Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD Radeon R7 265 Review: Curaçao Slides In At $150

Tags:
  • Gaming
  • Graphics Cards
  • AMD
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
February 13, 2014 5:00:05 AM

With pricing all over the map, AMD wants to plug the gap between its Radeon R7 260X and R9 270. To that end, it's introducing a Curaçao-based Radeon R7 265 with better-than-Radeon HD 7850 performance at $150. Will that be enough to stave off Maxwell?

AMD Radeon R7 265 Review: Curaçao Slides In At $150 : Read more

More about : amd radeon 265 review curacao slides 150

February 13, 2014 5:51:10 AM

I think the pricing issue is a moot point.If There's an Nvidia card at $190, an equally-performing (or slightly slower) car will be sold for $180 making a good profit, not at $150 to kill Nvidia.Card manufacturer won't benefit from Nvidia being pushed out of the market.
Score
-9
a b 4 Gaming
a c 178 U Graphics card
a c 143 À AMD
February 13, 2014 6:14:03 AM

Compelling card, but sad that a price hike on the 270 had to force it. So seems useless now.
Score
0
Related resources
February 13, 2014 6:36:51 AM

A 25% increase on the R9 270 was, essentially, a betrayal of consumer trust by AMD. I was totally excited to get in at the $180 price point, but now I'm waiting for Nvidia's offerings in that neighborhood to see if they can offer anything as compelling as the 270 was a couple months ago when it was still at its original price.
Score
-1
a b 4 Gaming
a c 111 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
February 13, 2014 6:54:32 AM

War on the high end segment over.Now Jihad style attack on mid end.
Score
0
February 13, 2014 7:06:05 AM

Wow, If it beats the 7850, I wonder how it stacks up against my overclocked 6850. I have two in crossfire but being limited to 1GB vram can be a hindrance. When I bought my original 6850, it was only $150 and my second was $100. I wonder what AMD has for $250 that could smoke my current setup / aka be a good single card upgrade.
Score
1
February 13, 2014 7:09:13 AM

i am not impressed at all, if it was under 100w then yes.
Score
-10
a b 4 Gaming
a c 111 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
February 13, 2014 7:13:38 AM

firefoxx04 said:
Wow, If it beats the 7850, I wonder how it stacks up against my overclocked 6850. I have two in crossfire but being limited to 1GB vram can be a hindrance. When I bought my original 6850, it was only $150 and my second was $100. I wonder what AMD has for $250 that could smoke my current setup / aka be a good single card upgrade.


http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/amd_radeon_r9_280_in_t...
Score
0
February 13, 2014 7:39:30 AM

All these price hikes are really becoming an issue. This card is launching at the same price I paid for my 7950 ~5 months ago.
Score
8
February 13, 2014 8:50:17 AM

And what does using more than 100W at full load has to do with this card? First we have someone complaining about not having enough " additional power pins " than someone compains about more than 100W usage on a "desktop" GPU. You are lame.Onto the pricing problem, i should not have to remind you that the prices in most of the world ( you know everywhere out of north america ) haven't followed the same trends as here . the 290 never went bozo up to 650$ in Europe ( if you use the exchange rate in position before december when the price was set ) . I would like to read more about who is really "jacking" up the prices . This card needs to be 150$, not 180$ of course , else it would be m00t .
Score
1
February 13, 2014 8:55:31 AM

so you are saying that R7 265 is best GPU in this price range?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 9:06:39 AM

Was about to order a 260x but will probably wait and see now -- The one thing keeping me from ordering twas the 128 bit memory bus since it does start to limit performance as shown in the benches. For the extra few $'s this new card with the 256 bit memory bus will be worth the wait if it actually hits at the $150 mark or below ( and should help bring down the 260x prices to $100-$120)
Score
1
February 13, 2014 9:14:24 AM

@meluvcookies

AMD does not set the retail price and neither does Nvidia, it is entirely up to the board partners and retailers what is charged. If you have a complaint about the price of these boards then moan at whoever you would buy it off, they are the ones screwing you for the cash. AMD is not making more profit from it they are.

I've honestly had enough of everyone bitching about AMD for the price of their boards, i'm sure they are just so upset that they made such an awesome compute capable GPU that they cant cant make them fast enough to keep the price down. It must be such a depressing situation for them to be in *rolls eyes*
Score
1
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 9:24:40 AM

irish_adam said:
@meluvcookies

AMD does not set the retail price and neither does Nvidia, it is entirely up to the board partners and retailers what is charged. If you have a complaint about the price of these boards then moan at whoever you would buy it off, they are the ones screwing you for the cash. AMD is not making more profit from it they are.

I've honestly had enough of everyone bitching about AMD for the price of their boards, i'm sure they are just so upset that they made such an awesome compute capable GPU that they cant cant make them fast enough to keep the price down. It must be such a depressing situation for them to be in *rolls eyes*


Exactly -- it's the retailers that are the problem -- figure Newegg has to cover the market fluctuations in the Bitcoin market now as well, which is the main reason for the demand on the 290s, since they are now taking Bitcoin for payment and the extra $100-$150 increase in the market price of the cards helps cover the loss in the exchange rate of the coins from day to day so they still make their profit margin.
\
AMD is still getting the same $ for the parts they are shipping to the manufacturers of the cards. It is the manufacturers and retailers that are increasing their prices and limiting the availability.
Score
4
February 13, 2014 9:33:21 AM

selvakumar13 said:
so you are saying that R7 265 is best GPU in this price range?


Yes, if it makes it to market at $150.

Score
7
a b 4 Gaming
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 9:34:24 AM

This is becoming too confusing with a cluster of cards within very small price gaps.240,250,250X,260,260X and now 265 all 6 cards within $70 of each other which means approx $10 gap between each card.Flooding the market with so many variants not to mention other variations like some having either DDR3 or GDDR5 memory while some having either 1 or 2GB models is bound to confuse the hell out of prospective buyers.That and the fact that 7000 series cards like 7750,7770 and 7790 are still easily available complicates the matter furthur.This is getting ridiculous.
Score
8
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 9:43:34 AM

I'm sorry but I'm getting more than a little irked by this author "Don Woligroski" he writes poor articles. I mean... this.."In short, you'll have to pardon our skepticism that Radeon R7 265 will show up on time and at the price point AMD is claiming. We've seen fingers pointed at gun-shy add-in board partners, performance-thirsty cryptocurrency miners, price-gouging retailers, and foundries unable to keep up with supply. But at the end of the day, we're left wondering why AMD is setting prices if it can't control what you pay for its hardware? After piling praise onto the Radeon R9 280X at $300 and 290X at $550, it's our credibility on the line now, and we've been burnt too many times to give you guidance on a card you can't buy yet."It's called economics 101. It is basic knowledge to most Human Beings on the surface of this planet. You may have heard of it. It is called Supply vs. Demand. In this case the Demand is incredibly high because of Litecoin, DOGEcoin and other such miners (let alone gamers and OEMs).So AMD is setting the prices by selling the boards and GPUs to the 3rd party manufacturers at the correct pricing. Where the issue stems from is AFTER this transaction. It is so obvious too.When those boards make it into the stores, they're sold instantly. Heck most have been sold prior to even arriving at the store (Retailers filling in back orders).So the issue is clearly, clearly occurring where the back order is occurring. The issue is with the Retailers not able to get enough cards to fill orders and thus raising the prices. They're the ones making the extra profits therefore they're the culprits.The reality of the situation is that if people are willing to pay these prices, then those are the market prices for AMD cards. I guess they're worth more than nVIDIA cards if people are willing to pay that much for them.AMD setting prices is only part of the equation. AMD does not own the "Market".
Score
-2
February 13, 2014 9:46:30 AM

Pricing is just a matter of supply and demand. AMD can set a target price @ $150 but ultimately it are the shops deciding the final retail price. Somehow there has to be a high demand for graphics cards at the moment considering the raising prices. I guess everyone is upgrading right now, buying new systems.
Score
1
February 13, 2014 9:57:20 AM

Great budget gaming card if pricing remains normal!Another god news for AMD is that Catalyst 14.1 beta fixes performance on Linux (up to 45% on R9 290).
Score
3
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 10:05:31 AM

panzerknacker said:
Pricing is just a matter of supply and demand. AMD can set a target price @ $150 but ultimately it are the shops deciding the final retail price. Somehow there has to be a high demand for graphics cards at the moment considering the raising prices. I guess everyone is upgrading right now, buying new systems.


Nope - it is more the bitcoin miners buying up as many of the high end cards as they can get their hands on to mine more coins to buy more cards with causing the price increases at the moment - once the bitcoin market settles down and the price of the coins stabilizes there will be a flood of used cards available bringing the price way down but for now the high end cards are in short supply and thus the mid range cards are now increasing as well since those that would normally buy the higher end cards are being priced out and the supply is limited so they are now buying 2 mid level cards for crossfire setups rather than a single high end card they can not get so the mid level cards are also seeing higher demand in the short run.
Score
1
February 13, 2014 10:33:11 AM

@ElMoIsEviL (Quote button is being finicky with me) I think Don qualifies his skepticism very well. If 3rd party manufacturers and Coin miners cause the price for this card to raise much above the 150 mark then it's really a wash between it and the 660 (especially for gamers and double especially for gamers using custom loops as heat is no longer as much of an issue). Also I think it was wise of Don to cite AMD's recent track record with pricing and launching cards. I don't think this is simply a case of supply and demand as AMD isn't in control of the price once the boards/GPU's are out of their hands. If these cards sell out at their current price then raise even a small factor, I might as well spend the extra 20 bucks for a few extra frames. Of course who knows the overclocking potential.I hope this comes out at the price AMD is quoting since my 6850 is getting a bit long in the tooth and I would like to finally take the plunge into custom loop cooling. Having two of these would be nice. Although... Maxwell looms (supposedly) so who knows.
Score
2
February 13, 2014 10:36:58 AM

mohit9206: i don't see having multiple choices from sub 100$ up to ~200$ as a problem.The lower in the price you get, on a budget system, the more a 10$ difference is accounted for. On a 2000$ computer budget, a 50$ additional may only sound marginal, but for someone with a 300-600$ budget, 10 or 20$ on each components might make a difference. More options is never bad, and AMD does not have to work very hard on the "rebadged" models to offer it to market, thus it is worth it for everybody. I also find it funny how 600$+ 290 cards were still selling out, how 280x @ 400$ is still sold out everywhere .. It is frustrating for someone who is on the market to purchase a GPU while the prices are boosted, i've been 3 times in this situation ( personal and 2 family computers build ) since last october, when it is solely for gaming use ( VS mining users ) . Very hard to decide on a 380$ 280x when your brother just paid 310$ for his 2 months before, but as some have pointed out,supply and demand. If "idiots" would've refrained from purchasing 290 and 280 @ ridiculous prices on newegg, the prices would've eventually come down faster.On another note : DON = could you please explain the problem you ecountered using Mantle API for testing ??
Score
0
February 13, 2014 10:49:16 AM

Question: Would two of these in crossfire provide better performance (assuming that it does stay @ the $150 price point) than one card that is at the relative $300 price point?
Score
-1
a b 4 Gaming
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 11:03:07 AM

For those of us who have already clocked our 7850's at 1000Mhz and 1400Mhz, this is a bit of a yawn.... I'm not sure what AMD's product strategy is - Increased Sales by Thoroughly Confusing the Market? Or maybe they just want to have the most # of products when you filter that Newegg list for $100-200 cards, playing the odds of random clicking I suppose....
Score
-1
February 13, 2014 11:06:57 AM

Quote:
Question: Would two of these in crossfire provide better performance (assuming that it does stay @ the $150 price point) than one card that is at the relative $300 price point?
The Radeon HD 7970 / R9 280X (300ish) has a Passmark score of 5,119.a single 660 (let's be fair, it's basically comparable to this card) is at 4,115.I'm not sure how much multiple GPU configurations affect performance (perhaps someone more savvy could enlighten me) but I think it's safe to say that you'd be at or over a $300 card with two of these.Also Yay, quoting worked for me.
Score
0
February 13, 2014 11:15:14 AM

shut up about the miners already. bitcoin has gone from $1000 to $400 a few times now. it's hardly stable. miners have every right to buy as many cards as they want. price goes up until it finds an equilibrium with demand. take s basic econ class. until their is a surplus of cards, the price is going to stay high.
Score
-1
February 13, 2014 11:22:39 AM

Quote:
Question: Would two of these in crossfire provide better performance (assuming that it does stay @ the $150 price point) than one card that is at the relative $300 price point?
The Radeon HD 7970 / R9 280X (300ish) has a Passmark score of 5,119.a single 660 (let's be fair, it's basically comparable to this card) is at 4,115.I'm not sure how much multiple GPU configurations affect performance (perhaps someone more savvy could enlighten me) but I think it's safe to say that you'd be at or over a $300 card with two of these.Also Yay, quoting worked for me.
Score
0
February 13, 2014 11:27:06 AM

mohit9206: i don't see having multiple choices from sub 100$ up to ~200$ as a problem.The lower in the price you get, on a budget system, the more a 10$ difference is accounted for. On a 2000$ computer budget, a 50$ additional may only sound marginal, but for someone with a 300-600$ budget, 10 or 20$ on each components might make a difference. More options is never bad, and AMD does not have to work very hard on the "rebadged" models to offer it to market, thus it is worth it for everybody. I also find it funny how 600$+ 290 cards were still selling out, how 280x @ 400$ is still sold out everywhere .. It is frustrating for someone who is on the market to purchase a GPU while the prices are boosted, i've been 3 times in this situation ( personal and 2 family computers build ) since last october, when it is solely for gaming use ( VS mining users ) . Very hard to decide on a 380$ 280x when your brother just paid 310$ for his 2 months before, but as some have pointed out,supply and demand. If "idiots" would've refrained from purchasing 290 and 280 @ ridiculous prices on newegg, the prices would've eventually come down faster.On another note : DON = could you please explain the problem you ecountered using Mantle API for testing ??
Score
0
a c 296 4 Gaming
a c 1427 U Graphics card
a c 372 À AMD
February 13, 2014 11:32:38 AM

No surprises here of course an overclocked HD7850 will beat a std clocked one!
Score
0
February 13, 2014 11:35:44 AM

Quote:
Question: Would two of these in crossfire provide better performance (assuming that it does stay @ the $150 price point) than one card that is at the relative $300 price point?
If you're going by Passmark scores it seems as though two of these in Crossfire should meet or exceed a single $300 GPU.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 11:53:17 AM

At the very least AMD should be profiting more if the re-sellers are. It's just not fair that they don't get any of the glory. And, if AMD did make those companies kick some of that profit back to them; they would think twice about price gouging...
Score
-1
a b 4 Gaming
a c 81 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
February 13, 2014 12:04:47 PM

CaptainTom said:
At the very least AMD should be profiting more if the re-sellers are. It's just not fair that they don't get any of the glory. And, if AMD did make those companies kick some of that profit back to them; they would think twice about price gouging...

simply: since there's no need to drop the msrp due to high retail price, the a.s.p. and revenue will go up. thanks to cryptocurrency mining trend (mainly litecoin), amd can sit back and rake in the green.
Score
-1
a b 4 Gaming
a c 178 U Graphics card
a c 143 À AMD
February 13, 2014 12:13:16 PM

CaptainTom said:
At the very least AMD should be profiting more if the re-sellers are. It's just not fair that they don't get any of the glory. And, if AMD did make those companies kick some of that profit back to them; they would think twice about price gouging...


Supply has nothing to do with price gouging, although it makes a good excuse.
Score
-1
February 13, 2014 12:39:49 PM

TechieNewbie : as from charts that usually pops at the end of gpu charts on here, the lower price point usually goes with higher value ( perf for $ ) so knowing that crossfire usually gives near double performance of a single card ( ~90%?? ) it is probably wise to believe that 2 cards will exceed a 300$ one ( but we do not have a 300$ one right now :p  ) just as 2 270x or 2 280x will exceed the card above ( 280 and 290 ) ..but with the 270x+ the base value is more than the card it beets up.
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a c 80 U Graphics card
a c 171 À AMD
February 13, 2014 1:20:10 PM

meluvcookies said:
A 25% increase on the R9 270 was, essentially, a betrayal of consumer trust by AMD. I was totally excited to get in at the $180 price point, but now I'm waiting for Nvidia's offerings in that neighborhood to see if they can offer anything as compelling as the 270 was a couple months ago when it was still at its original price.


You really don't know how supply and demand works do you? Not to mention AMD doesn't set the prices that stores sell the cards for. AMD sets a target MSRP at most. Board partners and retailers don't have to comply with said MSRP.

*Resists posting Billy Madison clip*


Score
-2
February 13, 2014 1:26:29 PM

ElMoIsEviL said:
I'm sorry but I'm getting more than a little irked by this author "Don Woligroski" he writes poor articles...
...AMD does not own the "Market".


You can be irked at me all you like. Having said that, I'm not going to write an article that ignores the current pricing issues. I'm going to do my best to make the issue known for potential buyers. I'm not going to unconditionally pour praise all over a card that is paper launched that potentially makes it to market at significantly more than the MSRP. When it gets here, as long as it's $150, you're going to see me barf love all over it.

As for AMD, I'm not sure what your beef is. AMD is a company, I'm telling it like it is. Its company that paper launches a $110 card (the 260), and then a month later it barely shows up on the market, and at a significantly higher price to boot.

You would prefer I just blindly trusted everything the company says after that? Yeah, I'm more worried about telling my readers and potential buyers the actual possibilities in the graphics card world, rather than put hands over their eyes and tell them that everything is perfect.

Sorry, that's just me. Like I said, you're entitled to stay irked as long as you like. :) 
Score
4
February 13, 2014 2:29:38 PM

"Four of Curaçao/Pitcairn's Compute Units are disabled, leaving 18". Yes sure because 20 - 4 = 18 :-)
Score
0
February 13, 2014 2:40:47 PM

"As for AMD, I'm not sure what your beef is. AMD is a company, I'm telling it like it is. Its company that paper launches a $110 card (the 260), and then a month later it barely shows up on the market, and at a significantly higher price to boot."Retailer's fault.You're placing the blame at the wrong end of the supply chain.
Score
0
February 13, 2014 3:38:59 PM

MajinCry said:
"As for AMD, I'm not sure what your beef is. AMD is a company, I'm telling it like it is. Its company that paper launches a $110 card (the 260), and then a month later it barely shows up on the market, and at a significantly higher price to boot."Retailer's fault.You're placing the blame at the wrong end of the supply chain.


I don't remember blaming anyone. Read the article:

"But at the end of the day, we're left wondering why AMD is setting prices if it can't control what you pay for its hardware?"

That's not blame, it's showing that AMD's MSRP all too often has little bearing in the real world lately.

As far as fault, it doesn't really matter whose fault it is. I don't care if it's AMD's fault, the vendors, or the AIBs.

I'm going to tell people about it, though.
Score
3
February 13, 2014 3:54:23 PM

JDFan, they already have at least one 260X card for $120. I pointed one out in the 250X article: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... - it's clocked at 1188 out of the box so it will actually perform a bit better than the one tested here. Anyway, that would give you a lot more breathing room on your PSU. I'd rather get a decent PSU and then replace the graphics card down the road, than to get a slightly faster GPU and replace them both later. I mean, that leaves you with $80 for a PSU, so you could get something efficient and reliable with room to grow like an 80 Plus Gold 550W Seasonic or FSP PSU.
Score
1
February 13, 2014 4:10:01 PM

AMD took a potentially good naming scheme and ruined it. This is what I would of done:

R7 240
HD 7730 > R7 250
HD 7750 > R7 250X
HD 7770 > R7 260
HD 7790 > R7 260X
HD 7850 > R9 270
HD 7870 > R9 270X
HD 7950 > R9 280
HD 7970 > R9 280X
R9 290
R9 290X

There was really no need to have a R7 265 if AMD was being more resourceful about how they named GPUs. The R9 270 was a waste of a monkier becuase the HD 7870 is already featured in this series. That could of been used for the HD 7850 instead of the awkward and dissonant "265". Another one that can be argued is the R7 260. Is there really much reason to strip down Bonaire when the 7770 GHz (which i now believe is the 250X if im not mistaken) would be enough of a step down?

The naming for the 270 and the 270x confuses me the most. This would be like NVIDIA labelling an overclocked 660 as the 660 Ti (which I guess GeForce -Ti = Radeon -X now) which would mislead the public into thinking that the two are totally different GPUs.

The HD 7850 was the value king before the Radeon R2XX series and it makes me dumbfounded to see it have such a name as the "R7 265" which would of made me think that its the 260X overclocked or came with sprinkles.

This is a personal rant but I had to get it off my chest.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 4:51:15 PM

alextheblue said:
JDFan, they already have at least one 260X card for $120. I pointed one out in the 250X article: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... - it's clocked at 1188 out of the box so it will actually perform a bit better than the one tested here. Anyway, that would give you a lot more breathing room on your PSU. I'd rather get a decent PSU and then replace the graphics card down the road, than to get a slightly faster GPU and replace them both later. I mean, that leaves you with $80 for a PSU, so you could get something efficient and reliable with room to grow like an 80 Plus Gold 550W Seasonic or FSP PSU.


