If Fury is overpriced, why is a $1000 Titan-X acceptable?

[exar333]

If you are buying 2-3 top-tier GPUs, going full water-cooled and full blocks + custom BIOS, the Titan X is the way to.

3x $700 (top-tier 980Ti) + 3x 130 blocks = $2490
3x $1000 (TX) + 3x $130 blocks = $3390

So yeah, the price is about 35% more, for ~10% more performance (assuming similar max clocks on water and custom BIOS) + more RAM. For extreme system builders, this isn't a 'huge' price difference.

I definitely agree the value difference is not the same as we saw with 780 vs Titan, but if you want that last 10% of Big Maxwell and will be doing balls-to-the-wall OCing, TX does bring some benefits.

This could change a little if you are going for strictly LN suicide runs...there are (and will be soon) special 980TI versions like the HOF LN that are ridiculously overbuilt. Those are getting close to a TX in price, but potentially could overcome the 10% shader difference with higher LN clocks.

For 90%+ users, the 980Ti makes more sense. There are some cases where the TX has advantages though...

 

[pj-]

Cool, quiet and heat exhausted outside the case ARE worth a little $$$ to a lot of us. In fact, it's why I bought my Kraken X60 instead of a cheaper, louder CPU cooling option.

I'd rather hear my game than be listening to the noise of a 980ti every time the fans spool up. The Fury X is flying off the shelves as fast as they are in stock. Im not a believer in the masses always being right, but it's a good indicator that the demand is high.

Selling out without knowing quantity tells you almost nothing.

Unless sapphire or newegg majorly fucked up, the other suppliers probably had a similar amount. 100 units for a major product launch on one of the largest internet retailers is basically nothing.

 

[AtenRa]

So I have a question for the forum: why do you think there's such a blatant double standard?

I will tell you what is happening and why AMD havent learned a damn thing all this years both in CPUs/APUs and GPU marketing and how to positioning its products.

NVIDIA released the GTX980 which was faster AND quieter AND had higher Perf/watt than ANY AMD CARD IN THE MARKET for 5-6 months.

Then they released TITAN-X that was faster AND Quieter AND had higher Perf/watt than ANY AMD CARD IN THE MARKET.

Not only that a month ago NVIDIA released the GTX980Ti that was almost a fast as TITAN-X but at $650.

So when AMD after all this time they release the Fury-X that is at the same price as GTX980Ti but offers lower performance AND lower perf/watt but it is the most quiet card it doesnt matter to anyone. In their ayes AMD failed to even reach NVIDIA performance at the same price AND failed to reach same or higher perf/watt.

Nobody would say that Fury-X failed if the card was faster than GTX980Ti AND quieter AND had lower temps AND its MSRP was at $700.

I believe People buying those top-end cards are after things in this order,

1: Performance
2: Power consumption
3: noise

(price is not even mentioned, see bellow)

When you only win number 3, its not what people have as primary target, but if you win in 1 and 2 you have the best product in the market even if your not the quieter card on the planet.

If R9 290X was faster and consuming less than GTX780Ti last year nobody would even care about the noise of the default AMD cooler.
Same as today with Fury-X, if it would be faster and consuming less that GTX980Ti it would be the better product even if MSRP was higher at $700 and noise levels higher.

 

[exar333]

I will tell you what is happening and why AMD havent learned a damn thing all this years both in CPUs/APUs and GPU marketing and how to positioning its products.

NVIDIA released the GTX980 which was faster AND quieter AND had higher Perf/watt than ANY AMD CARD IN THE MARKET for 5-6 months.

Then they released TITAN-X that was faster AND Quieter AND had higher Perf/watt than ANY AMD CARD IN THE MARKET.

Not only that a month ago NVIDIA released the GTX980Ti that was almost a fast as TITAN-X but at $650.

So when AMD after all this time they release the Fury-X that is at the same price as GTX980Ti but offers lower performance AND lower perf/watt but it is the most quiet card it doesnt matter to anyone. In their ayes AMD failed to even reach NVIDIA performance at the same price AND failed to reach same or higher perf/watt.

Nobody would say that Fury-X failed if the card was faster than GTX980Ti AND quieter AND had lower temps AND its MSRP was at $700.

I believe People buying those top-end cards are after things in this order,

1: Performance
2: Power consumption
3: noise

(price is not even mentioned, see bellow)

When you only win number 3, its not what people have as primary target, but if you win in 1 and 2 you have the best product in the market even if your not the quieter card on the planet.

If R9 290X was faster and consuming less than GTX780Ti last year nobody would even care about the noise of the default AMD cooler.
Same as today with Fury-X, if it would be faster and consuming less that GTX980Ti it would be the better product even if MSRP was higher at $700 and noise levels higher.

Great write-up.

I think power consumption is a bit-overstated. It really only matters if it is CONSIDERABLE. A few watts here and there isn't a huge deal. For many people here, power consumption matters at stock AND when overclocked. That's why Maxwell is so great, it can be OCd 20-25% for barely more power, in many cases. If you need 50% more power for 15% more performance, that's definitely NOT good.

Honestly, I think the goal posts do move a bit with different releases. I do agree that NV wins in 2/3 of these. You can't always win on EVERY metric, but if you can own a majority and market those advantages, that's a win.

AMD seemed to shoot for #1 and #3, with acceptable power usage. That was a great goal. Unfortunately they just missed the mark on #1 and #3 is (agreeably) the least important. As long as you don't completely fail on the noise front, you can lean on AIBs to help with quieter cards. Power consumption and performance, however, more difficult to obtain with design tweaks...

 

[BigDaveX]

The entire premise of this thread is bogus, because people did accuse the Titan-X of being overpriced. They just didn't do it so much at launch, because at that point we didn't know what the specs on the 980Ti were going to be. Once that chip actually did show up, everyone started questioning whether or not the Titan-X's extra 6GB of memory and small amount of additional shaders were worth paying 50% more for.

Oh, and as for the "It's a halo product because HBM and the water cooler!" argument, that excuse didn't fly when the GeForce FX5800 Ultra brought us GDDR2 and the Dustbuster. Though granted, the Fury X isn't anywhere near as horrible in execution as that was.

 

[Gunbuster]

Titan-X is acceptable because it came out over three months before the Fury limped across the starting line...

Expensive card for a quarter of the year or "Coming Soon™" and "we'll fix it eventually" promises... Hmmm

 

[Headfoot]

$1000 Titan-X which performs nearly identically to $650 980 Ti is acceptable because [insert ludicrous rationalization here]

 

[badb0y]

Going for watercooling on the reference design by AMD was a smart move. I have had a reference GTX 980 Ti and a EVGA GTX 980 Ti ACX 2.0 Sc+ and both of those cards get up to 82 degrees real quick.

 

[boozzer]

Titan X isn't actually in the top position. Custom 980Ti come faster out of box by 10%. OC vs OC, they are still faster because they reach higher clocks more often, and the custom 980Ti can do it while being quieter.

Titan X has less TDP reserves due to power wasted on 6GB extra vram that serve no purpose in gaming.

So it's not a $350 halo tax. It's a $350 stupid tax.

haha, I am laughing cuz this is so true. ^_^

 

[Goatsecks]

The entire premise of this thread is bogus, because people did accuse the Titan-X of being overpriced. They just didn't do it so much at launch, because at that point we didn't know what the specs on the 980Ti were going to be. Once that chip actually did show up, everyone started questioning whether or not the Titan-X's extra 6GB of memory and small amount of additional shaders were worth paying 50% more for.

Oh, and as for the "It's a halo product because HBM and the water cooler!" argument, that excuse didn't fly when the GeForce FX5800 Ultra brought us GDDR2 and the Dustbuster. Though granted, the Fury X isn't anywhere near as horrible in execution as that was.

Agreed.


OP: It is pretty unreasonable to assume that people find then titan pricing reasonable or acceptable, which has never been the case, and then use this assumption to defend the Fury X.

As a thought experiment, consider if the Fury X was released before the 980 or the titan. There is nothing wrong with the fury X, it is a good piece of silicone. Its timing, delivery and price has been unfortunate.

 

[sm625]

Why is a $1000 Titan-X acceptable? For the same reason a $1400 iphone 6 is acceptable: because of the brand image.

 

[tkrushing]

Sales failure? I thought it was about "the halo"? Who's shifting the goal-posts now?

Why was it priced that way to begin with? Or to put it another way, if Fury sells well, will that also make it a halo, irrespective of price?

Please repeat after me. "Fury will never be halo because it does not have the performance to beat 980ti or Titan X". It is really that simple. You can argue until your fingers hurt from typing but the performance numbers will stay the same and the statement will hold true.

 

[Keysplayr]

$1000 Titan-X which performs nearly identically to $650 980 Ti is acceptable because [insert ludicrous rationalization here]

And then question the rationalizations used to ask the question in the first place. Nobody is saying its acceptable. Why do you imagine people are saying this?
What is the deal with you guys. Please hear, understand, ans acknowledge that nobody has said Titan pricing is acceptable.
The OP seems to want the Fury to be christened a halo card. Fine. Its a halo card in AMD lineup.
However, it isn't in first or even second place over all GPUs and therefore cannot command a 2nd tier price let alone a halo price. It is what it is.
In essence, BFG appears angry at the market and what it will bear. Maybe because he'll have to bear it to when Titan 3 comes round.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Why would HBM and water cooling count as halo?

It doesnt matter performance wise if its HBM1 or GDDR5. And water is something you can always do if need be.

Stop shifting the goalposts. The Fury X just isnt the hype it was made to be. And by the looks of it AMD originally wanted 849$ for it before the 980Ti launch.

http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1496?vs=1513
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/1447?vs=1513

Well, "halo" can mean a lot of things, but I think in this context it usually reafers to performance, so in this case Fury is not halo. Reminds me a lot of the early quad core where AMD was advertising "true" quad cores, while intel's quads were much faster.

 

[yacoub]

By all accounts, the Titan-X is overpriced garbage given it's marginally faster than a 980Ti, but costs a whopping $350 more. That's more than the cost of an entire GTX970.

Yet a Fury - overall slightly slower than a 980Ti, but costs the same - is a "massive disappointment", and has many threads detailing how wrong such a product is to exist.

Meanwhile, the Titan-X continues to quietly sit in the corner and sell for $1000. It must be selling well enough, because the price hasn't dropped.

So I have a question for the forum: why do you think there's such a blatant double standard?

Because many people are biased and immature. They are both absurd prices for a GPU, particularly given their relative performance, and nobody in their right mind should be spending that much money on those cards. And it's not about "but if you have the money you should". No. It's not merely about having the means to do so. Wealthy people don't waste their money on such things, that's why they're wealthy - they retain their wealth rather than waste it on trivial things that they are wise enough to see are overpriced bait. And these cards are for the most part erroneously overpriced. It is the suckers that really shouldn't be stretching their meager budgets to buy these cards, but are hyped into doing by marketing and forum chatter, that enables NVidia or AMD to get away with continually advancing prices for GPUs. Whatever, it's no sweat off my back. I just watch in amusement.

 

[Ma_Deuce]

However, it isn't in first or even second place over all GPUs and therefore cannot command a 2nd tier price let alone a halo price. It is what it is.
In essence, BFG appears angry at the market and what it will bear. Maybe because he'll have to bear it to when Titan 3 comes round.

Right now the market is allowing the Fury X to "command" it's MSRP.

For those that don't want the added noise and heat of a 980ti it's a very real alternative.

Titan X price is Titan X price /shrug. Most people don't even consider getting one anyway. Nothing to fuss over.

 

[x3sphere]

Am I really reading this?

It's not hard to see why the Titan didn't get the same treatment at release. It was uncontested for almost 3 months, until Nvidia effectively lowered the entry price with 980 Ti.

Now the Titan is a terrible value yes, but it's a moot point with the 980 Ti out there. The disappointment with AMD stems from the fact when one side shows its hand, you expect the other to either beat it in performance or price. Fury X does neither.

 

[vissarix]

By all accounts, the Titan-X is overpriced garbage given it's marginally faster than a 980Ti, but costs a whopping $350 more. That's more than the cost of an entire GTX970.

Yet a Fury - overall slightly slower than a 980Ti, but costs the same - is a "massive disappointment", and has many threads detailing how wrong such a product is to exist.

Meanwhile, the Titan-X continues to quietly sit in the corner and sell for $1000. It must be selling well enough, because the price hasn't dropped.

So I have a question for the forum: why do you think there's such a blatant double standard?

Lol i wonder why i got 4 infractions out of 7 posts and then see a thread like this one, which is nothing else rather then a fanboy rant...:\

Titan x is garbage?... when it was released was 50% faster compared to the best Amd gpu the 290x, runs cooler consumes less and it overclocks like a beast...

and then Nvidia knew exactly what amd was going to release and they outplayed them 1 month ahead, releasing the gtx 980ti...industry spying? maybe...kudos to them anyway...Amd would have never released a slower product if they had the possibility to do so...they just cant get more out of fury x...

now we can argue about why a 50% faster gpu costs 3 times more then a 290x, but thats how it works, you pay the premium to get the best...i see alot of you guys saying that spending so much on a gpu is stupid and bla bla bla...i find it silly and just plain envious...its not like we all work at mcdonalds barely being able to buy food to survive, some people can afford it... end of the story.

 

[Headfoot]

Fury X:
What AMD promised: The fastest single GPU card on the market with 2/3 the price of the second place
What users expected: The fastest single GPU card on the market with 2/3 the price of the second place
What users got at launch: The tied for second fastest single GPU card on the market with the same price as the tied card

100% wrong. AMD didn't promise ANYTHING. Link AMD's statement promising the fastest single GPU card with 2/3 the price if you think otherwise.

A bunch of forum warriors intentionally overhyped a product and intentionally set unrealistic expectations in order to ensure "disappointment" in those other forum warriors gullible enough to fall for it.

That is in no way the same thing as AMD promising it.

 

[Headfoot]

What is the deal with you guys. Please hear, understand, ans acknowledge that nobody has said Titan pricing is acceptable.

Not true. I had a guy literally tell me the Titan X was a better option than Fury X on this very forum the other day. I'll try and find the quote here...

EDIT:

For DirectX 11 and lower than 4K resolution, I think better options are Titan X and GTX 980 Ti [as compared to the Fury X]

In which he's outright stating Titan X is a better option than Fury X for lower than 4k, which is completely ridiculous as its ~10-15% more performance at best for an additional $350. And anyone intellectually honest can see that the logical conclusion is that if Titan X is a better option, the price must therefore be seen as acceptable. (else it wouldn't be the better option, following this logic.)

You underestimate how ridiculous the rhetoric and exaggeration gets after a new launch...

 

[AtenRa]

Lol i wonder why i got 4 infractions out of 7 posts and then see a thread like this one, which is nothing else rather then a fanboy rant...:\

Titan x is garbage?... when it was released was 50% faster compared to the best Amd gpu the 290x, runs cooler consumes less and it overclocks like a beast...

and then Nvidia knew exactly what amd was going to release and they outplayed them 1 month ahead, releasing the gtx 980ti...industry spying? maybe...kudos to them anyway...Amd would have never released a slower product if they had the possibility to do so...they just cant get more out of fury x...

now we can argue about why a 50% faster gpu costs 3 times more then a 290x, but thats how it works, you pay the premium to get the best...i see alot of you guys saying that spending so much on a gpu is stupid and bla bla bla...i find it silly and just plain envious...its not like we all work at mcdonalds barely being able to buy food to survive, some people can afford it... end of the story.

Only 8 posts and you are talking about fanboys already ??

As for the second bold, you really dont know how Fury-X will mature. If we take Hawaii and Kepler, I could say that Fury-X will be faster than GTX980Ti in a few months from now. As I have said in the other threads, Im waiting to see if Fury-X will gain anything from Windows 10 drivers and if yes how much.

 

[AtenRa]

100% wrong. AMD didn't promise ANYTHING. Link AMD's statement promising the fastest single GPU card with 2/3 the price if you think otherwise.

A bunch of forum warriors intentionally overhyped a product and intentionally set unrealistic expectations in order to ensure "disappointment" in those other forum warriors gullible enough to fall for it.

That is in no way the same thing as AMD promising it.

+1

 

[Pariah]

Meanwhile, the Titan-X continues to quietly sit in the corner and sell for $1000. It must be selling well enough, because the price hasn't dropped.

So I have a question for the forum: why do you think there's such a blatant double standard?

You know why it is so quiet? Because no gamers are buying it anymore. The 980Ti is what gamers are buying now which is made by the same company. No one cares about the price of the TitanX when NVidia has a viable alternative at a much lower price. AMD has developed the reputation of being the poor man's alternative. More performance, lower cost. Fury X bucks that trend. As has been stated millions of times before on this very forum, no one is interested in a lower quality AMD product if it isn't faster and cheaper than the NVidia competition.

 

[Ma_Deuce]

i see alot of you guys saying that spending so much on a gpu is stupid and bla bla bla...i find it silly and just plain envious...its not like we all work at mcdonalds barely being able to buy food to survive, some people can afford it... end of the story.

Envious? Not likely. There just aren't many people that see any value in a $1,000 gpu. I could get a thousand $1 hooker bots for that kind of cash...

 

[Subyman]

I don't see what the issue is here. Hardly anyone recommends buying a Titan X anymore. Even when it was launched most people knew a cut down version would be coming eventually since Kepler did the same thing. Titan X isn't a "failure" because another card came out several months later with a better price/performance ratio. It was successful in what it did at the time and still holds the single GPU performance crown even if it isn't worth purchasing for most people. It did its job. Nvidia will not lower its price because it is a halo product. They'd rather discontinue it than devalue the Titan branding.