GTX 1060M Laptop Pricing

[Aereldor]

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

and this is why I don't buy gaming laptops.

 

thanks NVidia. Now I won't ever buy an NVidia mobile gpu. Oh and you can forget about making me buy NVidia desktop gpus

It was quite a feat of engineering, cramming a full desktop GTX 980 in there while still meeting the power requirements.

That being said-

NVidia giving up on budget laptops might leave an opening for AMD to exploit with their RX M4** mobile GPUs.

[D2ultima]

3 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

and this is why I don't buy gaming laptops.

 

thanks NVidia. Now I won't ever buy an NVidia mobile gpu. Oh and you can forget about making me buy NVidia desktop gpus

What is why?

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

Why was anybody ok with this abusive pricing? $3000 for a 980 for notebooks? It better include an a top tier Xeon CPU with 32GB RAM and 3GB/s 1TB PCI-E SSD.

I don't know who you thought was OK with it, but when there's no alternative, and some people need portable power, you get to call your shots.

 

Why aren't YOU bitching about the $700 Scammer's edition 1080 and the overpriced, $1200 Titan X Pascal, with no double precision, garbage video BIOS, garbage cooling design (the cooler is a damn hunk but it's not good ENOUGH for that card; it should have been watercooled), and power limited even at stock with nearly secure-flashed vBIOS so people can't actually unlock ?

 

There's no point bitching about prices anymore, because AMD refuses to compete, PERIOD. They can call whatever they want and people LITERALLY lap it up. There's more out-of-stock, $700+ 1080s than there are in-stock ones on newegg. Titan XPs are sold out.

 

I think you have a lot more bitching to do.

 

[AlTech]

14 minutes ago, D2ultima said:

What is why?

I don't know who you thought was OK with it, but when there's no alternative, and some people need portable power, you get to call your shots.

 

Why aren't YOU bitching about the $700 Scammer's edition 1080 and the overpriced, $1200 Titan X Pascal, with no double precision, garbage video BIOS, garbage cooling design (the cooler is a damn hunk but it's not good ENOUGH for that card; it should have been watercooled), and power limited even at stock with nearly secure-flashed vBIOS so people can't actually unlock ?

 

There's no point bitching about prices anymore, because AMD refuses to compete, PERIOD. They can call whatever they want and people LITERALLY lap it up. There's more out-of-stock, $700+ 1080s than there are in-stock ones on newegg. Titan XPs are sold out.

 

I think you have a lot more bitching to do.

 

I did complain about the Titan X Pascal. Also, the 1080 FE should have been the $599 GTX 1080 IMHO........

[D2ultima]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

I did complain about the Titan X Pascal. Also, the 1080 FE should have been the $599 GTX 1080 IMHO........

That's STILL too expensive.

 

Gx1x4 was always cheap.

 

9800GTX+ - $200

GTX 260 - $250

GTX 460 1GB - $230

GTX 560Ti - $250

GTX 680 - $500

GTX 980 - $550

GTX 1080 - $600, w/ $700 reference design useless price bump.

 

Wanna know what happened inbetween the 560Ti and the 680? AMD launched Tahiti, the 7970 for $549. It didn't beat the 680.

 

Instead of launching GK100, the flagship, as they usually do, they launched GK104, because it beat AMD's best, with a huge reduction in power draw, at double the price they normally would.

 

Then they hiked up the GK110 cards to $700 for the 780 (and later 780Ti) and $1000 for the Titan (and later Titan Black) because the Titans had Double Precision capabilities which was cut from Kepler (and existed on Fermi and earlier).

 

AMD never caught up. They've been literally playing catch-up and harping on their honestly mediocre at best GCN architecture, which is built for tech that is so far from being here that every single current card from the RX 480 to the R9 Fury X to every card below it will be ABSOLUTELY obsolete when time to make use of it happens.

 

And without actual competition, nVidia has been just hiking up the price every flipping year, with fucking IDIOTS saying shit like "omg, $700, such aggressive pricing on the 1080! And it's so strong!" Yeah, aggressive to see how much you'd fork over for a midranged video card, you damn dipshit, do some research before blowing $700 on something you barely understand.

