GTX 470 Price and PSU Requirement

[Skurge]

http://www.shanebaxtor.com/2010/02/22/gtx-470-price-and-psu-requirement/

we'll have to see performance of course, but at $299 could this be Nvidia doing an ATI to ATI like in 2008?

 

[PingviN]

IF $299 is true, then Nvidia has screwed up GF100. 6+ months late and they compete with the HD5850/HD5870. That's a major failure.

 

[Apocalypse23]

nice.

 

[toyota]

IF $299 is true, then Nvidia has screwed up GF100. 6+ months late and they compete with the HD5850/HD5870. That's a major failure.

why do you look at it like that? what if the GTX470 is about as fast as the 5870 and they are just releasing at $299 to help get sales because they are late?

 

[PingviN]

why do you look at it like that? what if the GTX470 is about as fast as the 5870 and they are just releasing at $299 to help get sales because they are late?

Say that's true. 6+ months late and they compete with HD5870. Sure, they will bring down the pricing a notch or two, which is good for us, but GF100 is still a big dissapointment (if the "competing with HD5850/HD5870 only"-part is true).

 

[MarcVenice]

Why are you guys putting any stock in what that website sais? I never heard of shanebaxtor, and they supposedly heard this, without citing a source? Don't give them any free pageviews lol. Just wait a few hours and we just might know ...

 

[Ben90]

I'm not sure how it being priced at 299 automatically means its a failure. What it if runs every game at 40000+ fps at 7000000x500000 resolution?

We need more information before we can jump to conclusions.

 

[zerocool84]

I'm not sure how it being priced at 299 automatically means its a failure. What it if runs every game at 40000+ fps at 7000000x500000 resolution?

We need more information before we can jump to conclusions.

Of course we need more info cus we have no idea if this info is even true.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Lol, do you people really think Nvidia would price it at $299 if it wasnt a failure? Cmon, Nvidia is the 2nd biggest price gouger out there, if Fermi "owns" like everyone is thinking, it will be no less than $500

 

[Skurge]

Why are you guys putting any stock in what that website sais? I never heard of shanebaxtor, and they supposedly heard this, without citing a source? Don't give them any free pageviews lol. Just wait a few hours and we just might know ...

Shane Baxtor does the graphics card and ram reviews for tweak town.

 

[Piotrsama]

I don't believe that price.
But if it were true (price and perf) with the low availability it will have.... price gouging will find new records.

 

[tviceman]

Say that's true. 6+ months late and they compete with HD5870. Sure, they will bring down the pricing a notch or two, which is good for us, but GF100 is still a big dissapointment (if the "competing with HD5850/HD5870 only"-part is true).

The problem with you is that it's a big disappointment no matter what. ATI had 2+ generations in a row of disappontments, but everyone got over it when the 4870/4890 came out so if the GF100 is competitive in price/performance be happy and stop complaining.

 

[tviceman]

Lol, do you people really think Nvidia would price it at $299 if it wasnt a failure? Cmon, Nvidia is the 2nd biggest price gouger out there, if Fermi "owns" like everyone is thinking, it will be no less than $500

Because the 8800GT's initial release was price gouging?

 

[TemjinGold]

Because the 8800GT's initial release was price gouging?

That didn't cost nV nearly as much in R&D. If this card doesn't suck and nV sells at this price, they would be screwing themselves given the demand that would ensue.

 

[Daedalus685]

Has any company ever released a halo at what would be a drastically under cut price/performance value?

If these prices are accurate, I can't see it being because they felt cuddly and wanted to help all us consumers out. It is because they feel it will make them more money in the long run... Which either means the things perform in line with the price, or there are so few for it to matter what they sell them at and the lower they go the better everyone feels about Nvidia down the road.

I just can't imagine a company releasing what has been touted as 30%+ improvement on a competitor at the same price. I mean these would be in the same ball park as the current gtx285 prices. That is unheard of...

I'll sit by and hope that Nvidia is simply planning on dominating the market, found some way to sell the things for a profit at a low price (or just went nuts, and wants to give away the things), and the performance is as the higher rumours indicate. I just don't find that likely.

 

[Keysplayr]

If GTX470 can perform like a 5870 at 200 dollars cheaper, what's not to like? Its already speculated that GTX480 would be faster than a 5870, so logic would suggest that 5870 performance would be more closely matched to a GTX470. Of course I'm bearing in mind that we don't hav any real idea yet how GF100 will perform. Now don't anyone get their panties in a bunch. I'm just speculating here as is everyone else.

