• 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.

NVIDIA 4000 Series

None of us know the margins and/or what they can get . Asking them to lower the price might not be viable or in the companies best interest commercially if it can be sold to private businesses I.e for AI etc. I get it as a gamer its frustrating. This is what happens with lack of viable competition.

If your price focused keep rewarding the company offering the best value IMO. If you highly value DLSS and Ray Tracing, like anything it's worth paying the premium.
 
Last edited:
Jay85 said:
What an odd thing to do, instead of dropping prices to increase sales ( i mean literally it would fly off the shelves ), they rather have trickle sales, have upset investors and damage their own reputation.

Is nvidia truly a lost cause to gamers?
Click to expand...

I think it's becoming more and more clear they're less interested in gaming and focusing elsewhere.
 
gjbf1 said:
Yep. And share prices don't increase for companies not turning a healthy profit.
Click to expand...

Playing devils advocate a bit, but if that's the case then why would they need to reduce their prices if what they have is working? Plus they may also see this as a transition year. If the next gen is also rough price to performance wise more people will feel "forced" to upgrade as its been even longer.

Only thing that will help is AMD becoming competitive, but even then it also comes down to how essential Nvidia feels the gaming market is to them.
 
Last edited:
Hostile_18 said:
Playing devils advocate a bit, but if that's the case then why would they need to reduce their prices if what they have is working? Plus they may also see this as a transition year. If the next gen is also rough price to performance wise more people will feel "forced" to upgrade as its been even longer.

Only thing that will help is AMD becoming competitive, but even then it also comes down to how essential Nvidia feels the gaming market is to them.
Click to expand...

You're not wrong mate, unfortunately.
 
Hostile_18 said:
Can you break it down for me lol. What's the ballpark figure we think Nvida is making on a 40 series card? We know the margins for the retailer are low (around 200 on a 4090 iirc) and for the board partner are slim, just ask EVGA.
Click to expand...
Last time the rough estimate seemed to be that Nvidia is marking up cards by 100% from what the actual bill of materiels are. It should go without saying that no one is expecting them to sell at cost, not to be making a profit or having big enough margin to pay for ongoing costs like R&D, software development (aka: driver support), marketing, and other associated cost. Having said that historically they used to make something in the range of 30-40% margin whereas now it's in the range of +60% (at least from what i remember last time i checked).
 
Last edited:
Murphy said:
Last time the rough estimate seemed to be that Nvidia is marking up cards by 100% from what the actual bill of materiels are. It should go without saying that no one is expecting them to sell at cost, not to be making a profit or having big enough margin to pay for ongoing costs like R&D, software development (aka: driver support), marketing, and other associated cost. Having said that historically they used to make something in the range of 30-40% margin whereas now it's in the range of +60% (at least from what i remember last time i checked).
Click to expand...

Thank you. Interesting their margin has gone up, despite rising costs. The 40 series has looked poor outside of the 4090. I just get the impression they don't really care (especially with the lower tiers).
 
Hostile_18 said:
None of us know the margins and/or what they can get . Asking them to lower the price might not be viable or in the companies best interest commercially if it can be sold to private businesses I.e for AI etc. I get it as a gamer its frustrating. This is what happens with lack of viable competition.

If your price focused keep rewarding the company offering the best value IMO. If you highly value DLSS and Ray Tracing, like anything it's worth paying the premium.
Click to expand...
Do you have shares in Nvidia?

They obviously have high margins when you look at the profits gained in the sector.

Yes we don't know exact but that ain't scraping by by a long shot.
 
Raelgun said:
Do you have shares in Nvidia?

They obviously have high margins when you look at the profits gained in the sector.

Yes we don't know exact but that ain't scraping by by a long shot.
Click to expand...

Not at all. But if your asking me to evaluate a companies pricing strategy you have to look at it from both of commercial and consumer point of view. If they can make the money with the AI sector or even the gaming sector by staying the course who are we to argue? They are ultimately a business, not our friend. I wish they were cheaper and in line with last gen for sure, but if I was in charge I may take the same course they are doing now myself, especially knowing the lead in tech and mind share they have against their nearest competitor.
 
Joxeon said:
Considering intel can sell the A770 16gb which has a larger die than a 4080 albeit on 6nm instead of 5nm and 16gb VRAM + 256 bus for under £350 and still make a profit then that tells you how much Nvidia is making on cards like the 4080.
Click to expand...

Are Intel subsidising it though to get a foothold? A quick Google search says estimated loses are 3.5 billion for ARC GPUs.
 
Last edited:
Joxeon said:
Considering intel can sell the A770 16gb which has a larger die than a 4080 albeit on 6nm instead of 5nm and 16gb VRAM + 256 bus for under £350 and still make a profit then that tells you how much Nvidia is making on cards like the 4080.
Click to expand...

As others mentioned Arc GPUs are sold at a loss. Intel's GPU division is running a multi billion dollar loss. So actually no you can't compare the prices, there is no way Nvidia is gonna be a loss leader when they already have 85% market share


Feel free to ask AMD to sell at a loss, they're in a position to do so since their market share is so tiny but don't ask Nvidia they won't even consider it
 
Last edited:
Hostile_18 said:
Not at all. But if your asking me to evaluate a companies pricing strategy you have to look at it from both of commercial and consumer point of view. If they can make the money with the AI sector or even the gaming sector by staying the course who are we to argue? They are ultimately a business, not our friend. I wish they were cheaper and in line with last gen for sure, but if I was in charge I may take the same course they are doing now myself, especially knowing the lead in tech and mind share they have against their nearest competitor.
Click to expand...

You are making it seem like it is either or when the clever business decision is to increase both revenue streams.

There is silicon fabrication overhead if Nvidia (or AMD) wanted to produce more gpu dies but they just do not want to do so. They appear to have dug their heels into the sand and will not reduce the ridiculous margins they are now demanding for their products. The gpu market is worth approx $20 Billion a year and with Nvidia's current pricing strategy they just do not seem to care whether they maximise their sales in this sector. I personally think this is a strategic move on Nvidias part and they are trying to normalise these current prices so when the 5060 comes out at $50 less than the 4060 they will look like they are delivering value when in fact they are maintaining their margins. Of course for this to happen they have to deal with poor sales for 2 years, this happened with the 2000 series cards so they are willing to let it happen.

AI will be a huge growth sector in the next couple of years but will this bubble burst when people realise what is touted as AI is actually just an algorythm crunching numbers faster than a human can...ermm computers have been doing that for over 50 years and they have called it a new name to create a buzz and increase sales and profits.

True AI is a totally different beast and not what the news highlights most days.
 
gjbf1 said:
I think it's becoming more and more clear they're less interested in gaming and focusing elsewhere.
Click to expand...

True, the issue at the moment is they can sell the same cores that are in GPUs as AI chips for massively more money. H100 costs something $35000-40000 IIRC, why would they crank out lots of 4090s or reduce the price on them when (for now, and possibly a long time) they have a queue of AI buyers who will give them massively more margin on the same silicon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom