Chazore said:
But that's the thing though, AMD is coming in now with lesser drivers, lesser tech and still going for Nvidia's pricing ideals, which is just going to end with them at a net loss, and hardly anyone will want to bother with them, when Nvidia is already on their 2nd gen RT, while AMD charges the same price and hardly bothering, let alone not adding in tech like DLSS, GFE (still lacking in the AMD dept for many features GFE has) as well as GFN (which was a boon for CDPR showing off Cyberpunk to review outlets during the pandemic, where's AMD's neato extremely helpful feature and pro push for that?). MS has also been the underdog for years now in the console space. Sony's been pulling ahead time and time again, they've got the money and mind-share, deals made all around, now we've got the sweet spot Epic+Sony buddying up, with MS and no one (Nvidia isn't helping them, AMD, god knows wtf they are pushing that's as worthy as what Nvidia is bringing to PC gaming, to Xbox levels). MS has been playing that title for years now and it's hardly helped them pull a massive, heavy hitting, outta the park hit, that lands them a top spot, which you would naturally and eventually think an underdog would achieve in the end, but they've yet to get to that point, and we both know they won't, because Sony's got next gen in the bag thanks to mind-share and partnerships, just like how Nvidia has an insane amount of mind-share with their GPU's and tech. I just don't see how being an underdog-=being the same as top place or it somehow being a good position to stay comfortable in for decades on end. Being 2nd place for years just shows you cannot last forever, and that you're just not good enough. I already look at MS as having lost the console space for some time now. I'm just waiting for them to eventually drop it and move back to PC, because let's face it, that's where they started, that's where they ultimately belong. They never really belonged or fit in all that well with the console space, and sales, lacking mind-share and memorable content (outside of shooty shooty bang bang titles) just prove this over time. Maybe if they take this upcoming gen by a complete storm, and firmly secure it throughout the new gen, then maybe I'd pay credence to that underdog anology, but right now, I don't see it as being something of a good thing. |
Captain_Yuri said:
Cause if they have similar price but worse drivers and less features. What incentive is there to buy AMD? Nvidia could have certainly had better performance sure but by having these features baked into Turing, they now have experience as to what works and what doesn't. Take DLSS for example, 1.0 was terrible. 2.0, incredible. Now going into 3000 series, they will probably have even more of an improved version. Then you have ray tracing. RDNA 2 will be AMD's first attempt and it might be good but this will be Nvidia's second generation which should mean greater gains. Now one could argue that consumer are the ones getting screwed but since the alternative is not having any of these at all while having lower or similar performance... I think most people would rather have the first generation features + the similar performance even if the first gen features are not fully ready for prime time. Since the prices are similar that is. Well if AMD wants to price like Nvidia, it won't be reasonable... Personally I don't consider the 5000 prices very reasonable myself as they lack Ray Tracing, Tensor cores and DX12 Ultimate. That's true. |
So that you don't end up with one GPU company that can do whatever they want (assuming Intel Xe hasn't caught up). Just look at what happened to Intel core CPU's.
If Radeon market share won't increase much no matter what AMD does, then what are they supposed to do? Create worthy consumer GPU's for cheap just for the sake of it? Since it's highly unlikely that AMD can take both the CPU and GPU crown, and since AMD is clearly more focused on CPU's, then they should just keep doing what their doing by milking their GPU's until Nvidia takes the entire market from them regardless? In which case, assuming Intel Xe is still trailing where Radeon was at, and Nvidia has almost the entire market to itself, they won't get absolutely out of control when it comes to pricing, or eventually slack off?
Setting expectations too high and continually buying into the most popular brand could lead to ending up with just Nvidia as the majority discreet GPU manufacturer, which would be the worst possible scenario. Ryzen moments are not the norm and shouldn't be the expectation.
Being the underdog for too long can eventually become a major problem for a company and all consumers of those products, because lack of competition over long periods time leads to even worse problems.
I think MS was initially more so in the console space to keep SNY out of the PC space, and not just gaming. MS losing a few billion to protect it's hundreds of billions from becoming tens of billions makes sense.
