Originally Posted by i7monkey
Agreed, but performance in the long run means nothing for AMD's sales.
Let me explain.
290x comes out, gets outperformed by the 780Ti by 10% and by the time AMD beats it significantly both cards are EOL which means no more sales for AMD.
Great for long term 290x users, great for the second hand market because 290x cards retain value unlike Nvidia cards, but it doesn't do any good for AMD's bottom line.
The only thing it might do for AMD is get people who want GPUs for the long long haul, and they're a small percentage. So Nvidia always wins in these 1-1.5 year short bursts, and it helps them in the long run because they continue to beat AMD in these contests.
People act like the 290x was actually not competitive at launch when it very much was. It was the titan killer at the time. Half the price and the same if not better performance. Aging well was just icing on the cake for users who bought it. The 290x cost $550 at launch and the 780ti cost $699. A minor performance lead and 1gb less of vram is somehow worth $150 and made Nvidia the better buy? I think not. Not then, not now.
You underestimate the amount of people that buy gpu's for the long haul as it is a much larger percentage than those who buy a new top of the line card each launch. This site alone which has members that are pretty much the cream of the crop as far as high end systems go and yet even here, many are using 2+ year old cards fine because the options at this point in time are just, well, meh.
AMD has been and always was competitive in every gpu margin up until recently when they have focused their resources on the cpu division and let Nvidia run away with the high end gpu market.