When the Gpu's prices will go down ?

[ASMB]

Some have suggested the 7600xt will perform about the same as the 6800 or 6800xt but have 8GB of ram to keep costs down. So in theory it could be a better 1080p card than the 6700xt as you don't need 12GB for 1080p gaming, just turn some settings down a bit if needed. Looking forward to the reviews of the next gen cards, to find out

 

[Darujhistan]

Some have suggested the 7600xt will perform about the same as the 6800 or 6800xt but have 8GB of ram to keep costs down. So in theory it could be a better 1080p card than the 6700xt as you don't need 12GB for 1080p gaming, just turn some settings down a bit if needed. Looking forward to the reviews of the next gen cards, to find out

To keep profits up more like.

8GB in 2022 is a sick joke.

 

[nomadd]

To keep profits up more like.

8GB in 2022 is a sick joke.

+1

 

[ASMB]

Yet people have been snapping up the 3070 & 3070ti at over £600, often more this past year, just saying

 

[CuriousTomCat]

I really hope the 7600 and 7600 XT has the full 16x PCI lanes for those of us on older motherboards.

 

[HangTime]

To keep profits up more like.

8GB in 2022 is a sick joke.

Assuming they keep similar naming conventions to current gen, the 600XT it would be 5th tier card behind 900xt, 800xt, 800, 700xt. 8GB doesn't seem that unexpected to me.
6800 performance at a 'cheap' price is probably desired by a lot of people, to date they've been locked out of that in part due to the cost of all the VRAM on high end parts.
One of the great things about VRAM limitations is they are relatively easy to overcome, unlike plain lack of grunt. Conversely paying extra for more VRAM than you need is kind of 'wasted' compared to paying extra for more raw performance.
I'd rather have 6800 performance with 8GB than 6700XT performance with 12GB.

 

[A.S.D.I.C.]

I still find it interesting that with the new AMD refresh in 9 days, the old gen is still costing the same. Wouldn't someone want make room for the old stock pile to clear out ?

 

[Calin Banc]

I still find it interesting that with the new AMD refresh in 9 days, the old gen is still costing the same. Wouldn't someone want make room for the old stock pile to clear out ?

If they bought them at high prices... can't really sell them cheap.

 

[A.S.D.I.C.]

Well in 9 days they are gonna be old gen, so I want to see how much are all the shops gonna sell them for .....

 

[CuriousTomCat]

Well in 9 days they are gonna be old gen, so I want to see how much are all the shops gonna sell them for .....

Old gen? The 6650 XT for example is based on Navi 23 so the same architecture as the 6600 and 6600 XT. The 6650 XT has the same number of shading units as the 6600 XT so 2048. It just has a higher core/memory frequency.

It's my understanding that the 6650 XT will just be a new tier to fill the huge price gap between the 6600 XT at £389.99 and the 6700 XT at £548.99.

The same with the 6750 XT and 6950 XT. None of the old pricing will change. These are just slightly faster cards with a slightly higher price.

 

[Darujhistan]

Assuming they keep similar naming conventions to current gen, the 600XT it would be 5th tier card behind 900xt, 800xt, 800, 700xt. 8GB doesn't seem that unexpected to me.
6800 performance at a 'cheap' price is probably desired by a lot of people, to date they've been locked out of that in part due to the cost of all the VRAM on high end parts.
One of the great things about VRAM limitations is they are relatively easy to overcome, unlike plain lack of grunt. Conversely paying extra for more VRAM than you need is kind of 'wasted' compared to paying extra for more raw performance.
I'd rather have 6800 performance with 8GB than 6700XT performance with 12GB.

I disagree it's 2022 now, and these cards are not cheap even old cards like the 6600 are going for nearly £400. Even NV who are notorious RAM grifters made a 60 card with 12GB. I think people who are buying towards the lower end tend to keep their cards a lot longer and should be geting 12GB for their money now...did you notice how NV suddenly found another 2GB of VRAM from behind the sofa for the 3080ti?

Do you really think the 4060ti (or AMD equivalent) which will be north of £500 easily should only have 8GB given that it will be expected to be a genuine 1440p card?

8GB is a standard from 5 years ago at least, I bought 580 and 590 cards with 8GB on for £200 as far back as 2017...now it's £500 for 8GB in 2022 going into 2023?

LMAO. Don't let these greedy, lying, dirty corps condition you into accepting less for more while their profits go through the roof.

 

[gpuerrilla]

I have read here @Darujhistan - Sony, Microsoft, nvidia are the authority and know how much vram is needed (although still waiting on the proof of this gymnastics).

 

[Darujhistan]

I have read here @Darujhistan - Sony, Microsoft, nvidia are the authority and know how much vram is needed (although still waiting on the proof of this gymnastics).

I'll never understand people who put the best interests of huge corps ahead of their own best interests. But here we are...

 

[HangTime]

I disagree it's 2022 now, and these cards are not cheap even old cards like the 6600 are going for nearly £400. Even NV who are notorious RAM grifters made a 60 card with 12GB. I think people who are buying towards the lower end tend to keep their cards a lot longer and should be geting 12GB for their money now...did you notice how NV suddenly found another 2GB of VRAM from behind the sofa for the 3080ti?

Do you really think the 4060ti (or AMD equivalent) which will be north of £500 easily should only have 8GB given that it will be expected to be a genuine 1440p card?

8GB is a standard from 5 years ago at least, I bought 580 and 590 cards with 8GB on for £200 as far back as 2017...now it's £500 for 8GB in 2022 going into 2023?

LMAO. Don't let these greedy, lying, dirty corps condition you into accepting less for more while their profits go through the roof.

You can get 6600 for under £300 and it's not an old card, it came out 6 months ago.
The 3060 is a classic example of the sort of situation I'm talking about, 12GB VRAM but not enough raw power. Much rather have a 3060ti.
If people are buying towards the lower end then spending money on excess VRAM seems like a waste to me, they would rather have less VRAM if it meant the card was cheaper.
The 3080ti has an extra 2GB VRAM but costs £400 more than the 3080. It's just another differentiator to try and persuade people to fork out that much, because the raw power of the 3080ti isn't that far ahead.
A 4060ti I could see having more than 8GB potentially.
Yes I bought a RX480 8GB over 5 years ago. Most of the time I didn't need that much VRAM, I only bought it because there was a mining boom causing rising prices and it was cheap. A 1060 6GB would have been fine also but was more expensive. But you have remember modern cards are using GDDR6 which is more expensive than GDDR5. Also the 80/90 range cards were top of the line. As per my original post, there are several tiers of card above that. They already have more than 8GB never mind next gen. Perhaps an alternative comparison would be too look at what VRAM then RX560 had (2GB or 4GB). So that tier of card now has 2-4x the amount of VRAM now.
I don't think we are being asked to accept less for more. We're being asked to accept more powerful GPUs with the same VRAM for more money. Unless you're talking 6500XT or some junk like that but that wasn't the topic under discussion. If it was the case of there being a RX6600XT with 12GB VRAM and then a 7600XT comes out with 8GB VRAM maybe that would be the case, but there isn't.

edit: to be clear, for sure we are being fleeced for more money than yesteryear. I always used to buy GPUs around the £150-240 range. But that's a different topic than VRAM amounts, cards are just more expensive across the board.

 

[Darujhistan]

You can get 6600 for under £300 and it's not an old card, it came out 6 months ago.
The 3060 is a classic example of the sort of situation I'm talking about, 12GB VRAM but not enough raw power. Much rather have a 3060ti.
If people are buying towards the lower end then spending money on excess VRAM seems like a waste to me, they would rather have less VRAM if it meant the card was cheaper.
The 3080ti has an extra 2GB VRAM but costs £400 more than the 3080. It's just another differentiator to try and persuade people to fork out that much, because the raw power of the 3080ti isn't that far ahead.
A 4060ti I could see having more than 8GB potentially.
Yes I bought a RX480 8GB over 5 years ago. Most of the time I didn't need that much VRAM, I only bought it because there was a mining boom causing rising prices and it was cheap. But you have remember modern cards are using GDDR6 which is more expensive than GDDR5. Also the 80/90 range cards were top of the line. As per my original post, there are several tiers of card above that. They already have more than 8GB never mind next gen. Perhaps an alternative comparison would be too look at what VRAM then RX560 had (2GB or 4GB). So that tier of card now has 2-4x the amount of VRAM now.
I don't think we are being asked to accept less for more. We're being asked to accept more powerful GPUs with the same VRAM for more money. Unless you're talking 6500XT or some junk like that but that wasn't the topic under discussion. If it was the case of there being a RX6600XT with 12GB VRAM and then a 7600XT comes out with 8GB VRAM maybe that would be the case, but there isn't.

It's a newish low end card on 2 year old tech.

Yeah of course I'd rather have a 3060ti, one with 12GB of VRAM...like it should have had. a £5-600 card with ther SAME VRAM a 2017-18 card had costing £200 and you defend it! LMAO.

This is the mentality that makes me laugh, defending the best interests of the corp with yesterday's RAM specs.

I don't think we are being asked to accept less for more. We're being asked to accept more powerful GPUs with the same VRAM for more money.

LOL! GPU prices have risen exponentially over the last 10 years, of course we're being asked to pay more for less...people are so naive, oh gof bless the corps working so hard to bring us the best products they can just scrape enough profit for their poor shareholders to scrape a living...oh and by the way, you talk as if increased performance is something we should be grateful for, if there weren't increases in performance they wouldn't be able to sell any cards, apart from people new to PC gaming or ones with broken cards...

 

[Calin Banc]

Does a 6800/XT uses those 16GB in any game? I have a 8GB RTX 2080 and I think I only hit the limit in a specific Scenario in Microsoft Flight Sim, but that's not the norm. AMDs 580 with 8GB were useless also.
There is a whole thread with the 10GB limit on the 3080 and there wasn't shown any specific trend where the card would fall behind due to vRAM and 6800/XT would pull ahead...
Extra vRAM not only costs more money (like the useless 290/390 where with 8GB), but also eats more power for nothing. Sure, it would be useful if SLI/CF would be a thing and work in every game. It will probably have the grunt in future games (2x3080), but as it stands now... nope, you don't need it.

 

[HangTime]

you talk as if increased performance is something we should be grateful for

Can you elaborate on this please, if anything I've said the opposite in the final paragraph. But this agenda you seem to be pushing about the evil corporations isn't what I'm debating, I'm talking about why I don't want to get pay them even MORE money for VRAM I don't want [for the price premium].

I would rather pay £500 for 6800 performance with 8GB VRAM than say £700 for 6800 performance with 12GB VRAM. Simple as that.

 

[gpuerrilla]

But you have remember modern cards are using GDDR6 which is more expensive than GDDR5. Also the 80/90 range cards were top of the line. As per my original post, there are several tiers of card above that. They already have more than 8GB never mind next gen. Perhaps an alternative comparison would be too look at what VRAM then RX560 had (2GB or 4GB). So that tier of card now has 2-4x the amount of VRAM now

This is where I think this train of thought is quite muddy. Parts are generally bought way ahead of time and in some contracts with bulk order discounts (for these GPU vendors to assemble them). Let's take your RAM example, I recall buying a kit for my system in 2013 and it used DDR3. I am pretty sure the prices of system RAM once the generation settles maintains a pattern like it always has for me around or below £100. This was the same when I built the ryzen system (some years later) DDR4 costing below £100 yet it was faster yet not 'more expensive'. Yet in my example I went from 8Gb DDR3 to 16Gb of DDR4 maintaining the price point in general of what the going rate in component markets follows.

To me it seems to justify arguments (and let these manufacturers off the hook) the information we are fed gets soaked up too readily. While gpu memory may be more expensive so is everything else, quite a relative market issue.

Referring to a HU review recently where they discussed this, they used prices to dictate how much VRAM a card should have these days:

$500+ price, 12Gb minimum
$240->499, 8Gb minimum

 

[HangTime]

For sure, you can't use GDDR pricing to explain the whole price differential - that's why I haven't, I'm just mentioning it as a factor but also stating that GPU prices have risen across the board (for reasons I think we're all familiar with by now). GPUs cost more than they used to. I bought a top of the range card (GTX280) for under £250 back in 2008. It had 1GB VRAM which was good for the time. These days you are talking £650+ for that sort of tier.

The desktop DDR progression follows a pattern. New DDR comes out. It's more expensive. Then the price drops. You reach a point where supply switches over and prior gen DDR actually costs more than current gen. This happened with DDR2, DDR3, DDR4 and I assume will happen with DDR5 at some point. I'm not familiar enough with GDDR supply chains but my assumption is we haven't hit the tipping point on pricing yet due to the supply chain disruption and huge demand over the past couple of years.

 

[gpuerrilla]

GPU's costing more is one thing.. scrimping on the cards VRAM is not something needed as per HU above. Whilst I understand there is no point slapping on more just for the sake of it, equally you cannot charge a price then make no effort to engineer the sensible buffer. It is quite evident the 12Gb point seems to be the safe amount in the high end. It is also not out of the realms of possibility both AMD and nvidia can workaround the hardware target and compress better for example. The industry awaits for late 2022 to see what occurs.

Now that we seem to have hit GPU stocks aplenty, all of a sudden these cards are not costing loads for expensive GDDR6.. and the very same cards specs are close to MSRP!