Nvidia GeForce GTX 200 Prices Crashing
Pricewatch - There is trouble in Nvidialand. AMD’s new graphics cards apparently have surprised Nvidia, forcing Nvidia to sharply cut prices of its new cards. Sources told TG Daily that Nvidia is adjusting its marketing strategy to GeForce 8800 cards to avoid what has all the signs for a big sales decline on the high end. Of course, that means that it is a good time for graphics cards shoppers. Here’s some insight in what you can expect to find on the market.
Nvidia has been dominating the graphics chip market for some time now. In fact, the last troubles are about five years back, when Nvidia faced the ATI Radeon 9700-9800 series in 2002 and 2003 and Nvidia’s own GeForce FX turned into an embarrassment. The new GTX 200 looked like a solid design, but it appears that AMD’s Radeon 4800 is shaking the ground in Santa Clara once again and we may be seeing a time in which Radeon desktop cards are gaining market share again. Nvidia products are experiencing substantial price drops: Some GTX 200 series cards are now 25% cheaper than just a week ago.
Taking a quick look back down the memory lane, ATI hasn’t had an easy ride over the past four years. In 2004, the GeForce 6800 outperformed the Radeon X800 and brought support for DirectX 9.0c. In 2005, the GeForce 7800 slaughtered the Radeon X850 while the GeForce 7900 trumped the Radeon X1800/1900. The GeForce 8800 was introduced in November 2006 and remained on top until the debut of the GeForce GTX 280. Nvidia had a clear 18 month lead over AMD/ATI.
ATI’s back-from-the-dead announcement came with the release of the Radeon 3800 series. The GPU did not have
the success the ATI guys expected, but it was enough to show that there is still life in ATI. The law of graphics industry is very simple: If you screw up, one decent chip generation won’t brick you back. But the second can.
Today’s market has a simple competitive structure: The Radeon 3800 is battling the GeForce 9600GT, the Radeon 4850 is going against the GeForce 9800GTX and the Radeon 4870 is fighting the GeForce GTX 260. What brought a surprising element to this scenario is the fact that Nvidia did not expect that the Radeon 4800 might reach Nvidia’s level of performance. Now we are seeing new market dynamics that create problems for Nvidia and opportunities for AMD/ATI. Actually, we are noticing that AMD is gaining traction on a marketing level as well and is going after Nvidia wherever it can.
The prices mentioned below are the lowest we were able to find as of July 11.
Entry level
Looking at retail/etail price data provided by PriceGrabber.com, Nvidia is pressured on several fronts: The Diamond Radeon 3850 with 512 MB GDDR3 memory sells for as low as $99.99 (current average retail price: $121). On Newegg.com, we even found a $20 rebate, bringing the cost of the card down to just $79.99. Nvidia’s competitor is MSI’s passively-cooled GeForce 8600 GTS 512 MB, which costs $70.93. However, we have to note that a 3850 GPU will drive circles around the 8600 chip and may be the better deal. This concludes the low-end debate: Diamond’s 3850 with 512 MB GDDR3 is the most powerful $80 graphics card in the history of 3D.
Gigabyte sells its 3870 with 512 MB GDDR3 memory for $129.99, but Asus has a better deal with higher clocks and GDDR4 memory for just $125.99 after a $20 MIR check. The GeForce 9600 GT is a price competitor at $129.99 and some manufacturers even offer a $20 check, but this is not the deal you should be looking at: The best $129.99 card is BFG’s 8800GT 512 MB. The card delivers the full performance of the G92 chip, which makes the card our winner in this segment. However, Nvidia is phasing out the 8800GT - if you are looking for a deal, be quick. What makes the 8800GT even more interesting is the fact that Nvidia and retailers apparently are counting on this card to compensate for sluggish GTX 200 sales. So keep your eyes out for this product for a potentially good deal. More on that below.
Mainstream
As we’re moving higher in the price bracket, we are seeing more fireworks and better deals than at any other point in the history of 3D industry - at least as far as we can remember.
The Radeon 4850 was introduced as a $199 card. But if you are looking closely, you can find much cheaper cards, such as Palit’s board for $169.99 (including a $20 rebate). In the $149-199 range, you can find many GeForce 8800 GTS boards: The 320 MB and 640 MB versions are using the original 90 nm G80 chip, while 512MB boards integrate the 65 nm G92 chip. If you own a SLI motherboard and an older GeForce 8800 GTS, getting a second card might be a steal.
If you compare Radeon 4850 to GeForce 9800GTX (Nvidia’s preferred case scenario), we have a dilemma between Palit’s board for $169.99 and Zotac’s 9800GTX for $196.99 and free shipping. Our advice: Go for the cheaper card.
Read on the next page: Performance cards, Vendor struggles, Conclusion
Performance
Let’s spend some time on the GTX 200 series.
When the new GPU was launched, there was little hope that that ATI’s $299 cards could compete against Nvidia’s $449 models. However, exactly that has happened. Within two weeks, Nvidia decided to cut the prices of its GTX 260 and GTX 280 cards by $100 - $150. We found PNY XLR8 GTX 260 for $329.99 on Pricegrabber.com, down from a launch price of $449.
If you are looking for a deal, you might want to check Newegg.com, because EVGA currently has a $30 MIR, bringing the cost of EVGA’s GTX 260 896 MB card to just $299.99. This is only $5 higher than VisionTek’s Radeon 4870 512 MB, but the GTX 260 comes with 75% more memory. We also noticed the MSI Radeon 3870 X2 1 GB for $299 as well, but we do not recommend buying the old X2 card.
The GTX 2800 remains the highest performing card. Nvidia has no competition in this segment and prices are still coming down sharply. Average prices are below the $550 mark, while you can find some models for $499 and $469, if you include the $30 MIR. These cards are actually cheaper than 8800 Ultra cards, which are selling in the $550 range.
Vendor struggles
While we prepared this article, we talked to several industry sources, who requested to remain anonymous, and we are somewhat convinced that the current price cuts are just the beginning. The competition between Nvidia and AMD/ATI will become more serious.
For example, we heard that some vendors consider the launch of the GTX 260/280 series as "the worst product launch in the history of Nvidia" and Nvidia may be selling "less than 3000 GTX 260/280 cards per month" in the North American etail market. This scenario not only creates a huge problem for Nvidia, but also for retailers that are now trying to find solutions how to move their stock.
It seems that some large stores have given up on putting extra effort in promoting GTX 260/280 cards for now and are changing their strategy towards other products that are easier to sell. Interestingly, Newegg.com appears to be leading the charge, heavily promoting 8800 GT cards directly against the GTX 280: "Whatever your favorite game, an Nvidia GeForce 8800GT in SLI mode (that’s 2) provides the best bang-for-the-buck performance for less than $299," the promo ad reads.
Is it a move to save quarter sales or is Newegg just clearing out its inventory? Your guess is as good as ours. Our sources indicated that AMD/ATI will be reacting soon. So expect the rivalry between Nvidia and AMD/ATI to intensify. Watch the big etail websites to see the battle unfold.
Conclusion
This years’ Back-to-School season will see a level of competition in the graphics industry we haven’t seen in years. AMD is in the driver’s seat for now and will be bundling its Radeon 4800 cards with Phenom processors, offering even more savings (an additional $15-30), while Nvidia has to react. AMD’s graphics unit believes that it can hit a market share of 40% (up from 21% in the first quarter) and it will be interesting to see if that will be the case and what Nvidia will do to hang on to its market shares.
The winner, of course, is the consumer. If you were looking to get a new graphics card anyway, you are more than likely to be able to score a great deal this August. Big performance gains appear to be very affordable now.
- 50 Megapixels, 150 MB Image Files: Kodak's New Flagship CCD Sensor
- Researchers Dive Into Invisible Light And The Origins Of The Universe
- Albatron Unveils GeForce 8-series Graphics Cards For PCI Slots
- Seagate Boosts Hard Drive Storage Capacity To 1.5 TB
- Hitachi Fires Up Second-generation Terabyte Hard Drives
- 'Nehalem' 2.93 GHz Benches Revealed
- LCD Panel Makers Cutting Small- To Medium-size Output Amid Weakening Demand
- Philips To Transfer PC Monitor Brand To TPV
- Samsung Puts 128 SSDs Into Mass-production
- Intel Announces Centrino 2
- ATI R700 Previews On The Web, Card To Hit Stores On 08/13
- Solar Inverter Market To Grow By 40% In 2008
- DRAM Contract Price To Remain Flat In July
- Elpida Develops Power-efficient 2 Gb/s High-speed DDR3
- Nvidia Reportedly Scores QPI License While Intel Gets SLI For X58 Motherboards
- Green Art: Designers Create PhotoBioReactor Sculpture
- Intel Invents A New Calendar, Replaces Christ With Centrino
- E3 2008 Exposed!
Umm....
I distinctly remember ATI's x850XT PE cards out performing the 6800 Ultras
(Their first X line outperformed all of nvidias offerings)
I also remember the x1900xtx out performing the 7950 GT's.
A trip to the VGA charts confirms this.
The only ATI flop that comes to mind is the HD2k series and the useless x1800 card, but NVidia had their own useless 7800 GT.
"the GeForce 7900 trumped the Radeon X1800/1900. "
If we are going to include the X1800 in that statement then lets make it slightly more clear that the competitor to it was the 7800 series of cards not 7900. Though you may want to rethink that statement as a whole because it was pretty widely stated that the X1900's (atleast in the high end) were better than the 7900's if only by a small margin. Neither card was trumped, but I am unsure where you got that the 7900 did this to the X1900 considering the X1900 was in fact the better card overall.
Best,
3Ball
and Nvidia may be selling "less than 3000 GTX 260/280 cards per month"
wow then nvidia is getting crushed i haven't heard anyone talk about buyin a nvidia card on the forums lately its all ati card
i wonder how low the 260 will go
and then the ati 4850 oc'ed editions
4870x2 will steal the market
woot ati
If nvidia can lower the price of its gtx 200 series enough to be competitive or even create a dual gtx 260 or 280 on one card like the 9800 gx2 then nvidia would once again rise to dominate the market. However since I don't see the second option happening anytime soon I guess I'll just have to wait and hope the gtx 260 lowers enough so I can get two
(I would get 4870x2 but I have an sli mobo and don't feel like changing).
"The GTX 2800 remains the highest performing card."
wow didn't knew the graphics market went that fast
It's in the 3rd part of text, @ performance header.
@radium: unrelated to topic, I just wanted to say that your animation is hilarious.
Thank God! Its about time Nvidias marketing deparment is awful 650 for a gtx 280 that barley out performed a 9800GX2 in some benchmarks. These price drops were imminent!!!!
heh,can't wait for the move to 40nm and 45nm cards.
Yeah, Processors are at 45nm, by this time next year they might be at 32nm. Graphics cards are a bit slower but who knows, 40nm? smaller? GDDR10 lol?
GO ATI! GO NVIDIA! MAKE ME SPEND LESS MONEYS!!! YAYAYAYA!
I'm typically an Nvidia buyer and have been waiting to upgrade from my tired 7800GTX...it looks like ATI/AMD will be getting my money for a 4870x2 this time, as long as the numbers are as expected. I'm glad to see this happen, good competition is great for everyone. Nvidia needed a good kick in the arse and the 4800 series seems to have done so thus far.
Not to even mention the 4789 OC edition that will OC the bejebus out if it and if its already able to pounce on the GTX2800s territory a OC like that might just take it over.
I for one want a 4870 OC but want to wait for Intels Larrabee. If it truly does make both ATI and NVidia sweat that means even lower prices for us.
No DX10.1 support in nVidia's latest. My two 4870's do actually out perform the GTX 280 even in "Crysis" -- an nVidia paired game designed to work best on nVidia GPUs.
Anyway, good to see ATI coming back, and the results, lower prices for everyone. Prices were starting to get OUT OF HAND where SLI 8800GTX Ultra's would set you back $1300 or more. My two 4870's at $600 seems like a positive bargain.
Still wondering why nVidia left the door so wide open? Like other's have said, the 4870X2 single card solution that is NOT Crossfire (read fully scalable) is another serious shake up at nVidia even if they release a GTX 300 soon.
Anyway, good for consumers and I hope it lights a fire under nVidia -- they played out the 8800 for a long run.
I always purchased Nvidia cards because they just seemed to work better with most of the games that I played and then along comes the 4850 and wow! It is a nice card. ATI/AMD back in the game. Kinda reminds me when ATI launched the 9700 Pro.
Well hush my mouth!!!!
Really need to blame nvidia for charging our customer too much, 8800 should drop to this price now, and its been 9 months after the release.
Thanks ATi for the competition, we dont want monopoly in either CPU or VGA sections
This time, ATI/AMD will rock, I own a 8800GTX, and in next upgrade, I will go to ATI's 4870x2, I did not like GTX 200 series, even with the price cuts...
but time will tell, I like to wait for more price cutting competition!
I like it, I like it. I was looking at buying a 4850 but with this news if I wait a bit more I may be able to get an even better deal... I guess my X1950 will have to hold on a bit longer lol
AMD/ATi FTW
ps: personal point of view, there no graphic card is worth more than $250, period.
If micro stuttering has been proven to be fixed on the 4870x2, then thats gona be my next card
"Taking a quick look back down the memory lane, ATI hasn’t had an easy ride over the past four years. In 2004, the GeForce 6800 outperformed the Radeon X800 and brought support for DirectX 9.0c. In 2005, the GeForce 7800 slaughtered the Radeon X850 while the GeForce 7900 trumped the Radeon X1800/1900."
You're an nVidiot who needs to get his facts right. Seriously, how did this mammoth dump of BS get published?
Damn, the GTX260 is still over $370 here. Hurry up and drop the prices more!
lol. As inaccurate as Theos view of past AMD cards was... the article goes on to basically say that this time even the Nvidia fanboys are impressed by ATI.
About damn time from ATI tho. They've been dominated by the 8800 for how many years now?
This article is full of errors. First the x800 cards were about equal to the 6800 with the exception of opengl games like Doom 3. Also ATI cards usually trounced Nvidia's cards when it came to Half-life 2. It was the same with the x850 vs the 6800 ultra. The x1800 were also comparable to the 7800 and the x1950 trounced the 7900. ATI's first misstep came after the acquisition by AMD with the 2900 series. The 3800 series were decent but were considerably cheaper than the 8800 series.
Theos, Theos , Theos...Im think you may need to take a look at Tom's own vga charts before writing about which cards are better. You totally missed the ball there in regards to at least the x1900/x1950 cards.
If you take your job seriously, Ide expect and update to that article explaining the mistake.
Here Numbers Game seems point & makes relative flatness of move evident.
HYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART VON DRASHEK M.D.
6200 from Jan '6 to scramble for 200/250/300 numbers to incorporate Ultimate, now seen as 92/93 coming up in 9 months or still 2 or 3 buried in thier, GTX 280 is bit of 2 with 8 or top. with next top 92/92 for Top yet still pesky 2 or 3 as second number series. Vista Ultimate will have its Uber Daze, yet 380 as another built in single 16X or 4/6 80 ofr some early break out numbers in 2010 with 880 or 690 or 890 just about Seven Time. & living is E-Z.
Signed
"Taking a quick look back down the memory lane, ATI hasn?t had an easy ride over the past four years. In 2004, the GeForce 6800 outperformed the Radeon X800 and brought support for DirectX 9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX .0c. In 2005, the GeForce 7800 slaughtered the Radeon X850 while the GeForce 7900 trumped the Radeon X1800/1900. ..."
How did that part get published ??? Take a look at the Desktop VGA Charts and make another try...It´s worrying to see these kind of "facts" here at Toms. I am not just referring to this article but also
reviews where the graphs say one thing and the author something else.
Those are some pretty sensationalist graphs in the article. They make a 5 dollar price fluctuation seem like the market is turning on its head and back.
Resize the graphs so every graph is shown from the 0 to what ever the max price is among these cards. In some graphs 2$ difference in price over few days looks like there was a revolution in prices. Price gone up by 50% and down for 75% (but in reality its 1$ up and 3$ down)
Near everyone who's posted so far has already commented on the inacuracies, but i can't help but add to it as it's finally clear proof of the shameless bias and fanboy-ish statements that are spouted not only on Toms but every most of the big hardware review sites.
The only accurate part of that statement is that the 6800 supported DX9.0c. All of the geforce 6 series cards did. However the only game that supported it at the time was Doom 3, so much like the 8800 series with DX10 it was a marketing ploy to be able to say they had support around for a year before anything really was even able to take advantage of the hardware.
Actually, i suppose it's technically accurate in fanboy logic, since the 6800 and x800 cards had half a dozen different versions released in 2004 and the R423 core x800 pro were about half the price of the 6800 with about the same performance having slightly faster Tfill rate and 2GB/s less memory bandwidth. Despite both cards being launced in may of 2004, it was near impossible to find the 6800 ANYWHERE until jan of 2005, if you could find it the card cost upwards of $550-650. The 6600 GT was the common nvidia card of choice at the time. the R430/R480 x800/x850 card that came out in Dec to counter the 6800 ultra however stomped nvidia. Unquestionably. The R480 was DX9.0B which meant it could run 9.0c games, just not with the full feature set, which didn't really matter as even Doom3 didn't take advantage of all the 9.0c capabilities and having the hardware support actually hurt performance in pretty much every other game out at the time. Thus the x850xt PE ended up performing astoundingly better than nvidia even in their own "the way it's meant to be played" games.
Actually the 7900 performed about 10% better than the x1800xt. the x1900xtx beat it out by about 5%, the x1950xtx beat it by 10%. In fact a single x1950xtx was almost dead even with 7800 GT in SLI. The x1950xtx in CF was beat out only by the 7800gtx SLI, 7950x2 SLI though only by about 4%.
So Theo, you have given a shining example of a biased fanboy that picks comparisons that prove your wet dreams justified, while ignoring reality. Either you have been vary creative in how you pair these cards against each other, in which case you're the biased fanboy douchey tool it appears, or you don't bother to check your facts. Either way you obviously should have someone not on the payroll read over your work first.
Having owned the 6600 GT, x800xt x850xt PE, x1800xt, x1950xtx i knew i was justified in laughing until my sides hurt before i checked the actual numbers. Hopefully someone at Toms will fix this offensive article, but seeing how biased toms has become if they can get away with it i don't expect much.
2 Nvidia 8800 ultras SLI! END OF STORY!!