Do you want AMD to make better low-end graphics cards?

[oxrufiioxo]

Well it's nice to see people fapping with excitement that their upcoming $899+ cards can potentially give Nvidia trouble, but in the real world AMD need some proper wins, the cost of entry to AM5 is already stupid beyond belief.

When I was watching the presentation I kept thinking this has to be less than 1k usd or else it isn't even worth buying.

I personally was hopeing they'd get closer to Lovelace in RT but it seems they may not even beat ampere at least in RT heavy games which is disappointing but not unexpected.

 

[Kapone33]

Clearly Nvidia isn't a saint here, the 3050 is meh, and they released nothing below it (in RTX series, the 1630 is pretty insulting too though), and gatekept the low profile card to only the RTX A2000 instead of a 3040 or something...

But wow was the 6500XT just a straight up insulting cash grab at the height of the market. No saints in this game, shit products and practices should be called out from any vendor at any time.

I really don't understand why there is so much negative sentiment towards the 6500XT. It is first in clock speed for any 6000 GPU. I got mine at launch for $229 CAD when other cards were minimum $500 (3060/6600). In this world of 1440P obviously it would not work but that was not the target market. This was for Gamers on a budget that were on the other side of the Crypto market (people without $500+ of free money) As with that card and a 3600/5600/10400/11400 you could build a system for that same $500. Let's keep in mind that the next card in price was the 1660 for $400 at the time. You are also right about the 3050 (Still up to $500). I keep saying it and maybe it's because I had a 470 in my HTPC before the 6500XT but HDMI 2.1 on a 4K TV makes a world of difference with VRR. As when you play at 1080P you still get 120HZ refresh and that is better than the 60HZ that is the maximum for the 470 and 1660. Why all the noise because they made it so that scalpers and miners were not interested. Was not Bitcoin at like $45000 and ETH at $2500 when that card launched as the 6600 would give you about 35-40 Mh/s or 3 to 5 dollars a day at that time?

I do wish that were still in the era where $100 would buy you a capable GPU for whatever Gaming was at the time. GTS 450, 6800 (Original ATI). For me that is what the 6500XT is a card that just Games. no Ray tracing, no 4K, no Streaming just gaming in front of your TV at 1080P. If you have MAME or any other emulator you will also appreciate this chip. It was Nvidia who decided to raise the price across the stack though. The kicker is that you were hard pressed to find a Nvidia GPU at a brick and mortar in Canada throughout all of 2021. All while Nvidia was making more profits than Chevron.

AMD does make a great budget card it's called the 6600M. I hope I get mine before the new year. $149 (CAD) shipped that is like $110 US.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I really don't understand why there is so much negative sentiment towards the 6500XT. It is first in clock speed for any 6000 GPU. I got mine at launch for $229 CAD when other cards were minimum $500 (3060/6600). In this world of 1440P obviously it would not work but that was not the target market. This was for Gamers on a budget that were on the other side of the Crypto market (people without $500+ of free money) As with that card and a 3600/5600/10400/11400 you could build a system for that same $500. Let's keep in mind that the next card in price was the 1660 for $400 at the time. You are also right about the 3050 (Still up to $500). I keep saying it and maybe it's because I had a 470 in my HTPC before the 6500XT but HDMI 2.1 on a 4K TV makes a world of difference with VRR. As when you play at 1080P you still get 120HZ refresh and that is better than the 60HZ that is the maximum for the 470 and 1660. Why all the noise because they made it so that scalpers and miners were not interested. Was not Bitcoin at like $45000 and ETH at $2500 when that card launched as the 6600 would give you about 35-40 Mh/s or 3 to 5 dollars a day at that time?

I do wish that were still in the era where $100 would buy you a capable GPU for whatever Gaming was at the time. GTS 450, 6800 (Original ATI). For me that is what the 6500XT is a card that just Games. no Ray tracing, no 4K, no Streaming just gaming in front of your TV at 1080P. If you have MAME or any other emulator you will also appreciate this chip. It was Nvidia who decided to raise the price across the stack though. The kicker is that you were hard pressed to find a Nvidia GPU at a brick and mortar in Canada throughout all of 2021. All while Nvidia was making more profits than Chevron.

AMD does make a great budget card it's called the 6600M. I hope I get mine before the new year. $149 (CAD) shipped that is like $110 US.

The 6500XT is not a 75W card for one.

It performs like a 1650 Super which is 3 years older, used to be $50 cheaper than the 6500XT, and draws about the same power. So it brought pretty much nothing new to the table. That's a sad indictment since we're talking about a 2 year old card when the 6500XT was launched.

It's like this whole segment is frozen in 2019.

Spec-wise, the 1650 Super was superior to the 6500XT - the 6500XT is 1024 / 64 / 32 (shaders/TMUs/ROPS) on a 64bit bus with 4GB GDDR6 vs 1280 / 80 / 32 and a 128 bit bus with 4GB GDDR6 on the 1650 Super.

Clock speed is the only thing that allows the 6500XT to equal the 1650 Super. And that same clock speed also made sure it was not a 75W card.

That is pathetic.

Honestly if Nvidia would just shrink the 1650 Super down to N6 and use the shrink to keep its power at 75W, and keep its 128 bit bus and GDDR6, it would be a perfectly ok replacement for 2-3 year old 75W GPUs as it is about 35% faster than a normal 1650.

As it stands right now though, there is nothing new in the 75W GPU space that is faster than what was available 2 1/2 years ago.

 

[InVasMani]

I'm perfectly fine with more entry level HTPC and entry level gaming cards that are high efficiency and priced appropriately. I think the RX 6500/6400 were priced a bit more than maybe they should've been and the lack of AV1 was unfortunately, but otherwise they were alright. If they can drop the RX6500 price down to like $125 with AV1 and 75w power draw they will have a rather decent HTPC card not to mention the other RDNA3 improvements.

 

[wolf]

I really don't understand why there is so much negative sentiment towards the 6500XT.

And in addition to all the excellent reasons @RandallFlagg gave...

It was that AMD was clearly capitalizing on the market conditions/mining boom/consumer desperation and flipped low end buyers the bird, by way of selling them turds. Turds that sold because they were better than literally nothing.

They took a GPU that was meant for the mobile space and made it work for desktop, only since it was never designed for desktop, that meant limitations that severely hurt the 6500XT's performance, features and this rightly so marred the reception.

Limited to 4 PCI-E Gen 4 lanes, not TOO bad if you had a gen 4 system, but a card so low as this will clearly find a home in many older/lower end systems, and the lack of lanes really hurt it in gen 3 systems.

No encoder or decoder, as it was meant for mobile, the CPU pairing was meant to do this, but a popular feature was totally absent.

Only 4GB VRAM, coming some time after AMD themselves said 4GB isn't enough, lol. Plus it meant that when that weak bus was saturated and the VRAM buffer was full (easy to do with 4GB), the performance crumbled.

And lastly, at least till I remember any other enraging things about the card, it totally bucked the trend of where it should have sat in the lineup performance wise, especially relative to the generation it replaced, check this out.

Plus in VRAM limited scenario's the 5500XT performs better due to the wider bus.

The 6500XT was a gobsmackingly, insultingly, bewilderingly atrocious card to launch at the time. AMD saving gamers my rear end, I've seen what they can do given the opportunity, and it's downright AM-gree-D.

This is part of the reason why I don't play favorites, I fanboy for no-one, I have zero allegiance of any brand, because all companies do, or at least are capable of doing, things that suck for the consumer but serves their own interests, either short or long term. People love to play the "but company X is worse, remember when they...", I couldn't care less, I just evaluate each product as it comes on it's own strengths, and weigh those against my (or someone I'm, helpings) buying criteria. And let me tell you, I've not once recommended a 6500XT, and I've recommended various RDNA2 cards, namely the 6600 series which at first I had issues with until I saw just how low AMD was willing to lower that bar.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

The thing is that AMD's lowest card Radeon RX 6400 4 GB is very limited and according to TPU's general performance chart, it falls so much down that RTX 4090 is rated at 827% the performance!

Do you want to see a Radeon for $150 which compared to not 830% but to 400% with RTX 4090?

Do you want AMD to start using the latest fab technology (TSMC N3, "3 nm") for the entry value graphics cards?

View attachment 268961
AMD Radeon RX 6400 Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database

Yes but wtaf this is not a one horse race, Intel and Nvidia need also to do more in this area.

 

[SL2]

Yes but wtaf this is not a one horse race, Intel and Nvidia need also to do more in this area.

You're right, but the topic of this thread was AMD, which I don't understand. The 3050 is inferior to the 6600 yet more expensive.

In the end they're all greedy, but pointing out AMD makes no sense right now.

 

[Totally]

Who in the 10

The thing is that AMD's lowest card Radeon RX 6400 4 GB is very limited and according to TPU's general performance chart, it falls so much down that RTX 4090 is rated at 827% the performance!

See nothing wrong there the RX 6400 still has a better perf/$ than the 4090. The problem is e-waste living on borrowed time.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

The problem is e-waste living on borrowed time.

The 6400 is a much better card than any variation of the GT 710,730, 740, ever were, yet they are ubiquitous. People aren't simply going to throw them away. Slot powered cards keep going. Pair it with a budget PCIe 4.0 Intel CPU with HD graphics, and you have media duties covered.

I'm in the U.S. I bought the XFX SWFT 105 on prime day for $113 after promotions with a free game. It's the best single slot LP card without buying an expensive Quadro. For tiny builds and some SFF OEMs, it is king of its little niche. It can play my entire GOG library, and most of my other libraries like Steam and Epic at 1080 with good to great visuals. It has no trouble with any of my old games on DVD either. Decent for most console emulators too.

As to the 6400 and 6500 being bad values at launch, have to agree to disagree. Why are we not roasting the ancient 1050ti for not only still being made, but selling for $225-$300 at that time? Shameful. Or the 1030 selling for $150. Then, even when things were normalizing, comes the real kick in the Jimmy, the 1630. The worst insult to gamers since the 1030 DDR4.

Trying to rely on historical pricing and features for why the low end 6 series are so terrible lacks essential context. A mining boom happened. Which combined with human malware, to make a perfect storm. Disrupting just in time manufacturing at every stage, radically disrupting pricing and availability. Precipitating nearly 2 full years of madness. The reality of the time was that when launched, they only needed to be better gamers than the cards priced around them. At the time that was the 1030, 1050ti, and 1650, here in the U.S. Easy pickings.

However, that was then, this is now. Currently, they are terrible values. The 6400 should be $80. The 6500XT should be $120.

 

[john_]

The thing is that AMD's lowest card Radeon RX 6400 4 GB is very limited and according to TPU's general performance chart, it falls so much down that RTX 4090 is rated at 827% the performance!

Do you want to see a Radeon for $150 which compared to not 830% but to 400% with RTX 4090?

Do you want AMD to start using the latest fab technology (TSMC N3, "3 nm") for the entry value graphics cards?

View attachment 268961
AMD Radeon RX 6400 Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database

I want to see low end cards again. And that's what I voted on the poll.

BUT.

This poll is pointing at the wrong company.
And also asks for things that are not realistic from AMD or Intel.
And so I ask the person who opened this poll.
Why not mentioning Nvidia?
Why not showing this image instead?

Some people should stop promoting, unwittingly I am sure, Nvidia's marketing by accusing indirectly AMD for something that Nvidia is as, if not more, guilty. It's really exhausting and annoying to keep looking at people accusing AMD, directly or indirectly, for what Nvidia is in fact doing, considering it holds both performance crown, features crown and 4 times the market share of AMD.

Nvidia holds 80% of the discrete GPU market share and also is the ONLY company that does not offer X86 CPUs with integrated graphics. Intel offers integrated graphics. It doesn't have an obligation to offer something really cheap in the discrete GPU market. People can choose an Intel processor with an iGPU. AMD offers the best integrated graphics with it's APUs. No reason either of those two to offer cheap low end discrete GPUs.

The only company that offers NOTHING in the low end market is Nvidia. And Nvidia keeps going up, away from the $75 price point, away from the $100 price point, away from the $200 price point, closer and closer to $2000 and beyond for the top model. It's latest model for that market, the GTX 1630, is both based on older architecture and cut down in such a degree that it is useless as a 3D card.

This thread is misleading, by mistake I am sure. It throws an negative aura on AMD, when in fact Nvidia is the one who drives prices up and does not offer valid, modern alternatives under $250.

So, yes. I want to see a new RTX 4030 at $150 offering 1/4th of RTX 4090 performance, at least in raster if not at RT. And off course it sould also support all DLSS versions available to RTX 4090.

Does the person who opened the thread also agrees with this? Or is it something asked specifically and only from AMD?

 

[maxfly]

AMD does make a great budget card it's called the 6600M. I hope I get mine before the new year. $149 (CAD) shipped that is like $110 US.

I agree. The problem is there's only one place you can get them. Alot of people get freaked out having to buy them from aliexpress.
If Chinese companies can make sub $200 6600m GPUs the rest of the world should be able to.

Edit- and I agree with the fact that NV has completely dropped the ball on the low end as well.

 

[john_]

Honestly if Nvidia would just shrink the 1650 Super down to N6 and use the shrink to keep its power at 75W, and keep its 128 bit bus and GDDR6, it would be a perfectly ok replacement for 2-3 year old 75W GPUs as it is about 35% faster than a normal 1650.

It gave you the GTX 1630. Enjoy.

and it's downright AM-gree-D.

You can enjoy not just the GTX 1630, but also the RTX 4090 and RTX 4080 16GB. Unfortunately the RTX 4080 12GB was canceled. 3 out of 4.

NV has completely dropped the ball on the low end as well

Nvidia started moving prices up, after AMD introduced FM2. Probably started seeing where things where going when AMD announced FM1. So, 10 years ago they where giving us the first Titan, a professional, gaming, anyway semi professional card, that it was the first real try from Nvidia to educate consumers to start accepting the $999 price point as an accepted price point for a gaming card. Sorry, semi pro card. Nvidia of course didn't move all it's high end models at the $1000 price point, but it did started differenciating itself from the sub $100 price point. AMD's inability to compete most of the times was making Nvidia's life easier and the latest mining craze, combined with the huge demand and scalping thanks also to the pandemic, gave Nvidia the chance to totally abandon the sub $200 market and strengthen it's image as a premium brand. People asking for Nvidia graphics cards lower than $250 today, they where only have the option of an older architecture lacking many features in the form of 1600 series and people not wanting to pay more than $100, could enjoy the GT 1030 (or a GT 730, a GT 710 and why not, a marvelous G210). With the latest GTX 1630, Nvidia made it clear. If you want a 3D card from them, get ready to pay over $200, maybe over $300 dollars.
Nvidia dropped the ball because that was a business decision. It wasn't some mistake they did.

You're right, but the topic of this thread was AMD, which I don't understand. The 3050 is inferior to the 6600 yet more expensive.

In the end they're all greedy, but pointing out AMD makes no sense right now.

It makes sense when the problem is not really the low end market, but the low end market is just an excuse.

 

[Kapone33]

The 6500XT is not a 75W card for one.

It performs like a 1650 Super which is 3 years older, used to be $50 cheaper than the 6500XT, and draws about the same power. So it brought pretty much nothing new to the table. That's a sad indictment since we're talking about a 2 year old card when the 6500XT was launched.

It's like this whole segment is frozen in 2019.

Spec-wise, the 1650 Super was superior to the 6500XT - the 6500XT is 1024 / 64 / 32 (shaders/TMUs/ROPS) on a 64bit bus with 4GB GDDR6 vs 1280 / 80 / 32 and a 128 bit bus with 4GB GDDR6 on the 1650 Super.

Clock speed is the only thing that allows the 6500XT to equal the 1650 Super. And that same clock speed also made sure it was not a 75W card.

That is pathetic.

Honestly if Nvidia would just shrink the 1650 Super down to N6 and use the shrink to keep its power at 75W, and keep its 128 bit bus and GDDR6, it would be a perfectly ok replacement for 2-3 year old 75W GPUs as it is about 35% faster than a normal 1650.

As it stands right now though, there is nothing new in the 75W GPU space that is faster than what was available 2 1/2 years ago.

So because it needs a 6 Pin as it pulls 100 watts is too much? Even a 450 WATT PSU is fine with any CPU and 6500XT. The mistake AMD made was calling it the 6500XT. It should just have been a 6500 with 4GB and then the 6500XT should have had 8 GB but it would have been able to mine crypto so either or.

The best budget card is the 6600M and you can even get some without the 6 pin so PCie power is there if you want it but you will be losing performance but it is still the best price/performance card right now period.

The last 2 1/2 years were unlike any other in the history of PC though you have to acknowledge that.

I agree. The problem is there's only one place you can get them. Alot of people get freaked out having to buy them from aliexpress.
If Chinese companies can make sub $200 6600m GPUs the rest of the world should be able to.

Edit- and I agree with the fact that NV has completely dropped the ball on the low end as well.

If you want a Byiski block you can pay $250 from a US company or pay $100 for the same block from Aliexpress. I know what you mean but is it any different than Walmart, Amazon Marketplace and Newegg 3 rd Party? I once ordered a 1920X CPU from Walmart. It took 4 months to arrive and were plastic pearls. They would all be from China as China is where most laptops are manufactured and therefore would be able to do that and China has no rules when it comes to Corporate laws. I doubt AMD wants to have the 6600M become a budget card that is made world wide as it would make the 6400/6500XT indeed useless as some are saying.

 

[Ripcord]

People hating on the 6500xt don't know what they are talking about TBH. Its a fantastic card AMD seem to have improved the drivers a lot. its performing as good as a RTX 3050 in COD:MW2 1080P if not better. and it draws next to no power.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

People hating on the 6500xt don't know what they are talking about TBH. Its a fantastic card AMD seem to have improved the drivers a lot. its performing as good as a RTX 3050 in COD:MW2 1080P if not better. and it draws next to no power.

I wouldn't say they don't know what they are talking about personally. People have different expectations and wants from products. The cut down media block is a deal killer for some. I always see them complaining because they use Plex. Or they want to stream and record without needing iGPU or putting the load on the CPU. Some are upset at the PCIE 3.0 performance drops in some games. Making it a bad pairing for old Optiplex and the like. All legitimate complaints if that's a requirement or want of the customer.

It is the blind spot for the $200 and under NIB competition that I think is weird. At the time they launched, even the used market was jacked up. Last week there was a 1050ti on Amazon U.S. as one of the top sellers for $187. That's bonkers. Nvidia has such a stranglehold on the market people will buy them even when their products are clearly inferior. AMD could give GPUs away, and probably not reach 50% market share. That might be hyperbole, but barely.

 

[ARF]

I want to see low end cards again. And that's what I voted on the poll.

BUT.

This poll is pointing at the wrong company.
And also asks for things that are not realistic from AMD or Intel.
And so I ask the person who opened this poll.
Why not mentioning Nvidia?
Why not showing this image instead?
View attachment 269029


Some people should stop promoting, unwittingly I am sure, Nvidia's marketing by accusing indirectly AMD for something that Nvidia is as, if not more, guilty. It's really exhausting and annoying to keep looking at people accusing AMD, directly or indirectly, for what Nvidia is in fact doing, considering it holds both performance crown, features crown and 4 times the market share of AMD.

Nvidia holds 80% of the discrete GPU market share and also is the ONLY company that does not offer X86 CPUs with integrated graphics. Intel offers integrated graphics. It doesn't have an obligation to offer something really cheap in the discrete GPU market. People can choose an Intel processor with an iGPU. AMD offers the best integrated graphics with it's APUs. No reason either of those two to offer cheap low end discrete GPUs.

The only company that offers NOTHING in the low end market is Nvidia. And Nvidia keeps going up, away from the $75 price point, away from the $100 price point, away from the $200 price point, closer and closer to $2000 and beyond for the top model. It's latest model for that market, the GTX 1630, is both based on older architecture and cut down in such a degree that it is useless as a 3D card.

This thread is misleading, by mistake I am sure. It throws an negative aura on AMD, when in fact Nvidia is the one who drives prices up and does not offer valid, modern alternatives under $250.

So, yes. I want to see a new RTX 4030 at $150 offering 1/4th of RTX 4090 performance, at least in raster if not at RT. And off course it sould also support all DLSS versions available to RTX 4090.

Does the person who opened the thread also agrees with this? Or is it something asked specifically and only from AMD?

I understand and do support your call that all companies - AMD, Intel and nvidia must follow this demand.
But I do not believe that nvidia is capable to listen to the customers, and actually I have no interest in any of their products - no matter the performance, no matter the price - simply their history is so dark that I cannot support (in any way) a company that is not loyal to its customers.

Only AMD can save the market if they are in the mood to do so.

 

[ymdhis]

AMDs most popular card to this day is still the Polaris based series.
It has been 6 years since it launched, and the similarly 6500 has about the same performance, but less features (missing hardware video coder, pcie x4 only). Six years, and we get worse bang for the buck. It only improves in power usage. The 6600 is better, but costs a lot more.

We need another card for the masses. But AMD is hellbent on chasing only high-margin cards. I recall some rumours about the AM5 APUs being really beefy, strong enough that they can completely abandon the $200 segment too in favor of APUs.

It seems dGPUs are now entirely rich peoples toys.

 

[Totally]

Snip.

I stand by my prior statement just want to clarify that it wasn't aimed directly at that specifically at that card but that class/tier in general since the performance needs at that level can easily be satisfied with an APU for the same money or cheaper. In my eyes they're obsolete, therefore a waste of material and manufacturing. And the main point I was making in my comment was the 4090 costs more than 10x the price of the example given but only delivers 8.3x the performance. Pardon me for not seeing how the 6400 is ill-priced with the given context.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

The 6600 is better, but costs a lot more.

I don't know where you live, but here in the U.S. it cost under $200 at times. I can get a factory refurb with a 1yr warranty right now for $178. It absolutely destroys everything under $200 here.

 

[Nike_486DX]

6400 and 6500 are just too weak and cut down, but these cards were made during gpu crysis period so its kinda understandable, the issue is that the crysis is now over yet these cards are still on sale. pcie x4 is the main problem, also the lack of video enconder. Something like R7 260X (HD 7790) from 2013 has got x16 and VCE, and sells for dirt cheap. If you want a cheaper temporary solution better buy used, instead of generating more ewaste with these low end 6000 series.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I stand by my prior statement just want to clarify that it wasn't aimed directly at that specifically at that card but that class/tier in general since the performance needs at that level can easily be satisfied with an APU for the same money or cheaper. In my eyes they're obsolete, therefore a waste of material and manufacturing. And the main point I was making in my comment was the 4090 costs more than 10x the price of the example given but only delivers 8.3x the performance. Pardon me for not seeing how the 6400 is ill-priced with the given context.

You do you man. Some share your stance, some share mine, That's how it works. I voted with my wallet, and gave XFX a sale. Heck of a lot more tangible than words typed in a forum.

 

[Kapone33]

AMDs most popular card to this day is still the Polaris based series.
It has been 6 years since it launched, and the similarly 6500 has about the same performance, but less features (missing hardware video coder, pcie x4 only). Six years, and we get worse bang for the buck. It only improves in power usage. The 6600 is better, but costs a lot more.

We need another card for the masses. But AMD is hellbent on chasing only high-margin cards. I recall some rumours about the AM5 APUs being really beefy, strong enough that they can completely abandon the $200 segment too in favor of APUs.

It seems dGPUs are now entirely rich peoples toys.

AMD wants to make money on development on RDNA3. There is a recession coming and we don't know what the PC market will look like after Christmas. When the replacement cards for the 6800/6700/6600 get released we may be in a world where $300 could get you better performance than those cards.

 

[Ripcord]

6400 and 6500 are just too weak and cut down, but these cards were made during gpu crysis period so its kinda understandable, the issue is that the crysis is now over yet these cards are still on sale. pcie x4 is the main problem, also the lack of video enconder. Something like R7 260X (HD 7790) from 2013 has got x16 and VCE, and sells for dirt cheap. If you want a cheaper temporary solution better buy used, instead of generating more ewaste with these low end 6000 series.

this is what I'm talking about, absolute nonsense

 

[ARF]

AMD wants to make money on development on RDNA3. There is a recession coming and we don't know what the PC market will look like after Christmas. When the replacement cards for the 6800/6700/6600 get released we may be in a world where $300 could get you better performance than those cards.

Well, the best prices we had seen so far were back during the 2008-2009 recession - high-end Radeon HD 4890 could have been taken for only $195 which is the best price for a GFX ever.

 

[john_]

I understand and do support your call that all companies - AMD, Intel and nvidia must follow this demand.
But I do not believe that nvidia is capable to listen to the customers, and actually I have no interest in any of their products - no matter the performance, no matter the price - simply their history is so dark that I cannot support (in any way) a company that is not loyal to its customers.

Only AMD can save the market if they are in the mood to do so.

Still Nvidia is the one with the 80% market share, Nvidia is the one with the strongest brand, meaning if they come out with a new low end card they can create a trend, because people will be buying, still Nvidia is the one without an X86 CPU with integrated graphics and the only one who can produce low end discrete GPUs and advertise them as perfect options for AM4 CPUs and Intel KF CPUs. Also Nvidia is the only one out of the three who will not have the problem of competing itself.

But with AMD having to cut Ryzen 7000 production because of low sales, we can hope they will throw some extra capacity on Radeon cards and get some cheaper RX 7000 models sooner, rather than latter. That will push RX 6000 prices lower. An RX 6600 at lower than $200 would be nice, especially if that price is consistent in all countries and not just US.