• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

So G70 or R5xxx to crush current cards???

P

paadness

Member

Well, its obvious now after alot of readings on the internet that the upcoming cards are likely to really fast han the current beasts.

What i want to knwo is whether the upcoming G70 will beat SLI.

I would love ATI to lauch a single core design to kill the current SLI market at $ 500.

But its really sad sometimes, i bought a new card for $ 500 6 months earlier only knowing that its gona be rubbish infront of the new cards within an year.

what do u guys think, will you sell ur current card for the new beasts or keep them for as long as they are fast.

 
If the new cards didn't "crush" the current ones, then there wouldn't be much of a point in releasing them (well, except to try to generate income for the companies....)

No one knows whether the G70 or R520 will beat SLI (by which I assume you mean specifically a 6800U SLI setup)...hopefully we will know within a month though. 😛

That's how the market goes...you spend hundreds of dollars on a high-end card only for it to be just "adequate" the following year. I personally am going to sell my 6800GT to a friend and upgrade when the new cards come out though...I have a relatively high-resolution monitor, so every bit of graphics horsepower is welcome. 😉
 
Its also interesting to not how much NVIDIA or ATI earns from thier high end cards.

An FX 5750 for instance can be manufactured for like $ 100, where NVIDIA sells its chip for $ 50-60.

When it was released the base price was $ 200 and so i believe min of $ 40 were going in the manufacturers pockets.

But take the example of the higher end cards.

Take X800 XT PE, does it ever make sense to spend $ 500 on it when u know that its not a big leap in design from $ 300 X800XL's.

Now whats interestng here is that the cost of an 6800U except the chip would never be more than $ 100, add $ 30 for packaging.

So whats going on, we are paying like $ 300-400 for the chip alone???

Or how much profit do the partners make on high end cards.

Its not fair, if we all would deny to buy these expensive cards every year, im sure the prices would be cut. But whose gona wait.. muwahawhhaw... G70 for $ 800... yo man ill take it 🙂
 
There will always be people who buy the latest and greatest video cards, but they do not make up the majority of the consumers - in fact Ati and Nvidia make the most money in their midrange market, because a lot more people are buying those cards. The high end cards are basically for prestige of having the fastest available video card.

I personally would not buy a high end card - I can buy it, but it's price doesn't justify the product. The only way it can be worth the money is if you have an earlier high end card, like a 6800u, and sell it when the G70 is available. That way you make a good part of the money back on the 6800u, and the net cost is not that high, considering you bought the g70 for msrp. Ususlly, though, the new high end cards are price gouged like crazy initially, so you'll spend a lot of money if you're an early adopter.
 
I hate when people say having the fastest card available is just for bragging rights. No... it's not. Having the fastest card available is so you can run higher resolutions with higher image quality and get the best possible performance. Some of us are willing to pay $400-500 to get the best possible gaming experience. Maybe you're satisfied paying $150-200 for a decent gaming experience. That's fine... I wouldn't be satisfied with a 6600GT. I'm starting to become unsatisfied with my overclocked 6800GT even. Double the performance of my 6800GT for the same price I paid for my 6800GT will be a VERY welcome upgrade for my computer.
 
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I hate when people say having the fastest card available is just for bragging rights. No... it's not. Having the fastest card available is so you can run higher resolutions with higher image quality and get the best possible performance. Some of us are willing to pay $400-500 to get the best possible gaming experience. Maybe you're satisfied paying $150-200 for a decent gaming experience. That's fine... I wouldn't be satisfied with a 6600GT. I'm starting to become unsatisfied with my overclocked 6800GT even. Double the performance of my 6800GT for the same price I paid for my 6800GT will be a VERY welcome upgrade for my computer.
Click to expand...

Same here. :thumbsup:

If I still had the 17" CRT I had last year, then I'd probably be perfectly happy with a mid-range card like the 6600GT. But more and more people are getting high resolution monitors (LCD's most often), and I for one do not want my gaming experience to be a slideshow at native resolution. 😛
 
Originally posted by: SynthDude2001
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I hate when people say having the fastest card available is just for bragging rights. No... it's not. Having the fastest card available is so you can run higher resolutions with higher image quality and get the best possible performance. Some of us are willing to pay $400-500 to get the best possible gaming experience. Maybe you're satisfied paying $150-200 for a decent gaming experience. That's fine... I wouldn't be satisfied with a 6600GT. I'm starting to become unsatisfied with my overclocked 6800GT even. Double the performance of my 6800GT for the same price I paid for my 6800GT will be a VERY welcome upgrade for my computer.
Click to expand...

Same here. :thumbsup:

If I still had the 17" CRT I had last year, then I'd probably be perfectly happy with a mid-range card like the 6600GT. But more and more people are getting high resolution monitors (LCD's most often), and I for one do not want my gaming experience to be a slideshow at native resolution. 😛
Click to expand...

