Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

WTF 8800 Ultra for $999?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 27, 2007 4:15:53 PM

Well for those that are praying for ATI/AMD to fail, I hope they are happy to be spending more on Nvidia cards!!! I always had nvidia, but I dont want AMD/ATI to fail, I really hope they can kick some ass with their dx10 cards, so we can buy awesome cards for less money!!!

See what happens when there is no competition?
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/7397/radeon_hd_2900xt_lau...

A $1000 for a gaming card? this is ridiculous!!!

Come on AMD, show us some POWER!!!

X2 3800+ @ 2.2ghz
1GB DDR Corsair (2X512MB)
BFG 7900GT 256MB

XB360 Gamertag SantistaUSA

More about : wtf 8800 ultra 999

April 27, 2007 4:20:01 PM

That price won't last long.
April 27, 2007 4:22:05 PM

Anyone who buys that is retarded and/or trying to compensate for certain short comings.
Related resources
April 27, 2007 4:46:24 PM

The sad thing is i have no choice,i have to pay an adverage of $900-$950 for what you yanks would pay $500 for on a high end card, because of taxes etc. DOH
But this $999 card i would have to pay about $1500 so screw that :cry: 
April 27, 2007 4:55:22 PM

One of the reason is that there's no competition on the market since ATI has failed to challenge Nvidia's high end card and instead going head to head with the 8800GTS, 8600 and 8500 series. That insane price knowing that the Ultra is not much of big performer against the 8800GTX. So until then it's only for the ones who have deep pockets.
April 27, 2007 4:57:32 PM

Two points-
-Any GTX overclocked can get within spitting distance of the Ultra from the specs that are out there.

-Only the village idiot would buy one Ultra at 999 instead of two GTX's at $61.00 more.
April 27, 2007 4:58:07 PM

8800 Ultra + $999 = FUD

That is unless the ultra is two 8800GTXs or something put together.
April 27, 2007 5:16:34 PM

Wasn't the 7800GTX 512 priced outrageously as well?

just reminiscing i guess.
April 27, 2007 5:31:12 PM

Quote:
he sad thing is i have no choice,i have to pay an adverage of $900-$950 for what you yanks would pay $500 for on a high end card, because of taxes etc. DOH
But this $999 card i would have to pay about $1500 so screw that

Yeah I'm at the same situation (Israel) I've got to consider if the GTS320 is worth the 430$ it cost here! I don't believe they would even try to sell that here :!:
April 27, 2007 5:32:07 PM

I'll say it yet again. This will also happen to CPU prices if AMD doesn't get it going again. Mark my words. And definitely do not expect the technolody advances that we've been enjoying, along with the drop in prices, if that happens. It will be a very sad day indeed.
April 27, 2007 5:37:00 PM

If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.
April 27, 2007 5:54:49 PM

And here was me hoping it'd come in at the same price bracket as the GTX and push that down a bit.
April 27, 2007 6:09:41 PM

Quote:
If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.


OMG ROFL! That right there is a quote for the f'ing truth!
April 27, 2007 6:11:07 PM

ATi and AMD are not going anywhere. AMD has always and will always be second. Even if they hold the performance crown, they are still second. At stock speeds, the X2s are still great CPUs, its not like they are crap like netburst was.

Also, as is discussed before, the high-end market is not where the money is. ATi will have a solid card with the XT and lower which is what the majority will buy.

You guys are drama queens... grow up
April 27, 2007 6:11:35 PM

Quote:
If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.


OMG ROFL! That right there is a quote for the f'ing truth!

now that..... was funny
April 27, 2007 6:13:10 PM

Quote:
If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.


Lol so when the highest end version of an operating system costs $380, but yet hundreds of other programs cost atleast $500 or more (EXAMPLE 1 , EXAMPLE 2) you screem this is what happens when there is no competition!

Its in microsoft's best interest to sell a product at a price that meets the demand(which is why they sell more than one version), and for a operating system that will run your pc and all of your components it seems pretty reasonable compared to the many other programs out there that cost way more than it just for a program.
April 27, 2007 6:15:25 PM

the funny thing is that people will be stupid enough to buy it......

Nvidia will sell it in limited quantity at that price until ati releases something better



and about software prices.... im sure glad us college kids get insane discounts on this stuff. I got windows vista ultimate for free
April 27, 2007 6:16:06 PM

I don't think he was talking about the price. He was talking about the quality of work. Any smart geek knows that Vista is a complete waste of money and time in it's current state. Most of us are sticking with XP and will stay with XP for a very long time unless MS comes up with something fantastic to fix Vista.
April 27, 2007 6:22:51 PM

Quote:
If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.


Lol so when the highest end version of an operating system costs $380, but yet hundreds of other programs cost atleast $500 or more (EXAMPLE 1 , EXAMPLE 2) you screem this is what happens when there is no competition!

Its in microsoft's best interest to sell a product at a price that meets the demand(which is why they sell more than one version), and for a operating system that will run your pc and all of your components it seems pretty reasonable compared to the many other programs out there that cost way more than it just for a program.

good point
April 27, 2007 6:23:21 PM

You guys I would still be a bit skeptic of the review from one website... I'm going to wait till the NDA clears before I make any final decisions...
April 27, 2007 6:26:26 PM

Hey Example 2 is not even the full version and that cost 2 arms and 2 legs!
April 27, 2007 6:35:49 PM

i predict that in 3 years we will see 1500$ cards and y ouul be able to run 6 of them with a 1700w power supply.
April 27, 2007 6:47:12 PM

Quote:
If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.


Lol so when the highest end version of an operating system costs $380, but yet hundreds of other programs cost atleast $500 or more (EXAMPLE 1 , EXAMPLE 2) you screem this is what happens when there is no competition!

Its in microsoft's best interest to sell a product at a price that meets the demand(which is why they sell more than one version), and for a operating system that will run your pc and all of your components it seems pretty reasonable compared to the many other programs out there that cost way more than it just for a program.

Are we really going to debate that competitive pricing and innovation are not stifled in a monopoly. I'm not a Microsoft basher but let's admit that Vista has not received the warmest reception. AMD comes up short on product and they lose $600 million, Microsoft makes 4.93 billion in the same quarter.
April 27, 2007 7:35:30 PM

I agree and the higher the cost of the OS, the higher the price other software programs will sell at because they're still staying at market. The price of software programs does not make the OS a good deal or not. After all these years, MS is still behind OSX in terms of being user-friendly and innovative. I don't use Macs, but I do see them being used and often wish Windows had some of those features.
April 27, 2007 7:36:55 PM

Well TBH i don't think your observation is quite accurate, in the sense that you compare productivity software (Autocad, Photoshop, etc.) with an OS.

Productivity software as the potential to erake revenues in for you, so if you spend 500$ on that and then bring in revenues with that software, then it pays itself quite rapidly.

I use a specialized software to design/build/detail Structural Steel, and 1 workstation liscence cost ~25k USD to buy, and then ~5k USD/year to maintain, but it has the potential of raking in 5-10 folds that amount per year when used for business.

So When you look at what direct productivity an OS can give you, which is 0$ since you can't output any type of product out of it, not taking in account people that sell stuff on ebay or whatever for a living (Which incidentally can be done on any OS), so justifying a 380$ OS by saying it must do so to meet the demand is foolish, because since it's mass adoption, the Windows OS is now almost an obligation in term of use since 80% of the software that is written only works on them. It's been debated before, it' can't be called a monopoly(sic), but IMO it is one.

My 2 cents.
April 27, 2007 8:09:39 PM

Everyone has made some good points about my reply on Microsoft's monoply thing or whatever he was trying to get across up there.

All i was trying to say is that in retrospect to how much other programs like AutoCAD and Photoshop cost it makes Vista look like pennis sometimes. And i don't want to make this sound like a bash but i mean you are using the that program on Windows.

To say that the OS doesn't rake in money for you is also not exactly true since it is able to run all those programs. I agree on many respects that Microsoft hasn't exactly revolutionized the OS that much but to say that price wise that Vista Ultimate is what happens when there is no competition is not valid in my book at all.

Microsoft offers like what 4 OS ranging in price range of $189-$380? Now of course the guy linked the most expensive version but of course Microsoft was smart enough to offer OS's that appeal for more people. Offering more than 1 version helps consumers because they get to pick a price to they want to pay for the features they want. Of course at $380 the appeal for a new OS is little to none but so is every high end processor, ram , motherboard or case. The high end appeals to very few as its features don't offer much more than the base OS and they all do the samething anyway.

I didn't want to bring up a huge arguement about Microsoft and its OS, i just thought the point being made was not valid.
April 27, 2007 8:15:48 PM

Quote:
Well for those that are praying for ATI/AMD to fail, I hope they are happy to be spending more on Nvidia cards!!! I always had nvidia, but I dont want AMD/ATI to fail, I really hope they can kick some ass with their dx10 cards, so we can buy awesome cards for less money!!!

See what happens when there is no competition?
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/7397/radeon_hd_2900xt_lau...

A $1000 for a gaming card? this is ridiculous!!!

Come on AMD, show us some POWER!!!

X2 3800+ @ 2.2ghz
1GB DDR Corsair (2X512MB)
BFG 7900GT 256MB

XB360 Gamertag SantistaUSA


How about waiting until the REAL benchmarks will be released and verified from multiple sources and after that draw your conclusion …

Even if 2900 XTX will not be as fast as the flagship from NVIDIA … ATI might still beat them at the low and middle-end … witch by the way is the most lucrative market.

So don’t despair, keep your faith and we’ll see what happens. :lol: 
April 27, 2007 8:50:17 PM

Quote:
Everyone has made some good points about my reply on Microsoft's monoply thing or whatever he was trying to get across up there.


Here is my attempt to stay on topic while addressing this. My point was for all those singing and dancing about DAAMIT's problems. Whether you buy green or red each has served you.

I can't think of a more clear analogy than Vista to illustrate what happens in an uncompetitive atmosphere. I didn't specify price/cancelled features/drm/driver compatibility/ lack of innovation or any other specific complaint about Vista. The interpretation was left for the reader. In you're case you assumed price. Maybe I linked to Ultimate to show it in it's best and most feature rich guise. :wink: Would you feel better if I had linked to Basic in all it's stripped down glory, you still would have cried foul.

I too can argue that Vista is worth every penny. That is not the point. My point is simply that if a single 8800gtx clocked up and relabeled Ultimate..I mean Ultra sells for $999 it is only because of a lack of competition.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 27, 2007 9:25:28 PM

It's an SKU with a single purpose, to keep the performance crown.

Like the GF7800Ultra or the more rare GF6800UltraExtreme before it, it's never meant to sell high volumes or to be 'reasonably priced'. It may come down significantly as some point, but more than likely wil simply dissapear from the market and be replaced by the refreshed core, just like we saw with the GF7800U. However this time it looks like it will keep it's name as a retail part.

As mentioned already you can get close to the GF8800U's speeds with a current GTX, and the only 'must have' market for this is the pro-sumer Bungholio extreme benchmarkers, who will gobble up the GF8800Us even at this price, because if the memory is 0.1+ns less then it may mean 100(200)+ more mhz on their memory overclocks.

It's coming, but no word on when and a true final price yet though, but I expect them to be rare.
April 27, 2007 9:55:47 PM

It is possible the 8800 Ultra will do more to reflect badly on Nvidia, if it does turn out to add no features and simply clock up the existing card for some crazy price. So far the headlines are not positive. Maybe that 999 price is Dell's price to add it to a config. seeing as the info seemed to come from Dell.

I'm not a believer that a company needs to have a halo product to do well at other price ranges.

Take the auto industry. Honda Accord and Toyota Camry rose up through the sales charts in 80's before there was an Acura or Lexus.
All the Corvettes, Viper's and GT'S in the world have not stopped Toyota.
April 27, 2007 10:25:24 PM

Quote:
To say that the OS doesn't rake in money for you is also not exactly true since it is able to run all those programs. I agree on many respects that Microsoft hasn't exactly revolutionized the OS that much but to say that price wise that Vista Ultimate is what happens when there is no competition is not valid in my book at all.


I'm totally on the same page with you on that, but my point of view is more like this; Microsoft can set the price for their OS as they wish, only because 20 year ago no one ever said "hey we should maybe try and duplicate this guy's work so we won't end up having to pay whatever he wants since it's going to be the only (not "only" but you get my point) mainstream and most deployed OS in the world"... And now it's too little too late for even the biggest players to come up and offer an equivalent solution.

That's my view.

EDIT: Grammar
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 27, 2007 10:55:28 PM

Quote:
It is possible the 8800 Ultra will do more to reflect badly on Nvidia, if it does turn out to add no features and simply clock up the existing card for some crazy price.


I agree, but it will only reflect poorly to those who know what it is. nVidia will still be able to legitimately brag about having the fastest card on the market if this acchieves that goal. And so while we look on it with a smirk, like the GX2, it accomplishes it's job. It'll be like a Buggatti, never meant to sell alot, but it's a feel good piece for the company, for it's customers, so that like every VW, Audi, Porsche owner, every nV owner can say, well but nV has the #1 card. And hey, ATi did the same in making their X800XTPE instead of just X800XT.

Quote:
I'm not a believer that a company needs to have a halo product to do well at other price ranges.


I'm not influence by it, but unfortunately the BestBuy/CompUSA/DELL buyers are thos very same people that are affected by it an because the GF88000UE++ or HD2900XTXTX.. is number one, they think hey if I buy this HD2300 or GF8300, I'll be 'just like mike' with pro gear.

Quote:
Take the auto industry. Honda Accord and Toyota Camry rose up through the sales charts in 80's before there was an Acura or Lexus.
All the Corvettes, Viper's and GT'S in the world have not stopped Toyota.


Oh definitely, but a converse example would be VW, they made money of their Bettle, Rabbit, Golf, Jetta, Polo, etc. But also made sure that their name was tied to the Porsche 911, 959, GT3, etc.

It's just different marketing for different consumer types. You, and I and the majority of people here wouldn't be fooled by it, but alot of people like to 'belong' to the 'winning team' and so it works, and realistically it's just expensive PR/marketing/Advertising, as much as if the big card makers got Jessica Alba to say "I only game with X card". If the GF8800Ultra only sells triple digit number of card (maybe a thousand) likely all of the marketing to promote it will be larger than the revenue (not even profit) from the card itself. But might be far better spent than if they doubled their advertising budget alone.

Anywhoo, either way it'll be an interesting couple of weeks. I can't wait for the real match-ups to start once the NDAs lift. :twisted:
April 27, 2007 11:27:07 PM

Quote:
Anywhoo, either way it'll be an interesting couple of weeks. I can't wait for the real match-ups to start once the NDAs lift.


I also can't wait until those NDA's lift, although it looks like nothing but bad news for ATI. They lift in about two weeks, correct?
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 27, 2007 11:37:48 PM

GF8800U NDA should lift next week according to the article in the InQ and the R600 should be shortly after that.
a b U Graphics card
April 28, 2007 12:00:51 AM

Don't forget, for the extra $400 with the Ultra, you get a card numbered 1-10. Instant collectors item, especially if you never open it. :wink:
April 28, 2007 12:45:31 AM

Lets go ATI.Show us what you got. :wink:
April 28, 2007 1:12:27 AM

Quote:
A $1000 for a gaming card? this is ridiculous!!!

It has to do w/ economics. If people don't buy it they will either lower the price or stop selling it. They can't charge $1000 for [Insert low-end graphics card here] because at that price they sell so small a quantity that:
price x quantity = low number.
They sell it for a lower price to sell more units. Even people with a monopoly, like Nvidia does now with high-end cards, cannot charge whatever they want. Especially with a "luxury" product like high end graphics cards. They set the price like anyone else, so that price x quantity is maximized.
April 28, 2007 1:28:46 AM

The funny thing is though, that in the Anandtech x2900XT benchies, they compared it to GTX that was overclocked to Ultra levels. They're comparing a $400 card to a $999 card.
April 28, 2007 1:35:54 AM

Quote:
he sad thing is i have no choice,i have to pay an adverage of $900-$950 for what you yanks would pay $500 for on a high end card, because of taxes etc. DOH
But this $999 card i would have to pay about $1500 so screw that

Yeah I'm at the same situation (Israel) I've got to consider if the GTS320 is worth the 430$ it cost here! I don't believe they would even try to sell that here :!:

You'r lucky here (Chile) we pay twice as much as U.S./European folks (8800 gts ~600 USD)

A card with such a price tag will never reach this market, or any other.
I personally like nVidia myself but I'm really eager to see ATI make a comeback soon.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 28, 2007 1:56:00 AM

Actually they were comparing the XTX to the GTX @ Ultra speeds.
the $400 XT was compared to the GTS.
The XTX is likely a $550+ card.

I am surprised that the ultra might only volt-mod the memory to achieve higher results, as that would give even the Bungholiomark champs no reason to upgrade because they are already volt-moding, bios hacking and LN2-ing the heck out of the things, with the same core and memory modules I don't know.

I would suspect that they would add new memory to the card, but I dunno, doesn't seem that way according to the InQ.
Only another week to know for sure.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 28, 2007 1:59:22 AM

Strange, and I always thought THIS was what you get when there's an unchallenged M$ Monopoly. :twisted:
April 28, 2007 2:04:40 AM

Quote:
Quote:

How about not being a tard and quoting this instead?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


I just took a quick look at you're posting habits. You consistently insult other forum members and consistently argue in an overly biased pro-Microsoft stance. You even started a thread just to argue and flame on behalf of Vista.
http://forumz.tomshardware.com/software/whinging-section-Vista-forums-ftopict233957.html

I respectfully decline the opportunity to piss all over this thread with you. Have a nice day.
April 28, 2007 2:33:42 AM

Quote:
If anyone is unclear what happens in the absence of strong competition click here.


Lol so when the highest end version of an operating system costs $380, but yet hundreds of other programs cost atleast $500 or more (EXAMPLE 1 , EXAMPLE 2) you screem this is what happens when there is no competition!

Its in microsoft's best interest to sell a product at a price that meets the demand(which is why they sell more than one version), and for a operating system that will run your pc and all of your components it seems pretty reasonable compared to the many other programs out there that cost way more than it just for a program.

the diference is very basic

while a IOs is required and sells millions, it should then lower its price...
while photoshop is more of a proffesioal tool for working, such as 3dmax..etc.. since its specialized, its price will be always higher
or you still think that these 5000gb enterprise hard drives that weight a ton should cost 200 US for you?
April 28, 2007 2:36:34 AM

You are all talking about a M$ monopoly. I thought this thread was about expensive Nvidia graphics cards. Do you think Nvidia has a monopoly on high-end cards?
April 28, 2007 3:08:23 AM

You can't have a monopoly on high-end cards, it's a contradiction in terms. A monopoly is a company that sells to everybody, while high-end cards serve only 2% of everybody. Just because this particular 2% is mostly buying nVidia doesn't qualify as a monopoly IMO. Wow, if the DoJ gets involved and sues nVidia who's going to pay higher prices for their cards to cover the lawyers' fees :o 
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
April 28, 2007 3:19:41 AM

Yeah I don't think the DOJ would get involved in the monopoly in high-end cards anymore than they would in high-end cars. :idea:

Next on NightLine.... DOJ tells Buggatti, Veyron is too expensive, and they have a monopoly on 250+MPH card, ordered to drop price to $25,000 for the masses. In a reply to the DOJ VW split Buggatti from the parent company and buggatti promplty declared bankruptcy. :twisted:

BTW, it's funny how everyone thinks that this will mean AMD will die, and that then there's only nV left. Of course intel is coming into the market, S3 is going to launch their wares in the fall, and SIS is alo supposed to launch something, so overall little chance of an overall monopoly, but there may only be one Ulra-High end card maker if either nV or AMD were to go down, because it's unlikely intel would persue that market,and unlikely that S3 nor SIS have the capacity to enter that market (or lose that kinda money on that market). But that still wouldn't give them monopolistic powers because the high end market is still very savy (more so on average than the others IMO), and therefore they would need to still perfectly balance the high end to maximize return on moeny spent. Just maybe no more promotional loss-leader cards.
April 28, 2007 3:27:02 AM

Quote:
You can't have a monopoly on high-end cards, it's a contradiction in terms. A monopoly is a company that sells to everybody, while high-end cards serve only 2% of everybody. Just because this particular 2% is mostly buying nVidia doesn't qualify as a monopoly IMO. Wow, if the DoJ gets involved and sues nVidia who's going to pay higher prices for their cards to cover the lawyers' fees :o 
Monopolies are applicable to a certain market. For example ONLY, the M$ monopoly is on the OS Software market. I am saying in the high-end graphics market, Nvidia has a monopoly. Your point that the market is small is noted.
!