NV30's $360 price tag: Why?

[Uttar]

Hello everyone,

I didn't see any thread on this, and as the dark hour of doom is upon us ( Knowing if the NV30 is faster/slower than a R300, knowing what AA/Aniso system is used, info of the different versions, ... ) , we better create one fast before it's too late! :)

The most obvious explanation would be that the GeForce FX is slower than the R300. But there is another explanation...

The Inquirer revealed that the yields of the R300 are of about 25% ( while they shouldn't be trusted too much, I see no reason for this to be wrong, many people speculated that before ) , and seeing how the die is HUGE, it is *essantial* to ATI to sell the R300 at about $399 - else, they'll lose money.

At $399, ATI still makes a small profit. But if the NV30 comes at $360 and is on par or better than the R300, ATI will have to reduce their R300 price.

The result? ATI would have three choices:
1. Sell Radeon 9700s while losing money
2. Sell overpriced Radeon 9700s
3. Stop producing Radeon 9700s

Now,what would be the consequences of each choice?

1. ATI would lose money. However, they aren't anywhere near bankrupty, so this could be pretty much okay. However, Radeon 9700 avaibility would be rapidly lower, as ATI wouldn't produce any more chip.
2. Radeon 9700s would barely sell, and this would make the NV30 the obvious choice for the gaming enthusiast. This would significantly increase NV30 sales.
3. NV30 would have no more competition once current chips are sold out, and would thus sell significantly better.


If either 2 or 3 happens, nVidia is once again in a position of power. The only problem then becomes the Radeon 9500, which remains a powerful competitor. However, with a few driver improvments and minor price cuts, nVidia will do alright.


Should this theory proof wrong, maybe the NV30 will indeed be slower than the R300. I guess we'll see...


Uttar

[Fotis]

Hold there Uttar!!!They said 360$ for an nv30 card but nvidia will launch 2 ala ti4400-ti4600 so the 360$ could be for the ti4400.
Try thinking for the simple answer first!!As you know nv30 yields aren't great either,as for the radeons bad yields they become radeon 9700 non pro and radeon 9500's so they aren't losing that much money.

[Uttar]

Yeah, they'll probably launch 2 NV30s. However, I see no reason for them to communicate the price of the slowest one... It just doesn't make much sense IMO.

NV30 yields aren't great, agreed. But Jen Hsun Huang publicly said in the investor conference that yields were better than expected. So it's likely that whole "20% yields" stuff is outdated.
I wouldn't want to speculate on such a number. It could be 25%, it could be 35%, it could be anything.

Anyway, remember that while some can be transformed into other types of Radeon, some of them are simply going to the trash. So let's not think they can do miracles.


Uttar

[Fotis]

You think a card with 110million trans ,325Mhz core and small board on 0.15 isn't a miracle?
Try looking the nv30 board.IMO they stated the price of the slower nv30 to mislead people into thinking that nv30 will be cheaper.Thats reason enough for me.You said it yourself radeon9700 is getting 25% yeilds(unofficial info)and it's been out for some months, if nv30 is getting better shouldn't it have been out by now?
Anyway we are too close to nv30's launch to continue making assumptions.

[Uttar]

Originally posted by Fotis
You think a card with 110million trans ,325Mhz core and small board on 0.15 isn't a miracle?
Try looking the nv30 board.IMO they stated the price of the slower nv30 to mislead people into thinking that nv30 will be cheaper.Thats reason enough for me.You said it yourself radeon9700 is getting 25% yeilds(unofficial info)and it's been out for some months, if nv30 is getting better shouldn't it have been out by now?
Anyway we are too close to nv30's launch to continue making assumptions.

The 110 million on 0.15 isn't a miracle; nVidia simply isn't doing that because they like having high margins on high-end products :)
The miracle part is the 325Mhz. ATI did a darn fine job there. However, they got even lower yields because of that, so again, nVidia would never authorize that.

Well, NV30 yields were maybe 10% a few months ago. So, that's simply unacceptable. TSMC likely fixed a pretty important problem in the 0.13 process at their fabs if NV30 yields are better than expected!
While we got no idea as to when that happened, it's likely it's a quite recent fix.

And, IMO, it's never too late to make assumptions :) The last hours are the most exciting for assumptions; you know your ideas will be verified VERY shortly.


Uttar

Uttar

[Lezmaka]

Originally posted by Fotis
You think a card with 110million trans ,325Mhz core and small board on 0.15 isn't a miracle?
Try looking the nv30 board.IMO they stated the price of the slower nv30 to mislead people into thinking that nv30 will be cheaper.Thats reason enough for me.You said it yourself radeon9700 is getting 25% yeilds(unofficial info)and it's been out for some months, if nv30 is getting better shouldn't it have been out by now?
Anyway we are too close to nv30's launch to continue making assumptions.

I forget where I read it (it was probably the inquirer) but the actual yields of the chip were around 50%, yields of the PCB were also 50%, and I think thats where they got the whole 25% thing.

But the lowest price for a 9700 hasn't dropped in a long time. Lowest price on pricewatch is $310, and I think I can still get it for around $315-325 with my discount at best buy (haven't checked in a while tho).

[thcdru2k]

im' suprised there hasn't been a countdown or anything just realized the 18th is tommorrow.

[nutball]

Originally posted by Lezmaka
I forget where I read it (it was probably the inquirer) but the actual yields of the chip were around 50%, yields of the PCB were also 50%, and I think thats where they got the whole 25% thing.



Mmmm, I read a similar thing. The yields of the chip were so so, but that card makers were having a real hard time making the 8-layer board that the 256-bit memory bus required.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=6244

That story's written by Mike Magee, not the Bosnian chappie. Magee seems a bit more reliable than the other guy.

[DrAkO]

I really think if nVIDIA sell this card at 360$ price, there make no profit with this card.

[thcdru2k]

even if they don't they'll survive..they're big enough. i think their nv35 will be their money maker.

[DrAkO]

yep, i agree with you...

the nv35 will be the big card, 256 bits architecture with DDR-II memory...

Don't forget the R350 or maybe the R400, maybe with a GDDR memory ???

[tazdevl]

Originally posted by Uttar
Yeah, they'll probably launch 2 NV30s. However, I see no reason for them to communicate the price of the slowest one... It just doesn't make much sense IMO.

NV30 yields aren't great, agreed. But Jen Hsun Huang publicly said in the investor conference that yields were better than expected. So it's likely that whole "20% yields" stuff is outdated.
I wouldn't want to speculate on such a number. It could be 25%, it could be 35%, it could be anything.

Anyway, remember that while some can be transformed into other types of Radeon, some of them are simply going to the trash. So let's not think they can do miracles.


Uttar

Uttar, we're talking about a competitive price point that enables nVIDIA to capture mindshare for the Xmas season in the hopes that folks might hold off on their purchase decisions.

If you talk about a $450+ price point given the current state of the economy, low discretionary income etc... (hope you don't have any stock in retailers, it's going to be a bad year, except for essentials), folks are going to go out and buy a 9700 Pro. Epecially when ATI drops the price of the 9700 after the NV30 launch.

Given the frequent product releases in GPUs, that if the high-end NV30 is priced over $400, I wouldn't buy it. I'm tired of buying a new card every 6-9 months and in all honesty, unless you're doing CAD, no graphics card should be priced that high. You just don't get enough value out of it in the time period you own it.

If that is the price for the high-end product, then yields must be better than folks originally thought and perhaps nVIDIA also realized that their pricing needs to be more competitive because there are other parts on the market that offer comparable price/performance.

Another thought is that nVIDIA might be willing to accept a smaller margin in the hopes of selling more high-end parts. The more they sell, the more likely that more developers will adopt CG, which puts nVIDIA in a better position for the future. It creates something of a pull effect if all the game developers are building CG into their games, folks "need" a NV.xx based card to take full advantage of the visual experience offered etc...

[tieros]

nVidia doesn't make graphics cards, just the GPU, so the pricing information you saw should be taken with a 200 pound grain of salt :D

[Uttar]

The money maker NEVER was the high-end parts.The money maker will be the NV31 IMO. And if the NV31 is sufficently cheap, then that's where developer adoption will come from too.


Uttar

[DrAkO]

yeah it's true...

360$ is for the entire cards or just for the GPU ?

If they just for the GPU, they cards will be sell at, what, 450$ ? 500$ ?

But if this price is sell for the public, 360$ is a great price ! :)

[tazdevl]

Uttar is questioning the logic behind the strategy. That's what I'm commenting on. I agree, until I see an actual price somewhere, it's rumor.

Remember this time around nVIDIA has their "preferred partner" program in an attempt to ensure consistent visual quality from it's boardmakers. Meaning you get the seal if you follow the reference design or use a certain range of components. This will keep folks from using poorer quality components that might say affect 2D quality. I remember Anand commenting that the 2D of the reference boards from nVIDIA were terrific, but it varied across the manufacturers.

If anything, given the complexity of the boards (assuming the rumors are true) and this program, you might see pricing become more consistent across manufacturers... so price differentials are going to be driven by supply, logistics and manufacturing efficiencies instead of using cheaper components.

[tazdevl]

You are correct, the overall money makers are the lower end parts which they sell in volume. However if you look at sheer margin on a per unit basis, the high end product has a bigger margin. That's all I'm saying.

[Harnagel]

The price seems to be ligit, here's the quote from Warp2Search...

The GeForce FX chips are set to go on sale in February. Gaming enthusiasts will be able to buy a graphics card with a GeForce FX chip for about $360, Nvidia officials say.

The interesting thing is that it says a graphics card with a Geforce FX chip, which leads me to believe if they have two models (let's just say a 400Mhz and 500Mhz one) then $360 would be for the lower end model.

[SavagePaladin]

'geforceFX' sounds so farking lame.
someone shoot me if that ends up true, man

[StealthHawk]

can someone explain to me why ATI would lose money if they had to lower the price of the R9700Pro under $400? you can already find boards at $320, so obivously ATI is making money there, as is the reseller.

anyway, if this indeed is true, and the high end nvidia product ends up costing $360(what a weird price by the way), it is a sign that nvidia is trying to get consumer confidence back. by offering a lower price than the norm, they wil entice people to buy their product over the R9700, and perhaps even try to lure nvidia fans who bought a R9700Pro to return to the fold and purchase an NV30.

[DrAkO]

Yeah it's sure...

But when nVIDIA put in NV30 project ? So, it's important for us they make profit by this card, and at 360$, i don't think nVIDIA making a lot of profit with this card!!

But in february ( when the cards is avaible in more quantities ), the price of the R9700 will be surely decreased, now it's 600$ CND for a R9700 Pro, so 600$ CND it's maybe, 400-450$ US ?

So nVIDIA will not have the choice to having a similar price that the R9700...

I'm just speculate and trying to find a reason for this lower price :)

[SavagePaladin]

Its possible that the .13 process allows saving on off chip components, or that the chip itself has so much on it that there are less of them...

[thcdru2k]

since nvida doesn't make their own cards, only selling the chips to manufactuer wouldn't they have less production cost than ati? since ati does manufactuer their own cards.

[DrAkO]

The 360$ price is for the GPU will be send to company for produce cards or it's for a card equipped by a NV30 GPU ?

[thcdru2k]

no..if that $360 is true, its not for sure yet, its probably the msrp for manufactuers, and the total cards. chips are alot less than $360 each.