There is no doubt that Ati is having problems with this launch, but the proof will be in the final product. If it is the best card by far, the heat turns on to Nvidia. If it can't compete, Ati will be in some trouble. If they are fairly equal, than a nice price war for all of us.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
ATI RV530 & RV515 specs revealed
Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
There is no doubt that Ati is having problems with this launch, but the proof will be in the final product. If it is the best card by far, the heat turns on to Nvidia. If it can't compete, Ati will be in some trouble. If they are fairly equal, than a nice price war for all of us.
Regs
Lifer
Last generation taught us that the price war is mostly in the mid and lower range market. I suspect the R520 to be at least 550 dollars MSRP at launch.
On a side not, I would of been more than happy to splurge on a 7800GTX if isn't was so darn expensive. It's not even a matter of money, it's a matter of demand. I don't need a 600 dollar card that badly. A guy with a 20 inch LCD screen will of course have a different opinion than me.
The 73% market share number for NV is misleading. I believe they included the 6600 series in that number (as high end based on transistor count), but didn?t include the X700? in ATI?s numbers for the high end.
There was something I read (somewhere..???) to the effect that ATI had ~ 2700 employees and NV only has ~2100. Considering ATI and NV have a bout the same revenue, ATI probably expanded too fast and has too many employees on hand.
There was something I read (somewhere..???) to the effect that ATI had ~ 2700 employees and NV only has ~2100. Considering ATI and NV have a bout the same revenue, ATI probably expanded too fast and has too many employees on hand.
ArchAngel777
Diamond Member
All statistics can be misleading. I believe nVidia is a more effecient company, but that is just my opinion.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
Remember ATI has been around much longer than Nvidia. ATI was competing wtih Matrox and 3DFX long before the Riva's and TNT's.
-Kevin
I agree with the fact that ATI's market share numbers don't tell the whole story.
If ATI's market share mostly comes from the ultra low end, and they are making, say, $10 profit on a $30 integrated chip...
While Nvidia's market share comes from mid to high end and are making $150, on a $250 chip...
Revenue is really all that counts, ATI loses $9 million while Nvidia posts record profits, market share is a moot point.
ATI can own 99.9% of the market share, but it means nothing if they can't MAKE money. Because in the end, that is what it's all about right?
If ATI's market share mostly comes from the ultra low end, and they are making, say, $10 profit on a $30 integrated chip...
While Nvidia's market share comes from mid to high end and are making $150, on a $250 chip...
Revenue is really all that counts, ATI loses $9 million while Nvidia posts record profits, market share is a moot point.
ATI can own 99.9% of the market share, but it means nothing if they can't MAKE money. Because in the end, that is what it's all about right?
You can't really call what ATI was doing with 3Dfx "competing" - no one who could afford 3Dfx had an ATI card in their box. 3Dfx ruled the gaming world for Voodoo 1 and 2, and shared it with nVidia for Voodoo 3. We all know what happened to Voodoo 5, even though it was a very nice card.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
Very true, so let me rephrase that. They were attempting to compete. Matrox did a good job for a while (G200) and then sort of went the Quality route instead of performance.
-Kevin
-Kevin
DidlySquat
Banned
wow what complete nonsense. wondering what kind of people post here.
From the consumer perspective, it doesn't really matter if they are "late to the game". The only important thing is the performance. Suppose the new R520 is twice as fast as the 7800GTX and is priced similarly, what do you think most people would buy ?
Right now Nvidia has the high end PERFORMANCE advantage - SLI is unmatched, and in single cards 7800GTX kill the X850XT. But if ATI release a card that blows the 7800GTX out of the water (for the same price), I could care less that it was "late" - I would be buying the R520. In my opinion there is no loyalty factor in video cards purchases - I will just buy the best bang for the buck at the very high end segment, be it 7800GTX or R520. That is the reason I'm holding off on buying a 7800GTX, because I don't want to see in a few weeks the R520 released with performance 20% faster or more.
Same thing happend for 6800GT - it USED TO BE the best bang for the buck high end card, UNTIL the X800XL was released, which is slightly faster and costs less. No one that needs a video card now cares which video card was released first. All they look at is performance vs price from the currently available cards.
Only advantage of being first is because of the dual card (SLI) upgrade path where people buy one card first and later buy another card of the same type. So people who bought the 7800GTX are more likley to buy a second one as an upgrade option, rather then upgrading to the R520. But SLI is a marginal business. For most people it would be the R520 vs the 7800GTX. Since R520 release is imminent, it makes sense to wait and see the performance and then form an OBJECTIVE evaluation about the best card in that segment.
Only shareholders and fanboy trolls care which company did something first, so they can say my company is better then yours.....I believe this forum is about gamers which are prospective video card buyers, and not about arguing history of which company is/was/will-be better, This thread is about information on performance of the upcoming R520 card, relative to the current high end cards, including the 7800GTX. That is of the utmost importance to buyers of high end video cards (like me).
Biatche1488
Junior Member
R520 R530 R515 will beat nvidia cards and i only hope that they release the cards the sonner it's possible i dont want a gtx because in 1 month R520 will crush out 7800gtx!!!!!!(LOL ATi fan)
coldpower27
Golden Member
Actually from what I read that 73% figure comes from only accounting for over 100 million transistor DX9 GPU's. For those Nvidia has the lead in marketshare. I don't beleive marketshare tells the whole story in this case. So were talking about, Radeon 9700/9800, Radeon X700, Radeon X800/X850 & on Nvidia's side Geforce 6200 NV43 Edition, Geforce 6600, and Geforce 6800 plus of course the illustrious Geforce FX 5900/5950 if there are any left as this point. This is correct to some point, counting by this method does include the 9800 SE too, so it's fair that the NV43 version of 6200 is counted, which is basically a crippled 6600.
If your talking stand alone graphics chips, ATI leads with 51.5% and Nvidia trails slightly 46.1%, this is basically anything that is on either PCI-E x16, AGP or legacy PCI.
If your talking all graphics shipments, which includes the volume dominated itegrated chipset market, then Intel leads with 43.7% no surprise with 845G, 865G, 915G, 945G, ATI follows with 26.8% and Nvidia last with 15.9% for the top 3 at least. VIA & SIS command a sizable 8.1% & 5.0% in this segment as well.
Keep in mind why Nvidia looks so bad, they haven't had a IGP chipset for quite some time since the Nforce 2's Integrated Geforce 4 MX GPU, they are going to address this with C51 and C60, which are IGP chipsets with 6200 level tech, for both AMD and Intel.
There is also to consider Nvidia very successful Nforce chipset line for AMD CPU's. ANd more recently launch of SLI mobo's for both AMD & Intel.
Though there is more to it then marketshare as well, as profit margins do say something too, regarding market share and profit margins, this is something Intel has in spades 😛
If your talking stand alone graphics chips, ATI leads with 51.5% and Nvidia trails slightly 46.1%, this is basically anything that is on either PCI-E x16, AGP or legacy PCI.
If your talking all graphics shipments, which includes the volume dominated itegrated chipset market, then Intel leads with 43.7% no surprise with 845G, 865G, 915G, 945G, ATI follows with 26.8% and Nvidia last with 15.9% for the top 3 at least. VIA & SIS command a sizable 8.1% & 5.0% in this segment as well.
Keep in mind why Nvidia looks so bad, they haven't had a IGP chipset for quite some time since the Nforce 2's Integrated Geforce 4 MX GPU, they are going to address this with C51 and C60, which are IGP chipsets with 6200 level tech, for both AMD and Intel.
There is also to consider Nvidia very successful Nforce chipset line for AMD CPU's. ANd more recently launch of SLI mobo's for both AMD & Intel.
Though there is more to it then marketshare as well, as profit margins do say something too, regarding market share and profit margins, this is something Intel has in spades 😛
It's true performance matters in the end...
but from a BUSINESS standpoint, it is not good to be late to the game.
Suppose, as you said, R520 is twice as fast as a 7800GTX.
Now if ATI hadn't slacked off, done this, done that, and just released the damn R520 alongside 7800GTX...
How many people do you think would have bought a 7800GTX??
If your scenario hold true, every 7800GTX owner out there is an R520 that ATI could have sold (two for SLI users).
Not everybody has the money to dump their 7800GTX or GTX SLI rigs and spend another $500-$1000 for R520 (or two).
IN the end, R520 delays have cost ATI money, and money is the object of the game.
DidlySquat
Banned
Agreed, but why should I care about that ? I'm a gamer and I want the best performance for around $500. I think the 7800GTX is a great card and worth $500 compared to what's been available previously. But I don't want to pay $500 for 7800GTX just to see a better card come along a few weeks later, for the same price. So I'm willing to wait a few weeks and see what ATI has to offer and decide then. I do have a small bias towards Nvidia because I already have SLI mobo, and also I like Nvidia's driver support for Linux, so unless ATI's card leapfrogs ahead of the 7800GTX without costing a lot more, I may still go with Nvidia. Btw, the core and mem clocks for ATIs new midrange cards are just amazing, and you can be sure the flagship card will be even better, so I do think theer is a good chance R520 will be a home run card. But if not I will get the 7800GTX. I really really dont care whose company share price will go up or down, or what the market share is, I'm just trying to get the best card for myself.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
Yet another intelligent post. I think i felt the IQ of the forum drop again.
-Kevin
coldpower27
Golden Member
There core clock on RV530 represents what the upper limit is achieveable on this process in good yield, R520's own core clock is doubtfully better, a good case secnario is identical core clock, memory is expected to be the same but on a 256Bit Wide Memory Interface. With a slim chance of use of 1.6GHZ GDDR3 modules. And with the ucrrent rumors of a Dual Slot cooling solution, it doesn't look like we will have a cool running card.
Until R520 arrives we just don't know how it stands against the current 7800 GTX. R520 is late, I wouldn't say too late, just late.. regardless ATI will survive this round just fine I believe. Though twice as fast as 7800 GTX seems, pretty imprabable.
Some people care about how ATI does in comparison to Nvidia as competition is good for the industry and the sooner ATI launches R520 and it's derivatives, the sooner the rest of the 7x00 line will arrive as well. We also want ATI to have good profit to fund their R&D to bring us good products in the future as well.
Until R520 arrives we just don't know how it stands against the current 7800 GTX. R520 is late, I wouldn't say too late, just late.. regardless ATI will survive this round just fine I believe. Though twice as fast as 7800 GTX seems, pretty imprabable.
Some people care about how ATI does in comparison to Nvidia as competition is good for the industry and the sooner ATI launches R520 and it's derivatives, the sooner the rest of the 7x00 line will arrive as well. We also want ATI to have good profit to fund their R&D to bring us good products in the future as well.
DidlySquat
Banned
I've heard that the card is ready and they are just waiting to sell all the remaining X800XT and X850 out there, because once the R520 comes out they will HAVE to slash prices on the previous generation, while right now there are stillnot so smart people out there that pay 400+ for X850XT and X800XT even though they could get a 7800GT for about as much.
Gamingphreek
Lifer
Ummm 99% sure that is completely wrong 😉
-Kevin
Gamingphreek
Lifer
Well you said "the card" so i thought you were referring to the R520 which is being taped out over and over again. The cards, RV515 and RV530 are probably close to ready, if not ready.
-Kevin
-Kevin
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
