New Pascal Titan X!

[Head1985]

Because we as consumers now get to pay $1200 (#$#$&$&*&!!!) for the top end. I'm not sure how you don't see that as a negative.


That would be a terrible idea. Nvidia would have no reason to keep prices in the sane world (case in point with Titan X). AMD still has a ~20% market share so getting them back to parity with Nvidia should be on everyone's wish list. That would help drive prices down for team green and team red.

TITANX is not even full SKU.Its just NEW 320USD GTX570 but for 1200USD.Enjoy:biggrin:
IF AMD have something like 5870/6970 TITANX will be named GTX1070 and it will cost probably 300-350USD.Just saying.

 

[guskline]

Because we as consumers now get to pay $1200 (#$#$&$&*&!!!) for the top end. I'm not sure how you don't see that as a negative.


That would be a terrible idea. Nvidia would have no reason to keep prices in the sane world (case in point with Titan X). AMD still has a ~20% market share so getting them back to parity with Nvidia should be on everyone's wish list. That would help drive prices down for team green and team red.

I assume you are also critical of AMD for producing a $1,499 Radeon Pro Duo consumer card? Is the price of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo in "the sane world"?

If Nvidia only produced the Titan X I could understand the complaints but it is in the process of releasing a number of pascal based cards spanning a large price range - right now per Newegg AND Nvidia from a GTX 1060 at $279 to a Titan X at $1,200.

AMD has chosen to focus on a different pricing model to broaden its market. Frankly I think with the limited budget AMD has, they are smart focusing on Polaris and Vega.

Highest end cards of BOTH companies (Remember that Radeon Pro Duo above?) jump higher.

Or is it really more of "it's not fair that Nvidia charges more for their Titan X"?

 

[xpea]

Do you mean ever or just with their current line up? Titan X is certainly well, well out of reach of the 480. But if you're saying Titan X will face no competition from AMD at all that's pretty absurd. They've already announced Vega... nVidia just has a huge TTM advantage here. This is like when 58xx series dropped months before Fermi.

knowing now Polaris, and putting fanboyism aside, do you really believe Vega will compete with GP102 ? objectively

 

[n0x1ous]

knowing now Polaris, and putting fanboyism aside, do you really believe Vega will compete with GP102 ? objectively

If its TSMC yes, if its GF then no.

 

[Glo.]

Because we as consumers now get to pay $1200 (#$#$&$&*&!!!) for the top end. I'm not sure how you don't see that as a negative.


That would be a terrible idea. Nvidia would have no reason to keep prices in the sane world (case in point with Titan X). AMD still has a ~20% market share so getting them back to parity with Nvidia should be on everyone's wish list. That would help drive prices down for team green and team red.

I do not want to suggest anything but...

Don't you think that Nvidia knew that AMD would go for mainstream market only and is milking the high end line to the last bit?

And the fact that they have rushed the release before there was enough space for producing chips in TSMC fabs is not giving anything else than questions.

 

[DooKey]

There is absolutely zero way to spin it so the top tier chip costing $1200 instead of the $500-$550 as it used to for many years is a good thing for consumers. It is many things, but it is not in any way good for consumers.

Gaming video cards across the entire range are a luxury. No one needs one so it's not good or bad for consumers if the prices creep higher. Buy a lessor (cheaper) card and move on is the way to handle this. Even better quit gaming (general statement not pointed at you) and find a new hobby. No one in the world forces anyone to buy a video card. This caterwauling about hurting consumers is just silly.

 

[Termie]

What I do think is bad is the move to Nvidia-direct distribution only. Nvidia is clearly pocketing much more margin despite a much higher price, and the result for consumers is reduced competition and innovation in the video card market.

Soon enough, Nvidia may go full-Apple and end its "clone" experiment.

 

[Snarf Snarf]

Gaming video cards across the entire range are a luxury. No one needs one so it's not good or bad for consumers if the prices creep higher. Buy a lessor (cheaper) card and move on is the way to handle this. Even better quit gaming (general statement not pointed at you) and find a new hobby. No one in the world forces anyone to buy a video card. This caterwauling about hurting consumers is just silly.

So much this. There is no obligation for either company to offer you a great value. You are being sold a luxury item that allows you to play games at higher fps and better IQ settings. Nvidia prices things at prices that the market will bear. If this is up $200 from last years $1000 that is because the market is willing to pay for a card at this price point with this level of performance.

If it doesn't appeal to you, don't buy it. Buy a 1080 or a 1080ti, or wait for Vega and see if there's any price drops. I don't complain that people buy Bugati's or Lambo's because I cant afford them. They exist in a bubble outside of what normal people need, because there are those that are willing to pay. It's that simple really.

 

[Nhirlathothep]

This card is nearly 2x the price of 1080. In terms of FPS/$, new Titan X is worse than 1080 by a lot. Not sure why you'd diss 1080 because of Titan X.

because gtx 1080 was only something bought "because you can t wait" for the top of the line.

it was not something you want to test with enthusiasm (if you already had the oldgen top gpu).
On the opposite, this gpu is something everybody wants to try (if they like technology)
many 1080 owners are going to sell the already old, expensive 1080 to try this, so 1080 was only a mistake (in my opinion).

for someone upgrading from older gpus 1080 wasn t a bad choice

 

[Elfear]

I assume you are also critical of AMD for producing a $1,499 Radeon Pro Duo consumer card? Is the price of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo in "the sane world"?

Dual cards are in a different category though and they've been very expensive for a few years now.

690 (2012) - $1,000
7990 (2013) - $1,000
295X2 (2014) - $1,500
Titan Z (2014) - $3,000
Pro Duo (2015) - $1,500

IMO, 2011 was the last time a dual card was in the reasonable range (Radeon 6990 or GeForce 590 for $699).

Single top end cards have historically been lower than $1,200 (even the more exclusive Titans):

GTX 580 (2010) - $500
7970 (2012) - $550
Titan (2013) - $1,000
GTX 780Ti (2013) - $700
290X (2013) - $550
Titan X (2015) - $1,000
GTX 980Ti (2015) - $650
Fury X - $650

As a consumer of course I have choices. I can "game" on my integrated graphics if I wanted to. Doesn't mean I have to be happy about companies jacking prices up.

So much this. There is no obligation for either company to offer you a great value. You are being sold a luxury item that allows you to play games at higher fps and better IQ settings. Nvidia prices things at prices that the market will bear. If this is up $200 from last years $1000 that is because the market is willing to pay for a card at this price point with this level of performance.

No one is arguing that Nvidia or AMD are obligated to offer us great value but why as a consumer would I be happy about the skyrocketing prices?

If it doesn't appeal to you, don't buy it. Buy a 1080 or a 1080ti, or wait for Vega and see if there's any price drops. I don't complain that people buy Bugati's or Lambo's because I cant afford them. They exist in a bubble outside of what normal people need, because there are those that are willing to pay. It's that simple really.

Sticking with the car analogy, if we used to get the top GPU for Corvette prices but now have to pay Lambo prices for the same thing, can you see why it would be irritating to consumers? Top performance has now been relegated to a much smaller group of gamers.

 

[eddman]

Because we as consumers now get to pay $1200 (#$#$&$&*&!!!) for the top end. I'm not sure how you don't see that as a negative.

Titan are an exception to the rule. They are like X CPUs from intel.

These cards are only there for those who have too much money to spend and simply cannot wait a mere 3 months to get the almost equal x80 Ti part down the line at a much lower price. Basically a "spitting contest" card.

Titans do NOT fall into regular video card pricing schemes.

 

[Termie]

...

Sticking with the car analogy, if we used to get the top GPU for Corvette prices but now have to pay Lambo prices for the same thing, can you see why it would be irritating to consumers? Top performance has now been relegated to a much smaller group of gamers.

Sorry, but this analogy doesn't hold water.

In the car arena, cars keep getting faster and more feature-rich, while the road or track remains the same.

In the game arena, video cards keep getting faster and more feature-rich, but the "track" is constantly getting more challenging.

So, in fact, you can get last year's top GPU performance for WAY LESS than you could it for last year. GTX 1070 equals Titan X for less than half the cost, does some thing. When's the last time a Corvette or Lambo stayed the same but got a 50% price cut? Never.

In fact, you're now paying Camaro prices for Corvette performance, it's just that you need a Corvette to max details at 4K in 2016's games.

I'm not in favor of all of Nvidia's practices, but there's nothing "unfair" about them. It's the free market, and Nvidia is in the business of maximizing profits.

 

[Bacon1]

Titan are an exception to the rule. They are like X CPUs from intel.

These cards are only there for those who have too much money to spend and simply cannot wait a mere 3 months to get the almost equal x80 Ti part down the line at a much lower price. Basically a "spitting contest" card.

Titans do NOT fall into regular video card pricing schemes.

Except all prices are going up. 1080 is $700+ vs $500 980. Titan just really shows it off considering this is already a cut die being sold for more than the previous uncut die.

 

[railven]

So, have people received shipment? Where the benches at?

 

[Krteq]

knowing now Polaris, and putting fanboyism aside, do you really believe Vega will compete with GP102 ? objectively

Vega is GFX 9.0 (maybe non-GCN uarch, Polaris is still GFX 8.0 - same as Tonga/Fiji), so why not?

 

[eddman]

Except all prices are going up. 1080 is $700+ vs $500 980. Titan just really shows it off considering this is already a cut die being sold for more than the previous uncut die.

Only the stupid FE version is $700, and before you say anything, the ONLY reason stock non-FE parts are above $600, is because of retailers/etailers jacking up the prices. Reason? High demand and lack of competition. 1060 already sells at its $250 MSRP because 480 is out. Even if you do count in the FE version, 780 Ti was $700 at launch.

I just made this chart. These are launch prices.

$600 and $650 were not unheard of for high end cards in the past. I didn't even bother with adjusting for inflation.

How about those $500 cards? At that time ATI/AMD cards were kick ass and NVidia had no choice but to price them lower.

 

[maddogmcgee]

It began with a meeting after Jen-Hsun demanded better sales of the new chip. The whole marketing department thought that was crazy. Well, we did it. The pitch was crazy. We made up a bet about Jen-Hsun owing Brian a dollar.


PS. Silly consumers! Everyone at Nvidia knows those two only bother keeping 50 dollar notes in their wallets!

 

[rgallant]

last time I looked the only high end card out this year is the titan X @ $$1200.00 US.
the rest are mid. - low range topping out @ $700.00.

 

[godihatework]

Only the stupid FE version is $700, and before you say anything, the ONLY reason stock non-FE parts are above $600, is because of retailers/etailers jacking up the prices. Reason? High demand and lack of competition. 1060 already sells at its $250 MSRP because 480 is out. Even if you do count in the FE version, 780 Ti was $700 at launch.

I just made this chart. These are launch prices.

$600 and $650 were not unheard of for high end cards in the past. I didn't even bother with adjusting for inflation.

How about those $500 cards? At that time ATI/AMD cards were kick ass and NVidia had no choice but to price them lower.

Adjust it for inflation and it becomes even flatter, especially if you go back to the days of the GF3 and 9700

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Elfear]

Sorry, but this analogy doesn't hold water.

Well the analogy breaks down at some point. Going along those same lines we are really getting Saturn V performance for Corvette prices if you consider the price/performance ratio from the beginnings of the computer age.


I get what you guys are saying about Titans being more exclusive and thus more expensive but even the high mark set by past Titans ($1000) is being bumped 20% in one year.

Plus the fact that a 1080Ti is looking unlikely due to lack of competition, we may be stuck with midrange cards until 2H 2017 unless you want to fork over $1200. :|

 

[Bacon1]

Only the stupid FE version is $700, and before you say anything, the ONLY reason stock non-FE parts are above $600, is because of retailers/etailers jacking up the prices. Reason? High demand and lack of competition. 1060 already sells at its $250 MSRP because 480 is out. Even if you do count in the FE version, 780 Ti was $700 at launch.

I just made this chart. These are launch prices.

$600 and $650 were not unheard of for high end cards in the past. I didn't even bother with adjusting for inflation.

How about those $500 cards? At that time ATI/AMD cards were kick ass and NVidia had no choice but to price them lower.

I'm sorry, what 1080 has an MSRP of $600 like your graph is showing?

 

[bystander36]

I'm sorry, what 1080 has an MSRP of $600 like your graph is showing?

All of them? Just because the retailers are not following the MSRP, doesn't change the MSRP (Manufacturer's Recommended Retail Price).

 

[JDG1980]

knowing now Polaris, and putting fanboyism aside, do you really believe Vega will compete with GP102 ? objectively

There are said to be two Vega chips. Do I think the bigger of the two can potentially compete with GP102? Sure. For one thing, keep in mind that there are architectural improvements from Polaris to Vega. Also keep in mind that memory speed won't be a bottleneck at all, thanks to HBM2.

GP102 is only a 471mm^2 chip. If AMD went to the reticle limit like they did with Fiji (~600mm^2) then they could almost certainly beat GP102 in absolute performance, even if they continued to fall behind Nvidia in perf/mm^2 and perf/watt. TDP is less of an issue with top-end cards anyway, since these buyers can be assumed to have beefy PSUs that won't break down under the load. As for thermals, AMD already has plenty of experience with watercooling.

 

[Bacon1]

All of them? Just because the retailers are not following the MSRP, doesn't change the MSRP (Manufacturer's Recommended Retail Price).

Sorry but that isn't how MSRP works. The actual MSRP hasn't been $600 for any card that I know of, cheapest is EVGA's $620 but most if not all are $650+.

Those are the MSRP by the AIB, not retailer increased prices.

Nvidia doesn't set the MSRP of board partners, that was just the price they gave out in hopes board partners would reach it (and it sounds amazing in reviews!)

 

[moonbogg]

All I want to know is how many Titan X buyers are going to sell them to buy 1080ti's? That's what happened just a year ago. People bought Titans, convinced themselves it was worth it, 980ti came out, they realized they got shafted, sold them and bought 980ti's.
Now with the Titan X being $1,200, many of the Titan SLI people are being priced out of the SLI solution. They are only buying one card. I predict they will sell the Titan in only a few months and replace it with dual 1080ti's.
That's 3 GPU solutions purchased by the same people in less than a year. Boy does Nvidia love the hell out of these guys.
Its obvious that without competition, NVidia is testing the limits of the high end market. I have already seen some high end buyers get priced out of SLI, perhaps not due to a lack of money, but due to a lack of justification with the insane price of $2,400.00 for two cards.
The next high end GPU will cost about $1,500.00 (GP100). The price will increase until equilibrium is reached and it will stay there. It they overshoot the equilibrium, they will back it down to maybe $1,350-$1,400.00 or so.