Is GTX 980ti pricepoint a leak to AMD FURY?

[thehotsung8701A]

Nvidia GPU almost always do not have a good price to performance ratios. This only lead me to believe that Nvidia know just how much more powerful the AMD Fury card releasing this June will be and thus we haven't seen a good deal for Nvidia gpu other than the GTX 970 promo with 2 free games.

I am truly led to believe that the AMD Fury will indeed have 4096 core, and is the single gpu powerhouse that everyone been waiting for.

This is coming from someone who is excited at the thought of owning his first TI card.

Have not upgrade my computer in 7 years, hoping this will be the perfect time. Currently still rocking an HD 5850

 

[Silverforce11]

8800GT & recently the GTX970 have been great bang for buck when they didn't needed to be priced so low due to lack of competition.

$650 980Ti is quite normal.

Compare Titan > 780.

 

[thehotsung8701A]

8800GT & recently the GTX970 have been great bang for buck when they didn't needed to be priced so low due to lack of competition.

$650 980Ti is quite normal.

Compare Titan > 780.

GTX 970 to me wasn't a great bang until they had the promo that gave you Witcher 3 and Batman AK.

 

[R0H1T]

Nvidia GPU almost always do not have a good price to performance ratios. This only lead me to believe that Nvidia know just how much more powerful the AMD Fury card releasing this June will be and thus we haven't seen a good deal for Nvidia gpu other than the GTX 970 promo with 2 free games.

I am truly led to believe that the AMD Fury will indeed have 4096 core, and is the single gpu powerhouse that everyone been waiting for.

This is coming from someone who is excited at the thought of owning his first TI card.

Have not upgrade my computer in 7 years, hoping this will be the perfect time. Currently still rocking an HD 5850

Common sense & the recent past, like the 780 launch 2yrs back, tells me that the Furies will be equal to (or better) than the 980Ti while being quieter & running cooler, possibly even less power consumption than the 980Ti at max load. It'll likely have an edge till ~1600p (after which 4GB can become a bottleneck) & if they somehow manage to get 8GB later in the year then expect it to cost nothing short of 700~750$ as this price will come down when the higher VRAM models launch, if they launch

 

[Alatar]

GTX 970 to me wasn't a great bang until they had the promo that gave you Witcher 3 and Batman AK.

It was extremely good value at launch.

The thing is that every other card including AMD's offerings dropped in price shortly after. (because again without price drops to the other stuff the 970 was extremely lucrative)

 

[flopper]

750 euro seems not a good point.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

possibly even less power consumption than the 980Ti at max load.

With the 295x2 amd has shown it doesn't care about powerconsumption in a top end card. And they're right, it's not important.

I hope they push the chip, well beyond 300W if there's a decent performance gain to be had.

 

[xthetenth]

With the 295x2 amd has shown it doesn't care about powerconsumption in a top end card. And they're right, it's not important.

I hope they push the chip, well beyond 300W if there's a decent performance gain to be had.

They might not push it that far stock, but even if it's just overclocking headroom that'd be amazing to have if wanted. The 295X2 is a dual GPU card and consumes power in line with that.

 

[sm625]

It could simply be that after 3 years, the cost of even a huge 28nm die just isnt that high? I think TSMC only wants around $6000 per wafer and if you can get 100 huge dies off a wafer then you're only paying like $60 per die. These companies arent apple, so you can only inflate the cost of a $60 die oh so many times. I assume they are printing smaller dies in the areas of the wafer that the big dies cant fit? If so then there's an extra 10% profit right there at least.

 

[tential]

GTX 970 to me wasn't a great bang until they had the promo that gave you Witcher 3 and Batman AK.

R9 290x made the 970 a meh deal until those 2 games were included.

 

[Ranulf]

R9 290x made the 970 a meh deal until those 2 games were included.

The game deal is what got me to buy a 970.

 

[LTC8K6]

R9 290x made the 970 a meh deal until those 2 games were included.

There was a game deal with AMD cards, too.

There are still deals available. 280, 290, and, 290X

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...00030349 600100181&IsNodeId=1&IsPowerSearch=1

 

[TemjinGold]

It could simply be that after 3 years, the cost of even a huge 28nm die just isnt that high? I think TSMC only wants around $6000 per wafer and if you can get 100 huge dies off a wafer then you're only paying like $60 per die. These companies arent apple, so you can only inflate the cost of a $60 die oh so many times. I assume they are printing smaller dies in the areas of the wafer that the big dies cant fit? If so then there's an extra 10% profit right there at least.

Err couple of things:

1) Unless you are about to lose money per unit sold, product pricing has nothing to do with cost and everything to do with "what the market will bear."

2) I'm no expert (or anything close to that) but I would think a process that prints big dies AND little ones on the same wafer would be way more expensive than the benefit that would bring (compared to just printing one type of die per wafer).

 

[tential]

There was a game deal with AMD cards, too.

There are still deals available. 280, 290, and, 290X

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...00030349 600100181&IsNodeId=1&IsPowerSearch=1

Those ram deals look good.

On topic though, I think the 980ti is not a priceleak but rather nvidia knows amd has something coming. Rather than wait til amd releases and react, nvidia decided to be first to market. I think the 980ti and whole 900 series lineup will see price adjustments if the 300 series is strong enough. If not it'll stay where it is. Nvidia just prices to make the most money possible. They're a for profit business.... It's understandable.

 

[flexy]

that the Furies will be equal to (or better) than the 980Ti while being quieter & running cooler, possibly even less power consumption

I am trying not to make this sound like nonconstructive trolling...

WHEN in the last some years...was AMD faster than the current GTX 970 or GTX 980, and in particular, when were equal AMD cards using less power and had been quieter?

And re: what OP claims..I don't have numbers...but I dare to say that the GTX 970 is POSSIBLY Nvidia's most popular card and the price is "ok". Nothing wrong with a €300 card which plays everything up-to 1600 flawlessly.

 

[Kenmitch]

I am trying not to make this sound like nonconstructive trolling...

WHEN in the last some years...was AMD faster than the current GTX 970 or GTX 980, and in particular, when were equal AMD cards using less power and had been quieter?

Sounds strangely worded to me.

 

[PG]

Nvidia has a history of preemptive strikes just before AMD releases a new product. See the history of the R9 290 as an example:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7481/the-amd-radeon-r9-290-review/2

We won't know the whole story until AMD's cards are released and reviewed.

 

[maddie]

I am trying not to make this sound like nonconstructive trolling...

WHEN in the last some years...was AMD faster than the current GTX 970 or GTX 980, and in particular, when were equal AMD cards using less power and had been quieter?

And re: what OP claims..I don't have numbers...but I dare to say that the GTX 970 is POSSIBLY Nvidia's most popular card and the price is "ok". Nothing wrong with a €300 card which plays everything up-to 1600 flawlessly.

Sounds strangely worded to me.

@FLEXY

You are obviously trying to get a specific answer. lots of qualifications.

 

[Despoiler]

I am trying not to make this sound like nonconstructive trolling...

WHEN in the last some years...was AMD faster than the current GTX 970 or GTX 980, and in particular, when were equal AMD cards using less power and had been quieter?

Aftermarket cooler 290 and 290x beat the 970 in 50% of the games out there. The 290x gap @ high res goes toe to to with the 980. The only problem with AMD is that all of the reviews use the reference model that has a terrible cooler.

No one cares about power use unless it's going to force you to upgrade your PSU. The aftermarket cooler 290 and 290x models are every bit as quiet as their Nvidia counterparts.

 

[Kenmitch]

Aftermarket cooler 290 and 290x beat the 970 in 50% of the games out there. The 290x gap @ high res goes toe to to with the 980. The only problem with AMD is that all of the reviews use the reference model that has a terrible cooler.

No one cares about power use unless it's going to force you to upgrade your PSU. The aftermarket cooler 290 and 290x models are every bit as quiet as their Nvidia counterparts.

Throwing out power consumption like you said....295x2 slapped around TitanZ nicely.

 

[iiiankiii]

I am trying not to make this sound like nonconstructive trolling...

WHEN in the last some years...was AMD faster than the current GTX 970 or GTX 980, and in particular, when were equal AMD cards using less power and had been quieter?

Let's be fair. Maxwell is Nvidia's new arch. It was just released less than a year ago. AMD's Hawaii, compared to the competition (GTX 780/ti, Titan) AT THAT TIME, was fairly competitive in all aspects. Only the reference design of Hawaii was a failure. AIB designs were much, much better. A properly cooled Hawaii consumed around 25 watts less than the reference design!

 

[Headfoot]

The 290 would have been an absolute killer at launch but 1) they borked the reference cooler, put on a terrible one, and its haunted the GPU ever since, 2) mining prices sold them all out and ruined the extremely competitive MSRP. AMD has no excuse for the first, but there's not much you can do about the second

 

[sm625]

2) I'm no expert (or anything close to that) but I would think a process that prints big dies AND little ones on the same wafer would be way more expensive than the benefit that would bring (compared to just printing one type of die per wafer).

I mean smaller graphics dies, not totally different products like smartphone SoCs, but GPUs, the same thing only smaller. Even if it was just GM 206, you could still fit several of those onto the unused space. Dont they do that?

 

[xthetenth]

It could simply be that after 3 years, the cost of even a huge 28nm die just isnt that high? I think TSMC only wants around $6000 per wafer and if you can get 100 huge dies off a wafer then you're only paying like $60 per die. These companies arent apple, so you can only inflate the cost of a $60 die oh so many times. I assume they are printing smaller dies in the areas of the wafer that the big dies cant fit? If so then there's an extra 10% profit right there at least.

Very likely much less than 10%. There's only 57% wasted space if you literally have one huge die as an upper bound and there's always going to be some waste even on a die full of the smaller dies to account for. This of course isn't taking into account the difficulty of finding smaller dies to make on the same process that are nicely sized to fill gaps. I have a feeling that we'd see it in pictures of wafers. Looking at a G80 wafer as an example and eyeballing it, you'd be able to get something like 22 dies a quarter of the size as a value add. The wafer has 118 dies on it. Adding 5.5 dies worth of space adds roughly 4.7%, and if I remember right wafers have gotten bigger since then.

Maybe media cards might work? But even then there's likely problems with gearing up to build one thing and not just having neat tiles of it.

 

[Headfoot]

I mean smaller graphics dies, not totally different products like smartphone SoCs, but GPUs, the same thing only smaller. Even if it was just GM 206, you could still fit several of those onto the unused space. Dont they do that?

No, having multiple sized die is a tech they've been working on in that space for a while but haven't cracked economically yet. While Charlie usually is a bit rabid, he had a good couple of pieces on a company that's providing die cutting tech that would make multiple die sizes on a single wafer economical.

https://semiaccurate.com/2015/05/18/disco-makes-hexagonal-non-regular-chips-possible/