NVIDIA Revenues for Q4 Significantly Lower Than Expected

[newtekie1]

However, the HD4870 512MB offers a better bang for the buck compared to the GTX260.

no real point in argueing with newtekie about this, hes dead set that nvidia is the better choice.........

Do you actually read the posts, or just ramble on about how everyone else is the fanboy?

 

[Melvis]

That is a massive drop, even im surprised at that, but i must addmit the 9 series was not great, not what i call a leap forward in tech and performance.

But the GTX 260 etc is a good step forword, but was to expensive, no one was buying them till the high end ATI cards came out.

I think its a bit of both, not great Products but also the global economy.

 

[newtekie1]

The 9 series was definitely not a huge leap, it was mainly done to reduce the costs over the original G80 8800 series. Performance increase wasn't the purpose, heat, power, and mainly cost was the driving factor.

The GTX200 series was definitely too expensive when it came out, it needed some competition to get the prices down. G80 was the same way, it was a great step forward, but way too expensive until there was at least some competition from ATi. Competition is key, it is the only thing that drives the industry forward, and keeps the industry in check price wise.

The last quarter downturn had a lot of factors. Products were too expensive to warrant an upgrade, then when they were priced right, there was decent competition to deal with. Then there is the chipset devision being complete shit... Add to that the global economy being in the shitter and you have a 40% revenue decrease over last year.

 

[Kursah]

Interesting to see the losses, but not a suprise. To counter Melvis's comment on the 9 series, my 9600GT's was one of my most favored cards ever, up there with my old ATI 9600Pro and X850XT PE in the "all timers" list. It performed great, it could be dead even or pull ahead of the then more expensive HD3870, and wasn't very far behind it's older 8800GT brother. To top that off it overclocked like a champ, especially with a super quick and easy vmod that I did while switching coolers.

I've used both ATI and Nvidia...a couple of things I've come to like on the NV side recently are temps, straight up performance (as in not having to mess with compatability) because of the next reason, drivers. Sure they're not the best, but it seems NV actually tries to get decent drivers out. With ATI you hope and wait, and hope some more...it got old.

Really neither ATI or NV is better than the other, both have been pretty competetive since ATI finally caught up with DX10+ hardware, they kick ass now, but still have higher failure rates...a strong reason I got my GTX260 over an HD48xx series to this day, no regrets. Both sides have great performers, competetive prices, some will want the big expensive ones, some will want the el-cheapo deluxes, some will want the mainstream gamer deluxe card, who cares...you get what you get because of reasons that matter to you, you support what you have and move on. At the end of the day, as long as you've been happy with the product from the brand/mfg you've owned, it's all good.

 

[Rebo&Zooty]

Really neither ATI or NV is better than the other, both have been pretty competetive since ATI finally caught up with DX10+ hardware, they kick ass now, but still have higher failure rates...

got any proof of this?

From my experiance and that of many people i know the 8800gt has had stupid high fail rates for example.....

 

[FreedomEclipse]

The cards were overpriced and undermade..
servers them right.

sheesh, which side of the bed did you get out of this morning. Also I see in your spec that your running a 8800GTS 320. so your one to talk about Nvidia having 'overpriced' & 'undermade' cards. nobody said you had to stick with Nvidia. if your that pissed with them, try upgrading to one of their more recent cards otherwise stfu & keep your bashing to yourself unless you can vent it in a more contructive manner.

 

[Melvis]

Interesting to see the losses, but not a suprise. To counter Melvis's comment on the 9 series, my 9600GT's was one of my most favored cards ever, up there with my old ATI 9600Pro and X850XT PE in the "all timers" list. It performed great, it could be dead even or pull ahead of the then more expensive HD3870, and wasn't very far behind it's older 8800GT brother. To top that off it overclocked like a champ, especially with a super quick and easy vmod that I did while switching coolers.

lol i was waiting for that, someone to say that the 9600GT's was a great card, and trust me i know, i almost bought one myself, but over all it only was a great card because the 8600GT was only 20% better over the 7600GT there for making the 9600GT 100% better then the 8600GT, and of course the price was good to, and very close to the performance of a 8800GT making it a winner in its self for the 9 series of cards. But it was mainly the only 9 series card that realy shinned, the rest like the 9800GT was basically just a rebadged 8800GT :shadedshu

 

[Kursah]

Really neither ATI or NV is better than the other, both have been pretty competetive since ATI finally caught up with DX10+ hardware, they kick ass now, but still have higher failure rates...a strong reason I got my GTX260 over an HD48xx series to this day, no regrets...

got any proof of this?

