nVidia GT200 Series Thread

[BFG10K]

I wish we had a better idea of exactly when GT200 parts will launch;

Geforce GTX 280 to launch on June 18th

 

[bryanW1995]

Nvidia just ran out of numbers and it?s starting all over again. It's like resetting the odometer, more or less.

That has to be the wittiest thing that fuad's every written! :laugh:

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: nitromullet
If the GTX 280 comes in at $500 I don't think it will be the monster most are hoping it will be. NVIDIA has consistently shown that they'll easily charge $600+ when they have a card that performs. For them to slot a new architecture beneath the going rate for most name brand GX2s wouldn't be a good sign. It's all just rumor, but I'm hoping it will be a $600 card that's worth every penny like the 8800GTX was when it launched.

Problem with $600+ prices are that even if that card would be monster performer, too few people will buy it

Yeah, because no one bought a $600+ 8800GTX or Ultra, right? People will pay for performance...

 

[bryanW1995]

it's a much more competitive landscape today than it was in nov 06. ATI's next gen is being released at the same time or possibly even earlier if the rumors of a gt200 paper launch are to be believed. gtx 280 isn't going to be the ONLY horse in town this time...just the BEST horse most likely.

 

[Rusin]

nothing

 

[HOOfan 1]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Nvidia just ran out of numbers and it?s starting all over again. It's like resetting the odometer, more or less.

That has to be the wittiest thing that fuad's every written! :laugh:

Nordic Hardware is claiming they will be named 9800GTX 280, 9800GTX 260 and 9800GTX 240. That would be even more confusing than the scheme they already have....I hope the Fudzilla news is closer to the truth.

 

[Dkcode]

I agree, it sounds stupid.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
it's a much more competitive landscape today than it was in nov 06. ATI's next gen is being released at the same time or possibly even earlier if the rumors of a gt200 paper launch are to be believed. gtx 280 isn't going to be the ONLY horse in town this time...just the BEST horse most likely.

Originally posted by: Rusin
nitromullet:
Times have changed. For example in Europe 9800 GX2 debuted with same price as 8800 GTS 640MB had.. When everyone here bought 8800 GTS 640MB now people think that 9800 GX2 is too expensive..and there similar situation at States.

Bryan:
GT280 and G260 will paper launch? I've only heard that HD4850 will be hard launch while HD4870 will paper launch.

Well, I guess we'll see. I still think that if NVIDIA or ATI has to settle for a sub-$600 flagship card on launch day, then it's only because the card isn't up to snuff. The only reason you haven't seen a $600+ card that sells in a while is because the common consensus is that there hasn't been a card out that's worth $600+ in a while.

 

[Rusin]

nothing

 

[bryanW1995]

yes, 8800gtx had very poor competition, gt200 and rv770/r700 have much better competition at VERY reasonable prices.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Rusin
That's because the competition on 100-200 USD range is very hard at the moment. Geforce 9600 GT 512 with 120 USD makes it very hard to create card that would be worth $600+ price tag.

I don't deny that, and that is exactly why I want to see NV or ATI come out with a card that is worth $600. We've been 'good valued' to death by NV and ATI lately. I think everyone is ready for them to move forward with something a little more exciting than what they've been dishing out lately.

 

[KyleGates]

I don't deny that, and that is exactly why I want to see NV or ATI come out with a card that is worth $600. We've been 'good valued' to death by NV and ATI lately. I think everyone is ready for them to move forward with something a little more exciting than what they've been dishing out lately.

What? "A little more exciting"? Wow...cant remember the last time I was excited for a graphics card launch. i mean, actually excited. You hit the nail on the head man.....getting some excitememnt back into this arena would be SWEET! My 780i is ready and waiting for 2 of whatever the top end is....i just hope they are worth it!...and exciting!

 

[Rusin]

nothing

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: Rusin
http://forum.donanimhaber.com/m_23295300/tm.htm
Don't know about reliability of this one, but it says that GT200 wouldn't support DX10.1

Also says GTX 280 would have 240 SP and GTX 260 192 SP

This is interesting:

... 2nd gen. Unified architecture delivers %50 more gaming performance over 1st generation through 240sp.

What is the 1st gen? 8800GTX or 9800GTX or 9800GX2?
Now, if RV770 is 1.25X faster than 9800GTX then GT200 won't be that much ahead.
R700 should be able to beat it.

 

[Rusin]

nothing

 

[Quiksilver]

Completely Random:
Whatever happened to that fake XFX employee "TulipGTX" that was spreading fake GT200 screenshots awhile back? I don't recall seeing her again after she donated that fake GPU-Z/3dMark06 screenshot to expreview for money. You would figure it she would have been real she would have posted more information by now.

 

[Rusin]

nothing

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Quiksilver
Completely Random:
Whatever happened to that fake XFX employee "TulipGTX" that was spreading fake GT200 screenshots awhile back? I don't recall seeing her again after she donated that fake GPU-Z/3dMark06 screenshot to expreview for money. You would figure it she would have been real she would have posted more information by now.

maybe she actually WAS legit and was caught. I wonder if you can surf the internet from indian jails?

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: Quiksilver
Completely Random:
Whatever happened to that fake XFX employee "TulipGTX" that was spreading fake GT200 screenshots awhile back? I don't recall seeing her again after she donated that fake GPU-Z/3dMark06 screenshot to expreview for money. You would figure it she would have been real she would have posted more information by now.

maybe she actually WAS legit and was caught.

Then it wouldn't make sense, I mean why post fake information if you can get the real stuff xD

 

[ddarko]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: nitromullet
If the GTX 280 comes in at $500 I don't think it will be the monster most are hoping it will be. NVIDIA has consistently shown that they'll easily charge $600+ when they have a card that performs. For them to slot a new architecture beneath the going rate for most name brand GX2s wouldn't be a good sign. It's all just rumor, but I'm hoping it will be a $600 card that's worth every penny like the 8800GTX was when it launched.

Problem with $600+ prices are that even if that card would be monster performer, too few people will buy it

Yeah, because no one bought a $600+ 8800GTX or Ultra, right? People will pay for performance...

Frak, what is so hard for you to understand? He didn't say no one buys $600 cards. Obviously, some people do. He only say that very few people spend $600 on a graphics card, which is an empirical, documented FACT. SOME people will pay for performance but MOST, the VAST majority, don't and won't. Seriously, why is this fact so hard to accept and why are you act like stating this simple fact, as Rusin did, is somehow an insult? It's the truth that the VAST majority of cards sold are cheap cheap cheap. In fact, the vast majority of cards are pre-installed OEM cards. Very few people actually even buy add-in cards.

And it's also the truth that no company can survive solely by selling $600 cards. The vast majority of profits and revenue comes from the cheap cards, which are the bread-and-butter. The high end cards aren't self-sufficient, meaning they don't generate enough revenue on its own to support the day-to-day operation of the company as well as the hundreds of millions of dollars that goes making the next gen product. Nvidia and ATI need the low end stuff that sells in massive volume to generate the cash. $15 OEM chips pre-installed in 15,000 computers makes far more money than a $600 card bought by 5 people at retail. They're not sexy but they're the lifeblood of Nvidia or ATI.

The high end stuff is glamorous and higher margin but they're a tiny segment of any company's overall revenues. Acknowledging the reality of this situation is no slur. Pretending that it's not the truth only leads to erroneous analysis of the graphics market because Nvidia and ATI business strategies are driven by the low-end and middle stuff, NOT the high end stuff.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: ddarko

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: nitromullet
If the GTX 280 comes in at $500 I don't think it will be the monster most are hoping it will be. NVIDIA has consistently shown that they'll easily charge $600+ when they have a card that performs. For them to slot a new architecture beneath the going rate for most name brand GX2s wouldn't be a good sign. It's all just rumor, but I'm hoping it will be a $600 card that's worth every penny like the 8800GTX was when it launched.

Problem with $600+ prices are that even if that card would be monster performer, too few people will buy it

Yeah, because no one bought a $600+ 8800GTX or Ultra, right? People will pay for performance...

Frak, what is so hard for you to understand? He didn't say no one buys $600 cards. Obviously, some people do. He only say that very few people spend $600 on a graphics card, which is an empirical, documented FACT. SOME people will pay for performance but MOST, the VAST majority, don't and won't. Seriously, why is this fact so hard to accept and why are you act like stating this simple fact, as Rusin did, is somehow an insult? It's the truth that the VAST majority of cards sold are cheap cheap cheap. In fact, the vast majority of cards are pre-installed OEM cards. Very few people actually even buy add-in cards.

And it's also the truth that no company can survive solely by selling $600 cards. The vast majority of profits and revenue comes from the cheap cards, which are the bread-and-butter. The high end cards aren't self-sufficient, meaning they don't generate enough revenue on its own to support the day-to-day operation of the company as well as the hundreds of millions of dollars that goes making the next gen product. Nvidia and ATI need the low end stuff that sells in massive volume to generate the cash. $15 OEM chips pre-installed in 15,000 computers makes far more money than a $600 card bought by 5 people at retail. They're not sexy but they're the lifeblood of Nvidia or ATI.

The high end stuff is glamorous and higher margin but they're a tiny segment of any company's overall revenues. Acknowledging the reality of this situation is no slur. Pretending that it's not the truth only leads to erroneous analysis of the graphics market because Nvidia and ATI business strategies are driven by the low-end and middle stuff, NOT the high end stuff.

I agree... but the trend seems to follow if you can release a monster $600 card you can take the upper segment and your derivatives for the lower end of the market will outperform the competition here...

 

[dv8silencer]

Originally posted by: ddarko

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: nitromullet
If the GTX 280 comes in at $500 I don't think it will be the monster most are hoping it will be. NVIDIA has consistently shown that they'll easily charge $600+ when they have a card that performs. For them to slot a new architecture beneath the going rate for most name brand GX2s wouldn't be a good sign. It's all just rumor, but I'm hoping it will be a $600 card that's worth every penny like the 8800GTX was when it launched.

Problem with $600+ prices are that even if that card would be monster performer, too few people will buy it

Yeah, because no one bought a $600+ 8800GTX or Ultra, right? People will pay for performance...

Frak, what is so hard for you to understand? He didn't say no one buys $600 cards. Obviously, some people do. He only say that very few people spend $600 on a graphics card, which is an empirical, documented FACT. SOME people will pay for performance but MOST, the VAST majority, don't and won't. Seriously, why is this fact so hard to accept and why are you act like stating this simple fact, as Rusin did, is somehow an insult? It's the truth that the VAST majority of cards sold are cheap cheap cheap. In fact, the vast majority of cards are pre-installed OEM cards. Very few people actually even buy add-in cards.

And it's also the truth that no company can survive solely by selling $600 cards. The vast majority of profits and revenue comes from the cheap cards, which are the bread-and-butter. The high end cards aren't self-sufficient, meaning they don't generate enough revenue on its own to support the day-to-day operation of the company as well as the hundreds of millions of dollars that goes making the next gen product. Nvidia and ATI need the low end stuff that sells in massive volume to generate the cash. $15 OEM chips pre-installed in 15,000 computers makes far more money than a $600 card bought by 5 people at retail. They're not sexy but they're the lifeblood of Nvidia or ATI.

The high end stuff is glamorous and higher margin but they're a tiny segment of any company's overall revenues. Acknowledging the reality of this situation is no slur. Pretending that it's not the truth only leads to erroneous analysis of the graphics market because Nvidia and ATI business strategies are driven by the low-end and middle stuff, NOT the high end stuff.

I believe he wasn't really relating to what is best for the companies ($$-wise) but rather which shows the cards having great performance. I know that the majority of profits would come from the cheap cards, but doesn't the "cheap" stuff of today get launched at nasty high prices first? How many people who will end up with a GPU actually care about the newest releases or know about their existence? How many even know what it actually does? I'm just saying that even if they release it at $600+, there will still be the "cheap" GPUs for those people which will be making the companies money.

Problem with $600+ prices are that even if that card would be monster performer, too few people will buy it

Based of off what ddarko said, it doesn't even matter!

 

[imported_Shaq]

Originally posted by: Rusin
Well G92 (9800 GTX GX2) is basically G80+NVIO+65nm.. so I think that all of those three are 1st gen. This will still be based on G80, but is much larger update than G92 was.

50% over 9800 GX2 is quite much:
http://plaza.fi/muropaketti/ar...dia-geforce-9800-gtx,2 ---Game performance

hmmm....Nvidia might be putting themselves out of business with this card. No game will need this horsepower since most games are ported from consoles and a GX2 already plays them flawlessly. I doubt developers will be able to add enough eye candy to push these things. Oh well, I guess we won't have to buy another video card after this one until at least late 2010. And for only $499 I would be a fool if I didn't buy one too.

However, I seriously doubt the 50% over 1st gen is speaking of the GX2. The GX2 is already equivalent to a 850Mhz 180 shader card assuming 40% scaling. This review however shows 55% average scaling over a single 8800 GTS 512. http://en.expreview.com/2008/0...er-GeForce-9800GX2/26/

At 55% average scaling and a 700Mhz core clock the 9800GX2 is equivalent to a 1085Mhz, 199 shader single GPU card. No way is the GTX 280 even 30% faster than that, probably less than 20%. But in certain games and at high resolutions it will be 40% faster no doubt due to lower scaling in those games and the wider memory bus of the 280. But if I can sell my GX2 for $400 or so and pick one up for $100 more I'm sure I would do it. I have to do my part to stimulate the economy ya know. :laugh:

 

[Rusin]

nothing

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: ddarko

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: nitromullet
If the GTX 280 comes in at $500 I don't think it will be the monster most are hoping it will be. NVIDIA has consistently shown that they'll easily charge $600+ when they have a card that performs. For them to slot a new architecture beneath the going rate for most name brand GX2s wouldn't be a good sign. It's all just rumor, but I'm hoping it will be a $600 card that's worth every penny like the 8800GTX was when it launched.

Problem with $600+ prices are that even if that card would be monster performer, too few people will buy it

Yeah, because no one bought a $600+ 8800GTX or Ultra, right? People will pay for performance...

Frak, what is so hard for you to understand? He didn't say no one buys $600 cards. Obviously, some people do. He only say that very few people spend $600 on a graphics card, which is an empirical, documented FACT. SOME people will pay for performance but MOST, the VAST majority, don't and won't. Seriously, why is this fact so hard to accept and why are you act like stating this simple fact, as Rusin did, is somehow an insult? It's the truth that the VAST majority of cards sold are cheap cheap cheap. In fact, the vast majority of cards are pre-installed OEM cards. Very few people actually even buy add-in cards.

And it's also the truth that no company can survive solely by selling $600 cards. The vast majority of profits and revenue comes from the cheap cards, which are the bread-and-butter. The high end cards aren't self-sufficient, meaning they don't generate enough revenue on its own to support the day-to-day operation of the company as well as the hundreds of millions of dollars that goes making the next gen product. Nvidia and ATI need the low end stuff that sells in massive volume to generate the cash. $15 OEM chips pre-installed in 15,000 computers makes far more money than a $600 card bought by 5 people at retail. They're not sexy but they're the lifeblood of Nvidia or ATI.

The high end stuff is glamorous and higher margin but they're a tiny segment of any company's overall revenues. Acknowledging the reality of this situation is no slur. Pretending that it's not the truth only leads to erroneous analysis of the graphics market because Nvidia and ATI business strategies are driven by the low-end and middle stuff, NOT the high end stuff.

I get it. I also get that most people won't buy a flagship card. There is nothing wrong with that. However, I still want to see NVIDIA or ATI come out with a high performing card that is worth a hefty price tag because it offers significant performance gains over any current offering. Of course, I don't want to see anyone charging a high price for a card that simply isn't worth it.

IMO, I think if NVIDIA and ATI continue to compete based primarily on value/price it will only be because neither of them has made a significant leap in technology/performance.

The fact of the matter is that the technological breakthroughs that are made on the high end trickle down to the mid-range cards, so these advancements benefit all market segments interested in buying a discrete video card. The desire to see a monster card come out this summer is essentially the same desire to see the same technology applied to a more value oriented card later this year.

The other fact is that video cards (like all technology based products) need the relatively few early adopters to spend the big money on new, expensive tech. I'm willing to do my part with purchasing a $600 GTX 280 if it provides a gain over my current GX2, but I'm not willing to shell out $400 for a blu-ray DVD player. So, someone else can champion that cause, and I'll buy one when they hit $200ish.