here is your 300 series Klep....uhhggg.:rolleyes:
I stand corrected. It seems that my estimation of $299 is in fact $290 for the cards that are available. Always good to see when you're expections are exceeded by 3%.
estimation? you provided links of cards over $300 saying AMD/Partners were price gouging.
I said they weren't, you gave reseller links to try to prove me wrong. just look at the previous posts.
Which is probably part of the reasoning behind the GT210, 220 and 240 being renamed GT310, 320 and 340 I assume. Some of it may also be a cynical ploy of course, but I don't see nV publicly announcing the OEM re-brands.
I also note that as a system builder a large percentage of my business is refurbishing and upgrading OEM systems (along with inevitably fixing them a few days after the warranty lapses) and can say that most people who shop for OEM's in my experience do so on a cost basis primarily (many using hire-purchase), and are mostly ignorant of even the most rudimentary specifications of their systems -AMD/Intel CPU, AMD/nV/IGP graphics, RAM, power supply etc. They just want the system to work and not be bothered with the finer details.
A lack of competition I think is more painful aspect. Not many people are going to rush out and buy the GTX480/470-just as well if there aren't going to be many in the retail channel. Likewise of the 2+ million HD5xxx series cards I wouldn't think the HD5870 and 5970 make up a huge percentage either.
If you have to have the newest becuse it is the newest then fine, pay the premium and become a beta tester for driver support. Logically, what games are playable on a GTX480/470 or HD5xxx series that aren't playable on the last generation of cards-especially if the card/s are enthusiast grade parts.
At the moment DX11 looks nice but I don't put it in the "must have" category any more than I do PhysX
I'm keen to see how the architectural approach works. AMD use a fixed single tesselator and the nV design uses a flexible system of tesselation/shading. I'm also keen to see if the nV design is moving more towards ray tracing. All this is from interest in where the graphics are heading rather than the cards themselves. I'm happy with the performance of my HD4890 and GTX280 SLI for the most part and will skip this generation of cards as both seem like shortlived (as is always the case in graphics) transitions to more efficient designs and process nodes.
What part of "I stand corrected" did you not understand ?
My assertion was that the MSRP of the HD5850 was $299 (the same figure quoted for the uncoming GTX470) when it is in fact, by your own submission, $290. Obviously a huge discrepency.
The links I posted were from the largest resellers most people would be familiar with (excepting Newegg) where I listed ALL the available HD5850's for sale- they just happened (strangely enough) to be $300+
Just for interests sake It also seems that the price at launch for the HD5850 was $259 ( with $379 for the HD5870) as Anand listed here http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3643 a nice little 12% price hike in the interim...even with good yields from TSMC.
Now I suggest once special school lets out you go have a good cry on Dear Leader Chas's shoulder
He's not the only one it seems :wave:
Well For all the hater i always prefer quality over speed cause over 60 fps stable there is np , Cuda and blue Ray Own real Good. Physx is crasy just play the new Batman and you forgot ATI fast .
Ati is same price for a couple of FPS But graphics look ordinary compare to Cuda thats my points!
I guy Nvidia since i'm Kid and its good compagny Peace !
nvidia and there naming of cards is just plain stupid and rebranding the same card 5 times is just dumb as hell
Hello all…I think we need to stop taking sides and just look at the mere facts. The website listing the GTX470 price of 299.99 is clearly wrong and is misleading a lot of people. 1st and foremost do you guys honestly believe Nvidia is going to release a new card with new architecture that is supposedly faster than their current lineup for cheaper? The 285GTX still sales for close to 400.00 and its outclassed by the competition at that price. For those who will argue that they are doing that until the new cards come out, well that still doesn’t make sense. What manufactures normally do when competition has a product that they can’t match, you drop the price of your current lineup to stay in the game and when the new product come in you price it accordingly. What I believe Nvidia is going to do is re-badge the current gtx200 series line up to 3series (they have done that before) for midrange and add direct x 10.1 the 4series will be dx11 and they will have a new lineup from low to high end. This makes sense to me because you will be hard pressed to get a gtx275 or 285 (slightly modified architecture than the 280 and 260) nowadays and the sites that carry them only have 3-5 different brands and all are typically in low quantity. But that’s my 2cents. Only time will tell what will happen, but the outlook for the green team doesn’t look all the promising right now.
So a respected tech reporting contributor is wrong, whereas everyone should believe an anonymous "Guest" because their opinion is stated as fact....riiiiiiiiiight...
