TechPowerup - Nvidia Kepler GK104 PCB Drawings and power connector pics

[Awkward]

How about posting your own arguments instead of this simplistic response? Almost everyone agrees that the prices are bloated right now. I fully expect this to be set right once Kepler arrives.

What else even needs to be said? You should read over your own post as many times as it takes you to realize everything you said was wrong.

Also, Nvidia has a far worse track record with price gouging than AMD. I don't know why you people think Nvidia are going to be generous with their performance parts, but continue living in your dream worlds.

 

[boxleitnerb]

What else even needs to be said? You should read over your own post as many times as it takes you to realize everything you said was wrong.

Also, Nvidia has a far worse track record with price gouging than AMD. I don't know why you people think Nvidia are going to be generous with their performance parts, but continue living in your dream worlds.

You know, this is bad discussion culture. If you disagree with something and call fail publicly, supply your own chain of reasoning or keep quiet.

GK104 is the successor of cards like GTX 460/560. If Nvidia did a really good job there this gen, I could see them raise prices by maybe $50, but I don't see more than $349 for GK104. Tell me, what Nvidia performance part cost 450$?
We're talking about a seperate significantly smaller and more efficient ASIC, not a salvage high end part like the 8800GTS 640 or the GTX570 for example. I don't consider $300-$350 max generous, I consider it normal.

 

[AnandThenMan]

How about posting your own arguments instead of this simplistic response?

I should not even have to do this, but oh well.

You people just don't get it. 400-450$ for a performance part is insane. No Nvidia performance part has been this expensive. If you could just admit that Tahiti is way overpriced in the grand scheme of the combined 28nm lineup of AMD+Nvidia, we would be actually getting somewhere with this discussion.

The 8800 GTX debuted at $650, and that is not even adjusted for inflation. And that is hardly the only example of sky high prices from Nvidia's high end cards.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

8800GTX wasn't a performance part though...

 

[boxleitnerb]

I should not even have to do this, but oh well.

The 8800 GTX debuted at $650, and that is not even adjusted for inflation. And that is hardly the only example of sky high prices from Nvidia's high end cards.

Don't act as if you're on a high horse and are not obligated to follow up on calling some post "fail". It's rude.

The 8800GTX improved performance by as much as 60-70% over the X1950XTX. MSRPs at launch were as follows:

8800GTX: $599
7900GTX: $499
X800XT PE: $500
X1800XT PE: $599 (raised from $549)
X1900XTX: $649
X1900 CF Edition: $600
X1900XT: $550
X1950XTX: $449
http://www.anandtech.com/show/1930/3

I don't see anything out of the ordinary here with the exception of the X1950XTX. Interestingly, the 8800GTX didn't even have the highest MSRP after all, that "honor" falls to the GTX280 and the X1900XTX.

The 8800GTX is on the same process as its predecessors if you remember (90nm), making it larger and more expensive to manufacture with all the things that follow (more complicated PCB, more VRAM, better power circuitry, more VRAM, larger cooler etc.). It was the fastest (with the exception of the Ultra) on the market for over 18 months, brought a plethora of new features/image quality, CUDA etc. The fastest cards of a generation always have a special place and carry a price premium.
What the e-tailers and retailers do with the prices is another matter altogether that follows supply and demand. The IHV sets the MSRP and cannot be made responsible when a shop charges more (or less).

The 8800GTX brought true next-gen performance and features which (judging by this level) the 7970 did not in my opinion. The 7970 is cheaper to make for a given level of performance, yet carries a MSRP increase of 50% and yet fails to beat the previous king of the hill by more than 30% on average. Now you can bring on special scenarios where that lead increases, but so could I with the 8800GTX. I think, the 8800GTX was way better value at launch than the 7970 at its launch.


Now that we have established that Nvidia was not price gouging with the 8800GTX, let's get back to the topic at hand, the GK104. Maybe you should try again and direct your arguments there.

GK104 is a performance SKU and as such almost always carried a price tag around $300.
Edit:
GK104 is a performance SKU, and performance SKUs have almost always carried a price tag around $300. GK104 is Nvidias second-tier chip akin to GF114, found on the GTX560(Ti). We're talking about the fastest card with GK104 on it, after the old naming scheme that would be the GTX660(Ti).

 

[AnandThenMan]

GK104 is a performance SKU and as such almost always carried a price tag around $300.

You're going to have to explain this to me. What do you consider "GK104"? How does it always have a price when it is not even out yet?

 

[boxleitnerb]

You're nitpicking. It is obvious what I meant - I'm not a native English speaker/writer.
I edited it, leaving the original intact.

 

[3DVagabond]

Imagine you're in charge at nVidia. Apple is making record profits. Intel is making record profits. AMD has just released their new series of cards at nice fat margins. Are you going to come in cheap, reducing the money you could make just to rain on AMD's parade?

People think AMD are making a killing by charging $550.00 for a card that the GPU has 4.3 billion transistors, 3GB of GDDR5 RAM that will run +6GHz, plus all of the other components that make up the card, and they are fabless.

Intel makes a ~2.2 billion transistor chip that they sell for the same price all by itself (I'm just talking the mainstream 3930K not even the 3960X). No PCB, RAM, etc... Plus they fab it themselves eliminating the expense of hiring a 3rd party.

I can almost promise you that both AMD and nVidia feel like they've been giving their tech away too cheap. I would, if I were in their shoes. They'd be dumb, and JHH might be a lot of things, but dumb isn't one of them.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Intel makes a ~2.2 billion transistor chip that they sell for the same price all by itself (I'm just talking the mainstream 3930K not even the 3960X). No PCB, RAM, etc... Plus they fab it themselves eliminating the expense of hiring a 3rd party.

Yet the cost of running a Fab i.e. operating expenses, upgrade expenses, let alone all the other costs (and problems) involved, going with a 3rd party company like TSMC is probably alot cheaper..

 

[BallaTheFeared]

You can't really compare gpus to cpus, for the most part gpus are a niche product. Even CUDA barely broke into the x86 stronghold.

Expecting all but the most die hard of the die hard who visit forums and have large res/multi monitor setups to spend $350+ on a single gpu, not to mention all the other required parts is folly considering there are almost no PC exclusive titles anymore, and there are tons of console exclusives... Consoles are also less than the price of a single decent video card.

So unless you want to see PC gaming die, stop supporting stupid pricing. Because while you might pay it, millions of others will not.

 

[AnandThenMan]

So unless you want to see PC gaming die, stop supporting stupid pricing. Because while you might pay it, millions of others will not.

I've decided to buy 5 of them, I guess I killed PC gaming.

 

[3DVagabond]

@Cookie Monster: I promise you Intel's fabs turn a profit.

@Balla: Don't compare "the market" with manufacturing costs like they are the same thing. You might not be willing to pay the price for a 7000 series card, but judging by the OoS's at Newegg, plenty of others are. Just like plenty were willing to pay the price when nVidia was charging it. Difference is nobody predicted the demise of PC gaming because nVidia was pricing their product at a premium. That's only going to happen now because AMD is doing it.

 

[AnandThenMan]

The Radeon 9700 pro was $399, ($500 inflation adjusted) ATI killed PC gaming way back in 2002. 10 year anniversary of PC gaming death. :'(

 

[MrK6]

The Radeon 9700 pro was $399, ($500 inflation adjusted) ATI killed PC gaming way back in 2002. 10 year anniversary of PC gaming death. :'(

Tonight, on Dateline.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I had to look it up, that is a real video.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I've decided to buy 5 of them, I guess I killed PC gaming.

So did my mom, you should start a club!

 

[wahdangun]

Don't act as if you're on a high horse and are not obligated to follow up on calling some post "fail". It's rude.

The 8800GTX improved performance by as much as 60-70% over the X1950XTX. MSRPs at launch were as follows:

8800GTX: $599
7900GTX: $499
X800XT PE: $500
X1800XT PE: $599 (raised from $549)
X1900XTX: $649
X1900 CF Edition: $600
X1900XT: $550
X1950XTX: $449
http://www.anandtech.com/show/1930/3

I don't see anything out of the ordinary here with the exception of the X1950XTX. Interestingly, the 8800GTX didn't even have the highest MSRP after all, that "honor" falls to the GTX280 and the X1900XTX.

The 8800GTX is on the same process as its predecessors if you remember (90nm), making it larger and more expensive to manufacture with all the things that follow (more complicated PCB, more VRAM, better power circuitry, more VRAM, larger cooler etc.). It was the fastest (with the exception of the Ultra) on the market for over 18 months, brought a plethora of new features/image quality, CUDA etc. The fastest cards of a generation always have a special place and carry a price premium.
What the e-tailers and retailers do with the prices is another matter altogether that follows supply and demand. The IHV sets the MSRP and cannot be made responsible when a shop charges more (or less).

The 8800GTX brought true next-gen performance and features which (judging by this level) the 7970 did not in my opinion. The 7970 is cheaper to make for a given level of performance, yet carries a MSRP increase of 50% and yet fails to beat the previous king of the hill by more than 30% on average. Now you can bring on special scenarios where that lead increases, but so could I with the 8800GTX. I think, the 8800GTX was way better value at launch than the 7970 at its launch.


Now that we have established that Nvidia was not price gouging with the 8800GTX, let's get back to the topic at hand, the GK104. Maybe you should try again and direct your arguments there.

GK104 is a performance SKU and as such almost always carried a price tag around $300.
Edit:
GK104 is a performance SKU, and performance SKUs have almost always carried a price tag around $300. GK104 is Nvidias second-tier chip akin to GF114, found on the GTX560(Ti). We're talking about the fastest card with GK104 on it, after the old naming scheme that would be the GTX660(Ti).

do you forget about $800 8800 ultra and about $450 GTX260 ? that even have lower performance than HD 4870 ??

 

[boxleitnerb]

do you forget about $800 8800 ultra and about $450 GTX260 ? that even have lower performance than HD 4870 ??

The Ultra created an all new segment altogether at $829 MSRP. What other card ever walked in this performance region of a generation? Yes, it was expensive. A Porsche and a Ferrari are expensive, too.
The GTX260 was akin to the GTX470/570, as it was the GT200 salvage part. In this generation, there was no seperate performance part from Nvidia unfortunately. The 4870 and the 260 traded blows, the 4870 had the edge with 8xMSAA but that's about it.

 

[wahdangun]

The Ultra created an all new segment altogether at $829 MSRP. What other card ever walked in this performance region of a generation? Yes, it was expensive. A Porsche and a Ferrari are expensive, too.
The GTX260 was akin to the GTX470/570, as it was the GT200 salvage part. In this generation, there was no seperate performance part from Nvidia unfortunately. The 4870 and the 260 traded blows, the 4870 had the edge with 8xMSAA but that's about it.

so then why you always complaining about amd HD79XX price ??? its the fastest card you can buy RIGHT NOW same like Ferrari or Porsche


yeah just like HD 5970 its even still faster than GTX 580 in some games.

 

[boxleitnerb]

so then why you always complaining about amd HD79XX price ??? its the fastest card you can buy RIGHT NOW same like Ferrari or Porsche


yeah just like HD 5970 its even still faster than GTX 580 in some games.

Because the 79xx don't even come close to the performance increase the 8800GTX/Ultra offered over the previous top dog. As I said - the 8800GTX had significantly better value when it was launched. It simply dominated. The 7970 does not.
No card could touch the 8800GTX/Ultra until the next node shrink. Just wait how close Nvidia's small GK104 will come to Tahiti XT...and that won't even be Nvidia's best offering. This comparison is ridiculous.

I won't drag MGPU into this, as it is plagued by a whole crapload of issues and cannot be compared to a card with a single GPU. 1GB VRAM was just another compromise there.

 

[wahdangun]

Because the 79xx don't even come close to the performance increase the 8800GTX/Ultra offered over the previous top dog. As I said - the 8800GTX had significantly better value when it was launched. It simply dominated. The 7970 does not.
No card could touch the 8800GTX/Ultra until the next node shrink. Just wait how close Nvidia's small GK104 will come to Tahiti XT...and that won't even be Nvidia's best offering. This comparison is ridiculous.

I won't drag MGPU into this, as it is plagued by a whole crapload of issues and cannot be compared to a card with a single GPU. 1GB VRAM was just another compromise there.

but its still dominated other card soo i don't understand your logic in here, even Ferrari or porches didn't come at 2X speed of their competitor and still priced insanely ???

hell even radeon 9700 pro that completely ridiculed FX5800 have a price just $399 and its take nvdia new node and next gen GPU to beat it. so i don't understand what so special about 8800 ultra than 8800GTX.


i will laugh if its turn out that this GK104 will have lower/same performance than HD7800.

 

[Keysplayr]

but its still dominated other card soo i don't understand your logic in here, even Ferrari or porches didn't come at 2X speed of their competitor and still priced insanely ???

hell even radeon 9700 pro that completely ridiculed FX5800 have a price just $399 and its take nvdia new node and next gen GPU to beat it. so i don't understand what so special about 8800 ultra than 8800GTX.


i will laugh if its turn out that this GK104 will have lower/same performance than HD7800.

Pretty sure you won't be laughing though.

 

[boxleitnerb]

but its still dominated other card soo i don't understand your logic in here, even Ferrari or porches didn't come at 2X speed of their competitor and still priced insanely ???

hell even radeon 9700 pro that completely ridiculed FX5800 have a price just $399 and its take nvdia new node and next gen GPU to beat it. so i don't understand what so special about 8800 ultra than 8800GTX.


i will laugh if its turn out that this GK104 will have lower/same performance than HD7800.

What do you not understand?
8800GTX=top dog+60-70% (same process)
9700Pro=top dog+100% (same process)
HD7970=top dog+30% (new process)

The 7970 doesn't dominate like G80/R300 did, no way. It could (higher clocks/TDP), but it doesn't.

The Ultra was a limited edition, only meant for the utmost enthusiasts. It truly was a luxury item. A "normal" high end card like the 8800GTX has a different market segment. Price/perf gets worse and worse the higher you get on the product ladder, nothing new here.

The 9700pro could have been priced at $500-600, no problem. The power was so insane, especially with AA/AF that the money would have been well justified. It belongs in the same category as the 8800GTX/Ultra, because it was an extremely remarkable product. I just didn't mention it because 2002 is now 10 years ago and the market has changed quite a bit. But if you insist: the launch/lifetime-value of the 7970 is abysmal compared to the 9700pro.

 

[Silverforce11]

What do you not understand?
8800GTX=top dog+60-70% (same process)
9700Pro=top dog+100% (same process)
HD7970=top dog+30% (new process)

The 7970 doesn't dominate like G80/R300 did, no way. It could (higher clocks/TDP), but it doesn't.

I don't even know why you guys are debating price or value on the 7970, it's NOT a value proposition clearly. It's a high-end chip with a small die designed to not push the performance boundary with no regards to TDP. A chip of these dimensions should be in cards priced <$400.

CLEARLY, AMD IS RIPPING consumers off because there's no competition. But its selling fine, because there are a lot of people out there who are willing to pay extra for "the best" regardless of its value. Is it overpriced? Hell yes. So what? Don't like it? Don't buy it and wait for competition.

 

[Creig]

WUT? All my cards in recent history that have either one or two 6-pin PCI-E connections, have latches.

You're right. I was thinking of one of my modular power supplies that didn't have latches holding wiring to it.

Looking closely at those GK104 power connector pics again, it appears that one connector is right side up and the other is upside down. So both latches would be facing in towards the blank spot between them.