Nvidia Should Be Held Accountable For OverCharging With Lower Performance.

Discussion in 'Video Cards' started by Ironhand, Mar 30, 2013.

  1. Ironhand

    Ironhand [H]Lite

    Messages:
    102
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2012
    Alittle Balance To The Threads Posted.

    Typically Nvidia's cards have cost more then their AMD counterparts all while having less VRAM and producing Lower FPS. With performance per dollar used in various reviews and guides, how does someone feel about paying more for less?

    Discuss..
     
  2. Redleader

    Redleader 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,730
    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    They are not forcing you to purchase their cards. What is the problem?
     
  3. KENNYB

    KENNYB 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,139
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Hahahaha... let me grab my popcorn. Please post a link where nVidia admits to not doing competitive analysis for stuttering. Oh wait.
     
  4. maxius

    maxius 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,350
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2001
    I have to agree with the op and lets not even get into the whole bump-gate fiasco... nvidia always over promises and under delivers while overchargeing
     
  5. KENNYB

    KENNYB 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,139
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    How about ask the [H] staff which multi-gpu solution they prefer?
     
  6. Slystealth

    Slystealth Gawd

    Messages:
    697
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Another one of these threads really :) Well someone is trolling
     
  7. ggplay

    ggplay Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    167
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    I think this thread is ...

    :eek:

    I see what you did there. ;)
     
  8. refraxion

    refraxion [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,420
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    So I guess the OP was butt hurt from what he read in other threads.

    I get it.
     
  9. nissanztt90

    nissanztt90 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,858
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Troll. Theres no accountability to be had, and theres nothing to discuss. Your other option is to buy an AMD card which you believe is faster and cheaper anyway. If someone wants to pay more for less, they need to be held accountable for being stupid.
     
  10. evilsofa

    evilsofa [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,078
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    If you bought a car based solely on performance per dollar, you would buy a Ford Mustang. Funny thing, though - not everybody buys a Ford Mustang.
     
  11. 5150Joker

    5150Joker 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,982
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    nVidia's driver support alone makes them worth more than anything AMD makes. I had AMD cards before my 680s and hated their drivers, especially multi-gpu. Also games are much smoother with SLI with both mobile and desktop GPUs, there's no comparison. Given the fact that AMD's multi-GPU has runt frames, I don't see why anyone would want to buy their cards right now. Maybe when/if they get around to remedying the issue it'll make them worth looking at.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2013
  12. flu!d

    flu!d Gawd

    Messages:
    562
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Haha, buthurt AMD owners attempt to balance out the slagging.

    Doesn't matter, as it's recently come to light that in SLI I'm getting far greater performance than the AMD alternative due to NV's superior SLI implementation - I'll gladly pay more for that privilege.;)
     
  13. jmilcher

    jmilcher [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,149
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Better driver support, less or no microstutter, MUCH better multi card scaling,....


    Yup I gladly pay more.;)

    **edit**

    Had to check, yup the OP has a AMD card. Lol I understand the butt hurt, with all the threads exposing AMD's poor drivers and poor multi card performance.
     
  14. DogsofJune

    DogsofJune 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,331
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    I think we should be mad at Matrox for not staying as a possible option.......
     
  15. wyqtor

    wyqtor Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    388
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2011
    It's a no-brainer really. If you are strapped for cash, you pick AMD and overclock. If you have money, you buy a Titan. I am still amazed by the thought processes of someone who picks up a 650 Ti over a just-slightly-more-expensive 7850 (yeah, I happen to know such a person).
     
  16. SirMaster

    SirMaster 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,122
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    I paid more for more with my GTX 680.

    I get CUDA, PhysX and 3D Vision all of which I use. I'll gladly pay the $100 more or so to gain those 3 things over the 7970 GHz. GTX 680 overclocks just as well IMO. I have my EVGA 680 running at 1300MHz.

    If all you care about is performance per dollar then sure, buy the AMD. But if you want more features, the nVidia makes perfect sense.
     
  17. hesho

    hesho Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    496
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    there will always be ppl who have no idea how to spend money on their hardware. Friend 2 years ago bought a i7 980x cpu.. Cost him over a grand for just a cpu. He even set up a custom water loop for it but.. he REFUSES to overclock it because he says "i shouldn't have to oc anything". A couple of days ago, he mentioned that he wants to upgrade his cpu......
     
  18. schmuckley

    schmuckley [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,236
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2011
    The real deal is 660s in SLI..;) ..beats a Titan.
    I prefer one large ATI ..ewps..AMD card myself.
     
  19. doug_7506

    doug_7506 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,215
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    If OP's logic were correct we would be suing Apple as well.

    Apparently there is price premium for products that just work and are simple to use.
     
  20. picket23

    picket23 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    153
    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2013
    OP's point is that some of the threads started in this forum lately have been retarded (this one included of course, that is how he is making his point.)
    Especially since the last pcper.com article basically stated what everyone knew.
    -Single card 7970ghz is marginally faster than gtx680. (even using their new FCAT frame time measurements)
    -SLI performs better than crossfire, in fact crossfire sucks balls without vsync/tweaking

    Pretty sure this has all been common knowledge for quite some time. People have just been embarrassing themselves spamming bullcrap on here to make some noise.
     
  21. GoldenTiger

    GoldenTiger [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    18,441
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Quoted for truth.

    Actually, that's not really what people are talking about... I'd recommend reading said articles before commenting. And, just because people are talking about yet more reasons to avoid AMD, doesn't mean they're "embarassing" themselves, unless you're a complete fanboy of one company or the other. Discussion is what forums are for, and that's what's (mostly) taking place.
     
  22. flu!d

    flu!d Gawd

    Messages:
    562
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    I thought people were simply discussing the issue more now that technical evidence has come to light confirming and explaining the existence of the problem?:rolleyes:

    Is physical proof that CF has some major performance issues resulting in people discussing the issue further cause for butthurt? If so, are AMD users really as mature as they like to claim to be?

    Because as an NV user I've copped it in every way, shape and form over everything from woodscrews through to hot running, power consuming 480's and I never felt the need to balance the butthurt out with a thread like this?! At the end of the day, only good can come from the majority of enthusiasts jumping up and down, openly discussing the problem and telling AMD it just isn't good enough - People have been complaining of this issue for years, and AMD did nothing about it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2013
  23. Zarich

    Zarich Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    208
    Joined:
    May 7, 2010
    Value of a product = what people are willing to pay.
    Hence some cars are more expensive than other simply because people are willing to pay more.
    AMD users need to understand that if AMD is successful in a while they will be paying a premium over Nvidia for no other reason than AMD has a better name at that time.
     
  24. Josephson_Junction

    Josephson_Junction [H]Lite

    Messages:
    69
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    I think there's something else to be mad at Matrox about.

    http://shopmatrox.com/usa/products/datasheet.asp?ID=886

    Either I've clearly missed an important detail or something just doesn't add up; USD $600 for that? It doesn't help that the rest of their cards (in similar specification) are also priced exorbitantly high, like this AGP card. The price premium of the FirePro and Quadro cards pales in comparison!
     
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2013
  25. sobe88

    sobe88 Gawd

    Messages:
    595
    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2012
    That's why we go for a BMW M3 instead, for the overall performance + smoother ride, wait... smoothness.... amd microstutter...... wait a sec, so basically AMD is like the Ford Mustang GT and nVidia is like an BMW M3, which would you buy?

    But in all seriousness, both companies offer good products, I think AMD is more on the competing for prices. IMO, yes MY opinion, nVidia cards are smoother, thus I got rid of my 7970 GHz to replace with this GTX 680 Lightning, the 680 does better in some benchies, the 7970 does better in others, it doesnt matter, go with which you prefer.
     
  26. MavericK

    MavericK Zero Cool

    Messages:
    28,639
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Totally necessary thread is necessary.
     
  27. Entertainer

    Entertainer Gawd

    Messages:
    639
    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    I'm going to drive my BMW up to Microcenter tomorrow to buy a Titan.
     
  28. mrtheshaggy

    mrtheshaggy [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,211
    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Every thread on this forum has an intent to troll or turn into a troll thread by page two. So I don't see a problem.

    I thought Nvidia and ATI were both quality products. I've always leaned Nvidia because they have better card makers. When AMD took over ATI, I saw a general downhill trend off sacrificing quality for performance. I see these polls up all the time and Nvidia is usually sitting at 60% while AMD sits at 40%. Higher demand for Nvidia products, so they charge more.

    Also, they have historically focused on different price brackets. Nvidia has always been the $200-$300 or $400+ cards. AMD focuses on $100-$200 and $300-$400. Since I've always been the $200-$300 range, Nvidia always offers a better product in that category IMO. I recently flirted with a 7870 Tahaiti only to be rewarded with a no post after two weeks of stock use.
     
  29. nissanztt90

    nissanztt90 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,858
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    This thread is boring.
     
  30. Zinn

    Zinn Pronouns: ze, zis, zit

    Messages:
    2,344
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Nvidia cards offer better gaming experiences, that's why they're more expensive.
     
  31. Mister E

    Mister E ?

    Messages:
    2,612
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Jesus flamebaiting Christ some of you need to grow the hell up.
     
  32. Revdarian

    Revdarian 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,356
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Only true on multicard setups.

    Proved on the pcper article, that single card, AMD won time and again :p
     
  33. StormUP

    StormUP Gawd

    Messages:
    628
    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Where does Corvette come into this?
     
  34. Zarich

    Zarich Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    208
    Joined:
    May 7, 2010
    Voodoo 5500
     
  35. demowhc

    demowhc Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    274
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Lol at this thread. Nvidia charge more because they offer more, its as simple as that.
     
  36. GoldenTiger

    GoldenTiger [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    18,441
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    Pretty much this. Yeah, you'd get some people buying for "brand name", but the bulk of purchases go to nVidia because of the quality.
     
  37. Fooshnik

    Fooshnik 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,922
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    What a fantastic thread. A good 7950 will run you about $210 after you sell the games vs a decent 670 which will cost you $360 for the same or worse performance. That's a $150 difference. Clearly Nvidia owes their customers a refund for having scammed them out of 70% more money for nothing.
    Some people are a little slow.
     
  38. JoeUser

    JoeUser 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,919
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Or like how you can buy a used 7970 for ~$300 but can't find a used 680 for under $400...
     
  39. WaTaGuMp

    WaTaGuMp Gawd

    Messages:
    713
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    I prefer Pepsi over Coke, but I drink them both.
     
  40. GoldenTiger

    GoldenTiger [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    18,441
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2004
    ROFL, and how do you explain this? http://slickdeals.net/f/5936068-PNY...0-2-GB-GDDR5-with-Assassin-s-Creed-III-290-AR

    That's $260 for a GTX 670 after selling the game ;). A $50 difference, not 150. Nice job trying to make a (false) case though by comparing hot deal prices to everyday pricing! :p Another one would be http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=72414 NCIX @ ~$250 after selling games/credits.