ATI 4xxx Series Thread

[dv8silencer]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: chewietobbacca
Well if they're trying to get market share back, then they're going to price it low.

Lets put it this way - if a 4850 at $199 is offering the same performance as 9800GTX, they'll force Nvidia to cut margins big time to compete otherwise Nvidia will lose market share. Besides, the 4850 is the PRO version of the card so it's supposed to fill in like the X1950PRO did and be priced for mainstream/low-end performance

nobody gives a donkeys wiener about market share. They care about making MONEY, and market share happens to follow this, by accident.
AMD would price it lower to move more units, thus making more money, not to "get market share"

The sacred Wal-Mart principle

 

[Zap]

I just got an interesting email for PDXLAN 12 (7/8/08).

The tournament machines will be provided by Intel and feature the latest ATI Radeon Graphics cards ? Ones we can not even name yet because they are not out!!!

 

[Zap]

double post

 

[taltamir]

actually, you know what... market share is BAD. if you can make the same amount of money with a smaller market share then you have the following benefits:
1. Support and warranty is cheaper.
2. There are more people who don't own your product that you can sell to.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: taltamir
actually, you know what... market share is BAD. if you can make the same amount of money with a smaller market share then you have the following benefits:
1. Support and warranty is cheaper.
2. There are more people who don't own your product that you can sell to.

Do you really believe this stuff as your saying it talt?

 

[taltamir]

yes... you want to sell the least amount of products while maintainin the same amount of cashflow...

mmm, on the other hand, there is the benefit of a product seeming better if it is more widely spread, and there is also the deal with compatibility and optimizations that exist in the video card market but not in other markets (aka, the more people have your product, the more likely it is that games would be optimized to perform better on it)...

But generally speaking in most markets market share is a necessary evil of making a profit.

To be fair, it wasn't me who made this amazingly good observation, I read it in various business books.

 

[zebrax2]

i think having the the same amount of money with a smaller market share only means your products/services are better than other or it is more in demand but having a big market share isn't bad since you do not price your products/services based on market share you price your products/services based on how much people are willing to pay for it

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: taltamir
yes... you want to sell the least amount of products while maintainin the same amount of cashflow...

mmm, on the other hand, there is the benefit of a product seeming better if it is more widely spread, and there is also the deal with compatibility and optimizations that exist in the video card market but not in other markets (aka, the more people have your product, the more likely it is that games would be optimized to perform better on it)...

But generally speaking in most markets market share is a necessary evil of making a profit.

To be fair, it wasn't me who made this amazingly good observation, I read it in various business books.

Having a bigger market share also gives you more power over suppliers (priority in access to newer parts and ability to bargain for lower prices) and sway with retailers on shelf space.

Cashflow wise, it might be better to have the same amount of profit with lower unit sales, but it might be hard to keep it up if your market share keeps on falling.

It's a balancing act, you can't too far into the extreme on either side unless your business plan/resources accounts for it ( lowering prices to increase market share to cripple a competitor with cash flow problems)

 

[dv8silencer]

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7826.html

 

[manko]

Hexus has shots of product slides from Gigabyte at Computex. They have a slide for the 4850 and a 3950 as well as the Nvidia cards. I guess the 3950 fits between the 3870 and the 4850?

GIGABYTE lets slip AMD and NVIDIA's next-gen graphics cards

 

[dv8silencer]

"Radeon HD 4850 (RV770PRO) Tested"

http://www.vr-zone.com/article...0PRO)_Tested/5829.html

"We have spotted a RV770PRO demo system over at Computex and we have checked out the settings of the beta Catalyst drivers for RV770 series. The card can be easily overclocked to 700MHz core and as a result, the score for 3DMark Vantage is P6466."

 

[AzN]

I just saw that vrzone article. Interesting. A bit higher than G92. Hope the benchmarks roll around soon.

 

[Hauk]

I was leaning towards a GTX 280, but considering consistent rumors that a 55nm version will launch in the fall (likely cheaper and faster), I've decided to hold off.

If 4850 launches at $199 I'm going to grab a couple for Crossfire. If they perform at G92 level, I'm done for now..

 

[taltamir]

i am leaning towards a 280 too... i am certain it is gonna be big, loud, and inefficient compared to AMD... but it is gonna be FAST. And I want MORE BIGGER STUFF!
I currently use an E8400, the second/third best gaming CPU (E8500 is better, if you don't consider the QX... but with OC the E8xxx series becomes better again for games).
I currently use a single 8800GTS 512, and the only reason I did not upgrade to a 9800GTX is because the 280 was just around the corner, i need it to be faster, and 280 seems like it would be.

 

[Rusin]

Taltamir:
What makes you think it will be lound and inefficient? GTX 280's power consumption in 3dMark load will be around 145W-150W..which isn't much compared to 8800 GTX's 132W.

 

[Tempered81]

gt200s are running lower clocks on the core & shader compared to older g80 & g92 cores. It does have to cover a lot of area on the heatspreader, uses more power than any other gpu, and has pretty massive cooling. No idea what the Vgpu is yet, my guess ~1.2v max pull i thought was like 286Watts?

 

[Rusin]

GT200's core clocks are at G80 level and comparing G80/G92 shaders with GT200's ain't fare (as fare as comparing Athlon64 and Core2 processors just using their clock frequencies). It consumes slightly less than HD2900XT under realistic situations (in theoretical situations it could consume more).. and it uses less than 9800 GX2..and HD3870 X2 (which consumes the most of these dual cards). These dual cards also have only one heatsink fan.

Again what makes you thnk that it will be loud and inefficient compared to AMD? There will be AMD product that will have same level TDP as GTX 280: HD4870 X2. Single HD4870 has 2x6pin connectors and TDP of 157W. Don't know about HD4870 X2, but HD3870 X2 consumed more than two single HD3870-cards. Perhaps it was because of PLX chip that can also be found on HD4870 X2.

 

[Tempered81]

think hes saying that because ATI are producing at 55nm and capable of lower temps @ higher core speeds while using less power. (requiring less cooling power + fan speed + fan noise)

575mhz gt200 65nm vs. 850-900mhz rv770 55nm

also, gtx280 is a single core, and the boards you compared it to are two core boards. they will obviously draw more power & be hotter.

word is that gx2 versions of the 65nm GT200 might be impossible because of heat/power/cooling

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Rusin
Taltamir:
What makes you think it will be lound and inefficient? GTX 280's power consumption in 3dMark load will be around 145W-150W..which isn't much compared to 8800 GTX's 132W.

that's impressive that you already know load power consumption figures for a card that hasn't been taken off nda yet.

 

[bryanW1995]

grrr...dp...

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
that's impressive that you already know load power consumption figures for a card that hasn't been taken off nda yet.

Well so far there haven't been anything else to use, but Nvidia slides about power consumption (idle, bluray, 3dMark06 load). Same source for TDP which everyone seems to believe as truth.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
think hes saying that because ATI are producing at 55nm and capable of lower temps @ higher core speeds while using less power. (requiring less cooling power + fan speed + fan noise)

575mhz gt200 65nm vs. 850-900mhz rv770 55nm

also, gtx280 is a single core, and the boards you compared it to are two core boards. they will obviously draw more power & be hotter.

word is that gx2 versions of the 65nm GT200 might be impossible because of heat/power/cooling

And that would still fall in to same category as "Athlon64 vs. Core2" clock frequency comparison.

But yes GTX 260 has TDP value of 182W which is 16% (25W) more than HD4870's. So there is chance that GTX 260 has better performance/wattage-ratio than HD4870.

Geforce 9600 GT, 8800 GT have better performance/wattage-ratio than HD3870 and 9800 GX2 has better ratio than HD3870 X2. Despite the fact that Geforce cards were done with 65nm and Radeons with 55nm. Also G80 cards (90nm) had better performance/wattage-ratio than R600-cards (80nm)..but that was because 80nm was faulty.

Those boards are dual GPU systems, but that isn't reason why those systems shouldn't be compared equally against GTX 280. Unless there will be 55nm dieshrink of GT200 in September as rumoured. There will be 55nm graphics cards from Nvidia in form of 9800 GT at least.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
that's impressive that you already know load power consumption figures for a card that hasn't been taken off nda yet.

Well so far there haven't been anything else to use, but Nvidia slides about power consumption (idle, bluray, 3dMark06 load). Same source for TDP which everyone seems to believe as truth.

sorry, I saw the link in the gt200 thread.

 

[AshPhoenix]

Radeon 4850 scores 5K in 3Dmark Vantage

Computex 08: On a Phenom system

A Radeon HD 4850 card on a Phenom 9850 system clocked at 2.5GHz can score slightly over 5000 in 3Dmark Vantage.

We had a chance to see the card, but we were asked not to take pictures of them; but we managed to see the score and touch the card.

Radeon HD 4850, aka RV770PRO card, is a single slot card with single 6-pin power connector that looks incredibly similar to Radeon 3850.

We had a chance to touch the back of the card and we can tell you that it feels quite hot, but at the same time runs stable.

The card is real and it works well, at least with this benchmark, but we still don?t know how it actually runs other games.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
think hes saying that because ATI are producing at 55nm and capable of lower temps @ higher core speeds while using less power. (requiring less cooling power + fan speed + fan noise)

575mhz gt200 65nm vs. 850-900mhz rv770 55nm

also, gtx280 is a single core, and the boards you compared it to are two core boards. they will obviously draw more power & be hotter.

word is that gx2 versions of the 65nm GT200 might be impossible because of heat/power/cooling

exactly, and we also know it is their biggest chip in a long time, which also means it will be louder and hotter and more power hungry.

But at the end of the day, you pick the gun with the max amount of damage (sorry, just finished Mass Effect )