newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2005
- Messages
- 28,472 (4.23/day)
- Location
- Indiana, USA
| Processor | Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz |
|---|---|
| Motherboard | AsRock Z470 Taichi |
| Cooling | Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans |
| Memory | 32GB DDR4-3600 |
| Video Card(s) | RTX 2070 Super |
| Storage | 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache |
| Display(s) | Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28" |
| Case | Fractal Design Define S |
| Audio Device(s) | Onboard is good enough for me |
| Power Supply | eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3 |
| Software | Windows 10 Pro x64 |
For $500 the Nano wasn't a terrible buy a couple months ago. Of course you new things are going to come out, and usually come out quickly, that makes your new shiny high end GPU seem like a bad buy. That is the nature of GPUs(and used to be the nature of CPUs but not so much anymore due to the slowdown in advancement). It is this reason that all these years I have never bought the highest end GPUs. The return on investment has always been a bad one. The one or two steps down GPU has has always gotten my money, because they are always better values. I bought a 9500 instead of a 9700(and unlocked to a 9700), I bought an X800GTO instead of the X850XT(and unlocked it to an X850XT), I bought the X1950Pro instead of the XTX, I bought an HD3850 instead of the HD3870, I bought an HD4850 instead of the HD4870/90(but later bought HD4890s for crossfire and did kind of regret it), I bought an HD5850 instead of the HD5870, I bought the HD6950 instead of the HD6970, a 7950 instead of a 7970. I only bought my 290X because it was a great deal and cheaper than a 390. Every time I've bought the highest end card, the ones that cost $500+, yes I have regretted it. This isn't just a red team issue, I've had the same experiences on the green side of the fence. I regretted my 980Ti, I was perfectly happy with 970s in SLI, and really am happy with a single 970. And the 970 was an awesome card for the money, so it makes sense.
The other issue is I think AMD botched Fiji. I'm not saying the GPU is bad, it is a great GPU. I'm saying they could have done some things differently and made Fiji a lot more appealing. They released no one, but two halo products. And made only one crippled SKU for board partners to use to release custom designs. That isn't smart, IMO. What I think they should have done is released the Fury X as it was, but allow board partners to release custom designs. Release the Nano as well as it was, but use the crippled Fiji on it, but also allow board partners to make custom designs with that GPU as well. Instead they made it so that the only way you can get a full Fiji GPU is to buy a reference design, and the only way to get an air cooled full Fiji is to buy a Nano with a tiny underpowered cooler. I would have loved to see a full Fiji GPU, under a decent air cooler, and I think I'm not the only one. Even better, I'd love to see a cut down custom designed Fiji selling for $400. I think that would have been a winning combo right there. And that is AMD's other issue with the Fiji cards, they overpriced them. The Nano should not have come out at $650, that is just insane. If they would have released a full Fiji, air cooled, with custom designs available on launch day for $500 or even $550 for custom designs it would have been a definite winner and it would have gotten a lot more wows. Same thing with the crippled Fiji. Why are they trying to sell the crippled Fiji for $550? The cut down cards are the cards you are supposed to make great values. I don't care that the Fury was noticeably faster than the GTX980, and the 980 was selling for $480 at the time. Undercut the competition to steal some sales, offer something better for the same price. That is how you get sales! Don't price the card so high that the GTX980 still beats it price to performance.
The other issue is I think AMD botched Fiji. I'm not saying the GPU is bad, it is a great GPU. I'm saying they could have done some things differently and made Fiji a lot more appealing. They released no one, but two halo products. And made only one crippled SKU for board partners to use to release custom designs. That isn't smart, IMO. What I think they should have done is released the Fury X as it was, but allow board partners to release custom designs. Release the Nano as well as it was, but use the crippled Fiji on it, but also allow board partners to make custom designs with that GPU as well. Instead they made it so that the only way you can get a full Fiji GPU is to buy a reference design, and the only way to get an air cooled full Fiji is to buy a Nano with a tiny underpowered cooler. I would have loved to see a full Fiji GPU, under a decent air cooler, and I think I'm not the only one. Even better, I'd love to see a cut down custom designed Fiji selling for $400. I think that would have been a winning combo right there. And that is AMD's other issue with the Fiji cards, they overpriced them. The Nano should not have come out at $650, that is just insane. If they would have released a full Fiji, air cooled, with custom designs available on launch day for $500 or even $550 for custom designs it would have been a definite winner and it would have gotten a lot more wows. Same thing with the crippled Fiji. Why are they trying to sell the crippled Fiji for $550? The cut down cards are the cards you are supposed to make great values. I don't care that the Fury was noticeably faster than the GTX980, and the 980 was selling for $480 at the time. Undercut the competition to steal some sales, offer something better for the same price. That is how you get sales! Don't price the card so high that the GTX980 still beats it price to performance.
, swap done to due the promo on Fury X. IIRC at the time a 980 Ti would have been ~£200 more than Fury X deal. A 980 was also steep in price, so a no brainer to get the Fury X.
.