Graphic Cards AMD HD7XXX Discussion Thread

#raghu_sp and #vb01 expect the HD 7850 2GB to be priced ~16500/- to 18000/- INR in the opening round, later it will stabilize ~14500/- when nVidia Kepler competitors release + supply becomes constant.

Hope this helps, Cheers!!
 
#ALPHA17 If that's the case, what do you think the prices of HD 7870 will statbilise to after Kepler's launch? Will it come under 17k-18k territory?
 
its all speculations for now. It is expected to come down a bit because the availability in the market grows and the competition too will alter the pricing a little.
 
The 7870 will probably launch around 21-24k+ and stabalize around the 20k mark or so, maybe 18.5-19.5k if you are a bit lucky
<
 
#[member='cybermantas'] Yeah, no news whatsoever of the launch. Even most of the online retailers have it out of stock as of now.
 
rakesh_ic said:
#ALPHA17

now my worry is if that is the case, will AMD increase the price further rather than reducing it..
happy55.gif
Click to expand...

Do not worry Sire, AMD is a primarily targeting the mid-range gaming scenarios customers like me and you, all of us who want a card that doesn't leave a gaping hole in our pockets as well as can drive all current generation titles at high --> medium settings at the native resolution of the specified display.

AMD prices generally head South on the price chart, albeit steadily rather than sudden price revisions which nVidia cards are subject to.
 
For the past two years we have been crying hoarse championing nVidia as the villain for its pricing to performance ratio.However this year we see that the tables are turned.Hope it serves as a reminder to us for what monopoly of the market heralds for us as consumers.Its better ts way that we have nVidia winning this round.If nVidia had lost with Kepler then I fear AMD would do to us what nVidia did with the pricing of the gtx200 series before HD 4000 came to the scene
 
Marcus Fenix said:
For the past two years we have been crying hoarse championing nVidia as the villain for its pricing to performance ratio.

They deserved it Sire, they were thumping around since the GTX 2** series as the ultimate performance, then when the HD 4*** series pulled the floor from under this one-upmanship and nVidia started spreading slander about ATi graphics and again raised heckles about Fermi equalizing the situations.

The release of the HD 5*** series a full ~5 months before Fermi and the WOODGATE polarized the gaming community against nVidia and left them smarting, when the GTX 4** cards came out they ran hot and were absolute power hogs compared to the HD 5*** line-up they were up against, the HD 6*** series sealed the fate of Fermi.

However this year we see that the tables are turned.

Not actually, though Tahiti cards consume more power vis-a-vis GTX 680 [GK 104], their Compute GPGPU raw performance is much better this time against the nVidia line-up.

Also in the time that nVidia has just launched its top end card, AMD has unleashed the majority of its HD 7*** line-up except for the HTPC and OEM launches. This shows that AMD is still following its plan and staying the course rather than turning tail and spreading slander about the Kepler cards, I really like competition but it should not keep the end user [me] waiting for ~4 months just to see which company has a clear upper hand.

If you are not on time, you have lost half the battle.
Click to expand...

This isn't a flame post, just expressing my views rather tersely. Cheers!!
 
I actually agree with Marcus on this, the tables do seem to have turned in more ways than one (both pricing and performance against an AMD lineup that is deemed to be a tad pricy at its levels and only has (AMAZING) power efficiency to show for itself, but not much in terms of significant absolute performance upgrade). As for the Compute performance, I read that its not as critical for gaming performance (hearsay, I am not very sure of this point).

As for the timing, a) its NOT Nvidia's top end card
cool.png
AMD still hasnt released the mainstream cards and most launches happened to be paper launches, so no, AMD doesnt get full marks in my books c) How exactly is Nvidia to be blamed if it doesnt have its lineup out yet... if its not ready, its not ready. No1 will fault people for buying AMD if they are tired for waiting for the Nvidia competition, but product launches are always like that... you wait months before buying the Iphone cos you know 4S is around the corner, and then you will wait for the S3 etc etc... so launch timing is definitely not part of the arguement here...

More importantly, the reason I agree with Marcus is the simple fact that since Nvidia has delivered a superb product, and now it will possibly force some price rationalisation across the length of the AMD product range. In fact, in a duopoly market, common sense tells you that when one of the competitors launches the next gen product, they are justified to charge a premium and the only way to cut down the premium is if the other company delivers a better price-performance product. If the second company fails on this, the premium only solidifies and may even become higher depending on the gap between the competiting products. So thanks to Nvidia for delivering on its role in a duopoly.

And now, on the actual card and its availability itself - Is it possible to consider a GO purchase or use Shop & Ship or some other service to order this in bulk if there are enuff buyers ?
 
cybermantas said:
In fact, in a duopoly market, common sense tells you that when one of the competitors launches the next gen product, they are justified to charge a premium and the only way to cut down the premium is if the other company delivers a better price-performance product. If the second company fails on this, the premium only solidifies and may even become higher depending on the gap between the competiting products.
Click to expand...

My only question is, when Nvidia failed to deliver the best for past three years, did they ever come down on thier pricing and did they price thier products atleast a tad low than what AMD was offering thier lineups?

PS:: Compare in segment wise - high end, middle and low end.
 
I am slightly unqualified to answer that, have been only active in the last 6 odd months and wouldnt know about the facts around the release of Nvidia 5xx or Amd 6xxx ... I am a lil surpirsied, however, to hear people say that AMD trumped even between 5xx and 6xxx, I always had the impression that both Nvidia and AMD had excellent set of Value for Money cards in the Middle range (560, 560 ti, 6850, 6870 & 6950) ... the low range was completely AMD dominated ofcourse while the high end was mostly Nvidia's...
 
cybermantas said:
I am a lil surpirsied, however, to hear people say that AMD trumped even between 5xx and 6xxx, I always had the impression that both Nvidia and AMD had excellent set of Value for Money cards in the Middle range.

I agree that absolute performance was nVidia's forte but the highest end crown was held by the AMD HD 6990 [the GTX 590 ran hot and early revisions had their MOSFETs catch fire @stock clocks].

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRo-1VFMcbc

Most AMD offerings were better in price / performance vis-a-vis nVidia offerings,

AMD HD 6950 1GB > GTX 560Ti

AMD HD 6850 > GTX 550Ti

AMD HD 6770 / 5770 > GTS 450

AMD focussed on best performance and price in mid-range wasn't really bothered if they did not have the absolute performance halo, their mid-range offerings [HD 6850 and HD 6870] went through constant price revisions throughout their life unlike nVidia cards which stuck to their prices for the most time until AMD releases forced them to revise them and to bring them in line with the market mood.
Click to expand...

cybermantas said:
I actually agree with Marcus on this, the tables do seem to have turned in more ways than one (both pricing and performance against an AMD lineup that is deemed to be a tad pricy at its levels and only has (AMAZING) power efficiency to show for itself, but not much in terms of significant absolute performance upgrade). As for the Compute performance, I read that its not as critical for gaming performance (hearsay, I am not very sure of this point).

The nVidia cards have generally been better COMPUTE [GPGPU performance] cards than head-on gaming performance vis-a-vis their AMD equivalents, so yes this might not affect gaming but out here AMD has pulled of a coup. Now it remains to be seen if the drivers do the magic OR not.

As for the timing, a) its NOT Nvidia's top end card
cool.png
AMD still hasnt released the mainstream cards and most launches happened to be paper launches, so no, AMD doesnt get full marks in my books c) How exactly is Nvidia to be blamed if it doesnt have its lineup out yet... if its not ready, its not ready.

Look in the market situation in the West, the two times that people generally buy such stuff in droves is ~Holiday season and Summer, most game releases coincide with this cycle in mind. If the company doesn't value this time, it looses customers irrespective of whether their releasing product redeems itself with stellar performance.

For e.g -- Bulldozer which had so much hype behind it had come out the same time as Sandy-Bridge with the same performance, at a slightly lesser price tag the budget server crowd would have gone towards it, but because it was delayed, had sub-par performance it was thumbed by the reviewers as too little, too late. The enthusiast market had moved onto Sandy-Bridge irrespective it demanding a premium for -k marked processor. A foe that does not reach the battle on time has lost half the battle.
Click to expand...

Hope this puts things in perspective, Cheers!!
 
Back
Top