Can this be true....475 for the 6800Ultra core now?
- Thread starter d2thez
- Start date
@Baron, as others have said, I think you're a bit off on that $399 assumption. That was a typo, the $499 wasn't.
You aren't going to see a $100 price drop given past pricing paradigms at any point in the near future once the 6800 Ultra hits the streets. It defies logic, every bit of business sense I've had building/pricing products and the market will hammer nVIDIA pretty hard.
It would be great to see a 475MHZ part hit the street soon, but I'm pretty doubtful nVIDIA can produce it in sufficient quantities. Perhaps after another rev or two and once IBM gets the process down, but in the near term I'm pretty skeptical of that.
You aren't going to see a $100 price drop given past pricing paradigms at any point in the near future once the 6800 Ultra hits the streets. It defies logic, every bit of business sense I've had building/pricing products and the market will hammer nVIDIA pretty hard.
It would be great to see a 475MHZ part hit the street soon, but I'm pretty doubtful nVIDIA can produce it in sufficient quantities. Perhaps after another rev or two and once IBM gets the process down, but in the near term I'm pretty skeptical of that.
I'm saying that while it may "officially" launch at that price, you will never see them for that much because of the existence of a A2-bsaed 6850/NV45-based 6900.
The Baron said:
Which I highly doubt you will see for a while. If people are willing to pay $499 for a product (this time around I think a lot will) they're going to charge at the highest price as long as they can. Why? Because nVIDIA is in the business to make money.
Bottom line is that if the pricing guidelines aren't broke, they aren't going to fix them. They ain't broke because people have gotten used to shelling out $499 for a top of the line graphics card, especially one with SM 3.0 support and those groovy decoding/encoding features.
LOL the other burning question is how much power will that thing draw, might want to skip a 480W PSU and go straight to a 550W.
Actually, A2 would probably take less power than a 5950U.
Final NV40 pricing depends on ATI, I bet.
Final NV40 pricing depends on ATI, I bet.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is precisely what I believe (excluding the 'for certain' knowledge for 1). I don't think the NV45 is far away, and I've also heard of NV41 and NV42 parts. Though these could simply be PCI Express bridged counterparts of the 6800, they could also have boosted core and memory speeds.The Baron said:
Luminescent
Veteran
Won't the A2 core be the revision used for the 6800 Ultra's real world debut? Wasn't the A1 revision to be found only on reviewer/reference cards?
If A2 can be clocked at 475Mhz (and like I said, I know that it can, I've had that confirmed), why would they only ship it at 400Mhz?Luminescent said:
Reducing power consumption considerably is quite possible with a respin. That's actually been confirmed as well. It wouldn't surprise me if they could reduce power consumption by 10-15%, which would probably amount to around 15W.
I don't know about the existence of A3. I'd be surprised, given the quality of A2 (unless it has considerable yield problems that are a result of design issues, not IBM problems).
I don't THINK that A2 is always the retail version--remember, there is an A0 as well. I want to say that there have been a few A1 retail cards (I think the 5900 Ultra and 5950 Ultra were both A1 revisions).
The Baron said:
Yield? What % of a2 cores will qualify at 475 and what % at 400?
They most certainly will not be upping core speed by ~20% and reducing power on a respin unless there was something seriously wrong with A1.
Possible I guess, but I rather doubt it.