NV20 : Isn't it expensive?

[dmbsuperfan]

my $30 v3 2000 works just dandy!

 

[Vinny N]

I had a hard time justifying the $127(got in on the buy.com deal) on a Geforce2 32mb GTS, all for what? to play Alice?

Thinking in terms of consoles, I could have easily gotten another Playstation and borrowed games from home, or even a Dreamcast and borrow some games...

I guess I got suckered in by the pricepoint. When I got a Voodoo3, it was ~$130, or that "below $150" mark.

As long as NVIDIA keeps releasing a toned down chip, or enough "Pro, Ultra" whatever versions to lower the price on the normal version to sub $150, I guess it'll be hard to do that once a year upgrade.

 

[paruhd0x]

The prices will lower.

 

[ElFenix]

^
|
|

thats a blanket statement up there.

 

[Wingznut]

"The prices will lower."

You mean that video cards don't appreciate in value?

Damn, so much for me stockpiling Virges.

 

[hans007]

any non completely insane person would not pay over $200 for a card. games aren't designed around the cards that .5% of the gaming population own. Its designed around the tnt2 or voodoo3 most people have. The most expensive card i've ever had was a voodoo5 that i traded a geforce256 64mb (that i got for free btw as a sample) and well that was not worth it either. if you buy an nv20 when it comes out, you might as well just burn your money. I mean $700 for a vid card, thats more than some people make a year in some countries.

 

[dougjnn]

Well hansoo7, until you had to go start talking about the price of rice in Bangladesh, I was pretty much agreeing with you.

I think it's nice to have a performance card, and rig, that allows you to be faster than the software was designed for. It probably doesn't work just incredibly neatso keen at its minimum, or mass, design speed. Cause they crammed stuff in, and ...

But on the other hand, buying an ultra or even a gf2 64 (especially cause it adds little to the gf2 32 benches) is a waste of money except I guess for those form whom it is only a rounding error.

As we were saying earlier, its primarily about bragging rights.

(To me the range of rational cards to buy and run TODAY run from the GF2 MX to the Radeon 32 DDR to the GF2 GTS 32 to the Radeon DDR 64 (cause you can now get it for < $160, and the extra 32 megs DOES increade the Radeon 64's benches signficantly.) Some under $100. All under $200. All damn good 3D accelerator cards.

OTOH, it also doesn't make much sense to me to be running something much below the speed / quality of the GF2 MX now, with it well under $100, and vastly better than stuff like TNT. It is also a bit whack to be suffering along w/ a TNT because someone is &quot;waiting for the NV20&quot; or something. When the NV20 first comes out it will be mondo expensive, and a dumb buy, espcially since it won't have game support yet. Sure cards will come down even more, but mostly at the high end. The lower end is already coming down huge by now.

That's how I see it.

Of course this is all individual economic judgement in a somewhat complex jumble of ever oncoming choices, not moral or religious truth.

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<Well, if we look at board level differences(listed ~in order of gaming performance, not price)-
GeForce2 Ultra
GeForce2 Pro
Quadro2 Pro
GeForce2 GTS 64MB
GeForce2 GTS 32MB
Quadro
GeForceDDR 64MB
GeForceDDR 32MB
Quadro2 MX
GeForce2 MX 32MB
GeForce2 MX 16MB
GeForceSDR 16MB
>>

Yes but some of those are different chips, they all aren't of the same chip design like a P3 or a ThunderBird, ie a Geforce2 MX does not have a full fledged Geforce2 chip in. Its like saying Intel's P2 is in the same class as the P3, it just doesn't work.

 

[sharkeeper]

Why don't they just put a bank of memory slots on the damn thing and let you buy a bare card for $200 or so. Then you can decide how much you want to pay for memory. (addressable up to 512 MB for freaks)

Of course we'll see that the same day we see a 10% flat tax rate!

Cheers!

 

[ahfung]

&quot;Yes but some of those are different chips, they all aren't of the same chip design like a P3 or a ThunderBird, ie a Geforce2 MX does not have a full fledged Geforce2 chip in. Its like saying Intel's P2 is in the same class as the P3, it just doesn't work.&quot;

No one expects them to be the same class. MX is the &quot;Celeron&quot; class of GeForce 2. Both Celeron and MX are neutered but they are aimed for budget users only, so no complaints. If you want more, pay more.

