• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

NVIDIA 4000 Series

Soldato
Joined
21 Jul 2005
Posts
16,751
Location
N.Ireland
I do hope RDNA3 lives up to some of its promises and also catch up on ray tracing enough to stem the %.

Its in the air for now but if nvidia do get crazy on the power requirements and fall short on the gen improvement, there is a chance AMD can win some over as long as they have a UK retailer that can offer the regional msrp drops that we missed out on this gen.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,223
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
RDNA3 needs to be competitive, comparatively good raster, good RT, good power.... all that, and a better price than Nvidia, in reality that is the only way they can steal back market share from Nvidia, i hope they do because AMD are spending a lot of their Ryzen profits on GPU development so that must pay off because they will not allow a failing product line to eat up the profits of a successful one.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Oct 2019
Posts
8,659
Location
Uk
If AMD want to win marketshare then they need to look at their pricing especially at the lower tiers where this gen they have had barely any better price to performance than RDNA 1.0
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jul 2005
Posts
16,751
Location
N.Ireland
Yeah regarding the above, while they wont catch nvidia on ray tracing as that will be far too optimistic, as long as they surpass what ampere could do and go a tad further you will at least offer customers the choice to run it in games. After all there seems to be a lot of ampere users who think ray tracing is playable right now or juggling settings its acceptable. If this is the case rdna3 has to just focus on being more power efficient, better at raster but most of all available at a good price!
 
Associate
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Posts
1,508
If AMD wants back market share then it will help to have solid products, generation after generation at good prices vs. the competition. Yes, some would buy only nVIDIA due to X reason: RT, DLSS, G Sync, all valid reasons, other just because they're fanboys and that's fine as well. Nothing stopping AMD to market more their technologies, get involved with the developers, etc. Just making demos doesn't appear to do much.

If AMD thinks they can just match raster performance and be okish with the rest, at about the same price with nVIDIA, then good look gaining market share.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,223
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
If AMD wants back market share then it will help to have solid products, generation after generation at good prices vs. the competition. Yes, some would buy only nVIDIA due to X reason: RT, DLSS, G Sync, all valid reasons, other just because they're fanboys and that's fine as well. Nothing stopping AMD to market more their technologies, get involved with the developers, etc. Just making demos doesn't appear to do much.

If AMD thinks they can just match raster performance and be okish with the rest, at about the same price with nVIDIA, then good look gaining market share.

You do know that "G-Sync" is just a name at this point, just about all screens these days are actually AMD Free Sync, including those with G-Sync written on them, but because of the Nvidia mindshare you think AMD need a G-Sync.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Oct 2011
Posts
6,204
I just think the vast majority of people will just buy NV come what may. AMD know this and aren't going to try and win a very costly and long mindshare war by giving cards away.

You're average gamer doesn't give AMD cards a thought, they're not the cool "Gucci" brand. I know this having spoken to many people who are gamers but not enthusiasts, and 95% of them go straight to NV without a second thought.

That's just how it is.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,223
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I just think the vast majority of people will just buy NV come what may. AMD know this and aren't going to try and win a very costly and long mindshare war by giving cards away.

You're average gamer doesn't give AMD cards a thought, they're not the cool "Gucci" brand. I know this having spoken to many people who are gamers but not enthusiasts, and 95% of them go straight to NV without a second thought.

That's just how it is.

Yes :)

Unfortunately this is not a viable business model, think about it, how can AMD keep up with Nvidia in R&D terms on 15% vs 85% market share? They can't, if you don't have money coming in you can't spend it on R&D.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,904
There are still a few monitors which have the gsync hardware "module" (however, very rarely found except for the high end displays), this provides the "ultimate hdr" feature set where as the gsync and "gsync compatible" options provides what you would get with freesyncs feature set.

ZyqlmCc.png


Can't say this is a reason I would buy a monitor with a gsync module though, however, having used both brands sync technologies, the gsync module does do a much better job of pixel response variable overdrive rather than relying on the monitors built in pixel overdrive setting but it's not exactly a deal breaker especially if you can maintain high fps in the first place.

Also, technically, both freesync and gsync and "gsync compatible" is not a nvidia nor an amd thing, it is all based on the industry standard called "adaptive sync", iirc, that was largely why nvidia had to invent a hardware module in the first place to get variable refresh sync tech. as their gpus did not have the newer DP/HDMI connections on their gpus (which were needed to utilize adaptive sync).
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Oct 2011
Posts
6,204
Yes :)

Unfortunately this is not a viable business model, think about it, how can AMD keep up with Nvidia in R&D terms on 15% vs 85% market share? They can't, if you don't have money coming in you can't spend it on R&D.

It is though, have you seen AMD losing money lately?
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,223
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
There are still a few monitors which have the gsync hardware "module" (however, very rarely found except for the high end displays), this provides the "ultimate" feature set where as the gsync compatible provides what you would get with freesync premium pro feature set.

ZyqlmCc.png


Can't say this is a reason I would buy a monitor with a gsync module though, however, having used both brands sync technologies, the gsync module does do a much better job of pixel response variable overdrive rather than relying on the monitors built in pixel overdrive setting but it's not exactly a deal breaker especially if you can maintain high fps in the first place.

Also, technically, both freesync and gsync "compatible" is not a nvidia nor an amd thing, it is all based on the industry standard called "adaptive sync", iirc, that was largely why nvidia had to invent a hardware module in the first place to get variable refresh sync tech. as their gpus did not have the newer DP/HDMI connections on their gpus (which were needed to utilize adaptive sync).

I can find you 100 Free-Sync screen's with out any effort what so ever, there are probably 500 to chose from.

Find me 10 G-Sync Module screens on sale right now, just 10.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,904
I can find you 100 Free-Sync screen's with out any effort what so ever, there are probably 500 to chose from.

Find me 10 G-Sync Module screens on sale right now, just 10.
Let me google that for you:



I'm not disputing about the range/selection either....

I'm just simply saying, freesync is not amds tech, it is their branding for adaptive sync, same way "gsync" and "gsync compatible" is nvidias branding for adaptive sync and not for "freesync".
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,223
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
It is though, have you seen AMD losing money lately?

AMD don't publish GPU and CPU revenue data separately, they just bundle it all together and call it client computing, in the past people have suggested this is because AMD don't want investors seeing that some segments are losing them money, tho AMD have on one or two occasions admitted some GPU's have been sold at a loss.


I think you need to think about what i said more carefully, can we really expect AMD to spend the same money on R&D that Nvidia do with only 15% market share?

Let me google that for you:



I'm not disputing about the range/selection either....

I'm just simply saying, freesync is not amds tech, it is their branding for adaptive sync, same way "gsync" and "gsync compatible" is nvidias branding for adaptive sync and not for "freesync".

The first one i clicked on was "G-Sync compatible" which is a Free-Sync screen, how much of my time is going to be wasted checking all the others?
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Posts
5,833
Isn't GSync Ultimate just a certification? The HDR is a function of the monitor panel not the GSync module.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,904
The first one i clicked on was "G-Sync compatible" which is a Free-Sync screen, how much of my time is going to be wasted checking all the others?
I'm not going to waste my time going through etailers to find you a list, you asked, I googled, second link is nvidias own list so unless they have made a mistake, there's your answer.

And either way again, not sure why you are changing the subject? My post mentioned nothing about gsync "ultimate" outweighing "freesync" monitor choice..... all that was mentioned is:

There are still a few monitors which have the gsync hardware "module"

i.e. it isn't as simple as you put it:

You do know that "G-Sync" is just a name at this point, just about all screens these days are actually AMD Free Sync

The other main point of the post was this:

I'm just simply saying, freesync is not amds tech, it is their branding for adaptive sync, same way "gsync" and "gsync compatible" is nvidias branding for adaptive sync and not for "freesync".

Isn't GSync Ultimate just a certification? The HDR is a function of the monitor panel not the GSync module.
Certification for meeting all these requirements:

ZyqlmCc.png


I don't know all the ins and outs of what exactly the gsync hardware module is doing but there was a video about it when it came to HDR functionality. Maybe @Rroff has more info on it.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Oct 2020
Posts
593
Isn't GSync Ultimate just a certification? The HDR is a function of the monitor panel not the GSync module.
Didn't it also change as well? I have an aw3821, g-sync ultimate and either that (or one of the others I was looking at) didn't meet the old ultimate certification, I think due to hdr level.
 
Top Bottom