Ya'll need to understand fundamental Supply and Demand

[tikker]

1 hour ago, Swndlr said:

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?

Because you can't play all of your games perfectly fine on less cutting edge hardware. Raytracing is a perfect recent example of that. The 2000 series introduced it and now the 3000 series is the generation that can comfortably do it. Your needs are different from my needs. As I said earlier, you are fine gaming at 1080p medium on a 770. Perhaps I want to game on 4k with RTX on and have a to me satisfactory framerate, so yes I need a 3080 for that.

[Swndlr]

2 hours ago, tikker said:

Because you can't play all of your games perfectly fine on less cutting edge hardware. Raytracing is a perfect recent example of that. The 2000 series introduced it and now the 3000 series is the generation that can comfortably do it. Your needs are different from my needs. As I said earlier, you are fine gaming at 1080p medium on a 770. Perhaps I want to game on 4k with RTX on and have a to me satisfactory framerate, so yes I need a 3080 for that.

So you are laying out the things you need for... yes, something you ultimately want. Needing things to fulfill something you want is still the pursue of a want, and they are two things that are distinctly different.

 

You literally don't need ray tracing, a feature that is described in print as the "holy grail" of realistic lighting in order to play in the "best visual quality you can." Sure it'd probably be nice to be able to have it switched on, but then again how is ray tracing any different from being able to run an intensive game at ultra settings, which we've already established is obviously a luxury in the realm of PC gaming? We both know we can sit here all afternoon and minutely go back and forth about the individual wants and needs of individual gamers because surely it differs prom person to person, sometimes even quite wildly. But again, going back to what I reiterated in posts above, the vast majority of gamers clearly don't need this and that is very easy to tell based on the recommended hardware specifications of the games that most people are going to spend most of their time playing, which is the whole point.

[tikker]

24 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

So you are laying out the things you need for... yes, something you ultimately want. Needing things to fulfill something you want is still the pursue of a want, and they are two things that are distinctly different.

How else are you going to define what you need if not by what you want... This is like saying that you don't need $4000 to buy a $4000 car, but that you just want $4000 to buy a $4000 car. As you've said you don't want 4k@60 RTX on ultra settings, so no you don't need the higest end GPU. Someone else does so they do need the highest end GPU. If you want to talk "need" as something we need at our core for survival then bluntly said you should stop playing video games at all as you don't need your computer.

24 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

You literally don't need ray tracing, a feature that is described in print as the "holy grail" of realistic lighting in order to play in the "best visual quality you can." Sure it'd probably be nice to be able to have it switched on, but then again how is ray tracing any different from being able to run an intensive game at ultra settings, which we've already established is obviously a luxury in the realm of PC gaming?

 Ray tracing is basically running a game on ultra settings, I don't know what you are on about. The way you phrase your arguments make you come off as saying that high end games and people who want to play high end games with high end graphics have no right to exist or want to, because "you don't need it". The only reason you can game on your 770 is because developers implement lower settings for weaker hardware. They have these varying settings, so that a wider audience with varying horsepower can all enjoy their games, at the expense of visual fidelity the lower you go.

 

The necessity argument quite literally doesn't work for games, because it's completely up to you how you want to enjoy your game. It doesn't work for a ton of other things in our society. You literally don't need your computer, your phone, internet, jewelry, expensive clothes, probably most of the possessions in your house right now and the list goes on. You only need food, water and basic shelter.

24 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

We both know we can sit here all afternoon and minutely go back and forth about the individual wants and needs of individual gamers because surely it differs prom person to person, sometimes even quite wildly. But again, going back to what I reiterated in posts above, the vast majority of gamers clearly don't need this and that is very easy to tell based on the recommended hardware specifications of the games that most people are going to spend most of their time playing, which is the whole point.

You're not going to convince me you are happy a 3060 now costs 3080 MSRP. Again you present this in a way where you imply that because a majority of gamers plays esports or relatively easy to run games, high end games, gpus and people that want to play high end games have no right to exist or want to be able to do that. I'm not talking about the majority of gamers. I'm talking about the people that do want stuff turned up to 11, for which you do need the top of the line GPU.

 

People shouldn't start outrages as they have because they absolutely need a GPU or they'll die, but the truth of the matter is for max settings you do need a max GPU. The key point why the necessity argument doesn't fly right now is as I said in my previous post: it's not comparing a $799  3080 to a $1499 3090 and complaining the 3090 is so expensive and you need that 24 GB VRAM. It's because the bare minimum now starts at the price of the ultimate gaming rig.

 

[Swndlr]

19 minutes ago, tikker said:

How else are you going to define what you need if not by what you want... This is like saying that you don't need $4000 to buy a $4000 car, but that you just want $4000 to buy a $4000 car. As you've said you don't want 4k@60 RTX on ultra settings, so no you don't need the higest end GPU. Someone else does so they do need the highest end GPU. If you want to talk "need" as something we need at our core for survival then bluntly said you should stop playing video games at all as you don't need your computer.

 Ray tracing is basically running a game on ultra settings, I don't know what you are on about. The way you phrase your arguments make you come off as saying that high end games and people who want to play high end games with high end graphics have no right to exist or want to, because "you don't need it". The only reason you can game on your 770 is because developers implement lower settings for weaker hardware. They have these varying settings, so that a wider audience with varying horsepower can all enjoy their games, at the expense of visual fidelity the lower you go.

 

The necessity argument quite literally doesn't work for games, because it's completely up to you how you want to enjoy your game. It doesn't work for a ton of other things in our society. You literally don't need your computer, your phone, internet, jewelry, expensive clothes, probably most of the possessions in your house right now and the list goes on. You only need food, water and basic shelter.

You're not going to convince me you are happy a 3060 now costs 3080 MSRP. Again you present this in a way where you imply that because a majority of gamers plays esports or relatively easy to run games, high end games, gpus and people that want to play high end games have no right to exist or want to be able to do that. I'm not talking about the majority of gamers. I'm talking about the people that do want stuff turned up to 11, for which you do need the top of the line GPU.

 

People shouldn't start outrages as they have because they absolutely need a GPU or they'll die, but the truth of the matter is for max settings you do need a max GPU. The key point why the necessity argument doesn't fly right now is as I said in my previous post: it's not comparing a $799  3080 to a $1499 3090 and complaining the 3090 is so expensive and you need that 24 GB VRAM. It's because the bare minimum now starts at the price of the ultimate gaming rig.

 

Christ, talk about putting words in my mouth, times ten.

 

Obviously if you want to run intensive games at the highest settings then you need high of componentry. Truth is, most people don't crank their games. My argument is not to say that people who want high end hardware do not deserve to exist, that is ridiculous and I don't know how you arrived at this conclusion.

 

I am quite literally saying that most people playing most games for most of their time can get away with hardware that isn't the latest, greatest, or most powerful, and I don't see how that is incorrect at all.

 

Not once did I say that I'm happy with a 3060 costing the MSRP of a 3080. It's stupid, and if you go up and read a few messages above, I made that clear in saying that scalpers suck. And again, I don't know how you arrived at the conclusion that I think high end gamers have no right to exist.

[tikker]

7 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

Obviously if you want to run intensive games at the highest settings then you need high of componentry. Truth is, most people don't crank their games. My argument is not to say that people who want high end hardware do not deserve to exist, that is ridiculous and I don't know how you arrived at this conclusion.

Because your responses appear to keep refuting people wanting high end hardware and max settings are justified to want so by saying that we "literally don't need it", "older GPUs can run your games just fine" and that "you don't need the latest GPU". Those are only true under specific circumstances if the corresponding level of performance satisfies the gamer in question.

3 minutes ago, Swndlr said:

I am quite literally saying that most people playing most games for most of their time can get away with hardware that isn't the latest, greatest, or most powerful, and I don't see how that is incorrect at all.

Unfortunately a GPU isn't something where you rent a 3090 for one week to play your demanding AAA game and then go back to your 3060 to play Rocket League for the rest of the month. You are presenting this as "can get away with", but in reality the situation is more like wanting the best performance in the new AAA titles that come by every 3 months or so and perhaps having some horsepower to space so it'll still run games comfortably a few years down the line.

 

So to go back to you original statement then:

6 hours 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?

"Is it necessary" already imposes that there is a certain way people should enjoy there games, namely the "it runs, what more do you want" way. iGPUs can run almost anything as well if you're willing to accept a cinematic 15 FPS. You'll probably say a better GPU is "necessary" in that case, however, but where does the line of "necessary" end? Minimum requirements? but what do those entail. What if I want to satisfy the minimum requirements for 1080p 120 FPS? for 4k 60FPS? for RTX? Necessity will always be intertwined with how you want to enjoy your game.

6 hours ago, Swndlr said:

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

This is applying statistics of one group to a completely different group though. Those people spending their time on easy-to-run games are not at all the people that go after or complain about availability/pricing of the super GPUs. They go after the casual GPUs, which they also can't get.

 

6 hours ago, Swndlr said:

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?

because they are impossible to obtain for the price they were supposed to cost.

 

- supply is extremely hard to come by (stores are literally getting stock by the dozen maybe)

- miners have generally been turning a good profit and can thus take the hit of a price increase reducing stock anyway and big farms hoarding dozens or hundreds of units

- scalpers are buying them up and selling them for 2x or 3x the price

 

This pricing mess has never been about "needing" max settings or a super GPU. It's about getting any GPU for a reasonable price. Even if you are the casual gamer that doesn't care about graphics or just plays graphically undemanding games, it will cost you an arm and a leg to get a GPU if you can even find one in the first place. This started with the 300 series and has trickled down the entire GPU line up making basically any GPU hard to obtain

[Swndlr]

2 minutes ago, tikker said:

Because your responses appear to keep refuting people wanting high end hardware and max settings are justified to want so by saying that we "literally don't need it", "older GPUs can run your games just fine" and that "you don't need the latest GPU". Those are only true under specific circumstances if the corresponding level of performance satisfies the gamer in question.

Unfortunately a GPU isn't something where you rent a 3090 for one week to play your demanding AAA game and then go back to your 3060 to play Rocket League for the rest of the month. You are presenting this as "can get away with", but in reality the situation is more like wanting the best performance in the new AAA titles that come by every 3 months or so and perhaps having some horsepower to space so it'll still run games comfortably a few years down the line.

 

So to go back to you original statement then:

"Is it necessary" already imposes that there is a certain way people should enjoy there games, namely the "it runs, what more do you want" way. iGPUs can run almost anything as well if you're willing to accept a cinematic 15 FPS. You'll probably say a better GPU is "necessary" in that case, however, but where does the line of "necessary" end? Minimum requirements? but what do those entail. What if I want to satisfy the minimum requirements for 1080p 120 FPS? for 4k 60FPS? for RTX? Necessity will always be intertwined with how you want to enjoy your game.

This is applying statistics of one group to a completely different group though. Those people spending their time on easy-to-run games are not at all the people that go after or complain about availability/pricing of the super GPUs. They go after the casual GPUs, which they also can't get.

 

because they are impossible to obtain for the price they were supposed to cost.

 

- supply is extremely hard to come by (stores are literally getting stock by the dozen maybe)

- miners have generally been turning a good profit and can thus take the hit of a price increase reducing stock anyway and big farms hoarding dozens or hundreds of units

- scalpers are buying them up and selling them for 2x or 3x the price

 

This pricing mess has never been about "needing" max settings or a super GPU. It's about getting any GPU for a reasonable price. Even if you are the casual gamer that doesn't care about graphics or just plays graphically undemanding games, it will cost you an arm and a leg to get a GPU if you can even find one in the first place. This started with the 300 series and has trickled down the entire GPU line up making basically any GPU hard to obtain

I have no problem with people buying high end hardware. If price is no object to someone and they have no problem spending the money to get the performance they want, who am I to tell them not to? I am simply saying most people really don't need as much power as they think to run the games that they want to.

 

Yeah no shit you don't rent a graphics card. There is obviously compromise in not buying the most expensive graphics card that can handle the most demanding games. If I spend most of my time playing games that can be handled by a 3060, my entire PC gaming experience isn't worthless when I have to dial back the heaviest hitting games for that minority of the time. A game can still be enjoyed for what it is without having the highest graphics quality. There is almost always a balance to be reached and obviously every problem cannot be perfectly solved. Asking if something is necessary does not imply that there is a way in which people should enjoy their games, all it poses is the question as to whether having all of the computing power to run things as high as they can go is necessary, which for most, is not the case.

 

I understand the market for graphics cards is absurd. You, nor I, nor anyone else can get performance for what it is supposed to cost. That doesn't mean accessible performance that would comfortably satisfy most gamers can't be had for a realistic price. The used market for graphics cards is plentiful with tons of deals to be had (not speaking on new cards being resold) and if you try hard enough, I am confident one can scout a deal or opportunity to get a new card that offers the performance they are seeking for a price they are comfortable paying. If neither of those options work, then like most people at the moment, waiting is the name of the game and there is not much any of us can really do about it.

 

 

[Ar558a]

On 6/6/2021 at 10:07 AM, Amias said:

How Does the Law of Supply and Demand Affect Prices?

 

 

Demand is increasing. Supply is not.

 

People are not price gouging, scalping or ripping anyone off. This is core, basic economics at play.

 

Supply of many very complex goods, requires expensive complex manufacturing and supply chain management. On razor thin margins, any misstep can result in bankruptcy, so supply is balanced carefully to not exceed the demand. When the demand increases significantly in a short period, the resulting impact to supply is slow and takes time. Meanwhile natural price increases occur. If this doesn't happen at the supplier end of the chain, and only within the middlemen (distributers), then the suppliers can't expand production rates.

 

Costs are going up people, and we should be grateful when the suppliers reflect the demand. Not the middlemen. That allows them the margin to increase supply so they can eventually build up production capacity to meet the demand. 

 

We all know the recent new product announcement and outrage OUTRAGE at the price. I'm sorry but if they don't increase the price substantially, we'll never see supply start to meet the demand and our high end hobbies will die out. I'm extremely disappointed at the outrage perpetuated by many leading tech journalists that can't see the market for what it is and understand basic economics. Maybe they're isolated from the sheer frustration of the actual consumers due to getting overloaded with review samples and first dips on products 99% of people can't touch. Maybe they're not doing their job properly. Maybe they need to do their job properly and report on the current market fairly and educate their viewers to keep expectations in check.

 

 

I thinking it is generally accepted that if you buy a product that is in high demand for X and Sell it a secondary market for 2X or 3X, that is scalping. While you are correct that demand is the largest issue, the real problem is that most the price inelasticity of the demand. It beggars belief to  me that anyone would  pay 2 or 3 times for a 30 series card let alone a similar multiplier for a card 3 or 5 years old. If the price was elastic we wouldn't see the price issues, it would still be hard to get cards but at least the ones out there would be at MSRP or the appropriate second hand value. 

[Amias]

6 hours ago, Ar558a said:

I thinking it is generally accepted that if you buy a product that is in high demand for X and Sell it a secondary market for 2X or 3X, that is scalping. While you are correct that demand is the largest issue, the real problem is that most the price inelasticity of the demand. It beggars belief to  me that anyone would  pay 2 or 3 times for a 30 series card let alone a similar multiplier for a card 3 or 5 years old. If the price was elastic we wouldn't see the price issues, it would still be hard to get cards but at least the ones out there would be at MSRP or the appropriate second hand value. 

 

Let's say I require a high powered GPU for my job, there are many many out there, from gaming development to modelling and CAD software etc. A high powered dedicated GPU is critical to my role and without it I have no livelihood. My current GPU just burnt out and I need to complete a project by the end of the week. Every. GPU. Is. Out. Of. Stock. Except ... wait for it ... ebay!

 

Without the current 'scalping' market, I would struggle to get equipment for my career, if I had a full team ... forget about it. Everything would be sold out. Except I can go buy the card I need right now. "Scalpers" have plenty of stock at a price that is meaningless for maintaining my career and livelihood, but keeps the rabid gamers from buying 'because it's a rip off'.

 

Without that service, many many careers would be at risk.

 

Nvidia should triple the price of its cards until it can sustain supply. I'm not happy most of that money for these cards is going to bots, retails campers. I'd much prefer that money go back to the company developing the actual hardware. But if Nvidia wants to be stupid they can be. Scalping is just a symptom of poor market pricing.

[Avocado Diaboli]

14 minutes ago, Amias said:

"Scalpers" have plenty of stock at a price that is meaningless for maintaining my career and livelihood

And this is where every CFO or person who has worked in accounting dies form a heart attack. Clearly, you have never managed a business budget before, if you think any professional can just shell out 2 - 3 times what is needed to replace hardware. And mind you, big businesses usually have fairly stringent contracts that guarantee they're priority customers, so this shortage mostly hits small businesses who already usually don't have much capital on the backburner for this kind of stuff, so none of your assumptions have any basis in reality.

[tikker]

9 hours ago, Swndlr said:

If I spend most of my time playing games that can be handled by a 3060, my entire PC gaming experience isn't worthless when I have to dial back the heaviest hitting games for that minority of the time. A game can still be enjoyed for what it is without having the highest graphics quality.

I'm not sure if we are even argueing about something here. We've either reached an impasse or are saying the same thing.  I agree that games can be enjoyed on lower settings and I'm not contending that. What I am disagreeing with is that you are saying that if 90% of the time you play 3060 level games and 10% of the time 3080 level games, you should be fine with a 3060. That is false, because a 3060 will not suffice that 10% of the time.

 

The fact that the majority of gamers are running 3060s tells you they are people like you. They play less demanding games, are fine with lower settings, don't game that ofter or any combination of those. You cannot use this to argue to a gamer running demanding titles 10% of the time that they don't need a 3080 however.

 

I'll take myself as an example. I bought a 1080 Ti at launch. Due to release rate and personal tastes I'm not playing AAA titles 7 days a week. There are a few bigger titles I play over a longer time, but most of the games I play now or played then don't/didn't push the card to its limits.

 

Why did I buy a 1080 Ti? because I want the (to me) best and proper experience for that 10% of the time that I do play demanding titles. That means high(est) settings and hopefully around >120 FPS, so yes having the top of the line card was necessary for me.

 

10 hours ago, Swndlr said:

That doesn't mean accessible performance that would comfortably satisfy most gamers can't be had for a realistic price. The used market for graphics cards is plentiful with tons of deals to be had (not speaking on new cards being resold) and if you try hard enough, I am confident one can scout a deal or opportunity to get a new card that offers the performance they are seeking for a price they are comfortable paying.

People are upset, because this is precisely what they cannot do. The new market is scarce at best and usually sold out. I don't know what markets you have, but the used market is not at all "plentiful with tons of deals". It's either sold out because everyone is looking for a card, they can't get a new one and hence resort to the second hand market, or hugely marked up because there is profit to be made. Realistic price at the moment means paying top-of-the-line unit prices for lowest-of-the-line units. Yes we can do nothing but accept that and either 1) pay too much money or 2) wait it out, but that's why people are upset.

[Amias]

8 hours ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

And this is where every CFO or person who has worked in accounting dies form a heart attack. Clearly, you have never managed a business budget before, if you think any professional can just shell out 2 - 3 times what is needed to replace hardware. And mind you, big businesses usually have fairly stringent contracts that guarantee they're priority customers, so this shortage mostly hits small businesses who already usually don't have much capital on the backburner for this kind of stuff, so none of your assumptions have any basis in reality.

This is laughable.

 

I manage and operate a £26 million production research and development programme within a £55m portfolio. I know exactly the impact of cost increases, it's why I have risk budget and have multiple risk managers reviewing my internal and strategic risk.

 

Each FTE I have within my programme costs between £60-120k per year per head. The cost of re-kitting each of them for working from home (Laptop, Screens, chairs, etc) even at inflated COVID prices barely made a dent in my general operating costs. When I'm buying £400k worth of PPE every month, the price of buying everyone in my programme a laptop and screen only cost me half a million. 

 

Operating a GPU dependent career, the price of a £850 card you buy once every 2 years going up to £1800 ... peanuts.

 

Game artists typically cost a company from $50,000 to $100,000 per year for a customer. You're telling me they're going to have a problem with paying an extra grand to ensure they can do their job? Come off it.

[RoseLuck462]

The key thing for me at least is that none of these electronics are essential to someone’s way of life, so that’s why I wouldn’t exactly say the sellers are ripping people off.

 

Ive sold about 90% of my own GPU collection for as high as bidders were willing to pay, leaving my own PC gaming, folding, and mining capacity down. But that’s ok because this insane demand is helping my other avenues like investing.

[Avocado Diaboli]

16 minutes ago, Amias said:

This is laughable.

 

I manage and operate a £26 million production research and development programme within a £55m portfolio. I know exactly the impact of cost increases, it's why I have risk budget and have multiple risk managers reviewing my internal and strategic risk.

 

Each FTE I have within my programme costs between £60-120k per year per head. The cost of re-kitting each of them for working from home (Laptop, Screens, chairs, etc) even at inflated COVID prices barely made a dent in my general operating costs. When I'm buying £400k worth of PPE every month, the price of buying everyone in my programme a laptop and screen only cost me half a million. 

 

Operating a GPU dependent career, the price of a £850 card you buy once every 2 years going up to £1800 ... peanuts.

 

Game artists typically cost a company from $50,000 to $100,000 per year for a customer. You're telling me they're going to have a problem with paying an extra grand to ensure they can do their job? Come off it.

1. Source: Dude, trust me.
2. Look at you, ignoring the fact that I specifically pointed out that big businesses are usually less affected by this. If you're a professional who requires a gaming GPU for work, you're clearly not in the kind of budget range where a doubling or tripling of prices isn't being felt. Otherwise, you'd be buying workstation gear that's validated for said purpose. 

Again, this comes down to you thinking that the presence of capital somehow represents entitlement in some kind of feeble attempt at convincing people that someone skimming off profits for no added value can somehow be presented as virtuous. 

[Amias]

15 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

Again, this comes down to you thinking that the presence of capital somehow represents entitlement in some kind of feeble attempt at convincing people that someone skimming off profits for no added value can somehow be presented as virtuous. 

 

Why are you applying morality to a global market?

 

Why is someone exploiting a broken market, stupid supplier and desperate demand immoral? It sucks. But it's literally just businesses. At least scalpers are keeping the market open for professionals and people desperate enough. You should really be questioning why Nvidia continues to sell these GPUs are such a low price. If they implemented perfect 1 card per person sales, people would literally lose their careers. Scalpers are at least keeping the market open for them.

 

Nvidia should really be bumping up the price and using that extra money to buy extra / invest in Silicon Fab time. If the demand goes away, they're net zero. If the demand continues they're massively beefing up their supply and satisfying the market. Instead they continue to flog them off at a stupidly low MSRP leaving money to be made by savy people with enough time on their hands ... ergo 'scalpers'.

[Jay427]

I hope people don't get too upset at me, as I realize our problem with the shortage is a combination "free money" stimulus (tax money), working from home, scalpers, bitcoin miners, and businesses caring more about sales than their customers (Hint: Boycott companies that allowed scalpers to thrive and buy multiple items at once, or buy online).

 

Here's the hidden factor: lazy and coddled people cry and complain when they don't get things handed to them on a silver platter.  That's entitlement incarnate if you're not willing to put in some work to get what you want.  I camped outside of a store and slept in my car overnight for 4 days straight with a spine injury, and even drove away scalpers by being well read in our local laws.  If you hate scalpers like I do, put in the work to stop them.  Bots can't go to a store that requires you to purchase in person, and scalpers won't spend the time camping at a store when their entire objective is to turn over a hot item as quickly as possible (otherwise their time is better spent doing something else, because every minute is money lost for them).  Know your enemy, and fight back, otherwise they are not ever going away.

 

Also, retailers will be FORCED to listen if you drop their sales.  They don't want to be fair to customers, and they keep enabling scalping behaviors?  Buy nothing else from them except only what you need, and let them know why their sales are plummeting.  Businesses only understand one thing: money.  So hit them where it hurts.

[whm1974]

58 minutes ago, Jay427 said:

I hope people don't get too upset at me, as I realize our problem with the shortage is a combination "free money" stimulus (tax money), working from home, scalpers, bitcoin miners, and businesses caring more about sales than their customers (Hint: Boycott companies that allowed scalpers to thrive and buy multiple items at once, or buy online).

The Shortages started last Year before anyone received any Stimulus Money. And most Folks including Me used it to get stuff they needed.

[Jay427]

14 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

The Shortages started last Year before anyone received any Stimulus Money. And most Folks including Me used it to get stuff they needed.

That's fair to a point, but the shortages continued as did the checks, which also went to many people who didn't need it, as well as the continuous unemployment benefits where people have been making more money than people who were working full time all year.  People also withdrew up to $100,000.00 from their 401k's (federally mandated) as emergency relief with no consequence, which artificially inflates demand by giving people much more buying power that they otherwise would never have.  Enter scalpers in a state that has 4 MCs compared to other struggling states which only have 1 Micro Center.

 

I'm glad that it helped people who needed it, but I came from an area with an extremely high welfare rate where people openly brag about gaming the system so they can stay home and play video games at the expense of others who work.  The only reason I'm offended by it is because it happens very often in NY, and it means that money is going to people who don't feel like working instead of people who really need it to survive hard times.

[whm1974]

25 minutes ago, Jay427 said:

That's fair to a point, but the shortages continued as did the checks, which also went to many people who didn't need it, as well as the continuous unemployment benefits where people have been making more money than people who were working full time all year.  People also withdrew up to $100,000.00 from their 401k's (federally mandated) as emergency relief with no consequence, which artificially inflates demand by giving people much more buying power that they otherwise would never have.  Enter scalpers in a state that has 4 MCs compared to other struggling states which only have 1 Micro Center.

 

I'm glad that it helped people who needed it, but I came from an area with an extremely high welfare rate where people openly brag about gaming the system so they can stay home and play video games at the expense of others who work.  The only reason I'm offended by it is because it happens very often in NY, and it means that money is going to people who don't feel like working instead of people who really need it to survive hard times.

Last a brought a decent pair of eyeglasses with the money and some clothes. With Public Aid I would have to wait four months due to my State having one exactly one Prison where the make the Lens at. Very thick Lens mind you.

[Swndlr]

20 hours ago, tikker said:

I'm not sure if we are even argueing about something here. We've either reached an impasse or are saying the same thing.  I agree that games can be enjoyed on lower settings and I'm not contending that. What I am disagreeing with is that you are saying that if 90% of the time you play 3060 level games and 10% of the time 3080 level games, you should be fine with a 3060. That is false, because a 3060 will not suffice that 10% of the time.

 

The fact that the majority of gamers are running 3060s tells you they are people like you. They play less demanding games, are fine with lower settings, don't game that ofter or any combination of those. You cannot use this to argue to a gamer running demanding titles 10% of the time that they don't need a 3080 however.

 

I'll take myself as an example. I bought a 1080 Ti at launch. Due to release rate and personal tastes I'm not playing AAA titles 7 days a week. There are a few bigger titles I play over a longer time, but most of the games I play now or played then don't/didn't push the card to its limits.

 

Why did I buy a 1080 Ti? because I want the (to me) best and proper experience for that 10% of the time that I do play demanding titles. That means high(est) settings and hopefully around >120 FPS, so yes having the top of the line card was necessary for me.

 

People are upset, because this is precisely what they cannot do. The new market is scarce at best and usually sold out. I don't know what markets you have, but the used market is not at all "plentiful with tons of deals". It's either sold out because everyone is looking for a card, they can't get a new one and hence resort to the second hand market, or hugely marked up because there is profit to be made. Realistic price at the moment means paying top-of-the-line unit prices for lowest-of-the-line units. Yes we can do nothing but accept that and either 1) pay too much money or 2) wait it out, but that's why people are upset.

Fair points. Yeah seems like we are circling a bit here. People have the right to be upset with the market. In my area particular there seems to be a lot of local options for buying secondhand, but I also live in an area not far from New York City, so that probably contributes to it.

[Beerzerker]

11 hours ago, Amias said:

 

Why are you applying morality to a global market?

 

Why is someone exploiting a broken market, stupid supplier and desperate demand immoral? It sucks. But it's literally just businesses. At least scalpers are keeping the market open for professionals and people desperate enough. You should really be questioning why Nvidia continues to sell these GPUs are such a low price. If they implemented perfect 1 card per person sales, people would literally lose their careers. Scalpers are at least keeping the market open for them.

 

Nvidia should really be bumping up the price and using that extra money to buy extra / invest in Silicon Fab time. If the demand goes away, they're net zero. If the demand continues they're massively beefing up their supply and satisfying the market. Instead they continue to flog them off at a stupidly low MSRP leaving money to be made by savy people with enough time on their hands ... ergo 'scalpers'.

OK - What justification is there to why would folks HAVE to be or become desperate enough to pay two to three times over MSRP for a card or anything in general?

There is reason for the desperation in the first place, at least everyone knows that's true.
One biggie is because the scalpers have largely cornered the market by buying and stockpiling these, knowing the readily available supply anyone can get for a reasonable price will quickly evaporate, leaving THEM as the only alternative......
Just as they planned.

No hardware will last forever and the need to replace what's dying, defective or just dead will come around one day and they know it.
They have inserted themselves between customers and the retail vendors to control the supply making any and everyone beholden to them at a much higher price and I mean higher.
Sad part of it all is it's actually not illegal to do so no real "Crime" has been commited.

I've heard others in different places around the world say stuff is hard to get, expensive if and when you do. Others from these same places for the same pieces say they can get them but sometimes also refer to the black market as a source and I do strongly suspect all this is directly black market related.

I don't have a problem IF one were to buy a couple and mark them up for some spare "Cheese", to me that's OK but using bots to snipe and edge out everyone while buying out the entire supply period is what the problem is and why it's not a good thing.

No - I will never believe scalping is anything good because it's not, regardless of the reasons for it or what's being scalped.
 




 

[Jay427]

3 hours ago, Caroline said:

The free market system looks great printed in a book and is probably better than porn for liberal economists, yet when they try to apply it to the real world it becomes a disaster because it ignores greed.

This is just a lack of knowledge in regards to system terminology.  There are Plutocracies, Oligarchies, Democracies, Democratic-Republics, and Dictatorships which manipulate economic systems to suit their agendas, and massage language to deliberately confuse the public and keep them misinformed by using economic systems interchangeably with political ones.  You can't criticize a free market when its freedom is restricted with predatory practices that are outsourced and manipulated by forces outside of buyers and sellers negotiating the market, because then it's no longer buyers and sellers negotiating the market, and therefor not a free market.  The mistake wasn't the free market, it was giving individual human rights to corporate machines that aren't inherently human.

[Avocado Diaboli]

11 hours ago, Amias said:

Why are you applying morality to a global market?

What other metric should I apply to determine on principle if something is good on its own merits without letting personal bias seep in? See, I'm not upset at scalpers or retailers or even the shortage because I didn't get a GPU. I bought a 3080 last year for MSRP (yes, I literally "only" paid $700 for it). So when I argue that it's still morally reprehensible to engage in this type of behavior, I don't do it for selfish reasons. Hell, I could've sold my card for 200% profit and continued to use my 980Ti from my previous PC. And I'm not salty just because others are doing it and I missed my chance. I could still do it right now and make a huge profit. The reasons why I'm not doing it are:

1. Obviously I have a use for it. It's not my job that depends on it, but gaming and CUDA accelerated tasks benefit from the uplift from my previous card. Never mind the NVENC.
2. I'm not too keen on simply trying to make a quick buck by acting like a vulture.

12 hours ago, Amias said:

You should really be questioning why Nvidia continues to sell these GPUs are such a low price.

Yes, how dare Nvidia allow the peasantry access to their shiny GPUs. Those shouldn't be in the hands of people engaging in frivolities like gaming. Only serious users - with deep enough pockets - should have access. Also, nice attempt at using the fallacy of relative privation, by insinuating that you can only ever be for or against a single thing and that because of that, you should focus your efforts exclusively on that thing.

 

12 hours ago, Amias said:

Nvidia should really be bumping up the price and using that extra money to buy extra / invest in Silicon Fab time. If the demand goes away, they're net zero. If the demand continues they're massively beefing up their supply and satisfying the market. Instead they continue to flog them off at a stupidly low MSRP leaving money to be made by savy people with enough time on their hands ... ergo 'scalpers'.

You act as if you have direct insight into how Nvidia operate internally when you imply that Nvidia aren't right now already investing their already record earnings in increasing production. I'm sure Jensen is having his business analysts whipped right now for not realizing that they could be squeezing the market even harder. Or Nvidia might be following a different strategy that some armchair expert isn't privy to.

 

6 hours ago, Jay427 said:

Here's the hidden factor: lazy and coddled people cry and complain when they don't get things handed to them on a silver platter.  That's entitlement incarnate if you're not willing to put in some work to get what you want.  I camped outside of a store and slept in my car overnight for 4 days straight with a spine injury, and even drove away scalpers by being well read in our local laws.  If you hate scalpers like I do, put in the work to stop them.  Bots can't go to a store that requires you to purchase in person, and scalpers won't spend the time camping at a store when their entire objective is to turn over a hot item as quickly as possible (otherwise their time is better spent doing something else, because every minute is money lost for them).  Know your enemy, and fight back, otherwise they are not ever going away.

This is quite literally addressing the symptoms without curing the disease. What kind of mental state do you have to occupy to think that camping in front of a store for 4 days for a gaming GPU is sensible in the least? Also, how exactly did you have time to camp in front of a store for 4 days? Don't you have a job?

 

Also, as a side note, some stores have actually switched to only selling sought after products online and refusing purchases on location, specifically to disincentivize camping or massive rushes of customers entering their stores, especially given the pandemic.

[Jay427]

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

Also, as a side note, some stores have actually switched to only selling sought after products online and refusing purchases on location, specifically to disincentivize camping or massive rushes of customers entering their stores, especially given the pandemic.

I'm glad you brought that up, and it's still boils down to poor leadership/management.  I camped the week prior to Christmas, and I had exactly 4 days off because I work 13 hour shifts.  How do I keep everyone safe when 50+ people wanted to wait in line in the dead of a northern winter?  Have them wait in their cars.  Nobody had close contact at all for multiple nights, recordings protected and ensured everyone's position in line against liars, NYS laws and one party consent with timestamps (other people's cell phones) stopped every shady attempt to steal a position in line cold, including flash mobs and people trying to bribe me since the list was on display at all times for all parties who waited.

 

Know your enemy, put in the work.  I got a card the first day, the processor took 4.  If I can do all this while having a spine injury, not willing to camp for 1 day when you're healthy (potentially vaccinated now) and with a store that does not sell to customers unless they are present at the store (Sorry to those where this may not be an option for them) is just lazy.  I've had young and healthy new hires tell me similar excuses when they couldn't run 80% production when I ran over 100% for years with a severe tear in my hip joint, and it felt like going home with a broken bone every day.  Yes I have broken bones, I know what it feels like.  If you want something, then earn it.  I was proud to be a list master because everyone got a card that day, but I can't always be the list master - others need to step up and take responsibility too, or it won't change.

Everyone hates scalpers.  Businesses are poorly managed.  Don't like it?  Do something about it, they're not going to change unless you give them a reason to.

 

You'll be surprised by what you're capable of like I was.

[Amias]

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

What other metric should I apply to determine on principle if something is good on its own merits without letting personal bias seep in? See, I'm not upset at scalpers or retailers or even the shortage because I didn't get a GPU. I bought a 3080 last year for MSRP (yes, I literally "only" paid $700 for it). So when I argue that it's still morally reprehensible to engage in this type of behavior, I don't do it for selfish reasons. Hell, I could've sold my card for 200% profit and continued to use my 980Ti from my previous PC. And I'm not salty just because others are doing it and I missed my chance. I could still do it right now and make a huge profit. The reasons why I'm not doing it are:

1. Obviously I have a use for it. It's not my job that depends on it, but gaming and CUDA accelerated tasks benefit from the uplift from my previous card. Never mind the NVENC.
2. I'm not too keen on simply trying to make a quick buck by acting like a vulture.

You apply the rule of law to the market. 

 

Nothing is illegal here. It's just frustrating.

 

Quote

Yes, how dare Nvidia allow the peasantry access to their shiny GPUs. Those shouldn't be in the hands of people engaging in frivolities like gaming. Only serious users - with deep enough pockets - should have access. Also, nice attempt at using the fallacy of relative privation, by insinuating that you can only ever be for or against a single thing and that because of that, you should focus your efforts exclusively on that thing.

This is just pure entitlement. Grow up please. Nvidia does not owe you anything, they owe their shareholders profit. 

 

Quote

 

You act as if you have direct insight into how Nvidia operate internally when you imply that Nvidia aren't right now already investing their already record earnings in increasing production. I'm sure Jensen is having his business analysts whipped right now for not realizing that they could be squeezing the market even harder. Or Nvidia might be following a different strategy that some armchair expert isn't privy to.

I don't need direct insight to see a company leaving a lot of money on the table. At least they bumped up the 3080/70 Ti price. That was a start. And guess what ... SOLD OUT EVERYWHERE. That shows they could have practically doubled the price and still sold them.

[Avocado Diaboli]

4 minutes ago, Amias said:

You apply the rule of law to the market. 

 

Nothing is illegal here. It's just frustrating.

Implying that laws are fundamental constants of the universe and not subject to change and that laws are a priori infallible. Thanks, I'll stick to evaluating situations and behavior on my own moral grounds, not if they merely abide by the law, because that's a low bar to clear. It's not against the law to be an asshole, but I doubt many would defend or even advocate being one just because the law doesn't say otherwise.

 

4 minutes ago, Amias said:

This is just pure entitlement. Grow up please. Nvidia does not owe you anything, they owe their shareholders profit. 

I never said anything about Nvidia with that statement. I was making fun of you for defending ultra-capitalist practices and trying to rationalize them with boiler-plate "economic wisdom". Again, a multi-billion dollar company probably has a better strategy than some armchair expert on a forum.

 

Here, I can even one-up you on that one: Why would anyone sell you something that literally prints money? Why would anyone sell you a GPU or an ASIC or whatever if they can mine cryptocurrency for themselves with it? They're leaving so much money on the table!

 

5 minutes ago, Amias said:

I don't need direct insight to see a company leaving a lot of money on the table. At least they bumped up the 3080/70 Ti price. That was a start. And guess what ... SOLD OUT EVERYWHERE. That shows they could have practically doubled the price and still sold them.

Sure, they could have. But you act as if financial capital is the only thing dictating the strategy and philosophy of a corporation. And there's probably also some kind of long game business decision that causes them to not increase prices for a short-term profit opportunity. Because if the behavior of a corporation at such a large scale seems incomprehensible to you on the ground level, where you're left wondering why a company does or doesn't do X, there might be some facts or reasons you're not aware of.