Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlademaster01 
Yes, but that source also said to expect cut down versions of GK110 in May. I think he was talking about GK114 since I don't think nVidia will do that.
@2010rig
agreed. That's why this period of no releases is very bad for consumers. I mean GF100 was really limited because of low yields. I don't think they ever had lower yields (1.7%). Still they released it for $499 because of AMD 5870. This $900 Titan is just a result of no competition (and it's not that AMD can't compete). If nVidia really needed a full blown GK110 around they would have priced it lower as well as the "GTX 670Ti". Now they just market their mid range chip as a top dog and their real high end chip as a premium product (it's even castrated for that matter). Well, everyone seems to buy their marketing scheme (can't really blame them since it's the only thing available). But this is bad folks. If GK114 doesn't release in H1 '13, the fiasco is complete...
and before I get attacked by the who needs x performance anyways crew. It's not about short term, this pricing situation will probably take until 2015-2016 to stabilize (if it even does) since the marketing peeps over at AMD and nVidia just look at each other and the current market. I basically saw this coming when 7970 released for $549. Imagine a $900 GTX 480 back in 2010...
Yes, but that source also said to expect cut down versions of GK110 in May. I think he was talking about GK114 since I don't think nVidia will do that.
@2010rig
agreed. That's why this period of no releases is very bad for consumers. I mean GF100 was really limited because of low yields. I don't think they ever had lower yields (1.7%). Still they released it for $499 because of AMD 5870. This $900 Titan is just a result of no competition (and it's not that AMD can't compete). If nVidia really needed a full blown GK110 around they would have priced it lower as well as the "GTX 670Ti". Now they just market their mid range chip as a top dog and their real high end chip as a premium product (it's even castrated for that matter). Well, everyone seems to buy their marketing scheme (can't really blame them since it's the only thing available). But this is bad folks. If GK114 doesn't release in H1 '13, the fiasco is complete...
and before I get attacked by the who needs x performance anyways crew. It's not about short term, this pricing situation will probably take until 2015-2016 to stabilize (if it even does) since the marketing peeps over at AMD and nVidia just look at each other and the current market. I basically saw this coming when 7970 released for $549. Imagine a $900 GTX 480 back in 2010...
This is exactly my point.
Fermi ( GF100 ) was a Power Hungry mess, yet, NVIDIA managed a refresh ( GF110 ) in 6 MONTHS!
After being 6 months late to the party, they felt pressure from AMD to deliver, and even got their refresh out a month before AMD got the 6970 out.
Now..... you probably know how I feel about the 680, and I won't rehash that...
Here we have GK104 delivering high end performance comparable to the competition, and it's been almost a year for a refresh. Why?
If things progressed like they were supposed to, this is the lineup we should be getting...
GTX 780 - GK110, 2688 cores, 384 bit, 3 GB RAM. $500.
GTX 770 - GK110, 2496 cores, 320 bit, 2.5GB RAM - $400.
GTX 760 - GK114, 1920 cores, 256 bit, 2GB RAM, $300.
How would AMD have to price their cards to compete against that lineup?
Better yet, can AMD even compete with that lineup today?
( Notice, this is right in line with Fermi's line up )
GK110 = 521mm2
GF110 = 520mm2
The die size is essentially the same, I bet NVIDIA's production costs haven't changed that much, if anything, 28nm should be cheaper. Plus, all signs point to yields being ok for GK110 so there's no shortage there.
So what are we getting instead?
A $900 GK110 based card, labeled Titan & "Limited Edition". Simply because its performance far exceeds that of the competition. *sigh*
IMO, it's this lack of competition that is allowing NVIDIA to get away with that $900 price tag.
It is also this lack of competition that allowed NVIDIA to get away with launching a GK104 based 680.
Of course, NVIDIA doesn't mind using GK1x4 for their x80 cards as they are enjoying much higher profit margins as a result.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artikbot
Why pretty sad? it's not like nVIDIA is going to do differently, or that their (AMD) cards don't perform up to par.
Sometimes the way of thinking of this community bedazzles me.
Would you rather AMD shift resources towards a 'meh' refresh of the 7xxx series, releasing something in March/April that in the best of the cases is 10% faster than the 7970GHz, and push forward the release of a new architecture to Q2 2014?
I would not.
Why pretty sad? it's not like nVIDIA is going to do differently, or that their (AMD) cards don't perform up to par.
Sometimes the way of thinking of this community bedazzles me.
Would you rather AMD shift resources towards a 'meh' refresh of the 7xxx series, releasing something in March/April that in the best of the cases is 10% faster than the 7970GHz, and push forward the release of a new architecture to Q2 2014?
I would not.
AMD has released a new series of cards every year almost like clockwork for its last 3 generations.
Radeon 5870 launched September 2009.
Radeon 6970 launched December 2010.
Radeon 7970 paper launched December 2011, released January 2012.
Now that they have consoles to deliver, we should just sit back and accept that AMD is stagnating progress? No thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avonosac
You're saying this to one of most known multi monitor / crazy GPU setups guys on OCN, congratulations the dunce hat is in the corner.
That would introduce a huge memory bandwidth issue. People seem to be of 2 worlds in this thread. Those running 1080p, and those who actually like their gaming to look good. These midstream setups are all well and good at 1080p, but introduce some large resolutions into the mix and things go to hell in a hand basket. I'm tired of hearing the "you don't need x performance ... " crap from people, and I thought my sarcastic quip about our hardware overlords would have hit a little closer to home with some of you.
People need to get off their AMD fanboy bandwagon and realize that huge delays in releases are in no way shape or form good for the consumer. The more power you give this company to dictate when you can get something, the worse the situation will become.
You're saying this to one of most known multi monitor / crazy GPU setups guys on OCN, congratulations the dunce hat is in the corner.
That would introduce a huge memory bandwidth issue. People seem to be of 2 worlds in this thread. Those running 1080p, and those who actually like their gaming to look good. These midstream setups are all well and good at 1080p, but introduce some large resolutions into the mix and things go to hell in a hand basket. I'm tired of hearing the "you don't need x performance ... " crap from people, and I thought my sarcastic quip about our hardware overlords would have hit a little closer to home with some of you.
People need to get off their AMD fanboy bandwagon and realize that huge delays in releases are in no way shape or form good for the consumer. The more power you give this company to dictate when you can get something, the worse the situation will become.
EXACTLY. And that goes for both sides.
I've seen people with 680's jump for joy that 7xx is rumored to be delayed to Q4 as well.
These people need / want to have the relevancy of having the latest gear. Stagnating progress is not a good thing for the consumer by any means.
Competition is what drives innovation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avonosac
The irony about the "polished and done" statement is that they need to allocate the resources to polish and complete the product to get it out the door. They aren't, or at bare minimum they obviously are not fully allocating their resources. Engineering is not some black box that an idea goes into and magically a new graphics processor comes out, it requires manpower they are putting on other projects.
The problem is the entire line of thought is apologetic in nature. "Its ok, stop driving innovation, we'll wait for you here." It would be one thing if they were sitting on a complete architecture like NVidia has been for at least 6 months, its entirely different if they need to DEVELOP the next product to be able to compete in market. The fact that they are doing other things, is the reason GK110 never needed to come out in the 600 series, because AMD really didn't have anything that could do much better than match the GK104s offerings.
What I care abouit isnt nvidia or amd, its market competition and innovation. Right now there just isnt any, and thats why titan is a paper release and GK110 hasnt been branded GeForce yet.
The irony about the "polished and done" statement is that they need to allocate the resources to polish and complete the product to get it out the door. They aren't, or at bare minimum they obviously are not fully allocating their resources. Engineering is not some black box that an idea goes into and magically a new graphics processor comes out, it requires manpower they are putting on other projects.
The problem is the entire line of thought is apologetic in nature. "Its ok, stop driving innovation, we'll wait for you here." It would be one thing if they were sitting on a complete architecture like NVidia has been for at least 6 months, its entirely different if they need to DEVELOP the next product to be able to compete in market. The fact that they are doing other things, is the reason GK110 never needed to come out in the 600 series, because AMD really didn't have anything that could do much better than match the GK104s offerings.
What I care abouit isnt nvidia or amd, its market competition and innovation. Right now there just isnt any, and thats why titan is a paper release and GK110 hasnt been branded GeForce yet.
If this trend continues I'm very worried about what's going to happen when Maxwell releases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levesque
Ok now I'm going back playing Borderlands 2 LAN games with my 4 computers at home, all with those awful/buggy/unplayable Quad-Fire and Crossfire set-ups .
Ok now I'm going back playing Borderlands 2 LAN games with my 4 computers at home, all with those awful/buggy/unplayable Quad-Fire and Crossfire set-ups .
Can you play Far Cry 3 on those rigs when you're done, please report back.
I'm curious to know how Quad 7970's run FC3.
Edited by 2010rig - 2/16/13 at 12:15pm
2010rig
(14 items) |
|
2010rig
(14 items) |
