RTX 3060 now selling for below MSRP in china following expected and unsurprising crypto crash

[tikker]

7 minutes ago, decolon said:

First of all, gamestop is one stock, and there are many arguing that it is too volatile or a bubble as well. Looking at the stock market as a whole, bloomberg has stated that bitcoin has 15x the volatility of the S&P 500, so it is more volatile than the stock market. Second, the article you posted is specifically about CMX GPUs, not GeForce which is what we are talking about (Nvidia sold a bunch of RTX gpus to miners before CMX came out and overall RTX supply was still low, as well as miners buying RTX gpus/laptops as well).

  I don't get why people have so much issue with it being volatile:

1. It's new and immature
2. Bitcoin has failed as a day to day currency, this is common knowledge in the crypto sphere
3. There are good alternatives to choose from that don't suffer Bitcoin's problems
4. It will never stabilise if nobody uses it and keeps going on this vicious circle
5. It's not the stock market, stop treating it like it. If you don't like risky trading go to the stock market.

Regarding the article, it's not from their CMP lineup. It's from before that according to the article:

Quote

Although it lacks “the ability to accurately track or quantify” the end uses of its graphic processing units (GPUs), Nvidia CFO Colette Kress said the company estimates that between $100 million and $300 million – a “relatively small portion” – of Q4 revenue came from Ethereum miners buying GPUs to use in their mining equipment.

In the future, though, miner-contributed revenue for Nvidia is likely to come from another of the company’s products. To serve the mining community, the company is launching Cryptocurrency Mining Processors (CMPs)

Nvidia plans to sell its new CMPs ...

 

[Brooksie359]

7 minutes ago, tikker said:

  

Perhaps we are having a misunderstanding. I'm not writing it off at all. I fully agree that the energy consumption is a problem. What you cannot say is that 200 TWh of gaming isn't a problem but 200 TWh of mining is, because that is both 200 TWh of energy used. You also cannot say one is useless and the other isn't, because if one was truly useless it wouldn't have survived. I don't know how much energy "each person mining" consumes, because I don't think we have any reliable estimates of how much GPUs the average home miner has.

This is 100% completely false. I can buy lots of things over here with crypto from food to PC parts.

But you can. Let's say one guy is gaming while another guy is having a gpu farm mining 24/7. You can see how one activity is clearly worse than the other so to try and boil it down to a number so you can gloss over the fact is simply disingenuous. That is why I would say you can't really compare them. 

[LAwLz]

10 minutes ago, decolon said:

You can use swedish currency in sweden to pay bills. You can't use bitcoin in ANY country, unless you are tapping the black market. The IRS does not define what a currency is, you can't go to Walmart and pay with crypto just because the IRS says its a taxable currency

But this is objectively wrong no matter how you look at it.

I can use bitcoin to pay for PIA if I want to. That is not the black market. I can use bitcoin to buy USD. That is not the black market either.

Even if it was only used on the black market, it would still be a currency! I think you are getting "currency" confused with legal tender, which has a more strict definition, but even if we use that definition you're still wrong because bitcoin is a legal tender in El Salvador.

You can go on about how YOU can't go to your local supermarket and pay for things with Bitcoin but that does not matter. It is still a currency, just not one that is accepted at the stores you buy things from.

 

If the IRS does not define what is an isn't a currency, then who does? You? According to the IRS and pretty much anyone else who looks at this objectively, bitcoin does fulfill the requirements for a currency that you posted above. It does not fulfill the requirements to be a legal tender in the US where you seem to live, but neither does the Swedish Krona for example.

[tikker]

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

But you can. Let's say one guy is gaming while another guy is having a gpu farm mining 24/7. You can see how one activity is clearly worse than the other so to try and boil it down to a number so you can gloss over the fact is simply disingenuous. That is why I would say you can't really compare them. 

But if that guy is gaming 24/7 and I'm mining 12 hours per day they are clearly worse than the other. If I'm mining 24/7 fully powered by my own solar energy and they are gaming on a coal plant they are clearly worse.

[Brooksie359]

5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Who is to say that a niche market that uses a lot per person is worse than a large market that uses a medium amount per user?

What matters in the end is total amount of power usage, and if we look at that then gaming and mining are about equal.

100TWh is 100TWh regardless of how many people use it.

That is true so long as it remains niche. Also it does matter as its unfair that a small few are polluting at a very high rate. They should do activities that aren't so destructive to the environment. I mean you using a single gpu then I have no issue but once you do more then personally I think that is an issue. Granted if it's like 2 midrange gpus that equals one high-end gpu in consumption then whatever it's probably fine. 

[Brooksie359]

Just now, tikker said:

But if that guy is gaming 24/7 and I'm mining 12 hours per day they are clearly worse than the other. If I'm mining 24/7 fully powered by my own solar energy and they are gaming on a coal plant they are clearly worse.

You can't game 24/7 as its an active activity. It's legit impossible. Mining on the other hand you can do 24/7 even while doing other things like going to work. Most people don't have time to game all that often because life has school work and other activities. To try and make the argument that miners mine less than gamer game is crazy. 

[IkeaGnome]

18 minutes ago, decolon said:

You can use swedish currency in sweden to pay bills. You can't use bitcoin in ANY country, unless you are tapping the black market. The IRS does not define what a currency is, you can't go to Walmart and pay with crypto just because the IRS says its a taxable currency

https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/details/200247094/business-development-manager-alternative-payments?team=MKTG

[LAwLz]

6 minutes ago, decolon said:

I have not seen one major retailer that has allowed crypto purchases, the whole point of a currency is that it is universal within a nation

No it's not.

You're thinking of legal tender, not currency.

Quote

Legal tender is anything recognized by law as a means to settle a public or private debt or meet a financial obligation, including tax payments, contracts, and legal fines or damages. The national currency is legal tender in practically every country. A creditor is legally obligated to accept legal tender toward repayment of a debt.

 

Also, bitcoin is legal tender in El Salvador as I said earlier.

 

 

9 minutes ago, decolon said:

Many people try to argue that crypto is an actual currency (it is not, but there is an argument that it is an asset), but most have not studied actual economic theory where it is defined very specifically what is a currency and what isnt.

I think the problem here is that you don't understand the definition and then try and dance around the fact that bitcoin fulfills all the requirements for a currency.

It only "doesn't fulfill the definition of a currency" when you start changing the definition. Apparently the definition of a currency is, according to you, something you can use to buy goods at WalMart with.

Me being able to buy a PIA subscription with bitcoin, or someone in El Salvador being able to pay their mortgage in bitcoin isn't enough by your definition because YOU can't use it at WalMart.

[LAwLz]

14 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

But you can. Let's say one guy is gaming while another guy is having a gpu farm mining 24/7. You can see how one activity is clearly worse than the other so to try and boil it down to a number so you can gloss over the fact is simply disingenuous. That is why I would say you can't really compare them. 

But you can't compare them that way.

By that logic we should go after PC gaming as well because it uses more energy per user than mobile gaming, or mobile gaming because it uses more energy than reading a book.

100TWh is still 100TWh. It does not matter how many people do it. It's still equally bad for the environment. 

 

Me using up 1 liter of oil to drive my car is equally bad for the environment as 10 people burning 1 dl oil each for fun. The 10 people burning oil for fun is not less bad just because they each individually do less harm. It's the collective harm that counts.

 

 

How many or how few people do it is absolutely and utterly meaningless. The only thing that matters is the combined harm, and when we look at that then gaming and mining are pretty much equal.

 

I really don't understand why you think a lot of people each doing a little harm each is somehow magically better than a few people doing a lot of harm each when we can accurately and reliable measure the exact amount of damage each group does and it turns out to be roughly the same.

100TWh of energy usage is just as bad as another 100TWh of energy usage. It's not like a coal power plant will be more efficient if the power goes to 100 people rather than 10 people. In fact, the opposite is actually true but if we start arguing about that then we'll be splitting hairs.

 

Let me ask you this. Do you agree or disagree with the statement that a coal power plant will need to burn the same amount of coal to generate 100TWh of power, regardless of however many individuals will use up that power?

[Brooksie359]

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

But you can't compare them that way.

By that logic we should go after PC gaming as well because it uses more energy per user than mobile gaming, or mobile gaming because it uses more energy than reading a book.

100TWh is still 100TWh. It does not matter how many people do it. It's still equally bad for the environment. 

 

Me using up 1 liter of oil to drive my car is equally bad for the environment as 10 people burning 1 dl oil each for fun. The 10 people burning oil for fun is not less bad just because they each individually do less harm. It's the collective harm that counts.

 

 

How many or how few people do it is absolutely and utterly meaningless. The only thing that matters is the combined harm, and when we look at that then gaming and mining are pretty much equal.

 

I really don't understand why you think a lot of people each doing a little harm each is somehow magically better than a few people doing a lot of harm each when we can accurately and reliable measure the exact amount of damage each group does and it turns out to be roughly the same.

100TWh of energy usage is just as bad as another 100TWh of energy usage. It's not like a coal power plant will be more efficient if the power goes to 100 people rather than 10 people. In fact, the opposite is actually true but if we start arguing about that then we'll be splitting hairs.

 

Let me ask you this. Do you agree or disagree with the statement that a coal power plant will need to burn the same amount of coal to generate 100TWh of power, regardless of however many individuals will use up that power?

How is it that hard to understand? If one guy was using 100TWh of power by himself everyone would tell him to stop because they are being super bad to the environment. That compared to a large amount of people wasting some energy to get some entertainment and enjoyment is completely different. Also again yeah the person burning oil for no reason is for sure being wasteful and should stop. 

[decolon]

2 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

How is it that hard to understand? If one guy was using 100TWh of power by himself everyone would tell him to stop because they are being super bad to the environment. That compared to a large amount of people wasting some energy to get some entertainment and enjoyment is completely different. Also again yeah the person burning oil for no reason is for sure being wasteful and should stop. 

The problem isn't even who is right or wrong, the real answer is likely very nuanced and not black or white. OP should not go around calling people "ignorant" and resorting to personal attacks when people disagree with his opinion. I simply pointed out that it was ignorant to call everyone who disagreed with his views "ignorant" and "bullocks" and he absolutely lost it

[tikker]

1 hour ago, decolon said:

I have not seen one major retailer that has allowed crypto purchases, the whole point of a currency is that it is universal within a nation, which afaik no crypto is (certain retailers may allow it, but a majority doesn't). Many people try to argue that crypto is an actual currency (it is not, but there is an argument that it is an asset), but most have not studied actual economic theory where it is defined very specifically what is a currency and what isnt. Crypto is like gold, its an asset that can be very valuable depending on how people view it, but it isn't actual currency (in most places I cannot trade gold for groceries, but there can be some places in the world that will accept that trade).

 I think you are confusing legal tender / national currencies with simply being a currency. Even the IRS and equivalent tax authorities in other countries consider it a currency, so if you don't agree with the government then I don't know what to say:

Quote

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/frequently-asked-questions-on-virtual-currency-transactions

What is virtual currency?
A1.  Virtual currency is a digital representation of value, other than a representation of the U.S. dollar or a foreign currency (“real currency”), that functions as a unit of account, a store of value, and a medium of exchange. <snip> The IRS uses the term “virtual currency” in these FAQs to describe the various types of convertible virtual currency that are used as a medium of exchange, such as digital currency and cryptocurrency.

What is cryptocurrency?
A3.  Cryptocurrency is a type of virtual currency that uses cryptography <snip>

 

52 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

You can't game 24/7 as its an active activity. It's legit impossible. Mining on the other hand you can do 24/7 even while doing other things like going to work. Most people don't have time to game all that often because life has school work and other activities. To try and make the argument that miners mine less than gamer game is crazy. 

Well maybe not 24/7 unless it's a marathon or something, but plenty of streamers who game the better part of their day. The counter argument will probably be "but those aren't the majority of gamers", but the majority of home miners also aren't @Moonzy with 500 GPUs in their bedroom (no offense Moonzy :D) I think. I don't know, is it crazy? Given the apparently literal billions of gamers in the world I don't think it'd be that far off that gamers game more or less the same as or more than miners mine, which the energy consumption numbers I posted earlier seem to corroberate... Say I was a streamer and gamed 12 hours per day that'd be ~3.7 kWh. Mining I'm doing something like 5.5 kWh when otherwise idle.

 

Furhter still If I'm mining 24/7 on solar that I generate on my roof I'm much better than the gamer that burns coal to enjoy his few hours of relaxation. This will probably be countered with "but the gamer can game on renewables as well" and then we've arrived at the actual core of the problem again: the fact that, in addition to consuming a lot, we are producing our energy in a very dirty unsustainable way (e.g. burning coal). And no, this isn't justifying one bad thing with another.

16 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

How is it that hard to understand? If one guy was using 100TWh of power by himself everyone would tell him to stop because they are being super bad to the environment. That compared to a large amount of people wasting some energy to get some entertainment and enjoyment is completely different. Also again yeah the person burning oil for no reason is for sure being wasteful and should stop. 

But the person using oil for their car is equally wasteful, because it impacts the environment the same way. I'm not denying mining is a problem. What I disagree with is the point of view that it is the problem. It would be a different story if mining was fully nuclear or solar. Then it would've been the textbook example of how to do green computing...

12 minutes ago, decolon said:

The problem isn't even who is right or wrong, the real answer is likely very nuanced and not black or white. OP should not go around calling people "ignorant" and resorting to personal attacks when people disagree with his opinion. I simply pointed out that it was ignorant to call everyone who disagreed with his views "ignorant" and "bullocks" and he absolutely lost it

I agree and this is more or less (I think) what we've been trying to argue here. It's not right vs. wrong, but a general problem that exists in multiple places. There is a lot of ignorance still about crypto though as it's very often still seen as crypto == Bitcoin == mining == bad, but the media is to blame for this, because the only stories you'll ever read are those of Bitcoin (and now a bit of Ethereum) crashing, soaring or using power and never about this smaller coin that is free, fast and uses little power.

[Brooksie359]

15 minutes ago, tikker said:

 I think you are confusing legal tender / national currencies with simply being a currency. Even the IRS and equivalent tax authorities in other countries consider it a currency, so if you don't agree with the government then I don't know what to say:

 

Well maybe not 24/7 unless it's a marathon or something, but plenty of streamers who game the better part of their day. The counter argument will probably be "but those aren't the majority of gamers", but the majority of home miners also aren't @Moonzy with 500 GPUs in their bedroom (no offense Moonzy :D) I think. I don't know, is it crazy? Given the apparently literal billions of gamers in the world I don't think it'd be that far off that gamers game more or less the same as or more than miners mine, which the energy consumption numbers I posted earlier seem to corroberate... Say I was a streamer and gamed 12 hours per day that'd be ~3.7 kWh. Mining I'm doing something like 5.5 kWh when otherwise idle.

 

Furhter still If I'm mining 24/7 on solar that I generate on my roof I'm much better than the gamer that burns coal to enjoy his few hours of relaxation. This will probably be countered with "but the gamer can game on renewables as well" and then we've arrived at the actual core of the problem again: the fact that, in addition to consuming a lot, we are producing our energy in a very dirty unsustainable way (e.g. burning coal). And no, this isn't justifying one bad thing with another.

People still sleep and alot of streamers don't stream much more than 12h at a time. Basically most miners go 24/7. Take that compared to someone like me who games maybe 8 hours in a week and you can see it's completely different. Also keep in mind that if mining has too big of energy consumption renewable energy won't keep up and mining farms has been a huge issue with power grids for this issue requiring much larger outputs due to a few people setting up mining farms. Also comparing one person that streams for a long duration each day to a mining farm that runs 24/7 is sorta crazy as again its not very comparable as mining farms use way more energy. 

[LAwLz]

13 minutes ago, decolon said:

The problem isn't even who is right or wrong, the real answer is likely very nuanced and not black or white. OP should not go around calling people "ignorant" and resorting to personal attacks when people disagree with his opinion. I simply pointed out that it was ignorant to call everyone who disagreed with his views "ignorant" and "bullocks" and he absolutely lost it

Who? Me?

I said a lot of arguments I see from the anti-cryptomining side come from ignorance and gave a few examples.

You then replied with what was essentially "no you're wrong" and then said:

Quote

It seems like society has gotten to the point where stating something that is factually correct that people don't agree with = fake news or ignorance.

which implied that I was saying things that were factually incorrect and brushed off facts as "fake news".

 

I replied to your post by saying that you can't just say "no you're wrong" and then get on a high horse and talk about how I deny facts and calls things fake news. I asked you to explain why you felt that my arguments were inadequate.

 

You then replied with, what I'd consider, a bunch of ignorant statements which clearly demonstrates that you do not understand the definition of "currency" (gets it confused with legal tender), that you underestimate how much power gaming uses (you brushed it off as gaming "doesn't even come close", probably before even having looked into it) and that you haven't looked into Nvidia's financial statements and breakdowns to judge how much of their revenue actually comes from crypto mining (you assume it's a lot for some reason).

 

All of those things are ignorance on your part. I didn't "absolutely lose it". I think I have been fairly calm throughout the thread. I have linked sources, explained myself, asked for you to explain yourself when you disagreed, and so on.

You on the other hand seems to have lashed out at Brooksie because you misread his posts and got them confused with mine, and you had to apologize to him afterwards.

 

Also, are you seriously going to start with the whole "we just have different opinions" now?

You're the one who said things like:

Quote

Do you even know what an Opinion is?

Quote

There is not a fundamental misunderstanding of what a currency is, unless you believe that literal economists don't know jack shit about economics.

Quote

if that's the case, literally everything is an opinion and nothing matters anymore, because reality can be whatever you want it to be

 

If you ask me, you're the one who "lost it". Not me. I quickly looked through my posts and couldn't even find a single swear word in them, except maybe "hell". Meanwhile, you were talking about how others "don't know jack shit about economics".

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

People still sleep and alot of streamers don't stream much more than 12h at a time. Basically most miners go 24/7. Take that compared to someone like me who games maybe 8 hours in a week and you can see it's completely different. Also keep in mind that if mining has too big of energy consumption renewable energy won't keep up and mining farms has been a huge issue with power grids for this issue requiring much larger outputs due to a few people setting up mining farms. Also comparing one person that streams for a long duration each day to a mining farm that runs 24/7 is sorta crazy as again its not very comparable as mining farms use way more energy. 

Yes but there are a lot more gamers so it evens out.

 

I would like for you to answer this question:

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Let me ask you this. Do you agree or disagree with the statement that a coal power plant will need to burn the same amount of coal to generate 100TWh of power, regardless of however many individuals will use up that power?

 

[Brooksie359]

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Yes but there are a lot more gamers so it evens out.

 

I would like for you to answer this question:

 

I think you fundamentally don't get the point I am trying to make and it is a waste of time trying to argue over it. If you think one guy using up 100TWh is no more of a problem than the collective of millions using up that much energy then I guess we just fundamentally disagree. 

[Moonzy]

2 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

Yes it does change things. It makes gaming a huge problem in its current form and the fact that people are trying to write it off like it doesn't matter is completely ridiculous. Again you scale up the energy consumption based on people who participate now to how much it would be when a ton of people get into it and you can fairly easily see how massive an issue it would be. That's why gaming vs playing in the mud is fundamentally different. If each person gaming didn't consume that much energy nobody would care but that isn't the case. 

- no one

 

changed a few words to see if it makes sense

 

5 hours ago, decolon said:

4. Crypto miners have affected the supply of cards.

Oh I'm sorry, were miners not supposed to buy GPUs?

Do you need a Gamer badge to buy GPU nowadays? didn't know that, my bad

 

47 minutes ago, tikker said:

the majority of home miners also aren't @Moonzy with 500 GPUs in their bedroom (no offense Moonzy :D) I think.

hey, it's only 22

gonna report u for personal attacks

[tikker]

30 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

People still sleep and alot of streamers don't stream much more than 12h at a time.

Miners still tweak their hardware for lower power consumption and a lot of miners don't have a multi GPU setup. Now we're just descending in the "but <insert the one-up here>" bottomless pit.

30 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Take that compared to someone like me who games maybe 8 hours in a week and you can see it's completely different.

But this assumes you are the norm, which we don't know if you are and I'd guess with ~1 hour per day you are not among "gamers". Then I could say that cars aren't so bad, because I don't have one and if they are everybody should just take their bike to work because I do that every day.

30 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Also keep in mind that if mining has too big of energy consumption renewable energy won't keep up and mining farms has been a huge issue with power grids for this issue requiring much larger outputs due to a few people setting up mining farms.

Not unique to mining. It's the same for gaming, or anything that will use an amount of power too big relative to the supply and is part of the general energy problem we face.

30 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Also comparing one person that streams for a long duration each day to a mining farm that runs 24/7 is sorta crazy as again its not very comparable as mining farms use way more energy. 

Two sentences up you use yourself as the example that people don't have a lot of time and game a few hours per week and now I'm guitly of using "one person that streams long each day"? If you're a full time streamer as your job then I can't imagine you streaming less than 6 hours a day or so on average (which you'll now probably counter with how few people are actually full time streamers).

 

Let's turn it around then. Say all mining is gone and the suddenly free 150 (BTC) + 50 (ETH) = 200 TWh is immediately replaced by gamers. Gaming would then consume 300 TWh per year globally if we go by the figures earlier in this thread. Would that be ok? because that is fundamentally the underlying issue we as humans are facing now. No matter what we are using it for, we are using too much and too unsustainably, and no this is not justifying one evil with another.

[Tellos]

@LAwLzUm you also realize almost NO miners of serious level are using 1 card. Their using 4, 8,12,36,256 etc. Their using HUGE numbers. 

[ravenshrike]

 

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

 

According to Nvidia themselves, they estimate that 2-6% of their revenue is from mining sales. That means the other 94-98% of their revenue is from non-mining sales.

 

Which means that according to their estimate the amount of consumer level cards bought by miners was between 4% and 13% as consumer graphics only accounts for 48% of their revenue. What's more, they refuse to say how they quantified that number. If they are going off of sales to third parties by various middlemen which aren't affiliated with the normal endpoints in the chain, then those numbers are a severe underestimation as plenty of miners and scalpers buy cards from consumer endpoints. 

[Blademaster91]

22 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

 

Which means that according to their estimate the amount of consumer level cards bought by miners was between 4% and 13% as consumer graphics only accounts for 48% of their revenue. What's more, they refuse to say how they quantified that number. If they are going off of sales to third parties by various middlemen which aren't affiliated with the normal endpoints in the chain, then those numbers are a severe underestimation as plenty of miners and scalpers buy cards from consumer endpoints. 

I would guess Nvidia knows what middlemen are buying shipments, or at least know how many chips AIB's are getting to make partner cards, numbers could get estimated from that, and its probably at least 10-13% from mining sales as a low estimate. Also considering how most online retailers only had paper launches for RTX 30 series. But Nvidia wouldn't want to risk upsetting their shareholders so I doubt we'd know what the real revenue share is from mining.

[Brooksie359]

1 hour ago, tikker said:

Miners still tweak their hardware for lower power consumption and a lot of miners don't have a multi GPU setup. Now we're just descending in the "but <insert the one-up here>" bottomless pit.

But this assumes you are the norm, which we don't know if you are and I'd guess with ~1 hour per day you are not among "gamers". Then I could say that cars aren't so bad, because I don't have one and if they are everybody should just take their bike to work because I do that every day.

Not unique to mining. It's the same for gaming, or anything that will use an amount of power too big relative to the supply and is part of the general energy problem we face.

Two sentences up you use yourself as the example that people don't have a lot of time and game a few hours per week and now I'm guitly of using "one person that streams long each day"? If you're a full time streamer as your job then I can't imagine you streaming less than 6 hours a day or so on average (which you'll now probably counter with how few people are actually full time streamers).

 

Let's turn it around then. Say all mining is gone and the suddenly free 150 (BTC) + 50 (ETH) = 200 TWh is immediately replaced by gamers. Gaming would then consume 300 TWh per year globally if we go by the figures earlier in this thread. Would that be ok? because that is fundamentally the underlying issue we as humans are facing now. No matter what we are using it for, we are using too much and too unsustainably, and no this is not justifying one evil with another.

Honestly I am pretty done with this conversation at this point. We are going in circles and will likely never agree. 

[IkeaGnome]

I wonder if this is a supply issue or a demand issue....

Spoiler

Maybe if there wasn't 5 groups of people all thinking they were better than each other we'd be in a different spot...

[ouroesa]

It would be so awesome if no-one buys these crypto cards for anything more than 10% of the MSRP. They should suffer like everyone else has. Remember, they are also the ones enabling scalping, if not scalpers themselves.
 

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, IkeaGnome said:

I wonder if this is a supply issue or a demand issue....

  Hide contents

Maybe if there wasn't 5 groups of people all thinking they were better than each other we'd be in a different spot...

Why not both? Tbh I think everyone knows the issue is supply is crap from covid shutdowns/shipping slowdowns and demand is high because of the new gpus actually being good compared to the previous 2000 series that was a flop and working from home has made pc sales go way up increasing demand for chips. To top all of that off the new gpus happen to be good at mining. Honestly this whole thing is the perfect storm of reasons why we can't get gpus at a reasonable price.