New ATI Board: ~2 Months

[olivier]

3d card seem to work like cpu now. New generation and a lot of refresh ( every month). Are you pissed off if you buy a 2.8 ghz and intel show a 3.06 ghz 2-4 weeks later ?

 

[Sabastian]

What about GDDRIII?

 

[Dave Baumann]

This product that was talked about is not the 9800 PRO 256MB, that was announced when 9800 PRO was released and it is effectively a done deal in terms of specs/speeds.

 

[Tahir2]

So it is just a speedbump.. and is probably the filler for what the R400 should have been.

I can't see ATI announcing it in "~2 months" - that will kill 9800 sales.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

hmm just wondering, if its a maxx, why does it have to be a duel 350?
what would a dual 9600pro be like? running at 450-500mhz clock speeds
just thinking that, coz 9600pro must be a smallish core at .13 shouldnt it?

 

[Sage]

hum yes the 9600 Pro core sure sounds like a good cantidate for a MAXX board. cheap, low power, low heat, high maximum clock

 

[saf1]

3d card seem to work like cpu now. New generation and a lot of refresh ( every month). Are you pissed off if you buy a 2.8 ghz and intel show a 3.06 ghz 2-4 weeks later ?

CPU's are generally on a different schedule - but whatever floats your boat. Again, I said "piss off customers" not piss me off. Releasing this card in no way impacts me. We are talking about a small market here anyway -

Should this card be released - my opinion is no.

 

[Sage]

why should this card be released?

1) some people dont have a 9700 or 9800 and are wanting to upgrade now, no reason they shouldnt be able to get the fastest thing ATi has just because ATi released a slower one a few months ago

2) if ATi keeps the performance lead then people will hear "the ATi xxxx, the fastest card available" and will then buy an ATi card, even if it's not the above mentioned "xxxx." Just look at how many people got a GF4 MX because the GF4 Ti was the fastest thing available for a while.

 

[Pete]

It seems pointless to MAXX an RV350 because an R350 is already essentially a doubled RV350.

 

[jb]

MAXX LOL

Sorry I two would like to see a MAXX product just because I like solutions like that just because they are a bit over the top. However every time a new product comes out from ATI we sooner or later here rumblings of a MAXX version of it.... Someday maybe.... And I am not trying to offened anyone here...

 

[saf1]

why should this card be released?

1) some people dont have a 9700 or 9800 and are wanting to upgrade now, no reason they shouldnt be able to get the fastest thing ATi has just because ATi released a slower one a few months ago

2) if ATi keeps the performance lead then people will hear "the ATi xxxx, the fastest card available" and will then buy an ATi card, even if it's not the above mentioned "xxxx." Just look at how many people got a GF4 MX because the GF4 Ti was the fastest thing available for a while.

Sage - fair enough.

Let me ask two questions though - if you will.

1. At what price do you think people will upgrade?
2. And - what card do you think they are upgrading from?

The card in question is in the high end market - a very small market, no?

 

[Tahir2]

That niche effects other products down the line. To be perceived as being part of the fastest brand (if you have a 9500 for example) is important in getting loyal customers as well as market recognition.

Case in point the GF4 Ti ---> GF4MX

 

[jjayb]

Having the fastest high end card will help you sell a lot of low end cards. Used to be everytime I'd go into a Best Buy or Compusa I'd hear the salepeople selling someone a gf4mx because of the gf4ti series. Typical sales pitch: "You should really buy this gf4mx400 because the gf4's are the fastest card out." I haven't been hearing that anymore when I go into the Best buys and other stores. Heck, win over the best buy and compusa type salespeople with a high end card and you will sell a lot of your low end cards. A lot of your low end card buyers don't know anything about them and rely on the sales people to help them decide. Not that Best buy sales people know anything about them either.

 

[saf1]

Ok - fair enough.

Now the last question - since ATI has been crowned speed king, have they actually gained any market share? Seems for the most part, no. Or, very little if any at all.

And lastly - their best card for the most part, the 9500 Pro, is on the way out with the lower performer 9600 line replacing it.

 

[megadrive0088]

R500 or R550 MAXX = XBox2

or XBox2 will have twin R500/550 MAXX (four R500/R550)


needs combat power against PS3!

just dreamin'

 

[Tahir2]

The 9600 Pro is slower than the 9500 Pro.
The 9600 Pro will make ATI a larger profit however.

ATI have not gained as much market share at this time (overall I believe it was 1%) but it takes more than one generation so that is why ATI needs to continue pushing aggressively. Is that hard to understand?

Gaining market share is also about OEM licenses and deals and design wins (see Medion/MSI story).

 

[Babel-17]

Regarding ATI gaining market share: Hehe, I consider simply surviving the ferocious marketing (backed by good, at the time, products) of the dominant player, nVidia, an accomplishment. And to have prospered, even if only a little, under todays economy is something to be proud of imo. ATI has laid a great foundation, now we'll see what they build on it.

I think ATI might have to work on the intagibles though. I can't find the exact words and maybe I'm still suffering from residual brainwash as a former nVidia user (JK!) but I feel a certain disconnect on ATI's part as it concerns their customer base.

This is hard to express but it's related to things like the option for Tru-Form not really being useable on R300 cards. I was excited about this option and it seemed a number of developers would pursue it but now ....

I won't beat a dead horse but I was looking forward to eventually having some rgss aa for my few titles that could benefit from it. Doesn't even seem to be on the horizon with future releases of hardware that could easily power it.

These are not big issues for me at all but I do wonder if ATI management has its fingers on their customers pulse as firmly as they should.

Still, my R9700 Pro continues to impress me and occasionally amaze me with its power.

 

[saf1]

The 9600 Pro is slower than the 9500 Pro.
The 9600 Pro will make ATI a larger profit however.

ATI have not gained as much market share at this time (overall I believe it was 1%) but it takes more than one generation so that is why ATI needs to continue pushing aggressively. Is that hard to understand?

Gaining market share is also about OEM licenses and deals and design wins (see Medion/MSI story).

Very easy to understand - yet my point is even with the so called performance lead, it is not helping them.

Even though the NV30 failed, Nvidia really lost nothing - if what you are saying is correct in 1% market share loss...

Aggressive is one thing, smart is another.

NV35 looks like it may be a reasonable solution. If so - what then? You have to think outside the box and not focus on this forum. General consumer vs. beyond3d forum members who are power users.

 

[tamattack]

ATI have not gained as much market share at this time (overall I believe it was 1%) but it takes more than one generation so that is why ATI needs to continue pushing aggressively. Is that hard to understand?

Very easy to understand - yet my point is even with the so called performance lead, it is not helping them.

Even though the NV30 failed, Nvidia really lost nothing - if what you are saying is correct in 1% market share loss...

Back in the RAGE3D days, ATI maintained leading marketshare for something close to a year (going off memory here, so excuse me if I'm a little off on the exact timeframe) even though they were getting hammered in the performance sweepstakes.

It wasn't until two performance leading NV generations later (TNT --> TNT2 --> GF) that ATI was effectively toppled as the marketshare leader.

Why is it so difficult for some people to recognize that marketshare shifts start slowly?

 

[saf1]

ATI have not gained as much market share at this time (overall I believe it was 1%) but it takes more than one generation so that is why ATI needs to continue pushing aggressively. Is that hard to understand?

Very easy to understand - yet my point is even with the so called performance lead, it is not helping them.

Even though the NV30 failed, Nvidia really lost nothing - if what you are saying is correct in 1% market share loss...

Back in the RAGE3D days, ATI maintained leading marketshare for something close to a year (going off memory here, so excuse me if I'm a little off on the exact timeframe) even though they were getting hammered in the performance sweepstakes.

It wasn't until two performance leading NV generations later (TNT --> TNT2 --> GF) that ATI was effectively toppled as the marketshare leader.

Why is it so difficult for some people to recognize that marketshare shifts start slowly?

Edit to remove comment - didnt' sound right. New comment below.

I agree somewhat regarding marketshare shifting slowly. But in this case, is it shifting? Or, are people waiting? And, how is the NV35 going to factor in?