HardOCP refuses to review GTS 250
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
Well I guess that depends on how they want to market it. I mean if the GTS 150 is on par with the HD4850 then the GTS 250 have to be a whole lot faster - after all it's a whole generation number above the GTS 150 isn't it
So yeah may be I'm a bit in conspiracy theory mode but the naming scheme you described actually fits nicely with it I guess we'll just have to wait and see how things will play out Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
Nvidia are just treading water. They can't match price/performance with ATI (particularly in the high volume middle-market segments) except at the expense of their margins. They haven't got anything ready to go that will fix that, so they are just stalling with marketing rebranding until they can bring something new to the table.
Nvidia's been going for "bigger, faster, more expensive" for a while now, and ATI sidestepped them wth their "smaller, faster, price/performance" that's given ATI better margins and more room for undercutting. So instead Nvidia rebadge their old products and look to the next-gen product for some kind of solution for the changed market landscape.
Nvidia's been going for "bigger, faster, more expensive" for a while now, and ATI sidestepped them wth their "smaller, faster, price/performance" that's given ATI better margins and more room for undercutting. So instead Nvidia rebadge their old products and look to the next-gen product for some kind of solution for the changed market landscape.
Is the GTX260 price competitive with the 4870 or is the GTX295 price competitive with the 4870X2?
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
So if that's the case why do Nvidia need to rebrand the cards with a different name? Why pretend they are something new when they are not and "who cares what generation they are"? The only reason for that is to fool the potential customer.
Fact is that while the 250 may be competative in price/performance for the customer, it's not competative for Nvidia in terms of margins in the marketplace, and until they have something that is, they are just making do with rebranding and re-marketing until they have something new. Just the die size difference tells you that Nvdia is getting less chips per wafer than ATI, yet they are being forced to sell at the same price with a complex board.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well the customer is what I care about as I am one.
We don't know the margins. That is the fact. If you have specific information please enlighten us.
We already went over this actually. Sorry if you missed it.
Maybe you should try reading what people write or alternatively writing something useful yourself.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
You keep saying "its competative, it's competative" but only from one narrow viewpoint, and not relevent to why Nvidia is rebranding rather than innovating. Sure, they've cut the prices of their more expensive cards to try and make people buy them, but taking last years $200 cards and selling them for $100 to make them match the ATI price performance isn't competative for Nvidia - it's a desperate move, just like rebranding instead of bringing new products with the same margin problems. It's not competative when you are forced to sell the product you made at half the price you wanted. Great for the customer, right up until you go bankrupt or come up with something you can make money on.
If I had such info beyond conjecture, then I wouldn't be able to share it, as you well know.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not in this thread, I'm not your personal stalker so .. you've dodged the question once again.
Arty try this http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=48843 If you want to discuss more of nvidia's lineup and the cost/performance comparison to AMD.
Rurouni
Veteran
I don't mind they rebrand their card as long the numbering scheme is inline with the performance and features. Although in Nvidia case is borderline ridiculous.
What I do mind is that their selling their top of the line mobile GPU with series 8 tech but brand it the GTX2xx! That's a bit to much for my stomach to handle...
Now, the desktop parts differentiate the rebrand stuff as GTS2xx, and the true next gen parts are the GTX2xx series... Why not the mobile parts use the GTS naming scheme? Surely by naming it GTS280M is enough to convey that it's top of the line mobile GPU... I just hope someone that do a lot CUDA programming and rely heavily on the GTX2xx architecture don't get fooled by the GTX260/280M branding and expect it to have the same feature as their desktop counterpart.
What I do mind is that their selling their top of the line mobile GPU with series 8 tech but brand it the GTX2xx! That's a bit to much for my stomach to handle...
Now, the desktop parts differentiate the rebrand stuff as GTS2xx, and the true next gen parts are the GTX2xx series... Why not the mobile parts use the GTS naming scheme? Surely by naming it GTS280M is enough to convey that it's top of the line mobile GPU... I just hope someone that do a lot CUDA programming and rely heavily on the GTX2xx architecture don't get fooled by the GTX260/280M branding and expect it to have the same feature as their desktop counterpart.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
It's nice to see board partners finally standing up to Nvidia a bit and telling them to shove it. At least in this one isolated case.
And you know it's getting bad and ridiculous when even the board partners are going up to Nvidia and basically saying, "WTF are you thinking?"
Regards,
SB
And you know it's getting bad and ridiculous when even the board partners are going up to Nvidia and basically saying, "WTF are you thinking?"
Regards,
SB
Jawed
Legend
You seem to be developing a habit of posting stuff that's already been posted in the thread
Jawed
You seem to be developing a habit of posting stuff that's already been posted in the thread
Jawed
Yeah, and as was said earlier it is incoherent and makes no sense (the 240 rebrand as it would have been slower than the 150).
150 makes no sense. 240 is the result of this.
What the hell is wrong with NVIDIA? Why can't they maintain their own naming scheme? It's like they have a hundred of people naming cards independently not talking to each other and trying to compete with each other.
I don't get it, why can't they put an end to this crap? They had a new naming scheme for half a year and it's already FUBAR thanks to themselves...
Jawed
Legend
Only if they also rebrand consumer (not OEM) 9600GT and 9500GT and all the other G9x GPUs still on sale. Is 9400GT on sale? 9300?
One of the ironies of the 150 name is that it correctly describes G9x-based architecture as being the generation before 2xx GPUS.
So, erm, 9300 should be G100, 9400GT - G110, 9500GT - G120, 9600GT - GS130, 9800GT GT 140 and 9800GTX GTS 150.
Does that make sense?
Are there any G8x GPUs still on sale? Should they be the G0xx series? Doesn't that make 8400GS the G000 in the new naming scheme?
Wow, that's a name to conjure with, "all zero".
Jawed
Similar threads
