NVIDIA just made EVERYTHING ELSE obsolete.

[Radium_Angel]

5 hours ago, AdmiralKyrd said:

But will it run MS Flight Simulator 2020?

Will that be the new meme to replace "But will it run Crysis?"

[Stahlmann]

32 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Will that be the new meme to replace "But will it run Crysis?"

It already is.

[savstars]

18 minutes ago, Stahlmann98 said:

It already is.

I'm hoping that it will ends quickly.  It already feels over used.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

6 hours ago, AdmiralKird said:

This is the first thing in PC tech to be excited about for awhile.

I mean, R3000 was something to be excited about.... Actually all Ryzen releases were something to be excited about.

[AdmiralKird]

25 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

I mean, R3000 was something to be excited about.... Actually all Ryzen releases were something to be excited about.

As an Athlon XP and 64 owner, they're exciting in the sense that there's finally competition for Intel and a whole suite of team red that are actually options, and it's forced Intel to slash prices down, but other than that... it's just AMD catching up to Intels modest upgrade cycle that they've been in for the past decade. And Intel still holds the lead by a smidgen in single core performance which is still (sadly) a pretty important metric for actual usage. Intel also hasn't responded in kind with anything themselves to get excited about. So there's reason to be excited, but any real excitement from the fruit of competition when we start making real Moore's Law progress akin to CPU upgrades from 1980-2010 hasn't yet materialized.

But this new GPU announcement...This is Nvidia responding to AMD's RNDA console GPU's which roughly match a 2080 and... well... to steal from the title of the LTT video "made EVERYTHING ELSE obsolete." The 3000 series announcement is like if Intel had responded to Ryzen with the Core i999 Taekwando Infinity Pow and bombed Ryzen right out of the conversation.So, this launch, if the performance holds up to Nvidia's claims, is actually super exciting....

 

...at least for now. Problem is, if Nvidia decisively hold its crown, there's yet again no real competition on the horizon. Which means unlike the Intel/AMD wars which will continue to force better CPU development at lower prices in the 2020's, Nvidia is likely to re-enter the same phase they've been in from 2013-2019 after the 3000 series: Small, incremental upgrades, and continually charging the consumer more in the 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000 lines until AMD or Intel figures out how to match them or we have another console cycle in 2028.

[papajo]

2 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

Your entire point basically is: The 3070 would make a nice flagship card (for 499$), but because there are two more tiers of performance and price, you are not satisfied?

No, it has a flagship card price, nvidia is sandbagging the other chips just to squeeze more margin... 

 

It's not a miracle that Nvidia got within a few years (since it started marking up its prices) a bigger stock share capital than intel... they just got crazy profits because of their tactics mostly because almost all the tech jurnalist gave the free (hoping for free sambles and a good grace by nvidia in general) advertisement instead of critizing its moves which in turn made people pay more for less. 

2 hours ago, AdmiralKird said:

The price isn't just driven by the cost to manufacture, it's driven by consumer demand and willingness to pay. Back when Linus and Luke were reminiscing about graphics card prices in a recent WAN show, they, and many of us, were teens back in those early 2000's days. Most gamers at the time were fairly young and couldn't afford $1,000 graphics cards. I remember staring at a Geforce 2 demo when I could only afford a Riva TNT2 thinking "man, that card and it's reflections are amazing, but a GF2 is $200 and I don't want to spend that." PC Gaming was definitely more niche, with most gamers between 13-30. Now everyone has gotten older, and the age has spread to 13-45. And as you get older, you work, you can (hopefully) afford to buy things, and that $200 GF2 which might have taken you a few birthdays to save can be saved for a 2080 Ti in a few biweekly paychecks. And for the past decade, people have been willing to save and pay those prices for the greatest cards on the market. We can call it absurd, but not really irrational; it's fiscally understandable in a noncompetitive market.

Its not that simple as you said you could not afford a riva TNT2 (a 300$ card) think nowadays 13yolds that now are faced with 1000$ paywalls.... which forces them paying 300$ to get a card that in today's terms was nowhere near the level of even a GF2 back in the day.... its like if you back in 2000's was either forced to play potato 2D games or spend 300$ to buy a mx 200..... 

 

Not only that but Nvidia has a monopoly its not like you want to buy their GPUs at such a prices you can either accept them or go with onboard graphics (or AMD but that only for a couple of tiers) 

 

 

 

[samcool55]

Prices sound good, specs sound good, but boy does it leave me confused AF.

Like, yea it seems like we finally have a reason again to upgrade (tbh I still don't with my ancient rx 480 because there's no new budget stuff yet).

Anyway, why do they suddenly want to compete with console gamers? They are a different market and even the 3070 is waaay to expensive compared to a console.

You can either get a complete new next-gen console, or a GPU with nothing else. Doesn't really make sense?

[AdmiralKird]

50 minutes ago, papajo said:

Its not that simple as you said you could not afford a riva TNT2 (a 300$ card) think nowadays 13yolds that now are faced with 1000$ paywalls.... which forces them paying 300$ to get a card that in today's terms was nowhere near the level of even a GF2 back in the day.... its like if you back in 2000's was either forced to play potato 2D games or spend 300$ to buy a mx 200..... 

 

Not only that but Nvidia has a monopoly its not like you want to buy their GPUs at such a prices you can either accept them or go with onboard graphics (or AMD but that only for a couple of tiers)

The TNT2 was off ebay and was $65 or so. Factoring in inflation, if that were today It would be like getting a GTX 780 off ebay for $110. A 780 will still run almost anything because there hasn't been any competition, just won't be able to go above 60fps and medium-low settings, which was pretty much what I played at in Battlefield 1942 and UT back then. Plus we don't have the almost mandatory two, three year upgrade cycle that existed from 1995-2008. We're talking every few years you'd get a shiny new PC and each time be blown away with "wow, look how fast Windows is!" I didn't know what a TNT2 went for at launch, but nothing held its value back then, to quote Weird Al's All About the Pentiums from 1999 "it was obsolete before I opened the box."  In the modern four, five, six year upgrade cycle that $120 will carry you much further and longer even if you can't ride as high as a 2080. If I were 13 today, I'd just do the same thing I did in 2000.

[papajo]

8 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

Prices sound good

Elaborate on that. 

 

 

And let me simplify it for you, 

 

If you gonna buy a 3000 GPU at those "good" prices what CPU would you buy? how much does it cost? 

What motherboard will you buy how much does it cost? 

 

How much does the entire rig without the GPU cost? 

 

if you pay about as much for the GPU as for the rest of the gear then how could prices be possibly good? 

 

 

[samcool55]

13 minutes ago, papajo said:

Elaborate on that. 

 

 

And let me simplify it for you, 

 

If you gonna buy a 3000 GPU at those "good" prices what CPU would you buy? how much does it cost? 

What motherboard will you buy how much does it cost? 

 

How much does the entire rig without the GPU cost? 

 

if you pay about as much for the GPU as for the rest of the gear then how could prices be possibly good? 

 

 

They are good relative to what we can get now. If what they say is correct.

We don't know the prices are actually good until we get reviews. Just to be clear. That's why I say they sound good, not that they are good.

 

Why they sound good? Because again, if what they say is right, you can get a lot more performance for your money. The jump between 2000 and 3000 is a relatively big one compared to what we used to see for the last few years.

[papajo]

35 minutes ago, AdmiralKird said:

I didn't know what a TNT2 went for at launch, but nothing held its value back then, to quote

about 300$ and that's exactly the point! nothing held its price (value is a different story) exactly because it used to be up until recently that new generations of cards were faster and at the same price if not cheaper now prices go up each generation. 

 

And  reality is the best proof of that https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zLLqkCpCaQ8J:https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=gr  (I use webcache since for some reason steam turns an error when trying to browse the statistics directly on their site but I am pretty sure things if not identical are not vastly different from the google webcash snapshot ) 

 

less than 4% of the entire steam gamerbase has a GPU that costs up to or more than a GTX 1080. (so GTX 1080ti, RTX 2080 ,2080 super,2080 ti ) COMBINED 

 

that means that the vast majority of the people are denyed of gaming without compromises exactly because of the pricing. 

 

I remember buying flagships at 400-500$ pricepoint (which I thought was expensive back then too but the teenage me wanted them eye candys ) but with that money I wasnt denied anything of each generation had to offer in terms of gaming. 

 

Now with that money I can only buy a GPU that will play decently 1080p and some titles at 1440p . <---- this kind of comproses in the not so far past where faced by people that would spend 150 to 200$ to get a mid tier card e.g a 4200 ti, a 8800GS a 9700 GT a GTX 250 etc 

 

Things have changed to the worse for the consumer period. 

[papajo]

1 minute ago, samcool55 said:

Why they sound good? Because again, if what they say is right, you can get a lot more performance for your money. The jump between 2000 and 3000 is a relatively big one compared to what we used to see for the last few years.

Following that logic get this nokia n95 for 580$ https://www.ebay.com/itm/BRAND-NEW-Nokia-N95-Black-Edition-RARE-Sealed-Vintage-Mobile-Phone-RARE-BNIB/193631193888?epid=110616602&hash=item2d15518b20:g:mp8AAOSwJCRfPlay

 

It used to cost 700$ when it launched so 580$ must be a hell of a bargain. 

 

What I try to convey is that price difference on its own  is not a good indicator to judge if the product is a good value. 

 

 

[Tristerin]

All I know is, Im getting a 1080ti eventually.  The only thing wrong with my Fury X in 2020 is lack of VRAM.

[HenrySalayne]

8 minutes ago, papajo said:

What I try to convey is that price difference on its own  is not a good indicator to judge if the product is a good value. 

No. You are claiming, because you can't get the best of the best for 500$ anymore, it must be a rip off. And you haven't provided any proof, why Nvidia is charging way too much in your opinion. Manufacturing cost are higher than they were 10 years ago. And you get a vast improvement in compute power compared to the previous generations. So you are getting more for your money, even if the price is higher. For 1080p60 gaming you can just buy a used 1070 and it should be absolutely fine. If you want 4k120, you have to pay more and you get more in return. But now you are complaining you can't game in 4k120 with all settings maxed out for 500$? How much does a new 4k120 monitor cost? Way more than a monitor back in 2010? Exactly.
I don't get your point if there is any. Prices change. Get over it. You should certainly not buy a new phone or car or you might be pretty disappointed.

[samcool55]

24 minutes ago, papajo said:

Following that logic get this nokia n95 for 580$ https://www.ebay.com/itm/BRAND-NEW-Nokia-N95-Black-Edition-RARE-Sealed-Vintage-Mobile-Phone-RARE-BNIB/193631193888?epid=110616602&hash=item2d15518b20:g:mp8AAOSwJCRfPlay

 

It used to cost 700$ when it launched so 580$ must be a hell of a bargain. 

 

What I try to convey is that price difference on its own  is not a good indicator to judge if the product is a good value. 

 

 

What are you on about? How did you go from new nvidia cards to an old-ass nokia?

The fact that the n95 is not the latest in tech but the 3000 series acutally is right now seems enough reason to not bother with this.

[kpluck]

I found this video a little hard to watch. Linus's breathless, overtop the top excitement was just too much and frankly, there wasn't much good information. Compare his video to the one Hardware Unboxed did about the cards, really there is no comparison.

 

-kp

[Murasaki]

well shit im obsolete what now?

[papajo]

3 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

. And you haven't provided any proof, why Nvidia is charging way too much in your opinion.

What proof do you need? (I have done that in previous topics btw) 

 

The cost designing them (since nvidia is just a designer of the architecture it doesnt produce them themselves) is more or less them same. (they did not acquire any extra supercomputers which they use in RnD to come up with new designs and emulate them to test said designs before production nor did they have any noticeable increase in their human resources) 

 

The cost of production (as in PCB production) for the partners is more or less the same. 

 

Their market share value skyrocketed since they started marking up prices and managed to exceed the one of intel (a company that has many other product categories than just CPUs ) https://www.eetimes.com/nvidias-market-value-bigger-than-intel/ 

 

 

 

And the fact that the userbase is bigger (as @AdmiralKird mentioned in one of his posts here saying that a wider age group buys graphics cards now and that more people in general buy computer parts compared to the past) would be a reason for production costs to sink and thus the GPUs be even cheaper because the smaller the customer base is the more expensive it is to make products for them, yet we see the opposite happen. 

 

So basically nothing changed other than Nvidias profits per GPU sold. 

[Kroon]

4 hours ago, papajo said:

Its not that simple as you said you could not afford a riva TNT2 (a 300$ card) think nowadays 13yolds that now are faced with 1000$ paywalls..

 

you cannot compare a TNT2 with a RTX 3090, they are not in the same class.  If you are going to take top end/proffesional from today and compare with 1999 card you need to look at cards like Tseng Labs ET4000 with a starting price at $1000 and I think the high end model was over $2000.  That is 1999 prices.

 

At that time there was a large amount of graphics cards on the market but Riva cards (TNT) was the one that was affordable and got the best support from games at that time.  That was the reason for it cusses not hard core performance.  

[papajo]

12 minutes ago, Kroon said:

you cannot compare a TNT2 with a RTX 3090, they are not in the same class

They are exactly the same class what are you talking about the TNT2 was the pinnacle of PC graphics when it was launched... 

 

Because now compared to a 3000 its obviously slower doesnt mean anything.. a 1970 Ferrari is considerably slower than a 2020 Ferrari but they had more or less the same price when launched and both were the fastest ferrari when launched  (and basically the 70s top tier ferrari e.g the Ferrari 512  was more expensive than compared to the current flagship because their production lines werent as big as they are now) . 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

15 minutes ago, papajo said:

They are exactly the same class what are you talking about the TNT2 was the pinnacle of PC graphics when it was launched... 

 

Because now compared to a 3000 its obviously slower doesnt mean anything.. a 1970 Ferrari is considerably slower than a 2020 Ferrari but they had more or less the same price when launched and both were the fastest ferrari when launched  (and basically the 70s top tier ferrari e.g the Ferrari 512  was more expensive than compared to the current flagship because their production lines werent as big as they are now) . 

But PRODUCTIONN COST!!!! The new process nodes are much more expensive, even when the old ones are brand new. 

[papajo]

12 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

But PRODUCTIONN COST!!!! The new process nodes are much more expensive, even when the old ones are brand new. 

Who told you that? 

 

Production nodes evolve to get cheaper not to get more expensive that is the reason e.g some nm architectures are not produced because it would be expensive they start to produce when its more or less about the same cost or cheaper to produce than the previous method that's how industry works from electronics to chicken nuggets lol  since ever. 

 

The companies operating said nodes charge by how much time you use their facility to produce your product and they try to keep competitive prices because they are a business on their own not related to nvidia or amd. e.g TSMC 

 

and here is a chart showing the revenue from their production (= the money they pocket from making this stuff for other guys such as nvidia for example

 

 

 

Their revenue (= the money they get when people pay them to produce stuff) is more or less the same (TSMC has slightly bigger revenue the late years because its demand increased e.g now even intel made orders from them which it did used to do in the past) 

 

 

 

But things are simpler than that we didnt even need to scrutinize things so much. 

 

the passed ~5 years Nvidias profits skyrocketed> the passed 5 years people that buy graphics cards are more or less the same in numbers >most of nvidias profits come from PC GPUs =  they just charge more. 

[Kroon]

21 minutes ago, papajo said:

They are exactly the same class what are you talking about the TNT2 was the pinnacle of PC graphics when it was launched... 

 

Seriously, if you don't know your graphic card history why do you discuss it?  Riva TNT2 was a great card for most games.  However there was faster cards out there so if you don't compare fastest vs fastest card for it's time there is no reason to discuss this.

 

In general this is quite ridiculous discussion since it was completely different times.  Some games did't even work on some cards while it was excellent on others.  To be able to play all gems at the time I had 3 different graphics cards in my computer, including a Rive TNT2 card that I still have for sentimental reasons (Was delivered to my same day my son was born.).  

[papajo]

1 minute ago, Kroon said:

Seriously, if you don't know your graphic card history why do you discuss it?  Riva TNT2 was a great card for most games.  However there was faster cards out there so if you don't compare fastest vs fastest card for it's time there is no reason to discuss this.

That is debatable what is not debatable is that other graphics cards did not cost more .

[Blademaster91]

13 minutes ago, TheTechWizardThatNeedsHelp said:

But PRODUCTIONN COST!!!! The new process nodes are much more expensive, even when the old ones are brand new. 

The Samsung 8nm process must be expensive? I think it's more of what the market will accept more than process nodes or increased manufacturing complexity, everyone was fine with a $1,200 2080Ti and now adding another $200 to the xx80 class GPU and everyone says it's such a good deal without even seeing actual benchmarks.