AMD Radeon (big NAVI) again rumored to get 80 Compute units

No,I don't think so.
I pointed out card availability that makes up a huge chunk of the overall sales numbers and you didn't include.
amd can't outsell nvidia if they have several times fewer units available for sale.

 

290X was faster than the 780Ti while was cheaper. It also aged much better because even today you find the 290X/390X 4/8GB version in the mid range of benchmarks, while the 780Ti is down the bottom if manage to run a game at all with that pitiful 3GB VRAM.
FuryX suffered from the 4GB ram size yet you forget it was going against the 980 not the 980ti at the price bracket.
Same applied to the Vega 64 which was priced against the GTX1080 (official MSRP) and has aged much better than the GTX1080 let alone the Vega 56 who cleaned up anything bellow GTX1080 because at it's price had no competitor.

Also the 5700XT was supposed to come out Sept-Oct 2018 not July 2019 and you forget there is also the Radeon VII in the market.

 

incorrect.it cost same as 980ti.if you have weak memory it's easy to check that.

V64 came almost a year after 1080,with some crazy power draw and availability was low for months.Nvidia released 1070Ti too.And as for aging "much better",it is incorrect as well

https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Graf...s/Rangliste-GPU-Grafikchip-Benchmark-1174201/

https://www.computerbase.de/thema/grafikkarte/rangliste/#diagramm-performancerating-2560-1440

they're the same now,they were the same before.

 

Yes and they're equally stupid.

I didn't say it was. But here's the thing: Nvidia is the one with the more reputable brand name, so, people buy them because of that. A lot of AMD's fans (when talking GPUs) care more about value and supporting the underdog, so it's a different reason.

What are you basing this on? It clear at all who will have the overall better product. I think it is likely Nvidia will still have something faster, but we're not to the point that they're running laps around AMD like in previous generations.

 

Up to 1 million units of 2080 TI's sold up to date. (06/Dec/2018)

Did a quick google search, It's not that small of a market as you may think man. These 2080 Ti's are sold like hotcakes in many areas not just gaming. Professional use, Research, you name it.

Super computers......

Up to 1 million units sold and that was (06/Dec/2018)!!!

It's not a small market by any means. Those cards are a sweet spot for top tier gaming and "Professional" use.

Not to mention as much as I don't like it...mining.....

 

cuda and tensor sell quite a chunk of those

 

Not just GPU but CPU too. How many people bought the 7600k in the summer of 2017 despite it having only 4c/4t because intel was better at gaming?

 

They need to keep working on the drivers but they have been very stable for me since maybe February. Don't have any problems anymore right now and i kind of like Adrenaline UI.

 

You're right except for aging part. As a past 1070 owner i can tell you it did not age well at all. So bad that it almost looked like nVidia purposely did it.

 

Why? The 5700XT is very close to a 2070 Super and it doesn't feel like the card is the best they could do. My card is running in the 60 something celcius while playing games. Power consumption is way below the 2080 TI. It feels they could have squeezed more performance.

To me it feels like the 5700 XT was a beta card for the new RDNA architecture kind of like RTX was a beta at raytracing. They had many problems with the drivers and it's a new architecture. It feels like their focus was put on RDNA 2 and next gen consoles right after they released the 5700 XT.

 

Here's the Guru3D review of the 780 Ti - It clearly shows the 780 Ti ahead of the 290x in all games except Hitman. Furthermore, the 780 Ti was an excellent overclocker, where the 290x had very little overclocking ability.

For buyers who are picking up a halo product when it's new, the performance 5+ years down the line is probably not a major concern. The value there is for buyers on the used market. If you want to debate the relative value of older cards, that's a different conversation than the rumor mill before cards launch.

I'm not forgetting anything. I was talking about the rumors that were floating around before each of those cards came out. You're talking about their market positioning after they launched.

I literally mentioned the Radeon VII in the post you quoted...

 

why ?

again,no data supports that 1080 let v64 an inch.
let alone it was some sort of catastrophe.
vega wins some in amd titles,nvidia wins some in nvidia titles,in most they're the same.
those pcgh and computerbase charts are from may and august 2020.

maybe you're just asking too much.when I upgraded my 980ti 1.5GHz in summer 2016 it already couldn't handle a smooth 60 at 1440p in a lot of games.it's 2020 and 1070 sits alongside 1660 super cards,it's really entry level gaming.

 

I'm ready for AMD and Nvidia to lay there cards on the table. Lets see what they both have. People will argue about every aspect of every rumor until both are out.

 

This could be AMD's new 7970.

Hopefully what ever happens it causes some competition with nvidia high end cards.

 

780Ti was good card until AMD drivers of April 2014 came out. After that bite the dust.
Also was £285 for custom cards over £530 (almost double) for the 780Ti.

Just a year later.
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_geforce_gtx_980_ti_strix_review,13.html

As for not having OC headroom 390X prove the argument wrong as it was an overclocked 290X.

 

It's not a long shot at all. People in a desperate situation will become more innovative and daring. Nvidia never stopped advancing like Intel did, so I don't see Nvidia suffering Intel's fate, but nonetheless there's no reason to doubt AMD's capabilities. Sony and MS are also betting on AMD, once again. In fact AMD is far less behind on GPUs than it was on CPUs. It just looks bad because AMD hasn't even tried to reach the top for years, settling for high mainstream and below.

 

I think they tried.
hbm2 and clc'd cards with 4096 sp/16gb is not a crack at mainstream.
looks like they tried with everything they could.

 

Seeing how it was still based on the dusty old GCN architecture from 10 years ago, it's not much different from what Intel is now trying to do by upping the clocks like a madman, heedless of the power cost. It wasn't a genuine effort to reach the top. However, by now AMD already has the RDNA architecture, which is not super behind Nvidia. Unlike Intel, AMD doesn't seem content to stay long in the tooth. This is why I say it's not a long shot to expect a decent show from AMD.

 

No they didn't try. It was not even a good half attempt making a compute GPU a gaming card. Smartly AMD focused on CPU's the last 5 years and its paid off and should pay off huge over the next two years as Intel keeps tripping on itself. Personally the last AMD GPU I bought was a 5870 and nothing Nvidia had at the time came close well at least for a few months. Since then AMD hasn't made a good attempt and for me I wouldn't have even considered and AMD GPU after that. Navi is there first go at competing since those days. I am not even going to guess how well they do but this is a real attempt since they finally split the compute and gaming chips.

 

Well that's not how it ended. The 290X got faster through driver improvements and game improvements. The 290X ended up on par with or sometimes faster than the GTX 970.