Cancel him until he does go back to Amd.
P.S can the mods only allow him to post in the Nvidia threads.![]()
Oh Good Grief no....
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.
Cancel him until he does go back to Amd.
P.S can the mods only allow him to post in the Nvidia threads.![]()
@LtMatt Get one from AMD for me, i'll pay for it if you can get them to hold one for me, preferably an AIB one.
Haha.Oh Good Grief no....
They will still be maintaining their premium with the 3080ti and 3090 its just that the competition this time around forced nvidia to use the better die for the 80 non ti which traditionally has been around 30% behind the 80ti but this time will only be around 10% but they also added the extra tier in the 3090 so they don't lose out.The 3080 is a GA102 die. The 2080, 1080 and 980 were all 104 dies. It would be safe to assume that Nvidia didn't want to give you a 104 die as an x80 class card. Therefore we can make a rough estimate as to where it would have been priced.
I disagree, they are losing out of the profit margins they wanted to have. I'm not saying they are bad, it just not as good as what they wanted and they could have had. They wanted that 102 die with an MSRP of at least £1000 (being conservative). The die in the 3070 should have been in the 3080.They will still be maintaining their premium with the 3080ti and 3090 its just that the competition this time around forced nvidia to use the better die for the 80 non ti which traditionally has been around 30% behind the 80ti but this time will only be around 10% but they also added the extra tier in the 3090 so they don't lose out.
O is it not a nvidia thread![]()
My Seasonic PSU isn't coming until Jan 1stAs close as possible to then I will be buying:
A 5800X or a 5700X (CPU) if the latter materialises.
A 6800XT or a 6700XT if the latter materialises and can do high-refresh 1440p.
A Gibabyte B550 Aorus Pro
A 970 Evo Plus 1TB or better.
In the meantime I've got plenty of searching to do for:
The perfect ATX case
The perfect UWQHD high-refresh monitor.
Some balls, in order to get an AIO and not be worried about water destroying everything (it's an irrational fear!)
Going to be an expensive start to the year but **** it. The 2500K keeps moaning about wanting to retire to a beach in FijiI've kept him in service long enough!
e: I would quite happily buy a 6800XT at the AMD RRP of <£600 (right now), but they are rarer than rocking horse crap, and realistically I have zero chance.![]()
Well most of this rig dates from 2012, so I think I've had fairly decent value from itHang on a second, your upgrading the whole damn rig!! Cant yield them sob stories when your shelling out such an outlay!
I only upgraded the GPU this year (and end of year at that) with the look to it lasting 3+ years (it only had to handle 4k display that I have had for a while and the vega struggled to push). You can get the FE cards you just need to be ready for 2-3pm on the day the alerts drop. Out of them all the 3080's seem to be harder to get alerts for and I wasnt interested in any of the marked up AIB flavours.
For the record, I couldn't get the 3080FE on release, and couldn't get the 6800XT on release, I did try hard for them.
Well most of this rig dates from 2012, so I think I've had fairly decent value from itVery little of it is worth re-using. In fact none, really.
I would imagen all of the dies are pretty cheap since they're on Samsung 8nm so even the full 102 is probably much cheaper than what AMD are paying.I disagree, they are losing out of the profit margins they wanted to have. I'm not saying they are bad, it just not as good as what they wanted and they could have had. They wanted that 102 die with an MSRP of at least £1000 (being conservative). The die in the 3070 should have been in the 3080.
Let's assume that the 6900XT was only as fast as the 3070.
How many people would have been willing to spend 3080 money on a ga104 die (A.K.A 3070 performance)?
How many people would have got a 3090/3080ti instead of a 3080 if the 3080 was using the ga104 die?
I think some people on the forums said they didn't get a 3090 because the performance jump compared to the 3080 wasn't big enough. They were clearly prepared to spend over £1000 on a GPU but didn't. Money that Nvidia isn't going to get.
Nvidia could have been selling the GA104 die for £649 instead it is £469.
Nvidia could have been selling the GA102 die for £1400 instead they have to settle for £649.
And after crying over the loss of 16:10 I'm going to go the other way and try a 21:9, lol. I do so love to contradict myself.
Yeah. For me 4K is where it's at. But if one does not upgrade often then better not see 4K and go 1440p ultra wide which is much easier to run.Personally never found 21:9 a good option for my main monitor - in fact my 21:9 screen hardly gets any use now - I ditched the 1440p one for another 16:9 4K screen and only reason I kept the 1080p one is that it is a Dell IPS with very good image quality.
Yeah. For me 4K is where it's at. But if one does not upgrade often then better not see 4K and go 1440p ultra wide which is much easier to run.
I am lucky as I find 60hz to be fine. But maybe that is because I do not play online or any twitch games. I have a 165hz 1440p monitor and prefer this 4K 60hz one over it. Next upgrade for me is OLED 120hz 4K. But probably in a couple of years time.I dont think I could go back to 4k 60hz again, I tried it a couple of years ago when borrowing a monitor from work and it was hideous ie refresh rate, I think if I went 4k again it would have to be one of the higher refresh 4k monitors. Then again its the cost.
Hideous... really? The world was gaming at 30fps and less for decades and is still mostly gaming at 60hz, especially at higher resolutions, very happily. I get why people prefer higher refresh rates in general, but 60fps is of course still very playable.I dont think I could go back to 4k 60hz again, I tried it a couple of years ago when borrowing a monitor from work and it was hideous ie refresh rate, I think if I went 4k again it would have to be one of the higher refresh 4k monitors. Then again its the cost.
Personally never found 21:9 a good option for my main monitor - in fact my 21:9 screen hardly gets any use now - I ditched the 1440p one for another 16:9 4K screen and only reason I kept the 1080p one is that it is a Dell IPS with very good image quality.
I have actually moved from a 27" 4K 60hz to a 34" 3440x1440 144Hz and that has been night and day better for gaming and productivity for me tbh. Higher res is great but the larger screen real estate to basically have two monitors in one for my day to day work makes things much easier. I mean a 38" I think would be the sweat spot for me but the price difference is huge tbh and often have other compromises. There just needs to be a proper 21:9 OLED 38" with dolby vision and we good to go and I am happy to drop £1k on a monitor rather than the £300-£400 I do these days.
Hideous... really? The world was gaming at 30fps and less for decades and is still mostly gaming at 60hz, especially at higher resolutions, very happily. I get why people prefer higher refresh rates in general, but 60fps is of course still very playable.