 

[Stephen24]

WTF, they deleted my post.

 

[BenSkywalker]

&quot;Yes but some of those are different chips, they all aren't of the same chip design like a P3 or a ThunderBird, ie a Geforce2 MX does not have a full fledged Geforce2 chip in. Its like saying Intel's P2 is in the same class as the P3, it just doesn't work.&quot;

Glad you brought up the PII/PIII. Speaking in relative terms-

GeForce - PII

GeForce2 MX - Celeron

GeForce2 - PIII

Quadro - Xeon

With several variations of each. It really is very comparable to the CPU market with nVidia's boards(could swap the Intel parts for comparable AMD also), that just hasn't been done in the video card market before. Pretty much any $50 range you have, nVidia has a board available. The NV20 will be quite a bit faster then the GF2U, but the Radeon is still the fastest part ATi has available, what should nVidia do? Drop the price of the GF2 32MB/64MB down to $100/$150 and put the same kind of hurt on ATi that they did on 3dfx?

In all honesty if nVidia wasn't pricing their fastest boards higher then the competition, there simply wouldn't be any competition. In two months the market will look like-

NV20
GeForce2 Ultra
GeForce2 Pro
GeForce2 GTS 64MB
GeForce2 GTS 32MB

For the top five performers, should nVidia price agressively now and simply kill off ATi? Would that be the better move for them to make in your eyes?

 

[ahfung]

&quot;Easy, Nvidia doesn't produce 5 to 8 speed grades of graphics chips, and its easier to overclock an Intel cpu than a Nvidia GPU.&quot;

If you take TNT2 16/32MB and Quadro series into consideration, NVIDIA DOES have over 8 speed grades of graphic chips. Since you said CHIPS so I assume you refer to the whole lines of NVIDIA chips.

&quot;When there is only one choice, who are you going to turn to? ATI? They only have one speed grade as well&quot;

Even for ATI Radeon you do have retail and OEM which are 2 speed grades already. Mixing up with 32/64MB video memory and DDR/SDR, there are MANY choices. And don't forget the upcoming Radeon LE and VE version.

 

[Blackhawk2]

IMO switching memory from DDR to SDRAM or from 32 megs to 16 megs of ram really doesn't designate it as a new speed grade. Nvidia has many different chips but not many speed grades for each chip.

Intel &amp; AMD have many different speed grades for each new chip that comes off the production line and both companies use a practice of phasing out older generations of chips. TNT? Nobody I know wants to buy what is considered a piece of junk at this time. Would you buy a TNT? I doubt it. I can buy a 600Mhz P3 and overclock it to acheive the equivalence of an 800 to 900Mhz P3 at a price thats way less than buying an actual 800 to 900 Mhz P3. You can't buy a Nvidia Geforce2 MX and expect to get the same peformance from overclocking it as a Geforce2 at stock speed.

Nvidia does not have a low priced Geforce2, they have a Geforce2 MX which is a totally different chip and a major downgrade in peformance.

As for the NV20 how many options do we have there: $700 128MB or $500 64MB, wow lots of choice there.

For comparison sake lets take a look at how many processors and their prices to choose from for a P3(Pricewatch listing):

P3 (keep in mind I'm not listing the variations within the same speed grade itself ie 100Mhz bus, 133Mhz bus e b eb ect)
450 - $95
500 - $143
550 - $128
600 - $129
650 - $123
667 - $122
700 - $149
733 - $147
750 - $161
800 - $187
850 - $204
866 - $193
933 - $242
1000 - $293

Thats 14 different variations for a single chip. Where oh where does Nvidia have anything close to that?

 

[BenSkywalker]

You call the TNT junk that noone would want and list the P3 450???

TNT Vanta
TNT2 M64
TNT2
TNT2 Pro
TNT2 Ultra
GeForce SE
GeForce SDR
GeForce DDR 32MB
GeForce DDR 64MB
Quadro 64MB
GeForce2 MX 16MB
GeForce2 MX 32MB
GeForce2 GTS 32MB
GeForce2 GTS 64MB
GeForce2 Pro
GeForce2 Ultra
Quadro2 MX
Quadro2 Pro
VPro(available only in SGI workstations)

All of the cards listed above will work in a proper AGP 2X or 4X slot, so there is no difference between the different FSB PIIIs. The various types of cache OTOH, does make a sizeable difference for the PIII chips and should be listed as seperate products as the nV parts are. Does intel have more choices for chip speeds/configurations? Of course, you didn't even list the Celerons, but now compare nV to any other graphics chip maker. nVidia is much closer to matching Intel then ATi is to nVidia.

&quot;Thats 14 different variations for a single chip. Where oh where does Nvidia have anything close to that?&quot;

There are eighteen board configurations listed above, thirteen of which are GeForce chips. Add in the differently clocked chips(Hercules DDR defaults at 130/301 for isntance instead of 120/301) and all the different vendors and there is a significantly wider range of nV graphics chip based products that you can buy compared to Intel's CPUs. There also is a 200MHZ version of the GF2MX available(though not for PCs AFAIK).

&quot;As for the NV20 how many options do we have there: $700 128MB or $500 64MB, wow lots of choice there.&quot;

Show me, right now, where I can purchase either of those boards for the prices you have listed. No we have to wait BS, show me right now and prove that those are the correct prices. Should we all then simply look at the price of a PIV and say that we have no choice buying Intel? Doesn't make any sense.

You don't want a DX8 board then don't buy a NV20. ATi will probably have one out within the next six or seven months, go that way. Or, you can wait for the Kyro2, possibly 3, to get a fully DX8 compliant part from them. If you want a low end graphics card, then buy it. When the NV20 does come out it will have the same effect that Intel/AMD releasing a new CPU does, lowering the prices on the currently available product. Why argue with choice? Do you feel bad knowing that there are cards out there well over twice as fast, soon to be three times as fast as what you have? Price versus performance, nVidia gives you the option of picking exactly where you want to sit on that scale just as Intel and AMD do.

&quot;You can't buy a Nvidia Geforce2 MX and expect to get the same peformance from overclocking it as a Geforce2 at stock speed.&quot;

No, but many people on this forum are running their GF2 at ~Pro speeds or their Pro at Ultra speeds. Many people with GeForce DDRs are running nearly as fast as stock GF2s, the boards are all memory bandwith limited. For that matter though, every mention I have seen in this thread dealing with this comparison has clearly put the GF2MX in the Celeron comparison when talking about performance.

 

[Sunner]

Blackhawk, going from SDR to DDR isnt a change in speed grade to you?
Heck in the case of the original GF thats like going from a Duron 600 to a TBird 900.
Or going from 32 to 64 MB of mem, thats like Duron vs TB, 64 vs 256 KB of cache, how are those two different?
And complaining that a product isnt good cause it doesnt overclock, please, sound like you're desperately trying to complain about everything nVidia does for some reason.

And if nVidia releases the NV20 at 800$, who cares, get a GTS or Radeon instead, its not like nVidia's making you buy it.

If they somehow manage to put ATi out of biz and starts releasing their low end parts at 300$, now that would suck big time.

 

[MSNY]

If you are upgrading from a TNT2 or GeForce (1) the the NV20 makes sense when the price drops.
Nvidia has a trend with it's refresh cycles to introduce 2 or 3 versions of one GPU chipset. These are usually cheaper models. I'd wait a while and scoop up a deal on a GF2 pro or ultra also.

Give it time, and the price will be right. I have a P3-650 w/ a Geforce DDR and may jump at the NV20 but, I may for the same price go to an Athlon 1.2ghz for about the same price. Hard decision to make.

Wait and see on price/features and then if performance increase makes sense.

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...Thats 14 different variations for a single chip...>>

BenSkywalker those are graphic cards you've listed, show me where Nvidia has 14 different variations on a single chip. You can't answer that because they don't. Oh and those prices are rumored prices for the NV20 but then $500 for the Geforce2 Ultra was a rumor and it turn out to be true :Q.

<<...its not like nVidia's making you buy it...>>

Yes they are, they bought out 3dfx's technology, technology that IMO was superior to what Nvidia has, so now I'm forced to buy Nvidia's or ATI's garbage. Hopefully PowerVR can deliver a part thats better so I won't be stuck with two companies that IMO suck at making graphics cards and drivers that, from what I hear, crash at least once a day :Q.

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...Consider this. The X-Box will essentially have an NV20 inside it. The X Box is supposed to sell all in for between $350 and $400. OK, MS is supposed to loose something on the hardware, to make back up on game licensing. But it can't be more than $100 or something they'll loose per box. That comes with a PIII 733, DVD, 6-10 gig hard drive, power supply, controllers, enclosure and cables. Which means that the NV20 plus the DDR inside the box can't come to more than say $250 in cost. AT the most. Maybe quite a bit less, once its ramping in production. NV20 cards should cost nvidia similar to make...>>

So tell me again oh mighty BenSkywalker why Nvidia is charging us $500+??? You want to know why? Because they love all the suckers in the PC industry.

 

[hans007]

the difference is that nvidia still sells the tnt2 vanta, whereas intel discontinued all pentium3s below 700mhz

 

[MikeyP]

!

<< Consider this. The X-Box will essentially have an NV20 inside it. The X Box is supposed to sell all in for between $350 and $400. OK, MS is supposed to loose something on the hardware, to make back up on game licensing. But it can't be more than $100 or something they'll loose per box. That comes with a PIII 733, DVD, 6-10 gig hard drive, power supply, controllers, enclosure and cables. Which means that the NV20 plus the DDR inside the box can't come to more than say $250 in cost. AT the most. Maybe quite a bit less, once its ramping in production. NV20 cards should cost nvidia similar to make >>


I honestly don't believe the Xbox will have 128MB of memory for the card. Plus, the NV2x in the Xbox will not be on its own card, thereby reducing cost. Also, isn't the NV25--closer to what the Xbox ix than NV20--supposed to have something to the effect of tile rendering? That would eliminate the need for the ultra fast memory.

I believe a T-Bird costs ~$50 to produce. The NV20 chip alone will cost more than this, it is larger and more complex. Add in the memory, the card, and R&amp;D, this card will be more expensive to produce than any consumer card before it. I actually believe NVIDIA is basically forced to charge this to keep up with their torrid R&amp;D spending--which is a good thing. Just buy a generation behind, plenty of performance at a great price. That, or go with a Radeon DDR, I love mine!

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...Also, isn't the NV25--closer to what the Xbox ix than NV20--supposed to have something to the effect of tile rendering? That would eliminate the need for the ultra fast memory...>>

Nvidia's HSR is nowhere near as effective as a deferred renderer, nor does Nvidia's method benefit from the extra features a deferred renderer enables, like 8-layer multitexturing.

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...The NV20 chip alone will cost more than this, it is larger and more complex...>>

The NV20 is probably the same size as a Voodoo3 (keep in mind the Voodoo3 was produced using 0.25 micron technology). Crucial PC1600 DDR - 256MB $144, thats end price for the consumer...Thats 256MB of DDR! (This is from Anandtech's own memory price guide!), I still see no valid reason for Nvidia charging $500+ for something with only 64MB of DDR ram. Nvidia has suckered most of the people on this board, its plain, simple and sad .

 

[MikeyP]

All I said was that the NV20 chip will be more expensive than a T-Bird to produce. That PC1600 runs at 100Mhz DDR, not 250Mhz DDR. Any deferred rendering method will great improve performance.

Another point with the Xbox chips, the games have to run at 640x480 at 29FPS. That isn't going to take 250Mhz DDR memory. The chip itself will have the same power, but it won't require the memory to use all its effects. The NV2x chip in the Xbox will be much cheaper to implement than a full version AGP card.

The point of this? Nvidia needs to implement HSR, so they can use much slower memory!

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...Any deferred rendering method will great improve performance...>>

Nvidia's method is NOT a method of deferred rendering. Deferred rendering is very different and way more effective than what Nvidia is using. If Nvidia's method was as effective as deferred rendering they wouldn't need 200Mhz+ DDR.