Nvidia knows what the next AMD card will be

L

lextheimpaler

n00b
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
18
It will be much faster than the 980Ti, thats why they had to price the Ti so aggressive...Wait 2 weeks before buying any card.
 
Yes, we needed more pointless speculation and rumor threads. Nice job.
 
So you're saying NVidia has an engineering mole?
Or perhaps, out of the kindness of it's heart, AMD gave a few of it's cards to NVidia to evaluate for competitiveness sake?
Or maybe NVidia has a Magic 8 Ball filled with performance enhancing gel, that gives them heightened knowledge of AMD's future products and profitability?
 
Great thread here. This topic totally hasn't been retread 30 times over in the main 390x thread.

And yes, nVidia has known for months. Even if they didn't have a mole inside AMD (which they surely do) they would have been able to simulate the performance/specs within a percentile.

The only thing AMD can catch nVidia on is pricing and exact timing, although nV knows even this days (if not minutes) after it's communicated internally or to partners.
 
Go figure.. an noob trying to start yet another flame war. Mod's should put an infraction on the noob for just trying to up his post count.

Lame.
 
Recent rumors aside, I wouldn't be surprised if it was much faster. But I don't think it's going to sell much, even if it's priced competitively. And HBM is going to be expensive which is going to cut into AMD's margins hard.

In all it's looking to me that HBM is being rushed to market and there's been a lot of trouble with it.

Then we have the AMD strategy of releasing a card in the dead middle of summer that runs so hot that it requires water cooling.
 
Maybe if I posted it in the AMD section, I would have different responses..and so the Fanboys come out.......or maybe they still sore from buying Titan X or because they can't get their hands on a 980Ti. Pathetic.
 
It makes sense. Whatever Nvidia knows about the upcoming AMD product caused them to panic and drop the price of the modified Titan X to almost half and release it prematurely since it would be a harder sale after AMD is released. Whatever camp you're in, competition brings about better pricing, so it's better to not to rush into a purchase until all products are on the market.
 
or alternatively Nvidia smells blood in the water, and is trying to finish AMD as a serious competitior, see that's how baseless speculation works.
 
mi7chy said:
It makes sense. Whatever Nvidia knows about the upcoming AMD product caused them to panic and drop the price of the modified Titan X to almost half and release it prematurely since it would be a harder sale after AMD is released. Whatever camp you're in, competition brings about better pricing, so it's better to not to rush into a purchase until all products are on the market.
Click to expand...

Thank you. At least someone who isn't biased! IF NV priced the 980Ti at $899, people would have a bought it. Pricing at $699 just cannibalized their flagship Titan X and also the 980. They wouldn't if they didn't have an idea what the new AMD card would be..
 
ikarinokami said:
or alternatively Nvidia smells blood in the water, and is trying to finish AMD as a serious competitior, see that's how baseless speculation works.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't even if they could..because they don't won't to violate US anti-trust laws..
 
lextheimpaler said:
No they wouldn't even if they could..because they don't won't to violate US anti-trust laws..
Click to expand...

Like Intel sees AMD as a serious competitor in the CPU market? Doubtful. Nvidia could end AMD as a SERIOUS competitor, and merely let them limp along so they don't violate the law.
 
lextheimpaler said:
No they wouldn't even if they could..because they don't won't to violate US anti-trust laws..
Click to expand...

that's not a violation of anti trust law. it wouldn't even be close. Firstly, the majority of the GPU market is held by intel. Secondly and more importantly, the discrete GPU market is not one in which the justice department or EU would be concerned about, because its affect on the general consumer is nearly nill. This is not the case for things like SOCs or CPUs.
 
lextheimpaler said:
Thank you. At least someone who isn't biased! IF NV priced the 980Ti at $899, people would have a bought it. Pricing at $699 just cannibalized their flagship Titan X and also the 980. They wouldn't if they didn't have an idea what the new AMD card would be..
Click to expand...

It's possible that Titan X sales have flagged and now they're only getting buyers that really need one (read: a cheaper version of Quadro).

In other words, maybe they've milked that for all it's worth, and now it's time to release the next thing to get the buyers that are in a lower price bracket.
 
I doubt AMD has an answer or else they would have already released benchmarks. Consumers don't have infinite money and they need to capture it before it goes to the competitor. Staying silent is just evidence they don't have a competitive product.
 
lextheimpaler said:
Thank you. At least someone who isn't biased! IF NV priced the 980Ti at $899, people would have a bought it. Pricing at $699 just cannibalized their flagship Titan X and also the 980. They wouldn't if they didn't have an idea what the new AMD card would be..
Click to expand...

Your statements make it seem that nvidia isn't making massive profits from every upper price range GPU sold, regardless of the model name/number on it, and they are actually worried about AMDs 300 series when they've already made bank from early/instant adopters of the 960, 970, 980, Titan X, and 980ti.


$900 for a GPU is a tough sell.
$1000 for a GPU is an even tougher sell.
Someone that has the option to afford a 6 GB flagship for $900 more than likely will pony up an extra $100 and get double the VRAM, thus cannibalizing the sales of the $900 product.

Instead, price that $900 card which almost matches the performance of the previously-released $1000 card at $650 and they fly off the shelves because of the perceived value. People have already been conditioned for a couple/few months now to know what kind of performance and overkill VRAM $1000 buys, so getting about that same level of performance but with still-plenty half the VRAM for $650 makes it seem like a fucking steal, when in reality it's still priced exponentially higher than the cost to mass produce it. This tactic is nothing more than psychological warfare on consumers...screw them over and make them feel like they are the winners out of all involved.
 
lextheimpaler said:
It will be much faster than the 980Ti, thats why they had to price the Ti so aggressive...Wait 2 weeks before buying any card.
Click to expand...
Aggressive? It is a gimped GM200 going for only 50 bucks less than the full Kepler chip did when it came out. $649 is basically the norm now for release price on a slightly cut down Nvidia big boy chip. The only reason it looks "aggressive" is because the Titan X was priced at a very high 1000 bucks.
 
Maybe short phrased posts should be deleted?

What's with all the "Agreed" / "Affirmative" kind of posts?
 
vicbdn said:
I doubt AMD has an answer or else they would have already released benchmarks. Consumers don't have infinite money and they need to capture it before it goes to the competitor. Staying silent is just evidence they don't have a competitive product.
Click to expand...

The silence is a little strange. Because right now their competitor enjoys a feeding frenzy.

They're probably trying to tweak their drivers now in the 11th hour.
 
Last edited:
vicbdn said:
I doubt AMD has an answer or else they would have already released benchmarks. Consumers don't have infinite money and they need to capture it before it goes to the competitor. Staying silent is just evidence they don't have a competitive product.
Click to expand...

It's sad, but it certainly feels this way. I still hold out hope, but it is fading.
 
DPI said:
So ahead of the E3 reveal they're scrambling now in the 11th hour to try to squeeze some last few drops of OC out of cards they've already used all the OC headroom on in their stock configuration. I can't imagine their partners are very pleased.
Click to expand...



Do you think that repeating this in every thread might actually make it true?
 
lextheimpaler said:
I guess I was right. Nvidia knew Fury X would be priced at $649...
Click to expand...

Or they knew it would be priced at around 700 and already had a source on preliminary benchmarks and priced the ti to be competitive against a slightly better card. The marginal advantage in some games - not all, meant AMD had to also price match. -This is a possibility I see happening.

Either way, it's absolutely clear that Nvidia set the price otherwise the Fury X would have been priced higher. I'm guessing the original pricing was closer to "750-850" for the 980ti, and the original price of the Fury X was 699.

the surprise was how well the ti overclocks so they were essentially competing now with a "$650 titan x" instead of simply a "slightly better 980".

---

The pricing also tells us a lot about the FuryX's benchmarks, if they are better than the 980ti, and I hope they are for competition's sake , they are only slightly better otherwise the price point would have been 750 with the Fury (air cooled) competing directly at 650 with the ti.

---

The above is just my guess, I could be very wrong but the lack of benchmarks means they are opening back up the bios and drivers trying to squeeze a bit more or they are simply not that impressive.
 
Even R9 Fury Nano is faster then R9 290x.

The full Fury versions will crap all over Titan X garbage :D
 
Last edited:
Hamakua said:
The pricing also tells us a lot about the FuryX's benchmarks, if they are better than the 980ti, and I hope they are for competition's sake , they are only slightly better otherwise the price point would have been 750 with the Fury (air cooled) competing directly at 650 with the ti.
Click to expand...

Even if they are just slightly better, nvidia has captured a ton of attention with the Gameworks stuff. Simple but adds more flair to games and is well worth a small performance decrease (if there even is one).
 
DeadSkull said:
Even R9 Fury Nano is faster then R9 290x.

The full Fury versions will crap all over Titan X garbage.
Click to expand...

Lets wait and see. I am hoping 4GB will not be a limiting factor. A lot of people are using ultra wide or 4K panels now. And [H]'s review puts a perspective into vram consumption.
 
The way the prices have been lately its almost always better to stay one generation behind and go SLI.
 
rmqgAMg.jpg

Hold position boys.
 
While that's not great, it's still better than what most of the 980 Ti's can produce.

TPU's FC4 4K on the G1 980 Ti
farcry4_3840_2160.gif
 
Keep in mind, the Fury X has a $649 price point, with an AIO attached. The Dual GPU version is going to be pretty impressive.
 
Dextar said:
While that's not great, it's still better than what most of the 980 Ti's can produce.

TPU's FC4 4K on the G1 980 Ti
farcry4_3840_2160.gif
Click to expand...

There is also an asterick next to the ultra. which means either something is toned down, card is overclocked to max, and/or combination of other things. They also chose a game that isn't vram intensive. If they gave 4k on gta v or shadow of mordor and much faster than 980 ti then i'm impressed and going to get one

seanclayton said:
rmqgAMg.jpg

Hold position boys.
Click to expand...

Where is that from? are there more benches?
 
x3sphere said:
Yeah that implies something was disabled to me, probably the Nvidia Gameworks settings.
Click to expand...

So someone with 980 ti can try testing ultra settings with gameworks stuff off? like no HBAO+ or hair at 4k and see how it matches?
 
darkangelamd said:
Like Intel sees AMD as a serious competitor in the CPU market? Doubtful. Nvidia could end AMD as a SERIOUS competitor, and merely let them limp along so they don't violate the law.
Click to expand...

I really hope AMD does really well with its upcoming GPUs. Competition is good. If AMD does poorly or goes down in the GPU sector, we will the same thing that is happening with CPUs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top