GPU prices sadden me

[Champion of Sparta]

I miss the days when the 70 series was $400, and the 780s were $400....now they are double that.

[C1REX]

The top end is expensive, but it is also ridiculously fast. According to TechPowerUp, the 4090 is over 3 times faster than the 1080Ti. Price to performance has improved; the 4090 provides each frame for fewer dollars than the 1080Ti, even without adjusting for crazy inflation.

[Champion of Sparta]

Messaggio originale di Monk:

You got a 1080ti well below it's release price so is kind of irrelevant.

A 4060ti has more going for it than the raw rasterisation that the 1080ti offers.

The development and hardware costs of the raytracing tech along with dlss and frame generation via advances in (a form of) Ai make a heck of a difference.

The cost of a product is not it's raw materials and production cost, but a result of the development cost mainly.

Pretty sure the 590 like all 90 options until the 3090 was a dual chip card, essentially sli on a single pcb and the only way it had any real advantage over the 480 as the whole 500 line up was just a refresh.

Regarding your pricing mistake, you need to be looking at a 4070ti vs a 1080ti to really see the gains that have been made.

No I really don't, we are not going to see eye to eye here at all. I can see that now. Not trying to be rude if it comes across that way. But to respond to your comments, it wouldn't matter. If I compared the 480 ($500) to 780 ($500) instead, or the 280 ($650) to the 680 ($500). You will see the same thing happen over and over again. Not every game support dlss, so for many(including me), its a non contributing factor. I completely understand the development cost perspective. However you cannot shove that onto the consumer, as bad that sound. Heck if you want proof, look no further than there quarterly growth.

As soon as they dropped there absolutely ridiculous price points, they made money, first time since October of 2022. Users vote with there wallets, and thats what happened. I wish they would post actual sales figures for all of there gpu lines, but I understand why they don't. However I would bet money that if they showed gpu sales charts, the GTX 4070 and above would be horrendous. And I would bet that they are struggling to sell them.

(report to Nvidia's revenue) https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NVDA/nvidia/revenue

[Champion of Sparta]

Messaggio originale di C1REX-PL:

The top end is expensive, but it is also ridiculously fast. According to TechPowerUp, the 4090 is over 3 times faster than the 1080Ti. Price to performance has improved; the 4090 provides each frame for fewer dollars than the 1080Ti, even without adjusting for crazy inflation.

That is not justifiable logic in the least. #1 you are comparing a card which is over a 80 series, to an 80 series....let alone one released 6 years prior.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGK5G37piqw&t=293s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L01WPDqy7QM

Here is a GTX 1080 vs GTX 680. 3 Generation difference. You will noticed that in some of those games that there is a 3X frame rate increase in quite a number of those games. So lets just say roughly that the GTX 1080 is 3X faster than the GTX 680....which I hope it is.

In this scenario the GTX 1080 is the RTX 4080 in all fairness when compared to the GTX 680.

However what was the price difference?
GTX 680 $500
GTX 1080 $600

A $100 difference for 3 times the performance.

Now its a $600 difference for maybe a little bit less than 3 times the performance

source https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VROooYQM7zk

I ain't the brightness shovel in the lamp post, but there be some math that aint quite mathin here.

[Monk]

Yeah, you really don't understand just how much more advanced these cards have gotten an just how insane the R&D budgets are that needto be recuperated.

I can tell you have never been your own boss or responsible for insuring your emoyees get paid by how easily you dismiss the main point of a business is to make money.

If not the final user, who is supposed to cover those costs?

Let's look at transistor counts alone.

480 3.1 billion

780ti 7.08 billion

980ti 8 billion

1080ti 12 billion

2080ti 18.6 billion

3050 12 billion

3090 28.3 Billion

4060 18.9 billion

4070ti 35.8 BILLION

4090 76 BILLION!!!

Hopefully this should give you some basic insight to just how much more complex new gpu's are and give an idea as to their production costs and why they have gone up in price.

Most modern games have a form of dlss built in now and frame generation is the future of gpu's, unless you want costs to double again, over the next couple of years, I doubt there will be anything that looks 'modern' that doesn't use atleast dlss and as frame generation makes raytracing and look sty tracing more and more viable, I expect to see more if it also.

Edit.

You also need to look at how much more complex the games have gotten over the past 5 years compared to before, so just being 3x faster requires a heck of a lot more processing power than it did 10+ years ago.

[UserNotFound]

A GTX 1080 Ti is certainly viable for gaming at 1080P/1440P, heck, I'd tried Godfall at 4K on my i7 4770K + 16GB RAM + Leadtek GTX 1080 with FSR at Quality and it was playable (~50fps and higher). But honestly, one should NOT be looking at nVidia only if one wants best bang-for-buck. Take the RX 7800 XT, for ~500USD, it spanks the RTX 4060 series, and falls somewhere between the RTX 4070 and RTX 4070 Ti in rasterize gaming performance.

With AMD working on FMF (Fluid Motion Frame), we will be getting FG in supported games (AMD has just released a new driver with FMF). Unlike the RTX 3000 series, FG via DLSS3 is a no go, plus 8GB VRAM is quite limiting, an RX 7800 XT with 16GB VRAM would age much more gracefully than any 8GB VRAM card.

Unless certain nVidia proprietary tech is needed for productivity work, the RX 7800 XT 16GB makes more sense for gaming, cheaper than both the RTX 4070 and RTX 4070 Ti, yet performs on their level....plus, the 12GB VRAM on the RTX 4070 series vs the 16GB VRAM on the RX 7800 XT is similar to the RTX 3060 Ti 8GB vs RX 6700 XT situation. For games that saturates the available VRAM on the 3060 Ti, performance and/or PQ would drop against the 12GB RX 6700 XT. Likewise, with more and more games using High Res textures, RT, etc...12GB VRAM card would not age as well as a 16GB VRAM card.

Edit - IF budget must be lower, or below 400USD, and RX 6800 16GB, would also work, a fair bit faster than the RTX 3060 Ti in rasterize gaming as well.
https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Speedster-SWFT319-Graphics-RX-68XLAQFD9/dp/B09KW68M2G/ref=sr_1_15?crid=2XKCOIN15X7QY&keywords=rx+7800+xt&qid=1699673701&s=electronics&sprefix=rx+%2Celectronics%2C364&sr=1-15

[Champion of Sparta]

Messaggio originale di Monk:

Yeah, you really don't understand just how much more advanced these cards have gotten an just how insane the R&D budgets are that needto be recuperated.

I can tell you have never been your own boss or responsible for insuring your emoyees get paid by how easily you dismiss the main point of a business is to make money.

If not the final user, who is supposed to cover those costs?

Let's look at transistor counts alone.

480 3.1 billion

780ti 7.08 billion

980ti 8 billion

1080ti 12 billion

2080ti 18.6 billion

3050 12 billion

3090 28.3 Billion

4060 18.9 billion

4070ti 35.8 BILLION

4090 76 BILLION!!!

Hopefully this should give you some basic insight to just how much more complex new gpu's are and give an idea as to their production costs and why they have gone up in price.

Most modern games have a form of dlss built in now and frame generation is the future of gpu's, unless you want costs to double again, over the next couple of years, I doubt there will be anything that looks 'modern' that doesn't use atleast dlss and as frame generation makes raytracing and look sty tracing more and more viable, I expect to see more if it also.

Edit.

You also need to look at how much more complex the games have gotten over the past 5 years compared to before, so just being 3x faster requires a heck of a lot more processing power than it did 10+ years ago.

I like how you just dismiss the whole Nvidia not making money for over a year......anyhow. You are literally using the same excuse...every...single.....developer has used over the past 30 years when it comes to gpu prices. I remember when the 400 series came out, FERMI was the NEXT STEP IN EVOLUTION. Games were becoming harder to make, graphics were becoming the EXTREME. Just look at the graphic difference of the first 3 assassins creed games. Yet the prices remained essentially the same year after year.

I have heard all of this before, anyone remember SLI. IT WAS THE FUTURE. Where is it now....dead in the ground. Oh but your next comment is going to be about how that could never possibly happen to DLSS. Anyone remember the EyeFinity, and how that was supposed to change the game as well? Also, Crossfire was a thing for a while....

As technology progress's, it actually becomes easier to make games with more detail. Not the other way around. Keep thinking that these prices make sense, because they don't. NVIDIA's profit margin shows that I am right.

DLSS, FSR, EYEFINITY, CROSSFIRE, SLI, PHYSX, NVIDIA 3D vision, have I missed any?

Keep thinking how your thinking. I will keep thinking how I'm thinking.

[Champion of Sparta]

Messaggio originale di UserNotFound:

A GTX 1080 Ti is certainly viable for gaming at 1080P/1440P, heck, I'd tried Godfall at 4K on my i7 4770K + 16GB RAM + Leadtek GTX 1080 with FSR at Quality and it was playable (~50fps and higher). But honestly, one should NOT be looking at nVidia only if one wants best bang-for-buck. Take the RX 7800 XT, for ~500USD, it spanks the RTX 4060 series, and falls somewhere between the RTX 4070 and RTX 4070 Ti in rasterize gaming performance.

With AMD working on FMF (Fluid Motion Frame), we will be getting FG in supported games (AMD has just released a new driver with FMF). Unlike the RTX 3000 series, FG via DLSS3 is a no go, plus 8GB VRAM is quite limiting, an RX 7800 XT with 16GB VRAM would age much more gracefully than any 8GB VRAM card.

Unless certain nVidia proprietary tech is needed for productivity work, the RX 7800 XT 16GB makes more sense for gaming, cheaper than both the RTX 4070 and RTX 4070 Ti, yet performs on their level....plus, the 12GB VRAM on the RTX 4070 series vs the 16GB VRAM on the RX 7800 XT is similar to the RTX 3060 Ti 8GB vs RX 6700 XT situation. For games that saturates the available VRAM on the 3060 Ti, performance and/or PQ would drop against the 12GB RX 6700 XT. Likewise, with more and more games using High Res textures, RT, etc...12GB VRAM card would not age as well as a 16GB VRAM card.

Edit - IF budget must be lower, or below 400USD, and RX 6800 16GB, would also work, a fair bit faster than the RTX 3060 Ti in rasterize gaming as well.
https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Speedster-SWFT319-Graphics-RX-68XLAQFD9/dp/B09KW68M2G/ref=sr_1_15?crid=2XKCOIN15X7QY&keywords=rx+7800+xt&qid=1699673701&s=electronics&sprefix=rx+%2Celectronics%2C364&sr=1-15

I appreciate it, I really do. Im not against AMD in any way. They have been able to give competitive prices I give them that. However I have always been a Nvidia man lol. I am just sad to see how they have forgotten about how they used to treat their customers with affordable products. NVIDIA sets the market price, AMD combats off of it, Intel just prays for customers. You have people up above who are the reason that Nvidia will keep squeezing every last dollar from us. Unless we actually vote with our wallets. Which has already happened, and we saw an over $100 price drop in the 4060 ti....and guess what, Nvidia finally made a profit.

[Slim]

double? My 970 crapped out on me and I had to spend $1200 to replace it with something I hope will last as long.

[C1REX]

Messaggio originale di Champion of Sparta:

I ain't the brightness shovel in the lamp post, but there be some math that aint quite mathin here.

Nvidia has increased its profit margins, and the gaming market is less of a priority as of late. Their prices have indeed gone up. However, you also have AMD, which offers better price to performance if you are not allergic to them. The 7900XT costs similar or even less than the 1080Ti when adjusted for insane inflation and offers more than double the performance.
I think it’s a case of a glass being half empty or half full. It’s a matter of perspective.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Messaggio originale di 🦜Cloud Boy🦜:

Don't count the GPU names. They are arbitrarily given by companies. Companies can add any SKUs on top and change anything in between.

Price/performance is the main idea.

GTX 1080Ti was $700.
2 generations later NVIDIA gave us same performance for the half-price with 3060Ti which costs 350- 400$.

Means, Nvidia has DOULBED the performance for the price.
People are getting 100% more performance gain for the SAME money in 2 generations apart, means 50% more performance in each generation for the money you spend.

Glad to see at least one person in here understands this.

People are being unrealistic in the very least; expecting to be able to buy RTX 3080 when it was new for around $700 or less. That is how unrealistic many are being and continue to be.

I grabbed two more 3080 Ti recently during Amazon Prime sales (2nd week of Oct 2023) for around $699 each. When they were brand new to market I had to get on waiting list, I was able to get one from MicroCenter and my wife got one through EVGA website. Both were EVGA 3080 Ti FTW3 at around $1300 each. Mine replaced my 2080 Super and hers replaced her 1080 Ti.

[[N]ebsun]

The 1080 TI was an outlier in terms of price vs performance at the time - it was a reaaaaaaly good investment for everyone who got one. I still use mine that I got in early 2017, an I don't have any plan to change any time soon unless it suddenly fails.

Cost of production has gone up, Demand has gone up, Prices have gone up..

[r.linder]

Messaggio originale di 🦜Cloud Boy🦜:

Don't count the GPU names. They are arbitrarily given by companies. Companies can add any SKUs on top and change anything in between.

Price/performance is the main idea.

GTX 1080Ti was $700.
2 generations later NVIDIA gave us same performance for the half-price with 3060Ti which costs 350- 400$.

Means, Nvidia has DOULBED the performance for the price.
People are getting 100% more performance gain for the SAME money in 2 generations apart, means 50% more performance in each generation for the money you spend.

Messaggio originale di Bad 💀 Motha:

Glad to see at least one person in here understands this.

People are being unrealistic in the very least; expecting to be able to buy RTX 3080 when it was new for around $700 or less. That is how unrealistic many are being and continue to be.

I grabbed two more 3080 Ti recently during Amazon Prime sales (2nd week of Oct 2023) for around $699 each. When they were brand new to market I had to get on waiting list, I was able to get one from MicroCenter and my wife got one through EVGA website. Both were EVGA 3080 Ti FTW3 at around $1300 each. Mine replaced my 2080 Super and hers replaced her 1080 Ti.

Both of you are missing the point of the thread, especially the latter, yet again:

Messaggio originale di Champion of Sparta:

I miss the days when the 70 series was $400, and the 780s were $400....now they are double that.

It's about how prices have changed massively for flagships, not the relative performance between a flagship and a lower end card years later that rightfully SHOULD match its relative performance. How freaking hard is that for you guys to understand?

The performance tiers that are actually seeing impressive progression are getting more and more inflated in price with each generation, becoming further and further out of reach with more potential buyers. What good is it to us if we can't afford it anymore? Even though technically the 3090 was better value than the 2080 Ti and the 4090 versus the 3090, with the prices getting progressively worse in such a short period of time, it means literally nothing to us because we can't buy one anyway.

The wealthy are so out of touch with the reality of the working class.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

The wealthy?

Ain't no one in here wealthy. If you were you wouldn't be wasting your time in here I can assure you.

Complaining about pricing isn't going to solve anything.

People complain about fuel prices, but you still need to drive do you not?
People complain about food prices, still got to eat right?

If you are happy with say, a GTX 1080 Ti then by all means, keep using that. No one forcing you to upgrade, yet. But it won't last you forever.

[Grimsdottir]

Heres my tip of foxy shopping.

New hardware announcements are usually the time to grab discounted inventory. Black friday and cyber Monday is alright.. but its a hit or miss depending on the platform. People and companies will mark down prices. Ebay, Amazon, Tiger direct, and Newegg I keep my eyes on.
When the 30 series was announced. I was able to nab a new 2080S for 200 dollars. I ♥♥♥♥ you not.

Its wild what deals you can find because of Market FOMO if you look in the right places.

[Champion of Sparta]

Messaggio originale di 尺．し工几ᗪヨ尺:

Messaggio originale di 🦜Cloud Boy🦜:

Don't count the GPU names. They are arbitrarily given by companies. Companies can add any SKUs on top and change anything in between.

Price/performance is the main idea.

GTX 1080Ti was $700.
2 generations later NVIDIA gave us same performance for the half-price with 3060Ti which costs 350- 400$.

Means, Nvidia has DOULBED the performance for the price.
People are getting 100% more performance gain for the SAME money in 2 generations apart, means 50% more performance in each generation for the money you spend.

Messaggio originale di Bad 💀 Motha:

Glad to see at least one person in here understands this.

People are being unrealistic in the very least; expecting to be able to buy RTX 3080 when it was new for around $700 or less. That is how unrealistic many are being and continue to be.

I grabbed two more 3080 Ti recently during Amazon Prime sales (2nd week of Oct 2023) for around $699 each. When they were brand new to market I had to get on waiting list, I was able to get one from MicroCenter and my wife got one through EVGA website. Both were EVGA 3080 Ti FTW3 at around $1300 each. Mine replaced my 2080 Super and hers replaced her 1080 Ti.

Both of you are missing the point of the thread, especially the latter, yet again:

Messaggio originale di Champion of Sparta:

I miss the days when the 70 series was $400, and the 780s were $400....now they are double that.

It's about how prices have changed massively for flagships, not the relative performance between a flagship and a lower end card years later that rightfully SHOULD match its relative performance. How freaking hard is that for you guys to understand?

The performance tiers that are actually seeing impressive progression are getting more and more inflated in price with each generation, becoming further and further out of reach with more potential buyers. What good is it to us if we can't afford it anymore? Even though technically the 3090 was better value than the 2080 Ti and the 4090 versus the 3090, with the prices getting progressively worse in such a short period of time, it means literally nothing to us because we can't buy one anyway.

The wealthy are so out of touch with the reality of the working class.

At least you get it. I am done wasting my time on the likes of Bad Motha, and Monk who are the reason these price hikes happen. Ignorant users like them are what is keeping the market where its at.