That's the end of mr. Baxtor's credibility ... gg. hope it was worth it for him.
NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
NathansFortune
Regular
Don't be too quick to say that.
All Digitimes are doing is writing an article about what most of us a speculating about. First tier manufacturers are taking pre-orders at prices that aren't proved to be real.
I would prefer to wait until the official word from Nv comes in the next few weeks.
All Digitimes are doing is writing an article about what most of us a speculating about. First tier manufacturers are taking pre-orders at prices that aren't proved to be real.
I would prefer to wait until the official word from Nv comes in the next few weeks.
FrameBuffer
Banned
Unless I'm reading it wrong, it's not about availability as much as pricing.. iirc Mr Baxter was the one who said in the editorial that the 470 was going to sell for $299.99 yet the Digitimes is saying $499.99. (Of course I could be reading it wrong and myself might be wrong in the process)
edit: http://www.shanebaxtor.com/2010/02/22/gtx-470-price-and-psu-requirement/
Cookie Monster
Newcomer
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
$299 was always an insanely low price for that size of chip. Nvidia is far more likely to go for a higher price, and will try and spin it as "better because it costs more", and it costs more because it's "faster" in convoluted extreme benchmark cases (eg when the chip is doing nothing but tessellation and Physx).
$499 seems much more realistic unless Nvidia wants to make a loss on every unit. It all seems a bit moot given what the supply situation is going to be like.
I'm not entirely convinced that $299 would constitute a loss. In the end, though, it's simply going to be a supply vs. demand issue: if they aren't able to make many chips, then they're going to price them higher so that they can make as much as they can on each individual chip. If, by contrast, it turns out that volume is not a problem, then they will price them lower so as to reach greater market penetration and, by extension, earn more money in total.
Which, as was discussed before, must be taken with a truck of salt.
I'm still betting on $399 for the GTX 470 and $499 for the GTX 480.
thatdude90210
Regular
Nvidia couldn't even get the GTX 285 to a competitive enough price point that they had to EOL it. How are they going to get a newer, more complex, and a bigger chip, to a cheaper price point?
The chip might be the most expensive part of the board, but at $299, they would still have room, even if we go by a per wafer calculation of cost (which is not very accurate and actually will be inflated), there is still around $100 bucks left over profits for the partners and nV, which is yeah minimal, but its still there, you can look through older threads for this information if you like.
Blazkowicz
Legend
but selling 320bit and 384bit board looks a bit easier than 448bit and 512bit ones.
aaronspink
Veteran
And once again Razor is so optimistic that it would require acts of god to make him right...
Basically they would need near 100% yield and effectively not make any margin to get 470 out the door at 299 in volume. I know you want nvidia to succeed but it doesn't hurt to keep realities in mind when coming to their defense. And here's another reality check, the last company that's going to take a margin bloodbath is the Fab.
What are the cost of a 40nm Wafer? $5000? $6000? With 100% and 106 chip on a wafer they would pay $48/$56. That's to high for a $299 selling point?
NathansFortune
Regular
NathansFortune
Regular
Yes but 100% yield is never going to happen. It more like 30-50% (probably closer to 30%) but even at 50% it would double the cost per chip and at 30% more than triple it.
Be realistic about it at least...
Seriously? With a statement like that we're supposed to put credence in any of your speculation now?
I don't think the yields are even close to 30%.
Hey man, nice joke there. For a moment you almost had me, I was convinced you were serious. Good one!
and you know how much I hate cutting down from wafer costs since its not accurate at all, if at $5000 per wafer, we get 60% yields (which yields have to be above 50% to launch a card with sustainable levels of inventory) we are looking at $80 per chip if we have 106 dies on the wafer, even if we put the PCB at $40 bucks which is ridiculously high and $50 for the ram and $20 for the housing, fan, heat sink and others, you will still get a nice profit.
realistic at 30% they won't be able to launch at all.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 2197
- Architecture and Products
