Whatever, its a losing battle, devs will just release a buggy, unoptimized pos that'll cockblock your uber expensive super duper gpu anyway.

Mother of god he sucks at making statements in English.

I would buy an AMD gpu if destroys the 5090 in rasterization, rt, efficiency. I would even pay more for it. I am pretty sure I am not the only one!
By not having the crown they lost almost 50% of their market share.
AMD is giving free advertisements to Nvidia's 4090 for the past 16 months when the 7800X3D came out. The benchmark charts all have the 4090 at the top when showing off those cpu gains. Rinse repeat Blackwell 5090/9800x3d.

I never understood why AMD also can't take advantage of the dead silicon untapped unused on the igpu. Their own igpu. With a dedicated gpu the igpu on the cpu is just wasted. They can literally have an advantage over the competition and lock in customers for the cpu and gpu if somehow they can leverage that advantage. Their has to be some pipeline of work that the igpu can do without any penalty This is performance left on the table. With all this low level api in an ideal world they would squeeze every ounce of performance from all their hardware with the right code. imo.

Lol imagine if Intel beats them to it.

If you can't compete at the top, you're dead. I see most comments here say: who cares, I just want a good mid range gpu, fxck expensive Nvidia, nobody needs a 5090, etc. Ok, well, I get your anger, but here's the problem with this approach: most people will say: "well, if AMD has only low specs products now, it means they suck", so, they'll buy a mid range Nvidia instead. But who cares, right? After all, you just want your cheap good AMD product. Think again! Nvidia will have less competition and increased sales because of what I said above. They will rise prices and AMD will follow closely. There's no way, when selling less to cut prices and AMD had shown consistently to only cut 50$ or so for a similar product. So then, get ready to buy a midrange at 6-700 bucks and still be happy AMD has decided to quit the big league.

emmzo said:

If you can't compete at the top, you're dead. I see most comments here say: who cares, I just want a good mid range gpu, fxck expensive Nvidia, nobody needs a 5090, etc. Ok, well, I get your anger, but here's the problem with this approach: most people will say: "well, if AMD has only low specs products now, it means they suck", so, they'll buy a mid range Nvidia instead. But who cares, right? After all, you just want your cheap good AMD product. Think again! Nvidia will have less competition and increased sales because of what I said above. They will rise prices and AMD will follow closely. There's no way, when selling less to cut prices and AMD had shown consistently to only cut 50$ or so for a similar product. So then, get ready to buy a midrange at 6-700 bucks and still be happy AMD has decided to quit the big league.

Click to expand...

With 2 mining boom craze advantages it's AMD's own fault by not spending more cash on r and d. Not developers, not gamers not the competition but AMD! Nvidia started using ai for driver development years ago. AMD is still learning crawl while Nvidia is sprinting with jets lol. If AMD is not careful they will lose remaining share to Intel's Battlemage especially if Intel can deliver superior rt performance. AMD has so many blind spots. They should have multiple strategies from every angle including a diversified hardware portfolio like the market leader has in case the market saturates prematurely ( ai bubble pop) in the near term. They are playing checkers while Nvidia is playing 4d chess!

The reason is simple, it is CoWoS allocation.

CoWoS allocation will be reserved for datacenter products, like EPYC and MI300.

In some way, don't expect miracle from Nvidia for the same reason.

It's a relatively quiet move (maybe they are tired). They're aiming for better wafer yields with smaller chips, which is a legitimate goal, especially if they don't have a lot of liquidity, so they can offer a lot cheaper mid-tier cards. However, I still have the hope that AMD will be able to reclaim its position as the world champion, rather than becoming a second-tier player. They are not a bank, they are a tech company, and it would be more beneficial for them to compete using their technology as the leading factor.

God I hope Intel steps up in the GPU world with they're next two, battle mage and celestial.

It's not really like amd was competitive at the high end currently. So now what, they're going to compete in the low end only?

The days of getting a decent gpu at a decent price is gone. The only way to get prices in line is to stop buying them at Nvidias price, which will also lower AMDs pricing. Gaming on a PC is becoming to expensive at the current moment.

Playing at 4k, which is nice, is way to expensive, so the high end market is in the toilet for AMD as they can not compete, and they havent for a long time.

It is what it is, their software, which has improved, is not as good as Nvidias and you can argue until the cows come home, most people that can afford it, buy Nvidia and they always will.

AMD is trying to find their place in the GPU market, and have been since they bought ATi. Unfortunately, this may be the best option for them.

emmzo said:

If you can't compete at the top, you're dead. I see most comments here say: who cares, I just want a good mid range gpu, fxck expensive Nvidia, nobody needs a 5090, etc. Ok, well, I get your anger, but here's the problem with this approach: most people will say: "well, if AMD has only low specs products now, it means they suck", so, they'll buy a mid range Nvidia instead. But who cares, right? After all, you just want your cheap good AMD product. Think again! Nvidia will have less competition and increased sales because of what I said above. They will rise prices and AMD will follow closely. There's no way, when selling less to cut prices and AMD had shown consistently to only cut 50$ or so for a similar product. So then, get ready to buy a midrange at 6-700 bucks and still be happy AMD has decided to quit the big league.

Click to expand...

AMD could easily do a 5000$ GPU that would wipe the spec of Nvidia, but they rather focus on Accelerator that they can sell for up to 4 times more.

The margins on dGPU means nothing to them anymore. The DIY gaming PC market is niche and marginal in comparison to datacenter. All of the latest acquisition from AMD recently have all been about the datacenter and industry, nothing related to gaming.

Anyway, at this point, just buy a PS5 Pro. The PC games are running like garbage even on a 4090 because devs take the sponsoring money from Nvidia with lazy optimizations by implementing gameworks.

godrilla said:

I never understood why AMD also can't take advantage of the dead silicon untapped unused on the igpu. Their own igpu. With a dedicated gpu the igpu on the cpu is just wasted. They can literally have an advantage over the competition and lock in customers for the cpu and gpu if somehow they can leverage that advantage. Their has to be some pipeline of work that the igpu can do without any penalty This is performance left on the table. With all this low level api in an ideal world they would squeeze every ounce of performance from all their hardware with the right code. imo.

Lol imagine if Intel beats them to it.

Click to expand...

The Ryzen 7000 & 9000 series only have a very basic iGPU built into their IO die, with just 2 compute units; AMD knows most of them are being used with discrete graphics cards so they made the iGPU just good enough to display a basic desktop, specifically so they did not waste die space. When the cheapest 7000 series, the 7600 comes with 32 CUs running at a higher clockspeed, even with perfect magical scaling adding another 2 CUs wouldn't help much.

Their mobile chip based 8000 APUs are better, topping out at 12 CU in the 8700G. But again, even with magical perfect scaling that would maybe be worth a ~25% boost to the cheapest 7000s graphics card, and probably be slower than buying a cheaper CPU + better graphics card.

And again, that is assuming you got magical perfect scaling; getting two graphics chips that have their own separate memory and have to communicate via PCI-E bus is not easy. Both AMD & Nvidia have tried this in the past, with Crossfire & SLI, but both companies found that you ran into all sorts of unpleasant micro stuttering issues and most people found that the performance gain was not worth it.

redgarl said:

ROFLMAO UTTERGASTROPHOLOGIST LOLYPOP...

The 4090 represent 50% of the market...

ROFLCOPTER

Click to expand...

In the context of not having the crown the mindshare trickles down to all tiers. This is with tech media heavily promoting rdna3 gpus including myself..Questions?

redgarl said:

AMD could easily do a 5000$ GPU that would wipe the spec of Nvidia, but they rather focus on Accelerator that they can sell for up to 4 times more.

The margins on dGPU means nothing to them anymore. The DIY gaming PC market is niche and marginal in comparison to datacenter. All of the latest acquisition from AMD recently have all been about the datacenter and industry, nothing related to gaming.

Anyway, at this point, just buy a PS5 Pro. The PC games are running like garbage even on a 4090 because devs take the sponsoring money from Nvidia with lazy optimizations by implementing gameworks.

Click to expand...

I have a 4080 and it crush every game out there with zero issues.

godrilla said:

With 2 mining boom craze advantages it's AMD's own fault by not spending more cash on r and d. Not developers, not gamers not the competition but AMD! Nvidia started using ai for driver development years ago. AMD is still learning crawl while Nvidia is sprinting with jets lol. If AMD is not careful they will lose remaining share to Intel's Battlemage especially if Intel can deliver superior rt performance. AMD has so many blind spots. They should have multiple strategies from every angle including a diversified hardware portfolio like the market leader has in case the market saturates prematurely ( ai bubble pop) in the near term. They are playing checkers while Nvidia is playing 4d chess!

Click to expand...

AMD has steadily been increasing R+D spending, last year they hit over $5 billion and got very close to nvidia's level.

godrilla said:

I would buy an AMD gpu if destroys the 5090 in rasterization, rt, efficiency. I would even pay more for it. I am pretty sure I am not the only one!
By not having the crown they lost almost 50% of their market share.
AMD is giving free advertisements to Nvidia's 4090 for the past 16 months when the 7800X3D came out. The benchmark charts all have the 4090 at the top when showing off those cpu gains. Rinse repeat Blackwell 5090/9800x3d.

Click to expand...

AMD has never figured out that the polaris/rDNA1 method has lost them marketshare repeatedly. The last time they were healthy they had a full range, including a flagship.

Now if they're prioritizing higher margins, that's fine. I have no issue with that. But AMD has to keep hitting, no more stagnation.

I never understood why AMD also can't take advantage of the dead silicon untapped unused on the igpu. Their own igpu. With a dedicated gpu the igpu on the cpu is just wasted. They can literally have an advantage over the competition and lock in customers for the cpu and gpu if somehow they can leverage that advantage. Their has to be some pipeline of work that the igpu can do without any penalty This is performance left on the table. With all this low level api in an ideal world they would squeeze every ounce of performance from all their hardware with the right code. imo.

Click to expand...

That is called hybrid graphics. AMD already tried it with Llano, and trinity, and richland. It was a massive support nightmare. You think dual GPU was a royal PITA? Try doing it with two completely different spec GPUs with wildly different performance. With DX11/12, its become so hard its just not worth it.

I had a laptop that supported this. A K53TA-BBR6 asus laptop, with llano and a 6650m. When it works, it was pretty cool, but outside of just cause 2 I never got it to work consistently, and then it broke with catalyst 13.4 and was never fixed.

n3o127 said:

Was that last month (maybe month before) where Steam stats show more 4090's that any (all) of AMD cards -- not real sold on the idea to keep making the slower cards but not make faster cards and that will sell more cards theory -- more power to them if some how that works for them.

Click to expand...

That doesn’t make sense. AMD has 15% market share on the steam survey, but the 4090 has less then 1%.

Benses said:

That doesn’t make sense. AMD has 15% market share on the steam survey, but the 4090 has less then 1%.

Click to expand...

Here: Steam: In May 2024, the RTX 4090 was in 0.96% of gaming PCs running Steam, which is more than any individual AMD GPU. For AMD (or anyone) to say AMD doesn't give hoots about going up against the RTX 4090, its market share and sales AMD dreams of and to surpass -- Personally, short of rays the 7900 XTX is in fact able trade blows (in res people play) and would have loved to see 2nd gen 7950 XTX released even if costed bit more.

I'd have to agree with AMD here, only a few people can afford to go with the top tier of graphics cards so to chase that niche segment that's already captured by nVidia is a financial mistake. Better to concentrate on the mid-tier to low-end part of the market where a vast majority of the people are in.

I don’t have a problem with that. AMD needs another Polaris. Remember how great the RX 470/570 and 480/580 were to budget tier and midrange systems? Yeah, more of that. Something to compete with the RTX xx60 and xx70 cards.

Benses said:

That doesn’t make sense. AMD has 15% market share on the steam survey, but the 4090 has less then 1%.

Click to expand...

The steam survey is notoriously broken. It thinks my 5800x3d and 6800xt are in a laptop. LMAO. And it still wont pop up on my linux install.

AMD is willing to try anything except for embracing a software infrastructure the way nVidia did.

Update another easy win for AMD is having developers fill those higher vram gpus ( AMD'S only advantage now) with higher quality textures without any compromise to performance. This would probably be the easiest win short term. Tech media will praise AMD for having higher vram. Gamers will win with higher quality textures without any performance penalty.

Video Games' quality been in decline for the past decade or so!
Maybe it's time for a good story/score games rather than enhancing Graphics.