Amd Volcanic Islands details

Attachment 131537

Some EUROPEAN PRICES

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivon

:ROTF:

The same bias since many years ;)

---

bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! haha ha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 22JHP

Attachment 131537

---

it was not postponed, original launch date was in november! now is launch date synced with bf4 launch, but someone believed 15th october is launch date

I heard Nda lifts at 15th

So when are we likely to get the first reviews for this card.

Evantaur - NOT, it is not
MaddMuppet - in few weeks!

maybe torrorrow?!?!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kuroikenshi

maybe torrorrow?!?!?

---

definitely NOT!

Delay Release R9 290 X - R9 290, Just Waiting Nvidia Release GTX 770 TI Gap Filler Between GTX 770 And GTX 780.

There is not any GTX 770 Ti, it is only rumor

Well I just gave in to the price cuts on the EOL 7970's. Just bought an Asus 7970 Matrix Platinum 3Gb for an impossible to resist 220 UK pounds. Which is an amazing price, and 3 free games thrown in too.
Especially when you consider that the R9 280X Matrix Platinum, which is the same damn card, is listed on the same site @ 330, and no game bundle.
So I used the cash I saved to buy an extra 8Gb of RAM :)
Need to change my sig now lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

Evantaur - NOT, it is not
MaddMuppet - in few weeks!

---

Nice, thanks for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

Bro its not about what you know. Its your attitude.

---

Cool bro. Thanks for letting me know bro. Keep your chin up bro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

The bias come forth when your typically optimistic about AMD and pessimistic about Nvidia. I remember you said the 7990 was going to come out shortly after the gtx 690 and that didn't happen.

It also relate currently about this topic where it might have been possible for Nvidia to release the gtx 780 release a year ago.

Considering some of AMD's releases recently like its 7990( some rumors were there was like a 1000 cards for launch) or the fx-9590 which were all high priced, extremely low volume parts, I think if Nvidia had wanted to at the time, they could have delivered a volume similar to those products. But they didn't.

One possibly reason which would be reasonable is they simply didn't want to cannibalize their gtx 680.

GTX 680's were still priced closer to 500 dollars at the time and were plentiful and easy for Nvidia to make. What would happen if something like a $650 gtx 780 popped up? Sure they would sell every single one of those cards, lets say 20,000 cards(cards that didnt make k20x) at $650. But the hundreds of thousands of gtx 680 that had no supply issues couldn't be sold for 500 anymore. It wouldn't be a flagship any more and at 650, the gtx 780 would be the better value considering their price difference and performance difference. The pricing of the gtx 780 only makes sense and doesn't cause as much cannibalization when the street price of the gtx 680 falls to 400 or less.

But what your saying LordECC without any proof and just say I know is it couldn't be done. They couldn't release it. If AMD was in the reverse situation, you might take the positive upshot(like the 7990 release).

If you want me to give you an example of this attitude and bias, lets look at Charlie from semiaccurate(don't worry your not this biased). When rx-xxx was leaked he was saying it was the end for Nvidia, they are screwed because of AMD's all new lineup is going to put Nvidia to the curb. He lightly mentions that some of the cards are rebrands but he talks up Hawaii like the second coming of Christ. When he was talking about gk110, he said the performance was underwhelming and underperforming, screaming at the top of his fingers that the gtx 770 was a rebrand. And he completely ignored hawaii is coming 8 months after gk110.

If we look at what AMD is doing with this launch aside from mantle, is releasing their Nvidia equivalent of the 7xx series 8 months later. Its hardly going to screw Nvidia besides put some pressure to lower the price of some of their products to have margins which resemble AMD's, rather than the record margins before this launch.

What I am trying to get at is you resemble to a lesser extent this negative outlook Charlie has. Talking up AMD and putting down Nvidia.

And lets look at the big picture, Hawaii's launch time was needed a long time ago. It was needed because the price of the 7970 and the rest of the lineup has fallen so far to the point AMD was barely breaking even on the graphics card division. Not having a new lineup has depressed the price of Tahiti so much that tahiti cards can be found at half the price of their initial value( and this price drop isn't a result of their own cards). It's coming out 8 months after gk110, and during this time AMD has lost a lot of potential revenue through shrinking margins.

Hawaii is on schedule from a roadmap stand point but late from a financial standpoint because it has caused them to lose a lot of potential revenue.

---

They could have released 7990 at that time but didn't want to cannibalize their partner's cards.

How many +$500 consumer cards do you think are sold in a quarter?
How is GTX780 a better value at $650 than GTX680 at $500?

Who was the first to say that Titan wasn't a limited run?
Who was the first to say that we should expect a cutdown Titan as a GeForce card about two months after Titan's launch?

Hawaii's launch is closer to GTX780, which is the only consumer GK110 on the market, than Maxwell is to Hawaii.

I'm sorry but I will repeat, you don't sit on inventory that could potentially become worth next to nothing within 8months.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

bingo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! haha ha

---

Mmm... English. WTF is that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

Face it - they could have launched the card a lot earlier. After all, it's just a K20X with higher clocks, and that card was sent to the Titan supercomputer as early as end of September. They shipped tens of thousands of these cards by the end of October.
I think you just have a problem accepting that because you want Nvidia to look bad. Guess what: Nobody here cares about your bias.

---

Sure mate. Nvidia just decided they were making to much money, why bother selling a $999 card earlier, much better sell it later and see AMD gain market share and then undercut it in performance and price just a few months later. It's just a K20x with higher clock? Do you mean more 130mhz, more RAM, faster RAM, wider bus etc...

Quote:

---

Just got our supermicro station with a new K20 gpu card. Tried a few benchmarks of our code and NVIDIA sdks and K20 was always 10-40% slower [vs GTX680] depending on the work load..

---

I guess it's easier to rip off workstation guys, specially if they need dp performance.


But the point is, it was ready? Isn't Titan a refresh? Isn't AMD late because Titan is a refresh? You greens need to get you story straight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

it was not postponed, original launch date was in november! now is launch date synced with bf4 launch, but someone believed 15th october is launch date

---

no offical launch date, then it cant be postponed.
logic....of the internet.

I really wish AMD was a bit more forthcoming with information about this launch. A bit disappointing really.

It seems 290X reviews - 10/24/2013 and 290 10/31/2013, but not final dates yet, i think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piledriver

Sure mate. Nvidia just decided they were making to much money, why bother selling a $999 card earlier, much better sell it later and see AMD gain market share and then undercut it in performance and price just a few months later. It's just a K20x with higher clock? Do you mean more 130mhz, more RAM, faster RAM, wider bus etc...

---

MSRP of Tesla >>> MSRP of Titan. If you have x number of products and you can sell them at $1000 or $3000, what would YOU do? The choice is obvious one would think.
Remember that Teslas were on back order, there was huge demand. Obviously it's a wise decision to fulfill these high margin orders first albeit to the detriment of us enthusiasts.

And no, K20X has the same amount of memory and the same bus width as Titan. Only clocks differ for obvious reasons: TDP. DP workloads are more power intensive than gaming workloads. At least with dedicated units. That's why Titan clocks lower in DP-mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

msrp of tesla >>> msrp of titan. If you have x number of products and you can sell them at $1000 or $3000, what would you do? The choice is obvious one would think.
Remember that teslas were on back order, there was huge demand. Obviously it's a wise decision to fulfill these high margin orders first albeit to the detriment of us enthusiasts.

And no, k20x has the same amount of memory and the same bus width as titan. Only clocks differ for obvious reasons: Tdp. Dp workloads are more power intensive than gaming workloads. At least with dedicated units. That's why titan clocks lower in dp-mode.

---

^^qft

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEC911

Cool bro. Thanks for letting me know bro. Keep your chin up bro.


They could have released 7990 at that time but didn't want to cannibalize their partner's cards.

How many +$500 consumer cards do you think are sold in a quarter?
How is GTX780 a better value at $650 than GTX680 at $500?

Who was the first to say that Titan wasn't a limited run?
Who was the first to say that we should expect a cutdown Titan as a GeForce card about two months after Titan's launch?

Hawaii's launch is closer to GTX780, which is the only consumer GK110 on the market, than Maxwell is to Hawaii.

I'm sorry but I will repeat, you don't sit on inventory that could potentially become worth next to nothing within 8months.



Mmm... English. WTF is that?

---

Cannibalize what sales? Early 7990 sold like garbage and were ultra limited edition in number. Plus partners would have been happy to take a AMD reference design if it was available, slap on their own cooler or sticker and sell it like they have done in the past.

I am pretty sure it was left to the partner initially because AMD didn't want to make a reference design that had sky high power consumption. Look at all the partner cards that were released early and they all had freakishly high power consumption, monstrous coolers(triple slot cooling and water cooling) and were simply inelegant designs. To make a card that really competed on all metrics against the gtx 690 wasn't a possibility without going way over PCI-e spec. They left it up to the partners because partners are willing to do all that and break all the rules of a reference design.

Even the later 7990 which took best of the best tahiti xt chips wasn't the best competitor even those it was released 1 year later. It still consumed significantly more power, has bad overclocking potential and cooling was less than ideal(particularly in xfire).

You would be surprised at how many 500 dollar cards sell. Look at steam statistics the gtx 680 still holds a reasonable high percentage relative to other cards this generation. This figure used to be about 50 % higher in the past when the gtx 680 was still a new cards. When you combine steam statistics and how much revenue Nvidia generates, they are likely selling 100,000's not tens of thousand of these cards. E.g 100,000 * 200-300(partners make up the rest of the profit/cost of card) = 20-30 million which in a 700 million plus quarter isn't that unreasonable.

It should be obvious why the gtx 780 would depress the price of a gtx 680. The gtx 780 is close to 30 percent faster than a gtx 680. For the high end, getting 30 percent more performance for 30% more spending is a bargain. The gtx 670 was only 8 percent faster than a gtx 680 and there was a 100 dollar difference yet the gtx 680 still sold well. Look at what that 150 dollar add on gets you with the gtx 780 if the gtx 680 was still 500, 30% better performance, better overclocking potential, a much nicer reference cooler and the title of flagship and the extra memory.

If Nvidia had released the gtx 780 in late fall, the gtx 680 for sure couldn't sell for 500 anymore. If the gtx 780 had unlimited quantity this wouldn't be a problem, but particularly in fall, releasing a low volume, completely supply limited gtx 780 would have caused more harm than good for Nvidia's overall revenue.
Gtx 680 sales would tank until a major price cut was made. While the gtx 780 would sell out instantly which is meaningless on a product that sells in the 10 of thousands.

It wasn't like the gk110 were stock piling collecting dust. Much of them were being sold to the pro market for much higher amounts.

Nvidia has a 250 dollar price difference between the 770 and the gtx 780 and the gap between these cards is less because the 770 is faster than a 680. This is the type of pricing Nvidia has set in place so the cards don't cannibalize each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

MSRP of Tesla >>> MSRP of Titan. If you have x number of products and you can sell them at $1000 or $3000, what would YOU do? The choice is obvious one would think.
Remember that Teslas were on back order, there was huge demand. Obviously it's a wise decision to fulfill these high margin orders first albeit to the detriment of us enthusiasts.

And no, K20X has the same amount of memory and the same bus width as Titan. Only clocks differ for obvious reasons: TDP. DP workloads are more power intensive than gaming workloads. At least with dedicated units. That's why Titan clocks lower in DP-mode.

---

Titan was late and it was not a refresh, that's what i've been saying all along, you said nothing that proves otherwise. It's just funny that stating facts in a AMD thread with 30 pages of nvidia propaganda is considered bias, when fantasy like Nvidia didn't put Titan for sale earlier because didn't feel like it, or that AMD is late is considered solid and correct information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piledriver

Titan was late and it was not a refresh, that's what i've been saying all along, you said nothing that proves otherwise. It's just funny that stating facts in a AMD thread with 30 pages of nvidia propaganda is considered bias, when fantasy like Nvidia didn't put Titan for sale earlier because didn't feel like it, or that AMD is late is considered solid and correct information.

---

Titan is not a refresh, true.
Titan was not late, because for that to happen you would have to have some proof that it was meant to be released earlier. If a company changes their strategy, for example to release GK104 first and GK110 later, this is irrelevant and not enough to claim delays. The only reference points for delays that we have and that ultimately matter are in respect to what the competition does. For example, GF100 was late because it was released 6 months after RV870. But if RV870 had not been released until say April 2010, how would one be able to tell if GF100 was late or not? Late compared to what?? We *need* a reference point.

By the timing set forth by Titans release AMDs response with Hawaii can be considered to be late:

Both companies released their first 28nm-GPUs within about 2-3 months of each other: GK104 and Tahiti
GK110 and Hawaii are the addition to their lineups in the upper segment and they are direct competitors.
Nvidia released GK110 for GeForce 11 months after GK104. AMD will have released Hawaii for Radeon 22 months after Tahiti or 7 months after Titan.

This is simple logic and mathematics. I suggest you find some solid arguments of your own instead of trolling without any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

Titan is not a refresh, true.
Titan was not late, because for that to happen you would have to have some proof that it was meant to be released earlier. If a company changes their strategy, for example to release GK104 first and GK110 later, this is irrelevant and not enough to claim delays. The only reference points for delays that we have and that ultimately matter are in respect to what the competition does. For example, GF100 was late because it was released 6 months after RV870. But if RV870 had not been released until say April 2010, how would one be able to tell if GF100 was late or not? Late compared to what?? We *need* a reference point.

By the timing set forth by Titans release AMDs response with Hawaii can be considered to be late:

Both companies released their first 28nm-GPUs within about 2-3 months of each other: GK104 and Tahiti
GK110 and Hawaii are the addition to their lineups in the upper segment and they are direct competitors.
Nvidia released GK110 for GeForce 11 months after GK104. AMD will have released Hawaii for Radeon 22 months after Tahiti or 7 months after Titan.

This is simple logic and mathematics. I suggest you find some solid arguments of your own instead of trolling without any.

---

AMD is following the same path they followed at 40nm with Cypress --> Cayman.

They released Cypress, and waited for nVidia to release and refresh, before they refreshed on the node.

this card launch is getting so annoying...no info, rebrand, no games, delays, makes me want to wait for a 780 price cut and go for that...