 

Anyway. Like I said. You're not even beginning to start bitching at them efficiently enough. The fact that you think the 1080 should have been $600 is proof enough. That card should be $400 or less. I'm not even going to be so mean as to say $250, but that pricing is ridiculous. And they only do the bare minimum to improve Each time. They constantly consistently, without fail, do the exact bare minimum to make sure their stuff is "working" (working for you and me and them are different things, mind) and then charge exorbitant prices for them. When they used drivers to block 3rd party programs from adopting NVIBR and NVFBC into their capture code, effectively giving almost free performance hits when hooking to games to record, nobody complained. When they force obsolescence on their old cards and hurt AMD badly by using ridiculous amounts of tessellation on everything in their "gameworks" titles, because Maxwell tessellated FAR better than Kepler and Pascal now tessellates FAR better than Maxwell (which is why in games like Witcher 3 vs non-tessellation-heavy games, you'll see 1080s shifting from 60-70% better than a 980 to 70-80% better), effectively producing the viewpoint in their consumer base that their old cards are worse than they appear, just to push sales of their new products? People didn't complain. Nobody big and important, anyway. When they released Maxwell (and to a lesser extent Pascal) with a voltage variance trick for their low TDP on midranged cards, which is INCREDIBLY unstable, so much so that people got crashes when their voltage did not ramp back up quick enough, especially overclocked or in SLI configurations? Nobody complained. NOBODY.

 

What about when Maxwell killed SLI AA entirely, and replaced CSAA with MFAA (which doesn't work in SLI), and introduced DSR and Gsync (which didn't work in SLI for over a year and a half), and due to Maxwell's voltage variance crap added disclaimers that different voltages in SLI "offered no benefit to the consumer to fix" but in fact made them so ridiculously unstable until a LONG time after when their drivers and aftermarket cards actually kind of caught up to the crap, or when they made the 970s have different BUS IDs depending on reference/blower style, superclocked style, or top-end overclocking-ready styles like EVGA K1NGP1N and Classified or MSI Lightning types, and each "kind" of BUS ID had to be paired with each other, so you could only choose two blower styles or two superclocked styles or two top end styles or SLI WOULDN'T WORK without hacking it using differentSLIAuto, nobody gave an absolute shit.

 

So yeah. Nobody gave enough shits, so they can do what they want. Complaining right now is useless, honestly.

[Synth3D]

If Nvidia are charging 5 times the price of the Desktop GPU, they are neglecting a huge amount of budget gamers and it could potentially have a negative effect on sales.

 

Many people may opt for a desktop GPU in a smaller form factor case, I recently saw a deal on a prebuilt computer with a Thermaltake CoreV21 Case, an I5-6500 and a GTX 1060 6GB for £599.

 

[Aereldor]

8 minutes ago, Synth3D said:

Nvidia are charging 5 times the price of the Desktop GPU

For AN ENTIRE LAPTOP. It's not great, but you can hardly compare it by stacking up the cost of five individual GTX 1060s.

[Synth3D]

36 minutes ago, Aereldor said:

For AN ENTIRE LAPTOP. It's not great, but you can hardly compare it by stacking up the cost of five individual GTX 1060s.

 

If you compare the price of the MSI laptop on Newegg to the prebuilt computer I saw at £599GBP/$776.50USD, it is over double the price. 

 

It is overkill for a gaming laptop unless you play The Witcher 3 or Crysis 3 99% of the time and even The Witcher 3 uses less than 2GB of VRAM on Ultra at 1080p. There are a huge percentage of people on Steam with low to mid range hardware, Nvidia are making a mistake by shutting the door on budget gamers unless they cram a 1050 in a laptop and price it at a competitive price.

 

Edit: I just read that Nvidia are pushing 120hz screens on the new laptops, the 1060 makes sense in that case I don't think that it is great price-performance ratio at $1799.99, I think $1300-1500 is competitive pricing. However, Nvidia won't have any competition for a couple of months and there will always be a few gaming enthusiasts that will break the bank for one of the first 120hz G-Sync gaming laptops.

[D2ultima]

41 minutes ago, Synth3D said:

Many people may opt for a desktop GPU in a smaller form factor case, I recently saw a deal on a prebuilt computer with a Thermaltake CoreV21 Case, an I5-6500 and a GTX 1060 6GB for £599.

Honestly, there's no way that's the price of everything you get in the laptop. Laptops have keyboard, mice (yes trackpads count), monitors, batteries, wifi cards, etc. They ARE much more expensive, make no bones about that, but a barebones desktop kit is not a fair comparison.

 

Gaming laptops are for people who need the portability, or just REALLY like laptops. That's it. They were different in the past, in the 700M series with the socketed CPUs, but now they're just not something I recommend lightly.