Nvidia CEO: Radeon VII is lousy and nothing new

I was trying to point out that neither company went unaffected by the crypto crash.

 

meanwhile Vega VII supports DirectML
source:
https://www.dsogaming.com/news/amd-...to-nvidias-deep-learning-super-sampling-dlss/

https://www.overclock3d.net/news/gp..._supports_directml_-_an_alternative_to_dlss/1

Fingers crossed for all GCN users

 

Damn, I feel like I am back in 2005 when new tech was coming out left and right. This stuff is getting exciting.

 

DirectML works on all DX12 class hardware - on top of that it can fallback to the CPU.

I also want to point out that comparing DirectML to DLSS doesn't really make sense. DirectML is a framework for running deep learning applications, DLSS is an application that would run on top of something like DirectML.

 

famous last words..

 

I guess you missed this part.

 

-- DirectML -- ​

A component of Windows Machine Learning. Integrated within current Windows builds (native support). Utilizes GPU for Hardware-Acceleration; in event none is available / falls back to CPU.

Supported on all DX12 compatible hardware.

• NVIDIA Kepler & above.
• AMD Radeon 7000-series & above.
• Intel Haswell (4th Gen) iGPUs & above.

Some slides with more information ...

​

 

Missed what? Hypocrisy? Asking AMD to deliver same performance for less than you are willing to pay to nVidia?
I did ask for purpose. Honestly, people should pre-order GPUs via crowd funding sites. And as long as GPU meets promised requirements, they would have no option to back out.
That way company could see real interest backed by real money. Not bunch of kiddies kidding around.

But instead people have claims about what company should make. Without realizing that such product will not sell and themselves will not buy.

 

While I agree with you, the thing is, with a pricetag like Nvidia's AMD would lose more sales than Nvidia because people are used to AMD being cheaper. It's just a habit to expect that... also, timing is a thing... many complaints show that being late with equal performance to a 1080TI doesn't help the opinion of the product when interpreting the numbers in the charts. People who want to spend 1200$ or more on a GPU don't wait for it to be released two years after the competition has that card's match already... it's just not that easy to pin things down to the price itself.

In general you are right, like it has been in the past, if AMD releases competitive products at the same time, they grab market shares. We all know this info graphic for market shares... when the releases between the GPU manufacturers were closer, AMD's share also was bigger.

 

I think you are misunderstanding what I wrote. You asked me if I wanted AMD to release an overpriced card and I don't think anyone wants that. Them releasing a competitively priced card would bring Nvidia's prices down.

 

Thing is that AMD did not and will not have finances similar to nVidia for GPU development unless people are willing to pay same money for same GPU performance.
AMD does not have motivation to release such products which would compete with top nVidia's dogs.

If they hit technological jackpot with Navi, they may release GPUs competitive with nVidia's high end at lower price, but that's where it starts and ends. It is just target of opportunity.
AMD's primary goal is profitability with reasonable profit margins. And that means to make GPUs which are affordable.

Same goes for Radeon 7. It is just target of opportunity. They shown GPU as gaming. Availability may be pretty poor as primary target for GPU are servers and gamers get partially defective chips. And on top of that, it is still great compute card which does better than any nVidia's card in same market.
And that means if gamer is slow at buying it, compute crowd will not hesitate.

 

You bought that "overpriced" card. (Using your word for it.)
But would not buy same from AMD. I understood exactly.

 

Yes, I don't see a single thing wrong or to which I wouldn't agree to.

Yet, it doesn't change much... people who want to buy the top line products don't wait 2 years for a 1080TI equivalent for the same price. I think they did a really well job even getting to the 2080 and bringing the battle back to Nvidia, but that doesn't help if I already bought this performance two years ago for a comparable amount of money. All in all, as a customer and enthusiast, there's nothing I could do to make it magically better for myself to buy AMD, no matter how one wants...

I too wish that the computing crowd picks up AMD's new cards, I really do, but I don't spend 700$ now to be nice to AMD from the goodness of my heart... like you said yourself, why should they make a card matching the competition cheaper than the competition? Why should I pay the same two years later when I can have it earlier and enjoy it sooner? That would be just as unlogical as offering a new card on a brand new node which matches Nvidia's 700$ card for 350$.

And that's exactly AMD's dilemma... good card, just at the wrong time. I hope that Navi does indeed show the improvements people hope for, so that it matches the 2080TI, even if it only works with AMD's 7nm against Nvidia's 12nm(?) node.
But the question remains:

If in 2019, AMD would release a card that matches the 2080TI and costs well above 1100$, would you buy it?
Since the answer probably will be "no", you might see why it's not as easy as just pointing at the price and deciding what card to buy. Because, if I'd want to pay that kind of money, I'd jump onto the Nvidia bandwagon now, buy a 2080TI. Not wait another half a year to get a card that doesn't work with my Gsync screen, for instance, etc.

But you too are right, the highest end segment is not AMD's battleground, they earn their money in the more normal market, and it keeps them going. If I wouldn't have a Gsync screen, my own decisions might look quite different as well in the scenario I talked about in the paragraph above. But... that's just not how it is.

 

Not sure what your point is? I clearly stated that it is the only choice for people who want to game in 4k ultra which is what I am doing. I never said people shouldn't buy them or wouldn't buy them. I just said the price is higher than we would like it because of the lack of competition. Stop turning my comment into something it isn't please.

 

I will clarify by example. Which you may recognize.

Large portion of our 'enthusiastic' forum members went with:
"AMD bring good, cheap CPU, so intel lowers prices and I can buy intel's chip."

That by itself gives absolutely no incentive to AMD to reduce their CPU prices or bring any better product.

A lot of members got it, yet it is still around a bit. They did realize that CPU situation was that bad because AMD was ignored last time they had good CPU products. But on GPU front, this mentality did not change at all.

nVidia is bigger dog and dictates prices. That's because people will pay them anything they ask. Unless they are willing to do same for AMD, AMD should not release competitive products in terms of performance at lower price.

It is enough that AMD well undercuts nVidia with bread and butter GPU like RX-580. Above that they do not need to release price competitive GPUs. Those will be mostly misused to get nVidia's HW and will not earn AMD any mindshare. RX-580 does it well enough. When Navi comes, this function will move to higher performance category. But do not expect lower price. AMD did learn their lesson and does not put higher end GPUs in way they would undercut nVidia. No reason to reduce profit margins when same action does not increase sales.

People are in situation of their own making.

 

Here is my rationale for this:
- > I do not ask AMD to make expensive GPU I have no intent to buy. (I would not buy 2080Ti performance for $1100. I would start to consider GPU with such performance at $900. Would not ask twice about price at $800.)
- > I do not expect AMD to ever produce GPU purposed to force nVidia to reduce price. (AMD is not here to control nVidia's prices. We are. We hold all the cards=money in this game.)

AMD stating that Radeon 7 is equal to RTX 2080 and their exactly same MSRP is clear message:
"We are not here to make your purchases of nVidia's HW any cheaper."

And unless people realize that AMD sees what nVidia's customers do and want. And that they (AMD) are pissed about it, situation will not change.

You, yourself are absolutely right. And that hypocrisy I wrote about is not yours.

On my personal level, I can go and buy 2x 2080Ti from computer budget I have left from last year and still have cash to upgrade from 8C/16T to 12C/24T as/if AMD releases them. It is that I do not support that price tag. I would support it in case it brought both types of improvements we were getting till now.

1st: year-to-year performance per $ spent improvement
2nd: performance per $ scaling up and down
This means that with small performance bump 2080Ti brought 2,5 years after 1080Ti release, I expect it to have exactly same MSRP at worst. And if there is this $1200 GPU, I expect it to have performance well above $700 2080Ti.
To put it simply. If nVidia followed usual trends, 2080Ti would cost ~$700. And if there was $1200 card, it would be 25~35% faster. And this percentage is practically performance which nVidia owns to people at each price tag down to 2070. Only 2060 is reasonably priced for what it delivers.