Striiiiiike ONE !!!
Given that the $US299 price quoted was for the second tier of performance card then the card's price is indicative of it's position regarding the current hierachy vis-a-vis the GTX260 (216) / GTX275......Striiiiiike TWO!!!!
Not to you maybe, but as the card if effectively EOL -along with the GTX 295, and prices tend to up at that point...another example would be an 8800 Ultra for $US229.
Most of the stock would be held now by resellers who would need the sale price to be high to recoup their initial wholesale purchase price. I wouldn't discount the fact that nVidia still need the GTX285/295 to appear in inventory to give the illusion that they are still offering products to counter the HD5850/5870 - if remaining stock is sold cheaply then it will not be replaced leaving the GTX 275 as nVidia's "flagship" desktop SKU
We're moving away from the mere facts part of the argument I assume...
Soooooo, you're "opinion" is in fact is an already proven fact for the rest of us.....You obviously aren't Edward De Bono writing under the guise of anonymity
Your own opinion makes sense to you!!! GTFO, that is amazing !
Mmmmmm, why is that ?....could it be that the cards are EOL ?....Striiiiike THREE!!
Which at todays exchange rate equates to some pocket lint and a small pebble.
Whaaaat , You ARE Edward De Bono !
No Sh*t !.....A new architecture late to market being produced by, and not taking into account, a foundry that is doing a passable impression of the Keystone Cops facing a successful rivals' on time and performing products....you Guest, simply amaze me in your prognosticative ability.
Ok either you have shaking baby syndrome or you are on crack. I would like for you to give me an example of where nvidia release a new card under new architecture that performs better than its lineup at that time for cheaper?
Oh and BTW you just proved to me that you are a crack head...when can someone state a opinion as a fact!! I rest my case...dude goto bed you are sleepy
Aaaaah, I love the smell of 'tard in the morning....it smells like...idiocy!
THe 9800GTX, which was the direct successor to the 8800GTX launched considerably cheaper than the MSRP of the latter.
At the time of the 9 series intoduction, the 8800Ultra (an overclocked 8800GTX) was nVidia's flagship SKU. The first 9 series card, the 9800GX2 which is essentially two 9800GTX's launched at a lower price than the single GPU 8800Ultra.
Ok… I see that you have a problem with comprehension or you are attempting to avoid the question. So I will repeat it again. I would like for you to give me an example of where nvidia release a new card under new architecture that performs better than its current lineup at that time for cheaper? Example Ati the 3000 series to is 4000 series successor. The 4000 series was a performance improvement over the 3000 series. Another example is the 9800gtx to the 200gtx series. The 9800gtx was not an improvement over the 8800gtx, in most situations it actually performs worse than the 8800gtx…so that is a bad example and because of the performance of that card nvidia couldn’t demand more…hell there are reviews indicating that if you have a 8800gtx the 9800gtx isn’t a worthy upgrade. You cant answer that question because the answer doesn’t exists. Nvidia has yet to release a card with better performance than the outgoing model for cheaper…that’s why “in my opinion” I cant see the 470gtx if does perform better than the 285gtx being cheaper… Lets entertain your “opinion” here for a sec. If the 470gtx is 299.99 how much will the 480gtx be?
Finding different "architectures" in stock at one etailer is a bit of a tough ask when looking for new cards...but here goes:
This store (which I happen to use) has 8800GTX in stock for $NZ556, an FX5950 for $752 , and a GTX260 (216SP) for $331
Or another vendor if you'd like to compare top tier with top tier...8800GTX for $899 + tax and a GTX 280 for $739+tax and a GTX285 for $725+tax
If you can find contradictory examples of those in-stock cards, by all means post the link/s.
On the same basic architecture-not a hell of a lot different from G80 and G92, they are both evolutionary in nature, not revolutionary. Neither are ground-up re-designs, new architectures inherently mean increased R&D costs that need to be factored in-hence the high launch price for the G200, which seems to be your main point of interest. You might note that similar changes in architecture from ATI produce the same pricing structure- compare the $US399 launch price for the HD2900XT against the $240 launch price for the HD3870.
You'll soon have a chance to find out. By your own admission you say the GTX285 retail price is "close to $400". You expect that price to drop or increase as stock dries up? IIRC the GTX285 isn't "new architecture" -you'll need to be looking at GTX 280 prices.
You are also comparing the top performing G200b card with the second tier card from the GF100. If you were comparing the flagship card of both then, yes, GTX480 is going be be more expensive than GTX285, or GTX295 for that matter.
Using your argument you could apply the same scenario to the 8800Ultra (G80) launch price of $829 (or it's last current price if you prefer) against the $400 launch price for the GTX 260.
Assuming that the TSMC 40nm process is likely as bugged as is claimed, then the top binned GPU's are likely to make up maybe 10% of viable cards, of which a great percentage are going to end up as workstation cards (C2050/C2070) since the HPC market are quite happy to pay $5000+ per card. Bearing in mind all the variables then I'd be surprised if a GTX480 is listed below $US600.
Since you now have my take on pricing, how about registering for the forums and post your pricing prognostications without the guise of anonymity?
FWIW respond away if you feel the need to. If you continue to plan on phrasing in absolutes then you may need to check that the argument is watertight. I'm done here in any case. The thread has run it's course and speculation on these cards prices will shortly be rendered moot, in addition to the thread seemingly moving OT.
You are right this argument has gone into overtime and I might decide to register…Any who back to my point. You are skipping around dear sir to make your case. My question was I would like for you to give me an example of where nvidia released a new card under new architecture that performs better than its current lineup at that time for cheaper? Current lineup is the word. The 8800gtx ultra may have been a better performing card however it was on its way of being phased out it (jan 2008 for the ultra). A more appropriate argument would be to compare the transition from the 9800series to the G200 series and I can tell you that the 260Gtx sold for 399.99 and the 280Gtx 649.99 the 9800gtx was 349.99. Which is the better performing card? We all know that the 260gtx is a much faster card than the 9800gtx but also commanded a higher price. Another thing by your own admission you indicated that the 480gtx “Bearing in mind all the variables then I'd be surprised if a GTX480 is listed below $US600.” Really!! Isn’t it safe to say that the 470GTX and 480GTX are pretty much the same card...for the exception that certain features are cut back…(like cuda cores, possible memory speeds etc…) kinda like what ati did to differentiate the 5850 from the 5870? Also how much better performance will the 480gtx have over the 470gtx? Under normal circumstance the end user won’t see anything more that 20-22% (betting on the high side examples 5870/5850 10-15% difference 280GTX/260GTX 12-18% difference) difference between top end and 2nd to the top if that? So with that in mind, based on your theory we are going to have a 480gtx for let’s say 599.99 and a 470gtx for 299.99 that at best will realistically offer maybe 10-18% better performance for twice the cost!! Hmm if that’s the case nvidia is really shooting themselves in the foot…what would be the incentive to buy a 480gtx when two 470gtx’s in sli would stomp it...and it would do so at the same price of a single 480gtx…Like Judge Judy says “if it don’t make sense then it’s probably isnt true” your argument doesn’t make sense!
So using your argument....
A GTX470 selling at $499 makes a viable sales alternative to a HD5850 at $300 ? or a HD5870 (which is likely to have better gaming performance) at $379 ?
As I mentioned, and you seem to have ignored, the GTX480 SKU's are probably not going to hit retail in any numbers ( 5,000 cards worldwide is the rumoured, and oft quoted figure), if they can't be purchased then it doesn't matter if it's two,five or ten times more expensive than the GTX470.
What you seem to have trouble comprehending is that the GTX480 is a marketing exercise. Since it cannot be released in anything approaching retail availability then the nVidia spin will be to release a few cards at a time in order to regain the title "worlds fastest GPU"- that fact alone gets customers to buy GT220's et al, and if you don't think that effort is worth it then ask yourself why AMD has chosen the GTX4xx release time to allow vendor OC cards and will most likely bring out a refresh of the HD5870 using hoarded speed binned GPU's. You can also bet that if this refreshed (HD5890 ?) card surpasses the GTX480 in performance then the reference HD5970 will be allowed to die after one of the shortest production runs in card history, simply because AMD will not need to counter "the worlds fastest GPU" with "the world fastest graphics card".
While I will stop short of saying your argument makes no sense, it does however take a very narrow and simplistic world view.
Your argument regarding the 9 series to G200 pricing shows a shocking lack of knowledge. Again with the apples-to-oranges tortured analogy. The GTX260 has no analog in the 9 series, and the GTX280 (top tier) succeeds the 9800GX2 (top tier), and not the 9800GTX.
List price for the GTX 280 was $650, with the retail price of 9800GX2's commanding a $20-30 premium over that*( the 9800GX2 launch price was $500). So assuming that the new in-stock not refurbished) price for a 9800GX2 remains static for another three weeks (this example is indicative of pricing at $US672 ) then we will have an architecture that is twice removed from the current one selling for effectively the same price- the 9800GX2 cards available would most likely be more expensive as those available now are generally waterblocked and/or vender OC varieties.
If you are looking for two architectures from one manufacturer selling side-by-side, like-for-like cards then you should be the one to seek "Judge Judy's" call (whoever she is). New architectures supplant the old, thats why they make them, or do you see AMD keeping the HD4890 around to take share away from the HD5830? (for example).
Also....."Isn’t it safe to say that the 470GTX and 480GTX are pretty much the same card...for the exception that certain features are cut back…(like cuda cores, possible memory speeds etc…) kinda like what ati did to differentiate the 5850 from the 5870?"
In a word, No.
The GTX470 will likely use a 320-bit memory bus, the GTX480 will use a 384-bit, whereas the HD5850 and 5870 both share a 256-bit bus, consequently the GTX470 will have 1283Mb of GDDR5 , while the GTX480 will have 1536Mb, unlike the HD5850/5870 which are both 1Gb cards. There is also a school of thought that some GTX480/Quadro/Tesla parts will have the original (likely) specced 512 shader (cuda)/700MHz Core/1600MHz shader/1100MHz (4400MHz effective) memory, as opposed to the neutered 480/625/1250/1000 that most are expecting- these in addition to the GTX470/480. If true then these SKU's, if available, will command a massive premium over the lower rated parts as not even a refreshed overclocked HD5870 is likely to match it's performance.
* The 9800GX2 debuted only 3-4 months prior to the GTX280/260. People looking for the max-performance card bought the 9800GX2 -including my customers- and due to the price of them delayed buying a second for quad SLI until they had the funds available, by the time they were ready to buy, the GTX280/260 had been released so buyers ended up paying slightly more for an older card. Not seen as a big deal at the time because in a few notable games the 9800GX2 runs very close to the GTX280 in performance.
Anyway, I'm done here...no doubt you'll repost, especially if the MSRP is realized at $499 for the GTX470. I certainly don't think you'll be reposting if $499 is a hundred or more too high...all part of the no-risk, no-balls joy of being anonymous I guess.
"So using your argument....
A GTX470 selling at $499 makes a viable sales alternative to a HD5850 at $300 ? or a HD5870 (which is likely to have better gaming performance) at $379 ?"
Well my friend we are in the same situation now with the GTX285 having close performance in many titles as the 5850 but selling from the price of a HD5870 so I don’t see your point there.
"What you seem to have trouble comprehending is that the GTX480 is a marketing exercise. Since it cannot be released in anything approaching retail availability then the nVidia spin will be to release a few cards at a time in order to regain the title "worlds fastest GPU"- that fact alone gets customers to buy GT220's et al, and if you don't think that effort is worth it then ask yourself why AMD has chosen the GTX4xx release time to allow vendor OC cards and will most likely bring out a refresh of the HD5870 using hoarded speed binned GPU's. You can also bet that if this refreshed (HD5890 ?) card surpasses the GTX480 in performance then the reference HD5970 will be allowed to die after one of the shortest production runs in card history, simply because AMD will not need to counter "the worlds fastest GPU" with "the world fastest graphics card"
I don’t even know where to begin with this argument. I guess what you fail to realize is that ATI will still be able to hold the title of the world fastest graphics card…at this time it has been said that nvidia will not have anything to counter the 5970. Why would ati kill off its fastest graphics card spend more money on producing a overclocked version to beat Nvidia at having the fastest gpu in the world..They have that now!!! Based on this lame argument why don’t ati just go ahead and kill the 5970 now and release a faster 5870 ie…5890 to compete to take the fastest single gpu. I do believe ati is working on faster versions of their very own cards but that is a normal product refresh typically(the 4850-4870/4890)…they will always have the 5970 to trump nvidia should they come up with a faster solution.
"While I will stop short of saying your argument makes no sense, it does however take a very narrow and simplistic world view.FWIW.Your argument regarding the 9 series to G200 pricing shows a shocking lack of knowledge. Again with the apples-to-oranges tortured analogy. The GTX260 has no analog in the 9 series, and the GTX280 (top tier) succeeds the 9800GX2 (top tier), and not the 9800GTX.List price for the GTX 280 was $650, with the retail price of 9800GX2's commanding a $20-30 premium over that*( the 9800GX2 launch price was $500). So assuming that the new in-stock not refurbished) price for a 9800GX2 remains static for another three weeks (this example is indicative of pricing at $US672 ) then we will have an architecture that is twice removed from the current one selling for effectively the same price- the 9800GX2 cards available would most likely be more expensive as those available now are generally waterblocked and/or vender OC varieties.If you are looking for two architectures from one manufacturer selling side-by-side, like-for-like cards then you should be the one to seek "Judge Judy's" call (whoever she is). New architectures supplant the old, thats why they make them, or do you see AMD keeping the HD4890 around to take share away from the HD5830? (for example)."
Dear sir...whatever you are smoking u need to let it go… I don’t know what planet you are flying on if you believe that the successor to the 9800GX2 was the 280gtx…. You need to click on this link (http://www.motherboards.org/reviews/hardware/1909_1.html) and read the 2nd paragraph the successor to a dual Gpu part is another dual gpu part and that would be the 295gtx…just like the successor to the 4870X2 is the 5970 not the 5870. Based on your argument before the 5970 was released then the successor to the 4870X2 was the 5870? Ha…I need not to go any further it was great chatting with you but you have made me very aware that you are either a nvidia fanboi of sorts are u have a skewed way of thinking (no offense). But you are very misinformed and you quoting item all over the place to prove a point. My argument has been and will continue to be for people to read as much information and make a decision but also follow common sense and if walks like a duck and quacks like one its not a horse!! Good day
BTW the 470 and the 480GTX are binned from the same chip...just because they have different memory widths doesn’t mean they are 2 different chips a perfect example of this would be the 8800gtx and the 8800gts 640. The 8800GTX has a memory with of 384 and the 8800gts have one of 320...they are both G80 chips...get your facts together. Here a link for reference... Let me educate you just for a moment. Memory width is based on the memory size. That’s why you cant have a gpu with memory width (or bit) of 384 with memory size of 2GB… it doesn’t fit… You should ask yourself why the 8800gtx came with 768mb of memory and the 285gtx have 1GB…look at the memory widths…285gtx is 512bits wide 8800gtx is 384. Have you asked yourself why the 9800gtx memory size is 512mb and not some odd number…look at the memory width is 256… have you asked yourself why is the 275gtx memory size 896…again look at its memory width 448. Just for your knowledge..it’s apparent that you don’t know.
You should have named yourself "MrBigTool".
Point out the passage where I said the GTX470 and 480 were different GPU's ?
You obviously don't have a clue "...and not some odd number" not even! not only NOT an odd number but I'll point out (big hint coming up) that EVERY bus width/memory for cards is a multiple of 64/128. Best you go back to wiki and not use your sole known parent's internet access entirely for getting bitchslapped in Runescape.
Your original question "I would like for you to give me an example of where nvidia release a new card under new architecture that performs better than its lineup at that time for cheaper?" ...What no follow up ? No more proviso's ? No more conditions?
Fact: The top performing card in a series is irrespective of the number of GPU's it incorporates. Prior to the GTX280/260 introduction in June 2008, the 9800GX2 was nVidia's top SKU. The GTX295 wasn't launched until Jan 2009, by which time the 9800GX2 was EOL. Easily seen (for some) since the GX2 was never seen as a candidate for the die shrink from 65nm to 55nm as was the 9800GTX/GTX+
So at the LAUNCH of the G200 the 9800GX2 was the top SKU of the G92 series.
This of course differs from the HD 5970 since the AMD card launched in the same time frame as the HD 5850 and 5870.
Re-read the sentence regarding the distinction between "worlds fastest GPU" and "worlds fastest graphics card" -you obviously think they are one and the same. They are not. And for marketing purposes there is a very clear perception of what each entails in PR value. I'm guessing that English is a second language at your trailer park.
As for the fanboi sh*t....well, a simple check of my previous posts should prove that one way or the other- have an adult read them to you. I'd have to say that you exhibit more of the braindead fanboi mentality....unless it's just you are comprehensionally challenged, since you cannot distinguish between what is written, and what you think is written.
funny how predictions are..this was last year
Afraid Nvidia is losing out big time after delaying so long. ATI is making a lot of huge gain in the market share and will do so for some time. Being an Nvidia fan, this is disappointing.
I agree with you my friend
Only thing i can say is i told you so......so glad the reviews are out. nvidia dropped the ball...and the card as i estimated was not 299.99 its 349.99 for the gtx470....wow divid...you got good knowledge but you arent well informed my friend.