They won the war of perception... When did 260+$ for a minimal card became cheap?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Dacalo

Diamond Member
Mar 31, 2000
8,780
3
76
These arguments are pointless. If you are willing to spend the money right now, fine. Enjoy it while others wait.

If you are willing wait, good for you too! You will save some bucks while getting the most out of your current video card.

But yeah, in general, the video card prices have gone up considerably. My first 3d card was Voodoo2 that I bought for $200 just to play FFVII on PC. However, the consumers AMD/nVidia target are the gamers who places premium in the visuals. Game developers meanwhile want to standout amongst all other developers by providing exceptionally good looking games. Put those together and you have super short cycles (8800 series being an exception this past year) and video card = the part of PC to depreciate the quickest/become obsolete.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Bah, I think I paid $400 for an X800 Pro when it was released. I think the 6800 GT was roughly the same price.

Don't like it, don't buy it.
 

yuppiejr

Golden Member
Jul 31, 2002
1,318
0
0
At it's suggested price of $200, the GT is an absolute steal in terms of it's price/performance ratio. The inflated early adopter prices are just that, once production of these cards ramps up and supply meets or exceeds demand the prices will settle into the $180-$220 range permanently either some time around or shortly after the holidays. Thank god Nvidia finally threw down the gauntlet and offered a decently performing DX10 card in the upper midrange price point.


 

JBT

Lifer
Nov 28, 2001
12,095
1
81
Ill say the 8800GT is a mid range part when it has something that creams it in performance, currently there isn't anything nor is there a gaurentee of one. We don't know how well the next gen cards will perform and at what price. We'll have to wait and see.

From everything I have read the ATI card is going to be a touch slower. I got my eVGA SC for $251 shipped with Quake Wars as well. what if the price drops by 50 in two weeks? Well it may not have been the smartest idea in the world but atleast I got a good card for $90 bucks after selling my 2 year old x1900XT.
 

njdevilsfan87

Platinum Member
Apr 19, 2007
2,327
249
106
I like how someone mentioned gaming resolutions these days, and the lack of them back when video card prices were lower.

1024 = $100-$150
1280 = $150-$250
1680 = $250-$350
1920 = $350-$500
2560 = $500+

I'll take the 8800GT which will give me give me all the performance I need at 1680x1050. It's high end from my point of view. Right now my 7900GT at 665/900 (massive overclock) gets 20-25 frames a second at medium settings. The fact that it can play medium settings at this overclock to me means it's still barely hanging on as a 'mid-range' card.

I think classifying video cards is very subjective these days. A person who games at 1280 and another who does at 1920 will have very different views on the same card.

Edit: And to say the 8800GT is a 'minimal card' is a big exaggeration.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Look at it this way, LAST WEEK if you wanted the performance of a GTX, you had to spend around $500. This week you can get it for around $250. I wouldn't call it cheap, but for a midrange card, this is exceptional.
 

JBT

Lifer
Nov 28, 2001
12,095
1
81
I think alot of people are basing all these cards performance on Crysis. There are SOOO many more games out there than this. Sure I will get it and play the hell out of it but there are other great games out there tha I plan on playing quite a bit that are much more suited to spitting good frames out with the GT. ...
 

GZDynastar

Member
Jan 29, 2003
117
0
0
I agree with OP.

Look at the 4 series. the 4400 was vanilla, the 4600 was "ultra" and the 4200 was the low/midrange. But price per performance the 4200 was also a "steal", but at only $120-150.

Looking at prices now... the high end is ridiculously priced at 500-600, the "vanilla's" are $300+ and the low end has #$%^ performance at a $100 price.

I'm still on an AGP 6800GT because I have been waiting for another "4200" to come out in the 8 series. The GT is it, but for $100 MORE... and even then we all think its a steal because we are tired of looking at $300-500 video cards....

and you cant blame it on inflation, look at CPU's/RAM/HD's.. they have the same price per performance as 2002-2003.

 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
To make it clear... I am gonna buy a GT... and I do realize its the best bang for the buck...

My whole point is that due to the way they have been slowly creeping up prices what was insane expensive a couple of years ago is not the norm... and the insane expensive is much much more expensive then that...
1000 CPU?
400+ Motherboard?
2 or more video cards each can cost 700$ for a top part? the max prices asked have increased dramatically and people's perceptions of what constitutes "expensive" drastically changed.
With those super expensive parts something that costs close to 300$ for almost the same performance APPEARS to be a great deal... you are getting 95% of the performance of 700$ for less then half the price... but you are still paying 300$ for something that isn't going to see all that much use before becoming obsolete.

This is all a perception issue... i know a guy who sells cellphones like nobody's business. He has a stall in a store and it practically made him rich... what is his secret? he marks up all the items on his stall above what he is supposed to sell them... then he offers people a great discount "just for them"... everyone eats it up and buys his cell phones at the "discounted" rate (which he is legally limited to anyways). He signs someone on a contract + phone deal every couple of minutes...

Or... anyone remembers how the coke sales skyrocketed after they brought back coke classic? they created the damand by selling inferior drink, and making people feel the need and lack of the quality they are used to... then brought it back and sold amazing amounts...
 

nwrigley

Senior member
Jun 19, 2005
260
0
76
Originally posted by: lil buttercup


please tell me what videocards you have purchased.


-swtethan

I bought a 9600 Pro for my first build for about $150 when it was midrange performance.

Then a 6600GT for less than $150 for a system I built for a friend.

7600GT was around $150, but I never bought one.

All of these cards provided midrange performance around the $150 price point around the time they came out. In general they all performed slightly higher than the previous generation's best part. Then along came the 8600GTS at the same $150 price point, but it didn't come close to outperforming the previous generation.

I'm currently running a X1950 Pro that I bought in August for $140 upfront, $100 after rebate. I also replaced the 9600 Pro in my aging AGP system over a year ago with a All-in-Wonder X800 XT for less than $100 (one of the best deals I've ever gotten - card still sells for that much on Ebay).
 

dreddfunk

Senior member
Jun 30, 2005
358
0
0
@taltamir - you've hit on the nature of a free market: value is always relative, defined by market conditions.

The 8800GT is a fantastic value, relative to the market as it exits.

We could certainly posit that a much more competitive market could have existed right now, which would have altered the 8800GT's actual value.

It isn't so much *perceived* versus *actual* value; it's that the *actual* value of a part is always relative.

Cheers.
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91
Originally posted by: Azn
Originally posted by: lil buttercup
Originally posted by: Azn
Originally posted by: lil buttercup
Originally posted by: Azn
Definitely. I'm not buying these until they are sub $200. People are crazy paying almost $300 for a midrange card.

you shoulda seen 4+ years ago when a 5600ultra cost $260


its always been this way.



-swtethan on fiance's account

Didn't buy a 5600ultra. Those were crap. I had a 9700pro. I think I paid less than $150 at the time. By that time though 9800pro were months into production.

There are deals always to be had.

Last year was 1950pro/7900gs. Year before it was 850xt or 7600gt. These were sub-$150 cards. They perform well and did exactly what the top end tier video cards did at mid-resolutions.

Now I look at these 8800gt and people paying $300 for them for some OC versions of the card. In 2 weeks they will depreciate by $50 when AMD has their part out. Most likely depreciate more by Christmas.

ROFL 850XT a sub $150 card? I PAID $300 for a x800xl, when it cam eout, thank you.

That's your fault. You don't buy it when they are first released. You buy them when 7800gt/gtx is out.

No, "you" buy them when "you" want to buy them. And so will the rest of us. Speak for yourself and yourself only. And if the OP is done barnstorming the video forum with numerous threads, we can all get on talking about the tech.
 

speckedhoncho

Member
Aug 3, 2007
156
0
0
Originally posted by: GZDynastar
I agree with OP.

Look at the 4 series. the 4400 was vanilla, the 4600 was "ultra" and the 4200 was the low/midrange. But price per performance the 4200 was also a "steal", but at only $120-150.

Looking at prices now... the high end is ridiculously priced at 500-600, the "vanilla's" are $300+ and the low end has #$%^ performance at a $100 price.

I'm still on an AGP 6800GT because I have been waiting for another "4200" to come out in the 8 series. The GT is it, but for $100 MORE... and even then we all think its a steal because we are tired of looking at $300-500 video cards....

and you cant blame it on inflation, look at CPU's/RAM/HD's.. they have the same price per performance as 2002-2003.

All the components' price/performance keep climbing as the prices' stay relative to the component's market while performance obviously climbs - look at the old pentium days when it was just released, the high-end CPU's went for a grand. And I remember the high-end Voodoo going for $600.

What's astounding is that the 8800GT is close enough to the GTX to warrant somebody skipping it if they are willing to upgrade earlier, and it costs half its price (at least to factory OC'ed GTX's).
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Originally posted by: dreddfunk
@taltamir - you've hit on the nature of a free market: value is always relative, defined by market conditions.

The 8800GT is a fantastic value, relative to the market as it exits.

We could certainly posit that a much more competitive market could have existed right now, which would have altered the 8800GT's actual value.

It isn't so much *perceived* versus *actual* value; it's that the *actual* value of a part is always relative.

Cheers.

indeed, the first rule of economics is that something is worth as much as people are willing to pay for it.

But that is just mincing words.

The battle which they one is one of perception. They altered the public perception to the point where people are just willing to pay so much more then they were before... because it became meainstream and standard... subtly affecting your customers in such a manner is pure genious (or pure luck... but i am not betting on it)
 

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
They won the war of perception... When did 260+$ for a minimal card became cheap?

I think it's just your perception is way off. The GT is hardly a minimal card.
 

AzN

Banned
Nov 26, 2001
4,112
2
0
Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Originally posted by: Azn
Originally posted by: lil buttercup
Originally posted by: Azn
Originally posted by: lil buttercup
Originally posted by: Azn
Definitely. I'm not buying these until they are sub $200. People are crazy paying almost $300 for a midrange card.

you shoulda seen 4+ years ago when a 5600ultra cost $260


its always been this way.



-swtethan on fiance's account

Didn't buy a 5600ultra. Those were crap. I had a 9700pro. I think I paid less than $150 at the time. By that time though 9800pro were months into production.

There are deals always to be had.

Last year was 1950pro/7900gs. Year before it was 850xt or 7600gt. These were sub-$150 cards. They perform well and did exactly what the top end tier video cards did at mid-resolutions.

Now I look at these 8800gt and people paying $300 for them for some OC versions of the card. In 2 weeks they will depreciate by $50 when AMD has their part out. Most likely depreciate more by Christmas.

ROFL 850XT a sub $150 card? I PAID $300 for a x800xl, when it cam eout, thank you.

That's your fault. You don't buy it when they are first released. You buy them when 7800gt/gtx is out.

No, "you" buy them when "you" want to buy them. And so will the rest of us. Speak for yourself and yourself only. And if the OP is done barnstorming the video forum with numerous threads, we can all get on talking about the tech.

It was a figure of speech as in how you save money not you or I.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Originally posted by: Wreckage
They won the war of perception... When did 260+$ for a minimal card became cheap?

I think it's just your perception is way off. The GT is hardly a minimal card.

If you want to play DX9 mode only then any cheap card is good...
IF you want to actually get DX10 EFFECTS (not just technicaly running in DX10 mode) then you need a DX10 card, DX10 game, and running it at very high settings... the handful of such games only run at such settings where you get DX10 effects on a GTS, GT, GTX, Ultra (and that one AMD card thats worse then the GTS...). So the GT is the CHEAPEST card you get to get playable DX10 effects, over a year after DX10 came about...

This is why it is a minimal card, cards like the 8600 and below aren't minimal, they are simply not capable of processing DX10 in above 10FPS on anything... they are DX9 cards with a DX10 capability on paper.
 

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
Originally posted by: taltamir
then you need a DX10 card, DX10 game, and running it at very high settings... the handful of such games only run at such settings where you get DX10 effects.....

It's a stretch to call DX10 and High Settings "minimal".

Minimal is DX9 and Medium settings at best.


 

MrUniq

Senior member
Mar 26, 2006
307
0
0
Either that or the buying power has increased amoung a wider majority of computer gamers. But to answer an earlier question..the top of the line only held it's value b/c Nvidia deviated from their old 6 month cycle...plus ATI was fubar for half of that time. I have paid $300 once..and that was for a 9800pro ...which served me a good 2 1/2 years. But for those who want performance $400+ is obviously the new hi-end mark. But I believe Nvidia knew where DX10 performance will head and by next year 8800GT like cards will be squarely midrange....or even lower...I think that is why it is set to sell below $200 after this holiday. It won't stack up to DX10 Q4 2008 or 2009 games (Alan Wake?).

Originally posted by: taltamir
Originally posted by: dreddfunk
@taltamir - you've hit on the nature of a free market: value is always relative, defined by market conditions.

The 8800GT is a fantastic value, relative to the market as it exits.

We could certainly posit that a much more competitive market could have existed right now, which would have altered the 8800GT's actual value.

It isn't so much *perceived* versus *actual* value; it's that the *actual* value of a part is always relative.

Cheers.

indeed, the first rule of economics is that something is worth as much as people are willing to pay for it.

But that is just mincing words.

The battle which they one is one of perception. They altered the public perception to the point where people are just willing to pay so much more then they were before... because it became meainstream and standard... subtly affecting your customers in such a manner is pure genious (or pure luck... but i am not betting on it)

 

Spike

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2001
6,770
1
81
I think your right that the prices have been increasing at a very fast rate but I see it from a different angle. Overall PC prices have been dropping like a stone for years so if you are a part maker and want to keep, or even increase, your margins this is the one way to do it. I don't have any statements from pc or part makers to back this up, it's just my take on the situation.

For example OD, Fry's, and Circuit City have been running a deal for a few weeks (deal changes stores each week) for a compaq laptop with a X2 AMD, 1GB, a 100+GB HDD, DVD burner, 15.4 wide, Vista home premium for $450 after either MIR or IR, thats crazy. If you look back to the "good old days" of the $200 high end video card what was the price of a starter laptop then? What about a desktop? You can get dell desktops with LCD monitors for less than $350 almost every week.

Now I do realize one of the flaws in this argument is that as technology progress it becomes cheaper to make the same, or a faster, part. However, I don't believe the decrease in manufacturing cost has followed the huge decrease in overall system cost so somewhere there has to be a difference. A huge part of the increase in PC makers profits increase had to be due to the increase in overall volume sold but I am willing to bet their profit per machine is way down from years ago. Now they had demands on the parts makers to produce cheap components for their cheap machines.

Anyway, this is obviously all just speculation but it's a theory I had that I have never bothered to confirm.

That being said I am planning to receive either the 8800GT or the GTS refresh for Christmas this year, whichever model I happen to leave on a slip of paper for my wife to find... ;)




 

Sureshot324

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2003
3,370
0
71
I don't see why people have a problem with high end video cards being $500 plus. If you you want to spend ~$150 for a video card, then do it. It's not like $150 video cards would be any faster if $500+ cards didn't exist. Competition between AMD and Nvidia is too fierce for that. They're going to make the best card they possible can at each price range.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Originally posted by: taltamir
then you need a DX10 card, DX10 game, and running it at very high settings... the handful of such games only run at such settings where you get DX10 effects.....

It's a stretch to call DX10 and High Settings "minimal".

Minimal is DX9 and Medium settings at best.

If you are running it in "Medium" settings then none of the DX10 features are on. they are all disabled and you are running in DX9... which you would get a better framerate on a last gen card then an 8600 or lower. running high settings isn't minimal, but if you are not on high then you are running DX9. (very high they call it on most games)...
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Originally posted by: DarthV
I guess it comes down to what display you are using. If you have a 17" CRT and play all games at 1024x768, then yes the 8800GT would be overkill and a cheaper solution would be your best bet. Once you hit 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 (20-22" LCD widescreen), then you'd probably want to pair up that $200-$250 display with an equal cost video card to get the most out of your viewing experience.

Before the 8800GT, the modern 'midrange' performance card was the $350 GTS. Dropping $100 and getting better performance seems like a good deal for those that are driving higher resolution displays.

And there's nothing to stop you from buying a 8600 and dropping the details, if that's your definition of midrange.
the "upper-midrange" or maybe "lower upper range" for the past 8 mos has been the 8800gts 320 for $260+. the true "midrange" has been the x1950xt for $175-200. both of those cards are complete crap compared to the 8800gt 512. Frankly, I don't see how AMD is going to produce something that will hang with this monster for a competitive price. The only thing keeping me on the hook is the rumor that nvidia bumped up their clocks at the last minute. They would only do that to either steal back the performance crown at the last minute or to try to keep up with 3870. If it's B then the 3870 could be the gtx killer that we've all been waiting for.

 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Originally posted by: Azn
Originally posted by: MichaelD
Originally posted by: munky
I don't care if the 8800gt is classified as midrange or performance or enthusiast, based on how it performs, at $250 it's almost a steal. If it wasn't for the upcoming cards and my 1920x1200 monitor and Crysis, I would have already picked 1 or 2 of these up by now.

I was going to say this, but once again, Munky said it before me.

While the OP is most definitely entitled to his opinion, fact of the matter is as Munky stated.

Now, my own two cents.

$600 for an 8800GTX Ultra is just stupid (unless you've got fat pockets and don't care).
$500 for an 8800GTX is pretty stupid too.
$300 for 90% of the performance of the above while using 1/3rd less wattage? That's a damn smart deal in my book. :thumbsup:

The "midrange" in the 8800GT being a "midrange part" is in the PERFORMANCE, not the price. Most assuredly, NVidia's new high-end card will make the 8800GTX Ultra look like onboard video. From 1994. :p

The 8800GT slots in nicely b/t the 8600-series cards (crushes them completely, actually) and the 8800GTX and soon to be released new Big Daddy Card.

You have to look at what you're getting for your $270 (what I paid for my EVGA 8800GT SC): 90-95% of the performance of the current $500+ card.

If my MB was SLI capable, I'd have bought two.

8800gt is definitely a good buy but not right now especially with inflated prices and still no competition from AMD. That will most likely by next card anyways. Personally I can wait. In couple of months these will drop to sub $200 anyways. That's when I'll make my move.
that's a very smart attitude. if nothing else you'll be able to wait 2 wks and see how amd stacks up. if they're competitive then it will take a lot of the price pressure off 8800gt and both cards should end up being very reasonable. let's face it, too, nvidia didn't kill the gtx for 1/2 the price because they wanted to, they did it b/c amd has finally come out with a decent card. we'll find out how decent it is in 2 wks.

 

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,271
323
126
Definitely the mid-range card has become a more expensive product. I still remember when I picked up my 7800GT OC 2 years ago for $230...good times.