backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 66 comment(s) - last by SiliconDoc.. on Mar 13 at 5:01 AM
ATI fights NVIDIA's rebranding with better pricing

DailyTech has learned from industry sources that ATI, the graphics division of AMD, is working with its board partners and several major e-tailers to lower prices on some key products.

The ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB will drop $50 in price, from the $199 segment down to $149. It will compete in this price point primarily against NVIDIA's GTS 250 1GB rebrand using the old G92 chip, variants of which were used in the 8800GT, 9800GT, 9800GTX, 9800GTX+, etc. However, the HD 4870 has been shown to surpass the performance of NVIDIA's GTX 260 line, and value seekers may choose to leave NVIDIA for a better price/performance point.

The Radeon 4870 uses GDDR5 to provide more video memory bandwidth than the GTX260, even though it has more RAM, a wider memory bus, and higher clocked memory.

The ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB will drop to $129, and is designed to compete at the same price point as NVIDIA's GTS 250 512MB version. The Radeon HD 4830 will be replaced by another part soon at a lower price point.

ATI's price cuts are anticipated to take effect early this week. One of our sources indicates that NVIDIA and its partners will unveil GTS250 parts at the CeBit tradeshow in Hannover, Germany on Tuesday.

 

GTX 280

ATI Radeon 4870

GTX 260 Core 216

ATI Radeon HD 4850

9800 GTX+

Stream Processors

240

800

216

800

128

Texture Address / Filtering

80 / 80

40

72/72

40

64 / 64

ROPs

32

16

28

16

16

Core Clock

602MHz

750MHz

576MHz

625MHz

738MHz

Memory Clock

1107MHz

900MHz GDDR5 (3600MHz eff)

999MHz

993MHz GDDR3 (1986MHz eff)

1100MHz

Memory Bus Width

512-bit

256-bit

448-bit

256-bit

256-bit

Frame Buffer

1GB

512MB

896MB

512MB

512MB

Transistor Count

1.4B

956M

1.4B

956M

754M

Price Point

$349

$149

$199

$129

$169

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Woow
By CyberHawk on 3/2/2009 8:11:35 AM , Rating: 2
That much graphics power, for this kind of money!

Awesome!

I just hope prices in Europe will drop for the same amount as in the US.

Time to upgrade. I was thinking about 4850, but I guess I'll go for 4870.




RE: Woow
By FITCamaro on 3/2/2009 10:29:17 AM , Rating: 1
Seriously. I really want to get rid of my dual 8800 GTS 512s with aftermarket coolers and SLI motherboard for a crossfire mobo with dual 4870s.


RE: Woow
By thelostjs on 3/3/2009 8:45:30 AM , Rating: 2
dont kick yourself. i bought a prescott


RE: Woow
By lakrids on 3/2/2009 6:28:08 PM , Rating: 5
Yes. ATI has done a LOT of good for the graphics card market lately.

8 months ago they priced the 4870 to 300$, they could have easily priced them at 410~420$ to match the first version of the gtx260. This forced down the prices of nvidia cards as well.

And now 8 months later, the price has been halved....Seriously how often does this happen?
We actually have a ENTIRE mid/high-end market segment go from a 400$ value to 300$ when RV770 was introduced. And now they give this kind of power to the 150$ segment...This is insane value, and we gained it in so little time thanks to this awesome RV770 chip.

Absolutely incredible, and I'm looking forward to their next generation 200-300$ offers. Awaiting eagerly.


RE: Woow
By murphyslabrat on 3/4/2009 11:09:07 PM , Rating: 2
Welcome to the wonderful world of "Late-bird", for whom all the apples are de-wormed by "Early-bird."


RE: Woow
By Spuke on 3/5/2009 4:37:36 PM , Rating: 2
I may have to rethink my future 260 purchase.


Price Drops
By techsup1 on 3/4/2009 10:41:44 AM , Rating: 2
Has anyone actually seen these price drops go into effect yet? A google search still reveals $200 price range for the 4870.




RE: Price Drops
By plonk420 on 3/6/2009 4:34:01 AM , Rating: 2
in what was probably a stupid move borne out of impatience for the R740/R800, i just ordered a 4870 from The Egg, $150 AR ($10)...


RE: Price Drops
By jskirwin on 3/6/2009 1:00:57 PM , Rating: 2
Picked up a Sapphire 4870 for $153 free shipping from Newegg this week.


RE: Price Drops
By SiliconDoc on 3/13/09, Rating: -1
By DEredita on 3/2/2009 8:13:16 AM , Rating: 2
I hope to see the 2GB 4850x2 and 2GB 4870x2 video cards drop in price this week. I'm waiting up on some sales to build a new computer.




Awesome pricing
By zshift on 3/2/2009 9:35:40 AM , Rating: 2
i bought a 4870 back in december for 230 and i thought it was a great deal. i never considered multi gpu as a real option because of pricing, but $150 for another 4870 would be awesome. All i need is 30" lcd (@2560x1600 of course ;) and ill be set for some awesome gaming

still, it really is tempting even though the only game i can't run at absolute max settings is crysis (which SUCKS in everything aside from graphics, honestly what a s~~~~ game




Hard decision...
By xeroshadow on 3/6/2009 4:05:18 AM , Rating: 2
The only reason I stay with Nvidia is CUDA and physics. Otherwise, I would buy AMD. Nvidia seems to be pushing physics more than Havok but then again I have seen some big titles using Havok(I think Diablo III or Starcraft II will be using Havok). But when I see the price/performance of AMD, I think I am paying too much for Nvidia products.




4870 faster than GTX 260!
By ali 09 on 3/2/09, Rating: -1
RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By dani31 on 3/2/2009 7:33:25 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
at least you don't have to put up with the Catalyst Control Centre


Well you don't have to put up with CCC with ATI either, unless you're the "typical installation" kind of person.

And the other half of the web shows the 4870 overperforming the GTX260 and sometimes the GTX280. Never ending story.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By therealnickdanger on 3/2/2009 7:48:17 AM , Rating: 5
Your mileage may vary.

Different configurations will always yield different performance, different games yield different performance, but from what I've seen, the 4870 is at least equal with the GTX260.

This price adjustment is the best thing I've seen in a long time. $149 MSRP means sub-$120 pricing after rebates. The 4850 will easily be available under $100 very soon. AMD wasn't joking about being "the people's champion". I'll definitely be upgrading soon.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By GlassHouse69 on 3/2/2009 11:05:25 AM , Rating: 2
yeah, nvidia is going to tank worse now. I do not wish it to as they seem to be on the cutting edge of technology, but they also are on the cutting edge of rip-off loyal users technology.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By davekozy on 3/2/2009 11:57:24 AM , Rating: 2
I like Nvidia but this rebranding BS is getting crazy. They have the same GPU's in 8800, 9800, and now 250 series. Makes it very confusing for people.
Get the 1 GB version of the 4870 if you can. It performs much better at high resolutions.


By murphyslabrat on 3/4/2009 11:20:51 PM , Rating: 2
It's pretty much what AMD did with the 2900, 3850, and 4670. There were die shrinks mixed with those steps, just like with NVidia's G92. The only real difference was that AMD made transistor-cuts along the way, instead of a full rebrand.

Although, I am definitely with you on the branding issue when it comes to the mobile segment. I mean, how is it not confusing to "Average Joe" to have a 280M that's not anywhere near the performance of the desktop 280. They've done this all along with mobile GPU's, but it still sucks.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By Targon on 3/2/2009 8:01:49 AM , Rating: 3
What is there to complain about? Do you sit in ANY config program for long before you shut it down?

Some people complain about how long it takes to boot up their computers, but if the computer runs very fast once the OS has finished booting, it becomes a minor point if you do not reboot very often.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By dgingeri on 3/2/2009 8:12:14 AM , Rating: 3
exactly what I was thinking. I have a 4870, and I have no problems with the CCC. I rarely even look at it. I just recently rebuilt my machine. I went in, set the 3D settings, and exited. No big deal.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By omnicronx on 3/2/2009 9:08:23 AM , Rating: 3
I've had just as many troubles with CCC as with Nvidia's control panel. Furthermore who spends time in the control panel after you setup your computer? Buying a graphics card based on the control panel software is pointless. If there are driver issues then sure, but there is nothing specific offered in either control panel that should sway you either way.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By therealnickdanger on 3/2/2009 10:53:08 AM , Rating: 3
I'm asking earnestly because I've never had an issue: what trouble do you get with CCC or NVCP? I've used both as well as alternatives like ATI Tray Tools and other hacked drivers. Aside from some limited overclocking features or more advanced graphics settings, I've never had a problem with CCC/NVCP. What does a problem look like?


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/2009 10:58:38 AM , Rating: 2
Years ago ATI had a bad reputation for crappy drivers and even worse control panels. Maybe that's what he's referring to.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By MikeMurphy on 3/2/2009 12:55:15 PM , Rating: 4
If you don't like CCC then why not just download the bare graphics driver from the ATi website?

You'll notice it available immediately below the CCC package link.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By omnicronx on 3/2/2009 1:37:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Years ago ATI had a bad reputation for crappy drivers and even worse control panels.
Yep, I am, and for Nvidia, their control panel was terribly unstable upon the release of Vista. Currently I have both ATI and Nvidia cards in my two PC setups, and have no problem with either control panel. Some people will always have issues, but from what I can tell neither console has any widespread issues.

The only thing CCC used to lack was a good overscan and underscan tool, which they have now.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/2/2009 8:50:44 AM , Rating: 3
What's wrong with CCC? It used to be slow to launch, but they fixed that problem in one of the early 8.x versions. The only other thing I can think of is that overclocking features are limited, but if you need advanced overclocking features then just use RivaTuner or ATi Tool -- it's not like you are bound to CCC. For typical usage (setting up multiple displays and changing 3D settings) CCC works perfectly, and personally I find it to be laid out much better than the nvidia panel.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By kellehair on 3/2/2009 12:06:32 PM , Rating: 2
I upgraded my 8800GT to an HD4870 512MB a while back. I feel that the CCC is much easier to work with than the Nvidia Control Panel. Overclocking works fine for the limited OC I'm doing and switching between my monitor and TV is much easier.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By hduser on 3/2/2009 12:22:02 PM , Rating: 1
CCC isn't hard to use but difficult to upgrade or get working correctly sometimes. I had CCC 8.08, then upgraded to OEM 8.9 version then tried to upgrade to 8.10 on a clean system. CCC no longer came up. I had to rebuild the system. No amount of uninstalling/reinstalling and registry editing would make CCC work.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By feraltoad on 3/2/2009 1:16:14 PM , Rating: 1
That's been my experience, too; some updates aren't an option. I think it must vary according to the card, hardware, and other software. When it works CCC is wonderful for ease of use, and if it doesn't work it won't even show up. I guess I prefer that to being glitchy. Much prefer CCC over NV's control panel. Both of them have problems with their drivers from time to time, I'm OK as long as I can upgrade my drivers once every few times they get updated.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By omnicronx on 3/2/2009 1:45:09 PM , Rating: 2
As a rule of thumb for all Video cards, new and old, you must uninstall the old drivers and software before you install the new ones.

Even if there is an update option, your best bet is to always start fresh. I used to have the problems all the time, the 1 minute + reboot time it takes to uninstall the old driver is more than worth it. I have not had trouble installing graphics drivers for over two years using this method. Of course sometimes these pesky drivers just won't uninstall, but for the most part they should, and is more than worth the potential hours of wasted time trying to fix the resulting problems.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By The0ne on 3/2/2009 6:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
Something both companies need to fix. How can you not be able to uninstall what you installed in the first place ><!


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By silversound on 3/2/2009 1:46:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think they are on par with each other on performance, but 4870 for only $149, its a better value there


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By walk2k on 3/3/2009 12:31:13 PM , Rating: 2
Not to mention there just aren't many games that need faster video cards for the majority of people using 19"-22" monitors. SLI, please. Unless you have a 30" monitor and want 8zillion xAA (not worth it unless you are taking screenshots maybe) you don't need more than a single mid-range card like 9800 or 260.


RE: 4870 faster than GTX 260!
By kmmatney on 3/4/2009 4:37:05 PM , Rating: 1
Most reviews (at least recent ones) show the 4870 beating the 260 is just about everything. The new Catalyst 9.2 drivers are very good as well. The CCC has also gotten a lot better, IMO. I really don't mind using it now - I've even considered uninstalling ATI Try tools (though I still like some of the ATT options, such as onscreen display).


The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/09, Rating: -1
RE: The Price was Fine
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/2/2009 8:40:51 AM , Rating: 3
Power hog, yes, but it doesn't really run all that hot because the stock cooler is very effective. I have my fan speed locked at 40% and it stays below 60°C at full load.

Still, it would be nice to have a die shrink and cut down the power consumption.


RE: The Price was Fine
By CyberHawk on 3/2/2009 9:05:51 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, but, as there will be a die shrink they will increase frequency and power consumption will stay high - the same.

But I think that temperatures are good - especially if you buy a card what has it's own cooling solution.


RE: The Price was Fine
By omnicronx on 3/2/2009 9:37:37 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I agree, but, as there will be a die shrink they will increase frequency and power consumption will stay high - the same.
That's very doubtful. Many times a die shrink will reduce the power consumption in half (which was the case with latest move of 65nm to 55nm). I can almost guarantee that a die shrink will not result in the 'same' amount of heat being create, regardless of how much they bump up clock speeds.

The bad news here is the word on the street is ATI is that the next revision will not use the 40nm process, so don't count on the die shrink coming anytime soon.


RE: The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/2009 11:55:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The bad news here is the word on the street is ATI is that the next revision will not use the 40nm process, so don't count on the die shrink coming anytime soon.


Boo ! :(


RE: The Price was Fine
By monomer on 3/2/2009 12:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, the rumours are that TSMC is having problems with their 40nm process, which is affecting both Nvidia's and AMD's revisions. Even if they do get them to 40 nm, the power savings and heat reductions are supposedly minimal, so the only real gain would be from a price standpoint.


RE: The Price was Fine
By jsv35 on 3/2/2009 8:19:03 PM , Rating: 2
It seems the same happened when NVIDIA took its G92 to 55nm for the 9800GTX+, it was able to clock higher, but I believe that it didn't actually use any less power or run any cooler. Still it'd be too bad if they didn't move to 40nm.


RE: The Price was Fine
By mindless1 on 3/2/2009 10:01:47 AM , Rating: 2
If you're not willing to accept significant increases in heat for performance, you're buying too far up the video card food chain. You can still underclock it if that's the tradeoff you want to make.

While you think "die shrink", that's what they've already done as we could just contrast "what if it had an even larger die like predecessors".


RE: The Price was Fine
By Staples on 3/2/2009 10:21:59 AM , Rating: 3
The problem is that even at idle, it uses a significant amount of electricity when it is not really necessary as seen with third party tools which clock the card down and cut its power consumption by 1/3 or more. It is ridiculous how much power these cards use when they are doing nothing.


RE: The Price was Fine
By omnicronx on 3/2/2009 10:43:48 AM , Rating: 1
Its called taking advantage of the technology provided. PCIe 2.0 supports 150W draw plus in this case the added 75w 6 pin connector (2 in total for another 150w) gives manufacturers the ability for 300w+ draw. If the technology is there, why not use it? If power is really an issue, that is what the lower models are for. This is a gamers card, plain and simple. This is not uncommon either for what I would consider the tock phase for both companies. Expect a lower power draw for the next series of cards (with the cycle repeating itself once again with the revision of the next core)


RE: The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/2009 10:51:06 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Its called taking advantage of the technology provided.


No it's called inefficient. The per watt performance of these cards is terrible.


RE: The Price was Fine
By GlassHouse69 on 3/2/2009 11:03:15 AM , Rating: 4
Yes, that is the case.

the 260 216 nvidia card is much better in this category. Only problem is the chips are prone to failure, and the company enjoys ripping people off $$$ wise.


RE: The Price was Fine
By StevoLincolnite on 3/2/2009 12:28:34 PM , Rating: 2
I think you would find that the flops/per watt ratio would be in favor of a GPU than a CPU, the GPU when it handles a CPU type task (Like Physics etc) completely wipes the floor with a CPU based implementation, especially if the GPU isn't rendering a complex 3D scene.

Still I agree, the power requirements are a little harsh, however there are IGP's/Low end and Mid-range parts for those who are more energy concerned.


RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/2/2009 12:36:03 PM , Rating: 2
i agree, and furthermore what's happened to nvidias motherboards? especially their igp (for desktop)?

come on folks dont let ati get comfortable their igp has room for improvement. (but you wouldnt know it looking at nvidias offerings)


RE: The Price was Fine
By erple2 on 3/3/2009 5:34:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No it's called inefficient. The per watt performance of these cards is terrible.

Have you actually thought about what you just said?

If you assume that the performance of the GTX260 core 216 is on par with the 4870 1GB model (which I think it is), then at load, they're both consuming similar (anywhere from within 2% to 10%) the same power. How is that terrible performance per watt?

Or are you suggesting that the GTX260 is also terrible performance per watt? If that's your benchmark, then I offer a solution:

No graphics card.

Seriously. Just turn off the computer. Performance per watt is a stunningly undefined!

Performance at idle? What the heck are you buying this card for if you're comparing performance at idle? Just buy the lowest performing graphics card on the market today for that kind of benchmark.


RE: The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: The Price was Fine
By teldar on 3/2/2009 6:32:42 PM , Rating: 2
I think they made some improvements with idle power comsumption with one of their last driver revisions. I'd like to see some new benchmarks re:power with the newest drivers.
You don't see that a whole lot.


RE: The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/2/2009 12:32:49 PM , Rating: 2
what if you are not willing to accept signifigant increases in $$$ for performance? like most people? (with sense)

That's a tradeoff you don't have to make if you own (ati)rv700 series cards though.


RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/2/2009 12:15:42 PM , Rating: 2
anyone posting negatively towards ati in this thread must be angry because of their recent $$$+ nvidia purchase.

so the 4870 uses alot of power at idle.. +30w start saving your pennies...
did you forget to look at power when loaded stats... +15w
remember that the video card is installed not just for looks
its there to be used and used hard
http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517&p=1...
it has more ram than a 260 or 216 or a 295 and more than a 9800 :-P lets not forget that its ram is (5)lightyears ahead of nvidia.
i do own a 4850 512mb. i do rock a 19" crt @ 1792x1344 (more pixels than 1920x1200) and all my games including fallout 3 and a heavily modded oblivion (games that are well known to run faster on nvidia will run on the highest+ settings with between 45-60 vsynced fps.

no matter who you are. bow down to ati and buy a new ati video card for yourself or a friend to show appreciation for their big hit to nvidias pompous prices


RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/2/2009 12:18:26 PM , Rating: 2
unleessss you are a fanboy


RE: The Price was Fine
By DeuceHalo on 3/2/09, Rating: 0
RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/3/2009 8:34:12 AM , Rating: 2
yeah what of it?

i only payed 150 +20 mir
and im enjoying super playable performance for the forseeable future.

if i didnt know any better id say i'll buy the 4850's replacement


RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/3/2009 8:42:35 AM , Rating: 2
if i've been smoked then consider me smoked


RE: The Price was Fine
By KCjoker on 3/2/2009 5:03:37 PM , Rating: 2
Problem is for ATI there isn't really any games that need more power than most already have. So if I am going to buy I'd rather get a card that uses less power which Nvidia does. However again, I'm not buying anything for a while because it's not needed for the current games. The card I have now has plenty enough power for me.


RE: The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/2/2009 9:49:50 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
anyone posting negatively towards ati in this thread must be angry because of their recent $$$+ nvidia purchase.


Not sure how you would come to that conclusion. I said they were great cards. Sorry if pointing out how they pushed an inefficient design ruffled your feathers.

Nvidia has had two cards fail on me. I'm now running a third RMA'd 9800 GT and looking to get out of it. So if you are thinking I'm an Nvidia fanboi, think again.

My point is both the GTX 260 and the 4870 are pretty much dead even on performance depending on who's doing the testing. So if the performance is equal, well your damn right I'm going to look at price, power consumption, operating temps, and build quality. It's not like I'm nitpicking about the color schemes here, these are pretty important factors in my opinion.

Goddamn you guys are so sensitive about your little fav brands sometimes.


RE: The Price was Fine
By thelostjs on 3/3/2009 8:38:29 AM , Rating: 3
my 4850 is my first ati card.
i have had one nvidia card fail me.. after playing around in the video bios..

i really like their value add features..

but i dont see 55-100+ dollars of value add from -30w idle and -15load and physx(at this point)


RE: The Price was Fine
By bankerdude on 3/5/2009 9:47:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Nvidia has had two cards fail on me. I'm now running a third RMA'd 9800 GT and looking to get out of it.


Really? Do you overclock the piss out of your cards, or are you just unlucky? I've never had an Nvidia OR ATI card go bad on me, I even knocked a capacitor off of an old AGP 9800 SE one time and TAPED it back on (my soldering skills suck) and the card still works to this day. Maybe you should stick with integrated graphics.


RE: The Price was Fine
By Reclaimer77 on 3/5/2009 6:14:43 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe you should pay freaking attention to what happens in the world.

Nvidia made a ton of bad GPU's, knew about it and tried to cover it up. Got sued by their shareholders and lost 30% of their stock price overnight.

It's called the NEWS. Might want to pay attention to it sometimes.

And gee, guess what, my video cards that failed had the bad GPU's in them.

quote:
Maybe you should stick with integrated graphics.


Maybe you shouldn't be an ignorant ass and assume things.


RE: The Price was Fine
By bankerdude on 3/6/2009 12:32:30 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, who pissed in your Cheerios, fanboi? So hostile...
quote:
It's called the NEWS. Might want to pay attention to it sometimes.

Oh you mean like this article here: http://www.dailytech.com/Dell+HP+Lists+Reveal+Defe...
quote:
And gee, guess what, my video cards that failed had the bad GPU's in them

Lol, maybe you should set down the crackpipe for a minute and try to discern if there's a difference between MOBILE chips and DESKTOP chips.
quote:
Maybe you shouldn't be an ignorant ass and assume things

I assume you have limited brain capacity and function, but hey, whatever works for you, man.


RE: The Price was Fine
By Cboath11 on 3/9/2009 12:06:22 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry i do not have a link at the ready atm but if you do some more searching around you will find out that the mobile GPU and desktop GPU more than likely used the same underfill, do not know for 100% as NVIDIA will not say if they do or not. But Desktop NVIDIA GPU cards are now starting to fail exactly as the mobile parts did. Laptops are usually hotter than comparable Desktops and get turned on and off alot more. What causes the failures, for the majority, is heat. Comp is turned on, GPU heats up, underfill expands, turned off and it contracts so the high lead underfill and soldering is failing. The connections are breaking way sooner, many years sooner, then they should. An example i read earlier today is to take a fork and bend it back and forth and eventually the metal breaks from the stress.

Because of the differences in how laptops and desktops are normally used it is taking longer for the desktop cards to fail, but they are starting to fail in higher than usual numbers.

Yeah someone is probably going to bash me because the underfill may not be "high lead". I got most of the info from http://www.theinquirer.net/. Granted the person that wrote the article is known to hate NVIDIA and the articles i read are a bit sensational, the basic info seems ot hold out from further googling. But there is a lawsuit concerning the failing parts, sort of. The lawsuit concerns that executives knew about the bad parts but hid that info from investors, securities fraud.


"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki