Gibson have had some terrible years where quality control went out the window. Fender on the whole are more consistant. On the otherhand, the cost of these graphics cards are a joke compared to guitars. Great graphics cards are cheap in comparison :bang: Relative to the monies we're talking about here, though, you're going to find it hard to find a £150-240 guitar that can compare to a £500+ one. Happy tuning if you buy a £100 guitar.
is 490 supposed to be announced this summer or later this year? It might be worth actually waiting for that card if it comes out in next few months.
It's also making their existing cards look very good due to price drops. AMD are saying 60fps in Hitman at 1080p OK, look at this chart http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_geforce_gtx_1080_g1_gaming_review,14.html and these products https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd/radeon-r9-390x With the knowledge that the RX 480 8GB will be roughly £240, then, for £30 more for 25% more performance? Yes please. It looks like a win for consumers.
They said the 480 will be the highest Polaris based product this year. 490 could be small vega? Just guessing.
GTX 780 launched at $649. The 1080 MSRP isn't anything extraordinary. Only the demand is high so retailers are pricing them higher, as with most new top end Nvidia cards. Once the market settles a little bit, we'll see them under MSRP.
Just out of interest... can any of you remember AMD or Nvidia ever coming out with a new generation of gpus and aiming at mid range, when they were already behind at high end? I can't if I'm honest, but maybe I'm just blank. It's weird to see AMD being second and yet aiming their new cards at mid range.
In terms of power-usage, temps, cooling/noise, price/performance sure. In terms of raw fps? not at stock. The only thing you can hope for is that it overclocks like a bitch. If they're getting anywhere close to 2.4Ghz though, it'll be an excellent card.
Let's be honest here, AMD doesn't need to worry about the 1080 because the X80 series has always been a 2% card and hardly anything for them to worry about. The 970 was a huge pita for AMD and i think they worry about 1070, but i don't think they need to worry to much about 1070 because it's too expensive for what it is. Let's not talk/think about 5% of PC gamers that are enthusiasts because either nVidia needs to lower the price of 1070 drastically or produce a sub 200$ card with great performance. AMD will reach the masses with these powerful mid range cards unless nVidia does something about it. 980 power for 200$ and that price will drop too. 980 power is more than enough for 1080p gaming and it wasn't that long ago it cost £600 and AMD is releasing that same power a little later for less than 200 pound. I'm not a huge fan of AMD but i still think they can be the "peoples champion".
Development cost went up. Especially if result does not end up being used in wide variety of products. But market is now much larger. USA may have been quite big market 20 years ago, but here in central/eastern Europe... Even having gaming GPU made you odd ball. 10 years ago, gaming was already super popular in every place where people could afford it. Today, even girls play games. Basically growth in industry is done by either addressing people who were not involved before. Or by opening new market. (Some country which was not rich enough to spend time gaming.)
This is totally my uneducated guess, but it seems to me AMD either was overestimating its HBM experience or it simply didn't have the money to make a high-end card still sticking to the old memory, like Nvidia did with 1070 and 1080 (the X isn't so special, at least not yet). I reckon AMD was originally imagining it could get Vega out sooner, to make a complete set with these Polaris GPUs. Like you said, it seems too strange otherwise. But then again, a company in financial trouble could try to pull off strange things because it didn't have a choice.
Oh they will, or do you honestly think Nvidia will just sit there and let AMD take over the mid range market? No way in hell. Nvidia are a step ahead of AMD atm and I'm sure they're quietly sat there, enjoying all this Polaris hype just to announce a value card to compete against it whenever they find feasible. Maybe not sub $200, but somewhat more expensive than the 480 and that will still be good enough for it to outsell the 480.
Yeah, it's definitely a factor and I was going to mention it but there's a bunch of other factors and ultimately they are all irrelevant because the pricing is generally the same as it was 10 years ago. X800XT PE was $500 the 6800 Ultra was $600. The 9800XT was $500 in 2004, that's $630 now. So again I don't really see why everyone keeps saying they cost so much now. http://www.anandtech.com/show/2376 AMD has tried this exact strategy before. It was right after the 2900XT vs 8800GTX. The only difference now is that they control the majority of the console market. That and there is no 8800GT comparable Nvidia card out.
That was slightly different. AMD tried a completely new approach to building a gpu and the 2900xt was supposed to be a top competitor. Only it failed, terribly.
Are we looking at the same graphs? If the 470 is is within 5% of the 970, I can easily imagine (we have to wait until the 29nth) a 480 getting on Fury levels. That's what I'm talking about. And I can't see those cards clocking above 1.5GHz. In fact I would be very very happy if they reached 1.5GHz reliably, but I don't think so.
The 2900XT, yeah but I linked the 3870. It was the launch of a new card/series/architecture rev and it was marketed towards the midrange segment. Anandtech even talked about AMD's "small die strategy" with the 4xxx series release (http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556/2). This was also all done partially under the leadership of Raja who worked as technical director for AMD until 2009, before he left for Apple, and is now back. Again, the only real difference is that they have console control and consequently DX12 control + Nvidia doesn't already have a competitor with that price range out (so AMD can potentially beat them to market). They also have MDA, which they can push to make better multi-GPU situations (if they push it).
Yeah, you're right, that was the last time this happened. We all know how that ended, 8800gt completely dominated. Even then, it's a strange move from AMD.
I got a £100 LP which is compareable, never need to tune it unless I use other tunings that standard E. Most £100 guitars have issues with staying in tune, especially when it comes to floating tremolos, but that can be fixed without much money. As for graphic cards, they are still expensive compared to how long they last. I mean, on a old guitar you can always play the latest songs, try that with the latest games on a high end graphic card that is 4 generations ago. Not that I would buy a 470 or 480 for that matter (waiting for my 1080), but they aim for the right spot and will come at the same quality as their Nvidia counterparts. As for price, if the 1070 is threatened, I bet that Nvidia has priced the chip high enough to start with and is able to give it a massive price dump to keep up the competition, on the other hand, we haven't seen the 1060 yet ^^
