Quotations, for those who know astronomy. Fighting is logistics. Know yourself and know yourself, and you will win every battle.
Players always like to stare at the performance of the graphics card, but ignore the shopping mall strategy behind it. In fact, the shopping mall strategy behind them is more interesting. Let's start with nv's masterpiece 8800. After amd introduced the 2900, it still lost to the 8800. Nv, like a smug local tyrant, is not motivated. In the past two years, it conquered the world with 8800. After the unprecedented 5 12 bit width of 2900 was also defeated, ati was acquired by amd. At the end of 2007, 3850 and 3870 came out. When 3800 was all distributed, I thought of a strange question. Obviously, the performance of 3870 is very different from that of 8800gt. Why is the price only slightly different, but now 5870 and 5850 are opposite? I'll talk about 5870 and 5850 later. The price-performance ratio of 3870 and the price-performance ratio of 8800gt, there is no doubt that you should buy 8800gt. As anyone in his right mind, he would never think of lowering the price of 8800gt. In this case, if someone suggests lowering the price of 8800gt, it will certainly be ridiculed. But many people ignore another potential killer-3850. Between 3850 and 8600, there is no strength to fight back. 8600 is the worst product in nv in recent years. Look ahead, 6600gt, 7600gt. Even 6600le is not bad. It shouldn't have brought a six at all, because it humiliated all its six predecessors. So 3850 stopped. The 3690 in the back is also good. Amd sacrificed 3870 to resist 8800gt, killed the middle end with 3850, and randomly tested the 55nm process. This is the first battle of the fledgling.
The appearance of 9600gt in the first half of 2008 eased this situation.
G200 came, its performance was unparalleled, its price was high, and it despised the world for a time. It is so high that everyone has to look up to see everything, but this owner has a dead hole, and that is its huge chip. If you aim at its dead hole, it will surely fail.
4800, this real blockbuster. In June 2008, the appearance of 4800 set off a tornado in the graphics card industry, blowing away 9800gtx, but g200 was the most seriously injured. The tall giant has fallen, and the fallen wound has not healed. The combination of performance and price of 4800 is a double-edged sword. Suppose: the price of 4850 conforms to 9800gtx and the price of 4870 conforms to gt260, then 4800 has this capital. That's just that nv's profits were divided up by amd. But the price of 4870 is relative to 260, and 260 is equal to the loss. 260 is killing 10 thousand and losing 12 thousand. Judging from the appearance price of 4800, the power of double swords combined with the wall is really different, which hurts the enemy invisibly. 4850 humiliated 9800gtx, and was forced to drop by the opponent overnight 1000 ocean. I'm afraid it's a rare joke in the IT field, so it won't work. When 9800gtx+ came out three months later, 9800gtx left in a daze. The other company has not avoided the fate of big price cuts. Gt260 and 9800gtx are a couple. He is my brother. The difference is that they have barely survived until now. In fact, they also have secrets. 260 is as big as 280, but it is forced to pay the same price as the smaller 4870 station. Fat people run long distances with thin people, but they can't leave like 9800gtx and dare not fall behind. It's delicious. . . . . 260 was seriously injured, all of which were internal injuries. On the other hand, amd has stood on the same starting line with nv, and on the other hand, it has already taken the lead, that is, let the fat man run with the thin man, and they can't refuse.
For nv people, 5800 is burning Chibi. All the glory of 8800 was taken away by 5800, leaving no shame. Aside from the advantage of 5800, let's look at the other side. The price difference between 5850 and 5870 is 1000, but the performance difference is not big. Why is this happening? This is a tactic. The price of 5870 is like a tiger on the mountain, or an arrow on the string, which leads but does not send. According to the news of g300 now, the cost must exceed 5870, which is beyond doubt, regardless of the rate of return. Assuming the two are the same, g300 will lose the price war. Do you think nv people are willing to sell 260 and 4870 at the same price, killing 10 thousand and losing 12 thousand? At the beginning, 4800 was a latecomer, and now 5800 is a pioneer. The premiere fee of 260 is 4000, which is why the premiere fee was hit by 4870. Now the premiere fee of 5870 is only 3299. How about g300? Compared with 5870, the performance of g300 has certainly not reached the expected goal, otherwise it would have been distributed on paper like 9800gtx+. Now 5800.5700 has superior forces, occupying highlands, laying out battles, and so on. . . . .