• 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

Jimmy Weirdarms said:
Yep, not a huge surprise, outrageous price jump and AMD's new generation to set to enter the market in a few weeks.
Click to expand...
Lets hope they perform better for the price if not they will end up the same as the 4080s. I have a horrible feeling after sitting down and reading many reviews of the 4090, 4080 and the AMD 7900xtx benchmarks they showed us and think these two companies are basically going to charge by the frame, so the AMD card looking cheaper is because it performs lower in RT and in some cases raster too compared to the 4080.

Something is very fishy this time round, like they have price fixed their cards between them and soon forcing people to except $1000 starting point for a "80/800" class card now and the 7900xtx is sounding like a 7800xt to me and the 7900xt is sounding like a 7800. Just with a new price and name. Lets see what is coming and if this theory turns out to be true then well these two companies with family ties have shown their true colours and basically controlling and manipulating the market.

Something is very off this time even more than normal and my spidey senses are tingling like crazy after I sat down and worked out what has been shown in benchmarks so far and what AMD has shown us so far and waiting for some real benchmarks now from our usual suspects to see what is really going on, but if it turns out to the pricing is based per frame then this is a complete an utter joke they are playing on their customers.

I'm expecting a 7950XTX and a 7950XT on a totally different chip too if not the same chip that has actually had a lot of shaders disabled then on a 7900XTX and XT.
 
Last edited:
Troezar said:
They'll have to relent at some point if even enthusiasts are refusing to buy. Once they shift all the 3000 series they'll probably knock off £100 and be surprised you're not grateful :cry:
Click to expand...
LOL the 4080 needs £500 knocking off it at least, they have no chance selling them otherwise in the near future, there will be a few that will fall for the £100,£200 drops and after that no one will bite. Same needs to happen to the 4090 it needs £350-£450 knocked off to be a more sensible purchase. They are not pro "titan" class cards anymore as they have none of the pro features now that make them pro cards like NVLINK.
 
Last edited:
Troezar said:
They'll have to relent at some point if even enthusiasts are refusing to buy. Once they shift all the 3000 series they'll probably knock off £100 and be surprised you're not grateful :cry:
Click to expand...
It's certainly going to be interesting to watch...

A lot of people have been saying that the pricing strategy for the 40-series is nvidia manipulating the market into buying 30-series cards (or upselling them to the 4090) but with all the stumbles (4070 12GB 'un-launch', the melting 12VHPWR connectors, backlash to pricing, EVGA and the glut of Ampere cards) it's starting to look more and more like a clown show.

I get it that Jensen told investors that the plan is sell 30 and 40-series in tandem but let's be honest here - a business genius wouldn't have been left with a year's worth of 30-series cards to sell after the Ethereum merge - it's not like the Ethereum Foundation weren't upfront about their plans. So having screwed up with oversupply of the 30-series, they priced 40-series like the crypto crash and the global recession never happened :confused:

I suppose the final clue is nvidia's balance sheet - they've just come off of one of the most profitable periods in the company's history and now their gaming revenue is in free-fall - I'm not saying that everything that's happened could be predicted, but nvidia just seem to have ploughed ahead ignoring *all* the warning signs.

For some reason I'm reminded of this :D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJElsNaC6yQ
 
Last edited:
Purgatory said:
so the AMD card looking cheaper is because it performs lower in RT and in some cases raster too compared to the 4080.
Click to expand...

I mean, yes, it will perform worse at RT, that's a given. If AMD have caught up to the 3 series in RT performance that's a minor miracle really.

But I'm not really seeing suspicious price fixing collusion, the opposite really - AMD are claiming greater raster performance than the 4080 at a 20% discount. I'll await the benchmarks when they get released but it seems to me that's a good thing, and it should (it probably won't, but it should) force nvidia to actually compete...
 
Last edited:
Jimmy Weirdarms said:
I mean, yes, it will perform worse at RT, that's a given. If AMD have caught up to the 3 series in RT performance that's a minor miracle really.

But I'm not really seeing suspicious price fixing collusion, the opposite really - AMD are claiming greater raster performance than the 4080 at a 20% discount. I'll await the benchmarks when they get released but it seems to me that's a good thing, and it should (it probably won't, but it should) force nvidia to actually compete...
Click to expand...
Lets wait for the benchmarks and decide from there, I do hope AMD has something to compete with Nvidia if not well they have well and truly lost their chance to gain more customers to their side, if it performs less than a 4080 in raster and RT it's game over for them this gen and they need to rename the 7900 cards to 7800 and bring out a real 7900 class card. They have said they are competing against a 4080 not a 4090 with these cards so...

Why have they named the card with a 9 in the name ? To fool customers not in the know so they think it's like 6900xt/6950xt class card that competed against the 3090/3090ti before ? The naming is all wrong too to me, if they are competing against a nvidia 80 class card then name it a 7800xtx and 7800xt. They are all not innocent and these two companies you need to watch like a hawk as they are both as bad as each other.

If AMD named their cards correctly to 7800xt and 7800 that competes against a Nvidia 80 class at $999 and $899 people would laugh at the price, all they have done this time as we can see is named them up a tier and said hey look same price as last time, but last time they competed against the 90 class nvidia cards not the 80 class. See the problem once you sit down and think it all threw ?

But lets see the benchmarks and go from there... I can read threw these companies BS and have come to the conclusion the 7900 class cards are named wrong and priced wrong too. OR they will have exactly the same per frame cost as Nvidia cards.

AMD 7900xtx gets 999 frames for $999 100% performance
Nvidia 4080 gets 1199 frames for $1199 120% performance at 20% higher cost.

1 frame per second = $1 ... lets see if this turns out to be true once they are in the hands of reviewers and they show the $ value per frame results at each resolution.
 
Last edited:
All nvidias problems could be solved with a price drop across the range, its really that simple.
Lots of people would happily buy a 3000 series as they are still very good cards.
No reason they couldn't sell them alongside 4000 for a year.
They have just got carried away with the nonsense of the last couple of years and completely lost the plot.

I can kind of sympathise, what I sell fluctuates with the market wildly and you do very much get used to the good prices very quickly.
For me I'm forced into lower prices the minute the market turns as its fresh/live produce so if no ones buying prices drop straight away.
 
When looking at the specs it is clear that the 7900 XTX is the updated 6900 XT. It is the 7900 XT that was meant to be the 6800 XT.

The problem is that at £1k the 6900 XT did have some argument at being the fastest GPU you could buy.

The 7900 XTX does not have this bragging right. So is overpriced purely because Nvidia have released the 4080 at joke prices.

AMD need to take note. If people aren’t buying enough 4080s, how well do AMD think a ~£1k 7900 will sell.
 
markoboyo11 said:
All nvidias problems could be solved with a price drop across the range, its really that simple.
Lots of people would happily buy a 3000 series as they are still very good cards.
No reason they couldn't sell them alongside 4000 for a year.
They have just got carried away with the nonsense of the last couple of years and completely lost the plot.
Click to expand...
They should have replaced the 3090 and the 3080's with their Ti variants at the original launch MSRP (£1049/£649) and cut prices on the rest of the stack by £100-£200.

3090 Ti - £1049 (Competitor refurb min. price: £1,318.99)
3090 - £899 (OC min. price: £1,199.95)
3080 Ti - £649 (maybe £699 - OC min. price: £989.99)
3080 - £549 (OC min. price: £749.99)
3070 Ti - £469 (OC min. price: £649.99)
3070 - £349 (OC min. price: £518.99)
3060 Ti - £249 (OC min. price: £428.99)
3060 - £149 (OC min. price: £359.99)
3050 - £99 (OC min. price: £299.99)
 
Last edited:
Aegis said:
They should have replaced the 3090 and the 3080's with their Ti variants at the original launch MSRP (£1049/£649) and cut prices on the rest of the stack by £100-£200.

3090 Ti - £1049
3090 - £899
3080 Ti - £649 (maybe £699)
3080 - £549
3070 Ti - £469
3070 - £349
3060 Ti - £249
3060 - £149
3050 - £99
Click to expand...


3090 FE was $1500 (£1400) original msrp and now the FE is priced at £1049 but they never sold at that because they never came back in stock at that price they were all sold out at £1400 and never came back in stock.

3090ti FE was $2000 (£1879) original msrp and now £1149 and still in stock and they had a previous price drop too to around £1500 and something can't remember but was higher than the original msrp of the 3090.

Nvidia is smart as they never gave away their 3090FE's for less than the msrp of £1400 and made AIBs drop their prices on a product they don't even have in stock or supply of.. Still wondering why EVGA ran for their lives ? That above explains part of it as they left the AIBS stuck with cards they can't sell at a larger loss than before in some cases even with Nvidia's rebates.

Nvidia played a very cruel game on AIBs with 30 series.
 
Last edited:
Purgatory said:
3090 FE was $1500 (£1400) original msrp and now the FE is priced at £1049 but they never sold at that because they never came back in stock at that price they were all sold out at £1400 and never came back in stock.
Click to expand...
Yeah - my bad :D when I was looking for the 3090 MSRP I missed the 'Promotional Price, Limited time only' Hahaha! Right. :rolleyes:

I think given that how late in the 30-series the 3090 Ti launched though, that the prices are still reasonable - after all, clearly they can (and are) selling the 3090 Ti for close to that.
 
Last edited:
OverDrive said:
The only game I play is Microsoft Flight Simulator (it's amazing for those that haven't tried it), so DLSS 3 was the major incentive for me to upgrade. I am also taking the step from 1440 (ultrawide) to a good high refresh 4K monitor with this generation.
Click to expand...

With something where the whole point is how beautiful the imagery is, you really want DLSS 3 with its god-awful frame insertion/creation making a hash of it?
 
Purgatory said:
The outrage is justified, the 4090 FE is £300 more here in the UK than what a 3090 sold for and has had features removed that professionals use like NVLINK, these cards should not be called 4090s but 4080ti if we look back at 3080ti again not having NVLINK. The 90 class was sold to us as a Titan replacement, meaning professional use, professional use means NVLINK. These are gaming cards being sold for £300 more and an important pro feature removed. The uplift is nothing special too even compared to previous generations.
Click to expand...

If anything, it wasn't the 4090 that was mis-named but the 3090, which should have been a Titan. As you say, they marketed it as a Titan replacement and even Jensen still referred to the 3080 as the top tier "gaming" card at launch. Who's to say there isn't a 4000 series Titan card coming with the "pro features" you mention?

Regards the uplift, the 4090 is nearly twice the performance of the 3090 which seems a pretty decent uplift to me, especially for only $100 more than the 3090 was at launch?

(I'm ignoring the 3090Ti here, which was just a money-grab)
 
Last edited:
Aegis said:
Yeah - my bad :D when I was looking for the 3090 MSRP I missed the 'Promotional Price, Limited time only' Hahaha! Right. :rolleyes:

I think given that how late in the 30-series the 3090 Ti launched though, that the prices are still reasonable - after all, clearly they can (and are) selling the 3090 Ti for close to that.
Click to expand...

You want to see the biggest insult if we are matching last gen to this gen.

The 3090 (GA102) was £1400 has 24GB VRAM and NVLINK.

They gave us a 4080 (AD103 a lot smaller chip) £1269 with 16GB no NVLINK.. meaning they gave us a card down a tier and chip with 50% less VRAM, 25% better performance on average depending on game, all for £131 less than a top end 3090 with all the pro features. Then real AIB pricing is even more than what AIB 3090s came out at for the same models and all 4080s have half empty pcbs compared to the 3090s that were fully loaded with components, so a card a lot cheaper to make is costing as much as a card that costs a lot more to make.

See you just have to look at that and say wow they are charging £131 less than what was the top end card.

OR

If you really want a reality kick... the 3080 was £649 and now the same class card is £1269 and means that same tier of card has gone up £620 a doubling almost in price.


Nvidia .........

 
Last edited:
Vertigo1 said:
Regards the uplift, the 4090 is nearly twice the performance of the 3090 which seems a pretty decent uplift to me, especially for only $100 more than the 3090 was at launch?
Click to expand...
Jensen would have you believe that - in reality (without DLSS 3.0) it's a pretty typical gen-on-gen advance (similar to 20->30 series).

Pic-02.png
 
Aegis said:
They revised their graphs after testing for CPU bottlenecks no?

www.techpowerup.com

RTX 4090 & 53 Games: Ryzen 7 5800X vs Core i9-12900K Review

We test the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 with 53 games at three resolutions, comparing the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X against the Intel Core i9-12900K. The idea here is to get a feel for how much graphics performance is lost by a weaker processor.
www.techpowerup.com www.techpowerup.com
Click to expand...

They did not retroactively go back and update all their 4090 review data. You can see that when you compare the relative performance chart forbthe 4090 against any of their 4090 launch day reviews
 
Last edited:
Aegis said:
They should have replaced the 3090 and the 3080's with their Ti variants at the original launch MSRP (£1049/£649) and cut prices on the rest of the stack by £100-£200.

3090 Ti - £1049 (Competitor refurb min. price: £1,318.99)
3090 - £899 (OC min. price: £1,199.95)
3080 Ti - £649 (maybe £699 - OC min. price: £989.99)
3080 - £549 (OC min. price: £749.99)
3070 Ti - £469 (OC min. price: £649.99)
3070 - £349 (OC min. price: £518.99)
3060 Ti - £249 (OC min. price: £428.99)
3060 - £149 (OC min. price: £359.99)
3050 - £99 (OC min. price: £299.99)
Click to expand...
Exactly, they would fly off the shelves.
No such thing as a product that won't sell, only a price it won't sell at.
But 3090 and ti need to be cheaper than that still.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom