• 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.

AMD Radeon R9 290X with Hawaii GPU pictured, has 512-bit 4GB Memory

Rusty0611 said:
Look - you're going off on a tangent. What you are willing to pay and what the market are willing to pay are different things.
Click to expand...

Not really.

I am a late 30's gaming obsessive compulsive, without kids, and with a relatively large disposable income (this dont mean I am rich btw).

I am a very good sample of the demographic that the gfx card vendors need to be appealing to if they want to shift high end products. If these new cards offered an 80% performance boost, then even at £700, I would probably bite. If they were priced at ~£400 with only a 20% performance boost (which is all they got), then I may still have bitten, cos I love high end graphics and I am an idiot with money.

I guess the accountants and market analysts will know what the best price is for the vendor's profits, but as we all know, these boys can get it wrong now and then. Perhaps this is one of these times.
 
I'm trying to catch up, had a top spec pc like 8 years ago, bought a rubbish 8400 on a rubbish board for 50 quid! It's on a stock cooler and doing 3.4gig, bought better ram, and got a cheap 650ti for 60 bucks.. enabled me to play tombraider at 1080 pretty much fine, like maybe 5 or 6 bits where you 'noticed' it slowed down in the entire game.. I'm going single card, you think it's worth waiting a couple of months and seeing how this pans out? Will be getting new mboard i7 + ram and a nice ssd, I'm just thinking til I upgrade my monitor, not really going to see much difference.. my current monitor maxes at 1080.
 
I guess the accountants and market analysts will know what the best price is for the vendor's profits, but as we all know, these boys can get it wrong now and then. Perhaps this is one of these times
Click to expand...

I guess Its all the time then!

Just look at Tv ads lol aimed at dumb people
 
Last edited:
DtGSyhh.jpg
 
Last edited:
MatTheCat said:
Not really.

I am a late 30's gaming obsessive compulsive, without kids, and with a relatively large disposable income (this dont mean I am rich btw).

I am a very good sample of the demographic that the gfx card vendors need to be appealing to if they want to shift high end products. If these new cards offered an 80% performance boost, then even at £700, I would probably bite. If they were priced at ~£400 with only a 20% performance boost (which is all they got), then I may still have bitten, cos I love high end graphics and I am an idiot with money.

I guess the accountants and market analysts will know what the best price is for the vendor's profits, but as we all know, these boys can get it wrong now and then. Perhaps this is one of these times.
Click to expand...

All of which bears no relevance to how much the market is willing to pay. I know it's quite an abstract idea but the market isn't necessarily represented by your average typical hardware fanatic because that by definition doesn't have any link to the price you're willing to pay. You keep looking at it on the individual level where it's at the "market" level. Of course the market is made up of millions of individual agents but that doesn't mean you can take the average agent of the market based on stereo-types of the kind of person who buys high end GPUs.

You keep saying about the price/performance ratio between generations decreasing and I don't think anybody has disagreed with you or even suggested that it's OK. However, if the market wasn't willing to pay the current prices for the performance bumps available then GPU manufacturers would have no choice to drop prices. The fact they're rising still suggests that they're more than happy with the volume they're selling and the total profit. Unfortunately that's one of those things :(.

To re-state I agree that the price/performance between generations is poor.

LtMatt said:
For the lads.
Click to expand...

LOL. Brilliant. Almost lost my morning coffee. :D :D
 
8 and 6 pin connections?! Guess I'm not getting one of those for my system then.

Come on AMD I want to throw money at you, at least launch a top end card that doesn't suck so much power. How can NV manage to get power so well under control this past gen. :(

Guess I might need to get a 7xxx, or 280X, they're practically the same anyway.
Now it just depends on the drivers, and performance in OpenGL for me.

Still interested in TDP information though. Depending on that, I might risk using at 6-8 pin converter.
 
Last edited:
Rusty0611 said:
All of which bears no relevance to how much the market is willing to pay. I know it's quite an abstract idea but the market isn't necessarily represented by your average typical hardware fanatic because that by definition doesn't have any link to the price you're willing to pay. You keep looking at it on the individual level where it's at the "market" level. Of course the market is made up of millions of individual agents but that doesn't mean you can take the average agent of the market based on stereo-types of the kind of person who buys high end GPUs.

You keep saying about the price/performance ratio between generations decreasing and I don't think anybody has disagreed with you or even suggested that it's OK. However, if the market wasn't willing to pay the current prices for the performance bumps available then GPU manufacturers would have no choice to drop prices. The fact they're rising still suggests that they're more than happy with the volume they're selling and the total profit. Unfortunately that's one of those things :(.

To re-state I agree that the price/performance between generations is poor.



LOL. Brilliant. Almost lost my morning coffee. :D :D
Click to expand...

performances will be predictable with hardware and node 28nm, if 20nm works we see a 50% change or so, with Mantle a software idea we might see a similiar addition and if so that changes the landscape of performance.

if you play games with support of Mantle, well then the choice is easy.
you still have performance without it.
 
So from the pic above, the 290 should be not much slower than the 290X I guess?

I'd love to pun "2560 steam processors for 2560 res gaming on Ultra (with the exception needing to drop down to high on Metro, BF4, Crysis 3 etc)" :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom