Why Today's Graphics Card Market Sucks

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: rise

I ended up going with the X1950 Pro just because it was the best performance per dollar...

looks at signature :Q fx and raptor... since when did $/perf. matter to you??

HEY raptors are good



but not as good as raid barracudas?

 

[rise]

lol, i got one in my other rig :laugh: perhaps the worst $$/perf. buy around.

but i wanted it

 

[bamacre]

We've all been screwed over throughout the years. Memory prices for one, they've been nailed twice now price-fixing. Serioulsy, this is messed up. We were paying over $200 for 2GB kits of DDR2 less than 6 months ago, and what, two weeks ago, we saw $59 shipped free for a 2GB kit.

As far as cpu's, and now video cards, we just saw a lack of competition. A little different situation though. Intel relied on marketing and an exclusive contract with Dell rather than actually providing a competitive product. The result was a $300 X2 3800 from AMD, which was really overpriced, and yet drooled over due to a lack of a competitive product from Intel. Of course this all changed with not only the intoduction of the Core 2 Duo, but it's pricing, and even its price drops. The result, a drooled-over E6600 at a little more than $200, and an even more enticing Q6600 which will be just a bit more in less than a couple of months.

I am, and I am sure I am not alone, dissappointed in hard disk drive technology. Today's faster consumer drives are only a percentage faster than what we saw 10 years ago. And having first-hand experience of the much-loved Raptors, I can say that I am NOT impressed. We see higher capacities and lower prices, sure. But the leap in speed is taking too long to show up to the market.

As for video cards, I wouldn't doubt the price-fixing. And as of right now, there is just no competition. AMD's cards are not up to par with performance, and still use significantly more power than their closest Nvidia counterparts. DX10 just adds even more confusion to the mix. Sure there aren't any real DX10 games out now, but Crysis is not too far off. And those benchmarks are going to be looked over very carefully and by lots of eyes.

And speaking of DX10, many don't even grasp what it is. I mean people celebrated when they saw a $185 DX10 card. What the heck were they expecting? As if DX10 means extra processing power, and as if DX10 makes games more demanding, when in fact it is really the opposite, it is efficiency, allowing more performance using less horsepower. Yes, future games will be more demanding, that's normal, par for the course, but they will be more efficient with good DX10 coding.

Gamers are really the ones getting screwed over. And it is mostly our own fault. I'm not really talking about physics cards, nor "extreme gamer" network cards, but I'm sorry, I laugh when I see 700W OCZ power supplies running systems that draw less than 400W at full load. "Crossfire" certified memory? The marketing, and false/biased info on the internet have people over-purchasing. And that just increases prices on just about everything and for everyone else.

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: swtethan
xDarc is paid by ATI :Q

You own an nVidia card, you must be paid by nVidia...

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: rise

I ended up going with the X1950 Pro just because it was the best performance per dollar...

looks at signature :Q fx and raptor... since when did $/perf. matter to you??

I didn't buy my FX when they were $1000 if thats what you are thinking.

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: bamacre
We've all been screwed over throughout the years. Memory prices for one, they've been nailed twice now price-fixing. Serioulsy, this is messed up. We were paying over $200 for 2GB kits of DDR2 less than 6 months ago, and what, two weeks ago, we saw $59 shipped free for a 2GB kit.

Memory is not really a good example. It's so cheap because Memory manufacturers ramped up production in expectation of huge demand due to Vista. When that failed to materialize, they had to drop prices because of oversupply. Samsung is stopping sales to OEMs because they are asking for prices below cost.

 

[rise]

da fix is in!!

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: Pale Rider

Originally posted by: swtethan
xDarc is paid by ATI :Q

You own an nVidia card, you must be paid by nVidia...

says the guy with the 1950pro :Q



I must be paid by ATI also since i have ATI cards?

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: golem

Originally posted by: bamacre
We've all been screwed over throughout the years. Memory prices for one, they've been nailed twice now price-fixing. Serioulsy, this is messed up. We were paying over $200 for 2GB kits of DDR2 less than 6 months ago, and what, two weeks ago, we saw $59 shipped free for a 2GB kit.

Memory is not really a good example. It's so cheap because Memory manufacturers ramped up production in expectation of huge demand due to Vista. When that failed to materialize, they had to drop prices because of oversupply. Samsung is stopping sales to OEMs because they are asking for prices below cost.

Well they haven't stopped yet. I see a lot of Samsung in Dell systems.

And they have still been busted for price-fixing, twice now. I know you are correct in that there are/were other factors that have caused the price fluctuations, but we were still getting screwed over.

 

[Matt2]

I wish ATI (AMD) would pay me. I have a X1900XTX and havent seen a dime. I even picked a laptgop with a X200M IGP instead of an nvidia 6150!

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: Pale Rider

Originally posted by: swtethan
xDarc is paid by ATI :Q

You own an nVidia card, you must be paid by nVidia...

says the guy with the 1950pro :Q



I must be paid by ATI also since i have ATI cards?

Que the space shuttle flying over your head.

Obviously...

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
I agree with the OP. I ended up going with the X1950 Pro just because it was the best performance per dollar - that and I needed a card in the short term. I was really hoping R600 was going to be a knockout and be able to buy a mid-range R600 that would be about 50% greater performance than my X1950 Pro. Thanks for nothing ATI. Since the launch the 8800 series of cards have actually gone UP slightly in price.

In my opinion DX10 is vaporware at preasent. People who paid big bucks for 8800s six months ago were out of their minds. Half a year later where are the DX10 titles? On top of that it turns out all that kick ass Crysis footage we all oogled over (prior to May2007 footage) was actually rendered in DX9 anyway - so Crysis is still going to be great even on DX9 cards!

8800GTX is near twice as fast in DX9 as the fastest DX9 only card. I fail to see how they are out of their minds?

As many before me have mentioned, DX10 on G80 is just a perk.

But you also fail to realize that most of the gaming public does not go above 1280x1024 for their gaming. They don't need an 8800 anything to play at that resolution with today's games. That's the issue I've been referring to that everyone seems to have forgotten or missed. I know all about super high resolutions, but not everyone has a 30" monitor. Sure big monitors in the range of 24"+ is becomming more commin, but it isn't true to say that a majority of the gamers have these monitors. Lets face it, most gamers don't even build their own PC. They buy a Dell or Alienware with a 19" LCD that comes with the package and maybe later they say "hey this new videocard can give me faster gaming".

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: Pale Rider
I agree with the OP. I ended up going with the X1950 Pro just because it was the best performance per dollar - that and I needed a card in the short term. I was really hoping R600 was going to be a knockout and be able to buy a mid-range R600 that would be about 50% greater performance than my X1950 Pro. Thanks for nothing ATI. Since the launch the 8800 series of cards have actually gone UP slightly in price.

In my opinion DX10 is vaporware at preasent. People who paid big bucks for 8800s six months ago were out of their minds. Half a year later where are the DX10 titles? On top of that it turns out all that kick ass Crysis footage we all oogled over (prior to May2007 footage) was actually rendered in DX9 anyway - so Crysis is still going to be great even on DX9 cards!

8800GTX is near twice as fast in DX9 as the fastest DX9 only card. I fail to see how they are out of their minds?

As many before me have mentioned, DX10 on G80 is just a perk.

But you also fail to realize that most of the gaming public does not go above 1280x1024 for their gaming. They don't need an 8800 anything to play at that resolution with today's games. That's the issue I've been referring to that everyone seems to have forgotten or missed. I know all about super high resolutions, but not everyone has a 30" monitor. Sure big monitors in the range of 24"+ is becomming more commin, but it isn't true to say that a majority of the gamers have these monitors. Lets face it, most gamers don't even build their own PC. They buy a Dell or Alienware with a 19" LCD that comes with the package and maybe later they say "hey this new videocard can give me faster gaming".

Then those people dont have to buy an 8800 series card. They can buy a $200 X1950XT and be done with it.

I still dont buy into the ideology that just because someone only games at 1280x1024, then an 8800 series card is "overkill". Last spring, I only gamed at 1280x1024 but I got a 7800GT SLi setup. Most everyone on this forum told me I was crazy and that I didnt need that kind of horsepower, but I for one am not happy with playing at merely acceptable IQ levels. I like to ramp up the IQ levels as much as possible. I like playing with the highest amounts of AA, AF, TRAA, etc. as possible. My 7800GT SLi running 1280x1024 that everyone said I didnt need was constantly pushed to it's limits because of the settings I was playing at. 8x/16x SLi AA, TRAA, super-sampling, every set up is relative to the desired level of IQ that someone wants to achieve.

You may be able to play with 4x/16x AA/AF at 60 fps, but what if I want to run 8xAA or 8xS AA and TRAA? At those settings, your 60fps quickly turns to 30fps or lower.

Just because xDarc is ok with turning down the settings to make his X1900GT playable, that doesnt mean that I am willing to turn down my settings at all. Therefore I need a more powerful video card. What he considers playable and acceptable, I might think looks and runs like crap.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Matt2
Just because xDarc is ok with turning down the settings to make his X1900GT playable, that doesnt mean that I am willing to turn down my settings at all.

heh.. that's part (of many) of why imo his whole rant is flawed... he says his stuff is just fine for all his settings, yet he bitches about the pricing of stuff that, according to him, he doesn't need anyway...

 

[grumpyboy]

Nice well written post but I disagree with your premise.

The only way to remain sane and spend money on computer gaming and comsumer elctronics in general.
Is to see them as a consumable, like food, drink etc.

Its funny its most people including my self will grumble and moan about spending 60 bucks on a vital pc part.
And than spend that at a bar or resturant without complaint (well not much anyway )

Computer gaming is much less ephemeral than some forms of entertainment

Very few marterial things hold monitary value for any extended period of time,
Only rare materials, property or artistically crafted objects tend to hold their value or increase it.

And lets not get too nostalgic about the past.

In 1994 and 1995 a typical Pentium based PC system typically cost around $1800 to $2500
And dont forget 2000 grand was worth a lot more then than now.

The 3dfx voodoo 5 6000 GPU cost around 600 dollars in the year 2000.

And as for games I remember going to the store and thinking jeuz most of these games are crap.

And they were not any cheaper in real terms either.

A huge chunk of computer games from any period are trash.

Theirs probably only a couple of dozen really stand out games in given year

For every single game that you remember theirs hundreds you dont.

Annway thats beside the point lets be honest many people reading this probably
spend many times price of a 8800 gtx on a holiday that may only last a week

Its not abnormal for individuals to spend hundreds of dollars on a fancy meal.

Ild be the first to admit spending what I did on 8800 gtx was idiotic and shameful in a way

But it sure has been fun.

 

[adairusmc]

Originally posted by: grumpyboy
Nice well written post but I disagree with your premise.

The only way to remain sane and spend money on computer gaming and comsumer elctronics in general.
Is to see them as a consumable, like food, drink etc.

Its funny its most people including my self will grumble and moan about spending 60 bucks on a vital pc part.
And than spend that at a bar or resturant without complaint (well not much anyway )

Computer gaming is much less ephemeral than some forms of entertainment

Very few marterial things hold monitary value for any extended period of time,
Only rare materials, property or artistically crafted objects tend to hold their value or increase it.

And lets not get too nostalgic about the past.

In 1994 and 1995 a typical Pentium based PC system typically cost around $1800 to $2500
And dont forget 2000 grand was worth a lot more then than now.

The 3dfx voodoo 5 6000 GPU cost around 600 dollars in the year 2000.

And as for games I remember going to the store and thinking jeuz most of these games are crap.

And they were not any cheaper in real terms either.

A huge chunk of computer games from any period are trash.

Theirs probably only a couple of dozen really stand out games in given year

For every single game that you remember theirs hundreds you dont.

Annway thats beside the point lets be honest many people reading this probably
spend many times price of a 8800 gtx on a holiday that may only last a week

Its not abnormal for individuals to spend hundreds of dollars on a fancy meal.

Ild be the first to admit spending what I did on 8800 gtx was idiotic and shameful in a way

But it sure has been fun.

:thumbsup:

 

[Laminator]

Sounds like some people are stupidly angry over the fact that they can't afford the newest video cards. The most recent posters have got it right - the market hasn't changed much in the last five years. The GeForce4 Ti 4600 was $400 - $500, too. If you don't like paying $500+ for a video card, then don't. Some people don't like compromising their IQ settings and will make sacrifices in other parts of their lives in order to play games with AA and AF cranked up.

G80 is still expensive because AMD/ATI f*cked up. To minimize their losses, AMD/ATI will resort to dirty tricks to keep tricking ignorant people into paying too much for slower cards. It's pretty easy to figure out. Quit whining, you whining whiners of Whinerville.

EDIT: Sheesh, I must have angry at something when I wrote this. Hmmm...

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: grumpyboy
Nice well written post but I disagree with your premise.

The only way to remain sane and spend money on computer gaming and comsumer elctronics in general.
Is to see them as a consumable, like food, drink etc.

Its funny its most people including my self will grumble and moan about spending 60 bucks on a vital pc part.
And than spend that at a bar or resturant without complaint (well not much anyway )

Computer gaming is much less ephemeral than some forms of entertainment

Very few marterial things hold monitary value for any extended period of time,
Only rare materials, property or artistically crafted objects tend to hold their value or increase it.

And lets not get too nostalgic about the past.

In 1994 and 1995 a typical Pentium based PC system typically cost around $1800 to $2500
And dont forget 2000 grand was worth a lot more then than now.

The 3dfx voodoo 5 6000 GPU cost around 600 dollars in the year 2000.

And as for games I remember going to the store and thinking jeuz most of these games are crap.

And they were not any cheaper in real terms either.

A huge chunk of computer games from any period are trash.

Theirs probably only a couple of dozen really stand out games in given year

For every single game that you remember theirs hundreds you dont.

Annway thats beside the point lets be honest many people reading this probably
spend many times price of a 8800 gtx on a holiday that may only last a week

Its not abnormal for individuals to spend hundreds of dollars on a fancy meal.

Ild be the first to admit spending what I did on 8800 gtx was idiotic and shameful in a way

But it sure has been fun.

:thumbsup:

Agreed. Good post, grumpyboy. Totally agree on all points, including the last bit about buying the 8800GTX

 

[Ruptga]

Aside from the upgrade bug, do you really have a reason to switch out your video card? 1900GT is old, but unless you can't play something you really want to, what's it really matter if the market is crap right now?

 

[golem]

But you also fail to realize that most of the gaming public does not go above 1280x1024 for their gaming. They don't need an 8800 anything to play at that resolution with today's games. That's the issue I've been referring to that everyone seems to have forgotten or missed. I know all about super high resolutions, but not everyone has a 30" monitor. Sure big monitors in the range of 24"+ is becomming more commin, but it isn't true to say that a majority of the gamers have these monitors. Lets face it, most gamers don't even build their own PC. They buy a Dell or Alienware with a 19" LCD that comes with the package and maybe later they say "hey this new videocard can give me faster gaming".

How does a GTX being priced at 500 to 600 affect them then if they don't need it or would be likely to buy it???

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: golem

But you also fail to realize that most of the gaming public does not go above 1280x1024 for their gaming. They don't need an 8800 anything to play at that resolution with today's games. That's the issue I've been referring to that everyone seems to have forgotten or missed. I know all about super high resolutions, but not everyone has a 30" monitor. Sure big monitors in the range of 24"+ is becomming more commin, but it isn't true to say that a majority of the gamers have these monitors. Lets face it, most gamers don't even build their own PC. They buy a Dell or Alienware with a 19" LCD that comes with the package and maybe later they say "hey this new videocard can give me faster gaming".

How does a GTX being priced at 500 to 600 affect them then if they don't need it or would be likely to buy it???

perhaps the premise is that those who either want or need the high end video cards messes up the market for those who don't really need it but just want it?

 

[golem]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: golem

But you also fail to realize that most of the gaming public does not go above 1280x1024 for their gaming. They don't need an 8800 anything to play at that resolution with today's games. That's the issue I've been referring to that everyone seems to have forgotten or missed. I know all about super high resolutions, but not everyone has a 30" monitor. Sure big monitors in the range of 24"+ is becomming more commin, but it isn't true to say that a majority of the gamers have these monitors. Lets face it, most gamers don't even build their own PC. They buy a Dell or Alienware with a 19" LCD that comes with the package and maybe later they say "hey this new videocard can give me faster gaming".

How does a GTX being priced at 500 to 600 affect them then if they don't need it or would be likely to buy it???

perhaps the premise is that those who either want or need the high end video cards messes up the market for those who don't really need it but just want it?

LOL... hey, I'm in the 2nd group!!!

 

[soydios]

I'm not going to buy a new graphics card to replace my X1900 XT (which is still plenty powerful for my purposes) until second-generation DX10 cards come out that are hopefully less of a power-hog than the current G80/R600.

To get the CPU/GPU markets really going again, AMD needs to challenge Intel and nVidia like they were this time last year.

 

[Laminator]

All right, guys. It's time to turn the tables on the video card manufacturers/distributors. ABSOLUTELY NOBODY BUY AN 8800GTX! Tell your friends, coworkers, family, etc. - this will require the cooperation of every single person on the planet. We will wait until prices plummet due to lack of sales. Then, at a given time and date, we will immediately swamp NewEgg, TigerDirect, and ZipZoomFly with 8800GTX orders before they can raise the prices again!

In-genious!

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

A great buy with DX10 and no DX10 showcase? That's the problem I have. I'm betting that these cards will have low performance in DX10 vs the cards that will be out later this year. That's a given obviously, but when you nitpicked my first point let me explain something.

There is NO and I mean NO game that I don't get at least 30fps in on my X1900xt. At this time 2 years ago there was many games that killed my card and was almost unplayable forcing an upgrade at the time. We're talking 1 year and there is nothing that makes me want to upgrade, It used to be different. $600 for a few extra FPS is not worth it

It's sort of irrelevant as you won't see a native Dx10 game for at least 2 years. Of course the G80 will struggle with games released that far after the card was current. That's been the case with pretty much every generation of 3d hardware. You wouldn't have a great experience running a 9700 with Oblivion and other last-gen Dx9 games either.


There are plenty of games that an X1900XT can't handle with AA and reasonably high settings. Oblivion with AA+HDR, for example, is not playable at anything above 1280x1024 on an X1900XT. Frankly, I'm considering grabbing a second GTS 640MB as my min framerates in Oblivion can still get down into the low teens when I have everything cranke dup at 1680x1050.