In the good old days, refreshes usually launched at the same MSRPs as the old models while the old models got price cuts to clear them out of the market. Most of the old MSRPs were already sufficiently ahead of costs to absorb inflation and still make decent margins. Add the fact that yields should have increased over the last two years and load on N7-N6P processes should be winding down as more designs transition to N5, net cost increase per chip should be below inflation. The increases are purely because AMD thinks it can price-gouge people some more.Considering these are merely refresh of the older thing, the price should not be that far off the original prices. I would say the small increase is mainly due to inflation and rising production cost etc...
if anything AMD only learned that being more consumer friendly will only hurt them in the end. make no mistake. company want the most profit for themselves. more profit means they can expand and fund better R&D for their product. consumer want the best deal for themselves. they did not care if the company survive or not in the future as long as they get the best deal.Still AMD lost another chance to be even more consumer friendly and get more mindshare by just releasing these at the old prices and let the old GPUs prices fall down $50-100.
if anything AMD only learned that being more consumer friendly will only hurt them in the end.
make no mistake. company want the most profit for themselves. more profit means they can expand and fund better R&D for their product. .
consumer want the best deal for themselves. they did not care if the company survive or not in the future as long as they get the best deal.
I'm hoping that the EU and other places will issue bans on PoW crypto soon if skyrocketing energy costs doesn't run crypto-miners out of business first. Selling millions fewer GPUs per quarter to miners should ease up demand on GPU components quite a bit.
That would only screw over people who have legitimate uses for over-powered PCs. When you get into "consumer" GPUs that cost $2000+, you are well within what used to be the realm of professional graphics and if a law banned consumer graphics over 300W, AMD and Nvidia would simply launch a mid-range "professional" GPU for deep-pocketed enthusiasts who want those 900W GPUs. Most gamers only play games a few hours a day, GPU power draw isn't a huge deal in the grand scheme of things as GPUs in mainly-gaming rigs are idle or powered down the remainder of the time where they consume about the same power as any other GPU.I would prefer the world to ban these power hungry graphic cards.. its a colossal waste of energy to use these cards for gaming purpose as well. An energy limit should be imposed to limit how much energy these gaming cards can use.