Rumor: Price Cuts on GTX660Ti series coming next week

[blackened23]

Let's all take a deep breath and cool off a bit? 😱

 

[Grooveriding]

Thread creates on 660ti getting prices slashed. Again another one turns into AMD vs Nvidia and crybaby pee pants commences.

 

[Keysplayr]

Thread creates on 660ti getting prices slashed. Again another one turns into AMD vs Nvidia and crybaby pee pants commences.

And you think this helps, apparently.

 

[tviceman]

You need to also consider average power consumption... 660TI needs about 50% more power than a stock 7850, to deliver 30% more performance.

It's a fast but expensive card with dubious power-efficiency (touted so hard by nVIDIA this year). Just look at this chart below, average power is really what matters.

After looking over several different site's reviews and power draws for various cards, I think by far the best way to measure power draw is by measuring the entire system. If card X draws 20 less watts of power than card Y, but card X in turn forces the rest of the system to draw 18 more watts than if the system had card Y, then the for all intents and purposes card X is NOT more efficient. The total power being sucked out of the outlet, that which shows up on the electric bill, is what counts. No one plays a computer game with the CPU, PSU, hard drive, and ram turned off.

 

[futurefields]

the 192-bit bus was a terrible idea.

they should have gone 256 and with a lower clock, but i suspect nvidia doesn't like its customers overclocking their cards and getting 670 like performance out of them.

 

[Lonyo]

the 192-bit bus was a terrible idea.

they should have gone 256 and with a lower clock, but i suspect nvidia doesn't like its customers overclocking their cards and getting 670 like performance out of them.

There's also the whole point of using cut down cards, which relates to using products which have defects, but shutting off the defective parts.
If they have a lot of yield issues due to the memory controllers, then cutting it down by one results in more useful dies than if they just used 256-bit and cut down the number of cores.

 

[futurefields]

they are scrambling to keep up and it's obvious

 

[tviceman]

the 192-bit bus was a terrible idea.

they should have gone 256 and with a lower clock, but i suspect nvidia doesn't like its customers overclocking their cards and getting 670 like performance out of them.

I too would have liked to have seen them cut out another SMX instead of cutting out a memory controller, but like Lonyo said, a part of how they create their products from defective units has to do with what kinds of yields and where the most defects are occurring.

 

[futurefields]

a part of how they create their products from defective units has to do with what kinds of yields and where the most defects are occurring.

something a company in desperation mode does

 

[Ferzerp]

something a company in desperation mode does

Just stop. You have no clue what you're talking about. Intel, AMD, Nvidia, are all "in desperation mode"? This is completely a standard practice in the market. Why throw something out when you can sell it as a lower end part?

 

[blackened23]

something a company in desperation mode does

I guess every silicon business on the planet is in desperation mode then?

 

[tviceman]

something a company in desperation mode does

They've been desperate and on the verge of complete incompetence and bankruptcy for a long, long, long time then.

GT200 - GTX280, GTX260 216, GTX260
GT200B - GTX295, GTX285, GTX275, GTX260
GF110 - GTX590, GTX580, GTX570, GTX560ti 448, GTX560ti OEM
GF114 - GTX560ti, GTX560, GTX560, GTX555 OEM

http://www.zdnet.com/nvidias-q2-results-strong-courtesy-of-tegra-sales-7000002413/

Gross margins: 51.8%

DESPERATION! lol.

 

[MrK6]

I guess every silicon business on the planet is in desperation mode then?

lol :thumbsup:

 

[RussianSensation]

nVidia was not late. They needed time to produce enough chips - thx to AMD. Their overpriced strategy was one side of the success of Kepler.

You just stated that "extra time was needed" to defend the fact that NV wasn't late? Is that an oxymoron?

HD7750/7770 sell for high prices, uncontested for this entire generation by NV. You blame AMD only.
HD7850/7870 sell for high prices, uncontested for 7 months of this generation until 660/660Ti launch(ed). You blame AMD only.

Whose fault? AMD alone!! NV had nothing to do with it.......

HD7950 = Jan 31st @ $449 - NV has no competing card for 3 months until 670 launched.
AMD drops prices (what you do in a first mover advantage strategy)
HD7950 goes uncontested until GTX660Ti launches
AMD drops prices

^ You say AMD ripped off us, they are desperate, always needing to drop prices to compete.
^ I say, AMD knew NV was late, raised prices, knew early adopters will pay the premium, and will drop prices only when they have to. (Most of us called this at 7950/7970 launching, saying way ahead that AMD will drop prices later).

It was really a great strategy to "go premium". :sneaky:

It's not to go premium. It's to go back to normal ATI prices. AMD graphics are not Walmart. AMD tried selling premium product at Walmart prices, NV loyalists didn't bite, for 3 generations in a row. :hmm:

Maybe the change was needed? Did this ever occur to you? NV ended with 62-63% discrete GPU market share after Fermi. You don't do the same thing over and over if it gives you the same results. You know like how you bought HD5850/5870 when they launched at $269/369 6 months before Fermi and you bought one of those cards, you did right? That really worked! (sarcasm)

The alternative was to try for a 4th generation in a row to give away cards for free to people like you who wouldn't buy an AMD card if it was $200 and 200% faster. Might as well close doors trying to get NV loyalists to switch. You seem to have a massive problem with AMD cards being priced at $450-500 but HD7970 GE > GTX680. :sneaky: Should AMD be selling this for $299?

What about when ATI smacked GeForce 4 with 9700Pro and then FX5800U with 9800Pro and then had the fastest single-GPU with X800XT/X850XT PE, and then X1900XTX/1950XTX, this ATI premium strategy was also a problem according to you?

Funny that you think AMD should still be selling you cards at discounts when NV was selling GTX580 for $430-450 when 7950 launch and you are placing no blame on them either. Should AMD keep giving you cards that are just as fast for $299/$369 if it means eventual bankruptcy?

Also, great logic defending NV "not being late" when all they had to do was launch GK110 and deliver GTX650/660/660Ti 6 months ago and force AMD to compete on price again. They didn't. Using TSMC excuses changes nothing that GTX660Ti launched August 16th (or 6 months after HD7950), while GTX660/650 will launch Sept 13th or 7 months after 7850/7870. Those are the facts = it's called being late and AMD took full advantage of NV's strategy due to lack of competitive pricing pressure.

NV did the same with 8800GTX @ $600, GTX280 @ $650, GTX260 @ $400, where where you then complaining? :biggrin:

I hear only NV is allowed to sell videocards for $500. It's pretty hilarious to read that NV was able to sell a 294mm^2 die chip for $500 and they aren't ripping you off since they purposely held back GK110? But when AMD prices their cards high because NV supposedly purposely held off GK110 they are ripping you off? So in your mind HD7970 GE should be $369 and GTX680 $499?

Team Green's thoughts:

- AMD competes on price/performance --> AMD is desperate. They have to compete on price with 4800/5800/6900 series because NV makes the BEST cardS!! NV loyalists don't buy 30-40% discounted AMD cards even though they offer better price/performance for 3 generations in a row overall.

- AMD raises prices to ATI levels, beats NV badly to market, gives faster performance than 680 with driver updates --> OMG! AMD is ripping us off. Premium strategy for Walmart product. Team Green claims GK110 was purposely held off (maybe) but then go out and buy a $500 mid-range Kepler card anyway (even though it's really just a GTX560Ti replacement).

If you are going to say we are being ripped off, at least admit that both AMD and NV raised prices. The way NV did it is sneaky - they are selling you a 294mm^2 compute neutered chip for $500.

Ok, new 2013 AMD strategy is rumoured. HD8970 series will be $99. Launches April 1, 2013.

Team Green's response:

- But there is no PhysX, no CUDA, no TXAA, goes out buys a $500 GTX780. AMD is bankrupt. 2014, GTX880 launches at $999.

Even I didn't like AMD raising prices and I was very vocal at launch, but then I thought about it over time and if this new strategy means AMD surviving, I'd rather have $500 AMD cards than $1000 NV cards from 1 GPU maker when there AMD has no $ left.

 

[ZimZum]

Is this still about price cuts lol?

Welcome to the Video card forum.

 

[sze5003]

Yeh its always a battle somewhere.

 

[RussianSensation]

Instead of consumers welcoming price drops on 660Ti, the thread turned ugly because people started defending $299 price level when it was obvious the card was a very poor offering compared to AMD's or even NV's own line-up. The $300 price for a 660Ti is in 'no man's land'. If you want a good gaming card without MSAA, you just buy the 7870. If you want a good enthusiast card, you buy the 7950. If you want an NV card and want to use MSAA, you buy the 670. Also, I would even add that at this point using 670's price of $400 to defend $300 for 660Ti is questionable. $399 price for a 670 itself is now overpriced. Who in the world is going to buy a Gigabyte Windforce 3x 670 for $400 when an 1100mhz 7970 Windforce 3x is $450 and after-market 7950s are going for $310-330? GTX670's price should be lower than $400 given the current standing, probably more like $369-379.

You can now buy a GTX670 on Newegg for as low as $360, but a 660Ti with the same crappy cooler is $300. You shouldn't have a linear price performance between a mid-range card and a high-end card and that's exactly what we are seeing here, which means 660Ti needs a price drop.

 

[balane]

I'll never figure out why some of you swear allegiance to a corporation that doesn't give two shits whether you live or die.

 

[Ferzerp]

Instead of consumers welcoming price drops on 660Ti, the thread turned ugly because people started defending $299 price level when it was obvious the card was a very poor offering compared to AMD's or even NV's own line-up. The $300 price is in 'no man's land'. If you want a good gaming card without MSAA, you just buy the 7870. If you want a good enthusiast card, you buy the 7950. If you want an NV card and want to use MSAA, you buy the 670. Also, at this point even using 670's price of $400 to defend $300 for 660Ti is questionable. $399 for a 670 in itself is overpriced.

That's a bit revisionist. Looks to me like the "AMD GOOD ALL ELSE BAD" crowd did the usual stirring.

What do you really expect from someone who uses an nvidia troll face avatar though. It's obvious the goal. (Though apparently the guy has now changed it. Maybe trying to hide more?)

 

[Protomize]

I'll never figure out why some of you swear allegiance to a corporation that doesn't give two shits whether you live or die.

+1

 

[RussianSensation]

That's a bit revisionist. Looks to me like the "AMD GOOD ALL ELSE BAD" crowd did the usual stirring.

It's not revisionist. If you read the concerns AIBs are having is that after-market 660Ti cards are being priced very close to the 670 worldwide. Are you implying AIBs are making this stuff up?

Also, HD7870 delivering far superior price/performance and HD7950 delivering far superior OC performance, and GTX670 delivering far superior MSAA performance are all facts, not "AMD good all else" comment you just posted. If you can't see the obvious, I don't know what to tell you.

You can go out and buy an HD7870 for $225.
http://slickdeals.net/f/5145404-Asu...49-AC-AR-20-free-Sleeping-Dogs-game-SuperBiiz

Even on Newegg 7870 is $240-250 for most cards. Most 660Tis are $300-310 on Newegg. So you are paying 25% higher price for 9-10% more performance.

Now that means 7950 is equally overpriced to the 7870 and that is true. But for enthusiasts 7950 has 25-40% overclocking room = GTX670 OC/680/7970 GE in overall gaming performance. Any PC component that can be overclocked to come close to a high-end part is automatically an enthusiast PC part (E6400, Q6600, i5 2500K fall in this category for CPUs for example).

GTX660Ti is overpriced @ $299 in the key aspects that matter - enthusiast performance (i.e., MSAA, overclocked) and in price/performance. Those are the facts, not fanboism. What we get out of it is cheaper 660Ti prices, which is good for the consumers!!!

What do you really expect from someone who uses an nvidia troll face avatar though. It's obvious the goal. (Though apparently the guy has now changed it. Maybe trying to hide more?)

Did you ask AnandThenMan if he owns an NV/AMD videocard or you just assumed he is biased because it fits within your context?

It seems to me the biased people here are the ones desperately defending price drops on GPUs (unless they come from AMD which makes them desperate).

 

[AnandThenMan]

What do you really expect from someone who uses an nvidia troll face avatar though. It's obvious the goal. (Though apparently the guy has now changed it. Maybe trying to hide more?)

I could not change my avatar for the longest time, it finally worked. Thanks for the conspiracy angle though, good stuff. :hmm:

So I've been hearing the 12th is the day.

 

[Ferzerp]

It's not revisionist. If you read the concerns AIBs are having is that after-market 660Ti cards are being priced very close to the 670 worldwide. Are you implying AIBs are making this stuff up?

Also, HD7870 delivering far superior price/performance and HD7950 delivering far superior OC performance, and GTX670 delivering far superior MSAA performance are all facts, not "AMD good all else" comment you just posted. If you can't see the obvious, I don't know what to tell you.

You can go out and buy an HD7870 for $225.
http://slickdeals.net/f/5145404-Asu...49-AC-AR-20-free-Sleeping-Dogs-game-SuperBiiz

Even on Newegg 7870 is $240-250 for most cards. Most 660Tis are $300-310 on Newegg. So you are paying 25% higher price for 9-10% more performance.

Now that means 7950 is equally overpriced to the 7870 and that is true. But for enthusiasts 7950 has 25-40% overclocking room = GTX670 OC/680/7970 GE. Any PC component that can be overclocked to come close to a high-end part automatically gets a pass (E6400, Q6600, i5 2500K fall in this category for CPUs).

GTX660Ti is overpriced @ $299 in the key aspects that matter - enthusiast performance (i.e., MSAA, overclocked) and in price/performance. Those are the facts, not fanboism. What we get out of it is cheaper 660Ti prices, which is good for the consumers!!!

I'm specifically talking about the trolling in this thread. I think you know that though, but are changing the subject.

 

[sze5003]

I think people should just buy what they want at the price they are willing to pay. I never saw a problem with an alternative that can be similar value but less money.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'm specifically talking about the trolling in this thread. I think you know that though, but are changing the subject.

Page 1 seems to be a peaceful discussion of prices and price/performance comparisons that seem to support that price drops are justified.

Page 2 and on discussed how AMD already tried the price/performance strategy and didn't work. Members have also linked data to support that AMD has been gaining market share vs. NV despite higher prices on AMD's cards (back to ATI historical levels). AMD gaining discrete GPU market share on the desktop has already been shown to be true:
http://www.techpowerup.com/171198/G...nally-Down-from-Last-Quarter-Reports-JPR.html

The trolling that started later dealt with the idea that AMD raised prices unfairly on the market and NV didn't rip off consumers. These points were all addressed and it's pretty obvious that both NV and AMD equally 'ripped off' consumers this generation. The difference is NV did it in a sneaky way - selling you a smaller die for $500 and a PCB/stock cooler that's lucky enough for pass for a $250 GTX560Ti, while AMD raised prices to ATI historical levels to match NV and threw their price/performance strategy away since it wasn't working and since NV never showed up for 6-8 months of this generation in the $0-349 price segment and in the $400-500 segment, they weren't faster.

Both companies effectively raised prices this generation. A person can't reasonably argue that only HD7970 is overpriced because "all NV had to do is compete with a mid-range Kepler, and purposely held back G110", yet then NV priced GK104 at $500 because it's AMD's fault. If people are going to argue that AMD ripped us off, so did NV. If people are going to argue that AMD's prices are too high (even if we agree), there is only 1 party to blame: NV, since they blew the performance lead and had no 28nm desktop chips for sale worth buying < $399 for 6 months. Who is to blame for this? Not AMD since AMD doesn't produce GeForce products. Both AMD and NV then got what they wanted - our wallets!

Also, what both AMD and NV accomplished this generation is that they convinced gamers the new mid-range is not $199-229 but $299-349 (7850/7870/660Ti). So really it's impossible to argue that only AMD raised prices.