No, it just means they finally got the MUL working constantly...Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
Which should have happened over 18 months ago.:down:
Printable View
No, it just means they finally got the MUL working constantly...Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
Which should have happened over 18 months ago.:down:
well at extreme high setting and aa on crysis is giving 43 fps with 280 in sli configuration and some quad core (no exact info) 1920x1200 resolution (dell monitor i guess it is 24")
BTW this is my 1st post
No, the Voodoo3 3000 was never $299. I know, because I bought it at launch day for $200 from CompUSA in April 1999. Unless you were an idiot... LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Not just Nvidia!!! ATI's X800XT was at the same $500+ price point, with the rare platinum edition running at well over $650. I got my X1900XTX at $500 off Ebay when it was selling for $599 at CompUSA for many months later.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
But, if you gotta blame it on Nvidia, you can say that the first $500 gaming card ever was the GeForce 2 Ultra! Remember that? Voodoo2 SLI was $500, but that was for 2 separate cards...
yes, the sad truth of high end cards is their price :D
:welcome:Quote:
Originally Posted by god's_gift
Would you like to be a little more detailed about what you're saying? I bet everyone's interested :D
oh you misunderstood me. i had no intention of bashing nvidia. and i could have done the same thing with older ATI cards as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by Bo_Fox
X850XT PE over $600
X1800XT 512 over $600
X1900XTX over $600
X1950XTX over $550
the only reason that the new ATI cards have not been the same way (2900xt and 3870X2) is because sub par performance would mean no one would pay over $600 for them.
people just need to realize that most top of the line cards are over $600 at launch. sure you can get good cards for $300 but there not top of the line. you want the big performance you pay the big bucks.
:welcome:Quote:
Originally Posted by god's_gift
Quote:
Originally Posted by god's_gift
Source ???
My system with 9800GX2 @ Crysis :
E8400@4Ghz
4Gb Gskill 8000 PQ
NVidia 9800GX2
TFT 22" @ 1680x1050
VERY HIGH Settings
AA = OFF
Vista 64bit @ DX10
Average = 35.5 FPS
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6...yhighocmy8.jpg
regards
No... The MUL would only account for a 33% increase(MADD = 2, MUL = 1), so there's more to the story than just the MUL working now.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
source is well .... a asic designer in MCP group........... with some chance it being myself :D
i am vacationing......no one can tress my ip
i do not have a lot of 1st hand info on this beyond design and simulation stage
initial design goal was 100% improvement on previous generation mostly through better shader structure
but there was some setbacks in doubling the shader performance and scaling for more than 200(initially thought) shaders
the quad core was probably qx9650 for the test rig on 790i
and i told that there was some aa involved for maximum stress test
unfortunately i do not have info on aa level
BTW mascaras are you using some tweaked thing for crysis?
why do not you check fps at 1920x1200 maximum setting and some varying level of aa
Stock ClocksQuote:
9600 GT Matrix
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/8...thybridmk7.jpg
Hybrid cooling tech.
Source: nordichardware
Asus latest baby (road to Computex 08)
sorry the offtopic :p:
Quote:
Originally Posted by god's_gift
nope , no tweak !
i dont have GX2 anymore to check at 1920x1200 (waiting for new card @ review)
i also bought a new HP 23" @ 1920x1200 two days ago !
i think ~40 fps crysis with 2x GTX280 @ SLI (~1200$) @ 1920x1200 is nothing special , i hope they are better ......
regards
I believe it's just too soon to make such an assumption, we should wait for reviews and trusty sources.Quote:
Originally Posted by mascaras
And he doesn't know AA level used in that "bench", so we cannot assume it's good or bad, i think...
If thats true, it better be AT LEAST 4X...Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
Think you got Alzheimer mate... all the top end cards I got the last few years, with exception of the 9800GTX were over 450-500 euro's here so about 600 dollars at release date (talking about Nvidia only)Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
All the cards you bought were surely NOT bought on launch date or you got some direct connect with Nvidia or access to some hidden cargo...
I payed at least twice as much as you...:shrug... and don't talk about online access as I look for those too... on Launch date you pay extra just to have it, if you wait a month(s) or so you can get far better deals... but I don't care for that...
If you got the fastest on the market and demand is there, why not ask for a premium price... would be stupid in a marketing point of view...
I always buy the fastest thing around , I don't know why really as my monitor doesn't support resolutions over 1600 x 1200 lol... I'm just a show off...:ROTF:
I hope it is 16x and VERY bad drivers. It would be pathetic if it did not outperform gx2.Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
I am kinda lazy, so could someone tell me whether it will support double precision? I guess no..
Vantage Xtreme settings, 1920*1200+4aa+16af
GTX 280 (D10U-30): X4098
GTX 260 (D10U-20): X3782
9800GX2 should score X3600
I thought it would be a yes to that q.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacky
Ownage, are you telling me that 280 is going to perform 8% better than 260 for 30% higher msrp? And that it is faster than gx2.
We already knew both cards would be faster then the GX2. I don't have any experience with Vantage, so don't know if 8% is allot or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuker_
I meant 260. I didn't really think that was going to be faster than GX2. 280 obviously would be faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
It was already rumored for a while both cards would be faster then the GX2. These Vantage scores say the same. One thing is sure, these cards are evil!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuker_
http://www.pureoverclock.com/images/...vidia_evil.jpg
Yeah! Hope I'm not too optimistic, but if the 260 is 10% faster the GX2 the 280 will be like 37.5% better! For 600 $ that's a quite nice price/performance ratio. If this is true, I will probably buy one at launch date, but I wonder how my power supply will handle the beast! Finally I will be able to play crysis at my desktop resolution with something like 40-60 fps, which my hd2900xt does at 8-9 fps.Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
Should be good, though I be people will whine that they were promised 2x GX2 speed :rolleyes:
Right, because I remember the past, I have Alzheimer's? Sounds like you do more than me, though personal insults are usually the resort of those who have no other ammo to debate with as you obviously do not. I bought all of the cards within a week or two of their launches always... before the 6800-series and ATI equivalents it was always that way ($300-350 tops, less often). This is a new trend that is ludicrous, $600-650+ is way too much for a card both historically and in modern-day money period. You can buy a whole gaming computer for that which performs 80% as well as a $650 card.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
Being a show-off is obvious... you act like getting fleeced is "cool" and "smart" when it is not. :rofl::rofl: :down: :shrug: :ROTF::ROTF:
Hmm GTX 280 only what 13% faster than X2? Is it just me or expectations run much higher?Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
If those numbers are real then I think some fanboys are gonna be crying.
It sure isn't. 37.5% more performance for ~90% price increase over a pair of 8800GTS 512's in SLI on a fairly easy-to-find deal nowadays ($175-180 isn't uncommon), is not a good "bang for the buck" "price/performance ratio". Nice job buying into marketing though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuker_
That requires a crappy nvidia mobo though. And then I can't use the PCI slots need.
If those are real benchmarks, the GT200 will be a huge letdown. I can't decide what to get....
dual 4870X2s in quadfire (thats 1920 SPs, 128 TMUs & 64 ROPs) or a single GTX280...
HuH?Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
The MUL was only WORKING ~33% of the time...
Which is why the Flops for the G80 was actually ~346GFlops.
Now you add back in the missing MUL and you "magically" get a 50% increase.
Hmmmm.... not that hard.
That 650 dollar gaming pc must be a true rocker i!f you think it can reach 80%... if you felt insulted sorry for that, but I would like to know in which country you live in as even for my Voodoo 12mb I payed more than 350dollars and that's a long long time ago...if I quickly recalculate that with my salary then and the past money value must be around 450 dollars ...Must be PCwonderland... Secondly noone forces you to buy the latest and the fastest, if you can go with a vidcard for 3 years, good for you...Thirdly some peeps don't want to risk the OC like most of us do and just want the fastest thing out of the box...Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
On my part I just sell my hardware to friends and co for a very fair price and just add some to get better hardware just to mess with and bench on... for gaming I could still play on my 7900GTX's at medium and low detail settings if I wanted, but for benching I need more... and as a PC assembler it's nice to show new stuff at LANS and co...
We all noted that you find the price unfair, so be it. No need to hump om each post and rub it in, over and over again... for single card users, these cards might be great if they deliver... no hassles for SLI, can be run on cheapo mobo's, easier cooling setups (thinking of water), etc... Also dual chip or SLI or Crossfire are nice things but can be plagued by bad drivers and for me never ever again after my 7950X2 experience and the micro stuttering issues with my 7900GTX's... I stick with a single card setup for gaming...
Think of me what ya want, I really don't care Tigro... Think the number of post that react on ya statements tell the story... If you calculate everything price/ratio you are in the wrong sector, even when you buy ya pc and walk out of the shop your rig is already dated and/or devaluated...
