Why are ATI cards more expensive?

[orangat]

Why does ATI keep pricing its cards higher (even if its just by a little)?
At every price point, ATI only delivers equal or slower performance and is more expensive.

Just doesn't make sense to me. I'd like to get an ATI card but I can't justify the higher expense for less performance. ATIs iq is better but its no enough to be a deal breaker to go with Nvidia.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: orangat
Why does ATI keep pricing its cards higher (even if its just by a little)?
At every price point, ATI only delivers equal or slower performance and is more expensive.

Just doesn't make sense to me. I'd like to get an ATI card but I can't justify the higher expense for less performance. ATIs iq is better but its no enough to be a deal breaker to go with Nvidia.

Fanboi Geek Tax. Some folks will pay the 'tax' to be first to own it.

 

[Unkno]

really depends on where you live, for example in BC, Canada, the X800XL cost around $310 while the 6800GT costs like $490. It all depends on the availiability of the cards, a great example is the 7800GT, which cost only $450, that's $40 less than the 6800GT

 

[fishbits]

Because people will willingly pay that much. If I make a widget that I was thinking of selling for $8 yet find out that people will pay me $10 for it, I'm going to charge $10. The more money ATI makes, the better off they are for taking future risks that might not pan out, hiring more/better engineers, etc.

It's like the misconception so many here have that a price being set higher than you like is "gouging." That only applies to something you have to have that you can't get somewhere else, like a hotel room rate in a place where people are fleeing to because of an evacuation. Vending machines sell little containers of carbonated water and sugar for 50 cents to a dollar. This isn't gouging, it's charging what people are willing to voluntarily pay for the product.

The right question is "Why are customers willing to pay more than a card is worth when compared to the available competition?" Gsellis has it right, fanboi tax. "I want a high end graphics card, but will not even entertain the notion of buying one with a chip from Nvidia." Well, ok, who else can they go to? No one. Thus ATI can charge more (within limits) knowing that these folks will pay it. Same as ATI could count on them to remain in an indefinite holding pattern waiting for the products instead of getting one from the competition.

Me, I do better for myself being loyal to price-vs-performance, but others have different priorities. Once the fanbois have their red chips, the prices will come down to try to entice more sensible buyers.

 

[ElFenix]

if you're talking about the new x1000 series, you should look at nvidia's msrp and compare that to ati's msrp. of course, you can find nvidia cards at lower than msrp all over the internet, but if you go to a b&m chain store like compusa, best buy, or fry's, you'll find nvidia cards at or near msrp. of course, we don't really know what the market price of an x1800xt is, so we can't make a proper comparison, yet.

and, as some people have said, some of this is just ati fanboyism at work and once they're satisfied the prices will come down.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: fishbits
Because people will willingly pay that much. If I make a widget that I was thinking of selling for $8 yet find out that people will pay me $10 for it, I'm going to charge $10. The more money ATI makes, the better off they are for taking future risks that might not pan out, hiring more/better engineers, etc.

It's like the misconception so many here have that a price being set higher than you like is "gouging." That only applies to something you have to have that you can't get somewhere else, like a hotel room rate in a place where people are fleeing to because of an evacuation. Vending machines sell little containers of carbonated water and sugar for 50 cents to a dollar. This isn't gouging, it's charging what people are willing to voluntarily pay for the product.

The right question is "Why are customers willing to pay more than a card is worth when compared to the available competition?" Gsellis has it right, fanboi tax. "I want a high end graphics card, but will not even entertain the notion of buying one with a chip from Nvidia." Well, ok, who else can they go to? No one. Thus ATI can charge more (within limits) knowing that these folks will pay it. Same as ATI could count on them to remain in an indefinite holding pattern waiting for the products instead of getting one from the competition.

Me, I do better for myself being loyal to price-vs-performance, but others have different priorities. Once the fanbois have their red chips, the prices will come down to try to entice more sensible buyers.

The next step is just "Geek Tax". Then it moves to "Enthusiast Tax"

Dang, that Econ degree comes in so handy...

 

[Stretchman]

I think over time the prices might stabilize. Just have to wait for that first-release rush to past, then its rebate time!

 

[justlnluck]

I have been using ATI video cards since 2002. First with the Radeon 8500, followed by a 9600pro in 2004. I chose ATI because I prefer cards that don't require active cooling. Because I like my case to be quiet, I value energy efficiency as much as performace. But ATI's constant delays and ridiculous prices have forced me to look at the competition. After seeing the performace/price ratios of the X1300 and X1600 series, I have now purchased my first nVidia card: a passively cooled Gigabyte 6600GT

http://www.giga-byte.com/VGA/Products/Products_GV-NX66T128VP.htm

 

[sandorski]

Right now it's because they have just been released and there's low supply. Prices will have to drop shortly as I doubt many will pay these prices.

 

[Sunrise089]

Originally posted by: orangat
Why does ATI keep pricing its cards higher (even if its just by a little)?
At every price point, ATI only delivers equal or slower performance and is more expensive.

Just doesn't make sense to me. I'd like to get an ATI card but I can't justify the higher expense for less performance. ATIs iq is better but its no enough to be a deal breaker to go with Nvidia.

Not even remotely true. At the low end and very high end ATI is a pretty bad value, but I would certainly guess that on this forum for every person currently buying a 7800 series card someone else is still considering a x800/x850/6800 series, and at that pricepoint ATI dominates.

X800XL>6800GT
X850XT-PE>6800 Ultra
X800GTO^2>everthing below 7800GT

 

[fishbits]

Right now it's because they have just been released and there's low supply.

Wrong. There's plenty of competitive Nvidia cards out there, so there's no shortage to point to. There's just some folks who will only buy ATI. That's the only reason the prices are so high. It's only after these people are milked that we'll see the prices go down, whether there's one or one million 1800XLs available for purchase. Because a non-fanboi wouldn't buy one compared to a 7800GT at current pricing, period. Limited supply only kicks in when there's nothing else out there that will meet you needs. In this case, that "need" is the ATI logo on the GPU.

 

[fishbits]

Sunrise089: Good point. I was only talking about the current x1000 series, specifically the 1800XL. Can't vouch for or refute the specifics you cite, but they sound plausible. It goes way too far for someone to claim that all ATI cards are overpriced/underperforming.

 

[PrayForDeath]

ATI cards aren't expensive. Only the new generation (1k series) is expensive, because it's not widely available yet. Give it a month, or two, then see how cheaper they will become. It's never wise to buy a video card right after its release. I remember people paying 600+ $ for the GTX when they first came out, that's insane.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: fishbits

Right now it's because they have just been released and there's low supply.

Wrong. There's plenty of competitive Nvidia cards out there, so there's no shortage to point to. There's just some folks who will only buy ATI. That's the only reason the prices are so high. It's only after these people are milked that we'll see the prices go down, whether there's one or one million 1800XLs available for purchase. Because a non-fanboi wouldn't buy one compared to a 7800GT at current pricing, period. Limited supply only kicks in when there's nothing else out there that will meet you needs. In this case, that "need" is the ATI logo on the GPU.

Shortage of ATI cards, not video cards.

 

[Wreckage]

The X1800's may be more expensive, but just think of all the money you will save heating your house.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The X1800's may be more expensive, but just think of all the money you will save heating your house.

In the 1960's computers took up an entire room. In the 2000's they heat up an entire room.

I see a pattern here, something to do with rooms... Hmmm

 

[fishbits]

I remember people paying 600+ $ for the GTX when they first came out, that's insane.

And the reason they were willing to is there was no competition for the GTX. Higher prices are the mechanism by which the rich/hardcore get their hands on uber tech first. By your logic, the X1300 should sell for $600 simply because it's new and/or in short supply, which clearly isn't happening. Had the GTX been released after the 1800XT, the only people paying substantially more than 1800XT prices for the GTX would be Nvidia fanbois.

Shortage of ATI cards, not video cards.

Which proves my point, people aren't paying for a video card at these prices, they're paying for the ATI label. Thus the only shortage is an artificial one, a shortage of logos. In fact ATI could have had a million 1800XLs available at launch and the price would still have been set just as high, since they're the fanbois only source (direct or indirect) for ATI logoed gpus. The only difference would be that the fanbois' overpriced orders could have been filled faster, but they still would be milked before the prices will be lowered for the rest of us.

If at this point there's only 10 of them left available nationwide, you'd still have a shortage of ATI 1800XLs, and not a single one of them would sell til the prices went down, proving that a shortage of ATI video cards doesn't account for inflated pricing, not when there are better price-to-performance alternatives in the same class and fanbois have their orders filled.

 

[orangat]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
....
Not even remotely true. At the low end and very high end ATI is a pretty bad value, but I would certainly guess that on this forum for every person currently buying a 7800 series card someone else is still considering a x800/x850/6800 series, and at that pricepoint ATI dominates.

X800XL>6800GT
X850XT-PE>6800 Ultra
X800GTO^2>everthing below 7800GT

Good point. But how long did it take for ATI to acknowlege that the x800pro couldn't compete and took so long to deliver the x800xl?
Is the GTO2 that good without unlocking or overclocking?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: fishbits

I remember people paying 600+ $ for the GTX when they first came out, that's insane.

And the reason they were willing to is there was no competition for the GTX. Higher prices are the mechanism by which the rich/hardcore get their hands on uber tech first. By your logic, the X1300 should sell for $600 simply because it's new and/or in short supply, which clearly isn't happening. Had the GTX been released after the 1800XT, the only people paying substantially more than 1800XT prices for the GTX would be Nvidia fanbois.

Shortage of ATI cards, not video cards.

Which proves my point, people aren't paying for a video card at these prices, they're paying for the ATI label. Thus the only shortage is an artificial one, a shortage of logos. In fact ATI could have had a million 1800XLs available at launch and the price would still have been set just as high, since they're the fanbois only source (direct or indirect) for ATI logoed gpus. The only difference would be that the fanbois' overpriced orders could have been filled faster, but they still would be milked before the prices will be lowered for the rest of us.

If at this point there's only 10 of them left available nationwide, you'd still have a shortage of ATI 1800XLs, and not a single one of them would sell til the prices went down, proving that a shortage of ATI video cards doesn't account for inflated pricing, not when there are better price-to-performance alternatives in the same class and fanbois have their orders filled.

I wouldn't pay the extra, but so you know there are some other things than just the ATI logo that may be the reaon for some to pay the extra.

 

[Insomniak]

Because they just came out.

Assuming they ever deliver in volume, the prices will drop.

 

[Sunrise089]

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
....
Not even remotely true. At the low end and very high end ATI is a pretty bad value, but I would certainly guess that on this forum for every person currently buying a 7800 series card someone else is still considering a x800/x850/6800 series, and at that pricepoint ATI dominates.

X800XL>6800GT
X850XT-PE>6800 Ultra
X800GTO^2>everthing below 7800GT

Good point. But how long did it take for ATI to acknowlege that the x800pro couldn't compete and took so long to deliver the x800xl?
Is the GTO2 that good without unlocking or overclocking?

The GTO^2 obviousely does require an unlock and overclock. Thats why I included the two other GPUs above, for those who do not wish to OC or Unlock, but in all fairness the steps to get big gains from the GTO^2 are pretty easy, seemingly a lot easier than OC'ing a 3000+ Venice, which is pretty commonly reccomended.

 

[orangat]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
....
Not even remotely true. At the low end and very high end ATI is a pretty bad value, but I would certainly guess that on this forum for every person currently buying a 7800 series card someone else is still considering a x800/x850/6800 series, and at that pricepoint ATI dominates.

X800XL>6800GT
X850XT-PE>6800 Ultra
X800GTO^2>everthing below 7800GT

Good point. But how long did it take for ATI to acknowlege that the x800pro couldn't compete and took so long to deliver the x800xl?
Is the GTO2 that good without unlocking or overclocking?

The GTO^2 obviousely does require an unlock and overclock. Thats why I included the two other GPUs above, for those who do not wish to OC or Unlock, but in all fairness the steps to get big gains from the GTO^2 are pretty easy, seemingly a lot easier than OC'ing a 3000+ Venice, which is pretty commonly reccomended.

Fair enough but the superiority of the GTO2 then is more a product of chance than an overt move.

 

[Sunrise089]

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: Sunrise089
....
Not even remotely true. At the low end and very high end ATI is a pretty bad value, but I would certainly guess that on this forum for every person currently buying a 7800 series card someone else is still considering a x800/x850/6800 series, and at that pricepoint ATI dominates.

X800XL>6800GT
X850XT-PE>6800 Ultra
X800GTO^2>everthing below 7800GT

Good point. But how long did it take for ATI to acknowlege that the x800pro couldn't compete and took so long to deliver the x800xl?
Is the GTO2 that good without unlocking or overclocking?

The GTO^2 obviousely does require an unlock and overclock. Thats why I included the two other GPUs above, for those who do not wish to OC or Unlock, but in all fairness the steps to get big gains from the GTO^2 are pretty easy, seemingly a lot easier than OC'ing a 3000+ Venice, which is pretty commonly reccomended.

Fair enough but the superiority of the GTO2 then is more a product of chance than an overt move.

I would say a 100% confirmed OC rate is beyond "chance", but thats just me

 

[Dethfrumbelo]

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Because they just came out.

Assuming they ever deliver in volume, the prices will drop.

When you assume, ATi will make an A$$ out of U and ME.

 

[orangat]

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: orangat
.......

Fair enough but the superiority of the GTO2 then is more a product of chance than an overt move.

I would say a 100% confirmed OC rate is beyond "chance", but thats just me

What I mean is the success of the gto2 is more a product of serendipity (or stupidity by ATI for not locking the pipes). ATI didn't market the gto2 on the basis of its overclockability.