ATI Radeon 4890 in April?

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
But yet in your mind it may be a good competitor for the GTX260 216... amazing.

You are right. After listening to your rant, the 4890 won't be such a good competitor since it will cost far more than it will offer in performance.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
But yet in your mind it may be a good competitor for the GTX260 216... amazing.

You are right. After listening to your rant, the 4890 won't be such a good competitor since it will cost far more than it will offer in performance.

So the GTX285 is the worst purchase you can make today on a graphics card? GTF out of here.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: allies

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
But yet in your mind it may be a good competitor for the GTX260 216... amazing.

You are right. After listening to your rant, the 4890 won't be such a good competitor since it will cost far more than it will offer in performance.

So the GTX285 is the worst purchase you can make today on a graphics card? GTF out of here.

It's hard to know if his Nvidia fanboy-ism makes him that blind, or he's just trolling at this point. But I guess if GTX285 performance at $299 is a bad buy, then GTX260 192 performance at a launch price of $450 less then a year ago was... good? In his eyes? Meh.

 

[MegaWorks]

Guys Wreckage is known to be a jackass, I would just ignore him if I were you.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: allies


So the GTX285 is the worst purchase you can make today on a graphics card? GTF out of here.

That's what Slowspyder was saying. So when I replied with the exact same line for the 4890 everyone starts hurling insults at me. :roll:

Proves a point for me though. Of that I am sure.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: allies


So the GTX285 is the worst purchase you can make today on a graphics card? GTF out of here.

That's what Slowspyder was saying. So when I replied with the exact same line for the 4890 everyone starts hurling insults at me. :roll:

Proves a point for me though. Of that I am sure.

That's not what I said. Show me where I said a GTX285 is 'the worst buy'. What I referred to is that it doesn't offer the same bang for the buck as cheaper cards like the 4870/GTX260, but there are people willing to pay the premium the GTX285 costs to have the single fastest GPU there is (paying a premium for performance and avoiding multiGPU issues for that performance). The GTX285 is not a bang for the buck part. It's a 'pay a lot more for not a whole lot more performance but it's the fastest single GPU' part. So my point was that there are indeed people out there who are willing to pay that premium for the GTX285, so that's why the 4890 would be a smart move for AMD as they don't really have a part to compete directly. The closest they have is the 4850x2 that offers more performance on a whole, but is multi-GPU which brings it's own unique cons to the mix. So the 4890 makes sense for AMD to introduce, even though, like the GTX285, it offers less bang for the buck. It seems everyone here understood that point but you... so I don't know who you might have liked to see me word it differently.

And if you'll take notice, I responded to someone who said that the 4890 wouldn't be a good buy compared to cheaper cards, much the same as you could say about the GTX285 vs. say the GTX260 216.

*edit - One more thing to add, GTX285 performance for $299 is better bang for the buck then GTX285 performance for $340... of course assuming the story is true. I doubt that either will offer the same bang for the buck as a sub $200 4870 1GB, or a GTX260, but $299 is better then $340.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

The 4890 will probably be a good match against a 260+ which you can buy for under $199.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? They're saying it'll be 20% faster than a 4870, which puts it into GTX280 territory performance-wise.

They?re also saying there?ll be an OC version, which is 25-30% faster. That puts it into GTX285 territory.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: allies


So the GTX285 is the worst purchase you can make today on a graphics card? GTF out of here.

That's what Slowspyder was saying. So when I replied with the exact same line for the 4890 everyone starts hurling insults at me. :roll:

Proves a point for me though. Of that I am sure.

That's not what I said. Show me where I said a GTX285 is 'the worst buy'. What I referred to is that it doesn't offer the same bang for the buck as cheaper cards like the 4870/GTX260, but there are people willing to pay the premium the GTX285 costs to have the single fastest GPU there is (paying a premium for performance and avoiding multiGPU issues for that performance). The GTX285 is not a bang for the buck part. It's a 'pay a lot more for not a whole lot more performance but it's the fastest single GPU' part. So my point was that there are indeed people out there who are willing to pay that premium for the GTX285, so that's why the 4890 would be a smart move for AMD as they don't really have a part to compete directly. The closest they have is the 4850x2 that offers more performance on a whole, but is multi-GPU which brings it's own unique cons to the mix. So the 4890 makes sense for AMD to introduce, even though, like the GTX285, it offers less bang for the buck. It seems everyone here understood that point but you... so I don't know who you might have liked to see me word it differently.

And if you'll take notice, I responded to someone who said that the 4890 wouldn't be a good buy compared to cheaper cards, much the same as you could say about the GTX285 vs. say the GTX260 216.

*edit - One more thing to add, GTX285 performance for $299 is better bang for the buck then GTX285 performance for $340... of course assuming the story is true. I doubt that either will offer the same bang for the buck as a sub $200 4870 1GB, or a GTX260, but $299 is better then $340.

I agree 100% on all of your points. I mean, right now for bang/buck single card solutions it's a tossup between HD4870s/GTX260 216s. This probably won't change in a month, as both solutions will fall in price, and offer ~70% of the performance for ~1/2 the price. For single card screamers the choice will be between the GTX285 and HD4890. nvidia will likely respond and take 285s down to $300 to compete if need be.

I'm curious to see how ATI managed 20-30% increases over the 4870 considering this doesn't look to be a die shrink.

Wreckage - can you agree with Slowspyder now that he put his thoughts in a manner that cannot be misconstrued?

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: allies


So the GTX285 is the worst purchase you can make today on a graphics card? GTF out of here.

That's what Slowspyder was saying. So when I replied with the exact same line for the 4890 everyone starts hurling insults at me. :roll:

Proves a point for me though. Of that I am sure.

No point has been proven, except that you take everything out of context which has to do with ATi doing ANYTHING good...

Edit: TBH, I hope ATi pulls a monster out with the 58xx series a la R300 just to see what you can come up with to detract from their good competition with nvidia.

BTW: My graphics card history: Diamond 3D Monster II -> Asus GeForce2 GTS -> ATI 9600XT -> EVGA 7800GTX -> EVGA 7900 GTO -> EVGA 8800GTX -(downgrade)> Gigabyte 8600GT -> EVGA 8800GS.... gonna look for a new card come summer time...

 

[Kalessian]

who cares what other people think is the best bang/buck

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Kalessian
who cares what other people think is the best bang/buck

It's an annoyance when some members come into a thread just to crap in it.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: allies


Wreckage - can you agree with Slowspyder now that he put his thoughts in a manner that cannot be misconstrued?

Indeed. It was when he posted....

The thing is that there are people willing to spend the money a GTX285 costs... damn near 2x the price for not anywhere near 2x the performance. The 4890 at $299 (assuming the story is true in regards to performance and price of course) would be a kick square in Nvidia's coin purse.

.....that he was a bit off his rocker.

Originally posted by: Kalessian
who cares what other people think is the best bang/buck

It truly does depend on how many bucks you have. If you have plenty of money to burn I imagine there is only the consideration for best bang and no consideration for the buck part.

When I bought my card it was a stretch for me to spend $200. Thankfully it has a lifetime warranty because if I had to replace it out of my own pocket (well I couldn't I would have to put my old card back in).

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
snip

Alright, well do you agree that if the HD4890 performs comparably to the GTX285 while priced $299 and $340, respectively, that nvidia will have to lower the price of the 285 to remain competitive?*

*Of course, if you take advantage of CUDA or Stereoscopic gaming you'd have to go with the 285, but those things aside, but I'm asking my question to strictly a gamer without any interest in stereoscopic gaming.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: allies

Originally posted by: Wreckage
snip

Alright, well do you agree that if the HD4890 performs comparably to the GTX285 while priced $299 and $340, respectively, that nvidia will have to lower the price of the 285 to remain competitive?*

*Of course, if you take advantage of CUDA or Stereoscopic gaming you'd have to go with the 285, but those things aside, but I'm asking my question to strictly a gamer without any interest in stereoscopic gaming.

Possibly, if the rumors pan out.

The 4870 certainly made the 260 price drop. No reason a new ATi card would not do the same in this situation.

Hopefully those in the market for a high end card this spring will indeed get what the rumors promise.

I'm in full support of competition (heck these forums would be sooo boring without it).

 

[solofly]

http://www.techpowerup.com/851..._Slated_for_April.html

Nevermind I didn't see the source...

 

[MR STROKE]

any ideas on what this would mean for the 58xx line? Does this postpone the next round of cards until next year now and maybe a 4890x2 in Fall 09?

 

[nosfe]

i thought that the 58xx line was kinda doomed to being late since we heard the rumors about how leaky TSMCs 40nm process was

 

[Obsoleet]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Guys Wreckage is known to be a jackass, I would just ignore him if I were you.

Yup, made a huge mistake banning Rollo instead of him.

Has cut down on my readership here dramatically, now HardOCP gets my ad-views far more often.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Obsoleet

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Guys Wreckage is known to be a jackass, I would just ignore him if I were you.

Yup, made a huge mistake banning Rollo instead of him.

Has cut down on my readership here dramatically, now HardOCP gets my ad-views far more often.

Yea! Lets ban everyone who isnt on the ATi bandwagon! Otherwise i'll leave! :roll:



The part in bold should be vacation worthy. Talk GPUs, not people.

 

[ronnn]

Wayyy off topic, but I would like to know in which 4 games and settings they used to get the 20%. Vr zone sucks red tomatoes - hell Britney Spears could have written that article.

 

[Hauk]

Certainly not wanting to contribute to thread crapping, I'd like to humbly add that GTX 285 pricing can be lowered to $299 to compete. I'd bet a paycheck it will happen as this product launches.

Thumbs up to competition! :thumbsup:

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I thought AMD reported their GPU division wasn't making money ? Or are you thinking they are losing less money than NV? (which would still be considered proof positive of your assertion IMO)

I think they reported their GPU division wasn't making enough money to cover for their cpu division...

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: Idontcare
I thought AMD reported their GPU division wasn't making money ? Or are you thinking they are losing less money than NV? (which would still be considered proof positive of your assertion IMO)

I think they reported their GPU division wasn't making enough money to cover for their cpu division...

They do break up the financial by division and the graphics division lost $10 million last quarter.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Obsoleet

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Guys Wreckage is known to be a jackass, I would just ignore him if I were you.

Yup, made a huge mistake banning Rollo instead of him.

Has cut down on my readership here dramatically, now HardOCP gets my ad-views far more often.

Yea! Lets ban everyone who isnt on the ATi bandwagon! Otherwise i'll leave! :roll:



The part in bold should be vacation worthy. Talk GPUs, not people.

YEah I'm really on ATI bandwagon!!! right! :roll:

The 4890 will probably be a good match against a 260+ which you can buy for under $199.

That's an inflammatory comment and you know it, so I don't see you criticizing what he said mister calling everyone a fanboy.

 

[thilanliyan]

nm