I'm running a 17 inch CRT at 1024x768 and I'm not completely satisfied with the performance on my 6800GT with max details and 4XAA and 8XAF in HL2 and CS:S. Or Far Cry. And especially not in Vampire: The Bloodline Masquerades... but it's pretty well known that that game is poorly written... it's "low frame rate friendly" though... not a lot of fast action.
 
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I hate when people say having the fastest card available is just for bragging rights. No... it's not. Having the fastest card available is so you can run higher resolutions with higher image quality and get the best possible performance. Some of us are willing to pay $400-500 to get the best possible gaming experience. Maybe you're satisfied paying $150-200 for a decent gaming experience. That's fine... I wouldn't be satisfied with a 6600GT. I'm starting to become unsatisfied with my overclocked 6800GT even. Double the performance of my 6800GT for the same price I paid for my 6800GT will be a VERY welcome upgrade for my computer.
Click to expand...

ya....:thumbsup:
 
but it's pretty well known that that game is poorly written...
Click to expand...
It is a shame that we have to throw money at our systems in the form of hardware to make up for poor coding, especially considering the fact that the game wasn't free to begin with.
 
Originally posted by: nitromullet
but it's pretty well known that that game is poorly written...
Click to expand...
It is a shame that we have to throw money at our systems in the form of hardware to make up for poor coding, especially considering the fact that the game wasn't free to begin with.
Click to expand...

True... that's where consoles have a slight advantage. Games are written for a specific combination of hardware. They can take advantage of the strengths and avoid the weaknesses. When you have AMD and Intel processors, and nVidia and ATI GPU's... you either have to write separate code to exploit the benefits for each combination, or find a happy median... or in the case of Bloodlines... half ass it so it runs like crap on anything, lol.
 
well, generally "industry rumor" is the g70 will be 2x fast as current high end, which would mean it's faster than sli (as sli is not 2x faster than single card).

would not be that surprising, as this generation was 2x as fast as last..

the bigger unknown may be pricepoint -- i've heard figures as high as 7-$800 for the "high end", which is quite different from what we are used to (tho it could be that exp. if it's a 512mb version rather than 256), and would cause consumers to rethink price/performance sweet spot. i still feel that a single g70 will cost less than current prices for 2x 6800u's, and will outperform them. arhcitecture improvement, more pipes, etc. suppose time (or the inquirer 😉 ) will tell soon enuff...

but then of course there's sli with 2x g70 to be considered.. hmmm...
 
Interesting that you should mention the pricepoint. If it does prove that the high end cards are in the neighborhood of $700-800 (MSRP), then SLI will have not only raised the bar on performance, but on cost as well. Aside from the high cost for us, this wouldn't be a good thing overall. Eye candly in games won't increase very quickly if it requires a $700-800 card to play. Nobody, except those who bought SLI this round, will buy the high end cards, and you can't target the top 0.5% of gamers when developing a game you actually want to make money on.
 
I read somewhere that only the 7800GTX (highest end card) will be able to work in SLI, this (if true) is a horrible marketing move, how many people have a 6800U SLI as opposed to 6800GT SLI or 6600GT SLI, if (and its a big if) AMR works as intended it looks alot more appealing.
 
i'd think more memory would make more sense, if anything.. i don't recall hearing nv working on that, and std card w/ different architecture -- 24 pipes, etc. (ala ps3) would seem to make more sense.
 
nope. in theory, it would but if you think about it, the console cards are running on resources from other parts, and only are good displaying resolutions like 640 by 480 which is standard tv (or something aroudn there). modern pc cards power 1600 by 1200, so they can really be faster than the console cards. plus, for a card that good, it would cost to much. so no it probably wouldn't be faster than 2 sli ultras, since it is only powering low resolutions for specific hardware and shares with the rest of the console.
 
Originally posted by: fierydemise
I read somewhere that only the 7800GTX (highest end card) will be able to work in SLI, this (if true) is a horrible marketing move, how many people have a 6800U SLI as opposed to 6800GT SLI or 6600GT SLI, if (and its a big if) AMR works as intended it looks alot more appealing.
Click to expand...

I disagree... the way nVidia has setup SLI this generation is a bad marketing move... You said so yourself that there aren't many with dual Ultras. The reason for this is because nVidia did not make a big enough distinction between the GT and the Ultra, so it isn't worth it to spend the extra cash on the Ultra. By making only their top card SLI capable, nVidia is giving the people who want extra performance at any price an even bigger incentive to get the top cards..This gives these few people the top performance without wannabe's running their second tier SLI rigs with dual 6600's. From a marketing standpoint, it makes SLI mean something, as opposed to it just being some checkbox feature.

As far as AMR goes... we'll see...
 
Originally posted by: SuperTyphoon
nope. in theory, it would but if you think about it, the console cards are running on resources from other parts, and only are good displaying resolutions like 640 by 480 which is standard tv (or something aroudn there). modern pc cards power 1600 by 1200, so they can really be faster than the console cards. plus, for a card that good, it would cost to much. so no it probably wouldn't be faster than 2 sli ultras, since it is only powering low resolutions for specific hardware and shares with the rest of the console.
Click to expand...

Both the xbox 360 and PS3 are designed to run at 1080p, which is 1920 x 1080. The new consoles are being built with LCD/plasma HDTV's in mind.
 
Originally posted by: fierydemise
I read somewhere that only the 7800GTX (highest end card) will be able to work in SLI, this (if true) is a horrible marketing move, how many people have a 6800U SLI as opposed to 6800GT SLI or 6600GT SLI, if (and its a big if) AMR works as intended it looks alot more appealing.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. What exactly about the AMR do you find more appealing? I'm interested to know know as all I've seen are Inquirer rumors about its size, dongle, and SLI methods?
 
Originally posted by: Rollo
Originally posted by: fierydemise
I read somewhere that only the 7800GTX (highest end card) will be able to work in SLI, this (if true) is a horrible marketing move, how many people have a 6800U SLI as opposed to 6800GT SLI or 6600GT SLI, if (and its a big if) AMR works as intended it looks alot more appealing.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. What exactly about the AMR do you find more appealing? I'm interested to know know as all I've seen are Inquirer rumors about its size, dongle, and SLI methods?
Click to expand...

I was saying that if only the 7800GTX was SLI capable then AMR and its ability to take any combination of video card looks better by comparison at that aspect. I wasn't saying that AMR is going to be better then SLI I was looking at only one area, I'll reserve my final judgement about whats better until I see benchmarks.
 
Originally posted by: paadness

Well, its obvious now after alot of readings on the internet that the upcoming cards are likely to really fast han the current beasts.

What i want to knwo is whether the upcoming G70 will beat SLI.

I would love ATI to lauch a single core design to kill the current SLI market at $ 500.

But its really sad sometimes, i bought a new card for $ 500 6 months earlier only knowing that its gona be rubbish infront of the new cards within an year.

what do u guys think, will you sell ur current card for the new beasts or keep them for as long as they are fast.
Click to expand...

i don't think the next gen cards will be twice as fast as this one.

The upcoming single G70 should EQUAL today's 6800GT/u sli'd

Don't expect "that much" from r520 . . . it will NOT beat the sli'd g70 (and probably barely beat the sli'd 6800u) - that's WHY ati is going AMR.

ALWAYS buy your new cards right away - if you can get a decent price . . . or wait (like i do - i got a 9800xt just over 1 year ago for $223 . . . it STILL plays ALL the latest games at 10x7 with everything 'on' and hi')

i expect to pick up my LAST agp card - the 6800u - at the END of this year for ~$200 . . . i plan to by a next gen CONSOLE and FORGET upgrading my rig for "just games" - i will re-evaluate PC gaming again in late '07 to see if it is "worth it" then. 😉
 
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: paadness

Well, its obvious now after alot of readings on the internet that the upcoming cards are likely to really fast han the current beasts.

What i want to knwo is whether the upcoming G70 will beat SLI.

I would love ATI to lauch a single core design to kill the current SLI market at $ 500.

But its really sad sometimes, i bought a new card for $ 500 6 months earlier only knowing that its gona be rubbish infront of the new cards within an year.

what do u guys think, will you sell ur current card for the new beasts or keep them for as long as they are fast.
Click to expand...

i don't think the next gen cards will be twice as fast as this one.

The upcoming single G70 should EQUAL today's 6800GT/u sli'd

Don't expect "that much" from r520 . . . it will NOT beat the sli'd g70 (and probably barely beat the sli'd 6800u) - that's WHY ati is going AMR.
Click to expand...

well i hope its twice as fast...always better for the consumer 😉
 
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: paadness

Well, its obvious now after alot of readings on the internet that the upcoming cards are likely to really fast han the current beasts.

What i want to knwo is whether the upcoming G70 will beat SLI.

I would love ATI to lauch a single core design to kill the current SLI market at $ 500.

But its really sad sometimes, i bought a new card for $ 500 6 months earlier only knowing that its gona be rubbish infront of the new cards within an year.

what do u guys think, will you sell ur current card for the new beasts or keep them for as long as they are fast.
Click to expand...

i don't think the next gen cards will be twice as fast as this one.

The upcoming single G70 should EQUAL today's 6800GT/u sli'd

Don't expect "that much" from r520 . . . it will NOT beat the sli'd g70 (and probably barely beat the sli'd 6800u) - that's WHY ati is going AMR.

ALWAYS buy your new cards right away - if you can get a decent price . . . or wait (like i do - i got a 9800xt just over 1 year ago for $223 . . . it STILL plays ALL the latest games at 10x7 with everything 'on' and hi')

i expect to pick up my LAST agp card - the 6800u - at the END of this year for ~$200 . . . i plan to by a next gen CONSOLE and FORGET upgrading my rig for "just games" - i will re-evaluate PC gaming again in late '07 to see if it is "worth it" then. 😉
Click to expand...

If the 6800u is 2x as fast as a 9800xt, then I'd expect the r520 to be 2x as fast as the 6800u. It might not be possible with 24 pipes, but if they release a 32 pipe version, then doubling the performance of current gen cards seems within reach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top