So I have a GTX 480, and a Seasonic Gold X750W PSU. Will it handle the GTX 780? time for an upgrade... I figure...
What?Probably because GK110 is the same generation and same Kepler uarch as Kepler.
This isn't even a real refresh, it just the rest of the lineup.
Is it just me or are these cards not selling in droves? Newegg has stock of all models except the EVGA ACX model.
This was sent to all of the Titan owners after the release of the GTX 780..
Why didnt they include percentages (difference) and average difference?
Here are the performance differences from those tests:
Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - ALL BENCHMARKS: +30.1% / +28.8%
Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - SYNTHETIC BENCHMARKS: +30.4% / +30.8%
Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - 25X16 GAMING BENCHMARKS: +32.3% / +26.3%
Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - 19X10 GAMING BENCHMARKS: +27.9% / +30.7%
I don't see how that's possible. If 20nm VI beats the Titan, why would AMD price that card at only $549 seeing consumers buy 780 for $649 and Titan for $1000? Since AMD is unlikely to build a 550mm2 die on 20nm, Maxwell should easily beat the best VI chip as well, allowing NV to maintain $649-$1000 price levels. Also, I do not believe it's possible to sell flagship 20nm cards for $369 anymore due to very high wafer prices at the beginning of the node process. Finally, keep in mind that Kepler is a pretty old architecture, really going back to Fermi 1 in 2010. Maxwell is NV's all brand new architecture for compute. I expect it to be way better than GCN 2.0 which is just a refresh. If NV beat AMD with Fermi 2.0 aka Kepler, then imagine what will happen when 550mm2 Maxwell arrives? It might beat VI by 40-50%+ at this rate if NV gains 15-20% through architectural advancements alone.
I was under the impression maxwell would be an evolution, not a major overhaul... Am I wrong?
I think this is a nice card and the price is justified, its the usual high end price of cards with no competition
Titan is bullshit, but I dont see anything wrong with this being 649$... At least not until AMD comes up with some sort of counter (which seems to be a long time away)
Pricing sucks, it should have been $550 to push the rest of the line-ups down. This is like NV saying to AMD, dont worry we wont touch your working segments, you dont need to release anything new, until we get prices down or you are ready for a new process node.
And about Titan, it got ruined so bad with the 780OC versions. LOL
Did you get this backwards or something? When price lowers, the number of potential buyers goes up exponentially. I mentioned a similar example of profit maximization earlier with a close example of this, although as I said - lower prices = far more volume.
But for nvidia, it doesn't matter, they know what they're doing. They can also use these same chips for the Titan and HPC segments, which means that they will always get more profit overall. So they can price the GTX 780 higher than some expected, and still make more profit because these chips are flexible in terms of where they can be allocated. If they can use the same chip in a 4000$ Tesla card.....yeah.
Maybe they should but, and when you read this remember that this is speculation on the Finance and Marketing crew of Nvidia.They should have priced the Titan at $750 or something, and the GTX 780 at $500. The Titan is ridiculously overpriced. As they say, two wrongs don't make a right.
Okay, I apologize in advance if this sounds rude, but,
You're basing your argument off of google with no real study of economics. Gotcha. You even quoted WIKIPEDIA. WIKIPEDIA. Have you ever tried citing wikipedia as a source in a higher learning environment? In any case, yes this isn't higher learning. But let's straighten something out - Your projected demand increase for a 250$ price drop is pretty laughable, I can assure you the real world DOESN'T work like that. If, for example, a macbook pro is 250$ cheaper do you know what happens to the sales? They skyrocket by a TON. Exponentially. Stuff like this causes stock at some distro centers to sell out, because the demand for such a price drop is that much higher - Your example is just a joke because the demand for a 250$ price drop would be far more substantial than you indicate - in fact, sweet spot or lower prices generally have so many additional sales that it increases profits by a sizeable margin, this is profit maximization.
Now, obviously as I mentioned earlier nvidia is selling GK110 in other segments as well, and they know what they're doing. They study statistics non stop to optimize the price and allocate all of the GK110 chips in such a way that it makes them and their shareholders the most money - and they hire economists like all firms do to assist them in the process. So they know what they're doing with their GTX 780 price. I just want to point out that your demand example is outright laughable and ridiculous.
This is false. It is dependent on the product. If the price of bread drops by 300%, sales do not then jump by 900%. You only need enough bread to keep you alive. Price Elasticity is dependent on the product. Every product has a different Price Elasticity.blackened32 said:When price lowers, the number of potential buyers goes up exponentially.
It's a definition of Price Elasticity and Veblen goods. If you know a lot about economics, you'd know the definitions are correct. I could list 100 other sources that state the exact same definition. Would you like them? This is similar to a personal attack by attacking not the information, but the source itself and isn't allowed by the rules or moderators.blackened32 said:You even quoted WIKIPEDIA.
I agree with you. I actually agree. Except you missed a vital point. Goods are Price Elastic (Meaning like you said, when prices drop substantially, demand increases substantially) when there are MANY substitutes. For example, there is a substitute for the GTX 680, it's the 7970. If the 680 dropped in price substantially, people would purchase that over the 7970. However, there is no substitute for the GTX 780 as no card is performing in its bracket. So this quote doesn't hold as much weight.blackened32 said:Your example is just a joke because the demand for a 250$ price drop would be far more substantial than you indicate - in fact, sweet spot or lower prices generally have so many additional sales that it increases profits by a sizeable margin, this is profit maximization.
blackened32 said:So they know what they're doing with their GTX 780 price. I just want to point out that your demand example is outright laughable and ridiculous.
I'm unsure why you even say these two quotes because you basically agree with me then. If you didn't agree with me then Nvidia would do exactly what you'd say. They'd drop prices by $250 and their sales would skyrocket exponentially. Instead they don't, indicating exactly what I said, sales wouldn't skyrocket exponentially, hence they hold the price where it is because revenues are higher at the price point for Titan and GTX 780, than they would if they lowered both prices by $250.blackened said:I can assure you the real world DOESN'T work like that. If, for example, a macbook pro is 250$ cheaper do you know what happens to the sales? They skyrocket by a TON. Exponentially.