Maybe I’m stuck in the last decade, but these prices seem insane. I know we’ve yet to see what a 5050 (lol) or 5060 would be capable of or its price point. However launching at $549 as your lowest card feels like a significant amount of the consumer base won’t be able to buy any of these.
Sadly I think this is the new normal. You could buy a decent GPU, or you could buy an entire game console. Unless you have some other reason to need a strong PC, it just doesn’t seem worth the investment.
At least Intel are trying to keep their prices low. Until they either catch on, in which case they’ll raise prices to match, or they fade out and leave everyone with unsupported hardware.
Actually AMD has said they’re ditching their high end options and will also focus on budget and midrange cards. AMD has also promised better raytracing performance (compared to their older cards) so I don’t think it will be the new norm if AMD also prices their cards competitively to Intel. The high end cards will be overpriced as it seems like the target audience doesn’t care that they’re paying shitton of money. But budget and midrange options might slip away from Nvidia and get cheaper, especially if the upscaler crutch breaks and devs have to start doing actual optimizations for their games.
Actually AMD has said they’re ditching their high end options
Which means there’s no more competition in the high-end range. AMD was lagging behind Nvidia in terms of pure performance, but the price/performance ratio was better. Now they’ve given up a segment of the market, and consumers lose out in the process.
the high end crowd showed there’s no price competition, there’s only performance competition and they’re willing to pay whatever to get the latest and greatest. Nvidia isn’t putting a 2k pricetag on the top of the line card because it’s worth that much, they’re putting that pricetag because they know the high end crowd will buy it anyway. The high end crowd has caused this situation.
You call that a loss for the consumers, I’d say it’s a positive. The high end cards make up like 15% (and I’m probably being generous here) of the market. AMD dropping the high and focusing on mid-range and budget cards which is much more beneficial for most users. Budget and mid-range cards make up the majority of the PC users. If the mid-range and budget cards are affordable that’s much more worthwhile to most people than having high end cards “affordable”.
But they’ve been selling mid-range and budget GPUs all this time. They’re not adding to the existing competition there, because they already have a share of that market. What they’re doing is pulling out of a segment where there was (a bit of) competition, leaving a monopoly behind. If they do that, we can only hope that Intel puts out high-end GPUs to compete in that market, otherwise it’s Nvidia or nothing.
Nvidia already had the biggest share of the high-end market, but now they’re the only player.
It’s already Nvidia or nothing. There’s no point fighting with Nvidia in the high end corner because unless you can beat Nvidia in performance there’s no winning with the high end cards. People who buy high end cards don’t care about a slightly worse and slightly cheaper card because they’ve already chosen to pay premium price for premium product. They want the best performance, not the best bang for the buck. The people who want the most bang for the buck at the high end are a minority of a minority.
But on the other hand, by dropping high end cards AMD can focus more on making their budget and mid-range cards better instead of diverting some of their focus on the high end cards that won’t sell anyway. It increases competition in the budget and mid-range section and mid-range absolutely needs stronger competition from AMD because Nvidia is slowly killing mid-range cards as well.
Steam hardware survey puts 4090 at 1.16% and 7900xtx at 0.54%. That means if we look at only the 4090s and 7900xtx-s then just between the two of them the 7900xtx makes up about a third of the cards. So yeah, you are a minority of a minority.
As for this number jargon. I’m not exactly sure what you’re trying to prove here but I’m sure you’re comparing an overclocked card to a stock card and if you’re saying it’s matching the 4090D then you’re not actually matching the 4090. 4090D is weaker than 4090, depending on the benchmark it ranges between 5% weaker to 30% weaker. If you were trying to prove that AMD cards can be as good as Nvidia cards then you’ve proven that even with overclocking the top of the line AMD card can’t beat a stock top of the line Nvidia card.
They’ll sell out anyways due to lack of good competition. Intel is getting there but still have driver issues, AMD didn’t announce their GPU prices yet but their entire strategy is following Nvidia and lowering the price by 10% or something.
Weird completely unrelated question. Do you have any idea why you write “Anyway” as “Anyways”?
It’s not just you, it’s a lot of people, but unlike most grammar/word modifications it doesn’t really make sense to me. Most of the time the modification shortens the word in some way rather than lengthening it. I could be wrong, but I don’t remember people writing or saying “anyway” with an added “s” in anyway but ironically 10-15 years ago, and I’m curious where it may be coming from.
Although considered informal, anyways is not wrong. In fact, there is much precedent in English for the adverbial -s suffix, which was common in Old and Middle English and survives today in words such as towards, once, always, and unawares. But while these words survive from a period of English in which the adverbial -s was common, anyways is a modern construction (though it is now several centuries old).
AMD has been taking over market share slowly but surely. And the console gaming market… and the portable gamimg market… and the chips out perform intel chips over and over. But ya sure.
I don't dispute that AMD is eating Intel's lunch, but performance-wise, AMD has nothing for nVidia. And that's what the discussion is about, performance.
So much of nvidia’s revenue is now datacenters, I wonder if they even care about consumer sales. Like their consumer level cards are more of an advertising afterthought than actual products.
Bought my first GPU, an R9 Fury X, for MSRP when it launched. The R9 300 series and GTX 900 series seemed fairly priced then (aside from the Titan X). Bought another for Crossfire and mining, holding on until I upgraded to a 7800 XT.
Comparing prices, all but the 5090 are within $150 of each other when accounting for inflation. The 5090 is stupid expensive. A $150 increase in price over a 10-year period probably isn’t that bad.
I’m still gonna complain about it and embrace my inner “old man yells at prices” though.
You still gotta use their shitty NVIDIA experience app (bloated with ads that make NVIDIA money when you open it), and you buying a used NVIDIA card increases demand (and thus prices) on all NVIDIA cards.
If you are a gamer and not doing AI stuff then buying a non-NVIDIA card is entirely an option.
Ok…they do. They get increased market share, which is measurable and valuable to shareholders, increasing stock value and increasing company liquidity.
This doesn’t make any more sense than Windows phones made. They required way too many hardware resources and power to run a system that is designed to do a ton of things on a ton of different types of hardware. Handheld hardware needs specialized OS optimized for the platform and I doubt this will do that. It will likely have a ton of RAM and processing tied up in OS activities just like windows phones making everything slow and/or battery life really bad, but still not be able to run a lot of the stuff that would make this all worth it. Better to start with a more modular system like the base linux kernel and add only what is necessary than to start with the idea of supporting a ton of software and sacrificing the real purpose of the device (handheld gaming) to do it.
This holds true for other companies using windows on handhelds, but Microsoft has the windows source code. I think this means that there is potential for Microsoft to make a version of windows that really works efficiently, but they’d have to had learned their lesson from windows phones.
If that happens I’d be extremely surprised. They have been really against truly modularizing Windows because of the lack of documentation partly due to the push of “agile” methodologies mixing with top down feature pushes and the effort required to create something that would support Windows applications in a way that users would understand. There are also just too many applications out there that use too many features in unintended ways, including or especially their own.
Scalpers were basically non existent in the 4xxx series. They’re not some boogieman that always raises prices. They work under certain market conditions, conditions which don’t currently exist in the GPU space, and there’s no particular reason to think this generation will be much different than the last.
Maybe on the initial release, but not for long after.
I’m not so sure. Companies were definitely buying many up, but they typically stick to business purchasing channels like CDW/Dell/HP etc.
Consumer boxed cards sold by retailers might have went to some small businesses/startups and independent developers but largely they were picked up by scalpers or gamers.
I work in IT and have never went to a store to buy a video card unless it was an emergency need to get a system functional again. It’s vastly preferred to buy things through a VAR where warranties and support are much more robust than consumer channels.
Get fucked. After all the shit I’ve seen them pulling with Windows 11 they’ll never get a dime out of me again. I’ll ride my win 10 until it’s out of support then switch to Linux. Fuck monopolies, and fuck enshittification for profit.
I’m sure on the game specs on the store it says steam will no longer support win 10 in jan 2025. Unless i misread and it’s it’ll only support win 10 and above.
Maybe you are confusing this with the news from a year ago that Steam doesn’t support Windows 7 and 8 anymore?
By the way MS-support for 7 ended in 2015, so that’s 9 more years of Steam support after updates from MS stopped. I’d count on Steam working on Windows 10 for years to come.
Steam already runs fine on Linux, you don’t need SteamOS to us the compatibility functionality, meaning anything you can play on the steamdeck already works on a Linux pc.
Playing modern Windows games on Linux and SteamOS is done using Wine and Proton. Wine is available on almost every Linux distro and Proton comes* with Steam.
*You can use Proton outside of Steam but it’s quite hacky and not really needed.
And to think that this all started because Gabe was afraid that microsoft’s “app store” would hurt Steam so he decided to fully embrace Linux to in preparation. I bet not even Gabe expected back then that the situation would be as it is today.
I am fairly sure Gabe expected this, in fact I think he expected more. See, back when Windows95 was first released people were skeptical that Windows would be a good platform for gaming, they cited non-existent technical issues (similar to how they do with Linux now) that drove the employees at Microsoft mad, so one particular employee had the idea to port the most advanced game at the time to Windows, they contacted ID software, and got in an agreement that they would write the Windows port of Doom and give them the code back, ID agreed and after Doom was released for Windows more and more people started to port their stuff over since it was clearly possible. So essentially Windows being a gaming platform was only possible thanks to that employee, who after working with games liked it so much that he quit Microsoft to create his own gaming company which he called Valve. Yup, Gabe Newell is responsible for both Windows and Linux being seen as a gaming platform.
Not every game has frame gen… not everybody wanna introduce lag to input. So 50% is 100% sketchy marketing. You can keep your 7 frames, Imma wait for 6090
Their whole gaming business model now is encouraging devs to stick features that have no hope of rendering quickly in order to sell this new frame generation rubbish.
theverge.com
Aktywne