>AMD spends 200 million on R&D every quarter for both CPU and GPU
>Nvidia spends 300 million every quarter for just GPU
why does Sup Forums find it so hard to believe that the 1060 destroys the rx480 in every way possible, no "muh Async" bullshit involved? Theres been billions more put into Pascal than Rajeet would ever hope to make off of AMD products.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
intc.com
twitter.com
It's only 10% faster on average and costs $100 more
in addition we all know AMD cards age better, in a year the 480 will be as fast as the 1060 just like with the 7950 vs 780ti
You faggots really need to tone this shit. Everyone with a functioning brain expected it to perform better since it's considerably more expensive.
>$250-$300 is $100 more than $250
I guess AMDpoors couldnt afford an education
stop posting nigel with these garbage threads
the 4gb 480 is $199
I just wish AMD fucking died so we could finally stop making these threads
I thought having unnecessary shitloads of Vram was super important, AMDtards
>$230 RX480 vs $250 GTX 1060 is fine
>$200 RX480 vs $300 GTX 1060 isn't
Get better bait. Fuck you OP.
Not if you're gaming at 1080p
i'm gonna need some sauce OP
>$300 card beats $200 card
>so hard to believe
Eh?
god he's sexy
the thing is Nvidia could sell it for $200, kill AMD, and still make a profit
technologically wise Nvidia will always be superior to AMD, and them deciding not to prematurely support Async or HBM has nothing to do with it
i don't care about your videogames
i was talking about the dashing rogue in the pic
>technologically wise Nvidia will always be superior to AMD
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I prefer AMD's business practises.
5€ difference in Italy
Can't order a 480 for cheaper than 274€
>benchmarks cite 8GB cards
>using 4GB prices because fuck it
Real talk:
Does Intel even consider AMD real competition in the majority of the markets they share?
r480>gtx480
NVIDIA BTFO!!!
Realistically speaking, Intel could stop selling processors to home system builders and still be very profitable. AMD is competitive in certain categories but overall isn't much of a threat.
More spending doesn't always equal a better product. There was a brief time where AMD caught fucking Intel off guard and were kicking their asses.
AMDKEKS ON SUICIDE WATCH
During those times the gap between intel and AMD in terms of spending on R&D and revenue were closer to each other.
It was just intel being retarded with netburst. There were desktop MBs for pentium M which OC shitted even on athlon64 at the time.
Proof? I don't believe it at all. AMD were a much smaller company then and were the underdogs. They didn't even have their hand in GPUs yet.
According to this, Intel spent 3.1 billion on R&D in 1999, the year the Athlon was released. I highly doubt AMD spent anywhere near as much.
The losing party of any competition is "the party just being retarded with x". My point stands that the money isn't everything.
it's $10 more stop fanboying you retarded AMD faggot
> 1080 is 600 more than 480
> AMD BTFO
>$300
Non-Founder's are $249. Founder's is, admittedly, just a cash grab to make a quick buck on low availability.
Plus, the $249 price tag is the same as that of the 8GB RX480, which means the 1060 has better performance at the same cost with less VRAM than the 8GB RX480, or better performance at a worse cost with more VRAM than the RX480 4GB.