Price fall in Graphics Cards soon?

[safeer1982]

Hello,

someone informed me that there are a new batch of (DirectX10?) graphics
cards coming out soon and these will affect the prices of current
cards, i.e. - make them cheaper, as the technology is slightly older

is this true?

when are these cards likely to come out?

by how much will e.g. an ATI X1950 come down by (currently retaling for
~ £120)?

Advice appreciated

thanks

 

[You Know Who ~]

I just picked up a video card for $39 that cost $180 just a couple of years
ago. Prices keep falling on these things (of course new cards have more
features). I wouldn't wait, I'd just buy.


--
----------------------------------------------------
Advice is what we ask for when we already know the answer but wish we
didn't.
Erica Jong


Hello,

someone informed me that there are a new batch of (DirectX10?) graphics
cards coming out soon and these will affect the prices of current
cards, i.e. - make them cheaper, as the technology is slightly older

is this true?

when are these cards likely to come out?

by how much will e.g. an ATI X1950 come down by (currently retaling for
~ £120)?

Advice appreciated

thanks

 

[kony]

Hello,

someone informed me that there are a new batch of (DirectX10?) graphics
cards coming out soon and these will affect the prices of current
cards, i.e. - make them cheaper, as the technology is slightly older

is this true?

Yes, just as the current cards made the prior generation
cheaper, and the generation after the first DX10 cards will
make the first-gen DX10 cheaper too.

This is a continual process, nothing new about this point in
time.

when are these cards likely to come out?

by how much will e.g. an ATI X1950 come down by (currently retaling for
~ £120)?

Advice appreciated

It's not really worth waiting, because a card depreciates
due to it's relative value. Once it gets cheaper it's
really worth less, so if all you're really wanting is the
best value for $X, you might as well buy it when you need
it, not a moment sooner or later (unless you had a need to
build a new system at any given time and lack a video card
for it).

To more directly answer, here's an example of an ATI
roadmap, if you want others that're potentially more up to
date then Google search for "ATI Roadmap"
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4188
Just keep in mind that when a product first appears on the
market it tends to be a lot closer to retail price than the
normalized price it'll hit a few months later, so if you are
waiting for next gen product to depreciate current gen you
will have to wait not just till the next gen is released but
also nearly until it has dropped from the market entry
pricepoint which could be several months away.

 

[Michael C]

It's not really worth waiting, because a card depreciates
due to it's relative value. Once it gets cheaper it's
really worth less, so if all you're really wanting is the
best value for $X, you might as well buy it when you need
it, not a moment sooner or later (unless you had a need to
build a new system at any given time and lack a video card
for it).

This point in time is a little different though in that we've had directX 9
for so long and 10 is just coming out now.

Michael

 

[Ken Maltby]

This point in time is a little different though in that we've had directX
9 for so long and 10 is just coming out now.

Michael

Another question is whether DirectX10 will be of much value
without Vista? And if it has DRM or other nasty surprises
embedded in it.

Luck;
Ken

 

[kony]

Another question is whether DirectX10 will be of much value
without Vista? And if it has DRM or other nasty surprises
embedded in it.

DX10 won't be of use without Vista, but such a newer card
may have HDCP support, better HD video acceleration, smaller
process size for lower heat at any given performance level,
or even more transistors, pipes, etc for better performance
in the same class/tier of card... performance gains on DX9
too, not just DX10.

Not sure what you meant about "it" having DRM or other nasty
surprises... Vista does of course, it's doubtful it would
be necessary to add more redundantly into DX10.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...


DX10 won't be of use without Vista, but such a newer card
may have HDCP support, better HD video acceleration, smaller
process size for lower heat at any given performance level,
or even more transistors, pipes, etc for better performance
in the same class/tier of card... performance gains on DX9
too, not just DX10.

Not sure what you meant about "it" having DRM or other nasty
surprises... Vista does of course, it's doubtful it would
be necessary to add more redundantly into DX10.

Anyone even considering Vista should read the following URL:

--
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>

"A man who is right every time is not likely to do very much."
-- Francis Crick, co-discover of DNA
"There is nothing more amazing than stupidity in action."
-- Thomas Matthews

 

[Noozer]

DX10 won't be of use without Vista, but such a newer card

Anyone even considering Vista should read the following URL:
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>

.... and to take this one step further...

Anyone who's considered trying out Linux to get away from all this Microsoft
BS should give SuSE 10.2 a try.

Out of all the Linux installations I've done, this had to have been the
simplest and most productive "out of the box" that I've ever seen.

 

[kony]

Anyone even considering Vista should read the following URL:

I'd not recommend Vista to anyone but a gamer with a 2nd
system they could devote to it, and only that once games
have any significant advantage using DX10.

Vista is like a virus that infects XP, consumes a few gigs
of HDD space and a few hundred MB of memory then
continuously degrades performance while it interferes with
normal system uses.

 

[Interesting Ian]

I'd not recommend Vista to anyone but a gamer with a 2nd
system they could devote to it, and only that once games
have any significant advantage using DX10.

Vista is like a virus that infects XP, consumes a few gigs
of HDD space and a few hundred MB of memory then
continuously degrades performance while it interferes with
normal system uses.

I haven't upgraded apart from monitor since I bought my system back in May
2002. So was thinking of splashing out £1000 or so on a new PC (minus
monitor) within the next few weeks. I was thinking of getting a DX10 card
and vista and having vista on one partition of my hard drive to play games,
and XP on the other partition for everything else.

Is this a good idea or do you reckon I should just avoid DX10 cards and
Vista altogether?

 

[Rod Speed]

Usual mindless rabid bigotry.

I'd not recommend Vista to anyone but a gamer with
a 2nd system they could devote to it, and only that
once games have any significant advantage using DX10.

Vista is like a virus that infects XP, consumes a few gigs of
HDD space and a few hundred MB of memory then continuously
degrades performance while it interferes with normal system uses.

The same mindless claim was made about XP too.

 

[Ken Maltby]

I haven't upgraded apart from monitor since I bought my system back in May
2002. So was thinking of splashing out £1000 or so on a new PC (minus
monitor) within the next few weeks. I was thinking of getting a DX10 card
and vista and having vista on one partition of my hard drive to play
games, and XP on the other partition for everything else.

Is this a good idea or do you reckon I should just avoid DX10 cards and
Vista altogether?

At this point, I don't think reliable answers are available.
I predict "interesting times" for early adopters. While that
is always a safe prediction, there are factors at play, in this
arena, that will make things especially 'interesting".

Just an opinion.

Luck;
Ken

 

[Interesting Ian]

At this point, I don't think reliable answers are available.
I predict "interesting times" for early adopters. While that
is always a safe prediction, there are factors at play, in this
arena, that will make things especially 'interesting".

Just an opinion.

Luck;
Ken

I'm just wondering if I should settle for a dx9 card at the moment and get a
dx10 card (and vista) in 12-18 months time. That'll give sufficient time
for all the bugs to be sorted. dx9 will be an improvement for me since I've
only ever seen dx8 graphics (my current card is a ti4200)

 

[kony]

I haven't upgraded apart from monitor since I bought my system back in May
2002. So was thinking of splashing out £1000 or so on a new PC (minus
monitor) within the next few weeks. I was thinking of getting a DX10 card
and vista and having vista on one partition of my hard drive to play games,
and XP on the other partition for everything else.

Is this a good idea or do you reckon I should just avoid DX10 cards and
Vista altogether?

A *serious* gamer will eventually want Vista for DX10. That
point in time will be when games offer a significantly
better experience on DX10. I can't predict that point in
time with any degree of accuracy but it is probably not
going to be within the next 12 months.

If the card you want happens to be DX10, that might be a
reasonable forward-looking choice but today Vista doesn't
hold anything compelling a gamer would want. Therefore,
considering the high price of the full retail versions I
personally would wait until another system upgrade had
passed then get the OEM version at that point in time.

 

[kony]

I'm just wondering if I should settle for a dx9 card at the moment and get a
dx10 card (and vista) in 12-18 months time. That'll give sufficient time
for all the bugs to be sorted. dx9 will be an improvement for me since I've
only ever seen dx8 graphics (my current card is a ti4200)

It might depend a bit more on what your use is for the
upgrade, since a TI4200 isn't much of a gaming card these
days I'm suspecting you aren't gaming very often or at least
not anything that would have DX10 benefits, and you moreso
than some would be as well off not buying vista yet, and
whether a DX10 card or not would depend on what you can get
for the budget since DX10 cards will be priced higher early
into their market cycle.

 

[kony]

The same mindless claim was made about XP too.

Nope, XP only consumes a few dozen (if that) more MB memory
and without system restore, less than 1GB more HDD space.

It is somewhat a similar situation though, in that someone
not appreciating the features XP brings over Win2k, has no
real reason to upgrade, though XP can be pared back to be
close to the same load and invasiveness level as 2K, while
the same cannot be said about Vista to XP.

 

[Rod Speed]

Nope,

Yep, PRECISELY the same utterly silly claim was
made about XP when it was just released too.

XP only consumes a few dozen (if that) more MB memory
and without system restore, less than 1GB more HDD space.

Irrelevant to whether PRECISELY the same utterly silly
claim was made about XP when it was just released too with
regard to the claim that there was bugger all to gain with XP,
PRECISELY the same stupid claim you made in the last line
of the first para of yours, now at the top of the quoting.

It is somewhat a similar situation though, in that someone
not appreciating the features XP brings over Win2k, has no
real reason to upgrade, though XP can be pared back to be
close to the same load and invasiveness level as 2K, while
the same cannot be said about Vista to XP.

Irrelevant to that stupid pig ignorant claim you made at the top.

 

[kony]

Yep, PRECISELY the same utterly silly claim was
made about XP when it was just released too.

What is it that makes you feel I'd care if you consider it
silly? The evidence is plain to see if one takes off their
blinders.

 

[Rod Speed]

What is it that makes you feel I'd care if you consider it silly?

Because PRECISELY the same utterly silly claim
was made about XP when it was just released too.

That claim in the last sentance of your original para is just plain silly, as I said.

The evidence is plain to see if one takes off their blinders.

PRECISELY the same utterly silly claim was
made about XP when it was just released too.

 

[Interesting Ian]

It might depend a bit more on what your use is for the
upgrade, since a TI4200 isn't much of a gaming card these
days I'm suspecting you aren't gaming very often or at least
not anything that would have DX10 benefits, and you moreso
than some would be as well off not buying vista yet, and
whether a DX10 card or not would depend on what you can get
for the budget since DX10 cards will be priced higher early
into their market cycle.

Yeah I haven't really played any games for the past 2 years. But there's a
few games coming out soon which I'd like to play. I'll prob just get a dx9
card now and replace it with a dx10 card in about 18 months.