News AMD Radeon RX 9070 series graphics cards global rollout set for March, confirms AMD exec

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Gururu said:
I'd hate to be those offices right now. Some information out there pointing to pricing issues. Tough place to be in with Intel and nVidia's momentum.
Click to expand...
No-one to blame but themselves. All they had to do was make the best cards they could, for the most competitive prices they could, and release them into the wild.

Instead, and as always, AMD chooses to play games - and with it they have lost this generation's cards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM and artk2219
Well, Jensen truly played AMD here, so props to him. AMD dropping the ball and then kicking it down the aisle further.

They seriously need to reshuffle the marketing team into a division that:
1- Actually cares about Radeon as a brand.
2- Actually wants to be independent from nVidia and Intel.
3- Understands their own products so they can actually sell them on their strengths and not te gaps nVidia leaves for them (which, they still fail to exploit).

While it seems a bit harsh, I mean... Come on. They've been playing tag with nVidia for so long, they forgot how to be "independent grown ups". Stop chasing and start leading for once, AMD. Look at your own tech and go from there.

Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM, systemBuilder_49, thestryker and 4 others
I have zero facts to base these assumptions on, but what I imagine happened is that AMD may have been expecting Nvidia's 5070 series to be priced the same as the 4070 series - which is to say in the $700 range. AMD may have been banking on the possibility of charging around that amount for their own 70 series cards. But Nvidia may have pulled the rug out from under AMD (possibly deliberately) when they undercut the pricing of the 5070 series to $500. Now AMD may be in the rare situation of needing to charge more than Nvidia to make a profit, and they are scrambling to figure out how to do that.

AMD can only discount their cards so much, and they can only raise the performance so much... so if they show up with $700 cards, they had better show up with an additional $200 worth of performance. If they don't, they're cooked, and they probably know it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
Gururu said:
I'd hate to be those offices right now. Some information out there pointing to pricing issues. Tough place to be in with Intel and nVidia's momentum.
Click to expand...
Intel has no momentum, its cards have no volume. The momentum is with leather jacket man.

-Fran- said:
They seriously need to reshuffle the marketing team into a division that:
1- Actually cares about Radeon as a brand.
2- Actually wants to be independent from nVidia and Intel.
3- Understands their own products so they can actually sell them on their strengths and not te gaps nVidia leaves for them (which, they still fail to exploit).
Click to expand...
Maybe they should fire David McAfee:
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...issing-rdna-4-gpus-in-its-ces-2025-livestream
 
  • Like
Reactions: systemBuilder_49 and artk2219
valthuer said:
Unfortunately for all of us, by abandoning flagships, AMD have pretty much forfeited any ambition they had of leading in the consumer GPU race.
Click to expand...
They do not need to compete in the high end, but you're not entirely wrong either. Because they were "so open" about their intentions, Jensen was able to predict their entire play well in advance and act on it.

I don't think they need a "flagship" card, only because they can still be competitive as long as they're smart with the accounting and how to fund the division. The way nVidia dried up Radeon was by pushing them further down the slim margins, so their division is the smallest out of, possible, everyone making video cards right now? Maybe? At least, the size difference between nVidia and Radeon is orders of magnitude (budget), much like Intel was with AMD (and probably still is).

They now have to choose to eiher make do with slim margins and stagnate a bit or try to push into the higher end as much as they can, but that will require internal reshuffling of funding.

usertests said:
Maybe they should fire David McAfee:
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...issing-rdna-4-gpus-in-its-ces-2025-livestream
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say "fire", but at least learn from it as a division and create the appropriate process to avoid this from happening in the future.

If they're really a team, then one's loss is the whole division's loss; one's victory is the whole division's victory. That's how we do it over here at least. We make mistakes, learn and improve. I hope AMD can do that as well.

As they say: the first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging* you have a problem.

Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219 and valthuer
-Fran- said:
I don't think they need a "flagship" card, only because they can still be competitive as long as they're smart with the accounting and how to fund the division.
Click to expand...

God, i hope you 're right.

Because, during the last 3 years or so, AMD have been looking like a company that has thrown in the white towel, in discreet GPUs.

Compared to Nvidia, they 've almost never had the better flagship.

However, that didn't stop them, and i can certainly recall times that they were at least trying to contend for the top.

Hate to say it, but, right now, a great number of consumers buy Nvidia, based on the perception that Jensen's company is the best, no matter what.

Sounds foolish, i know, but, unfortunately, they 're not entirely wrong to think this way.

In order for that perception to change, AMD have to try and do the only thing they persistently avoid doing: create a better flagship card.

Sales wise, it wouldn't make a significant impact. But it would send a message that AMD can still be competitive.

The last time ATi/AMD had a clear technology leading design, was probably with the Radeon 9800 Pro. But that was like 22 years ago.

AMD made the wrong choice, by not introducing Tensor and RT cores and ignoring them for 1-2 generations. That decision, will be coming back to haunt them.

Their CPUs, are nothing sort of magnificent. GPU-wise, though, if they don't do something soon, they'll be reduced into a non-factor.
 
valthuer said:
The last time ATi/AMD had a clear technology leading design, was probably with the Radeon 9800 Pro. But that was like 22 years ago.
Click to expand...
Ah, the good ol' 9800.... that was a good one... and the last red GPU I've owned. As I've stated elsewhere, that isn't because I'm an Nvidia fanboy, it's because for years Nvidia has produced better products for my personal tier of budget. I'm sick of their prices though... if AMD released a flagship that was on par with a 5080, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

The problem is, no one is going to sacrifice performance by buying AMD just to keep the market competitive. They have a terrible branding perception that needs to be overcome - 'You only buy AMD if you can't afford Nvidia.' Instead of trying to fight that perception, they have leaned into it full swing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219 and valthuer
Jabberwocky79 said:
Ah, the good ol' 9800.... that was a good one... and the last red GPU I've owned. As I've stated elsewhere, that isn't because I'm an Nvidia fanboy, it's because for years Nvidia has produced better products for my personal tier of budget. I'm sick of their prices though... if AMD released a flagship that was on par with a 5080, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

The problem is, no one is going to sacrifice performance by buying AMD just to keep the market competitive. They have a terrible branding perception that needs to be overcome - 'You only buy AMD if you can't afford Nvidia.' Instead of trying to fight that perception, they have leaned into it full swing.
Click to expand...
I dont think you can give AMD credit for the 9800 because it was a product of Canada's ATI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: renz496
Jabberwocky79 said:
Ah, the good ol' 9800.... that was a good one... and the last red GPU I've owned. As I've stated elsewhere, that isn't because I'm an Nvidia fanboy, it's because for years Nvidia has produced better products for my personal tier of budget. I'm sick of their prices though... if AMD released a flagship that was on par with a 5080, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

The problem is, no one is going to sacrifice performance by buying AMD just to keep the market competitive. They have a terrible branding perception that needs to be overcome - 'You only buy AMD if you can't afford Nvidia.' Instead of trying to fight that perception, they have leaned into it full swing.
Click to expand...

Same here: i have no allegiance to Nvidia.

But, two years ago, when i went to the market for a flagship, Nvidia had the better one.

If AMD are comfortable with eating Nvidia's dust, i'm more than comfortable staying away from AMD's GPUs, until they decide to get serious about it.

Consumers, should not be in the business of "donating" their money to tech giants, just so they can help them catch up with their rivals.

And, besides, that would send the wrong message to AMD: "Hell, if people are already buying our cards for what they are, why should we even bother to improve them?"

P.S. My last AMD GPU, was an MSI Radeon HD 6950. I bought it back in 2011, flashed its BIOS, effectively turning it into a 6970, thus becoming the proud owner of probably the 2nd best GPU at that time. Ah, the nostalgia! Good old days, when you could buy a mid-range card for 300$. 😊
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM and Jabberwocky79
Flayed said:
Hopefully, this delay will mean plenty of stock will be available at launch.
Click to expand...
I think this is the only positive way to look at the delayed release. Last night when I read the news this was the only possible positive I could come up with.

No matter what though the public perception immediate goes to "what's wrong with them?" since retailers had already started getting stock, they had a FSR4 live demo at CES, but also their announcement effectively consisted of "here are the models bye".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jabberwocky79, Flayed, artk2219 and 1 other person
Part of it makes sense to delay to March since tax refund time is the next big sales driver, but unless they overwhelming stand out in terms of price and performance, they're just going to be another "If you can't buy Nvidia, buy these" year when consumers lose to high prices and marginal performance gains.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jabberwocky79
I wont be surprised if AMD drop out of the GPU market in the next few years ..

Intel will be the budget masters Nvidia will give us the high end and AMD will be gone !!

They needed to have a 5090 beating flagship to cement a win over Nvidia keeping prices down and offering competition ..

For all there smarts ( they think mid to low is where everyone want AMD to be ) they are losing customers who like that 4080 , 5080 $1000usd AMD card ..

I would have paid $1500usd for a 5090 competitor from AMD as it stands now unless they have something there not telling us 9080xt or 9090xt i will most likely buy a 5080 to replace my 7900xtx at some point !!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jabberwocky79
^^^^ Yes exactly, and to add more to your point:

As evident in my signature, I have skipped the past 3 generations. I can't get away with it anymore, so this is the year I buy a new GPU. Looking to spend around $1000, and literally anything I get will be a big upgrade, so, I really can't go wrong. It's just strange that despite that fact, it doesn't feel like I have much of a choice. I was hoping for more enticing choices.
 
This is unfortunate, by the time they release their cards even if they offer good performance and value, AMD will have to be content with getting the scraps.
Intel had a good GPU launch for the budget section, Nvidia undoubtedly has the buyers with deeper pockets in their corner and that leaves AMD with a minority of customers who have yet to make their choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KyaraM
ilukey77 said:
I wont be surprised if AMD drop out of the GPU market in the next few years ..

Intel will be the budget masters Nvidia will give us the high end and AMD will be gone !!

They needed to have a 5090 beating flagship to cement a win over Nvidia keeping prices down and offering competition ..

For all there smarts ( they think mid to low is where everyone want AMD to be ) they are losing customers who like that 4080 , 5080 $1000usd AMD card ..

I would have paid $1500usd for a 5090 competitor from AMD as it stands now unless they have something there not telling us 9080xt or 9090xt i will most likely buy a 5080 to replace my 7900xtx at some point !!
Click to expand...
They can't pull out. At most, they'd have to sell their graphics division.

As to why they can't in my eyes: Enterprise needs integrated graphics and AMD has already spend, IIRC, $7000M on ATI back then and have a very healthy portfolio of patents they can still use and have been using to design and fab with other. There's a lot of value they still get from the ATI purchase and, while we all meme with Radeon, you have to understand they're a 400M division (or so?) against a "Trillion" dollar company? I wonder how much the graphics division at Intel is "worth", but I'd imagine similar to Radeon?

The other reason is AMD is taking a very good strat to encrouch nVidia and, to a lesser degree, Intel: bigger APUs. When they get the chiplet working more reliably and cheaper, they'll be able to sell giant SoCs, like Apple, to compete in the midrange and under very well. They need a better ecosystem, but at least Strix Halo (the big APU) is the foot on the door.

EDIT: Good timing for this one.
https://www.techspot.com/news/106435-playstation-6-chip-design-nearing-completion-sony-amd.html

Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flayed and thestryker
The cost to produce Navi48 / 9070xt / 9070 at TSMC should be 42% more than the 7800xt - an upcharge going from $16,000(N5) vs $20,000(N4) for each 300mm wafer, and 346mm vs 390mm size increase. I get $151 for each 9070xt with an eventual 90% yield vs $106 for every 7800xt:

https://www.adapteva.com/white-papers/silicon-cost-calculator/

If AMD GPUs have a 40% margin (in Q4 of 2024 it was a paltry 17%) the price increase to AIBs (vs. 7800xt) might be around $63 more than the 7800xt when yields hit 90%, and $74 higher cost (vs. 7800xt) at retail (+ 12% AIB + 5% retail margins). The 7800xt is $480 at retail right now and they will need a price increase of $80-$90 for Navi48 and because of the extra power transistors, power connections, and possibly extra cooling. A $550 price is a money-loser (violating AMD's fiduciary responsibility to shareholders) but a $600 price is feasible.

They will lose money for a some time at $600 at initial 70% yields. The 9070xt price floor is $630-$640 at 70% yields.

Would you buy 95%+ of a 4080 for $600? I sure would!

The delay will give them a chance to increase yields from 70% to 90%, it will give them a chance to complete and release FSR4, and it will give NVidia a chance to screw up by under-supplying 5090 and 5080 cards, and it will reveal the ACTUAL $800+ and $600+ prices that NVidia AIBs will probably charge for 5070/Ti's; those NVidia price announcements are probably fiction.

Just FYI Intel is STILL 4 years behind AMD & NVidia. The cost to produce a B580 card is the same as the cost to produce a 4070. What a waste of good silicon!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: -Fran-, Flayed and Jabberwocky79
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom