Quote Originally Posted by zerazax View Post
Success? Based on what? Pure performance?

If I made a GPU that netted me a $15 profit while drawing 400w and heats up my coffee everyday, but is 20-30% faster than the 5970, but was half a year late and is in extremely limited numbers, is that a success? Okay that was an extreme example but my point is: You can't look at performance numbers in a vacuum and call the card a success.

Not to mention that if new rumors are true and the 480 is indeed 480sps instead of a full 512, then that's a failure to meet your own set requirements.

Furthermore, if the power/tdp numbers are true, it's going up against 5970s (don't bother rehashing 2v1 gpus, we are talking price and power figures since those are objective categorization points)

"Just" 10-20% (overall, which remains to be seen) after 6 months is dissapointing. It's not a flop like R600 (where it was slower) or NV30, but consider that GT200 vs RV770 had similar performance deltas but GT200 was almost a month earlier.
You are repeating many rumors that nobody knows if they are true or not, yet.

You say 20% is disappointing after 6 months, but 20% lead would be the best business scenario for nVidia and make many people (with sans for high-end GPU) happy too.
You are avoiding to tel if it should be 200% better or what to satisfy you? and what those 6 mounts got to do with performance crown of the best performing GPU av the time?