RussianSensation
Elite Member
- Sep 5, 2003
- 19,458
- 765
- 126
But the R9 290 rapes games at the $270 price point and will probably be dropped back to the $250 range due to pressure from the 970, so I don't see why it's unrealistic to think Nvidia's answer at this price point should also.
I would say 960 at $249 is OK, but nothing special if it's only as fast as a 780. Perf/watt will be impressive which seems to be a major selling point with gamers now.
Asus R9 290 is $240 on Newegg with 4 free games after MIR.
Asus R9 290X is $280 on Newegg with 4 free games after 6% off + MIR.
You can probably get another $25 credit with the AMEX/Twitter deal.
Performance at 1440P:
780/960 $249 (?) = 87%
After-market R9 290 $240 = 290X = 104%
290X $280 = > 104%
970 $350 = 107%
980 $550 = 115%
If 960 only has 2GB of VRAM, it has to be $199 or otherwise it's pretty disappointing as so little VRAM is a big limiting factor now. I think it'll be $249-269 with 3GB of VRAM and performance between a 970M and 980M. 2GB of VRAM for a $250 range card is not acceptable in 2015 imo. 2GB of VRAM was a big detriment to 285's lack of appeal over 280/280X.
NV sold 760 and 770 2-4GB for inflated prices vs. 280/280X for months, which to me sounds like they don't need to go below $249 for a 960 since a lot of people only consider NV and 960 would automatically fill in that demand in the $200-330 backet for NV. NV doesn't need to beat AMD in performance to sell as superior brand name, newer tech association and power usage will sell the card (as well as negative stigma in the average gamer's mind regarding R9 200 series).
With R9 290 prices regularly in the $240-250 range, R9 280/280X/760 really need to be in the $149 level or below. Yet, because 760/280/280X are hovering in the $150-200 range, NV knows that R9 290 isn't $240-250 in the rest of the world and thus can easily go for the $249 level.
Last edited: