Opinion: You think ATI is...

[Lithan]

No clue, I've not looked at platform upgrades in a year or so. ask in the memory forum.

 

[Pelu]

how much $$$$ for that e8400 with the sli mobo and the two 9800x2... with 4gb 1333.... ????

I already have the case... lol... and the dvd drive and such... oh wait i need a better PSU... which one is recommended 1000W.. how much for that too $$$$$

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: hooflung

Then they will start massive price cuts to drop the prices of their products which in turn limits the commercial success of their competitors. Remember, if AMD/Nvidia/Intel sell a product for 250 dollars and slash prices to 150 dollars the next month its easy to see they built acceptable return + a buffer to cover future price slashes. If AMD can push Nvidia to keep prices low on new to market goods then Nvidia cannot recoop that buffer.

Both Intel and Nvidia are profitable at current price levels. ATI is bleeding money at current price levels. If AMD slashes prices, they increase their losses while causing Intel or Nvidia to be less profitable. How is this a sustainable business practice for ATI/AMD?

ATI slashing prices hurts Nvidia, I'm not denying that. But the pain ATI inflicts on itself, is way beyond the pain they cause Nvidia.

 

[Pelu]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: hooflung

Then they will start massive price cuts to drop the prices of their products which in turn limits the commercial success of their competitors. Remember, if AMD/Nvidia/Intel sell a product for 250 dollars and slash prices to 150 dollars the next month its easy to see they built acceptable return + a buffer to cover future price slashes. If AMD can push Nvidia to keep prices low on new to market goods then Nvidia cannot recoop that buffer.

Both Intel and Nvidia are profitable at current price levels. ATI is bleeding money at current price levels. If AMD slashes prices, they increase their losses while causing Intel or Nvidia to be less profitable. How is this a sustainable business practice for ATI/AMD?

sounds like earning less... to make the other one earn less???

aka.... I throw to the floor the only food plate, NO one will eat this night....

 

[batmang]

Originally posted by: Pelu
ATI have 3870... and nVidia 9600...

when

3870 = 9600

and

nVidia have 9800

this means that ATI is with out a high end card right now????

I ask because... i have 2 CF 3870 and they arent that great at all... wondering how the 4xxx series is going to be... or should i go Intel + nVidia

You don't like your CrossFired 3870's? Man, I love mine! What games do you play?

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: Pelu

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: hooflung

Then they will start massive price cuts to drop the prices of their products which in turn limits the commercial success of their competitors. Remember, if AMD/Nvidia/Intel sell a product for 250 dollars and slash prices to 150 dollars the next month its easy to see they built acceptable return + a buffer to cover future price slashes. If AMD can push Nvidia to keep prices low on new to market goods then Nvidia cannot recoop that buffer.

Both Intel and Nvidia are profitable at current price levels. ATI is bleeding money at current price levels. If AMD slashes prices, they increase their losses while causing Intel or Nvidia to be less profitable. How is this a sustainable business practice for ATI/AMD?

sounds like earning less... to make the other one earn less???

aka.... I throw to the floor the only food plate, NO one will eat this night....

That would be what they are doing. But this is only a sound business tactic if you have a cash hoard or can be still profitable if you reduce prices. AMD/ATI doesn't have either of these advantages. It's deeply in debt and hasn't seen a profitable quarter in who knows how long.

In fact this is more likely a tactic that Intel or Nvidia would use on AMD/ATI than the other way around. Actually, it is already a tactic Intel is using against AMD Cpus. Don't know about Nvidia tho.

 

[Pelu]

dude... i dont have that spider platform board... besides it cost around 250 bucks here (store price)

and I play right now... this day... tomorrow can be diferent...

games...

yeah games I play

Unreal Tournament III

Oblivion

Guild Wars

Medieval II

 

[Pelu]

oh by the way ... yesterday at night... i finish the story of Oblivion: shivering isles.... in other words I dont think i will play it again...

omg...

i swear that this game with the so called Prince of Madness is a warranty of you... (player) going mad after you get it done...

anyway.... I kinda want to play another game... a new one... tell me one that really rocks... something that is open like medieval in where you can play over and over and try diferrent stuff each time...

not so one time story like game.... example of this is..... Bioshock...

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Pelu
ATI 3870x2 = nvidia 9800

what about

nvidia 9800x2 = ati ???

I am getting kinda worried that AMD and ATI falls into the crap... because I always have been into the AMD side... never had a Intel processor... and only a few nvidias like the 6800gt and the 8800gtx.... besides that... it have been a bunch of radeons...

Let me ask something... if right now.. right here.. I want to build a kick ass computer with intel and nvidia... what stuff should i pick up????

$380 ATI card (3870 X2) =! $500 nVidia card (9800 X2)

 

[OmegaShadow]

In my opinion ATi haven't been getting crappy. It's just that nvidia's high end cards are too much for ATI right now. The 3850 and 3870 are both great cards and I never had any issues with the 3850 256mb.

I just like nvidia geforce over ATI because Nvidia makes better cards at a cheaper price . 88xx series owns

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: OmegaShadow
In my opinion ATi haven't been getting crappy. It's just that nvidia's high end cards are too much for ATI right now. The 3850 and 3870 are both great cards and I never had any issues with the 3850 256mb.

I just like nvidia geforce over ATI because Nvidia makes better cards at a cheaper price . 88xx series owns

The problem is that Nvidia is everywhere: 9600GT, 8800 GS, 8800 GT, GTS , GTS 640 ,8800 GTX, 9800GTX and so many more. Nvidia has released one of these cards every two months or so and nobody seems to pay attention to ATI. This is aggressive marketing at its worst.

All the magazines and hardware sites are always talking about testing another video card that Nvidia released and this is happening at such a large scale that people are starting to forget that there is another videocard producer in the world. ATI should have taken the 3870 and made a "couple" of cards out of it, exactly like Nvidia did and probably things would have been better for them right now. But this is something I quite admire about ATI, they never make to much "noise" when releasing something new and they never release stupid products, just because it's fun and can squeeze a couple of dollars from the consumer, like: 9800 GTX and 9600 GSO.

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: OmegaShadow
In my opinion ATi haven't been getting crappy. It's just that nvidia's high end cards are too much for ATI right now. The 3850 and 3870 are both great cards and I never had any issues with the 3850 256mb.

I just like nvidia geforce over ATI because Nvidia makes better cards at a cheaper price . 88xx series owns

The problem is that Nvidia is everywhere: 9600GT, 8800 GS, 8800 GT, GTS , GTS 640 ,8800 GTX, 9800GTX and so many more. Nvidia has released one of these cards every two months or so and nobody seems to pay attention to ATI. This is aggressive marketing at its worst.

All the magazines and hardware sites are always talking about testing another video card that Nvidia released and this is happening at such a large scale that people are starting to forget that there is another videocard producer in the world. ATI should have taken the 3870 and made a "couple" of cards out of it, exactly like Nvidia did and probably things would have been better for them right now. But this is something I quite admire about ATI, they never make to much "noise" when releasing something new and they never release stupid products, just because it's fun and can squeeze a couple of dollars from the consumer, like: 9800 GTX and 9600 GSO.

You don't remember all the x800 or x1800/x1900 varients?

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: OmegaShadow
In my opinion ATi haven't been getting crappy. It's just that nvidia's high end cards are too much for ATI right now. The 3850 and 3870 are both great cards and I never had any issues with the 3850 256mb.

I just like nvidia geforce over ATI because Nvidia makes better cards at a cheaper price . 88xx series owns

The problem is that Nvidia is everywhere: 9600GT, 8800 GS, 8800 GT, GTS , GTS 640 ,8800 GTX, 9800GTX and so many more. Nvidia has released one of these cards every two months or so and nobody seems to pay attention to ATI. This is aggressive marketing at its worst.

All the magazines and hardware sites are always talking about testing another video card that Nvidia released and this is happening at such a large scale that people are starting to forget that there is another videocard producer in the world. ATI should have taken the 3870 and made a "couple" of cards out of it, exactly like Nvidia did and probably things would have been better for them right now. But this is something I quite admire about ATI, they never make to much "noise" when releasing something new and they never release stupid products, just because it's fun and can squeeze a couple of dollars from the consumer, like: 9800 GTX and 9600 GSO.

You don't remember all the x800 or x1800/x1900 varients?

You got me there , but those were in the past, right now nvidia has the upper hand in "lots of videocards" made from the same card. I shouldn't have been so categoric in my statement, but I still like more the way ATI's marketing works today, opposed to Nvidia's.

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: error8

You got me there , but those were in the past, right now nvidia has the upper hand in "lots of videocards" made from the same card. I shouldn't have been so categoric in my statement, but I still like more the way ATI's marketing works today, opposed to Nvidia's.

Fair enough. I think the 9800GTX is different enough in design/price point, if not in performance to give it a pass. But I agree the 9600 GSO is sort of silly.

 

[Greenman]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: OmegaShadow
In my opinion ATi haven't been getting crappy. It's just that nvidia's high end cards are too much for ATI right now. The 3850 and 3870 are both great cards and I never had any issues with the 3850 256mb.

I just like nvidia geforce over ATI because Nvidia makes better cards at a cheaper price . 88xx series owns

The problem is that Nvidia is everywhere: 9600GT, 8800 GS, 8800 GT, GTS , GTS 640 ,8800 GTX, 9800GTX and so many more. Nvidia has released one of these cards every two months or so and nobody seems to pay attention to ATI. This is aggressive marketing at its worst.

All the magazines and hardware sites are always talking about testing another video card that Nvidia released and this is happening at such a large scale that people are starting to forget that there is another videocard producer in the world. ATI should have taken the 3870 and made a "couple" of cards out of it, exactly like Nvidia did and probably things would have been better for them right now. But this is something I quite admire about ATI, they never make to much "noise" when releasing something new and they never release stupid products, just because it's fun and can squeeze a couple of dollars from the consumer, like: 9800 GTX and 9600 GSO.

That's exactly why I didn't buy an nvidia card a month back when my 1950 burned out, I couldn't figure out which one to buy. There I am standing in Fry's, a pocket full of money, a shelf full of video cards, and me ready to give nvidia a try this time around. I couldn't crack the code, I couldn't figure out which card I needed or where it stood speed wise. After half an hour I gave up and picked up a 3870.

 

[Pelu]

Originally posted by: Golgatha

Originally posted by: Pelu
ATI 3870x2 = nvidia 9800

what about

nvidia 9800x2 = ati ???

I am getting kinda worried that AMD and ATI falls into the crap... because I always have been into the AMD side... never had a Intel processor... and only a few nvidias like the 6800gt and the 8800gtx.... besides that... it have been a bunch of radeons...

Let me ask something... if right now.. right here.. I want to build a kick ass computer with intel and nvidia... what stuff should i pick up????

$380 ATI card (3870 X2) =! $500 nVidia card (9800 X2)

oh.. what exactly stands side to side from ati against the plain 9800?

 

[Lithan]

It's a $100+ investment. I'd spend the five minutes it takes looking online @ reviews before I go shopping. I am a bit of a cheapskate though.

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: error8

You got me there , but those were in the past, right now nvidia has the upper hand in "lots of videocards" made from the same card. I shouldn't have been so categoric in my statement, but I still like more the way ATI's marketing works today, opposed to Nvidia's.

Fair enough. I think the 9800GTX is different enough in design/price point, if not in performance to give it a pass. But I agree the 9600 GSO is sort of silly.

I believe the gso is nothing more than a namechange, isn't it? Basically to TRY (not to self insert big flashing sign pointing to try) to make naming simpler. Take for instance the 6800gt versus the 7600gt. The 6800gt was faster. So people might think the 8800gs is faster than the 9600gt, especially considering that the 9800gtx isn't exactly killing 8800gtx's. So roll the 8800gs into the 9x family and there you go. If they were smart they'd phase it out completely, phase out the 8800gt and call the 8800gts a 9800gt, basically get rid of all the 8X series in a fell swoop, so that they don't have TWO old gens cluttering things up when the next gen comes out. By doing that they'd keep 4 price points active, not counting the <$100 cards, which is plenty. They'd have a $500 dual gpu, a $300 top end single gpu (I don't see them making any more 8800gtx and 8800ultras due to manu cost, though I havent seen any official word to that effect), a <$200 solid midrange gpu (prolly $225 MSRP) and a $125-175 lower-midrange cpu.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky
After all, they have the edge on NVidia in the process department; the R770/48xx looks to be a potentially huge winner;

I'm not sure if this can be considered an advantage. If your chips at a more advanced process are still generally slower and roughly just as hot, when your competitor goes to the same process you'll be even further behind.

In any case, since both ATI and Nvidia contract out to 3rd parties to build their chips, it's not really an ATI process advantage anyway. It might be a design advantage to be able to migrate your designs to a smaller process, but it's not a process advantage since it's third party fabs.

True enough; I forgot that they're fabless semiconductor companies! That being the case, why does NVidia still have a 65nm process? Their cards are (at least what I hear around here and on the tubes) MUCH hotter than ATI's. Far as speed goes, you do get what you pay for. I'm perfectly happy with what I'm running; since I'm not a big gamer even a 3870 is overkill.

 

[KeithTalent]

In the past few years, whenever I have been upgrading, ATI has always provided the best bang for my buck, so that is what I have gone with and have been very happy.

I'm sure I would have been happy with the other guys too (though I do quite like ATI's drivers) but it just happened to work out the way it did over the past while. I'm thinking of upgrading soon though, so maybe I'll step over to the dark, erm, green side if the value is there.

KT

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky

True enough; I forgot that they're fabless semiconductor companies! That being the case, why does NVidia still have a 65nm process? Their cards are (at least what I hear around here and on the tubes) MUCH hotter than ATI's. Far as speed goes, you do get what you pay for. I'm perfectly happy with what I'm running; since I'm not a big gamer even a 3870 is overkill.

I'm not positive about this, but I think a design you have at one process has to be tweaked or changed when you put it on a different (more advanced) process. ATI was comfortable enough with the more advanced process to put their chips on it, while Nvidia went the safer route and went with the older process, at the cost of size and heat.

From my thinking, it's hard to say who has the edge in this. ATI is already working with this process (for this particular chip) and may be able to tweak it for further speed or heat improvements rather easily. Nvidia has a bigger upside because the shrink itself should naturally result in relative bigger improvements in speed and size, but this is their first try (at least for this level of chip) with the resultant bigger chance of messing up.

So I guess, there's more risk for Nvidia, but also more possible reward.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: Lithan

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: error8

You got me there , but those were in the past, right now nvidia has the upper hand in "lots of videocards" made from the same card. I shouldn't have been so categoric in my statement, but I still like more the way ATI's marketing works today, opposed to Nvidia's.

Fair enough. I think the 9800GTX is different enough in design/price point, if not in performance to give it a pass. But I agree the 9600 GSO is sort of silly.

I believe the gso is nothing more than a namechange, isn't it? Basically to TRY (not to self insert big flashing sign pointing to try) to make naming simpler. Take for instance the 6800gt versus the 7600gt. The 6800gt was faster. So people might think the 8800gs is faster than the 9600gt, especially considering that the 9800gtx isn't exactly killing 8800gtx's. So roll the 8800gs into the 9x family and there you go. If they were smart they'd phase it out completely, phase out the 8800gt and call the 8800gts a 9800gt, basically get rid of all the 8X series in a fell swoop, so that they don't have TWO old gens cluttering things up when the next gen comes out. By doing that they'd keep 4 price points active, not counting the <$100 cards, which is plenty. They'd have a $500 dual gpu, a $300 top end single gpu (I don't see them making any more 8800gtx and 8800ultras due to manu cost, though I havent seen any official word to that effect), a <$200 solid midrange gpu (prolly $225 MSRP) and a $125-175 lower-midrange cpu.

I have to disagree with you: 7600 GT was faster then 6800 GT in about any game and resolution even if, on paper, looked inferior.

http://penstarsys.com/reviews/...ga/7600gtco/index.html

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: SunnyD

Originally posted by: taltamir
it is called fusion. AMD and ATI are working tireless on fusing the CPU and GPU onto a single multi core chip. giving you multiple CPU and GPU cores that fit right into the mobo and share a single bus and have direct CPU to GPU link (not wasting time sending info back and forth through the north and southbridge of the mobo).

Comming to a PC near you in 2009 or 2010

The only disconcerting thing about fusion to me is that you're going to lose the high speed memory. System memory is getting up there, but when you add in the latencies involved, I don't think Fusion will be competitive with high end discrete video.

Latency isn't that much of a problem, memory for video cards already have really high latency. What they do need is massive bandwidth, but even though current system bandwidth is getting up there with dual channel DDR3, it still doesn't hold a candle to the bandwidth we see with dedicated video memory and their elaborate architectures.

DDR is 64bit on its own, dual channel is common for motherboards these days upping it to 128bit, but video cards essentially have quad channel 256bit memory architectures as a standard (especially now that its been seen in mainstream cards such as the 9600GT), and higher end cards have seen even higher such as 320/384bit (five/six channel) and even 512bit (eight channel). And then when we pair those higher end architectures with even faster memory (DDR3 is just now catching up with the now relatively old and outdated GDDR3, we're into much faster GDDR4 and 5...) the available bandwidth can be several times higher...

That being said I really do not believe Fusion is meant for the average AT enthusiast. It really sounds more of a dream come true for system builders such as HP and Dell who could cut costs by eliminating stand alone video cards or special IGP motherboards.

Who knows, I think a best case scenario would be that Fusion is adequate enough to compete on a midrange level which wouldn't be that bad of a scenario at all...much better than the current integrated market and it would reach the widest potential audience - most gamers really don't want to spend money on a video card upgrade but end up getting forced to because their current performance is too abysmal...if their all-in-one Fusion can do it then they're going to be more than thrilled.

Besides, it isn't like dedicated high end graphics would disappear, there will still exist a demand for absolute eye melting performance and those that want it will still be able to buy a dedicated add-in card to get it.

 

[Blacklash]

I think ATi has been decapitated and absorbed by AMD. We will see what AMD can do with what remains of their crew.

 

[Pelu]

I hope I am wrong... but something i get a feeling that in 2 or 3 years there isnt going to be any more high end card at all.. just a bunch of midrange.. because the manufacture costs... I know you can sell it for more.. but in an economy that is about to break into pieces... people is kinda afraid of investing a bunch of money on a card... the only ones that will still get it no matter what are those with no live.. and no love to anything at all... aka.. me... lol