• 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.

RTX 4070 12GB, is it Worth it?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can refuse to pay and tell Jenson to do one

Jensen doesn't care. Either $599 is worth playing PC games to you or it isn't.

So if in reality $599 was worth the reward to you, who are you spiting really.

The best you can do is go to their competitor, but wait, they are doing the exact same thing.
 
Last edited:
Jensen doesn't care. Either $599 is worth playing PC games to you or it isn't.

So if in reality $599 was worth the reward to you, who are you spiting really.

The best you can do is go to their competitor, but wait, they are doing the exact same thing.

I know that he has long held the belief that the GPU card is more important than the rest of the PC, so his theory has long been that it should cost more too. The real problem for people like you and me is that he is killing the upgrade market, which used to be accessible to all, but now is rapidly becoming accessible only to the few real enthusiasts.
 
Jensen doesn't care. Either $599 is worth playing PC games to you or it isn't.

So if in reality $599 was worth the reward to you, who are you spiting really.

If I thought that £599 was "worth it" then I would pay it and be very happy. That's not what people are doing though. Plenty of people are agreeing it's bad value, paying the money, then moaning about it. It's as if people feel like they don't have a choice.
 
If I thought that £599 was "worth it" then I would pay it and be very happy. That's not what people are doing though. Plenty of people are agreeing it's bad value, paying the money, then moaning about it. It's as if people feel like they don't have a choice.

The person you replied to isn't you.

They said they don't really have a choice. Doesn't sound like they want to quit PC gaming.

Everyone wants a bargain. They will always complain.
 
Last edited:
Playing devil's advocate for a moment, the 3070's original 2020 MSRP ($499) in 2023 inflation adjusted prices would be close to £/$600 and the 3080 would be more like £/$800. Ignoring of course it was challenging to actually obtain those cards at MSRP to begin with in between scalping insanity.

So the 4070's $600 pricing at least is sort of business as usual from that perspective which is probably how they landed on that price.

But the 2xxx and 3xxx series both drove prices up as well which I think is really why there's so much discontent and the 4070 is to the 3080 what the 3070 was to the 2080 ti so the xx70 SKU has definitely "shrunk" generation on generation.

It's the kind of thing that makes you want to relive 2008 in glorious 1650x1050 where the second fastest single GPU part on the market could be had for like £300.
 
How much VRAM do you need to play Devil's Advocate? :p

john-jonah-jameson-lol.gif
 
Last edited:
Playing devil's advocate for a moment, the 3070's original 2020 MSRP ($499) in 2023 inflation adjusted prices would be close to £/$600 and the 3080 would be more like £/$800. Ignoring of course it was challenging to actually obtain those cards at MSRP to begin with in between scalping insanity.

So the 4070's $600 pricing at least is sort of business as usual from that perspective which is probably how they landed on that price.

But the 2xxx and 3xxx series both drove prices up as well which I think is really why there's so much discontent and the 4070 is to the 3080 what the 3070 was to the 2080 ti so the xx70 SKU has definitely "shrunk" generation on generation.

It's the kind of thing that makes you want to relive 2008 in glorious 1650x1050 where the second fastest single GPU part on the market could be had for like £300.

Not just the pricing though - anything below the 4090 realistically in comparison to the top end silicon capabilities are a tier down on their model name. Personally not so bothered about what it costs but what you get for the cost.
 
Not just the pricing though - anything below the 4090 realistically in comparison to the top end silicon capabilities are a tier down on their model name. Personally not so bothered about what it costs but what you get for the cost.
That' conclusion is drawn by faulty comparison. The 4070 is a megachip, much bigger than the 3090ti. Did that ever happen before, ever? An xx70 chip being bigger than the previous titan / 80ti or whatever?

Comparing it to the 4090 is just unfair, cause that chip has had the biggest increase in transistor count ever in the history of gpus. If the 4090 was smaller, would that make the 4070 a better card? No. So why does it make it a worse card just because the 4090 is bigger? Doesn't really make sense, right?
 
Last edited:
That' conclusion is drawn by faulty comparison. The 4070 is a megachip, much bigger than the 3090ti. Did that ever happen before, ever? An xx70 chip being bigger than the previous titan / 80ti or whatever?

Comparing it to the 4090 is just unfair, cause that chip has had the biggest increase in transistor count ever in the history of gpus. If the 4090 was smaller, would that make the 4070 a better card? No. So why does it make it a worse card just because the 4090 is bigger? Doesn't really make sense, right?

There has always been some odd discrepancies in that respect between generations what matters is how things line up vs the previous generation(s) and the realistic top performing part of a generation.
 
That' conclusion is drawn by faulty comparison. The 4070 is a megachip, much bigger than the 3090ti. Did that ever happen before, ever? An xx70 chip being bigger than the previous titan / 80ti or whatever?
Doesn't that happen every generation? That is unless you're measuring a pointless metric like the actual physical size of the die and not transistor count.
 
Doesn't that happen every generation? That is unless you're measuring a pointless metric like the actual physical size of the die and not transistor count.
No, actually it hasn't - not even close. This is the first generation that the xx70 is massively larger than the previous full chip Im not talking about the 3090, im talking about the actuall full GA102.. The 3070 was smaller than the 2080ti and of course smaller than the TU102. The 2070 was smaller than the 1080ti and the GP102. The 1070 was smaller than the 980ti and the GM200. Didnt go further back, but just for context, the 4070 packs 26% more transistors than the full GA102. That's insane, and it's probably mostly the cache, which is 6 times larger this time around
 
I mean the 3060Ti (GA103-200) had more transistors than the 2080Ti and the 2070 Super had more transistors than the 1080Ti. :confused:
 
Last edited:
I mean the 3060Ti (GA103-200) had more transistors than the 2080Ti
Νο?
the 2070 Super had more transistors than the 1080Ti. :confused:
Yes but this is the normal 4070, not a super. Plus you have to realize that turing had TENSOR and RT cores that pascal didn't.

Point is, the 4070 is absolutely massive - the performance is lacking - but it's not because nvidia undercut the chip or anything
 
Last edited:
If I thought that £599 was "worth it" then I would pay it and be very happy. That's not what people are doing though. Plenty of people are agreeing it's bad value, paying the money, then moaning about it. It's as if people feel like they don't have a choice.
FOMO like children. It's why so many are in debt now over frivalous purchases.
 
Last edited:
GA103-200 22bn, TU102-300 18.6bn. :confused:
Yes but this is the normal 4070, not a super. Plus you have to realize that turing had TENSOR and RT cores that pascal didn't.

Point is, the 4070 is absolutely massive - the performance is lacking - but it's not because nvidia undercut the chip or anything
I get that but my point is that size (transistor count) isn't really related to performance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom