GeForce Titan coming end of February

[raghu78]

I really don't get the outrage about the prices...they are VIDEO CARDS!! If you think it costs too much, don't buy it and please don't b!tch about it...they are not necessary for you to live. nVidia and AMD are publicly traded companies that have to make profits, not satisfy forum goers...they should price their cards at whatever the market will bear. If nVidia prices their high end cards now on at like $800, so be it...I won't be spending that much on a video card, and I sure as heck will not moan about it on these forums.

Thats well said. on the lighter side looks like sontin and keys are in full flow. :whiste:

 

[badb0y]

If not higher fps, then smoother. Better drivers. More features. PhysX, CUDA.
While these things are acid on your tongue, some people actually appreciate and like the extra lengths Nvidia goes to to offer a better product.

"Smoother"

I hope you realize that nVidia has this problem too, just with different games.

"Better drivers"

You sound like a broken record...lol

I give you that nVidia does offer more features and having PhysX and CUDA a definite positive as well.

I am not even going to bother responding to sontin's posts he's already moved the goal post a few times.

 

[sontin]

You generalized and said this, not "first half of 2012":
"AMD failed with this generation: High prices, underperforming cards, driver bugs."
At release, yes the prices were higher, and they were adjusted accordingly, but they were first to market by 3-4 months...why wouldn't they price their cards according to what was available at the time (GTX 580)?

GCN was on 28nm, so it's normal it would beat the GTX580. But with that logic we will get always more expansive cards.
Think about it: The next 20nm cards will be as fast or faster than TITAN - would you pay more than $900 for it?

Last time you got only less power than more performance.

As for reviews, again, at release fine, but now the 7970GE is competing (and beating) the GTX680, yet the GTX680 costs more. Where is your outrage at nVidia for keeping prices high?
Who do you blame for nVidia keeping prices high now? I'd genuinely like to know.

If people have no problem to pay more for an equal nVidia card there is your reason why nVidia is "keeping prices high".
And who i'm blame? AMD. We have only two players so if one is trying to screw even their one fanbase then we get what we have right now: A successor to the GTX580 which will cost 90% more...

AMD has to price their cards according to the competition at the time of release. Don't forget their older cards (9800, X800, X1800XT, X1900XTX, etc) cost $500+ many years ago. People act like AMD has always been charging $379 for their high end single GPU...they HAVE NOT.

For over 4 years AMD was the reason we got cards at lower prices.
And you can look at their earnings that the old style of pricing fixed nothing.

I really don't get the outrage about the prices...they are VIDEO CARDS!! If you think it costs too much, don't buy it and please don't b!tch about it...they are not necessary for you to live. nVidia and AMD are publicly traded companies that have to make profits, not satisfy forum goers...they should price their cards at whatever the market will bear. If nVidia prices their high end cards now on at like $800, so be it...I won't be spending that much on a video card, and I sure as heck will not moan about it on these forums.

Sure, i don't complain. If i don't like the perf/$ i will not buy.
But onething is sure: You will not get more performance for the same money if AMD is not getting their mind together and gets more competitive.

 

[wand3r3r]

This is strictly opinion.

Just to pull some random numbers to convey the thought, I hope AMD pulls the HD 8970 out during Q2 as has been rumored at times.

If the nvidia dwarf, I mean titan is say 60% faster then the 680, and the 7970 GE is already say 15% (whatever it actually is?) faster then the 680, then the 8970 only needs to be about 35% faster to be competitive.

I would find it humorous if AMD 8970 and NV dwarf are within say 20% of the performance, but 200% the price difference. My personal random guess of the day is that they will be less then 25% apart (dwarf and 8970).

I call if dwarf because it's merely the true 580 successor with a 'titan'ic price. Think or say what you'd like but I believe many would share the opininon.

 

[3DVagabond]

It is possible that nVidia has inflated the price of Titan in the leaks simply to try and avoid hurting current sales. If they were to say they had GK110 coming at the end of the month and it was $600 who would buy a $400-$500 card now? The point is that we don't really know anything for sure. It's best to wait a few(2?) more weeks.

 

[Fx1]

Lets wait till it gets announced with actual net pricing.

All this bitching is boring

 

[Will Robinson]

Lets wait till it gets announced with actual net pricing.

All this bitching is boring

It'll probably be about $1300.

 

[piesquared]

"Smoother"

I hope you realize that nVidia has this problem too, just with different games.

