Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Video Cards and Graphics

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-23-2009, 04:05 PM   #126
Creig
Diamond Member
 
Creig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 4,861
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Uh ya, because he's taking performance and price into consideration. As usual they're forced to cut their prices in order to compete.
Once again, you're deliberately glossing over the fact that ATI can create a less expensive video card because their GPU has fewer transistors and they use GDDR5 which eliminates the need for a 512-bit bus. ATI can sell their cards cheaper because they're less expensive to produce.

And how can you not take price into consideration? Nvidia still had the fastest available video card even after the 4870 was released, but they certainly couldn't keep selling them for $650. They were the ones forced to drop their price because the much cheaper 4870 could deliver 80% of the GTX280s performance at less than 50% of its price. Nvidia stopped trying to charge $650 for them because they knew that nobody would pay that much after the 4870 was released.


Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Financial statements for both firms are public and available for anyone to see. AMD's latest quarterly for the GPG indicates 1 million in profits on $222 revenue before any allocated expenses or one time charges, but they were still losing money prior to the current recession at the very peak of RV770's popularity at the end of Q2 and throughout Q3. So while RV770 was a critical success amongst reviewers and end-users (even though it was firmly a 2nd place part), that certainly didn't translate into profits or even significant gains in market share. All market indicators also reflect this, with Nvidia regaining any market share lost in that period with roughly equal market penetration of 4800 compared to 200 series since launch.
Again I ask, do you have a detailed breakdown showing the ATI division's profit/loss statements? ie- separate from AMD as a whole. And Nvidia's as well to show possible recession trends?


Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
LMAO. Tell me, how much was 2900XT and 2900XTX Dragon Head and Lil' Dragon Head supposed to retail for at launch? How much did the X1950XTX debut at? Now look at how much the 3870 launched at. The only reason it was even able to keep its launch price was because of the excessive price gouging on Nvidia's G92 8800GT, which contrary to popular belief, actually offered high-end performance at mainstream prices long before RV770. If you think for a second that ATI would've lowered prices in each iteration if they had the performance lead, you're either being disingenuous or extremely naive. Or you're acknowledging AMD's poor business acumen and decision-making.
What that little diatribe had to do with the 48X0 series forcing Nvidia to lower price on its GT200 series is beyond me.


Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
And yes its pretty obvious ATI was forced to lower prices on their 4890 because its slower than the GTX 275
No, the 4890 and GTX275 are roughly equal. Some sites put the 4890 ahead, some put the 275 ahead. X-bit labs, which has performed the most extensive testing on both cards I've seen to date, puts the 4890 ahead at 1680x1050 and 1920x1200, the GTX275 ahead at 2560x1600. Those findings also agree with the AT review.


Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
, which accurately reflects the following financial statement comments: While the the number of graphics chips sold were also down, but their prices were up. Sales in AMD's graphics division fell 15 percent to $222 million.
Which could very well be due to the depressed state of the world's economy. Purchasing a new video card definitely falls into the "disposable income" category, which is in somewhat short supply these days. I'd imagine that Nvidia's own sales are down as well.
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by desprado - I now ignore that person which only post but dont make any sense.
Creig is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:16 PM   #127
error8
Diamond Member
 
error8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,194
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow

And yes its pretty obvious ATI was forced to lower prices on their 4890 because its slower than the GTX 275
Wow, so you really believe that, don't you? Man, you're more biased than I thought you are.

Even Keys, had a very, very long post with some 20 reviews picked up from all over the net, where, it was very clear that while some were taking the GTX 275 side, others were seeing 4890 as the winner .Even he, as a "Nvidia focused member", admitted that these two cards are as equal as they can be. You have to be blind to see the GTX 275, on the whole , a faster performing card then 4890.
__________________
Q6700 @ 3.6 ghz
Xigmatek S1283 + Antec tricool
MSI P35 Neo 2-FR
4x2048 A-data
WD 640 gb
Gigabyte 4870 1GB
Antec EarthWatts 650W
Antec 300
BenQ FP202WA (20 inch)
error8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:18 PM   #128
dguy6789
Diamond Member
 
dguy6789's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 8,521
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig

Nvidia may currently have the fastest single card, but ATI makes the cards that are being most often recommended for purchase. Looks like Nvidia is firmly in second place there.
Yes but if you look at a more objective site like TR they recommend NVIDIA as the top choice in 3 out of 4 systems. They only gave the nod to ATI in the "econobox"

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/16721

Not to mention that NVIDIA still has greater marketshare.

Their flawless execution of the GTX275 prevented ATI from gouging their customers and forced them to take a bath on the 4890 causing a price drop almost immediately.
LMAO @ thinking TR is a better or more credible review site than AT.
dguy6789 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 04:58 PM   #129
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Once again, you're deliberately glossing over the fact that ATI can create a less expensive video card because their GPU has fewer transistors and they use GDDR5 which eliminates the need for a 512-bit bus. ATI can sell their cards cheaper because they're less expensive to produce.
No I'm not glossing over anything as I never made any comparisons to prices of parts, not to mention by doing so you're clearly glossing over the price premium for a more advanced process, a more expensive memory type, and more expensive components. Even if Nvidia's cards were more expensive to produce, they can afford to sell them at a lower price and generate as much profit simply because they sell 2 video cards for every ATI card. Its simple economies of scale.

Quote:
And how can you not take price into consideration? Nvidia still had the fastest available video card even after the 4870 was released, but they certainly couldn't keep selling them for $650. They were the ones forced to drop their price because the much cheaper 4870 could deliver 80% of the GTX280s performance at less than 50% of its price. Nvidia stopped trying to charge $650 for them because they knew that nobody would pay that much after the 4870 was released.
Uh no, there would still be a % who would be willing to pay for that premium performance, just as there is for any other components. By dropping prices they simply chose to sell more cards for less margin, to get to similar revenue and profit targets.

Quote:
Again I ask, do you have a detailed breakdown showing the ATI division's profit/loss statements? ie- separate from AMD as a whole. And Nvidia's as well to show possible recession trends?
And like I said, they are available on both company's web sites for all to see, publicly available. Detailed breakouts of market segments are there as well, although they're not plainly obvious and require some experience with navigating financial statements. Feel free to dig them up and if there's anything there you don't understand I'll do my best to explain them to you.

Quote:
What that little diatribe had to do with the 48X0 series forcing Nvidia to lower price on its GT200 series is beyond me.
Rofl, it directly contradicts the point that ATI forced Nvidia to drop prices, when in fact, it was Nvidia's dominance over the previous 2 years that forced AMD to misprice their first winning part in years with the 4800 with their current pricing strategy. It clearly shows ATI also charged what the market would bear throughout history when they did actually have a 1st place part. Which all changed when they were forced to DRASTICALLY cut prices on the 2900XT even before launch, to completely cancel and place the 2900XTX on vaporware status, and to launch the 3800 as a firmly low to mid-range part from the outset.

The end result is that no one will ever pay for a high-end ATI part ever again because ATI has willingly priced themselves out of the high-end by low-balling their parts so badly. Any attempt to price a part higher will just be met with a willingness to wait until ATI again drops prices in an effort to compete. The 4890 is once again perfect proof of this, as it dropped overnight from a $269 part to a $200 part AR. This will ONLY change if they start beating Nvidia on the high end for sustained periods of time, something they haven't managed to accomplish since R300.

Quote:
No, the 4890 and GTX275 are roughly equal. Some sites put the 4890 ahead, some put the 275 ahead. X-bit labs, which has performed the most extensive testing on both cards I've seen to date, puts the 4890 ahead at 1680x1050 and 1920x1200, the GTX275 ahead at 2560x1600. Those findings also agree with the AT review.
No, the overwhelming majority of reviews showing the 275 is the faster part. For every review you pick that favors the 4890, you'll have 1-2 more that favor the 275. If they were equal, why drop the MSRP of the 4890? Why drop its price and add a rebate before the 275 even launched? Why drop it even further in price to pre-launch 4870 prices if it was equal? There's 2 answers here, neither of which are good outcomes for AM either the 275 is faster and the 4890 needed to drop its price to compete or AMD doesn't know how to run a business.

Quote:
Which could very well be due to the depressed state of the world's economy. Purchasing a new video card definitely falls into the "disposable income" category, which is in somewhat short supply these days. I'd imagine that Nvidia's own sales are down as well.
Yep, while that's true, the emphasis was on the part "while prices were up", meaning they're selling fewer cards that cost more to make, a direct result of having to sell their entire single-GPU mid to high-end at bargain basement prices. I've said this numerous times, but when you start at $300, there's a lot less downward pricing mobility before you start hitting break-even thresholds.....
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 05:01 PM   #130
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: error8
Wow, so you really believe that, don't you? Man, you're more biased than I thought you are.

Even Keys, had a very, very long post with some 20 reviews picked up from all over the net, where, it was very clear that while some were taking the GTX 275 side, others were seeing 4890 as the winner .Even he, as a "Nvidia focused member", admitted that these two cards are as equal as they can be. You have to be blind to see the GTX 275, on the whole , a faster performing card then 4890.
Yep, and the majority of those reviews picked the 275 as the faster part. How is this hard to understand? Yes, they are close, but the 275 is the faster part based on reviews. Again, its obvious, if the 275 was slower, why drop the price of the 4890 30-35% within the first week or two of launch?
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 05:34 PM   #131
Astrallite
Diamond Member
 
Astrallite's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,816
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Well if its really a 295 on a single die, I can finally play Crysis Very High circa 2007 without stuttering! w00t.
__________________
Intel 4770k @ 4.3 GHz | Nvidia GTX 980 @1442 MHz | 32" Acer B326HK@ 3840x2160 | Dynaudio C1 Signature | Yamaha RX-A3000 Receiver | Dual JL Audio F110 Subwoofers
Astrallite is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 05:39 PM   #132
error8
Diamond Member
 
error8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,194
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow

Yep, and the majority of those reviews picked the 275 as the faster part. How is this hard to understand? Yes, they are close, but the 275 is the faster part based on reviews. Again, its obvious, if the 275 was slower, why drop the price of the 4890 30-35% within the first week or two of launch?
They've dropped the price probably because they considered that it's not worth so much more over 4870 1 gb, for just some 8% extra performance, besides, with the price cut, it makes it even more appealing over GTX 275.

And "based on reviews", I still don't see GTX 275 faster. If all the reviews on the web would have pointed this, then yes, there is no doubt about it, otherwise, some say it is, some say it is slower , that in my book, makes them equal. It's just the same situation as it was with GTX 260 c216 versus 4870 1gb. If you are a PhysX-CUDA fanatic, then go for the Nvidia card, otherwise, flip a coin.
__________________
Q6700 @ 3.6 ghz
Xigmatek S1283 + Antec tricool
MSI P35 Neo 2-FR
4x2048 A-data
WD 640 gb
Gigabyte 4870 1GB
Antec EarthWatts 650W
Antec 300
BenQ FP202WA (20 inch)
error8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 05:49 PM   #133
Creig
Diamond Member
 
Creig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 4,861
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: error8
Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow

Yep, and the majority of those reviews picked the 275 as the faster part. How is this hard to understand? Yes, they are close, but the 275 is the faster part based on reviews. Again, its obvious, if the 275 was slower, why drop the price of the 4890 30-35% within the first week or two of launch?
They've dropped the price probably because they considered that it's not worth so much more over 4870 1 gb, for just some 8% extra performance, besides, with the price cut, it makes it even more appealing over GTX 275.

And "based on reviews", I still don't see GTX 275 faster. If all the reviews on the web would have pointed this, then yes, there is no doubt about it, otherwise, some say it is, some say it is slower , that in my book, makes them equal. It's just the same situation as it was with GTX 260 c216 versus 4870 1gb. If you are a PhysX-CUDA fanatic, then go for the Nvidia card, otherwise, flip a coin.
Or save some coin by going with the cheaper card.
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by desprado - I now ignore that person which only post but dont make any sense.
Creig is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:01 PM   #134
BenSkywalker
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 8,955
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
You should read your own sources a little better:
You linked a different article, appears that AT had improper information posted in the article I linked, or the one you linked. One of them was wrong anyway

Quote:
Way to run DX9 benches at 1999 settings, without AA or AF.
I was trying to be generous- limiting it to AA/AF only benches the score is 800XT 5, 6800U 12. The x800xt looks better if we stick to, as you state, 1999 settings.

Quote:
And since the 7950gx2 was released half a year after the x1900xt, lets see how the 6800U compares to later r480 cards:
Bringing up the 79xxgx2 parts was in direct response to the claim that no 7 series GeForce could compete with the x1xxx parts from ATi, that was obviously false. Replying to the comparison to the x800xt killing the 6800U was direct comments about two parts- I didn't start the comparison nor have I ever indicated in any way whatsoever that the x850xt pe wasn't considerably faster then the 6800U. I corrected the incorrect assertion that the 6800U was blown out of the water by the x800xt, a point which clearly you back me on considering the link you just provided.

So in your own words XBit which is a far more competent site, the review you just linked has the x800xt on top in 19 game benches, the 6800U in 21 if we eliminate what you call the 1999 settings. So I assume since you are linking sites on your own that agree with exactly what I have been saying you are coming around

Quote:
Anandtech.com is now a biased web site?
According to Anandtech, the 4670 is equal to the 9600GT. Is that bias or just straight stupidity in your estimation?
BenSkywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:07 PM   #135
SlowSpyder
Diamond Member
 
SlowSpyder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,117
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
The end result is that no one will ever pay for a high-end ATI part ever again because ATI has willingly priced themselves out of the high-end by low-balling their parts so badly.
You've seen no one here with a 4870x2 card?

I think AMD made a design descision, smaller GPU's that are scalable. It just so happened that the economy was where it was (and still is) when the 48x0 and GTX2x0 cards launched and made AMD's stradegy look really good... who knows if people would have paid as much attention if the economy was booming.

I have no belief what so ever that AMD is some kind of angelic company that wants to do right by my wallet and Nvidia is some kind of demon. But it looks like AMD's small scalable GPU stradegy is the better one for current conditions. To say no one will ever pay for a high end AMD part again is pretty out there in my opinion... the 4870x2 is proof of that.

On the topic of the OP, AMD already fully supports a newer version of DirectX, I don't think it would be shocking if they launched a DX11 card sooner than Nvidia. But really, just like every newer version DX capable card, no one buys them for that ability, almost all of us buy them for how well they can play current games. I don't think it'll matter too much who launches a DX11 capable card sooner than the other so long as the other has their cards out in time for DX11 games and Win7.
__________________
Steve
FX 9370 / 7970 / ASRock 990FX Extreme 9
GO PACKERS!
SlowSpyder is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:11 PM   #136
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: error8
They've dropped the price probably because they considered that it's not worth so much more over 4870 1 gb, for just some 8% extra performance, besides, with the price cut, it makes it even more appealing over GTX 275.
Again, this makes ZERO sense whatsoever. I'll ask a simple question, why bother to release a new part if its just going to sell for the same price as the part its meant to surpass, especially given it costs more to produce before counting any additional design and engineering costs? If its only 8-13% faster, can't beat the competitions fastest, why spend the time and money to basically swap price points and further push the price down on the rest of your product range?

Quote:
And "based on reviews", I still don't see GTX 275 faster. If all the reviews on the web would have pointed this, then yes, there is no doubt about it, otherwise, some say it is, some say it is slower , that in my book, makes them equal. It's just the same situation as it was with GTX 260 c216 versus 4870 1gb. If you are a PhysX-CUDA fanatic, then go for the Nvidia card, otherwise, flip a coin.
4890 vs. GTX 275 reviews
Again, feel free to count em up, I'm sure you'll see the majority of sites saying the GTX 275 is the faster part. Do you think the 4890 would've dropped in price if the majority of reviews said it was the faster part? I don't think so.

__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:11 PM   #137
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Or save some coin by going with the cheaper card.
Or spend some more coin giong with the better card.
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:15 PM   #138
Creig
Diamond Member
 
Creig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 4,861
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Or save some coin by going with the cheaper card.
Or spend some more coin giong with the better card.
And since they're roughly equal, the better card is the cheaper card.
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by desprado - I now ignore that person which only post but dont make any sense.
Creig is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:16 PM   #139
OCGuy
Lifer
 
OCGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: CA
Posts: 27,156
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Or save some coin by going with the cheaper card.
Or spend some more coin giong with the better card.
And since they're roughly equal, the better card is the cheaper card.
Funny how that works.

The 4850 and the 9800GTX+ traded punches at launch, so they were "roughly equal", yet somehow I doubt you felt the same way.
__________________
4670k @ 4.2
MSI Gaming GTX770 @ 1246/7500
OCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:19 PM   #140
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
You've seen no one here with a 4870x2 card?

I think AMD made a design descision, smaller GPU's that are scalable. It just so happened that the economy was where it was (and still is) when the 48x0 and GTX2x0 cards launched and made AMD's stradegy look really good... who knows if people would have paid as much attention if the economy was booming.

I have no belief what so ever that AMD is some kind of angelic company that wants to do right by my wallet and Nvidia is some kind of demon. But it looks like AMD's small scalable GPU stradegy is the better one for current conditions. To say no one will ever pay for a high end AMD part again is pretty out there in my opinion... the 4870x2 is proof of that.
LOL, well certainly not the 100 or whatever and 50% of total respondents in that poll around the 4870X2's launch.

But ya I was referring to single-GPU in that instance, but even extended to multi-GPU, the same applies when Nvidia beats them there as well. Similar to Error8's position with the 4890, the same happened when the GTX 295 launched. Why did ATI suddenly feel the need to drop the price of their part $50-100 all of the sudden, if it was actually on par with the 295 as ATI fan's claimed? Why do reports indicate the 295 badly outselling the 4870X2 despite the price difference and Nvidia's inability to meet demand?

Again, you can claim their strategy is good all you like....but when it doesn't produce the expected results what did it really accomplish? Sure a few fans are happy with their cheap graphics cards, but in the long run the impact on their pricing and profits (losses) could be catastrophic, especially if their parts start underwhelming and underperforming again.
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:20 PM   #141
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Or save some coin by going with the cheaper card.
Or spend some more coin giong with the better card.
And since they're roughly equal, the better card is the cheaper card.
No not really, even if performance is similar, an Nvidia card is superior in just about every way. I recently put together a nice long list, can't remember if it was for you or someone else.
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:26 PM   #142
Creig
Diamond Member
 
Creig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 4,861
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
No not really, even if performance is similar, an Nvidia card is superior in just about every way. I recently put together a nice long list, can't remember if it was for you or someone else.
I guess it depends on whether or not the features provided by the Nvidia card are useful to the person looking to buy a new card. PhysX and CUDA didn't seem to offer much value to me, so I went for a $183 MSI 4890 OC rather than spending $230 on a GTX275. And judging from the number of people jumping on the recent 4890 OC sale, I'm not alone.
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by desprado - I now ignore that person which only post but dont make any sense.
Creig is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:31 PM   #143
SlowSpyder
Diamond Member
 
SlowSpyder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,117
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Quote:
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
You've seen no one here with a 4870x2 card?

I think AMD made a design descision, smaller GPU's that are scalable. It just so happened that the economy was where it was (and still is) when the 48x0 and GTX2x0 cards launched and made AMD's stradegy look really good... who knows if people would have paid as much attention if the economy was booming.

I have no belief what so ever that AMD is some kind of angelic company that wants to do right by my wallet and Nvidia is some kind of demon. But it looks like AMD's small scalable GPU stradegy is the better one for current conditions. To say no one will ever pay for a high end AMD part again is pretty out there in my opinion... the 4870x2 is proof of that.
LOL, well certainly not the 100 or whatever and 50% of total respondents in that poll around the 4870X2's launch.

But ya I was referring to single-GPU in that instance, but even extended to multi-GPU, the same applies when Nvidia beats them there as well. Similar to Error8's position with the 4890, the same happened when the GTX 295 launched. Why did ATI suddenly feel the need to drop the price of their part $50-100 all of the sudden, if it was actually on par with the 295 as ATI fan's claimed? Why do reports indicate the 295 badly outselling the 4870X2 despite the price difference and Nvidia's inability to meet demand?

Again, you can claim their strategy is good all you like....but when it doesn't produce the expected results what did it really accomplish? Sure a few fans are happy with their cheap graphics cards, but in the long run the impact on their pricing and profits (losses) could be catastrophic, especially if their parts start underwhelming and underperforming again.
AMD's GPU business actually made a very small profit this quarter, their CPU business is same ol' same ol'. How did Nvidia do? Like I said, I think AMD's stradegy is good for this economy, but the GPU business certainly can't hold up the CPU business as well as itself.

At what price range do you consider the 'high end' to start? 4870x2's are $400+ on Newegg. Certainly the GTX295 is an even higher end part at being $525+... of course you can't actually buy any of them on Newegg though. So tell me, if you wanted a high end single card, what would you buy right now? 4870x2's are in stock.
__________________
Steve
FX 9370 / 7970 / ASRock 990FX Extreme 9
GO PACKERS!
SlowSpyder is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:32 PM   #144
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
I guess it depends on whether or not the features provided by the Nvidia card are useful to the person looking to buy a new card. PhysX and CUDA didn't seem to offer much value to me, so I went for a $183 MSI 4890 OC rather than spending $230 on a GTX275. And judging from the number of people jumping on the recent 4890 OC sale, I'm not alone.
I think CUDA was #10 on my list, PhysX would've been #11 but unlisted. There was at least 9 reasons ahead of those, one certainly being the superior game bundle included with most GTX 275s (COD5 I believe).
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:47 PM   #145
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
AMD's GPU business actually made a very small profit this quarter, their CPU business is same ol' same ol'. How did Nvidia do? Like I said, I think AMD's stradegy is good for this economy, but the GPU business certainly can't hold up the CPU business as well as itself.
No, they really didn't. I already know how this argument goes, AMD reports non-GAAP pre-EBITDA earnings, then dumps all their charges without properly allocating them on their consolidated financials. So basically, AMD will take a one-time 200 million loss for example, then claim the very business unit responsible for those impairments actually made a profit. Except that's not how it works lol.

Also, I was directly referring to the Q2 and Q3 results during the peak of RV770's popularity, so the current economy wasn't an issue at that time.

And yes, I'm pretty sure Nvidia's GPU business would've been "profitable" if you calculated profits similarly, given their chipset business lost money (~100M) last quarter. Overall they lost money though.

Quote:
At what price range do you consider the 'high end' to start? 4870x2's are $400+ on Newegg. Certainly the GTX295 is an even higher end part at being $525+... of course you can't actually buy any of them on Newegg though. So tell me, if you wanted a high end single card, what would you buy right now? 4870x2's are in stock.
Personally I'd buy a GTX 285 or two, but ya that's the point. The GTX 295 can't meet demand and its priced significantly higher than the 4870X2. I'm sure the 4870X2 is fine, if you want the 2nd fastest multi-GPU single-card on the market, but even then the 4870X2 can't compete with their own individual cards in CF in price and performance.
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 06:51 PM   #146
SlowSpyder
Diamond Member
 
SlowSpyder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,117
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Do we know how many 4870x2's were made, how many sold? Do we know the same for the GTX295? Everything I've seen stated that the GTX295 was going to be a limited run card. Maybe AMD has sold 25,000 4870x2's and made many more. Maybe Nvidia has sold 5000 GTX295's and that's what they've made. Maybe not. We just don't know.
__________________
Steve
FX 9370 / 7970 / ASRock 990FX Extreme 9
GO PACKERS!
SlowSpyder is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 07:04 PM   #147
chizow
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,525
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Do we know how many 4870x2's were made, how many sold? Do we know the same for the GTX295? Everything I've seen stated that the GTX295 was going to be a limited run card. Maybe AMD has sold 25,000 4870x2's and made many more. Maybe Nvidia has sold 5000 GTX295's and that's what they've made. Maybe not. We just don't know.
No we don't know exact numbers, we have reports the 295 is outselling the 4870X2 since launch however, which seem to be corroborated by high demand and low supply in channel. The 295 isn't going to be limited run afaik, in fact the single PCB version is due sometime early next month which may help alleviate demand pressure.

Fudzilla links, but they've basically reported this since launch in January from board partners:

Quote:
GTX 295 is hard to get

Very limited numbers

Nvidia's top performing card Geforce GTX 295 is getting harder and harder to get and Nvidia is not even close to fill the demand.

The card is selling well, but at the same time, Nvidia simply cannot deliver any serious quantities to the partners.

The single PCB GTX 295 might change this story but this is nothing to be exciting as early reports claims that the card will run at the same clocks and will have the same price. It might be cheaper for Nvidia to manufacture something like this, but we don't have any confirmation on such a claim.

ATI on the other hand has enough Radeon HD 4870 X2 cards, but since it's slower than GTX 295 it is not selling that great, but the lower price sure helps.

According to what we know, ATI won't be doing a Radeon HD 4890 X2 card, but some partners might go for it, but such a card should probably still end up slower than GTX 295.
Quote:
Geforce GTX 295 is hard to get by

Selling good, if you have them

Geforce GTX 295, Nvidia's dual PCB dual chip high-end card is selling well, but only if you can get enough of them. Nvidia has a severe shortage on its hands but it is shipping every single one it gets into the hands of partners.

This is what keeps Radeon HD 4870 X2 sales in quite healthy level, as people do prefer GTX 295 over HD 4870 X2, but as one is not readily available, they simply go for the second best. Nvidia is sending a limited number of card to its partners, and the number is much less than the demand.

Both Nvidia and ATI plans to keep their GTX 295 and HD 4870 X2 dominating this market for at least one more quarter, but some modifications such as single PCB GTX 295 are likely to happen.
__________________
Intel Core i7 5820K @4.5GHz | Gigabyte X99 Gaming 5| Win8.1 x64 Pro | Corsair H100i | Crucial Vengeance 16GB DDR4 | EVGA GeForce GTX 980 SC | Asus ROG Swift 144Hz 3D Vision G-Sync LCD | 2xDell U2410 |Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD | Samsung 840EVO 4x1TB SSD RAID 0 | Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1| LG Blu-Ray | Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G110/G502/G27/G930 | Cooler Master HAF X | Antec TPQ 1200W
chizow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2009, 07:15 PM   #148
OCGuy
Lifer
 
OCGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: CA
Posts: 27,156
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
*snip*
I wonder how many were allocated to Dell. I was on the john reading my Maxim the other day, and the 295 was in thier top Alienware system according to an ad.
__________________
4670k @ 4.2
MSI Gaming GTX770 @ 1246/7500
OCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 03:02 AM   #149
error8
Diamond Member
 
error8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,194
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow


4890 vs. GTX 275 reviews
Again, feel free to count em up, I'm sure you'll see the majority of sites saying the GTX 275 is the faster part. Do you think the 4890 would've dropped in price if the majority of reviews said it was the faster part? I don't think so.
Here, 12 reviews and conclusion gathered by Keysplayr: link to forum post

If you look thorough each and every review, you'll see that 4890 has games and settings, where it's considered faster and so is GTX 275. Some reviews put them equal. It's true that gtx 275 won more "sites" then 4890, but the score is still tight. Again I say, if it would have won 12 out of 12, then it was truly the faster part, otherwise is still a wash out between the two.

__________________
Q6700 @ 3.6 ghz
Xigmatek S1283 + Antec tricool
MSI P35 Neo 2-FR
4x2048 A-data
WD 640 gb
Gigabyte 4870 1GB
Antec EarthWatts 650W
Antec 300
BenQ FP202WA (20 inch)
error8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2009, 03:05 AM   #150
error8
Diamond Member
 
error8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,194
Default ATI months ahead of NVIDIA with DirectX 11 GPU schedule?

Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Quote:
Originally posted by: chizow
Quote:
Originally posted by: Creig
Or save some coin by going with the cheaper card.
Or spend some more coin giong with the better card.
And since they're roughly equal, the better card is the cheaper card.
No not really, even if performance is similar, an Nvidia card is superior in just about every way. I recently put together a nice long list, can't remember if it was for you or someone else.
Yes, chizow convinced us all, that Nvidia is by far superior, with its "higher quality build" and some other points that were either unimportant, or unproven.
__________________
Q6700 @ 3.6 ghz
Xigmatek S1283 + Antec tricool
MSI P35 Neo 2-FR
4x2048 A-data
WD 640 gb
Gigabyte 4870 1GB
Antec EarthWatts 650W
Antec 300
BenQ FP202WA (20 inch)
error8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.