[VC]NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, GTX 980 SLI, GTX 970, 3DMark performance

[RussianSensation]

Everyone here seems to lack common sense and critical thinking ability. It's really simple, there's nothing complex to think about.

No, in fact the opposite. Many are seeing the same thing repeated by NV over and over - when they release a new card before AMD they price it sky high to milk all the early adopter fans only later to quietly drop prices:

$649 280 -> $499 the minute $299 4870 dropped
$649 780 -> $499 once $399 290 dropped

When AMD releases a new card, it almost always forces $100-150 price drops on NV's flagship. Until then NV milks indefinitely. Why should we support this over and over again? When NV releases new cards, it forces AMD to make $50 price drops at most (7970/7950). AMD's cards drop in price quicker because of AMD itself than because NV forces them too. Look many thought a $450 7950 was way too expensive and in less than 8 months that thing dropped to $300-325 from $449-479 launch prices.

If you already have a GTX 780 or GTX 780 Ti, you can wait for GM200 or Pascal. That's your upgrade. No one is forcing you to upgrade every cycle.Also go look up the word inflation, cost of materials keep rising every year yet you think you should get a free ride?

First, this is a 680 replacement so how does one justify a 20% inflation in 2 years? Second, with your logic, if we applied such aggressive price increases every generation for the last 10 years, a GM210 would cost $1,500 USD. That's not how it works as technology is one sector of the economy where we usually see major improvements in features at similar or lower prices or similar performance for much lower prices. 680 beat 580 by 30-35% at lower power usage. The increase in price by 20% for its successor that is looking to only beat 780Ti by 10-15% would be very disappointing. If 980 beats 780Ti by 30-35%, then your argument would have been much stronger. And using 780Ti's high price is just as bad of a justification for 980's price as using 580's price to justify high prices of 7950/7970. But at least the 7970 OC absolutely destroyed the 580 OC - a real next gen leap. Is 980 OC going to beat 290X OC by 40-80%?

 

[Phynaz]

I believe you are exaggerate

I believe you don't know me.

 

[Phynaz]

nor is gaming at high framerates or resolutions with that limit you put on yourself

Meh, I'll turn down a few settings.

 

[Phynaz]

I think you dramatically misunderstand just how little 75 watts is.

Do you start sweating in an island of heat when you turn on a light bulb? Because one those puts out more heat than a second 6-pin would add.

150 watts GPU plus the rest of my system consumption stuffed under my desk is plenty hot enough for me.

I think you dramatically misunderstand that everyone doesn't have the same priorities as you.

 

[3DVagabond]

Not sure that the Titan Z/Black owners will also thumb up when seeing the graph...

A new user (3 posts) called nvgpu posts a single benchmark pulled from a benchmark suite with no test conditions, system specs, or anything and people assign value to it? SMH

 

[Phynaz]

You're not "one of those people" because you didn't slam Fermi AND buy a Hawaii based AMD card.

True, I slam them both.

 

[nvgpu]

Enthusiasts GPUs have always been in the $500-$600 range, if you don't like it, there's always the $200-$300 GPU that has always been the best bang for buck and the GTX 960 looks to be a winner there.

Again, no one is putting a gun to your head and say you must buy this enthusiast GPU.

It's not cheap to develop GPU families, just look at what you have to invest in to make them.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2011/05/16/sneak-peak-inside-nvidia-emulation-lab/

https://communities.netapp.com/comm...014/04/07/announcing-latest-epic-story-nvidia

Multi-million dollar emulators & data storage in the petabyte range, cost of electricity to run and cool them 24/7, cost of paying employees salaries, etc.

Jen-Hsun also said it costs almost a couple of billion dollars investment in R&D for the Kepler family. Think about that, 2 BILLION dollars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq202LKkeHI

Also "Perf per watt equals perf" for those that still don't get it.

 

[RussianSensation]

Enthusiasts GPUs have always been in the $500-$600 range, if you don't like it, there's always the $200-$300 GPU that has always been the best bang for buck and the GTX 960 looks to be a winner there.
.

That's the point - selling 960Ti $250-300 card for $600 as 980 because this strategy worked with the 680 (aka 660Ti). There is nothing enthusiast about a next mid-range card, other than "enthusiast" marketing. Look back at history of NV GPUs (next gen mid-range vs. Last gen flagship) to understand. Even the flagship marketed 7800 GTX 256MB that launched at $599 on Newegg, but that was shortly replaced by a real flagship 7800 GTX 512MB / 7900 GTX, beat out 6800 U by respectable amounts. 980 is looking like the worst "flagship" successor of all time from NV which still makes me think NV won't be greedy enough and price it at $499 as a 680 replacement.

 

[wand3r3r]

Enthusiasts GPUs have always been in the $500-$600 range, if you don't like it, there's always the $200-$300 GPU that has always been the best bang for buck and the GTX 960 looks to be a winner there.

Again, no one is putting a gun to your head and say you must buy this enthusiast GPU.

It's not cheap to develop GPU families, just look at what you have to invest in to make them.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2011/05/16/sneak-peak-inside-nvidia-emulation-lab/

https://communities.netapp.com/comm...014/04/07/announcing-latest-epic-story-nvidia

Multi-million dollar emulators & data storage in the petabyte range, cost of electricity to run and cool them 24/7, cost of paying employees salaries, etc.

Jen-Hsun also said it costs almost a couple of billion dollars investment in R&D for the Kepler family. Think about that, 2 BILLION dollars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq202LKkeHI

Also "Perf per watt equals perf" for those that still don't get it.

So there's the "NV" side, how about the consumers POV since this is an enthusiast forum, not exactly a marketing and shareholder convention.

 

[sontin]

nVidia is so far ahead of AMD that they have no other choice. If they sold it for $299 they would literally crush AMD.

So, stop talking about "worst 'flagship' successor of all time" when the failure lies within the competition.

So there's the "NV" side, how about the consumers POV since this is an enthusiast forum, not exactly a marketing and shareholder convention.

A r9 285 with the same performance and the same power consumption like a 7950.

 

[3DVagabond]

Enthusiasts GPUs have always been in the $500-$600 range, if you don't like it, there's always the $200-$300 GPU that has always been the best bang for buck and the GTX 960 looks to be a winner there.

This is G*104. GF104 was $200 in 2010. Four years later GM104 is threatening to triple in price. No amt. of adjustment for inflation can justify that. Especially when the rest of the industry hasn't had similar increases.

Again, no one is putting a gun to your head and say you must buy this enthusiast GPU.

This is pure nonsensical and irrelevant to the discussion. It does not address the concern, it dismisses it.

It's not cheap to develop GPU families, just look at what you have to invest in to make them.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2011/05/16/sneak-peak-inside-nvidia-emulation-lab/

https://communities.netapp.com/comm...014/04/07/announcing-latest-epic-story-nvidia

Multi-million dollar emulators & data storage in the petabyte range, cost of electricity to run and cool them 24/7, cost of paying employees salaries, etc.

Jen-Hsun also said it costs almost a couple of billion dollars investment in R&D for the Kepler family. Think about that, 2 BILLION dollars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq202LKkeHI

nVidia's profit margins are at record levels. Don't come here talking that the price increases are due to cost increases. The facts are in dispute.

Also "Perf per watt equals perf" for those that still don't get it.

Historically the performance and pricing has been significantly better. What is looking like virtually the same performance for higher prices is poor value no matter how it's presented.

 

[Erenhardt]

God forbid they release new arch and have node shrink at the same time.
Imagine GX307 beating GM210. They will charge $999 for 120mm2 die size GPU because the performance is there, + power consumption is <100 Watts.
</logic>

 

[iiiankiii]

Enthusiasts GPUs have always been in the $500-$600 range, if you don't like it, there's always the $200-$300 GPU that has always been the best bang for buck and the GTX 960 looks to be a winner there.

Again, no one is putting a gun to your head and say you must buy this enthusiast GPU.

It's not cheap to develop GPU families, just look at what you have to invest in to make them.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2011/05/16/sneak-peak-inside-nvidia-emulation-lab/

https://communities.netapp.com/comm...014/04/07/announcing-latest-epic-story-nvidia

Multi-million dollar emulators & data storage in the petabyte range, cost of electricity to run and cool them 24/7, cost of paying employees salaries, etc.

Jen-Hsun also said it costs almost a couple of billion dollars investment in R&D for the Kepler family. Think about that, 2 BILLION dollars.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq202LKkeHI

Also "Perf per watt equals perf" for those that still don't get it.

Bro, why are you taking Nvidia's side on this? Why is it cool paying "enthusiasts" level pricing for a mid-range gpu? Is that the cool thing to do now? I don't get it. I'm glad you are ok with paying x80 gtx pricing for x60 gtx gpus.

I'm glad "no one is putting a gun to your head and say you must buy this enthusiast GPU." Then, and only then, I would have to buy a mid-range gpu at ethusiasat level prices b/c.. you know.. I don't want to die.

 

[nvgpu]

So why don't you people stop whining and go and buy that 300W AMD card with hybrid Asetek CLC and fan cooling solution that was leaked recently?

After all, AMD is losing money almost every quarter and they're willing to sell products at low prices. I bet it will be priced low enough despite the high BOM costs of the Asetek CLC and you'll be singing and dancing in the rain about it.

Warning issued for inflammatory language.
-- stahlhart

 

[amenx]

After all, AMD is losing money almost every quarter and they're willing to sell products at low prices. I bet it will be priced low enough despite the high BOM costs of the Asetek CLC and you'll be singing and dancing in the rain about it.

AMD would be out of the GPU business if Nvidia lowered its pricing to be in line with what its critics demand. Imagine how badly a 980 @ $399 and 970 @ $299 could shake up the market. It would be close to what Intel did with C2D which ended AMDs run with Athlon X2 (forcing their $500 chips to half price pretty quick) and putting them in misery ever since.

 

[Fezlakk]

So why don't you people stop whining and go and buy that 300W AMD card with hybrid Asetek CLC and fan cooling solution that was leaked recently?

After all, AMD is losing money almost every quarter and they're willing to sell products at low prices. I bet it will be priced low enough despite the high BOM costs of the Asetek CLC and you'll be singing and dancing in the rain about it.

And if said AMD card was at least 40% faster than the 290X, for $550-600 USD, i'd buy it in a heartbeat, rather than the 5-15% we may be getting with the anaemic 980, 180 watts, or not.

 

[3DVagabond]

So why don't you people stop whining and go and buy that 300W AMD card with hybrid Asetek CLC and fan cooling solution that was leaked recently?

After all, AMD is losing money almost every quarter and they're willing to sell products at low prices. I bet it will be priced low enough despite the high BOM costs of the Asetek CLC and you'll be singing and dancing in the rain about it.

You can't tell others what to do and you can't stifle opinion with your attempts at degrading the posters. You are the one who is whining because not everyone sees the value in nVidia as you claim to. Also, we don't care about profit margins. Maybe you do, but we don't see any of it.

AMD would be out of the GPU business if Nvidia lowered its pricing to be in line with what its critics demand. Imagine how badly a 980 @ $399 and 970 @ $299 could shake up the market. It would be close to what Intel did with C2D which ended AMDs run with Athlon X2 (forcing their $500 chips to half price pretty quick) and putting them in misery ever since.

AMD and nVidia have been competing back and forth. Any time nVidia releases ahead of AMD we have people trying to claim AMD can't compete. That's rubbish. Yet when AMD releases first the response is, "It doesn't matter". Like when the 5870 came out first. Or when the 7970 came out first. nVidia just kept selling their old cards until they released their new ones. That's all AMD will do too. We'll just see better pricing on AMD. Which is nothing new.

 

[AtenRa]

Also "Perf per watt equals perf" for those that still don't get it.

Try again,

100fps using 50W = 2 fps/watt

240fps using 120W = 2 fps/watt

60fps using 20W = 3fps/watt

You can have higher pref/watt but lower performance

The best way to compare efficiency is at the same performance or at the same power usage.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

AMD would be out of the GPU business if Nvidia lowered its pricing to be in line with what its critics demand. Imagine how badly a 980 @ $399 and 970 @ $299 could shake up the market. It would be close to what Intel did with C2D which ended AMDs run with Athlon X2 (forcing their $500 chips to half price pretty quick) and putting them in misery ever since.

The die size of the 970/980 is pretty much the same as that of the 290(x) if the pics are to be believed. they won't be that much cheaper to make.

Nvidia would probably win a price war, but they'd rather make money and leave the hurting amd part to intel. Also, it might not be in nvidia's interest to let intel have an absolute cpu monopoly.

 

[sontin]

Nvidia would probably win a price war, but they'd rather make money and leave the hurting amd part to intel. Also, it might not be in nvidia's interest to let intel have an absolute cpu monopoly.

Why not? nVidia doesnt sell any GPUs to AMD OEMs anymore.
With a Intel monopol they will increase their discrete market share.

Try again,

100fps using 50W = 2 fps/watt

240fps using 120W = 2 fps/watt

60fps using 20W = 3fps/watt

You can have higher pref/watt but lower performance

The best way to compare efficiency is at the same performance or at the same power usage.

Perf/W between a GTX980 and GTX750TI will be nearly the same.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

nVidia is so far ahead of AMD that they have no other choice. If they sold it for $299 they would literally crush AMD.

NV is now officially a philanthropy organization, helping struggling tech companies to stay afloat.

 

[sontin]

Na, it's better for their business, too. They dont need to decrease the prices of the rest of their lineup.

 

[AtenRa]

Perf/W between a GTX980 and GTX750TI will be nearly the same.

Exactly my point, one produces 60fps and the other 200fps

Also, you may have higher perf/watt but the performance will not be acceptable for the job you want to do.

 

[digitaldurandal]

NV is now officially a philanthropy organization, helping struggling tech companies to stay afloat.

In markets that only have two major players with one far behind this is actually more common than you think. Although of course their pricing scheme is designed to get the most profit for shareholders - just like AMD's is.

Microsoft has given money to Apple multiple times when they struggled to hold any market. Partially it comes down to working with number 2 to keep new players out of the market while at the same time keeping yourself number 1.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html

 

[Enigmoid]

I only care about performance, not mid-range, 256 bit bus, etc.

Frankly I wouldn't care if someone sold a 150 mm^2 GPU for $500 as long as it could perform better than the $500 competition.