Yes I realize there are a few available at $120 already but most of those up until just this week were with MIRs (which I don't consider since many times they lose the paperwork etc. and your out the $ for 3-6 months anyway !) OR like the one you linked have only 1GB of VRAM rather than the 2GB of most of the cards so are not suited for 1080P resolutions with AA\AF etc. - Which is why I hadn't ordered yet ( along with the 128 bit memory bus which means reducing some settings in games at 1080P resolutions - notice the benches in this article on games that actually give the memory bus a workout and you'll see how the 265 pulls ahead of the 260x on those titles when the bus width starts to become a factor (ie. this is where the memory bandwith of 179.2 GBs on the 265 pulls ahead of the 104.0 GBs of the 260x) - also notice the spikes on the Frame time variance chart where the 260x runs into delays (ie. stuttering) also due to the lack of bandwidth at times.

This is the same as last generations 7770/7790 vs 7850\7870s which had the same sort of results. so having the new 265 as a choice in a similar pricing level is reason enough to wait a couple weeks to order. Since I game at 1920x1080 resolution and like to use higher levels of AA\AF the difference in the bus width is worth the extra $.

As far as PSU goes that is a given when building a system, I always over invest in the PSU since the stability of the entire system is at stake so no upgrade to it will be required with which ever GPU I decide to get.
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a c 99 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
February 13, 2014 5:11:35 PM

What AMD really needs to do is plug the gap between the 270X and 280X that was previously filled by the 7950
Score
0
February 13, 2014 5:30:40 PM

pretty sure the xfx and gigabyte r9 270s are already 1024 shaders...
Score
0
February 13, 2014 6:44:30 PM

mczak1 said:
"Four of Curaçao/Pitcairn's Compute Units are disabled, leaving 18". Yes sure because 20 - 4 = 18 :-)


Good lord. Nice catch, fixed! :) 
Score
1
a b 4 Gaming
a b U Graphics card
February 13, 2014 7:53:41 PM

meluvcookies said:
A 25% increase on the R9 270 was, essentially, a betrayal of consumer trust by AMD.

The prices AMD announces are nothing more than the price point AMD is intending their chips for but AMD does not manufacture or distribute the actual cards and individual manufacturers/distributors/vendors are free to charge whatever they wish for them. If the GPU miners are willing to pay $200 extra to soak up all the higher-end models, there isn't much AMD can do about it... except maybe raise the chip prices to get their slice of that inflation pie.
Score
0
February 14, 2014 1:34:04 AM

svgf
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a b U Graphics card
February 14, 2014 5:19:37 AM

There is no way this card is going to slide in at $150. It will actually turn out to be a decent little litecoin mining card, probably getting 350KH/sec or so. With the market price for the R9 270 sitting at $230, the price for the 265x will be closer to $190 before it's all said and done.

And even approaching $190 it will be a good value. I know this drives the Tom's editors nuts, but this card will be perfect for someone interested in dabbling in litecoin (or any other script) mining. Just pop this into a PC, use it for mining when you're not gaming. It's not going to overheat your system like a bigger card might, and by the end of the month, you'll have a nice $30-40 rebate (yes, net of electricity). Of course there is risk in that, as the prices are fluctuating, but it could be double that (or it could be zero). Even so, I think it's better odds and quicker than a mail-in rebate. Plus, if it works out, you get that rebate coming in month after month.

Just another take on "Value". The inflated prices of the AMD cards really are justified for those gamers who are savvy enough to take advantage of that.

Finally, for those complaining about AMD prices who are not well versed in economics 101, neither AMD NOR the vendors set prices. The MARKET sets prices. If anyone tries to fix prices lower than what the market demands, the result will be a shortage of cards. So, the inflated pricing is what the market is willing to pay, and the only thing that will cause the prices to fall will be a decrease in demand (i.e if crypto currencies continue their current plunge) or if more suppliers jump into the mix. Otherwise, it's useless to blame anyone.
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
a b U Graphics card
February 14, 2014 12:03:27 PM

Anyone else wondering about the huge frame time variance difference between the 7850 and 265 in BF4?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
February 14, 2014 12:50:02 PM

Is this gcn?
Score
0
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!