Nvidia GeForce GTX 690 Reviews

But if the price never reaches a level that i'm prepared to pay in a window where I find the performance attractive then they will have lost a sale
It's a non issue for me as the performance isnt enough to justify buying one.

 

That's better than losing profit on products they can't keep in stock anyway. People who can and will pay $500+ apparently exist in sufficient quantity to absorb their current supply thus they would be stupid to price their product lower.

 

There are market-based and physical considerations that influence what can be delivered and at what cost.
Due to these factors, if someone has certain price/performance prerequisites that put them above that point, they are not worth pursuing. It's losing money or taking on additional risk for the sake of negative return.

Sometimes, there are reasons for doing so, such as fighting for market share or some kind of marketing bullet point. If the upside isn't high enough, it doesn't help the manufacturer to hurt itself pursuing it.

 

You can't lose a sale on something you don't have in stock.

I think both the 680 and 7970 are excellent performers. My 8600GTS is still going strong, so no desire to upgrade, but no bitterness either.

The combined facts that the dies are so small, that the next process node is still quite a bit out, and, for Nvidia, that a bigger 28nm part is supposedly in the pipe, pretty guarantees that prices will go down significantly for the current generation chips. So whoever was bitter at $500, won't be so bitter anymore at, say, $350.

Unless you're one with those irrational long-term grudges. But they are not worth caring about anyway. There's no point arguing with irrationality.

So, what about Intel?

 

Niether NVIDIA nor AMD financial groups are represented on the forums. Nevertheless, both organizations do have financial teams -- very large ones. They know how to make money and pay their bills.

When NVIDIA or AMD set a price, there is a reason for it. Your seeming inability to understand basic economics notwithstanding, people who have made a living from financial strategy are doing things with finances that you do not understand.

is it A: because they are wrong and you are right? Or is it B: that they are right and you do not understand?

Occams razor suggests B. For the record, so do I.

 

No no, the grumbling will just shift to why THAT generation of enthusiast class cards are so expensive.

I think those people are just never going to be happy. Myself, I just look at what I can afford and decide whether it's good enough to warrant budgeting money for it.

I think most people are like you and me and just look at what we can afford. I'd love to have the GTX 680/Radeon 7970 be in my comfortable price range, but it's not. No use complaining about it.

I'm just amazed that after all these years we have relative price/performance parity at the enthusiast level between the two companies again.

Regards,
SB

 

Are you sure that applies to amd ? they lost over 500million first quater

 

Dunno, how much worse might it have been? It's easy to say "AMD needs to do (x), (y) and (z) to make money" but is it really so easy to accomplish? I'm no AMD apologist; I just finished buying two Intel processors in the last three months (a 3930k and an i5-3570k today.) That doesn't mean there aren't some hard-core financial gurus trying to keep it from sinking like a rock

 

I don't understand why you do make it personal. How do you know that I don't understand? How do you know what my education is? I have had many subjects on it so I'm fully aware but sometimes it's not only money. But even if it is- it's money after all- nothing more...
So, what I'm trying to say is that I don't accept your reasoning. In most cases what drives those high-level top management decisions is pure policy, those are political decisions and often they are ridiculous. Not to mention that often they are driven by evil intentions such as hurting you as much as possible, to work like a slave all month long just to be able to pay someone else's crazy charges, etc.

 

A big chunk of that was composed of various charges and accounting adjustments, which isn't quite as simple as losing 500 million dollars in actual funds.

To be fair, it does take some skill to lose hundreds of millions of dollars a year for years on end.

 

Are you being serious or do you and I differ in the way we appreciate humor?

 

Neither are the prices of graphics cards carved into stone tablets handed down by God, to be obeyed forever and eternity.

 

What? I'm not sure whether to sit here and laugh or to gasp in astonishment that you might actually believe what you just wrote.

Companies are not out to hurt people as much as possible.

They are out to do one thing and one thing only. Make a profit. The best way to make a profit is make something or provide a service that someone wants and then to charge a price that keeps their product or service in demand but not to much in demand that they cannot maintain any reasonable levels of supply.

It really is that simple. Good and evil don't even remotely enter into the equation. I truly am amazed that I actually read what you typed on a tech forum where most of the users are assumed to be at least somewhat intelligent.

Regards,
SB

 

For someone somewhat intelligent it shouldn't be hard to completly dismiss such claims. It hasn't passed that long to forget for example, the foxconn suicides that hold UniversalTruth generalised claim quite some truth to it.

The gap between the wealthiest and poorest isn't diminishing. And good and evil do enter the equation, take tax evasion in the billions. They may not hurt you directly, but indirectly the hit is severe. Tax money that could be in use for social security, health, education and debt repay, gone to tax havens.

Sorry for the off topic.

 

If a chemicals plant is knowingly dumping carcinogens into the local water table rather than spending money to filter their waste because such measures would hurt their annual earnings report and a decade later a nearby town sees much higher cancer rates than normal in their children, that's pretty amazingly f'n evil. And of course in a capitalistic society the profits are privatized and the cleanup costs are socialized, and those in mgmt who made that decision are rarely held accountable.

</ot opinion>