From my experiance and that of many people i know the 8800gt has had stupid high fail rates for example.....

One it's called quote it right, two it's called Google and research. Part of why I got a GTX260 back in July was one, it was generally the same price or cheaper to a comparable 1GB model (were they out then?), two it had more stable "out of the box" operation at the time with better drivers, cooler temps, OC-ability and fan tuning that didn't require anything but installing Riva or Precision, three way less failures per-search per card model. Look in the NV side, look in the ATI side, compare GTX failures to HD48xx failures, I've done this on many forums...including TPU. Both sides will have failures, and that's fine, but a card burning up because of the bench Furmark? Come on...the same hot as hell VRM's that have been used since and probably before my 1950 pro and xtx? Why? They get too hot and can fail..same dissapointing strategy. The VRM's on my 260 run COOLER than my GPU does..which runs cooler than most stock HD48xx series with it's stock cooler. I'm not a fanboy, I do my research and pick what I feel is best for me, the statements I make that you require proof of are summaries of my research of sludging through forums, threads, reviews both pro and consumer, thb till I did, I was going to get an HD48xx series card..still no regrets. You want the facts, feel free to search for yourself.

That's not what this thread is about at this point though...this thread is about the losses NV has taken in Q4, which sucks, but they still make a decent part that does a good job, for me I installed it, installed drivers and went, the temps were fine at stock and the performance was solid. Sure I OC'd and tweaked, but I didn't have to to keep it stable, which was what I was after this time around, something that (remember, back in July mind you) was plug-n-play, it did that and excelled greatly, still does, glad to see prices have gotten better and I hope NV can stay competetive for sure, ATI is definately churning cards out, and damn solid performers.

 

[Rebo&Zooty]

the 8800gt's with the stock nvidia cooler(the reference one) cook themselves at stock clocks, have had 3 of them do that, not even pushing the clocks above stock, and running fan at 100% locked in rivatuner.......horrible design using a cooler that could barly cool a mid range card on a high end card......(pisses me off)

and the 260, i can see there being lower fail reports, most people i know who had 4800 or g92 cards didnt see a point in buying a 260 or 280, so less sales of the cards=lower reports of fails.

i do agree that some of the cards have piss poor cooling and componants, most of the 4800's i have seen dead are sapphire with the typical crappy sapphire cooler on typicaly crappy sapphire componants(sorry but compared to other brands sapphire is blah in my extended experiance with the company)

nvidia needs to pull it togather and at least make some changes to chips that matter insted of just renaming the damn things and selling the same thing again(gt100-120-130=9600gso=8800gso) blah, i wish i could be sure the 8800gts i have wasnt gonna fail like my 8800gt's did(better cooler but still, flawed gpu packege...)

 

[newtekie1]

the 8800gt's with the stock nvidia cooler(the reference one) cook themselves at stock clocks, have had 3 of them do that, not even pushing the clocks above stock, and running fan at 100% locked in rivatuner.......horrible design using a cooler that could barly cool a mid range card on a high end card......(pisses me off)

I've seen no problems with the single slot stock cooler on the 8800GT/9800GT. Temps were always fine with the ones I had. Temps were more than fine, especially with the fan adjusted. Never saw over 80C with the stock cooler with overclocked clocks. If you fried 3, I would look at other reasons, and not blaim the cooler. The cooler was more than fine, in fact I've seen the single slot cooler used on an 8800GTS without heat issues.

 

[Hayder_Master]

the nvidia 8xxx better than ati 3xxx
ati 4xxx better than nvidia 9xxx
ati 4xxx better than all nvidia gtx2xx with costumers which is using LGA775 with intel chipset ( crossfire )

 

[Flint]

Most of the posts regarding "bang for the buck" deal with the customer getting the most out of their GPU for the best price. That is debatable because of different variables that have all been said in previous posts. Depending on how each card in each price segment is actually priced, the pendulum swings between both Nvidia and AMD.

However, if you switch it around and ask, "Which GPU company is getting the best performance while keeping manufacturing costs low?", it seems that AMD might be the better positioned company.