 

QFT.

 

Yes I agree, people's expectations usually are the big problem in perceived quality, or worth of a buy of a GPU. I honestly did not expect AMD to even meet 2080 performance, then again, Nvidia's current generation doesn't offer such a big boost that Navi might indeed close the gap more than before. That's also why Vega2 isn't a bad card in my personal opinion. It's more the when and where that keeps it from being 1:1 to the 2080. Not yet, that is.

Also, I do agree with the current pricing and performance increase situation on the 2080TI. I too could afford it, but it just doesn't feel like the buy I want to make, not like back in the day when I switched to the 1080TI, which gave me a considerable boost to my 980 SLI configuration.

 

Well I don't know about other people but that's not me anyways. I would have no problem buying an amd product provided it was the better option for gaming. I used to have an all amd rig. Usually with competition, one company will lower it's price slightly to gain sales over the other company. Which is why I said it would be great if amd tried to make a comeback and released a 2080ti competitor, without waiting until the 2080ti was last gen, to give people some options and take from nvidias profits. If they got in the habbit of doing this, I'm not sure if Nvidia would price their cards so high if people knew amd would come around shortly after with a better priced card.

 

Yes, nice that you had AMD systems. I guess it would be hard to find older person around who did not.
But all you wrote about again is: "nVidia's pricing reduction in reaction to AMD's products."
And just added "AMD may become option for some."

But as AMD projects poor sales of any product, count in manufacturing, repairs, ... Having no product is often better than having product which does not sell in sufficient volume.

When (and if) AMD releases nicely priced products, I'll be happy as you will. But I would rather see people to show at least 1/2 of respect AMD treats them with.
And as I wrote, AMD is angry on GPU front. (Yes, sign of weakness on human level. "Being angry because someone does not recognize your strength.")

But I hope (likely as AMD do) that people will open their eyes as result. And start treating nVidia<->AMD in similar fashion as they do intel<->AMD. Anywhere near objectively is good.

One can objectively go and say: "Sorry AMD, Radeon 7 is not good gaming GPU. You are selling yet another Compute GPU as gaming."
For me, AMD does not have Gaming product above RX-580, and that's why gaming performance/$ was not exactly good. But I recognize that it is Compute GPU and that it has its use there.

Situation we are in now was understandable (and predictable) within 2 months from Vega 56/64 release. If you can find those threads and my critique there. I would say I gave it more hammering than it deserved.

And I can say that I did wrote about different "leaks" and what will be consequence if they are true. RX-590 one before Radeon 7 hint.
RX-590 release told us that Navi is either not very close or will perform above it. Now we have radeon 7, therefore you can expect that AMD will not replace it with Navi.
Therefore Navi will fill space of older Vega 56/64 1st. Shortly after it will scale down to replace Polaris. (Unless there is still need to produce 14nm GPUs at GloFo.)
And then much later it will jump to 2080(Ti) territory.

But Chiplets on CPU shift things too. Especially AMD using that "I/O hub" even on Ryzen (Top-Bottom strategy). Having similar "I/O hub" designed for GPU Chiplets, and suddenly You have 4 times 20CUs on one card. Comfortably outperforming even 2080Ti-successor at much lower manufacturing cost. But this is really vaporware till we see actual Ryzen having 2 chiplets and therefore 12C/24T (or even 16C/32T). Because we need to see if those "I/O hubs" are good at memory bandwidth management and more importantly "chiplet to chiplet context switching".
My guess is 2020Q2 for AMD to deliver that top-dog-GPU. This will shift depending on Ryzen 3000 prices.
we may find out that "I/O hub" + 2 chiplets is cost efficient solution. And then AMD will have much bigger reason to push it down to GPUs sooner.

Don't take it bad or as personal attack. I do not really mean to bash you or anyone else. I just want people to realize situation we are in. And way they do affect it. That will save a lot of people a lot of frustration.