That was supposed to be 30%, methinks.But it's strange, as it leaves the 7850 without competition.
"Methinks" on the other hand that it's high time for NVIDIA to start considering slashing their prices for a change.
Blazkowicz
Legend
it's one fast 128bit card.
I'm sure it'll get down in price but nvidia is not in a hurry. Wait for when 28nm has a lot of volume.
I'm sure it'll get down in price but nvidia is not in a hurry. Wait for when 28nm has a lot of volume.
Right now in my neck of woods I can find a 7950 a tad over 300 Euros, a 670 at =/>380 Euros and 680s start at 500 and upwards. It might be an awkward comparison but for the performance difference between a 7950 and a 680 I'd personally wouldn't give a rat's ass with a rough 200 Euros price difference. It's not that I can afford a 30" monitor either at this point.
Ignore Steam hw surveys, yields and capacities have been rising lately, meaning that after some point if NV covers demand they're going to do what with the inventory above that?
I'm quite surprised base GTX 680s are going for 499.99$. More propper pricing would probaly be 429.99$ for GTX 680, 349.99$ for the 670, and 279.99$ for the 660Ti.
But if they are moving stock at the inflated prices, there are no incentives to slash prices....
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Oh, and do you remember the 55 nm heights? When the state-of-the-art 55 nm RV790 was priced even below 200$.
If now GTX680/ Radeon HD 7970 are priced at that level, everyone will wanna one (or perhaps more) and slower (cheaper) products would be unnecessary.
If now GTX680/ Radeon HD 7970 are priced at that level, everyone will wanna one (or perhaps more) and slower (cheaper) products would be unnecessary.
If now GTX680/ Radeon HD 7970 are priced at that level, everyone will wanna one (or perhaps more) and slower (cheaper) products would be unnecessary.
There will always be users that would want a =/<$50 GPU and not just a few of them. Considering how small the GK107 actually is, it's the price point where the lowest end Kepler actually should be (give or take) with up to 40nm prices.
But if the highest end SKU starts with 500 bucks MSRP for a performance part, it's no particular miracle either that the lowest SKU starts at $110.
I at least hope that things will be a lot better next year when both IHVs release their respective successing parts to the existing ones today.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Oh, there will always be someone who is not completely satisfied.
Now, it's me and many like me who don't see any value in 500$ GTX680 (you know it's a mainstream part but they lie to you that it is the best they can offer
) (even though I can be considered as an enthusiast but this pricing kills that instinct in me ), and others who will potenitally complain why you offer them a state-of-the-art top performance for 200$ but they don't wanna it, and instead some trash for 50$...
Now, it's me and many like me who don't see any value in 500$ GTX680 (you know it's a mainstream part but they lie to you that it is the best they can offer
) (even though I can be considered as an enthusiast but this pricing kills that instinct in me ), and others who will potenitally complain why you offer them a state-of-the-art top performance for 200$ but they don't wanna it, and instead some trash for 50$...A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y
Veteran
Where are the GTX 650 Ti reviews?
Nvidia has issues a press release for the GTX 650 Ti
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nvidia-introduces-turbocharged-geforce-gtx-130000041.html
so where are the reviews?
Nvidia has issues a press release for the GTX 650 Ti
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nvidia-introduces-turbocharged-geforce-gtx-130000041.html
so where are the reviews?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6359/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-650-ti-review
Not everyone is playing games on a PC; in fact the majority isn't. Why would anyone with a budget PC that doesn't intend to play any games on it would want a $200 GPU of any sort anyway, if the entire PC won't cost probably more than say $400 with a low end GPU in it?
See Anandtech's conclusion in the review above; it's not that the 650Ti is a bad product its pricing just is out of place considering that AMD made a smart strategic move and reduced its 7800 prices. Prices are relative within each product family; it hardly makes sense to have a low end variant priced at $50 as in my previous example with a performance SKU ending up at $500. The price of a GTX650 isn't absurd at $109 if you consider what the higher end SKUs cost. My only other point was that as much a 680 isn't really worth its 500 bucks the same goes for the $110 for a 650.
Oh, there will always be someone who is not completely satisfied.
Now, it's me and many like me who don't see any value in 500$ GTX680 (you know it's a mainstream part but they lie to you that it is the best they can offer
Not everyone is playing games on a PC; in fact the majority isn't. Why would anyone with a budget PC that doesn't intend to play any games on it would want a $200 GPU of any sort anyway, if the entire PC won't cost probably more than say $400 with a low end GPU in it?
See Anandtech's conclusion in the review above; it's not that the 650Ti is a bad product its pricing just is out of place considering that AMD made a smart strategic move and reduced its 7800 prices. Prices are relative within each product family; it hardly makes sense to have a low end variant priced at $50 as in my previous example with a performance SKU ending up at $500. The price of a GTX650 isn't absurd at $109 if you consider what the higher end SKUs cost. My only other point was that as much a 680 isn't really worth its 500 bucks the same goes for the $110 for a 650.
Reviews have been up for 30 minutes already.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Oh, if they don't play games, then they can be easily taught how to do it.
How is it possible that everyone was taught how "good" it is to have a smartphone (which in some cases is used only for respect accessory), or tablets, or etc stuff?
Oh, if they don't play games, then they can be easily taught how to do it.
Isn't that discussion extremely pointless? Whoever wants to go out on a mission evangelizing for PC gaming be my guest. The point in case is that there are products in all markets for all pockets and needs. There are also humble work PCs for example; should we convince firms that don't need to spend the additional money on higher end GPUs when they actually don't want their employees to do more than office work?
Even worse let's try and convince all the low end dumbphone users that they absolutely "need" a $200 or higher priced smart-phone. To each his own.
Looks like GTX 650Ti could have really used the full 192bit bus. This SKU is the GK106 salvage part. If AMD can release a Pitcairn salvage SKU(7850) with full 256bit bus and a few less shaders then NV really needed the 650Ti to have the full bus and 1.5GB mem. It might have competed better with the 7850 than it did...
The problem is by use the name 660TI for a card who is closely a 670 with a little memory bus. they have completely decline the 650 series with lower position on performance.
the 660 should be the 650TI ( GK106 ) and the the 650TI should be the 650 ( on GK106 too.. ( and priced accordly offcourse ) ..
There you have a 660 on GK106, a GK660TI on GK104.. and a 650TI who is around 25% slower of the HD78501gb ( who cost more or less the same price )
or they decrease the price by a good 25-30$ on the 650, 650 TI and GTX660 for place them each time against the AMD cards ( 7770-7850 priced respectively now at 109 and 159$ )
Last edited by a moderator:
