Ok where the heck are the GeforceFX reviews?
- Thread starter Sabastian
- Start date
Johnny Rotten
Regular
I really have a hard time believing that price. I simply cant imagine nvidia being THAT out of touch with the current competitive climate. Of course since no one has boards yet and nvidia hasnt announced any msrp's its all speculation.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
1)10 layer PCB
2)DDR-II
3)Exotic cooling
Lots of reasons why its expensive.
2)DDR-II
3)Exotic cooling
Lots of reasons why its expensive.
Doomtrooper said:
Is the 'exotic' cooling a requirement for the Ultras or will it be standard for the entire NV30 lineup? And I would add a possible #4: yields.
Doomtrooper
Veteran
1)10 layer PCB
2)DDR-II
3)Exotic cooling
4)Yields
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021118/geforcefx-03.html
It appears to be the reference for a standard NV30.
2)DDR-II
3)Exotic cooling
4)Yields
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021118/geforcefx-03.html
It appears to be the reference for a standard NV30.
John Reynolds said:
That depends on the yields. One example in the past of a similar scenario is the GeForce3. If you remember, cards based on that chip were set to debut at $500, but yields improved very quickly, dropping the price by $200 within about a month, if I remember the timeline properly. This seems, to me, that yields made it so that nVidia could sell the GeForce3 at $500 (and, if you'll remember, those were incredibly hard to get...very few were actually made) and still exhaust supply.
Regardless, more than actually being able to buy one, I'm very interested in the performance and image quality of the GeForceFX.
Nvidia has to recoup R&D somehow thus high initial price of gffx. Something else, they're going to hit all the rich folks first, then down the line. If they released it for lower price then they would miss the people that would be willing to pay more. Then they slowly reduce the price to hit all price levels. This is ofcourse taking in account their part is competitive.
Chalnoth said:
Personally, I view the whole GF3 thing to be more like this:
1) Nvidia planned to charge $500
2) GF3 performance was barely higher than GF2:Ultra due to immature drivers
3) Marketing realized they could not sell it for $500
4) Price is quickly lowered to $300 (not $200...where the hell did you get that number? DX8 cards were not affordable until the R8500 came out. For $200 I might have bought a GF3)...
In other words the "yields" thing is just an excuse.
The current MaxPC that has the GFX preview *also* has two system builder adds that claim GFX availability. One is OC System ("Geforce FX Available!") and the other is MSI ("nVidia GeForce FX Available Now!") Of course, with mag lead times we all know there is a certain amount of guessing involved in making that decision to put it in this month's ad instead of next month's. Still, I would consider that a pretty hopeful sign that The Day is coming very soon.
Nagorak said:
I said by.
Anyway, nVidia knows that they can make more money by selling lower-cost chips. The problem is, they couldn't sell lower-cost chips because they didn't have enough to sell. I don't think there's any other reason we'll see greater than $300 or so video cards in the near future.
SvP said:geo said:
Maybe 8)
tomshardware said:
or maybe not
tomshardware said:
epicstruggle
ps my day would just be made if ATI releases a kick a$$ driver set that adds another 5-25% in performace to rain on NVIDIAS damp parade.
This probably does not happen:epicstruggle said:
http://www.driverheaven.net/ben/ATI vice president of software said:
Coming down in price, or lower end model?
