why won't nvidia drop their prices?

[alcoholbob]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Rezist
Also nVidia has the name brand that everyone knows like Intel. The P4 reference has already been made but it's the same thing here as well. Until market perception changes this will always work, nVidia will never have to compete on a price/performance scale with ATi since there better known.

THis is probably the most ignorant, hilarious hillbilly, ridiculous claim made in this thread (sans Wreckage's worthless trolling but everybody knows he's full of sh!t anyway.)

That's not entirely false is it? I mean didn't Nvidia maintain a huge market share despite being pummeled with the 9700Pro & 9800Pro? In the same vein, the Athlon, followed by the Athlon XP, followed by the Athlon 64 pummeled Intel in not only performance but also price/performance for something like 3 consecutive years and yet Intel still maintained a huge market lead throughout that time.

It would be the modern equivalent of Phenom II costing more than Core i7 while outselling i7 for consecutive years.

 

[T2k]

Yeah except you're full of it, as I said - over the last year ATI kept taking market share from NV, it's only this year since things got more even.

 

[alcoholbob]

Originally posted by: T2k
Yeah except you're full of it, as I said - over the last year ATI kept taking market share from NV, it's only this year since things got more even.

Who is full of what?

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: thilanliyan


I think it was the X1800 that was late.

Funny how he left that card out. :laugh:


The 4800 series was better than what ATI had out before, but other than being cheaper on release. It offered nothing over what NVIDIA already had.

Revenue and marketshare back what I have been saying. I'm not sure why certain people are in denial over this. I think they feel, if they say it enough people will actually believe it.

The X1800 wasn't any later than Fermi is going to be.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: Astrallite

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Rezist
Also nVidia has the name brand that everyone knows like Intel. The P4 reference has already been made but it's the same thing here as well. Until market perception changes this will always work, nVidia will never have to compete on a price/performance scale with ATi since there better known.

THis is probably the most ignorant, hilarious hillbilly, ridiculous claim made in this thread (sans Wreckage's worthless trolling but everybody knows he's full of sh!t anyway.)

That's not entirely false is it?

It is entirely false. When someone knows Nvidia VGA cards then he knows ATI as well. This whole claim is entirely illogical and idiotic.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: Astrallite

Originally posted by: T2k
Yeah except you're full of it, as I said - over the last year ATI kept taking market share from NV, it's only this year since things got more even.

Who is full of what?

Wreckage, as I pointed out several times already.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: dguy6789


The X1800 wasn't any later than Fermi is going to be.

You left it out because it sucked. Besides Fermi will most likely crush the competition. The x1800 was an epic failure.

 

[scooterlibby]

Nvidia is done evil they way they gougin us. SO GREEADY!!!! And ATI, WTFQ?!? How does they price 5870 so low when it profits BAD BAD!

Everyone take a deep breath, take Principles of Micro, Intermediate Micro, Advanced Micro, and Regression Analysis. Or work in a private company for 5 or so years. Then come back and argue about pricing theory.

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: dguy6789


The X1800 wasn't any later than Fermi is going to be.

You left it out because it sucked. Besides Fermi will most likely crush the competition. The x1800 was an epic failure.

I will say right now and go ahead and quote me on this so you can reference it later: Fermi will not take the performance crown when it launches.

The X1800 was not an epic failure and it didn't suck. It was completely 50/50 with the Geforce 7800 GTX. Your memory is hazy. The only reason the X1800 didn't receive major kudos is because it launched later than the 7800 and wasn't faster, but suck it did not, it was just as good and priced competitively.

 

[akugami]

Originally posted by: GodisanAtheist
I'd say its because the 5xxx series doesn't quite have the kind of availability everyone would want at the moment, coupled with the fact that there is nothing out there at makes serious use of DX11 quite yet. Nvidia can leave their cards right where they are, and people will pay the slight premium for Nvidia.

Other option is that they simply cannot afford to drop the price any further.

We have a winner.

Until ATI gets more cards out, nVidia can leave the price of the GTX 295 where it is. It's simple supply and demand economics at work. There is also the question of whether nVidia can afford to drop the price as GodisanAtheist stated. The 5870's continue to trickle in to retailers but not enough to satisfy demand, as is expected with a new GPU launch.

Originally posted by: *kjm

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Because NVIDIA has had the better product for years now. Just because AMD comes out with a new card (with limited availability), is not going to change things.

Come on Wreckage enough..... I have found it for sale almost every day just dont know if I want to jump on it. *SNIP*

The problem with the 5870 is it's not meeting demand. But to illustrate the double standards, nVidia has done the same thing with a "hard launch" but with limited availability and yet they get a free pass. It's funny that many of the same knocks on ATI are also the same things that people have been knocking nVidia for in the past and vice versa. Things seem to go in a huge circle.

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
In the mean time, I feel bad for anyone paying ~$300 for a GTX285.

A fool and his money are soon parted...

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: thilanliyan


I think it was the X1800 that was late.

Funny how he left that card out. :laugh:


The 4800 series was better than what ATI had out before, but other than being cheaper on release. It offered nothing over what NVIDIA already had.

Revenue and marketshare back what I have been saying. I'm not sure why certain people are in denial over this. I think they feel, if they say it enough people will actually believe it.

It offered a better value for one's gaming dollars. The concept might seem strange to some people but I like getting a similar performing video card at a cheaper price.

If someone bought a GT200 series because they were experimenting with its GPGPU features which were superior to the 4xx0 series, then fine. But as a pure gaming card, the 4xx0 series offered value that the GT200 can not match. That is a fact. Only someone with bias could possibly claim the 4xx0 series offered nothing over the GT200 cards.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Because NVIDIA has had the better product for years now. Just because AMD comes out with a new card (with limited availability), is not going to change things.

Troll more. You're so full of crap it's ridiculous.

The GTX 295 has not been out for years. The GTX 280 had the performance crown for not even half a year. The 4870x2 had the performance crown for at least as long as the GTX 280 did. The 4850x2 was ALWAYS better than the GTX 280 and 285 from day one while also being cheaper at launch and for the rest of history. You always ignore this or bash it because it's a dual card, yet you're the first person to say the GTX 295 is a better card than the 5870. Hypocrite much? There has never been a reason to buy a GTX 260, 275, 280, or 285 for almost their entire life spans. ATI has had a cheaper card that was just as fast or faster than every single one of those for almost the entire last generation. Once in a while there were some hot deals that shook things up, but the vast majority of the time, Radeon was consistently cheaper at every performance level. All Nvidia has is the GTX 295 which was always over $100 more expensive than the 4870x2 while being 5-10% faster in the best case scenario and consistently slower in plenty of games. It wasn't even faster across the board despite the huge price gap. How can you justify that as Nvidia having the best product for years?

As of right now, the HD 5870 is faster than the GTX 295 in the very most popular PC game of all time, World of Warcraft.

Undisputed history: Radeon 9700 > Geforce FX, Radeon X800 > Geforce 6800, Radeon X1900 > Geforce 7800/7900, Radeon HD 2900/3800 < Geforce 8800/9800

Edit: And limited availability of the 5870? It's been in stock somewhere online at MSRP every single day since launch.

Also:

GTX 295
HD 5870
GTX 295
HD 5870

For the most part this is a true post, but the 6800 series vs. X800/850 series and 7800/7900/7950 vs. X1800/X1900/X1950 are not quite so simple. There was a *ton* of overlap, and neither could really be considered superior overall across the range of models and successive releases. So it would make sense to call both of those series basically a draw, it came down to who could offer the better price, and that varied wildly depending on rebate, distributor, etc.

You left out the earlier era, GF4 Ti was a bit better than any ATI solution, although I thought the 8500 was a bit underrated (the drivers improved a lot over time).

GF FX was an abomination, and to a lesser but similar degree, so was 2900/3800 ATI series.

I much prefer a single GPU solution, as multi-GPU is always a power-hungry compromise at this point, and historically. Old 3dfx SLI probably was the best multi-3d of all time ironically Gains were noticably larger by % than they are now, with fewer glitches/issues.

For the time being, 5870 rules the roost IMHO, have to wait and see, but I'd wager we'll see another give and take battle much like the era I commented on above.

 

[alcoholbob]

If you are looking for an HD 5870 today it is not a problem. Stock may have been a problem for the first few days but this is no longer the case. Amazon has 4 brands available, ncix has 5, tiger direct, enworld, zipzoomfly, avadirect, etc.

There's no shortage from the OEM side--Dell hoarded 60% of the first shipment of HD5870s.

 

[nOOky]

If people remain savvy and buy what performs best for them at the price point they target then things will shake out fine in the price/performance arena. If people remain ignorant and buy a product because of perceived (but not necessarily correct) quality then it sux to be them.

I will probably be upgrading in the next month or so, it will be hard to justify buying an nvidia card unless the price drops to a competitive level or lower to offset ATI's superior performance.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
You left it out because it sucked. Besides Fermi will most likely crush the competition. The x1800 was an epic failure.

What is an epic failure is the fact that Fermi is late, the GeForce FX, your lies in which you try so hard to make them appear like if they were true, but they're just a parody of a cheap marketing propaganda wanna be. Also the HD 2900XT was a failure, the fact that the GTX 2x0 series were overpriced when first launched and nVidia had to drop the prices urgently to match the price/performance of a rival with a chip which is much smaller, cheaper and competitive, with newer drivers, the performance gap of the GTX 260+ vs HD 4870 or the GTX 285 vs HD 4890 is widening, look at the Anandtech's review of the HD 5850/HD5870. The HD 4890 is so competitive with the much more expensive GTX 285 and the HD 4870 is just faster overall than the GTX 260+, which proves my point that ATi cards ages better. Even my old X800XT can run Call of Duty 4 with medium settings and 2x FSAA at 1280x1024.

The X1800 were late and only matched the performance of the 7800GTX 256, but thanks to its much more efficient architecture, the performance of the X1800 currently in DX9 applications is just much better, ATi cards ages much better than their nVidia counterparts,

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Astrallite
If you are looking for an HD 5870 today it is not a problem. Stock may have been a problem for the first few days but this is no longer the case. Amazon has 4 brands available, ncix has 5, tiger direct, enworld, zipzoomfly, avadirect, etc.

There's no shortage from the OEM side--Dell hoarded 60% of the first shipment of HD5870s.

Yea, all in all I'd have to say this was a pretty impressive launch for AMD. They had cards (though limited in numbers) on the day of the launch. Over the next week the parts trickled in more and more to the point that just a week after launch you went from looking and hoping to get lucky that it'd be there to them just being there for the most part.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
As of right now, the HD 5870 is faster than the GTX 295 in the very most popular PC game of all time, World of Warcraft.

World of Warcraft still runs on Intel IGP and is to some extent still CPU limited.

Originally posted by: thilanliyan

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Radeon X800 > Geforce 6800

But...but the 6800 had SM3!!! It must have been better.

Heh, maybe in several years we'll be saying the same thing about DX 10.1/11.

Incidentally I had several X8xx series cards because they were cheaper than 6800. I had way too many of them fail. The only one that worked great was my Connect3D X800 GTO that I unlocked. Too bad they went out of business. All my Sapphire cards either worked crappy (some emasculated X800SE with only 8 pipes or something), died (X800), artifacted (X800XL) or overheated (X850XT). But that X800 GTO rocked!

Originally posted by: lopri
More realistic reason is that NV has already sold the cards at a price to AIB partners. Lowering prices before their inventories are taken care of would anger the partners very much, and NV can't afford to pay back the difference.

NV can and does pay the difference. It is called channel rebates and Nvidia does that as does Intel.

Originally posted by: happy medium
The same reason you buy a Corvette instead of a Mustang.

Coincidentally in the current Car & Driver magazine the cover story is a shootout between the Corvette Club Sport versus the Mustang Shelby GT500.

Mustang
Pro: More HP, got bigger crowd at a car show, had nicer interior, has rear seats.
Con: Very nose-heavy, live axle gimped handling, didn't live up to the big HP number in real world performance.

Corvette
Pro: Faster acceleration even with much less (near 100) HP, much higher cornering Gs, better handling, better track times.
Con: Cheap interior, no rear seats.

C&D Winner: Corvette

Originally posted by: evolucion8
the fact that the GTX 2x0 series were overpriced when first launched and nVidia had to drop the prices urgently to match the price/performance of a rival

They were not overpriced on launch because there was no single GPU that came anywhere even close in performance. Alternative single GPUs at the time were the 9800 GTX and Radeon 3870. The GTX 260 handily beat both, so why wouldn't it cost more?

They merely became overpriced when ATI released the 4870/4850.

Originally posted by: dguy6789
I will say right now and go ahead and quote me on this so you can reference it later: Fermi will not take the performance crown when it launches.

How do you know? Are you guessing, hoping, or have actual facts that you are under NDA and can't tell us?

We should keep this quote handy so in case Fermi takes the performance crown it will be SIG worthy.

 

[Munky]

Um.. considering how well Nvidia sold the turds knows as GeforceFX back in the day, that's hardly a surprise. They're probably still selling em in some backward place to this day.

 

[Zensal]

If ATi ever wants to take a real chunk of market share, the need to get their name plastered on games like nVidia does. I had to convince a guy a while back that an ATi 4830 was superior to his 8400gs. He called all graphics cards "nVidia cards". They have the mind share, which is much more important than anything else.

