Why are Video/Graphics Card prices plummetting?

[GundamF91]

It wasn't long ago that $200 8800GT cards were considered average price point, but since 1Q this year, the prices have dropped signifcantly. With rebates or other savings, you can get nearly the same performance for half the price. Obsolescence in technology always make things cheaper, but it has never been this fast of a drop that I've seen.

 

[archcommus]

What really started the affordable video card trend to me seems to be the initial introduction of the 8800 GT. First time for awhile really that you could get that kind of performance for around $200. Why they initially released at such a low price I do not know, I guess to grab holiday sales. That set the bar at around that level, and so when the new 8800 GTS's came out they weren't priced much more, which lowered the GT prices even more. It's interesting but great because the performance I'm getting right now from my G92 8800 GTS probably would've cost $350-$450 a few years back.

 

[Syntax Error]

Because the 8800GT/9-Series was just really a die-shrink, nothing really new or any significant performance gains over the previous generation. Also, the G92 is cheaper to manufacture than the more complex G80, so we're being sold essentially the same performance a year later after the GTX's release.

Not complaining, though, being someone who missed out on the GTX, the 8800GT was a perfect way to catch up on an inexpensive price.

 

[ajaidevsingh]

The real reason is that ATi is about to send out their racer "4XXX" and Nvidia the "9900 XXX" ATi will have 3-4 types of cards out and 8800 GT may lose its edge..!!! So sellers are selling it now to clear the stock!!!

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ajaidevsingh
The real reason is that ATi is about to send out their racer "4XXX" and Nvidia the "9900 XXX" ATi will have 3-4 types of cards out and 8800 GT may lose its edge..!!! So sellers are selling it now to clear the stock!!!

What's a racer "4XXX"?

Anyways, your "real" reason is probably only a part of it. There has been a serious price war between AMD and Nvidia for the last seven months.

 

[Lonyo]

ATi couldn't compete on performance, so they dropped price, and nvidia responded. Then they introduced new parts at cheaper prices with lower performance.

 

[Jax Omen]

For a differing opinion: I think it's because the demand for super-high-end cards has simply dwindled. What game, other than Crysis, needs a supercard? Nobody wants to make a game like that because there's no money in it. They're catering to a lower denominator: make your game run well for the people with a 7600GT or so. Sure, they add a bunch of eye candy for people with the super cards, but they have to make the game run smoothly on the low-end.

Besides, is there a game out now that the 8800GTX can't keep up with, besides Crysis? No. So why would they spend major money pumping out drastically-more-powerful cards than the card that can already do it all for the foreseeable future. Better to cut manufacturing costs, save the consumers some money at the same time (easy way to gain brand loyalty and consumer confidence), and keep the status quo on performance. So now we're at the situation where, a year and a half after it's release, the 8800GTX is still the performance point to hit for the high-end, only now it only takes $200 to hit that point. And Nvidia is rolling in the dough because of it.

As for ATI, they tried, and failed, to compete at the high-end. 2900XT was overpriced and underperforming. So they refined it and released at a much lower price, and guess what? It worked for them.


Now both companies are gearing up for another high-end launch? Why? Well, in ATI's case, because they need something that the enthusiasts want to buy instead of Nvidia's cards. We are a market, albeit a small one. Nvidia, on the other hand, is gearing up for another high-end launch because they have to. If they don't, all the marketshare and loyalty they've gained with G80 and G92 gets flushed because ATI would take back the performance crown.


The few of us out there who want/need super-high-end cards? The GPU companies would rather sell us two cards anyway. And make lots of money on each card, instead of charging exorbitant amounts for a single card that costs a large amount to build and has low yields.



THAT is why we have cheap powerful cards now. Same reason that you can get a fast dualcore for $200 or less - few people need more than that, so instead of pouring MASSIVE amounts of money into more speed, Intel is spending a bit of money to lower costs and raise yields, and raking in the cash in the meantime, while working on the "real" next-gen at a somewhat less frenzied pace.



Really, we all win this way, so I wouldn't complain too much

 

[nanaki333]

meh.. i thought it was cause since ati failed at the high-end, they released a good mid-range at a nice price point that performed on par with the previous gen's high-end. did that make sense? so nvidia came out with their 9600 and 8800s at similar or cheaper. that cooky nvidia!

the 8800GT is an awesome card though, plays oblivion maxed out on my girl's computer. step-bro's 9600 play cod4 maxed on his 20" just fine too. the real winners here are the consumers

 

[videopho]

The real answer to the question is the current economy not because of the competition.
I could only imagine a year ago we'd never seen the pricing this low for such a high performance card.
More evidence, today TD is selling the 9800gtx for $269 (NO REBATE), go figure?
Yes, companies need to generate revenue to keep lines moving and what not.
More and more people are cutting down all luxury items and hi-end/price video card is one of those.
Enjoy the low pricing if you're among the cash elitists.

 

[AzN]

Prices drop after the initial prices after retailers milk the consumer because of high demand. G92 is cheap to produce anyway and still making a good margin off sale prices.