fightingfi
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2008
- Messages
- 3,231
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't know what's more baller: bluffing about the price, and then dropping it to the real price. Or lying about the bluff.
This is the kind of game AMD needs to play if they want to get ahead. I like it.
There's a thread on this in the news section too.
And u think another one will do differently..something about doing the same thing and expecting different results.
Sub forum, so that's probably true. I don't know if I believe the hole trap thing, more likely it was a backup plan. If Nvidia releases the super series @ +$50 do you think AMD would have done this?
Even though the AMD exec throws around childish terms like "Jebaited ( Nothing like middle aged executives trying to be cool by using millennial slang) , what he actually described is having a contingency plan, not a "trap". If NVidia didn't introduce "Super" there would have been no price cut. The price was NOT fake.
AMD would be much happier to not have to invoke that contingency and sacrifice $30 to $50 per card in profit. Even less happy if NVidia cut more and and AMD also had to cut more.
AMD had absolutely no choice, but to drop prices, or their launch would have essentially been ruined.
But sure spin that as a "trap". I guess some people believing that spin is a marketing success.
The only source we have telling us this is from AMD and they are saying that the price was fake, so show some evidence that it wasn't?
You basically qouted me then completely agreed with what i said that it was probably a contingency plan more than a trap. If Nvidia didn't release the super or priced them higher, I was saying I doubt AMD would have dropped their prices (not blaming them, they are a company in second place were every $ counts).Even though the AMD exec throws around childish terms like "Jebaited ( Nothing like middle aged executives trying to be cool by using millennial slang) , what he actually described is having a contingency plan, not a "trap". If NVidia didn't introduce "Super" there would have been no price cut. The price was NOT fake.
AMD would be much happier to not have to invoke that contingency and sacrifice $30 to $50 per card in profit. Even less happy if NVidia cut more and and AMD also had to cut more.
AMD had absolutely no choice, but to drop prices, or their launch would have essentially been ruined.
But sure spin that as a "trap". I guess some people believing that spin is a marketing success.
The market ain't magical sorcery, it's just prices. AMD and Nvidia aren't stupid. Things reach equilibrium. Nothing out of the ordinary for the parts market.
It's a bluff either way. Not sure why it's so controversial or that somehow AMD can't play ball.
Lot of people said price was 50 to 100 too high including myself.An AMD marketing slide had a price, Nvidia drops their price to play spoiler followed by AMD marketing saying "ha we got you, we actually meant $50 less than we said this whole time!" and you're demanding that the skeptic provide proof that they DIDN'T mean to do this the whole time? Sorry but short of some verifiable leaked internal documents proving otherwise, I think occam's razor would point toward AMD reacting to NV's move rather than some 4D chess move. If you want to drink the kool-aid, by all means, but AMD is 100% trying to control the narrative around the price change in a way that makes them look good, and you don't have proof one way or the other.
Nvidias move with super is nothing new. The idea that AMD can't foresee Nvidia doing something it always does is just pessimistic or biased.Even though the AMD exec throws around childish terms like "Jebaited ( Nothing like middle aged executives trying to be cool by using millennial slang) , what he actually described is having a contingency plan, not a "trap". If NVidia didn't introduce "Super" there would have been no price cut. The price was NOT fake.
AMD would be much happier to not have to invoke that contingency and sacrifice $30 to $50 per card in profit. Even less happy if NVidia cut more and and AMD also had to cut more.
AMD had absolutely no choice, but to drop prices, or their launch would have essentially been ruined.
But sure spin that as a "trap". I guess some people believing that spin is a marketing success.
This. Not like they won't have a few insiders and vice versa. When it comes to stuff like TR with tiny, compartmentalized groups then you don't get any leaks.Nvidias move with super is nothing new. The idea that AMD can't foresee Nvidia doing something it always does is just pessimistic or biased.
Even though the AMD exec throws around childish terms like "Jebaited ( Nothing like middle aged executives trying to be cool by using millennial slang) , what he actually described is having a contingency plan, not a "trap". If NVidia didn't introduce "Super" there would have been no price cut. The price was NOT fake.
AMD would be much happier to not have to invoke that contingency and sacrifice $30 to $50 per card in profit. Even less happy if NVidia cut more and and AMD also had to cut more.
AMD had absolutely no choice, but to drop prices, or their launch would have essentially been ruined.
But sure spin that as a "trap". I guess some people believing that spin is a marketing success.
That is the key point. It's irrelevant who moved first. If AMD launched first at it's current pricing, absolutely nothing would have changed on the pricing front, because this is essentially the price differential that both AMD and NVidia are comfortable with.
Check nearly every release, it always reaches that point where AMD has a slight perf/$ advantage.
it is a pointless card with AMD's Radeon 5800 series incoming.
Lot of people said price was 50 to 100 too high including myself.
I said they only do this because nvidia pricing is high and amd wants to keep it high too.
So regardless of who reacted, consensus was pricing was too high.
Who reacted first?
After announcing navi launch super teasers came out. The rest is he says she says but I'm leaning on the side that amd shot for the pricing moon and corrected minimum needed. Rest is pr fluff.
Duron,
Then I guess you are missing the bigger picture.
Little-Navi uses RDNA architecture and is matching the 2080 in certain games. That is because RDNA is more powerful than Turing in modern games. Transistor per transistor, AMD wins. It is not because of 7nm, it is because of it's architecture. 2070 Super scaled down, is still bigger chip than Navi 10 @ 251mm^2.
If that doesn't sink in, then let this: What happens when Navi scales up just 8 or 16 more CUs and use GDDR6's 16 Gbps memory @ is close to 335mm^2 and it replaces the $499 market @ 2080 Super levels of performance...? With the understand that when bigger Navi hits, it will still be so small that by economy of scale, the Radeon 5800 Series will be mainstream GPU size and pushing the 5700 series down the price scale. (jabaited x2)
Thus, boxing out anything Nvidia has to offer. Or until they release their 7nm GPU in 12 months time.
Additionally, many believe AMD is waiting for Jensen to release the RTX2080 SUPER, before they announce the Radeon 5800 Series, perhaps being released around xmas time. Time will tell, but Lisa Su is holding all the cards.
I believe it when I see it. I doubt AMD is going to win on outright performance anytime soon. Of course, they don't have to! A mid-range product at the right price is absolutely fine mang. Don't need to make more of it than it is.
Only fanboys could possibly look at this situation and believe the marketing FUD. Lower prices are great for consumers, not for profit margin. No business person thinks this was a "clever trap" by AMD. This is a response to RTX Super. AMD had to lower pricing.
Only fanboys could possibly look at this situation and believe the marketing FUD. Lower prices are great for consumers, not for profit margin. No business person thinks this was a "clever trap" by AMD. This is a response to RTX Super. AMD had to lower pricing.
Please spare us your viral marketing drivel.Except that is not what happened.
AMD already knew their actual pricing, but showed off their RDNA in games and at Nvidia's pricing levels. w/ RDNA being better/faster than the competition and cheaper.... (knowing Jensen already released month ago viral videos of SUPER). Knowing that Jensen wasn't doing any keynote speeches this year, and knowing they have no 7nm product this year and knowing what Turing is and what full Turing is... so AMD knew what SUPER was and knew what it was going to be priced at.
So they jebaited Jensen... and it is about to happen again!
Please spare us your viral marketing drivel.