Nvidia's 600 series pricing

[RussianSensation]

I find it amusing though when people who have never owned one brand or the other are still annoyed by their driver issues.

Balla said he hasn't owned a single AMD GPU but their drivers are much worse because he said so. :sneaky:

On other forums where people value price/performance and overclocking over PhysX and even GTX680 owners are admitting that HD7950 OC as often fast as an overclocked GTX680 (and professional reviewers like TPU long-time ago showed 1100mhz HD7950 easily delivering GTX680 level of performance for $200 less). Of course on this forum, some people would rather pay $450-500 for a GTX680, ignore overclocking, focus in on 20-30W power consumption differences, and heavens forbid admit that a $270-300 AMD GPU can compete with a $450+ NV flagship card once overclocked. Free games also apparently not that important unless it's AC3 masking GTX650Ti's 40% performance deficit against HD7850 or BL2 because it includes PhysX.

Nvidia has a better value due to their good drivers however.

Your opinion on this forum is forever tainted now by your own admittance of being biased against AMD's GPU products due to the AMD brand and their CPU performance. Posts like these don't help your cause. Furthermore, you made posts complaining how NV released a mid-range Kepler chip and then still went out and dropped $400 x 2 on both of those. At least Balla insists that GK104 is mid-range and he won't touch it. You flipped out that GK104 was mid-range, and how this was awful and then proceeded to give NV $800 of your $. Stating that NV is ripping us off with a mid-range Kepler and then still giving them 8 bills anyway doesn't sound like you care what NV sells you as long as it's green.

GTX660Ti is already starting to show weaknesses in latest games despite NV's "superior drivers." Good drivers cannot save neutered hardware when the GPU had ROP/memory controllers chopped off.

It's convenient to ignore that NV has its own SLI driver issues, but professional reviewers are thankfully more objective as this GTX660Ti 2-way vs. 3-way SLI review showed. Also, a user on our very forum demonstrated poor scaling with GTX670 Tri-SLI. We also had a couple honest NV users who said NV's SLI scaling wasn't working well in Guild Wars 2 for at least a month. Then there is this review where on 3x 1920x1080 monitors, GTX690 SLI ($2K setup) only beat HD7970 GE CF ($900 setup) by 10%. I'll take "broken CF" for $900 than 10% faster $2000 NV SLI setup. Thanks! Looking at GTX670 reviews, some users are having a lot of issues with RROD/BSOD/crashes. The point is both NV and AMD have their issues but it seems over and over certain people pretend NV cards are bullet-proof and have no driver issues at all. This is ironic of course as even this month Tom's Hardware found driver issues when testing GTX650Ti:

"This specific combination of settings caused Nvidia's cards to demonstrate intermittent black textures, which we'd be most inclined to blame on the company's beta graphics driver."

Tom's Hardware is going to run HIS HD7970 X2 against GTX690 in an SLI vs. CF high-end resolution gaming review soon. We'll see how much better NV drivers are. The interesting part is SLI vs. CF discussions are used as proof that nV has better drives and this then is extrapolated to single-GPUs, which has nothing to do with micro-stutter issues that affect multi-GPU setups. There are plenty of people who prefer NV's control panel, are used to NV's drivers or just stick to NV because they are used to them and it feels comfortable. It's just interesting to hear people talking about how superior SLI drivers are but having never used CF at all, having never owned a single AMD card at all in the last 5 years and extrapolating SLI vs. CF to single-GPUs!

 

[RussianSensation]

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...game-bundles&p=5146705&viewfull=1#post5146705

That guy :biggrin:

"thought the 670 SC and 7970 probably aren't that far apart performance wise.
Came down to "I'm going to end up paying $100 to get these games and a little more performance if I do this".

EVGA GTX670 Superclocked = $430

vs.

1Ghz HD7970 for $387.

What he meant to say that he is going to pay $43 more for the NV card (but NV will reimburse him for it) and then go out and spend $150 on 3 of those games. For any other gamer, this would actually mean paying $193 more for a slower card and 3 games. That's Rollo twisting facts and not realizing that 1Ghz 7970 cost less than the NV card he bought and gets those 3 games for free.

 

[Final8ty]

He is not as bad as he used to be on that forum after his lengthy suspension.

 

[RussianSensation]

One must not be loyal to any Corporation but only to your own money.

If a user was convinced deeply that NV offered better drivers and bought an NV card based on this assumption, then seeing AMD improve drivers would appear to them as reinforcing the view that AMD had poor drivers to begin with, or how else were they able to achieve a significant performance boost? In their mind, it would further reinforce that NV has better drivers. To the same user, NV improving drivers would not appear as evidence that NV also had underperforming drivers but reinforce that NV has a better driver team than AMD as they were able to extract free performance.

Also, once most consumers make a selection for a product, after making their selection, the consumer holds the chosen item in higher regard and thinking less of the item they left behind.
"Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives" -The Science of Fanboyism - TechReport

"McCombs marketing professor Raj Raghunathan and Ph.D. student Szu-Chi Huang point to their research study that shows comparative features are important, but mostly as justification after a buyer makes a decision based on emotional response." ~ Source

This is why I always talk about how GTX670/680 were excellent choices back in Spring and early summer but as market changes (i.e., new drivers are released, we get new data points in performance in latest games, new price drops, new features are added/removed), it doesn't mean we should continue to blindly stick to past performance and price indicators. I think it's important to re-evaluate the landscape. NV spent less $ on TWIMTPB program, didn't spend much time closing loopholes in games where it trailed HD7000 series, didn't drop prices enough, didn't allow MSI and EVGA to have full voltage control, didn't maintain game bundles for long and the end result is their products appear to be in a totally different spot that they were when 670/680 launched. Of course if NV cards still sell despite all of this, then NV has little reason to make adjustments. However, I don't think all of us buy into the argument that if a product sells well at a high prices, then it's good value or a good product. PS3, despite being 6 years old, still sells for $300 with 1 game. Despite millions of people buying PS3s at $300, I am sure a lot of us would deem this to be an overpriced product at this stage of its life-cycle.

 

[moonbogg]

Your opinion on this forum is forever tainted

Troll fail.

 

[RussianSensation]

Troll fail.

:hmm:

Negative SLI scaling.

Tri-SLI scaling in BL2 does NOT work. Too bad, you just wasted $300 on a 3rd 660Ti.

GTX690 exhibits more stutter than a single GTX680, while a gamer would gain just 10 fps over a 680 at 2560x1440. GTX690 SLI is worthless for multi-monitor gaming in this game.

9 fps more to go from GTX690 to GTX690 SLI in multi-monitor gaming, loses badly to just 2 7970s. Total SLI fail.

Stutter-fest on a 590

GTX680 SLI scaling at 5760x1200 multi-monitor gaming is a medicore 26%, losing by nearly 16% to GTX690 (gasp!) and getting destroyed by 7970 CF.

BF3 5760x1200 multi-monitor gaming - what happened here? 79% SLI scaling vs. 97% CF scaling.

Major SLI scaling, minimum frame-rate issues and micro-stutter failures in at least 6 games.

So much for your biased opinion about how error-free SLI and NV drivers are. Those minimum frame-rates in SLI = micro-stutter galore. Keep living in dreamland that NV drivers are perfect and that only AMD cards have multi-GPU scaling issues. Both companies have driver issues but at least AMD owners own up to them.

 

[thilanliyan]

Troll fail.

How about some concrete proof that nVidia drivers are better as you claimed?

As RS just posted, nVidia has issues too.

 

[Jaydip]

@RS ms is probably worse on CF.Time and again [H] said that CF needs better frame rates to feel comparable to sli.

 

[3DVagabond]

Perceived quality can be overcome. I can remember when a Hyundai was considered lowest possible quality. Hyundai then offered a 10yr 100K mile warranty and people figured they must be good if they'll back it like that. AMD might consider something similar. The last way any business wants to compete is on price alone. Their marketing seems to be getting stronger under Read. I'm curious to see what else they might come up with.

 

[Jaydip]

Agreed they are really working closely with developers.Its a good sign for the pc gaming as a whole.

 

[moonbogg]

Perceived quality can be overcome. I can remember when a Hyundai was considered lowest possible quality. Hyundai then offered a 10yr 100K mile warranty and people figured they must be good if they'll back it like that. AMD might consider something similar. The last way any business wants to compete is on price alone. Their marketing seems to be getting stronger under Read. I'm curious to see what else they might come up with.

I agree, it can be overcome. Hell, I used to prefer ATI for a time when I got my 9700 pro. I got suckered into replacing it with an FX5800 Ultra. Boy that was a mistake. My opinion of Nvidia went down the drain for a while, but I slowly started to like them again with the 6800GT's and then 7800GTX cards were sick. I still have warm fuzzy feelings about grabbing a couple of 8800GT's for just under $300ea and they performed like a high end. Those were the Crysis days. Good times.
I can change my mind, and I do. I just need to experience a reason to do so. It takes more than AMD having better price/perf for the second half of this round. The first half they got destroyed (after Nvidia finally decided to show up) and then they came back with an answer, etc.

 

[moonbogg]

Here is my take on the whole gtx 600 lineup. Most of it is already known, but people don't see Nvidia's strategy which is obvious. They release the mid range chip and call it a high end and charge $500.00. People buy it at this price, and as planned, it runs out of stock since they didn't make that many for a reason. This reason is they know the gtx 670 makes the gtx 680 obsolete. The 680 was only there to put the $500.00 price in people's heads.
Next they release the gtx 690 for a ludicris $1,000.00. As planned, its out of stock as its sole purpose really was to put $1,000.00 into people's heads for this level of performance, although a few might still be available now and then, but not many for the stated reasons since now you'd have to be an idiot to buy one and you should be vomiting if you already have one.
Next, they release basically the same gtx 680 at $400.00 Now people think, "LOOK how CHEAP it is NOW!" and they can't wait to spend this high price for a mid range, especially since they can now get $1,000.00 performance for $800.00. It seems like a bargain but its a complete ripoff. When GK110 hits, they can classify it as an unusually high end card and charge $700.00 for it. The end result is an entire lineup that is way more expensive than any other in history, and people will pay their money and thank them for it as they laugh all the way to the bank.

Personally, I will be patient and watch the dust settle from this launch. Prices will fall at some point and with the whole lineup infront of me I can make the best choice. Right now any purchase will be guarenteed to result in buyer's remorse in the near future.

Quoting myself here from the original post. But its worse than anyone thought if $900 is true for Titan.

 

[Rvenger]

Quoting myself here from the original post. But its worse than anyone thought if $900 is true for Titan.

Thinking about this more and more.. Once the new cards come out, it might be a good value to get a GTX 690 once the new cards push the 690 price down.

 

[BrightCandle]

Thinking about this more and more.. Once the new cards come out, it might be a good value to get a GTX 690 once the new cards push the 690 price down.

If you can avoid SLI you really will want to. There are still games that don't benefit (F1 2011 and 2012) and instances of microstutter every now and then. I haven't hit a game recently that stutters all the way through, but periods of it for a few seconds are still common enough. Better than a pair of 7970's but neither is nice compared to a single high end card.

 

[moonbogg]

If you can avoid SLI you really will want to. There are still games that don't benefit (F1 2011 and 2012) and instances of microstutter every now and then. I haven't hit a game recently that stutters all the way through, but periods of it for a few seconds are still common enough. Better than a pair of 7970's but neither is nice compared to a single high end card.

Would you be willing to give up your 680's for a Titan? I got two 670's and I really like them. It would take a really fast card to replace them both, and you know what the next thought would be of course....getting TWO Titans.
I am stuck with SLI forever. I can't stand having one card when I can have two.