NV20 : Isn't it expensive?

[Blackhawk2]

100Mhz DDR 256MB = $144-------->200Mhz DDR 256MB = $288

$288/4 = $72 for 64MB of 200Mhz DDR, I still see no reason for Nvidia's $500+ price tag.

 

[BenSkywalker]

"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."

So you buy the individual chips? You create your own PCBs and add the RAM yourself? Then you should have no problem with the NV20 which only costs about $50-$70 per chip.

"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 ."

And who didn't think they would be? At the time most people had a hard time believing nVidia could anywhere near enough RAM to produce the Ultra as a consumer product. Again though, who cares if the NV20 does cost $500??

"Yes they are, they bought out 3dfx's technology, technology that IMO was superior to what Nvidia has,"

They are coming to your house, holding you at gunpoint and making you purchase their products? You should call the police, not be complaining on a BBS.

"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"

PowerVR with better drivers then nVidia, you are worse then Hardware ever was.

"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."

Let's see... February... October. Slower RAM, hardware that is a loss leader versus a margin maker, you can't figure this out for yourself? Try some basic math and business courses and track the PC industry over the course of seven to eight months, particularly pricing on cutting edge hardware, and maybe it will start to sink in for you.

"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."

Deferred rendering has NOTHING to do with eight layer texturing support, ZERO, NADA. WTF made you say something like that? The two are not in any way whatsoever intertwined nor have they ever been. The Rampage was a traditional and was supposed to be able to handle eight layer textures, nVidia could well support it with the NV2X, or maybe they won't. It is doubtful as there is no API support right now anyway.

"Crucial PC1600 DDR - 256MB $144, thats end price for the consumer...Thats 256MB of DDR!"

That is less then one quarter the bandwith of the NV20's RAM!" My K6-2 400 had 1MB of L2 cache and it and the motherboard cost less then one quarter what the 1MB Xeon of the time did, if you can't figure out why you have a lot to learn.

"Nvidia has suckered most of the people on this board, its plain, simple and sad ."

End results. We don't need to listen to ignorant and unfounded BS, the results speak for themselves. If IT comes out with a superior proudct I'll buy it, no problems at all. Whoever has the best product in my $$ range I'll go with them, it sounds like you can't say the same.

 

[MikeyP]

<< 100Mhz DDR 256MB = $144-------->200Mhz DDR 256MB = $288 >>


How do you get that? Towards the top end, prices increase exponentially, not linearly. Take the P4 1.5Ghz for example: lowest price on pricewatch is $718. Intel's very own P3 750 is going for $161. (And the P3 offers much more than 1/2 of the performance of the P4.) Given this example, your 200Mhz DDR costs $698.53. Yes, this is a very extreme example, but you can make numbers do anything you wish A year ago, I believe the Athlon's 350Mhz cache modules were ~$30-40 for 512Kb. Granted that was SRAM, but historically prices on the upper end of the performance scale increase dramatically. I wouldn't be suprised if 256MB of 250Mhz DDR goes for $750. Now mind you, that is a very rough guess, but that is $187.50 for the memory alone in a 64MB NV20.



<< 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. >>


That is exactly the point I was trying to make The NV25 is supposed to implement some method of HSR. This is the card which the Xbox has been said to be based on. Therefore, the graphics unit in the Xbox will cost much less to produce than the NV20.

I am in no way defending NVIDIA, they need to get some HSR out fast so they can reduce prices back to the $200 level for a high-end card. TNT2 Ultra anyone?
Edit: TNT2 Ultra is an allusion to the days when it was the highest performing card, and priced in right around $200. A little more for the Hercules version.

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...Deferred rendering has NOTHING to do with eight layer texturing support, ZERO, NADA. WTF made you say something like that?...>>

I was talking about Kyro and yes it does, without deferred rendering do you think the rest of the Kyro's graphics engine could do 8-layer multitexturing? I don't think so. The way Kyro does its deferred rendering allows it to do 8-layer multitexturing something which even the NV20 is still unable to do. BenSkywalker I thought you were brighter than that.

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<...So you buy the individual chips? You create your own PCBs and add the RAM yourself? Then you should have no problem with the NV20 which only costs about $50-$70 per chip...>>

Don't be such an @ss. Nvidia does not sell 14 different speed variations to the board manufacturers. You knew what I mean't

<<How do you get that?...>>

Estimation MikeyP.

<<...End results. We don't need to listen to ignorant and unfounded BS, the results speak for themselves..>>

BenSkywalker, may you wallow in your ignorance. Nvidia's Geforce2 doesn't do 25 million polygons per second in a game. Yes I brought that to peoples attention when ignorance was flying sky high, where were you BenSkywalker? I guess you care more about Nvidia's marketing department than people getting suckered out of money with numbers they will never see. Why don't you go work for Nvidia, your head is so far up their @ss already.

 

[Blackhawk2]

You win BenSkywalker, this is my very last post. Thanks to those who's company I have enjoyed and who's humor has brightened many of my days.

 

[Rza]

hopefully Ultras will drop in price by then
hehe

 

[dougjnn]

In my view Ultras are mostly a bragging rights card.

I think Ultras, and for that matter all GF2 64 meg cards are unlikely to ever be a smart buy. The extra memory doesn't do much in the GF2 engine. What helps ultras a bit is the faster SPEED memory. Now if they ever released an GF2 32 meg Ultra, that might make sense in the future, if it was priced in some relationship with cost.

Unlike ultras compare to GF2 GTS cards, the NV20 is a new architecture, with tight Direct X 8 support. When game REALLY support it, due first of all the the mass market X box effect, then the NV20 will be a significant upgrade. It will be smart to buy in the fall - Xmas to just after Xmas of this year. Not when it first comes out.

 

[ahfung]

dougjnn, I think you've forgotten the insane amount of video memory eaten by frame buffer under 32 bit extreme resolutions and FSAA.

 

[Beowulf]

hopefully after the nv20 is out I'll see some good deals on the ultras.

 

[lonewolfz28]

Flame Fest Alert. Who cares! I'll pay alittle over $100 for something that gives my good vid, DVD and the option to play games on the rare occasion that I can actually sit still for more than 10 minutes straight. Get a life, quit bickering and realize that not everyone in the world agrees. If so, we wouldn't have Apple and Linux, Intel and AMD, and half a dozen decent MB makers. You all sound like a bunch of dweebs in a pissin' contest. Sheesh.

 

[Sunner]

<< this is my very last post >>


Sounds good as you're obviously only here to troll.

 

[BenSkywalker]

&quot;You win BenSkywalker, this is my very last post. Thanks to those who's company I have enjoyed and who's humor has brightened many of my days.&quot;

ROTFLMAO, oh well, another troll gone

 

[dougjnn]

ahfung --

<<dougjnn, I think you've forgotten the insane amount of video memory eaten by frame buffer under 32 bit extreme resolutions and FSAA.>>

What I'm going by is no theory about how much memory the cards need at high resolutions and color depths, but benches.

Where you are comparing the SAME SPEED MEMORY and core, adding 64 megs doesn't do very much. It does help some in 1600x1280x32. That however is a resolution many can live without. A bit in 1280x1040x32 (I like this res), but not huge amounts. Less in lower ones.

Now yes, the ultras look lots better than the GF2 GTS 32's. That's largely because ultras have very high speed DDR's (which are expensive), and a core to match. But it's mostly the speeded up memory. There ARE not 32meg nVidia cards which have ultra speed DDR and cores.

Seems to me, anyway.

 

[Spook]

I dont care... I'm a computer nut... I'll buy one... As long as it gives me a 50%+ advantage over my GF2 Ultra.... Yeah, I bought one, and its a great video card, UT with all the bells and whistles on runs 70FPS+.... But its not the average or Max I'm trying to increase, its those dips down into the 10-20Frames that need faster boards... Who cares about the MAX or Average FPS... Also Tribes 2 is going to need all the power I can get when It is released... I'm building my system around this game above all others..

 

[Blackhawk2]

<<ROTFLMAO, oh well, another troll gone>>

BenSkywalker your such an @sshole thanks for proving that. You would flame someone who is leaving, for someone who I mistakenly thought was so bright, your such a prick, have a nice life .

 

[KevinH]

Jeez louise, have you guys forgotten when the V2 12 megger SLI's were released people were paying 6 bills for the pair? If you gotta sit here and whine and complain about the price then the nv20 is NOT meant for you! Quit your whining and be happy with the fact that nvidia STILL makes cards at various price points for everyone else. Think about it, if the nv20 was released at say 200-300 bucks and all prices are pushed down relative to that...does anyone realize what a ridiculous notion that is? An mx for 20 bucks then?

 

[dougjnn]

KevinH --

My perspective is a little different. I could afford to buy the NV20 when it first comes out if I really wanted to. But I won't (unless there is a lot about it I don't know / haven't figured out yet). I won't because it would make me feel stupid and a chump to do so.

Chances are it won't make that much difference it available games when it first comes out. Yes, it will be a bit faster than everything else straight up, but the bottleneck now is DDR speeds, and that isn't improving radically in the next couple of months. The real way that the NV20 will improve gaming is through a significantly new architecture. It's biggest deal is -- forget what they call this -- but a hardware implemented way of not having to calculate and draw the hidden sides of polygons/shapes in scenes. Supposed to save up to 40% of the processor time. That could be big.

But it won't be big until games are written to use that. It is unlikely that a lot will come out that do until the X-box comes out -- and even then we will see how many really phat games are available right at X-box launch. That could be a bunch though. X-Box to PC should be a mad easy port. Actually, maybe they will just straight up run on PC's with nv20 cards, they look to be so similar.

So around the launch of the X-box, or maybe a bit after that, is when I will feel like a smart and savvy computer nut/deal nut in buying a NV20.

Before then it looks to be mainly useful in impressing certain types of crowds. Not my crowd, and that doesn't cut it with me anywho.

Yah follow?