RTX 4070 12GB, is it Worth it?

TNA · 30 Apr 2023 at 08:50

Murphy said:
What you're essentially describing is planned obsolescences.

If my name was darujhistan I would have responded with "and?" :cry:

But as it is not, what I will say is, that is not much of a insight. We all know about planned obsolescence. Companies that can get away with do so to maximise profits. And what do Nvidia like more than profits and leather jackets?

I upgrade on avarage ever gen, so it bothers me less. I would rather a GPU with enough vram for that gen than pay a lot more for the extra vram that I won't use. And yes, Nvidia do make you pay a lot more for it, does not mean it costs more. And before someone says yeah but AMD.. I am not on about AMD right now. Talking about Nvidia. Until AMD sort out FSR and their pricing they are not on my radar.

Murphy · 30 Apr 2023 at 08:53

Bencher said:
Did ever in the history of GPUs a 3 year old mid range card manage to play games at ultra settings in the heaviest of titles? Like, EVER? Pascal was considered a very good GPU generation, the 1080ti was struggling to get 60fps at 1080p in 2018 and 2017 games - when it was actually brand new. I know, cause I had it. I played RDR2 (a 2018 game) at glorious 17-19 fps @ 4k. 1080p could just about average mid 50ies. And that wasn't the heaviest of games, watchdogs 2 and ghost recon were much heavier.

You really need to start reading things properly instead of making things up, who said anything about "ultra settings in the heaviest of titles", what even is "the heaviest of titles". Also in your usual fashion you're disproving your own point without even realising it. :cry:

g67575 · 30 Apr 2023 at 08:54

Joxeon said:
Even £500 is far to much for a performance level that last gen would have sat between a 3060 and 3060ti so around £350. No 70 card has ever lost to the previous gen 80.

If it was called a 4060 would you be saying £500 is ok?

I don't care about any of that. Try to stick to facts for once, perhaps.

Names are just names. What is important, is that the shader count has stayed the same, and there has been a significant amount of inflation since the last generation was launched. It can't be wished away.

muon · 30 Apr 2023 at 08:56

humbug said:
No, what he said was "the 4070 is the best value $500 + card" its not a $500 + card, its a $600 + card. IE the starting price is $600, not $500. If it was $500 + i might have already bought one, for $500.

The 3070 was $500 +, if it was $500 + it would be ok value given its actually.....

It is a $500+ card. Just like the 3070, 6800 was and just like the 4070 ti and 7900 XT are.

Feel free to twist his words. Most people without an agenda know what he is saying.

muon · 30 Apr 2023 at 08:57

Joxeon said:
I think the 7900XT is better value even though I still think its over priced, your getting 34% more perf at 1440p and 39% more at 4k + 8gb more VRAM so will definitely age better.

At it's current price in the UK, at least on OCUK. I agree.

At MSRP, I don't think so.

Murphy · 30 Apr 2023 at 09:02

TNA said:
But as it is not, what I will say is, that is not much of a insight. We all know about planned obsolescence. Companies that can get away with do so to maximise profits. And what do Nvidia like more than profits and leather jackets?

I wasn't trying to be insightful, i was just pointing out what you were describing. Like you say for some people, those who don't mind upgrading every generation, that's not as bad however i suspect most people don't like the idea of spending $600 every 2-3 years. Especially when the value of their old cards is less than it could be due to them now being obsolete so commanding lower values in the second-hand markets.

It also, IMO, lowers the perceived value of the product. If i know a product is going to be of less use in just 2-3 years I'm a lot less inclined to spend $600 for it, in fact you'd be lucky to get me to spend $200-300 on something i know is going to need replacing in 2-3 years.

TNA · 30 Apr 2023 at 09:14

Murphy said:
I wasn't trying to be insightful, i was just pointing out what you were describing. Like you say for some people, those who don't mind upgrading every generation, that's not as bad however i suspect most people don't like the idea of spending $600 every 2-3 years. Especially when the value of their old cards is less than it could be due to them now being obsolete so commanding lower values in the second-hand markets.

It also, IMO, lowers the perceived value of the product. If i know a product is going to be of less use in just 2-3 years I'm a lot less inclined to spend $600 for it, in fact you'd be lucky to get me to spend $200-300 on something i know is going to need replacing in 2-3 years.

What I am saying is it is obvious Nvidia do it. More importantly they also do it to upsell, so no need to describe it is what I am saying. It is known

I have not had an issue selling on my GPU's. My personal experience is Nvidia GPU's retain their value quite well relative to AMD. I actually factor that in into my buying decision a little. I know if I go AMD it will be harder to shift and likely depreciate more.

I am not saying what you said is wrong. Especially when you are using yourself as an example
But due to mind share most people still rather go Nvidia with less vram it seems

Bencher · 30 Apr 2023 at 09:27

Murphy said:
You really need to start reading things properly instead of making things up, who said anything about "ultra settings in the heaviest of titles", what even is "the heaviest of titles". Also in your usual fashion you're disproving your own point without even realising it.

Well what freaking planned obsolescence are you talking about then? You think the 4070 won't be able to play games 2 years from now or what? What the heck are you talking about?

Murphy · 30 Apr 2023 at 09:34

How have you managed to forget a conversation you had an hour ago.

e: Here, I'll help you out. I'm talking about the "freaking planned obsolescence" described here. :rolleyes:

Bencher · 30 Apr 2023 at 09:35

Murphy said:
How have you managed to forget a conversation you had an hour ago.

Whatever, you are pulling your typical shenanigans again. Either answer the question or move on, smiley faces won't help you

gpuerrilla · 30 Apr 2023 at 09:54

g67575 said:
I don't care about any of that. Try to stick to facts for once, perhaps.

Names are just names. What is important, is that the shader count has stayed the same, and there has been a significant amount of inflation since the last generation was launched. It can't be wished away.

Did you misread the bus/bandwidth spec?

Murphy said:
What you're essentially describing is planned obsolescences.

What was described was actually 10 >8 > 12GB if you follow the trail. Pay attention to the last version and its amount.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 30 Apr 2023 at 10:29

gpuerrilla said:
Did you misread the bus/bandwidth spec?

What was described was actually 10 >8 > 12GB if you follow the trail. Pay attention to the last version and its amount.

All of this would be solved if Nvidia didn't try upselling the RTX3060 replacement as the RTX4070TI,and then not add a few dollars of VRAM more.

For instance if the RTX4070TI was the same price as the overpriced RTX3070TI(which was barely faster than the RTX3070 for $100 more),it would have been 45% faster than an RTX3070TI and had 12GB of VRAM. But even then price progression over the RTX3070 would mean it came with a 20% price increase. But they could have still spun it and managed to essentially double the price of the RTX3060 replacement. But it shows how poor that the positioning of this range is - worse than something Apple would do and shows the contempt they have for PCMR.

Murphy · 30 Apr 2023 at 10:30

gpuerrilla said:
What was described was actually 10 >8 > 12GB if you follow the trail. Pay attention to the last version and its amount.

Well as i wasn't the one to describe it take that up with someone who cares.

ASMB · 30 Apr 2023 at 11:08

TNA said:
But thread is about the 4070 which has 12gb. You can always sell your 3080 and add like £100 or less and get a brand new 4070

Maybe your should take your mates advice:

I can't believe how much 3080s still sell for on auction sites. If you do use your gpu a lot moving from a 3080 to a 4070 would eventually pay for itself in reduced energy costs. No way I would pay what some people are for a 3080.
Don't think that everyone has got the message that the extra 2GB of vram on the 4070 is useful over the 3080, plus reduced energy use and dlss3. While I think this Youtube title is clickbait and OTT as they will not be worthless I wonder how quickly the prices of used 3080/3070/3060ti will go down in future as more games that use dlss3 and 12gb of vram come out. https://youtu.be/Ng8mlICgMT4

humbug · 30 Apr 2023 at 11:34

Joxeon said:
Even £500 is far to much for a performance level that last gen would have sat between a 3060 and 3060ti so around £350. No 70 card has ever lost to the previous gen 80.

If it was called a 4060 would you be saying £500 is ok?

That's a good point....

Aretak · 30 Apr 2023 at 11:51

g67575 said:
What is important, is that the shader count has stayed the same

Yet the memory bus has been crippled. The 4070 is the first 70-class card in history to have less than a 256-bit bus. You know, if we're sticking to (non-selective) facts here.

humbug · 30 Apr 2023 at 11:57

ASMB said:
I can't believe how much 3080s still sell for on auction sites. If you do use your gpu a lot moving from a 3080 to a 4070 would eventually pay for itself in reduced energy costs. No way I would pay what some people are for a 3080.
Don't think that everyone has got the message that the extra 2GB of vram on the 4070 is useful over the 3080, plus reduced energy use and dlss3. While I think this Youtube title is clickbait and OTT as they will not be worthless I wonder how quickly the prices of used 3080/3070/3060ti will go down in future as more games that use dlss3 and 12gb of vram come out. https://youtu.be/Ng8mlICgMT4

The used market is like that all over when it comes to GPU's, private sellers on auction sites trying to sell their used GPU's like we are still in the middle on a mining boom, large pawn broker chains selling used GPU's at the same or higher price than you can get the same make and model right here brand new.

Its bat guano crazy, everyone seems to have lost their minds.

Joxeon · 30 Apr 2023 at 12:05

Bencher said:
Τhat comparison is flawed. What you are basically saying is that if 3080 was a terrible card that would make the 4070 better. Let's say hypothetically the 3080 only matched the 2080 in performance. That would make the 4070 much faster than the 3080. Does that suddenly change the value proposition of the 4070? NOPE.

£469 got you 67% of the 3090 performance last gen, yet this gen your paying £600 for just 50% of the performance. So your paying more for less.

DavidTJ · 30 Apr 2023 at 12:10

muon said:
He keeps saying best value card above $500. Not sure what you are hearing. He is also correct. Sounds like you have a subconscious reason to twist his words.

The issue is he's comparing on MSRP. It's why GPU hierarchies and competition (albeit admittedly minor in the dGPU market) is very important.

Is the 4070 at £550 to £600 the most compelling value for money Nvidia option above £500 probably. But with the AMD 6950xt going for under £650 and the 7900 XT going for £750 I don't think it's the best value overall.

Joxeon · 30 Apr 2023 at 12:13

g67575 said:
I don't care about any of that. Try to stick to facts for once, perhaps.

Names are just names. What is important, is that the shader count has stayed the same, and there has been a significant amount of inflation since the last generation was launched. It can't be wished away.

Don't it seem odd though that the 4070 shader count is the same while the 4090 has a 60% increase for the same +$100 premium.