• 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.

More GeForce GTX 465 Details Surface

p0rks0da said:
Meaker said it was £120, i bought a 4850 not long after launch from this store for £99, that would be 20%.
Click to expand...

5770s can be had for 100 if you look around......I will admit that prices have not fallen at the same pace as the 48xx series...but that's because NVIDIA has nothing to combat the sub 200 quid ATI range now.

Also at launch the 5770s were cheaper than the 4850 at launch. I know because I purchased a 4850 on launch day. As stated before, I think the high price is largely due to the market.


ss20100517213856.png
 
gurusan said:
As stated before, I think the high price is largely due to the market.
Click to expand...

Oh aye let me be clear, i am NOT saying ATI priced them too high, just they cost too much at retail. I don't care what factors go into pricing any card, it's just the final price i'm interested in.

For it's performance i think £100 is acceptable like i said, i think anything above that is too much though.

EDIT: i think prices are terrible all round for what it's worth, on every card from both brands.
 
I do agree that more than 100 seems a bit much for the performance.

I just bought one today for 101inc . Not too far off my budget :D Going to go CF in a few weeks as these 260s are just too hot and loud in SLI, though the performance is really quite good.
 
nope they are spoken for. big.wayne was interested in one but unfortunately I had to sell to someone else. Sorry wayne!
 
p0rks0da said:
Oh aye let me be clear, i am NOT saying ATI priced them too high, just they cost too much at retail. I don't care what factors go into pricing any card, it's just the final price i'm interested in.

For it's performance i think £100 is acceptable like i said, i think anything above that is too much though.

EDIT: i think prices are terrible all round for what it's worth, on every card from both brands.
Click to expand...

The 4*** was on a mature 55nm process with exceptional high yeilds(in comparrison to this gen)which meant ATI could sell them reasonably cheap and drive profits by volume.The waifer costs were also significantly cheaper not to mention cheaper components and better exchange rates etc.
Do you honestly think that ATI will happily just take absorb 50% increase in price.If they did they would be screwed.
They could probably re spin the 5*** to increase yields slightly but its not needed as they will have southern islands out this year.
They tested the 4*** 1st on this 40 nm process so they could see what issues they would face with leakage etc and what they could do to compensate for it for the 5*** series.If they didnt they would be like Nvidia with Fermi with low yields and high heat issues etc who just went balls deep without any lube :)
 
They did and AFAIK they were largely successful in terms of yields. However the problem is that GF100 is so freakin huge.
 
kieves1 said:
The 4*** was on a mature 55nm process with exceptional high yeilds(in comparrison to this gen)which meant ATI could sell them reasonably cheap and drive profits by volume.The waifer costs were also significantly cheaper not to mention cheaper components and better exchange rates etc.
Do you honestly think that ATI will happily just take absorb 50% increase in price.If they did they would be screwed.
They could probably re spin the 5*** to increase yields slightly but its not needed as they will have southern islands out this year.
They tested the 4*** 1st on this 40 nm process so they could see what issues they would face with leakage etc and what they could do to compensate for it for the 5*** series.If they didnt they would be like Nvidia with Fermi with low yields and high heat issues etc who just went balls deep without any lube :)
Click to expand...

None of that is my problem, i look at the price of a card and see what performance it offers compared to previous generations at around the same price point. 5770 is not an attractive product at anything over £100 to me, end of story.
 
p0rks0da said:
Oh aye let me be clear, i am NOT saying ATI priced them too high, just they cost too much at retail. I don't care what factors go into pricing any card, it's just the final price i'm interested in.

For it's performance i think £100 is acceptable like i said, i think anything above that is too much though.

EDIT: i think prices are terrible all round for what it's worth, on every card from both brands.
Click to expand...

So do I but blame that mainly on our weak pound. As I remind people on every occasion when they complain about graphics card prices, it's the fact we don't get $2 to the pound anymore which screws us. When the 4 series was launched we did have $2 to the pound. If we still did then the current range of cards from both manufacturers would be as follows:

ATI 5770 - £99.87
ATI 5830 - £140.41
ATI 5850 - £175.66
ATI 5870 - £234.41
ATI 5970 - £351.91

GTX 470 - £205.04
GTX 480 - £293.16

On those prices both sides would be selling more in the uk plus they compare very well price/performance wise to the last generations.

Even I would have been tempted to buy a gtx480 for under £300.

So ATI have pitched the price of 5770 exactly right. Blame the £168 billion we are in debt as to why you can't but one for £100.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom