Re:Testing AMD's Giant MI300X
by 0cf8612b2e1e on Tuesday June 25, 2024 @01:41PM
(#40791289)
Been a while since AMD had the top tier offering, but it has been trading blows in the middle tier segment the entire time. If you are just looking for a gamer card (ie not max AI performance), the AMD is typically cheaper and less power hungry than the equivalent Nvidia.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Testing AMD's Giant MI300X
by aurareturn on Tuesday June 25, 2024 @02:04PM
(#40791568)
It’s trading blows because AMD sells their cards at lower margins in the midrange and Nvidia lets them.
But, the fact that Nvidia cards command higher margins also reflects their better software stack, right? Nvidia “lets them” trade blows in the midrange, or, equivalently, Nvidia is receiving the reward of their software investments: even their midrange hardware commands a premium.
Re:Testing AMD's Giant MI300X
by bobsondugnut on Tuesday June 25, 2024 @02:03PM
(#40791555)
> the AMD is typically cheaper and less power hungry than the equivalent Nvidia
cheaper is true, but less power hungry is absolutely not true, which is kind of my point.
It was true with RDNA 2. RDNA 3 regressed on this a bit, supposedly there was a hardware hiccup that prevented them from hitting frequency and voltage targets that they were hoping to reach.
In any case they're only slightly behind, not crazy far behind like Intel is.