Wednesday, July 26th 2017

AMD RX Vega First Pricing Information Leaked in Sweden - "Feels Wrong"

Nordic Hardware is running a piece where they affirm their sources in the Swedish market have confirmed some retailers have already received first pricing information for AMD's upcoming RX Vega graphics cards. This preliminary pricing information places the Radeon RX Vega's price-tag at around 7,000 SEK (~$850) excluding VAT. Things take a turn towards the ugly when we take into account that this isn't even final retail price for consumers: add in VAT and the retailer's own margins, and prospective pricing is expected at about 9,000 SEK (~$1093). Pricing isn't fixed, however, as it varies between manufacturers and models (which we all know too well), and current pricing is solely a reference ballpark.

There is a possibility that the final retail prices will be different from these quoted ones, and if latest performance benchmarks are vindicated, they really should be. However, Nordic Hardware quotes their sources as saying these prices are setting a boundary for "real and final", and that the sentiment among Swedish retailers is that the pricing "Feels wrong". For reference, NVIDIA's GTX 1080 Ti is currently retailing at around 8,000 SEK (~971) including VAT, while the GTX 1080, which RX Vega has commonly been trading blows with, retails for around 5600 SEK (~$680) at the minimum. This should go without saying, but repare your body for the injection of a NaCl solution.

Source: Nordic Hardware
Add your own comment

79 Comments on AMD RX Vega First Pricing Information Leaked in Sweden - "Feels Wrong"

#1
Dimi
Well that kind of makes sense since they said the whole setup including gsync vs freesync monitor would differ 300$ while the gsync monitor was 500$ more compared to the freesync version. Meaning RX Vega would cost 200$ more than a GTX 1080.

I hope they are joking because that could be the fatal blow for AMD's gpu devision.
Posted on Reply
#4
Dave65
All these rumors are hurting my brain:wtf:
Posted on Reply
#5
coolernoob
but this looks right - at this twisted market (miners) this makes sense... RX 580 are sold out for 450$+... this card will be around +30% faster (also in mining) - so lets add real rx 580 price and +30%, now lets add +25% for sweden (in article even gtx 1080 there costs 650$+)... and we get - bs that amd should be called out from day one - when we saw that the mighty Vega can not compete with 1.5 year old gtx 1080... and you have to include a monitor prices in amd pr bs (monitor sepcs and price* of their preference).
Posted on Reply
#6
wiak
everyone assumes rx vega to be slow.. and thinks 800 dollars is to high, we do have to remember it was nvidia that was pricing gpus up the wazzzoo for the last years

also i sense amd has been doing alot of sandbagging and most of the leaks of their products has been eerm wierd lately, in the past most of them has been spot on, but now they are all over the place

setting the preliminary prices to 800 basically gives them a way to mess with nvidia


its amusing that everyone gets up in arms over a not set in stone, unreleased product price on a unreleased product that we dont know shit about yet
Posted on Reply
#7
Terry Blanchard
I have more faith in management at AMD, this is just to throw Intel off in their pricing structures for their entire range. AMD will give the new Pricing 1st week in August
Posted on Reply
#8
oxidized
We'll just know in 4/5 days if RTG is getting kicked out of AMD or something
Posted on Reply
#9
fullinfusion
1.21 Gigawatts
:roll::roll::roll::roll::kookoo::wtf:
Posted on Reply
#10
Dimi
wiak said:
everyone assumes rx vega to be slow.. and thinks 800 dollars is to high, we do have to remember it was nvidia that was pricing gpus up the wazzzoo for the last years
Come on man, how long have you been into the PC scene? You don't remember paying 300$ for a Voodoo card? Or 500$ for a 9800 Pro? That was AGES ago...

AMD has just been as guilty as all the others but a lot of people fail to see that. For anyone that remembers the FX cpu's, they were priced to the extreme, 12 years ago might i add!

AMD could have OWNED the market if they priced the Fury cards at a normal price. But at 650$ for the Fury X... You can't blame Nvidia for this one.
Posted on Reply
#11
erocker
Senior Moderator
Sweeden seems to have a tax burden.
Posted on Reply
#12
wiak
Dimi said:
Come on man, how long have you been into the PC scene? You don't remember paying 300$ for a Voodoo card? Or 500$ for a 9800 Pro? That was AGES ago...

AMD has just been as guilty as all the others but a lot of people fail to see that. For anyone that remembers the FX cpu's, they were priced to the extreme, 12 years ago might i add!

AMD could have OWNED the market if they priced the Fury cards at a normal price. But at 650$ for the Fury X... You can't blame Nvidia for this one.
fun fact, wasnt the 980ti also at around $600? and that was aircooled ;)

yeah FX was up the wazzo but same with 1080ti/titsan, also intel cpus like the new 18-core Core X goes for almost $2k

if in fact the 800 usd price is true, then amd is back in the highest end again, they can price it at 1080ti level for the top end part, there is more than one card... if the 850 rx vega card is real, then nvidia have rethink their pricing on 1080ti, why? it means the amd card is faster, amd hasnt done this for ages

we shall see, i sense a disturbance in the force
Posted on Reply
#13
oxidized
wiak said:
fun fact, wasnt the 980ti also at around $600? and that was aircooled ;)

yeah FX was up the wazzo but same with 1080ti/titsan, also intel cpus like the new 18-core Core X goes for almost $2k

if in fact the 800 usd price is true, then amd is back in the highest end again, they can price it at 1080ti level for the top end part, there is more than one card... if the 850 rx vega card is real, then nvidia have rethink their pricing on 1080ti, why? it means the amd card is faster, amd hasnt done this for ages

we shall see, i sense a disturbance in the force
What are you smoking i wonder...
Posted on Reply
#14
Hugh Mungus
Dimi said:
Well that kind of makes sense since they said the whole setup including gsync vs freesync monitor would differ 300$ while the gsync monitor was 500$ more compared to the freesync version. Meaning RX Vega would cost 200$ more than a GTX 1080.

I hope they are joking because that could be the fatal blow for AMD's gpu devision.
That was at a different location though, and AMD wouldn't price it that high after the fury x, unless it's amazing...

Price leaks like these are often fake, though, as retailers accidentily post an unreleased product at a random price all the time.
Posted on Reply
#15
theoneandonlymrk
coolernoob said:
but this looks right - at this twisted market (miners) this makes sense... RX 580 are sold out for 450$+... this card will be around +30% faster (also in mining) - so lets add real rx 580 price and +30%, now lets add +25% for sweden (in article even gtx 1080 there costs 650$+)... and we get - bs that amd should be called out from day one - when we saw that the mighty Vega can not compete with 1.5 year old gtx 1080... and you have to include a monitor prices in amd pr bs (monitor sepcs and price* of their preference).
The shops have inflated the price not Amd i got 3 580s last week for £239 each while shops were indeed being silly with upto £550 asked for one also mining requires specific optimisation and programming ,it wont be great out the gate at that.
But all told it could pan out that way , but it would be a shitstorm for Amd , round my ways shops are discounting 1060- 1080ti quite a bit , a sure sign something new is on the way , could just be because of vega but it would not be that if vegas a grand a pop , so Vegas cheaper than a 1080 Or Nvidias Pascal refresh Volta is nearly ready.
Opinions be here, i know nothing for sure.
Posted on Reply
#16
P4-630
The Way It's Meant to be Played
Posted on Reply
#17
theoneandonlymrk
Getting better than me at trolling p4-630 , like it ,i actually chuckled.
Bov to the d.
Posted on Reply
#18
TheinsanegamerN
wiak said:
everyone assumes rx vega to be slow.. and thinks 800 dollars is to high, we do have to remember it was nvidia that was pricing gpus up the wazzzoo for the last years

also i sense amd has been doing alot of sandbagging and most of the leaks of their products has been eerm wierd lately, in the past most of them has been spot on, but now they are all over the place

setting the preliminary prices to 800 basically gives them a way to mess with nvidia


its amusing that everyone gets up in arms over a not set in stone, unreleased product price on a unreleased product that we dont know shit about yet
We assume that vega will be slow because vega FE is slow, and that is the same silicon. there is no black magic to suddenly dramatically increase the performance of finished silicon like that.

People say $800 is way to high because the performance isnt there. If VEGA was as fast as the 1080ti for $800, there would be less complaining (although AMD being over a year late to the game would still produce the counterpoint of "simply matching 18 month old competition isnt good enough"). At the moment, it is barely 1080 level at best, and the 1080 is a $450 card (excluding the mining tax) not $800. Nvidia got away with it because their arch was superior to AMDs (and still is right now) and had a range of cards AMD refused to fight.

That is what happens in a capitalist system. If you are the only one with a competitive product, you can charge way more and people will still buy it. Only the daft would not take advantage of being two generations ahead of their competition.

Their weird releases are due to them knowing VEGA is undercooked, and the last thing they want to do is derail the hype train before the flood of initial sales is over.

They cant mess with nvidia at that price. Nvidia can just look at that price, and know that either AMD has completely lost their minds, or it is fake. Either way, they do not have much to worry about.
Posted on Reply
#19
theoneandonlymrk
TheinsanegamerN said:
We assume that vega will be slow because vega FE is slow, and that is the same silicon. there is no black magic to suddenly dramatically increase the performance of finished silicon like that.

People say $800 is way to high because the performance isnt there. If VEGA was as fast as the 1080ti for $800, there would be less complaining (although AMD being over a year late to the game would still produce the counterpoint of "simply matching 18 month old competition isnt good enough"). At the moment, it is barely 1080 level at best, and the 1080 is a $450 card (excluding the mining tax) not $800. Nvidia got away with it because their arch was dramatically superior to AMDs (and still is right now) and that is what happens in a capitalist system. If you are the only one with a competitive product, you can charge way more and people will still buy it. Only the daft would not take advantage of being two generations ahead of their competition.

Their weird releases are due to them knowing VEGA is undercooked, and the last thing they want to do is derail the hype train before the flood of initial sales is over.

They cant mess with nvidia at that price. Nvidia can just look at that price, and know that either AMD has completely lost their minds, or it is fake. Either way, they do not have much to worry about.
Come on im no computer scientist but I know no one using mumbo jumbo black magic to run games, they use hardware, registers caches and loads of software , amd presently competes with a 4 year old optimised design and vegas got plenty of new stuff in , they don't and never did need black magic just better software, something that does take time to get right as we all know.
And they were four years behind with the useless to games stuff ripped out , highly optimised and node swapped for clocks and power then continually pampered via drivers for each use case , some see Rosey stuff where i see what's actually there it seams.
Yes it works for nvidia but don't build them up as if the sun shines out their bottom and i should be glad to pay three hundred quid for what is a £80(Bom) peice of tech ie 1060s.
Posted on Reply
#20
the54thvoid
erocker said:
Sweeden seems to have a tax burden.
After ABBA, they had to find another income stream.
Posted on Reply
#21
Steevo
Perhaps AMD is pricing on it running mining really well and is trying to squeeze profits out of it.
Posted on Reply
#22
efikkan
Most products are overpriced prior to launch, some even after launch as well. Fury X did at times have a 50% premium over MSRP. If Vega remains in short supply, we could see such prices for a while.
Posted on Reply
#23
EarthDog
wiak said:
fun fact, wasnt the 980ti also at around $600? and that was aircooled ;)

yeah FX was up the wazzo but same with 1080ti/titsan, also intel cpus like the new 18-core Core X goes for almost $2k

if in fact the 800 usd price is true, then amd is back in the highest end again, they can price it at 1080ti level for the top end part, there is more than one card... if the 850 rx vega card is real, then nvidia have rethink their pricing on 1080ti, why? it means the amd card is faster, amd hasnt done this for ages

we shall see, i sense a disturbance in the force
The concern comes with the price and the level of performance. Its priced around a 1080Ti, but if these rumors are true, performs around a 1080, while using a significant amount of power (thinking 1080 @ 180W vs XTX air/water at 285/375W). If this doesn't win in performance, doesn't win in performance per watt, and not in price to performance... what does it have????????????????????

I hope this isn't true.. really doesn't make sense honestly.
Posted on Reply
#24
dozenfury
It definitely wouldn't be the suggested retail pricing. I'm assuming this is just the standard new video card+mining gouging. If performance is where the leaked benchmarks are at I'd hope that suggested retail is closer to $399, maybe $499 max. But who knows what they'll actually be listed at. Look at people selling Nintendo Switches for $600+ the first couple months they were out.
Posted on Reply
#25
EarthDog
This is talking MSRP rumors though... they haven't hit the shelves to inflate pricing due to being new/good at mining/lack of stock etc....
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment