Just what is NVIDIA up to?

[gjbf1]

Pile 'em high sell 'em cheap. Not for Nvidia! They probably think they can sell high to AI and their other business interests, gamers are not their concern.

Yes, AI is the new cash cow following mining.

 

[Calin Banc]

Yeah was gonna say i think the 4090 was the only one worth noting, the 4080 would have been had it been released at a lower price point.

I feel the 4000 series as a whole though has been a big disappointment for most. This forum and many others speaks for itself.

What's the reference point when we consider 4090 better, but 4080 not?

Sure, 4090 is by default better for those wanting the absolute best, no matter the price. However, going a bit into price/performance, then comparing to 3090 is not really ideal since that was a crap card. Compare it to 3080 and you have 4080 being 49% faster and 71% more expensive, while 4090 is 90% faster and 129% more expensive.

So, ratio between price and speed is 1.45 (4080) vs. 1.43 (4090) - the high the ration, the better. So in this case 4080 has actually a better price as price/performance vs. the optimal performance card from last gen. Both cards are bad if you care about price/performance.

Problem is, if you consider that 4090 should be priced against the 3090 no matter what, then a possible 5080 being 30% faster for 10% more money sounds good compared to 4080, ignoring the fact that 4080 was actually priced also bad compared to 3080

4090 is nicely done marketing scheme

 

[Jay85]

What's the reference point when we consider 4090 better, but 4080 not?

Sure, 4090 is by default better for those wanting the absolute best, no matter the price. However, going a bit into price/performance, then comparing to 3090 is not really ideal since that was a crap card. Compare it to 3080 and you have 4080 being 49% faster and 71% more expensive, while 4090 is 90% faster and 129% more expensive.

So, ratio between price and speed is 1.45 (4080) vs. 1.43 (4090) - the high the ration, the better. So in this case 4080 has actually a better price as price/performance vs. the optimal performance card from last gen. Both cards are bad if you care about price/performance.

Problem is, if you consider that 4090 should be priced against the 3090 no matter what, then a possible 5080 being 30% faster for 10% more money sounds good compared to 4080, ignoring the fact that 4080 was actually priced also bad compared to 3080

4090 is nicely done marketing scheme

The 4080 isn't a bad gpu, it's the price that makes it bad. The 4080 would be a hot seller if it was sub £900 tbf, £800 would be flying off the shelves as i feel that would be the limit for most people looking to scratch an itch. It's the undeniable fact that the 4080 is almost double what the 3080 FE cost when new that puts people off.

 

[Murphy]

I feel the 4000 series as a whole though has been a big disappointment for most. This forum and many others speaks for itself.

I just can't shake the feeling, and it is just a feeling, that they designed and priced the 4000 series for the mining boom and despite that now being over they're to proud/stubborn to lower prices.

 

[Jay85]

I just can't shake the feeling, and it is just a feeling, that they designed and priced the 4000 series for the mining boom and despite that now being over they're to proud/stubborn to lower prices.

Yeah i feel the same too in a way, he would look so stupid and greedy if he turned his back now dropped prices astronomically like AMD have done in the past. I'm sure he's been getting stick from investors and shareholders, who knows maybe 5000 series will be different but same feeling.. would he turn his back on his words "Moores law is dead" and be too proud to admit he was wrong?

We can only speculate!

 

[willhub]

It's just a shame there isn't any worthy competition to detract from buying NV cards.

 

[Xelene]

The 4080 isn't a bad gpu, it's the price that makes it bad. The 4080 would be a hot seller if it was sub £900 tbf, £800 would be flying off the shelves as i feel that would be the limit for most people looking to scratch an itch. It's the undeniable fact that the 4080 is almost double what the 3080 FE cost when new that puts people off.

Agreed, the 4080 is a great GPU but it's massively overpriced. Same can be said all the way down the stack actually.

 

[iron_monkey]

Every nvidia card should come with lube.

 

[Joxeon]

What's the reference point when we consider 4090 better, but 4080 not?

Sure, 4090 is by default better for those wanting the absolute best, no matter the price. However, going a bit into price/performance, then comparing to 3090 is not really ideal since that was a crap card. Compare it to 3080 and you have 4080 being 49% faster and 71% more expensive, while 4090 is 90% faster and 129% more expensive.

So, ratio between price and speed is 1.45 (4080) vs. 1.43 (4090) - the high the ration, the better. So in this case 4080 has actually a better price as price/performance vs. the optimal performance card from last gen. Both cards are bad if you care about price/performance.

Problem is, if you consider that 4090 should be priced against the 3090 no matter what, then a possible 5080 being 30% faster for 10% more money sounds good compared to 4080, ignoring the fact that 4080 was actually priced also bad compared to 3080

4090 is nicely done marketing scheme

The 4090 is the halo card though so price performance is isn’t supposed to be good, you pay a price performance premium for having the best, you shouldn’t have to pay the same premium for the 2nd best. Also those figures come from tech power up who tested the 4090 with a 5800X so the 4090 is more like 100% when used with a better cpu.

Also from a 3080 owners perspective if you are going to spend £1100 for a card which is just 50% faster yet for £400 more you can get a card that will give you closer to a 100% uplift then that extra £400 is giving you almost the same performance boost as the initial £1100

 

[gjbf1]

The 4080 isn't a bad gpu, it's the price that makes it bad. The 4080 would be a hot seller if it was sub £900 tbf, £800 would be flying off the shelves as i feel that would be the limit for most people looking to scratch an itch. It's the undeniable fact that the 4080 is almost double what the 3080 FE cost when new that puts people off.

Precisely.

I just can't shake the feeling, and it is just a feeling, that they designed and priced the 4000 series for the mining boom and despite that now being over they're to proud/stubborn to lower prices.

AI is the new mining boom.

Every nvidia card should come with lube.

Hahaha. Well, at 14" long and very wide....

 

[Calin Banc]

The 4080 isn't a bad gpu, it's the price that makes it bad. The 4080 would be a hot seller if it was sub £900 tbf, £800 would be flying off the shelves as i feel that would be the limit for most people looking to scratch an itch. It's the undeniable fact that the 4080 is almost double what the 3080 FE cost when new that puts people off.

Yup, price is bad. But 4090 isn't any better either. Price for the top end creeped up slowly and people were putting up with it, finding excuses "is the best, is worth it", "I do what I want with my money", etc. I understand to buy one as you need it for one reason or another, defending it is something else.

2080ti was 754mm2, absolutely huge and was only $999 MSRP. And that was a gen considered too expensive as well...
4090 is 609mm2 and $1599, 60% more expensive, normalized in 2 gens. "Is worth it"; I can almost see it as a nVIDIA motto.

The 4090 is the halo card though so price performance is isn’t supposed to be good, you pay a price performance premium for having the best, you shouldn’t have to pay the same premium for the 2nd best. Also those figures come from tech power up who tested the 4090 with a 5800X so the 4090 is more like 100% when used with a better cpu.

Also from a 3080 owners perspective if you are going to spend £1100 for a card which is just 50% faster yet for £400 more you can get a card that will give you closer to a 100% uplift then that extra £400 is giving you almost the same performance boost as the initial £1100

Like I've said above, that extra price has been normalized and so will for x80. Give it a couple of gens. After all, is still high end, right? It deserves a premium!

In another review it was around 7% or so more, not quite 10%, but doesn't really matter. Difference is too small either way. If I were to chose a 4090 over a 4080 would have been a lot more expensive as a new PSU would have been required and my "lowly" 5800x3d would have really helped to get all that 4090 has to offer? No, the price for that card goes up and up when you start to add one + one.
Also sauna would have been a bonus at 450W. Not that a XTX would have been that much better...

All smoke and mirrors. For instance DLSS3 is quite good, so that performance over 3080 is a lot larger than that. CB77, 4k, Path Tracing, DLSS Performance and DLSS3 is about 70fps. It uses about 11.5GB of vRAM. Can a 3080 get at least a 30fps?

But... DLSS2+3 is not in every game and not every game gets the same love and attention as CB77.

Coming from a 2080, to me, 4080 was the logical step up as best price/performance overall from both green and red team. Best from a crappy overall situation. Lesser evil and all that

 

[Joxeon]

Coming from a 2080, to me, 4080 was the logical step up as best price/performance overall from both green and red team. Best from a crappy overall situation. Lesser evil and all that

I would have chose either of AMDs 7900X cards over a 4080, while not great they both offer much better price performance

Like I've said above, that extra price has been normalized and so will for x80. Give it a couple of gens.

It only gets normalised if you buy it which you have unfortunately.

I honestly can’t see how Nvidia can raise the price by £500 in one gen which is more than the previous 20 years combined while also doubling the performance gap to the 90 and people actually consider this card, seems like madness to me.

 

[Jay85]

Yup, price is bad. But 4090 isn't any better either. Price for the top end creeped up slowly and people were putting up with it, finding excuses "is the best, is worth it", "I do what I want with my money", etc. I understand to buy one as you need it for one reason or another, defending it is something else.

2080ti was 754mm2, absolutely huge and was only $999 MSRP. And that was a gen considered too expensive as well...
4090 is 609mm2 and $1599, 60% more expensive, normalized in 2 gens. "Is worth it"; I can almost see it as a nVIDIA motto.


Like I've said above, that extra price has been normalized and so will for x80. Give it a couple of gens. After all, is still high end, right? It deserves a premium!

In another review it was around 7% or so more, not quite 10%, but doesn't really matter. Difference is too small either way. If I were to chose a 4090 over a 4080 would have been a lot more expensive as a new PSU would have been required and my "lowly" 5800x3d would have really helped to get all that 4090 has to offer? No, the price for that card goes up and up when you start to add one + one.
Also sauna would have been a bonus at 450W. Not that a XTX would have been that much better...

All smoke and mirrors. For instance DLSS3 is quite good, so that performance over 3080 is a lot larger than that. CB77, 4k, Path Tracing, DLSS Performance and DLSS3 is about 70fps. It uses about 11.5GB of vRAM. Can a 3080 get at least a 30fps?

But... DLSS2+3 is not in every game and not every game gets the same love and attention as CB77.

Coming from a 2080, to me, 4080 was the logical step up as best price/performance overall from both green and red team. Best from a crappy overall situation. Lesser evil and all that

4090 is abit of an outlier because its such a big gap between the 4080 and the 3090 from the 3000 series. We didn't see such a jump on 3000 series so you can see why people think its not as bad value.

 

[Grim5]

Every nvidia card should come with lube.

I thought it did? It's AMD that gives it to you dry

 

[Calin Banc]

I would have chose either of AMDs 7900X cards over a 4080, while not great they both offer much better price performance

It only gets normalised if you buy it which you have unfortunately.

I honestly can’t see how Nvidia can raise the price by £500 in one gen which is more than the previous 20 years combined while also doubling the performance gap to the 90 and people actually consider this card, seems like madness to me.

I was considering AMD for a while, but lacking proper RT performance gen on gen and with FSR being hit or miss, FSR3 completely MIA and costing about the same, it wasn't really the better option.

7900xtx would have required a new PSU, overall it seemed to me would be slower (especially in the long run) and less than ideal in power consumption. Summers can be pretty hot.

4090 and previous top tier also got normalized. Heck, even 7900xtx people were saying is good compared to 4080 - so compared to poorly priced card (lol). Event 7900xt (aka 7800xt), got pushed go $900 and people would have been happy to see it at $750.

Yes, 4080 got a double increase in price, but again... 4090 is 60% more expensive than 2080ti. Any excuse for that can be easily applied down the stack in one shape or form, until some point where it makes "sense".

Not the least, 4090 implies possible extra costs. So the true gap is wider.

4090 is abit of an outlier because its such a big gap between the 4080 and the 3090 from the 3000 series. We didn't see such a jump on 3000 series so you can see why people think its not as bad value.

A hidden gap between 3080 and 4080 is the vRAM.

It would be nice to see from someone a result with PT in CB77 with the 3080 at 4k dlss performance and then with RT.

 

[tommybhoy]

I was considering AMD for a while, but lacking proper RT performance gen on gen and with FSR being hit or miss, FSR3 completely MIA and costing about the same, it wasn't really the better option.

Better RT and software features with less vram, isn't costing about the same, there's a hefty premium incorporating less vram.


A 79XTX with 3 yrs warranty costs 30% less than an equivalent 4080 with 3 yrs warranty.

Factoring Starfield premium into the price, with a sell on value of ~£50 makes the XTX 37% cheaper than a 4080.

 

[humbug]

Better RT and software features with less vram, isn't costing about the same, there's a hefty premium incorporating less vram.


A 79XTX with 3 yrs warranty costs 30% less than an equivalent 4080 with 3 yrs warranty.

Factoring Starfield premium into the price, with a sell on value of ~£50 makes the XTX 37% cheaper than a 4080.

That's quite an eye opener and i just checked, you can get an AIB 7900XTX with a huge cooler on it for £890, its cheaper than the previous gen flagship was and near 50% faster than that, again comparing it to previous gen its running in the RTX 3080 12GB tertiary, that was £800 and people thought that was ok.

These AMD GPU's now are not over priced. they are priced quite well, Nvidia Ada is overpriced, some of them, ,like the 4080 really quite horrendously so, people don't see it or even think of them as good value because of the premium they place on the Nvidia brand or the features.
That's their problem, of course they still want things to be cheaper and yet because of the premium they put on Nvidia what they want from AMD is the impossible, 50/60% cheaper is just never going to happen, at that point, which we are now at AMD might as well pack it all in because you cannot turn a profit like that.

The thing with all of this is this, Nvidia don't want AMD out, that would cause problems with competition regulations, so they are happy to leave AMD 10 or 15% market share and add the premium Nvidia's is worth it over AMD on top of where AMD can turn a reasonable profit. That's how you end up with the 3080's replacement costing 70% more.
In the eyes of Nvidia fans do Nvidia have any fault here? No, its AMD's fault for not making Nvidia GPU's cheaper.

The cycle continues....

 

[humbug]

It feels like these two are in cahoots because they are.

But we created the environment for that to be possible, AMD know they have zero chance to get to 30/40% marketshare, Nvidia know you will pay whatever they ask and whatever they don't sell goes to their professional eco system for even more money.
So yes they are working together, to keep AMD in and profitable while Nvidia just milks you lot dry.

./

 

[humbug]

Nvidia could push AMD out in about 6 months flat if they wanted to, that's what you lot don't get.

 

[humbug]

AMD's fight isn't with Nvidia, its with Intel. And not in the GPU space. If AMD ever needed help with Intel in the GPU space, Nvidia will provide that help.