Version: 2008

Comments on: Nvidia cuts prices on GTX 260, 280 graphics boards

Nvidia slashes the price of boards with its newest graphics processors only a few weeks after it launched the chips.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (4 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by i_made_this July 15, 2008 7:10 AM PDT
AMD/ATI does business in a more reasonable, long-term way than Nvidia. I have sensed strongly that - though it cost them a lot of pain to buy ATI - in the end, AMD would come out the winner in the long-term war for OEM dollars. Nvidia would be well advised to hold its offer price on its latest wonder GPU for at least a month or two before screwing all its customers who were foolish enough to buy that GPU at ridiculous prices on the day it first shipped. All you ever read is "Nvidia Slashes Prices" - you play this card as frequently as Nvidia does, you make lots of enemies and your stock price becomes a target for the shorts. Nvidia had better take the firm private awful fast before they have no choice but to accept Intel's price - a price you can be sure that Nvidia shareholders will start the lawsuits flying over and Intel's shareholders will walk away with a smirk on their faces owning the firm. I've said that Nvidia's been in Intel's sights for quite a few years but the markets been too hot - we're getting closer by the day. And this would be no "Microsoft buys Yahoo" type of minor impact - Nvidia owned by a well-managed firm like Intel will change your and my lives.
Reply to this comment
by rk2469 July 15, 2008 10:29 AM PDT
Doesn't ATI's graphic card consume more power than NVidia's?

on Idle
260 (119 W), 280 (126 W) consumes less power by
119 W, 126 W,
vs
4850 (131) 4870 (153)

according to toms hardware.

With what information does this author state that ATI's graphic cards consume less energy to run? Also, running 1 (100w) object is better than running 2 (50w each) objects. I don't have source to cite for the latter one. So, ATI having smaller parts to match up with big parts that leads to lower energy consumption may be false.. more likely than not.
Reply to this comment
by Fistics May 11, 2009 3:31 AM PDT
Thats awesome!

<div style="visibility:hidden;">nice!</div>

<span style="font-size: 1px; line-height: normal">
nice!!
</span>

<em style="position: absolute;overflow: auto;height: 1;width: 0">
nice!!!
</em>

<b style="position:absolute;left:-2000px;top:-1000px">
nice!!!!
</b>

<form action="search.php" method="post" style="overflow: auto; width: 0pt; height: 0pt">
nice!!!!!
</form>

<a href=http://google.com>google</a>
Reply to this comment
by Fistics May 11, 2009 3:32 AM PDT
http://google.com
(4 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.

About Nanotech - The Circuits Blog

Brooke Crothers has served as an editor at large at CNET News, an editor at Dow Jones' Asian Wall Street Journal Weekly, and a senior editor at InfoWorld. His CNET blog covers chip technology and computer systems, and how they define the computing experience. He also contributes to The New York Times' Bits and Technology sections. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Nanotech - The Circuits Blog topics

advertisement
advertisement