Anyone else think that Video Card Prices are out of Control!?!

[moutwtrng]

I maybe wrong but, I really feel that Video Card prices are way out of control...

You would think that as technology advances that it would get more cost efficient and make it more affordable for the masses to acquire?

I mean if you look at the price progression from the gtx 300's to the 600's or the Amd 4800's to the 7800's its just crazy?! And not to mention the economy we are in right now...

The GTX 690 was just announced and I am loving the card but for $999, the excitement just went out the door!

Anyone else feel the same way?

 

[Ozymandias]

High end video cards have always been expensive.

You would think that as technology advances that it would get more cost efficient and make it more affordable for the masses to acquire?

That is happening! You can get performance equivalent to last year's high-end cards (used to be $500) for $350 today.

 

[atticus14]

its always been the same really, but this moment is escalated a little probably because of the new 28nm process; but regardless these companies are going to bleed the wallets of the impatient or those with excess money till they cant anymore, then prices will drop as always.

 

[ZoNe]

Yup. there are many threads in here to this effect. Basically a lot more money for NOT a lot more performance compared to past.

Oh well. Just won't buy the top shit and there are some good values still out there.

 

[Crosshairs]

You get a whole lot more now for $600.00 than you got 5 or 6 years ago.....
The 690 is rumored to come out at pretty close to the same price the 8800GTX came out at ,so no, I don think they are out of control at all.....

We have also reached a point of diminishing returns.....you cant expect double the performance at every new release anymore...technology only moves so fast

 

[ZoNe]

its always been the same really, but this moment is escalated a little probably because of the new 28nm process; but regardless these companies are going to bleed the wallets of the impatient or those with excess money till they cant anymore, then prices will drop as always.

Has not been the same.
7970 was almost twice the price of 6970
7950 was almost twice the price of 6950
7870 was almost twice the price of 6870
etc

Last time AMD had top card before that, 5800's - they were half priced too as 28nm.

You could always get near top performances for $200-250 every gen. I know cause that's where I buy.

6800GT to 8800GT to GTX 260 to GTX 448. Now nothing. Just mid range 7850 around that price. 7950 should be $250 like 6950 was. Coming GTX 670 should be $250 as well but will be $400.

 

[DejaWiz]

They always have been expensive. Voodoo2 8MB was around $300 at launch, iirc. Then the 12MB version came out and carried a bit of a price premium over it.

I had lots of friends that ditched their recently acquired 8's for 12's.

They are priced like this because that's what people are willing to pay. Given what a modern GPU is capable of compared to what the Voodoo2 would provide, we're getting a hell of a deal more often than not. It's cool and awesome and all to have the flagship card at time of release, but for the remaining 99.9% of us, the performance mainstream GPU models suffice just fine.

I paid $300 for my GTX 570 a year ago. It's still a powerhouse and I suspect it will be for quite some time. I could have gone with the 580 for $150 more, but the only thing I would have gained is marginally better performance and a much larger diminished return on investment. I'm happy with what I have, and will be for quite some time.

 

[PRIME1]

I picked up a 560ti 448 for $189.

As for the 690 @ $999, it's far better than a $1100 7970 setup. So I think it's priced better than it could have been.

 

[Draxanoth]

You get a whole lot more now for $600.00 than you got 5 or 6 years ago.....
The 690 is rumored to come out at pretty close to the same price the 8800GTX came out at ,so no, I don think they are out of control at all.....

We have also reached a point of diminishing returns.....you cant expect double the performance at every new release anymore...technology only moves so fast

If the 8800GTX released at $599 and the 690GTX is going to be $999, how are they close in price? XD

 

[ZoNe]

You get a whole lot more now for $600.00 than you got 5 or 6 years ago.....
The 690 is rumored to come out at pretty close to the same price the 8800GTX came out at ,so no, I don think they are out of control at all.....

We have also reached a point of diminishing returns.....you cant expect double the performance at every new release anymore...technology only moves so fast

I bet big kepler is 100% faster than fermi. They just got greedy and only give 20-30% over GTX 580 for more money. Same with AMD but worse. They decided to double prices for 30% performance improvment. LOL.

 

[Monkey God]

Not out of control. Supply and demand. People keep thinking they need $1000 of video cards and 3 monitors to enjoy themselves.

 

[shansoft]

I picked up a 560ti 448 for $189.

As for the 690 @ $999, it's far better than a $1100 7970 setup. So I think it's priced better than it could have been.

Lol what?

 

[wonderfield]

No, I don't. High-end graphics cards are costly to produce and have limited market viability, which makes it difficult for vendors to price them lower.

 

[NickJames]

Has not been the same.
7970 was almost twice the price of 6970
7950 was almost twice the price of 6950
7870 was almost twice the price of 6870
etc

Last time AMD had top card before that, 5800's - they were half priced too as 28nm.

You could always get near top performances for $200-250 every gen. I know cause that's where I buy.

6800GT to 8800GT to GTX 260 to GTX 448. Now nothing. Just mid range 7850 around that price. 7950 should be $250 like 6950 was. Coming GTX 670 should be $250 as well but will be $400.

AMD changed their number scheme around, the performance of the 7000 series isn't in the same categories now.

 

[demingo]

If the 8800GTX released at $599 and the 690GTX is going to be $999, how are they close in price? XD

The 8800GTX was a single GPU card, the 690 is dual GPU.

A fair comparison would be the $800 8800 ULTRA vs $500 680 GTX. So actually prices are coming down on the top end. Top single GPU vs Top single GPU.

Don't forget inflation too, $500 today is not what $500 was years ago. The $800 8800 Ultra would be $885 in todays dollars.

Some people have very short memories.

 

[doug_7506]

You could always get near top performances for $200-250 every gen. I know cause that's where I buy.

A 480gtx will give you great performance per dollar and is only around $220. If you want the latest and greatest you will pay for it. If you game at 10000000x10000000 resolution you will pay a lot for that too. My 480gtx handles everything I throw at it on reasonable settings no problem.

If you game at 1080p on one monitor, a $300 card will handle almost any game at max settings.

Card prices at the top end are insane. But these are not meant for everyone. They are meant for enthusiast on the bleeding edge. I will probably never pay over $300 for a graphics card, and for that price I can get a lot of great cards.

It's the same thing behind the intel extreme processors. How much extra performance do you get for the $1000 i7 compared to the $300 i7?

 

[ZoNe]

A 480gtx will give you great performance per dollar and is only around $220. If you want the latest and greatest you will pay for it. If you game at 10000000x10000000 resolution you will pay a lot for that too. My 480gtx handles everything I throw at it on reasonable settings no problem.

If you game at 1080p on one monitor, a $300 card will handle almost any game at max settings.

Card prices at the top end are insane. But these are not meant for everyone. They are meant for enthusiast on the bleeding edge. I will probably never pay over $300 for a graphics card, and for that price I can get a lot of great cards.

It's the same thing behind the intel extreme processors. How much extra performance do you get for the $1000 i7 compared to the $300 i7?

Thing is you can't get near top end 28nm in that price range. 7850 is a mid range card for this 28nm and is $250 while before near top end were $200-300 like GTX 570, GTX 448, 6950s and so on.

7950 should be $200-300 not $450 at realse and $380 today. It's at least $100 over priced.

GTX 670 is $415 is also at least $100 overpriced.

No i7 is a rip off too. You're much better with 2500K and 3570k for less than $200. And make them better than $1000 processors

 

[demingo]

I maybe wrong but, I really feel that Video Card prices are way out of control...

You would think that as technology advances that it would get more cost efficient and make it more affordable for the masses to acquire?

I mean if you look at the price progression from the gtx 300's to the 600's or the Amd 4800's to the 7800's its just crazy?! And not to mention the economy we are in right now...

The GTX 690 was just announced and I am loving the card but for $999, the excitement just went out the door!

Anyone else feel the same way?

You do not understand how pricing and economics work. Price isn't set by cost, its set by supply and demand. Nvidia charges what the market is willing to pay. You could actually argue Nvidia is charging too little for the 680 gtx. I'll use a very basic example to explain it.

Let’s say Nvidia can only produce 100 cards per month. This is the physical limit of their manufacturing. They choose to price the card at $500. Say over the course of the month, 200 people are willing to pay $500 for the card. Nvidia can only sell 100 cards since that is all they can produce. They make $50000.

You could argue Nvidia is charging too little. Say Nvidia decides to charge $600 instead. In a month, because of the higher price, demand drops to 125 cards from 200. Since Nvidia can only make 100 cards, they still only sell 100. However now they have made $60000.

Price is simply supply/demand. The 680 is priced properly because as you can see, demand is out pacing supply and it is difficult to buy one. Your idea of "fair" or "Nvidia's costs" is completely irrelevant to what they should charge in a free economy.

 

[Dan_D]

You must be new here..........................

Video card prices, accounting for inflation aren't that bad. $400 for NVIDIA GeForce GTS2 back around 2000 is a hell of a lot worse than $599.99 is today. And it used to be that mid-range cards were next to useless for gaming. Now mid-range cards can power through all but the most demanding games even at 1920x1080 and often beyond.

 

[Medion]

This year is odd due to the costs associated with a die shrink and an architectural change at the same time for both companies. Also, this is largely AMD's fault, as they've raised the prices on their hardware significantly (7850/7870 vs 6850/6870).

For NV, it looks like prices are ultimately going to fall in line with last year. For example:

GeForce GTX 660Ti - $249 (same as the original MSRP on the 560Ti)
GeForce GTX 680 - $499 (same as the 580)
GeForce GTX 670 - $399?

Speculation is that we'll see a 670 at $349 and a 670Ti at $399, but that's unconfirmed. This slots the 670 between the 660 and 680, but gives breathing room for upper end price drops of $50 each without having to drop the 660 Ti price.

This leaves room for a 660 non-Ti for $199 (same MSRP of the current GTX 560), and 650/650Ti at $149/$179, similar to current generation cards.

So, Nvidia's prices per sector seem to be on par with last year's. Where things get weird are in the spec department. The 680 LOOKS like it should have been the 670Ti, but performance is better than both the 580 and 7970, so NV was happy calling it the 680. The 660Ti having 192-bit memory shows that it likely should have been the 650Ti. However, at least it as 1.5GB memory and not 1GB/2GB like the 550Ti (the latter would give it a truly crippled memory interface and kills performance).

All in all, it looks like the Kepler series has had the product number shifted up one across the board. However, we should still ultimately see more performance AND lower power draw at the same price point as last year's cards. Typically, we get either a ton of performance gains AND higher power draw, or slight performance gains with similar power draw. The fact that we're going backwards in power draw while still getting performance gains is pretty significant.

 

[ZoNe]

You do not understand how pricing and economics work. Price isn't set by cost, its set by supply and demand. Nvidia charges what the market is willing to pay. You could actually argue Nvidia is charging too little for the 680 gtx. I'll use a very basic example to explain it.

Let’s say Nvidia can only produce 100 cards per month. This is the physical limit of their manufacturing. They choose to price the card at $500. Say over the course of the month, 200 people are willing to pay $500 for the card. Nvidia can only sell 100 cards since that is all they can produce. They make $50000.

You could argue Nvidia is charging too little. Say Nvidia decides to charge $600 instead. In a month, because of the higher price, demand drops to 125 cards from 200. Since Nvidia can only make 100 cards, they still only sell 100. However now they have made $60000.

Price is simply supply/demand. The 680 is priced properly because as you can see, demand is out pacing supply and it is difficult to buy one. Your idea of "fair" or "Nvidia's costs" is completely irrelevant to what they should charge in a free economy.

You contradict yourself in very first paragraph by saying nV is not meeting proper supply and demand pricing.

No cost is set from day 1 by the maker. We will buy or not buy depending if it has value to our eyes. They are not entitled to what they ask and sometimes lower price like 7950 did. Or raise them like 680s are doing. Only after market reacts do supply and demand matter. But price is set by nV/AMD - probably in collusion explicit or implicit to maximize profit to them.

No one in their right mind would buy @ price AMD set on 7870 when 7950 is only $20 more. So I expect that to crash next.

 

[Intel_Hydralisk]

6800GT to 8800GT to GTX 260 to GTX 448. Now nothing. Just mid range 7850 around that price. 7950 should be $250 like 6950 was. Coming GTX 670 should be $250 as well but will be $400.

The 6800 GT was $400. I had two of them.

I don't see what the issue is. A $250 card will run all games on high settings on a single 1080p monitor just fine, much like the "old days".

Just because there's something juicier out there doesn't mean you have to buy it.

 

[MrGuvernment]

ugh! here we go again...

15 years ago $2k got you an awesome computer
today $2k gets you an awesome computer.

15 years ago 128Mb of ram was $400.... today ram is dirt cheap
15 years ago a 40G harddrive was $500..... today they are dirt cheap
15 years ago motherboard were cheap - today they can get dam expensive
15 years ago cases we cheap - now they can be dam expensive
15 years ago vid cards were cheaper or expensive - depends what you wanted...
15 years ago my 19' CRT monitor was $600....... you can get 24' LCD for $200...


see where i am going.. price change between components often, sometimes CPU are expensive, sometimes they are cheap... vid cards are at a good point right now, problem is most people think they "need" some $500 vid card...when they simply dont.

 

[Crosshairs]

If the 8800GTX released at $599 and the 690GTX is going to be $999, how are they close in price? XD

I remember the 8800 series top dog being a lot closer to $799.00 when released...and the 690 may well release at $899.00...that's pretty damn close

 

[GotNoRice]

I don't have a problem with the cost of new cards necessarily. At the same time, since my setup from 2008 is still giving me ~7970 level performance in the games that I care about, I'm in no rush to drop $500 on a side-grade. If it was more like $300 we were talking about, it might be worth it due to heat and power reasons but since that is not the case, it sure makes waiting easy.

 

[Medion]

If the 8800GTX released at $599 and the 690GTX is going to be $999, how are they close in price? XD

Did you really just go there? The 8800GTX was a single GPU! It's modern comparison would be the GTX 680! The 690 is not just the "top dog," but rather, SLI on a single PCB. It's 2x680s.

Your choice of comparison was poor.

 

[ZoNe]

You must be new here..........................

Video card prices, accounting for inflation aren't that bad. $400 for NVIDIA GeForce GTS2 back around 2000 is a hell of a lot worse than $599.99 is today. And it used to be that mid-range cards were next to useless for gaming. Now mid-range cards can power through all but the most demanding games even at 1920x1080 and often beyond.

I only go back to 6800GT and it was fine for gaming then. So was 8800GT, 260 GTX. They were only 20% under top cards of their day for like half the price.

All I want is what we got last few gens. A little under top card for $200-300. seems like they are failing with 28nm. And not only that, to add insult to injury, there was not as much improvement in speed this architecture/gen change. About 20-30% across the board while previous changes were 50-100%. Like 3870 to 4870 for example.

A lot money money for a lot less improvement is a fail in my eyes.

 

[cageymaru]

I see the market as this:

#1. Onboard video is mainstream for the masses. This is what the world games on.
#2. $99 Wal-Mart special video card. This is for the Sims crowd that spends more money than the average Joe. If they are big spenders then they might head to Best Buy and grab something higher end like a 7850. They wouldn't buy a separate card normally, but the damn Sims just runs so crappy on the onboard video!
#3. Eccentric video game purists. They may purchase 1 - 3 video cards and multiple monitors just to experience something that none of their friends are willing to afford. Then it becomes a hobby and an obsession just like model railroading and race cars.

If for example AMD sold 1 million video cards this year the sales breakdown would probably go like this:

900,000 onboard video.
72,000 Wal Mart / Best Buy cards.
28,000 Video game purist cards.

Thus Nvidia and AMD feel as if they can charge what they wish for the high end because they will make 1000x more off the low end sales. It's like Nascar to them; whatever wins the benchmarks on Sundays sells Monday - Saturday. Meaning if their high end card is the fastest then the sales person will tout that company as the best when the average Joe buy his new Wal Mart / Dell tower special and decides which onboard video he wants.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[demingo]

You contradict yourself in very first paragraph by saying nV is not meeting proper supply and demand pricing.

