News AMD unveils promo pricing in wake of Nvidia's Super launch — cuts pricing for RX 7900 XT and 7900 GRE

[Admin]

AMD says its RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 GRE can now be found for much less than MSRP, though this isn't exactly a price cut.

AMD unveils promo pricing in wake of Nvidia's Super launch — cuts pricing for RX 7900 XT and 7900 GRE : Read more

 

[-Fran-]

This makes sense and it is welcome, but I wish we could've seen corrections on the lower end of the price bracket instead... A 7800XT at $400 would have been a dream card for everyone.

Also, a nitpick on the wording: AMD's frame generation is on-par or even better than nVidia; this is been reported in many sites and demonstrated. FSR upscaling and RT I'll agree, but FSR for most people is pretty close. The only real gap left to close is RT performance, but AMD does support it at least and it is as unplayable as nVidia in most cases 😛

Regards.

 

[digitalgriffin]

AMD is out of their ever loving mind. Not even close to what's needed.

On the 31st I'm turning my back on them.

 

[bit_user]

If the 7900 GRE would use the same speed (or faster) memory as the 7800 XT, a $550 price point would make it very appealing.

This makes sense and it is welcome, but I wish we could've seen corrections on the lower end of the price bracket instead... A 7800XT at $400 would have been a dream card for everyone.

True. However, I fear that $500 was already at the low end of what that part was designed to sell for. There might not be much room for them to do repricing, though they could still lean on sales, rebates, and bundle deals to make them more appealing.

 

[javiindo]

Clearly this is not enough. It looks like they are focus in AI. DLSS reputation it's much better that AMD techno. They just copy Nvidia and they are not able to follow. They need to push harder.

 

[magbarn]

I thought chiplets were supposed to be saving AMD money, the 7900XTX needs to undercut the 4080 Super in order to be successful.

 

[bit_user]

I thought chiplets were supposed to be saving AMD money, the 7900XTX needs to undercut the 4080 Super in order to be successful.

I think chiplets might not be necessary for the current generation, but will become increasingly necessary if current technology trends continue.

Chiplets definitely have costs as well as savings, so the key question is how much of a net win they are.

 

[CelicaGT]

Welcome, but needs to be more and permanent. AMD needs to undercut Nvidia by at least 10% at every performance tier. They also need to get serious about functional feature parity (Kudos to FSR3 Frame Gen and whomever managed that feat) and marketing. Sure, most people never use RT but it SELLS CARDS to the unwashed masses. I don't know how many of you out there deal with the "average PC gamer", but all they ever look for is Intel i9 XXXXXKS liquid cooling RTX XX90Ti Super OC and 128GB RAM liquid cooled GPU, RGB Asus ROG etc etc. They know that's the 'best' and they buy the brands and components associated with those things. Typically prebuilt anyways..... On other fronts AMD has done well with Ryzen and specifically X3D branding (Quiet oohs and aaahhs when I mention I have one to my "gamer" coworkers and friends), they need to do whatever they did there with GPUs.

 

[bit_user]

AMD has done well with Ryzen and specifically X3D branding (Quiet oohs and aaahhs when I mention I have one to my "gamer" coworkers and friends), they need to do whatever they did there with GPUs.

There was some speculation their RDNA3 GPUs could support X3D-style MCD stacks, for additional cache. That could also explain why their top tier card dropped from 128 MB LLC to 96 MB - if they were later planning on releasing a 192 MB version. Maybe they discovered that it would deliver too little additional performance to justify the higher price?

 

[g-unit1111]

This makes sense and it is welcome, but I wish we could've seen corrections on the lower end of the price bracket instead... A 7800XT at $400 would have been a dream card for everyone.

Also, a nitpick on the wording: AMD's frame generation is on-par or even better than nVidia; this is been reported in many sites and demonstrated. FSR upscaling and RT I'll agree, but FSR for most people is pretty close. The only real gap left to close is RT performance, but AMD does support it at least and it is as unplayable as nVidia in most cases 😛

Regards.

I'd totally pick up a 7800XT for $400. That would be a steal.

 

[spongiemaster]

Welcome, but needs to be more and permanent. AMD needs to undercut Nvidia by at least 10% at every performance tier.

10% isn't remotely enough. 7900XTX is the only RDNA3 card that makes the Steam survey and the 4080 has more than twice the market share despite a real world cost difference that typically exceeds 20%.

 

[CelicaGT]

10% isn't remotely enough. 7900XTX is the only RDNA3 card that makes the Steam survey and the 4080 has more than twice the market share despite a real world cost difference that typically exceeds 20%.

At 10% I was both being generous and generalizing. Hence the "at least". AMD has their work cut out for them on the GPU front and a price cut is only one piece of any strategy they mount.

 

[vanadiel007]

Everyone wants things cheaper, but I don't think 10% price cuts or more is realistic or needed.
It's not just about RT or DLSS.

It's about memory size, software support. I think AMD has some good things going with these cards, and following the price cut strategy that Nvidia is doing is not always the best option.

7900XTX performs well and has enough memory for the future. It even has DP 2.1, where even the top of the line Nvidia card is still stuck at DP 1.4. I think the 7900 cards are going to age like wine, without going sour and they are set for the future.

 

[kyzarvs]

Everyone wants things cheaper, but I don't think 10% price cuts or more is realistic or needed.
It's not just about RT or DLSS.

It's about memory size, software support. I think AMD has some good things going with these cards, and following the price cut strategy that Nvidia is doing is not always the best option.

7900XTX performs well and has enough memory for the future. It even has DP 2.1, where even the top of the line Nvidia card is still stuck at DP 1.4. I think the 7900 cards are going to age like wine, without going sour and they are set for the future.

I don't want things cheaper per-se, more that I'd prefer to pay roughly the same price for each tier (+inflation obviously) for each generation. When I bought my 1080ti, it was expensive at a bit over £500, but justifiable to me. £1700+ for a top tier card now? No, no and hell no - I'll happily spend my money on other hobbies.

Other than that I completely agree with you - if I put money down for a new card, it won't be nvidia.

 

[HaninTH]

When I bought my 1080ti, it was expensive at a bit over £500, but justifiable to me. £1700+ for a top tier card now? No, no and hell no - I'll happily spend my money on other hobbies.

Those trying to convince the rest of us that these inflated prices are justified need to have their heads examined.

No single component should cost more than an entire PC system.

 

[vanadiel007]

Those trying to convince the rest of us that these inflated prices are justified need to have their heads examined.

No single component should cost more than an entire PC system.

Sadly enough, it costs what people are willing to pay for it. Remember during the bitcoin years, how impossible it was to buy any video card unless you were willing to fork over substantially more than the MSRP?

As long as people keep purchasing 4090 and 4080 cards for MSRP, we all will be paying these prices.

 

[vanadiel007]

I don't want things cheaper per-se, more that I'd prefer to pay roughly the same price for each tier (+inflation obviously) for each generation. When I bought my 1080ti, it was expensive at a bit over £500, but justifiable to me. £1700+ for a top tier card now? No, no and hell no - I'll happily spend my money on other hobbies.

Other than that I completely agree with you - if I put money down for a new card, it won't be nvidia.

Yes and no. You could purchase a card that would be an upgrade over a 1080 for a few hundred. If you want top tier card, yes you will pay.

So it all depends on if you need a top tier card, or if you need extra performance but not top tier performance.

 

[digitalgriffin]

I thought chiplets were supposed to be saving AMD money, the 7900XTX needs to undercut the 4080 Super in order to be successful.

It did make it cheaper.

The cost was offset by a complex interposer beneath.

 

[digitalgriffin]

There was some speculation their RDNA3 GPUs could support X3D-style MCD stacks, for additional cache. That could also explain why their top tier card dropped from 128 MB LLC to 96 MB - if they were later planning on releasing a 192 MB version. Maybe they discovered that it would deliver too little additional performance to justify the higher price?

The problem I heard was the interposer. It would be stable initially but would eventually corrupt as it heated. So they had to throttle chip to chip speeds.

 

[digitalgriffin]

Everyone wants things cheaper, but I don't think 10% price cuts or more is realistic or needed.
It's not just about RT or DLSS.

It's about memory size, software support. I think AMD has some good things going with these cards, and following the price cut strategy that Nvidia is doing is not always the best option.

7900XTX performs well and has enough memory for the future. It even has DP 2.1, where even the top of the line Nvidia card is still stuck at DP 1.4. I think the 7900 cards are going to age like wine, without going sour and they are set for the future.

Umm yessss but no.

Dp2.1 really doesn't have any benefits. The 7900XTX can exploit unless you want 8k gaming.

AMD is getting stomped on in RT. DLSS quality and av1 encoder quality is also better on nvidia.

The 4080S is going to STOMP all over the 7900XTX

 

[bit_user]

Sadly enough, it costs what people are willing to pay for it.

No, it's not just about demand[1]:

​

You want more performance? That comes mostly from more gates. As gate costs have stagnated, chips become more expensive. In the long run, Nvidia and AMD have no choice but to pass most of this cost onto you. Once they reach the limit of what the market will bear, performance must inevitably stagnate.

Here's one reason for increasing costs[1]:

​

Design costs are also going up[2]:

​

Here's a full cost breakdown[3]:

​

Finally, here's a history of TSMC wafer pricing, but the forum software doesn't want to inline it, I think because it's SVG[4]:

https://leimao.github.io/images/blog/2023-04-10-Moore-Law/tsmc_wafer_price_2.svg
​

As long as people keep purchasing 4090 and 4080 cards for MSRP, we all will be paying these prices.

Sadly, it's not that simple. I think if Nvidia thought there wouldn't be a market for a $1.7k GPU, they simply wouldn't have made the RTX 4090. You wouldn't just magically get the same card for $1k.

This page has a cool graph showing how long it takes for a 5 nm fab to break even, based on % utilization and amount of government subsidies it receives. They claim that with 100% utilization and zero government subsidies, it would take a 5 nm fab 5 years to break even! I can't embed the image, however:

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries...facturing-achieving-leading-edge-capabilities
​

References:

• https://www.fabricatedknowledge.com/p/the-rising-tide-of-semiconductor
• https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2016/03/10/the-incredible-shrinking-transistor
• https://www.granitefirm.com/blog/us/2023/04/29/cost-of-chip-foundry/
• https://leimao.github.io/blog/Moore-Law/

 

[Thunder64]

10% isn't remotely enough. 7900XTX is the only RDNA3 card that makes the Steam survey and the 4080 has more than twice the market share despite a real world cost difference that typically exceeds 20%.

AMD could sell cards for 50% less and I doubt it would matter. People were buying the 3050 left and right even though the 6600 was cheaper and beat it consiberaly. At least, back when prices were still inflated.

 

[kyzarvs]

Yes and no. You could purchase a card that would be an upgrade over a 1080 for a few hundred. If you want top tier card, yes you will pay.

So it all depends on if you need a top tier card, or if you need extra performance but not top tier performance.

Yes and no. They don't operate in a vacuum. I used to be able to buy a top card for £500ish. If I could buy top tier for say £700ish now I'd be happy to pay, however it's more like £1700-£2000. So I think of the trackdays / weekends away / garage gear / home improvements I could buy for that money and think that such a purchase will never manage to get to the top of the list.

 

[-Fran-]

Umm yessss but no.

Dp2.1 really doesn't have any benefits. The 7900XTX can exploit unless you want 8k gaming.

AMD is getting stomped on in RT. DLSS quality and av1 encoder quality is also better on nvidia.

The 4080S is going to STOMP all over the 7900XTX

I thought AV1 was deemed "equal" among all 3 in every test I've seen? The only encoding area where AMD is behind is H264, but even in H265/HEVC, it's more or less equal.

And DLSS vs FSR2 is not terribly different to say AMD is far behind. Plus, that one is terribly subjective for a lot of people and most have to really try and find differences on Balanced+ and higher than 1440p. The only consistent thing every one says (reviewer) is that at 1080p is where the differences truly show more evidently.

Regards.

 

[Colif]

7900XTX is the only RDNA3 card that makes the Steam survey

Steam surveys accuracy is questionable as its unknown how they get the data.

No single component should cost more than an entire PC system.

GPU in Australia have cost about the price of an entire system for years now, nothing really changes. 4090 = $3300. That is about how much my entire system would cost me to replace it.