$1000 dollars for 200 extra 3dmarks

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Laminator
The 8800 Ultra is an elongated middle-finger of victory from nVidia to ATi. What they are saying is, "Yes, this product is ludicrous and exorbitantly priced, but people are going to buy it anyway because we own the market. WE OWN THE MARKET!" Then there's the 8900GTX. And the the 8900 Ultra. And then the 8950GTX. And then the 8950 Ultra. And then the 8950GX2...

Yes, and I'm sure all those are just waiting in the wings for the r600, just like the 7900gtx was and the 32-pipe monster g71 that was suposed to crush the r580.

Same thing can be said about the 64-SIMD Vec5 320 stream processor GPU + sound card + physics processor that is supposed to crush G80.

 

[nZone]

Originally posted by: swtethan
1.5b pf ram?? where si that from?

Vista show 1536MB total available memory for GTX / 768MB as onboard. The other half if needed; Vista will deallocate from the system ram and add to the GTX up to 1536 total.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


Very well. While you have your calm meltdown about flip-flopping, we are all going to continue to discuss the thread topic. That is of course, if you don't mind?

Im not having a meltdown. Just noting the bias some people have about launches.

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: terentenet
They tested a stock 8800 Ultra against an overclocked 8800GTX. Overclock both to their max and test some more, or, make a direct comparison between a stock GTX and the Ultra.
Performance increase is there and you can attain it if the core gets past 700MHz and memory above 2300MHz. And it can get past that according to many rumors.

Why is it fair to test an OC'd gtx against stock ATi cards, but not fair to test OC'd gtx against a stock ultra? The factory OC'd gtx comes with a warranty and requires no user fiddling, so as far as the user is concerned, it's stock. I give credit to any site that benches an OC'd gtx against the ultra, because the reader should be aware that cards costing $200 less offer the same performance as the ultra. AT did mention that they will OC the ultra once they get retail samples and not a cherry picked ES, and I agree with that decision.

Funny that. Another flip-flop argument.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Laminator
The 8800 Ultra is an elongated middle-finger of victory from nVidia to ATi. What they are saying is, "Yes, this product is ludicrous and exorbitantly priced, but people are going to buy it anyway because we own the market. WE OWN THE MARKET!" Then there's the 8900GTX. And the the 8900 Ultra. And then the 8950GTX. And then the 8950 Ultra. And then the 8950GX2...

Yes, and I'm sure all those are just waiting in the wings for the r600, just like the 7900gtx was and the 32-pipe monster g71 that was suposed to crush the r580.

Same thing can be said about the 64-SIMD Vec5 320 stream processor GPU + sound card + physics processor that is supposed to crush G80.

So, the lesson from all this is the card that comes out later has more chance of being underperforming, rather than beating the card that came out first.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Laminator
The 8800 Ultra is an elongated middle-finger of victory from nVidia to ATi. What they are saying is, "Yes, this product is ludicrous and exorbitantly priced, but people are going to buy it anyway because we own the market. WE OWN THE MARKET!" Then there's the 8900GTX. And the the 8900 Ultra. And then the 8950GTX. And then the 8950 Ultra. And then the 8950GX2...

Yes, and I'm sure all those are just waiting in the wings for the r600, just like the 7900gtx was and the 32-pipe monster g71 that was suposed to crush the r580.

Same thing can be said about the 64-SIMD Vec5 320 stream processor GPU + sound card + physics processor that is supposed to crush G80.

So, the lesson from all this is the card that comes out later has more chance of being underperforming, rather than beating the card that came out first.

Of course. This line of reasoning should be standard for everyone. I dont know why people assume that just because something comes out later, it's going to be better. We saw this with NV30 vs R300, R580 vs G71, and now more than likely R600 vs G80.

However, I think the reason why people jump to this conclusion is that they are being fed so much inaccurate information and jump the gun.

There's also the situation where people still think bigger numbers = better performance. R600's 320 SP vs G80's 128 SP hasn't lived up to the hype so far. Neither has R600's 512bit memory bus. What about clock speeds? R600 has a 200mhz+ clock speed advantage and it's likely to only match G80's 575mhz clock at best.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


Very well. While you have your calm meltdown about flip-flopping, we are all going to continue to discuss the thread topic. That is of course, if you don't mind?

Im not having a meltdown. Just noting the bias some people have about launches.

And reason being? Did someone ask you? Or did you just decide to donate the unsolicited info?

 

[Laminator]

Originally posted by: munky
Yes, and I'm sure all those are just waiting in the wings for the r600, just like the 7900gtx was and the 32-pipe monster g71 that was suposed to crush the r580.

Originally posted by: Ackmed
There is? Where are these products? I havent heard of any of these cards you speak of.

Its my opinion that NV made this card, because they thought it would "one up" ATi, and the newly released 2900XTX. As they have tried to do in the past. Not to extend their victory lap, if you will.

I was trying to be a bit satirical towards fanboys here, but it appears that their comments are so extreme and common nowadays that I have been mistaken for one instead. Apologies.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


Very well. While you have your calm meltdown about flip-flopping, we are all going to continue to discuss the thread topic. That is of course, if you don't mind?

Im not having a meltdown. Just noting the bias some people have about launches.

And reason being? Did someone ask you? Or did you just decide to donate the unsolicited info?

Right, because every post you make, someone asked you for it? Stop being bitter that I pointed it out. Its true the same people who complained when ATi did it, will not say anything negative about it now that NV has done it. Including you.

Want to get back on topic now, or are you going to continue going off, and then accusing me of doing it again?

Originally posted by: Laminator

I was trying to be a bit satirical towards fanboys here, but it appears that their comments are so extreme and common nowadays that I have been mistaken for one instead. Apologies.

I know, just playing along. No apologies necessary.

 

[BFG10K]

I'm afraid those of you wanting this product to be a flop are likely to be disappointed.

The product flopped. Does that make you disappointed instead?

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
There is? Where are these products? I havent heard of any of these cards you speak of.

Its my opinion that NV made this card, because they thought it would "one up" ATi, and the newly released 2900XTX. As they have tried to do in the past. Not to extend their victory lap, if you will.

They'll be along soon enough. You don't think nvidia went to the trouble of a G80 respin just to spoil ATi's party do you? (its more of a pleasant fringe benefit).

Take a look at the qualities of the new chip - very highly overclockable while remaining cool enough for air cooling. THis cool running trait will be extremely important in a product such as a 8850GX2 one would imagine.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
They'll be along soon enough. You don't think nvidia went to the trouble of a G80 respin just to spoil ATi's party do you? (its more of a pleasant fringe benefit).

Take a look at the qualities of the new chip - very highly overclockable while remaining cool enough for air cooling. THis cool running trait will be extremely important in a product such as a 8850GX2 one would imagine.

Well.. I doubt think NV had to go through a lot of trouble for A3 revision G80. Various reviews revealed that there is (if any) hardly improvement over A2 silicon. (from the power/thermal point of view, clock for clock)

If anything, the revision was probably necessary to cope with the new, fast memory. (I'm thinking of memory controller as well as clock generator logic units) There has been many reports where 8800 GTS 320 is capable of achieving higher overclock than 8800 GTX. I myself own a GTS 320 that clocks up to ~680MHz.

Also doubt that we'll see a GX2 cards with G80. Those will have to wait till G81 at the very least.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed


And reason being? Did someone ask you? Or did you just decide to donate the unsolicited info?

Right, because every post you make, someone asked you for it? Stop being bitter that I pointed it out. Its true the same people who complained when ATi did it, will not say anything negative about it now that NV has done it. Including you.

Want to get back on topic now, or are you going to continue going off, and then accusing me of doing it again?


[/quote]

I was asking for a reason, and you just ask another question. Dance boy dance!!! LOL.. So by your logic, what you said is fine because others do it. So why have any complaints if people don't say anything negative about NV? You know you have no problems with people who do, so why have problems with the people who do not? Answer: Because you are die hard ATI fan. /done.

 

[lopri]

(Folks, we need to get out of this AMD vs NV for a few minutes

Another thing to pay attention (from 3D enthusasts' point of view) is:

We do know NVIDIA has wanted to push up towards the $1000 graphics card segment for a while. Offering the top of the line for what almost amounts to a performance tax would give NVIDIA the ability to sell a card and treat it like a Ferrari. It would turn high end graphics into a status symbol rather than a commodity. That and having a huge margin part in the mix can easily generate additional profits.

Obviously the 8800 Ultra is the first step towards NV's desire. They've been dying to having GPU pricing similar to CPU pricing ($1K for FX/XE edition CPUs), but they couldn't. It's due to various reasons but if I pick a couple, the strong competition (ATI), and consumer resist are among them. Now that there isn't any threat from ATI in the foreseeable future, NV is attempting this again and the 8800 Ultra will be the first barometer.

Also, from my understanding, the GPUs will evolve like CPUs eventually (past SM4.0 maybe). This might happen sooner than I thought, but when that comes, most GPUs (or CGPUs) will share same things, with the difference being the number of units, clocks, and the size of cache.

For instance, instead of 8800 GTX ($599) / 8800 GTS ($499) / 8800 GTS 320 ($399)

What NV might have wanted is,
-----------------------------------------------------------

1. 
   Geforce 8 seriese with (insert lots of features) Here!
   
   650MHz : $1,000
   650MHz : (Half the cache) $800
   600MHz : $650
   550MHz : $550
   550MHz : (Half the Cache) $450
   500MHz : $400

-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm normally a 'free-market' proponent, but with the case of 8800 Ultra, I even think we should figure out a way to send a collective message via boycotting, forum threads, polls, whatever.

NV isn't fighting against AMD with 8800 Ultra. NV is testing us out with it.

Edit: Spellings & Grammar

 

[lopri]

Another in-direct proof is, which I've just found out through a marketing email, that EVGA allows their Step-Up program for 8800 Ultra. If I remember correctly, EVGA has never been fond of allowing the Step-Up for 'limited' edition cards.

 

[Munky]

So far, Nvidia's latest two releases (8600 series and the 8800u) have been way overpriced, and I have no doubt this is mainly due to not having strong competition. I don't have the sales figures, but I would not be surprised if the 8800gtx and gts sold more in the first few months than the midrange 8600 cards.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: lopri
(Folks, we need to get out of this AMD vs NV for a few minutes

Another thing to pay attention (from 3D enthusasts' point of view) is:

We do know NVIDIA has wanted to push up towards the $1000 graphics card segment for a while. Offering the top of the line for what almost amounts to a performance tax would give NVIDIA the ability to sell a card and treat it like a Ferrari. It would turn high end graphics into a status symbol rather than a commodity. That and having a huge margin part in the mix can easily generate additional profits.

Obviously the 8800 Ultra is the first step towards NV's desire. They've been dying to having GPU pricing similar to CPU pricing ($1K for FX/XE edition CPUs), but they couldn't. It's due to various reasons but if I pick a couple, the strong competition (ATI), and consumer resist are among them. Now that there isn't any threat from ATI in the foreseeable future, NV is attempting this again and the 8800 Ultra will be the first barometer.

Also, from my understanding, the GPUs will evolve like CPUs eventually (past SM4.0 maybe). This might happen sooner than I thought, but when that comes, most GPUs (or CGPUs) will share same things, with the difference being the number of units, clocks, and the size of cache.

For instance, instead of 8800 GTX ($599) / 8800 GTS ($499) / 8800 GTS 320 ($399)

What NV might have wanted is,
-----------------------------------------------------------

1. 
   Geforce 8 seriese with (insert lots of features) Here!
   
   650MHz : $1,000
   650MHz : (Half the cache) $800
   600MHz : $650
   550MHz : $550
   550MHz : (Half the Cache) $450
   500MHz : $400

-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm normally a 'free-market' proponent, but with the case of 8800 Ultra, I even think we should figure out a way to send a collective message via boycotting, forum threads, polls, whatever.

NV isn't fighting against AMD with 8800 Ultra. NV is testing us out with it.

Edit: Spellings & Grammar

And if I ran Nvidia, this is what I would do too. Power of the monopolist.

Dont be mad at Nvidia, they're just doing what every company does, make money. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at AMD for allowing all this to be set into motion.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: lopri
Another in-direct proof is, which I've just found out through a marketing email, that EVGA allows their Step-Up program for 8800 Ultra. If I remember correctly, EVGA has never been fond of allowing the Step-Up for 'limited' edition cards.

Nope. Remember the 7800GTX 512MB fiasco? That was pretty bad.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: lopri
(Folks, we need to get out of this AMD vs NV for a few minutes

Another thing to pay attention (from 3D enthusasts' point of view) is:

We do know NVIDIA has wanted to push up towards the $1000 graphics card segment for a while. Offering the top of the line for what almost amounts to a performance tax would give NVIDIA the ability to sell a card and treat it like a Ferrari. It would turn high end graphics into a status symbol rather than a commodity. That and having a huge margin part in the mix can easily generate additional profits.

Obviously the 8800 Ultra is the first step towards NV's desire. They've been dying to having GPU pricing similar to CPU pricing ($1K for FX/XE edition CPUs), but they couldn't. It's due to various reasons but if I pick a couple, the strong competition (ATI), and consumer resist are among them. Now that there isn't any threat from ATI in the foreseeable future, NV is attempting this again and the 8800 Ultra will be the first barometer.

Also, from my understanding, the GPUs will evolve like CPUs eventually (past SM4.0 maybe). This might happen sooner than I thought, but when that comes, most GPUs (or CGPUs) will share same things, with the difference being the number of units, clocks, and the size of cache.

For instance, instead of 8800 GTX ($599) / 8800 GTS ($499) / 8800 GTS 320 ($399)

What NV might have wanted is,
-----------------------------------------------------------

1. 
   Geforce 8 seriese with (insert lots of features) Here!
   
   650MHz : $1,000
   650MHz : (Half the cache) $800
   600MHz : $650
   550MHz : $550
   550MHz : (Half the Cache) $450
   500MHz : $400

-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm normally a 'free-market' proponent, but with the case of 8800 Ultra, I even think we should figure out a way to send a collective message via boycotting, forum threads, polls, whatever.

NV isn't fighting against AMD with 8800 Ultra. NV is testing us out with it.

Edit: Spellings & Grammar

And if I ran Nvidia, this is what I would do too. Power of the monopolist.

Dont be mad at Nvidia, they're just doing what every company does, make money. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at AMD for allowing all this to be set into motion.

And this is why I dislike Nvidia more and more... I dont understand how someone can be a fan of a company that cant wait to rape its users as soon as it gets the chance!

Ati NOT ONCE has upped the high end MSRP, even when the X1900 was already beating the 7900, they still launched the X1950 with the same MSRP... Even when the 9700PRO came out and KILLED the Geforce 4, it still came out with the same MSRP as previous gen...

But not Nvidia, the slight chance they get they up the MSRP to sky levels :thumbsdown:

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: Matt2
And if I ran Nvidia, this is what I would do too. Power of the monopolist.

Dont be mad at Nvidia, they're just doing what every company does, make money. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at AMD for allowing all this to be set into motion.

I wouldn't say I'm mad at NV. It's rather, that history has always been a battle between protagonists vs antagonists (umm... dialectic, is that what it's called? )

NV's gonna do what they gotta do. And we do what we can do. Sure there could be emotional factors as well as rational basis. (Hey, I run a business, too.)

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
And this is why I dislike Nvidia more and more... I dont understand how someone can be a fan of a company that cant wait to rape its users as soon as it gets the chance!

Ati NOT ONCE has upped the high end MSRP, even when the X1900 was already beating the 7900, they still launched the X1950 with the same MSRP... Even when the 9700PRO came out and KILLED the Geforce 4, it still came out with the same MSRP as previous gen...

But not Nvidia, the slight chance they get they up the MSRP to sky levels :thumbsdown:

Very doubtful. ATI simply had an incompetent management/marketing compared to NV.