So, do we know anything about RV670 yet?
- Thread starter nicolasb
- Start date
That depends: do I win a prize if a thread that I started hits 1500 posts?
That depends: do I win a prize if a thread that I started hits 1500 posts?
You get a cookie
In the Netherlands lowest prices are around €150 for the HD3850 and sub €200 (€197) for the HD3870.
Edit: Cheapest listed is the Sapphire HD3850 at €144 and cheapest HD3870 is €183
Last edited by a moderator:
I've been told by a reliable source that AMD is pushing much lower cost than NV are in all areas. This allows them to compete on price without cutting into their margins like NV is doing already with G92. RV670 is 73% smaller than G92 and NV need twice as much wafers to get the same volume to the market. Partners also realise this.
Does that matter considering G92 based SKU's will demand a higher price including the cut-down versions? I'm just guessing here but a $350 G92 based part probably isnt too badly off compared to a $230 RV670.....
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
You can only sell what you've got. The Inq reports that partner firms who do both ATI and Nvidia currently have 6-1 stock of the 38xx compared to the equivalent Nvidia cards. Nvidia supply is constrained, AMD has dropped a ton of 38xx on the market. Which do you think suppliers will be pushing?
Even if Nvidia's margins are good (and I have trouble believing they are better than AMDs given the ferocious price cuts on 38xx and the success of the smaller AMD process advantages), if AMD is selling six 38xx for every G92....
What's up with all the reviews using these card at ridiculous resolutions? Who buys video cards this cheap to play @ 1920x1200 and higher? I know 1280x1024 isn't "sexy", but it's what the target market uses.
Sound_Card
Regular
It is faster than the 2900XT....
I bet a lot of people that are reading those reveiws and looking at the 1920 x 1200 charts have no idea that the LCD monitor they have is limited to 1280 x1024 at best. They get wowed by the video card that does the best at 1920 x 1024 AA on AF on and the proceed to buy it based on that.
The sites can show various benchmarks using a variety of resolutions and quality but the sites can't help people who are uninformed and don't understand what the benchmarks mean for their particular equipment and gaming pattern.
The sites can show various benchmarks using a variety of resolutions and quality but the sites can't help people who are uninformed and don't understand what the benchmarks mean for their particular equipment and gaming pattern.
8800GT cannot have a premium price, because HD 3870 in overclocked editions (every assemblers already have this versions) will put lot off pression in 8800GT.
The second item is that ATI have a much smaller core -> have more cores per waffer -> have more cards in the market -> sell lot more cards.
The 8800GT core is to way big for a mid-end. Nvidia will have serious suply problems due to this.
By the other side ATI have a super-small core and com ship undreds of thounsands of grafic cards in a very short period of time. Nvidia simply can do this because manufacturing constraint.
ATI this time have a serious winner not only on the market but also can make lots of cash.
Mintmaster
Veteran
Even worse is 80% of the graphs not having AF enabled. I would take 1280x1024 w/AF over 2048x1536 any day of the week, and I doubt anyone would honestly think otherwise. Better image quality and better performance.
EDIT: Okay, it seems that was mostly the case with the earlier, crappier reviews.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep, but that's a whole other topic. If Nvidia did bump up the 8800GT specs to ward off RV670 it seems to be a pretty unnecessary move at this point. Even a 6 cluster 8800GT would have been more than enough to hold the 3800's at bay.
You seem to forget that the G80 itself was a much larger core than the R600 (681M vs 700M transistors), that it was also produced on a bigger process (90nm vs 80nm), and that it even needed an extra chip to handle I/O duties ("NVIO"), unlike the R600.
Who ended up profiting more from what products ?
You seem to forget that the G80 itself was a much larger core than the R600 (681M vs 700M transistors), that it was also produced on a bigger process (90nm vs 80nm), and that it even needed an extra chip to handle I/O duties ("NVIO"), unlike the R600.
Who ended up profiting more from what products ?
The problem is that now you are not handling in values of 300/400/500 euros.
You are handling with values between 150-250 euros witch have 20x more volume.
Do you think that Nvidia survives by 8800GX or Ultra?
50% of their profits are on the segment 150-250 euros.
40% came from sub 150 euros, and the rest 10% come from the Quadro lines and the high ends of the desktop products.
The problem is that Nvidia treated the 8800GT as a high-end and now don´t have volume for the price-segment market.
The second problem is that HD 3800 are out with lots of cards. And that´s a problem because in a normal situation if 8800GT is out of stock the costumer whould pick 8800GTS, but with HD 3870 they pick this one.
Last edited by a moderator:
You are overplaying this argument.
There's plenty of 8800 GT cards coming in these next few weeks, otherwise the 256MB version wouldn't even be promised so as not to further strain supply of G92 cores.
In fact, they would probably can the 8800 GT 512MB/256MB altogether and release only the upcoming 128sp part at a higher price-point than the current version so that the profit and demand targets were under tighter control according to the "supposed" predictions of their bean counters.
And let's not even talk about the already "announced" (sort of) mobile version of the G92 core...
Think about it.
I think they might have "pushed" the 8800 GT launch by two weeks in order to secure additional sales (and to "sandwich" the HD38xx launch between the 8800 GT and the upcoming lower and higher end G92 parts), but by this time next week things will probably look much better on the supply issue.
Jawed
Legend
How come AMD has brought forward RV670 by 2 months and has more than enough for everyone but NVidia's 2 week advance has left the shelves empty?
Jawed
Sound strange this round through, I recalled this same argument awhile back between R580 and G70 core advantage... This time around it seems like a flop by the AMD/ATi side.
On the bright side, I HOPE that NV might try to stock pile the G92 core for the next high-end boards rumour to be outed around Jan 08.
On the bright side, I HOPE that NV might try to stock pile the G92 core for the next high-end boards rumour to be outed around Jan 08.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
I would guess that AMDs schedule was pulled forwards because they didn't need the second tape-out they expected ie, they had a 2-3 of months of work cut out of their schedule. Also 55nm seems to be working well, and is coming out with a lot of chips per wafer compared to the larger G92.
Nvidia was probably on schedule for a launch in late 07/early 08, and were still in the process of stockpiling when they decided to do a spoiler launch ahead of 38xx with what chips they had.
Are you sure they brought them in advance by two months ?
What tells you they weren't planing to release a relatively cheap card in time for the holiday season right from the start, as they did ?
G80 also commanded a HUGE price premium over R600, outsold R600 (atleast) by more than 5x ..You seem to forget that the G80 itself was a much larger core than the R600 (681M vs 700M transistors), that it was also produced on a bigger process (90nm vs 80nm), and that it even needed an extra chip to handle I/O duties ("NVIO"), unlike the R600.
Who ended up profiting more from what products ?
So yeah, apples to oranges.
