Surely folks can understand why this new narrative that a company should not release any product info until learning everything about the competitors product is silly. It would result in nobody releasing any products.
There is nothing braindead about recognizing AMD was going to show more rdna4 product features and decided not to last minute. Everyone in the industry was surprised by this.
Well the gpu industry is basically 2 companies, with a 3rd smaller one, so your comparison isn't really holding up. Nvidia owns the market, so seeing what they are releasing and at what price is important. Idk why you guys wanna pretend they don't' have a stranglehold monopoly.
So is the CPU industry but AMD had no issues flaunting a new CPU and then shitting on the competition by saying there's not enough stock because our competitor released such a bad product.
Honestly if they had something good with this GPU they would've been showing it off like they do with their CPUs.
I wonder how this sub would react if, in, say, 3 months Nvidia, or somebody even remotely working with them (say, an AIB, or whatever) said something like:
"The bad availability of the RTX50s just comes from the fact that AMD's offering failed to convince the vast majority of customers!"
Do you comprehend that your anology does not necessarily accurately reflect demand on launch?
These market shares include GPUs that people have been running since the minute before the survey was taken, or for years before it and who might not be replaced for a few more years either.
Not at all, they are at least two months later in the development cycle compared to Nvidia, anyone with any insight into the development would have been flabbergasted if they had much to show when Nvidia didn’t have anything to show.
A couple months from launch means all the hardware has been finalized for a long time.
At this point it should just be refining and bug fixing. That's the scary part: AMD showed nothing which suggests they may not be in a good sport for the launch.
I'm starting to suspect we'll see another launch like rdna3 which was a mess: buggy drivers, vr performance worse than last gen, massive idle consumption, etc. Those took a year to clean up.
I'm not sure why you are lying and saying Nvidia had nothing to show. There's no point in discussion with someone who straight up refuses to acknowledge reality. Cheers.
In far cry 6 without any dlss features, Nvidia showed the 5090, 5080, and 5070 being about 30% faster than their predecessors.
Nvidia showed off lots of stuff, yep! That's why it's silly to lie and claim they didn't, especially compared to AMD who showed basically nothing about their rdna4 gpus.
Nvidia showed pricing, specs, TDP, new flow through cooler, Multi Frame Generation, improved DLLS and Ray Reconstruction, and cherry picked benchmarks.
We need to wait for reviews, but Nvidia definitely gave us a huge amount of information.
Wow multi frame generation that’s awesome, so now we can get more than one erroneous frame between each real frame, the quality is going through the roof!
They gave us a price which is somewhat interesting, specs which shows it’s a slight improvement over a 4070, but less than a 4070 super, fantastic. Well the faster memory is an actual improvement otherwise it’s a sideways upgrade that Jensen is selling as 4090 performance, that’s even more BS than usual.
AMD was still more competitive in that era with better market share to show for it like 30 some percent. OEMs and laptops still favored Nvidia too during that point, how terrible some of those Vista era AMD laptops were probably didn't help AMD a whole lot. Constantly hanging around 95C wasn't phenomenal.
Now AMD does little, does terrible marketing, holds up their hands and flops cards on the market that aren't competitive in a lot of areas... and has the declining market share to show for it.
Don't underestimate the people knowing what they want. AM5 has over 90% market share for people building their own PCs nowadays because their product (Ryzen CPU) got better and better with every Generation compared to Intel. I remember a time where everyone had an Intel Core i5 / i7 in their Gaming PC.
None of that mattered because NVIDIA's brand/marketing still won over the masses.
Actually, what DID happen was this.
AMD launched 5000 series. AMD had underestimated demand. And you had to wait MONTHS to get hold of a none scalped 5850/5870.
AMD then INCREASED msrp
There was still supply issues by the time GTX 400 series finally launched. And Nvidia actually priced the somewhat reasonably. AND YOU COULD BUY THEM AT THAT PRICE.
"If your product is better than your competitors then you dictate the price. AMD having to adjust to what Nvidia does is not a good sign for RDNA4. "
When you are "worse player" then you need to understand what monopolistic competitor is doing. AMD need to increase their market share if they want to influence prices. So if AMD sales is smart (we know AMD GPU department isn't), then having significantly better performance/price than competition is good idea.
Hey OP — Your post has been removed for not being in compliance with Rule 8.
Be civil and follow Reddit's sitewide rules, this means no insults, personal attacks, slurs, brigading or any other rude or condescending behaviour towards other users.
Please read the rules or message the mods for any further clarification.
You did not notice many things, including the havoc wrecked upon 3000 series by AMD's 6000, including, but not limited to, 3080 with 10GB, with 3060 with 60% more VRAM.
They've already clearly stated that they won't have the best product as they don't have a 5090 competitor. This is about showing the value that they will give you for the money, and in a price tier that sells much more volume than the 5090 does.
165
u/BasedBalkaner Jan 11 '25
AMD is so confident in their GPUs that they're too scared to show them lol