless of how much bandwidth you throw at a GPU, the GPU will still have to do the actual rendering work which is the major factor in it's performance.

Extra memory bandwidth will only help up to the point where the GPU is no longer wasting cycle waiting for data. Beyond that, it's all down to how fast the GPU can do it's rendering work.

I think in recent time, memory has been lesser of an issue with improved techniques such as data compression and higher VRAM speed. HBM will help with any remaining bandwidth bottleneck, but it certainly won't be some kind of booster that will make the GPU faster. It simply allows the GPU to work efficiently.
 
Rizen said:
I'm not sure you've been paying attention recently. The Titan X is noticeably faster than the 980. The 980 Ti is nearly the same performance as the Titan X, but with 6GB of RAM and a $350 cheaper MSRP. There's certainly enough of a performance increase over the 980 to justify the 980 Ti. But there's very little reason to justify a Titan X.
Click to expand...
Agreed. $100 is not a lot for a 30% increase in performance, but $350 over that for another 3% and 6GB more VRAM is nigh impossible to justify.
 
The Cobra said:
Considering that WCC got the 980ti correct a few months before it came out, I will trust the source. Yes they get stuff wrong sometimes, but recently they seem to be correct than wrong...
Click to expand...

When they made 1500 different guesses as to what it was, one was bound to be close :p and they didn't get the specs right
 
MrCaffeineX said:
With the 980 Ti releasing at $649 and the 980 being reduced to $499, that is an awful lot of ground to operate in for AMD. If they can make a card that is faster than the 980, but slower than the 980 Ti, as may currently be the case, they could price it between the two, couldn't they? The market for high-end GPUs gets pretty small when you get above the $500 price-point as far as I have seen.
Click to expand...

Why would people jump to AMD if they price it in between those two cards if the performance is in between?

I know the AMD trolls will come out with this comment, but NV drivers are a good step ahead of AMD's. This is truth, coming from someone who used AMD cards from the 4870 > 5850 > 6970 > 7970 > and R290x. Ive also been using NV since GTX680 and GTX780. NV drivers are night and day better and IMO, that makes a huge difference in choosing a card. If I dont get more performance for money, why the hell would I pick up AMD? And keep in mind, all those cards I listed were not purchased new. I like to grab newish cards that are used for a good amount of money off (or pick up cards on pricing errors).
 
doz said:
Why would people jump to AMD if they price it in between those two cards if the performance is in between?

I know the AMD trolls will come out with this comment, but NV drivers are a good step ahead of AMD's. This is truth, coming from someone who used AMD cards from the 4870 > 5850 > 6970 > 7970 > and R290x. Ive also been using NV since GTX680 and GTX780. NV drivers are night and day better and IMO, that makes a huge difference in choosing a card. If I dont get more performance for money, why the hell would I pick up AMD? And keep in mind, all those cards I listed were not purchased new. I like to grab newish cards that are used for a good amount of money off (or pick up cards on pricing errors).
Click to expand...

Lol AMD trolls. Nvidia drivers have better l been utter shit for me. I have never had one driver crash when I had my 7850. The first 5 months I got my 780 I had about 7-15 driver crashes a week. It then was fine for a while and when I just tried the recent drivers I had 10 driver crashes in 4 hours.
 
doz said:
Why would people jump to AMD if they price it in between those two cards if the performance is in between?

I know the AMD trolls will come out with this comment, but NV drivers are a good step ahead of AMD's. This is truth, coming from someone who used AMD cards from the 4870 > 5850 > 6970 > 7970 > and R290x. Ive also been using NV since GTX680 and GTX780. NV drivers are night and day better and IMO, that makes a huge difference in choosing a card. If I dont get more performance for money, why the hell would I pick up AMD? And keep in mind, all those cards I listed were not purchased new. I like to grab newish cards that are used for a good amount of money off (or pick up cards on pricing errors).
Click to expand...

I haven't had issues with AMD or Nvidia drivers for ages....Any BSODs were due to overclock on old arse Phenom or my super ultra overpriced POS can't handle multi tasking i5 3570k
 
I just plan to run my 770GTX awhile longer myself and see what windows 10 has to offer.
 
wizzi01 said:
Maybe quote the rest of my post? I can teach you how to show the rest if it is too hard for you to comprehend.
Click to expand...

What he was pointing out was your point was hard to follow as written. But I got it simply because I have seen the huge number of NVIDIA users that have been getting bsod over the last 2 driver updates.

Yet some how that fact AMD not having this problem makes them inferior.
 
durquavian said:
What he was pointing out was your point was hard to follow as written. But I got it simply because I have seen the huge number of NVIDIA users that have been getting bsod over the last 2 driver updates.

Yet some how that fact AMD not having this problem makes them inferior.
Click to expand...

Yeah I understood his post as well it's just that the first part really had me laughing. On the driver topic I have noticed Nvidia slacking lately, those quotes of better drivers on team green's side are becoming hearsay, which really is a shame because people listen to others without doing their own research.
 
filip said:
Yeah I understood his post as well it's just that the first part really had me laughing. On the driver topic I have noticed Nvidia slacking lately, those quotes of better drivers on team green's side are becoming hearsay, which really is a shame because people listen to others without doing their own research.
Click to expand...

Well not only that it seems a huge chunk of people somehow believe whql is unlikely to have serious bugs which is far from the truth:rolleyes:
 
So AMD is still dinking with the clocks, eh? Doesn't that put a bit of a strain on their partners for box art and marketing when these things are supposed to be announced in a couple of weeks? Drivers, sure, those are a forever tweaking thing, but you kind of want your basic specs set a little bit ahead of time, no? Partners should already have the chips and possibly boards waiting to ship, unless the 'Fury' boards are going to be a paper launch.
 
AVogel said:
So AMD is still dinking with the clocks, eh? Doesn't that put a bit of a strain on their partners for box art and marketing when these things are supposed to be announced in a couple of weeks? Drivers, sure, those are a forever tweaking thing, but you kind of want your basic specs set a little bit ahead of time, no? Partners should already have the chips and possibly boards waiting to ship, unless the 'Fury' boards are going to be a paper launch.
Click to expand...

Personally I don't see why they would want to launch this card before DX12 hits as it was certainly designed around that API. I think it would make a much larger splash if it shows off all of it's DX12 features at launch. I know that isn't a popular opinion as people are clamoring for the new cards, but from an AMD marketing standpoint it would be best.

Nvidia doesn't even get this tech until next year, so why showcase your new card running old software?
 
AVogel said:
So AMD is still dinking with the clocks, eh? Doesn't that put a bit of a strain on their partners for box art and marketing when these things are supposed to be announced in a couple of weeks? Drivers, sure, those are a forever tweaking thing, but you kind of want your basic specs set a little bit ahead of time, no? Partners should already have the chips and possibly boards waiting to ship, unless the 'Fury' boards are going to be a paper launch.
Click to expand...

So my question for you is, do you find it more plausible that AMD still hasn't even finalized their product design by this point, or that the site either misunderstood what the rep said or is plainly bullshitting us?
 
If they want to remain competitive I would think they'd need to get something out the door by early July. I find it unlikely they'd be able to meet those timeframes if they were still mucking about with clockspeeds.

I call bs tbh
 
AVogel said:
So AMD is still dinking with the clocks, eh? Doesn't that put a bit of a strain on their partners for box art and marketing when these things are supposed to be announced in a couple of weeks? Drivers, sure, those are a forever tweaking thing, but you kind of want your basic specs set a little bit ahead of time, no? Partners should already have the chips and possibly boards waiting to ship, unless the 'Fury' boards are going to be a paper launch.
Click to expand...

Clocks are pretty much written in stone before mass production.
You can maybe do some small tweaks after the warmup runs, but that would mainly be changing the bins slightly.
 
doz said:
Why would people jump to AMD if they price it in between those two cards if the performance is in between?

I know the AMD trolls will come out with this comment, but NV drivers are a good step ahead of AMD's. This is truth, coming from someone who used AMD cards from the 4870 > 5850 > 6970 > 7970 > and R290x. Ive also been using NV since GTX680 and GTX780. NV drivers are night and day better and IMO, that makes a huge difference in choosing a card. If I dont get more performance for money, why the hell would I pick up AMD? And keep in mind, all those cards I listed were not purchased new. I like to grab newish cards that are used for a good amount of money off (or pick up cards on pricing errors).
Click to expand...

Yes, and I have had a Geforce 256->Geforce 2->Geforce 3->Geforce 4->Geforce 5->Geforce 6->Geforce 8800->Geforce 9800->Gtx 280->Gtx 480->Gtx 580->Gtx 680->Gtx 780 and they all were destroyed because of bad nvidia drivers.....
 
Remon said:
Yes, and I have had a Geforce 256->Geforce 2->Geforce 3->Geforce 4->Geforce 5->Geforce 6->Geforce 8800->Geforce 9800->Gtx 280->Gtx 480->Gtx 580->Gtx 680->Gtx 780 and they all were destroyed because of bad nvidia drivers.....
Click to expand...
You upgraded from a 8800 to a 9800... ? They were the same GPU...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top