• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

£700 for gtx 1080 (aka new 980) - ehmmm..no thank you!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2011
Posts
11,375
Yes, absolutely right, i'm sure every AMD-skeptic has shares in nvidia, its the only explanation that makes any sense. I mean its not like AMD ever say anything that turns out not to be true.

AMD have also never launched a 3xxmm2 GPU for more than the encumbent about to go EOL cards either. No sirree.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
30 Mar 2010
Posts
13,039
Location
Under The Stairs!
People forget AMD already tried to inflate a gen jump with the 6970 to 7970, only difference is AMD failed miserably and arsed it up:p with stupidly low stock clocks and less than stellar out the box driver fps performance.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2008
Posts
5,950
You have a vested interest in talking up Nvidia so most would be advised to not take your opinion seriously at all. I wonder how many others here have such an interest?

But at least I have stated it but I don't expect me talking to add to any sales and I'm fairly sure my views would be the same if I did not hold the company shares.
Unlike many others I'm pretty good at looking away from myself and outside of my world so tend to have pretty balanced views on many things, and able to give a more unbiased view, apparently anyway :).
It was predictable some would go down a certain avenue after mentioning I hold the shares but it's no bother, but funny :D
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
16 Nov 2006
Posts
753
Funny thread. Not that people complain but that Nvidia play a clever game to extract as much as they can for their product and consumers who should really want the cheapest best product possible make apologies for the tactics used. Maybe it's like Stockholm syndrome?

Study business practices and you'll see a lot of big companies are masters at extracting money. The fact that people are willfully allowing it to happen to them is probably why we have huge amounts of personal debt in the UK.

Some on here may be able to pay any price and not notice it affects their finances but I bet a lot of people get into debt to line the pockets of companies like Nvidia and Apple.

Some will say is their money, probably really the bank's money, which is fine if individuals get into financial difficulties. However when large numbers of the population are doing it it can become a real problem.

I agree with you. Imo, companies are improving their money extraction tech faster than the actual tech :D

Titan was really a testbed to see if the market will support this type of pricing (which it clearly has), not in a mass market type fashion but as a halo product, pushing prices of the entire range upwards. People are now used to the idea of spending ridiculous (to me) amounts of money for a product that doesn't hold much price/performance ratio. It's a sign of conspicuous consumption, another 'feature' that's included at this price is 'poor people can't afford it'. It's isn't listed in the technical specifications but the subtext is there.

It's a little bit of Stockholm syndrome and a bit of prisoner's dilemma, and a bit of endowment affect. Once you buy into the system you're much more likely to support it regardless of 'moral errors', the 3.5gb debacle, nvidia's shady practices and cheating in the past.

To actually get nvidia to stop the price hikes, we as consumers have to actually work together. Just like in prisoner's dilemma, both parties have to work together and keep their mouth shut to get the best possible outcome. Similarly, consumers could work together stop buying at this price point and drive the price down, but it's impossible to get everyone to work together. People who have the money will buy it and the poor people who want it will either put up or shut up. And thus the cycle continues.

There's also a bit of the 'boiling the frog' analogy. This year's mainstream card the 1070 card looks like being priced at the enthusiast level. And the enthusiast level is now at omgwtf price, a new category. :D More and more segmentation and more and more skus to fill those gaps. :o
 
Associate
Joined
28 May 2016
Posts
48
I'm extremely disappointed with the price, particularly when the MSRP has pretty much translated at $600 for a 3rd party card to £550+. No one should be celebrating the price increase, because it means we all have to pay more. Whether you get a 1080, 1070, Titan, 1080Ti, no one wins except Nvidia.

Really, who actually thinks to themselves that paying more for a product is a good thing?

Yes prices will no doubt drop a bit post launch as stock increases, more competition (both 3rd party and eventually from AMD), but this is not a good sign.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Dec 2007
Posts
1,383
Location
Cambridge
Bear in mind that supply seems pretty tight at the moment, so what limited stock is available is going to be expensive. If you look at pricing between various stockists, you'll notice that there's massive discrepancies with specific models (eg OC UK's MSI Gaming is £50 cheaper than other places). Give it some time for stock and demand to balance out and I suspect the prices will settle down.
 
Associate
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Posts
790
This trend has been going on for a while. Nvidia has been matching AMD's high end offerings with what is really their mid end for a while now. The 980 was never the high end maxwell chip, it was just marketed as such when it was released, eventually to be replaced with the real high end in the form of the 980ti and titan x.

now we're just seeing another iteration of the same thing. Market the mid end 1080 as a high end chip and charge whatever people are willing to pay to have the fastest card around, holding back the bigger chips to make it so. Then do the same for a mid-high end gp102 1080ti, bumping down the 1080. Finally release the full fat gp100 and yet again Nvidia manage to get people to pay the very high price to have the fastest card available. Because AMD aren't managing to match Nvidia in a timely fashion Nvidia can get away with charging premium prices for what are really non-premium products. Why would they sell a mid end chip for a mid end price if AMD have no response to it - they may as well charge what the market will bear.

Sure you can argue that ultimately the 1080 is still a very fast card and it's purely price/performance of what is actually available that should matter to consumers, not how much it costs Nvidia to make it or where it sits in their product portfolio. But it's frustrating as hell knowing the huge profit margin they are making at our expense, drip feeding consumers just enough to keep buying their cards while spending as little as they can get away with on R&D (I fully expect the $2bn figure quoted is BS). It's completely due to a lack of competition from AMD and it's only going to lead to GPU technology falling far behind where it could be. I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia do something similar to intel and start slowing down their architecture development - why bother bringing out Volta when you can keep selling Pascal for the next x years?
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
3 Sep 2010
Posts
2,847
This trend has been going on for a while. Nvidia has been matching AMD's high end offerings with what is really their mid end for a while now. The 980 was never the high end maxwell chip, it was just marketed as such when it was released, eventually to be replaced with the real high end in the form of the 980ti and titan x.

now we're just seeing another iteration of the same thing. Market the mid end 1080 as a high end chip and charge whatever people are willing to pay to have the fastest card around, holding back the bigger chips to make it so. Then do the same for a mid-high end gp102 1080ti, bumping down the 1080. Finally release the full fat gp100 and yet again Nvidia manage to get people to pay the very high price to have the fastest card available. Because AMD aren't managing to match Nvidia in a timely fashion Nvidia can get away with charging premium prices for what are really non-premium products. Why would they sell a mid end chip for a mid end price if AMD have no response to it - they may as well charge what the market will bear.

Sure you can argue that ultimately the 1080 is still a very fast card and it's purely price/performance of what is actually available that should matter to consumers, not how much it costs Nvidia to make it or where it sits in their product portfolio. But it's frustrating as hell knowing the huge profit margin they are making at our expense, drip feeding consumers just enough to keep buying their cards while spending as little as they can get away with on R&D (I fully expect the $2bn figure quoted is BS). It's completely due to a lack of competition from AMD and it's only going to lead to GPU technology falling far behind where it could be. I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia do something similar to intel and start slowing down their architecture development - why bother bringing out Volta when you can keep selling Pascal for the next x years?

Yep, like Intel cpu 0-5% each iteration.
a die shrink normally adds same performance at 300$ that the previous 700$ used to have but that isnt what happens now. (Polaris might change that)
someone at nvidia is really happy that they got away with it.
 
Associate
Joined
28 May 2016
Posts
48
I wouldn't call the 970/980/1070/1080s as mid end cards, and think there's a great distortion of the market in the minds of some. It's like saying a 50K sports car isn't the high end part of the market because there's a 100K version. When the average person drives a car between maybe 5-15K-ish.

Remember that a lot of people don't even have dedicated GPUs, and those that do will be on the budget models. The 70s will be mid-high end, 80s high end, and the Ti / Titan models are for extreme users.

Of course, obviously by being here we're in a niche market, so perhaps this is all semantics.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2010
Posts
4,967
Location
Aberdeenshire
This trend has been going on for a while. Nvidia has been matching AMD's high end offerings with what is really their mid end for a while now. The 980 was never the high end maxwell chip, it was just marketed as such when it was released, eventually to be replaced with the real high end in the form of the 980ti and titan x.

now we're just seeing another iteration of the same thing. Market the mid end 1080 as a high end chip and charge whatever people are willing to pay to have the fastest card around, holding back the bigger chips to make it so. Then do the same for a mid-high end gp102 1080ti, bumping down the 1080. Finally release the full fat gp100 and yet again Nvidia manage to get people to pay the very high price to have the fastest card available. Because AMD aren't managing to match Nvidia in a timely fashion Nvidia can get away with charging premium prices for what are really non-premium products. Why would they sell a mid end chip for a mid end price if AMD have no response to it - they may as well charge what the market will bear.

Sure you can argue that ultimately the 1080 is still a very fast card and it's purely price/performance of what is actually available that should matter to consumers, not how much it costs Nvidia to make it or where it sits in their product portfolio. But it's frustrating as hell knowing the huge profit margin they are making at our expense, drip feeding consumers just enough to keep buying their cards while spending as little as they can get away with on R&D (I fully expect the $2bn figure quoted is BS). It's completely due to a lack of competition from AMD and it's only going to lead to GPU technology falling far behind where it could be. I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia do something similar to intel and start slowing down their architecture development - why bother bringing out Volta when you can keep selling Pascal for the next x years?

When is this nvidias mid range argument going to stop. The 680 was the top end and got beat by the 7970. The 780 was the top for a while and is now barely faster than a 7970. The 780ti was the top end and loses to the 290x such was actually meant to complete with the 780.

I guess your referring to the 980 vs 290x which is 1 gen up from the 290x but the top end for a while, filtered down after the Ti was released. The 980 still barely beats the 290x if at all. The 980ti vs fury x was the only clear winner to me.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
28 May 2015
Posts
476
Location
Overclockers Basement
Of course, obviously by being here we're in a niche market, so perhaps this is all semantics.

Yup, this is it.

High end gaming is a niche in itself, then we have a place like OC in which the niche goes a step further. In the minds of the majority of OC members the Ti and Titan are the high-end cards, when the truth is x70 and up is high-end.

If you want to call it something else, sure, the Ti and Titan are in some sort of 'enthusiast' tier, but it doesn't take away from the fact that x70 and x80 are high end cards.

Now, giving these 'high end' cards an 'enthusiast' card price, that is the problem, and I don't think it's logical for anyone to disagree with that.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Posts
7,071
You have to agree someone at Nvidia is a genius and thoroughly deserves whatever they pay them. If I was AMD I'd poach them! Either that or they stay to offer some real competition. That's a win for both camps ;)
 
Man of Honour
Joined
13 Oct 2006
Posts
91,063
When is this nvidias mid range argument going to stop. The 680 was the top end and got beat by the 7970. The 780 was the top for a while and is now barely faster than a 7970. The 780ti was the top end and loses to the 290x such was actually meant to complete with the 780.

I guess your referring to the 980 vs 290x which is 1 gen up from the 290x but the top end for a while, filtered down after the Ti was released. The 980 still barely beats the 290x if at all. The 980ti vs fury x was the only clear winner to me.

Its true though - compared to the traditional configs in regard to electronics. memory, core size compared to what is possible, etc. cards like the 680, 980 and now 1080 are basically that of a mid-range card - its like selling cars for years where you have a say GTI with a 2L engine stage 2 trim and GT with a 1.6L and stage 1 trim then after awhile putting out the GTI with a 1.6L engine and stage 1 trim and calling it high end because it is still faster than the last gen.
 

Mei

Mei

Soldato
Joined
3 Jan 2012
Posts
3,983
the sociology of it is interesting to me, part of the reason i visit tech forums/youtube i think

fanboys has become an insult but its a very common thing for people to ride the success of a big company, a personality or sports team, i dont think its a new thing created by apple :)
people vicariously living their lives is for sure not new, maybe with the internet it has become more intense that feeling of being part of something
 
Associate
OP
Joined
29 Sep 2015
Posts
224
When is this nvidias mid range argument going to stop. The 680 was the top end and got beat by the 7970. The 780 was the top for a while and is now barely faster than a 7970. The 780ti was the top end and loses to the 290x such was actually meant to complete with the 780.

I guess your referring to the 980 vs 290x which is 1 gen up from the 290x but the top end for a while, filtered down after the Ti was released. The 980 still barely beats the 290x if at all. The 980ti vs fury x was the only clear winner to me.

some people are just asking to be milked...
 
Associate
OP
Joined
29 Sep 2015
Posts
224
This trend has been going on for a while. Nvidia has been matching AMD's high end offerings with what is really their mid end for a while now. The 980 was never the high end maxwell chip, it was just marketed as such when it was released, eventually to be replaced with the real high end in the form of the 980ti and titan x.

now we're just seeing another iteration of the same thing. Market the mid end 1080 as a high end chip and charge whatever people are willing to pay to have the fastest card around, holding back the bigger chips to make it so. Then do the same for a mid-high end gp102 1080ti, bumping down the 1080. Finally release the full fat gp100 and yet again Nvidia manage to get people to pay the very high price to have the fastest card available. Because AMD aren't managing to match Nvidia in a timely fashion Nvidia can get away with charging premium prices for what are really non-premium products. Why would they sell a mid end chip for a mid end price if AMD have no response to it - they may as well charge what the market will bear.

Sure you can argue that ultimately the 1080 is still a very fast card and it's purely price/performance of what is actually available that should matter to consumers, not how much it costs Nvidia to make it or where it sits in their product portfolio. But it's frustrating as hell knowing the huge profit margin they are making at our expense, drip feeding consumers just enough to keep buying their cards while spending as little as they can get away with on R&D (I fully expect the $2bn figure quoted is BS). It's completely due to a lack of competition from AMD and it's only going to lead to GPU technology falling far behind where it could be. I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia do something similar to intel and start slowing down their architecture development - why bother bringing out Volta when you can keep selling Pascal for the next x years?

980 was a very neat attempt by nv to test how far they can go with their pricing and how many naive ppl are out there. It appears there are plenty hence 1080 price
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2010
Posts
4,967
Location
Aberdeenshire
Its true though - compared to the traditional configs in regard to electronics. memory, core size compared to what is possible, etc. cards like the 680, 980 and now 1080 are basically that of a mid-range card - its like selling cars for years where you have a say GTI with a 2L engine stage 2 trim and GT with a 1.6L and stage 1 trim then after awhile putting out the GTI with a 1.6L engine and stage 1 trim and calling it high end because it is still faster than the last gen.

It doesn't matter to me the performance and price at the time of release determine the cards segment. So 680 was mid range where was the high end one. Oh wait that was the 780 but wait that was mid range.

I guess nvidia are just holding back and everything they ever release is just mid range but costs 600 pounds. Well I'm not fooled by it.

For there record what is 970? Low end. Wow only 300 quid thanks nvidia.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom