FUD: NV to drop GT200 Prices
- Thread starter OCGuy
- Start date
Hehe, price cuts of $90 and $30 on the gtx260 and gtx280 respectively won't cut it 
You'd still be looking at $500 or more for a gtx280 compared to a HD4870 :S
You'd still be looking at $500 or more for a gtx280 compared to a HD4870 :S
Yes but $90 off the 280, - a $50 PNY rebate if they offered one.....they are going to sell alot more cards.
IMO this is only the first of many NV price cuts we'll be seeing in the near future
I'm almost tempted to get a 4870 even when I don't need one.
I'm almost tempted to get a 4870 even when I don't need one.
I was expecting this, but the price drops need to be about double that to make those cards worth buying at full retail prices.
That would still put the GTX280 over $500 after the hassle of a rebate (a lot of people don't really care for rebates). Still a terrible buy in my opinion. The GTX260 will be much more affordable to most people, and offer much better bang for the buck. But based on the benchmarks I've seen, the GTX260 really needs to be priced right with the 4870, until then it's over priced.
I especially like this part of the article:
Seems nVidia was getting screwed from both sides.....by themselves and by ATi.
Seems nVidia was getting screwed from both sides.....by themselves and by ATi.
The size of the die and the amount of silicon area required to produce one? (Also, low yields due to the size of the die.) Expectations that RV770 would be far less competitive than it turned out to be? Miscalculation of how much people are willing to pay for a video card, with the economy and gas prices as they are?
etc, etc, etc
etc, etc, etc
Top Desktop CPU: $1500 (QX9770)
Next best: $1000 (Qx9650)
Price Difference: 50%
Difference in performance: 6%
Top desktop GPU: ~$560 (GTX280)
Next best: $309 (HD4870)
Price difference: ~80%, less or more with rebates on either product.
Difference in performance: ~10%
This obviously all changes once the 4870X2 comes out as the top performing single-card. If ATi keeps it at the rumored prices, then kudos to them, because they sure wont have to.
The "best of the best" always carries a premium, even though the price/performance isnt there.
Edit: Edited for mistake in prices
Next best: $1000 (Qx9650)
Price Difference: 50%
Difference in performance: 6%
Top desktop GPU: ~$560 (GTX280)
Next best: $309 (HD4870)
Price difference: ~80%, less or more with rebates on either product.
Difference in performance: ~10%
This obviously all changes once the 4870X2 comes out as the top performing single-card. If ATi keeps it at the rumored prices, then kudos to them, because they sure wont have to.
The "best of the best" always carries a premium, even though the price/performance isnt there.
Edit: Edited for mistake in prices
Originally posted by: Powernick50
Is it just me or has nRollo been pretty quiet lately
nrollo has been quiet but the shills for big red have more than made up for it
not enough... g280 needs to be at most $150 more expensive than 4870, and g260 should be priced the same as 4870 if not less. AMD definately win this one ;D
competition is awesome !
g8800 for $100, 4850 for $150.. wow..
competition is awesome !
g8800 for $100, 4850 for $150.. wow..
Yea, the highest end parts are never bang for the buck parts. But the thing is, nothing AMD has can touch the highest end quad from Intel. The QX9770 and QX9650 are both faster then what the competition has to offer. The problem with the GTX280 is that while it is considered the fastest card overall, sometimes the $300 4870 beats in in benchmarks. That shouldn't happen at all seeing as Nvidia wants to price it as the highest end premium single GPU money can buy, but it seems that the 4870 is right there with it in the benches and way to often even ends up being faster.
Also not to mention that Intel probably doesn't mind selling you a $1000 processor if they can't get you to buy their $1500 processor. It's a bit different for Nvidia as they are losing high end parts sales to a competitor, not themselves.
The GTX 280 is too monolithic and large to be produced cheaply, so this $90 is probably the best they'll be able to do right now.Well it's not only Nvidia that's surprised, I was shocked how good 4850/70s are in benchmarks for their modest price range. I guess for all the wrongs AMDs done recent years, finally got their act together on this one.
NVDA just lowered guidance and is getting CRUCIFIED after hours....
Big monolithic GPU seems to have been an absolutely terrible choice.
So much for that "can of whoop ass" huang spoke of at the analyst day.
Big monolithic GPU seems to have been an absolutely terrible choice.
So much for that "can of whoop ass" huang spoke of at the analyst day.
I don't think the monolithic gpu is the culprit here, but rather NV trying to kill 2 birds with one stone. They could have spent all those gt200 transistors on better game performance and new features, but they also wanted a slice of the gpgpu pie too badly. So in the end, you have a gpu that's good in both areas, but isn't so efficient in performance/mm^2 when it comes to gaming.
You are correct, that was a typo on my part. I meant to say $560, so that changes the percentages.
I guess I get to eat a pig piece of that humble pie
I think you might have a point. The desire to put a parallel processing monster in the hands of as many people as possible instead of those who would actually use it on a regular basis likely hurt its gaming performance.
nitromullet
Diamond Member
- Jan 7, 2004
- 9,031
- 36
- 91
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Facebook
Twitter