XFX Radeon R9 280X Double Dissipation Surfaces

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.


Right... nice save. So it's option B combined with a level of dishonesty I didn't even consider. And even after I pointed this out you, somehow you still decided to give it one last shot and post a link, and concentrate solely on the first option I gave (idk, in the hopes that no one would read into it?) Maybe I'm giving you too much credit, an you actually had no idea what I was getting at. Sad thing is, it looks like at least 8 uninformed readers actually believed you.
 


Won't make profits? How do you know what the BOM cost is of this card? It its a refreshed variant of an existing card, so the total cost to produce, additional R&D, marketing etc is not the same as a brand new card all together. It's AMD's own interest to be profitable. Their last earning call, they even said they expect to be profitable next quarter. They need to show their investors. They won't sell their products at a lose just to regain marketshare.

AMD won't be selling these cards for a loss (they need the money). If anything, this drives competition when your'e paying $450-500 for same performance on an Nvidia card. If you were a recent Nvidia customer, how upset would you be if you could have saved a couple $100 for similar performance?

I take price to performance very seriously when contemplating a new card. Not sure about you. AMD will not sell these for a loss, and will entice more people to make the switch back to AMD.

You can still be very profitable by selling a ton of hardware at lower price margins. Most people go with the best value for their money. If you blindly pay more for the same, then you are a stupid consumer.
 
280X is, in fact, a refreshed version of the Radeon HD 7970 GHz edition

How is that a fact, oh dear so called journalist?
Does nVidia pay for this crap or you do this for free?

R7 series are rebranded, R9 ARE NOT!
http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-r9-280x-radeon-r7-260x-radeon-r7-240-specifications-confirmed-october-8th-launch/
 


They haven't made profits in ages yearly. So what I'm saying is true. You're not selling for enough TODAY if you aren't making money. I'm not sure how I can put it if you're confused. Today the gpu division makes ZERO. So you're not selling for a profit correct? Quit giving free games with every card maybe you'll take home some ACTUAL profits. Check the Quarterly report and you'll see the gpu division made ZERO. Last year (IIRC) they barely made a few million. You can't do that when NV makes 500-600mil. They sell 1/3 of the cards that NV does. So I'm not quite sure where you're getting that they're going to magically sell HUGE volumes at low margins and get rich. You get rich on XEONS, not on Celerons. Titan's/780's shoved up margins/profits/revenue at NV (they said they're selling every one), not the GTX 640's.

Nobody sells LARGE volumes of $400-1000 cards, but they make a killing on the ones they do sell.. Which is good or most of us wouldn't be getting great $200 cards that are WORTH buying.

If they actual manage to BEAT Titan in 90% of the games, and don't price the card ABOVE Titan, AMD is STUPID. Cash in while you can or keep losing money. They say they'll be profitable because of xmas consoles (which they already sold chips to), but after that back to losing money as the world+dog ignores consoles once launched everywhere. At single or low double digit margins they won't get more than 100-200mil/year from this. That kind of profit won't cover the CPU losses each quarter (25-50mil/quarter PROFITS if all goes GREAT in consoles).

You need to read quarterly reports. Also EXPECTING to be profitable and ACTUALLY being profitable are two very different things. I will WAIT and see :) Also is profitable 1million, or 150million this Q like NV? Is profitable $50 bucks?...LOL.
http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/financial-statements?symbol=US%3aAMD
AMD hasn't made more than 500mil in the last 10yrs. NV does it every year and with FAR less revenue. Translation:AMD NEEDS TO CHARGE MORE and quit cutting prices (which NV will do no problem, they like more money). AMD is only broke because they are choosing to fight a PRICE WAR that Jen Hsung has said he doesn't want. He wants a higher share price, but AMD keeps thinking you can price a company to death when you're broke and the other guy is rich. YOU CAN'T.

In fact as you can see from the 10yr summary, they have lost ~6Billion over that last 10yrs. OUCH. When will their madness on pricing end?
 



Um your own link just proved you wrong. The R9-280s are all just Tahiti XT cores which are the current HD7970GHz cores. There is nothing new about the R9-280 series at all, even the Tahiti XT Matrix core is not even new.

Sapphire had a Toxic version of the HD7970 which featured a clock speed of 1100MHz and the ability to go to 1200MHz and memory speeds up to 6400MHz or GDDR5 1600MHz with that 1200MHz core speed.

http://www.sapphiretech.com/presentation/product/product_index.aspx?pid=1483&lid=1

Its the R9-290 and 290X that's are new GPUs and the R7-260X is just a HD7790 (which is GCN 2.0 like the R9-290 series).
 
looks great, but my two XFX 7950 DD cards had shocking cooling, the worst I've ever known on a graphics card. The size of the cooler was sacrificed for a good looking shroud. Running the valley benchmark, the GPU got up to 95C and rear of the PCB was 90C, with the card above it sucking in the hot air from the lower card. Just 1.5 minutes of Kombuster had the temps up to 80C with the fans at 75%! They simply couldn't control the temperature, even though they we at stock clocks. The styling of this R9-280X looks like it has a similar small heatsink and this card is based on a 7970 with even more heat to dissipate. I would expect this card also to run very hot and the fans to be ok 70%+ most of the time when gaming.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.