GTX 880 and 800 Series to be More Powerful But Cheaper than the 700 Series

Status
Not open for further replies.
:confused: The trend they are setting with Titan-Z is to be less powerful and more expensive.
 
Yeah yeah that's what they said last time. and the time before... and the time before... :rolleyes:
 
only way it will be cheaper is if AMD comes out with something that is faster/cheaper.
 
bigdogchris said:
:confused: The trend they are setting with Titan-Z is to be less powerful and more expensive.
Click to expand...
That's actually one of the oldest sales tactics known to man. If something isn't selling well, increase the price. Suddenly the item looks more valuable (and desirable) than it did previously.

Also allows you to release a newer version at the original price and have it sell extremely well because people are now afraid the price will go up (as past experience has taught them).

Apple is famous for this kind of pricing and marketing. Not saying it's good for consumers, but it certainly works.
 
for price shoppers like me id consider going nvidia for my next upgrade if that would be the case..........currently running a 7950 that i got for $90 doubt that any equivalent nvidia card could currently compete
 
Believe it when I see it. If you mean cheaper as in the price of the 880 comes back down to the $499 range then I'd say that's just normal. The 780, 780 Ti, and Titan have been overpriced for awhile.
 
if that 880 ti is cheaper at launch than the 780 ti i'll be surprised. Hopefully it's got enough raw juice to replace my 680's.
 
20nm?
I thought the rumored GTX 880 by the end of the year, including the engineering sample they "intercepted", as well as the leaked manufacturing document, were all pointing to 28nm.

Why are we suddenly talking about a 20nm in Q4 2014? :/
20nm was delayed, heavily.
 
the always-perceived-behind-nvidia AMD is rumored to be going 20nm in their next gen gpu's...........
 
That's pretty interesting. I'm really squirming about upgrading my GTX670 and this kinda makes me want to wait til later in the year to see what's coming. The current line of cards has been out over 9 months now so we should be getting some rumors of upcoming GPU's.

As for the pricing, I think I could see it. AMD has been slapping Nvidia around for a while now in value having faster cards for less money. Maybe it's finally starting to cut into Nvidia' bottom line.
 
I couldn't handle another 7-8 months of 2GB of video memory, so i caved and got two 780 Ti's. I was using a pair of 680's. Monitor is a Dell U2711.

A better man would have waited. I am not one of those better men.
 
If true, must mean AMD has a very competitive product in the works. NV wouldn't go cheaper than their last series unless they had to...
 
hdgamer said:
Yeah yeah that's what they said last time. and the time before... and the time before... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

this comment doesn't make any sense at all considering that 1) nvidia has not made a habit of apologizing about its pricing strategy; 2) it rarely proclaims that an incoming product will be cheaper than an outgoing product; and 3) it actually delivered a cheaper incoming product once in the form of the $500 gtx 680 vs the gtx 580 that entered the market at an inflated $560.
 
Now I just got to figure out the right time to sell my 780ti, I can go a month or so with a back up card if it means getting a good chunk of my $$ back towards a 880ti. Man I cannot fricken wait. I have no need for that much power right now but I just WANT IT!
 
ffs... they're already starting out with the stupid naming scheme of TI's?
 
Nvidia introduced faster products at the same price tiers when going from GTX 4xx->GTX 5xx.

AMD 7xxx series did not significantly improve on performance/price. This was mentioned in reviews at the time and discussed on forums. The 7970 debuted at $550 MSRP which was much higher than the 5870 and 6970. The 7870 debuted at the same price as the then outgoing 6970 at $350. 7xxx did not go downwards in pricing until facing pressure from Nvidia launching the GTX 6xx series.

The GTX 770 and GTX 760 were launched at lower price points and faster than what they replaced. GTX 770 undercut the then AMD flagship 7970 Ghz Edition.

While AMD priced the 290/290x aggressively keep in mind the lower cards (such as the 280x) were very minor updates (re-brands) and mainly served to push up then lowering street prices of 7xxx cards back up to MSRP values.

As you can see the AMD and Nvidia pricing relationship is not so cut and dry as well as simple.
 
limitedaccess said:
AMD 7xxx series did not significantly improve on performance/price. This was mentioned in reviews at the time and discussed on forums. The 7970 debuted at $550 MSRP which was much higher than the 5870 and 6970. The 7870 debuted at the same price as the then outgoing 6970 at $350. 7xxx did not go downwards in pricing until facing pressure from Nvidia launching the GTX 6xx series.

The GTX 770 and GTX 760 were launched at lower price points and faster than what they replaced. GTX 770 undercut the then AMD flagship 7970 Ghz Edition.
Click to expand...
Correct in some respects, but unlike the 5870 or 6970, 7970 (Tahiti) was a different beast, a clear departure from their previous "small die" strategy that had pretty much prevented them from challenging for the top performance spot. It was the fastest card on the market and AMD launched it for $550, which made absolutely perfect sense considering the hotter and slower 580 was still at its $500 launch price when the 7970 launched. Sure the 680 came out and undercut it, forcing a drop to ~$450 very quickly, but lets examine what nvidia has done over the last few years when dropping a "worlds fastest" type card. GTX 780: $650, GTX 780Ti: $700, GTX Titan: $1000, TitanZ: $3000. In every case nVidia has pushed pricing above and beyond what AMD has done in the past. It nice to say that the pricing dynamics aren't cut and dried, but I would argue that over the couple years, with the notable exception of the 680, it has been a clear cut situation of nvidia taking advantage of minor performance advantages to push the price ceiling to new heights
 
They should drop "Ti" and start using "Ultra" again, not only is it evocative of their other great "8" oriented cards of yesteryear; the word "ultra" as we all know has since matriculated into our vocabulary to become an umbrella term for maxing out the graphics quality.

Nvidia start using "Ultra" again for your tip-top cards, it only makes perfect sense.
 
So when AMD launched a faster card at a higher price point, it was deserved because it was a better card. But when Nvidia launched a faster card at a higher price point (bar the Titan Z) they were "taking advantage" and pushing the price ceiling higher? That's what your post is basically saying.
 
Activate: AMD said:
Correct in some respects, but unlike the 5870 or 6970, 7970 (Tahiti) was a different beast, a clear departure from their previous "small die" strategy that had pretty much prevented them from challenging for the top performance spot. It was the fastest card on the market and AMD launched it for $550, which made absolutely perfect sense considering the hotter and slower 580 was still at its $500 launch price when the 7970 launched. Sure the 680 came out and undercut it, forcing a drop to ~$450 very quickly, but lets examine what nvidia has done over the last few years when dropping a "worlds fastest" type card. GTX 780: $650, GTX 780Ti: $700, GTX Titan: $1000, TitanZ: $3000. In every case nVidia has pushed pricing above and beyond what AMD has done in the past. It nice to say that the pricing dynamics aren't cut and dried, but I would argue that over the couple years, with the notable exception of the 680, it has been a clear cut situation of nvidia taking advantage of minor performance advantages to push the price ceiling to new heights
Click to expand...

Regarding the 7970 what you're saying is they released a product that could command a higher price in the market at the time essentially? I don't disagree with that, it's natural for any at profit company. But do you see what point I'm trying to bring up? AMD itself also prices higher or lower depending on the market condition and response from Nvidia, it is not a one way street so to speak.

I also understand on a forum like this there is more disproportionate interest to the highest end products but realistically speaking the consumer base which is the most strongly price sensitive is further down. Pragmatically speaking if you care about value at all you would not have considered any Titan product for a purely gaming card.

The GTX 780 is actually an interesting case. On one hand it did push to a higher price point, on the other hand it offered itself as a more value proposition within Nvidia's own lineup compared to the Titan. This was without any pressure from AMD at all.

I would say the GTX 780 and 7970 situation is quite comparable actually. Both launched and pushed the price boundary due to having significant advantages compared to the opposing products at time of launch, but depressed in price quite fast once competing products from the other side turned up.

I'm also not seeing the arguments for your last point. The price ceiling was stagnant for the 480, 580, and 680. Only until the 780 did the price ceiling rise on Nvidia's side. However the GTX 780 had a significantly greater performance advantage of the 7970 Ghz than the original 7970 had over the GTX 580 on the flip side.

What I'm trying to present isn't that Nvidia should be praised for it's pricing or that they are strongly consumer friendly in pricing. There however does not seem to be anywhere near enough historical sample and evidence to put Nvidia on the opposite and negative spectrum as AMD in terms of consumer friendly pricing.

I have to say personally at the end I don't subscribe to a good/evil company belief. They are both large public corporations primarily with responsibilities to their shareholders. The price they set for their products at the end is primarily self beneficial and dependent on their (and the products) market position.
 
limitedaccess said:
Regarding the 7970 what you're saying is they released a product that could command a higher price in the market at the time essentially? I don't disagree with that, it's natural for any at profit company. But do you see what point I'm trying to bring up? AMD itself also prices higher or lower depending on the market condition and response from Nvidia, it is not a one way street so to speak.

I also understand on a forum like this there is more disproportionate interest to the highest end products but realistically speaking the consumer base which is the most strongly price sensitive is further down. Pragmatically speaking if you care about value at all you would not have considered any Titan product for a purely gaming card.

The GTX 780 is actually an interesting case. On one hand it did push to a higher price point, on the other hand it offered itself as a more value proposition within Nvidia's own lineup compared to the Titan. This was without any pressure from AMD at all.

I would say the GTX 780 and 7970 situation is quite comparable actually. Both launched and pushed the price boundary due to having significant advantages compared to the opposing products at time of launch, but depressed in price quite fast once competing products from the other side turned up.

I'm also not seeing the arguments for your last point. The price ceiling was stagnant for the 480, 580, and 680. Only until the 780 did the price ceiling rise on Nvidia's side. However the GTX 780 had a significantly greater performance advantage of the 7970 Ghz than the original 7970 had over the GTX 580 on the flip side.

What I'm trying to present isn't that Nvidia should be praised for it's pricing or that they are strongly consumer friendly in pricing. There however does not seem to be anywhere near enough historical sample and evidence to put Nvidia on the opposite and negative spectrum as AMD in terms of consumer friendly pricing.

I have to say personally at the end I don't subscribe to a good/evil company belief. They are both large public corporations primarily with responsibilities to their shareholders. The price they set for their products at the end is primarily self beneficial and dependent on their (and the products) market position.
Click to expand...

7970 was 15-25% faster than the 580 @ launch
780 was 22% faster than a 7970Ghz card @ launch, so not really.

it's not good / evil. NV will price what their card at what they think they can get, so will AMD.
 
limitedaccess said:
Regarding the 7970 what you're saying is they released a product that could command a higher price in the market at the time essentially? I don't disagree with that, it's natural for any at profit company. But do you see what point I'm trying to bring up? AMD itself also prices higher or lower depending on the market condition and response from Nvidia, it is not a one way street so to speak.
Click to expand...
Yes, thats true. They clearly don't price in a vacuum
limitedaccess said:
I also understand on a forum like this there is more disproportionate interest to the highest end products but realistically speaking the consumer base which is the most strongly price sensitive is further down. Pragmatically speaking if you care about value at all you would not have considered any Titan product for a purely gaming card.
Click to expand...
True again, but at the lower or middle tiers where pricing is a more serious issue to consumers the pricing tends to be based a lot more strictly on performance than the more esoteric "halo effect" pricing. I just find the pricing dynamics at the high end to be a little more interesting than the mid tier for this reason. Its also interesting that AMD/ATI hasn't ever built a card that has occupied a titan-like position in the market, so we don't know how they'd price such a thing. Nvidia obviously priced the Titan to protect Tesla sales to some extent.

limitedaccess said:
The GTX 780 is actually an interesting case. On one hand it did push to a higher price point, on the other hand it offered itself as a more value proposition within Nvidia's own lineup compared to the Titan. This was without any pressure from AMD at all.

I would say the GTX 780 and 7970 situation is quite comparable actually. Both launched and pushed the price boundary due to having significant advantages compared to the opposing products at time of launch, but depressed in price quite fast once competing products from the other side turned up.


I'm also not seeing the arguments for your last point. The price ceiling was stagnant for the 480, 580, and 680. Only until the 780 did the price ceiling rise on Nvidia's side. However the GTX 780 had a significantly greater performance advantage of the 7970 Ghz than the original 7970 had over the GTX 580 on the flip side.
Click to expand...
I disagree with you here, I think nvidia launched the titan to have a halo card that was priced so far out of even most die-hard enthusiasts hands that it would justify a $200 premium for the 780 over the 7970 by appearing to be a much better value as a "titan-lite". The 7970 launched with a ~30% performance improvement (depending on the game obviously) and better thermals than the 580 for $50 more at launch. The 780 had a similar lead (~30%) over the 7970 GE but cost $200 more at launch. Their pricing on the 780Ti is also pretty dire, a $200 premium over the 290X for even less of an advantage.
limitedaccess said:
What I'm trying to present isn't that Nvidia should be praised for it's pricing or that they are strongly consumer friendly in pricing. There however does not seem to be anywhere near enough historical sample and evidence to put Nvidia on the opposite and negative spectrum as AMD in terms of consumer friendly pricing.
Click to expand...
True, the current pricing dynamic has only been in place for a little over a year, basically since the launch of the Titan, but in that time AMD has released cards that clearly win the performance/$ proposition, while nvidia has released several cards pushing the high end of pricing at disproportionate levels than in the past. As you said, the 480, 580, 680 pricing tiers were static at around $500, which made sense considering that AMD, with their smaller die products, didn't have a competitive product that could justify that price. What I do find interesting is that as soon as AMD came out with competition that could get to that price point, nvidia moved the bar upwards. It was almost as if they were so used to getting $200 more than AMD's cards, that they figured all they had to do was maintain the "fastest single GPU" crown and they could still get a $200 premium, regardless of where AMD was pricing their product. On the flip side, AMD launched the 290X, faster than the 780 for $100 less. Its just a bit of a strange pricing scheme, one that shows that nvidia realizes they can squeeze people based in large part on a combination of branding power and the halo effect.

limitedaccess said:
I have to say personally at the end I don't subscribe to a good/evil company belief. They are both large public corporations primarily with responsibilities to their shareholders. The price they set for their products at the end is primarily self beneficial and dependent on their (and the products) market position.
Click to expand...
Neither do I, its a free market and you can set prices however you want, I don't think there is a malice factor involved. What is clear is that some companies have different strategies when it comes to delivering value to their consumers. Some attempt to deliver more value in the hopes of making it up on volume or marketshare gains, while others push margins and use branding as a "value-add". In this overly simplified example, I tend to favor the former over the latter. Both of these companies have competed from both positions over their history and I tend to choose the option that delivers me more bang for my buck whatever my price point is.
 
Titans are priced like this because fully functional GK110 cores can fetch $2000 a pop inside Tesla cards. nV probably wouldn't have released 780Ti/Titans at all if AMD didn't have cards that were faster than 780's.
 
Stryke1983 said:
So when AMD launched a faster card at a higher price point, it was deserved because it was a better card. But when Nvidia launched a faster card at a higher price point (bar the Titan Z) they were "taking advantage" and pushing the price ceiling higher? That's what your post is basically saying.
Click to expand...


A $50 price hike is a lot different than a $150 price hike. The 7970 @ $550 doesn't even remotely compare to the 780's launch price of $649. The price also went down fairly quickly on the AMD front. Not saying either side is right, but the GPU market has gone crazy since the HD 7000/600 Series with prices.

Had AMD not sat back for 2 years only to release a refreshed 28nm 290/290X card, Nvidia would not have pulled the shit they've been pulling and had Nvidia not dropped the 600 Series so quickly the 7970 wouldn't have come down so fast. AMD lost so much desktop market share by not releasing the refresh over a year ago like it should have been that Nvidia doesn't even care about the prices.
 
Sounds like the 8800GT and 680. Use the die shrink and more efficient architecture to bring graphics card prices back down to sane levels. Then release the big chip later when the process is matured or competition requires it. GK110 is a beast and I don't know how great NV's margins are on the lower-priced GK110 cards.
 
I'm just happy that the 20nm production is picking up. Was getting worried that we would have to wait another year or two for the 20nm parts and the next iteration would simply be 28nm with added architecture, or revamped architecture. That's what some of the rumors a few months ago were saying.
 
I also want to upgrade my GTX670 so I am waiting for the 8xx series. But I want 6GB but would consider one with 4GB on board. I'd also want the Asus like Silent features if possible. My 670 is pretty loud when playing a game. It runs at about 40% fan speed at idle and like 70% when gaming. Anything over 55% is loud :(, that's why that review of the 6GB 780 from Asus was just so darn tempting lol.
 
Maybe cheaper for nVidia to produce... but we all know how much consumers will benefit from that: none.
 
Man for some reason the 7xx series seems to me that it's been out for way to long way to long, I am gonna wait for the 880 pop it in to replace my aging 480's. and hopefully go back to playing on native 5760x1200 :cool:.
 
Nahawand said:
Man for some reason the 7xx series seems to me that it's been out for way to long way to long, I am gonna wait for the 880 pop it in to replace my aging 480's. and hopefully go back to playing on native 5760x1200 :cool:.
Click to expand...
It has been too long... Both Nvidia and AMD have only released two new GPU's since Q1 2012.
290/290x, 780/780 Ti. Maybe put the Titan in there. Technically one GPU depending how you look at it.

Sad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top