I live in the U.S., perhaps things are more expensive over in Belgium, I don't know. However, here you can build an 8800GT-512 SLI rig for around $650 without much effort mostly from newegg. Anyone who doesn't calculate price/performance on any purchase, except pure benchers with money bleeding out their ears who care about performance at any cost, is a fool and likely to run into financial trouble as they likely apply it to everything in their life, money be damned. By the way, it's "Tiger," not "Tigro."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
EDIT:
Here's an example build I found and made in five minutes of work, if you wanted to meet my target of $650 you could just drop the CPU to a lower-end dual core and you'd be a scant amount over it with a CPU such as an Allendale for $60-70 oc'd to 3.0ghz or so... this is a quad-core rig with near-GX2 performance, 2GB ram, real motherboard/case/psu/etc., plenty of storage, etc. (hard drive could be shaven down too a few bucks such as a $30-40 200-250gb jobbie). It adds up to $662 with a dual-core CPU, $642 with a smaller hard drive and a dual-core CPU, or as shown $792. So, please try to tell me that for anyone but a hardcore bencher, again that $650 is not a lot for one computer's part?
Q6600 $200 when added to cart http://shop2.frys.com/product/5101696
Motherboard with X-Fi sound onboard $140-30rebate=110 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813130080
2gb 1-stick RAM module PC2-6400 $35 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820609283
Rosewill case w/ free shipping ATX (non-junky) $39 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811147088
Rosewill 550w SLI PSU well-rated on various real review sites $65 shipped http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817182090
2x 8800GT 512 video cards in SLI mode, various, example $160-30rebate=130x2=$260 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814121224
DVD burner, various Lite-On/etc. drives $23 w/ free shipping example http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827106228
hard drive 500gb 7200.11 Seagate $60 shipped via various specials every week or two at various vendors
We can't do that. I don't know about Belgium, I expect it's similar there and across Europe, but here are some prices for you:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
http://www.netshop.no/aspx/produkt/p...spx?plid=44579
Q6600 307.909 USD
http://www.netshop.no/aspx/produkt/p...spx?plid=93181
ASUS 8800GT 512MB 277.214 USD for one
That's over 850 dollars for the quad+SLI setup, without even getting into mobo, RAM, case, PSU, DVD, HDD..
Also, the 9800GX2 costs $750 here so I'd expect these cards to debut at something like that as well.
If only newegg shipped here.. Even with the transatlantic shipping and 25% VAT I'm sure it'd pay off, dollar being as low as it is..
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
Ouch at your prices :(. In the U.S. though, I think my argument holds water... overseas, obviously not.
Why do you think I said PCwonderland :) if I buy a CPU/mobo/Gfx card I'm already at your budget :down: I can assemble an AMD 6000/3870/2GB rig for that money...Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
In Sweden you can buy cheap hardware! Norway is the most expensive country in the world, people come from across the border to shop food here in Sweden a lot just to give an example. :up:
That system can be done in the Eu for just about $1000, with higher quality components like Corsair psu, coolermaster case, better ram etc
http://www2.hardwareversand.de/3/home.jsp
http://www.pix.sparky-s.ie/images/sm...qlf8_thumb.jpg
Incredible deal when you think that a Gtx280 will cost €550 here too...
hardwareversand is where its at, Best prices in Europe by miles! The dollar is so weak atm that it makes our prices sound even worse :P
Its very easy to make an affordable (500 euro ~ 780usd) gaming rig in Europe atm
E2180
Cheapo 650 / 750i board for option of SLI upgrade
8800gt
2gig kit of ram
640gig HDD
Corsair VX550
DVD Burner
Crappy
etc
I don't think people were expecting it to be much faster than the GX2 in apps that scale well with SLI. But I'm sure it will be in cases where the 512MB on the GX2 is an issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by SimBy
It's funny how every time a new product is discussed, and 3DMarks leak, people immediately jump to conclusions based on 3DMark, 3DMark hasn't been a real benchmark for years, and the way things are going will never be.
3DMark = no reality benchmark whatsoever.
but it does give you a rough idea where how the performance stacks up on these
Actually the people that claim it means nothing are just as ignorant as the people who use it as a sole performance base.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
And actually, it can be used as a good sole performance base, you just have to pay for it to do so. The default settings are low res, no AA or AF.
