kylewCome on as if, why would they bother? Considering an overclocked 4890 can end up 5% faster than a GTX285, where's the logic in creating a new chip that's a few percent faster than their previous highend chip?

What they mean is that it will be their card closest in price to the GTX285.

They did the same with the 4800s. They said they were to compete with G92 GPUs yet they were much faster, they only reason they were deemed G92 competition was due to their pricings.

They know better than to sell their latest cards at expensive prices. It's nVidia that doesn't understand the process of lowering the price and selling bucketloads.

4800s outsold GT200 based cards by a huge amount for this very reason, even though they're similar in performance.

ATi's high end was priced the same as nVidia's middle end, yet offered nVidia highend performance. Of course they're going to sell far more.

Add on to that the low cost of manufacture and there's no reason for them to 'overprice' their cards the way nVidia do.

They know it's not about 'Let's put the highest price possible on these cards'. They will definitely sell more and make far more money if more people buy them at a lower price.

It's so simple, I don't get why people assume they're gonna charge crazy prices for their cards. ATi has ended the day of silly priced cards, nVidia have to go cheaper to compete and this is where ATi are destroying nVidia.

Well firstly, forget about the HD4890 overclocked is slightly faster than a GTX285 at STOCK, they dont talk that language, stock to stock, reference to reference, secondly, to be clear (I have owned both cards), an HD4890 overclocked in excess of 1000mhz is marginally faster than a stock GTX285 (across the board), at stock speeds for both cards the GTX285 is probably about 8-10% faster across the board, so a 5870 that is 5% faster than a 285 would be upto a 15% performance improvement on a 4890, thats fairly normal in next gen cards, yes sometimes you get a bit more but rarely like 25 - 50%.

Maybe I am a skeptic, but the cost of manufacturing is only one factor in pricing points, both companies price their hardware based on it's performance, usually most of us moan about NVidia's over inflated prices, thats mostly because they quite often have the fastest and therefore feel they can charge the premium, when they dont or they get it wrong, their prices tumble to compensate, the G200 was a good example of this...... the GTX280 to be specific..... why would we think that ATi would be any different? They priced the 4870 512MB really well on it's release, but thats because it didnt have any significant advantage agains the top end opposition, if it had.... do you really think they would of held it at the same release price? Add to that their 2nd ranking card (4850) was not as quick as NVidia's (GTX260) which was only a little behind the 4870 512MB in some things so they has to be real careful there, it is often the other sides marketing that helps dictate this sides pricing as we know.

IMO, the botttom line "might be", that a 15% performace increase over the 4890 and therefore around a 5% performance improvement over the 285 would fall pretty much in line with some of ATi's new offerings over the past couple of years and would still give them the "fastest single GPU" and probably multi GPU at least until the G300 thingy comes out then the picture changes yet again....... mostly as usual.

Of course as the optimist, you may well be right, IDK, if when the card is released it 15% or more faster than the 285, I will gladly send you a PM to point out that I was wrong.

Having the 1 gig of memory on board, and having the most radical change in some aspects since the R600 series, as claimed by ATI themself, and just going by the most conservative estimates of 1200 shders, which is a 50% bump, add all that up, plus whatever else theres going to be, and to expect just a 15% increase is bad ROI, and will quickly be seen as a failure.

tiggerGoing by the thread on the overclockers forum,its not just me that thinks the prices will be higher than you seem to think.

And i am reading your posts,i just think you're been a bit too optimistic.

Care to explain how I'm being too optimistic? You have inadvertently demonstrated that what I'm saying it's true.

You tried to prove me wrong by stating the US price of a GTX295 as an example of how I'm wrong yet you assisted in proving me right.

Graphics card prices are the US price PLUS VAT. Don't forget the PLUS VAT.

Yet you say I'm being too optimistic. :confused:

Tatty_OneWell firstly, forget about the HD4890 overclocked is slightly faster than a GTX285 at STOCK, they dont talk that language, stock to stock, reference to reference, secondly, to be clear (I have owned both cards), an HD4890 overclocked in excess of 1000mhz is marginally faster than a stock GTX285 (across the board), at stock speeds for both cards the GTX285 is probably about 8-10% faster across the board, so a 5870 that is 5% faster than a 285 would be upto a 15% performance improvement on a 4890, thats fairly normal in next gen cards, yes sometimes you get a bit more but rarely like 25 - 50%.

Maybe I am a skeptic, but the cost of manufacturing is only one factor in pricing points, both companies price their hardware based on it's performance, usually most of us moan about NVidia's over inflated prices, thats mostly because they quite often have the fastest and therefore feel they can charge the premium, when they dont or they get it wrong, their prices tumble to compensate, the G200 was a good example of this...... the GTX280 to be specific..... why would we think that ATi would be any different? They priced the 4870 512MB really well on it's release, but thats because it didnt have any significant advantage agains the top end opposition, if it had.... do you really think they would of held it at the same release price? Add to that their 2nd ranking card (4850) was not as quick as NVidia's (GTX260) which was only a little behind the 4870 512MB in some things so they has to be real careful there, it is often the other sides marketing that helps dictate this sides pricing as we know.

IMO, the botttom line "might be", that a 15% performace increase over the 4890 and therefore around a 5% performance improvement over the 285 would fall pretty much in line with some of ATi's new offerings over the past couple of years and would still give them the "fastest single GPU" and probably multi GPU at least until the G300 thingy comes out then the picture changes yet again....... mostly as usual.

Of course as the optimist, you may well be right, IDK, if when the card is released it 15% or more faster than the 285, I will gladly send you a PM to point out that I was wrong.

I honestly think you don't really know what you're talking about. Do you honestly actually think that a next gen card is going to be 15% faster than the last? That's utter nonsense.

As for the average speed increase between generations, 25-50%? I call a huge amount of BS on that.

Since I had a 9800, nVidia and ATi have both brought cards out that were roughly 2x the performance of the last generation.

They wouldn't bother with a 15% increase. It's laughable that you're even willing to suggest that.

Seriously, I don't know anyone that would be interested in next gen cards if they go by your numbers. Maybe you're really bad at maths or something? As for the 4870 512MB, that was faster than the original GTX260, and is neck and with the latest GTX260. The 4850 was around the same speed as the original GTX260 yet it was priced at G92 price points.

ATi is a business, it knows how to run its business. It doesn't make sense to price as high as possible. No where near the same amount of cards would get sold if they did.

Even if you want to factor greed in to the equation, then they'll still reduce the price and sell bucketloads. What OEMs are going to choose nVidia cards of ATi's when they cost far less while offering similar performance?

:confused::confused::confused:

Are you drunk or something?

eh, the HD 4850 is good bit less performing than the GTX 260, and the GTX 260 c216 beats the HD 4870 512mb in almost every benchmark, the HD 4870 1gb can almost keep up but still is slightly n i mean just slightly behind. It really comes down to which games ur playing when u choose between a GTX 260 c216 and HD 4870 1gb.

i do very much agree however that a 15% increase from the HD 4890 is ridiculous. The HD 4870-HD 4890 is almost a 15% increase and that was just increased clock speeds. I think the HD 5870 is going to yield 30-50% increase, it has 32rops which will help greatly with higher resolutions and AA even though the HD 48X0 series already handles it fine, and as stated at least a 50% increase in shaders, not to mention general core refining on tweaks and probable shader performance increase from the shaders that were on the HD 4XX0 series. No way in hell it'll only be 15% faster than the HD 4890

You know what? I think AMD is playing it safe right now, I believe the HD 5870's are going to perform disgustingly much faster than anything Nvidia will have to offer at the time of it's release, just look at the HD 5870's spec's, it almost doubles the HD 4870.

There's something up AMD's sleeve and it's "Price/Performance" something Nvidia stinks at.:D

I'm hoping for at least a 40% increase with the 5870 over the 4890.

Nick89I'm hoping for at least a 40% increase with the 5870 over the 4890.

i wouldn't dout it. n i'm hopin for at least that as well cause i'm gettin one when they're released

I expect 5870 to be at $199-$250. Not everyone have a job nowaday.

kylewI'm convinced that you're not reading my posts. I keep telling you, US price PLUS VAT.

What's £305 + VAT @ 15%? It surely can't be about £350 can it? I think you'll find it is. A £9 discrepancy at £350 is hardly 'rip off' bearing in mind there are slight variations in price between stores anyway.

You have a very good point there, however when comparing US to UK prices you cannot just add 15% VAT to it, for example, you must DEDUCT US sales tax from the US price before adding the 15% VAT, currently US sales tax is as low as 2.9% or as high as 7.25% depending on which state, although a couple have zero ratings, I am guessing that sales tax is levvied on goods dependant on where in this case Newegg is located as opposed to where the consumer lives.... not sure on that one.

kylewI honestly think you don't really know what you're talking about. Do you honestly actually think that a next gen card is going to be 15% faster than the last? That's utter nonsense.

As for the average speed increase between generations, 25-50%? I call a huge amount of BS on that.

Since I had a 9800, nVidia and ATi have both brought cards out that were roughly 2x the performance of the last generation.

They wouldn't bother with a 15% increase. It's laughable that you're even willing to suggest that.

Seriously, I don't know anyone that would be interested in next gen cards if they go by your numbers. Maybe you're really bad at maths or something? As for the 4870 512MB, that was faster than the original GTX260, and is neck and with the latest GTX260. The 4850 was around the same speed as the original GTX260 yet it was priced at G92 price points.

ATi is a business, it knows how to run its business. It doesn't make sense to price as high as possible. No where near the same amount of cards would get sold if they did.

Even if you want to factor greed in to the equation, then they'll still reduce the price and sell bucketloads. What OEMs are going to choose nVidia cards of ATi's when they cost far less while offering similar performance?

:confused::confused::confused:

Are you drunk or something?

Lol, so the 8800GT and 8800GTS 512MB were twice as fast as the 8800GTS 320 and 640 and the 8800GTX/Ultra? Ohhhh and the HD3870 was of course twice as fast as the 2900XT? sorry try around 10-15%..... so who is drinking?

As for pricing.... well you seem to be forgetting a key point in your argument, so I will quote a specific comment of yours.....

"It doesn't make sense to price as high as possible. No where near the same amount of cards would get sold if they did"

You seem to be forgetting that the high/top end cards in a generation only account for 5 - 10% of the sales and thats why specifically manufacturers can sell them at a premium, but they only get away with it successfully if they are holding the No 1 spot, it's easy to say ATI dont do that because more often than not (but not exclusively) they dont often tend to have a significant long term performance advantage over it's main competitior.

It's clear that some of us differ in our opinions here, aside from the fact that you seem to think some of us have been drinking because of those opinions, lets just wait and see the pricing point on release both in the US and UK and how the card performs, then as I said, if you are right, I will be the first to let you know! All I am simply saying is, that if the new card is lets say 25% faster, then i expect it to be priced more highly than speculated, if it is released at the $299 or below, i expect lesser performance.

Personally, I think ATi will overcharge us for their high end product, but just until NVidia releases it's new offerings, I acknowledge that if you get the performance to merit that price it is more digestable, but thats kind of my point all along.

Actually, traditionally, the high end of the old gen is considered the mid range of the new in most new generations.
To claim either the 2xxx gen or even the 3xxx gen as a successful generation in performance, well, we all remember the 2900, and the 3xxx gen was a shrink and brang cooler temps and lower power, with slight improvements, and did very little to stop nVidia dominance with their 8xxx series.
nVidia has since been called lazy, living off their past, renaming instead of moving forwards since the release of the G80, and people were somewhat underwhelmed by the performance of the G200 series. Especially, being that it was such a long time in between a "real" new gen
Prior to that, we saw what I said, the mid range new gen = to the old gens top card. So, a 5850 could very well = a 4870x2, and just as the 4870 topped the 3870x2, it will be higher yet.
Thats the real history, or recent history of gfx cards, with a lil perspective thrown in

jaydeejohnActually, traditionally, the high end of the old gen is considered the mid range of the new in most new generations.
To claim either the 2xxx gen or even the 3xxx gen as a successful generation in performance, well, we all remember the 2900, and the 3xxx gen was a shrink and brang cooler temps and lower power, with slight improvements, and did very little to stop nVidia dominance with their 8xxx series.
nVidia has since been called lazy, living off their past, renaming instead of moving forwards since the release of the G80, and people were somewhat underwhelmed by the performance of the G200 series. Especially, being that it was such a long time in between a "real" new gen
Prior to that, we saw what I said, the mid range new gen = to the old gens top card. So, a 5850 could very well = a 4870x2, and just as the 4870 topped the 3870x2, it will be higher yet.
Thats the real history, or recent history of gfx cards, with a lil perspective thrown in

You are right of course, however a 5850 COULD = a 4870x2 in performance...... do you really think it will? which is why i said it's probably best to wait until it arrives if only to prove my skeptisicm wrong.

Lets look at what we know.
The 4770, with its lessor amount of shaders, can crank up to 4890 speeds, but still has inferior ram.
At those speeds (1Ghz core) its the equivilent of the 4890.
Now, add better ram, thats 50% faster, add at least 100% more shaders, and the same core clocks, with improved schedular etc etc, and that card alone would put down a 285.
Now add possibly more shaders, and maybe doubling everything, I can see it happening
The 4770 at 1Ghz is = to a 4890, thats with 640 shaders, and inferior ram, its already been done and benched

After HD4800 series launch I'd think people would have learned that it makes no sense whatsoever to try to speculate performance via rumoured retail price.

Tatty_OneLol, so the 8800GT and 8800GTS 512MB were twice as fast as the 8800GTS 320 and 640 and the 8800GTX/Ultra? Ohhhh and the HD3870 was of course twice as fast as the 2900XT? sorry try around 10-15%..... so who is drinking?

As for pricing.... well you seem to be forgetting a key point in your argument, so I will quote a specific comment of yours.....

"It doesn't make sense to price as high as possible. No where near the same amount of cards would get sold if they did"

You seem to be forgetting that the high/top end cards in a generation only account for 5 - 10% of the sales and thats why specifically manufacturers can sell them at a premium, but they only get away with it successfully if they are holding the No 1 spot, it's easy to say ATI dont do that because more often than not (but not exclusively) they dont often tend to have a significant long term performance advantage over it's main competitior.

It's clear that some of us differ in our opinions here, aside from the fact that you seem to think some of us have been drinking because of those opinions, lets just wait and see the pricing point on release both in the US and UK and how the card performs, then as I said, if you are right, I will be the first to let you know! All I am simply saying is, that if the new card is lets say 25% faster, then i expect it to be priced more highly than speculated, if it is released at the $299 or below, i expect lesser performance.

Personally, I think ATi will overcharge us for their high end product, but just until NVidia releases it's new offerings, I acknowledge that if you get the performance to merit that price it is more digestable, but thats kind of my point all along.

I understand what you're saying, but to quote the 'gen' difference between R600 and RV670 and G80 to G92 is in my opinion being extremely selective.

Outside of the name change, there wasn't really a 'next gen' jump between both lots.

I'm talking real generation jumps.

9800>X800>x1800>2900/3870>4800s

Each step there was roughly a doubling of performance. Same goes for nVidia's parts too.

FX 5800>6800>7800>8800/G92 8800s and 9800s>GTX200 series

We all know the jumps from 2900s and G80 8800s was nothing more than a respin.

They were basically the same jumps that happened between:

9700Pro > 9800 pro/XT

X800XT> X850XT

X1800XT>X1900XT>X1950XT

FX 5800>FX5900 >FX 5950Ultra

6800>6800 Ultra

7800>7900>7950 Ultra.

As for expecting less performance, there's nothing to suggest that's the case. The 3800s and 4800s prove that. ATi want to price their cards at the prices they want them at.

They're forcibly bringing highend parts to the more mainstream sectors. I remember when mid range cards cost the same as what ATi have priced their XX50 and XX70 at.

They're trying to advance the gaming industry as well as going for value over anything else. Don't forget ATi saying that they don't intend to bring any reference cards out at more than $550. That means their X2 cards are at most $550, their single GPU cards are going to have to be roughly half that.

My point is that people are speculating to the point of making things up that go against past card releases. We should use past releases as a datum unless we hear otherwise.

Thats the problem, people do forget.
I understand that ATI is in a different situation than they were with the 4xxx series, but theyve gained huge momentum, theyll have the market to themselves for at least 2 months, and yes, they may come in a lil higher than before, but it wont be monstrous.
I remember an interview with someone at ATO when the first DX11 slides were shown I think it was PCPer, and thats when the pleasantly surprised statement came out, and also a small blurb refering to pricing in an offhand way, meaning good prices, excellent perf, but possibly a lil higher

Ill dig it up

"I would say we don't make money by delivering slow hardware. Our expectation is that we'll give you a really pleasant surprise this year when we ship our DX11 hardware."
www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,689522/AMD-beliefs-DirectX-11-Radeons-pleasantly-fast/News/
To me, this leaves the door open a bit for pricing, as long as the perf is there

A different take.

IF! the new card can perform as well as some say and is equal to or even slightly better than the 295, I am saying this as there are a lot of people who say it will outperform a 4870X2 putting it into the 295 realm, then the $500-$800 295 will suddenly find itself with fewer buyers.Why pay $500 when for $200 less I can get the same/better card? Nvidia will be forced to reduce price on a card that I gather is expensive to make.

As Nvidia won't have anything to counter with for a couple of months, ATI could seriously hurt them and take a chunk of market.

This is just an idea and is based on ATI not falling flat on their faces with the launch. Cough AMD cough cough.

Tatty_OneSo, let me get this right....... the 5870 is priced around the GTX285 price point which would suggest that it will be no more than around 5% faster at best, if it was more, they would charge more, even ATi like to make a little money outta their hardware, I kind of find this a little dissapointing as this is a generation on from the G200 series, kind of suggests that the 5870 x2 will only be marginally faster than the 295 (possibly 10%), makes you wonder what all the hype is really, ATi had better have something up their sleeve when the G300 whateveritscalled is released later on by NVidia otherwise the Green side are going to be charging a mint for "the worlds fastest single and multi GPU's", kind of sucks really :shadedshu

Lol man, do you really believe, that amd will release a whole new generation of gpu's which are only 5% faster than teh previous generation? :roll:
You must be joking :D

kylewI understand what you're saying, but to quote the 'gen' difference between R600 and RV670 and G80 to G92 is in my opinion being extremely selective.

I dont think you can discount those minor "facelift" generation changes as they form the majority of upgrades. Also.... it's hardly my fault that ATi didnt make any huge architectural leaps going from the 2 to the 3 series.... speak to them, fact is, the majority of new genertions are not huge architectural changes simply because the R & D costs are to high and neither company could sustain it, it's often how well they do with the more minor changes on "facelift" release that determine the success, the 4890 is a good example of that I think, along perhaps with the 8800GT/GTS, although of course I acknowledge that the 5 series is a major change so that should see higher %'s of performance improvement, our only real differences on this topic is that you beleive that we will see a 25 - 50% performance improvement over the 4890 for a top end card thats retail point will be $299, as you know, my skepticism thinks that for $299 we will get a little less performance or pay a higher price for it.

ValdezLol man, do you really believe, that amd will release a whole new generation of gpu's which are only 5% faster than teh previous generation? :roll:
You must be joking :D

No I dont think the performance increase will only be 5% at all, someone else earlier mentioned that supposidly the new 5870 would be just 5% faster than a GTX285, to be precise, what I have said (guessed) is that for $299 I dont think that there would be much more than a 15% performance gain over the existing gen and if there was a 25-50% improvement (which would be good!) then I just think that we will be paying more than $299 for it, at least until NVidia's new offerings arrive....... I have also said that I could be very wrong and it's best to wait and see, as largon said, speculation like this is rarely accurate in any case.

The friendly debate we have had was more about the validity of my reasons for coming to that conclusion as much as the conclusion itself but time will tell. of course I really do hope we get a single GPU solution from ATi that is as fast as a 4870x2 and nearly as quick as a GTX295 for $299 :D

1 other thing I didnt mention on what we know.
The new cards will have double the flops vs the 4xxx series.
You do realize, to command marketshare, you have to pirce properly, come in (with product) at opportune times, and most importantly, deliver.
In the 4xxx series, we saw ATI slowly move down the entire market with highly competitive products, at great pricing, which drove nVidia products pricing down as they arrived.
I dont have the number, but the 4830 was priced well enough to make nVidia move it 9600 down in pricing to be competitive.
Later, the 4770/4850 moved down as well, while nVidia had their old gen parts relatively high.

ATI has gained 4% overall marketshare in this last qtr, they have momentum.
ATI is releasing a DX11 part, where no competition stands in its way, other than old nVidia parts, which due to process and perf to nm size, it loses badly, as the G92s will be out of the competition.
So, in order to truly move the market in their favor, they have to : Beat nVidia current best, the G200 series
They have to price accordingly to do so, so as to not lose that momentum and the timing, with the release of a new OS, and holidays around the corner.
Best method?
Make high performing parts, with no true competition, where the competitors real only competing parts are too costly, and underperforming comparatively.
Thats why the confidence. They have the perf, they have the product, and the time is now.
To screw it over by pricing, or low perf wouldnt show this confidence we see.

So, Ive listed how ell theyll do by what is already here. Ive shown why theyre so confident and why a 20% jump doesnt fit into anything theyve been trying to achieve since the R600 debacle

jaydeejohn1 other thing I didnt mention on what we know.
The new cards will have double the flops vs the 4xxx series.
You do realize, to command marketshare, you have to pirce properly, come in (with product) at opportune times, and most importantly, deliver.
In the 4xxx series, we saw ATI slowly move down the entire market with highly competitive products, at great pricing, which drove nVidia products pricing down as they arrived.
I dont have the number, but the 4830 was priced well enough to make nVidia move it 9600 down in pricing to be competitive.
Later, the 4770/4850 moved down as well, while nVidia had their old gen parts relatively high.

ATI has gained 4% overall marketshare in this last qtr, they have momentum.
ATI is releasing a DX11 part, where no competition stands in its way, other than old nVidia parts, which due to process and perf to nm size, it loses badly, as the G92s will be out of the competition.
So, in order to truly move the market in their favor, they have to : Beat nVidia current best, the G200 series
They have to price accordingly to do so, so as to not lose that momentum and the timing, with the release of a new OS, and holidays around the corner.
Best method?
Make high performing parts, with no true competition, where the competitors real only competing parts are too costly, and underperforming comparatively.
Thats why the confidence. They have the perf, they have the product, and the time is now.
To screw it over by pricing, or low perf wouldnt show this confidence we see.

So, Ive listed how ell theyll do by what is already here. Ive shown why theyre so confident and why a 20% jump doesnt fit into anything theyve been trying to achieve since the R600 debacle

I agree completely with all you have said, your theory is spot on, lets just see if it is born out in practice is all I am saying.

I'm expecting ~100% increase over RV790.
And that's not just a guess.

They want name recognition. All this has to come at the expense of nVidia, whos a more widely known brand.
ATI is playing the upstart spoiler, with low pricing and great perf, why upset that now? It wouldnt make good business sense
If their cards were only so so, the need for the rush and big presentation aboard ship wouldnt be there. Itd be toned down, possibly later, when W7 arrives, not before, and theyll be here beforehand