How many of you have bought a current gen graphics card?

[spicy little monkey]

How much did you spend, and did you think it was worth it?

I still use a Geforce 1080 Ti.

[Illusion of Progress]

Mitsuha lähetti viestin:

How much did you spend, and did you think it was worth it?

I still use a Geforce 1080 Ti.

Yes, I did find it worth it, but I was still on a Pascal like you, and one much worse off than yours with a GTX 1060. I went to an RX 7800 XT so needless to say it was a substantial difference. I went with the Nitro+ so I spend $560.

While I'm super impressed with performance, I think I'm just as impressed with thermals and noise levels. My (EVGA) GTX 1060 ran quiet, but warm. Safe, but warm. The default fan curve/BIOS was tame as it prioritized noise levels, which I prefer. I also run my case fans at lower voltage/speed for the same reason, so part of me was figuring a graphics card with well over twice the power consumption was going to result in some combination of similar temperatures or higher noise. Yet it runs just as quiet (maybe quieter?) and much cooler at the same time.

Like you, I don't tend to upgrade often, since I don't chase performance for the sake of it, and I share in what you said in a later post and prefer to get closer to triple digit percentage uplifts in performance when I upgrade, as less than that doesn't register as much for me (for reference, my past upgrades of 8800 GT to GTX 560 Ti, and then that to GTX 1060 didn't feel too substantial for me at the times).

The GTX 1060 lasted me just shy of seven years though so I can't say anything bad about it. I might have upgraded sooner, but every generation after Pascal had some reason for people to wait it out. The RTX 20 series was only one generation later, and saw price hikes. The RTX 30 series was the earliest most would consider upgrading, but cryptocurrency mining set pricing to the moon, and by time that passed, I decided to hold out for the upcoming generation on the horizon. I'm glad I did, much as I may have wanted to upgrade sooner. The RTX 30 series was still a poor value after price drops, and had serious VRAM deficiencies. Unfortunately, price/performance with this generation was a low uplift too, but it had gotten to the point the overall uplift was well warranted.

With you having a GTX 1080 you might be able to sit longer. I think that's the one graphics chip in the Pascal generation still hanging on. If I had one, I might have been waiting still and hoping next generation is a decent enough uplift (I'm slightly skeptical though, outside nVidia finally offering decent levels of VRAM now that pricing is on the floor for it). You'll know when the time is right. Someone else said it above and I absolutely agree with it, and that is trust your own feeling on this. Buy when you find a worthwhile uplift at a price you agree with.

[Karumati]

Show-NO-MerCy lähetti viestin:

When i was young and started building my own pc's, i upgraded to every new GPU.
What i learned is that upgrading to the latest hardware always gives problems with drivers and not optimized software. Games crashes and blue screens, and constantly tweaking stuff.
If you want to trow money out of the window, buying hardware is the way to go !
Nothing is losing value faster that hardware or cars, or you have to buy crypto at the top :)
I never buy high end graphics cards again ! Why because Nvidia broke the gaming pc market with insane prices ! The ones that pay 1800$ for a GPU are nuts :)

Depends how much you are willing to invest into the hobby. Applies to cars, gaming and every other hobby

[secuda]

Bought a 7600 last week went from 1070ti, and i am pretty happy with it. Atleast i can run most games at 4k now. It cost me €350 on rabate.

[spicy little monkey]

Tiberius lähetti viestin:

If you're thinking the next gen card is gon consume less pwr and cost less, boy, you better be ready for disappointment

It.. factually will consume less power. It's using a more efficient node. 3nm instead of 5nm renamed as 4nm.

[deadshooter]

got a RX 7600 by ASUS a month ago. Decent upgrade from 3050. Cost me about $330 with free copy of Starfield in bundle.

Current pricing in GPU market is not great... I'm happy with the card, but not with the price.

[nullable]

deadshooter lähetti viestin:

got a RX 7600 by ASUS a month ago. Decent upgrade from 3050. Cost me about $330 with free copy of Starfield in bundle.

Current pricing in GPU market is not great... I'm happy with the card, but not with the price.

All things considered, given the position of the card, inflation, etc and a MSRP $269 USD. You add in whatever aftermarket tweaks, cooling, and other jazz (a "free" AAA game). $330 doesn't seem like a terrible price. Arguably for the price of Starfield being $70 USD you came out ten dollars ahead if you had found a $269 version with no frills and had to buy Starfield separate.

I dunno in some cases I think people get so used to grousing about GPU prices every deal seems terrible. In 2016 a GeForce 1060 6GB MSRP'd for $249 and there were probably $300 versions easy. And I kinda feel like the RX7600 is in an equivalent spot in the lineup. So again the price doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

I guess what do you think the price ought to be? And what makes you think that?

[deadshooter]

nullable lähetti viestin:

All things considered, given the position of the card, inflation, etc and a MSRP $269 USD. You add in whatever aftermarket tweaks, cooling, and other jazz (a "free" AAA game). $330 doesn't seem like a terrible price. Arguably for the price of Starfield being $70 USD you came out ten dollars ahead if you had found a $269 version with no frills and had to buy Starfield separate.

I dunno in some cases I think people get so used to grousing about GPU prices every deal seems terrible. In 2016 a GeForce 1060 6GB MSRP'd for $249 and there were probably $300 versions easy. And I kinda feel like the RX7600 is in an equivalent spot in the lineup. So again the price doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

the main problem with pricing for me - it's not the mid-level card like 1060 was. There is no anything lower than 7600 in product line, so it's the entry-level GPU despite having digit 6 in the name. And entry-level should be about 150-180.

MSRP btw somewhat nonexistent outside the US.

[nullable]

Well I understand the reasoning. I don't entirely agree with it in this case. The lowest sku on the list doesn't mean it's equivalent to a 1050 or 1030 or some entry level AMD card. Or should be priced at a specific point because back in the day the lowest end card was $150, it seems to ignore a few asterisks with how things have changed over the last 6-7 years.

Regardless the RX 7600 is competitive with RTX 4060. And I don't think you can point at the product line to argue price, when ultimately performance is usually a better indicator. Competitive products will often have competitive prices. That's not a new thing.

I mean the RTX 4060 is the lowest desktop sku too at the moment. There's no desktop 4050 or 4030 either. I just think entry level cards aren't being produced like they used to be. If there is going to be a 4050 and an equivalent RX 7500 that would also kinda shoot holes in your arguments. The entry level hardware tended to be released last/later anyway.

[deadshooter]

nullable lähetti viestin:

I mean the RTX 4060 is the lowest desktop sku too at the moment. There's no desktop 4050 or 4030 either. I just think entry level cards aren't being produced like they used to be. If there is going to be a 4050 and an equivalent RX 7500 that would also kinda shoot holes in your arguments. The entry level hardware tended to be the last to be released anyway.

AFAIK, AMD has no plans to release any new GPUs in 7000s series product line. So 7600 will be starter level gear just by being lowest tier. 4050 is another story, but leaked specs (6 Gb VRAM and 96-bit bus) made it dead on arrival.

nullable lähetti viestin:

Regardless the RX 7600 is competitive with RTX 4060. And I don't think you can point at the product line to argue price, when ultimately performance is usually a better indicator. Competitive products will often have competitive prices. That's not a new thing.

Speaking of performance - it's increase from 6000 series is pretty small to justify 300+ price tag.

The entry level hardware tended to be the last to be released anyway - last, but not least. It's the most massive segment of the market in terms of quantities sold.

[Illusion of Progress]

I'm mixed on that myself. I absolutely agree that getting hung up on the technical specifications or names is a bit arbitrary and would be missing the forest for the trees, because the price for performance (and price/performance/VRAM maybe for some) is what ultimately matters. But that factor also feels disappointing to a degree (and I'd say more so on nVidia's side with VRAM as it is). Look at the RTX 4060 over the RTX 3060, or the 7800 XT over the 6800 XT. Both are rather disappointing uplifts over their predecessor (sometimes, if at all), but both are also about some of the best values in their price segment despite it. So I guess I can see it both ways.

I think it's a mix of gains being harder to get, at least economically, but I also think nVidia and AMD are giving the least possible amount of uplift they thing the market will tolerate because the previous generation coincided with a demand surge (both because of lockdowns plus cryptocurrency mining) and it left them in the tough spot of needing to bring out a new generation without cannibalizing themselves in the process. So I guess I'm hoping this generation being a smaller uplift is partly because of that.

To a point, the x60s/x600 tiers from nVidia/AMD respectively, at least the non Ti and XT versions of them, are feeling more like entry level gaming chips rather than "the" midrange spot they used to be. This is both because there's more tiers atop them (introduction of x90/x900 tiers), and the production of tiers below them are falling out from under them (improving integrated graphics and the cost of products below the x60 not being as worthwhile to make anymore).

Just speaking as someone who used to buy particularly at the x60 tier for nVidia and found they always hit the mark, but the RTX 3060/4060 were just not appealing for some reason or another. The former gives the VRAM you want, but less of the price/performance, and the latter is the inverse. Of course, maybe Pascal (what I had before) being slightly generous with VRAM is skewing my perception, but it does seem nVidia goes through this cycle of being stingy on VRAM and the last generation or two seems to be that time again (Kepler was the time before it).

[Illusion of Progress]

deadshooter lähetti viestin:

AFAIK, AMD has no plans to release any new GPUs in 7000s series product line. So 7600 will be starter level gear just by being lowest tier.

Just want to clarify that what AMD stated here was no new "chips". There's Navi 31 (7900 series), Navi 32 (7700 and 7800 series), and Navi 33 (7600 series), and they won't be developing any new ones beyond those.

This doesn't means no new products will ever come out; just that if they do, they would be based on existing chips rather than new ones.

[Tiberius]

Mitsuha lähetti viestin:

Tiberius lähetti viestin:

If you're thinking the next gen card is gon consume less pwr and cost less, boy, you better be ready for disappointment

It.. factually will consume less power. It's using a more efficient node. 3nm instead of 5nm renamed as 4nm.

Yea like how the jump from 8nm ampere to 5nm adalovelace reduce the power consumption 🙄

[Karumati]

Tiberius lähetti viestin:

Mitsuha lähetti viestin:

It.. factually will consume less power. It's using a more efficient node. 3nm instead of 5nm renamed as 4nm.

Yea like how the jump from 8nm ampere to 5nm adalovelace reduce the power consumption 🙄

power consumption is not important, what is important is fps that card provides

[spicy little monkey]

Tiberius lähetti viestin:

Mitsuha lähetti viestin:

It.. factually will consume less power. It's using a more efficient node. 3nm instead of 5nm renamed as 4nm.

Yea like how the jump from 8nm ampere to 5nm adalovelace reduce the power consumption 🙄

It did. Undervolt / reduce the clockrate of the 4090 by just a little and it'll draw 300 watts or less, while being significantly faster than the 3090 / 3090 Ti.

Did the 3090 Ti run at 3000mhz like a 4090 can? No. So you're comparing apples and oranges.

It can be the most efficient manufacturing process in the universe and you can still make a card draw 1000 watts if you increase the clocks / voltage high enough.

As Karumati said, it's not relevant. What matters is the performance you get for that same power draw.

[Tiberius]

Mitsuha lähetti viestin:

Tiberius lähetti viestin:

Yea like how the jump from 8nm ampere to 5nm adalovelace reduce the power consumption 🙄

It did. Undervolt / reduce the clockrate of the 4090 by just a little and it'll draw 300 watts or less, while being significantly faster than the 3090 / 3090 Ti.

Did the 3090 Ti run at 3000mhz like a 4090 can? No. So you're comparing apples and oranges.

It can be the most efficient manufacturing process in the universe and you can still make a card draw 1000 watts if you increase the clocks / voltage high enough.

As Karumati said, it's not relevant. What matters is the performance you get for that same power draw.

A better comparison would be a tdp of two undervolted gpus but whatd i knw abt steams logic