Is there someone else who think that nVidia prices are out of control?

bluesynk said:
So I think there is just a larger segment of people willing to spend extra to have higher performance. Companies have seen this and responded by releasing parts that are harder to produce and have higher manufacturing costs. They did not bother mass producing this level of parts. Now they do and they charge for it. if anything the "top" of the mainstream cards has dropped in price.
Click to expand...

That's why i've said earlier in the thread a lot of these people complaining are likely younger.

They don't remember that there used to actually be a difference between workstation and home. They don't realize what it took to actually run CAD back in the day, etc.

You are getting high-end parts these days that before never existed to begin with because the concept of 'prosumer' wasn't there.

But again; I will plainly point out that I was buying Quantum 3D Obsidian's for nearly $1000 in the late '90s. Quantum 3D basically invented 'prosumer' for the PC market and made buying expensive CAD workstations w/ SGI gear irrelevant. $700 back in the late 90's is over $1k today, and basically puts my Obsidian's in Titan X Pascal pricing range.

The prices are exactly where they should IMO, and people suggesting otherwise are ignorant of history.
 
I'm not really sure the prices have increased that much. Yes - for the top-end cards, the prices are ridiculous. But for the midrange (where most of the bread is made), prices are more-or-less the same (you could argue that due to inflation, they're lower now) as they were ten years ago. $250 still buys you a heck of a GPU. Oh sure, it won't push 4K monitors, but shit - for most - 1080p is more than enough. If you have the right display (think LCOS projector, CRT projector, highend CRT monitor, etc) - I would argue you're getting a better experience than the 4K boys (unless you own Sony's $23,000 4K projector or OLED monitor). :D
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
It's hilarious that these people are the same ones that complain that the GPU market is stagnant, and then when one company comes out with a product that handily beats the competition while being smaller, cooler and quieter, they complain that because it has a certain internal designation, that it should be priced a certain way.

That's called innovation. And innovation should be rewarded. And the market rewarded NVIDIA for their constant innovations regarding GPU design and fab process. AMD, not so much.
Click to expand...

Hey, now... Intel is going to give us a new $350 processor that will offer "up to 12% more productivity!".

Let me know when nvidia can top that.
 
Nvidia prices are high, but the fact that the $1200 Titan kept going out of stock and still might be (haven't checked in a while) is an indication that they are charging a price that plenty of people are willing to pay, and if plenty of peolple are willing to pay it, it is not overpriced.

They have the liberty to do this because there is no competition from AMD at the high end. Without real competition pricing always goes up.
 
5k?

yeah my number 9 back around that time was up there too.

Also my 8088 which had no graphics card was 3k, without a monitor.

People don't realize that manufacturing and supply has dropped the average computer prices and components down quite a bit.

Enthusiast parts will remain expensive that is it.
 
razor1 said:
5k?

yeah my number 9 back around that time was up there too.

Also my 8088 which had no graphics card was 3k, without a monitor.

People don't realize that manufacturing and supply has dropped the average computer prices and components down quite a bit.

Enthusiast parts will remain expensive that is it.
Click to expand...

Lets not go that far back, 7950 was $450 in 2012 before taking inflation into account, didn't win as much as the $400 1070 over the previous gen counterparts and we now are supposed to believe NV is the GPU Hitler.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Nvidia prices are high, but the fact that the $1200 Titan kept going out of stock and still might be (haven't checked in a while) is an indication that they are charging a price that plenty of people are willing to pay, and if plenty of peolple are willing to pay it, it is not overpriced.

They have the liberty to do this because there is no competition from AMD at the high end. Without real competition pricing always goes up.
Click to expand...

it's the same old bloody entitlement bullshit the third worlders and poors who love to employ to whine about how "iPhones are too expensive = Apple is ripping us off" since forever. And then proceed to flaunt it endlessly to those without when they DO actually somehow get it.

You know, because it's a fundamental human right to get luxury goods for free/cheap, amirite.
 
Was looking at the prices recently, as the upgrade itch is getting under my skin, and the 1080 costs the same, I paid for my 980 Ti. So if I'd pay the same for card that's much faster and cooler I'd not say that prices are out of control.
 
I love how none of the people asking "How dare Nvidia charge $1,200 for a video card" are asking how Porsche dares asking $200k for a 911 Turbo S

There will always be top end luxury products not everyone can afford in just about every market and that is fine.

The companies don't owe us shit at any price level.
 
If prices don't come down, IMO they should release a 1060ti (or whatever you want to call it). Something that performs between the 1060 and 1070 with a price point right between. $330 or so. Would be excellent for those looking to upgrade a GTX 970 in the same price bracket.
 
Flogger23m said:
If prices don't come down, IMO they should release a 1060ti (or whatever you want to call it). Something that performs between the 1060 and 1070 with a price point right between. $330 or so. Would be excellent for those looking to upgrade a GTX 970 in the same price bracket.
Click to expand...

Nah, it wont make sense from a BoM point of view. All NV need is to continue price the 1070 linearly in perf/$ against custom 480s and the former is guaranteed to continue outselling the latter.
 
I don't get many of the responses in this thread.

OP is very well constructed, citing RECENT price jumps. I find it ridiculous people feel the need to point out nvidia is not a charity and that's how markets operate, etc. Well, no shit.

I have no problem buying the latest titan but I won't do it because I see no value in it. How's that stopping me from pointing out it's a ripoff, huh? It doesn't. We all vote with our money. Problem is, many people find current prices acceptable. I blame them most of all.
 
dgz said:
I don't get many of the responses in this thread.

OP is very well constructed, citing RECENT price jumps. I find it ridiculous people feel the need to point out nvidia is not a charity and that's how markets operate, etc. Well, no shit.

I have no problem buying the latest titan but I won't do it because I see no value in it. How's that stopping me from pointing out it's a ripoff, huh? It doesn't. We all vote with our money. Problem is, many people find current prices acceptable. I blame them most of all.
Click to expand...
"Blame"?

Why would you use the word blame? Do you think it's wrong for people to buy from nVidia at the prices they are charging now?
 
chenw said:
"Blame"?

Why would you use the word blame? Do you think it's wrong for people to buy from nVidia at the prices they are charging now?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do. As one still running 2500k and 560ti, I think it's very wrong.

I really want a new card but I am voting with my wallet. Paying current prices is like paying people to spit on your face. Jen sun can go fuck himself.
 
When the 1060 6GB is sightly cheaper than custom RX480 8GB and performs better while the 1070 has the same perf/$ with the RX480 at the same TDP, I have a hard time taking the NV haters seriously.

By the same standard, shouldn't they also blame AMD too? If they are talking about how overpriced halo products like Titan XP are, boy they gonna hate the entire world.
 
dgz said:
Yes, I do. As one still running 2500k and 560ti, I think it's very wrong.

I really want a new card but I am voting with my wallet. Paying current prices is like paying people to spit on your face. Jen sun can go fuck himself.
Click to expand...

You voted with your wallet and I voted with mine. I don't see the problem here. If you want to be upset about pricing, you can place the blame on AMD's lack of competition at current, pure and simple. No alternatives or comparative products = a premium price.

Why would (better yet, should) nVidia leave a few hundred extra bucks on the table per card when there is literally no reason to? Out of the goodness of their hearts? I think the demand for this card speaks for itself. The market is willing to pay 650-700 bucks for the 1080, it would be foolish for them as a company to not charge this. The market would love to not pay this much for a 1080, myself included, but what's my alternative?
 
dgz said:
Yes, I do. As one still running 2500k and 560ti, I think it's very wrong.

I really want a new card but I am voting with my wallet. Paying current prices is like paying people to spit on your face. Jen sun can go fuck himself.
Click to expand...

DGZ how much did you buy your 560 ti for? $250? that was the retail price of that card at launch.

What kind of card can you get for that price now? GTX 1060?

How much performance are you getting for your money now?

You are getting a hell of a lot more performance for the same tier card same money card.

I don't see why you are complaining. Nvidia hasn't changed those tier cards, the ONLY card they are charging more for is the Titan class cards, everything else has been fairly unchanged. You get what you pay for.
 
Palladium@SG said:
When the 1060 6GB is sightly cheaper than custom RX480 8GB and performs better while the 1070 has the same perf/$ with the RX480 at the same TDP, I have a hard time taking the NV haters seriously.

By the same standard, shouldn't they also blame AMD too? If they are talking about how overpriced halo products like Titan XP are, boy they gonna hate the entire world.
Click to expand...

AMD's lack of compelling products is the main culprit here. The 480 is a joke, plain and simple. However, it's hard to blame a company for not having a better product on the market. Nobody but nvidia is happy about it, regardless what AMD says.
 
razor1 said:
DGZ how much did you buy your 560 ti for? $250? that was the retail price of that card at launch.

What kind of card can you get for that price now? GTX 1060?

How much performance are you getting for your money now?

You are getting a hell of a lot more performance for the same tier card same money card.

I don't see why you are complaining. Nvidia hasn't changed those tier cards, the ONLY card they are charging more for is the Titan class cards, everything else has been fairly unchanged. You get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

The 1060 is as compelling as the 480. I paid 250 euro for the 560ti. Most 1060 cards are pushing 320 and beyond.

While it would be a nice upgrade, I can't ignore performance relative to what's out there. That would be silly.

No matter how you put it, prices are not unchanged.
 
AlphaQup said:
You voted with your wallet and I voted with mine. I don't see the problem here. If you want to be upset about pricing, you can place the blame on AMD's lack of competition at current, pure and simple. No alternatives or comparative products = a premium price.

Why would (better yet, should) nVidia leave a few hundred extra bucks on the table per card when there is literally no reason to? Out of the goodness of their hearts? I think the demand for this card speaks for itself. The market is willing to pay 650-700 bucks for the 1080, it would be foolish for them as a company to not charge this. The market would love to not pay this much for a 1080, myself included, but what's my alternative?
Click to expand...

Isn't that what I said but without the grump?
 
dgz said:
The 1060 is as compelling as the 480. I paid 250 euro for the 560ti. Most 1060 cards are pushing 320 and beyond.

While it would be a nice upgrade, I can't ignore performance relative to what's out there. That would be silly.

No matter how you put it, prices are not unchanged.
Click to expand...

Well if you are getting price gouged or looking atoverclocked models, don't blame that on retail pricing man......

Suche nach ''gtx 1060'' - Hardware, Notebooks

I see a few 1060's there that are close to 270 euros all overclocked including vat. 6 GB versions and 3gb version around 205 euros.

Again ya get what you pay for. if you want an overclocked model, they will cost more.
 
dgz said:
Isn't that what I said but without the grump?
Click to expand...

In post #221 you do, yes, but not before my post.

dgz said:
We all vote with our money. Problem is, many people find current prices acceptable. I blame them most of all.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the argument against how I spend my money is all. Why should I wait around and miss out on performance just because a competitor doesn't have a comparable product? In other words, I have no problem rewarding innovation with my wallet.
 
It's a hell of a lot of fun to just load a game, hit "Max" or "Ultra" and play and not have to fidget around to find "playable" settings.

;)

The fact that they just work like that is worth it to me. If it isn't to you, vote with your wallet, plain and simple.
 
AlphaQup said:
In post #221 you do, yes, but not before my post.



I don't understand the argument against how I spend my money is all. Why should I wait around and miss out on performance just because a competitor doesn't have a comparable product? In other words, I have no problem rewarding innovation with my wallet.
Click to expand...

How you spend your money is your business. Me blaming you for current prices is simply my way of venting, nothing more. I wouldn't prevent your from doing so even if I could.

Maybe I should've bought the 1070 six months ago.
 
dgz said:
How you spend your money is your business. Me blaming you for current prices is simply my way of venting, nothing more. I wouldn't prevent your from doing so even if I could.

Maybe I should've bought the 1070 six months ago.
Click to expand...

All good, nothing wrong with venting and I do understand your position.
 
I am glad we agree. Now, if anyone needs me, I'll be in the angry dome.

145778.gif
 
Before any of us embarrass ourselves, why don't we make sure we are discussing the actual data.

Below I have grabbed a selection of top end cards, and calculated - based on CPI-U inflation estimates - their price in 2016 dollars. I have excluded Titans, as I think we mostly agree that the Titans are a new extreme product group above the old high end.

(Sorry for the pic, wanted to paste this as a text table, and tried code tags but couldn't get it to line up)

geforce prices 01.jpg


Let's chart the inflation adjusted prices:

geforce prices 02.jpg


If anything, it appears as if current high end non-Titan pricing is pretty much inline with historical averages.

I know. Let's plot a trend line :rolleyes:

geforce prices 03.jpg


The trend line suggests there has been a slight price increase over the years on average, but nothing to write home about.


Let's analyze the data for a bit. If I had to guess, areas where the pricing is low, is going to line up pretty well with times when AMD had a strong competitor, and areas where the pricing is high is going to line up with times when AMD had poor competition.

I'll let someone else who knows AMD"s graphics portfolio history better than I do chime in here better than I can though. (I've - with a few notable exceptions - been an AMD CPU+Nvidia GPU guy over the years, so I don't know which AMD GPU's were killer in which years.)

It is not unreasonable to expect the price to trend upwards slightly over time, due to both the drop in competition from AMD, and due to the increasing difficulties (and associated costs) in continuing to shrink die sizes.
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
Before any of us embarrass ourselves, why don't we make sure we are discussing the actual data.

Below I have grabbed a selection of top end cards, and calculated - based on CPI-U inflation estimates - their price in 2016 dollars. I have excluded Titans, as I think we mostly agree that the Titans are a new extreme product group above the old high end.

(Sorry for the pic, wanted to paste this as a text table, and tried code tags but couldn't get it to line up)

View attachment 8197

Let's chart the inflation adjusted prices:

View attachment 8198

If anything, it appears as if current high end non-Titan pricing is pretty much inline with historical averages.

I know. Let's plot a trend line :rolleyes:

View attachment 8199

The trend line suggests there has been a slight price increase over the years on average, but nothing to write home about.


Let's analyze the data for a bit. If I had to guess, areas where the pricing is low, is going to line up pretty well with times when AMD had a strong competitor, and areas where the pricing is high is going to line up with times when AMD had poor competition.

I'll let someone else who knows AMD"s graphics portfolio history better than I do chime in here better than I can though. (I've - with a few notable exceptions - been an AMD CPU+Nvidia GPU guy over the years, so I don't know which AMD GPU's were killer in which years.)

It is not unreasonable to expect the price to trend upwards slightly over time, due to both the drop in competition from AMD, and due to the increasing difficulties (and associated costs) in continuing to shrink die sizes.
Click to expand...
Here are Radeon numbers. In fairness I only included single-core cards in the data, since Titan was excluded from GeForce.

upload_2016-9-26_17-27-51.png


upload_2016-9-26_17-28-31.png
 
yeah it does, AMD has been competing nV's marketshare gains with price, and hasn't been very successful at it. And this is why the value and mainstream segments have been shrinking. People what more performance and feature sets and other metrics, they don't care of the price drops or increases AMD has been doing.
 
Armenius said:
Here are Radeon numbers. In fairness I only included single-core cards in the data, since Titan was excluded from GeForce.

View attachment 8205

View attachment 8206
Click to expand...

Zarathustra[H] said:
Thanks for that.


Is it just me, or does that resemble an upside down nvidia chart a lot? :p

Goes to reinforce that when AMD is competitive, pricing is lower, and when AMD isn't , we get the 8800 Ultra...
Click to expand...


Actually, come to think of it, if you remove the RX480 from the end (because let's be honest, it isn't really a top end product, there are other products in their current inventory that out perform it) I bet those two charts look even more like eachother.

It's really quite funny to see the spike of the 8800 Ultra line up so nicely with the dip of the 3870. It goes a long way to prove the point that competition is - above all else - what drives prices.
 
I agree that the 480 shouldn't be included in that chart. The charts should show the high end cards for each generation and the 480 does not qualify.

What you can see from the charts is that when ATI/AMD released a really nice card (9700 Pro, 9800 XT, x1800XT, 7970) their prices reflected that. In both cases the only really outrageous cards were the 8800 Ultra and the Fury Pro Duo (which wasn't included in the chart.)

Thank you both for those charts.
 
razor1 said:
yeah it does, AMD has been competing nV's marketshare gains with price, and hasn't been very successful at it. And this is why the value and mainstream segments have been shrinking. People what more performance and feature sets and other metrics, they don't care of the price drops or increases AMD has been doing.
Click to expand...

Yup, exactly like the Android OEMs, so obsessed with gaining raw marketshare at all costs only to realize the profits have evaporated when they finally got there. What good is sacrificing margins to gain marketshare for AMD if they can't make a more profit out of it?
 
I look at this way. For $400, a GTX 1070 is about the performance of a 980Ti which went for $649 for a rather long time and an OC 1070 version = Titan X Maxwell in performance. I say that is a rather good deal almost spectacular. A 1080 for $688 slaughters both easily and cost about as much as the 980Ti did before which was considered a real bargain when it came out. The Titan X Pascal does seem steep but look how much it is over the 1080 25%-35% at 4K.

On the other side when AMD priced their stuff over $500 numerous folks complained about it etc. :ROFLMAO:. Seems like AMD never catches a break but Nvidia has over the years built a decent reputation of delivering the goods and of course with some controversy stuff to go along with it. Ask how many 1070/1080 owners were glad of their purchase, I know I am and looks like most others as well = the price is good enough of a bargain.

What will drive the prices down since it looks like Nvidia has sufficient margins to reduce pricing if needed is competition as in products that actually compete with Nvidia. At the present AMD can only compete somewhat with the 1070 with the Fury X at sub 1070 pricing and that is it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top