Agreed.
-
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.
What would you regard to be fair current gen prices?
- Thread starter gjbf1
- Start date
Agreed.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 1,018
- Location
- Aberdare, Wales
Would need a wardrobe for a case though
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,309
- Location
- United Kingdom
I paid £799 for my 1080ti Strix. So for an AIB i'd be happy with around £900 for a 4080 or 7900xtx after 6 years of inflation. I was planning on getting a Sapphire Nitro 7900xtx and would have jumped at £1000 but it came out 30% more than that and now my FOMO and Hype have died off I no longer feel the urge even though I need a new card. If that AIB came out at £1000 I would have paid £1000.
As it stands i'd say AIBs for around the 900 mark for a 4080/7900xtx would be something i'm willing to pay, but in all honesty how much they are failing to sell ill probably hold for longer.
As it stands i'd say AIBs for around the 900 mark for a 4080/7900xtx would be something i'm willing to pay, but in all honesty how much they are failing to sell ill probably hold for longer.
Lol
This seems about right.
Mean what's funny about it?
A halo card or second tier card this day for £450 isn't realistic. Yes it's overpriced, but it couldn't be £450 either.
Last edited:
So nvidia has brainwashed you I see
Its
70 series card were 104s for a few generations.
80 series cards were 102s for a few generations.
But every now and again they stick one on the customers and moved them down a bracket, usually when you are getting too much performance at what would be a lower price bracket.
I'm sure the 4090 and 3090 and even the 20xx titan is a lesser designation than the original titan was so everyone assumes there is a titan waiting to happen if they need it to.
Not the power consumption or the performance that is the factor I am taking into account its the chip designation. Say my gtx 970 was a 104 chip with the maxwell name but the 1070 ended up being a 102 chip (I can't remember what the chip designations where) which was previously a 960 designation.
70 series card were 104s for a few generations.
80 series cards were 102s for a few generations.
But every now and again they stick one on the customers and moved them down a bracket, usually when you are getting too much performance at what would be a lower price bracket.
I'm sure the 4090 and 3090 and even the 20xx titan is a lesser designation than the original titan was so everyone assumes there is a titan waiting to happen if they need it to.
That level if tech for £450 isn't realistic at all. £650-700 maybe. Someone is still living in 2010.
It's brainwashing, Nvidia raised prices so high and made you believe this should be normal.
Question is, why do you think it should be priced high.
Halo cards (and hardware products in general, AMD FX-51 etc) have existed for decades, it's only recently where pricing across the range has went to crap.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,718
It's interesting that consoles have largely remained in the £400 bracket for 25 years, are there any good reasons why GPU inflation should be so crazy ?
Update: Comparing the Price of Every Game Console, With Inflation - IGN
With PS5 and Xbox Series X on the way, IGN looks back on decades of console launch prices — and how much they would cost today.
Last edited:
It's interesting that consoles have largely remained in the £400 bracket for 25 years, are there any good reasons why GPU inflation should be so crazy ?
Update: Comparing the Price of Every Game Console, With Inflation - IGN
With PS5 and Xbox Series X on the way, IGN looks back on decades of console launch prices — and how much they would cost today.www.ign.com
In fairness, modern console hardware has mostly sold at a loss. Nintendo is an exception because they don't seem to care about modern technology. I don't think the PS3 started to turn a profit for the console itself until the latter third of its lifespan.
I do however agree that GPU prices are out of hand and have been for a few years for a multitude of reasons.
Numbers unrelated to anything are worthless.
A "good" price for customers is one that is fought for.
No one is going to reduce their prices until they see a competitor selling a better product for less. Then they'll consider rethinking how they make cards and price cards.
But when one company has most of the market and the next company price matches you pay what the sticker says or you get nothing.
A "good" price for customers is one that is fought for.
No one is going to reduce their prices until they see a competitor selling a better product for less. Then they'll consider rethinking how they make cards and price cards.
But when one company has most of the market and the next company price matches you pay what the sticker says or you get nothing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,430
Not necessarily at a loss.
Sony Finally Turns a Profit on $499 PS5
Just after hitting 10 million PS5 sales, Sony has announced that its pricier version of the console is no longer selling at a loss. Its $399 Digital Edition, however, still has a while to go.
www.extremetech.com
Of course, consoles do sale for a very small profit (if any), since that isn't their job. That's what people are missing when comparing the price of a console with a PC. If a PC is better than a console, price/performance wise, then the console seller takes you for a ride (basically).
With that said, components do go down in price and manufacturing processes improve. That overcomes inflation. But not so much greedflation.
A 4080 is not a halo card and it’s only 2nd tier because Nvidia didn’t release anything else on AD102. For context a 3060ti uses a larger die than a 4080 and that sold for £369 last gen.
As technology advances R&D and manufacturing costs typically rise too, in addition inflation of most economies make materials, logistics, energy, property, wages etc. higher. Competition for silicon is also still high. I'm certainly not defending current prices, but 50% or more for top end compared to 10+ years ago wouldn't seem completely unreasonable.
I don't know tons about manufacturing, but I do manage teams of software engineers, I'm paying them circa 50% more than a few years ago, plus energy, T&E, rent have all increased considerably too. Products I make haven't fundamentally changed in the past few years but my costs definitely have and unfortunately some of that must be passed on to the consumer.
Interesting and fair point. Aren't 3060 Tis binned 3070s though?