Caporegime
I personally want to see 780ti do well as im in the market for a new card, and i do have a preference for nvidia.
-
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.
NVIDIA 780 Ti Announced (18/10/13)
- Thread starter Silly Goose On The Loose
- Start date
Caporegime
Associate
I can't see how its going to 'fail'? Its a Titan-turbo which may well come in noticeably cheaper than the Titan was - a card in itself is on par the competition today. I expect it to cost (a lot) more than the 290X - but then you make you choice, the premium product at the premium price, or the AMD.
Its a bugger for me as I'm fed up waiting for all the hardware to be available at the same time. First it was the Ivybridge-E, then it was the Asus RIVE Black, and now looks its going to be the 780ti. I've never buy this thing!
Its a bugger for me as I'm fed up waiting for all the hardware to be available at the same time. First it was the Ivybridge-E, then it was the Asus RIVE Black, and now looks its going to be the 780ti. I've never buy this thing!
Soldato
Fixed, and AMD user doesn't = AMD fanboy.
Yes, I know you didn't say fanboy, but you might as well have done.
Soldato
Well let people stick with their preferred brand. It's not a crime. But honestly I don't think I could own an AMD product prominently. Within 24 hours I had issues with 2d clocks putting load on the GPU, the drivers broke my power schemes along with the clean-up tool. It's all very rough edged. Sure the performance is there on the 290X but I wouldn't give it the time of day if the 780 GTX came down to the same price, which it practically is already.
Just being honest.
Just being honest.
Soldato
I suspect many here want to see the 780ti fail because of its expected price, not because of the company that makes it. I'd count myself among them: I'd rather buy Nvidia, but there is just no way I can justify the extra cost. The only way Nvidia will lower its prices is if it releases a card at a much higher price point than a comparable AMD product and the card is a commercial failure.
It's a brand new product, just teething problems. It's programs like GPU-Z that don't support the new cards yet that cause the voltage/clocks/desktop loading issues.
Has nobody ever owned a launch card before around here?
I didn't say fanboy because I didn't mean it like that, as usual though people jumping to conclusions.
There's people here who'd want to see it fail at any price.
Soldato
You make sweeping generalizations like that and then talk about people jumping to conclusions?
There may well be people here that want it to fail regardless (just as there are some nvidia fans here that want the same for AMD), but I hardly think they constitute the majority of the forum as you put it. They're just the ones that shout the loudest and most often.
Caporegime
What the heck are you going on about?? Why don't you bother and so some reading up about,especially with the long threads about G-sync on places like overclock.net which have a big Nvidia community too. All,it is a knee jerk response(I have a Nvidia card myself,so please don't try the other crap too) without bothering to read what I said.
Most photography orientated monitors(including many very expensive pro models) using IPS and VA panels do not support 144HZ,let alone 120HZ refresh rates. That includes most of the the 16:10 ratio ones,with 8 bit or 8 bit+ AFC(NOT 6+2 A-FRC IPS panels). They are stuck at around 60HZ which you don't seem to understand. G-sync needs the high modes too, as it needs a wider range of refresh rates to support its mode of action.
Its a good idea in practice,but sadly most monitors are really not ready for it,as are most monitors from the last 3 years.
About cost:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2013/10/18/nvidia-g-sync-unveiled-as-stunning-new-moni/1
Most of us on this forum live in the UK,so we pay VAT and the same goes in the US as the prices quoted are without state taxes which are added at the checkout.
Nvidia said $175 which equates to around 108 quid or around 130 quid with VAT in the UK. They later on said that the DIY kit would eventually cost around $130 which equates to nearly 100 quid with VAT. That was said in the comments section of their own website. That means for the vast majority of monitors that is the cost you are paying,unless you think people are going to start throwing away 400 quid+ Dells and NECs and the like away.
That is the price of the DIY kits which you need to install yourself.
The price premium for the Asus monitor is $100 or nearly 80 quid if you include VAT:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2013/10/22/nvidia-g-sync-update-pricing-and-retrofits.aspx
That is the kind of premium you will see,if other companies start to making G-sync enabled monitors. That is not $70 or the 40 quid you are stating.
Last edited:
The amount of hate nvidia get on here it wouldn't surprise me. All people ever complain about is price with nvidia and proprietary stuff which AMD have started doing now anyway.
If the prices were so bad the cards wouldn't be selling as well as they have done for years.
Soldato
All people complain about is Nvidia's pricing, so you wouldn't be suprised if the majority wanted the 780ti to fail regardless of price? Hmm.
The fact of the matter is, Nvidia have not responded to AMD's price cuts. The 770 in particular looks poor value compared to the 7970/280x - and if the 290 comes in at around £350 it will look poorer value still. So when people come onto these forums asking which GPU they should get within a given budget, or to spec them a mid-high end gaming rig within a reasonably tight budget, is it suprising that everyone recommends AMD? It's just good sense. I hardly think it constitutes Nvidia hate.
Notice that when someone comes here asking for a high-end system with a larger budget (say, £1500+) there is no AMD bias, because we can take factors other than the price/performance ratio into account.
Soldato
It really depends on what particular area people are 'hating on'. Some of it is quite justified and some is just fanboy nonsense (and that goes for both).
Some people just feel the need to defend their chosen brand, regardless.
As for the prices... Well, that argument has been played out so many times.
One can say that it's blatant overcharging and another can say that it's not a rip off if you're willing to pay for it etc, etc... We could go round in circles on that one for days.
All I'm saying is that making statements like 'the majority of the forum wants to see the latest Nvidia card fail because they own AMD cards' is a massive generalization and a little insulting.
Those few loudmouths who desperately try to big up their brand and **** off the other don't represent the majority.
Some people just feel the need to defend their chosen brand, regardless.
As for the prices... Well, that argument has been played out so many times.
One can say that it's blatant overcharging and another can say that it's not a rip off if you're willing to pay for it etc, etc... We could go round in circles on that one for days.
All I'm saying is that making statements like 'the majority of the forum wants to see the latest Nvidia card fail because they own AMD cards' is a massive generalization and a little insulting.
Those few loudmouths who desperately try to big up their brand and **** off the other don't represent the majority.
Caporegime
Regarding the GTX780TI,how can people say the pricing is not something relevant?? How many of you would rather it was priced at no more than 500 quid,instead of 750 to 850 quid??
Why wouldn't people want to see a GTX780 which is around 400 quid or less(where it should be looking at the GTX580 and GTX680 after a few months).
Its about time high end GPUs start dropping down to under 500 quid for the cheapest models again,otherwise when the 20NM models arrive next year,we are going to see silly high price from both AMD and Nvidia and more crappy sub 150 quid cards at launch. Instead of competition we will see a cartel with each one patting themselves on the back.
Remember,the DDR2 pricing cartel a few years ago?? Current HDD pricing due to the reduction in competition and the flood excuse?? We all ended up getting less but paying more. We don't want a repeat of that.
Why wouldn't people want to see a GTX780 which is around 400 quid or less(where it should be looking at the GTX580 and GTX680 after a few months).
Its about time high end GPUs start dropping down to under 500 quid for the cheapest models again,otherwise when the 20NM models arrive next year,we are going to see silly high price from both AMD and Nvidia and more crappy sub 150 quid cards at launch. Instead of competition we will see a cartel with each one patting themselves on the back.
Remember,the DDR2 pricing cartel a few years ago?? Current HDD pricing due to the reduction in competition and the flood excuse?? We all ended up getting less but paying more. We don't want a repeat of that.
Last edited:
As you state, Nvidia get crap here because most people hate the fact they are overpriced. That is not the same as wanting Nvidia to fail. I thought Titan and GTX780 pricing was (and still is) a joke but I recognised how great the cards were at an engineering level. Some of us are also perplexed by the fact that Nvidia has an undeserved higher brand recognition amid baseless claims claims they are better quality hence the higher price. This place seems AMD biased because most of us are actually vendor neutral and it just so happens that for the past while AMD have had Nvidia well beaten on price/perf. So most rational recommendations go to AMD GPUs.
As someone mentioned previously Nvidia take the **** with pricing far more often than not. A GTX770 is an horrendous card for the price compared to R9 280X yet Nvidia refuse to drop the price. The £90 difference in price between these two similar performing cards is frankly insulting, especially if we add the fact that the cheaper card has an extra 1GB of VRAM. Of course Nvidia have a higher brand recognition but it is not worth a 40% premium, that's just an insane idea.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-225-MS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1842
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-202-MS&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1750
When R9 290 is released in a few days how will GTX770 be allowed to stay anywhere near this price, or will Nvidia finally recognise their value is utterly atrocious? For the record I ended up getting a GTX780 when I found a great deal for well under £500. So I don't hate Nvidia or want them to fail, I just hate the way they price compared to AMD. In so many cases we are asked to pay a lot more for less if we choose Nvidia.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
Nvidia's own website says that they will be doing 2560x1440 and 4K versions with Gsync... please link me to a 120hz+ TN on either of these resolutions?
I can only find IPS, PLS and VA at 60hz
on cost - not my fault you've read some bad articles, the RRP on the non-gsync Asus monitor is $330... it is available in some retailers for $280-299, but that is the sale price, not the RRP... the Gsync one is not yet available, so we ONLY have the RRP to go on which is $330 > $399
clearly I know nothing about IPS monitors as I only own 3 of them
Last edited:
Permabanned
This.
Caporegime
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-g-sync-asus-monitors-brands-q3-2014/#ixzz2ix6gxbbq
Another article saying $300 for that monitor,so that is a $100 difference or around 80 quid with VAT if you buy it pre-installed. That is what people will be paying extra.
It also says late 2014 until non-Asus monitors are released. ATM,current 4K monitors run at 30HZ to 60HZ. Most pro grade IPS and VA ones at 60HZ. That has been the case for the last 7 years of photography biased monitors I have needed to use for worK I have done. These are distinctive to the bog standard ones(even using VA and IPS panels) which are designed for cheapness not absolute image quality.
Moreover,its not my fault that you have not read any articles about the cost of the DIY modules being between $130 to $175(around 100 to 130 quid with VAT). That is straight from Nvidia which is why so many big sites mentioned the pricing:
http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/technology/g-sync/faq
On another of the Nvidia.com webpages,they mentioned in the comments section that they would try and drop the price down to $130(or nearly 100 quid with VAT) for the DIY modules.
It does make me wonder why the DIY modules cost so much more??
What Nvidia is also stating is future monitor models will have versions which incorporate G-sync. That means FUTURE high resolution models with higher refresh rates. You have just taken the PR literally to mean any monitor available now,which Nvidia have not stated and which you seem to imagine it is.
If you look carefully,Nvidia mentions 2560X1440 and NOT 2560X1600,which means 16:9 ratio panels. I predict they will be 27" panels launched next year running at 120HZ or higher,and I suspect they will be IPS ones,going by some of the artificially overclocked Catleaps and the like which can hit 110HZ to 120HZ if you are lucky. However,outside of them most are lucky to hit 80HZ after modding TBH.
NOT current ones,as Nvidia is not making plug in modules for 99% of current monitors. The monitor needs to either have the G-sync daughterboard already in it or have the ability to be accept one which means,the monitor has to be designed with it in mind.
Even the Asus model which can be updated,was probably designed that way already and guess what,they used a high refresh rate model,not any of the loads of 60HZ pro models Asus makes.
If it were not Asus and Nvidia would have shown off a whole load of other monitors with lower refresh rates,but they didn't did they??
Asus obviously worked with Nvidia on it,hence the exclusivity and I suspect not all Asus monitors can use the module anyway. Hence,of course they are going to say G-sync enabled 4K monitors will be out,but that will only happen when the panel technology has caught up IMHO.
Its no different from AMD talking about 4K with the R9 290X,when there are probably 10 people in the world who own one for gaming due to cost, and outside one monitor,rubbish refresh rates at 4K.
Nvidia have not given any timeframe,but anybody would realise over the next few years higher refresh rate IPS panels(even at 4K) will be released.
However,it means loads of monitors won't really be able to make any use of it,as I said before,and that includes a whole load of expensive monitors launched in the last few years. They are not designed to be ripped apart,or neither are the other parts really designed to work well with G-sync.
So,at this point we will need to agree to disagree.
Last edited: