Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Ya'll need to understand fundamental Supply and Demand

It's always interesting to see people who think that just because they can explain why something happens then that thing is automatically justified.

11 minutes ago, Whos Sayin said:

every customer is impacted by the shortage, not scalpers. You can't scalp something that there's a surplus of. Most scalpers just manually try to snatch stock the same as anyone else. There's no reason for everyone to have to play that game if they are willing to pay someone to do it.

Aside from the fact that what "most" scalpers do is irrelevant when some get a hold of all the stock using bots, it's very obvious that without scalpers trying to make a profit on something they bought from retail the prices for that stock would be lower for everyone.

 

It doesn't matter how little or how much stock there is, scalpers by definition inflate the prices in exchange for absolutely no benefit. If stock is abundant then scalping becomes impractical, but modern supply chains are just-in-time; it doesn't make sense to produce more than people want to buy, and if scalpers come in to snatch any amount of that stock then the prices will be inflated.

 

I don't think it's reasonable to demand unnecessary and wasteful surplus production just because otherwise some assholes will artificially inflate the prices for personal profit; it should instead be made illegal to engage in this sort of behavior without a license to be a retailer. If you flip a card or two little harm is done, it's the volume that makes a difference and should be regulated accordingly.

Don't ask to ask, just ask... please 🤨

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Beerzerker said:

If there was a surplus as you say, can you explain why all the vendors have no readily available stocks of them?

I think that's why the OP has this opinion, I don't think he realize there are no surplus.

 

I'm on 2 Discords that use bots to check inventory and sends notifications with links when they find something. There are TONS of notifications for "replenishment" of 1-5 GPUs.

 

Weekly shipments of 1 to 5 GPU for one store isn't normal. The PC store I go to from time to time used to have shelves packed with GPUs, 5 GPUs of ONE model wasn't rare, now that's their weekly shipment for any type and models. There are no surplus, and with bots that can purchase something within fractions of seconds, regular users can't do much to get their hands on one.

 

I've seen it ; notifications for 10+ GPUs of one model from an online retailer showing "out-of-stock" a few seconds later.

 

 

Though it's true that when supply is low and demand is high, scalpers will be part of that market, but it's false to say ;

On 6/6/2021 at 5:07 AM, Amias said:

People are not price gouging, scalping or ripping anyone off.

 

If "resellers" didn't use bots to undermine retail customers, this would be a much smaller issue and scalping prices would be lower.

 

I have a GTX 1060 3GB that I bought for $245 CAD ... those are now selling for $250+ (I've seen some sold for as high as $300) on ebay and local classifieds (so a 3yo used one is now worth more than when it was brand new), that's NOT normal (these used to be $70-90 a few months ago).

If you need help with your forum account, please use the Forum Support form !

 

VPN server guide

Introduction to Mechanical Keyboard

Spoiler

My Gaming Rig - Motherboard: MSI Z370-A PRO CPU: i7-8700 RAM: 32GB DDR4 2400(4x8GB) GPU: Gigabyte GTX 1060 3GB OS SSD: 512GB SU800 SSD Storage: 2x 1TB Seagate PSU: Seasonic G650 OS: Windows 10 Pro 64bits Monitor: Acer 21in G205H + Lenovo 21in

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whos Sayin said:

scalpers provide liquidity. it allows those with more inelastic demand to get the cards by pricing out the rest. they are the only reason your able to get a card for any price at all. if your job requires that you have a good card for compute applications, you no longer have to spam refresh and pray to god that you somehow get it before the hordes of manchildren who want 20 more frames on their game. scalpers are the people who stand in line for those who have better shit to do and they charge a fee for their work. scalpers arent causing a worldwide silicon shortage. in a world where there isnt enough cards, there's no reason to want a market out of equilibrium, beside the fact that it's inevitable, the only alternative to finding its market equilibrium price via scalpers or AIBs charging those same scalper prices is for everything to be cheaper and impossible to buy, which will result in there being nothing to distinguish someone who just wants an upgrade and someone who needs the card to earn a living. 

If any of this were even remotely true, we would've had a continuous shortage for the last couple of decades, because high-end computing requirements always existed. So your entire premise doesn't withstand even a cursory critical analysis.

 

2 hours ago, Whos Sayin said:

This chart meanwhile makes the 1050ti look like shit.

No, it makes it look like a product of its time. You have to use a metric to compare hardware performance. Of course a 1050Ti is enough to play games at decent quality at a 1080p resolution, nobody debates that and nobody tries to make it look bad. But you make it seem like objective comparison based on real world performance is somehow designed to make things look bad. 

 

2 hours ago, Whos Sayin said:

also, im curious why you think scalpers are the ones causing shortages. they sell every card they buy and those who buy from them would buy it themselves if scalpers didnt exist. They aren't like some african diamond company that stockpiles cards to slowly trickle in.

Nobody said scalpers cause shortages - although some might very well be operating by stockpiling a couple of dozen or hundred cards and trickle them out over time to artificially limit availability even more, thus increasing prices and contributing to the shortage, because the number of people who want cards at regular retail prices are still largely the same. Scalpers certainly profiteer off of the existing shortages. What you're essentially advocating for here is that people with more money inherently have more rights to own something because the scalping mechanism enables a market dynamic that ousts people with less capital.

 

2 hours ago, Whos Sayin said:

You act like gamers have a divine right to first bid on GPU stock because why exactly?

And you act as if its not morally reprehensible to artificially inflate prices. Remember your first post, where you said that if your job requires the performance, you can now just buy it from a scalper instead of waiting in line? Yeah, that privilege costs you more money than if you had just bought it at retail prices.

 

Here's an easy back of the envelope calculation for you: You have 100 cards and 100 people who want them for gaming/work/whatever for any given unit of time. The market is at equilibrium, prices stay stable. Now a scalper realizes that this situation is ripe for abuse, because they now come in and buy up 10 cards. That means, that only 90 people can now buy their cards at retail price, while the others have to buy them at higher cost from the scalper. Two things happen here now: 

  1. Other scalpers notice this opportunity and also start siphoning away stock.
  2. The part of those 10 people who didn't get a card during the last time window are now still in the market for a card, meaning for that unit of time, you now have <90 cards available for >100 people. This causes a runaway effect of people scalping and more and more people getting pushed farther and farther down the line.

This is actually a fairly common ocurrance elsewhere. You can observe it while driving on a highway. If someone hits the brakes for no reason, even if it's just for a split second, a few miles further behind, traffic will slam to a halt, because every car further down the line has to brake a little and the cumulative effect ads up over time. This type of traffic congestion has been widely documented and studied and this principle applies directly to this situation as well.

And now a word from our sponsor: 💩

-.-. --- --- .-.. --..-- / -.-- --- ..- / -.- -. --- .-- / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

And you act as if its not morally reprehensible

That’s a bit dramatic.

 

There are plenty of morally reprehensible things going on in the world. Reselling gamer hardware above MSRP isn’t on the list.

MacBook Pro 16 i9-9980HK - Radeon Pro 5500m 8GB - 32GB DDR4 - 2TB NVME

iPhone 12 Mini / Sony WH-1000XM4 / AirPods Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Roswell said:

That’s a bit dramatic.

 

There are plenty of morally reprehensible things going on in the world. Reselling gamer hardware above MSRP isn’t on the list.

Being a pain in the ass to other people just to make quick money is on my list. Isn't that what scalping is?

Dislaimer: If my post is older than 5 minutes, refresh the page. Most of my posts get edited straight away. 😄

 

PSU Tier List          AMD Motherboard Tier List          SSD Tier List

 

Current Specs:

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X - Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix B550-E - GPU: PNY RTX 3080 XLR8 Epic-X - RAM: 4x8GB (32GB) G.Skill TridentZ RGB 3600MHz CL16 - PSU: Corsair RMx (2018) 850W - Storage: 500 GB Corsair MP600 (Boot) + 2 TB Sabrent Rocket Q (Storage) - Cooling: EK, HW Labs & Alphacool custom loop - Case: Lian-Li PC O11 Dynamic - Fans: 6x Noctua NF-A12x25 - AMP/DAC: FiiO K5 Pro - OS: Windows 10 Pro - Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG35VQ - Mouse: Logitech G Pro + Powerplay - Keyboard: Logitech G915 - Headphones: Beyerdynamic Amiron Home - Microphone: Antlion ModMic

 

Temperatures @steady state: Furmark + CinebenchR23 running for 1 hour. Fans @850RPM. Pump @1600RPM.

Water: 37°C

CPU: 73°C

GPU: 54°C

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Roswell said:

That’s a bit dramatic.

 

There are plenty of morally reprehensible things going on in the world. Reselling gamer hardware above MSRP isn’t on the list.

Morality is 100% subjective, while you might not find scalpers morally reprehensible, others might, and that's ok.

If you need help with your forum account, please use the Forum Support form !

 

VPN server guide

Introduction to Mechanical Keyboard

Spoiler

My Gaming Rig - Motherboard: MSI Z370-A PRO CPU: i7-8700 RAM: 32GB DDR4 2400(4x8GB) GPU: Gigabyte GTX 1060 3GB OS SSD: 512GB SU800 SSD Storage: 2x 1TB Seagate PSU: Seasonic G650 OS: Windows 10 Pro 64bits Monitor: Acer 21in G205H + Lenovo 21in

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If lynching doesn't work out there is always that other tool against scalpers.

 

J U S T  D O N ' T   B U Y  F R O M  T H E M

 

*doh*

 

At one point it will all collapse and those scalpers will end up sitting on inventory they can't even sell at MSRP (because BestBuy has them at sale 10% of).

 

Seems to already starting with lumber (at least thats what I've heard).

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Whos Sayin said:

I built my PC last year and got a 1650 super for $170 and it's more than enough for all my games and both my monitors. I think anything above a 1660 is a luxury and completely unnecessary to enjoy games. The tech community just obsesses over new hardware and always uses the most demanding games to show a difference between them like this. 

 

[chart]

 

Of course they tell you the csgo results in one of the slides in a 10 minute video but when you fill up most of it with charts like this one the viewer is swept up in the narrative that it matters for them. For most people, even an iGPU should be sufficient for their 1080p games and even some 1440p games. This chart meanwhile makes the 1050ti look like shit.

This was exactly my fear recently when my old GPU gave in and I had to quickly replace it. With new cards, my main question was, "How much better could they realistically and practically make them for games that most of us play most often?" Needless to say, I quickly realized that I didn't need the flashiest, latest card because what kind of lunacy does one have to believe in to convince themselves that they need to spend $1500-$2000+ for one component when a majority of their time is spent playing games like CSGO, Valorant, League of Legends, Fortnite, Rocket League, Minecraft, etc, etc.? Sure, the games have gotten beefier over the years, but up until I replaced my GTX 770, they all ran totally fine at 1080p, so why was I to believe that I needed something that was A) 1,000% (obv exaggerating) more effective, B) insanely expensive, and C) ultimately unnecessary?

 

And yes, I say this knowing that there are AAA-dedicated gamers out there who really do want the latest cards to max out games at high resolutions and perform other very intensive tasks. But is that necessary? The numbers really speak for themselves here in the sense that the vast majority of gamers are spending their time on easier-to-run games that would see little to no real world benefits from going after the latest crop of super GPUs, so why is there a mass hysteria when it comes to finding new cards? Yes I get there is short supply and rampant price increases, but when you don't actually need the newest, best cards, why chase them at all? I went and scooped a used GTX 970 for stupidly cheap and it has ran everything I've thrown at it so far basically perfectly. Am I sliding every graphics setting to 10? No not necessarily (this doesn't mean I'm playing on crappy Low-Medium either) but at the same time, for so cheap, how could I convince myself that I made the wrong move here? I avoided the crazy market and get to play 9/10 games that most people are spending a majority of their time on.

 

I agree with you, the narrative surrounding new GPU coverage seems to be... off.

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roswell said:

That’s a bit dramatic.

 

There are plenty of morally reprehensible things going on in the world. Reselling gamer hardware above MSRP isn’t on the list.

There's obviously a gradient of morality, but needlessly depriving people of something just to skim profits off the top without adding any real value is, to me at least, firmly on the immoral side of the balance. 

 

Also, since I found this fascinating, I quickly modeled a few of the numbers. Here are my starting parameters.
There's only a single type of card available, from a single manufacturer in this scenario, retail prices overall stay exactly the same and the numbers are obviously streamlined to make the math easier.

 

Number of cards produced per week: 10000

Number of legitimate interested customers per week: 10000

Number of initial scalpers: 100

Percentage of people willing to buy a card at a scalper price: 90% (yes, I'm aiming high here)

 

This is what it would look like if every scalper would only buy one card per week and the number of scalpers would remain the same. The yellow and blue lines are overlapping.

image.png.ad07b1a9b879119a6778036a26c0be26.png

 

Increasing the scalping rate (number of cards per scalper per week) would obviously have a linear impact on this calculation.

 

But let's now introduce a growth rate into the number of scalpers, since if a market opportunity presents itself, people will often take that chance. Here's a growth rate of 1% per week in the number of scalpers, still at 1 card per scalper per week.

image.png.29b709e42f0f323bc9e542a7bfa885a3.png

 

By the end of the year, you have almost 2000 people trying to get a card that they could get if scalpers hadn't entered the market. And again, this is with 90% of those people who were denied one during the week they were interested in being ok with instead buying one from the scalpers at a marked up price. And by the end of the year, scalpers have bought and sold a total of 6527 cards, or a total of 12% of the available cards.

 

Now again, I stress, this is a hypothetical example. I haven't looked up production numbers of graphics cards, I have no idea how large the number of scalpers vis-a-vis legitimate customers are, I thought 1% of the number of legit customers and a 1% growth rate in the number of scalpers would be a fair enough approximation, but do correct me if my assumption is way off base here. I'm aware that the growth rate of scalpers would eventually hit a plateau, but that's why I kept the numbers small. And of course, this "model" (if you want to be bold enough and call it that) doesn't take price - be it retail or scalper price - into any consideration, so neither profitability nor price delta between retail and scalper price have any impact. And obviously, the number of interested customers roll over week after week, so nobody loses interest in that card and sticks to wanting to buy that specific card.

 

You can obviously play around wildly with these numbers.

Here's an example of a very aggressive scalper population going for 2 cards per week per scalper and an increase in the number of scalpers of 2%, where a third of all cards get bought and sold by scalpers:

image.png.1c7fc5f4182656abb6c0eed40b6663e7.png 

 

This isn't intended to show exact figures of how the current market behaves. It's intended to show that even a small imbalance in the market can cause significant problems later on.

And now a word from our sponsor: 💩

-.-. --- --- .-.. --..-- / -.-- --- ..- / -.- -. --- .-- / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2021 at 6:43 AM, Amias said:

Those are just terms I see constantly thrown around.

 

Gaming Nexus - "At $1200, NVIDIA is opportunistically gouging its customers in a predatory fashion."

 

 

I disagree, and believe he's right.

 

If at original MSRP NVidia turned a profit on the RTX 3080 (Which clearly they did.  They wouldn't have sold it at a loss)

Upcharging nearly 75% for a relatively small performance / hardware boost is...  Well...  Absolutely gouging.  

 

 

  

3 hours ago, Whos Sayin said:

scalpers provide liquidity. it allows those with more inelastic demand to get the cards by pricing out the rest. they are the only reason your able to get a card for any price at all. if your job requires that you have a good card for compute applications, you no longer have to spam refresh and pray to god that you somehow get it before the hordes of manchildren who want 20 more frames on their game. scalpers are the people who stand in line for those who have better shit to do and they charge a fee for their work. scalpers arent causing a worldwide silicon shortage. in a world where there isnt enough cards, there's no reason to want a market out of equilibrium, beside the fact that it's inevitable, the only alternative to finding its market equilibrium price via scalpers or AIBs charging those same scalper prices is for everything to be cheaper and impossible to buy, which will result in there being nothing to distinguish someone who just wants an upgrade and someone who needs the card to earn a living. 

 

....  So you're saying someone buying up cards to scalp them is helping keep supply going?

 

When if the scalper didn't buy it, a real person could have bought it to actually use as a card is intended, therefore satisfying the nugget of demand that card could fill.

 

You're so absolutely full of it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

I went and scooped a used GTX 970 for stupidly cheap and it has ran everything I've thrown at it so far basically perfectly.

 

Sufficient number of gamers thinking that way plus AMD releasing their new APUs (assuming they perform well enough and are available) and anything but the highest end of GFX cards will cease to exist. Just like what happened to "normal" cards once Intel iGPUs got good enough for office use.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

I quickly realized that I didn't need the flashiest

Yes: you don't need or want the latest card, because you are content with 60 FPS at 1080p low/med or whatever. Others may want 120 FPS at 4k high and hence do need or want that top of the line model.

33 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

what kind of lunacy does one have to believe in to convince themselves that they need to spend $1500-$2000+ for one component when a majority of their time is spent playing games like CSGO, Valorant, League of Legends, Fortnite, Rocket League, Minecraft, etc, etc.?

Scalpers are part of the reason why these things cost this much in the first place.

33 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

Sure, the games have gotten beefier over the years, but up until I replaced my GTX 770, they all ran totally fine at 1080p, so why was I to believe that I needed something that was A) 1,000% (obv exaggerating) more effective, B) insanely expensive, and C) ultimately unnecessary?

Again, just because you are fine with 1080p low settings on a 770, others want a different experience and therefore want the powerful card. This is like me seeing you buy nice shoes and asking you is that ultimately necessary? Why do you buy a $200 pair of shoes when a $20 pair does just fine.

 

33 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

And yes, I say this knowing that there are AAA-dedicated gamers out there who really do want the latest cards to max out games at high resolutions and perform other very intensive tasks. But is that necessary? The numbers really speak for themselves here in the sense that the vast majority of gamers are spending their time on easier-to-run games that would see little to no real world benefits from going after the latest crop of super GPUs, so why is there a mass hysteria when it comes to finding new cards?

This makes no sense. So just because a large number of gamers play easy to run games we should not allow for GPU melting graphical eyecandy on AAA games? Might as well go back to the olden days of DOOM then. Runs on practically anything you can imagine. The hysteria isn't coming from a games perspective, it's aimed at asshole people intentionally buying up dozens of $800 cards just to sell them for $3000.

 

33 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

Am I sliding every graphics setting to 10? No not necessarily (this doesn't mean I'm playing on crappy Low-Medium either) but at the same time, for so cheap, how could I convince myself that I made the wrong move here? I avoided the crazy market and get to play 9/10 games that most people are spending a majority of their time on.

Well if you're not playing on high you are playing on low or medium. Nothing will change that. Some people just want to be able to max out settings. Some people don't want to have to bother optimising settings in every game and just want something that runs ultra settings on whatever they throw against it.

Crystal: CPU: i7 7700K | Motherboard: Asus ROG Strix Z270F | RAM: GSkill 16 GB@3200MHz | GPU: Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti FE | Case: Corsair Crystal 570X (black) | Storage: 250 GB Crucial BX100 SSD + 2 TB Seagate HDD + 1TB WD Green + 3TB WD Red | PSU: EVGA Supernova G2 1000W | Monitor: Asus VG248QE 24"

Laptop: Dell XPS 13 9370 | CPU: i5 10510U | RAM: 16 GB

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kronoton said:

 

Sufficient number of gamers thinking that way plus AMD releasing their new APUs (assuming they perform well enough and are available) and anything but the highest end of GFX cards will cease to exist. Just like what happened to "normal" cards once Intel iGPUs got good enough for office use.....

That is good to hear. And heck yeah, I am all for APUs, I've been a fan of the idea for a long time but when I was heavily following PC components and hardware, I always remember they weren't really serious performance contenders. Hopefully that changes soon!

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tikker said:

Yes: you don't need or want the latest card, because you are content with 60 FPS at 1080p low/med or whatever. Others may want 120 FPS at 4k high and hence do need or want that top of the line model.

Scalpers are part of the reason why these things cost this much in the first place.

Again, just because you are fine with 1080p low settings on a 770, others want a different experience and therefore want the powerful card. This is like me seeing you buy nice shoes and asking you is that ultimately necessary? Why do you buy a $200 pair of shoes when a $20 pair does just fine.

 

This makes no sense. So just because a large number of gamers play easy to run games we should not allow for GPU melting graphical eyecandy on AAA games? Might as well go back to the olden days of DOOM then. Runs on practically anything you can imagine. The hysteria isn't coming from a games perspective, it's aimed at asshole people intentionally buying up dozens of $800 cards just to sell them for $3000.

 

Well if you're not playing on high you are playing on low or medium. Nothing will change that. Some people just want to be able to max out settings. Some people don't want to have to bother optimising settings in every game and just want something that runs ultra settings on whatever they throw against it.

A) Yes, you're right. I don't, and the way a majority of gamers actually game, data suggests they don't either. Playing at three digit frame rates at 4K is a big luxury in and of itself, and that portion of gamers is small in comparison. If you're paying for hardware to support that style of gaming, odds are you don't really have budget as the foremost important factor in your build. I say "I" because I know that I share common gaming habits and interests with a majority of other gamers who make up a large chunk of the market, based on general figures that show what games most spend their time actually playing. I did not mean this as a blanketed statement. I get that I am using myself as reference, which is potentially inaccurate and I also went on to acknowledge that I know there are others out there who are different in the sense that they do want the latest and greatest hardware to max out AAA titles.

 

B) I don't really see the connection here, or maybe we're just approaching it from different angles. I am trying to say that though there are gamers out there who, as mentioned, want the best hardware to run intensive titles at maximum settings, that grouping of people is small in relation to people who mostly spend their days playing easy-to-run titles. As such, why chase the bleeding edge cards when it is far overkill? In my post, I should have made this distinction more clear. I have no issue with year over year improvements in graphics cards that can produce "eye candy" in AAA games, it is part of the competition that keeps progress going. I also don't think that it makes sense for budget-minded consumers to get caught up in that sphere of performance when they don't need it. Also, you're right, fuck scalpers. Hysteria is probably a bit of an exaggeration, I meant most of the forum chatter and other endless discussion about the market as it sits.

 

C) This is kind of semantical and I don't want to get caught up in this lol. I know that you know that most games aren't just plain slated in their graphics settings anymore. "High" is often not the highest games allow you to set graphics settings just as "Low" is often not the lowest. Many popular games get pretty down to the details with settings, including Very Low, Low, Medium, High, Very High, Ultra (or something along these lines). Just because I am not gaming at Low-Medium also does not mean I am gaming at the utmost highest setting available. There is a middle ground to Medium-High and High settings that does not constitute the most detailed option. But again, if someone just wants to max out games on ultra and has no interest in adjusting settings, expecting their system to handle it all without question, then odds are they are either building a computer in the price range that would be considered very excessive to begin with (not in-line with the majority of gamers) or are building without price as a guiding factor, as they just want the best and will not substitute. 

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

As such, why chase the bleeding edge cards when it is far overkill?

Same reason people do anything: because they want it. Person A want's expensive shoes, person B wants an expensive GPU, person C wants that legendary limited edition record from 20 years ago.

 

7 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

I also don't think that it makes sense for budget-minded consumers to get caught up in that sphere of performance when they don't need it.

But they aren't. The budget minded consumers are exactly the people that don't buy an expensive GPU. Moreover they are especially the ones getting screwed in times where even 3060s go for what the 3080 should have cost. That's why the "is it necessary" argument doesn't work. We're no longer at the point where we consider "do I want to pay $700 more to get a 3090 instead of a 3080", we're at the point of 3060s go for what a 3080 was supposed to cost and hence needing to pay through the roof to even game at all.

Crystal: CPU: i7 7700K | Motherboard: Asus ROG Strix Z270F | RAM: GSkill 16 GB@3200MHz | GPU: Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti FE | Case: Corsair Crystal 570X (black) | Storage: 250 GB Crucial BX100 SSD + 2 TB Seagate HDD + 1TB WD Green + 3TB WD Red | PSU: EVGA Supernova G2 1000W | Monitor: Asus VG248QE 24"

Laptop: Dell XPS 13 9370 | CPU: i5 10510U | RAM: 16 GB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well.. like it or not, we are heading for another GPU price jump, only this time it's not nearly as subtle as before. Forget about mid-range GPUs for $250-300. Even the lowest possible tier - the RTX 3050 or so from now on would start straight from $400. Good mid-range card as the 3060 would start from $600-700 and you get the idea. How many of you remember that there was a class of $200 GPUs and the flagship cards used to cost $500? Yup back in 2012 a GTX 680 used to cost $499 and a HD 7950 - $449. We are talking high-end stuff. Adjusted for inflation for the past 9 years that's $584 and $525 respectively. In 2009 i managed to buy an HD 5870 - then the world's fastest GPU for $349 - $30 less than MSRP and at launch week. And it's not like the wages back then were any lower than now. In fact back then i used to make more than i do currently. This was the boom of Bitcoin mining and yet there was no shortage or scalping. That's why i think this entire fiasco is the working of the manufacturers themselves. Not saying nVidia or AMD, but the likes of Asus, MSI, Gigabyte and so on. Sadly from now on, if we want some GPU, we would have to pay premium for that. 

And no, there will be no salvation in consoles. Forget about $500 consoles anymore. Everything will launch at $999 and add few hundred bucks for the extra packs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tikker said:

Same reason people do anything: because they want it. Person A want's expensive shoes, person B wants an expensive GPU, person C wants that legendary limited edition record from 20 years ago.

 

But they aren't. The budget minded consumers are exactly the people that don't buy an expensive GPU. Moreover they are especially the ones getting screwed in times where even 3060s go for what the 3080 should have cost. That's why the "is it necessary" argument doesn't work. We're no longer at the point where we consider "do I want to pay $700 more to get a 3090 instead of a 3080", we're at the point of 3060s go for what a 3080 was supposed to cost and hence needing to pay through the roof to even game at all.

Yes, and wants can be irrational relative to what someone actually needs. I want a 25,000 square foot house with a 10-car garage filled with opulent luxury cars. And you bet your ass I have no use for all of it. Hyperbolic exaggeration aside, why does someone need the latest greatest when they can play all of their games perfectly fine on less cutting edge hardware?

 

You're right. The little guy does get screwed in the market for new cards in instances like these. I personally approached this from the angle of being able to purchase slightly older, used hardware, which, in my opinion, still shows opportunity for great value to be had, even if it costs more on average than it did in previous years. I apologize for not making this clearer before.

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love when someone tries to educate me, without me asking to be educated.  Makes me desire to read and understand their points on the topic of debate...far far less.

Current in process build: Project Odyssey - Build Logs - Linus Tech Tips

Workstation Laptop: Dell Precision 7540, Xeon E-2276M, 32gb DDR4, Quadro T2000 GPU, 4k display

Ryzen Rig 3: ASRock B450m Pro4, Ryzen 5 3600, ARESGAME River 5 CPU cooler in push/pull, EVGA RTX 2060 KO, 16gb (2x8) 3600mhz TeamGroup T-Force RAM, ARESGAME AGV750w PSU, 1tb WD Black SN750 NVMe Win 10 boot drive, 3tb Hitachi 7200 RPM HDD, Fractal Design Focus G Mini custom painted.  Lenovo 27" 1080p 60hz placeholder monitor, generic mouse, generic keyboard.  Still a work in progress

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 5 3600,ASRock B450M Pro4 (3dmark.com)

Ryzen Rig 2: ASrock B450 Pro4, Ryzen 7 1700 @ 4.2ghz all core 1.4vCore, AMD R9 Fury X w/ Swiftech KOMODO waterblock, Custom Loop 2x240mm + 1x120mm radiators in push/pull 16gb (2x8) 3600mhz V-Color Skywalker (or 4x8gb DDR4 2666mhz for large tasks), Corsair HX850 PSU, 250gb Samsun 960 EVO NVMe Win 10 boot drive, 500gb Samsung 840 EVO SSD, 512GB TeamGroup MP30 M.2 SATA III SSD, SuperTalent 512gb SATA III SSD, CoolerMaster HAF XM Case.  Zalman K600S keyboard, Zalman ZM-GM1 mouse, Viotek GN24C 24" 1080p 144hz curved and Hannspree HF207 as 2nd monitor

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/37004594?

Ryzen Rig 1: ASUS B350-PRIME ATX, Ryzen 7 1700, Sapphire R9 Fury Tri-X Nitro 4gb HBM, 16gb (2x8) 3200mhz V-Color Skywalker, ANTEC Earthwatts 750w PSU, MasterLiquid Lite 120 AIO cooler in Push/Pull config as rear exhaust, 250gb Samsung 850 Evo SSD, Patriot Burst 240gb SSD, Cougar MX330-X Case.  Zalman K600S keyboard, Zalman ZM-GM1 mouse, Acer XF270HU 2560x1440 144hz IPS monitor

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/37628874?

Dell OptiPlex 3040 MFF: Dell 0MGK50 A02, i3-6100T, 2x4gb DDR3 1600, Team Group 120gb SSD, 500gb Seagate 7mm HDD attached storage, Windows 10 Pro, Logitech K400+, USB Wifi adapter all vesa mounted to the back of a 37" 1080p TV 

Linux Box: Toshiba Laptop, i7 620M, NVS graphics, 4gb ram tinker toy at the moment.  Running Manjaro XFCE at the moment.

Home Security: ZOSI 8 channel CCTV (4 used at this time, 1080p) DVR H.265+, 3tb HGST Enterprise HDD, ASUS monitor for display

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

 why does someone need the latest greatest when they can play all of their games perfectly fine on less cutting edge hardware?

You see the trouble is you can't enjoy every game on old hardware. Cyberpunk for example. Yes it runs just fine on a GTX 1070 or 1080, but when you launch it with Ray Tracing, it's an entirely different game. It's like comparing GTA San Andreas with GTA V. So turns out you need an RTX 3000 series GPU. Also, i run the game fine at 1080p, but i have to scale down from native resolution, since at 1440p, which my monitors are, i bottom on VRAM. I believe this also added quite a bit to the negative reception of Cyberpunk - people not being able to experience the game in its full glory and it's really sad. For the first time in god knows how many years we get a developer to present us a game with revolutionary graphics and engine, but it's in time when hardware is at premium and the majority of people can't afford it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, QuantumSingularity said:

Forget about $500 consoles anymore. Everything will launch at $999 and add few hundred bucks for the extra packs

Not gonna happen, both SONY and MS want to have as many consoles in the market as possible to than make money on the games, so yeah once the crazy market is saturated you will see them at MSRP, 6 months later as bundles still at MSRP and another year later as "Slim" versions for $300.

 

Same with GFX cards, as long as there are to vendors in competition (maybe 3 if Intel enters that market) they will sell you anything that they can sell you at any profit. 

Improvements in the APUs will kill of the ultra low end (aka the 2021 made 1660s) the mid range might get squashed by used cars getting "returned" from mining but in the end there will be ways to build reasonable gaming-PCs from 500-2000$ with every amount inbetween.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, QuantumSingularity said:

You see the trouble is you can't enjoy every game on old hardware. Cyberpunk for example. Yes it runs just fine on a GTX 1070 or 1080, but when you launch it with Ray Tracing, it's an entirely different game. It's like comparing GTA San Andreas with GTA V. So turns out you need an RTX 3000 series GPU. Also, i run the game fine at 1080p, but i have to scale down from native resolution, since at 1440p, which my monitors are, i bottom on VRAM. I believe this also added quite a bit to the negative reception of Cyberpunk - people not being able to experience the game in its full glory and it's really sad. For the first time i god knows how many years we get a developer to present us a game with revolutionary graphics and engine, but it's in time when hardware is at premium and the majority of people can't afford it.

Yep, you bring up good points. Cyberpunk is admittedly something I have little knowledge or experience with. Based on Steam data alone however, it looks like very few people are actively playing it, meaning that what I've been saying above does still apply here. If you're playing Cyberpunk today, you are apart of a small minority of gamers and one that is getting smaller month after month. Like I said, I don't know much about the game and haven't followed its development closely at all, but if I recall correctly, it's been a rocky road (?).

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

Yep, you bring up good points. Cyberpunk is admittedly something I have little knowledge or experience with. Based on Steam data alone however, it looks like very few people are actively playing it, meaning that what I've been saying above does still apply here. If you're playing Cyberpunk today, you are apart of a small minority of gamers and one that is getting smaller month after month. Like I said, I don't know much about the game and haven't followed its development closely at all, but if I recall correctly, it's been a rocky road (?).

Keep in mind the majority of us bought the game from GOG directly to support CDPR as they politely asked us to do so and that's why it's not showing on Steam data. I play it every single evening and even though i launch it through my Steam where i manually added it, it's not shown at all in my activity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cyberpunk has 2 problems, 1st the quality issues that tarnished it's reputation, and 2nd that it mostly targeted those high end system which even without 2021 being 2021 would have been what a small minority of gamers use.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, QuantumSingularity said:

Keep in mind the majority of us bought the game from GOG directly to support CDPR as they politely asked us to do os and that's why it's not showing on Steam data. I play it every single evening and even though i launch it through my Steam where i manually added it, it's not shown at all in my activity.

Ahhhhhhh. Very good point. I guess in that case finding accurate player base data is probably difficult, knowing that most got it through GOG and they aren't publishing figures about it. A quick search yielded me nothing specifically from them in terms of a player count. Can you briefly educate me on what Ray Tracing is?

4690K // 212 EVO // Z97-PRO // Vengeance 16GB // GTX 770 GTX 970 // MX100 128GB // Toshiba 1TB // Air 540 // HX650

Logitech G502 RGB // Corsair K65 RGB (MX Red)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×