With the paid version, you can set the quality to highest, put on high res, and use AA and AF. With those settings, it will separate the good cards from the bad ones pretty quick. I am speaking of 3dmark06, have not used vantage.
same story with vantage from what i was toldQuote:
Originally Posted by 003
the lower the settings the more CPU/system intense it is>>> as it goes up to highest settings GPUs take over
I Spec'd a similar system on our website (www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk):Quote:
Originally Posted by bowman
Q6600
2x1Gb Mushkin/Transcend
Asus P5N-D (N750)
Coolermaster Elite
550W PSU
8800 GT 512 SLi
DVD-R with Litescribe
500Gb HDD (Samsung HD501LJ)
PCI X-Fi
Price: £645.00 ($1,278) ex. VAT, £757.88 ($1,501.41) inc. VAT @17.5%
Price would include build and testing with Vista 64 and a 3 year warranty.
So yeah, GBP/EUR prices = 2.5-2x USD prices. There was a time when you could get parts from US at USD prices plus shipping but not now that they've tightened up import taxation. I could probably get away with it by having them sent to work as 'samples'.
Again, all mid-range to low end components... :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
You're calling a quad-core rig with equivalent to near-GX2 performance, a "normal" amount of RAM, X-Fi sound, a beefy enough PSU, etc. etc. a "low-end" rig? Ignorant... :rofl::rofl: :ROTF: :shrug: :rofl::rofl: your 10% faster 5x the cost rig doesn't mean something 90% of the performance is "low-end." By your logic, your 10% faster rig is low-end also if that one is because it's not much faster. Two words come to mind about your post: materialistic/gullible.Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Tiger, it is obvious that you have something to prove... I suggest that there are better places to do that than this thread. Please go somewhere else to peddle your wares! A thread on the latest and greatest is full of individuals who can't wait to spend top dollar to get the newest thing, myself included. I for one can't wait to get 2 of these in sli driving my 30" Dell!!!
I have nothing to prove, in fact the burden lies on them as accusing someone of being stupid for regarding something as wasting cash to prove it is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
I too am looking forward to the cards and am planning on buying a GTX 280 on its launch. However, that doesn't change the fact that to me, $650 is an ABSURD price for a card regardless and is a trend I hope changes.
People in the thread couldn't stand that I said that and began flinging personal insults, so I proved that it logically makes little sense. Now you and others are being very defensive for no reason, acting as though it's a personal attack on your honor or something like that when it's nothing to do with it.
You guys get far too worked up over this stuff sometimes. :D
Although I guess being passionate about your hardware isn't necessarily a bad thing :up:
I can agree with that :D !Quote:
Originally Posted by Sly Fox
The pricing debate here made me curious. The last two cards I have bought before my current one were a Geforce4 Ti 4400 for around $330 and a Geforce2 for just under $300. Here is what I found with some googling. It's called boiling a frog. The Riva 128 could be had for about $130. here you can see the TNT2 Ultra, a summer 1999 refresh of the TNT2 selling on release for only $180. In this firingsquad review you can see that the first geforce cards with DDR ram were selling at $299 MSRP. These were the top end Asus cards at that time (12/99) and Creative was selling a geforce 256 DDR card for $250. Here is a nice comparison chart from tomshardware that gives a good idea for prices at the start of 2000. I still have my Elsa Erazor X2 which was selling for just under $300. Again, state of the art and arguably the best brand at the time. It was not until the Geforce2 Ultra at $500 MSRP that we started to get a hint of current pricing. It was rumoured that such pricing was simply to compete against the $600 3dfx Voodoo 5 6000. and indeed here you can see a geforce3 for $280 (street price) in 09/2001. And by the end of 2001 you can see that the top of the line Nvidia card, the geforce3 Ti 500 had an MSRP of $350. In 2002 the bar was raised again with the geforce4 Ti 4600 selling for just under $400. By summer 2003, we are again back to an MSRP of $499 for the top end card, geforce FX 5900 Ultra. This was replaced in October with the FX 5950, again at the $499 price point. Fast forward to the summer refresh of 2004 and we have the 6800 Ultra at $499 again. Although the non-ultra 6800 GT could be had for just under $400. By the end of 2005 Nvidia is selling the geforce 7800 GTX 512 for $700. And that is the street price at the time. By spring of 2006, the 7900 GTX is released at $499. Then in November of 2006 the ever famous and still king of graphics cards, the 8800 GTX was released at just over $600. So it set a new record for both perforrmance and for cost. Although the 8800 ultra had an MSRP of $829, it soon dropped to about $700 probably due to the fact that no one was buying them. I wonder if Nvidia was testing the waters to see how much people would really be willing to pay for a top end graphics card. It seems like they were trying to go for a similar pricing strategy to Intel, with the fastest product costing a huge premium.
You are pretty much insulting anyone here that buys highend hardware. And what makes this worse is that you have a very selective memory for your arguements. I and a few others have already shown that the trend for hardware of 300 dollar hardware has not been around in a while and was never really a historical trend to begin with really. In addition, NV didn't just pop out the 8800gtx at 599. The price has been like that for a while for true high end(look through this thread).Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Since this is xtremesystems, an enthusiest website about highend hardware, your calling alot of people stupid here for spending lots of money on the latest and greatest hardware. Of course your going to get flammed(which has mainly been attacking your arguements). If anything you have made the rudest comment here.
This comment
Being a show-off is obvious... you act like getting fleeced is "cool" and "smart" when it is not. :rofl::rofl: :down: :shrug: :ROTF::ROTF
Says anyone with highend hardware is a showoff, buys into marketing, gets ripped off and is stupid. Seriously on a site like this, your lucky your not banned because this applies to alot of of the members here. Its alright to attacks someone argument but your above comment is a direct personal attack on a lot of people. There's really no other interpretation.
What even more ridiculous is your selective memory or your blanket statements, which makes your comments even more maddenning when you condescend on us.
Your memory is very selective for your arguments because, you choose not to ackknowledge alot of cards have been higher than 300 dollars. Which we have already shown in this thread, which dozen of MSRP all over the place. Also you are labelling all the card you own as high end when they are not.
And if we say a card is expensive to make or anything to that effect, you vedo it or say it is a poor argument because we are just gullible and falling to marketing. Is stuff getting more expensive not a valid argument when world trend have shown this?
Industry insiders are saying yields are bad and real hardware engineers around here say that the card is expensive to make. Heck even the long lineup of components and specs show(Die size and complexity of the card it self) it an expensive card. Your rebuttle, that marketing garbage(even those most people who buy this card don't know most of this information), begin to insult us and say we are all suckers.
Thats hogwash and acting really ignorant because you are ignoring alot of information that can justify our arguments valid.
Seriously don't peddle your so called answer here.
P.S your the only one throwing around personal insults.
I think this quote says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by gojirasan
I suggest you re-read the comments IN CONTEXT. I was being insulted, so I responded back with facts. I also noted that YOU acted like paying MSRP meant you were cool somehow, which you did by inference easily.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Please show me where the cards were that expensive prior to the 6800 series. The post I quoted above shows they were not. We're talking an overall timespan of 10 years here, not 1,000 years, which qualifies as recent by standard definition.
Highend hardware is a relative term... if it performs 80-100% as well as the best of the best out there, it is high-end to any reasonable person.
I'd appreciate your use of proper grammar and spelling when flinging demeaning, silly insults at me. It's quite hard to take someone seriously when they write like that. Try re-reading the facts in this thread, and don't be scared to admit that sometimes, you CAN be wrong. Being stubborn about a misguided opinion based off of false "facts" is not bolstering your argument. Tearing down your false argument is hardly personally insulting, I don't know why you might interpret it that way unless you are as materialistic as I hinted I thought you might be earlier.
As far as your "point" about things being more expensive, do you think it was any easier for them to develop previous cards? Sure wasn't, yet they put them out at the lower prices. It is indeed a poor argument to try and pull the "OOH it's shiny new tech! it SHOULD be expensive!" card out of the hat.
On your saying I should be banned for having a different opinion than yours, well, I think that says it all. You can't possibly accept someone else's view, and thus lash out at it.
Anyway, I think this has been hashed out enough, so I'm done with it. Thread has become WAY derailed.
Seems to me me you grabbed the tiger by the tail! careful he might bite.:shakes:
If we're using analogies, it's more like them having been eaten alive by the tiger :p: .Quote:
Originally Posted by purefun65
We want results no more MSRP's talk... let's get back on topic... each one has it's points, hardware demands differ, prices too ; some spends ridicilous amounts of cash, some are more economical : to each his own
I suggest you re-read the comments IN CONTEXT. I was being insulted, so I responded back with facts. I also noted that YOU acted like paying MSRP meant you were cool somehow, which you did by inference easily.
Noone claimed it was cool, how can you inference that? Its just the best thing to use in an arguement because you can prove it, and not a unique case such as an open box. E.g I got 280 gtx for 299 because of a sale on hardware and it was open box. It would turn this argument into a battle of unsubstantiated claims. This would be fruitless.
Please show me where the cards were that expensive prior to the 6800 series. The post I quoted above shows they were not. We're talking an overall timespan of 10 years here, not 1,000 years, which qualifies as recent by standard definition.
