Official GTX680 shipment number

[sontin]

Not a real number but it gives us a clue about shipments of GTX680:

Look at nVidia's investor site. I think they will upload the stream.

 

[blckgrffn]

Interesting, but without #'s on the 580, not extremely useful. Hopefully more concrete data is found

With the 580, they were concurrently shipping the 570, right?

 

[sontin]

Interesting, but without #'s on the 580, not extremely useful. Hopefully more concrete data is found

With the 580, they were concurrently shipping the 570, right?

GTX570 was released 4 - 5 weeks after the GTX580.

 

[tviceman]

The gtx580 had supplies issues at launch at well, though nothing close to what gtx680 is going through. I'm not sure if I believe Nvidia on this one, but there are a few factors working in their favor with gtx680's launch. 1) it was cheaper than the competition 2) it was cheaper AND at the same time faster than the competition 3) it is more efficient than the competition.

The gtx580 may have been faster than anything AMD, but it certainly wasn't cheaper, and despite the improvement in power draw, the combination of AMD's more efficient 40nm designs and Fermi's power-sucking stigma were working against it. Also, the gtx580 was 15-20% faster than the next-fastest single GPU solution, making it a less compelling upgrade from a performance standpoint than the gtx680 30-35% improvement over gtx580.

 

[blastingcap]

What's the over/under on how many more posts there will be in this thread until RS shows up?

 

[Phynaz]

Depends up what their definition of "Sales Out" is.

Until they define that, this chart is meaningless propaganda.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I think a lot of people found the GTX580 (and Radeon 69xx cards) to be rather unexciting if you already had a GTX4xx (or Radeon 58xx). So I doubt the sales numbers were huge in the beginning of the last generation of cards.

 

[tviceman]

I think a lot of people found the GTX580 (and Radeon 69xx cards) to be rather unexciting if you already had a GTX4xx (or Radeon 58xx). So I doubt the sales numbers were huge in the beginning of the last generation of cards.

Yeah that is kinda what I said in one of my points a few posts up, you just said it better.

 

[RussianSensation]

I am not seeing actual #s though.

Regardless not sure why that's impressive. GTX570 was $350, HD6970 was $370 and GTX580 was $500. It was much more difficult to justify spending extra for GTX580 back then. This time HD7970 cost $550 and then NV came out with a cheaper, faster, quieter card, more power efficient card than the competition, and priced it at $500. From that point of view, GTX680 outselling GTX580 isn't unexpected.

I want to see what would have happened if the old AMD management was at the helm.

AMD shipped 16 million DX11 cards in 9 months

In 1 year's time that number increased to 25 million units.

AMD delivered a more expensive and slower product line this round with no concrete advantages. Even their HD video decoding was broken. I wouldn't be surprised if current GTX670/680 sales are good. Imo, it's less to do with 670/680 being a revolutionary GPU over the 580 and more to do with the high pricing / conservative clocks on HD7950/7970. HD7950 is still $400.....(is that a joke? I guess it's not.)

Honestly, AMD has it in their power to make GTX670/680 less impressive:

1) Launch 1.1ghz factory pre-overclocked 7970 cards for $500
2) Drop reference design 7970 to $400
3) Drop HD7950 price to $350

GTX670/680's success is all but assured at this point unless AMD does something to make 7900 series more attractive for new buyers who haven't upgraded yet. Under AMD's new management team, the GPU division no longer has the price/performance or top performance in the > $300 price level. I don't ever recall ATI graphics in that position.

 

[blckgrffn]

What's the over/under on how many more posts there will be in this thread until RS shows up?

The line is at 10, and I am taking the under :awe:

And to top it all off, I agree with Russian Sensations entire post.

AMD, are you guys awake in there? Hello?

Good thing nvidia has supply problems, I guess. Good thing for AMD, that is. Sucks for us.

 

[blastingcap]

The line is at 10, and I am taking the under :awe:

And to top it all off, I agree with Russian Sensations entire post.

AMD, are you guys awake in there? Hello?

Good thing nvidia has supply problems, I guess. Good thing for AMD, that is. Sucks for us.

In that case RS just smashed the line four posts after my post. Nice after-bet. Lol.

The scary part about all of this is that the graph, if accurate, is talking about gaming chips only. I.e., GeForce GTX 680. I suspect NV has been hoarding most of its uncut GK104 chips for more-profitable-per-card Tesla K10s, each of which houses two GK104 chips. So for NV to have enough GK104s left over to make into GTX 680s to outship what they were shipping with GTX 580 is impressive.

 

[bryanW1995]

What's the over/under on how many more posts there will be in this thread until RS shows up?

Please stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks.

 

[bryanW1995]

I am not seeing actual #s though.

Regardless not sure why that's impressive. GTX570 was $350, HD6970 was $370 and GTX580 was $500. It was much more difficult to justify spending extra for GTX580 back then. This time HD7970 cost $550 and then NV came out with a cheaper, faster, quieter card, more power efficient card than the competition, and priced it at $500. From that point of view, GTX680 outselling GTX580 isn't unexpected.

I want to see what would have happened if the old AMD management was at the helm.

AMD shipped 16 million DX11 cards in 9 months

In 1 year's time that number increased to 25 million units.

AMD delivered a more expensive and slower product line this round with no concrete advantages. Even their HD video decoding was broken. I wouldn't be surprised if current GTX670/680 sales are good. Imo, it's less to do with 670/680 being a revolutionary GPU over the 580 and more to do with the high pricing / conservative clocks on HD7950/7970. HD7950 is still $400.....(is that a joke? I guess it's not.)

Honestly, AMD has it in their power to make GTX670/680 less impressive:

1) Launch 1.1ghz factory pre-overclocked 7970 cards for $500
2) Drop reference design 7970 to $400
3) Drop HD7950 price to $350

GTX670/680's success is all but assured at this point unless AMD does something to make 7900 series more attractive for new buyers who haven't upgraded yet. Under AMD's new management team, the GPU division no longer has the price/performance or top performance in the > $300 price level. I don't ever recall ATI graphics in that position.

2970 was much worse than their current situation.

 

[blckgrffn]

2970 was much worse than their current situation.

If they can pull the equivalent of the 29xx --> 38xx --> 48xx out of their hat now, assuming 79xx == 29xx (scarily similar had nvidia been able to deliver on time and in mass quantities) then AMD is going to be just fine.

At least the 79xx parts are much more compelling than the 29xx was in its time, you are very right about that.

Here's to hoping they keep trading blows in that fashion.

 

[blastingcap]

Please stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks.

Please grow a sense of humor. I know RS has one.

 

[Olikan]

If they can pull the equivalent of the 29xx --> 38xx --> 48xx out of their hat now, assuming 79xx == 29xx (scarily similar had nvidia been able to deliver on time and in mass quantities) then AMD is going to be just fine.

At least the 79xx parts are much more compelling than the 29xx was in its time, you are very right about that.

Here's to hoping they keep trading blows in that fashion.

i think that i look to the bright side too much...

but, imo, Amd position with 7970 never have been so good...the 6970, 5870 baraly could tie with 470, 570 at gaming...while with gpgpu, overclock and dx11 was instant lose...

now, 7970 wins at gpgpu, gaming and overclock...and trade blows with 680...
7970 is just overpriced or underclocked

 

[Jaydip]

I think a lot of people found the GTX580 (and Radeon 69xx cards) to be rather unexciting if you already had a GTX4xx (or Radeon 58xx). So I doubt the sales numbers were huge in the beginning of the last generation of cards.

The same is true for Gtx680 as well.I just upgraded from 580 to 680 and it was nothing groundbreaking.

 

[guskline]

The same is true for Gtx680 as well.I just upgraded from 580 to 680 and it was nothing groundbreaking.

Jaydip your point is a good one. I "upgraded" from a Radeon 6970 powering 3 1920 x1080 monitors to a GTX 680 and noticed a significant difference in power and smoothness.

Just for fun, I connected a single 24" monitor to rig 1 below and then rig2 (2 5850s CF vs single GTX 680). It felt about the same, though the GTX 680 had better diagnostic scores. Where you REALLY feel the difference is in a multi-monitor setup.

The single GTX 680 smoked the 2-5850s eventhough in CF. Obviously, more Vram. However the Radeon 6970 has 2 g Vram, the same as the GTX 680. The difference is the processor "horsepower" for lack of better term, especially when you get to higher resolutions (5760 x 1080)

Blastingcap, you are running 3 monitors on your rig with a 7970OC. What GPU were you using before the 7970?

 

[SlowSpyder]

The same is true for Gtx680 as well.I just upgraded from 580 to 680 and it was nothing groundbreaking.

But I feel like there is a lot more buzz around this generation than when the GTX580 and Radeon 69xx cards launched. The GTX580 was really just a corrected GTX480. The Radeon 6970 offered 10-15% more performance than the 5870. I think a lot of people held off as they felt that we had already pushed 40nm as far as was worth going. I feel like there was a lot more excitement around AMD and Nvidia's first 28nm than than their last 40nm parts.

 

[SirPauly]

. I feel like there was a lot more excitement around AMD and Nvidia's first 28nm than than their last 40nm parts.

Why would that be surprising? The move to 28nm from 40nm is substantial and significant -- coupled with new architectures -- usually stir up lots of excitement considering how rare they are.

 

[SirPauly]

The same is true for Gtx680 as well.I just upgraded from 580 to 680 and it was nothing groundbreaking.

Felt like a more evolutionary and incremental upgrade? Based on the performance value didn't match the substantial and significant node and arch change?

 

[Jaydip]

Felt like a more evolutionary and incremental upgrade? Based on the performance value didn't match the substantial and significant node and arch change?

Yup and the feeling is due to my Asus DC II 580.680 is faster sure but the reference cooler is still no match for the DC II cooler.I would suggest people to get a non reference 680 if they are upgrading from a non reference 580.It was costlier than 580 but it is cheaper than 7970 here,so compared to 7970 its definitely a better value.Honestly I expected a bit more.Also it seems Kepler doesn't scale that well compared to Fermi.

 

[Rvenger]

I just hope AMD doesn't take the "Its fast enough" approach if Nvidia comes out on top every time.

 

[Jaydip]

But I feel like there is a lot more buzz around this generation than when the GTX580 and Radeon 69xx cards launched. The GTX580 was really just a corrected GTX480. The Radeon 6970 offered 10-15% more performance than the 5870. I think a lot of people held off as they felt that we had already pushed 40nm as far as was worth going. I feel like there was a lot more excitement around AMD and Nvidia's first 28nm than than their last 40nm parts.

I believe the buzz is due to improved power efficiency.680 is faster than 580 while using a lot less power.Regarding new features unfortunately its a bit underwhelming this round specially for AMD.They put a good architecture to the table but it seems their driver team is on vacation to make a good use of it.