How much? GTX 470 and the GTX 480?

[Joeteck]

To be in competition with ATI, I can't imagine the price being all that crazy....

(without having specs) I'm going to take an educated guess;

GTX 470 : $349

GTX 480 : $449

Would you buy one if these were the target prices..?

[dgb303]

I'd prob consider them but then again I'd have to see what ATI's response prices would be. I'm itching for a DX11 card.

[Nebulous]

Dang $100 difference between the 2? I would take the 470 for the cheaper price and oc the snot out of it :)

Besides, I'd wait till you got one first Joe, then drive out to LI and see it for myself in action :cool:

[Yojo]

I'm a sucker for the GP GPU applications of the fermi and would unfortunately probably pay as much as $600 for the card. I hope the GTX480 comes out as cheap as you have it listed.

Speaking of these cards, aren't they due out Q1 2010? Nvidia is either going to have to put out or step up to the fact they are late again...Q1 ends at the end of March, does it not?

I don't see any of the bigger sites posting benches yet. So I'm guessing samples have yet to be distributed...

[Bobnova]

Nope, but i don't have the cash to buy much of anything >$100, so no shock there.

I expect initial pricing to be higher then that though, by at least $100 each.

[Joeteck]

Dang $100 difference between the 2? I would take the 470 for the cheaper price and oc the snot out of it :)

Besides, I'd wait till you got one first Joe, then drive out to LI and see it for myself in action :cool:


That's not a bad idea.... lol GTX480 is in my cross-hairs... Regardless of price... Going to be worth it just because of the Folding capability alone!

[Lavacon]

Sadly, given speculated yields and such, I can't see ANY Fermi variant coming in under $500 unless the first iteration of Fermi is nothing but fused off mid range bins. Keyword their is speculated. I would love to be pleasantly surprised :-)

That said, I agree that this will be one heck of a folding GPU :-)

March is coming up on us very soon, I can't wait for benchmarks.

[Joeteck]

Sadly, given speculated yields and such, I can't see ANY Fermi variant coming in under $500 unless the first iteration of Fermi is nothing but fused off mid range bins.

That said, I agree that this will be one heck of a folding GPU :-)

March is coming up on us very soon, I can't wait for benchmarks.


I think that's why the long wait... Don't want to fall into the same shoes as ATI when they released their flagship card....

[Lavacon]

ATI totally dropped the ball with 5970.... I wonder if they are just holding it back at this point due to lack of competition or if they are having problems with their thermals. 58xx cards have been in full swing/availability since January.

[ratbuddy]

I'm going with $500-$550 for the 480, and $425-$475 for the 470, at least at launch.

[reap3r]

I'm going with $500-$550 for the 480, and $425-$475 for the 470, at least at launch.

I'd say those are probably about right.. But watch us all be wrong and the cards come out in the $1000 range haha.. It could happen. :p

[ratbuddy]

I'd say those are probably about right.. But watch us all be wrong and the cards come out in the $1000 range haha.. It could happen. :p

I really doubt it. They claim to have learned from the GTX 260/280 initial pricing mistake, see http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3651&p=7 for more.

[reap3r]

I really doubt it. They claim to have learned from the GTX 260/280 initial pricing mistake, see http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3651&p=7 for more.

I see.. well in that case maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.. but for now I'm not going to hold my breath :p

[raptor15sc]

So what's the date?

End of March? Beginning of April?

[ratbuddy]

So what's the date?

End of March? Beginning of April?

They said Q1 but that's Nvidia's financial Q1 so any time up till the end of April. Hopefully not that long :confused:

[Bobnova]

Wait April now? Everybody was saying end of March at the latest back in january.
Next month is Q1 going to mean May?

[PretzelPusher]

I think you are all over pricing this thing.... Nvidia has totted 2 or 3 times that this architechture is inexpensive to make. I see them hitting the market at $300-$400 tops...

[EarthDog]

Huang stated end of that quarter for Fermi/GF100 w/e people want to make up and call it, yup. April 26th to be exact.

NVidia CEO Jen-Sun Huang (Jen-Hsun Huang) commented on these rumors and said that the mass production of Fermi will be established only in early 2010. At a meeting with financial analysts Huang said: "Next year will be an interesting first quarter, because, in reality, we need more plates in the first quarter. The reason for this is the complete separation of Fermi on three different lines of products: GeForce, Quadro, and Tesla" . Note that in understanding nVidia first quarter begins January 26 and ends April 26. That is, at best, Fermi will be available at the end of the first quarter of 2010. If something goes wrong, as planned, but this possibility can not be excluded, then it will have to go to the second quarter of 2010.

[Joeteck]

I think you are all over pricing this thing.... Nvidia has totted 2 or 3 times that this architechture is inexpensive to make. I see them hitting the market at $300-$400 tops...

I somewhat agree. Looking forward to it actually. $349 - $449 will be the target price, and I for one will get the $449, because I remember spending $569 for a video card way back... So this would be cheap!

[PretzelPusher]

Twitter post today.

NVIDIAGeForce ARE YOU READY? Check back here on Monday morning at 9:00 a.m. PST for a major announcement!


My perdicted major announcement... "Nvidia will be releasing a limited number of it's 400 series cards today to the very priviliged media, and by Quarter end we will yet again be releasing a very limited number of cards to some 2000 privledged customers that can get to one of three select retailers fast enough to secure this elusive pot of gold that is sure to make ATi drop it's already low prices and cost Nvidia suppliers.... ( i.e. BFG, Evga...) more lost revenue..... ":blah::blah::mad:

[raptor15sc]

Twitter post today.

NVIDIAGeForce ARE YOU READY? Check back here on Monday morning at 9:00 a.m. PST for a major announcement!


My perdicted major announcement... "Nvidia will be releasing a limited number of it's 400 series cards today to the very priviliged media, and by Quarter end we will yet again be releasing a very limited number of cards to some 2000 privledged customers that can get to one of three select retailers fast enough to secure this elusive pot of gold that is sure to make ATi drop it's already low prices and cost Nvidia suppliers.... ( i.e. BFG, Evga...) more lost revenue..... ":blah::blah::mad:

I hope Provantage is one of the 3 retailers.

[mattspalace]

My guess is the GTX 470 will be $399 and the GTX 480 will be $499

[gsrcrxsi]

Wait wait wait. Now they are putting out 400 series cards? What happened to the 300 series cards? Or did they just change the name ?

[necrokiller]

http://www.sabrepc.com/p-174-xfx-geforce-gtx-480-2gb-gddr5-pci-express-x16-retail.aspx

Some exceptional user reviews. nVidia has a winner folks!

Pros: 12,983,249,893,843 cuda cores of graphical rendering goodiness RENDERS MIDGET PORN LIKE NO OTHER, THOSE LITTLE ******** LOOK LIFE SIZED WITH THESE CARDS !!!!
Cons: It's mythical, you can hear about it's greatness more then you can see it because it's a force of nature, not a material object
Other Thoughts: I have 8 of these in octuplet SLI, it blew up my first 10 monitors it's so good
Pros: Packaging was pretty nice. Came with a free copy of Metro 2033 and Bioshock 2.
Cons: I came home 2 days after installing into my computer, and found my wife packing her bags, saying she was moving out and taking the GTX480 with her. She said it pleases her in more ways than I would ever know. She packed her bags and took the kids.
Other Thoughts: The house is empty.

[mattspalace]

lol...the second one is pretty funny.

[atm743]

http://www.sabrepc.com/p-174-xfx-geforce-gtx-480-2gb-gddr5-pci-express-x16-retail.aspx

Some exceptional user reviews. nVidia has a winner folks!

link asked me for a username and password. i dont have an account. can you copy and paste info here so i can see these said reviews

[mattspalace]

It didn't ask for that info before, so they must have pulled it.

[tachi1247]

I can't see these cards coming in at anything over $450/350 for the 480/470 respectively. That would price it $50 more than ATI. Unless the performance is outrageously better than the 58xx it would be a poor business strategy to price them anywhere else. They would be better off selling them at a loss until yields come up just to keep market share.

BTW, release date has been announced for March 26th.

[Neuromancer]

nVidia has a history of charging more for an "equal performance" product though. I would expect the 470 to price out at $400 with the 480 considerably more. DOn't they usually launch their flagships at $600 and drop it after a month?

[EarthDog]

nVidia has a history of charging more for an "equal performance" product though. I would expect the 470 to price out at $400 with the 480 considerably more. DOn't they usually launch their flagships at $600 and drop it after a month?When they had no competition this is thier practice. If its only a hair faster. I dont see that pricing happening. ANd if it does...well...:bang head :screwy:

[jason4207]

Keep in mind that the lower bit-width (384 vs. 512) will reduce costs a lot. The use of DDR5 will keep the bandwidth high despite the reduction in bit-width.

[720x770]

It's costing nvidia $500 just to produce each GTX 480 GPU chip, due to manufacturing problems which will take at minimum another 6 months to fix (if it can be fixed), and that's before starting another round of production. Out of nearly 900K chips produced, only less than 10K will be viable...more around 5-8K worldwide.

I have to point out that this is for the GPU ONLY. Now imagine that combined with the cost of the rest of the components, and you're looking at some high prices....even if nvidia is taking a loss with selling each one.

[EarthDog]

It's costing nvidia $500 just to produce each GTX 480 GPU chip, due to manufacturing problems which will take at minimum another 6 months to fix (if it can be fixed), and that's before starting another round of production. Out of nearly 900K chips produced, only less than 10K will be viable...more around 5-8K worldwide.Links or are we speculating?

[720x770]

Links or are we speculating?

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/17/nvidias-fermigtx480-broken-and-unfixable/

was posted on here not too long ago, and it is all pretty logical...not just some opinion based rant.

[ratbuddy]

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/17/nvidias-fermigtx480-broken-and-unfixable/

was posted on here not too long ago, and it is all pretty logical...not just some opinion based rant.

Well..

For those not interested in the 'why' side of things, the short answer is that the top bin as it stands now is about 600MHz for the half hot clock, and 1200MHz for the hot clock, and the initial top part will have 448 shaders. On top of that, the fab wafer yields are still in single digit percentages.

He's already backtracked on the 448 shader bit, and says they'll have 512 now. That doesn't give me high hopes for the rest of his guesswork.

[Bobnova]

So far with fermi he's been right more often then wrong, but one does have to remember that he's violently anti-nvidia. Good news for nvidia, or even mid range news, will not come from that site.

[EarthDog]

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/17/nvidias-fermigtx480-broken-and-unfixable/

was posted on here not too long ago, and it is all pretty logical...not just some opinion based rant.Sorry I should have clarified... I was more specifically talking about the $500 cost /chip. $400/$500 is as high as I see it and if thats beating out 5870.

[muddocktor]

Personally, whatever nVidia posts the MSRP on these cards is pretty much going to be irrelevant IMO, because the cost to you and I is going to be market driven. In other words, unless nVidia can put a shed load of these out in the first days they are available, the e-tailers are going to gouge everyone's eyeballs out. And you guys know that they will do it too, even Newegg.

[720x770]

Well..



He's already backtracked on the 448 shader bit, and says they'll have 512 now. That doesn't give me high hopes for the rest of his guesswork.

well they have to disable an average of 2 shader blocks per gpu due to defects. even if only 1 is affected, a whole block must be turned off. With 32 shaders in each block, disabling 2 blocks would bring 512 down to 448. Increasing the die size to compensate for the lost blocks makes it hotter, and use more energy. even the good blocks can have leaky transistors, which leads to the need for more voltage which causes more heat and more power usage.

[720x770]

So far with fermi he's been right more often then wrong, but one does have to remember that he's violently anti-nvidia. Good news for nvidia, or even mid range news, will not come from that site.

as long as it isn't fake bad news, does it really matter? I guess you could look at it like this, if he doesn't say anything bad about nvidia, then obviously things would be going good for them.

[720x770]

Personally, whatever nVidia posts the MSRP on these cards is pretty much going to be irrelevant IMO, because the cost to you and I is going to be market driven. In other words, unless nVidia can put a shed load of these out in the first days they are available, the e-tailers are going to gouge everyone's eyeballs out. And you guys know that they will do it too, even Newegg.

not only that, there will be a limited number available, most of which will go to industrial buyers.

[Bobnova]

as long as it isn't fake bad news, does it really matter? I guess you could look at it like this, if he doesn't say anything bad about nvidia, then obviously things would be going good for them.

That's just it, previous to fermi it mostly was fake bad news.
Previously the site should have been named "rarelyaccurate.com", now it's "strangelyaccurate.com" instead.


It may be that he actually does have a mole now, that would explain the sudden increase in accuracy.

[-Blue-]

for those of you who did not see... launch date is march 26th

[ratbuddy]

well they have to disable an average of 2 shader blocks per gpu due to defects. even if only 1 is affected, a whole block must be turned off. With 32 shaders in each block, disabling 2 blocks would bring 512 down to 448. Increasing the die size to compensate for the lost blocks makes it hotter, and use more energy. even the good blocks can have leaky transistors, which leads to the need for more voltage which causes more heat and more power usage.

No, I'm referring to a story he posted about 2 days after the one I quoted - now he's saying they will ship the top part with the full 512 SPs active. No mention is made of his previous guess that they would only have 448. Now it's just 'well it's 512 but they still suck!'

Friendly reminder: Look to the right of the quote button there's a quote+ button - if you click that on each post you want to include, you can multiquote posts instead of making a seperate response to each one.

[720x770]

Sorry I should have clarified... I was more specifically talking about the $500 cost /chip. $400/$500 is as high as I see it and if thats beating out 5870.

"Nvidia bought 9,000 risk wafers late last year. Presumably those will be used for the first run. With 104 die candidates per wafer, 9,000 wafers means 936K chips.

its yields are still in the single digit range. At $5,000 per wafer, 10 good dies per wafer, with good being a very relative term, that puts cost at around $500 per chip."

[ratbuddy]

"Nvidia bought 9,000 risk wafers late last year. Presumably those will be used for the first run. With 104 die candidates per wafer, 9,000 wafers means 936K chips.

its yields are still in the single digit range. At $5,000 per wafer, 10 good dies per wafer, with good being a very relative term, that puts cost at around $500 per chip."

Before you take Charlie's word as gospel, consider this quote from an 'article' of his about a year and a half ago:

Basically we are told all G92 and G94 variants are susceptible to the same problem - basically they are all defective. Any guesses as to how much this is going to cost?

From the look of it, all G8x variants other than the G80, and all G9x variants are defective, but we have only been able to get people to comment directly on the G84, G86, G92 and G94, and all variants thereof.

Riiiiight.

[Bobnova]

Yes, one failure clearly means all further attempts are failures.

[720x770]

It certainly doesn't mean that, but failures can take a long time to fix and sometimes aren't worth fixing, you have to cut your losses. I don't know if it will get that far, but from the looks of it they're not going to have a yield fix for 6 months at minimum.

AMD had 40nm yield problems, somewhere around 40% or less were viable and that's across the entire 5xxx series. Even they had trouble keeping up with demand.

They could do what AMD did, and sell defective GPU's as lower end cards, or construct some frankenstein multi-chip monstrosity. But they already sell cards in lower segments, so they'd have to compete with their own last gen cards performance wise. not exactly a step forward.

I don't take his word for gospel, but it is a well written article. If anyone can prove the main points of the article wrong, go right ahead.

[ratbuddy]

I don't take his word for gospel, but it is a well written article. If anyone can prove the main points of the article wrong, go right ahead.

As always, burden of proof rests with the accuser.