Is a G92 GTS Instead of GTX A Bad Move?

Been wondering why exactly Nvidia decided to make a new GTS based on the G92 instead of doing it with the GTX. If you look at benchmarks for the 8800GT vs the 8800 GTX, the lil slim card is a very good runner up under it's big brother. With the new GTS they are increasing both the Stream Processors to 128 and the core clock speed to 650/1940 shader clock speed. These specs surpass the current GTX, even OC versions. Also its being said that these will be under $500. So basically is this the new top dog? If so where does that leave the GTX? I wonder why Nvidia decided to make a G92 GTS instead of a G92 GTX because to me it just seems like a shot to the foot to themselves in a way. Am i right or wrong? Maybe someone could give me another perspective to look at this from.

Nvidia did it because AMD is having trouble and they can smell blood.

They're willing to take a hit on their own product line - prematurely sending the GTX and Ultra to obsolescence - if they can wipe out AMD as an option.

This, plus they were probably a little worried about the 3870 coming in as a sub-$200 8800 GTS killer. So they started playing hardball.

In my humble opinion, anyhoo.

ofcourse they decided to do a G92 GTS to cater to the "less priviledged" masses.

a G92 GTX would not be affordable by many only the rich

the rich can wait for the 9SERIES D9E in february 2008

The main reason is that the G92 GTS is cheaper to make than the GTX. Thats where the price differance comes from. From a sinical stand point they released the GT at a really good price to steal any possable ATI thunder and everybody was wow and a good price too. Then they realised there was none so the prices creep up. The same will probably happen with the GTS as well.
There is nothing we can do except not buy it but thats not going to happen is it.
Mactronix

Premature based on performance, not on age.

i'm very curious to see what the benchmarks will look like cause the 8800GT's perform right under the GTX, i think even surpassing the 640mb GTS though i never seen a benchmark showing that. If a Faster GTS comes out then i can really see, with very little effort, it surpassing the GTX. I'm curious to know if the GTS being 256 bit and not 384 bit like the GTX make it a tad slower? From what i've read the new GTS will be DX 10 and PCI 2.0 and rumored to come in a 512mb and 1GB version. Wish we had more concrete details on the specs.

read this review from tweaktown: http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/ [...] index.html

This is why we need more competition.

I heard they are going to be releasing a 1 gig version of the g92 GTS at some point. An official confirmation of that will prove to be the death knell of the GTX in all venues.