AMD Claims Higher FPS/$ Radeon GPU Value Over NVIDIA Offerings

[AusWolf]

I'm not saying that it's total BS. The 6600 series really represent great value over the 3050 and 3060.

All I have to say is that the numbers in this chart are flawed, and without system and settings data, they don't mean anything.

AMD tarnishes their reputation by trying too hard in the marketing department, imo.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

What did AMD did to you guys? And this coming from someone that usually trashes AMD gpu's.

Aren't those MSRP? What's the point of looking to prices in random sites? They don't control retail prices (sure there is more to that, but in honesty AMD or NVIDIA aren't the main guilty parties for the difference to real prices)

I think some of it is dog piling.... It seems to be the popular thing to be a front runner, become an Nvidia fan and trash AMD, not exactly a "brave" choice to choose the side that has 80% market share and a graphics R&D budget 5x larger than its competitor, though I'd arguing choosing any side is ridiculous. But people should be cheering on AMD, but not for the typical fanboy reasons of bickering about performance metrics, but in the interest of maintaining a competitive industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again, when you compare the Financials between Nvidia and AMD, it's truly amazing how competitive AMD is capable of being....Nvidia is spending way, way more on R&D than AMD and has what, a few percentage points advantage in FPS? An advantage that the average human cannot even discern... I want to ask all the Nvidia cheerleaders if they honestly want a world in which Nvidia dominates the market and has a monopoly? Everyone should remember the pre-ryzen dark ages, right? Would that be good for the graphics market? Any reasonable person would answer "no". I would genuinely argue that everyone who cares about competition in the long term, and having the best environment for consumers possible should be cheering for AMD to reach 50% market share, it is undeniably in every enthusiasts best interest. As for Intel in the graphics market....not so much, yes another competitor would be good, but dont mistake Intel's entry for true competition.... It's just a conglomerate spreading their tentacles to another sector and relying on financial power rather than innovation to dominate, something that might not be so good in the long run. What would be truly advantageous would be a wholly new company entering the game, not some large entrenched company just expanding (BTW, the way Intel has been buying up companies in the last couple of years is troubling, and I wish regulators would do something about it, though I'm honestly not surprised they don't)

 

[catulitechup]

The 6500xt was made to exploit the current market conditions, is it bad? Yes, just as bad as nvidia waiting more than a year to bother releasing the 3050 for example. Neither company is our friend.

yeah nvidia are scumbags too, them gradually up prices on newer series and cut seriously capabilities between xx30 series especially notorius between GT 730 (GK208 kepler based) and GT 1030 (GP108 pascal heavy cutted based for example on encode capabilities)

personally i dont give money until prices lower more and stay waiting for intel arc but now this seem need time

 

[natr0n]

One thing I don't like about radeon drivers is they are extremely bloated and invasive.

 

[TheEndIsNear]

I like my 6900xt. It's a good card. I couldn't possibly list all the cards I've owned the past few years but I don't really have a preference. I've really never had a problem with either. But the 6900xt was much cheaper than the 3080ti at the time.

 

[erocker]

Oh! So price/performance is something in their vocabulary again! Prices for the most part are still over MSRP.

 

[Robin Seina]

Results from TPU's very own https://www.techpowerup.com/review/geforce-rtx-3080-vs-radeon-rx-6800-xt-megabench/

Fairly conclusive and tested with both brands' reference designs.

This is already a half-year old. New "preview" May 22 drivers improve DX11 performace. In some cases by quite a lot.

 

[InVasMani]

One thing I don't like about radeon drivers is they are extremely bloated and invasive.

I hate to break it to you, but so too are Nvidia drivers.

 

[mechtech]

Oh! So price/performance is something in their vocabulary again! Prices for the most part are still over MSRP.

Yes, but, they (AMD) have been selling cards on their (US) website at MSRP, but etailers/retailers way over MSRP, makes me wonder whats going on?? AIB partners marking it up, or others down the line or??

 

[Recus]

That's always been the case, AdoredTV did a multi part series on this a few years ago that analyzed the sales figures compared to performance and reviews, and showed that even when AMD had a better product in basically every category, Nvidia still sold more by far. AdoredTV chalks it up to "mentia", or minds hare, and I'd agree.... When someone new to PC DIY or gaming encounters enough rabid fans over and over and over again in every comments section they go to, they're going to start believing there's something to it... I think part of it is a sort of "peer pressure", that people go with Nvidia because they don't want to be the odd person out so to speak....

*Say what you want about AdoredTV, but the videos I'm referencing were meticulous in research and citing sources to reputable reviewers and sales figures... The empirical data is there to support his conclusion

AdorkedTV is just fanboy without objective opinion. People still bought Polaris even Pascal was better across the board. AMD was saved because people bought Bulldozer.

I think some of it is dog piling.... It seems to be the popular thing to be a front runner, become an Nvidia fan and trash AMD, not exactly a "brave" choice to choose the side that has 80% market share and a graphics R&D budget 5x larger than its competitor, though I'd arguing choosing any side is ridiculous. But people should be cheering on AMD, but not for the typical fanboy reasons of bickering about performance metrics, but in the interest of maintaining a competitive industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again, when you compare the Financials between Nvidia and AMD, it's truly amazing how competitive AMD is capable of being....Nvidia is spending way, way more on R&D than AMD and has what, a few percentage points advantage in FPS? An advantage that the average human cannot even discern... I want to ask all the Nvidia cheerleaders if they honestly want a world in which Nvidia dominates the market and has a monopoly? Everyone should remember the pre-ryzen dark ages, right? Would that be good for the graphics market? Any reasonable person would answer "no". I would genuinely argue that everyone who cares about competition in the long term, and having the best environment for consumers possible should be cheering for AMD to reach 50% market share, it is undeniably in every enthusiasts best interest. As for Intel in the graphics market....not so much, yes another competitor would be good, but dont mistake Intel's entry for true competition.... It's just a conglomerate spreading their tentacles to another sector and relying on financial power rather than innovation to dominate, something that might not be so good in the long run. What would be truly advantageous would be a wholly new company entering the game, not some large entrenched company just expanding (BTW, the way Intel has been buying up companies in the last couple of years is troubling, and I wish regulators would do something about it, though I'm honestly not surprised they don't)

That's just a talks. It's a fact that AMD fanboys first who forgets about competition and buy only AMD. Every upcoming GPU is Nvidia killer, every AMD feature is Nvidia killer, every gadget must be powered by AMD, Mindfacrory Ryzen sales 80% who cares about 50-50 for healthy competition, APU will kill Nvidia low-end GPUs. I will never buy Nvidia GPU because GPP or *insert random anti-competition, shady doing by Nvidia. Sounds familiar? That's comments from so called not brand loyalists.

 

[trsttte]

Yes, but, they (AMD) have been selling cards on their (US) website at MSRP, but etailers/retailers way over MSRP, makes me wonder whats going on?? AIB partners marking it up, or others down the line or??

MSRP is just a sugested price from the manufacturer, allegedly nvidia sets their prices very agressively to the point where AIB have no chance at hitting that reference price after making the heatsink, pcb, etc.

I feel everyone got hang up on this supposed MSRP term this generation because price gouging and scalping was so prevalent, plus shortages, inflation and higher demand it all went to hell, but MSRP are just a launch reference, prices are supposed to drop as time passses (because the product also is getting cheaper to make, and they need to move the inventory before next gen) which obviously didn't really happen this time (not so far anyway)

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

F#@£ I thought I was in the toxicity thread then , had to check.

I don't yet care which is best price per dollar, they're both still taking the piss with pricing, one more than the other, this is the reason Intel's Arc delays annoy me, since only market competition can slap these companies back to reality, IMHO.

 

[ARF]

AMD does have slightly better FPS/$ but Nvidia has competent software devs, things like DLSS, RT, good shadowplay etc. etc.

DLSS is a thing that you don't need - it is basically a new setting for lowering your image quality and giving you back some more FPS;
RT, well, it is too early for it, it is extremely expensive and there is absolutely nothing done by RT which can't be done by the classic and cheap for hardware lighting methods.


Shadowplay? I have never heard about it, must be something new in the nvidia making... lol

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

DLSS is a thing that you don't need - it is basically a new setting for lowering your image quality and giving you back some more FPS;
RT, well, it is too early for it, it is extremely expensive and there is absolutely nothing done by RT which can't be done by the classic and cheap for hardware lighting methods.


Shadowplay? I have never heard about it, must be something new in the nvidia making... lol

Shadow replay would have been a more apt name, it's also not for everyone, me included.

 

[Bomby569]

I think some of it is dog piling.... It seems to be the popular thing to be a front runner, become an Nvidia fan and trash AMD, not exactly a "brave" choice to choose the side that has 80% market share and a graphics R&D budget 5x larger than its competitor, though I'd arguing choosing any side is ridiculous. But people should be cheering on AMD, but not for the typical fanboy reasons of bickering about performance metrics, but in the interest of maintaining a competitive industry. I've said it before and I'll say it again, when you compare the Financials between Nvidia and AMD, it's truly amazing how competitive AMD is capable of being....Nvidia is spending way, way more on R&D than AMD and has what, a few percentage points advantage in FPS? An advantage that the average human cannot even discern... I want to ask all the Nvidia cheerleaders if they honestly want a world in which Nvidia dominates the market and has a monopoly? Everyone should remember the pre-ryzen dark ages, right? Would that be good for the graphics market? Any reasonable person would answer "no". I would genuinely argue that everyone who cares about competition in the long term, and having the best environment for consumers possible should be cheering for AMD to reach 50% market share, it is undeniably in every enthusiasts best interest. As for Intel in the graphics market....not so much, yes another competitor would be good, but dont mistake Intel's entry for true competition.... It's just a conglomerate spreading their tentacles to another sector and relying on financial power rather than innovation to dominate, something that might not be so good in the long run. What would be truly advantageous would be a wholly new company entering the game, not some large entrenched company just expanding (BTW, the way Intel has been buying up companies in the last couple of years is troubling, and I wish regulators would do something about it, though I'm honestly not surprised they don't)

i really honestly don't care about corporations, my CPU is an AMD, off my previous 4 GPU's, 2 were AMD ones.

I really hated my experience with the 5700xt and i speak from experience. I will stay away from AMD gpu's for a long time, i will hapilly buy another Ryzen CPU. Most people on this AMD defense never owned or not recently supported AMD's gpu's, or just got on now that they are on top. I supported them when they were down and it wasn't fun at all.

This to say i speak from my experiences. This chart seems absolutely normal to me, i don't get the reactions.

 

[Durvelle27]

i really honestly don't care about corporations, my CPU is an AMD, off my previous 4 GPU's, 2 were AMD ones.

I really hated my experience with the 5700xt and i speak from experience. I will stay away from AMD gpu's for a long time, i will hapilly buy another Ryzen CPU. Most people on this AMD defense never owned or not recently supported AMD's gpu's, or just got on now that they are on top. I supported them when they were down and it wasn't fun at all.

This to say i speak from my experiences. This chart seems absolutely normal to me, i don't get the reactions.

Speak for yourself I been using AMD since the HD 5770 upto the RX 6700XT. Hardly any issues other than my R9 290X running heck a hot

 

[Bomby569]

Speak for yourself I been using AMD since the HD 5770 upto the RX 6700XT. Hardly any issues other than my R9 290X running heck a hot

i usually always speak for myself, no clue how i could speak for someone else, maybe ventriloquism, idk

 

[Durvelle27]

i usually always speak for myself, no clue how i could speak for someone else, maybe ventriloquism, idk

You stated "Most people on this AMD defense never owned or not recently supported AMD's gpu's, or just got on now that they are on top. I supported them when they were down and it wasn't fun at all."

 

[watzupken]

In my opinion, I feel a lot of people are misusing the cost per frame data. The problem is low end cards tend to offer better value because they are significantly cheaper than high and even mid tier cards. And because hardware don’t scale perfectly, i.e. you don’t get double the performance just because the card have double the CUs or CUDA cores. The data should be for buyers to decide how much more are they willing to pay for a given card, knowing that they will still be paying a premium for higher end cards. There is 0 reasons to compare cost per frame for flagship/ halo products because they are intentionally priced at a steep premium. And the buyers/ target market generally won’t be deterred by the price tag.
In any case, even if the RX 6500 and 6400 series have “great” cost per frame, I will still avoid buying or recommending the cards. They are just bad value to me. The card may appeal to some.

 

[AusWolf]

In my opinion, I feel a lot of people are misusing the cost per frame data. The problem is low end cards tend to offer better value because they are significantly cheaper than high and even mid tier cards. And because hardware don’t scale perfectly, i.e. you don’t get double the performance just because the card have double the CUs or CUDA cores. The data should be for buyers to decide how much more are they willing to pay for a given card, knowing that they will still be paying a premium for higher end cards. There is 0 reasons to compare cost per frame for flagship/ halo products because they are intentionally priced at a steep premium. And the buyers/ target market generally won’t be deterred by the price tag.
In any case, even if the RX 6500 and 6400 series have “great” cost per frame, I will still avoid buying or recommending the cards. They are just bad value to me. The card may appeal to some.

I personally find cost per frame data pointless as I'm using a 60 Hz monitor, and I can't really tell much difference above 40-45 fps anyway. Anything above these numbers is either wasted money or reserve performance for future games.

 

[watzupken]

i really honestly don't care about corporations, my CPU is an AMD, off my previous 4 GPU's, 2 were AMD ones.

I really hated my experience with the 5700xt and i speak from experience. I will stay away from AMD gpu's for a long time, i will hapilly buy another Ryzen CPU. Most people on this AMD defense never owned or not recently supported AMD's gpu's, or just got on now that they are on top. I supported them when they were down and it wasn't fun at all.

This to say i speak from my experiences. This chart seems absolutely normal to me, i don't get the reactions.

Personally, I had no issues using a RX 6800 XT and 6600 XT. Both worked flawlessly to me. My opinion is that the first gen RDNA cards were more like pipe cleaner as these are the first time they made a significant architectural change from Vega. It is unfortunate, and it left a bad taste in the “tester’s” mouth.

 

[R-T-B]

I mean cost per FPS.... @1440p

View attachment 247776

You can't really use both sides halo products as references for a "bang for the buck" comparison. You need a more wide dataset.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

You can't really use both sides halo products as references for a "bang for the buck" comparison. You need a more wide dataset.

You'll see in a later comment from me in this thread that for the most part it's like arguing over pennies over the entire lineup between Nvidia and AMD.

This comment was a little bit of a tongue in cheek reply to the 'put up or shut up' from Mr. Freeagent.

But in this specific case, between the 6950XT and 3090Ti, cost per frame is basically half in AMD's favor. Outside of these two, it's pretty much a tossup.

 

[Bomby569]

You stated "Most people on this AMD defense never owned or not recently supported AMD's gpu's, or just got on now that they are on top. I supported them when they were down and it wasn't fun at all."

Just look at their GPU market share before the new cards were released. It's a fact.

Before the new cards release it was 17%

Global GPU Market Share (2010 - 2023)

This statistic highlights GPU Market Share from 2010 onwards. AMD's GPU market share in Q1 2021 stood at 20%, whereas Nvidia had an 80% share.

businessquant.com

 

[medi01]

AMD can claim whatever they like, it does not make it true.

Looks spot on though, looking at TPU benchmarks and street prices.

Which particular line did you find dubious?

AMD does have slightly better FPS/$

"Slightly" is a funny way to refer to 30-80% lead. (3070Ti is the only exception)

But in this specific case, between the 6950XT and 3090Ti, cost per frame is basically half in AMD's favor. Outside of these two, it's pretty much a tossup.

Let me pick up cards "outside of these two'. 6650XT ($400) vs 3060 ($430)

TPU figures (1080p): 112.8/96.5*430/400

25% higher fps/$. (around the same at 1440p)

MSI Radeon RX 6650 XT Gaming X Review

With the Radeon RX 6650 XT priced at a competitive MSRP of $400, AMD is offering a new contender for the 1080p Value King title. Thanks to an improved 18 Gbps memory subsystem, the RX 6650 XT can extend its performance lead over the NVIDIA RTX 3060.

www.techpowerup.com