PDA

View Full Version : NVIDIA claims NV30 at months end, limited qualities due to high demand


Pages : [1] 2

jAkUp
02-13-03, 04:27 PM
from extreme tech:

Nvidia executives denied rumors that the GeForceFX Ultra series will be deliberately manufactured in a limited supply, but said the high-end part would be on allocation.

Both the GeForceFX Ultra 5800 and the GeForceFX 5800 will be in stores at the end of the month, said Tony Tamasi, senior director of desktop product management at Nvidia.


In addition, Tamasi acknowledged that the GeForceFX Ultra 5800 will be in short supply, but that the reason behind it was strong demand, which has outstripped the available supply of components. "The Ultra is in short supply; there's no denying that," Tamasi said. "That's not an uncommon situation. The (GeForce4) Ti 4200 was in short supply. The Ti 4600 was in short supply. We don't intend to make them in short supply, however."

Earlier, an Nvidia spokesman said that the GeForceFX Ultra 5800 would be on allocation through April. Tamasi declined to confirm that date.

However, Tamasi declined to comment on the number of GeForceFX components the company planned to make, saying that would violate Securities and Exchange Commission regulations concerning revenue projections. Rumors have surfaced that Nvidia only plans to make 100,000 units of the GeForceFX Ultra series.

Tamasi also declined to comment on rumors that Nvidia is shifting its emphasis to the NV35 and subsequent parts. "There's always a next-generation product waiting in the wings, as soon as you buy something," he said. "But that's always the guarantee of any product in the tech industry."

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,886715,00.asp

volt
02-13-03, 05:21 PM
High demand? Muahaha

It's because there is not many around, not the demand :)

abb
02-13-03, 08:08 PM
You mean limited quantities because the card is a dud. Most people that have pre-purchased a card got their money back and cancelled their order.

suburbanguy
02-13-03, 09:18 PM
I take this as NV35 in the summer/late summer, instead of fall.

Raptorman
02-13-03, 09:29 PM
high-demand? LMMFAO! :bs:

Me thinks ATi is kicking nVIDIA in the nuts right now. See, right here it is - :nutkick:

scott123
02-13-03, 10:29 PM
Why can't Nvidia just fess up? Its really getting old, and I wish we could get some honesty instead of spin, spin, spin

Scott

Slappi
02-13-03, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by abb
You mean limited quantities because the card is a dud. Most people that have pre-purchased a card got their money back and cancelled their order.


Do you have facts to back up that claim ..... didn't think so. Do you honestly think that the talk you hear on message boards is indicative of nVidia's graphic business? Please stop the BS statements like you actually know something, cause you don't.

Slappi
02-13-03, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by scott123
Why can't Nvidia just fess up? Its really getting old, and I wish we could get some honesty instead of spin, spin, spin

Scott


Fess up to what? All you have is an opinion and a bunch of rumors. You don't have the slightest idea about the truth yet. Be patient and learn before you spout half-a$$ed rumors.

kyleb
02-13-03, 11:29 PM
the thing is none of us, we at least most of us aside from you Slappi, could care less about the business world or CEOs for that matter. we just like nice grapics cards and when it comes to that ati is currently kicking nvidia in the nuts right now as Raptorman mentioned. if they strongarm their way back to the top useing underhanded business tactics like they are know for then that only does those of us who like grapics cards a diservice. on the other hand, if they every get back to makeing grapics cards that are honestly on par with or beter than compitition again, that would be wonderful.

Sazar
02-13-03, 11:41 PM
my goodness slappi...

3 posts and all of them on 1 thread :)

let me go over this bit by bit...

nvidia's stock has gone from year to year from a high of 60 odd to around 10 dollars a share now...

sales and revenue for nvidia are lower than they were last year...

revenue increased but net income decreased massively...

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=IO_20030213_5606

this is the nvidia link to their earnings call...

concerning ati's earnings... revenue has increased... though profits remain elusive (more so because of charges than anything else...)

if you hear the earnings call... there are some things I dont understand... makes me wonder a little bit about the amount of knowledge some of the 'analysts' have about actual hardware and the role of PR used to placate the unknowing peeps who invest in nvidia...

remember one major difference between nvidia and ati is that nvidia dabbles a little in motherboards and what not :) that allows them to have nice margins...

I would really like to question the nvidia brass about the claim that the gf FX is the MOST POWERFUL VIDEO CARD ON THE MARKET...

this is february 13th, 2003... how is that possible? they dont HAVE the product out there...

:)

nvidia was within 2 cents of industry estimates.... I cannot for the life of me see how that equates to 500% :)

nvidia spokesperson says they are aggresively looking to ramp up their clock speeds... if this is so.. why has the quadro FX card initially clocked @ 400/400 been dropped to 324/400 ?

mobile gpu's... they have a nice little solution based on the gf4 ti 4200 but it is TOO HOT and consumes TOO MUCH POWER... AFAIK it has not been released on the market... I may be wrong...

in light of my assumption... ati has the most powerful mobile gpu solution other than a prototype thinger that nvidia dropped...

remember if nvidia claims a product is on the market based on a sample.. then ati had the first ddr II product ever.. not nvidia :) based on nvidia type claims...

all in all though.. nvidia is a financially strong company... no doubt about that... we just have to see what happens in the upcoming months as it appears as though ati is winning more orders in the OEM market... which is good...

nvidia on the whole is not bad as a company... but the fact that the stock price has dropped around 50 dollars makes it more a HOLD than a BUY @ the moment.. same can be said for ati...

StealthHawk
02-14-03, 12:31 AM
Originally posted by Sazar
remember one major difference between nvidia and ati is that nvidia dabbles a little in motherboards and what not :) that allows them to have nice margins...

so does ATI...not sure what happened to them though. there was some hype about their motherboards, but they weren't exceptional and fell off the face of the planet it seems.

Sazar
02-14-03, 12:50 AM
I have seen their motherboards.. perhaps ati needs to do a little more PR work like nvidia :)

dunno how good the boards are though... have not seen reviews on top tier websites...

abb
02-14-03, 06:37 AM
Originally posted by Slappi
Do you have facts to back up that claim ..... didn't think so. Do you honestly think that the talk you hear on message boards is indicative of nVidia's graphic business? Please stop the BS statements like you actually know something, cause you don't. Ugh yeah...I am one of them that cancelled my order. If you do a search in forums, you will see that others have done the same. if you read the reviews (there are too many to point out), they have also shown dissapointment in the GeForce FX. This is not BS. it was all been discussed in forums and written in reviews. You are too blinded to read them , that is all. And yes I do know. I have kept on top of the industry and I have owned every Nvidia card from TNT on. It was my dissapointment in their GeForce FX launch (or lack of), and talking to others that had ATI cards (as well as reviews that I have read on ATI), that made me for the first time purchase an ATI card. If Nvidia comes out with something better, I might consider it. Right now though, there is only the NV35- which is still just a wet dream. Sorry if I sound grim towards Nvidia, but if you research, you will find out that I am dead on. I like Nvidias latest line of defense. They are slamming 3DMark 2003 and saying that it is not a decent benchmark. The reason for this is that they have not got a DX9 card with the new shaders (and they won't for some time) and this benchmark makes their cards look like crap. It is the same thing when the GF3 came out and it dominated 3DMark2001 (because the GF3 had the features for the benchmark). You did not here ATI badmouthing MadOnion at the time because the benchmark made their cards look like crap (which it did as well- before the 8500 came out). I am just extremely dissapointed with Nvidia.
Abb

Slappi
02-14-03, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by Sazar

nvidia was within 2 cents of industry estimates.... I cannot for the life of me see how that equates to 500% :)




nVidia had a consensus of .06 this quarter and they came in at .30 so it is more like 400%. Even if you take out their MSFT arbitration settlement they still made .14 but that is their money so they made .30

Hanners
02-14-03, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by StealthHawk
so does ATI...not sure what happened to them though. there was some hype about their motherboards, but they weren't exceptional and fell off the face of the planet it seems.

ATi's motherboards aren't made for performance like the nForce series, which is why not much is heard about them - They are unspectacular but relatively cheap, and mostly aimed towards the mobile market.