No cost is set from day 1 by the maker. We will buy or not buy depending if it has value to our eyes. They are not entitled to what they ask and sometimes lower price like 7950 did. Or raise them like 680s are doing. Only after market reacts do supply and demand matter. But price is set by nV/AMD - probably in collusion explicit or implicit to maximize profit to them.

No one in their right mind would buy @ price AMD set on 7870 when 7950 is only $20 more. So I expect that to crash next.

I didn't contradict myself. I go on to fully explain why I think Nvidia MIGHT be charging too little. It could also be they have demand for 100 cards per month and are selling exactly 100 cards which would show perfect pricing. I do not have their financial data and production data. However, from what we as consumers can observe, the $500 price is either correct or too low. It is not too high. If the price was too high, there would be an excess of stock. Currently stock is being sold through very quickly which points to correct or under priced.

You also ignore your own points. Nvidia sets price according to supply/demand. Upon release, the demand portion is an estimate based off sales data from the 580/480/280 and so on. Nvidia has a good "guess" as to what demand for a high end card will be and prices accordingly. Also, its been a few weeks, and the market has quite clearly stated $500 is fair for a 680gtx since they are selling out. If Nvidia was sitting on large amounts of stock they would lower the price to increase demand, but as is, they are either properly priced or underpriced as demand is equal to or higher than supply.

As for the line about profit. Nvidia is a corporation and not a charity. The entire point of their existance is to make money.

 

[Geolith]

Out of control? No. Ridiculous? Oh yes!

From marketing point of view, they are perfectly in control. The high end cards become less affordable, but the medium range still gets better cards for roughly the same money as before.

It is indeed frustrating for us, mere mortals, but unfortunately this is the normal way of things. There are normal cars and super-cars, normal clothes and designer clothes, and so on.

There's a 36.4" LCD monitor from Eizo which costs around $35,000. That's right, it's $960 for an inch. And it's selling. Cost efficiency? They laugh at it. It's the last factor in establishing prices.

 

[stealthy123]

revisionists history is all this thread is about.

No the prices aren't out of whack, your interpretation of event and neglecting of inflation is.

 

[teletran8]

Less for more it's an awesome concept ain't it? This is why I game @ 1280x720p/120Hz on a 80 inch projector. I seen them greedy bastards comin 1.5 years ago!

 

[Dan_D]

I only go back to 6800GT and it was fine for gaming then. So was 8800GT, 260 GTX. They were only 20% under top cards of their day for like half the price.

All I want is what we got last few gens. A little under top card for $200-300. seems like they are failing with 28nm. And not only that, to add insult to injury, there was not as much improvement in speed this architecture/gen change. About 20-30% across the board while previous changes were 50-100%. Like 3870 to 4870 for example.

A lot money money for a lot less improvement is a fail in my eyes.

My first video card wasn't even capable of 3D graphics as we know them today. And I don't recall what some of those cards really cost back then, but I do recall that we had cards that were $300-$400 during the Voodoo 1 & 2 days.

 

[ZoNe]

Out of control? No. Ridiculous? Oh yes!

From marketing point of view, they are perfectly in control. The high end cards become less affordable, but the medium range still gets better cards for roughly the same money as before.

It is indeed frustrating for us, mere mortals, but unfortunately this is the normal way of things. There are normal cars and super-cars, normal clothes and designer clothes, and so on.

There's a 36.4" LCD monitor from Eizo which costs around $35,000. That's right, it's $960 for an inch. And it's selling. Cost efficiency? They laugh at it. It's the last factor in establishing prices.

LOL I all seriousness I will pay $3000 for a OLED when they come but not premium for parts with minimal gains. I just dont need it like I need to get rid of motion blur/lag I've been discuted with on every LCD.

 

[PRIME1]

Way back in the day I spent $100 for 4MB of memory. It was such a good deal that I actually had to stand in line for it.

 

[ZoNe]

My first video card wasn't even capable of 3D graphics as we know them today. And I don't recall what some of those cards really cost back then, but I do recall that we had cards that were $300-$400 during the Voodoo 1 & 2 days.

That's funny. I don't even know what those are. Well hardware is supposed to get cheaper and faster/better all the time. Like intel CPU, memory, or HDDs (however SSDs threw them back to high prices) but anyway generally it holds true. We pay $1000 for a good computer these days while my moms mac in college was like $5000. It's just a little disconcerting is all video cards are going up on 28nm compared to 40nm. Hopefully they fall a bit.

I'll probably have to wait till 770ti/760ti to get my customary 100% performance bump for same $250 like I'm used to. This gen offers not much over my 448 for a lot more.

 

[Dan_D]

That's funny. I don't even know what those are. Well hardware is supposed to get cheaper and faster/better all the time. Like intel CPU, memory, or HDDs (however SSDs threw them back to high prices) but anyway generally it holds true. We pay $1000 for a good computer these days while my moms mac in college was like $5000. It's just a little disconcerting is all video cards are going up on 28nm compared to 40nm. Hopefully they fall a bit.

Actually, high end systems still cost a lot of money. But you do get more for less than you did in days past. But Intel still has $800+ CPUs, NVIDIA has $600 video cards, etc. Granted that stuff isn't for the masses, but the masses didn't spend $3,000 on computer hardware back in the day either. Part of the difference is where your money goes inside the machine these days. PSUs are more expensive than they used to be, cases run the gamut, where as they never really did before, but RAM and hard drives are cheaper than ever. (Not counting that bullshit flooding driving prices up recently on mechanical drives) We also pay less for displays than we used to. In 1999 I think I paid $450 or something for a 19" Sony Trinitron display. We pay a little more for motherboards than we used to, but as a general rule we don't buy sound cards, modems, network cards, or drive controllers anymore. We used to have to get all that crap separately. And it added up.

 

[revenant]

Way back in the day I spent $100 for 4MB of memory. It was such a good deal that I actually had to stand in line for it.

yep that is a good deal.. in their time 1mb simms were usually around $35 each.. or so...

as a lot of others have said I think the prices are on par from the past.. maybe even a little better? the hardware of today does a lot more for your $ that is for sure.. I paid 699 for my 8800GTX at launch... definitely the most I spent on a single video card but never regretted the purchase at all.. I used the crap out of it for over two years!

 

[ZoNe]

Actually, high end systems still cost a lot of money. But you do get more for less than you did in days past. But Intel still has $800+ CPUs, NVIDIA has $600 video cards, etc. Granted that stuff isn't for the masses, but the masses didn't spend $3,000 on computer hardware back in the day either. Part of the difference is where your money goes inside the machine these days. PSUs are more expensive than they used to be, cases run the gamut, where as they never really did before, but RAM and hard drives are cheaper than ever. (Not counting that bullshit flooding driving prices up recently on mechanical drives) We also pay less for displays than we used to. In 1999 I think I paid $450 or something for a 19" Sony Trinitron display. We pay a little more for motherboards than we used to, but as a general rule we don't buy sound cards, modems, network cards, or drive controllers anymore. We used to have to get all that crap separately. And it added up.

I'm not going to even start on what a superior display trimitron/diamondtron was - show me a NIB Sony GDM-FW900 and I'll buy it right now. But I see your point that top parts always cost top dollars. Maybe we were just lucky w/ last few gens price wars on video cards where you could get some real screamers less than $300. Not GTX 580s but close with a little tweaking.

 

[Dan_D]

I'm not going to even start on what a superior display trimitron/diamondtron was - show me a NIB Sony GDM-FW900 and I'll buy it right now. But I see your point that top parts always cost top dollars. Maybe we were just lucky w/ last few gens price wars on video cards where you could get some real screamers less than $300. Not GTX 580s but close with a little tweaking.

We even had cards like that once in awhile. The vanilla NVIDIA GeForce 6800 was a screamer. The 6800GT could be made as fast as the Ultra with a little overclocking, but none were as impressive as the GeForce 4 Ti4200 which could overclock to Ti 4600 speeds.