When the Gpu's prices will go down ?

Murphy · 8 Jun 2023 at 14:46

Either we/you think linear means something different or you're not looking at just pricing.

e: I've only ran the Kepler numbers so far but...

GTX 950 @ $159	GTX 960 @ $199	%25 increase
GTX 960 @ $199	GTX 970 @ $329	%65 increase
GTX 970 @ $329	GTX 980 @ $549	%67 increase
GTX 980 @ $549	Titan X @ $999	%82 increase

Pascal...

GTX 1050 @ $109	GTX 1060 @ $249	%128 increase
GTX 1060 @ $249	GTX 1070 @ $379	%52 increase
GTX 1070 @ $379	GTX 1080 @ $599	%58 increase
GTX 1080 FE @ $699	Titan X @ $1200	%71 increase

gpuerrilla · 8 Jun 2023 at 15:04

First ten seconds:

danlightbulb · 8 Jun 2023 at 15:47

Murphy said:
Either we/you think linear means something different or you're not looking at just pricing.

I didn't include the Titan's in my chart, so maybe it went non-linear at this very top end.

Linear means in terms of price and performance, Im using timespy benchmark as my normaliser because its impossible to use average game framerates (no data source for this). You're not taking account of performance in those numbers, you're just looking at price uplifts from model A to model B.

Look at my chart - the data is there. Draw visual best fit lines through the series' and you'll see the patterns.

Murphy · 8 Jun 2023 at 15:51

danlightbulb said:
I didn't include the Titan's in my chart, so maybe it went non-linear at this very top end.

It's also non-liner at the bottom end. (Or at least it used to be) Basically you'd have small increases in price at the lower end, fairly liner increases in the mid, and big increases at the top end. (not what we're seeing with the 40 series yet AFAIK).

danlightbulb said:
Linear means in terms of price and performance...

Naughty, naughty.

That's moving the goal posts that is, we were talking about liner price not liner price and performance.

danlightbulb · 8 Jun 2023 at 15:55

Murphy said:
Naughty, naughty. That's moving the goal posts that is, we were talking about liner price not liner price and performance.

I have always been talking about price and performance, those are the two axis on my chart that Ive been banding about here since Ampere came out.

danlightbulb · 8 Jun 2023 at 15:57

Murphy said:
It's also non-liner at the bottom end. (Or at least it used to be) Basically you'd have small increases in price at the lower end, fairly liner increases in the mid, and big increases at the top end. (not what we're seeing with the 40 series yet AFAIK).

It is true Ive only considered the cards from 60 class upto 90 class /Ti. I haven't included very low end cards because it made the charts messy and generally its not what we all buy, we all tend buy 60 class and up.

Murphy · 8 Jun 2023 at 15:58

danlightbulb said:
I have always been talking about price and performance, those are the two axis on my chart that Ive been banding about here since Ampere came out.

*cough*, *cough*

danlightbulb said:
In terms of product stack, the 30 series was not linearly priced, which I think is a big part of the problem here. The 40 series is very linearly priced. So when you compare against say 3080fe which was very keenly priced it's not much of a value jump, but the 3090fe was only a bit faster than the 3080 but over double the price so terrible value. The 4090 is a fair bit faster than the 4080.

If it wasn't skewed by the last gen, linear pricing is actually a reasonable approach that we should have been pleased about.

danlightbulb · 8 Jun 2023 at 16:08

Murphy said:
*cough*, *cough*

Well apologies if it wasn't clear. Pricing means nothing without knowing the performance too, I assumed this was common approach.

Means nothing to say 4070 is 30% higher price than 4060. Those are just model numbers, only a general indication of a step up in perf.

Murphy · 8 Jun 2023 at 16:16

TBH i find the whole 'they're just model numbers' rather annoying. They're not, they're performance and price expectations.

E.g If Nvidia reversed all the model numbers so the 4050 was the most expensive, top performing card would you seriously say there's nothing wrong with giving the most expensive, highest performance, card the lowest numerical model number. Like it or not the vast majority of consumers expect more number means more better.

If Intel did it, if AMD did it, would you say 'they're just model numbers' so it's OK to reverse the nomenclature.

Joxeon · 8 Jun 2023 at 16:19

danlightbulb said:
I prefer linear pricing. Want 30% more performance from the 4090 compared to the 4080? Ok and it comes with 30% more cost. Seems fair to me, provided the whole series is calibrated correctly which it isn't.

Linear pricing just means you’re paying more for less except if you’re already buying the halo card. Not sure why you would want to pay more for less as a consumer.

86dan · 8 Jun 2023 at 17:02

kieran_read said:
Perhaps not but if your willing to go AMD I can see the XTX coming down to 900 and below this year.

The Nitro X is on a crazy offer right now.

Annoyingly on hotukdeals app gor lots of different things just had some 4080 msi's for £887 but they sold out quick, of course right after I buy the 4070ti

kieran_read · 8 Jun 2023 at 17:20

86dan said:
Annoyingly on hotukdeals app gor lots of different things just had some 4080 msi's for £887 but they sold out quick, of course right after I buy the 4070ti

That's a good price I probably would have jumped for that price only 100 more than what I paid for my 1080ti 6-7 years ago.

86dan · 8 Jun 2023 at 17:28

kieran_read said:
That's a good price I probably would have jumped for that price only 100 more than what I paid for my 1080ti 6-7 years ago.

It was def a misprice some orders went through others got cancelled, I feel like £800ish is what its original price should have been.

kieran_read · 8 Jun 2023 at 17:35

86dan said:
It was def a misprice some orders went through others got cancelled, I feel like £800ish is what its original price should have been.

Yep 800 - 900 with AIBs is where I expected that and the Top AMD card to sit.

I was ready to jump hitting refresh in the 7900xtx then the AIB at 1100 with AIBs at 1300 I was just like nope.

Like I said before now my FOMO has gone I'm waiting until the Nitro X is under £1000 that's my current plan anyway I do need a card but my existing isn't broken.

If I get the new job I'm applying for I might treat myself.

danlightbulb · 8 Jun 2023 at 18:15

Joxeon said:
Linear pricing just means you’re paying more for less except if you’re already buying the halo card. Not sure why you would want to pay more for less as a consumer.

How does it mean you're paying more for less?

If performance of x costs £300, then under linear pricing performance of 2x costs £600. Everyone is paying the same per unit of performance.

kieran_read · 8 Jun 2023 at 19:23

danlightbulb said:
How does it mean you're paying more for less?

If performance of x costs £300, then under linear pricing performance of 2x costs £600. Everyone is paying the same per unit of performance.

Yep.

The issue for me isn't linear pricing, the issue i have is liner pricing accross generations.

Traditionally a new generation brings old performance down a tier or two, the issue currently especially with Nvidia is that the new generation maybe 20% faster but it's also 20% more expensive (obviously it's not exactly linear in real tearms but it's close enough as to how i see the current generation)

danlightbulb · 8 Jun 2023 at 19:45

kieran_read said:
Yep.

The issue for me isn't linear pricing, the issue i have is liner pricing accross generations.

Traditionally a new generation brings old performance down a tier or two, the issue currently especially with Nvidia is that the new generation maybe 20% faster but it's also 20% more expensive (obviously it's not exactly linear in real tearms but it's close enough as to how i see the current generation)

Yes I agree, the 4070 only equals the 3080 in performance, which isn't sufficient. The 4070ti equals the 3090ti, but that is only because the 3090ti wasn't much of a leap over the 3080/3090 in the first place.

If we say the 4070 should be £480, the same as the 3070 was, then the 4080 which is 50% faster should be about £720 and the 4090 which is about twice as fast as the 4070 should be just under £1k.

Aretak · 8 Jun 2023 at 20:08

danlightbulb said:
How does it mean you're paying more for less?

If performance of x costs £300, then under linear pricing performance of 2x costs £600. Everyone is paying the same per unit of performance.

Because typically in the past you've gotten far better than linear price/performance across the stack. The price of the halo products simply isn't going to come down, so linear pricing would only drag the lower-end SKUs up. The ~~idiots~~ fine people who pay so ridiculously over the odds for cards like the 3090 help keep Nvidia's profit margins healthy enough for them to be able to (at MSRP and not in this world completely shafted by mining and Covid) sell a 3080 that offers 85% of the performance for less than half the money, or a 3060 Ti that offers 60% of the raw performance for 27% of the 3090's MSRP. In your linear pricing scenario the 3090 would still cost $1500 and the 3060 Ti would be priced at $900. That would be how everyone would pay the same per unit of performance in reality.

StriderX · 8 Jun 2023 at 20:16

I kinda wish that the last two digits were just literally the percentage of the biggest chip performance and the TI was like 5% better... but NV would have a fit about poor differentiation.

Joxeon · 8 Jun 2023 at 20:18

danlightbulb said:
How does it mean you're paying more for less?

If performance of x costs £300, then under linear pricing performance of 2x costs £600. Everyone is paying the same per unit of performance.

A 3070 cost $500 and you got 67% of a 3090 performance yet a 4070 costs $600 and you only get 50% of the 4090 performance so clearly you’re paying more for less performance when the scaling is more linear.

Even paying $800 only gets you 61% of a 4090 performance while $1200 now gets you 75% so we’ve gone from paying 500 for 67% of the top cards perf to paying 1200 for 75% which is terrible imo.