7800GTX512 Shortage/unavailability

[Keysplayr]

It has been said by some that it is Nvidia's fault for choosing memory for the 512GTX that they, Nvidia, knew would be in short supply initially.

It has also been said that it is Samsung's fault for not producing enough of this memory.

Talking about the GDDR3 1.1ns stuff.

So which is it? And why do you think so?

 

[route66]

LOL. I had meant to vote for nVidia for choosing the memory, but I misclicked on nVidia for intentionally limiting the quantities.

First, I don't like the last answer because I don't think nVidia is intentionally limiting the quantities. If they could I think they'd like to see more supplied so the price would drop to a price where it would crusth the X1800XT. The price that it's at now it's not a slam dunk win.

Second, I blame nVidia for two reasons - first they could still make a card that beat the X1800XT without the 1.1ns memory, or they could have made a 256MB card to reduce costs and it would still beat the X1800XT. Second, if they knew they could only get 4000 of these Samsung units within a certain timeframe, than they shouldn't have writen to the press that it's 'widely available now'. I don't qualify 4000 as 'widely available', hence a bit of lying or misdirection on their part. [I'm not sure if they actually said that to the press, but it's the impression that they implied.]

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

Actually, if they had 4000 cards, that would be more like 32,000 units from Samsung. Each card has eight 64MB units.
I think it's Samsungs fault. Nvidia wanted to go all-out to beat the X1800XT. They needed to choose the 1.1ns ram to accomplish this, but Samsung can't make enough for Nvidia to produce enough cards for the price to drop.
I wouldn't mind if they made a card imbetween the 7800GTX and GTX512 with, say, 1.26ns ram, but hey, then it would probably tie the X1800XT.

 

[Bateluer]

I say its the fault of the people buying the cards. Bastards.

 

[Acanthus]

nvidia is limiting supply, you can buy one if you shop around, there are weekly shipments.

 

[RobertR1]

It's nvidia fault no matter what the case. Nvidia was well aware that the 1.1 memory would not be in mass quantities but their only goal was to handidly beat the x1800xt and the 1.1 memory would ensure that. They were well aware at the lack of availability and it was an acceptable decision to them. No one did this to nvidia but themselves.

The minimum stock pile of cards were shipped at launch and now we'll slowly start to see the cards trickle in over the next months. As time goes by availability will get better. This is exactly why, in my other thread, I compared the 7800GTX 512 to the x800xt pe and 6800Ultra launches. Exact same characterisitics in terms of availability. Hopefully they make a lair out of me and next week everyone looking can find these cards at MSRP or below but I wouldn't start wasting wishes on it.

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: RobertR1
It's nvidia fault no matter what the case. Nvidia was well aware that the 1.1 memory would not be in mass quantities but their only goal was to handidly beat the x1800xt and the 1.1 memory would ensure that. They were well aware at the lack of availability and it was an acceptable decision to them. No one did this to nvidia but themselves.

i agree although i also think nv seriously under estimated the demand for this card.

 

[tuteja1986]

i thought they made it clear that it was limited :!

 

[otispunkmeyer]

i voted for samsungs fault

i dont think nv would of chosen them memory modules if samsung had said "we'll not be able to make that much of them" samsung must of said some where that they'll be able to keep up with demand....obviously not.

but when you want the absolute best then this is what happens.

im sure everyone wanted a ferrari enzo....theres plenty of millionaires in the world, but no you had to be chosen by ferrari to have the best. they only made 400, its probably gonna be the same with tthe bugatti veyron. plenty of people ready to lay the cash down....but theres not gonna be enough cars to go round. its the same with bleeding edge technology

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: RobertR1
It's nvidia fault no matter what the case. Nvidia was well aware that the 1.1 memory would not be in mass quantities but their only goal was to handidly beat the x1800xt and the 1.1 memory would ensure that. They were well aware at the lack of availability and it was an acceptable decision to them. No one did this to nvidia but themselves.

The minimum stock pile of cards were shipped at launch and now we'll slowly start to see the cards trickle in over the next months. As time goes by availability will get better. This is exactly why, in my other thread, I compared the 7800GTX 512 to the x800xt pe and 6800Ultra launches. Exact same characterisitics in terms of availability. Hopefully they make a lair out of me and next week everyone looking can find these cards at MSRP or below but I wouldn't start wasting wishes on it.

Bolded statement for a bold statement. I have to admit that was pretty funny.
Samsung has been very busy providing 700MHz GDDR3 memory for the XBox360, so it's possible they are concentrating where the money is as the 360 is selling like mad. So Samsung could be neglecting, but not totally ignoring the 1.1ns memory for the time being. Hey, if RobertR1 can make a statement above in the context of "without a shadow of a doubt", then I suppose I can say the opposite without too much flak eh?

 

[Paratus]

What nobody has blamed ATI yet!


Seriously though it is Nvidias fault for any of those choises. There are no excuses in business.

The simple fact is it's a paper launch.

posted via Palm LifeDrive

 

[theMan]

whats wrong with a low supply? nvidia can put out as many cards as they want. i would never want one of those cards, i just dont really care.

 

[xtknight]

You can't blame Samsung when the memory is brand new (and probably has no competitor) and they're still working out the kinks with it. I'm sure NVIDIA knew that full well when they implemented it. It's only Samsung's fault if they claimed they could offer it in mass quantities and they're falling short. But we don't know that, so this question is unanswerable. I still voted NV's fault because I doubt Samsung bragged about mass quantities with cutting-edge memory.

 

[Griswold]

Of course it's nvidias fault.

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
i voted for samsungs fault

i dont think nv would of chosen them memory modules if samsung had said "we'll not be able to make that much of them" samsung must of said some where that they'll be able to keep up with demand....obviously not.

What if samsung is the only company that can actually deliver that memory with that speed? Think about it...

 

[Snooper]

When you are trying to build an Uber part, some times you have to use components that are NOT wildely available. With the price of this thing, it IS a limited video card. Heck, the "performance" video card market is a tiny part of the whole video card market anyway. Something like the 512 is a tiny part of that tiny part. Which means it IS limited, one way or the other.

And blaming Samsung for not making enough 1.1 parts is silly as well. These are NOT hot dogs! You can't just set up a line that makes them and then drop them in the package and ship them to your customers! The 1.1ns parts are going to be a VERY small yield out of all their memory chips produced. Only a very small number of these things will pass all the sort and reliability tests at that speed. Most are going to be slower. Some, a lot slower (and end up in the trash at the end of the day). There are things they can do to increase the yeild of high performance parts (things like ... Uh. Sorry. Trade secrets.), but these steps always increase the cost, increase the time it takes to make the parts overall and often has negative impacts on yields. You tweak parameters during manufacturing to increase speed and it tends to push a lot of parts over the edge. Instead of being fast, they simply don't work.

As process improvements are made, the availability of these 1.1ns parts WILL increase. The price WILL come down. And then someone will start using .9ns parts instead for their top of the line card... And we start all over with this debate at the .9ns level.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: xtknight
You can't blame Samsung when the memory is brand new (and probably has no competitor) and they're still working out the kinks with it. I'm sure NVIDIA knew that full well when they implemented it. It's only Samsung's fault if they claimed they could offer it in mass quantities and they're falling short. But we don't know that, so this question is unanswerable. I still voted NV's fault because I doubt Samsung bragged about mass quantities with cutting-edge memory.

Ok, how are you sure of this again? Everybody keeps saying "I'm sure" with nothing to show for it or to back it up with? Why?

Feel free to state your opinions (everyone) but at least show SOMETHING to add a little credit to what you say. -thanks.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Snooper
When you are trying to build an Uber part, some times you have to use components that are NOT wildely available. With the price of this thing, it IS a limited video card. Heck, the "performance" video card market is a tiny part of the whole video card market anyway. Something like the 512 is a tiny part of that tiny part. Which means it IS limited, one way or the other.

And blaming Samsung for not making enough 1.1 parts is silly as well. These are NOT hot dogs! You can't just set up a line that makes them and then drop them in the package and ship them to your customers! The 1.1ns parts are going to be a VERY small yield out of all their memory chips produced. Only a very small number of these things will pass all the sort and reliability tests at that speed. Most are going to be slower. Some, a lot slower (and end up in the trash at the end of the day). There are things they can do to increase the yeild of high performance parts (things like ... Uh. Sorry. Trade secrets.), but these steps always increase the cost, increase the time it takes to make the parts overall and often has negative impacts on yields. You tweak parameters during manufacturing to increase speed and it tends to push a lot of parts over the edge. Instead of being fast, they simply don't work.

As process improvements are made, the availability of these 1.1ns parts WILL increase. The price WILL come down. And then someone will start using .9ns parts instead for their top of the line card... And we start all over with this debate at the .9ns level.

So memory chips are not made on an assembly line then? Are you suggesting each one is made by hand? C'mon man, a HUGE A$$ company like Samsung? How else are these chips made? (Try not to give up too many of those trade secrets now.)

I would agree that chips are binned according to speed capabilites and stability at that speed. Just don't know why some of you think that it is not plausible for Samsung to be the culprit just as easily as nvidia could be. ::::shrugs::::

 

[xtknight]

Without reasonable doubt NVIDIA knew these new memory chips would be in limited quantity. At least I hope they did. Then again...:Q

We can still only speculate. We don't know the whole story.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: xtknight
Without reasonable doubt NVIDIA knew these new memory chips would be in limited quantity. At least I hope they did. Then again...:Q

We can still only speculate. We don't know the whole story.

:thumbsup:

 

[CP5670]

The first option seems most likely to me. They possibly underestimated the demand for this card, but i doubt that they didn't know of the short supply of the 1.1ns chips.

Also, it might have helped to make these cards 256MB only at first and release a 512MB version later. I don't think the performance drop would have been significant in current games and it would have still beat the X1800 XT by a fair margin.

 

[Corporate Thug]

its not samsungs fault at all. nvidia knew about the supply before they started production. they could have used slightly slower memory that is more widely available

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Paratus
Seriously though it is Nvidias fault for any of those choises. There are no excuses in business.

The simple fact is it's a paper launch.

posted via Palm LifeDrive

Q F T

keys can I have a link which proves that it is Samsung that is unable to produce 1.1ns memory?

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: xtknight
You can't blame Samsung when the memory is brand new (and probably has no competitor) and they're still working out the kinks with it. I'm sure NVIDIA knew that full well when they implemented it. It's only Samsung's fault if they claimed they could offer it in mass quantities and they're falling short. But we don't know that, so this question is unanswerable. I still voted NV's fault because I doubt Samsung bragged about mass quantities with cutting-edge memory.

Ok, how are you sure of this again? Everybody keeps saying "I'm sure" with nothing to show for it or to back it up with? Why?

Feel free to state your opinions (everyone) but at least show SOMETHING to add a little credit to what you say. -thanks.

if they didnt know, they should have known. how are you going to launch a new product without knowing the availability of essential components???

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Paratus
Seriously though it is Nvidias fault for any of those choises. There are no excuses in business.

The simple fact is it's a paper launch.

posted via Palm LifeDrive

Q F T

keys can I have a link which proves that it is Samsung that is unable to produce 1.1ns memory?

Well I would Dingo, but first you would have to show me where I said that Samsung is definitely unable to produce 1.1ns memory. I gave my opinion as others have and I stated why I had that opinion. So, rather than antagonize me, why don't you contribute an opinion of your own? And then we can discuss it.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Paratus
Seriously though it is Nvidias fault for any of those choises. There are no excuses in business.

The simple fact is it's a paper launch.

posted via Palm LifeDrive

Q F T

keys can I have a link which proves that it is Samsung that is unable to produce 1.1ns memory?

Well I would Dingo, but first you would have to show me where I said that Samsung is definitely unable to produce 1.1ns memory. I gave my opinion as others have and I stated why I had that opinion. So, rather than antagonize me, why don't you contribute an opinion of your own? And then we can discuss it.

Well you have to provide proof (or basis) as to how you came to this opinion of yours (that Samsung is unable to meet demand) or is it because this case involves Nvidia?

There is no antagonizing here, you should probably calm down. After all this is a FORUM.