Performance numbers won't take market share, and neither will price/performance ratios. nVidia learned this a long time ago.

 

[Shmee]

I wonder when the GTX 260 prices will drop dramatically, thats what I am interested in, getting another one. Plus, ATI cards dont fold as well. Hopefully that will be fixed soon.

 

[Kuzi]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: dguy6789
I will say right now and go ahead and quote me on this so you can reference it later: Fermi will not take the performance crown when it launches.

How do you know? Are you guessing, hoping, or have actual facts that you are under NDA and can't tell us?

We should keep this quote handy so in case Fermi takes the performance crown it will be SIG worthy.

It won't take the performance crown if Hemlock (HD5870x2) is already out, that's what he means I think

About the prices of high end nV cards, I believe they will see a drop when Windows 7 releases or soon after. But we'll see.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: thilanliyan

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Radeon X800 > Geforce 6800

But...but the 6800 had SM3!!! It must have been better.

Yeah, and the FX series performed well in DX9 games.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: happy medium
The same reason you buy a Corvette instead of a Mustang. If you have the money to buy, you buy the best name in reliability and performance. Even though some of us know better, overall the Nvidia name still like a Corvette. Most buyers outside of enthusiast forums like this still go with the product that is traditionally the best, Nvidia. [/L]

But nvidia hasn't traditionally been the best since the Geforce4 series. ATI's have performed better and had better driver support since then. Nvidia's are more like Volkswagens. Check any game tech support forum in the last 8 years, there are many more problems with nvidia cards than ATI. You are always trying to find out which drivers work best. With ATI, you just download the latest. If you have any problems.

One developer made a comment about the slogan Nvidia has in games. He said Nvidia was always there to help make the game work on their hardware, tweaking things and updating drivers and whatnot. Which is great and all... but the game just always worked on ATI. They didn't need ATI's help with anything. ATI only falls behind in marketing.

 

[BenSkywalker]

Why won't ATi drop their prices on the 5870? It is a terrible value, the 5850 absolutely blows it out of the water on a price/performance basis. What's that you say? Their is a premium to be paid at the high end? Huh, whoever would have thunk it

Yeah except you're full of it, as I said - over the last year ATI kept taking market share from NV, it's only this year since things got more even.

From Q1 2008 to Q1 2009 nVidia's marketshare increased versus ATi.

But as a pure gaming card, the 4xx0 series offered value that the GT200 can not match.

The fact that the GT200 boards tended to come with a new pack in game has no impact? I don't live in a theoretical vacum, so the 216 costing $24 more then the 4870 but coming with a $50 game seems like a relatively superior value to me. Of course, I like to play games which doesn't seem to be popular on these boards.

Check any game tech support forum in the last 8 years, there are many more problems with nvidia cards than ATI. You are always trying to find out which drivers work best. With ATI, you just download the latest. If you have any problems.

Hop on to the WoW forums and try spreading that one, you'll get a lot of good laughs. ATi constantly creates new bugs for WoW, once every few months they will fix one thing and screw something else up, I used to have to do a driver dance depending on what raid was being run that night. Of course, with ATi being as brilliant as they are on the marketing end, they are more worried about their Crysis numbers then how their drivers impact WoW. The fact that ATi is being outsold by 2:1 would shock a lot of people playing WoW, they would be surprised ATi can sell close to that much. This seems to be one area where nVidia is shockingly ahead of ATi- their drivers never seem to cause any major issues in WoW. Given the amount of people that play, that kind of has a much larger impact then some random bug in a FPS.

Which is great and all... but the game just always worked on ATI.

They fixed the massive stuttering with Shift yet? nVidia certainly has their own share of problems, but ATi is more then capable of going toe to toe with them.

 

[v8envy]

And then there's Linux. ATI's drivers for Linux are simply terrible. I did some hardware shuffling last night with the end result of fglrx on an ATI AGP. It's still broken beyond description. Unbelievable amount of flickering with flash (ironic naming, that) with a composited desktop. And that's just for starters.

For me there is some value in not needing a reboot to play games. I'd settle for second fastest while more expensive if it meant I don't have to reboot my machine twice a day. If it wasn't for NV's latest bout of lock-in madness, that is.

 

[Mr Fox]

Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Is anyone else wondering why it still costs $500 for a new gtx 295? The 5870 offers nearly the same performance @ $120 less in a single gpu card. It must mean that people are still blindly buying nvidia cards just to buy nvidia. Or is nvidia just that greedy? If thats the case then they drop a notch in my book.

This question is like asking "Where did Syphilis Come From ?"