 

[Daedalus685]

If GTX470 can perform like a 5870 at 200 dollars cheaper, what's not to like? Its already speculated that GTX480 would be faster than a 5870, so logic would suggest that 5870 performance would be more closely matched to a GTX470. Of course I'm bearing in mind that we don't hav any real idea yet how GF100 will perform. Now don't anyone get their panties in a bunch. I'm just speculating here as is everyone else.

Well obviously there is nothing to be upset about in that case... but come now, Nvidia wants to make money, they are not stupid.

In the best case I see this as a sign that Nvidia is sure ATI is going to cut prices hugely, all the best case performance numbers are true, and we will soon be able to get 5870 level performance for 5850 level prices.

In the worst case, they are simply pricing to where they see the performance, perhaps with a bit of an undercut in the price/performance ratio to get some extra sales.

 

[Qbah]

If a GTX470 performs similarly to a HD5870 and costs $100 less, nVidia will be literally pulling an ATi from last gen ($200 HD4850 vs $300 9800GTX and $300 HD4870 vs $400+ GTX260 - performance categories).

And Keys, the link says $299, so 100 bucks less and not $200 If the GTX470 will offer more power than a HD5850 for the same price, it will be awesome. If it will be on par with a HD5870, that's even better. This will force the prices down for the HD58xx for people wanting to go red And will also give affordable green cards.

 

[Keysplayr]

Sure. Totally plausable. Could be trying to make up for a bit of lost time? I dunno. Or like you said, anticipating a monstrous price cut by ATI. But to be honest, if GTX470 is in line with 5870 performance, and the MSRP of the 470 is indeed 299, I don't see how ATI could slash a clean 100 bucks off their 5870 without enraging those who bought them at current pricing. NV may be trying to reverse roles of last launch (GT200 vs R7xx).
Many folks were miffed about NVs pricing and the relatively large price cuts that ensued. Maybe this time, it's ATIs turn?
Gonna be an interesting launch to say the least.

 

[Creig]

I don't see how this website could possibly be correct. $299 for 5870 level performance from a chip that has 50% more transistors and a correspondingly lower yield?

It just doesn't seem fiscally possible. Nvidia would be taking a bloodbath loss on each unit sold.

 

[Keysplayr]

Sorry guys. I meant 100 dollars. On a blackberry and it doesn' like when I edit posts.

 

[Keysplayr]

I don't see how this website could possibly be correct. $299 for 5870 level performance from a chip that has 50% more transistors and a correspondingly lower yield?

It just doesn't seem fiscally possible. Nvidia would be taking a bloodbath loss on each unit sold.

You're right it wouldn't. Unless ATI is severely overpricing their current lineup in the face of lack of a competitors lineup.

 

[PingviN]

The problem with you is that it's a big disappointment no matter what. ATI had 2+ generations in a row of disappontments, but everyone got over it when the 4870/4890 came out so if the GF100 is competitive in price/performance be happy and stop complaining.

GF100 is a disappointment if it merely stands head-to-head with Cypress. GF100 was supposed to be oh so awesome and so worth the wait. I would love GF100 to be a killer and that's what I expect from a ~530mm^2 chip. If the 3 billion transistors GF100 can't beat a 338mm^2 ~2 billion transistors chip senseless, it's a failure for Nvidia.

I have no affection towards AMD or Nvidia other than that I know both are capable of making great components, but Nvidia took a wrong turn at GT200 and seems to be doing the same thing with GF100. I know full well that R600 was a joke and RV670 barely stood up to the competition, but that doesn't change anything; RV780 and RV880 are awesome, who cares about earlier generations? Fanboys can look back at the glorious G80 days, but I don't want a G80 GPU, do you?

 

[Creig]

You're right it wouldn't. Unless ATI is severely overpricing their current lineup in the face of lack of a competitors lineup.

It's possible, I suppose. But from the calculations I've seen, ATi doesn't seem to have priced their cards outrageously above production costs.

To me, either the performance of the GTX 470 isn't at HD 5870 levels or the MSRP will be higher than $299. Or both. I would have a hard time believing that neither one is true.

 

[StrangerGuy]

One thing I don't get it is why is Nvidia discontinuing GT200 before even Fermi hits the market. Heck, we don't even hear of the Fermi-derived budget parts yet. It doesn't seem to be a rational business decision at any angle I look at it.