GTX 560 Coming soon!

[duploxxx]

Different environments, different test conditions, GPU samples, etc can all impact upon the results methinks.

thx for the try but I do prefer to trust the data provided by anandtech rather then you
sites that measure the total power consumption of the system always end up with higher power consumption with the default cards btw, not mentioning the OC parts....

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1533/17/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/16
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...60-ti-review/7

You have many good points there.

I personally, have always reacted when people argue with die-size, transistor-count, yield (and other manufacturing costs). Because as you've mentioned correctly "costing around 35$ thats not a big deal...". The real cost is in R&D, PR, sales and such. Manufacturing cost is not a big chunk of the total cost. and that's why the sales-volume becomes a really important factor.

AMD could make a bigger 6970 chip and beat/match 580 actually. They could double the transistor-count (for only 35$ +/- some, not a big deal) without hitting the heat or power usage wall. They could easily spend 35$ (+/- some) and do it, but they underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture. They thought 580 was a 480 + "minor"-improvements, and they wouldn't need more to beat it. they didn't expect such a good 580 really. That was the first mistake in this round.

The second mistake (and even bigger) came when they released 6950-1GB. They spend time and money to make a "change", but they chose to "degraded" the 6950-2GB and use it for a mainstream-fight. In my opinion, it was really bad move, they should somehow (i dunno how) "upgrade" the 6970 to take a fight with 580. This move didn't beat 560, but created a big mess for them too. Now they have many cards that "performs the same for most gamers" on their hand.


nVidia did a really good job with 560. They got the upper-hand over 6950-1Gb/2GB, in performance/OCing/power-usage for most gamers, and they priced it under too, at start!

But the mainstream is not about performance-crown, its' all about price/performance-ratio, and as you mentioned, AMD can still drop the prices and put up a good price-fight. They made a good attempt already at the first day of 560-release, but it will be interesting to see nVidia's counter-attack.

AMD may get problems following nVidia in an aggressive price-war tho, because 560 is a mainstream card, and has been developed for a "cheap" marked, while AMD is using those "degraded" high-end cards to fight. It will be interesting to see how far they can follow nVidia in near future.

It can get really ugly, depending on nVidi's resistivity. 560 got a good price already, but I'm still crossing finger for $199. It will be interesting to see that

ATI always use there dual card for the high-end, it was never the intention with 6970 and yes performance wasn't that great from 69xx series, forgot a few months ago where 6870 totally destroyed prices 460-465-470, ah you probably don't, you're still pissed for that.

NV has to regain marketshare and profit these days from there initial fermi losses, so I won't think they will drop 560 any time soon as long as they don't need to, they have upset the board makers a long time with the 2xx and 4xx series.

OH you also need to start talking with few GPU marketing folks from NV and ATI to get a better idea about the market, the 69xx-68xx or 56x are not mainstream cards, they call them performance - enthousiast. The real mainstream is like the 65-66xx series where the mass volume is from OEM supplies

and the best entry level card to get seems to be the 460...

did you ever check any price/performance/power of the 68xx series against the 460???
not to mention NV still doesn't have anything against the 57xx ehh rebranded 67xx series.