What would be a reasonable price for GeForce GTX Titan?

[kn00tcn]

7 billion transistors, double 680... almost double shader units... 24 gddr5 chips.... come on, how can $550 be possible?

people complained about the crippled compute in 680, now complain about the price when the pieces of metal are doubled

$750-850 sounds about right, it's not supposed to be a fixed ratio with game performance

& how is a 7970 slow to have caused this?? why was the 680 still almost half a year later? look how far behind a 6970 is in comparison, plus how the 660ti beats 580 http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan/images/perfrel_1920.gif

i really dont agree with this conspiracy that titan is the real 680, the jump from 580 is so huge, the size is so huge, the power draw is pretty large, TSMC is/was quite shaky for a couple years now... this titan seems more like x1800 -> x1900

you try making a monster gpu, keeping yields high, keeping voltage & heat down, making a fancy cooler, adding plenty of compute power, paying for all that vram

both companies should just make 2 sets of gpus, 1 for games, 1 for compute, but of course that costs money & many customers want to do it all on 1 card

what would be cool is to have 'oem' gfx cards without a cooler the same way we have a mobo+cpu then add our own cooler & case

 

[Fluffmeister]

7 billion transistors, double 680... almost double shader units... 24 gddr5 chips.... come on, how can $550 be possible?

people complained about the crippled compute in 680, now complain about the price when the pieces of metal are doubled

$750-850 sounds about right, it's not supposed to be a fixed ratio with game performance

& how is a 7970 slow to have caused this?? why was the 680 still almost half a year later? look how far behind a 6970 is in comparison, plus how the 660ti beats 580 http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan/images/perfrel_1920.gif

i really dont agree with this conspiracy that titan is the real 680, the jump from 580 is so huge, the size is so huge, the power draw is pretty large, TSMC is/was quite shaky for a couple years now... this titan seems more like x1800 -> x1900

you try making a monster gpu, keeping yields high, keeping voltage & heat down, making a fancy cooler, adding plenty of compute power, paying for all that vram

both companies should just make 2 sets of gpus, 1 for games, 1 for compute, but of course that costs money & many customers want to do it all on 1 card

what would be cool is to have 'oem' gfx cards without a cooler the same way we have a mobo+cpu then add our own cooler & case

Like I said earlier in the thread, they are basically delusional.

 

[BigMack70]

You guys trying to defend Nvidia's pricing are hilarious

Applenomics really do work, I suppose.

 

[Aquinus]

You guys trying to defend Nvidia's pricing are hilarious

There is no defending 20% more power when shaders increased by 75% for 100% more money over the 680. :shadedshu

 

[Fluffmeister]

You guys trying to defend Nvidia's pricing are hilarious

Applenomics really do work, I suppose.

It's funny but yes, Applenomics clearly do work.

I can't afford a Titan along with many other things I would love to have, but at least I'm realistic and don't constantly cry about it.

 

[Fourstaff]

You guys trying to defend Nvidia's pricing are hilarious

Applenomics really do work, I suppose.

They have the right to charge their goods at any price they wish. Its up to us to vote with our wallets.

 

[the54thvoid]

They have the right to charge their goods at any price they wish. Its up to us to vote with our wallets.

My wallet voted Beer & Pizza.

 

[BigMack70]

I wouldn't say that pointing out how overpriced the card is is "crying" about it.

I understand they can charge what they want for their product, and I fully expect this thing to be completely sold out for a considerable amount of time as I doubt they have much stock of this thing (if they had a lot of availability, I would expect the price to be lower). However, there's no denying that this thing is overpriced from a consumer's point of view. It's not like Intel's 3960X which has nothing really to compete with it.

Now here's where I'll cry: I really wanted at least one of these, but the $1k cost is just not justifiable for me to get a card so much slower than what I already have.

So until the price comes down (which I don't really expect will happen, just like with the 690), I will indeed be voting with my wallet.

 

[Jack1n]

definitely around 700$,thats considering price/performance and the price premium of having the fastest single GPU gaming card on the market.

 

[Fluffmeister]

I wouldn't say that pointing out how overpriced the card is is "crying" about it.

I understand they can charge what they want for their product, and I fully expect this thing to be completely sold out for a considerable amount of time as I doubt they have much stock of this thing (if they had a lot of availability, I would expect the price to be lower).

Now here's where I'll cry: I really wanted at least one of these, but the $1k cost is just not justifiable for me to get a card so much slower than what I already have.

So until the price comes down (which I don't really expect will happen, just like with the 690), I will indeed be voting with my wallet.

And that is swell, they will just have to cope without you. Although it's been pretty clear for months it was gonna be an expensive halo product. It's now time for you to be realistic or patient.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

(just got in from work)

TL;DR - Im waiting for the price of 680s to drop so i can grab another for great awesome super funtastic powers that surpass even the $1000 elite GPUs for $200-300 less

 

[syeef]

Like I said earlier in the thread, they are basically delusional.

I am curious... what GPU do you own now?

 

[kn00tcn]

overpriced - yes
real 680 - no
25% performance + more vram + tons of compute + the DP mode that wasnt there in past geforces = it cannot cost ONLY 25% more than 680

i'm technically anti nvidia (& even more anti apple), but this situation isnt sounding any alarms other than a couple hundred dollars premium.... i'm not defending exactly $999 but i'm defending $700+

not like i'm 30" or multimonitor to need the power anyway, fine with OC 680 or 7970 (which i still dont have, dealing with legacy 4870x2)

i'd like to ditch intel but what can i do... the performance & OC are there

 

[15th Warlock]

They have the right to charge their goods at any price they wish. Its up to us to vote with our wallets.

This

I believe nVidia priced this card in the wrong bracket, as such it's setting a dangerous precedent for a single GPU, having said that, they are not pointing a gun to your head to purchase it, it's called capitalism.

Even considering low yields and the unusual amount of premium GDDR5 used, it should have been priced at around $700-750 at the most, I bet you they would've still made a handsome profit at that price.

Guess they see each Titan sold as one less $7000+ GK110 tesla sold, sad thing is the days of 50-70% performance gain between generations are probably over and Intel got away with pricing EE processors at $999, hell, even AMD did too for a while when it was top dog, so nVidia thinks there definitely is a market for this card.

The only way to prove them wrong is by voting with our wallets.

 

[Fluffmeister]

I am curious... what GPU do you own now?

7970 from a GTX 460... once it came down to a realistic price. Which as it turned out was because of competition from nVIDIA.

Turns out they aren't all bad huh? I guess I'm just sensible and know my means.

 

[BigMack70]

To be fair, the 7970 was priced OK relative to the GTX 580 when it launched. (-edit- I agree it was more expensive than it should have been)

The Titan is not priced OK relative to the 690/680/7970 at its launch.

 

[syeef]

once it came down to a realistic price.

Hypocrisy??

 

[Fluffmeister]

To be fair, the 7970 was priced OK relative to the GTX 580 when it launched. (-edit- I agree it was more expensive than it should have been)

The Titan is not priced OK relative to the 690/680/7970 at its launch.

Titan isn't meant to be a mainstream product, they obviously don't intend or need to sell as many, hence the price

Hypocrisy??

Just because I can appreciate what target market nVIDIA are aiming at with Titan, doesn't mean I'm not sensible.

 

[BigMack70]

Titan isn't meant to be a mainstream product, they obviously don't intend or need to sell as many, hence the price

In what universe was the 7970 a mainstream product? Last I checked, $500+ GPUs were not considered anything near "mainstream".

That's why I get bothered by this Titan launch... it's Nvidia trying to reinvent precedents about pricing structure on GPUs, even though I don't think they really have the market or product positioning to do so.

 

[Fluffmeister]

In what universe was the 7970 a mainstream product? Last I checked, $500+ GPUs were not considered anything near "mainstream".

That's why I get bothered by this Titan launch... it's Nvidia trying to reinvent precedents about pricing structure on GPUs, even though I don't think they really have the market or product positioning to do so.

It's all relative, the $500+ card as you say seems to be rather popular, hell even the people that have apparently been relieved of their senses in this poll deem $550 "reasonable".

$1000 on the other hand makes their parents credit cards cower in fear.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

$600 is the most I'd ever pay for a GPU. This doesn't mean there isn't a place for more expensive cards, just that anything more expensive shouldn't be targeted to gaming. Where did I get that number? A console, at release can fetch that price.

But, why? A console? Where does such heresy come from?

Consoles are where most developers focus their attention. This means that amazing computer you build five years after a console is released is still effectively running games designed for that console. While not a pleasant thought for us PC users, it's the objective truth.

While it may be heresy, I actually want GPU releases and CPU releases to slow down. AMD and Nvidea are both bound by their silicon production. Pushing this as fast as possible has led to artificially inflated pricing, minimal improvement between generations, and splintered silicon that doesn't really command pricing brackets like they currently have (I'm looking at you 670 and 680).

Give me a generational improvement of 50%, released every two years, make the brackets a more reasonably defined affair, and I'll be happy. I'm sure if the average person could see a performance difference between generations they'd be willing to shell out a couple hundred dollars. As it stands, the average consumer sees nothing but synthetic benchmarks showing a 10-15% increase in a metric they don't understand. This is why Intel can get into the game with the HD3000 graphics. It's playable, look. They can articulate that better than either Nvidea or AMD can say "playable doesn't mean pretty." Such a shame.

 

[BigMack70]

I really hope that as Intel/AMD are increasingly able to use integrated graphics to pressure the discrete GPU market, AMD and Nvidia are able to offer better options at lower price points rather than better options at increasingly higher price points.

 

[atikkur]

i agree, this is just a normal card with fancy casing. better engineering is expected in this stiff competition and next generation. gtx580 was also compute card, and their architecture used also in their tesla lineup, same as titan. what emphasizes titan is a better ratio of double precision compute than fermi was. so titan basicaly is no more than normal card than gtx580,, only a lot better which is expected from the new architechture.

so what, to me, to look titan more normal than it is now,, it should use just normal casing material with normal vram amount and normal price and a normal name. titan is cheap name to my ear.

that would be, use normal cheap plastic as the casing, give it 3 or 4GB vram, name it GTX 685 or GTX680Ti (these names sound more cool than Titan), and price it $650-700. there you have it, a normal card with resonable price.

 

[Delta6326]

I voted $700.
The 680 cost $480 from w1zz charts now if you take 25% of the $480 that gives you $120 now had to the $480 you get $600 Now add $100 do to it being all new, fancy lookin cooler, I would say $700 is a good STARTing price.

And personally I would only buy this for around $400ish, but that will never happen I just don't see how these company's charge so much anymore. I got my 4850 for $190 and at the time it was ATI's (AMD) 2nd fastest single gpu. I think all these company's need to get rid of a line of their cards, and start charging less. The 7970 GHz/GTX 680 should be max $350 and then go down from their on the rest, these makers just have to many cards. For the record I could go to Newegg and buy 6 Titans on the spot, but they are just way over priced along with all the other gpu's.

The only thing I'm confused about is where did you find a HD 7970
GHz Ed. for $400... the cheapest on is $430 and it on sale, usually is $450

 

[Merluz]

for me, 750-800$ like the 8800 Ultra...