I'm not sure exactly how well that side of things does for them revenue-wise, but I believe they've had a fair few design wins for their laptop motherboard solutions.

schuey74
02-14-03, 09:39 AM
I rarely get involved in forum discussions but seeing what has been said since the release of the first GFX benchmarks is really something else. I'll post this here because I am not looking for flame war about which Graphics card is better or worse. Thousands of gamers (& benchmarkers!) talking about how Nvidia is on the brink of dying off like 3DFX, what disaster the GFX is and that ATI is the new king. Why is the GXF such a disaster? (1) because the first review cards were super loud but..... we all know that it won't be the case on the final cards (just look at Chaintech). (2) Did anyone ever really look at the first benchmarks?! At 1280 & below the GFX is usually ahead no matter what the quality settings! I have three LCDS in home (17s & 18s) with native rezs of 1280 so right now the GFX would be the best choice for me. (3) And remember that these are 1st gen. drivers. It may not mean anything to some people (but this is a fact!) , Nvidia has a killer driver team and we have all seen huge improvements from their drivers. (4) For the clockspeed the card has a huge amount of power...500 Mhz is usually equalling 2-3 times the power of 4600ti which is clocked at 300 Mhz. You don't need to be an engineer to figure out what that means.

I'm not saying where I work but I will say that I have been the computer & video game industry for about ten years and being late on a product is nothing new. Everyone is just shocked because one of the few constants in this industry was Nvidia, and the slipped. They DID NOT mean to and were not resting on their laurels as some morons have said. They had a huge delay cause of the problems w/ .13 and that's it. ATI got a card to the market w/ hardly any more GPU power that the 4600ti but it has all that bandwidth so people said wow! It is a great product and ATI really did a great move by going to the 256 bit bus first on the memory. But one question...........imagine if Nvidia would have had no problems w/ .13 and they had the FX in stores last August and ATI had problems w/ their 256 bit bus and their were releasing their card now. I think everyone would agree in saying that ATI would be in a much worse position then Nvidia has ever been. Nvidia still owns the majority of the market (w/ Intel 2nd!), their posting profits (not losses, sorry ATI), and while their card is not what everyone expected (hoped for!) They will sell all their GFX cards, make some money, keep improving the performance w/ drivers and release more powerful cards soon.

You may not like it, but is the facts. The business these companies are in does not depend on a few thousand people arguing over benchmarks and what company they like best. It depends on long term planning, stability, and money in the bank. All of which are fortes of Nvidia. If you like competition (and you should!), then you need to hope that ATI keeps the pressure on and sticks around for a bit. Because they really can't afford any big setbacks!

silence
02-14-03, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by Slappi
That doesn't mean anything. Not enough for you to make the assertion that MOST people have cancelled their preorders.

i never preordered,but i intended to buy non-ultra FX.......now i am having second thoughts......looks like there is stability issue for those cards......they dropped quadro's clock by 20%.....that sounds VERY bad to me.

and i know i'll recomend ATi to everybody asking me.......cause currently ATi has better card.......i'll also recomend nforce2 mobo cause it's best athlon mobo around.........

and my friends ask me often what to buy:cool: only with me andmy friends nvidia lost at least 10 sells.......now that might not look much but 10 here,10 there and market share goes to ashes.....FAST...........

ErrorS
02-14-03, 09:45 AM
i think ATi just recently with the R300 made their name worth something .. cant expect them to get rich overnight.. especially with competition like nVidia..

Slappi
02-14-03, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by silence
i never preordered,but i intended to buy non-ultra FX.......now i am having second thoughts......looks like there is stability issue for those cards......they dropped quadro's clock by 20%.....that sounds VERY bad to me.

and i know i'll recomend ATi to everybody asking me.......cause currently ATi has better card.......i'll also recomend nforce2 mobo cause it's best athlon mobo around.........

and my friends ask me often what to buy:cool: only with me andmy friends nvidia lost at least 10 sells.......now that might not look much but 10 here,10 there and market share goes to ashes.....FAST...........


I agree with you. I have a nforce2 MB and I have a 9700Pro I just bought. I just can't stand peple putting out their opinion as fact. And why anyone hates a company is beyond me.

Sazar
02-14-03, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by schuey74
I rarely get involved in forum discussions but seeing what has been said since the release of the first GFX benchmarks is really something else. I'll post this here because I am not looking for flame war about which Graphics card is better or worse. Thousands of gamers (& benchmarkers!) talking about how Nvidia is on the brink of dying off like 3DFX, what disaster the GFX is and that ATI is the new king. Why is the GXF such a disaster? (1) because the first review cards were super loud but..... we all know that it won't be the case on the final cards (just look at Chaintech). (2) Did anyone ever really look at the first benchmarks?! At 1280 & below the GFX is usually ahead no matter what the quality settings! I have three LCDS in home (17s & 18s) with native rezs of 1280 so right now the GFX would be the best choice for me. (3) And remember that these are 1st gen. drivers. It may not mean anything to some people (but this is a fact!) , Nvidia has a killer driver team and we have all seen huge improvements from their drivers. (4) For the clockspeed the card has a huge amount of power...500 Mhz is usually equalling 2-3 times the power of 4600ti which is clocked at 300 Mhz. You don't need to be an engineer to figure out what that means.

I'm not saying where I work but I will say that I have been the computer & video game industry for about ten years and being late on a product is nothing new. Everyone is just shocked because one of the few constants in this industry was Nvidia, and the slipped. They DID NOT mean to and were not resting on their laurels as some morons have said. They had a huge delay cause of the problems w/ .13 and that's it. ATI got a card to the market w/ hardly any more GPU power that the 4600ti but it has all that bandwidth so people said wow! It is a great product and ATI really did a great move by going to the 256 bit bus first on the memory. But one question...........imagine if Nvidia would have had no problems w/ .13 and they had the FX in stores last August and ATI had problems w/ their 256 bit bus and their were releasing their card now. I think everyone would agree in saying that ATI would be in a much worse position then Nvidia has ever been. Nvidia still owns the majority of the market (w/ Intel 2nd!), their posting profits (not losses, sorry ATI), and while their card is not what everyone expected (hoped for!) They will sell all their GFX cards, make some money, keep improving the performance w/ drivers and release more powerful cards soon.

You may not like it, but is the facts. The business these companies are in does not depend on a few thousand people arguing over benchmarks and what company they like best. It depends on long term planning, stability, and money in the bank. All of which are fortes of Nvidia. If you like competition (and you should!), then you need to hope that ATI keeps the pressure on and sticks around for a bit. Because they really can't afford any big setbacks!

see once again the logic of posts like this is lost on me...

whether a company makes a profit or not means jack all to me as a consumer... I am not an investor so I don't really care... heck if that was the case all these people with amd's on this board by that logic would have other processors :)

IMO its not that nvidia is late with a product... it is the PR that they have been releasing concerning this product...

it is utterely useless to continually repeat the same old stuff so I am going to leave it to you guys to search for a product history..

concerning the move to 0.13 micron... I think it is bashed a little too much... :)

nvidia knew full well what they were doing... as did ati since they BOTH would have had the same info from TSMC... nvidia made a gamble... and then when the 9700pro debuted more changes were made... obviously...

look @ the white paper released of the gf FX "ultra" and you will see what I am on about... nvidia's card is one of the most unbalanced products I have seen architecturally in a long time...

however... as I have said before... I do not believe the product is BAD per se... it is a highly competetive part and it DOES have some nice features... but the card itself fails to really prove itself because of the burden of the PR hype that bandied it around so much...

also... nvidia is a fine company... they make good products and are an industry staple... personally I have nothing against nvidia... but their PR department is one of the most irritating/deceitful in the industry... it is THEIR way or the highway in a lot of situations... does not endear itself in many ways does the PR department...

sure... many companies have PR travesties they commit... but I have never seen a company act like nvidia... even in their conference call, nvidia loves blowing smoke screens

Sazar
02-14-03, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by schuey74
I rarely get involved in forum discussions but seeing what has been said since the release of the first GFX benchmarks is really something else. I'll post this here because I am not looking for flame war about which Graphics card is better or worse. Thousands of gamers (& benchmarkers!) talking about how Nvidia is on the brink of dying off like 3DFX, what disaster the GFX is and that ATI is the new king. Why is the GXF such a disaster? (1) because the first review cards were super loud but..... we all know that it won't be the case on the final cards (just look at Chaintech). (2) Did anyone ever really look at the first benchmarks?! At 1280 & below the GFX is usually ahead no matter what the quality settings! I have three LCDS in home (17s & 18s) with native rezs of 1280 so right now the GFX would be the best choice for me. (3) And remember that these are 1st gen. drivers. It may not mean anything to some people (but this is a fact!) , Nvidia has a killer driver team and we have all seen huge improvements from their drivers. (4) For the clockspeed the card has a huge amount of power...500 Mhz is usually equalling 2-3 times the power of 4600ti which is clocked at 300 Mhz. You don't need to be an engineer to figure out what that means.

decided that I have enough time left before work to post on this little section of your submission :)

concerning your resolution argument... the gpu is a lot more stressed the higher the gpu... with AA and FSAA on to any reasonable degrees... the difference between the cards is negligible... IQ also matters coz @ raw speeds many video cards produce high frame rates though many people on this board feel that the gf FX rules in the IQ department...

the gf FX has been taped out for a while.. I cannot for the life of me imagine WHY the drivers are STILL raw... that is ludicrous... because the product has not debuted means that they are more likely working on hardware solutions such as noise and heat... drivers should be optimized to a decent level IMO... heck anandtech had a view @ a few working cards a WHILE back... if I remember correctly... a couple of months before the big debut @ the end of the year '02...

concerning the raw power.. it is a very very nice solution compared to the gf4 ti 4600 but the point is the 9700pro ALSO outperforms the ti4600 by the SAME margins WITHOUT a super high clock speed... and no... one does not have to be an engineer to figure that out...

is on better than the other? I will reserve judgement on that... will nvidia go under... only not very bright people with no idea of business will say that...

I personally have not seen any reputable reviewers say nvidia will go under... that is ludicrous because of the cash mountain nvidia has to support its endeavours... and their cash flow from various quarters... but this product and the PR that has surrounded it is not the best thing.. and neither is the aloof attitude of the nvidia brass... acting as if everything is in order and what not...

I feel for the consumers who get taken for a ride in situations like this...

Sazar
02-14-03, 10:35 AM
Originally posted by Slappi
nVidia had a consensus of .06 this quarter and they came in at .30 so it is more like 400%. Even if you take out their MSFT arbitration settlement they still made .14 but that is their money so they made .30

I was commenting on the fact you said nvidia had beat the street by 500% which I feel is grossly mis-stating the case and misleading :)

nvidia had an operating profit... which was lower than what they had last year... 34% lower actually...

considering that nvidia made a net profit of 50.9 million INCLUDING the amount in the arbitration from m$ and considering that the amount was a total of 40.4 million dollars...

therefore WITHOUT this amount that it recognized from m$ you can clearly see the operating profit would have been a lot lower than the 34 %.... hence once again I reiterate... your 400% and 500% figures are grossly misleading...

btw for all you investment junkies... nvidia stocks == 11.47 usd... profit making company even with the market as it is :)

might be time to buy ?

Slappi
02-14-03, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by Sazar
I was commenting on the fact you said nvidia had beat the street by 500% which I feel is grossly mis-stating the case and misleading :)

nvidia had an operating profit... which was lower than what they had last year... 34% lower actually...

considering that nvidia made a net profit of 50.9 million INCLUDING the amount in the arbitration from m$ and considering that the amount was a total of 40.4 million dollars...

therefore WITHOUT this amount that it recognized from m$ you can clearly see the operating profit would have been a lot lower than the 34 %.... hence once again I reiterate... your 400% and 500% figures are grossly misleading...

btw for all you investment junkies... nvidia stocks == 11.47 usd... profit making company even with the market as it is :)

might be time to buy ?


How is that misleading? That is what they made. They made .14 even without the 40.4 million from MS which is well over 100% more. But you have to include that 40 million because that is NVDA's MONEY. THay made that and it was deffered until arbitration was settled. THAY MADE IT.

Sazar
02-14-03, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by Slappi
How is that misleading? That is what they made. They made .14 even without the 40.4 million from MS which is well over 100% more. But you have to include that 40 million because that is NVDA's MONEY. THay made that and it was deffered until arbitration was settled. THAY MADE IT.

imo... to beat the streets estimates by 2 cents when you are talking about 30 odd cents to the share is NOT 500%... :) or even 400% :)

Slappi
02-14-03, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by Sazar
imo... to beat the streets estimates by 2 cents when you are talking about 30 odd cents to the share is NOT 500%... :) or even 400% :)



You obviously have no idea what the numbers are. The range was expected from .04 to .08 with an average of .06. Nvidia made .30 and .14 without XBOX reevenue which is theirs anyway. Either way I don't see you .02 ahead of estimates.