Why does everyone hate the 4080?

[GreatnessRD]

On 12/10/2022 at 12:01 AM, JimmyJJones said:

This has to be an scalper-sponsored post right?

Why would my post be scalper-sponsored? I just literally said consumers need to stop buying GPUs are stupid prices, lol.

[JimmyJJones]

2 minutes ago, GreatnessRD said:

Why would my post be scalper-sponsored? I just literally said consumers need to stop buying GPUs are stupid prices, lol.

You were arguing that the MSRP should be lowered.  The only people that would help are scalpers.

[g335]

On 11/17/2022 at 3:44 PM, Chewyloop said:

As somone who personally purchased a 4080fe, I can confirm this is 100% buyers remorse

You regret buying it?

[Digitaltantrum]

the RTX 4080 is not poorly priced, people are whiners, MSRP of the 3090 TI was 1999 and the msrp of the 4080 is 1199

 

benchmark after benchmark you are getting better performance, with lower TDP than the 3090 TI for almost 700 dollars less at launch

 

and you even get better RT and DLSS 3 performance...?

 

Why people arent saying thank you for the improvement and the discount, when still cant get a new 3090 ti (still $1600 - $2000) for even close to the retail price of the 4080, is baffling to me. you can find straight 3090 for close to the price of a 4080 but why would I want 20% less performance for the same money.?

 

These are facts, anything else is just words without some kind of sound logic to back it up. 

[LOST TALE]

Nividia must be really hot given the premium ya'll are willing to put up with.

[starsmine]

4 hours ago, Digitaltantrum said:

the RTX 4080 is not poorly priced, people are whiners, MSRP of the 3090 TI was 1999 and the msrp of the 4080 is 1199

 

benchmark after benchmark you are getting better performance, with lower TDP than the 3090 TI for almost 700 dollars less at launch

 

and you even get better RT and DLSS 3 performance...?

 

Why people arent saying thank you for the improvement and the discount, when still cant get a new 3090 ti (still $1600 - $2000) for even close to the retail price of the 4080, is baffling to me. you can find straight 3090 for close to the price of a 4080 but why would I want 20% less performance for the same money.?

 

These are facts, anything else is just words without some kind of sound logic to back it up. 

And you get the same/better performance with a 7900xtx which is 900 USD.

OH BOY DLSS 3. WOOOooooooo
its DLSS 2 + frame gen, and the frame gen does two things, adds motion artifacts and worsens playability (takes all the latency gains from run running DLSS 2 and then yeets it out the window so you are close to native latency). If you want better motion clarity just turn on motion blur. 

[Digitaltantrum]

3 hours ago, starsmine said:

And you get the same/better performance with a 7900xtx which is 900 USD.

OH BOY DLSS 3. WOOOooooooo
its DLSS 2 + frame gen, and the frame gen does two things, adds motion artifacts and worsens playability (takes all the latency gains from run running DLSS 2 and then yeets it out the window so you are close to native latency). If you want better motion clarity just turn on motion blur. 

way to straw man the DLSS 3 lol, not your cup of tea, throw away tech for you?  fair enough

And the AMD card still slumps in RT performance and with driver evolution we will probably see that gap increase but it is a fair point..I think that getting 30% greater performance than the last generation top teir for 4-700 dollars cheaper is also a fair point

 

[starsmine]

26 minutes ago, Digitaltantrum said:

way to straw man the DLSS 3 lol, not your cup of tea, throw away tech for you?  fair enough

That is not strawmaning DLSS 3. 
Nor am I even sure what you are saying, the definition of strawman does not even work here so I have to guess at what you are saying

What did I say about DLSS 3 that was a made up argument to beat it down easier? DLSS 3 is literally running frame generation on top of DLSS 2. It, in every single case because of how math works, increases latency making the game less playable then just running DLSS 2. It, in every case introduces motion artifacts as it guesses where things are, intelligently and very well most of the time sure given its tied into the game engine and not just frame interpolating so it has internal motion vectors, but its still a guess, and to do that it holds a frame of information longer then it would have otherwise, aka increased latency. 

If you want smother visual motion sure, but that is not something you need in games. The same visual smotheness effect is achived through motion blur without the hit to playablity.

The AI frame gen is amazing for videos if you want that as its the best real-time frame interpolation technology out there, but using it for games is not really a selling point. It's supported by very few games. FSR 3.0 will have frame gen as well so when the tech is widespread, its not some exclusive feature for Nvidia 40 series and again, not a selling point for it.

 

  

26 minutes ago, Digitaltantrum said:

 

And the AMD card still slumps in RT performance and with driver evolution we will probably see that gap increase but it is a fair point..I think that getting 30% greater performance than the last generation top teir for 4-700 dollars cheaper is also a fair point

yea... sure... K. 
900USD 7900xtx is still faster than the 1200 USD RTX 4080.
Sure there are a couple of titles the 4080 is faster in, But a game with Ray tracing is still a rasterized game first and foremost.
Its a weird claim to make that Nvidia drivers will age better than the RNDA 3 drivers will. Its hard to say with any certainty either way but there is a forced stall to prevent memory corruption still in the RDNA 3 drivers that they will hopefully some day get rid of. There is no known stall like that in nvidia's. Though we have no reason to assume AMD will be able to get rid of that stall either. Like I said, the confidence there from you is unfounded as that has historically not been the trend. 


Its also not 4-700 dollars cheaper. the 3090TIs were 1000-1100 NEW before they sold out.

If you are going to spend 1200USD for a GPU, might as well spend the 1500 for the 4090 that is actually a good card. 

[SteveGrabowski0]

42 minutes ago, Digitaltantrum said:

way to straw man the DLSS 3 lol, not your cup of tea, throw away tech for you?  fair enough

And the AMD card still slumps in RT performance and with driver evolution we will probably see that gap increase but it is a fair point..I think that getting 30% greater performance than the last generation top teir for 4-700 dollars cheaper is also a fair point

 

It's more like 16% in Techpowerup's testsuite

 

[freeagent]

I really wanted to buy a 4080, but I have a hard time supporting these high prices.

 

I bought a 4070 Ti instead.. great deal, under 1k.

[TeraSeraph]

7 hours ago, LOST TALE said:

Nividia must be really hot given the premium ya'll are willing to put up with.

They have RT cores and AMD doesn't. The only reason I didn't go for a 7900XTX over the 4080 was this. The realism and immersion it adds is worth the cost for me. 

[starsmine]

24 minutes ago, TeraSeraph said:

They have RT cores and AMD doesn't. The only reason I didn't go for a 7900XTX over the 4080 was this. The realism and immersion it adds is worth the cost for me. 

They dont?


Man does nvidia get away with a lot with marketing
Each compute unit contains an RT "core"

[TeraSeraph]

5 hours ago, starsmine said:

They dont?


Man does nvidia get away with a lot with marketing
Each compute unit contains an RT "core"

Those aren't dedicated RT cores, nice try. AMD cards have their FPS tank when raytracing, and the more raytraced features the slower they go. 

[starsmine]

2 hours ago, TeraSeraph said:

Those aren't dedicated RT cores, nice try. 

I’m sorry what? They literally are. 
Find the RT Cores on the ada chips
I know where they are at, will you? 

 

I'll Give you a hint, its not different then AMD with their 1 RT core per CU.

Ill also give you a hint that they are bullshiting about its size on die as seen here

2 hours ago, TeraSeraph said:

AMD cards have their FPS tank when raytracing, and the more raytraced features the slower they go. 

It’ll let you in on a dirty secret. The same thing happens with nvidia cards. The more ray tracing you turn on, the slower they go as well. It’s almost like that is how math works. 

[Rusty Proto]

On 11/16/2022 at 8:01 PM, Omga4000 said:

Hi everyone,

 

I've been seeing everyone BASHING on the 4080, honestly, for not apparent reason.

The main argument is: The 3080's MSRP is 699$, the 4080 is 1199$. nVidia is a greedy company.

 

Now here's my (logical?) counter-argument:

1. The 4080 is better than even a 3090 Ti which was released at an MSRP of 1,999$. People were not as negative towards the 3090 Ti as they are over the 4080.
2. The 4080 is much closer to the 3080 Ti in terms of CUDE Cores and VRAM, and then 3080 Ti was released at the exact MSRP of 1,199$ as the 4080.
   I assume the 4080 12GB was intended to be the "real" 4080, and the 4080 16GB the 4080 Ti? If nVidia would have simply called the 4080 16GB version a "4080 Ti" would people not be as pissed as they are?

3. The current market is awful, allowing nVidia to basically do whatever they want. Reality check, "courtesy" of pcpartpicker:

   1. Want a 3090? Pay 1,298$+ (only 1 card at that price). ~13-23% slower than the 4080 for ~8% more money.

   2. Want a 3090 Ti? Pay 1,639$+ (only 1 card at that price). ~9-14% slower than the 4080 for 36% more money.

   3. Want a 4090? Pay 2,079$+ (only 1 card at that price - the next one is 2,199$). ~5-25% faster than the 4080 for 73%-83% more money.

   4. Or frantically refresh websites until (maybe) some website sells them at MSRP. Maybe.

And on a more personal note and a bit more details about my thought process here:

Yes - it's very justified for companies to spike their prices. nVidia isn't some charity organization intended to give back to the community. They are here to make money and please the investors first and foremost. If that means increasing the prices dramatically due to numerous reasons, such as: extremely high demand, shortage of chips in the industry, increased prices of the workforce, materials, development process and shipment, no competition, and purely because they can - they will do it.

Whether you (the user) like it or not makes 0 difference to them, since they have done their research (they have people smarter than many of us working on exactly that) and know it will sell either way due to the current market situation. They can only make X GPUs a year, knowing very well the vast majority of them will sell. Why sell them for 699$ a piece if it'll sell the exact same way for 1199$ a piece?

Is it ethical / good for consumers? Nope and nope.

Is it something that was done in the past? Only a million times by a million different companies. Tesla has been doing it for years.. Does that stop people from buying Teslas? Not really. They are still selling far more than they can produce. Only now people with less money can't afford it. Did you see Elon Musk crying about all those people who can't afford Teslas? Didn't think so.

Until nVidia produces more GPUs than they can sell, prices will continue rising. Until AMD/Intel doesn't produce anything worthwhile and competitive, prices will continue rising. Until scalpers will be dealt with, price will continue rising. This is a very very basic demand and supply issue.

This problem won't be fixed just because xxx_insert_username_here_xxx can't afford a product, or thinks a private company is doing "unethical" things. They have enough customers without them, they've done their research. It being sold out very quickly just proves it they were not wrong.

 

Thoughts?

 

Full disclosure:

OP had bought 2 RTX 4080's at MSRP for 2 different builds and doesn't understand all the fuss and hate around it.

The only problem with your argument is that it has been refuted by multiple outlets including LTT, Jay's Two Cents, Gamer's Nexus, and others through actual testing with a wide variety of games, that the uplift from the 3080 to the 4080, or even to the 4090 from both the 3080 and the 4080 isn't that noticeable in a wide variety of situations. While it may be a powerhouse of a card, is it really giving $500+ worth of an increase? ...and while Team Red may not be much better, I would likely put one of their cards in my rig on my next build unless Team Blue somehow manages to get their act together. As for their "unethical business practices," if they keep it up, they may find themselves playing second, or perhaps even third fiddle before they know it. They have momentum right now, yes, but you know how battleships turn. If the market forces currently in play remain somewhat similar, the market will wind up changing for them and they will be playing catchup again.

[Sarra]

On 12/11/2022 at 4:08 AM, JimmyJJones said:

You were arguing that the MSRP should be lowered.  The only people that would help are scalpers.

I REALLY hope you aren't serious.

[Digitaltantrum]

14 hours ago, starsmine said:

That is not strawmaning DLSS 3. 
Nor am I even sure what you are saying, the definition of strawman does not even work here so I have to guess at what you are saying

What did I say about DLSS 3 that was a made up argument to beat it down easier? DLSS 3 is literally running frame generation on top of DLSS 2. It, in every single case because of how math works, increases latency making the game less playable then just running DLSS 2. It, in every case introduces motion artifacts as it guesses where things are, intelligently and very well most of the time sure given its tied into the game engine and not just frame interpolating so it has internal motion vectors, but its still a guess, and to do that it holds a frame of information longer then it would have otherwise, aka increased latency. 

If you want smother visual motion sure, but that is not something you need in games. The same visual smotheness effect is achived through motion blur without the hit to playablity.

The AI frame gen is amazing for videos if you want that as its the best real-time frame interpolation technology out there, but using it for games is not really a selling point. It's supported by very few games. FSR 3.0 will have frame gen as well so when the tech is widespread, its not some exclusive feature for Nvidia 40 series and again, not a selling point for it.

 

  

yea... sure... K. 
900USD 7900xtx is still faster than the 1200 USD RTX 4080.
Sure there are a couple of titles the 4080 is faster in, But a game with Ray tracing is still a rasterized game first and foremost.
Its a weird claim to make that Nvidia drivers will age better than the RNDA 3 drivers will. Its hard to say with any certainty either way but there is a forced stall to prevent memory corruption still in the RDNA 3 drivers that they will hopefully some day get rid of. There is no known stall like that in nvidia's. Though we have no reason to assume AMD will be able to get rid of that stall either. Like I said, the confidence there from you is unfounded as that has historically not been the trend. 


Its also not 4-700 dollars cheaper. the 3090TIs were 1000-1100 NEW before they sold out.

If you are going to spend 1200USD for a GPU, might as well spend the 1500 for the 4090 that is actually a good card. 

Also to be fair my initial point wasn't "the 4080 is a better value than all the other cards out there" it was that it was a good value compared to NVidias own line and their last teir cards specifically their top tier 3090 ti. 

[YoungBlade]

13 minutes ago, Digitaltantrum said:

Also to be fair my initial point wasn't "the 4080 is a better value than all the other cards out there" it was that it was a good value compared to NVidias own line and their last teir cards specifically their top tier 3090 ti. 

Except that it's not good value compared to Nvidia's previous generation. Compared to the 3080, the 4080 goes backwards in terms of value. And the 3080 was considered to be the "sensible" flagship card, because the 3090 was 10-15% faster for almost double the price. And the 4080 is now in the same boat as the 3090 was - dumb in terms of value.

 

Everyone also complained that the 3090Ti was a stupid, overpriced card for people with more money than sense. You're saying that, compared to a garbage value card, this card is slightly less of a garbage value. That's not a good argument.

 

And worse still, is that the 4090 is arguably a better value card, because it is the best of the best. Whereas the 3090 was dumb from a value perspective, at least it was the best, but now, the 4090 makes sense even from a value perspective if you have more than $1000 to spend on a graphics card. This leaves the 4080 in a no-man's-land where it isn't the best, but it's not a good value either. In other words: it's a not good value, even compared to Nvidia's own line-up.

[thejackalope]

The 3090 performs better for some things than the 4080 because it has TWICE the VRAM and TWICE the memory bandwidth.

[Digitaltantrum]

1 minute ago, thejackalope said:

The 3090 performs better for some things than the 4080 because it has TWICE the VRAM and TWICE the memory bandwidth.

I think we were speaking of general gaming performance in general and most other tasks but yes if you are running an unreal, blender, maya scene that eats all your vram past 16gb then you may very well see better performance on the 3090, but most benches ive seen thats rare.

[Digitaltantrum]

38 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

Except that it's not good value compared to Nvidia's previous generation. Compared to the 3080, the 4080 goes backwards in terms of value. And the 3080 was considered to be the "sensible" flagship card, because the 3090 was 10-15% faster for almost double the price. And the 4080 is now in the same boat as the 3090 was - dumb in terms of value.

 

Everyone also complained that the 3090Ti was a stupid, overpriced card for people with more money than sense. You're saying that, compared to a garbage value card, this card is slightly less of a garbage value. That's not a good argument.

 

And worse still, is that the 4090 is arguably a better value card, because it is the best of the best. Whereas the 3090 was dumb from a value perspective, at least it was the best, but now, the 4090 makes sense even from a value perspective if you have more than $1000 to spend on a graphics card. This leaves the 4080 in a no-man's-land where it isn't the best, but it's not a good value either. In other words: it's a not good value, even compared to Nvidia's own line-up.

why are you getting stuck on naming instead of real numbers. Look at dollars vs performance. if the 4080 can outperform the 3090 ti then thats what you should be comparing it to

 

they moved the names around ...sooo what?  stop getting stuck on that. go do some research where you compare the current $699 dollar card to the previous 3080 which launched at $699 ...It will perform  better for the same launch price .

 

in this case its the 4070 which is $599 so you get the same or better performance for 100 dollars less than the 3080 ...youre welcome.

 

stop getting stuck on naming conventions

 

also, if the name is important to you for some reason the 4080 outperforms the 3080 by almost 50% (or more in some games) and is 40% more expensive...which absolutely tracks

[YoungBlade]

7 minutes ago, Digitaltantrum said:

why are you getting stuck on naming instead of real numbers. Look at dollars vs performance. if the 4080 can outperform the 3090 ti then thats what you should be comparing it to

 

they moved the names around ...sooo what?  stop getting stuck on that. go do some research where you compare the current $699 dollar card to the previous 3080 which launched at $699 ...It will perform  better for the same launch price .

 

in this case its the 4070 which is $599 so you get the same or better performance for 100 dollars less than the 3080 ...youre welcome.

 

stop getting stuck on naming conventions

 

also, if the name is important to you for some reason the 4080 outperforms the 3080 by almost 50% (or more in some games) and is only 30% more expensive...again...youre welcome

I'm not stuck on the naming. I'm saying that the 3080 was the true flagship of that generation, as it was almost as powerful as the actual flagship at half the price.

 

The 3080Ti is the true price comparison point, as it launched at the same MSRP as the 4080, so why are you mentioning the 3090Ti, which was the dumbest, most overpriced card of the last generation?

[starsmine]

12 minutes ago, Digitaltantrum said:

why are you getting stuck on naming instead of real numbers. Look at dollars vs performance. if the 4080 can outperform the 3090 ti then thats what you should be comparing it to

 

they moved the names around ...sooo what?  stop getting stuck on that. go do some research where you compare the current $699 dollar card to the previous 3080 which launched at $699 ...It will perform  better for the same launch price .

 

in this case its the 4070 which is $599 so you get the same or better performance for 100 dollars less than the 3080 ...youre welcome.

 

stop getting stuck on naming conventions

 

also, if the name is important to you for some reason the 4080 outperforms the 3080 by almost 50% (or more in some games) and is only 30% more expensive...again...youre welcome

minus non flagship (as flagship pricing rules are thrown out the window). Gaining 50% more performance while being 50% more expensive is pure stagnation. (3080 was 800 when 4080 launched)

[Digitaltantrum]

10 minutes ago, starsmine said:

minus non flagship (as flagship pricing rules are thrown out the window). Gaining 50% more performance while being 50% more expensive is pure stagnation. (3080 was 800 when 4080 launched)

if you are running a 3080 you probably dont feel the need to upgrade. and again, even if you are and want to upgrade youll get a bit better performance with a 4070 for $100 dollars cheaper than the launch price of the 3080 which is the opposite of stagnation.

 

if you dont have a 3080 and need to upgrade not only can you get a 3080 new or used or a 4o70 for again 599 which is saving you a hundred bucks

 

stop getting hung up on the names

[Digitaltantrum]

16 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

I'm not stuck on the naming. I'm saying that the 3080 was the true flagship of that generation, as it was almost as powerful as the actual flagship at half the price.

 

The 3080Ti is the true price comparison point, as it launched at the same MSRP as the 4080, so why are you mentioning the 3090Ti, which was the dumbest, most overpriced card of the last generation?

ok so you get waaaaay better performance in the 4080 than the 3080 ti for the same price...youre welcome