** NVIDIA GTX 1080 FOUNDERS EDITION: WANNA PRE-ORDER?

Legend said:
You could say EXACTLY the same about the 980 when it released 18 months ago. But IT was £200 less. So your point is...?
Click to expand...

That's its the fastest single GPU on the market so calling it mid range regardless of price is stupid? The obsession that some people have here and on the CPU thread with die size* is amazing! If its faster its faster it doesn't matter what size the die is!

*for die size also read bus width - if its faster with a 256bit vs 384/512 bit bus its still faster!
 
Last edited:
Caracus2k said:
That's its the fastest single GPU on the market so calling it mid range regardless of price is stupid? The obsession that some people have here and on the CPU thread with die size is amazing! If its faster its faster it doesn't matter what size the die is!
Click to expand...

It's mid-range in the sense of the place it will occupy in the overall line-up, as the Ti is all but a certainty, we know this because it's what Nvidia have been doing for years. Regardless, high-end, mid-range whatever, and I repeat, it's no different to what you could say about the 980 which was £200 less when it released. There is no justification for this other than greed.
 
Legend said:
It's mid-range in the sense of the place it will occupy in the line-up. Regardless, high-end, mid-range whatever, and I repeat, it's no different to what you could say about the 980 which was £200 less when it released. There is no justification for this other than greed.
Click to expand...

poor pound to dollar conversion rate move from a 28nm process to a smaller one after a number of years?

In time it will occupy a position not at the top of the 10XX (ti/ Titan/ etc) range. For now its the fastest single GPU... for now its 'top end' much the same as the 8800 GTX Ultra was once top end but which now gets its rear handed to it by decidedly not 'top end' contemporary cards...
 
Matt26LFC said:
Not sure the price is that bad. Brand new 980Ti cost £500 all the way up to £620 for the Asus Matrix and being that the 1080 is well faster and comes with support for new features and technology then it costing more is well what was always going to happen.#

Not sure why any ever expects different, top end cards have always been expensive.

As for no competition how much did AMD charge for the FuryX and Nano?! Hardly cheap at launch where they.
Click to expand...

I hope your joking. If that's the case the 1180 will be £800 next gen.
 
Caracus2k said:
poor pound to dollar conversion rate move from a 28nm process to a smaller one after a number of years?

In time it will occupy a position not at the top of the 10XX (ti/ Titan/ etc) range for now its the fastest single GPU for now its 'top end' much the same as the 8800 GTX Ultra was once top end but which now gets its rear handed to it by decidedly not 'top end' contemporary cards...
Click to expand...

£200 increase isn't explained by mere £/$ exchange/conversion rate, come on! It doesn't matter about the whole top end, mid-range aspect... whatever is stated in regards to the 1080 can also be said of the 980, and I say again, which was £200 cheaper on release. There is simply no justification for the 1080 price-tag... not if it stays where it is anyway, north of £600. I think only the naive would expect it to be exactly the same price as the 980 was, that isn't realistic, but £615 cheapest for a Reference, wow... it's clearly made a lot of people angry, and there's every chance we will see the high-end AIB cards more than that. That said, I don't think we've seen anything yet if the 1070 ends up north of £400!! That won't be pretty...
 
Last edited:
Legend said:
£200 increase isn't explained by mere £/$ exchange/conversion rate, come on! It doesn't matter about the whole top end, mid-range aspect... whatever is stated in regards to the 1080 can also be said of the 980, and I say again, which was £200 cheaper card on release. There is simply no justification for the 1080 price-tag... not if it stays where it is anyway, north of £600. I think only the naive would expect it to be exactly the same price as the 980 was, that isn't realistic, but what it's come in at is genuinely nuts... just have a look around the web, it's made a lot of people angry. That said, I don't think we've seen anything yet if the 1070 ends up north of £400!! That won't be pretty...
Click to expand...

980 was $549 on release FE 1080 is $699 so that's $150 difference in the USA = about 100 pounds sterling difference. So the poor pound to dollar exchange rate equates for about half of that extra 200 pounds.... As I said NVidia have also had to move to a delayed and expensive new node. As I keep having to tell people on the CPU forum the actual cost of making the computer component is only a small fraction of the retail price. The main bulk of the price is to recoup R+D....
 
Legend said:
£200 increase isn't explained by mere £/$ exchange/conversion rate, come on! It doesn't matter about the whole top end, mid-range aspect... whatever is stated in regards to the 1080 can also be said of the 980, and I say again, which was £200 cheaper on release. There is simply no justification for the 1080 price-tag... not if it stays where it is anyway, north of £600. I think only the naive would expect it to be exactly the same price as the 980 was, that isn't realistic, but £615 cheapest for a Reference, wow... it's clearly made a lot of people angry, and there's every chance we will see the high-end AIB cards more than that. That said, I don't think we've seen anything yet if the 1070 ends up north of £400!! That won't be pretty...
Click to expand...

Difference wasn't 200 pounds on launch anyhow OCUK were selling pre order branded 980GTX's for 469.99 with the 1080 gigabyte selling pre order now for 635.99 so 166 pounds difference not 200!
 
Caracus2k said:
980 was $549 on release FE 1080 is $699 so that's $150 difference in the USA = about 100 pounds sterling difference. So the poor pound to dollar exchange rate equates for about half of that extra 200 pounds.... As I said NVidia have also had to move to a delayed and expensive new node. As I keep having to tell people on the CPU forum the actual cost of making the computer component is only a small fraction of the retail price. The main bulk of the price is to recoup R+D....
Click to expand...

I give no sympathy to Nvidia to use '' its cause its 16nm and its costing us''

they already milked enough money with 28nm to fund 16nm, now it seems theyre offsetting the cost on us again for their endeavor into 16nm, as a consumer we should not be paying more for better technology, it should stay within the same price range, this is also AMDs fault and I also will be taking a kg of salt whenever the leather-coat wearer speaks.
 
Legend said:
You could say EXACTLY the same about the 980 when it released 18 months ago. But IT was £200 less. So your point is...?
Click to expand...

well I never claimed the 980 was a mid range card.


Nvidia have decided to do this if you don't like it vote with your wallet.
 
So what's this "Founders Edition" then?

As far as I can see, it's marketing gaff for having a stock cooler, or am I missing something?
 
Aedus said:
So what's this "Founders Edition" then?

As far as I can see, it's marketing gaff for having a stock cooler, or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Pretty much reference design with supposedly best quality components used.

Custom ones are supposed to be around $100 cheaper than this.
 
Wouldn't nvidia be screwing over owners of current gen cards in terms of resale value if they priced the 1080 the same as a 980?
 
I'm not saying nvidia priced the 1080 just because of that. They probably priced it for its relative performance to current gen cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom