Originally Posted by fateswarm
You know what? People often say NVIDIA
are overpriced but in this case it seems AMD
are the crooks.
What did they do? They sticked two 7970s on the same board and priced it almost 3 times that. And now, they returned it to its real supply-side cost with some profit on top: 2X7970. Hell, it's probably even cheaper since it saves some common components. OK, someone may claim the novelty and the R&D would take a cost but really, it's most likely that the only "R&D" needed was just better cooling, and most people find its heat (and not temperature, different thing) excessive anyway.
And NVIDIA, what did they do? They cut a huge die that has genuinely a higher cost per wafer, it has genuinely higher failure rate on manufacturing (in fact, it may be the reason 780 exists in the first place) and then they are the overpriced? Please.
Again, I don't care who "wins", I'd rather have both be better, but in this case, truth be told: Sticking two 7970s together is not worth $1000 full stop.
it is still better value than a 690 when it was high priced and comes with 8 games.
on that bolded part I would like to state:
8800 275/280 480 580 all had big dies and fell into that same segmentation.
Waffer cost is only marginal the reason the 780 exists is because it is what was supposed to be the 680 to begin with it is the 8800 of the line up. (more like a 480 considering it is still not fully unlocked)
About the argument of more expensive wafers with a smaller node well that is true but they made the wafer size bigger so not really a point yet until sub-14nm and for the record by that time there might be a cheaper better way just like Intel's 3d finfet which replaced insulated transistors.Edited by maarten12100 - 8/13/13 at 5:20am