Radeon HD 9000 series

If we're talking about making money, frankly, the real cash right now is in mobile, as in phones and tablets. Qualcomm, Samsung, and NVIDIA are making a killing here, Intel's just trying to scratch the surface, and AMD just doesn't have the R&D cash. Major arrow in the knee for both major CPU manufacturers.

Ivy said:

AMDs major gain of the console deal isnt the profit margin, thats a standart US mentality and thats why the market is in such a mess. I do feel sorry for all those money hunters. Anyway, AMDs major gain will be the game support, they can now start to get more close to devs and technology. Prehaps we can finally break free of proprietary solutions even and with some hard work start to create a new GPGPU age able to hit gamers too. The future will be interesting and amongst all the money greed, the stuff considered equally important to AMD is to have proper support for theyr causes/concerns and that sort of advantage may be granted now.

Intel will be attacking both, AMD and Nvidia in the GPU market, at least low to mid range in the not to far future. Because Intel, such as most companys, is a money digger and theyr CPU is already unable to be beaten. So whats ulitmately left is to destroy and dominate the mainstream graphic market, in order to make theyr CPUs even more popular but inside a integrated shape and not discrete. Discrete stuff isnt truly the cash cow anymore and to much competition so Intel wont interfere. Intel simply is trying to make theyr CPU and IGP shine better than anything else so they can dominate the entire mainstream market for almost any CPU and GPU solutions (80% wont need a discrete GPU anymore). So, many investors are very insecure how much more impact Intel is able to create, because its a pretty powerful company.

However, i could care less, im almost certain that AMDs stuff may work out at some point and they will find theyr market. More important than the ellbow cash cow fight, is the hard truth and the gain we are getting for the overall advancement of our gaming software (and hardware). I think AMD is able to contribute a lot and Nvidia too, while Intel is not truly a gamers future dream but more of a grave digger i feel. Because they attack possible advancement by either delaying own possibilitys (because it will grant more bucks) and/or attacking a possible force and finally weakening them.

Click to expand...

well said.

Indeed, AMD gained an advantage through the console deal, and now games like BF4 will be made centered around AMD optimization, which in a way, helps AMD saves R&D to 'optimize' the game 'after' it is released (to them). I read somewhere, AMD doesn't even view NVIDIA as main competition, it has always been INTEL.

I feel AMD might start to further integrate their graphics onto their CPU, as the discrete GPU market is only appealing to a relatively small group of people.

If you look at AMD's operative in the war against Intel, you will see that AMD never tries to get the top crown jewel, instead it tries to dominate the mid-section, where it is easier to mass market at a lower price. That being said, I don't think AMD will put too much money to create something to 'beat the Titan' so to say, rather they will produce something that will completely obliterate the 760 in cost : performance ratio... that's my prediction.

Knufire said:

If we're talking about making money, frankly, the real cash right now is in mobile, as in phones and tablets. Qualcomm, Samsung, and NVIDIA are making a killing here, Intel's just trying to scratch the surface, and AMD just doesn't have the R&D cash. Major arrow in the knee for both major CPU manufacturers.

Click to expand...

I never paid more than 40 bucks for a phone a single time in my life. So im probably not a good example for a cash cow.

Anyway, no one can beat Samsung in the long run, Nvidia will soon see the force and feel it no matter how much Tegra-Cow chips they hand out. I will gladly watch how much longer Nvidia seems to make a "killing" there. Samsung did destroy the TV market (japanese market is struggling now) and will destroy phone market by beating them all and wipe out competition. Ultimately whats left is a wiped and cleaned battlefield. Intel is probably only scratching surface at current time when it comes to mobile market (phone, tablet, laptop) but they got the power (R+D cash) to be a serious threat to anyone standing in theyr way and they will try to set theyr foot into those fields because its where the cash is located and thats in Intels (and Samsungs) interest.

I always just hear mobile mobile mobile and its making me crazy that people really think that they did even see the world. Truth is they know close to nothing about the real world, else they may not create a isle of trash in the middle of the ocean without even knowing about, and if they do it will be ignored the moment they got the knowledge. Its just a trashy lifestyle in my mind, not the real "mobility", taking care of every single aspect that comes with mobility and the junk created by the "throw away society". Noticeable to say that the mobile phones and general most mobile devices are one of the devices creating one of the highest recycling issues from any device ever produced, because its almost impossible to be recycled properly (so im not against "big systems" when it comes to those matters).

Uhm i kinda feel its to much OT now, ultimately i do enjoy to see a new AMD "discrete" GPU series soon, no matter cash cow or not. Prehaps AMD will be crawling inside a dirty path of endless missunderstanding and low sells/income but at least there is some enthusiasts believing in them and settings trust into more values other than just raw cash cow matters. People that want to see advancement for general software and gaming industry and believe into them regaining strength (sadly the mobile/social/online life was hurting it a lot the past years) and finally once again able to increase the popularity of the "static lifestyle".

trueblack said:

well said.

Indeed, AMD gained an advantage through the console deal, and now games like BF4 will be made centered around AMD optimization, which in a way, helps AMD saves R&D to 'optimize' the game 'after' it is released (to them). I read somewhere, AMD doesn't even view NVIDIA as main competition, it has always been INTEL.

I feel AMD might start to further integrate their graphics onto their CPU, as the discrete GPU market is only appealing to a relatively small group of people.

If you look at AMD's operative in the war against Intel, you will see that AMD never tries to get the top crown jewel, instead it tries to dominate the mid-section, where it is easier to mass market at a lower price. That being said, I don't think AMD will put too much money to create something to 'beat the Titan' so to say, rather they will produce something that will completely obliterate the 760 in cost : performance ratio... that's my prediction.

Click to expand...

AMD already had their GPUs in the previous gen console(s) didn't they? Assuming that is correct, that doesn't seem to help much in the way of optimization of games did it? Why do you feel it would be different this time around?

AMD's graphics are already deep lodged in its transistor laden rear. They have the best iGPU on the market already.

Sonys PS3 was running on a Nvidia GPU, so not every previous gen console was using a Radeon. Nowadays thats different, but even more important, the 2 "true next gen" consoles are using the GCN architecture, the by far most advanced GPU AMD ever created so its not comparable the the previous "old gen". On top of that even the CPU interface is from AMD, allowing further optimization toward theyr likings (massive multi core, 8 cores to be exactly is a great benefit to AMD CPUs). Massively multi threaded games may become the future, and Intel frankly isnt doing much into multi CPU anymore, they are stick to 4 cores for a eternity already. But the next gen consoles are supporting massive multi core CPUs and GCN (prehaps even DirectCompute GPGPU), thats both a advantage to AMD without doubt.

AMD has the Xbox360 though... so my point still remains. At the time of the Xbox360 release it used a neutered R600 (3 series?) AMD GPU in it. So it has had the last several years to accomplish what TBlack was discussing. Perhaps now that it is in both consoles things will change, but it certainly didnt for just the Xbox.

The Xbox360 allone wasnt enough of force in order to grant AMD the necessary support but nowadays it looks like the force is strong enough to make a change and granting the best support AMD ever had. So AMD is not in a bad spot at all, but as usual, a lot of work have to be done to make something great out of it. No matter how it turns out, i wish both of em AMD and Nvidia good luck. I hope AMDs new 9000 (or whatever its called) series will be able to challenge Nvidia one more time, its the challenge most enjoyable for a pretty long time regarding IT environment.

Perhaps it wasn't enough, but they didn't seem to do squat with it. I wouldnt hang my hat on this being the answer, considering what history has told us. Hopefully I am wrong though.

ivanlabrie said:

Yeah, indeed...must be fu playing with those and making them fight

I too wanna see AMD beat the 780 at least at stock, and have good oc potential.

Click to expand...

That 780 really is a monster. Looks like it runs for something like $640 ish

trueblack said:

well said.

Indeed, AMD gained an advantage through the console deal, and now games like BF4 will be made centered around AMD optimization, which in a way, helps AMD saves R&D to 'optimize' the game 'after' it is released (to them). I read somewhere, AMD doesn't even view NVIDIA as main competition, it has always been INTEL.

I feel AMD might start to further integrate their graphics onto their CPU, as the discrete GPU market is only appealing to a relatively small group of people.

If you look at AMD's operative in the war against Intel, you will see that AMD never tries to get the top crown jewel, instead it tries to dominate the mid-section, where it is easier to mass market at a lower price. That being said, I don't think AMD will put too much money to create something to 'beat the Titan' so to say, rather they will produce something that will completely obliterate the 760 in cost : performance ratio... that's my prediction.

Click to expand...

Those are some really good words right here. This being the case, how do you guys think this will change the high end GPU market?

Sorry about the double post. Got too excited.

first a link for EarthDog
http://techreport.com/news/24976/re...e-3-games-to-be-optimized-exclusively-for-amd

Similar is with Sony related programers, like NaughtyDog, which made famous games like "The Last of Us".

AMD's victory on the console is nearly ALL about getting these games programmers to use THEIR R&D to optimize around their card, at least, that what the spokesman from AMD seem to imply when he said, "the profit are good, but only secondary".

I think AMD will run a minimal budget to get highend top GPU, if their team of remaining experts gets a breakthru, that it is their hardwork out of a minimal budget. The roadmap of Nvidia is much more aggressive, with Maxwell supposedly another 'magnitute' better than the Kepler as well. (we will see, as for now it is 'so they say' only.)

My prediction:
TOP GPU for the next 3 years: Nvidia, near undisputed.
TOP CPU for the next 3 years: INTEL, undisputed.
AMD will likely move towards the mid section, offering mid-range, but cost effective choice. Which will keep AMD alive and well (if they do it right. or if Intel doesn't slash price to KILL them.)


PS: there's an update from the IGN story:
The IGN story has now been updated with an official statement indicating that DICE's partnership with AMD "does not exclude DICE from working with other partners to ensure players have a great experience across a wide set of PCs for all their titles." Additionally, AMD says its Gaming Evolved program "undertakes no efforts to prevent our competition from optimizing for games before their release." Nvidia should have early access to Battlefield 4 and other Frostbite-powered titles, allowing GeForce drivers to be optimized before games are released.

Thanks TB, that is a good sign for AMD. Hopefully more to come like that... I'm (still)not holding my breath though.

I was nervous about the whole thing until the updates at the end of the article!

nVIDIA monopolizing the high end sector can only mean increased GPU prices. Lets face it, for PC gamers and benchmark enthusiasts, couldnt that only mean that in 3 years we would see a price shift as in an nvidia GPU's price? i.e. something like ~$599 will be the new ~$499. If amd is shifting towards the mid-section, i don't know if i see any other way.

LegolasElf said:

nVIDIA monopolizing the high end sector can only mean increased GPU prices. Lets face it, for PC gamers and benchmark enthusiasts, couldnt that only mean that in 3 years we would see a price shift as in an nvidia GPU's price? i.e. something like ~$599 will be the new ~$499. If amd is shifting towards the mid-section, i don't know if i see any other way.

Click to expand...

isn't this already happening?

$1000 GPU these days.. 5 years ago, I would had call BS on that being a possibility.

AMD can compete in the high end gpu range...are you forgetting that the 7970 beats the 770/680? (clock for clock please, no stock benchies...cough kepler boost)

bluezero5 said:

isn't this already happening?

$1000 GPU these days.. 5 years ago, I would had call BS on that being a possibility.

Click to expand...

6 years ago the 8800 ultra launched at like 800 or 850. Not quite a cool grand but too close for my liking.

Edit: Google says it launched at $829.00

Actually Nvidia isnt that supreme anymore, AMD is absolutly keeping up in the high end market. Of course the new 700 series from Nvidia is beating AMD but it been released just a month ago. AMD may soon release a new series too.

I would never pay 1000 $ for a GPU but Nvidia can easely create that stuff by using a server GPU. R+D cost arnt that crazy doing so (most of the R+D is already done for another purpose) and as long as sufficient units available they can still make some money out of it. The GTX 780 is simply a heavely cutted down server GPU, its nothing mind blowing. The Titan itself is a slightly depleted server GPU with almost any features available (can easely be seen by its powerful double precision performance, most consumer GPUs are cutted down at that spot). AMD cant do that kind of stuff because they simply dont own such a server GPU at that time (7970 is basically the largest chip they ever made).

Still, its not something able to impress me, AMD got a good chance to keep up with Nvidia head to head when the new series is released. But because AMD got lesser R+D money, its harder for them to throw so many different stuff into the market such as Nvidia recently did.

Supertrucker said:

6 years ago the 8800 ultra launched at like 800 or 850. Not quite a cool grand but too close for my liking.

Edit: Google says it launched at $829.00

Click to expand...

And dont forget that the $ was higher value 6 years ago. Taking inflation into account, that GPU wasnt any cheaper than a 1000 $ GPU from 2013.

Taking inflation into account, on this calculator, that is only $933.

http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Calculators/Inflation_Rate_Calculator.asp

what's this with $1000 we talking about?

a top end rig some X yrs ago will cost more than just inflation adjustment.
As all computer parts are generally getting cheaper, just think about how much the Flat Screens has dropped in price, how much more RAM is now cheaper, and you see what I mean.

The fact that nvidia can maintain a product at that price, is already an achievement. As it is certainly out of my budget !!!!

Lol, "only". The first and last time I ever dumped 1k+ on gfx was a pair of 7800gtx for 550$ each. Its all about the 500 ish price window for me these days.