Learn extra at:
A couple of yr in the past, we revealed a bit outlining a collection of AMD’s biggest self-inflicted wounds. From mispriced GPUs and inflated benchmark claims to overhyping options and launching them in a damaged and embarrassing state – there was a constant sample of AMD making easy blunders and taking pictures themselves within the foot.
In the present day, we’re checking in to see whether or not AMD has realized its lesson. Has the corporate truly taken this suggestions on board and improved the way in which it handles launches and advertising and marketing? With a contemporary wave of merchandise now obtainable, this follow-up revisits the identical 12 errors we referred to as out final time.
From pricing to efficiency guarantees, we’re taking a contemporary take a look at what has modified, what has not, and whether or not AMD in 2025 is any smarter than it was years prior, beginning with…
Mistake #1: Pricing merchandise out of the dialog
One in every of AMD’s most important failings with the earlier Radeon GPU era (RDNA 3) was absurd pricing for a number of key merchandise. The Radeon RX 7900 XT was the headliner on this dialogue: at $900, this GPU by no means made sense. Its {hardware} was reduce down by a minimum of 15% relative to the flagship RX 7900 XTX, resulting in 17% slower gaming efficiency in our benchmarks. However AMD priced this mannequin simply 10% beneath the XTX, making it mainly lifeless on arrival.
Different fashions within the lineup have been additionally poorly priced, just like the Radeon 7700 XT, a graphics card that was 10% cheaper than the RX 7800 XT however 17% slower. The Radeon 7600 debuted at $270 providing zero enchancment over what the earlier era delivered on the time, too. And even the flagship mannequin, the 7900 XTX, was underwhelming at $1,000 after AMD’s preliminary efficiency claims turned out to be exaggerated.
With RDNA 4, AMD has put themselves in a significantly better spot, launching the Radeon 9070 XT at $600.
And whereas that card is hard to really discover at that worth, it is smart within the present GPU market in comparison with Nvidia’s choices, one thing you undoubtedly could not say concerning the 7900 XT.
AMD additionally noticed success with the RX 9060 XT 16GB mannequin, priced at $350, which once more is a really aggressive place towards Nvidia’s RTX 5060 collection. Neither of those playing cards will want embarrassing worth cuts simply months after launch attributable to dangerous pricing selections, so in that regard, AMD has undoubtedly realized and improved.
It isn’t an entire turnaround although. AMD continues to be struggling to cost all the lineup correctly. The principle level of rivalry is perhaps the RX 9070, which is 12% slower than the 9070 XT however solely 8% cheaper when evaluating MSRPs, making it worse worth in price per body. However it’s not a catastrophe like we noticed the earlier gen – the 9070 in all probability must be $50 cheaper, whereas the 7900 XT ought to’ve been a minimum of $150 much less.
Then there’s the 8GB RX 9060 XT – a product we strongly imagine should not exist, or on the very least, should not be $300. However this case is a bit totally different. You could possibly say it is poorly priced and must be cheaper, however weirdly sufficient, it is truly fairly aggressive with Nvidia’s other 8GB fashions – in a means the RX 7600 by no means was.
So we’re not giving AMD a full move right here, however we’re not giving them a fail both. They’ve made progress, however there’s nonetheless room to enhance.
Mistake #2: Ignoring suggestions and making the identical mistake twice
One in every of our largest criticisms of AMD previously was how they saved making the identical errors again and again – even after getting sturdy suggestions that these selections have been dangerous. As we simply talked about, they priced the Radeon 7900 XT poorly – obtained slammed for it with bad reviews and poor gross sales – after which months later did the identical factor with the 7700 XT.
To date, AMD hasn’t achieved that once more. The closest they’ve come is ignoring all of the early warnings that the 8GB RX 9060 XT can be a nasty concept and both should not exist or ought to launch at a bargain-bin worth. They went forward with it anyway, however that wasn’t a repeat of a earlier, well-criticized mistake.
Repeating the identical errors is quite dumb after clear suggestions, so avoiding that lure this time is a win and an indication that AMD has truly realized one thing.
Mistake #3: Launch selections that trigger adverse evaluations
This challenge is intently associated to the earlier two round pricing. AMD’s technique with previous-gen launches has been to stuff up the product from the beginning, making certain evaluations are adverse and curiosity within the merchandise is low. They’ve tried to eek out just a few additional {dollars} from merchandise just like the 7900 XT, however finally this has led to lackluster gross sales as shoppers and the media rejected these costs instantly.
There was a transparent shift in technique with RDNA 4 to make sure merchandise launch in a state that results in constructive evaluations. The RX 9070 XT was priced at a stage the place reviewers did not instantly dismiss it as lifeless on arrival. In truth, the exact opposite occurred: most reviewers praised it!
Now, there was some behind-the-scenes haggling across the last worth, and there is been some problem truly hitting that worth, plus AMD has, to some extent, been taking part in Nvidia’s recreation – one thing we might quite not see.
However there is no doubt this new strategy has been much more profitable than the outdated one, and this is applicable to different fashions just like the RX 9060 XT 16GB as effectively. Nailing these first impressions is vital, and AMD has improved their launches to higher arrange their merchandise for fulfillment.
The one exception is perhaps the 8GB 9060 XT, which did launch to adverse suggestions. That might have been averted with a spread of various methods: decreasing the value, altering the identify, launching at a special time, or simply not launching it in any respect. So we would not say this challenge has been totally resolved, however there have undoubtedly been steps in the proper path.
Mistake #4: Slashing costs after the harm is finished
If you make any of the earlier 3 errors we simply mentioned, you are mainly pressured to make a fourth one, which is adjusting the product’s worth quickly after launch. After all, decreasing the value of a graphics card to a stage the place it truly sells is an effective transfer, however the mistake right here is doing it after the launch, not earlier than.
This error has a knock-on impact. It means prospects lose confidence in launch pricing. In the event that they know AMD will simply decrease costs after just a few months, they will not purchase at launch – they will await the drop.
That results in decrease revenue for AMD and offers rivals the possibility to swoop in and take the sale. Establishing a very good worth from the beginning will get gross sales instantly, and if that worth holds – like Nvidia does – prospects know they will not get a greater deal later. If something, the very best deal is shopping for the cardboard the second it comes out, and that is one thing AMD has did not ship previously.
To date, AMD hasn’t wanted to regulate the place of their merchandise as a result of no harm has been achieved and gross sales have been sturdy. We will tick this one off as an enchancment from Group Pink.
Mistake #5: Chaotic last-minute modifications
This error particularly associated to the Radeon RX 7600 from the earlier era, though that is not the one time AMD has made final minute modifications to a GPU. What occurred is that reviewers received the cardboard anticipating it to be priced at $300, after which, proper earlier than evaluations have been set to go stay, AMD modified the value to $270 and did a poor job speaking that.
Some folks weren’t informed of the change in any respect and revealed evaluations primarily based on the fallacious, much less enticing worth. Others, like us, had 90% of a evaluate accomplished primarily based on the unique worth and needed to scramble to replace it – although it did not make a lot distinction because the product was nonetheless dangerous.
Setting the proper worth earlier than launch is sweet. Altering the value to a greater one earlier than launch can also be good. However these modifications have to occur effectively earlier than the launch, not 24 hours out. You need the launch to go easily, not be crammed with miscommunication and confusion.
Primarily based on what we have heard, there have been undoubtedly some final minute discussions concerning the Radeon 9070 XT’s worth, however importantly, this all occurred earlier than the product was formally introduced. So it did not impression something.
There was no miscommunication with the media, no evaluations or information revealed with the fallacious worth – it was a easy launch the place everybody had time to digest the data. Throughout RDNA 4 to this point, it appears to be like like AMD has realized their lesson on this one.
Mistake #6: Overhyping product efficiency
AMD made this error a number of instances throughout the Zen 5 and RDNA 3 launches. When announcing the Radeon 7900 XTX, they claimed the half was as much as 1.7x sooner than the RX 6950 XT whereas gaming at 4K, and 55% sooner on common. Nonetheless, in our benchmarking, we discovered the cardboard was simply 35% sooner than its predecessor, which made it look loads much less enticing at its $1,000 worth level.
AMD repeated this once they claimed the Ryzen 7 9700X can be 13% sooner than the Intel Core i7-14700K on common when gaming, however our day-one testing discovered the Intel half was 6% forward on common. AMD additionally claimed the 9700X can be a few proportion factors sooner than the 7800X3D, which additionally turned out to be false. Like with the 7900 XTX, this led to lackluster, underwhelming evaluations as a result of Zen 5’s precise efficiency did not meet the claims.
Throughout the RDNA 4 launch to this point, AMD has been rather more correct with the information they’ve introduced to everybody, which has stopped an overhype-then-underwhelm scenario from taking part in out.
Within the RX 9070 XT day-one review, AMD claimed the RX 9070 XT was 2% slower than the RTX 5070 Ti on common at 4K gaming. In our day-one evaluate, we discovered it was 1% slower – a way more correct end result than the 7900 XTX’s launch. AMD additionally claimed the RX 9060 XT provided related efficiency to the RTX 5060 Ti, and that turned out to be largely true as effectively primarily based on our impartial testing.
Clearly that is an space AMD has labored on, and serving to the scenario is the very fact the merchandise they’re promoting are simply higher, so the true outcomes can principally communicate for themselves. Both means, not a mistake they’ve made this era.
Mistake #7: Not figuring out easy methods to benchmark their very own merchandise
One of many most important issues that precipitated the overestimation of product efficiency in promoting slides was AMD’s incapability to correctly benchmark their very own merchandise (imagine it or not).
Throughout the Zen 5 information, there have been some actually unusual outcomes they introduced to the media within the evaluate information – numbers that did not make sense, testing configurations that did not make sense, and a heavy reliance on poor high quality canned benchmarks. This led to Zen 5 gaming information that was fallacious and painted an inaccurate image of the way it in comparison with Intel and older Zen merchandise.
This hasn’t been a problem with the RDNA 4 launch in 2025 as a result of AMD have moved to utilizing a bigger variety of video games of their advertising and marketing supplies. They’re testing extra related and newer video games, they usually’ve made an actual effort to enhance the accuracy of their information. That is actually good to see.
Mistake #8: Deceptive benchmarks that get uncovered
This one pertains to AMD’s promoting of the Ryzen 7 5800XT and Ryzen 9 5900XT, the place they benchmarked these CPUs utilizing an entry-level Radeon RX 6600 graphics card. That bottlenecked the system and created GPU-limited outcomes.
There additionally seemed to be testing errors, resulting in laughable outcomes just like the 5800XT being 12% sooner than the 13600KF in Cyberpunk 2077. We showed the Core i5 half was truly about 33% sooner on common when examined correctly with out a sturdy GPU restrict.
This form of mistake is totally different from simply poorly benchmarking merchandise and overestimating efficiency, as a result of this one seemed like a deliberate misconfiguration of the benchmark system to make the product look means higher than it actually was.
Different deceptive benchmarks – just like the 7900 XTX and Zen 5 examples – appeared extra like benchmarking incompetence or trustworthy errors. We do not like seeing deliberate efforts to magnify efficiency both, and if something, this can be a worse mistake, as a result of as soon as it will get uncovered, it actually hurts your popularity.
Throughout AMD’s 2025 launches to this point, we have not seen this error repeated. The benchmark information we have been given has been correct, with no intentionally dangerous take a look at setups. Let’s hope that continues.
Mistake #9: Saying options means too early
In response to Nvidia’s DLSS Frame Generation that launched with GeForce 40 series GPUs, AMD introduced FSR 3 alongside RDNA 3 in November 2022. However they did not truly launch the function till 11 months later, after a ton of frustration over why it was taking so lengthy, and after patrons had bought RDNA 3 GPUs anticipating to make use of the function a lot sooner.
With current merchandise we aren’t ready the place AMD have introduced a brand new function means too early. The preliminary RDNA 4 reveal with the RX 9070 XT centered virtually solely on options that will be obtainable day one – like FSR 4, higher video encoding, and new stuff added to Radeon Software. No promising one thing after which failing to ship it for almost a yr.
There’s nonetheless a little bit of a query mark round FSR Redstone, which is an upcoming suite of applied sciences that features neural radiance caching, AI-based ray regeneration, and AI-based body era.
This was announced alongside the RX 9060 XT with an anticipated launch window within the second half of 2025. So long as AMD truly hits that focus on, it will not be a repeat of asserting a function means too early. For now, issues are going effectively on this space.
Mistake #10: Debuting options in video games nobody performs
When releasing model new graphics options which might be the cornerstone of your GPU software program providing, you need these options to be in top quality video games folks truly personal and are fascinated by taking part in.
AMD failed to do that with FSR 3, launching the function in an embarrassing style. It slid out with little or no fanfare in two poorly obtained titles that few folks needed to play: Immortals of Aveum and Forspoken. In distinction, Nvidia have been in a position to get their new tech into main flagship titles, like Cyberpunk 2077.
Launching in irrelevant video games damage AMD’s model notion, and that is why it was a mistake to debut FSR 3 within the video games they did. Nvidia tries very arduous to keep up their picture as a pacesetter in gaming, they usually do that by making certain main titles help RTX options. Again with RDNA 3 and FSR 3, AMD wanted to do the identical.
That is one other space the place AMD have made vital enhancements. FSR 4, by way of their driver improve function, launched day one in dozens of titles together with main video games folks truly owned. This included Horizon Forbidden West, The Last of Us Parts 1 and a pair of, Name of Responsibility Black Ops 6, and extra. And on prime of that, they’ve saved up a significantly better tempo of including FSR 4 help to new titles. This yr it is come to Stellar Blade, Kingdom Come Deliverance II, Oblivion Remastered, and Murderer’s Creed Shadows, to call just a few.
When players purchase a GPU, they need to know key options like FSR 4 will probably be supported throughout a broad vary of video games once they play them. To date, AMD have achieved a significantly better job delivering this than they did with earlier iterations of their graphics options.
Mistake #11: Releasing options that simply do not work
One more different mistake AMD made with FSR 3’s launch was releasing it in a damaged state. The implementation within the two launch titles had body pacing points in a wide range of configurations, which was a giant letdown. This meant the primary style players obtained of FSR 3 (after almost a yr of ready, in the event that they even owned the 2 supported titles) was one thing substandard and never fully functional.
The launch of FSR 4 was a lot totally different. FSR 4 worked flawlessly from the beginning. It delivered superior picture high quality and nice efficiency. Anybody shopping for a brand new RDNA 4 graphics card would have gotten a strong expertise within the first FSR 4 title they tried.
First impressions are necessary, particularly for players who may need come from an Nvidia GPU that supported DLSS, which works rather well. Secure to say, this error has been mounted.
Mistake #12: Breaking video games with poorly carried out options
The ultimate mistake revolves round AMD Anti-Lag+, which broke video games. Basically, this was a model of Nvidia Reflex, besides as an alternative of being built-in into the video games themselves, AMD injected Anti-Lag+ into video games by way of the driver.
This triggered anti-cheat detection in main multiplayer titles like Counter-Strike 2 and Apex Legends, precisely the type of video games the place you’d need to use Anti-Lag – inflicting some customers to get banned.
After this embarrassing mistake, AMD pulled the function. Finally, the banned players have been unbanned, and Anti-Lag+ re-emerged as Anti-Lag 2, now requiring recreation integration.
This form of avoidable error hasn’t occurred with the launch of RDNA 4’s options. Whereas FSR 4 does not require recreation integration itself, it depends on current FSR 3.1 integrations, and the motive force improve function is not breaking video games so far as we’re conscious. AMD can also be maintaining a whitelist of supported titles and are updating this record when video games are confirmed to work, which is an effective strategy. So that is one other space the place it is secure to say AMD have improved considerably.
Holding Rating
Throughout the 12 errors we have revisited right here, AMD appears to be avoiding making the identical errors in 2025 within the overwhelming majority of instances. Their in-house benchmarking is extra correct. Their advertising and marketing is much less noisy and extra grounded. FSR 4 launched in precise video games folks need to play, and it labored out of the field.
We did not see the identical rollout chaos, last-minute pricing flips, or wild efficiency claims that outlined earlier Radeon launches. Briefly, AMD appears to have stopped tripping over its personal ft. That does not imply they’ve nailed every part. The Radeon RX 9070 nonetheless echoes among the pricing missteps of the previous, and the RX 9060 XT 8GB stays arduous to defend. However these really feel extra like remoted fumbles, not a sample of self-sabotage.
In our opinion, this exhibits AMD has reversed a pattern of botching launches. Their advertising and marketing division appears to be like extra assured, extra measured, and, most significantly, extra in contact with actuality. Let’s hope it stays that means.
