Report: Nvidia GTX 880, 880 Ti to be Cheaper than 780 Ti

Status
Not open for further replies.
don't expect gpus fabbed on early, immature 20nm node with yield issues (if history repeats itself) to be "cheaper". those will be anything but cheaper. especially nvidia's. nvidia positions gpus with 256bit bus near the top of the price range and forces people to buy crippled, 192bit versions at high price.
 

singlejm

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2009
29
0
18,540
1
I wish they would bring the price down and stop bundling game we don't want with them
Amen to that! 500 should get you basically the best card out there, this 800 shit (aside from insane double GPU's) is totally out of control. Keep your 150 dollar bundles that after one month are worth MAYBE 75 bucks because the games are so heavily discounted and give me back the $500 top of the line GPU's.
 

boju

Titan
Ambassador
I hope there's no negative reasons for price reductions and hoping Nvidia believes they're doing something right and their labs are producing with less hassle this time.

 

leo2kp

Distinguished
Oct 9, 2006
2,055
0
20,160
115
Price gouging is exactly why I haven't upgraded yet. Unfortunately I'm one of those suckers that waits to buy the fastest instead of the smartest piece of hardware. So I will be upgrading to another NVidia card eventually.
 

rapman4488

Honorable
Jul 26, 2013
64
0
10,640
2
I wish they would bring the price down and stop bundling game we don't want with them
Amen to that! 500 should get you basically the best card out there, this 800 shit (aside from insane double GPU's) is totally out of control. Keep your 150 dollar bundles that after one month are worth MAYBE 75 bucks because the games are so heavily discounted and give me back the $500 top of the line GPU's.
You guys have to realize that NVIDIA isn't losing profits by adding the bundles. It's a marketing strategy that only costs the game developers. NVIDIA would be losing profits by lowering the price of their cards, not issuing the game bundles.
 

Damn_Rookie

Reputable
Feb 21, 2014
791
0
5,660
256
8 GB VRAM on only a 256 bit bus? Unless they've sped up the VRAM substantially, surely that would be a rather foolish plan? nVidia aren't going to deliberately bottleneck an 8 GB gaming card with a bus that small, surely?

Although a GM204 would suggest a mid range to upper mid range card, so a 256 bit bus isn't unreasonable; but that much VRAM on it?
 

MANOFKRYPTONAK

Distinguished
Feb 1, 2012
952
0
19,060
42
These prices are very ridiculous. $500 for a vanilla top of the line GPU is where the market should be, anything higher is just greed. And I feel sorry for those who pay ridiculously high prices, BUT if you have the money go ahead and get it. If no one paid those prices then Nvidia couldn't charge those prices. So we the consumer are doing it to ourselves, I hope this is true though... But I wont be surprised if its not...
 

dstarr3

Honorable
Mar 18, 2014
1,527
0
11,960
52
I picked up a GTX770 over Christmas and I still think that's just about the sweet spot for 1080p gaming. I can max out everything with performance room to spare, andI doubt I'll need to replace it until 4k is mainstream. So, unless you're gaming at resolutions above 1080p, you really don't need to spend much more than $300. Let alone $500 or $700.
 

Keyrock42

Honorable
Jan 15, 2014
8
0
10,510
0
8 GB VRAM on only a 256 bit bus? Unless they've sped up the VRAM substantially, surely that would be a rather foolish plan? nVidia aren't going to deliberately bottleneck an 8 GB gaming card with a bus that small, surely?
Nvidia increased the size of the cache on Maxwell, eliminating the need for a wider bus.
 

doomtomb

Distinguished
May 12, 2009
810
0
18,980
0
I too believe cheaper cards would be a god send. $500 is still a hefty price for top of the line card. My now 2 year old GTX 670 is holding strong until competitively priced 800 series appear
 

RCguitarist

Distinguished
I picked up a GTX770 over Christmas and I still think that's just about the sweet spot for 1080p gaming. I can max out everything with performance room to spare, andI doubt I'll need to replace it until 4k is mainstream. So, unless you're gaming at resolutions above 1080p, you really don't need to spend much more than $300. Let alone $500 or $700.
Agreed. If someone is playing games at 1080p on a single monitor, anything above a 770 is a complete waste of money. But you know the saying, a fool and his money....
 

soldier44

Honorable
May 30, 2013
443
0
10,810
6
2560 x 1600 with 2 GTX 780 Tis here and happy camper. Going 4K display when the prices come down to a more manageable $1200 or less. Not going below 30 inches either.
 

ultameca

Distinguished
Mar 5, 2010
82
0
18,630
0
I'm also waiting for cheaper high end cards, I think most people are and Nvidia knows this is the case. The card prices right now are ridiculous, no wonder I just read an article on this site stating that gpu sales are plummeting to 30-40% it's time for the price to go down.
 

Damn_Rookie

Reputable
Feb 21, 2014
791
0
5,660
256

Very good point, I forgot about that change they made with the new architecture. Thanks for that :)
 
It sounds like we are looking at Q1 2015 for the high-end 8-series if Nvidia continues the pattern of introducing low-to-high end cards over the course of a couple of months. I skipped the 7-series and bought a second 680 for 1440p gaming. The heat out the back is killing me in warm weather. Would LOVE to go back to one single powerful card to replace them but just can't justify getting a 780Ti with these high Maxwells a half year away.
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20
I hope both sides charge whatever the market will bear - that is called capitalism in a FREE market. If you can't afford product X, get a better job. If they go cheap they make no money and that ends with a new gen every 3 years instead of every year or so. NV isn't making what they did in 2007 and hasn't since, so for the last ~7 years they've been giving you a break despite what you believe or they'd make MORE at some point in the last 7yrs correct?

AMD, still trying to make money for a full year. See the point. Quit whining about pricing when nobody is making much cash. IF you think that price is too high on either side, I'd challenge you to PROVE they are ripping you off after looking at their 10yr summaries and recent balance sheets. YOU ARE WRONG.

If you want pricing to come down some, you could also hope AMD makes more money so they can put out products that don't have as many problems which would cause NV to price lower. You price your product for a premium over your competition when the competition has issues (be it speed, drivers in phase 3, etc etc, same with Intel vs. AMD). Companies are in business to make money, NOT do you favors no matter what you think. Their job is to make money and neither side is doing very well compared to the last 10yrs. The pricing war has killed them both. If you took out the payments to Nvidia from Intel they wouldn't be making 1/2 what they were in 2007...LOL.

You whiners need to read balance sheets and financial reports. Clueless. I sincerely hope companies IGNORE you whiners and charge whatever they can get, because they are both WEAKER today than before. We need them stronger, NOT weaker than they already are.
 

singlejm

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2009
29
0
18,540
1
You couldn't sound more like a stock holder if you tried. Companies maximize profits by being EFFICIENT with there money and allocations to R&D among other things. When your EFFICIENT you can make lots of money and still keep prices REASONABLE. Your balance sheets and financial reports don't tell that story sweetheart.
 

hixbot

Distinguished
Oct 29, 2007
818
0
18,990
1


I disagree with this as you seem to be ignoring 1080p at a 120hz refresh rate. If you're looking for rock solid 120fps at 1080p to be combined with low persistence strobing, you'll need more than a GTX770.

 

wtfxxxgp

Honorable
Nov 14, 2012
173
0
10,680
0
I hope both sides charge whatever the market will bear - that is called capitalism in a FREE market. If you can't afford product X, get a better job. If they go cheap they make no money and that ends with a new gen every 3 years instead of every year or so. NV isn't making what they did in 2007 and hasn't since, so for the last ~7 years they've been giving you a break despite what you believe or they'd make MORE at some point in the last 7yrs correct?

AMD, still trying to make money for a full year. See the point. Quit whining about pricing when nobody is making much cash. IF you think that price is too high on either side, I'd challenge you to PROVE they are ripping you off after looking at their 10yr summaries and recent balance sheets. YOU ARE WRONG.

If you want pricing to come down some, you could also hope AMD makes more money so they can put out products that don't have as many problems which would cause NV to price lower. You price your product for a premium over your competition when the competition has issues (be it speed, drivers in phase 3, etc etc, same with Intel vs. AMD). Companies are in business to make money, NOT do you favors no matter what you think. Their job is to make money and neither side is doing very well compared to the last 10yrs. The pricing war has killed them both. If you took out the payments to Nvidia from Intel they wouldn't be making 1/2 what they were in 2007...LOL.

You whiners need to read balance sheets and financial reports. Clueless. I sincerely hope companies IGNORE you whiners and charge whatever they can get, because they are both WEAKER today than before. We need them stronger, NOT weaker than they already are.
I agree with the sentiment, I take exception to the delivery though... You didn't have to be so rude. On the plus side, I agree that we need those company's to be financially strong. However, if you continually bring out re-hashed and re-named cards and you have an unnecessarily number of cards, then it means you also have to make sure that every one of those cards is profitable in their own right. I personally feel that less is more - and is actually better for everyone. Why should they have such a wide array of cards, really? Manufacturing costs...so save yourself some costs and manufacture fewer products at a better price...more people would be able to afford it and leave these 4-digit monster cards as collector's editions or something to that effect. Those are for your bragging rights. They will almost NEVER be accessible to the everyday Joe.
 

somebodyspecial

Honorable
Sep 20, 2012
1,459
0
11,310
20


That is only a part of the story. But in the end if your balance sheets/financial reports suck, you're going bankrupt. PERIOD. They tell me more of the story than anything else. If you're not reading these, for god's sake man, don't trade stocks or invest in anything. You'll lose money. I guarantee it.

Yes, I am a shareholder in many things and if you've read many of my posts you'd see I admit it all the time ;) If you're not, I pity your retirement. If you're not hoping for them to make money, I pity your next gen cards or any product you buy. You should hope for strong companies or expect crap products and advancements.

You sound like someone who ignores all the financial data (the most important thing you need to understand if you want to make money on any stock). You can only be so efficient, but that doesn't make you money and in AMD's case it just got them to break even (and they have 30% less workforce to fight with getting there!)...It takes more than company efficiency to make a profit. You still have to have a product you can price at a level that allows you to profit. They have to want that product badly enough that they'll pay you a premium over your costs for it. You can be horribly inefficient if you have a product so good you can price it at levels that covers up your bloated inefficient company. However, you can't do the opposite.

Since neither company makes as much as they used to, I guess you're saying both are horribly inefficient? LOL.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/06/16/amds-new-reporting-structure-will-mask-pc-weakness.aspx
All re-orgs for efficiency are not created equal either. AMD's been doing it for nearly a decade, let me know when it pays profits in spades. Instead this re-org seems to just be marketing fluff to hide the data from people like you who don't dig into the sheets.
http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/financial-statements?symbol=amd
10yr on AMD doesn't look good. 1/2 the assets, shares outstanding doubles etc etc. NV now spends more on R&D than AMD. AMD is in trouble because they have been making one bad decision after another for years. IE, paying 3x what they should have for ATI, selling mobile division to Qcom for 65mil in 2009 instead of being on SOC rev 5 right now with Nvidia etc etc. Now they're trying to get back into the mobile division after selling it before...LOL. I love AMD, but hate the management. $6Bil in losses over the last 10yrs says all you need to know efficiency or not. You can't just ignore the money angle.

 
To put this rumor in proper contexed you must also note the rumor the 880's will not be the top single gpu card. Rumor has it there will also be a 890 single gpu card. The rumor also has it the 890 will be late as its heavily dependent on the 20nm.
 

Ramar

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
249
0
18,680
0
Was no one else paying attention to nvidia's actions sl and presentations thus far with Maxwell?

Maxwell's point is the unification of mobile and desktop architecture. Thus, 750ti not needing a power adapter.

I'm not saying it's guaranteed we'll see less expensive, hyper-efficient, less overkill GPU's

I'm just saying it's -basically- guaranteed.
 

airborne11b

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2008
466
0
18,790
4
I picked up a GTX770 over Christmas and I still think that's just about the sweet spot for 1080p gaming. I can max out everything with performance room to spare, andI doubt I'll need to replace it until 4k is mainstream. So, unless you're gaming at resolutions above 1080p, you really don't need to spend much more than $300. Let alone $500 or $700.
Agreed. If someone is playing games at 1080p on a single monitor, anything above a 770 is a complete waste of money. But you know the saying, a fool and his money....
This is a pretty false statement. A single 770s in a lot of high end games only nets 60 - 80fps on max settings. A lot of competitive people use 120 - 144hz 1080p gaming monitors and a single 770 GTX doesn't cut it. It also leaves very little to look forward to in the future as games naturally become more demanding.

Imho dual 770s in SLI is a bare minimum for any serious PC gamer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS