Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Megalith, Dec 29, 2018.
You don't like more performance?
I mean, I'm as salty as the next guy who has more sense than money, but, really, nVidia fucking nailed it. They shifted all their old stock without reducing any prices, and they managed to sell current generation performance (bar the 2080 Ti) for current generation prices to people that already had current generation cards.
I mean, what part of that is a "fuck up"? Sure, the crypto crash really shafted them hard, and the bleating of us enthusiasts is an annoyance, but they really couldn't have done much better with the RTX launch from a business perspective.
When they have trouble moving that 6 months of inventory, they have to down play the new 2060 (which is better than a 1070 ti in some instances) to sell the 1070ti at $360.
This channel problem is something special, they would not lower prices after crypto hit the shit for a few months and now they lower prices at the release of the new products like I said above. They could have done much better.
As far as the release of the new cards lets take a look at what AMD did with excess inventory: discount the products, include nice game bundles and don't announce the new cards for as long as possible to sell the excess inventory. Now AMD can come in with real priced mid-range cards, which is the bulk of what people buy, and strip market share. Once again, Nvidia could have done far better.
V56 outside of two models is a crapshoot as many are not Sammy hbm. 56s can clock quite well on core though, less shader may help there. V64 ref are all Sammy hbm.
With that I mind personally it's easier to just get the 64 and mod it as memory is a huge gain. 30 bucks isn't worth the hassle.
So what if they have to downplay the 2060? Does that cost them anything?
The thing with cost is that you can only expect to sell a finite amount of cards whether it is 10 or a billion. In a vacuum, you should charge the absolute most you can still sell any units for until you can no longer sell a single one. Then you drop the price, rinse, and repeat until you have no stock. By pricing the RTX line up so highly, they are still making the same money on the old stuff as they would have, but they can charge a premium on the new stuff that they wouldn't be able to get away with if A) they dropped the price of the old lines and B) actually had any competition.
Yeh AMD dropped prices and gave us some sick game bundles, but other than a warm fuzzy feeling that doesn't give them shit. So what if it takes nVidia a year longer to sell out stock; they'll be making much better margins. And if they still have trouble in the future they can start adjusting pricing around (probably with the RTX range as well, if that stalls in sales) and spark more interest. Besides, AMD have been on the back foot for so long they don't really have a choice. For whatever reason, people just don't buy a lot of AMD, despite the competition in the less-than-enthusiast end.
I'm not saying nVidia are doing any good for the industry or enthusiasts etc, but they are damn smart and shady when it comes to making money. Granted, their stock has dived, but I don't see that as a permanent thing; people were just panic selling after the crypto bubble burst and then the sentiment towards RTX didn't help anyone get back on the wagon. Some more solid quarters now that the mining craze has worn off and I think you'll see they stabilise somewhere below their mining peak.
When we see the much needed come back from AMD, sure, they'll be poised to take back some marketshare. But then since nVidia all of a sudden have someone to compete with other than themselves, they can lower their prices to something more palatable (to me, if no one else). All it means is nVidia made bank hand over fist while they could. Which is exactly what I'm saying about nVidia being very shrewd about the last few months. The pricing on RTX is a joke, but if people are buying it and you can get away with it, only an idiot would charge less.
$350 seems like a good deal for the 2060 especially since it comes bundled with Battlefield 5 or Anthem
Reading is key. It will cost them market share in the biggest segment, the mid to low range. Here is an example 10 people want to buy a 2080ti but 1000 people want to buy a 2060 at around $200. There is no 2060 at $200 so AMD will take that market share.
That is why this is bad, it inflates the prices of products to sell old stock leaving the lower end market open for the competition. What Nvidia is doing is screwing themselves, it does not matter how good AMD's product is compared to Nvidia the bulk of the market buys cheap cards (even cheaper than $200) and Nvidia is not selling them.
Oh and Nvidia does not adjust prices, you can read what the master of the channel had to say in regards to the quarter financial results of Nvidia.
Edit so I don't have to reply: Most People have a finite amount of money, they will not cough up $350 because it is Nvidia they will buy the cheaper card.