"Better drivers"

You sound like a broken record...lol

I give you that nVidia does offer more features and having PhysX and CUDA a definite positive as well.

I am not even going to bother responding to sontin's posts he's already moved the goal post a few times.

Of course he realizes that, one of their jobs is to propagate the driver myth. It's something that has an immediate impact on purchasing decisions. That myth is the only thing NV has left going for it, without that FUD being spammed across multitudes of websites, their unrealistic ASP's wouldn't even have these artificial legs to stand on. Imagine if their was a group dedicated to posting on forums reminding users of how NV released drivers that literally bricked their cards.

As for features, NV doesn't offer more features that's just another myth that the horde needs to keep going. Sure there is CUDA and physx, but they are missing things like full DX11.1 support, PRT's, ect.

 

[SickBeast]

Do you guys really think that Titan will be faster than a pair of 7970s?

 

[badb0y]

Do you guys really think that Titan will be faster than a pair of 7970s?

I don't think so but we won't know until reviews come out.

 

[Jaydip]

Do you guys really think that Titan will be faster than a pair of 7970s?

pair are you crazy? even the quad will tremble in fear :biggrin:

 

[sontin]

I guess 50% faster than one 7970 and 17% slower than two of them (average scaling of 80%).

 

[thilanliyan]

GCN was on 28nm, so it's normal it would beat the GTX580. But with that logic we will get always more expansive cards.
Think about it: The next 20nm cards will be as fast or faster than TITAN - would you pay more than $900 for it?

IMO, all they did was go back to historical (for AMD) pricing levels of their high end cards. nVidia has ALWAYS priced their high end cards at and above those levels...I see nothing wrong with AMD doing what it used to do. Launching cards at the $379 level didn't help AMD get a lot of marketshare anyway...the GTX2xx cards and Fermi cards sold really well despite being priced higher. And back in the day, ATI's cards sold well despite being priced high as well, so it makes no sense for them to price their cards cheaper just for the hell of it.

If they had priced their cards at like $700-$800, THEN I can understand the outrage, but they didn't...they went back to historical high end card prices. If anything it is nVidia pricing their cards super high. When was the last time AMD/ATI charged $800+ for any video card (nvidia has done that several times)?

If people have no problem to pay more for an equal nVidia card there is your reason why nVidia is "keeping prices high".
And who i'm blame? AMD. We have only two players so if one is trying to screw even their one fanbase then we get what we have right now: A successor to the GTX580 which will cost 90% more...

I struggle to see how nvidia's current prices are AMD's fault...nVidia has the choice to lower prices, but they don't. AMD HAS ALREADY LOWERED PRICES...WHY DOESN'T NVIDIA DO THE SAME?

For over 4 years AMD was the reason we got cards at lower prices.
And you can look at their earnings that the old style of pricing fixed nothing.

Exactly, pricing their cards cheaper didn't help them a whole lot, so why would they continue doing it?

But onething is sure: You will not get more performance for the same money if AMD is not getting their mind together and gets more competitive.

Again, why is it AMD's fault that nVidia has STILL not lowered prices? If people continue to buy nVidia cards at higher prices, nVidia will keep the prices high.

 

[MrK6]

I'm not sure where the fanboy logic ends and the outright stupidity begins, but it's neither company's fault that prices are where they are. Economics 101 - the market determines the prices because the companies are in it to make the most money. Especially in a superficial commodity like graphics cards, they really are under no regulatory pressure to price the cards in anyway except to maximize profits. If you want to blame anyone, blame yourself for not buying more graphics cards.

 

[thilanliyan]

I'm not sure where the fanboy logic ends and the outright stupidity begins, but it's neither company's fault that prices are where they are. Economics 101 - the market determines the prices because the companies are in it to make the most money. Especially in a superficial commodity like graphics cards, they really are under no regulatory pressure to price the cards in anyway except to maximize profits. If you want to blame anyone, blame yourself for not buying more graphics cards.

QFT, both companies will price the cards at what the market will bear. IF WE are not willing to buy at whatever the price is, THEN it should be lowered.

 

[Rubycon]

Do you guys really think that Titan will be faster than a pair of 7970s?

It's may not push raw benchmark numbers higher but without a doubt it will deliver better (smoother) gameplay than any crossfire setup. :biggrin:

As long as the compute performance is stellar, it looks like it will be a good replacement for a pair of 690s. (a pair of titans, that is) Oh yippee! Time to shop for GPU blocks again!

 

[SirPauly]

Launching cards at the $379 level didn't help AMD get a lot of marketshare anyway.

Sure it did! The sweet spot strategy actually did take over-all discrete share away from nVidia in 2010.

 

[SirPauly]

the market determines the prices because the companies are in it to make the most money.

Indeed! Especially, if one has a competitive advantage or competitive opportunity to maximize revenue and margins.

 

[Silverforce11]

Well considering the Asus ROG II is $1500... still, this is getting obscene, for a single GPU to go for so much is nuts. Never thought id see the days of 8800GTX ultra exceeded.

 

[thilanliyan]

Sure it did! The sweet spot strategy actually did take over-all discrete share away from nVidia in 2010.

According to this:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/graphi..._Back_Market_Share_from_Intel_Nvidia_JPR.html

A while back is the last time ATI led by a meaningful margin...and that is when their high end cards cost MORE than $379. Around the time of G80, that changed.

It hasn't looked as good as before for AMD dGPU marketshare in a while:
http://www.techspot.com/news/47593-jpr-discrete-gpu-shipments-down-65-nvidia-gains-market-share.html

http://www.techspot.com/news/49946-discrete-gpu-shipments-down-in-q2-amd-regains-market-share.html

It's sat at about 40/60 AMD/Nvidia for a while it looks like.

 

[SickBeast]

"Smoother"

I hope you realize that nVidia has this problem too, just with different games.

"Better drivers"

You sound like a broken record...lol

I give you that nVidia does offer more features and having PhysX and CUDA a definite positive as well.

I am not even going to bother responding to sontin's posts he's already moved the goal post a few times.

Down boy! Bad! Get down!

He's actually right to a large extent. There has to be some reason why nVidia continues to make more money than AMD despite consistently losing in terms of price/performance.

I will tell you that going from a GTX 460 to a 7850 was like a trip to hell in terms of drivers.

 

[thilanliyan]

I will tell you that going from a GTX 460 to a 7850 was like a trip to hell in terms of drivers.

I went from a 4870, to a GTX460, then to a 6950, and now a 7950...never once had any issues with drivers.

What were your issues?

 

[MrK6]

Down boy! Bad! Get down!

He's actually right to a large extent. There has to be some reason why nVidia continues to make more money than AMD despite consistently losing in terms of price/performance.

I will tell you that going from a GTX 460 to a 7850 was like a trip to hell in terms of drivers.

nvidia has much stronger marketing than AMD and takes advantage of it heavily. Most people, especially novices/uninformed folks fall prey to this all the time. Most of the parroted market speak seen in forums is a great example of it. On top of that, they have viral marketing, focus groups, and shills that invade many forums to further market their products. Plenty of companies rely heavily on marketing and marketing an image, look at Apple as a great example, I just always find it interesting how easily people are manipulated.

Also, there's plenty of driver problems on both teams, anyone who has owned products from both companies knows this. However, nvidia's drivers, which have literally destroyed cards from overheating and still have game-breaking bugs are amazingly still viewed as "better." For a current example, my friend can't play GW2 on his GTX 680 without reducing some settings because performance is awful; notice how that never got covered in any of the articles on TechReport, but stuttering on AMD's side did? For your reading pleasure: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=gtx+680+gw2

Finally, consider the release of Titan. It's going to be faster than the GTX 680 and priced disproportionately so, but I guarantee it will be hailed as the second coming of awesome gaming cards. The 7970 did the same thing against the 6970 with a much better price/performance ratio, but it was lauded by critics despite better improvements. Furthermore on day one it surpassed even overclocked 6970 CF performance but again, no one noticed. I even made a thread about it: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2215295

I don't know if it speaks more about the rising ignorance of the enthusiast community, the poor coverage/review/ignorance of the tech sites they read, or something else. I can't complain because it is ignorance that allows things like bitcoin mining to remain so profitable, but I find it odd that some people don't pick up on these things.

 

[SickBeast]

I went from a 4870, to a GTX460, then to a 6950, and now a 7950...never once had any issues with drivers.

What were your issues?

Let's see, with a single 7850 the card wouldn't downclock properly when idle, and my computer would not wake up from S3 sleep which was terrible. It was very annoying and required a hard reset and I would lose any of my unsaved work. Completely unacceptable bug IMO. I would also get some BSODs.

Then when I got a 7870 for hybrid crossfire, I had a ton of issues adjusting the voltage and clockspeed of the 2nd card. I also had a ton of microstutter in games like BF3.

The GTX 460 was flawless in terms of drivers when I had it. Even in SLI in an unsupported configuration I did not have driver issues. The cards did feel "smoother" as well.

 

[RussianSensation]

I don't know if it speaks more about the rising ignorance of the enthusiast community, the poor coverage/review/ignorance of the tech sites they read, or something else. I can't complain because it is ignorance that allows things like bitcoin mining to remain so profitable, but I find it odd that some people don't pick up on these things.

1) Less emphasis on OCing vs. past generations. We have seen a complete reversal regarding overclocking. GTX460/470/560Ti's overclocking were killer advantages but overclocking of HD7850/7950/7970 cards was downplayed for a while now. There was also a lot of focus on less irrelevant metrics for enthusiasts such as power consumption and overclocking of reference HD7950/7970 cards with overly conservative 1.25V bioses. Interesting cherry-picking since most enthusiasts tend to buy after-market 7950-7970 cards. AT also never followed up with a single review of any after-market 7950 cards despite us asking for it. Yet after-market GTX660Ti cards were used in reviews against reference 7950.

2) Revisionist history. HD7970GE beat GTX680 all the way in June 2012:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970_GHz_Edition/28.html
http://techreport.com/review/23150/amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/11

Computebase showed it winning in 5 out of 6 gaming resolutions / AA settings:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-amd-radeon-hd-7970-ghz-edition/4/

Yet again, somehow people kept denying this and stated that only after Catalyst 12.11s that HD7970GE was the faster card. It was actually already faster in June.

3) The first time in history there is a GPU that's faster and cheaper on the high-end for a consistent period of time. It was also remarkable that people talk about GTX680 vs. HD7970 and justify NV's prices due to features/drivers ($360-380 vs. $440-450). Yet one of the big advantages of GTX680 when it launched was its lower price and faster performance. Why didn't NV launch GTX680 at $600 at launch then? I guess back then price/performance mattered but when 680 lost in both areas of price and performance, people went back to the same old argument of "NV's drivers/features are better." The reason NV didn't drop prices is because NV knows its fanbase will pay more; so they keep milking them!

When you consider that for around $500 of many 680s, you can get the Asus Matrix Platinum that at 1330mhz is a good 30% faster than a 680 at 1600P, but that card was largely dismissed and MSI Lightning 680 hailed! Same story with HD7950 OC vs. GTX660Ti = largely dismissed on our forum (although at OCN forums and OcUK forums this wasn't the case). Similarly HD7970s were selling as low as $380 as far back as July 2012.

4) Dismissal of BTC -- key feature that made AMD cards way cheaper/free over time. I remember when GTX600 owners also dismissed BTC mining as not a worthwhile feature since a case was being made that people buy GPUs for gaming, who cares about some trivial ways to use the GPU to make $. Fast forward and by the time HD8000 series launches, many people who didn't dismiss BTC have now fully paid off X # of HD7970 cards in their rigs, and will have saved up enough for free HD8000/GTX700 upgrades by Q4 2013. If anything BTC prices are rising to $24/coin which means all those coins collected by HD7000 owners from January 2012 have increased in value 4x as BTC coins were going for $6-7 at that time!

5) Discussion of "HD7970's rip-off high prices" at launch is used to justify the existing high prices of 680s, despite 680 losing by 10-11% to HD7970GE today. Whatever price structures were in effect 8-9 months ago isn't really relevant to today since prices adjust and we should adjust our recommendations. Consider that GTX580 is just 9-15% faster on avg than HD6970 and it cost $130 more.

Today HD7970GE at stock speeds is faster and it costs less. NV owners were willing to pay more for a marginal benefit of GTX580 and now they are still willing to pay more $ even for a slower card, that's voltage locked, that scales worse with overclocking and performs worse at 1600P and much worse in multi-monitor gaming. Why would NV lower prices when they know their fanbase will pay more for slower GPUs, with gimped OC features, and will pay even more to go from 2-> 4GB of VRAM? That's some serious brand loyalty right there. Some NV owners even claim the only way AMD can sell cards is if they price them for 50% less and they are within 85% of the performance of NV's flagship. IMO that borderline mirrors the same logic/brand attachment often associated with Apple users.

Maybe the term PC enthusiast is changing to who spends the most $ on their rig. :biggrin: