AMD Radeon RX 8000 RDNA 4 GPUs rumored to use slower 18 Gbps GDDR6 memory
- Thread starter DragonSlayer101
- Start date
m3tavision
Posts: 1,528 +1,275
The price of the RTX4090 went back up is because Professionals and Content Creators do NOT want to spend $3,200 on a Pro card for CUDA.The price for 4090 went up because of massive demand. I paid 1500 dollars on day one, and will be able to sell it for 1000 dollars when I upgrade to 5090 in ~6 months.
500 dollars "lost" for 2 years with top tier performance is great. Try that with an AMD card
AMD won't even have 4090 performance before RDNA5 in 2026.
AMD is not competiting in high-end anymore.
The sole purpose of RDNA4 is to regrab marketshare, because they lost tons with 7000 series.
GPU sales are on the up but AMD's RX 7000-series graphics cards are its least competitive in 20 years
Though it's worth noting overall more than 2.3 billion graphics cards have been sold since 2000, worth a staggering $482 billion.www.pcgamer.com
Sad but true. Lets hope AMD can win some back with RDNA4.
But for gaming CUDA is dead and RDNA is the king now.... that is why EVGA got out of the NV market and what you seem to not understand. I've been GAMING for over 30 years with a clan of ovr 20 life long friends. We share hardware woes and even swap sell and hand me down hardware PC component. We can afford any hardware we want & none of us care about CUDA. Bcz we all realize (and have seen ovr time) how the Gaming Industry trends.
RDNA is the wave..
Secondly, I have had my 7900XTX for ovr a year and I get more frames than several of my Clansmate's 4090. See this is how we know (for gamers) bullch!t walks.
There is a reason NVidia had to rebrand the 4080 3 times... it is because they couldnt convince Gamers that the "Nvidia tax" is worth it. Ada Lovelace is not gaming architecture, RDNA is...
Lastly, RDNA4 is monolithic single die GPU and RDNA5 is multi-chip coming out 5 months later... to fill in the high-end/Pro tiers for AMD Graphics.
The idea behind expanding AMD's RDNA5 patented Multi-chip GPU market to Professional levels, is bcz how well the 7900XTX did as the first consumer Multi-chip gaming GPU.. & now AMD has had 3 years of architectural engineering (from Navi 31's taping) to release a professional multichip design using advanced Infinity Fabric and HBM3 memory FOR GAMERS.
If you don't understand what that means, I can not help you. But most of the die hard gamers put away their green pom-poms a long time ago. Specially for those who buy a new GPU every year.
NVidia can't compete with RDNA5 bcz it can't compete with RDNA2.
DDR7 can only compensate so much for 128-bit or 96-bit busses, it depends on how each company targets compromises, price and performance.
m3tavision
Posts: 1,528 +1,275
I did say:
"If you don't understand what that means, I cannot help you"
Do you think those who pay $299+ for their new GPU, cares what type of memory is in their Gaming card... when it's crushing frames faster than a 3080..?
Even with very high performance AMD cards, Nvidia still sells roughly 3/4 of GPUs used for gaming, the remainder shared about 2/3 AMD I&dGPUs and 1/3 Intel iGPUs. So little will change.
And by far the most used GPUs are in the affordable "50-70" range, not at the very top, marking them as the heart of the market and where the money is made. 50-70 series are not low performance unless all you do is look at FPS bar sizes at 1440p Ultra. They still play all the games at good framerates, so ceding that top 5% of the market to Nvidia is reasonable when you can then concentrate on selling to the other 95% of buyers.
While the risk of Nvidia leading in benchmarks is AMD may lose some mindshare, that's already been happening for a decade. So again little will change.
And by far the most used GPUs are in the affordable "50-70" range, not at the very top, marking them as the heart of the market and where the money is made. 50-70 series are not low performance unless all you do is look at FPS bar sizes at 1440p Ultra. They still play all the games at good framerates, so ceding that top 5% of the market to Nvidia is reasonable when you can then concentrate on selling to the other 95% of buyers.
While the risk of Nvidia leading in benchmarks is AMD may lose some mindshare, that's already been happening for a decade. So again little will change.
m3tavision
Posts: 1,528 +1,275
Faster than a 3080 is maybe fine today, but by that time the 50 serie will be out and games will wanne use the performancewith AMD give only low performance technology, nvidea will take all the customers
lol^
By the time the RTX 5000 series is released..? (4 months from now?). ?
Please, just admit you do NOT game and do not own a gaming monitor and never intend to spend any money on NVidia.
People with money don't pretend, they do not spend their hard working money on gimmicks, but on actual performance (ie raster), in which RDNA beats non-gaming Ada Lovelace. And RDNA 4 & 5 will beat Blackwell at gaming too. BECAUSE NVidia's technology is for data centers and CUDA for content Creators, not gaming.
RDNA = Gaming
You mean RDOA the game plain changed today just pixels polygons and shaders is not enough, if DLSS was so useless AMD would never wanne follow with FSR, and if RTX was so useless AMD wouldn't add the same technology to they hardwares (and consoles) 40 serie is garbo, nobody wanne burn their computer, and everything that is not 4090 is garbo (aka: why buy 4080 when you can buy 3090 Ti with 24 giga). it's not that im saying RTX and DLSS are as king as nvidea wanne us belive, but it is now part of the plain but I don't think you know what nvidea technology is, you are not a member of the engineering team and I care to say that for them it may be quite possible to design hardware with the ability to play games and do CUDA on the same chip, just like it's possible for AMD cards to be used for maining in addition to gaming. one last thing: I wish AMD cared about their cards performance as you do it looks like you care about they cards performance more than they do but Lew Zealand is right, nothing will change I wished AMD stoled some of the market in graphics, but it dosen't looks like it will hapen
the game plain changed today just pixels polygons and shaders is not enough, if DLSS was so useless AMD would never wanne follow with FSR, and if RTX was so useless AMD wouldn't add the same technology to they hardwares (and consoles) 40 serie is garbo, nobody wanne burn their computer, and everything that is not 4090 is garbo (aka: why buy 4080 when you can buy 3090 Ti with 24 giga). it's not that im saying RTX and DLSS are as king as nvidea wanne us belive, but it is now part of the plain but I don't think you know what nvidea technology is, you are not a member of the engineering team and I care to say that for them it may be quite possible to design hardware with the ability to play games and do CUDA on the same chip, just like it's possible for AMD cards to be used for maining in addition to gaming. one last thing: I wish AMD cared about their cards performance as you do it looks like you care about they cards performance more than they do but Lew Zealand is right, nothing will change I wished AMD stoled some of the market in graphics, but it dosen't looks like it will hapen
m3tavision
Posts: 1,528 +1,275
You mean RDOA
NVidia doesn't make games... they make hardware.
The Game Developers who make games (XBOX, PLAYSTATION, STEAMDECK, ROG ALLY, PERSONAL COMPUTER) do not care about NVidia's Data-Server technology (Ada Lovelace/Blackwell).
Nobody is going to buy EXTRA hardware to use proprietary software, when they can just use the Industry Standard RDNA for free. (VHS vs BETAMAX for a history lesson)
RDNA2 and RDNA3 already beat NVidia's technology in Gaming.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
AMD Ryzen 7 9700X vs. Ryzen 7 7700X: 45 Game Benchmark- cristianm replied