Me to, but it dont offer enuf of a preformance increase, even if it cost half of what it does in NZ it still wouldnt be worth it, over my current gpu setup.
When will you people get it? It's not the companies that are causing these high prices, and I'm not just talking about video cards here. IT'S US! The consumer. Some people just have to have the best, or increase their status. Stop buying these over priced items, they will have to lower prices. Not good if nobody is buying, and their capital is pretty much sitting on a shelf collecting dust. Just to verify, I didn't spend full price on my cards. I will never spend over $500 for single card or cpu again. Made that mistake with the 8800GTX, and amd FX-60.
I agree, and that's why until I see a real increase in performance and an improvement in the gaming industry I'm not wasting my money on anymore upgrades. There are only three games that i have my eye on this year and that's the new Aliens game, Tomb Raider and maybe Far Cry 3 - and i Dont expect to have to upgrade for those titles (could be wrong) so whats the point.
While it's entirely possible there is some price fixing going on, 28nm could just be turning out to be more expensive than anticipated, none of us know for sure. Note even sure why people think boycotting these cards from Nvidia and AMD will make them reduce the prices? Less cards sold means they have to increase the price so that there is more profit per card, or that they end up concentrating more on console GPU's and tablets than PC GPU's, as the PC side of things becomes less profitable. Not that i would ever buy the top GPU, i go out my way to make sure i don't, but people forget it's a business, and it has always been run this way.
1.Not boycotting - Just dont see any point in upgrading for such a small P/I. 2. Are you suggesting that we should buy their cards just for the hell of it in hopes that one day it will reduce prices and so they don't abandon the PC market (I don't think that's what your saying but that's how i read it). I'm off ta bed, night gurus
Three reasons why I bought a stock GTX680 is : 1: its a lot quieter and cooler than the Palit GTX580 I had that had a Palit custom cooler on it 2: It uses less electricity than the GTX580 I had 3: It is slightly faster than my GTX580 (Every bit counts to me) Anything that makes my electric bill cheaper is good to me. Thats why I am also moving frpm a core I5 760 to a 3570. I dont have my GPU overclocked and I doubt I will OC the 3570.
1. Wasn't aimed at you, and I don’t blame you, it would be more for of an increase for me, but I’ve still spent the last 6 months deciding if it was enough of a P/I for the money, and until the 670 appeared the answer was no. 2. No, far from it. My point was that anyone thinking that if we all stopped buying expensive cards, then Nvidia/AMD would just make them all cheaper is dreaming, as it just doesn’t work like that. Would never expect anyone to pay more than it’s worth to them, but if someone has the money and is willing, then that is their choice as it’s their money and it’s not fair of people to put the blame on them for these high prices.
So what I am hearing is the majority expect NVIDIA to sell their current 670/680 at a lower price than it was charging for it's previous generation? Correct me if I'm wrong but the GTX 580 was selling for $470 or so right up to Kepler launch. The 680 is a very nice improvement over that and the price is the same. Supply and demand drives prices. What should they sell these fast cards for?
GTX 680 has bad price = US$500 but $300-350 is good price because it's mid-end = small area of die(much smaller than GTX480/580) and only 256-bit bus memory. Therefore, I don't like that bad price.
um no, it's not, and this is the problem... people who think this is even a half decent improvement. I came from an older card and found 3-4 years down the line it was still damned hard to beat for under £200...lol ARE YOU KIDDING ME!? As it is, I want what I want, so I had to buy what I needed, but I am not happy about it thats for sure... it is 2012.. several generations down the line a £500 STAND ALONE GRAPHICS CARD should yield at least a 300% performance increase over a 4 year old card. I don't wanna piss people off but anybody who thinks otherwise is a moron, or works for Nvidia/ATI
Every time Nvidia and ATI release a new GPU with the past two or three years this argument always comes up that they either did'nt release a high end card or that there is'nt much of an improvement. People said tat the GTX480 was'nt much of an improvement over the GTX280 and they said the GTX580 was'nt much of an improvement over the GTX480. Even if they did release the GK110 GPU as the GTX680 you guys would have something to complain about.
My Old GTX 285 gets completely destroyed by the GTX 670 @ 1080p resolution... and don't even think about turning AA on recent titles on a GTX 285... IIRC, the GTX 285 costed about 399.99 when it came out... (though it was top of the line back then...) I agree the price would of been more reasoanble if the GTX 680 was 399.99 and the GTX 670 was 299.99 Though, if you don't use AA at all, most cards after the GTX 2xx series seems to completely fine @1080p for new games even now. And also, the GTX285 uses more power and it's much louder than the GTX 670...
Most blame would need to go to AMD for their suck ass. Made the 7970 a bit faster than GTX 580 and overpriced it. GK104 was supposed to be an upgrade to GTX 560Ti, but since it's faster than AMD 7970, NV made it GTX 680. I've overpaid enough to NV. I won't give me any more money until I cannot play my games with my GTX 580 1.5GB. GTX 680 should have been $400 or less GTX 670 should have been $300 or less I don't like AMD but I'm starting to hate NV more and more.
Then shouldn't that blame go to NV? The GTX 580 was a bit faster than AMD xxxx and overpriced it, and the 7970 should of been an upgrade to AMD xxxx? Oh wait, then shouldn't that blame go to AMD because that AMD xxxx was a bit fater than NV xxxx and over priced it...? etc. ad infinitum. Lol you see your circular logic?
Why does it sound like people think that if GK110 appeared now it would be the same price as the 680, and the 690/680/670 would go down in price? Even if it did, those three cards would stay the same and the "GTX685" would be priced even higher, as why would they force a price drop on themselves?? Who says GK110 even exists anyway, we haven't heard a new rumour in months, and even if it does i can see it being a workstation card, not a gaming one. People just think GK104 is mid-range because its small, but they are wrong. They are clearly basing it on the broken, brute force Fermi cards of the few years, and don't realise that Nvidia are going out their way to shed this image, and change it into something more "eco-friendly" The GTX690 is the perfect example as it's one of the best dual GPU cards ever, compare that to the GTX490 which never appeared, or the GTX590 which blew up so much that Nvidia eventually gave up and stopped making them.