• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Why are GPUs so expensive?

V F said:
I find it quite amusing reading the first page. You've got some posting "because idiots paying for it" and "epeen" yet the cards they have from those users. I love it when people diss others for what they do with their money yet they followed the same path while condemning it. Now that is funny.
Click to expand...

I posted an example of exactly what I was referring to in post #413. Some other posts were removed before I could quote them. Basically :"People are just complaining because they can't afford the top tier stuff."

I actually pointed out that all of this stuff is a waste of money to people who aren't into it. You even quoted me comparing *my equipment* to a "pet rock" just to illustrate the point. People who try to insinuate that the only reason people wouldn't buy a 2080Ti is because they can't afford it are "dissing" people for what they didn't buy.
 
Rock_n_Roll said:
Definitely. There are many that aren't happy with the current market situation and ready to bail on the platform. Can't blame them. As a competitor AMD have been absolutely useless, so a third player is more than welcome in my book. More competition the better.

On another matter, the amount of GPUs needs to be reduced. It really is a cluster-****.
source.gif


Talk about confusing the customer. :confused:
Click to expand...

The Radeon lineup is fine, the nvidia lineup with several cards within few percentage points differentiation in performance is what is not normal.

The problem in paying what they ask for is that you as a customer, user and gamer don't receive anything meaningful.

Look, if they asked 1000 pounds but in return you get 120 FPS 4K performance in all titles, it would be a motivation factor.

But instead, we get NEW titles like RDR2 which run badly on all hardware at 1920x1080@60. WTH?
RTX is also not good just yet to motivate users to spend.
 
Rock_n_Roll said:
AMD have been absolutely useless
Click to expand...

Nvidia spend $2.3 billion per year on R&D.
AMD can only afford $0.5 billion per year on R&D and that's split between their CPU and GPU divisions.

How can you expect AMD to remotely come close to Nvidia's high end? Are you crazy? How can AMD bring better competition to the table with a quarter of the budget? A freaking quarter?
 
CuriousTomCat said:
Nvidia spend $2.3 billion per year on R&D.
AMD can only afford $0.5 billion per year on R&D and that's split between their CPU and GPU divisions.

How can you expect AMD to remotely come close to Nvidia's high end? Are you crazy? How can AMD bring better competition to the table with a quarter of the budget? A freaking quarter?
Click to expand...

According to this logic, a start-up has never got any chance to succeed because they have not enough $$$$.
Of course, it is false. AMD can innovate without money.
 
CuriousTomCat said:
How can you expect AMD to remotely come close to Nvidia's high end? Are you crazy? How can AMD bring better competition to the table with a quarter of the budget? A freaking quarter?
Click to expand...

I don't give a damn about AMD's (or anyone else's) financial situation, i'm not a shareholder. I'm the customer, put of out great product that has very good value and not overpriced and i'll buy it.

Until the situation changes, i'm not paying new money for old rope.

Oh and stop treating AMD differently just because they have less funds. These firms aren't your friends and would strip you dry of your finances if they had the chance.

4K8KW10 said:
The Radeon lineup is fine, the nvidia lineup with several cards within few percentage points differentiation in performance is what is not normal.
Click to expand...

That Radeon lineup isn't fine. It's well over saturated. Should be a maximum of 5 products, tops, with the sucker/idiot editions being priced the most expensive. Anymore, you just start to confuse Joe average.
 
Last edited:
Rock_n_Roll said:
I don't give a damn about AMD's (or anyone else's) financial situation, i'm not a shareholder. I'm the customer, put of out great product that has very good value and not overpriced and i'll buy it.

Until the situation changes, i'm not paying new money for old rope.

Oh and stop treating AMD differently just because they have less funds. These firms aren't your friends and would strip you dry of your finances if they had the chance.



That Radeon lineup isn't fine. It's well over saturated. Should be a maximum of 5 products, tops, with the sucker/idiot editions being priced the most expensive. Anymore, you just start to confuse Joe average.
Click to expand...

I'm not asking you to buy it. You just seemed confused why AMD cant beat Nvidia. It seemed like you thought they're too lazy or cant be bothered.

I dont expect anybody to overpay for a GPU that could be purchased elsewhere for cheaper.
 
Last edited:
CuriousTomCat said:
Nvidia spend $2.3 billion per year on R&D.
AMD can only afford $0.5 billion per year on R&D and that's split between their CPU and GPU divisions.
Click to expand...

People keep bring up this myth. Myth because your quote Nvidia's RND budget which includes all their divisions - that means RND towards computer systems for cars, scientific research and machine learning, machine automation, AI and parallel learning, data centers, robotics is included. Where as AMD's GPU rnd isn't split into so many directions - in fact if you head over to AMD.com you'd think all they do RND for is gaming hardware.

So of course their RnD is going to be less, they target fewer markets.
 
Rock_n_Roll said:
Definitely. There are many that aren't happy with the current market situation and ready to bail on the platform. Can't blame them. As a competitor AMD have been absolutely useless, so a third player is more than welcome in my book. More competition the better.

On another matter, the amount of GPUs needs to be reduced. It really is a cluster-****.
source.gif


Talk about confusing the customer. :confused:
Click to expand...

What's confusing?

I'm not confused at all. I read reviews before buying.

So what is your solution reduce the number of gpus? That means people will end up spending more money as options are less.

For example if I can't get the gt 730 do I now need to buy a 1660 super? If you remove all the ones I between too?

It makes zero sense to reduce the number of gpus available
 
I don't see why anyone would think there are too many options.

we have too much competition guys let's just reduce the number of options to meet different customer budgets.
 
Rock_n_Roll said:
On another matter, the amount of GPUs needs to be reduced. It really is a cluster-****.
Click to expand...

A nice history lesson on Nvidia's present and previous graphics cards there. Although you missed off Geforce 600 series, 500 series, 400 series etc.
 
Rock_n_Roll said:
That Radeon lineup isn't fine. It's well over saturated. Should be a maximum of 5 products, tops, with the sucker/idiot editions being priced the most expensive. Anymore, you just start to confuse Joe average.
Click to expand...

Half of those products are previous generation. AMD has contracts with GlobalFoundries for wafers, there is also capacity limitation at TSMC. AMD can't simply begin to offer only N7 products.

Grim5 said:
People keep bring up this myth. Myth because your quote Nvidia's RND budget which includes all their divisions - that means RND towards computer systems for cars, scientific research and machine learning, machine automation, AI and parallel learning, data centers, robotics is included. Where as AMD's GPU rnd isn't split into so many directions - in fact if you head over to AMD.com you'd think all they do RND for is gaming hardware.

So of course their RnD is going to be less, they target fewer markets.
Click to expand...

Yeah, nvidia's budget is spread among more divisions and products than AMD's budget is.

CuriousTomCat said:
A nice history lesson on Nvidia's present and previous graphics cards there. Although you missed off Geforce 600 series, 500 series, 400 series etc.
Click to expand...

The lineup is only products offered NOW
:D
 
It's a straight copy and paste of the lineup from the OCUK Web page and not a true representation of cards either company produces, eg 3 generations of AMD polaris cards, most of which have been EOL for ages.
 
bru said:
It's a straight copy and paste of the lineup from the OCUK Web page and not a true representation of cards either company produces, eg 3 generations of AMD polaris cards, most of which have been EOL for ages.
Click to expand...

There is no official confirmation about your claim that some of the cards are end-of-life. But even if they were end-of-life at the production level, it really doesn't matter - what matters is that there is enough stock available in the supply chain.
 
4K8KW10 said:
There is no official confirmation about your claim that some of the cards are end-of-life. But even if they were end-of-life at the production level, it really doesn't matter - what matters is that there is enough stock available in the supply chain.
Click to expand...

there isn't though.

go show me a 1070 card available to buy the quadro's and teslas are both in the main bought to order.

the supers were never going to be released but had to be due to competition so what he is saying is nvidia shouldn't make themselves competitive?

also he is yet to explain how it is confusing. plenty of people on here manage to buy a card without any confusion so what is he having a problem with?
 
Psycho Sonny said:
also he is yet to explain how it is confusing. plenty of people on here manage to buy a card without any confusion so what is he having a problem with?
Click to expand...

You need to brush up on your reading skills. If you read my post properly, i stated the purchasing choices would be confusing to average Joe (or those looking to get into PC gaming), not for some enthusiast ***** posting on a PC forum.

Hope this makes it clearer for you.
 
Rock_n_Roll said:
You need to brush up on your reading skills. If you read my post properly, i stated the purchasing choices would be confusing to average Joe (or those looking to get into PC gaming), not for some enthusiast ***** posting on a PC forum.

Hope this makes it clearer for you.
Click to expand...

Hehe. That tickled me :)
 
bru said:
I don't know about 2 decades, but there has been $1000 GPU's for the last decade at least without taking inflation into account. I quite understand why people are annoyed at it, but we certainly don't have a right to have GPU's at a certain price.
If Mars suddenly decided that mars bars were going to cost £3 each only you could decide if you wanted one enough to justify the price.

And for the record I do think that GPU prices are too high, but it still doesn't mean we have a right to cheaper GPU's and I myself held off until the 2070 super came down to £469, even that was £20 over my expected max spend.
Click to expand...

If a mars bar cost £3 you could easily buy multiple of the Tesco equivalent for much less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom