Can I state that this is in my opinion the best move to make. AMD can go and throw a crap tonnes of money for the title of slightly faster or almost as fast as Nvidia’s 5090 TI Super, where both cards will retail $2000 and very few will buy them, or it makes a bang for buck, focusing on the $200-$500 market where most are waiting for basically a generational leap in performance to make the commitment to upgrade. The RX range like the 480-580 from AMD used to be the plan and even Intel has seen a gap in the market there.
The RDNA 2 vs Ampere generation featured the 6900 XT vs the 3090 in a really competitive showdown.
The RDNA 3 vs Ada generation sees AMD compete really strongly everywhere except the very very top. The 7900 XTX is cheaper and faster at raster than the 4080 and 4080 Ti in most cases (with worse efficiency and RT), for instance. You can make a competitive argument for either company at each pricing segment except Nvidia below $200 and AMD at the very very top.
That’s a farrrr cry from “the 8700 XT competes with the 5070, but past that there’s no AMD card”
It’s reminiscent of the RDNA 1 vs Turing, where the 6700 XT and 2070 were competitive but AMD had no answer for the 2080, let alone the 2080 Ti, except this time it’ll be more obvious since they’ll be a 5090 as well.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
Can I state that this is in my opinion the best move to make. AMD can go and throw a crap tonnes of money for the title of slightly faster or almost as fast as Nvidia’s 5090 TI Super, where both cards will retail $2000 and very few will buy them, or it makes a bang for buck, focusing on the $200-$500 market where most are waiting for basically a generational leap in performance to make the commitment to upgrade. The RX range like the 480-580 from AMD used to be the plan and even Intel has seen a gap in the market there.
The issue i think is that it reinforces the belief that Nvidia cards are faster and that AMD cards are cheap/budget,
AMD cards being just as fast (besides RT) with good/better value is one thing, but AMD being slower is a harder misconception to unravel
Misconception? What AMD card is faster than my 4090?
The RDNA 2 vs Ampere generation featured the 6900 XT vs the 3090 in a really competitive showdown.
The RDNA 3 vs Ada generation sees AMD compete really strongly everywhere except the very very top. The 7900 XTX is cheaper and faster at raster than the 4080 and 4080 Ti in most cases (with worse efficiency and RT), for instance. You can make a competitive argument for either company at each pricing segment except Nvidia below $200 and AMD at the very very top.
That’s a farrrr cry from “the 8700 XT competes with the 5070, but past that there’s no AMD card”
It’s reminiscent of the RDNA 1 vs Turing, where the 6700 XT and 2070 were competitive but AMD had no answer for the 2080, let alone the 2080 Ti, except this time it’ll be more obvious since they’ll be a 5090 as well.
Imo the last time AMD was truly competitive was way back with the 7970.
deleted by creator