I truly hope that Navi will be a game changer, even though I won't be able to change due to my G-Sync monitor.
The RX 590 (a re re branded 480 from all the way back in 2016) costs around $250 and sits between the 1060 and 1070, getting from between 1060 and 1070 to around 1080 performance in a three years newer architecture doesn't sound all that unrealistic.
If AMD can produce a GPU that performs at the level of a £400+ product from their competitor, and they price it at $250 then I'd be quite surprised tbh. I have my doubts about their ability to deliver the performance in the first place (mainly due to once bitten, twice shy when it comes to them delivering on their promises), but even if they do produce the goods I'd be staggered if they chose to sell it for half the price of their opposite number. This myth of AMD being super generous and benevolent and screwing themselves to give customers a great deal is just that. Both AMD and nVidia are there to make money, and although you could argue that it's better to sell three cards at $250 than one at $500, if it costs you $300 to make each card then that's just not the case! Again, though, for the avoidance of doubt, it would be tremendous if AMD could pull this out of the bag. More competition is a good thing.
Only absolutely all of the facts completely disagree with you. At the time of launch of the Ryzen 1700, for example, the Intel 5960x was a thousand pounds. AMD come along with a brand new tech and then sell it for £320. And guess what, it performed exactly the same as the 5960x or better. They also released it on a socket that they stuck by, and released their next range onto. All you needed was a BIOS update. Then of course we have all of the free Easter eggs they have given away. What? free cores, unlocked CPUs, GPUs that can be unlocked and flashed to the model above and so on and so forth. And they are still doing that now. Last week they released a new CPU that was locked, then a bios comes out that you can unlock. That is all 100% fact based on history. Have you ever seen Intel do that? unlock their Xeons later in life so people get more use out of them? or Nvidia release a GPU that can be flashed (I've seen it twice in the last 20 years. The 5800 to 5950 and the very early 465 to 470). AMD do it deliberately, though. And whilst you call it "screwing themselves" it's plainly just a case of them being FAR more generous with their customers.
If it was a current gen £400+ GPU? Sure, but in 2019 when Navi comes out the 1080 will be a three year old museum piece.
Exactly. Time stopped when the 1080 launched. Well actually no, it didn't it stopped when the Vega 64 came out and could not even best the 1080. From there? it's been pure milking on Nvidia's behalf. I personally can't wait for Navi now. I don't need it, but if "Scaleable" actually means some sort of way to connect two GPUs without needing drivers and etc (kinda like IF on the Ryzen CPUs) then I will be in for sure.
Bovine-ejecta! AMD clamp down on core unlocking as soon as they have the chance to respin. e.g. with CUINFO when as soon as they realised that firmware-locked binning could be bypassed they switched to laser-fuse binning. It's not out of the goodness of their hearts, it's a loophole that gets patched as soon as they have the chance.
Only once again all of the facts disagree with you. So this was a mistake? then they made it on Semprons, Athlons, Phenoms etc over the space of many years. Where were the cease and desist orders from AMD when the unlocking feature became a big selling point on boards, like that time Intel accidentally released an I3 that could be overclocked? So I don't agree with you at all.
Or how about the Rx Vega launch, where the marketed RRPs were £100/$100 below the prices of actually available cards, as the 'unbundled' version sold out immediately leaving only the 'Radeon pack' versions with inflated pricetags? Or if you wanted the liquid-cooled Vega 64 at launch you had to buy the inflated-price pack, as those were simply not sold as just cards? Or how about the Fury (and especially the Fury Nano) where, when called on their benchmark fiddling by TechReport, AMD decided to not send them cards to review with their VP accusing their reviews of being 'unfair' (something he later had to retract and apologise for under backlash) when it turned out real world performance was not even close? AMd are not nice guys. Nvidia are not nice guys. Intel are not nice guys. All are corporations who would rob your mother blind if they though they could get away with it.
Well, i'm hopeful of finally getting a reasonable more than sideways upgrade for notsostupidintelprices in the new year. If there's a gpu that's a bit of a step up on the 1080 i may even nibble, be nice to actually use that freesync on my monitor.
@edzieba and I have opposing views on many things, this however I agree with - the only thing I will say is AMD in the here and now are the lesser of the evils.
