HWUB/Techspot adds more games, 5700XT falls further behind 2070 Super.

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
Your own personal math is not proof, I mean specifically something from AMD or TSMC?
He posted the slide from AMD stating it cost twice as much for 7nm.... So he used simple math to show that it comes out similar. It wasn't intended to be an exact #, just show that it's not 1/2 the price like gamer x keeps stating but closer to 1:1 based on factual data from AMD, not pure conjecture, hopes and dreams. Obviously unless TSMC or AMD releases the #'s, we can only guess, but that doesn't mean we can't call out blatantly false statements presented as fact using logic and data.
He keeps changing the subject and skirting the responses while blaming others for doing the same... Hypocritical, ignores facts, and uses the term "fact" when he's using pure conjecture and guesswork (flawed at best). Seriously, if this is what you support, then you are no better. AMD has made great gains, I own all AMD gpus right now (in all 4 of my desktops + 1 laptop), so I'm not some Nvidia fanboy, but I'm not an AMD fan boy either. AMD had a price/performance i could live with at the time. That doesn't make them magic and defy laws of physics. ;)
 

Araxie

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
6,445
He posted the slide from AMD stating it cost twice as much for 7nm.... So he used simple math to show that it comes out similar. It wasn't intended to be an exact #, just show that it's not 1/2 the price like gamer x keeps stating but closer to 1:1 based on factual data from AMD, not pure conjecture, hopes and dreams. Obviously unless TSMC or AMD releases the #'s, we can only guess, but that doesn't mean we can't call out blatantly false statements presented as fact using logic and data.
He keeps changing the subject and skirting the responses while blaming others for doing the same... Hypocritical, ignores facts, and uses the term "fact" when he's using pure conjecture and guesswork (flawed at best). Seriously, if this is what you support, then you are no better. AMD has made great gains, I own all AMD gpus right now (in all 4 of my desktops + 1 laptop), so I'm not some Nvidia fanboy, but I'm not an AMD fan boy either. AMD had a price/performance i could live with at the time. That doesn't make them magic and defy laws of physics. ;)
You guys are trying to argue with a guy that make hardware purchases based on feelings and company attachments... don't waste time ans/or effort, facts works for rational minds not "feeling" guided ones.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,009
You guys are trying to argue with a guy that make hardware purchases based on feelings and company attachments... don't waste time ans/or effort, facts works for rational minds not "feeling" guided ones.
Really? I probably have more hardcore and logical knowledge then you will ever hope to have. (Just a guess, of course.) I base my personal purchases on what I know works for me and who I choose to support, whether you personally like or agree with that or not. As for my knowledge, I know what it is in the industry and what works with what and what is needed in any given scenario.

If you disagree with me, that is fine but you have crossed the line into disrespect.

He posted the slide from AMD stating it cost twice as much for 7nm.... So he used simple math to show that it comes out similar. It wasn't intended to be an exact #, just show that it's not 1/2 the price like gamer x keeps stating but closer to 1:1 based on factual data from AMD, not pure conjecture, hopes and dreams. Obviously unless TSMC or AMD releases the #'s, we can only guess, but that doesn't mean we can't call out blatantly false statements presented as fact using logic and data.
He keeps changing the subject and skirting the responses while blaming others for doing the same... Hypocritical, ignores facts, and uses the term "fact" when he's using pure conjecture and guesswork (flawed at best). Seriously, if this is what you support, then you are no better. AMD has made great gains, I own all AMD gpus right now (in all 4 of my desktops + 1 laptop), so I'm not some Nvidia fanboy, but I'm not an AMD fan boy either. AMD had a price/performance i could live with at the time. That doesn't make them magic and defy laws of physics. ;)
I do not hitch my wagon with anyone here. :)
 

5150Joker

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
4,423
It's the anti gamer-x, lol. Going on about how much Intel 10nm can pump out is a really funny line as th y even said they are having so many issues they're basically going to skip it for most things. First feed the troll, then give him this kind of crap to work with? Seriously, not quite, but almost as bad as gamer x just in the opposite direction. At least you had a few valid points intermixed.
I'm not under any illusion that intel has struggled to get 10nm going and will still have issues with mass production of desktop cpus. But I'm not really concerned about that, they will produce Xe in 10nm and possibly take advantage of emib and price the gpus competitively with the margins they want. Furthermore, they'll be pushing Xe into laptops in both integrated and discrete form which will put significant pressure on both amd and nVidia. They will shake up the market a lot in the next 2-3 years and I think AMD will take the biggest losses.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,009
I'm not under any illusion that intel has struggled to get 10nm going and will still have issues with mass production of desktop cpus. But I'm not really concerned about that, they will produce Xe in 10nm and possibly take advantage of emib and price the gpus below what amd or nVidia could with the margins they want. Furthermore, they'll be pushing Xe into laptops in both integrated and discrete form which will put significant pressure on both amd and nVidia. They will shake up the market a lot in the next 2-3 years and I think AMD will take the biggest losses.
Intel pricing things below their competition? What planet do you live on? That has never happened in the past so I do not see it happening in the future, based upon Intel's business practices.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
Intel pricing things below their competition? What planet do you live on? That has never happened in the past so I do not see it happening in the future, based upon Intel's business practices.
He said competitive, not less than, but read it as you will. Either way, I don't have huge hopes for Intels first dGPU, but they do have the resources to be competitive. Maybe we'll be surprised, maybe disappointed, more than likely it'll be just another card about the same price about the same performance.

Edit:. Reading your qoute, it appears he changed the words to competitive after, sorry about that. The rest of what I said still applies and I'll leave my.origin statement just because it's based on what his post said when I read it.
 

5150Joker

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
4,423
Intel pricing things below their competition? What planet do you live on? That has never happened in the past so I do not see it happening in the future, based upon Intel's business practices.
They will be competitive which means likely below NVidia prices and probably on par with AMD depending on how good Xe performs. Raja already said they will cover ranges from $100 to enterprise. As a new competitor with deep pockets, they will come in swinging.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,009
He said competitive, not less than, but read it as you will. Either way, I don't have huge hopes for Intels first dGPU, but they do have the resources to be competitive. Maybe we'll be surprised, maybe disappointed, more than likely it'll be just another card about the same price about the same performance.

I read exactly what he typed: "price the gpus below what amd or nVidia could with the margins they want."
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,009
They will be competitive which means likely below NVidia prices and probably on par with AMD depending on how good Xe performs. Raja already said they will cover ranges from $100 to enterprise. As a new competitor with deep pockets, they will come in swinging.
This is what you typed: "price the gpus below what amd or nVidia could with the margins they want."
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
This is what you typed: "price the gpus below what amd or nVidia could with the margins they want."
I was reading his last post in which he stated "But I'm not really concerned about that, they will produce Xe in 10nm and possibly take advantage of emib and price the gpus competitively with the margins they want". My mistake that he said something different and earlier.
 

5150Joker

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
4,423
This is what you typed: "price the gpus below what amd or nVidia could with the margins they want."
That was before I edited the post almost immediately after typing it, you just happened to catch it before I did. Competitive is the better description with lower prices than nVidia and on par with AMD is my prediction except with better margins than AMD.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
I do not hitch my wagon with anyone here. :)
But you did when you stated his math was not accurate, implying the original math by gamer x was accurate, which is not true. Obviously both are wrong (just guesses), but at least one isn't completely ignoring facts that they didn't want to beleive :).
I will say based on what we know, 1:1 sounds closer, but like I said, they are both estimates and guesses.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,009
But you did when you stated his math was not accurate, implying the original math by gamer x was accurate, which is not true. Obviously both are wrong (just guesses), but at least one isn't completely ignoring facts that they didn't want to beleive :).
I will say based on what we know, 1:1 sounds closer, but like I said, they are both estimates and guesses.
Nope, I do not hitch my wagon onto anyone here. :) As for my 5700, the thing kicks and only will be getting better over time. :) And for the games I play, it is faster.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
He said competitive, not less than, but read it as you will. Either way, I don't have huge hopes for Intels first dGPU, but they do have the resources to be competitive. Maybe we'll be surprised, maybe disappointed, more than likely it'll be just another card about the same price about the same performance.
This isn't Intel the dominant market share holder, this is Intel the outsider trying to break in.

Witness what they did not just selling for less, but billions in subsidies trying to break into the Android ecosystem:
https://www.valuewalk.com/2014/11/intel-stop-subsidizing-tablets-year/
Previously, Bernstein research analyst Stacy Rasgon noted that Intel is offering $51 in subsidy, which is a significant rebate as some of the low-priced Intel-powered tablets are available for as less as $199.

Intel had to forgo approximately $3 billion on mobile chips in 2013 and is expected to lose another $4 billion this year. Intel will not swallow any further loss after $7 billion
I know I would need a lot of convincing (better perf/$ than both AMD/NVidia) before I would buy an Intel GPU.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
This isn't Intel the dominant market share holder, this is Intel the outsider trying to break in.

Witness what they did not just selling for less, but billions in subsidies trying to break into the Android ecosystem:
https://www.valuewalk.com/2014/11/intel-stop-subsidizing-tablets-year/


I know I would need a lot of convincing (better perf/$ than both AMD/NVidia) before I would buy an Intel GPU.
Yeah, how'd that work out for them, lol. Not saying they can't, but they don't want to be seen as the the brand to Joe public (IMHO). I think maybe a very small price difference to break into the market, but nothing substantial. It would take a few reviews and maybe a generation or two before I would buy their cards.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
Nope, I do not hitch my wagon onto anyone here. :) As for my 5700, the thing kicks and only will be getting better over time. :) And for the games I play, it is faster.
Fair enough, I e had my eye on the 5700 now that the AIB cards are out, but I honestly don't.play many games anymore, mostly just development work.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Yeah, how'd that work out for them, lol. Not saying they can't, but they don't want to be seen as the the brand to Joe public (IMHO). I think maybe a very small price difference to break into the market, but nothing substantial. It would take a few reviews and maybe a generation or two before I would buy their cards.
Not saying it worked out, just that Intel is willing to undercut the other guy, when the shoe is on the other foot (they are the underdog).

The underdog, pretty much has to offer better value than established players.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
Not saying it worked out, just that Intel is willing to undercut the other guy, when the shoe is on the other foot (they are the underdog).

The underdog, pretty much has to offer better value than established players.
Hard to say, AMD has no choice without the vast reserves, Intel doesn't have to undercut and can just not make as much to not appear as the value brand. They can and will bundle their machines and builds with their GPUs to make up for some #s, so it's not as mandatory for them to undercut as someone else just joining. I'm just saying they have options, time will tell what they feel is the best path forward.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Hard to say, AMD has no choice without the vast reserves, Intel doesn't have to undercut and can just not make as much to not appear as the value brand. They can and will bundle their machines and builds with their GPUs to make up for some #s, so it's not as mandatory for them to undercut as someone else just joining. I'm just saying they have options, time will tell what they feel is the best path forward.
You just said that it would take generations of product and good reviews for you to buy one. Buyers need an incentive.

Without that pricing incentive it's not getting off the ground.
 

Dayaks

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,067
Hard to say, AMD has no choice without the vast reserves, Intel doesn't have to undercut and can just not make as much to not appear as the value brand. They can and will bundle their machines and builds with their GPUs to make up for some #s, so it's not as mandatory for them to undercut as someone else just joining. I'm just saying they have options, time will tell what they feel is the best path forward.
Yeah, Intel can actually leverage “economy of scale” in it’s real meaning. Especially since they are vertically integrated.
 
Last edited:

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
You just said that it would take generations of product and good reviews for you to buy one. Buyers need an incentive.

Without that pricing incentive it's not getting off the ground.
What Dayaks said, they are vertically integrated, they don't have to do super awesome in the enthusiast market. They have the option. They don't need me to buy one, they want system integrators to include them in sales. They *could* come in at a loss or break even just to get a couple of sales (much less than their existing channels), or they could price it the same as everyone and get a couple of sales with high margins and as people gain confidence they will buy them. If they start low and then try to raise prices later it will put people off more than maintaining consistent pricing (which allows healthy margins).

Edit:. My point was supposed to simply be they have options, and I have no clue which they will choose and can see some pro/con for both.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
What Dayaks said, they are vertically integrated, they don't have to do super awesome in the enthusiast market. They have the option. They don't need me to buy one, they want system integrators to include them in sales. They *could* come in at a loss or break even just to get a couple of sales (much less than their existing channels), or they could price it the same as everyone and get a couple of sales with high margins and as people gain confidence they will buy them. If they start low and then try to raise prices later it will put people off more than maintaining consistent pricing (which allows healthy margins).

Edit:. My point was supposed to simply be they have options, and I have no clue which they will choose and can see some pro/con for both.
The have those options on chips integrated into laptops. But not really bigger ones for enthusiast GPU cards.

These will get reviews, and if reviews pan them, for poor value, then no one buys them, and no one is going to want them in their Alienware Gaming PC either.

They need compelling product, or they shouldn't even bother.
 

Ready4Dis

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,153
The have those options on chips integrated into laptops. But not really bigger ones for enthusiast GPU cards.

These will get reviews, and if reviews pan them, for poor value, then no one buys them, and no one is going to want them in their Alienware Gaming PC either.

They need compelling product, or they shouldn't even bother.
Compelling doesnt mean undercutting the competition, just not pricing above. My point was they could undercut or price accordingly, either one could work out for them. Also, it works for more than just laptops when most systems sold have Intel inside already if they can prepackage an Intel dGPU instesd of having to deal with multiple vendors (and no doubt Intel will give them deals to entice), it can save them time and money. This is where Intel can almost likely will sell cheaper to build market share. Enthusiast market, while useful for giving general positive views, isn't their biggest market.
Again, just offer counter view, they could easily come in undercut and produce a lot of buzz to generate market penetration early, I just doubt they want to jump in and start a price war. They have want the margins high just like Nvidia and AMD. To come in and start a price war and destroy your own margins just seems silly to me, but I'm not a CEO and don't have as much inside knowledge either. They know their margins, prices and competition better than I do.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
I am not suggesting massive price drops to gut margins, and start a big price war.

Instead I expect they will do what AMD does. Price slightly under NVidia, though I would expect Intel will have to price slightly under AMD and NViida.

AMD has had very positive reviews of 5700 series, due in large part to the last minute price cuts. Without those, it would be a different story.
 

HockeyJon

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 14, 2014
Messages
1,269
I love the penis-measuring contests from fanboys who have zero personal or financial stake in either company. It’s like a personal victory when the brand of their choice wins a benchmark.
 

viivo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
1,698
Buying a 2060/2070S solely for RT is like buying a car because the speedometer says 180MPH on it. Sure, it's theoretically possible, but it'll take a while to reach it and the ride will be bumpy.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
Buying a 2060/2070S solely for RT is like buying a car because the speedometer says 180MPH on it. Sure, it's theoretically possible, but it'll take a while to reach it and the ride will be bumpy.
Who said they are doing that? You just like building straw men?
 

Dayaks

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
8,067
Buying a 2060/2070S solely for RT is like buying a car because the speedometer says 180MPH on it. Sure, it's theoretically possible, but it'll take a while to reach it and the ride will be bumpy.
2070 Super actually does RT at 1440p pretty well. Like BF4 ultra / rtx low should be around 70 fps at 1440p.

It does better than you’d think in practice.
 

dave343

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 17, 2000
Messages
1,757
At the end of the day, I can grab the Gigabyte 5700 XT Overclocked 3 fan version for $396, or the Gigabyte RTX 2070 Super OC 3 fan version for $491 (at least locally here in Toronto). We all already know the 5700 XT is priced cheaper, so really it comes down to is the extra 5-10% percent worth the $100... and even then it's game dependent as it's usually on the lower side %. Even the 2080 Ti can be bought up here for $1100 while being 50-55% more $, yet it's kicking back 25% more performance (at 1440P, on average).
Been reading this thread but it seems logic and reason forgot to show up to the conversation... you can't really compare the cards (die size etc...) because there is a significant cost difference. Even the vanilla 2070 is on average $50-60 more up here, so either you really want that 2-5% on average fps (vs the vanilla 2070, &it it does flip the other way in certain games), or you'd rather bank the $$.

Nvidia also has the $ to have devs design games around their product line, so there is that when talking about performance on NV cards, vs saying Navi cards are falling behind. I do believe AMD's performance usually goes up, but normally months after a game is released and they can optimize the drivers for particular games. Difference architectures, difference prices... don't see how it can be argues.

I'm not NV or AMD bias, I just don't get this whole 5 page argument when you're discussing different cards at totally different price points.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,537
Well its all agenda, why else would you want to compared an AMD product to an Nvidia product that is priced $100 cheaper. It fits into their agenda!
 

dave343

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 17, 2000
Messages
1,757
I do find it odd, that 95% of people compare the 5700XT to the 2070S, when the 2060S is actually the SAME price as the 5700XT and makes for a more obvious comparison.
yeah, exactly, I just compared the 2070 super because well, that's what this whole thread's argument is about. If we were going by price point, then the 2060 Super should be used in comparison.
 

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
11,267
yeah, exactly, I just compared the 2070 super because well, that's what this whole thread's argument is about. If we were going by price point, then the 2060 Super should be used in comparison.
Well yes in this thread, because that is the comparison the GPU review did. But on reddit buildapc thread, several times every day someone asks 5700Xt or 2070S. I don't think I have ever seen someone say 5700XT vs 2060 Super.

It's just odd. Maybe AMD did a great job of marketing to get everyone doing the comparison that favors them.
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
5,487
Comparing performance with fastest recorded single card 2070 Super on a Ryzen 3900 X system to my 5700 XT Lisa Sue Ryzen 3900 X system, FireStrike - Guess which graphics card comes out on top?

FireStrike.jpg

FireStrike2.jpg

Anyways as far as I am concerned, you can take every RTX card produced and shove it up Jensen's Ass. Nvidia could do much better by really taking care of their hard earned customers than this generation of RTX cards, mis-directed Ray Tracing promises, initial large scale hardware failures. That being said, I look very much forward to Ampere.
 
Top