So the 3000 series is really a Q1 2021 card. :)

That’s kind of glossing over the fact that performance wise they’ve also been kicking the crap out of AMD for many years. :)

Price/performance has been super-duper close, actually.

As a person who will never, ever buy a $1200 video card, I could care less what the top end looks like except as a view of the future.

Kinda, if you don’t look at the top-end and are willing to wait a year for AMD to match a mid-range product while using a ton more power every cycle.

Maybe in a limited range. My latest purchase was a 1080 and I don’t think AMD had much to compete with that at the time, from what I recall (I could be mistaken!). I think this generation is probably going to be different, though, where AMD is a lot more competitive.

Yeah, this is my recollection of the past few generations.

That is a ridiculous price, even accounting for the exchange rate. They should have sold last month.

They had the Vega64, released over a year later and using 65% more power. It didn’t sell.

Oh, all hail stusser with his opinions up in here again. :)

I stand by what I said, but each gen is a little different. This last one was a little rough for AMD. They are definitely playing catchup now.

I mean, the 20-series was so anemic and overpriced because they didn’t have any real competition. The fact that the 30-series is reasonably priced indicates to me that AMD has some nice cards coming our way (thank goodness!). Can’t wait to see what they have up their sleeves, even if I’m doubtful to purchase one myself. Too many bad experiences with AMD cards.

This really is sort of a sea-change moment for the industry, isn’t it.

That isn’t my opinion, it’s fact. AMD hasn’t competed at the enthusiast or top-end tiers for over 10 years. Their last really competitive cycle was in 2009 with the 5850/5870.

The RX480 was a great competitor at the $200 tier in 2016, and that’s the best they’ve done. Nothing for enthusiasts.

You’re right, and time is relative it’s been longer than I thought.

But, I only watch midrange and below where I actually care. And if someone says “I want a $200 video card whatcha got?” a lot of times AMD makes sense.

Sure, and AMD bulldozer CPUs made sense at very low pricepoints too. That didn’t make them successful, though.

Nvidia grew complacent with their 10 year winning streak. This coming cycle looks very good for AMD. Nvidia actually dropped prices on the 3070.

I feel like maybe you’re arguing something that is not my point at all.

I don’t even remember anymore though, I could be arguing a point that wasn’t a good response to whatever I started with. So I’m just going to stop because I don’t feel like going back and forth with you forever.

Umm, OK.

Anyway, I’m all for AMD competing. I had a 5850, that was a fantastic videocard. Even Nvidia fanboys (which sadly, do exist) should be happy they have competition. Drives prices down.

See?5

I think it’s more than that, personally. I think it has everything to do with leaning in to Ray tracing as hard as they did.

The best analogy I’ve come up with is electric cars. The early ones were expensive, didn’t go far, and didn’t have places to charge them. You were paying a premium to do a particular thing, but they didn’t really do that thing all that well. But all that time and money spent on developing related technologies pays off eventually, which is what we are now seeing.

Oh I agree. Let me rephrase a little bit: the reason Nvidia could go so hard at ray tracing 1.0 with only marginal performance gains at those price points was due to AMD not being able to compete at the time. AMD had an opportunity to eat their lunch and couldn’t do it.

Not really. To this day ray-tracing is a gimmick. Very few actual games support it, and the 20-series RT cores weren’t fast enough to turn everything on.

Next-gen consoles support RT, so we should see a lot more uptake next year.

Absolutely right, the piss-poor 20-series performance and pricing provided AMD with a huge opportunity that they completely failed to seize.