It s a commercial decision of greediness.

They done the same with FSR 4 and 7000 series. the refused to release fsr 4 to 7000 , so they can force people into buying the 9000.

bitzu101 wrote on Yesterday, 11:51:

It s a commercial decision of greediness.

They done the same with FSR 4 and 7000 series. the refused to release fsr 4 to 7000 , so they can force people into buying the 9000.

Funny thing about that .. recently some .."code" was dropped that allows FSR4 to run on RDNA 1 and 2 ...weirdly the code was internal code from the AMD driver team..no idea how it came to get leaked but many suspect some of the driver devs had a heads up on what AMD was gonna do and decided to get it out there so the community can finish it.

AMD just loves to shoot themselves in the feet, every dam time they get on a winning streak they go and do something monumentally retarded..in this case its making nVidia look good and telling everyone to keep on buying their GPUs because we don't want to support ours.

The entire RDNA department needs to go take a lesson from the team handling the AM4 platform and follow suit instead of sending perfectly capable modern GPUs to the EOL bin.

Seriously they have some stupid people on their team.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on Yesterday, 10:45:

Relevant article from Tom's Hardware.

While the company says that its RDNA 1 and RDNA 2 graphics cards will continue to receive critical security updates and bug fixes, new features, like the latest Battlefield 6 update, are reserved for the Radeon RX 7000 and RX 9000 series in the latest AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 25.10.2.

IMO, this is a disgraceful business decision and needs to be reverted ASAP. What makes this even weirder is that the PlayStation 5 GPU is basically an RX 6700 equivalent, so most games will still target that as their baseline until the PS6 comes out. Also, some Windows handhelds use RDNA 2 based APUs. How will they handle new games?

I saw an update from HUB, Steam deck is unaffected as valve does the drivers for that internally, its the windows handhelds that will get hit unless they are using 3rd party maintained drivers. The Xbox ROG Ally uses AMD drivers, so yeah this move wont go down well with MS.

I honestly cant see this change staying put, who ever decided to push it out there is likely getting grilled for being a bonehead and I can see the higherups making sure it gets reversed to avoid the backlash.

Trashbytes wrote on Yesterday, 12:05:

The entire RDNA department needs to go take a lesson from the team handling the AM4 platform and follow suit instead of sending perfectly capable modern GPUs to the EOL bin.

The worst part of this is how capable and yet affordable many RDNA 2 cards remain to this day.

A while back, I was heavily considering getting a second-hand RX 6700 XT. It fit my use case almost perfectly, and it could be had for a little over 200 EUR locally. Ultimately, I went with a cheaper (but slower) RTX 3060 12GB because I wanted DLSS (and especially DLAA). But the RX 6700 XT still struck me as a great value card, on pair or even better than the PS5 GPU. It would be a shame if it became obsolete due to AMD's crappy driver update policy.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on Yesterday, 12:22:

Trashbytes wrote on Yesterday, 12:05:

The entire RDNA department needs to go take a lesson from the team handling the AM4 platform and follow suit instead of sending perfectly capable modern GPUs to the EOL bin.

The worst part of this is how capable and yet affordable many RDNA 2 cards remain to this day.

A while back, I was heavily considering getting a second-hand RX 6700 XT. It fit my use case almost perfectly, and it could be had for a little over 200 EUR locally. Ultimately, I went with a cheaper (and slower) RTX 3060 12GB because I wanted DLSS (and especially DLAA). But the RX 6700 XT still struck me as a great value card, on pair or even better than the PS5 GPU. It would be a shame if it became obsolete due to AMD's crappy driver update policy.

Exactly, even RDNA 1 cards are capable for most games, sadly RDNA 1 is showing its age as its not compatible with many modern titles due to lacking RT hardware or mesh shaders but its still got plenty of life in it.

I just recently bought a 9070XT ..now I'm partially regretting that decision since if they stick to their guns and keep this policy then the 9070XT has a much shorter life than it should have and that 5070Ti for 150 dollars extra now looks like it would have been the better option. Say what you like about NVidia but at least I know their cards will be supported for at least 8-10 years with driver updates, I still consider buying the 1080Ti to have been one of my best GPU purchases.

They've been operating this way for their entire existence. And it's probably part of why their marketshare is miniscule.

swaaye wrote on Yesterday, 12:54:

It's not really surprising. They've been operating this way for their entire existence.

Is that the ones they made for the Intel NUCs ?

I know they dropped them super fast too.

I'm not sure. The worst example I remember is one of their Piledriver based APUs aka "Richland" with a VLIW4 GPU. They moved those to "legacy" after less than 2 years. Of course, everything prior to Ryzen was awful and likely saw minimal game use anyway.

I bought a heavily discounted 6750XT just last year, to upgrade my aging Ryzen 3000 system. Great card, bang for the buck was impossible to beat.
This is a really crappy move.

Jasin Natael wrote on Yesterday, 13:08:

I bought a heavily discounted 6750XT just last year, to upgrade my aging Ryzen 3000 system. Great card, bang for the buck was impossible to beat.
This is a really crappy move.

I had a 6700xt , bought new for 300 quid , worked a treat , i even played stalker 2 on it. good card , 12 gb vram , will play most games on max and good price compared to similar priced cards but that have 8gb.

bitzu101 wrote on Yesterday, 15:02:

Jasin Natael wrote on Yesterday, 13:08:

I bought a heavily discounted 6750XT just last year, to upgrade my aging Ryzen 3000 system. Great card, bang for the buck was impossible to beat.
This is a really crappy move.

I had a 6700xt , bought new for 300 quid , worked a treat , i even played stalker 2 on it. good card , 12 gb vram , will play most games on max and good price compared to similar priced cards but that have 8gb.

Yeah, I bought one that was on sale priced $299.99, I had a $99.99 off coupon that brought it to $199.99 for a brand new card.
I really couldn't beat that price, noticeable upgrade from my old 1080, even if it is an XFX 🤣.

It's like they saw Nvidia drop driver support for Maxwell and Pascal and decided they could cut back on support for some products as well. I understand that AMD says they are just ending specific game optimizations (bug fixes should hopefully continue), but... do you think someone should remind them that Maxwell and Pascal were mostly from 2014-2017, while RDNA 1 & 2 are mostly from 2019-2021?

I could understand if they were cutting back on RDNA 1 since it lacks support for ray tracing and other newer features, but why RDNA 2?? The cards are barely four years old and were one of AMD's most successful generations in years.

RDNA2 is good, but RDNA4 is better, i have only Polaris. 😀
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_400_series
https://www.amd.com/en/support/downloads/driv … eon-rx-470.html

Ozzuneoj wrote on Yesterday, 16:16:

The cards are barely four years old and were one of AMD's most successful generations in years.

Because historically AMD never supported their GPUs past 4-6 years. Radeon 4000 series (2008) was supported for 4 years. Then it was ditched and moved to "security" fixes in 2012 and completely dropped in 2013. Same story for for HD 5000/6000 series. And legacy ATi cards like X1950 Pro were dropped even faster, because AMD weren't enthusiastic about supporting products they didn't sell.

Nvidia historically had better legacy support. With the exception to really old stuff, because tech was moving too fast back then and supporting it was pointless.

Good news, people who are forced to switch to a new GPU are going to flood the market with cheap but perfectly fine modern options for people who don't care about recent games and +++ fps.

Yeah, I seen that, and it does indeed suck. However, this is how AMD operates.

My modern rig is a Ryzen 5600, RX6600, 32GB system still on Win 10. It still serves my needs excellently. So, I have no real interest in upgrading in the foreseeable future.

That being said, I am a fan of the Battlefield franchise, and while I do own BF6, I can't play it yet due to its requirement to have both TPM and SB enabled. On my system, both are disabled, and I cannot enable them without doing a full OS reinstall. So, BF6 will sit until that day comes. Until then, more BF4 on those rare occasions I'm in the mood for some BF.

Lastly, whenever I do get around to upgrading my system, there's a decent chance I may go with whatever Nvidia GPU best fits my needs and budget at that time. We will have to see. Been using AMD GPU's for a long time and have been generally happy, but perhaps it's time to test the waters on the other side of the fence. In all reality, for the games I play and what I do on my modern systems, the maker of my GPU is largely irrelevant. Both can do what I really need them to do, but AMD generally wins due to price.

Looks like AMD got wet feet.

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gp … th-future-games

The Serpent Rider wrote on Yesterday, 17:33:

Ozzuneoj wrote on Yesterday, 16:16:

The cards are barely four years old and were one of AMD's most successful generations in years.

Because historically AMD never supported their GPUs past 4-6 years. Radeon 4000 series (2008) was supported for 4 years. Then it was ditched and moved to "security" fixes in 2012 and completely dropped in 2013. Same story for for HD 5000/6000 series. And legacy ATi cards like X1950 Pro were dropped even faster, because AMD weren't enthusiastic about supporting products they didn't sell.

Nvidia historically had better legacy support. With the exception to really old stuff, because tech was moving too fast back then and supporting it was pointless.

Of course, Nvidia has supported their GPUs for much longer than AMD.

Not sure why you're focusing on stuff from 15+ years ago though. It is a bit hard to tell how the RDNA 1\2 support situations aligns with older generations (they don't always use the same terminology), but GCN 1-3 were supported for 8-11 years, and GCN 4 was getting normal driver support until 2023 (6-7 years) and is apparently still getting basic driver updates.

The GPUs from those generations that would have had the shortest support periods (released late) would have been the low end or OEM-only stuff that hardly anyone needs gaming driver updates for anyway.

Compare that to RDNA 2...

Radeon RX 6950 XT = May 10, 2022 for $1,099 USD
Radeon RX 6750 XT = May 10, 2022 for $549 USD
Radeon RX 6750 GRE = Oct 18, 2023 for $269 - $289 USD
Radeon RX 6650 XT = May 10, 2022 for $399 USD
... plus many of the recent (expensive) gaming handhelds and laptops with mobile graphics.

Those GPUs are no longer getting full driver support after 2-3 years.

This is just baffling for a company that is always right on the edge of competing with the market juggernaut.

Ozzuneoj wrote on Yesterday, 18:29:

Compare that to RDNA 2... […]
Show full quote

Compare that to RDNA 2...

Radeon RX 6950 XT = May 10, 2022 for $1,099 USD
Radeon RX 6750 XT = May 10, 2022 for $549 USD
Radeon RX 6750 GRE = Oct 18, 2023 for $269 - $289 USD
Radeon RX 6650 XT = May 10, 2022 for $399 USD

RDNA2 was premiered in October 2020. Marketing refreshes with zero changes to the silicon don't really count. That's how it always was for both Nvidia and AMD.

GCN 1-3 were supported for 8-11 years, and GCN 4 was getting normal driver support until 2023

GCN 1.0 through 3.0 support is peculiar, because they were made on the same lithography (28nm) and had a lot of minor architecture tweaks. One of the reasons why GCN 1.0 was held alive for so long and why they all were dropped simultaneously. As for immortal Polaris, it held for so long due to the mining GPU craze.