Next NV High-end

[KimB]

I don't think memory space means quite as much in the high end as it does in the low end, marketing wise, though.

 

[Geo]

edit: and then came the Inq with this message: http://www.theinq.com/?article=26595
A GTX with 512MB, questions answered.

The "adjusting pricing" thing at the end was kind of interesting if accurate. Could be interpreted as NV acknowledging that R520 is a little faster. . . Typically you compete on price/performance. . .

 

[trinibwoy]

The "adjusting pricing" thing at the end was kind of interesting if accurate. Could be interpreted as NV acknowledging that R520 is a little faster. . . Typically you compete on price/performance. . .

They would have to adjust pricing no matter how fast the r520 is if they plan on introducing a 512MB SKU. Don't forget MSRP on the 256MB GTX is still $600.

 

[John Reynolds]

And by past history, I mean that nVidia has very frequently released an "update" to a high-end card with more memory.

?? Examples please that support that "very frequently" claim.

 

[Geo]

They would have to adjust pricing no matter how fast the r520 is if they plan on introducing a 512MB SKU. Don't forget MSRP on the 256MB GTX is still $600.

True. I was reacting to this:

plans to adjust the prices to put some additional pressure on Radeon X1800 and the rest of R520 generation

Which suggested something more than the usual process you are pointing at. But that could be overanalyzing on either Faud's part or mine.

 

[trinibwoy]

Which suggested something more than the usual process you are pointing at. But that could be overanalyzing on either Faud's part or mine.

I don't recal if Nvidia slashed prices on the NV30 to compete. If they didn't then, they certainly won't do it with the GTX now.

 

[Geo]

I don't recal if Nvidia slashed prices on the NV30 to compete. If they didn't then, they certainly won't do it with the GTX now.

"Slashed" is rather a strong interpretation. Marginal adjusting of prices for competitive reasons is pretty common. Tho it often happens as "street" with rebates and such to protect the MSRP. So I dunno. Guess we'll see.

 

[KimB]

?? Examples please that support that "very frequently" claim.

Well, not that frequently I suppose. But the first NV part to support 64MB was the GeForce DDR 64MB, and the first NV part to support 512MB was the GeForce 6800 Ultra 512MB. That's two out of four new memory sizes that came first to a chip that didn't originally sell with those memory sizes.

But since there is a version of the 6800 Ultra that supports 512MB, the path should be wide open for the 7800 to support 512MB. They may or may not want to put out a 7800 Ultra 512MB instead of a 7800 GTX 512MB.

 

[ChrisRay]

I don't recal if Nvidia slashed prices on the NV30 to compete. If they didn't then, they certainly won't do it with the GTX now.

Do you not remember the 5900XT? My point is they can obviously are willing to take hits on a chip for competitiveness.

 

[trinibwoy]

Do you not remember the 5900XT?

A friend had one. What about it?

Oh, just saw your edit. Was the 5900XT sold at very low margins or something? I can't remember the specs/performance/price of that SKU.

 

[ChrisRay]

5900XT were available at the 200 dollar price point. And were made the 5900 core. Complete with 256 memory bus ect. It was the best value'd NVidia card during the FX eras. Many believed it was sold at very low margins to be competitive in mainstream market.

 

[Fodder]

Well, not that frequently I suppose. But the first NV part to support 64MB was the GeForce DDR 64MB, and the first NV part to support 512MB was the GeForce 6800 Ultra 512MB. That's two out of four new memory sizes that came first to a chip that didn't originally sell with those memory sizes.

It's a habit of both camps. The first 128MB parts were an 8500 and a Ti200, both well after launch, ATI brought out the 256MB 9800 Pro to spoil the 5900 launch and there was the 512MB X800XL too.

Many believed it was sold at very low margins to be competitive in mainstream market.

The 5900XT was specifically targeted at the 9600XT/HL2 bundle that was walking all over the 5700s, they even added Call of Duty to sweeten the deal.

 

[KimB]

It's a habit of both camps.

Yes, I agree. But I was just focusing on nVidia because we were talking about a hypothetical GTX 512MB.

 

[HaLDoL]

5900XT were available at the 200 dollar price point. And were made the 5900 core. Complete with 256 memory bus ect. It was the best value'd NVidia card during the FX eras. Many believed it was sold at very low margins to be competitive in mainstream market.

And they could easily be overclocked to FX5950 ultra speeds. It was a great card, stock speed of 390Mhz and I managed to overclock it to 650Mhz (on air).

Wouldn't it be more likely that nvidia will slash the price of the 256Mb GTX and keep the price of the 512Mb GTX on par with ATi's high end?

 

[Richthofen]

In my opinion Nvidia will launch a higher clocked 512MB version of the GF7800GTX right after R520.

They have the room in clockspeeds and memory to do that and they have a lot of room to adjust GF7800GTX 256MB pricing because in contrast to ATI they have already sold a lot of those cards. The time advatage is really big considering the normal lifecycle of high end parts.
In fact the GTX already sells a lot lower than MSRP pricing so the market already anticipated that price cut in advance. Nvidia is already in a better position than with NV40.

 

[KimB]

Nvidia is already in a better position than with NV40.

I don't know about that. At least with the NV40, nVidia had a clear technology lead.

 

[_xxx_]

I don't know about that. At least with the NV40, nVidia had a clear technology lead.

He means the pricing headroom.

 

[CMAN]

I don't know about that. At least with the NV40, nVidia had a clear technology lead.

And most people here said the tech they had was not necessary...

 

[ZoinKs!]

And most people here said the tech they had was not necessary...

It wasn't... not this year and probably not for at least part of the next. sm 2.0 isn't yet a serious limiting factor.

But that's from a gamer's perspective. If I was a developer I'd have used nv40 as my main dev platform as soon as I could get my hands on one.

 

[ANova]

And most people here said the tech they had was not necessary...

How many games do you currently see using SM3 to any degree? Maybe four? And that got you what, soft shadowing in two of those titles which also lead to a nosedive in performance.