Maybe I'm being dense but why are people going AMD all of a sudden just because a 2060 is not $200? Do nVidia have no cards at $200? Just because I can't buy a 2080 Ti for £500 doesn't mean I'm going to buy AMD instead. I'll just buy what I can get for £500, that offers the best value, green or red, or that satisfies my criteria for looking at a 2060 in the first place (G-sync etc). I can't say I've looked at card prices across the range recently, but as far as I always new, nVidia and AMD are generally pretty tied in value for any performance segment where there actually exists some competition.
So that person looking to buy the 2060 isn't necessarily going to buy AMD just because the 2060 is overpriced; they are going to cough up the money (reluctantly), or see what they can afford that fits their requirements, whether that is still nVidia, or AMD. All else being equal, nVidia have not lost anything so long as they are price competitive where AMD can be performance competitive. Everything after that (i.e. pretty much the whole RTX range) is just extra margin until they have no choice but to react some way, whether that's game bundles, extra offers, or pricing. I can't imagine they wouldn't lower prices if they had no choice, no matter what anyone says. Again, though, it would only be where the competition is. I don't really see RTX getting cheaper (at least nothing that can not be matched with a Navi).
nVidia's marketshare has been dominant for years; I don't think half a year to a year's worth of high prices in places you can't get anything from the competiton is going to change that. I'd be price gouging where I could as well.
For this kind of price and performance, the card would have to be able to do it all with 75W for me to have any interest in it.
What the hell are you smoking? You are getting 1070Ti performance for 1070Ti pricing with less memory (and some models are slated to have GDDR5X just like the 1070Ti) a year after the 1070Ti came out. If this was $249-279 like the current gen 1060 MSRP, then I'd agree with you.
To borrow an argument from 2015-2016, those free games aren't worth that much with the grey market. Though, most of those games are locked into the card and emails so it is harder to sell the codes on ebay now. Oh, and hopefully those are games you actually want to play. Nevermind that BF5 is down to $30 for some versions a month after it came out. I like game bundles but in the long run, just give me a price cut. They won't because it doesn't look good on nvidia or retailer's bottom lines.
This analysis is spot-on. The "just wait til AMD comes out with their $200 2060 killer" arguments always seem to transmit from some alternate reality where the laws of supply and demand don't exist. Or just someone deep-inhaling magic markers. "If they price a Lexus like a Camry then more people will totally buy it" -- yeah, no shit. But it's bad business.
AMD will never MSRP a 2060 equivalent at $200, or even $300. And even if they did, the AIB and retail stages of the pipeline would see to it that the price you can actually get it for ends up being pretty close dollar-to-performance what the 2060 is selling for. Children will call this gouging - "Newegg is gouging bro" - but it's just supply/demand at work, and AMD is not immune.
The fact is Nvidia has raised the ceiling on GPU pricing, and lifted everything else all the way down the line up with it - including whatever AMD comes out with. Enough people have voted with wallets that they're ready to pay more per performance, and so all the whining about "what should be" is just banging pot on head with wooden spoon. Enjoy.
Said nobody ever. You can't justify the price of a card for the games it comes with. For one, I may not want the games, which is true. Secondly, if the 2060's performance is just 10% faster than a 1060 and costs $100 more, then that's a really bad buy. If Ray Tracing is barely works for the 2080 Ti then it won't work at all for the 2060, so you can rule that out.
After AMD's announcement in CES I doubt this "leaked" pricing is going to stay true, assuming AMD doesn't fuck it up and announce a RX Navi for $350 that performs 10% faster than the RX 590. That's the kinda shit that pushes people to console gaming.
Nobody should care about power consumption unless you do crypto mining. Most people play games for a few hours at best. Try to calculate how much money you lose to power consumption playing a game for a few hours per day.
it should drop to those prices soon enough...I forgot about the VRAM gimp so yeah I think ~$300 would be a better price
Just because Nvidia has significantly raised their pricing for this generation does not mean that the entire GPU market pricing is going up with them. AMD won't just look at Nvidia pricing and match, they will look at what is a reasonable market price. They will use their resources to see just how well the RTX series is selling, what is the margin on those prices, and if Nvidia priced too high, their margins are low, or anything else similar, AMD will not price to match. Just as Nividia's 20xx GPU's have to compete with existing stock of 10xx GPU's, so AMD's new offerings will need to compete with previous AMD offerings.
Reports are indicating that Nvidia's pricing scheme is too high, and sales are not as good as previous generations. If Nvidia had kept the previous generation pricing, or even if they had raised MSRP by 10-15%, the sales numbers would be so high, instead of stock prices being cut in half, they would have continued to rise. Truth is, Nvidia got themselves in a pickle with this generation, and it will be painful for them to get out. This leaked product (of which may or may not see light of day before Navi, probably will, but not before announcement) is going to continue that problem.
Nvidia also had the additional data points regarding yields. Perhaps they knew something that we don't and sales were always going to be low, whether constrained by supply or price.
AMD does not have to match the 2060 they just need to get a competitive $200 and sub $200 cards put there.
People have voted with their wallet just check the Steam hardware. Guess what they did not vote for a $350 GPU and from the looks of it they are not ready to pay that much more for performance.
The only real counter argument to what many people have said in regards to pricing is that Nvidia has 6 months of 1060's to sell and for that reason will not release a new card in the $200-sub $200 range because they need to sell all those 1060's. There is a good chance AMD might do the same thing but that is yet to be seen. Both companies said at the end of October that they each personally have 12 weeks of inventory but cannot tell investors how much inventory is with their partners, saying that this inventory backlog may go all the way to second or third quarter next year.
This mining shit show fucked the consumer and some people seem to be happy about that, they are not selling you a sports car they are selling you the same car with the exhaust pushed into the cabin of the car instead of out the muffler, for the same price if not higher, because they have too many of the old cars to sell. this is true for all the cards except the 2080ti and the RTX Titan.
I'm curious what the next king will be in the 75-150w (pci-e +6pin max) at under $200 will be in a few months.
Son's got an old 7850 (I think) which is due for an upgrade with some of his Xmas money.
They kind of by default brought the whole market with them because they control the market share. This argument that nVidia has fucked the pricing etc seems to exist in a world where AMD already have competition out, nVidia is losing marketshare, and no RTX cards are selling. That is not this world.
As far as AMD pricing goes, I tend to agree. They could release at the same price (or very slightly less) and try to make the money, or they could undercut as much as possible and go for the hearts and minds and claw back some marketshare. I'd expect somewhere in the middle. No matter what they decide, when they act it will be disruptive, I'm sure.
I don't agree with your last paragraph though. Pricing being "too high" is relative to the person saying it. Sure, they could have had more sales of the 2070 and up if only they were cheaper, but people still bought then atmatmthat price since there is nothing else, and nVidia have got room to maneuver when AMD hit the seen. There was an opportunity to make money off early adopting enthusiasts, and they took it. As a side benefit, it kept their old stock looking somewhat competitive and allows them to shift it. Cheaper RTX cards would have destroyed sales of the old high end cards. Utterly. As it is, they all sold for the same prices they were going for, and they made better margins on the RTX stuff. Granted, the mid-range is a little bit of a mixed bag, but that's not a problem really until AMD make a move, and I have no doubt nVidia will have no choice but to act.
As for the stock price, that is almost entirely down to the crypto crash and the almost bald-faced lying about their ability to accurately supply the right amount of stock for the demand. The RTX saga is just keeping it down there. If nVidia come out saying they are 50% down YTD for gross income or something, then I'd be worried. But stock price is not something I'd be that concerned with unless they aren't recovering before H2 next year.
4870 4850 resulted in price cuts of the 280 and 260. Excellent performance at excellent prices can shift the market even if it isn’t “best” performance.
That is pretty much what we are all hoping for. It's just that the argument that nVidia have fucked it by pricing things the way they have being some monumental mistake is largely not in keeping with the reality; sales may be less (without even seeing figures, I'd bet they are), but the margins will be higher. And anyone who is holding out for a cheaper price will likely buy in if we see similar behaviour as the aforementioned 2xx range from nVidia and 48xx range from AMD (4870X2 was my first ever card for a custom build, not that anyone cares).
75W allows the card to be powered by the PCI-E slot alone, making it useful for people with cheap pre-built computers that didn't come equipped with a GPU or the PSU wires to support one... Or in my case, it allows you to pull out one more wire out of the SFX system in the living room. M.2 got rid of two wires... I'd love to lose another. I run a 1070 in the living room system, but used to have a 1050 Ti in there and I miss the simplicity.
Does this card have the same issues as the others or have they fixed that?