this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
112 points (92.4% liked)

PC Gaming

12214 readers
595 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

To be fair, AMD is trying as hard as they can to not be appealing there. They inexplicably participate in the VRAM cartel when… they have no incentive to.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

My theory is that they're just scared to annoy Nvidia too much. If they priced their GPUs so as to really increase their market share, Nvidia might retaliate. And Nvidia definitely has the deeper pockets. AMD has no chance to win a price war.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What's the VRAM cartel story? Think I missed that.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Basically, consumer VRAM is dirt cheap, not too far from DDR5 in $/gigabyte. And high VRAM (especially 48GB+) cards are in high demand.

But Nvidia charges through the nose for the privilege of adding more VRAM to cards. See this, which is almost the same silicon as the 5090: https://www.amazon.com/Blackwell-Professional-Workstation-Simulation-Engineering/dp/B0F7Y644FQ

When the bill of materials is really only like $100-$200 more, at most. Nvidia can get away with this because everyone is clamoring for their top end cards


AMD, meanwhile, is kind of a laughing stock in the prosumer GPU space. No one's buying them for CAD. No one's buying them for compute, for sure... And yet they do the same thing as Nvidia: https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Professional-Workstation-Rendering-DisplaPortTM/dp/B0C5DK4R3G/

In other words, with a phone call to their OEMs like Asus and such, Lisa Su could lift the VRAM restrictions from their cards and say 'you're allowed to sell as much VRAM on a 7900 or 9000 series as you can make fit." They could pull the rug out from under Nvidia and charge a $100-$200 markup instead of a $3000-$7000 one.

...Yet they don't.

It makes no sense. They're maintaining an anticompetitive VRAM 'cartel' with Nvidia instead of trying to compete.

Intel has more of an excuse here, as they literally don't manufacture a GPU that can take more than 24GB VRAM, but AMD literally has none I can think of.