# Radeon HD 7970 Price Cuts Not Any Time Soon: Report



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2012)

A lot of prospective buyers of new generation GPUs were counting on the US $499 launch price of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 to result in reactionary price-cuts in the red camp, particularly with the $549 Radeon HD 7970. NVIDIA's GPU is faster, more efficient, and under normal circumstances, should leave AMD with no other option, but to cut prices of HD 7970 to stay competitive. However, that hasn't happened, and according to a HardwareCanucks report, will not happen any time soon. 

NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 680 launch wasn't just on paper, there was market-availability on launch-day, although like every other new GPU launch, stocks have been quite limited. Before this launch, AMD and its partners managed to replenish inventories of Radeon HD 7970, making it generally available, while not budging from its ~$549 price. Sources told HardwareCanucks and this situation won't change unless NVIDIA has a more full-fledged lineup of new-generation GPUs against AMD's, or unless the availability of GeForce GTX 680 drastically improves.



AMD can't cut prices of HD 7970 without disturbing prices of its other HD 7000 SKUs, namely HD 7950, HD 7870, and HD 7850. The company is able to command relatively high prices for these SKUs, because they offer relatively high performance in their market segments. Until NVIDIA has new products to compete with these three SKUs, it makes sense for AMD to overlook, and even sacrifice the competitiveness of one SKU, the HD 7970. Besides, with AMD AIB partners out with a bouquet of non-reference design products based on the HD 7970 without charging too high premiums, AMD has a chance of attracting buyers awaiting availability of GTX 680 away from it.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Delta6326 (Mar 29, 2012)

Dang I was hoping for price cuts.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Mar 29, 2012)

Now its going to propell people to get the GTX680 over the 7970 even more, if they were contemplating between them.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 29, 2012)

The truth indeed.
AMD has no reason to lower 7970 price, GTX680 is vapor ware right now.....way to go nvidia...
Now 2 more months for availability and for the GTX 660, 670 launch....


----------



## BigMack70 (Mar 29, 2012)

I just sucked it up and paid the price premium since I don't feel like selling the 7970 I got at launch... will have spent $1200 for an XFX DD BE and MSI Lightning 7970. 20% price premium over the 680s but overclocked (@1200 MHz) the performance should be very competitive. 

I wish I had been more patient... could have saved some cash, but couldn't wait anymore past Jan. for the new card 

Price/performance ratios are never good on the top end GPUs anyways... the 7870 and eventual 660ti are where all the great deals are gonna be.


----------



## n-ster (Mar 29, 2012)

This is another reason why I'm not going to be going the 7XXX route

This makes the 6XXX series still very viable


----------



## btarunr (Mar 29, 2012)

Every personal attack kills one of those. Have a constructive, objective debate.


----------



## Dent1 (Mar 29, 2012)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> Now its going to propell people to get the GTX680 over the 7970 even more, if they were contemplating between them.



I agree. Only 3% performance difference between the cards - according to TPU review - They are the same speed. But the GTX 680 is $30 cheaper, so grabs the your attention.

But then again,  if you are spending $500+ I doubt you'll care about another $30. So you'll probably still go with the 7970, if ATI was your brand of choice.


----------



## AKlass (Mar 29, 2012)

AMD has something under there sleeves... either a victory driver, or they are hiding that it unlocks into a 7990


----------



## ZoneDymo (Mar 29, 2012)

Well thats what you get when Nvidia puts their card up for just 50 bucks less and not lets say 100 or 150 bucks less (which they could easily do seeing as teh GTX680 was meant to be the lowest of the high performance cards) but nope, more money to be made this way.


----------



## Darkleoco (Mar 29, 2012)

ZoneDymo said:


> Well thats what you get when Nvidia puts their card up for just 50 bucks less and not lets say 100 or 150 bucks less (which they could easily do seeing as teh GTX680 was meant to be the lowest of the high performance cards) but nope, more money to be made this way.



The GTX 680 is being released as the highest single GPU card of "this generation" though it is not maximising the performance of Kepler. 

Also I would be much happier with 3GB of vram on the 7970 over the minimal difference in performance between the 7970 and 680.


----------



## TRWOV (Mar 29, 2012)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> Now its going to propell people to get the GTX680 over the 7970 even more, if they were contemplating between them.



The thing is that availability of the GTX680 isn't widespread yet. What good is to have a $50 cheaper option if there isn't stock of it? AMD is betting on people getting impatient and going for a 7970/7950


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 29, 2012)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> Now its going to propell people to get the GTX680 over the 7970 even more, if they were contemplating between them.


As long a GTX680 aren't on shelves like now or just piddle in it really isn't any threat to a 7970. Face it it easier to get a 7970 for $550 than any GTX680 anypoint soon.

While GTX680 wasn't all that much faster on any true "demanding titles" at 2650x, nor was it that much better in true efficiency while actually gaming ~3% for 5% Fps in those same demanding titles.  Cards at this price still struggle @2560x to maintain 40-60 Fps that's where it really matters. Will it will curtail some AMD 7970 sales IdK, hardly those who want AMD solution got theirs months ago, while those aspiring Nvidia will wait... It not a price thing it a deliverable thing.



ZoneDymo said:


> (which they could easily do seeing as teh GTX680


The chip is one thing but you need to factor in the new components and PCB cost to hire that "Clock Speed Nanny".  I haven't heard what those peice add to production cost, while give 2Gb on 256-Bit they made consessions to hold cost.


----------



## erocker (Mar 29, 2012)

7970's must be selling just fine at the current price-point. If sales start to drop, AMD knows what to do. Once 680's actually start to flood the market, AMD may rethink their pricing.


----------



## jihadjoe (Mar 29, 2012)

TRWOV said:


> The thing is that availability of the GTX680 isn't widespread yet. What good is to have a $50 cheaper option if there isn't stock of it? AMD is betting on people getting impatient and going for a 7970/7950



This is exactly what people meant when they said that it's TSMC manufacturing that's actually causing high GPU prices.

Since TSMC can only manufacture so many 28nm wafers, and those wafers have to be divided between Pitcairn, Tahiti and Little Kepler, supply is effectively limited. Nvidia could sell Kepler for $300 and still be profitable (the die is smaller than the $250 at launch GF114, after all), but their maximum sales numbers would ultimately be limited by TSMC production. 

In this regard, it's makes much more sense to price GK104 at $500, because even at that price they will sell out anyway. Or conversely even if they priced GK104 at $300 they wouldn't sell a single card more, because TSMC production is max'd out either way. It's an economics error much like the DDR3 debacle (oversupply = rock bottom prices), except this time things the other way around.

There just is no way a GPU price war can happen unless Nvidia can find a way to produce Kepler in large quantities (probably why their CEO was poking at Intel to accept more companies to their fabs).


----------



## ensabrenoir (Mar 29, 2012)

Amd......the lovable underdog.....the peoples company........ Are we awake now?   Business is business


----------



## dir_d (Mar 29, 2012)

AMD wont lower the price because the card out preforms the 680 in compute and has more VRAM. The 7970 is overall the better card but the 680 is the best gaming card.


----------



## phanbuey (Mar 29, 2012)

dir_d said:


> AMD wont lower the price because the card out preforms the 680 in compute and has more VRAM. The 7970 is overall the better card but the 680 is the best gaming card.



Yeah but the market at the moment doesn't really care about compute or Vram, those are fringe users.  Basically the 7970 is slower and more expensive.  It seems like they are castrating their own sales.

Not to mention the NV card *seems* cheaper to produce, so I bet NV has some room to play with



jihadjoe said:


> This is exactly what people meant when they said that it's TSMC manufacturing that's actually causing high GPU prices.
> 
> Since TSMC can only manufacture so many 28nm wafers, and those wafers have to be divided between Pitcairn, Tahiti and Little Kepler, supply is effectively limited. Nvidia could sell Kepler for $300 and still be profitable (the die is smaller than the $250 at launch GF114, after all), but their maximum sales numbers would ultimately be limited by TSMC production.
> 
> ...



What you are missing from this analysis is that TSMC fills orders just like any other factory - by demand.  If the demand is 80% for Kepler, 20% for AMD offerings, their production will adjust to match.  There are currently 7970 in stock, so chances are retailers arent  placing large orders for it, which means AMD is no longer demanding as many 7970 wafers = more production to kepler.



jihadjoe said:


> Nvidia could sell Kepler for $300 and still be profitable (the die is smaller than the $250 at launch GF114, after all), but their maximum sales numbers would ultimately be limited by TSMC production.



This statement is not 100% true.  It is true now, because there is a time lag between the initial batch and the subsequent shipments to meet demand.  But if that price was $300, the backorder list would be much much bigger, and TSMC's production lines would all be getting fresh "Kepler" stickers put on them.


----------



## vega22 (Mar 29, 2012)

yay!!!

lets kill teh kittehS!!!

anyway, so price fixing cocks in price fixing shocker?

why am i not surprised, nv release a midranged card for high end money and amd dont do price cuts. 

money grabbing bastards.


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 29, 2012)

Doesn't surprise me at all TBH, they (ATi) were first with 28nm tech and they are using 3Gb Vram & 384bit bus. Thing's which add to overall card $$$ and i'm 99% sure will make the 7 series a more viable product for long term usage (some people like myself buy a card and use it for 3+ years) as software emerge's/mature's to take advantage of the hardware. 

They need to recoup some of that R&D $$$ and i expect to see cut's in May/June. It really irk's me that ATi doesn't put much effort into marketing their product's because IMHO they made a huge leap with the 7 series and most people look right past them and straight to Nvidia. 

It actually make's Nvidia look worse IMHO because they cheaped out on VRAM and cut back their bus to 256bit, nevermind the other shady tactic's employed to make this core look good. The only reason the GTX680 is $499 is to reduce the sting from the massive faceslap to their customer's, sorry to say  Gotta give prop's to Nvidias COO/CEO & marketing dept as they really know how to make something out of nothing

Either way i'm skipping this gen unless i see 7970/680 @ $300 - $350, the price gouging from both side's need's to stop


----------



## swirl09 (Mar 29, 2012)

Not to mention the fact the 680, not on sale a week, and the prices have gone up. So no, you really won't see the 7900 price drop for awhile sadly.

I think it's pretty cheeky of nV, they put out a card which was originally not meant for the single gpu flagship position in that very slot because they could. That's not the part I have a problem with, they did make a great card and it performs at the high end, makes perfect business sense to do so. My issue is that they weren't satisfied enough with that measure and now because of demand they are pushing the price up even more, they're making a killing already :/

Wouldn't be surprised if it was all very deliberate, the launch mrsp featured heavily in every review, now that all major sites have the reviews out, price creeps up.


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 29, 2012)

swirl09 said:


> Wouldn't be surprised if it was all very deliberate, the launch mrsp featured heavily in every review, now that all major sites have the reviews out, price creeps up.



Yup! That's why i keep mentioning their marketing & business mgmt dept they realy, _REALLY_ do know how to make something out of nothing


----------



## phanbuey (Mar 29, 2012)

swirl09 said:


> Not to mention the fact the 680, not on sale a week, and the prices have gone up. So no, you really won't see the 7900 price drop for awhile sadly.
> 
> I think it's pretty cheeky of nV, they put out a card which was originally not meant for the single gpu flagship position in that very slot because they could. That's not the part I have a problem with, they did make a great card and it performs at the high end, makes perfect business sense to do so. My issue is that they weren't satisfied enough with that measure and now because of demand they are pushing the price up even more, they're making a killing already :/
> 
> Wouldn't be surprised if it was all very deliberate, the launch mrsp featured heavily in every review, now that all major sites have the reviews out, price creeps up.



Nvidia does not set prices at that level - board partners do.  The same thing happened with the 5850.  The price per chip stays the same from NV to the board partners, but due to demand they jack up their prices to the outlets.  Nvidia doesn't see a $ extra from that 680 that PNY decided to sell for $550 unless they start jacking up the price that they sell the actual GPU for, which is not the case.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Mar 29, 2012)

And people say AMD are the good guys... Intel is competing against itself and they still have great priced cpus. Yet they are the evil ones.


----------



## Inceptor (Mar 29, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> I agree. Only 3% performance difference between the cards - according to TPU review - They are the same speed. But the GTX 680 is $30 cheaper, so grabs the your attention.
> 
> But then again,  if you are spending $500+ I doubt you'll care about another $30. So you'll probably still go with the 7970, if ATI was your brand of choice.



That's probably true.  But I can also see another reason; so far the 680 is only available with reference boards sporting the usual 'leaf blower' turbine cooler.  The people willing to spend more money usually want better cooling, and the 7970s have better cooling solutions, allowing overclocking without excessive fan noise -- that also factors into the equation -- especially with such a small performance difference at stock.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 29, 2012)

Yo_Wattup said:


> And people say AMD are the good guys... Intel is competing against itself and they still have great priced cpus. Yet they are the evil ones.



zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

You fail to see NV did this with the 8800, Intel does the price hikes all the time too


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Mar 29, 2012)

I was waiting for a price drop, well I'll wait more I think xD


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 29, 2012)

Well, Tahiti is big and when TSMC levied their 28Nm price increase end of last summer, AMD was too far into the idea of making a Top Enthusiast card that supposedly destined to go up against the GK100, AMD figured they had nowhere to go but forward.  

Then GK100 wasn't coming out like Nvidia had hoped, and with the price increase it was going to be an albatross.  I think they even had the "Clock-Speed Nanny" being looked at to tame the GK100, but that chip with the added components to rein it in, plus 384-bit; because I don’t believe even the most ardent fan would slap down $650+ to schlep with only 256-Bit.  All that was way outside what the market would pay for... What to do.  

Nvidia found the GK104 with Boost had great results and by November knew they could compete with Tahiti and could price it to sell.  A little delay to get a new spin on a GK104 and PCB readied. They saved-face and then the comments of how "disappointing" Tahiti turn out started being flouted.  That worked out good for them, but now they need good production and scavenge the cream of those chips to use on the first GTX680. That where TSMC lets all of us down, and why a longer delay than we were first looking at. 

This is where it's now a little strange. If they get say 15% GTX680 of a 28Nm wafer why would Nvidia now waiting till May to start capitalizing on those GK104.  I’d think they’d have plenty still to deliver as the GTX670 sitting in a bin.  To me the PCB and all the things to bring that product didn’t completely stop, with all resources going to delierer the GTX680... or did they?  Maybe that was what the congratulatory letter was all about from Jen-Hsun?  

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5703/jenhsuns-email-to-nvidia-employees-on-a-successful-kepler-launch


----------



## ironwolf (Mar 29, 2012)

swirl09 said:


> Not to mention the fact the 680, not on sale a week, and the prices have gone up. So no, you really won't see the 7900 price drop for awhile sadly.



How have the prices on the GTX 680 gone up?  Did it not release at $499 for most of them?  Most places have most cards for the same price, just OOS.  Or am I missing something?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 29, 2012)

oh well....this will only hurt AMDs sales imo. the 680 is already shown to be a few steps ahead in almost every review on the net. not only is it faster then AMDs flagship, its also cheaper! win for Nvidia


----------



## Dent1 (Mar 29, 2012)

FreedomEclipse said:


> oh well....this will only hurt AMDs sales imo. the 680 is already shown to be a few steps ahead in almost every review on the net. not only is it faster then AMDs flagship, its also cheaper! win for Nvidia



?????? Haven't read the other review sites. But the official TPU review shows an average of 3%. Yes 3%. Hardly a few steps. Unless I'm missing a peice of the puzzle?


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 29, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> I'm missing a peice of the puzzle?


If you say it enough it makes it true! AMD should lower the price against what vapor cards?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 29, 2012)

I would say its a little higher then 3%. the 680 was consistantly higher by 3-10fps in almost all benchmarks. Faster = better no?


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 29, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> ?????? Haven't read the other review sites. But the official TPU review shows an average of 3%. Yes 3%. Hardly a few steps. Unless I'm missing a peice of the puzzle?



It's 7% at 1200p and 4% at 1600p, at 1050p it's even bigger. I only say this because you are repeating the wrong number so many times as fact. At least get it right, just saying, no offense.

Regarding the thread, I agree with Yo Wattup's comment. It's really fun to watch so many comments justifying a higher price on a product that is inferior to another one, even if only by 5% average. In every past generation in the last 5+ years Nvidia has had competing cards that were consistently 15%-25% faster and its price was only increased by just as much, except for the absolute fastest one which had a $50 premium over the perf/$ that would be expected, no more. This made Nvidia the evil one, but now that the tables have turned on pricing policies (not on who has the fastest card), it's OK to even price an inferior product higher. Funny.


----------



## Dent1 (Mar 29, 2012)

FreedomEclipse said:


> I would say its a little higher then 3%. the 680 was consistantly higher by 3-10fps in almost all benchmarks. Faster = better no?





Casecutter said:


> If you say it enough it makes it true! AMD should lower the price against what vapor cards?



Freedom. If 60FPS is the target. 3FPS is only 1.8% faster. 10FPs is 6%.

1.8% -6% faster is not a few steps head. At best on par, maybe half-a-step ahead.


Casecutter, I'm just looking at TPU's review. Says 3% average access all resolutions and 1% at 2500x1600. Are you saying TPU's review is wrong?

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_680_SLI/images/perfrel.gif
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_680_SLI/images/perfrel_2560.gif


----------



## the54thvoid (Mar 29, 2012)

FreedomEclipse said:


> I would say its a little higher then 3%. the 680 was consistantly higher by 3-10fps in almost all benchmarks. Faster = better no?



I just read a good review by Overclockers club, used two windows to get a comparison of a Powercolor 7970 LCS and a GTX 680 (they reviewed both cards).
They do stock and overclocked tests and surround tests.  The 7970 overclocked fares well against the 680 (until that is overclocked obviously).  The GTX 680 loses a lot of ground at surround resolution but still tends to win.
The tell all is power consumption.  At full OC on both cards the Liquid cooled 7970 draws 50 watts more and performs generally worse.  But the caveat is it wins on most reviews on Metro 2033, AVP and Crysis (tells a bit about it's power).

Scary thing is, I might just buy a 7970 LCS tomorrow.  Why? because it'll hump my current card (a 580) and I've waited long enough to complete my loop.  And i plan on getting GK110(or 100) when it comes out.  This is my expensive stop gap until then. 



> Freedom. If 60FPS is the target. 3FPS is only 1.8% faster. 10FPs is 6%.



erm no.  60fps:. 3 fps faster is 5% (10% of 60 = 6, therefore 3 = 5%).  10 fps faster would be 10/60 x 100 = 16.6%

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_gtx680/
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/powercolor_lcs_hd7970/


----------



## dj-electric (Mar 29, 2012)

All im gonna say is - When you have an overclock goggles you see things differently. I simply cannot and will not compere any two products that I'm gonna use by their stock frequency performance.
You can call it overclo-mania you can call it whatever. IMO the HD7850 is a better card then the GTX570\HD6970 for example.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 29, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Freedom. If 60FPS is the target. 3FPS is only 1.8% faster. 10FPs is 6%.
> 
> 1.8% -6% faster is not a step better.
> 
> ...



Look at the GTX680 review which is what you have to look at. In the SLI review everything is normalized to the SLI results which makes the difference look a lot smaller. Plus rounding one card up and down another one can make a nearly 3% difference evaporate into nothing.


----------



## Dent1 (Mar 29, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Look at the GTX680 review which is what you have to look at. In the SLI review everything is normalized to the SLI results which makes the difference look a lot smaller. Plus rounding one card up and down another one can make a nearly 3% difference evaporate into nothing.



OK. I'm looking at the non-SLI review now.

I'm not going to deny it, Nvidia have a fantastic card. It is faster according to reviews overall. But I still disagree that its a few steps ahead. Even in non SLI TPU shows 6% accross all resolutions and 4% on 2500x1600. Which puts it on par in the same performance bracket.

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_680/images/perfrel_2560.gif
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_680/images/perfrel.gif

Now the question is. Why would the "average" consumer pay for an ATI card when the Nvidia (the brand the know and trust) is $50 less. For competition reasons (not performance reasons) ATI should lower their price IMO.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 29, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> OK. I'm looking at the non-SLI review now.
> 
> I'm not going to deny it, Nvidia have a fantastic card. It is faster according overall. But I still disagree that its a few steps ahead. Even in non SLI TPU shows 6% accross all resolutions and 4% on 2500x1600. Which puts it on par in the same performance bracket.
> 
> ...



I was not trying to say it was a few steps ahead. But it still is faster, cooler, and quieter (even if only by a little bit) so a higher price on the HD7970 is not justifiable no matter how you look at it IMO. I understand the situation and the fact that it's probably justifiable for AMD, but I don't see how *consumers* can justify it. More soin the face that AMD has been increasing the price of their cards by $50-150 every generation, despite the fact that the cards were almost identical. Same die size, same amount of memory, similar PCB...



> Now the question is. Why would the "average" consumer pay for an ATI card when the Nvidia (the brand the know and trust) is $50 less. For competition reasons (not performance reasons) ATI should lower their price IMO.



True. IMO and as I've said plenty of times, both should be selling for $400.


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 29, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Now the question is. Why would the "average" consumer pay for an ATI card when the* Nvidia (the brand the know and trust)* is $50 less.





Funniest shit i read in a while, if Nvidia was any shadier they'd be Marshall Mathers


----------



## fochkoph (Mar 29, 2012)

Well...their logic is pretty sound.


----------



## Super XP (Mar 29, 2012)

AKlass said:


> AMD has something under there sleeves... either a victory driver, or they are hiding that it unlocks into a 7990


If they did release a victory driver with gains in excess of say 25% or soo boost in performance, then by all means, I would buy one.

But right now, as it stands, the price is too high for the HD 7970 regardless.


----------



## Dent1 (Mar 29, 2012)

m1dg3t said:


> Funniest shit i read in a while, if Nvidia was any shadier they'd be Marshall Mathers



I agree Nvidia have done some dodgy things.

What I meant was, the average customer have heard of Nvidia - They are seen to be the best in the noob community. ATI is seen as second best or second class. 9/10 if a customer is left to their own devices they'll buy a PC with an Nvidia 560ti than ATI 7970. Ask them why? They'll say Nvidia is better *shrugs*



Super XP said:


> If they did release a victory driver with gains in excess of say 25% or soo boost in performance, then by all means, I would buy one.
> 
> But right now, as it stands, the price is too high for the HD 7970 regardless.



Why 25%? TPU "official" review proves that upto 6% seperate the two cards.


----------



## manofthem (Mar 30, 2012)

I'm glad that at least second hand 7970's dropped in price when the 680 released


----------



## ensabrenoir (Mar 30, 2012)

As much as I love amd cards.....gotta give it to the green team.   Seems like this time around amd charged like nvidia and nvidia c harged  like amd usually dose.....and they switched back plates


----------



## Steevo (Mar 30, 2012)

phanbuey said:


> Nvidia does not set prices at that level - board partners do.  The same thing happened with the 5850.  The price per chip stays the same from NV to the board partners, but due to demand they jack up their prices to the outlets.  Nvidia doesn't see a $ extra from that 680 that PNY decided to sell for $550 unless they start jacking up the price that they sell the actual GPU for, which is not the case.




Finally someone who understands that Nvidia and AMD sell a GPU chip to board makers at a set price, the board makers sell the package at whatever price they want and teh retailer sells tham at whatever price they can get. So the end price is not set by AMD or Nvidia.




Yo_Wattup said:


> And people say AMD are the good guys... Intel is competing against itself and they still have great priced cpus. Yet they are the evil ones.




What part of your comment has ANYTHING to do with the discussion at hand?


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 30, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> I was not trying to say it was a few steps ahead. But it still is faster, cooler, and quieter (even if only by a little bit) so a higher price on the HD7970 is not justifiable no matter how you look at it IMO. I understand the situation and the fact that it's probably justifiable for AMD, but I don't see how consumers can justify it. More soin the face that AMD has been increasing the price of their cards by $50-150 every generation, despite the fact that the cards were almost identical. Same die size, same amount of memory, similar PCB...



So let me get this right Amd design their Pcbs right , from the off manage increased performance whilst keeping costs down and your wrong about the memory their bus size has increased and memory standards is now 2 gig not 1

and as far as i can see in the uk 7970's range from 414 -465 quids ,a 680 can be had for 419 - 455 so what are you on about thats a pie and a pint, and both are refference spec at the min price ,which is ideal if you have a waterblock in mind

bring on the next round please this ones boreing me now 

prices from aria



Benetanegia said:


> True. IMO and as I've said plenty of times, both should be selling for $400.



this we agree on


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 30, 2012)

I keep saying it and i'm gonna keep saying it: These "top tier" card's should cost no more $300 - $350  It is not 2004 anymore, NO MORE OVER PRICED GFX CARD'S! :shadedshu :shadedshu I'd be _REALLY_ surprised if these card's cost Nvidia/ATi more than $100/ea to produce, even then i think i'm being generous in that guesstimate 



fochkoph said:


> Well...their logic is pretty sound.



Yup! Capitalism at it's finest, and they are commies!  American companies should take note of Nvidia's business model/practice's 



Super XP said:


> If they did release a victory driver with gains in excess of say 25% or soo boost in performance, then by all means, I would buy one.
> 
> But right now, as it stands, the price is too high for the HD 7970 regardless.



There is no way that they can gain 25% from a driver, maybe 10% or 15% if lucky. *BOTH* card's are overpriced but can you blame them? There are more tool's out there willing to pay top $$$ than there are smart shopper's. They know how "everyone" love's that epeen and they make 'em pay for it!



Dent1 said:


> I agree Nvidia have done some dodgy things.
> 
> What I meant was, the average customer have heard of Nvidia - They are seen to be the best in the noob community. ATI is seen as second best or second class. 9/10 if a customer is left to their down devices they'll buy a PC with an Nvidia 560ti than ATI 7970. Ask them why? They'll say Nvidia is better *shrugs*



Nvidia has always been shady, at least as long as i can remember, but that's just them. They are smart businessmen, for sure, they make/release a product that is inferior to what they claim is "coming" but perform's *just* better than the competition and price it accordingly all the while every review headline's that Nvidia has the fastest single GPU card and the fantrollios eat it up and scream "I TOLD YOU SO" and the n00bs are all like "zOMGwtFBBQ!!! i need it n4o!!"   Plus Nvidia does a LOT of marketing, A LOT, so brand recognition is easily made and that = sale's. Very smart business men running that co. 

If you guy's are happy to pay $500+ for a GFX card and $450+ for a MOBO go right ahead i'll be  at you all the way to the bank when i go to collect my dividend's on the $$$ i lent you to pay for those over priced piece's of "tech" that will be outdated in 3 month's anyways 

/Rant

Sorry bta and anyone else not interested in my cynical ranting


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 30, 2012)

Ya 400 bux in 2002 was for a Radeon 9700 Pro All In Wonder.


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 30, 2012)

Board partner's get their MSRP's from Nvidia/ATi. Whether they'll admit to it or not.



eidairaman1 said:


> Ya 400 bux in 2002 was for a Radeon 9700 Pro All In Wonder.



And $740 for a x850xt pe in '04  NEVER again! I still have that card and i used the shit out of it, think i ran that card for 4yrs, maybe 5  I had to there was no choice for that kind of money i spent. I aint stupid rich 

That was a time when i had epeen envy, i actually remember spending $300 for 1gb of dual channel RAM  

Thankfully i'm smarter now, i think?


----------



## Steevo (Mar 30, 2012)

I paid 549 for a 1800XT only to sell it less than a year later for $100.


I was smart about most of my other purchases, bang for the buck for the games I play. 


I have honestly given up on ATI/AMD and their hardware acceleration of anything compute based. Not enough stuff uses it. They were the first with Folding @ Home though due to their full precision hardware.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 30, 2012)

Well It did have extra equipment on the board itself, probably one of the most intricate display boards at its time



m1dg3t said:


> Board partner's get their MSRP's from Nvidia/ATi. Whether they'll admit to it or not.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## nikko (Mar 30, 2012)

This means the opposite. There will be hudge price drops. This is like basic marketing lies. have you learned nothing.


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 30, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Well It did have extra equipment on the board itself, probably one of the most intricate display boards at its time



That's the thing, at least the AIW card's did so much more than just munch FPS. I wish they would bring them back


----------



## xenocide (Mar 30, 2012)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> All im gonna say is - When you have an overclock goggles you see things differently. I simply cannot and will not compere any two products that I'm gonna use by their stock frequency performance.
> You can call it overclo-mania you can call it whatever. IMO the HD7850 is a better card then the GTX570\HD6970 for example.









See that chart, over there, on the wall?  Check that out.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Mar 30, 2012)

Disappointing to say the least, now all nvidia needs to do is knock about $10 or $20 off the 680, and they will be sitting pretty.


----------



## Steevo (Mar 30, 2012)

xenocide said:


> http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_680/images/max_oc_vs_7970.gif
> 
> See that chart, over there, on the wall?  Check that out.



You seem to be able to read or at least know that on a chart higher is usually better. However, no 7970 voltage adjustment must have escaped you. 

Other reviews with voltage tuning show 1200+ core clock. These cards much like everything from 5xxx series on also seek to clock better at lower temps., allowing for 1300+ with water cooling.

Most of us here will at least change TIM to get better temps.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 30, 2012)

m1dg3t said:


> Board partner's get their MSRP's from Nvidia/ATi. Whether they'll admit to it or not.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Funny thing is that for example AMD is making people believe that if they price the 7870 at $250 it would be a HUGE discount...........and that's the price it was supposed to launch at.
When it is at $199, there is a discount.


----------



## symmetrical (Mar 30, 2012)

Brand loyalists are the only one who will pay "More" for "Less." And yes I'm talking about you ATI fanboys.

The GTX 680 is equal or better than a 7970, costs $50 less, introduces new features like dynamic clock speeds, has lower power consumption, has lower power requirements, also NOW supports 3 monitor gaming with one card, 3D vision (with actual driver support unlike AMD HD3D), PhysX, overclocks easily, and more than likely will only get better with driver updates.

And before you point to me as some Nvidia fanboy, I have an MSi 6850 OC, and Two Sapphire 6950s as well as my GTX 580. 

AMD for the sake of the consumer, drop that sucker to $499 or lower to level the playing field.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Mar 30, 2012)

symmetrical said:


> Brand loyalists are the only one who will pay "More" for "Less." And yes I'm talking about you ATI fanboys.
> 
> The GTX 680 is equal or better than a 7970, costs $50 less, introduces new features like dynamic clock speeds, has lower power consumption, has lower power requirements, also NOW supports 3 monitor gaming with one card, 3D vision (with actual driver support unlike AMD HD3D), PhysX, overclocks easily, and more than likely will only get better with driver updates.
> 
> ...



OMG your using logic rather than blind favoritism .. . .. RRRRRAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEE!


----------



## alienstorexxx (Mar 30, 2012)

i don't like how this looks for amd.

the only way, people would buy right now a amd 7xxx card would be a fair price, competitive with nvidia 5xx and amd's 6xxx. well... it's not in that place.

the reasons are that nvidia has shown us the power, of his generation of gpu's, and it gives a good taste of what the next gtx650 and gtx660 could be.

me (and i think no one) would like to buy a 7770 now and, in like, 3 months, appears the gtx650 faster, more eficcient and cheaper, as the gtx680 to the 7970. (same with 7850/7870 and gtx660)
that is something i don't want. 

i think amd is speculating with that 1gb vram extra, seems they want to trick unexperienced customers that asks "wich one has more *megabytes*"  really i don't know what to think. i hope that, when amd said they were going to be more agressive, they don't mean overpricing..


----------



## alienstorexxx (Mar 30, 2012)

i need to say something more. i'm sick of some reviews. i mean, why don't the separe the game titles that really matter in one bench, and in another, syntethic benchs and the games that actually nobody would care to run at more than 60fps (because the can run with an onboard graphics card or they are old gen, or engine disappeared) like cod's (as seen on TPU) or farcry2 *and cod (on guru3d) and so many other games and reviewers. i forgot, shity just cause 2 WTF?, *and of course a lot more.

because those fps affect on final result, nobody cares about them, but they are affecting on final score that everyone will be talking about and consulting them.


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 30, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> So let me get this right Amd design their Pcbs right , from the off manage increased performance whilst keeping costs down and your wrong about the memory their bus size has increased and memory standards is now 2 gig not 1



Well the 7970 does have 384 bit, but that does not justify a $150 jump. Neither does the die size or yields, if according to AMD, they have good yields, or so they said to their investors. The price cannot be justified in any form other than "we asked this much because we could". Well now, they can't and should lower the price.

I was talking in general anyway. 4870>5870>6970 were very similar and the price increased by $50-100. 6870 to 7870 are very similar and price increased by $100. 2 Gb GDDR5 does not cost much more than 1 Gb GDDR5, as in 2x as much, it does not cost double, not eveb close, and it does not cost more than 1 Gb GDDR5 several months/years ago. 8 chips vs 12 chips does increase price more but not by $50 or anything close to that.

So their prices can't be justified now, neither really is GTX680's price, except for the fact that it's the fastest card and is actually priced lower than the competing card, so it's more justified.


----------



## dj-electric (Mar 30, 2012)

xenocide said:


> http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_680/images/max_oc_vs_7970.gif
> 
> See that chart, over there, on the wall?  Check that out.



My answer to that chart is NO. 1080Mhz core for HD7970 is what w1zz calls MAXOC. That PathOC as in pathetic OC.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 30, 2012)

m1dg3t said:


> That's the thing, at least the AIW card's did so much more than just munch FPS. I wish they would bring them back



Ya but no need for a Analog TV Tuner, it be nice if they were DTV


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 30, 2012)

Physx is still barely used and easily overclocks? hardly AMD boards didnt need a cheater board to reach the speed it did. Btw you wouldnt be accused of being a NV fanboy if you wouldnt talk the way you do.



symmetrical said:


> Brand loyalists are the only one who will pay "More" for "Less." And yes I'm talking about you ATI fanboys.
> 
> The GTX 680 is equal or better than a 7970, costs $50 less, introduces new features like dynamic clock speeds, has lower power consumption, has lower power requirements, also NOW supports 3 monitor gaming with one card, 3D vision (with actual driver support unlike AMD HD3D), PhysX, overclocks easily, and more than likely will only get better with driver updates.
> 
> ...


----------



## n-ster (Mar 30, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> It's 7% at 1200p and 4% at 1600p, at 1050p it's even bigger. I only say this because you are repeating the wrong number so many times as fact. At least get it right, just saying, no offense.
> 
> Regarding the thread, I agree with Yo Wattup's comment. It's really fun to watch so many comments justifying a higher price on a product that is inferior to another one, even if only by 5% average. In every past generation in the last 5+ years Nvidia has had competing cards that *were consistently 15%-25% faster and its price was only increased by just as much*, except for the absolute fastest one which had a $50 premium over the perf/$ that would be expected, no more. This made Nvidia the evil one, but now that the tables have turned on pricing policies (not on who has the fastest card), it's OK to even price an inferior product higher. Funny.



Nvidia always had a worse perf/$ except for 1 card where it was the same, usually in the mid range.  GTX 260, GTX 460 Ti etc.

And people don't seem to know the basics of math. The 7970 is 7% slower than the GTX 680, doesn't mean the 680 is 7% faster! 100/93 = 7.53% faster. Now think about it. I haven't checked the prices but assuming the GTX 680 can be had for 500$ and the 7970 at 550$. If you normalize the 680 price/perf to the 7970's, you get 591.42$, and considering it is the fastest card, an 8$ price premium would be normal, so basically, the GTX 680 priced itself *100$ LOWER * than the 7970 if you take into account *1200p perf* which is usually where you have to base yourself off as most people use that resolution.

It's the same thing as if, let's say, the HD 8850 and the GTX 760 Ti were priced at 350$, but the HD 8850 is 20% faster. Would you be defending NV in this case? Also note NV usually has better driver support and a few more features like CUDA/PhysX. CUDA can be a great feature for some, else it usually doesn't matter

Yes, 20% faster perf/$ on the most used resolution is steps ahead. I know I'm being a bit favorable to NV here not taking into account 2560x1600, but before the cheap Korean panels, noone except people who had 700$ to burn on a monitor used the resolution, and usually they'd buy 2 cards if they did (so you'd have to take into account CFX and SLI scaling etc)

*TL;DR: If you compare it to a 7970, perf/$, the GTX 680 is 100$ lower, that's like 17% cheaper perf/$ (or 20% faster perf in perf/$) (again this is for the 1200p resolution ONLY as most people use 1080p, higher resolutions the diff is much lower). Many here seem to be biased towards AMD* 

also:



symmetrical said:


> Brand loyalists are the only one who will pay "More" for "Less." And yes I'm talking about you ATI fanboys.
> 
> The GTX 680 is equal or better than a 7970, costs $50 less, introduces new features like dynamic clock speeds, has lower power consumption, has lower power requirements, also NOW supports 3 monitor gaming with one card, 3D vision (with actual driver support unlike AMD HD3D), PhysX, overclocks easily, and more than likely will only get better with driver updates.
> 
> ...



+1 Except I have a GT 240, 2 6950s and a 6870, close enough xD


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 30, 2012)

n-ster said:


> Nvidia always had a worse perf/$ except for 1 card where it was the same, usually in the mid range.  GTX 260, GTX 460 Ti etc.



I agree on everything you said except on this. In my experience what you described only happens later on in the life cycle. When launched and in the months after launch they are equal, sometimes AMD ahead, sometimes Nvidia ahead, and changes every month after price reductions from both camps. Of course the flagship "fastest card on the planet" has to always be excluded since it will always come with a premium and 90% of the times it's been a Nvidia card.

Over the time, what you dscribed is true probably. AMD does the last price reduction while Nvidia doesn't, or doesn't reduce it as much, but this is only because of how the market goes. If you look at sales of discrete cards, Nvidia has a 60%+ of market share so it does not make sense for them to lower the price below a certain point when they are selling 2x as many cards at the current price. And we are talking about the $100-200 bracket mostly, where AMD having a better perf/$ ratio barely means a $5 or $10 difference. Essentially AMD does have the better ratio (say 10% better ratio), but for an extra of $5 you get many features like CUDA, PhysX and the peace of mind of knowing that most times than not driver support and optimisation for new games is going to be there the day the games are launched and not in the next driver package. I think most users feel those advantages and that's why Nvidia enjoys the market share and slightly higher ASP. But again, from what I've seen at least, perf/$ is almost always the same at launch and next few months: it's 3-6 months later when it starts to "deviate" from that norm.

EDIT: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/30.html

Even when HD7970 was reviewed, long before GTX500 cards got the price reduction:






GTX570 better perf/$ than HD6970, GTX560 Ti better than HD6950.


----------



## n-ster (Mar 30, 2012)

I don't take into account CUDA as it is pretty niche. I think the market share favoring NV is much more because of their marketing

We'll have to respectfully agree to disagree on this point  I've rarely ever seen NV beat AMD perf/$... At launch or later on. IIRC, the 5XXX series was a great example, especially with the launch prices of the 5850. Even after the price went up, it still was great perf/$

EDIT: Yea that's my point, recently NV has been getting better perf/$, AMD needs to do price cuts! Yet people keep defending them for no reason..


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 30, 2012)

n-ster said:


> I don't take into account CUDA as it is pretty niche. I think the market share favoring NV is much more because of their marketing
> 
> We'll have to respectfully agree to disagree on this point  I've rarely ever seen NV beat AMD perf/$... At launch or later on. IIRC, the 5XXX series was a great example, especially with the launch prices of the 5850. Even after the price went up, it still was great perf/$



Well look at my edit, the only AMD cards with decidedly better perf/$ there are HD6850 and 6870 and IMO it's not random coincidence that their competing parts are GTX460 and GTX560, by far the best selling cards of late: which means their prices remained higher as I explained in the other post.

EDIT: Maybe we are talking about different time frames. I'm talking about the last 3 years or so, I wouldn't say that's "recently", it's been a long time. They have been pretty even or much to my surprise, NV has actually been better according to the chart. I mean, GTX470 and 480, both better than HD5870...


----------



## n-ster (Mar 30, 2012)

That's kind of my point, NV's has been stepping it up lately, yet people still have still negative view of NV perf/$. My point was more on the 5XXX and 4XXX series of AMD


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 30, 2012)

n-ster said:


> That's kind of my point, NV's has been stepping it up lately, yet people still have still negative view of NV perf/$. My point was more on the 5XXX and 4XXX series of AMD



Well, so we are arguing about what "recently" means then. About 4xxx series, I agree, but not about HD5xxx. It's like the chart shows. It seems HD5850 is the exception, not the norm.

EDIT: I think the reason that people tend to think AMD has better perf/$ is because they always do the wrong/weird/biased comparison. Look at old threads and you'll see people comparing HD5870 to GTX480, HD5850 to GTX470, HD6970 to GTX580, HD6950 to GTX570 and so on, I even remember people comparing GTX460 with HD5770, based on the basis that both were the mid-range parts, even with the obvious performance difference. Of course comparing different "class" cards will show better results. The lower you go in price points the better that perf/$ is.


----------



## NHKS (Mar 30, 2012)

talking abt when AMD 'might' reduce prices -  I dont think we can expect any drops until nvidia outs its 670Ti / 670 cards in the (300$ - 450$) range, and that will probably be May at earliest.. and also depends on how nV will price those cards.. until then AMD, from a business perpective, will not be concerned of losing any sales to nV with the 7970, if any(considering the shortage in supply of 680s) .. they still have majority of their 28nm products(7950, 78xx & 77xx) without direct(28nm) competition..

 it's the overall business case they will be looking at rather than concentrating with one model, which if they now cut by 50$ will have a cascading effect on the prices of other 7xxx models..

also, the 6xxx series is not going to be EOL any time soon(at least not this year)... so we can expect AMD (and also nV) to price current & previous gens at different price points(a 'portfolio' made up of more than one generation of cards).. simply dropping price of one model could affect the prices(value) of other models

below is very likely the 2012 product line-up for both sides


----------



## Regenweald (Mar 30, 2012)

Gentlemen and ladies, the reason that AMD prices will not fall anytime soon is very simple. 

True, what what probably meant to be Nvidia's mid range card is a little faster than AMD's high end (in gaming) and true, the 680 is a great purchase, but where are they ? Don't you all think that AMD had a _very_ good idea of Nvidia's stock in the channel ? The fact is there is simply no _*physical*_ competition currently and apparently will not be for a couple of months. 
So the question is : Do you price war with 'competition' that isn't on the shelves ?

this isn't about fps or perf per dollar, this is simply supply and demand, there is demand and currently, AMD has a complete card lineup of supply. Nvidia does not.


----------



## Super XP (Mar 30, 2012)

Steevo said:


> Finally someone who understands that Nvidia and AMD sell a GPU chip to board makers at a set price.............


With a "Recommended" retail price. Anyhow it looks like AMD has overpriced it's HD 7970 boards seeing how there wasn't no real competition. If AMD does not drop prices, GTX 680 will sell more.


----------



## fullinfusion (Mar 30, 2012)

Till the price drops down to $350ish Im sitting with what I got... Oh hey why the hell would I upgrade to such an fugugly gpu. I liked when ATI had the top of the card covered and just the core exposed, and dont say its due to cooling 

Nvidia will drop there price even more in the weeks to come and watch amd FAIL again


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Mar 30, 2012)

symmetrical said:


> Brand loyalists are the only one who will pay "More" for "Less." And yes I'm talking about you ATI fanboys.
> 
> The GTX 680 is equal or better than a 7970, costs $50 less, introduces new features like dynamic clock speeds, has lower power consumption, has lower power requirements, also NOW supports 3 monitor gaming with one card, 3D vision (with actual driver support unlike AMD HD3D), PhysX, overclocks easily, and more than likely will only get better with driver updates.
> 
> ...



You shouldn't stop talking about ATI fanboys, as nVidia fanboys do aswell, no? Or nVidia Fanboys are just better?  I'm kinda sick of thoses comments about fanboys... If they wants to be fanboys, it's their rights... We could do the same for any products, you know...

They will drop the price until the GK104 will be available, as they can't supply for everybody!


----------



## Jonap_1st (Mar 30, 2012)

the only problem that nvidia has right now is the stockpile, so from the marketing point of view what AMD do right now for not cutting the price 7970 is a right decision..

28nm wafers availability for Nvidia is on scarce, it means they cant meet the numbers of availability that consumers demand. so the consumers who dont have any choice if they want to buy the fastest card which available on the market they have to go for 7970 (if they were smart enough to understand price-performance wise they can bought 78xx and overclock it), 

looking at the rest of GTX6xx family which release date is still uncertain and limited availability of GTX680 on the market, AMD will still be happy with their current price tags. i knew you were dissapointed by 7970 ridiculous price, but that's how marketing's work. they would take any kind of way to take a profit as long as there's still a chance to do it..


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 30, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Well the 7970 does have 384 bit, but that does not justify a $150 jump. Neither does the die size or yields, if according to AMD, they have good yields, or so they said to their investors. The price cannot be justified in any form other than "we asked this much because we could". Well now, they can't and should lower the price.
> 
> I was talking in general anyway. 4870>5870>6970 were very similar and the price increased by $50-100. 6870 to 7870 are very similar and price increased by $100. 2 Gb GDDR5 does not cost much more than 1 Gb GDDR5, as in 2x as much, it does not cost double, not eveb close, and it does not cost more than 1 Gb GDDR5 several months/years ago. 8 chips vs 12 chips does increase price more but not by $50 or anything close to that.
> 
> So their prices can't be justified now, neither really is GTX680's price, except for the fact that it's the fastest card and is actually priced lower than the competing card, so it's more justified.



+99
So much TRUTH there.


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Mar 30, 2012)

Jonap_1st said:


> the only problem that nvidia has right now is the stockpile, so from the marketing point of view what AMD do right now for not cutting the price 7970 is a right decision..
> 
> 28nm wafers availability for Nvidia is on scarce, it means they cant meet the numbers of availability that consumers demand. so the consumers who dont have any choice if they want to buy the fastest card which available on the market they have to go for 7970 (if they were smart enough to understand price-performance wise they can bought 78xx and overclock it),
> 
> looking at the rest of GTX6xx family which release date is still uncertain and limited availability of GTX680 on the market, AMD will still be happy with their current price tags. i knew you were dissapointed by 7970 ridiculous price, but that's how marketing's work. they would take any kind of way to take a profit as long as there's still a chance to do it..



but another way to think, if they have plenty of stock by Mai, they should reduce the price before, as maybe people will buy their hardware instead of waiting for the competitor..

it all depens on how long it will take to nVidia to have plenty GTX 680 ready to be sold..


----------



## Casecutter (Mar 30, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Casecutter, I'm just looking at TPU's review


Sorry not what I meant.  I "thanked you" and was agreeing that the more times the Nvidia folks hear stuff like beats up on, owns, wiped the floor, they go into a trance like state of belief.  

Me I'd rather C-F 7850 and OC them which beat some Vaporcard that can't be purchased, and when it finally can it will be at least $530.


----------



## mechtech (Mar 31, 2012)

supply
and
demand

sigh


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 31, 2012)

mechtech said:


> supply
> and
> demand
> 
> sigh



that
justifies
nothing

They knew supply would be short so they should/could have prepared themselves. How? Hmm... what about ensuring sufficient production of *one chip* instead of flooding the market with a whole overpriced lineup, all of which will be extremely short in supply? They knew what supply would be so they did it on purpose to keep supply short and then even mocked on us by releasing the press release about them releasing 3 chips in 3 months. And I hear Nvidia will do the same in 2-3 months too. Bravo. We should be proud of both of them for forcing us to suffer these shameful prices.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Mar 31, 2012)

ChristTheGreat said:


> but another way to think, if they have plenty of stock by Mai, they should reduce the price before, as maybe people will buy their hardware instead of waiting for the competitor..
> 
> it all depens on how long it will take to nVidia to have plenty GTX 680 ready to be sold..



that's why i said what AMD did is all about marketing, i'm sure it's no problem for AMD to cut 7970 price to $400 and recalculate the price for the rest of lineup if in the next few months GTX680 supplies would return normal or even the release of the next line up. but now, they just wait and see, and probably didnt care about what we said here..


----------



## n-ster (Mar 31, 2012)

mechtech said:


> supply
> and
> demand
> 
> sigh



same excuse the HDD companies gave... Seagate's stock when up 170%, yes it more than doubled, it practically TRIPLE (probably will). It's the highest it's been for over 4 years... Oh but you say WD was hit really really hard, surely they have lost a lot of money because of this disaster! Yea, they did SOOO BAD. THEIR STOCK PRICE ONLY WENT UP 74% POOR THEM (24.44$ to 42.60$)

SUPPLY
AND
DEMAND
MY
ASS

Companies will give you any excuse to have higher prices or keep them high. In the GPU business they slowly brought the prices up every generation and give the supply and demand to keep the prices high... DEJA VU. OMG THAILAND FLOOD TRIPLE DA PRICES NOWWW... Oh prices of material are higher by 2 %, we gotta charge you 200% of pre-flood prices now k? plus so much demand now, rose 1%!


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 31, 2012)

n-ster said:


> same excuse the HDD companies gave... Seagate's stock when up 170%, yes it more than doubled, it practically TRIPLE (probably will). It's the highest it's been for over 4 years... Oh but you say WD was hit really really hard, surely they have lost a lot of money because of this disaster! Yea, they did SOOO BAD. THEIR STOCK PRICE ONLY WENT UP 74% POOR THEM (24.44$ to 42.60$)
> 
> SUPPLY
> AND
> ...



LOL, just 
I agree, and i have no idea of what's going on these peoples mind that justifies a company chargin ridiculous prices....like i said before, they are making people melieve $350 for a 7870 is a just a "little" overpriced.


----------



## Super XP (Mar 31, 2012)

The same can be said about companies like Apple. For instance, many Appleholic's think if Apple kept manufacturing in North America, the hardware junk would double in price vs. today's prices. So this makes them feel good because they don't want to admit outsourcing to slave Labour oversees.

Anyhow let me explain, claiming that hardware prices would go up if jobs were kept in North America is a load of shit. 

Apple for example makes over 350% profit with slave Labour, yet there JUNK is overpriced & overhyped. If they kept jobs here in North America profits would be approx: 250% to 300%.

Not much difference. This is called vulture capitalism among other names.

Ever since the 1960's and 1970's big corrupted business's and banks were doing everything the deregulated the financial industry for the goal to get rich while the poor and middle class work like dogs for low wages.

Anyhow they've succeeded, society is going into Oblivion while they continue to make $$$$$$$.
Sorry the rant.


----------



## N3M3515 (Mar 31, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Apple for example makes over 350% profit with slave Labour, yet there JUNK is overpriced & overhyped. If they kept jobs here in North America profits would be approx: 250% to 300%.



And that's why i don't buy apple.


----------



## radrok (Mar 31, 2012)

I think that lowering HD 7970 prices would also mean for AMD to officially admit that the 7970 is inferior.


----------



## amd/atifiend (Mar 31, 2012)

their stance makes sense.......i agree that it makes no sense for amd to cut prices right now bc they would have to reduce all their prices to compete with just the 680 and if they reduce price on just the 7970 it would detract from the adjacent cards in AMD's lineup.....basically once NV has a competitive lineup and not just a competitive card AMD will indeed compete and cut prices.

so if you are waiting for a price cut from the red team it is coming once nv pumps out some more hardware. IMO.

my general opinion on the price of the card.....it is expensive but that is alot of card for the money too. That 7970 and/or 680 is more powerful than 3 russian pc's. lol.


----------



## symmetrical (Mar 31, 2012)

7970 - $499
7950 - $419
7870 - $349 (same)
7850 - $249 (same)
7770 - $149
7750 - $99

Do it AMD!

At this point the only AMD cards actually worth the money are the 7800s.


----------



## Frizz (Mar 31, 2012)

Hmm well 7970 is faster than the gtx 580 I bring this up because the 580 is priced around 500 whole 7970s have gone down here to 579 aud fair price as it is IMO.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Mar 31, 2012)

symmetrical said:


> 7970 - $499
> 7950 - $419
> 7870 - $349 (same)
> 7850 - $249 (same)
> ...



i bet AMD can cut it out to even more cheaper if nv release the rest of the line up with an adequate stock to answer the consumers demand..


----------



## AvonX (Mar 31, 2012)

In few days we might see a trick that unlocks the 7970 shaders.


----------



## SIGSEGV (Mar 31, 2012)

sad but true.
i hope i'd get MSI Lightning HD7970 with "reasonable" price in the future.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 31, 2012)

AvonX said:


> In few days we might see a trick that unlocks the 7970 shaders.



now that would be pretty amazing if it happened. the price of the 7950 is quite good IMO here in the UK its around £330-350 where a standard reference 7970 is close to £400. the 7970 Twin FrozR III is around £500 shadedshu:shadedshu I could get a pretty decent second hand car for that price


----------



## jrs3000 (Mar 31, 2012)

What if they release the magical driver that unleashes 30% performance boost in all games all resolutions lol.  Side note I managed to score a 7950 for 350 from ebay!


----------



## Inceptor (Mar 31, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> that
> justifies
> nothing
> 
> They knew supply would be short so they should/could have prepared themselves. How? Hmm... what about ensuring sufficient production of *one chip* instead of flooding the market with a whole overpriced lineup, all of which will be extremely short in supply? They knew what supply would be so they did it on purpose to keep supply short and then even mocked on us by releasing the press release about them releasing 3 chips in 3 months. And I hear Nvidia will do the same in 2-3 months too. Bravo. We should be proud of both of them for forcing us to suffer these shameful prices.



Computer hardware companies don't exist to make things nice and happy for enthusiasts.
IF AMD and NV were privately held companies, maybe they would be more sympathetic to the people that buy their products; lower prices to something more realistic, release products in a more consumer friendly manner etc.  But, they are not privately held companies, they are publicly traded companies; it is their duty to maximize profit wherever and whenever possible, in order to do everything they can to increase share prices, so that their shareholders benefit.  They have no choice, they have to do this, and the management of the companies get rewarded when they succeed.  This is all that matters to them, not idealistic arguments about how something could have been done better in order to satisfy the economic and idealistic wishes of young and not so young gamers and hardware enthusiasts who want the next new thing NOW! RIGHT NOW! ....
Yes, there are engineers and others working for them who still have that sentiment deep down, but that doesn't make the companies money, that just drives those engineers to do the best they can to create the best products they can within the business limitations the executives have to enforce. 

That's it, no point going over and over and over it, constantly and without any benefit to anyone.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Mar 31, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> Computer hardware companies don't exist to make things nice and happy for enthusiasts.



actually they do - otherwise nobody would buy their hardware, same can be said about buying other things. truth be told. If a sales rep were to constantly talk down to you like a 5 year old. you wouldnt want to buy what his or her company is selling but yet the company is in the business of selling what they are selling, be it performance tuned cars or ladys handbags.

Enthusiasts make up such a small percentage of the overall market. but yet its the Enthusiast that forms quite a large part of the companies income because they are the ones that are  constantly upgrading. 

No average joe is going to build their own pc or buy expensive parts to upgrade their current PC - they look for pre-built machines that meet their requirements/spec.

Of course every company is out to make money. theres no denying that. but theres doing it in a JUST way then theres DOING IT BECAUSE THEY CAN. why do you think price wars exist??? If AMD lowers the price, they will attract more customers and im not just talking about the ones that are forced to buy it because their pre-made came bundled with a AMD 79x0


----------



## Benetanegia (Mar 31, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> Computer hardware companies don't exist to make things nice and happy for enthusiasts.
> IF AMD and NV were privately held companies, maybe they would be more sympathetic to the people that buy their products; lower prices to something more realistic, release products in a more consumer friendly manner etc.  But, they are not privately held companies, they are publicly traded companies; it is their duty to maximize profit wherever and whenever possible, in order to do everything they can to increase share prices, so that their shareholders benefit.  They have no choice, they have to do this, and the management of the companies get rewarded when they succeed.  This is all that matters to them, not idealistic arguments about how something could have been done better in order to satisfy the economic and idealistic wishes of young and not so young gamers and hardware enthusiasts who want the next new thing NOW! RIGHT NOW! ....
> Yes, there are engineers and others working for them who still have that sentiment deep down, but that doesn't make the companies money, that just drives those engineers to do the best they can to create the best products they can within the business limitations the executives have to enforce.
> 
> That's it, no point going over and over and over it, constantly and without any benefit to anyone.



Like Freedom said they do exist to make their customers happy. In fact, that is the pillar of their success and hence the very reason of their existence. Pleasing their shareholders* is part of their duty, but price gouging, supply and demand control and other monopolistic/duopolistic tactics are not part of their duty and are illegal in most places afaik.

* They are NOT *forced* to please shareholders at any cost BTW. Shareholders can opt to buy and sell their shares and have some voting privileges as to what happens in the company, but that's far, really far from saying that the company has to do anything they can to please them. The only duty that the management is really forced to fullfill is ensuring an ongoing bussiness. (and alienating your customers is fastest way to ensure the opposite)


----------



## Inceptor (Apr 1, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Like Freedom said they do exist to make their customers happy. In fact, that is the pillar of their success and hence the very reason of their existence. Pleasing their shareholders* is part of their duty, but price gouging, supply and demand control and other monopolistic/duopolistic tactics are not part of their duty and are illegal in most places afaik.
> 
> * They are NOT *forced* to please shareholders at any cost BTW. Shareholders can opt to buy and sell their shares and have some voting privileges as to what happens in the company, but that's far, really far from saying that the company has to do anything they can to please them. The only duty that the management is really forced to fullfill is ensuring an ongoing bussiness. (and alienating your customers is fastest way to ensure the opposite)



If the practices are illegal, they'll be punished, in some way.  But, if it's happening, it's more likely that it's _*not illegal*_, simply a grey area, that's why large companies have a large staff of lawyers on the payroll, in the form of legal departments.  They're there to make sure nothing blatantly illegal is done by the executives.
They are obligated to increase the value of their stock, if possible, to increase shareholder returns.  Not doing so could result in executive firings, eventually.  This is the responsibility of a board of directors, who choose a Chief executive, who then chooses other executives, who are all beholden to the board of directors, who are themselves_* legally*_ beholden to the shareholders.  The shareholders own the company.  It may take time, but the shareholders can and do have the power to make sweeping changes to a company, if a majority of them want it done.

Ultimately, without having all the information available, concerning pricing decisions and all the rationale that went into those pricing decisions, it's pointless to ascribe any kind of wrongdoing to any company.  If there is some kind of illegality at work, it is most likely either something extremely obscure and legally arcane or simply in a 'grey area' where there are no specific prohibitions, otherwise it would have been immediately flagged as a problem by AMD's legal department.
So, 
Supply and demand.  Charge high, until competition forces you to reduce prices, until then, collect the profit, please the shareholders.  The reality is that Nvidia releasing one card, even if it is high end and slightly outperforms the top AMD card, hasn't been enough for AMD to decide to lower prices across the board for their new gpu line.  Sounds to me like the usual business person's ploy to make as much money as possible, when it's possible to make the most amount of money.

We may not like it, and think it's unfair, and then go on to rant about how it's somehow illegal and/or unethical and 'bad form', but it happens all the time, everywhere, in every economic domain.
Enough already.

EDIT:
Meanwhile, on Newegg, all the GTX680s are sold out, and the entire line of AMD 7000 series gpus are available.
Looks like they made the right economic decision for their company, and are currently maximizing their profits.


----------



## N3M3515 (Apr 1, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> If the practices are illegal, they'll be punished, in some way.  But, if it's happening, it's more likely that it's _*not illegal*_, simply a grey area, that's why large companies have a large staff of lawyers on the payroll, in the form of legal departments.  They're there to make sure nothing blatantly illegal is done by the executives.
> They are obligated to increase the value of their stock, if possible, to increase shareholder returns.  Not doing so could result in executive firings, eventually.  This is the responsibility of a board of directors, who choose a Chief executive, who then chooses other executives, who are all beholden to the board of directors, who are themselves_* legally*_ beholden to the shareholders.  The shareholders own the company.  It may take time, but the shareholders can and do have the power to make sweeping changes to a company, if a majority of them want it done.
> 
> Ultimately, without having all the information available, concerning pricing decisions and all the rationale that went into those pricing decisions, it's pointless to ascribe any kind of wrongdoing to any company.  If there is some kind of illegality at work, it is most likely either something extremely obscure and legally arcane or simply in a 'grey area' where there are no specific prohibitions, otherwise it would have been immediately flagged as a problem by AMD's legal department.
> ...



I amazing as the GTX680 may be, the reason it's sold out i think its low stock, same thing happens all the time with new hardware and more if it's as good as the gtx680.

And the 7970 i think wasn't sold out even before gtx680 was out, because of good stock(supply?) because the launch was almost 3 months ago.


----------



## Inceptor (Apr 1, 2012)

N3M3515 said:


> I amazing as the GTX680 may be, the reason it's sold out i think its low stock, same thing happens all the time with new hardware and more if it's as good as the gtx680.
> 
> And the 7970 i think wasn't sold out even before gtx680 was out, because of good stock(supply?) because the launch was almost 3 months ago.



Exactly.  That's more than enough reason for AMD to keep the prices of the 7850-7870-7950-7970 where they are at the moment.  When Nvidia produces enough GPUs to keep up with demand, availability will be just as good as the AMD GPUs.  When that happens, AMD will have to drop prices to be competitive, but only when that happens.  Probably 3 months from now, after the 670, 670Ti, and 660 are all released.  Maybe sooner, who knows.


----------



## Munki (Apr 1, 2012)

I had to buy a 7970 because the egg was out of 680's and I am impatient. 

Side note.....I tried to reply before and the tab at the top said the domain was seized by ICE...wtf


----------



## Inceptor (Apr 1, 2012)

Munki said:


> I had to buy a 7970 because the egg was out of 680's and I am impatient.
> 
> Side note.....I tried to reply before and the tab at the top said the domain was seized by ICE...wtf



I just noticed that too...

...April fools joke I guess


----------



## Benetanegia (Apr 1, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> If the practices are illegal, they'll be punished, in some way.  But, if it's happening, it's more likely that it's _*not illegal*_, simply a grey area, that's why large companies have a large staff of lawyers on the payroll, in the form of legal departments.  They're there to make sure nothing blatantly illegal is done by the executives.
> They are obligated to increase the value of their stock, if possible, to increase shareholder returns.  Not doing so could result in executive firings, eventually.  This is the responsibility of a board of directors, who choose a Chief executive, who then chooses other executives, who are all beholden to the board of directors, who are themselves_* legally*_ beholden to the shareholders.  The shareholders own the company.  It may take time, but the shareholders can and do have the power to make sweeping changes to a company, if a majority of them want it done.
> 
> Ultimately, without having all the information available, concerning pricing decisions and all the rationale that went into those pricing decisions, it's pointless to ascribe any kind of wrongdoing to any company.  If there is some kind of illegality at work, it is most likely either something extremely obscure and legally arcane or simply in a 'grey area' where there are no specific prohibitions, otherwise it would have been immediately flagged as a problem by AMD's legal department.
> ...



Lol, this is the most stupid argument I've ever seen. So because they might not be caught or because it's gray area it's OK to do it. I guess that child prostitution is not so bad after all, because it's being done constantly in some places, it's gray area legally in those places and far from trying to catch them, it's allowed because it's good bussiness and attracts some tourists (sadly). 

Yeah not even remotely the same, but you get the idea. Like I said, for them to try and do something is more or less OK, to use shaddy tactics to achieve that, is not so OK, but still more or less normal in bussiness, sadly, but for a consumer to swallow those shaddy tactics and defend them is stupid and obscene. Even if we concede to the false and corrupt expression "in bussiness everything is valid", we as conscious consumers have the right and the obligation to protest when they cross the line and we have to do our best to try to inform other consumers of this morally if not legally bad behavior.

They were caught and punished for practicing price fixing not so long ago, so don't even pretend there's no tactic behind all of this. According to everyone involved 28 nm is a lot better than 40 nm, yet they increased the prices by $150 when compared to 40 nm launch, all in the name of "low supply", a low supply they have forced on themselves.


----------



## SIGSEGV (Apr 1, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> Exactly.  That's more than enough reason for AMD to keep the prices of the 7850-7870-7950-7970 where they are at the moment.  When Nvidia produces enough GPUs to keep up with demand, availability will be just as good as the AMD GPUs.  When that happens, AMD will have to drop prices to be competitive, but only when that happens.  Probably 3 months from now, after the 670, 670Ti, and 660 are all released.  Maybe sooner, who knows.



what if they had another reason on why they shouldnt lowering the prices rather than supply/market stock availability? or maybe they're (AMD) offer more than NVidia's GTX680, not only just for gaming, but also on graphics computing performance ??


----------



## Inceptor (Apr 1, 2012)

Benetanegia said:


> Lol, this is the most stupid argument I've ever seen. So because they might not be caught or because it's gray area it's OK to do it. I guess that child prostitution is not so bad after all, because it's being done constantly in some places, it's gray area legally in those places and far from trying to catch them, it's allowed because it's good bussiness and attracts some tourists (sadly).
> 
> Yeah not even remotely the same, but you get the idea.



That's right, not even remotely the same, not a valid objection, and so a useless comment.

But, to quibble, in your style, I'll point out that a 'gray area' means something not_* specifically*_ covered by any law or regulation.  It's entirely possible their legal department realizes something is not OK, but that maybe the repercussions are not likely to be serious, and the financial gains outweigh the legal risks, who knows?  Only they know.



> Like I said, for them to try and do something is more or less OK, to use shaddy tactics to achieve that, is not so OK, but still more or less normal in bussiness, sadly, but for a consumer to swallow those shaddy tactics and defend them is stupid and obscene. Even if we concede to the false and corrupt expression "in bussiness everything is valid", we as conscious consumers have the right and the obligation to protest when they cross the line and we have to do our best to try to inform other consumers of this morally if not legally bad behavior.
> 
> They were caught and punished for practicing price fixing not so long ago, so don't even pretend there's no tactic behind all of this. According to everyone involved 28 nm is a lot better than 40 nm, yet they increased the prices by $150 when compared to 40 nm launch, all in the name of "low supply", a low supply they have forced on themselves.



But there is no defense from me, I don't like it either, but that is the reality.  If they can do it, they will; which is exactly what I pointed out.  Moral questions almost never come up in business decisions where profit is being maximized.


----------



## symmetrical (Apr 2, 2012)

jrs3000 said:


> What if they release the magical driver that unleashes 30% performance boost in all games all resolutions lol.  Side note I managed to score a 7950 for 350 from ebay!



The same hotfix they released for Bulldozer?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Apr 2, 2012)

symmetrical said:


> The same hotfix they released for Bulldozer?



actually no.....because the BD hotfix didnt actually do much of anything


----------



## n-ster (Apr 2, 2012)

FreedomEclipse said:


> actually no.....because the BD hotfix didnt actually do much of anything



I think he was using this exact point as sarcasm


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 2, 2012)

AKlass said:


> AMD has something under there sleeves... either a victory driver, or they are hiding that it unlocks into a 7990


 

So it will magically spawn another GPU core?  :shadedshu


----------



## ensabrenoir (Apr 2, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> So it will magically spawn another GPU core?  :shadedshu



Yes......and reveal an extra 2 billion transistors when paired with an  fx chip


----------



## vagxtr (Apr 4, 2012)

I know i wasnt contemplating between buying HD7970 or GTX680 because its way over my budget limit for GPU i'm ready to pay. But certainly i wont pay those insane prices for HD7800 or HD7700 series.

DAMN become extremely cocky with this HD700 series just because they wanna kill peoples needs to buy their also limited offerings while their on the side track running GPU business for consoles with their lucrative concord deals. Shame on YOU DAMN.

I just hope envy will be kind enough to quickly release some halfcut GK104 desighns with 1024SFX (Quad 256SFX) as it would more than satisfy my needs in 200-250USD segment which could be hopefully be a killer card for those measly HD7700/HD7800 (HD5700/6700/6800 refresh offerings) that DAMN give us.


----------

