Good marketing work from nVidia

p0rks0da · 25 Feb 2010 at 14:55

rhys216 said:
No, my 5870...

Oh then that's fair enough. But the cheapest 5870 around is ~£320 atm.

All i'm saying is this:

4850 @ 5 months after launch = £100
4870 @ 5 months after launch = £175

5850 @ 5 months after launch = £220 (£250 for the cheapest in stock)
5870 @ 5 months after launch = £315

So you either think ATI are charging a fair price, or you don't. I don't think even with whatever problems they are having that these are reasonable prices. That's all i'm getting at.

Stock on the 5870 seems tolerable btw, if the OcUK store is correct then they have well over 50 cards atm.

RizlaKing · 25 Feb 2010 at 14:59

Is it right to constantly rebrand the same product no it isn't and it is playing to the gullible in the pc market who see a bigger number and automatically think it must be better because if that wasn't the case nvidia wouldn't be rebranding them. Is it good business practice like it or not yes it is they have managed to sell a hell of a lot of these regardless of the fact it is by modern standards old tech so that is impressive, it isn't right. Rhys i don't like it anymore then you and neither do most on here but as others have said you have to seperate the moral side of it from the business side.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:00

p0rks0da said:
Oh then that's fair enough. But the cheapest 5870 around is ~£320 atm.

All i'm saying is this:

4850 @ 5 months after launch = £100
4870 @ 5 months after launch = £175

5850 @ 5 months after launch = £220 (£250 for the cheapest in stock)
5870 @ 5 months after launch = £315

So you either think ATI are charging a fair price, or you don't. I don't think even with whatever problems they are having that these are reasonable prices. That's all i'm getting at.

Stock on the 5870 seems tolerable btw, if the OcUK store is correct then they have well over 50 cards atm.

So taking into account all issues with production, and retailer price gouging etc, what do you think the price tags should look like?

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:03

RizlaKing said:
Rhys i don't like it anymore then you and neither do most on here but as others have said you have to seperate the moral side of it from the business side.

I have... And I can only see it offering them a short term benefit, before Nvidia gets forced to pay the piper for sacrificing it's brands reputation for short term profit.
So my opinion is still that it's both poor morale and business practice...

p0rks0da · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:07

rhys216 said:
So taking into account all issues with production, and retailer price gouging etc, what do you think the price tags should look like?

Would need accurate numbers for everything, just like you would need to justify them. To me, double seems unreastically high - just a guess and it's as good as anyone elses.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:09

It's not just Nvidia...
Intel also on my hit list as well as Tesco Lol!

Edit:

Oh and Gaviscon

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:19

p0rks0da said:
Would need accurate numbers for everything, just like you would need to justify them. To me, double seems unreastically high - just a guess and it's as good as anyone elses.

Without numbers you can conclude that their choice of not putting a £500+ price tag on the cards (Particularly at launch) indicates they are not trying to rip off their customers. Perhaps they have increased there margin to subsidize the lower volume this time around... Who know's?

Brizzles · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:24

rhys216 said:
^^^
Are you confirming 'good marketing = Deceit' are your celebrating this immoral behaviour?

How can this be described as 'Deceit', when the information is even on Wiki of all places.

Deceit would be physically taking an original batch of 8800GT cards and putting new GT880 ( for example ) stickers over the top of the old ones.

Its a different card, built on existing arcitecture - Hence a new card.

TheRealDeal · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:26

The problem is the 4 series prices were incrediable for the performance of the cards. So now amd prices are being judged on this. I think people need to look at all other launches from nvidia/ati and then compare the 5 series prices. This will give you a much better picture when looking at the 5 series prices and actually how decent most of the prices are.

bledd · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:31

Fanboy views aside, both AMD and nVidia have terrible naming schemes, the HD2600pro wipes the floor with most of the lower end 3xxx 4xxx and 5xxx series.

They're both at it

p0rks0da · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:32

rhys216 said:
Without numbers you can conclude that their choice of not putting a £500+ price tag on the cards (Particularly at launch) indicates they are not trying to rip off their customers. Perhaps they have increased there margin to subsidize the lower volume this time around... Who know's?

I'm not sure why you keep saying £500 though, i don't recall nVidia ever releasing a single card anywhere near that. Or do you just mean they could have released at whatever price they wanted?

Google GTX285 launch prices and you will find the first result has a link to a site which i can't post. But it's an article from 2 weeks after the card launched and it's price was listed at all the major retailers. It was (ironically!) ~£320.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:46

Google GTX280's

http://www.techpowerup.com/62603/NVIDIA_GeForce_GTX_280_Available_for_Pre-order_in_Europe.html

p0rks0da · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:50

rhys216 said:
Google GTX280's

http://www.techpowerup.com/62603/NVIDIA_GeForce_GTX_280_Available_for_Pre-order_in_Europe.html

According to the same site that has the GTX285 prices, the GTX280 was £430 on the morning after the launch. Stupidly priced, but still not £500.

Kenai · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:51

rhys216 said:
I have... And I can only see it offering them a short term benefit, before Nvidia gets forced to pay the piper for sacrificing it's brands reputation for short term profit.
So my opinion is still that it's both poor morale and business practice...

Is that really likely to happen? How many people are going to turn down a GTX460 or something because of the dodgy morals involved in renaming an 8800GT to 9800GT?

If the cards are good people will buy them, I don't think they've really sacrificied any reputation.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:51

It makes £298 look cheap.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:55

Kenai said:
Is that really likely to happen? How many people are going to turn down a GTX460 or something because of the dodgy morals involved in renaming an 8800GT to 9800GT?

If the cards are good people will buy them, I don't think they've really sacrificied any reputation.

Well I here a few people saying the same as me on these forums about they are ****ed off with Nv's renaming BS.
How do you think I became anti Nv? It's not because I love Ati!

Edit:
I give Nv 5 years tops before it 3DFX's

Kenai · 25 Feb 2010 at 15:58

Of course people won't always like it but really honestly how many people do you think it would stop buying a new nVidia card if it's any good? I doubt there are that many people who would turn down a better card purely on the back of this renaming stuff. Certainly not enough that nVidia will end up 'paying the piper'.

Your admission to being anti-nvidia casts a slightly different light on some of your previous posts too.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 16:02

Kenai said:
Of course people won't always like it but really honestly how many people do you think it would stop buying a new nVidia card if it's any good? I doubt there are that many people who would turn down a better card purely on the back of this renaming stuff. Certainly not enough that nVidia will end up 'paying the piper'.

Probably allot of people considering Ati outperforms Nv at every price point.
I wasn't suggesting renaming will be the sole reason Nv will be 'paying the piper'
but it's another factor among many.

p0rks0da · 25 Feb 2010 at 16:04

rhys216 said:
It makes £298 look cheap.

Yep i agree with that, but the thing is nVidia have always been way over the odds on pricing for launch products at the high end, especially when they were miles ahead in terms of performance.

ATI did so well with the 48xx series because it was priced so aggresively - hence why i bought one! (and i still love the card tbh) I just find it hard to believe that they need to charge twice what they did for those cards to turn a profit this time around. But we are just going round and round in circles now so i think we should just accept that either you think the 5800 series are priced fairly or not.

All i know is that they are priced unacceptably high in comparison to the 4800 series for my taste, so i won't be buying for a good while yet. If Fermi is good and priced well i will be interested for the CUDA side of things, but if it's not i will just hold out until prices are sane again and buy whatever card seems decent.

I forgot to mention that the only nVidia card i ever bought on launch was the original Geforce 256

And i've mostly owned ATI since then.

rhys216 · 25 Feb 2010 at 16:06

Kenai said:
Your admission to being anti-nvidia casts a slightly different light on some of your previous posts too.

Woops, didn't want to let that slip...
WTF it only takes a person with half a brain to work out I'm anti Nv, and it's with good reason.

Anything I'v said has been either fact or my honest opinion, but somehow I can no longer be objective no?