http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility#.V0qXg5ErKHs 
 
I would suggest this read from HardOCP
 
What HardOCP knows from sources inside and outside the company, AMD has a problem on its hands, as both these products have come up significantly short of where these were supposed to land. But that is OK for AMD, it will simply send Chris Hook out to fall on the sword and tell a story of that was the plan all along....to produce brand new parts much slower than its last high end GPUs. In the simplest terms AMD has created a product that runs hotter and slower than its competition's new architecture by a potentially significant margin
....
 
the desire of AMD’s current GPU leadership to spin off from the rest of AMD and become "ATI" again. There’s been lots made of the current leadership structure of the Radeon Technologies Group (RTG) led by Raja Koduri and his band of ATI loyalists. After conversations with a number of current and recently departed employees a clear picture emerges. A picture ripe with tension, blind ambition, and backwards thinking.

It's funny, because just a few months ago I couldn't go to any tech rumor article without seeing "JUST WAIT UNTIL POLARIS!" in the comments section.  Right now, it's "JUST WAIT UNTIL ZEN!"  I think AMD should ask Sony if they can borrow their catch phrase for the PS4:
 
"Greatness Awaits"
 
It seems more appropriate for AMD, since their fans will always be waiting for something that competes with Nvidia and Intel.
 
Also, how was the 1070 and 1080 performance a surprise?  This isn't unprecedented.  Just look at 680 and 670 vs. 580.  Even 970 and 980 outperformed Titan Black (not in every test for the 970, but definitely for new games at the time).  If their people didn't see this coming, then they really need to rethink their position in the industry.

Amd is always beat out by nvidia launches, nvidia has more money and people.
However look at the prices of the new 1080 and 1070 cards, that is not because nvidia felt like lowering the price but because there is some competition on the block again.

Will Polaris beat pascal in raw power?
Probably not, but it will use a fraction of the power (maybe) and will be way less money.

If anyone remembers AMD has been marketing Polaris as a big leap in performance based on power and price.

I just see a lot of users calling AMD out on stuff that their fan base says, as if their users speak for them.

Yeah us people with duel 970s and higher are just the minority and not whats most important to amd right now :( most gamers look to spend $150-$350 range on cards and not $700 and up. I want to spend $1200 on a single card thats much faster than the 980 ti but 100 other people don't, they want to spend $150-350 only.
 
http://store.steampowered...ey/videocard/?sort=chg

you guys should also follow the discussion at [H] forums
 
anyways polaris is 14nm and pascal is 16nm...so amd has smaller transistors
 
polaris is 232 mm and pascal is 300mm - so the polaris should be just as powerful as pascal - not half baked as it seems to be
GF seems to have issues with production yields and performance - and why AMD is slow to get the product out - re-tuning both GF silicon/fab and the design . retapping? - new steppings?
 
AMD has been teasing for what now a year or 1/2 a year and no polaris yet... still no silicon....didn't we see teases/demos pre Jan? and in Jan
 
the infighting shows it all
 
. Koduri was able to wrestle control of the graphics division away during AMD’s last leadership transition after threatening to leave the ship and take a role at Intel, something he's not shy about telling his AMD colleagues. Lisa Su caved and Koduri got the job.
 
Rory Reed started it by chopping GPU R&D staff - engineers
and putting it where??? - CPU side - dead as a horse and ARM? where is it
 
GPU was the profitible side - not  the cpu side - so you cut the side that makes money to ppur down a drain on the losing side
how many years AMD lost money - 8yrs in a row... you think investors are gonna keep bailing out the company
 
and it's why AMD is trying to raise funds thru licensing tech and patents - selling porfolio
and why the chinese deal a month or so ago
 
the fact that senior staff are almost jumping ship already shows us everything
-----------------------------
 
for those that want cheaper GPU's - that's a losing battle
Silicon cost money
 
AMD gas been cutting price squeezing their own margins - to what - make less profit at a time they are losing $$ and when they need it for R&D and engineers
you don't make $$ on low end gpu's - - you might but seriously not as much as you could with high end - and most notable with commercial
 
$12k a GP100 - count the supercomputers - and using 1000's .if not 100k's of cards for that alone - .we are talking billions here
12k for a part that cost what? a few hundred to make - serious profit margin
 
example
4500 pascals at  Swiss National Supercomputing Center (CSCS)  (Piz Daint) is $54M
at Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee (Titan) and at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (vulcan) respectively $325M
Sandia ?
 
 
 
 
 
 
Anyways  to add... people say look at the contracts they are getting from apple and consoles
seriously look at apple - cheapest labour they can find and and get the lowest price on parts ...you think they are doing AMD a favor ...more likely taking advantage of AMD's position
to get a seriously low price - console makers are the same - because people want a cheap gaming system - not a good one - if you wanted something good you would get a PC...can't afford one get a cheap console - or one the kids can break and you can replace easily
 
to companies it's about bottom line get a product at a lower price that will do the same job or close ...squeeze the one you can
Nvidia can't be squeezed
 
Intel - if they don't get their heads out of their arses will be in the same boat 12k jobs cut at intel
why? cpu division hasn't got sale - most notable in server sales...when Arm and Nvidia are cutting into it
 
Being stagnant hasn't helped Intel - being the only dog hasn't pushed intel hard enough - i hope Nvidia doesn't get this complacent
 
 
 

gridironcpj

seth89
Amd is always beat out by nvidia launches, nvidia has more money and people.
However look at the prices of the new 1080 and 1070 cards, that is not because nvidia felt like lowering the price but because there is some competition on the block again.

Will Polaris beat pascal in raw power?
Probably not, but it will use a fraction of the power (maybe) and will be way less money.

If anyone remembers AMD has been marketing Polaris as a big leap in performance based on power and price.

I just see a lot of users calling AMD out on stuff that their fan base says, as if their users speak for them.

AMD isn't always beat out by Nvidia in terms of launching first.  The 7970 came out before the 680, which were the flagship cards at the time.  
 
Also, your thoughts on the 1070 and 1080 prices are a bit odd.  GP104 cards should be compared to GK104 and GM204 cards in terms of pricing, as they're in the same position of the generation's lineup.  There is a slight markup with the 1000 series, which one could argue comes from a LACK of competition by AMD.  Also, Polaris isn't even expected to compete with 1070 and 1080, so I'm not sure how AMD is influencing Nvidia's pricing of their flagship cards when they have no direct competition.

Well the 1080 is as strong as two 980 cards and the 1070 is as strong as a titan, nvidia could have charged way more for this amount of power.
The 1070 could easily be 500 bucks and people would pay it.

seth89

gridironcpj

seth89
Amd is always beat out by nvidia launches, nvidia has more money and people.
However look at the prices of the new 1080 and 1070 cards, that is not because nvidia felt like lowering the price but because there is some competition on the block again.

Will Polaris beat pascal in raw power?
Probably not, but it will use a fraction of the power (maybe) and will be way less money.

If anyone remembers AMD has been marketing Polaris as a big leap in performance based on power and price.

I just see a lot of users calling AMD out on stuff that their fan base says, as if their users speak for them.

AMD isn't always beat out by Nvidia in terms of launching first.  The 7970 came out before the 680, which were the flagship cards at the time.  
 
Also, your thoughts on the 1070 and 1080 prices are a bit odd.  GP104 cards should be compared to GK104 and GM204 cards in terms of pricing, as they're in the same position of the generation's lineup.  There is a slight markup with the 1000 series, which one could argue comes from a LACK of competition by AMD.  Also, Polaris isn't even expected to compete with 1070 and 1080, so I'm not sure how AMD is influencing Nvidia's pricing of their flagship cards when they have no direct competition.

Well the 1080 is as strong as two 980 cards and the 1070 is as strong as a titan, nvidia could have charged way more for this amount of power.
The 1070 could easily be 500 bucks and people would pay it.

The 980 outperformed the Titan Black, but it retailed less than the 1080 at launch.  The 980 was in the same slot as the 1080 for the Maxwell generation.  A similar story holds for the 680, which outperformed the 590.  Also, the whole "Founder's edition" nonsense drove the price up of all 1080s even more.  Even the $599 price is high for an '80 card from Nvidia.  I just don't see how AMD is even part of the equation when they aren't releasing anything that competes with the 1070 or 1080 until we see Vega.

gridironcpj

seth89

gridironcpj

seth89
Amd is always beat out by nvidia launches, nvidia has more money and people.
However look at the prices of the new 1080 and 1070 cards, that is not because nvidia felt like lowering the price but because there is some competition on the block again.

Will Polaris beat pascal in raw power?
Probably not, but it will use a fraction of the power (maybe) and will be way less money.

If anyone remembers AMD has been marketing Polaris as a big leap in performance based on power and price.

I just see a lot of users calling AMD out on stuff that their fan base says, as if their users speak for them.

AMD isn't always beat out by Nvidia in terms of launching first.  The 7970 came out before the 680, which were the flagship cards at the time.  

Also, your thoughts on the 1070 and 1080 prices are a bit odd.  GP104 cards should be compared to GK104 and GM204 cards in terms of pricing, as they're in the same position of the generation's lineup.  There is a slight markup with the 1000 series, which one could argue comes from a LACK of competition by AMD.  Also, Polaris isn't even expected to compete with 1070 and 1080, so I'm not sure how AMD is influencing Nvidia's pricing of their flagship cards when they have no direct competition.

Well the 1080 is as strong as two 980 cards and the 1070 is as strong as a titan, nvidia could have charged way more for this amount of power.
The 1070 could easily be 500 bucks and people would pay it.

The 980 outperformed the Titan Black, but it retailed less than the 1080 at launch.  The 980 was in the same slot as the 1080 for the Maxwell generation.  A similar story holds for the 680, which outperformed the 590.  Also, the whole "Founder's edition" nonsense drove the price up of all 1080s even more.  Even the $599 price is high for an '80 card from Nvidia.  I just don't see how AMD is even part of the equation when they aren't releasing anything that competes with the 1070 or 1080 until we see Vega.

That is the problem with AMD. They wait till the very last minute with their beast card (A WHOLE YEAR LATER ) when everyone pretty much got impatient and went and bought Nvidia. AMD needs to strike with their heavy duty flagships, not their middle little guys. Come out strong next time with their best card when Nvidia launches their flagship, and then they will have a fight, and then maybe more people will have a second look at it.

 
Keeping on renaming themselves really isn't going to help. I would stick with Nvidia cards.