So basically the card is rereleased 20 months after initial launch, with a new
name and tweaked performance that's slower or little better than the original,
and pretty much the same price point. Can someone explain where one can
find Moore's Law in all this? IMO it all looks like a waste of time. I mean, after
20 months, this is all we get? Not impressed at all. I'd hoped AMD wouldn't
go down the road of rebranding (it was bad enough with the 8800GT fiasco),
but I guess they figure enough people will fall for the PR. I foresee yet more
cards on eBay from disgruntled gamers who upgraded only to observe little
or no speed gain.
The 290/290X at least offer something tangible, whether it's solid performance,
good prices, or both, sans noise issues, but these reissued older GPUs really
irritate me. Reminds me of the lacklustre improvements we've had in CPU power,
the halting of price drops for SSDs, the shooting back up of RAM prices since
Feb, and so on. If the PC market is shrinking, I don't think one can blame it
entirely on the rise of tablets & suchlike, or the dislike many have of Win8;
instead, IMO these days there are simply fewer items that are worth buying
as upgrades. All this stalls demand, people stop buying, or buy less often
as they wait for something better, which makes it look like the market is
shrinking when infact users are just waiting for products that are worthy
of their cash.
Sometimes I think it's a pity that all the various 3rd-party GPU makers can't
combine their own talents and come up with a completely separate GPU
development path to NVIDIA and AMD. Surely there's enough skill & knowledge
by now at ASUS, Sapphire, Gigabyte, EVGA, HIS, etc., to do this. Oh if only...
Ian.