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

I think for the same price you get much more performance than ever before.
I remember low end cards in around 2000 were sold for $200-$400(inflation doubled since then, so you paid like today $800 for GeForce2 MX-400. And still most games of those times were sluggish on those cards. Today you buy high end card for $400-500 but you play all present games with full details and highest offered resolutions, with fast and smooth framerate.
I remember the overpriced Nvidia GeForce FX debuting around early 2003, you paid $600 for, and you got just slightly faster performance than mainstream cards.

So I guess for what you get today, you pay like 1/4 of original prices in the past.
 
I paid over $720+ on my Creative Annihilator Ultra 2 (GeForce 2 Ultra) back in the day. Sure, it was CAD back then with low trade value but still.
 
I paid $550 for a 7950 GX2 in 2006. I'm pretty sure A GTX 680 is better at $499. Don't see why that is considered out of control.

Just because manufacturing costs may have decreased doesn't mean R&D has decreased. They still need to make up those costs.
 
I guess we'll see when Q2 earnings reports come out 3 months from now, but I think they are charging what they have too for now. It's just expensive tech, I don't think there is any collusion or price gouging going on.
 
I paid over $720+ on my Creative Annihilator Ultra 2 (GeForce 2 Ultra) back in the day. Sure, it was CAD back then with low trade value but still.

Hey! I had a Creative Geforce 2 Ultra as well. And yea, it was $500 American, lasted me until the 9700 Pro :).
 
I'm a "generation skipper" myself. I always skip a couple of generations. That's my "performance boost feeling" philosophy. And in my past experience two generations were never enough for a 100% boost.

Now I have GTX 460. Immediately before that I had 9600GT. It was a "giant leap forward" (forgive the commie Chinese term usage) indeed, skipping a whole bunch of generations. But did I get the 100% boost? Nope. In some games I got around 30% increase, in others around 50%, but nothing near 100%.

Now, do I get a 2x performance jump if I upgrade to a hypothetical GTX 660? It's exactly a two generation leap.

Something tells me I don't. And the same something tells even 680 won't get me there. 30%, 40%, 50% -- maybe. But 100% performance increase? Hardly.

It is an awkward moment when the whole 2 generations of hardware can't get you an adequate performance improvement.

The midrange market is garbage right now. ATI's offerings are underwhelming and Nvidia is taking an eternity to release anything.

I'm still waiting for something decent in the $300-350 range to replace my 460 so I can max BF2 at 1920x1200.
 
I think for the same price you get much more performance than ever before.
I remember low end cards in around 2000 were sold for $200-$400(inflation doubled since then, so you paid like today $800 for GeForce2 MX-400. And still most games of those times were sluggish on those cards. Today you buy high end card for $400-500 but you play all present games with full details and highest offered resolutions, with fast and smooth framerate.
I remember the overpriced Nvidia GeForce FX debuting around early 2003, you paid $600 for, and you got just slightly faster performance than mainstream cards.

So I guess for what you get today, you pay like 1/4 of original prices in the past.

No you get less performance boost than ever before between architectural changes. About 30% with both AMD and nV this generation vs 50-100% we have been given before. Both with AMD's 28nm and so far nVidias. And they are charging more for it save GTX 680 which is same price as GTX 580 was. But their 670 seems to be at least $60 more than 570 was so still more for less.
 
The midrange market is garbage right now. ATI's offerings are underwhelming and Nvidia is taking an eternity to release anything.

I'm still waiting for something decent in the $300-350 range to replace my 460 so I can max BF2 at 1920x1200.

Disagree. The 7850 is a good with a lot of potential, like can OC 300-450Mhz, but overpriced considering its a mid range chip like 560s and 6850s were. Should be $200 max. The 7870 is massively overpriced since it has same mid range chip and is only like $29 less than 7950.

That should be $250 instead of $350.
 
I do, mainly because of my backlog. I realized there are a lot of games from the last 20 years that I haven't played yet.
 
Disagree. The 7850 is a good with a lot of potential, like can OC 300-450Mhz, but overpriced considering its a mid range chip like 560s and 6850s were. Should be $200 max. The 7870 is massively overpriced since it has same mid range chip and is only like $29 less than 7950.

That should be $250 instead of $350.

So you admit that it's $100 overpriced, but don't feel that's an underwhelming offering in terms of value? Were you trying to say a GPU you feel is $100 overpriced would make the midrange market not garbage?
 
No you get less performance boost than ever before between architectural changes. About 30% with both AMD and nV this generation vs 50-100% we have been given before. Both with AMD's 28nm and so far nVidias. And they are charging more for it save GTX 680 which is same price as GTX 580 was. But their 670 seems to be at least $60 more than 570 was so still more for less.
Yes I'm aware that the performance increase in every generation is smallest in history, but that more justifies your purchase. Because your older card still performs wery well compared to new ones and you just don't need to upgrade as there is not reasonable difference in performance. That's how I meant it;)
 
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.

features man...
that's why I'd consider a 680

less power and now for the first time ever - NVSurround gaming on a single card

4 monitors on a single card --- and whats more - according to the WSGF recent review. Nvidia's new 300 series driver for the 680 makes some fantastic improvments to three monitor gaming and desktop display setups.
 
Not even close, how long have you been buying video cards??

I paid $600 for a 7800GTX when it came out, and back then you needed cards like that to max out the "new" games on a single monitor.

Now unless you're running 3 monitors you don't even need the flagship card, and you max out just about every game with stupid high AA and an incredible resolution.

You get incredible value for your money these days. We may be in the bad part of the cycle, but just hold your horses for a month or two and you will have your precious 8800GT, HD 5870, 560ti, etc price point back.
 
So you admit that it's $100 overpriced, but don't feel that's an underwhelming offering in terms of value? Were you trying to say a GPU you feel is $100 overpriced would make the midrange market not garbage?

You are focusing on 1 card. The 7770 and 7850 are quite nicely priced for their performance. That makes 1 card garbage in terms of value. Not the whole selection.
 
You are focusing on 1 card. The 7770 and 7850 are quite nicely priced for their performance. That makes 1 card garbage in terms of value. Not the whole selection.
the 7850 only looks nicely priced because the other new cards are expensive. the 7850 offered nearly ZERO improvement over the 6850 in terms of performance per dollar. and that's just looking at the 6850 launch price as the 6850 street prices were actually way way lower when the 7850 launched. the ONLY reason that a 7850 is not a complete ripoff for a next gen card is that it overclocks very well.
 
The "problem" is more that the 460/480 and 5850/5870 kicked so much ass.

Remember how ridiculous they were compared to the previous generation? The 480 is still better than everything Nvidia offers up to the 570 and it performs better than that once OC'd. For the price you can buy a 480 used it's pretty crazy the performance you can get at the cost of power and heat.

Also the 5850 and 5870 were bonkers. We're not going to see that kind of jump every generation.
 
You are focusing on 1 card. The 7770 and 7850 are quite nicely priced for their performance. That makes 1 card garbage in terms of value. Not the whole selection.

It was the only card he brought up. Just wanted some clarification.
 
I just found a review for a GeForce 3 Ti 500 from 2001 that says the card costs $698, which is over $900 in today's dollars according to some simple inflation calculators I found online. So really, even if the price of top-tier cards remains fairly constant, they are technically becoming more affordable as time goes on due to inflation and purchasing power.
 
I agree, those who complain about $500 for a GTX 680 should be killed. Preferably through decapitation (they don't use their heads much, anyway). :D

But it's a real "pricing vandalism" going on in Europe. GTX 680 costs over $700 here, something like 8800 GTX cost back in 2006.

I bought the 8800GTX in 2006 Nov for $900(!) in Europe, but that wasn't a midrange chip :D

It was a beast, bringing over 100% performance gain... and this... for $700... :rolleyes:
I want to replace my "old" 5870s to one card (crossfire sux sometimes, and got tired of it), but for this much money, it doesnt worth it. I will wait for the high-end chip.
 
I still use a 5850 that OC'd and I can play every single PC game out there, most on high settings. I dont even have a need to upgrade for the foreseeable future either, its great
 
Amen to that! If someone had told me when I bought my 5850 over 2 years ago that it would still run most games on high (not highest) settings I would've thought them barmy... ah well, it's a good thing as I can spend my money else where!
 
No you get less performance boost than ever before between architectural changes. About 30% with both AMD and nV this generation vs 50-100% we have been given before.

You're insane if you think 50-100% performance boosts between generations is normal, even with a smaller fab process.

That or the only generation change that you paid attention to (ever) was the 5870 launch.
 
You're insane if you think 50-100% performance boosts between generations is normal, even with a smaller fab process.

That or the only generation change that you paid attention to (ever) was the 5870 launch.
actually 50% or greater is pretty common.
 
It's not like video card prices are out of control, any $120 card or so could play games reasonably. If you look at any other products in the world, the ultra high end are always worth more because people are willing to pay that much to be the best. Look at bicycle parts, running shoes, stereo equipment or whatever. If you can make that much money off them why not? And video cards are short lived it will be obsolete in 3 months and there will be a better thing out. So make the best bang for the buck
 
Back in the day you didn't need two GPUs to max out video games without slowdowns.

Of course games have become a lot more demanding, but the solution of buying 2 GPUs to max games is a $$ scam. Just my opinion...
 
Back in the day you didn't need two GPUs to max out video games without slowdowns.

Of course games have become a lot more demanding, but the solution of buying 2 GPUs to max games is a $$ scam. Just my opinion...

WTF? What back in the day are you talking about? Try running Quake 2 at 1600x1200 on a GeForce 1 or Doom 3 at 1600x1200 on a 6800 GT. Games have become MUCH LESS demanding relative to hardware.
 
WTF? What back in the day are you talking about? Try running Quake 2 at 1600x1200 on a GeForce 1 or Doom 3 at 1600x1200 on a 6800 GT. Games have become MUCH LESS demanding relative to hardware.

Perhaps I should have said, it didn't take 2 $500 GPUs to run the games that I played back in the day on their highest settings.
 
I have finally decided to move from mid-range to high end cards. My new GTX 680 will arrive early next week. I paid bloody 550 EUR for it (which is around $720 in bucks). Can't wait to see in action.

If GTX 680 gives me at least 50% performance boost, compared to GTX 460, I'll call it a good investment. If it gives me a stable 60 fps at 1920x1200 under VSYNC in current games I own (and I don't own anything really next-gen, my "youngest" resource-hungry games are 1-2 years old), I'll call it a wish come true. Otherwise, it'll be an EPIC rip-off.
 
I have finally decided to move from mid-range to high end cards. My new GTX 680 will arrive early next week. I paid bloody 550 EUR for it (which is around $720 in bucks). Can't wait to see in action.

If GTX 680 gives me at least 50% performance boost, compared to GTX 460, I'll call it a good investment. If it gives me a stable 60 fps at 1920x1200 under VSYNC in current games I own (and I don't own anything really next-gen, my "youngest" resource-hungry games are 1-2 years old), I'll call it a wish come true. Otherwise, it'll be an EPIC rip-off.

You overdid it. Assuming your cpu is up to the challenge you will not find many games that trouble that resolution with a 680.
 
I still use a 5850 that OC'd and I can play every single PC game out there, most on high settings. I dont even have a need to upgrade for the foreseeable future either, its great

The 5850 was likely the best value of the last few years. I bought two of them at launch for $249 before AMD raised the price. I used them in crossfire for almost two years, finally sold them last week for a 7950. The 5850 is a special card.
 
Last edited:
One must also understand that it has become common to run games with at least 4xAA these days where a few years ago that was not as common. 4xMSAA still takes a good hit on demanding games where a few years ago gamers weren't as obsessed with AA. You hardly ever see a video card reviews these days without 4xMSAA applied. Don't get me wrong, I love AA, just stating that it has become common these days and it still cuts framerates a good bit on demanding games even with high end hardware.
 
4xMSAA still takes a good hit on demanding games where a few years ago gamers weren't as obsessed with AA.

Yes they were..

Any [H] gamer will tell you he/she hates jaggies.

And 10 years ago we only had SSAA, so it was even more demanding on our cards.. I remember my first high-end card, the Ati X850 XT PE.. I finally could turn on the AA, and that was 2004-2005!
 
Back in the day you didn't need two GPUs to max out video games without slowdowns.

Of course games have become a lot more demanding, but the solution of buying 2 GPUs to max games is a $$ scam. Just my opinion...

I think this guy's smoking something. For real.

Relative performance of mid range cards is incredibly high right now. No game requires 2 GPU's. You can artificially impose performance limitations to define the term "maxed out" (5x 30" screens with all sorts of AA turned on?), but that doesn't mean a 6950 or a 560 ti can't run all the games out there on a single monitor with high settings fluidly.
 
I think this guy's smoking something. For real.

Relative performance of mid range cards is incredibly high right now. No game requires 2 GPU's. You can artificially impose performance limitations to define the term "maxed out" (5x 30" screens with all sorts of AA turned on?), but that doesn't mean a 6950 or a 560 ti can't run all the games out there on a single monitor with high settings fluidly.

Game developers can now rely on dual gpu setups to run their highest settings in a video game. Good luck running bf3 on ultra with a 560ti.


Whereas I could run anything on highest with my leadtek ti4400 at the time.
 
Yes they were..

Any [H] gamer will tell you he/she hates jaggies.

And 10 years ago we only had SSAA, so it was even more demanding on our cards.. I remember my first high-end card, the Ati X850 XT PE.. I finally could turn on the AA, and that was 2004-2005!

You may be right about that, the last few years for me may have been 10, my life is flying by like a freight train it seems these days. I remember being able to use 6xAA on ATI cards during that time was a big deal.
 
I was excited for the 690 as well but with the way pricing is now I think we just have to expect more cost for these cards, I was really hoping 350 would be the price for high end single GPUs but Nvidia has made it clear that 500 should be the cost so AMD is following suit.
 
Back
Top