ATI RV770 in May??!!!

[ronnn]

Whats killing graphics is consoles. You need a fancy monitor and a huge dislike for a small jaggie to even consider upgrading. Unless new games come out, built for the computer ..... The money is likely in ps4 or whatever. kids just want to have fun.

edit: that was a oblique way of saying, the big profits are likely over for both graphic companies - as they fight over the midrange threatening to become the low range.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: ronnn
Whats killing graphics is consoles. You need a fancy monitor and a huge dislike for a small jaggie to even consider upgrading. Unless new games come out, built for the computer ..... The money is likely in ps4 or whatever. kids just want to have fun.

edit: that was a oblique way of saying, the big profits are likely over for both graphic companies - as they fight over the midrange threatening to become the low range.

Consoles are dead as far as i am concerned .. the Rest of you will watch them bleed to death over DX10.1 .. as those scenes on the XPox360 and BS-3 get slower and slower .. chug a chug .. as consoles *struggle* with DX9 to keep up with the DX10.1 PC as it BLOWS them AWAY this year!! - on midrange PCs.

only the Wii has it right and are readying the Wii-2 that is more action oriented; rightly, 'screw graphics' - do something the PC doesn't already do better

.. the console makers are already planning for xBox720 and Wii2 - Wii is a success and MS still is clueless about the gold in their hands - they are trying to turn it into lead
.. i certainly doubt there will be a PS4
- if NVIDIA and AMD ever gets smart they will double the price of their GPUs to the console makers - they have them over a barrel pricewise and can crush them if they wish [they don't] .. i'd hate to be a console when the PC is the real Console

PC Graphics has won the war!
-the console makers are just slow to get the news and are continuing to "milk" you guys with their sh!tty over-priced retreaded games.

 

[bryanW1995]

um, apoppin, wtf are you smokin'? Have you checked out sales figures lately???

nice to see you again btw.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
um, apoppin, wtf are you smokin'? Have you checked out sales figures lately???

nice to see you again btw.

thank-you .. likewise .. now i won't confuse you anymore .. my Kitty was really bad :|

and yes i have - i am keeping up .. i am just giving you the near-future prediction of mine - BEFORE it happens [what i do]

it's the last push .. then they get discounted .. then xbox720 ... next year

how long has it been since 360 got released? .. PS3 is a failure as a GAMING machine .. the only reason anyone buys it is for Blu-Ray

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Just look at the "GPU gems" series and the amount of effort has gone to support the devs in utilizing these features.

It's funny that you mention that book, since I don't think I've ever seen it mentioned in a discussion here before. GPU Gems may be the single smartest thing NVIDIA ever did. A strong standard developer relationship is important, and TWIMTBP is a nice bribe for other developers, but I'm convinced that book is the single biggest factor towards wooing developers their way. It's the definitive guide for shader and GPGPU programming, a guide on how to do all of the cool things you've ever wanted to do on a GPU, most importantly on an NVIDIA GPU.

You can't be a serious GPU programmer without reading that book, there's just too much good information in there that you'd otherwise have to find out the hard way.

 

[apoppin]

Didn't ATi do something similar? .. i remember a that they started a similar program about the same time twiimtbp started
-what happened with them and is AMD continuing it .. i haven't heard anything?

 

[geokilla]

Originally posted by: apoppin
how long has it been since 360 got released? .. PS3 is a failure as a GAMING machine .. the only reason anyone buys it is for Blu-Ray

That's not true. If I had the money, I would buy a PS3 NOT for it's Blu-Ray ability, for for the games. I won't be doing anytime soon though.

I've been following the thread for a while but I got lost somewhere around page 3. All I care about is how the new graphic cards will perform on the latest games such as CoD, F.E.A.R., Crysis, etc. As long as we consumers get to benefit from this war, I'm happy with how things turn out for AMD, NVIDIA, and Intel.

BTW, wasn't this thread about the RV770? Now it's kind of like a mini war/comparison between NVIDIA and ATI graphic cards.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Didn't ATi do something similar? .. i remember a that they started a similar program about the same time twiimtbp started
-what happened with them and is AMD continuing it .. i haven't heard anything?

"Get in the game!!"?? I don't know how much of a difference it actually made though.

Originally posted by: geokilla
That's not true. If I had the money, I would buy a PS3 NOT for it's Blu-Ray ability, for for the games. I won't be doing anytime soon though.

Exactly...I have a PS3 and while I like the Blu-Ray functionality (especially now that it's won ), I also bought it for games such as Uncharted, GTA, MGS, and Stuntman (which is damn fun to play with a couple of friends). However, I won't touch a FPS unless it's on PC...I just can't get completely used to the controller. I have to say though...only Uncharted has wowed me graphics wise...PC graphics is much better. I really don't understand some of the RAM limitations in consoles I mean memory is very cheap so why did they skimp out on it (what is it 256mb on PS3 and 512 on 360??)...also maybe they should have used regular GDDR3 instead of XDR on PS3 and whatever it is in the 360. They might as well stick a 9600GT in there and they'd have better graphics.

BTW, wasn't this thread about the RV770? Now it's kind of like a mini war/comparison between NVIDIA and ATI graphic cards.

Lol, welcome to Anandtech Video forums...enjoy your stay.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: golem

My feelings exactly. They also seem to engineer the cards for future trends and not as much for current games. Over time, ATI cards seem to age better and play newer games better than NV cards, but at launch Nvidia usually does better on the current games.

You don't get it, NV cards run better because most of the publishers are affliated with NV, they involve in driver developent and creative work. AMD has limited choice, this isn't a question of who has better technology as both companies seem to make equally powerful crappy cards -the problem lies in the software side. If they really wanted to please fans or consumers or cared about innovation, they'd have waited until something extraordinry is invented but that is not how they work- say if AMD releases a card next month, nv will release one of their incomplete backup card lineup that scores 2 points higher than amd and they naturally steal consumer attention.

The HD3XXX series does have more features than the G80 and G92/94 cards, such as onboard sound, DX10.1, and AVIVO. If I were buying a new HTPC, I would probably get an AMD card for the HDMI sound, but for gaming I would prefer one of the faster nVidia cards.

That's why I have a hd2600xt 256mb in my HTPC heh I'd also like to point out Valve was in kahoots with ATI when they developed the Source engine. I remember going to E3 prior to Hl2's release and seeing ATI plastered everywhere in the Valve booth and every machine Valve had to demo the game out there was running an ATI card. But if you look now at HL2 - Episode 2 benches Nvidia's cards generally work better and I highly doubt Valve switched sides this late in the game, hell I doubt they're even on anyones side atm in respect to upgrading the Source engine.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: apoppin
Didn't ATi do something similar? .. i remember a that they started a similar program about the same time twiimtbp started
-what happened with them and is AMD continuing it .. i haven't heard anything?

"Get in the game!!"?? I don't know how much of a difference it actually made though.

Originally posted by: geokilla
That's not true. If I had the money, I would buy a PS3 NOT for it's Blu-Ray ability, for for the games. I won't be doing anytime soon though.

Exactly...I have a PS3 and while I like the Blu-Ray functionality (especially now that it's won ), I also bought it for games such as Uncharted, GTA, MGS, and Stuntman (which is damn fun to play with a couple of friends). However, I won't touch a FPS unless it's on PC...I just can't get completely used to the controller. I have to say though...only Uncharted has wowed me graphics wise...PC graphics is much better. I really don't understand some of the RAM limitations in consoles I mean memory is very cheap so why did they skimp out on it (what is it 256mb on PS3 and 512 on 360??)...also maybe they should have used regular GDDR3 instead of XDR on PS3 and whatever it is in the 360. They might as well stick a 9600GT in there and they'd have better graphics.

BTW, wasn't this thread about the RV770? Now it's kind of like a mini war/comparison between NVIDIA and ATI graphic cards.

Lol, welcome to Anandtech Video forums...enjoy your stay.

Sorry .. rv770 . . . Blah .. blah .. blah
-what the hell is there to say about it?

Here let me give you the cliffs.

[q"]It looks like r700/rv770 might be really early ... like May"
.. "Wow!" .. apoppin says "i said so" and we *discuss speculation*[/quote]

it is merciful it went off topic .. until there are facts it should be put out of it's misery imo

and my prediction re: PS3 is my own opinion .. we already had a 20 page thread on it and most of what i said is now generally believed .. i am just going further out on a limb to say MOST of us haven't given a CRAP about PS3 games - there are SO few "exclusives" {compared to PS2} .. and PS3 is not a success for Sony > so i SPECULATE [like with r700] that there will NOT be a PS4 .. unless they made too much on BluRay and just want to screw with MS.

i could be wrong
duh

However, everytime i am wrong there is a PM and sometimes a Post or even a thread to remind me that i had insufficient data to make my analysis correctly [they usually are less polite and it usually begins with "Hey stupid, you were wrong about .." ]

 

[batmang]

you have a s#it load of posts.

 

[v8envy]

Hrm. Let's call it 8 years of posting. so, 3000 days or so. 10 posts a day average. Maaan. That's a trooper for you! How on earth do you find time to play games? =)

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: batmang
you have a s#it load of posts.

Me?

i have a sh!tload of analysis and things to say

and if you look .. you average 2 posts a day ... i average 10
- maybe 20 more minutes of posting every day!

i wasn't going to post in this thread any further either

Hrm. Let's call it 8 years of posting. so, 3000 days or so. 10 posts a day average. Maaan. That's a trooper for you! How on earth do you find time to play games? =)

Thanks - and i don't - i have 16 brand new games including LotRO and Crysis [arriving tomorrow] and ALL i frickin do is benchmark them!!!
- and loving it :Q

:heart:

 

[Rusin]

I hope they could release this RV770 and other RV7**-goons soon and they would beat Nvidia's offerings. This was (at least) third quarter in row when AMD's ATi department made negative results, 11 million dollars this time :/.

 

[BenSkywalker]

and PS3 is not a success for Sony > so i SPECULATE [like with r700] that there will NOT be a PS4 ..

Year over year PS3 sales are up 98% in the US(its' relatively speaking weakest market) it is tracking ahead of the 360 and PS2 for installed based over time on market and it is DEMOLISHING the revenue stream the PS2 generated in the same timeframe. The PS3 has buried HDDVD is pacing to surpass the 360 in installed base world wide by the end of this year(after being a year late to the market, by way of comparison the XBox dealing with the same situation was utterly demolished due to the same gap) and is currently on track to easily best everything but the Wii this generation.

Given the fact that sales wise, PC gaming is very, very near death- I would think that people would want to see the consoles at least do well so there is some hope at ports for the PC at least. Let's face it, the sales on the PC are far too low to warrant $30Million budget games- they aren't uncommon on the console side.

For your comments on DX10.1(lol) games choking the consoles and resulting in their failure- The PS2 couldn't handle all of the DX6 features and still stomped the PC in a rather dominating fashion right through the DX9 era. In terms of the market gamers>>>tech whores

I have every system as I refuse to miss a game because of some extreme nonsensical tech bigotry, but I am very unusual on these boards as I still care more about the games then the team red v green flames.

nVidia and AMD have the console makers over a barrel? You can't say you honestly believe that? Want to see what would happen to them if the three console manufacturers all decided to adopt Intel's new rendering technique and pump billions of dollars into game development based on that rendering technique? Intel would damn near give away their graphics solutions for a chance at that. They would be handing over the overwhelming majority of the gaming market in a single move. nV and AMD aren't so stupid. Sony already showed they could pimp slap the R300 core with a Voodoo1 class graphics chip when it came to generating revenue.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

and PS3 is not a success for Sony > so i SPECULATE [like with r700] that there will NOT be a PS4 ..

Year over year PS3 sales are up 98% in the US(its' relatively speaking weakest market) it is tracking ahead of the 360 and PS2 for installed based over time on market and it is DEMOLISHING the revenue stream the PS2 generated in the same timeframe. The PS3 has buried HDDVD is pacing to surpass the 360 in installed base world wide by the end of this year(after being a year late to the market, by way of comparison the XBox dealing with the same situation was utterly demolished due to the same gap) and is currently on track to easily best everything but the Wii this generation.

Given the fact that sales wise, PC gaming is very, very near death- I would think that people would want to see the consoles at least do well so there is some hope at ports for the PC at least. Let's face it, the sales on the PC are far too low to warrant $30Million budget games- they aren't uncommon on the console side.

For your comments on DX10.1(lol) games choking the consoles and resulting in their failure- The PS2 couldn't handle all of the DX6 features and still stomped the PC in a rather dominating fashion right through the DX9 era. In terms of the market gamers>>>tech whores

I have every system as I refuse to miss a game because of some extreme nonsensical tech bigotry, but I am very unusual on these boards as I still care more about the games then the team red v green flames.

nVidia and AMD have the console makers over a barrel? You can't say you honestly believe that? Want to see what would happen to them if the three console manufacturers all decided to adopt Intel's new rendering technique and pump billions of dollars into game development based on that rendering technique? Intel would damn near give away their graphics solutions for a chance at that. They would be handing over the overwhelming majority of the gaming market in a single move. nV and AMD aren't so stupid. Sony already showed they could pimp slap the R300 core with a Voodoo1 class graphics chip when it came to generating revenue.

While I'm not sure about the whole PS3 thing as I don't know a single person with a PS3 I will say PC Gaming is definitely dying. It's so easy to pirate any PC Game and you can get a keyboard/mouse on a 360/PS3/Wii...

It's over for PC Games... It'll still exist but it'll be way more niche...

Originally posted by: apoppin
Consoles are dead as far as i am concerned .. the Rest of you will watch them bleed to death over DX10.1 .. as those scenes on the XPox360 and BS-3 get slower and slower .. chug a chug .. as consoles *struggle* with DX9 to keep up with the DX10.1 PC as it BLOWS them AWAY this year!! - on midrange PCs.

Nearly every-single next generation title is being developed for 360s and/or PS3s. Arma 2, Farcry 2, Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30, etc...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

and PS3 is not a success for Sony > so i SPECULATE [like with r700] that there will NOT be a PS4 ..

Year over year PS3 sales are up 98% in the US(

of course it is up .. on the strength of it's BluRay .. they actually used my strategy to "forget PS3", to slash the price and use it as a Weapon to win the Hi-Def war
they are 'losing' money - big money - on each one they sell but now there is only BluRay and no Toshiba - big profit for Sony - IF they capitalize on it [and i imagine that is their strategy- they can even "afford" to lose PS3 completely]

and PS3 sales are only "up" because it was SO "down" for so long
- it's all relative .. they are selling each one for $250 less then they counted on and they were losing money originally - at $650 ... as a gaming console, measuring it's "success" on Exclusives, i'd say it SUCKS - big time, compared to PS2. They couldn't figure how to sell PS3 to their PS2 fans - SOny just blew it and is making the best of it.

I's say they lost well over a billion dollars over their original estimates for PS3
- is that a "success" even if it is making a nickel here and there now?

compare to PS2 and tell me you know for sure there will be a PS4
-unless Sony announces it to just screw with MS' head i . e > "27 cell processors each operating at the equivalent of 10ghz using newly discovered bio-crystalline technology!".
[i would ]

 

[hokahknow]

How about just using 2 HD 3870 (non X2). A single MSI 3870 is about $160 at newegg after rebate. So get 2 of those for about $320. How much is the perfomance hit doing that instead of the 3870 X2 @ $450+??

Just a thought

 

[BenSkywalker]

of course it is up .. on the strength of it's BluRay .. they actually used my strategy to "forget PS3", to slash the price and use it as a Weapon to win the Hi-Def war

It's priced has dropped by $100, the norm for its' time on market for a high end console. Of course BluRay is going to help it, not nearly as much as the DVD player helped the PS2 at first but it without a doubt adds value for a lot of customers. One little problem with your idea that that 98% bump in hardware was due to BluRay only though, software sales were up 139%.

- it's all relative .. they are selling each one for $250 less then they counted on

According to who? At launch they were selling below cost, which has been standard for high end consoles for quite some time. I have seen nothing at all to indicate that their losses would be anything remotely approaching that at their current pricing with more mature manufacturing processes.

I's say they lost well over a billion dollars over their original estimates for PS3
- is that a "success" even if it is making a nickel here and there now?

Yes, that would be about half of their predicted up front losses. Perhaps you are not appreciating the scale of the console market. This past month the segment of the US market tracked by NPD(which doesn't include WalMart) was $1.1Billion. That is one Q1 month. You have to appreciate the scale of the market you are talking about, in one market in one of the slowest months of the year they are generating over a billion in revenue. World wide over the course of several years a billion dollar investment can seem rather trivial.

compare to PS2 and tell me you know for sure there will be a PS4

The PS3 is currently ahead of where the PS2 was at the same time in its' lifecycle. It is selling more hardware, more software and generating significantly more revenue. SCE(the Playstation division of Sony) has generated the majority of Sony's profits for the last decade and had a couple quarters of loss to offset the launch of a new console(which they did for the PS2 also). The console market is growing extremely quickly now, posting record numbers month after month in terms of unit volume and dollar volume, the PS3 in terms of raw numbers at this point in its lifecycle has sold better then any Sony console ever has, from a business perspective they would be utterly foolish to abandon it. To put it into proper perspective, from a business standpoint Sony would be better off abandoning their entire electronics division over SCE. Is there going to be a PS4? The only way it won't happen is if Sony decides to use a new name(doubtful). Nintendo will almost certainly win this generation, and Sony will almost certainly sell more hardware and more software then they ever have in the past, that is the pace at which the consol market is growing.

 

[apoppin]

it's price dropped by $250 .. if it was "natural" market forces, it would be $500 now - with no bundles.
Sony is matching prices with MS's much cheaper to produce Xbox360 [as i suggested]

PS3 dropped ANOTHER $100 last July 12 - which was unexpected [to everyone but me] and look at all the "bundled" goodies with it .. not at all in-line with Sony's vision at all - and over $1B [billion] off ORIGINAL projections; all Sony did after PS3 launched was scale back projection after projection to ZERO .. yes it's a "profit" now
:roll:

the ONLY reason the PS3 is selling is because it is "cheap" BluRay .. and the Kids are now asking mom and dad for games .. my own strategy for Sony! But is is NOT a "success"

The PS3 is currently ahead of where the PS2 was at the same time in its' lifecycle. It is selling more hardware, more software and generating significantly more revenue.

Just because you haven't seen Sony's red ink on the PS3 doesn't mean they are pleased with it

i think you and i are just going to disagree for now until there is *proof* for everyone to see

and i am sure there will be no PS4 .. i am done discussing this .. just wait and see; i was right about the PS3 originally and my analysis was true for about a year .. frankly i got bored with PS3/Sony marketing analysis and am working on a much bigger and hopefully more practical project for myself. This was just an exercise

i [hope i] will be here to say i told you so .. again
- or you can say it to me .. my fragile ego might survive it

 

[BenSkywalker]

it's price dropped by $250 .. if it was "natural" market forces, it would be $500 now - with no bundles.

Base model launched at $500(link), it is now $400(link). They do come with a SpiderMan3 BluRay disc now, although they removed the BC hardware. Not sure how you add that up to $250?

PS3 dropped ANOTHER $100 last July 12 - which was unexpected [to everyone but me] and look at all the "bundled" goodies with it

Another? Uhm, where did the first "$150" come from? Showed you launch price, showed you current, onus is on you to find the rest of that dough. And what bundled goodies? Spider Man3? The new PS3's lost BC, overall a net loss in the package.

the ONLY reason the PS3 is selling is because it is "cheap" BluRay .. and the Kids are now asking mom and dad for games .. my own strategy for Sony! But is is NOT a "success"

Hardware sales were up 41% LESS then the software. For proper perspective, they were selling more then 7 games PER console for March. BluRay certainly helps Sony, but a 7:1 software to hardware tie ratio at this point in the systems life cycle is extremely strong.

Just because you haven't seen Sony's red ink on the PS3 doesn't mean they are pleased with it

I have to assume you think I am borderline retarded. Sony is a publicly traded company and they give full reports on exactly what their losses are per division and most of the time per sub division also. I can only assume that you haven't even taken a quarter of the time to Google the information as you have spent typing about it, else your tone would be quite different. The reason I say this is because on one of your points you would have more ammunition- 30 seconds to check that Sony actually had lost billions on the launch of the PS3 for laymen numbers(full financial breakdowns are available) and they have since started turning a profit in the sector again. I could link to the full financial breakdowns also if you would like, but I can tell you aren't big on researching this topic, so I figured a laymans link would do

i think you and i are just going to disagree for now until there is *proof* for everyone to see

I have proof, that isn't an issue.

and i am sure there will be no PS4 .. i am done discussing this .. just wait and see; i was right about the PS3 originally and my analysis was true for about a year .. frankly i got bored with PS3/Sony marketing analysis and am working on a much bigger and hopefully more practical project for myself. This was just an exercise

I spent several years of my life predicting sales trends for a living, I would say to you- don't quit your day job. I bring real numbers to the table, not my imagination.

i [hope i] will be here to say i told you so .. again

Told me so? Heh, I've been on these forums since before these forums were here(Anand started off on GeoCities a couple years before they came up with these forums). I have about nine years worth of back dated posts, you can feel free to point out at any time when you could say you told me so

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: v8envy
ATI's problem past the 9700 days was: they were months behind nv's offerings for slightly better performance. By the time the X800 came out enthusiasts already bought 6800s. Repeat again with the 7800 vs 1800. And again with 7900 vs 1950. And once more with 8800 vs 2900 (although here we don't see the performance improvement). In each case the ATI part was a better performer, but not enough so to warrant an upgrade from the higher end NV parts at release prices.

While ATI still sold wagonloads of those cards they couldn't command the kind of early adopter e-peen premiums that NV's been getting away with -- with the enthusiast market mostly tapped they were left with value conscious upper mainstream/lower enthusiast buyers like myself. Sure, I got the X850XT PE and X1800XT -- but it was for $150 and $249 respectively, 4-6 months after launch. Not $500 and $650 MSRP that ATI would have received had they beaten NV to the market.

The Radeon X800XT PE was released 20 days later, I don't think that was enough time for nVidia to dominate greatly the market share against ATi. The X1900 was released before the 7900 series, also bear in mind that were the money is isn't in the high end, is in the midrange (OEM's for example), nVidia currently commands the High End Market, but ATi commands the midrange market, not everybody got 400 bucks to spend on a videocard, and not everybody is a gamer.

 

[apoppin]

I spent several years of my life predicting sales trends for a living, I would say to you- don't quit your day job. I bring real numbers to the table, not my imagination.

i woud say that is pretty rude, did i offend you that badly by an *opinion*? - and you have ZERO clue about me
.. hey, Ben .. me2 .. i wasn't 'apoppin' till 2000 when i 'found' this site again - i moved from Hawaii in Dec 99 and everything was chaos for a couple of months before and after.

Told me so? Heh, I've been on these forums since before these forums were here(Anand started off on GeoCities a couple years before they came up with these forums). I have about nine years worth of back dated posts, you can feel free to point out at any time when you could say you told me so

Are you kidding us? Many times - you refuse to believe you can be wrong; in fact i never heard you admit a mistake - once; perhaps i missed it - are you perfect?
Your debates with BFG10K are famous and they stretch on for days .. and you NEVER 'give' on anything - although he does.
- you will not sucker me into one of these marathons in an UNrelated thread

I have to assume you think I am borderline retarded. Sony is a publicly traded company and they give full reports on exactly what their losses are per division and most of the time per sub division also. I can only assume that you haven't even taken a quarter of the time to Google the information as you have spent typing about it, else your tone would be quite different. The reason I say this is because on one of your points you would have more ammunition- 30 seconds to check that Sony actually had lost billions on the launch of the PS3 for laymen numbers(full financial breakdowns are available) and they have since started turning a profit in the sector again. I could link to the full financial breakdowns also if you would like, but I can tell you aren't big on researching this topic, so I figured a laymans link would do

That is a NASTY *assumption* and was furthest from my mind
:Q
No wonder you are biting at me .. sorry for any 'whatever' i might have given offense to your highness ..
[now THAT is "in kind" ^^- Do you like it? - please stop]

Base model launched at $500(link), it is now $400(link). They do come with a SpiderMan3 BluRay disc now, although they removed the BC hardware. Not sure how you add that up to $250?

and no one could buy it for $500 .. i don't think you remember the *bitterness* when PS3 launched at $650 with a nasty game bundle

here go wild on the links .. i have literally hundreds more - the damn thing was "practically" $650 .. or you waited .. and waited .. and .. wtf?

http://gamepolitics.com/2006/1...gore-intense-violence/
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/747/747413p1.html
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/747/747413p1.html
http://www.8bitjoystick.com/ar...aystation_3_launch.php
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/742/742845p1.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09...ited-to-500-000-units/

i don't want to discuss it with you

talk by yourself or post for someone else - i disagree 100% with your traditional "sony" baloney [imo] "analysis" .. i said "we'll see" about PS4 and i don't care to hear your spin; save it for someone else; all my opinions are the old ones in that HUGE thread i started about PS3/Xbox are "doomed" ... resurrect it *there* if you want ... but at least do me the courtesy of reading the last 1/3rd of it before you post .. it is still "active"

i am done here - this is an ATI thread .. this is very disruptive to the forum

aloha

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: v8envy
ATI's problem past the 9700 days was: they were months behind nv's offerings for slightly better performance. By the time the X800 came out enthusiasts already bought 6800s. Repeat again with the 7800 vs 1800. And again with 7900 vs 1950. And once more with 8800 vs 2900 (although here we don't see the performance improvement). In each case the ATI part was a better performer, but not enough so to warrant an upgrade from the higher end NV parts at release prices.

While ATI still sold wagonloads of those cards they couldn't command the kind of early adopter e-peen premiums that NV's been getting away with -- with the enthusiast market mostly tapped they were left with value conscious upper mainstream/lower enthusiast buyers like myself. Sure, I got the X850XT PE and X1800XT -- but it was for $150 and $249 respectively, 4-6 months after launch. Not $500 and $650 MSRP that ATI would have received had they beaten NV to the market.

My feelings exactly. They also seem to engineer the cards for future trends and not as much for current games. Over time, ATI cards seem to age better and play newer games better than NV cards, but at launch Nvidia usually does better on the current games.

Yeah, I couldn't say it better, ATi even still supporting their Radeon 9X00 series of cards, and during time, their performance gap difference widened, the 9700PRO during time was able to smoke the FX, the X800XT PE was slighly faster than the 6800 Ultra, and then in newer games, it was able to perform considerably faster, that also happened with the X1900 series which was slighly faster or as fast as the 7900GTX, and now, the performance difference is outstanding, even a X1950PRO is able to outperfom it in next generation games. The HD 2900 most of the time was unable to keep up with the 8800GTS 640, and now it can keep up most of the time, and sometimes (SOMETIMES), can rival the 8800GTX. In the Catalyst Dissecting article made by Anandtech also stated that the ATi cards tends to age much better than their nVidia counterparts.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Highend was always a toss up between ATi and NVIDIA. But here are the important facts that cleared the paths to nVIDIA success:

-All 7800GTX 512mb were sold and people who could buy it bought one, or two. For the price premium, the amount of profit earned per card must've been pretty damn high.

Profit? loll, that card was very hard to find, and also it was using cherry picked G70 cores which had the tendency to fail later due to it's high frequency using a budget manufacturing process (110nm)