Nvidia Corporation’s Ethical Pricing Problem – Monopolistic Price Skimming or Fair Value?

[Sin_Chase]

Why are you so desperate to defend a near 100pc raise in the price point of the flagship card?

I hesitate to use the term "lol" in a post because in reality it's never so side splittingly funny that I laugh aloud, but comparing the automative industry to the comparatively insignificant GPU market in a totally different sector and drawing direct comparisons between a Ferrari and a Titan X? Nearly lol.

The Titan X is a flagship card as part of a very niche market, it's a halo card. It's not a flagship mainstream product. It's a flagship halo product.

It's not supposed to be accessible, follow pricing trends, fit into a price : performance bracket. It is what it is and if you want it, you buy it. If you do not 'get it' then you have no business buying it, irrespective of price.

There is no defending, no justifying or otherwise needed - nVidia could charge £5,000 for it and I would say exactly the same.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

Why are you so desperate to defend a near 100pc raise in the price point of the flagship card?

I hesitate to use the term "lol" in a post because in reality it's never so side splittingly funny that I laugh aloud, but comparing the automative industry to the comparatively insignificant GPU market in a totally different sector and drawing direct comparisons between a Ferrari and a Titan X? Nearly lol.

Just because its their flagship, doesn't mean it should be priced as their previous flagship. You are labeling different cards from different generations to fool yourself into thinking that Nvidia has committed some great injustice to the PC community.

At the end of the day, it is a new card, with a new design, with new production costs, in an ever changing market.

Don't think the card pricing is fair? Don't buy it then, obviously that price bracket is not targeted at you.

I wont be getting the TX as it doesn't interest me and is outside what i am willing to pay for a single card, i just find it ridiculous that some care enough to angrily attack a brand over possible GPU pricing of a card they wont get.

Desperate to defend? I don't think anyone here is desperate to defend the brand, they seem like they just want to know why are you so desperate to slander them? Didn't get the GPU you asked for last Christmas?

 

[Gregster]

His comparison was to the 'halo' aspect of the Titan, the laferrari would be one such product.
I hate car analogues like the next bloke, would take that over your gibberish any day.

Indeed!

The Titan X is a flagship card as part of a very niche market, it's a halo card. It's not a flagship mainstream product. It's a flagship halo product.

It's not supposed to be accessible, follow pricing trends, fit into a price : performance bracket. It is what it is and if you want it, you buy it. If you do not 'get it' then you have no business buying it, irrespective of price.

There is no defending, no justifying or otherwise needed - nVidia could charge £5,000 for it and I would say exactly the same.

Indeed!

Just because its their flagship, doesn't mean it should be priced as their previous flagship. You are labeling different cards from different generations to fool yourself into thinking that Nvidia has committed some great injustice to the PC community.

At the end of the day, it is a new card, with a new design, with new production costs, in an ever changing market.

Don't think the card pricing is fair? Don't buy it then, obviously that price bracket is not targeted at you.

I wont be getting the TX as it doesn't interest me and is outside what i am willing to pay for a single card, i just find it ridiculous that some care enough to angrily attack a brand over possible GPU pricing of a card they wont get.

Desperate to defend? I don't think anyone here is desperate to defend the brand, they seem like they just want to know why are you so desperate to slander them? Didn't get the GPU you asked for last Christmas?

Indeed!

Spot on but I love a car analogy. They work very well.

 

[africanos23]

I need a card or cards (2 max no more)

That can

a) run 4K at near or over 60 FPS.

b) without any stutter or hitting a vram wall on any title currently out.

c) provide somewhat future-proofing for 4K.

Only option imo - Titan X

(that's my value proposion)

 

[Silent_Scone]

The fact people are willing to make a stand about the price says to me they want it enough.

Nobody likes paying top dollar for anything...


Just as ridiculous as the people saying to others to stop buying at these prices.
The hard truth of the matter is that without a leading alternative product from competition, they can charge whatever they want. NVIDIA is a multi billion global conglomerate, AMD is not. Here is the fundamental problem...we need better alternatives.

Next thread.

 

[Dave2150]

Sadly for you your argument falls flat on it's face.

Check with Gibbo how many 4k monitors he is selling and what he expects to sell next year and you will realise how wrong you are.

Don't take my word for it, ask the guy who sells the monitors.

I don't believe I'm wrong. I said that 1% of gamers have 4k monitors at this point in time. The reality is that it's probably not even 1% yet.

Lets take a look at the steam hardware survey, bear in mind steam had 66 million users as of December 2014, so I believe it's a decent sample size. I know of no other survey conducted on this many gaming PC's.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

0.05% of users running a 4k resolution on steam.

I'm very interested in seeing your data, Kaap. Feel free to link us to your data, where you believe far more than 1% of gamers have a 4k monitor.

 

[Dave2150]

The reason why is very simole, support. Driver support, software support, games suppirt, slightly support, feature support, customer support.

Who cares if a card is a few FPS faster but you have to wait 4 months to get drivers?

For the vast majority of gamers who only use a single GPU, AMD's drivers are perfect.

 

[nomadd]

I cant quite believe there is brand loyalty in this area. Personally when upgrading I just buy the best I can at the price point I want to pay. Had virtually every brand in history.

This^

 

[africanos23]

I don't believe I'm wrong. I said that 1% of gamers have 4k monitors at this point in time. The reality is that it's probably not even 1% yet.

Lets take a look at the steam hardware survey, bear in mind steam had 66 million users as of December 2014, so I believe it's a decent sample size. I know of no other survey conducted on this many gaming PC's.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

0.05% of users running a 4k resolution on steam.

I'm very interested in seeing your data, Kaap. Feel free to link us to your data, where you believe far more than 1% of gamers have a 4k monitor.

I don't think we can actually get hard numbers (everything is % based with no actual numbers).

You forgot to add Multi-Monitor Desktop Resolution below the primary one from your screenshot.

I think if Gibbo can gives us the numbers in terms of 4K monitors sold vs any others resolutions it would be better statistically than raw percentages.

 

[TNA]

Another example, Nvidia's marketing is in your text and you don't even realise it.

True, after reading a few of his posts in the past I just tend skip them now.

 

[andybird123]

I don't believe I'm wrong. I said that 1% of gamers have 4k monitors at this point in time. The reality is that it's probably not even 1% yet.

Lets take a look at the steam hardware survey, bear in mind steam had 66 million users as of December 2014, so I believe it's a decent sample size. I know of no other survey conducted on this many gaming PC's.

0.05% of users running a 4k resolution on steam.

I'm very interested in seeing your data, Kaap. Feel free to link us to your data, where you believe far more than 1% of gamers have a 4k monitor.

steam survey represents historical data, or at best previous installed base... OCUK have been on record as saying that 4K sales account for 20-25% of their monitor sales... by dismissing installed base as less than 1% you are ignoring the fact that 4K is selling very well, so they all need to be onboard with supporting it to generate future sales, which is the important bit

For the vast majority of gamers who only use a single GPU, AMD's drivers are perfect.

any one who claims either set of drivers is "perfect" is instant BS

 

[Dave2150]

I don't think we can actually get hard numbers (everything is % based with no actual numbers).

You forgot to add Multi-Monitor Desktop Resolution below the primary one from your screenshot.

I think if Gibbo can gives us the numbers in terms of 4K monitors sold vs any others resolutions it would be better statistically than raw percentages.

My comments were related to 4K uptake overall, not just from one country, and certainly not just from one retailer like ocuk, which attracts more enthusiasts than most retailers.

Average joe probably gets his bog standard 1080P screen from a local PC shop, or as part of an overpriced PC system from one of the huge retailers out there.

 

[Dave2150]

steam survey represents historical data, or at best previous installed base... OCUK have been on record as saying that 4K sales account for 20-25% of their monitor sales... by dismissing installed base as less than 1% you are ignoring the fact that 4K is selling very well, so they all need to be onboard with supporting it to generate future sales, which is the important bit



any one who claims either set of drivers is "perfect" is instant BS

The Steam hardware survey is regularly updated, the data in the second column in the picture I linked shows the % increase from the previous month. For 4k monitors, it shows a 0.01% increase.........

For single GPU's, both AMD's and NVIDIA's drivers are equally perfect imo.

 

[Silent_Scone]

So you're saying sales data is less accurate than an optional survey? It's updated at intervals, not very often ones at that.

 

[Dave2150]

So you're saying sales data is less accurate than an optional survey? It's updated at intervals, not very often ones at that.

Sales data worldwide would be very accurate.

Sales data from one retailer (ocuk attracts enthusiasts) wouldn't be representative of the overall picture in the world, imo

 

[andybird123]

The Steam hardware survey is regularly updated, the data in the second column in the picture I linked shows the % increase from the previous month. For 4k monitors, it shows a 0.01% increase.........

For single GPU's, both AMD's and NVIDIA's drivers are equally perfect imo.

So we should include people who use intel integrated and 5+year old gpu's and try to apply that in any logical sense to current sales rates?
I cant help but think that you are entirely missing the point.

We arent talking about people who buy a business machine and just happen to install steam and a couple of time killer "games", we are talking about the enthusiast market and whether it has the volume to justify supporting.

 

[Dave2150]

So we should include people who use intel integrated and 5+year old gpu's and try to apply that in any logical sense to current sales rates?
I cant help but think that you are entirely missing the point.

We arent talking about people who buy a business machine and just happen to install steam and a couple of time killer "games", we are talking about the enthusiast market and whether it has the volume to justify supporting.

I suggest you go back through the last few posts to understand what kaap and I were debating.

 

[Klunt Bumskrint]

I think Sega should start making GPU's.
A third manufacturer would do the industry no end of good.

 

[andybird123]

I suggest you go back through the last few posts to understand what kaap and I were debating.

I have. literally, you said that 4K and by association potential Titan X represent less than 1% of "PC gamers", the problem is that installed base based on up to 10 years of historical purhcases isnt really relevant to a discussion about current selling patterns (which is what the thread is about and what kaap was obviously referring to).

So yes, literally, if you include anyone who has ever run any type of "game" on their PC, you are right, however the point kaap was clearly trying to make is that 4K is becoming a significant portion of sales for PC gaming proper. The thread is about pricing, sales, and future sales/pricing... The Steam survey is about none of these. The source of your "1%" is not relevant to the overall discussion you joined.

 

[Kaapstad]

I suggest you go back through the last few posts to understand what kaap and I were debating.

Live with it 2160p is here and it's not going away.

As for sales data around the world in countries like Japan, Korea and USA for example I suspect that they buy a lot more 2160p displays than we do.