Super-enthusiast ATI $599 GPU segment being created??

If the SE is having same price point with 6800, I think Nv will be having a better chances, according to rumor spec. It seems from past that nv usually has a better mid-end part, like ti200, ti4200, 5900xt.
But this round after the heavy price drops of radeon 9800 pro, it will definitely be a winner.

So, anyone want to hook me up with a old radeon 9800pro so that I can finally ditched the ancient 8500 of old.

 

I figured , x800xt 500$ pro 400$ se 300$ , 9800pro 200$ (like it is now)

9600xt/pro 100$


That would make the most sense . I heard the yields are still bad for the 9800xts (or worse than what would replace it and wrose than the pro

 

Sounds logical. Only if the SE has a 128-bit bus as rumour has it, it's not going to fit well in that price segment at all. It's got to be a 256-bit bus, or the 6800 non-Ultra will crush it.

 

That's why I'm choosing to ignore that rumor until I see what the SE is, I can't see ATi cutting their own throat like that.

 

I figure that the $600 market exists. I was there years ago, with the Voodoo2.

 

I dunno, I think it would be pretty stupid to charge 100 dollars more than the competition for your high end part unless it totally wasted it in performance. If there's anything even resembling a comparable performance between the parts it simply wouldn't make sense to spend the extra hundred dollars. Then again... considering the power requirements of the 6800...

I guess we'll find out as soon as the NDA gets lifted.

 

I think it exists too, but not for the initial launches. I think that both companies plan to put out an "Uber Elite Premium Platinum Limited Reviewer's Edition" card a month or so after launch and I expect 'em to charge $599 for that one.

I don't think they'll be making that many, and I don't think they'll need to...but if you want the best-o-the-best you'll be willing to pay for it.

 

3dfx didn't really have any competition in the enthusiast segment when the Quantum cards and the SLI stuff hit the market. We could just end up seeing the first real pricing war this year with all the close competition.

 

I used to think no one would pay over 399. USD for a card, but over time we can be conditioned to accept price hikes.

Personally, I dearly hope Ati is not doing what the first poster suggested. I think this is more a case of individual retailers trying to gouge people than it is an Ati marketing strategy. Retailers and others in business do not care how much we complain about a price, it is what we do. If people pay the asking price it will remain. Ati/Nvidia know it is all about perceived value.

I would like to believe that consumers would have a loosely unified front to resist prices above the 499 mark, but I know that is highly unlikely. There are many people who have the money to burn and not the patience or wit to wait.

 

http://www.dabs.com/uk/channels/components/graphicscards/productView.htm?quicklinx=2MG0

that's $770

So $599 for something a lot quicker is a bit of a bargain in my opinion

 

Hardly - that Gainward card is the absurd water-cooled version.

 

if the new benchmarks are correct then there is no way this si going to sell for 599$

 

512MB would fill a small niche of 3D-games software developers needs. So would having Pixel and vertex 3.0 support.

I would not be surprised to see >$600 cards being bought (Heck, anyone whos ever seen an institution with >$300,000 SGI stations knows there is such thing as an unlimited budget) There are always lottery winners, and hyper-enthusiasts who don't mind spending an extra $100 or $200 to get the absolute best.

Just like cars... You can get regular tires, or spend the extra $200 and get mags.

 

How about €899 or 1,093.00 USD for a graphic card

http://www.digit-life.com/news.html?104514#104514

 

You'll know the thread is old when none of its links work anymore.






Or when the date in the posts is ~10 years old.

 

This thread is so old you have to take inflation into account.

GPUs these days have dramatically increased complexity and build quality (the boards, power circuitry, coolers, drivers etc.) compared to 2004 cards.
E.g. compare a $200 ($250 in 2013) 6600GT to the $250 GTX760 . We get more for our money than the 2004 versions of ourselves did

 

Yup, I agree with you that today's cards in the same range are bigger and obviously need higher quality boards in order to keep up with the higher power requirements, etc.

How do you think... Which graphics quality has bigger value? The one nowadays which is much closer to photorealism, or the one from 10 years ago? If the answer is the former, then the cards receive even further value boost

 

3D was new(ish sorta) and got visually more fucking awesome every year, that's why cards were worth so much back then.