AMD Radeon RDNA2 Navi (RX 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, 6900 XT)

[Silent_Buddha]

Out of stock for me (checking from Finland / EU if it makes a difference)
View attachment 6452

edit: I think it matters, just noticed the /us switched to /fi automatically

Yup, country/market specific offers on that page. In the US, the 6900 XT is still available as of this post. Interestingly, the lowest price on Amazon is still ~1,100 USD. Used ones are starting to appear on E-bay in the US for as low as ~930 USD (buy it now).

Speaking of E-bay, out of the Radeon 6xxx series, the 6900 XT is the only one with used cards available for below MSRP. The other cards are in higher demand and still command >= MSRP for used ones.

Regards,
SB

 

[digitalwanderer]

I'm seeing a lot of 6600s going for $360us lately. Not good, but a big improvement.

 

[BRiT]

I'm seeing a lot of 6600s going for $360us lately. Not good, but a big improvement.

You know you're an old PC builder when your first thought is "Wow, why are folks buying those CPUs?" and I don't mean the i5 models either.

 

[PSman1700]

You know you're an old PC builder when your first thought is "Wow, why are folks buying those CPUs?" and I don't mean the i5 models either.

I had a Q6600 (and QX6700)

 

[Man from Atlantis]

You know you're an old PC builder when your first thought is "Wow, why are folks buying those CPUs?" and I don't mean the i5 models either.

I still think 6600GT and HL2

 

[PSman1700]

I still think 6600GT and HL2

GPU

 

[pharma]

 

[DegustatoR]

So they've increased the MSRPs?

 

[arandomguy]

Given the also latest rumoured Intel pricing it seems like the industry seems to be predicting that prices have fallen to "equilibrium" for lack of a better term.

It seems like we will not hit 2020Q4 launch level MSRP perf/$ values much less go below them until miners start selling off in mass and/or next gen starts shipping in volume.

 

[trinibwoy]

Given the also latest rumoured Intel pricing it seems like the industry seems to be predicting that prices have fallen to "equilibrium" for lack of a better term.

It seems like we will not hit 2020Q4 launch level MSRP perf/$ values much less go below them until miners start selling off in mass and/or next gen starts shipping in volume.

Or maybe the profit maximization equation has permanently shifted in favor of higher prices. The only thing that would bring prices down is aggressive competition. AMD seems to be quite happy letting Nvidia have 80%+ of the GPU market. They have a significant feature and brand deficit yet their pricing isn't aggressive at all.

 

[Jawed]

Or maybe the profit maximization equation has permanently shifted in favor of higher prices. The only thing that would bring prices down is aggressive competition. AMD seems to be quite happy letting Nvidia have 80%+ of the GPU market. They have a significant feature and brand deficit yet their pricing isn't aggressive at all.

AMD can't magically buy 100% more wafers than were originally contracted say 3 years ago, though.

We don't know how fluid the contracts are and how much opportunistic breathing room there is.

Do we even know what Radeon's volumes are since 2020Q3? Sales have probably increased. To gain market share, Radeon sales would have had to increase faster than NVidia's.

So, with a locked-in quantity of wafers, and being able to sell all those wafers, what is the point of lowering prices?

 

[trinibwoy]

So, with a locked-in quantity of wafers, and being able to sell all those wafers, what is the point of lowering prices?

There wouldn't be any point assuming they are in fact supply constrained. Forward looking contracts aren't a valid excuse though. The volumes contracted are influenced by strategic market share goals. So is AMD only contracting enough volume to maintain a 15-20% share of the market?

 

[Jawed]

So is AMD only contracting enough volume to maintain a 15-20% share of the market?

That's the question you should have started with

 

[neckthrough]

The real question is what percentage of wafer allocation AMD is willing to steal from Zen to give to Radeon. I think that's pretty much a zero-sum game.

 

[trinibwoy]

That's the question you should have started with

Makes you wonder what numbers Intel is projecting for their first go round. They should be able to coerce a few OEM wins.

 

[Kaotik]

Makes you wonder what numbers Intel is projecting for their first go round. They should be able to coerce a few OEM wins.

Intel said 4 million+ this year IIRC

 

[Silent_Buddha]

There wouldn't be any point assuming they are in fact supply constrained. Forward looking contracts aren't a valid excuse though. The volumes contracted are influenced by strategic market share goals. So is AMD only contracting enough volume to maintain a 15-20% share of the market?

It depends on how long the projection is. For the next fiscal year? If they are optimistic perhaps single to double digit percentage changes to their current marketshare (so from a start of 20% to projected range of 20.1% to 40%). For the next couple fiscal years? It depends on a combination of how optimistic their projections are combined with how much risk they want to take on based on those projections. For 3 years and beyond? Likely no long term increases in wafer contracting based on current sales projections.

On top of that there will be year to year shorter term wafer contracting. It's more expensive but less risky than contracting for large wafer increases 2-3+ years in advance.

So, at the 3 year timeframe that Jawed speculated about, it's unlikely they would have been so optimistic about things that they would have contracted for a significantly larger number of wafer starts for their GPU business. Their CPU business on the other hand was booming so the bulk of their wafer start increases were likely to go towards that.

Considering how constrained the market is WRT fab capacity and wafer starts, it's not like AMD could speculatively go all in on a massive wafer reservation increase 3 years ago.

Risk management will be a large part of their budget allocations considering how historically they haven't done the greatest job WRT risk management (over committing to wafer starts and then being stuck with more wafers starts than they needed).

Regards,
SB

 

[DavidGraham]

AMD seems to be quite happy letting Nvidia have 80%+ of the GPU market.

Speaking of which:

Tom’s Hardware pointed out that the top 10 best-selling graphics card listed by the US retailer are GeForce models at the time of writing.

In fact, the entire top 20 models are all Nvidia products, with one exception – an AMD entry at number 15, which is the MSI Mech Radeon RX 6600.

To frame that another way, 95% of the top 20 graphics cards are made by Nvidia, and those are all Ampere (RTX 3000) GPUs, except for the RTX 2060 at number 17.

What’s also interesting to note is that the top dog sellers are quite expensive Nvidia GPUs, namely the RTX 3070 Ti, a trio of models of which hold the top three positions, and they’re followed by a 3060 Ti, then an RTX 3050 – an affordable option, of course – but at number six there’s an RTX 3080 Ti.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...y-amd-for-gpu-sales-right-now/ar-AAWZp5v?ocid

 

[PSman1700]

AMD really needs to improve there, all the more reason now Intel also is joining and probably taking a piece of the gpu market. They will fall further and further back tech.wise due to this, NV can do what they do because they have the resources (due to sales).

 

[swaaye]

I think AMD would need to have a performance halo product to turn that around and they don't seem willing to go that far. It would also help to have some VR features, be sure their video encoding is the best, high visibility driver updates for big new games, etc.