We have shown that the price of videocards has been on the rise. That enought to prove that your 300 dollar historical trend is wrong which is entire basis of your arguement. It not a static statistic we can lament about. In addition to this we can show a whole crap load with a price above the 300 dollar price point(it also illustrates the price on the rise).
Geforce 2 ultra MSRP = 500 ATI 7500 = 199
Geforce Ti 500 MSRP = 350 ATI 8500 = 299
Geforce Ti 4600 MSRP = 399 ATI 9700 pro = 399
Geforce 5900 ultra = 499 ATI 9800XT = 499
and now we are at the current generation we are now at the 6800 generation and we know how that went.
Highend hardware is a relative term... if it performs 80-100% as well as the best of the best out there, it is high-end to any reasonable person.
To keep this debate consistent, we have to take the price of the highest end product. Otherwise your complaint of 650 dollar videocards become much weaker. E.g Both the 8800 gts(640) and the 280 gtx have a price of 449 and fit into your description of highend. Are we going to now lament about $449 high end cards? Keep it consistent.
I'd appreciate your use of proper grammar and spelling when flinging demeaning, silly insults at me. It's quite hard to take someone seriously when they write like that. Try re-reading the facts in this thread, and don't be scared to admit that sometimes, you CAN be wrong.
You mean to buy highend hardware on initial release(personally I wait until the scalping is done, so I can buy at MSRP or lower). Of course its expensive and in terms of economics not the best choice, but their are untangible benefits which why people buy Ferrari's, Mercedes benz and other things. And thankfully unlike those which are mostly to showoff, PC hardware is purely about performance.
Being stubborn about a misguided opinion based off of false "facts" is not bolstering your argument. Tearing down your false argument is hardly personally insulting, I don't know why you might interpret it that way unless you are as materialistic as I hinted I thought you might be earlier.
So what makes them false fact, because you say so? Are you saying everyone that says the 280 gtx expensive to manufacture is misguided and wrong. I think you have alot of people to talk to. What makes your facts more valid than mine when you can find the evidence for alot of it from very credible people.
It depends on your definition of materialistic, if you mean that I show off and brag that I have so and so hardware, I would never do that. If I get hardware it's so I can enjoy it myself. So does wanting to performance mean your materialistic. Again with the personal insults and this one has no basis. So is everyone at xtremesystems, who has a highend hardware hobby materialistic now(not saying some aren't).
Your not tearing down anything when you have nothing to back your arguements up.
Everyone here is speaking against you, no one is on your side in terms of your side of the argument. I think you might be the one wrong.
As far as your "point" about things being more expensive, do you think it was any easier for them to develop previous cards? Sure wasn't, yet they put them out at the lower prices. It is indeed a poor argument to try and pull the "OOH it's shiny new tech! it SHOULD be expensive!" card out of the hat.
The more complex things are, the more difficult it is to manufacture; that is common sense. The cost of operations and building something with new tech is more expensive. Plus most people here, don't look at something at see woo new tech we should buy it. First off we look at the performance. Typically new generation hardware blows everything out of the park when it is released. E.g the 8800 gtx was faster than a 7800 gtx in SLI when it was released, we don't buy it because it is simply new tech, we buy it because it bring a higher level of performance with it. This performance (at least upon release) is a result typically of new components (which add to the expense to varying degree's). If its expensive and performs like a boat, we won't touch the thing with a ten foot pole. In fact in disgust, we will lose respect for the company and buy the competitor product.
Sure the prices were lower in the past, but they didn't invest as much money into developing the chips(research) or add as complex components as we have now. And probaly made similar margins(percentage wise). If the highend chip price was 200 like 12 years ago, I can guarentee you that we wouldn't have close to the transister counts, the amount of memory or performance we have availible today. Heck the software bundles of these things are sometimes 100 dollars in games.
I want you to answer this question the most. Do you think we could release the 280 GTX at the 300 dollar price point upon initial release considering its complexity,yields and manufacturing process. Answer this please. If you cannot, that is why you are wrong.
If your basis is the price of the g92 chips, Smaller chips(90nm vs 65nm), Yields have gotten better, stuff have been cut, price of components have dropped, etc. That is why the 8800gtx was so expensive and the 8800gt was so cheap. When I say I want my tech early, I am saying I would rather buy the 8800gtx when it came out, then wait for the cost of things to settle down and get the 8800gt much much later.
On your saying I should be banned for having a different opinion than yours, well, I think that says it all. You can't possibly accept someone else's view, and thus lash out at it.
You can have another opinion, that not the problem. Its when you have personal attacks against someone that the problem I have. Serious I didn't attack you at all. I think lasthing out is when you start insulting or insinuating things against a person BTW, you directed that comment at someone else, not me.
Anyway, I think this has been hashed out enough, so I'm done with it. Thread has become WAY derailed.[/QUOTE]
Anyways, I think I will stop derailing this topic, I am really excited about the new GTX as you can tell.
It's pretty simple, latest greatest GPU is expensive. Always has been.
Perhaps start another thread about GTX-200 pricing. This thread is for performance leaks and speculation, I thought. ;)
Vantage results for GTX 280, 260, Radeon HD 4870 and 4850
regardsQuote:
Both the GeForce GTX and Radeon HD 4800 series will arrive in about three weeks. Each series will bring two new cards to the market; GeForce GTX 280 and 260, and Radeon HD 4870 and 4850. There is a big difference between the cards though as the GeForce GTX series is enthusiast range, while Radeon HD 4800 series is more mid-range. There have been talks of what GeForce GTX 280 can do in Vantage, but it has now been completed with figures for the other cards.
These are of course in no way official and we can't say for certain where they come from. The only thing we know is that the numbers are not unreasonable, but some information about the rest of the system would be nice. ATI performance (with all cards) is still subpar due to poor drivers, and should improve in Vantage with coming releases. The numbers that are circulating the web are something like this;
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/509...resultsmd5.jpg
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7809.html
HD 48xx scores are not real http://www.forumdeluxx.de/forum/show...postcount=1378 .
How does the physics portion of the gfx card work? If it works like the ageia physics card then its going to steal some points, think it was around 900 (?).
DEAD LINKQuote:
Originally Posted by whocaresbg
Actually you've been posting the exact same dead link all day now x(
I want to know where all the GX2s will go if those numbers are true though 0_0
Perkam
Link has worked for me....all day... ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...sucessor-tapesQuote:
Nvidia GT200 sucessor tapes out
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9...altpileeu3.jpgQuote:
The GT200b will be out in late summer or early fall, instantly obsoleting the GT200. Anyone buying the 65nm version will end up with a lemon, a slow, hot and expensive lemon. Kind of like the 5800. It would suck for NV if word of this got out. Ooops, sorry.
That will change the game between ATI and Nvidia..... ATi might recapture a large amount of Market unless Nvidia starts dropping prices and will in turn Drop their Earnings for 2008. This seems to make things interesting again!
if those scores are true then GT200 doesn`t sound as a such powerful GPU like a few weeks ago. Some guy on Pcinlife forum has said that GT200 can run 7K in 3dmark Vantage in X-mode (strange because this guy has said other info which we know they are true) and the we see that it`s score is about 40% lower and only about 10% higher than GX2 score.
I wonder how this GPU can run Crysis playable in 1920x1200 AA/AF enabled with only 4K in 3dmV? It`s only 2 times faster than G92 so to run Crysis playable at these settings GT200 has to be about 3 times faster.
ooh, ubr bash
so lets put theinq text together:
there will be cards at launch and they will be fast, but there will be so few that the gross of oems dont even care ordering some, especially because that chip will be EOLd after only 3 months:eek:
looking like a sphinx built from 9800 XXX lifetime and x850xt pe+7800 gtx 512mb availability (well, at least that card was ordered by oem; dell)
but which guy that chip is aimed at wouldnt care less....
itll be the fastest thing around, 'nuff said :D
IF this article is true,then NV will not be able to create GX2 based on GT200b even if it is built on 55nm process...The die will still be quite big(400mm2).TDP of GX2-like card based on these would blow out of the water the now confirmed large TDP of GTX280.Quote:
Originally Posted by fornowagain
But,like i said,if the article is based on a real informations.
On another side,we'll have AMD with their cheap RV770 performance parts that will cost lot less,heat our rooms less(and yes,without the X2 R700 part,perform most likely somewhat worse).But competition is a good thing,prices will no doubt go down as AMD,through their partners, starts massive production of their RV770 chips.
If theinq got some facts right, for anyone interested in a single GPU solution unlike SLI, x2 or GX2 it'll be still worth the money IF you bought a card with the possibility for step-up. You would just need to wait a bit before buying to make sure that your 3 months step-up time are enough to get a gt200b...
But of course they forgot to mention something like this. I'm by no means an nV fanboy, but it would just have been a bit more on the fair side side, instead of bashing the sh*t out of a chip that isn't even on the market yet. I think nV accomplished something in making this monster sort of work. And being able to turn down the heating in the winter due to your shiny new gpu accounts to something, too, doesn't it?
A sidenote: the author mentioned the term "Itanic", ignoring the fact that Intel, after years, starts to make money with a "new" architecture. Poor idiot I say. :shakes:
The wordusage alone told it was clueless charlie that wrote it. Even before opening the article. Now thats foresight :p:
While the TDP would be closer to 300W it is possible for a GX2 to be made, altho it would probably come stock with water cooling. Don't be surprised to see 55nm G200 before too long. Wityh 260 & 280 used, there is still 270 & 290 available for a 55nm refresh.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
What's up with Demerjians personal Crusade against nVidia?
It's ridiculous?!!! :confused: :shakes: :shrug:
Probably because the Inq wasn't invited for "nVidia Editors Day" :ROTF::rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
He's a DAAMIT shill, always has been. He was spewing the same kind of BS about the G80 before it came out. Check out this laugh riot from the archives:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim
http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquir...rts-thickening
L O FAKn L at that article. What a tool. :ROTF: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
I think people are too worried about whether NV can put out an X2 version of this 280 card, there's a more conventional way of getting that kind of performance - it's called SLI!
Say 4870X2 does pip GTX280 to the performance post, what would it have to say to 2 x GTX280's?:confused: I imagine both the cost and performance differences will be there for sure. Maybe we're going to end up putting 2 x 4870X2's against 3 x GTX280's for the Vantage WR's.
What would this be?
http://img126.imageshack.us/img126/2564/gt200cjzo7.jpg
GT200 :D
Hope the inq is right this time, but unfortunately probably not.
dude, this was coming a long time now!
sucks for the stepup guys, but the rest might as well just wait 3-4 months longer...
who was it that said the GX2 was going to have the shortest life span?!
these guys are crazy!
these cards are pushing pcie 1.1. I really would not like to upgrade my board this year for my gaming system..just the card..the kentsfield should be more then enough.
now we just need some games on the market, guess i could use it for the F@H client when it's out..even though i said i was quitin
I think this is funny :D
http://www.ngohq.com/images/rules.jpgQuote:
Second rule of Nvidia: Don't leak to the INQUIRER
Well blow us down
By Adamson Rust: Thursday, 09 March 2006, 9:49 PM
WE NOTICE that Tom's Hardware has a piece about Nvidia's recent announcements.
When you get to the page, here, scroll down to the last slide on the page to be sure of a big surprise.
Yes, that's the second rule of an Nvidia non disclosure agreement (NDA) briefing.
nVidia gives the Inq a nice whoopass!
haha, now we know why charlie is so angry. :p:
i just post everything i can find on the net.
http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/175...espricenk1.jpg
High prices for the suck!
GTX 260 < 9800GX2? :stick:
Wait, what? This confirms that Inq actually obtains leaked info, LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
ask lots of questions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
this slide was from 2006. ;)
So they were getting leaked info for 2 years :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/175...espricenk1.jpg
There ya go :) (Originally posted by member "ownage" in the 9900 thread)
From Nvidia's Editor's day.
This basically means that if the 4870 GDDR5 is $329, the GTX 280 will cost the same as two of them in crossfire.
Perkam
Hefty even with step-up to an eVGA one, but probably too good to resist. Hoping to get G80 value out of these.
Does that slide somehow imply that the GT260 will be between 9800GTX and 9800GX2 if it comes to performance and the GT280 will beat the 9800GX2 or am I reading too much into it?
Reading too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by naokaji
The 9800GTX also got 2 different positions. The new is a tad lower placed :p:
hopefully it means there's a significant real world performance gains aside from theorycrafting, otherwise it'll be a tough pill to swallow
I'm hopeful they will quickly make cuts...assuming that ati has a very competitive product.
Jeebus..! :eek: Can't wait for a "real" 9800 (and 4870) comparison..
Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
/agree
Thanks for the find though :). I'm thinking toward the GTX 260 now, myself... I have a hard time thinking the 280's gonna be worth it.
Yeah, we'll see... hope so. Seems pretty high, I might go for the 260 instead now.Quote:
Originally Posted by turbox997
http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquir...nnards-exposed The inq does not feel worried about "no leaks to the inq". According to them(him?)selves.
Aah, 649 USD is just too predictable. We all knew that 600+ equals 649 since the previous launches.
3 280s sound very fun to me:)
Tri SLi
that pretty much guarantess the card will be +700 at launch through the normal channels.
I remember when I thought $300 was expensive for a videocard :(