Radeon 9700 price cut and new GeForce4 Ti 4800SE products open new graphics card war

[Adul]

http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/01/24&pages=04&seq=20

New sparks of competition in the high-end graphics card market are expected to be rekindled with ATI Technologies-camp card maker CP Technology planning price cuts for its Radeon 9700 products, while Nvidia-group manufacturers like Micro-Star International (MSI), Albatron Technology and Gainward adding new GeForce4 Ti 4800SE (NV28) cards for the segment.

ATI is currently offering its own Radeon 9700 and Radeon 9500 cards to its card-production clients to ensure quality. As a result, product prices have generally remained at a much higher level. To stimulate overall buying sentiment, CP Technology decided to cut the price of its Radeon 9700 cards to NT$9,000 (about US$257) by the end of January. The product is officially quoted at US$299.

Besides the price cuts, CP Technology is also planning to introduce a 128MB memory-included Radeon 9500 card after the Chinese New Year holidays to strengthen its product lines. According to sources, the new graphics card will be sold at NT$7,000 (about US$200). Currently, the Radeon 9500 card is equipped with 64MB of memory.

As supply of R300 chips, upon which the Radeon 9700 and 9500 are built, gradually increases, more and more card makers are planning to manufacture their own Radeon 9700 and 9500 cards. CP Technology?s price cut on the ATI-offered Radeon 9700 cards is regarded as a move to pave the way for its own products.

In the Nvidia-platform sector, manufacturers including MSI, Albatron and Gainward recently added new AGP 8x-supporting graphics cards based on the chip designer?s GeForce4 Ti 4800SE chips to fortify the high-end segment before Nvidia?s GeForce FX starts volume shipments. The chips, according to Nvidia, were aimed at certain high-end markets in Europe only. However, despite its planning, Nvidia said that it is unable to limit the areas to which its clients decide to ship their products.

 

[MichaelD]

GF4 4800? I've never heard of such a thing until you just posted it...has this been in the works? Has anyone heard anything about it? Possibly a stall technique on NVidias part? Throw the dogs a bone to gnaw on while they get the FX up to speed.

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory? If that is the case, I'll bet there's almost zero overclocking ability in them...they are probably running "almost on the edge" already.

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: MichaelD
GF4 4800? I've never heard of such a thing until you just posted it...has this been in the works? Has anyone heard anything about it? Possibly a stall technique on NVidias part? Throw the dogs a bone to gnaw on while they get the FX up to speed.

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory? If that is the case, I'll bet there's almost zero overclocking ability in them...they are probably running "almost on the edge" already.

4800 has been out for months. Its just a 4600 with AGP 8x. In fact, in North America, they renamed it the Ti46008X to avoid confusion. Its been out a while though.

 

[bluemax]

^^ More like ADD to the confusion!

 

[Bovinicus]

Actually, it's just a Ti4400 with AGP 8x support. It actually performs slower than a Ti4600.

I can't wait for Radeon 9700 Pro pricedrops. Once the price nears $200 street, it will be time for me to buy it. Maybe I'll even spring that extra $50 or so and buy an AIW. =)

 

[ElFenix]

ooo pricedrops

got my w2 here... wonder what my return will buy me

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: Bovinicus
Actually, it's just a Ti4400 with AGP 8x support. It actually performs slower than a Ti4600.

I can't wait for Radeon 9700 Pro pricedrops. Once the price nears $200 street, it will be time for me to buy it. Maybe I'll even spring that extra $50 or so and buy an AIW. =)

Thanks guys...I haven't been following the video card scene for some time now. Got my 4200 about 6 months or so ago, and that was that.

ATI seems to have gotten their driver-act together...don't hear of too many probs with the 9700 Pro + the newest drivers (Catalyst is what they call them, right?)

If they drop it to around $200 street, I'll spring for one.

We've yet to see hard numbers on an FX and once it DOES come out, it's gonna be mucho-mucho-expensive...

 

[Auric]

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Auric

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

Anyone that doesn't do their homework about a purchase may very well be in "Special Education". They're probably the same people that wouldn't buy a part b/c it wasn't 8X AGP compatible. And why are you blaming Nvidia again for the numbering system? They'res only so many numbers, and not everyone has a perfect enumerating scheme. Its no different than ATI opting to name their budget DX 9 part Radeon 9000, when it is easily outperformed by the Radeon 8500.

Chiz

 

[MichaelD]

Well, uneducated or ignorant, I am not. I full well know that 8X AGP is pretty much just theoretcial these days...we still haven't maxxed-out the 4X AGP bus! As has been said; I'd never actually buy anything w/o researching it first.

Just b/c I admitted (I'm honest, if anything) that I'd never heard of a GF4 4800 doesn't mean I'm going to cut off my left nut to get the money to go buy one! While it's true I had no idea it's basically a rodded 4400, that's why I ASKED.

Anyway, I'm fairly happy w/my 4200. It gives good framerates at the resolutions that I like...but I want to be able to do AA at the resolutions that I like too. Unfortunately, my Palit 4200 doesn't OC for crap...unlike most "good"4200's, so, I've not been able to enjoy the overclocking that most 4200 owners have.

I'm waiting for new stuff from ATI and NVidia...so the prices on the 4600s' drop.

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: Auric

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

Ha Ha. I just did an archive search in Video for "9000". I quit counting at 35 the number of threads where people were asking for help in figuring out which Radeon did what to who where.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Auric

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

Anyone that doesn't do their homework about a purchase may very well be in "Special Education". They're probably the same people that wouldn't buy a part b/c it wasn't 8X AGP compatible. And why are you blaming Nvidia again for the numbering system? They'res only so many numbers, and not everyone has a perfect enumerating scheme. Its no different than ATI opting to name their budget DX 9 part Radeon 9000, when it is easily outperformed by the Radeon 8500.

Chiz

Actually I have no problem with the naming of the 8500 vs. the 9000. The 8500 is an older model supporting DX8 which used to be top-of-the-line. The 9000 is the bottom-of-the-line new model supporting DX9.

If you want really a really crappy performing card with a "great-sounding" name (as opposed to a cheaper/ordinary GF3 that blows it away performancewise) try the GeForce MX line.

Of course, ATI's renaming the 8500 doesn't help any in clearing up confusion.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Auric

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

Anyone that doesn't do their homework about a purchase may very well be in "Special Education". They're probably the same people that wouldn't buy a part b/c it wasn't 8X AGP compatible. And why are you blaming Nvidia again for the numbering system? They'res only so many numbers, and not everyone has a perfect enumerating scheme. Its no different than ATI opting to name their budget DX 9 part Radeon 9000, when it is easily outperformed by the Radeon 8500.

Chiz

Actually I have no problem with the naming of the 8500 vs. the 9000. The 8500 is an older model supporting DX8 which used to be top-of-the-line. The 9000 is the bottom-of-the-line new model supporting DX9.

If you want really a really crappy performing card with a "great-sounding" name (as opposed to a cheaper/ordinary GF3 that blows it away performancewise) try the GeForce MX line.

Of course, ATI's renaming the 8500 doesn't help any in clearing up confusion.

Heh what about the use of "LE"??? If video cards were cars, everyone would want a Radeon "Limited Edition"

Chiz

 

[Kingofcomputer]

Limited Features/Power/Performance/Handling Edition.

 

[Viper96720]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Auric

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

Anyone that doesn't do their homework about a purchase may very well be in "Special Education". They're probably the same people that wouldn't buy a part b/c it wasn't 8X AGP compatible. And why are you blaming Nvidia again for the numbering system? They'res only so many numbers, and not everyone has a perfect enumerating scheme. Its no different than ATI opting to name their budget DX 9 part Radeon 9000, when it is easily outperformed by the Radeon 8500.

Chiz

Actually I have no problem with the naming of the 8500 vs. the 9000. The 8500 is an older model supporting DX8 which used to be top-of-the-line. The 9000 is the bottom-of-the-line new model supporting DX9.

If you want really a really crappy performing card with a "great-sounding" name (as opposed to a cheaper/ordinary GF3 that blows it away performancewise) try the GeForce MX line.

Of course, ATI's renaming the 8500 doesn't help any in clearing up confusion.

ATI just adds more confusion since the 9000 supports dx8.1 and not dx9. Now it looks like the 8500 will be the 9100.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Auric

W/O researching, to me is sounds like a hot-rodded GF4 4600...kinda overclocked directly from the factory?

Yeah, that's what the sh1tweasels at NVIDIA marketing are counting on. Little does that average schmuck know that SE stands for "Special Education", as in what a buyer is in for when they find out too late that they have got a 4400.

Anyone that doesn't do their homework about a purchase may very well be in "Special Education". They're probably the same people that wouldn't buy a part b/c it wasn't 8X AGP compatible. And why are you blaming Nvidia again for the numbering system? They'res only so many numbers, and not everyone has a perfect enumerating scheme. Its no different than ATI opting to name their budget DX 9 part Radeon 9000, when it is easily outperformed by the Radeon 8500.

Chiz

Maybe it's no different to idiotic fools posting in threads with things like your post.
Radeon 9000/PRO is not DX9, the 8500 is not DX9, the 8500 has been renamed to avoid confusion, so actually ATi is a lot better than nVidia in these terms. You buy a 9100 (new named 8500) and lo and behold, better performance than the 9000. So, as one might expect, the higher number gives better performance.
The 9 at the start can be seen as whatever you want, if you want to assume it means DX9, then lets say the Geforce 4's are DX4 compliant, shall we? The 4800 issue is much worse and is a blatant marketing ploy by nVidia, especially as the name the worse of the two (the Ti 4400 with AGP 8x) the SE, normally letters mean it's the better card, in this case it's not.
The LE on the Radeon 8500's could stand for Light edition, which would suggest the worse performance it has, normally SE stands for special edition, like they needed to be snapped up because they're limited and "special" cards.
I much prefer ATi's marketing in terms of how the user might see things, much easier for the average consumer, bigger number = better performance, unlike all the nVidia rubbish.

That said, I do own a normal Geforce 4 Ti 4400, and I like what it can do, so don't call me an ATi fanboy. I've bought 2 graphics cards, both were nVidia.

 

[DX2Player]

Originally posted by: MichaelD
Well, uneducated or ignorant, I am not. I full well know that 8X AGP is pretty much just theoretcial these days...we still haven't maxxed-out the 4X AGP bus! As has been said; I'd never actually buy anything w/o researching it first.

Just b/c I admitted (I'm honest, if anything) that I'd never heard of a GF4 4800 doesn't mean I'm going to cut off my left nut to get the money to go buy one! While it's true I had no idea it's basically a rodded 4400, that's why I ASKED.

Anyway, I'm fairly happy w/my 4200. It gives good framerates at the resolutions that I like...but I want to be able to do AA at the resolutions that I like too. Unfortunately, my Palit 4200 doesn't OC for crap...unlike most "good"4200's, so, I've not been able to enjoy the overclocking that most 4200 owners have.

I'm waiting for new stuff from ATI and NVidia...so the prices on the 4600s' drop.

Why would you buy a 4600 when a 9500 Pro would own it at high res and all the stuff enabled