Did AMD miss a big opportunity in 2017?

M

_mockingbird

Gawd
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
992
I know you probably read the heading and wondering what I am talking about.

Summit Ridge, Threadripper, and EPYC are well received.

Vega is a dumpster fire, but this is as expected.

What is missing is Raven Ridge.

The majority of new desktop PCs and laptop PCs comes with integrated graphics.

Ryzen did well in DIY market, but is mostly missing from pre-build PCs that account for the overwhelming majority of sales.

Now, at least AMD has a valid reason for not launching Raven Ridge for laptops.

Battery life is paramount in laptops and AMD may need time to optimize Raven Ridge for better power consumption.

The same cannot be said for Raven Ridge for desktops that should have been launched months ago.

There should have been plenty of pre-build desktop PCs with Raven Ridge on the market at this point.
 
They are selling every Vega they can make, if it was rotting on the shelves I could see calling it a dumpster fire. Raven Ridge will be here shortly and it's for a very specific market and Raven Ridge is 15 watts so I think it's just fine on battery life. Ryzen was the focus for AMD nothing else had the same R&D so those projects had to wait, they are coming but they dont have the budget to do everything at once.
 
Gideon said:
They are selling every Vega they can make, if it was rotting on the shelves I could see calling it a dumpster fire. Raven Ridge will be here shortly and it's for a very specific market and Raven Ridge is 15 watts so I think it's just fine on battery life. Ryzen was the focus for AMD nothing else had the same R&D so those projects had to wait, they are coming but they dont have the budget to do everything at once.
Click to expand...

1. After miners bought all the Radeon RX 570/580 and Geforce GTX 1070, they have to turn to the next best thing, but that is definitely not a measure for long term success.

2. Raven Ridge will come in different configurations with different TDP.

3. AMD already have integrated graphics in its previous products, so there no need to "wait".
 
I will probably change my NAS processor a quad core 32nm E5-1620 out for a Raven Ridge in it's place at a whopping 45 watts or whatever watts the desktop ends up being.
 
AMD does not have the cash flow it needs to be able to operate in the manner people would expect it.

For AMD to pour Raven Ridge desktops on the market is just pure suicide. Mind share still does not favour AMD ....
 
Pieter3dnow said:
AMD does not have the cash flow it needs to be able to operate in the manner people would expect it.

For AMD to pour Raven Ridge desktops on the market is just pure suicide. Mind share still does not favour AMD ....
Click to expand...

Would you care to elaborate?
 
you folks keep calling vega a flop and it keeps selling like hotcakes

Would you folks stop already? This anti amd shit is so tired.

and look, you anti amd crowd could have bought the stock @ 1.76 and made a shit ton of money if you weren't constantly looking for a reason to shit on them.
It's unethical as all hell when you realize you have people with no computer knowledge at all parroting the crap you all say because they did a google search and start parroting your same negative nonsense.
 
stealthballer123 said:
you folks keep calling vega a flop and it keeps selling like hotcakes

Would you folks stop already? This anti amd shit is so tired.

and look, you anti amd crowd could have bought the stock @ 1.76 and made a shit ton of money if you weren't constantly looking for a reason to shit on them.
It's unethical as all hell when you realize you have people with no computer knowledge at all parroting the crap you all say because they did a google search and start parroting your same negative nonsense.
Click to expand...

Radeon RX Vega 56/64 sells because miners ran out of Radeon RX 570/580 and Geforce GTX 1070 to buy.

That's hardly a measure of success.

Also, you think that I am "anti-AMD" ? LOL!

...and using stocks to justify something? double LOL!
 
stealthballer123 said:
you folks keep calling vega a flop and it keeps selling like hotcakes

Would you folks stop already? This anti amd shit is so tired.

and look, you anti amd crowd could have bought the stock @ 1.76 and made a shit ton of money if you weren't constantly looking for a reason to shit on them.
It's unethical as all hell when you realize you have people with no computer knowledge at all parroting the crap you all say because they did a google search and start parroting your same negative nonsense.
Click to expand...

Vega looses in perf/watt, perf/$, and overall performance to Pascal in gaming. And its 18 months late vs Pascal, and larger and more expensive to produce. Its a failure any way you try and spin it unless you are a miner or a Professional user.

It has its uses for mining and pro user/development type of work but as a gaming card it is a complete failure, literally to little to late to be competitive.
 
_mockingbird said:
Would you care to elaborate?
Click to expand...

It means no money if you don't have money you can not spend it.

AMD does not have much success selling their products in the laptop space , maybe this sounds weird but yes they are not selling much. Mainly because rivals have that part shored up. That is why you saw the new Intel deal , Intel can do it AMD clearly can not..

So your Raven ridge idea is pretty bad , beyond spectacularly bad really desktop pc with raven ridge is not where the money is ...
 
Just a side-note and I barely read the thread so I might be off-topic.

So I was at best-buy earlier just to kill some time and I noticed how the Ryzen desktops were kinda separated from areas of traffic. The best Ryzen was a Lenovo Ideacenter with a Ryzen 7 for $1000 on an end cap near the laptop bags with no marketing what-so-ever. Good lord... Lenovo deserves an award for making a $1000 desktop look and feel so cheap. The sub $350 desktops puts it to shame.

The shiny Dell Insprion i7 for $1000 had its own glowing platform in the middle of the laptop showroom floor for all to see. The chassis is simple, clean, and doesn't feel like it is going to break if you press the power button.

I guess to a normal consumer. It kinda felt like you were either buying a depressing desktop in an alleyway for outcasted people vs a tender desktop that would tuck you in at night and read you a story.

It might do some good if AMD talks to their partners who can talk to re-sellers in making AMD more marketable. But then again... what does AMD know about marketing really?

Feel free to stone me for my weird analogies.
 
Vega is very competitive at it's price. Only the 1080ti has no competition. Plus Vega gives you freesync compatibility with cheaper adaptivesync monitors. I'm about to pounce on a Vega 56. What's wrong with that?

These weirdo trolls make no sense to me. You realize I can actually read the benchmarks right? And then go look at the prices of the video cards right? And then after that go search for a new monitor and compare freesync vs gysnc right?

I mean you realize I'm not mentally retarded right? And all your dumb dumb blabbering amounts to in my head is "why is this guy wasting his time posting blathering nonsense?"
 
Snowdensjacket said:
Vega is very competitive at it's price. Only the 1080ti has no competition. Plus Vega gives you freesync compatibility with cheaper adaptivesync monitors. I'm about to pounce on a Vega 56. What's wrong with that?

These weirdo trolls make no sense to me. You realize I can actually read the benchmarks right? And then go look at the prices of the video cards right? And then after that go search for a new monitor and compare freesync vs gysnc right?

I mean you realize I'm not mentally retarded right? And all your dumb dumb blabbering amounts to in my head is "why is this guy wasting his time posting blathering nonsense?"
Click to expand...


How do you figure? the cheapest vega on newegg in my country is $679, for the Vega 56 8GB model. https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...cription=vega&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

The cheapest 1070 is $509 https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...cription=1070&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

The cheapest 1080 is $649 https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...cription=1080&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

So i can get a 1080 cheaper than a Vega 56. And a 1080 will beat a Vega 56 in vast majority of games all while using less power to do it. This may not be the same pricing in all countries obviously but it is true for at least Canada. Vega does NOT win in price/perf.

Looking at the reviews you will find it also looses in perf/watt https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-radeon-vega-64/page12.html

And then there is the fact that the 1080Ti/Titan is still untouched and maintains the overall performance crown(note that is also does this using much less power than the Vega 64). Which in itself is very bad since AMD ran a "Poor Volta" Marketing campaign just prior to vega launch, indicating that vega will be competitive vs Volta, which is an outright lie, as vega is not even competitive vs Pascal let alone volta, this was very bad/dishonest move for AMD marketing.

Here are the overall performance charts for 32 games for anyone interested https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-radeon-vega-64/page13.html

I can look and benchmarks too, and check prices, and found that they support my original statement. Vega is not competitive in price/perf, or perf watt, or overall performance vs pascal in gaming.

Vega may have its uses for pro use or mining, but not for gaming at its current prices.

You bring up a good point about freesync being cheaper than gsync, this is very true. However they are both vendor locked solutions, and if you are going to be locked into one vendor does it not make alot more sense to be locked into the Vendor offering a full range of cards from low end to enthusiast? so if you decide to upgrade later you can actually do that. AMD is currently only offering low end to mid range/mainstream cards, they have nothing to compete with the Ti or Titan Nvidia cards on the top end, and will likely have nothing to compete with Volta in a few months either. You buy freesync and Vega now you have no upgrade path for the GPU if you decide you need more performance in a few months. There is also the fact that Gsync is better than freesync, alot of freesync displays have a poor range that they operate in compared to Gsync. Gsync is a more standardized solution you can count on all Gsync displays meeting the same performance standards, this is not the case for freesync which is more a free for all as far as specs go.

When i built my system when Ryzen was released my plan was to upgrade to Vega and a freesync display around Christmas, but given Vegas performance and price this no longer seems like a good idea, they cant even compete effectively with 18 month old Nvidia products. I will now wait out volta and get a Volta 2070/2080 and Gsync display in the spring. I dont prefer any company over another, am not a fanboy to any company. I just buy the best products i can when i need them, and anyone objectively looking at Vega will see it is currently not competitive with Pascal, let alone volta in a few months. I would have much preferred to save some cash and go freesync, but this seems like a poor decision at this current time, maybe prices will change by Christmas but i doubt it will be by enough to matter. Maybe AMD will fix the drivers and enable the disabled features, and this will change the landscape enough to make vega competitive, who knows, all i know is right now it doesnt look good.
 
Rifter0876 said:
Vega looses in perf/watt, perf/$, and overall performance to Pascal in gaming. And its 18 months late vs Pascal, and larger and more expensive to produce. Its a failure any way you try and spin it unless you are a miner or a Professional user.

It has its uses for mining and pro user/development type of work but as a gaming card it is a complete failure, literally to little to late to be competitive.
Click to expand...

This was essentially the same point I was going to make. Adding to what was said, the Vega 64 cards have to be sold at prices below that of a GTX 1080 to be worth considering as a gamer. Due to the demand and lack of supply, that's not happening and thus, it only appeals to miners. Gamers won't generally see these cards at cheap enough prices to seriously consider them as a viable alternative to the GTX 1080. Vega may not be a flop for AMD in the sense that it's selling every card it can make, however, the target audience has little interest in them at their current price point. From the gamer's perspective Vega is a let down. I don't know if I'd call it a total flop, but as you said, a card that's 18 months late with less margin and inferior performance isn't a resounding success.

If the availability was better and the prices $50 under a GTX 1080, I think the card would be a bigger hit with gamers due to FreeSync monitors being around $200 cheaper than an equivalent G-Sync monitor.
 
daglesj said:
Vega? A sale...is a sale. AMD doesn't care what you use it for.

Countries buy $billions of arms a year and never use them for what they are intended. The companies that made them though...got very rich.
Click to expand...


I see what you are trying to say, but one big problem is that AMD isn't getting rich selling the few Vega GPUs they produce.
 
The only benchmark that matters is sales. Watts used is totally irrelevant to AMD's bottom line. I'm sure like most others here on [H], we're brand-agnostic and will switch sides to whoever performs / gives the best bang for the buck. And for the most part, we don't even really care about power usage - as long as the performance is there.

The issue is - at the currently crypto-inflated prices (tho it does seem to be getting better) - the 'performance / $' ISN'T there. If the price is at MSRP, the 'performance to $' is much more acceptable (which is why I purchased a Vega 56 for my AMD rig).

This is especially true if you factor in the Freesync monitor users who gain additional sync benefits.
 
Rifter0876 said:
Vega looses in perf/watt, perf/$, and overall performance to Pascal in gaming. And its 18 months late vs Pascal, and larger and more expensive to produce. Its a failure any way you try and spin it unless you are a miner or a Professional user.

It has its uses for mining and pro user/development type of work but as a gaming card it is a complete failure, literally to little to late to be competitive.
Click to expand...

Um, it wins pretty easily in perf/dollar with Vega56 at current pricing (and even more so if you oc). Perf/watt, yeah not as good. They can't compete with 1080ti, but are competitive at the 1070 and 1080 level with lower pricing at both points. Current pricing has Vega56 at $399 with pretty wide availability, and Vega64 at $465 (albeit in one place at that price, the rest at $499).

https://www.ebay.com/itm/PowerColor...2-3DH-8GB-2048-Bit-HB/382198554012?rmvSB=true

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...14131730&cm_re=vega_56-_-14-131-730-_-Product

Edit: Links added to support pricing and availability
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
bobzdar said:
Um, it wins pretty easily in perf/dollar with Vega56 at current pricing (and even more so if you oc). Perf/watt, yeah not as good. They can't compete with 1080ti, but are competitive at the 1070 and 1080 level with lower pricing at both points. Current pricing has Vega56 at $399 with pretty wide availability, and Vega64 at $465 (albeit in one place at that price, the rest at $499).

https://www.ebay.com/itm/PowerColor...2-3DH-8GB-2048-Bit-HB/382198554012?rmvSB=true

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...14131730&cm_re=vega_56-_-14-131-730-_-Product

Edit: Links added to support pricing and availability
Click to expand...

In the US perhaps, not in canada, here a Vega 56 is more expensive than a GTX 1080.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
daglesj said:
Vega? A sale...is a sale. AMD doesn't care what you use it for.
Click to expand...

In this case, a sale isn't just a sale. The problem is that the card was designed for gaming and almost no one buys Vega for that purpose. It's bought primarily for mining. People who are interested in buying a gaming card and know nothing of mining will ask their gamer friends and Google about what card to get. If their budget can include Vega, it will be dismissed for being a card that performs about as well as a GTX 1080 at a higher cost which isn't even available. This impacts AMD's reputation, brand recognition and has further reaching consequences down the line as a result.

To what extent this impact will be, is hard to say.
 
Dan_D said:
In this case, a sale isn't just a sale. The problem is that the card was designed for gaming and almost no one buys Vega for that purpose. It's bought primarily for mining. People who are interested in buying a gaming card and know nothing of mining will ask their gamer friends and Google about what card to get. If their budget can include Vega, it will be dismissed for being a card that performs about as well as a GTX 1080 at a higher cost which isn't even available. This impacts AMD's reputation, brand recognition and has further reaching consequences down the line as a result.

To what extent this impact will be, is hard to say.
Click to expand...
You should look at the current prices and links above your post.
 
I personally think that Ryzen would have been even more successful if it came with some basic on board radeon graphics. Even 4CUs would be better than Intel's integrated graphics, and it would keep the BOM for a Ryzen system cheaper.
 
Dan_D said:
In this case, a sale isn't just a sale. The problem is that the card was designed for gaming and almost no one buys Vega for that purpose. It's bought primarily for mining. People who are interested in buying a gaming card and know nothing of mining will ask their gamer friends and Google about what card to get. If their budget can include Vega, it will be dismissed for being a card that performs about as well as a GTX 1080 at a higher cost which isn't even available. This impacts AMD's reputation, brand recognition and has further reaching consequences down the line as a result.

To what extent this impact will be, is hard to say.
Click to expand...


Again, it doesn't matter. AMD sold an expensive card and another and another...

Do you want them to ask for a letter from your mom promising you'll use it for gaming only?:D

If I was AMD I wouldn't care if folks were buying them in the thousands to just throw off a cliff.

Folks would criticise them if they were selling nothing at all.
 
KazeoHin said:
I personally think that Ryzen would have been even more successful if it came with some basic on board radeon graphics. Even 4CUs would be better than Intel's integrated graphics, and it would keep the BOM for a Ryzen system cheaper.
Click to expand...
That was the roadmap but Raven Ridge comes a little late. I'd be interested in the socket with HBM2, if that's gonna happen.
 
Raven Ridge is a low margin chip with Vega which was not ready with drivers, Vega still has issues with drivers. It would probably been a pretty bad release for Raven Ridge if done earlier. I don't see AMD having much choice in this matter. Succeeding in Server is the big win if they can get it. Consumer having great sells, HEDT sells will get them by. OEMs would be nice. Mobile market is also a big win if they can do it either via Intel collaboration and/or themselves.

Vega 56 at $399 beats anything Nvidia has at $400 by a significant amount in games and trade blows with the 1070Ti (HardOCP review). Except one maybe limited on what one can buy depending where you are at. So the consumer should make an informed decision considering the price they have to pay.

Now I bought the Veg 64 for gaming (4K FreeSync monitor already had), it is doing just fine in gaming and VR. But, it is a mining whore!!! CyptoNight and this baby is out-producing $/day two 1070's!!! Still mining has such fluctuations where the Nano beats the 1070 at times and visa versa so buying a Vega 64 for mining is probably not a good idea (using it for mining after gaming though can help pay for it as a consideration). I just about bought a Vega 56 for $389 ($409 with a $20 gift card from NewEgg) but decided not - all my mining now is pure profit. Still I may bit anyways.
 
Rifter0876 said:
How do you figure? the cheapest vega on newegg in my country is $679, for the Vega 56 8GB model. https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...cription=vega&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

The cheapest 1070 is $509 https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...cription=1070&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

The cheapest 1080 is $649 https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Produ...cription=1080&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

So i can get a 1080 cheaper than a Vega 56. And a 1080 will beat a Vega 56 in vast majority of games all while using less power to do it. This may not be the same pricing in all countries obviously but it is true for at least Canada. Vega does NOT win in price/perf.

Looking at the reviews you will find it also looses in perf/watt https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-radeon-vega-64/page12.html

And then there is the fact that the 1080Ti/Titan is still untouched and maintains the overall performance crown(note that is also does this using much less power than the Vega 64). Which in itself is very bad since AMD ran a "Poor Volta" Marketing campaign just prior to vega launch, indicating that vega will be competitive vs Volta, which is an outright lie, as vega is not even competitive vs Pascal let alone volta, this was very bad/dishonest move for AMD marketing.

Here are the overall performance charts for 32 games for anyone interested https://www.techspot.com/review/1476-amd-radeon-vega-64/page13.html

I can look and benchmarks too, and check prices, and found that they support my original statement. Vega is not competitive in price/perf, or perf watt, or overall performance vs pascal in gaming.

Vega may have its uses for pro use or mining, but not for gaming at its current prices.

You bring up a good point about freesync being cheaper than gsync, this is very true. However they are both vendor locked solutions, and if you are going to be locked into one vendor does it not make alot more sense to be locked into the Vendor offering a full range of cards from low end to enthusiast? so if you decide to upgrade later you can actually do that. AMD is currently only offering low end to mid range/mainstream cards, they have nothing to compete with the Ti or Titan Nvidia cards on the top end, and will likely have nothing to compete with Volta in a few months either. You buy freesync and Vega now you have no upgrade path for the GPU if you decide you need more performance in a few months. There is also the fact that Gsync is better than freesync, alot of freesync displays have a poor range that they operate in compared to Gsync. Gsync is a more standardized solution you can count on all Gsync displays meeting the same performance standards, this is not the case for freesync which is more a free for all as far as specs go.

When i built my system when Ryzen was released my plan was to upgrade to Vega and a freesync display around Christmas, but given Vegas performance and price this no longer seems like a good idea, they cant even compete effectively with 18 month old Nvidia products. I will now wait out volta and get a Volta 2070/2080 and Gsync display in the spring. I dont prefer any company over another, am not a fanboy to any company. I just buy the best products i can when i need them, and anyone objectively looking at Vega will see it is currently not competitive with Pascal, let alone volta in a few months. I would have much preferred to save some cash and go freesync, but this seems like a poor decision at this current time, maybe prices will change by Christmas but i doubt it will be by enough to matter. Maybe AMD will fix the drivers and enable the disabled features, and this will change the landscape enough to make vega competitive, who knows, all i know is right now it doesnt look good.
Click to expand...

I g
Dan_D said:
In this case, a sale isn't just a sale. The problem is that the card was designed for gaming and almost no one buys Vega for that purpose. It's bought primarily for mining. People who are interested in buying a gaming card and know nothing of mining will ask their gamer friends and Google about what card to get. If their budget can include Vega, it will be dismissed for being a card that performs about as well as a GTX 1080 at a higher cost which isn't even available. This impacts AMD's reputation, brand recognition and has further reaching consequences down the line as a result.

To what extent this impact will be, is hard to say.
Click to expand...

Vega is like a hundred bucks less than a 1080. Seriously what are you talking about? How can you be an editor here?

Hell I just went and checked. Vega 56 is currently $110 LESS than the cheapest 1080 I can get right now.

Dude. Really
 
Dan_D said:
In this case, a sale isn't just a sale. The problem is that the card was designed for gaming and almost no one buys Vega for that purpose. It's bought primarily for mining. People who are interested in buying a gaming card and know nothing of mining will ask their gamer friends and Google about what card to get. If their budget can include Vega, it will be dismissed for being a card that performs about as well as a GTX 1080 at a higher cost which isn't even available. This impacts AMD's reputation, brand recognition and has further reaching consequences down the line as a result.

To what extent this impact will be, is hard to say.
Click to expand...

Vega 64 is $50 less than the cheapest 1080 right now.

Dude stop talking out of your ass. Some of us are trying to make real purchasing decisions.
 
noko said:
Raven Ridge is a low margin chip with Vega which was not ready with drivers, Vega still has issues with drivers. It would probably been a pretty bad release for Raven Ridge if done earlier. I don't see AMD having much choice in this matter. Succeeding in Server is the big win if they can get it. Consumer having great sells, HEDT sells will get them by. OEMs would be nice. Mobile market is also a big win if they can do it either via Intel collaboration and/or themselves.
Click to expand...


Anyway getting back on topic,

Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, etc. sell millions and millions of those boring black box PCs with integrated graphics.

Even though AMD has to sell Raven Ridge to OEMs at a deep discount, there's still a lot of profit.

And if Vega wasn't going to be ready, AMD should have used Fiji or Polaris.
 
_mockingbird said:
Anyway getting back on topic,

Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, etc. sell millions and millions of those boring black box PCs with integrated graphics.

Even though AMD has to sell Raven Ridge to OEMs at a deep discount, there's still a lot of profit.

And if Vega wasn't going to be ready, AMD should have used Fiji or Polaris.
Click to expand...
Agreed and AMD should do OK there - Raven Ridge was just not ready and I would say mostly due to the Vega inside and GF able to produce enough chips on their process. RyZen as a base is the real key in four markets - Consumer DIY, OEMs, HEDT and EYPC. Same CPU just different packaging. To me that just has a higher priority than Raven Ridge which is out now anyways.
 
Rifter0876 said:
Vega looses in perf/watt, perf/$, and overall performance to Pascal in gaming. And its 18 months late vs Pascal, and larger and more expensive to produce. Its a failure any way you try and spin it unless you are a miner or a Professional user.

It has its uses for mining and pro user/development type of work but as a gaming card it is a complete failure, literally to little to late to be competitive.
Click to expand...

Not true with Vega 56. It performs better than a 1070 Ti and is cheaper.
 
noko said:
Agreed and AMD should do OK there - Raven Ridge was just not ready and I would say mostly due to the Vega inside and GF able to produce enough chips on their process. RyZen as a base is the real key in four markets - Consumer DIY, OEMs, HEDT and EYPC. Same CPU just different packaging. To me that just has a higher priority than Raven Ridge which is out now anyways.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the delay, if you will, is due to IF use and implementation. That is likely a driver headache up front with huge returns in performance.
 
Dan_D said:
This impacts AMD's reputation, brand recognition and has further reaching consequences down the line as a result.
Click to expand...
You win some you lose some.

Anyone with any iota of the industry will know AMD exists. So what if Vega fails in this category?

We're going to be seeing Ultrabooks with AMD due to RavenRidge.
We're going to see mainstream laptops with AMD inside, thanks to the Intel partnership.
If anything, these should generate far more brand recognition than Vega ever would.

Why do people recognize nvidia? Because every budget laptop that had a dGPU in the past decade had an nvidia sticker, not because it is more or less the king of gfx cards.
 
Snowdensjacket said:
Vega 64 is $50 less than the cheapest 1080 right now.

Dude stop talking out of your ass. Some of us are trying to make real purchasing decisions.
Click to expand...

You don't need to be condescending about it. Anyway, you might want to do a quick fact check before running your mouth in such a tone.

All I did was a quick Google search. The cheapest I found a GTX 1080 for was $509.99 from Newegg. The cheapest I found a Radeon RX Vega 64 card was $499.99 from Newegg. I did see a single Ebay ad for less than that, but when I clicked on it the Ebay ad was actually fulfilled by Newegg and showed as being out of Stock. That was the Powercolor version for $465.00. That's $44.99 for a brand that I didn't see in stock and certainly not the average price. If you know of in stock Vega 64 cards at $50 less than a GTX 1080, I'd love to see some links.
 
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
_mockingbird said:
Radeon RX Vega 56/64 sells because miners ran out of Radeon RX 570/580 and Geforce GTX 1070 to buy.

That's hardly a measure of success.

Also, you think that I am "anti-AMD" ? LOL!

...and using stocks to justify something? double LOL!
Click to expand...
A sale is a sale.

What's the difference?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top