Just curious...is anyone actually going to buy the Geforce Ultra?

[Giovanni]

The title says it all...I can't believe anyone would buy this thing, with so many next-gen cards right around the corner, but if you're going to, I'd love to hear your reasons

 

[Dark4ng3l]

A few stupid crazy rich bastards bought it(those rich bastards probably needed something faster than a GeForce2 while they wait for nv20)

 

[Shagga]

Dark4ng3l - lol

I nearly did, but I decided that the GF2 was good enough until the NV20 arrives....

 

[The Wildcard]

Haha nv20 is gonna destroy it.

 

[caboob]

Waiting for the V5 6000 instead babee!!! But I might change my mind and wait for the Rampage chip if they don't ever release the 6000. As for the Ultra, while powerful, it seems it is at the end of its technological life at 0.18 um. and dont think the price will ever come down considering current yields of chip and memory.

 

[StickHead]

Dark4ng3l doesn't like crazy rich bastards.


Caboob:

Why are you waiting for the V5 6000?? That will be more overpriced, more expencive, and more outdated than the GeForce2 Ultra is now.


Yeah the Ultra's are not cheap, but how much are the GeForce2 Pros going for?

 

[BFG10K]

Even if I had enough money, I don't think I would buy it unless I already had a top of the line system with everything in it. Failing that I would be perfectly happy to buy a GF2 MX and upgrade my other stuff with the money that was left over.

Waiting for the V5 6000 instead babee!!!



As for the Ultra, while powerful, it seems it is at the end of its technological life at 0.18 um. and dont think the price will ever come down considering current yields of chip and memory.

Um.... you do realise that 3dfx are still using the 0.25 micron manufacturing process, right? That is part of the reason why the V5 5500/6000 burn so much electricity and generate so much heat.

and dont think the price will ever come down considering current yields of chip and memory.

Larger chip surfaces (ie the Voodoos) decrease chip yields compared to smaller surfaces (ie nVidia, ATi).

 

[JellyBaby]

If someone buys an Ultra and freely admits it here at AT, I will flame him or her.

We must do everything in our power to keep people from buying these over-hyped, over-priced and damn near unnecessary video cards. Why? Because if they create a demand for $750, video chipset makers and resellers might actually believe they can keep prices that high indefinitely. And nobody in their right mind wants that!

 

[Hawk]

It would be dumb to buy an Ultra, espeically if you already have a GF2. It's just a bit faster (clock wise) and won't really make you better at games...besides, you could buy 1/2 of a new computer with that money.

 

[The Wildcard]

JellyBaby's got a good point. If somebody buys the Ultra that means some stupid marketing person who decides/sets the prices of these products will actually believe that the company CAN rip us off, lol.

 

[PeAK]

It is about price, performance and diminishing returns.
The most important thing about a graphics card is
2D quality as 3D, games and business applications have one
thing in common...they are
ultimately projected onto a 2D monitor.

I wrote a little editorial on value and have proposed
an alternate "weighting" of criteria that I think will line
up with the subjective feel of a graphics card better than
in the past: The results show why there is such a ground swell
of support and purchases of the ATI's Radeon based products.

Last, a note about a upcoming driver fixfrom ATI to accomodate
the high resolution capabilities of Sony Trinitron monitors

 

[Maverick2002]

man, there must be really rich people out there........well, as for the rest of us, i gotta say that im quite happy with my geforce2mx (it was a nice upgrade from my Genoa Systems 8mb i740 agp card

 

[Fozzie]

Who'll buy the Ultra at a $450-500 price point? A fair amount of people actually, just like people who bought a SLI originally or would have gotten a V5 6K. nVidia knows that the $500 price range is a niche high-end market and that the next gen series, EG NV20, will have different models that will eventually(Fall 01) replace the whole lineup from the MX to the Ultra. Remember though many TNT's are still sold now.

How many people will buy the Ultra when it sinks to $300-340 or so by the end of the year? This is the projected price I've been hearing from graphics companies. Possible? Certainly, unlike the V5 6K or even the 5K the cost of the Ultra is in limited RAM, which will certainly become less limited as time goes on.

I expect honestly that the NV20 will come it at the $400-450 price range and quickly drop within 3 months to 300-350. Just think how much a Geforce Pro or Radeon 64MB will be then.

I also think 2D quality is very important and I hope that the graphic card companies will start to pay attention more even at the low end with the attention that it is starting to receive. There are some Geforce series cards that use lower quality RF filters that will affect all 2D quality. However what I'm hearing is that series wide nVidia, like ATI, has is an issue with Trinitron monitors that is resulting in the majority of serious 2D quality issues.

However the other issue is that graphics card companies are probably thinking that if someone is buying a 19" monitor that they'll buy a $200 price point video card. However with dropping monitor costs, less and less MX price point buyers are going to be using 15" monitors and 2D issues will become more and more important.

 

[pillage2001]

Will probably buy it if it's 250Bucks but by then, the NV20 would be out. Why bother getting it now? The GTS is already overpowered and not much applications today fully utilise the potential of it. The only reason you would want to buy is to get higher frames and minimize the memory bottleneck.

Other than that, why bother getting one?

 

[Jumpem]

Honestly, I am considering it if the "NV20" or "Radeon Pro or MAXX" isn't around when I build my new box at the end of December or early January. Also, I've seen the Creative Labs Ultra for $418 already.

 

[merlocka]

Buy.com $418 in stock (as of now )

 

[JellyBaby]

$417.95 + s/h isn't nearly as bad. I shelled out $350 for my GTS back in June and felt that was barely an acceptable trade. I replace my video subsystem every 1.5-2 years so $350 or even $418 ain't that bad unless you're a frequent upgrader, then I'd consider the move wastefull.

 

[NOS]

No, gonna wait till the next cards arrive!

 

[Compellor]

No. My Geforce 2 GTS is fast enough as it is, but, some people upgrading from regular Geforce 1 cards or TNT/TNT2 cards might. Don't criticize people for having more money than you; they work hard for it. If they want the very best, so be it; it's their choice.

I originally bought a TNT card two years ago (prior to that I had a Matrox Millennium/Voodoo 1 combo). Several people bought a TNT and then splurged on TNT2/Ultra's because it was faster (but more expensive -- and had the same features as a TNT). I waited two years to upgrade because my old TNT was still a good 3D card, and most current games were very playable at 1024 x 768 in 16 bit color. Hell, Quake 3 is still very playable on a TNT in 16 bit color at 1024 x 768! Some people just want the very best at all times -- whether they are rich or poor.