Why does everyone hate the 4080?

[Omga4000]

EDIT:
Since people continue commenting and sometimes recommend the same thing to me, please note the following message I had posted yesterday.
Regardless, feel free to continue discussing this matter as you please. Turned out to be an interesting topic.

I've decide to cancel one of the orders of the 4080 and wait for the 7900 XTX. If it disappoints, I'll just wait another damn year and see what'll happen to GPU prices. Sigh.
I'll discuss this with the person I had bought the 2nd GPU for and try to convince them to give it up and wait for the 7900 XTX as well.

Thank you very much to all of you who were actually useful and trying to help and educate me.
Greatly appreciate the assistance!

Original post:
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.

 

[wolf]

The price, it's just very poorly priced, the vast majority of tech press agree with that, it can DEFINITELY be sold for less.

I see your reasoning, and I disagree with your reasoning that it justifies the price. They are bucking the trend that you get more value as you go down, but the 4090 is better value?

The card itself seems fine, quite impressive even, but it's insulting at $1200 USD and is positioned to either upsell the 4090 and move 30 series stock. To some extent they're taking advantage of this window before AMD launch competing products too, just like with the 4090.

Let them sit on shelves till Nvidia gets it, which it is in a LOT of places.

Believe me, I'm the first one to try and leave the politics out of it, I could care less about "big bad greedy, shady, unethical leather jacket man" bulldust, but THIS PRODUCT, should not cost $1200 USD starting price, it needs a MINUMUM $200 price cut to be competitive, and longer-term sales will reflect that (selling out day 1 is nothing new, well priced or not).

 

[GerKNG]

because they charge 1200 bucks for a f**** RTX XX80 GPU?!

 

[Omga4000]

The price, it's just very poorly priced, the vast majority of tech press agree with that, it can DEFINITELY be sold for less.

I see your reasoning, and I disagree with your reasoning that it justifies the price.

The card itself seems fine, quite impressive even, but it's insulting at $1200 USD and is positioned to either upsell the 4090 and move 30 series stock.

Let them sit on shelves till Nvidia gets it, which it is in a LOT of places.

Telling me I'm wrong and that they can sell it for less is empty words. Can you show me the numbers who support this argument and show this is indeed the case?
How, in current market prices (which are insane), is the 4080 not priced correctly?
Note: I don't mean price fairly, I mean correctly as in it fits the performance it's providing compared to everything on the market right now.

because they charge 1200 bucks for a f**** RTX XX80 GPU?!

Call it a 4080 Ti if it helps you handle it (?)
I doubt there will be a 4080 Ti anyway with the way things are priced right now. A 1,399$ card in-between the 4080 and the 4090 makes 0 to little sense, unless they want to kill the 4090.

 

[3x0]

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.

The 3090Ti pricing was ludicrous to begin with, but as it was, the 3090Ti was a halo product released in a time when mining was rampant and there was a shortage of cards- such pricing was expected. The 4080 should have been a more reasonable product than the halo cards and the current ridiculous price of 1200 dolarydoos doesn't make it that, especially when there is no shortage of other cards.

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?

If the current 4080 16GB was named 4080Ti then it would have been ridiculed for how much cut down it is compared to 4090.

It's plain and simple, nV is price fixing the cards such that they incentivize people to buy the remaining 3000 stock, and then maybe cutting down 4000 prices if pressured by AMD.

 

[trickson]

Video cards have become way overpriced and that is just a plain fact.
I try to get them under $350.00 but that is almost impossible now days. What a shame too.
Talk about greed all them crypto miners greedy bastards! got taken to the bank to LMFAO!

 

[64K]

It is normal for a xx80 to be faster than the previous generation's flagship so you can't compare the 4080 to the 3090 Ti as far as MSRP goes. It would be more accurate to compare the 4090 Ti (when/if it arrives) to the 3090 Ti.

A more accurate comparison would be to compare the 3080 MSRP ($700) to the 4080 MSRP ($1,200)

It's pretty obvious why people are not liking the huge price hike from the previous generation. Also pointing this out isn't hating. It's just people saying they don't like the huge price hike.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

The mindshare is strong with this one.
all jokes as side,

The reason for this pricing, feels like a lack of compitetion. I'm sure if Nvidia wanted they probably would priced the the old 4080 12gb, which is now the 4070 ti now at $1,200. It really doesn't seem like AMD RDNA3 can compete even with ampere in raytracing let lone ada lovelace. It'll be really disappoiting, if a RTX 4070 ti beats the RX 7900 XTX in raytracing imo. Sure it beats is Rasterization but many people buy Nvidia for raytracing, DLSS, AI voice, "driver support", cuda, Nvec, & more.

 

[wolf]

Telling me I'm wrong and that they can sell it for less is empty words.

I didn't say you were wrong, I said I disagree, which doesn't necessitate you being right, me being wrong, or vica versa. Nvidia will still sell some, of course they will, as it's priced it will make sense to some, like yourself I suppose and many others.

I won't entertain this any further though, you've made your point, so have I, you won't change your mind, neither will I - I assume we can agree on that front?

 

[N/A]

At this rate 4060 will cost 599 for a 128 bit. Who has that kind of money. This is what i was saving for a full die 256 bit 4070 or slightly cut 4070 Ti carved out of 4080, so this is so out of reach and so slow that's practically useless for the money.

 

[Omga4000]

The 3090Ti pricing was ludicrous to begin with, but as it was, the 3090Ti was a halo product released in a time when mining was rampant and there was a shortage of cards- such pricing was expected. The 4080 should have been a more reasonable product than the halo cards and the current ridiculous price of 1200 dolarydoos doesn't make it that, especially when there is no shortage of other cards.

If the current 4080 16GB was named 4080Ti then it would have been ridiculed for how much cut down it is compared to 4090.

It's plain and simple, nV is price fixing the cards such that they incentivize people to buy the remaining 3000 stock, and then maybe cutting down 4000 prices if pressured by AMD.

There isn't a shortage?
How come 3080's, 3090's and 3090 TI's are still being sold well above MSRP, then?
Even second-hand cards aren't that much of a steal.

The last point makes sense, but I once again raise the question: What are my options?
Wait another 4 years in the hopes the market stabilizes (maybe)?
New card, current market prices, right here and right now - what's the best bang for the buck?

Video cards have become way overpriced and that is just a plain fact.
I try to get them under $350.00 but that is almost impossible now days. What a shame too.
Talk about greed all them crypto miners greedy bastards! got taken to the bank to LMFAO!

That's the sad truth, yes. Do you foresee this changing anytime soon and GPUs going back to their low prices?

It is normal for a xx80 to be faster than the previous generation's flagship so you can't compare the 4080 to the 3090 Ti as far as MSRP goes. It would be more accurate to compare the 4090 Ti (when/if it arrives) to the 3090 Ti.

A more accurate comparison would be to compare the 3080 MSRP ($700) to the 4080 MSRP ($1,200)

It's pretty obvious why people are not liking the huge price hike from the previous generation. Also pointing this out isn't hating. It's just people saying they don't like the huge price hike.

I would agree this is true if people hadn't tried convincing others not to purchase the 4080.
It's not a matter of "hey, the price-to-performance ratio is the same as a 3080 so if you have the money go buy it", it's strictly a "whoever buys this card is a clown".
That's just pure hate right there, and I am having this discussion in more than 1 forum.

The mindshare is strong with this one.
all jokes as side,

The reason for this pricing, feels like a lack of compitetion. I'm sure if Nvidia wanted they probably would priced the the old 4080 12gb, which is now the 4070 ti now at $1,200. It really doesn't seem like AMD RDNA3 can compete even with ampere in raytracing let lone ada lovelace. It'll be really disappoiting, if a RTX 4070 ti beats the RX 7900 XTX in raytracing imo. Sure it beats is Rasterization but many people buy Nvidia for raytracing, DLSS, AI voice, "driver support", cuda, Nvec, & more.

Well, yes. I had mentioned lack of competition in my original post.
All the things you've mentioned are valid points for the price spike, isn't it?
You pay for things you may not receive elsewhere. You can't expect a Cadillac to cost as much as a Chevy.
If AMD made truly competitive cards we wouldn't be having this discussion right now and everyone would be happy

I didn't say you were wrong, I said I disagree. Nvidia will still sell some, of course they will, as it's priced it will make sense to some, like yourself I suppose and many others.

I won't entertain this any further though, you've made your point, so have I, you won't change your mind, neither will I - I assume we can agree on that front?

I disagree with your disagreement
All I want is to see the numbers, really. I am very open to change my mind.
So far I was only given 1 valid point, which is the awful 16-pin connector.
Everything else I am just too dumb to understand, I guess. If you show me the numbers I'll probably agree.
I am not here to fight / say that I am right, I am truly here to expand my knowledge, discuss and hear other peoples' opinion.
Sorry if my original comment appeared harsh, that was not the intention.

At this rate 4060 will cost 599 for a 128 bit. Who has that kind of money. This is what i was saving for a full die 256 bit 4070 or slightly cut 4070 Ti carved out of 4080, so this is so out of reach and so slow that's practically useless for the money.

As someone who isn't fully invested into the fine details, this doesn't tell me much.
I am looking at the end results - how much FPS am I getting? How does it compare to other things on the market?
If it's an 128-bit or 256-bit doesn't matter all that much to me, as long as the final result is good.
Do you mind explaining why this one is bad?

 

[erocker]

RTX 3080 MSRP $699+
RTX 4080 MSRP $1200+

That much increase in one generation... Sorry but you have to have more money than sense to purchase this card. Seriously, it makes more sense to just buy the 4090 at this point. The 4080 isn't going to give you what you want at 4k and there's plenty of cheaper offerings that are more than enough for 1440p.

 

[JATownes]

As someone who isn't fully invested into the fine details, this doesn't tell me much.

And this is why you're not upset about the price, and that's fine. Some of us are fully invested into the fine details, and we know what die is being sold, and care about the memory bandwidth. Some of us aren't just consumers, we're enthusiasts.

If you've followed GPUs for long, including those fine details, you'd know that Nvidia is selling a 103 die, which is historically a xx70 series card, and charging $1200 dollars for it.

Some of us into the fine details still miss the full 100 series dies, which us lowely enthusiasts can't feasibly get our hands on anymore.

 

[evernessince]

The 4080 is an AD103 die that's smaller than even the 3070.

You are paying $3.166 USD per mm2 with the 4080

You are paying $1.275 USD per mm2 with the 3070

Ain't no way costs for Nvidia nearly trippled per mm2. Cost for 5nm wafers were $16,000 in 2020, current estimates place them at around $9,000. That means Nvidia is only paying a modest increase over 7nm and many times less than the price increase.

In direct response to your points

1) The 3090 Ti was indeed thoroughly lambasted for it's price. The 4080 is taking a larger negative hit because unlike the 3090 Ti, it is not a flagship card where insane pricing can be excused. The xx80 class is a lot of people's go to card each generation as it's usually reasonably priced while providing near flagship performance. With the 4080, not only did they massively increase the price but they also reduced the shader count to such a degree that the card is no longer within striking distance of the flagship card. In essence Nvidia is saying that now not even $1,200 will get you anywhere near their best effort anymore and again they shift the goals posts to requiring you to spend a whopping $1,600 USD or be forced to buy a massively cut down card. It's a huge middle finger to PC enthusiasts, same as AMD's 7900 XT which also represents a huge price hike for AMD's 2nd best GPU.

Yes the 4080 is faster than the 3090 Ti but it'd be a joke if it weren't.

2) The 3080 Ti was heavily criticized for it's pricing to begin with. It's not really a good argument to justify 4080 pricing. The 4080 has less shader cores and TMUs but more cache. Don't think I ever remember a regression in GPU resources at the same price that has ever gone down well. If you look at how many cores the 4090 has, it really puts it into perspective how little Nvidia is giving you for that price.

3) The market for Nvidia cards is terrible. You can find AMD cards for "cheap" (relatively speaking) brand new. A 6900 XT can be found for $700 brand new. Even then IMO that's overpriced. Retail pricing of Nvidia cards right now is a complete joke. In either case it's no excuse for the pricing of the 4000 series. If you haven't somehow learned this lesson through the pandemic, don't bother refreshing pages or hoping for a good deal. Just stop caring and spend more time gaming or doing other things. Turns out that anything from a 970 or faster plays most games exceedingly well. That way you can actually game instead of being gamed by Nvidia. Running the rat race isn't worth the aggravation.

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.

No inflationary factors are the cause of this price increase, it far outstrips any measure of inflation. FYI the chip shortage has been over for some time now. We are in a chip glut right now and foundries announced they are scaling back production as a result. These companies keeping prices high despite the drop in costs are just cashing in. You aren't making a compelling argument here for Nvidia, merely highlighting what has angered so many people as prices for them have skyrocketed across the board. Greedy companies will hopefully get their comeuppance.

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.

A product being sold out doesn't say anything of the number of units sold. Modern electronic launches are designed to sell out, regardless of units sold. It drives sales, brand desirability, and allows prices to be pushed higher as FOMO kicks in. Your comment is a good example of how you've been manipulated to believe a product is desirable by assuming sold out = high sales.

There isn't a shortage?

That should have been obvious given that fabs are cutting back production due to a huge drop in demand.

That's the sad truth, yes. Do you foresee this changing anytime soon and GPUs going back to their low prices?

The world is entering a recession so if prices stay high the PC platform will hemorrhage marketshare to console. Heck even without the recession the prices are crazy. At that point it won't matter much how much you dump on your GPU, we'll be back to the xbox 360 days where games are designed for console first and your overpriced metalic paperweight of a GPU won't be good for much other than fighting the low effort optimization the devs put into the PC version. High prices have consequences, the vast majority of PC gamers reside at $300 and below.

If AMD made truly competitive cards we wouldn't be having this discussion right now and everyone would be happy

First, AMD does make competitive cards. Anyone saying otherwise is drinking the Nvidia kool-aid. Second, you assume that prices would somehow lower if AMD had better GPUs. No, they wouldn't. AMD would 100% price their GPUs according to the max people would be willing to pay, same as they do in the CPU market. AMD and Nvidia don't competete on price, hence why AMD GPU's MSRP being very close to Nvidia. The market is better described as a Duopoly today, regardless of AMD's competitiveness.

As someone who isn't fully invested into the fine details, this doesn't tell me much.
I am looking at the end results - how much FPS am I getting? How does it compare to other things on the market?
If it's an 128-bit or 256-bit doesn't matter all that much to me, as long as the final result is good.
Do you mind explaining why this one is bad?

Follow this logic to it's conclusion. If you only focus on the FPS and ignore the details, that logic leads you to ever increasing GPU prices while you are functionally getting less for your money. Eventually you'd be priced out of the market and then you'd understand the fallacy of thinking like this. This is why people reference things like die size, core count, relative performance to the rest of the GPU stack, ect. You teach Nvidia that you'll pay any price without thinking that you too in fact have a price which you won't pay.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Why does everyone hate the 4080?​

I don't. Not a fan of the power requirements and heat output, but otherwise I think is a great GPU.

RTX 3080 MSRP $699+
RTX 4080 MSRP $1200+

That much increase in one generation... Sorry but you have to have more money than sense to purchase this card. Seriously, it makes more sense to just buy the 4090 at this point. The 4080 isn't going to give you what you want at 4k and there's plenty of cheaper offerings that are more than enough for 1440p.

Ok, yeah that's a good point. Prices suck!

 

[Omga4000]

it makes more sense to just buy the 4090 at this point

But.. It doesn't. Because the 1,599$ MSRP of the 4090 is just an imaginary number at this point.
First of all, many 3rd party companies sold it for more than that.
Second, the actual current price of a new 4090 is 2,080$ - unless I am gravely mistaken and someone out there does sell it for less. Would appreciate a link.
No one is actually selling them for that price, so whether the MSRP was 1$ or 50,000$ makes no difference right here and right now.
As it stands, the 4090 is 811$ more than I had paid for the 4080.

The 4080 isn't going to give you what you want at 4k

Cyberpunk is honestly the most demanding one on the list, and even that is sitting at a nice 56 FPS.
I won't be a complete graphics slot (get it?) and demand full max ultra settings. I'm definitely OK with lowering it a bit.
But still, 56 FPS isn't all that bad in my opinion.
Everything else is higher than 60 FPS so.. What do you mean by that sentence?

If you've followed GPUs for long, including those fine details, you'd know that Nvidia is selling a 103 die, which is historically a xx70 series card, and charging $1200 dollars for it.

AMD and Intel have been doing the same thing for years. That's not necessarily bad, it's similar to a tick-tock model.
Another full disclosure, I'm a past Intel employee and have been responsible for verifying the programs which end up verifying the CPUs. So to say I'm not fully invested may have been a misstatement.
I definitely understand the fine details, I just haven't been following them when it comes to GPUs.
Thanks for sharing that detail though, was interesting to know

they also reduced the shader count to such a degree that the card is no longer within striking distance of the flagship card

First of all - thank you for the lengthy comment, really appreciate it!

This intrigues me, as I've heard those claims around, but can't really understand where it's coming from.
According to Techpowerup's testing, the 4090 is a mere 25% faster than the 4080 - and that's only at 4K.
At 1080p & 1440p it is only ~5-11% faster than a 4080.
Why do people consider this to be such an enormous gap in performance? I mean - the price difference is 33%.

product is desirable by assuming sold out = high sales

I don't see it as a scheme or a manipulation of the mind, not at all. The fact is I can't get a 4090 (or even a 4080 now) at MSRP even if I wanted to.
They may be providing very few units to sellers, causing the market to dry very quickly, but that doesn't change the fact the market is dry and if I need a GPU I can't get one.
It being "desirable" doesn't matter much to me, I was just making a point saying they are gone.
Whether it's an elaborate scam or just them being greedy doesn't matter much to an end user. I either have a GPU to play on or I don't.

No, they wouldn't. AMD would 100% price their GPUs according to the max they'd be willing to pay

nVidia is a much more well-known and tursted company and they are dominating the market. Not by a bit, but by a lot.
When a new player attempts to enter the market, they make it worth while by having lower prices on things that match the performance of the competitor.
AMD has definitely been in the market for a while, but mostly at the low-medium end of GPUs, making nVidia the king of high-end and supporting the "Duopoly" you had mentioned.

I'm not saying AMD is the "nice guy" here, but they will definitely sell at better prices just to have more control over the market. it's just how it is.
And when I meant I want to see AMD as a competitor I meant GPUs that can humiliate the 4090 / 4090 Ti to come. I know AMD does well mid-range.

Yes, they'll still price them at a profitable (and even greedy) prices, but not as much as nVidia, if they can do it.

This will either force nVidia to lower their prices, or AMD to lower theirs even further if sells won't be at their desired rate.
Something will have to happen once AMD puts out an actually good GPU.
They had a TON of issues in the past, causing people like me to shun away from them, but I am definitely keeping an open mind here and willing to try an AMD card if their performace:cost ratio is better.

you are functionally getting less for your money

I'll ask you this, then.
What does "more for money" mean for you?
If it has triple the amount of VRAM / CUDA cores but the end result is lower FPS, did you get more for your money?
Just trying to understand where exactly is the issue when looking at FPS when selecitng a GPU.
I'd appreciate learning what am I missing and why things like die size, core count, etc.. matter that much over end results (FPS).

 

[INSTG8R]

Um well here in Norway I got an email and the cheapest one they listed(Proshop) cost more than my brand new 34” OLED. That’s bad maths…

 

[erocker]

But.. It doesn't. Because the 1,599$ MSRP of the 4090 is just an imaginary number at this point.
First of all, many 3rd party companies sold it for more than that.
Second, the actual current price of a new 4090 is 2,080$ - unless I am gravely mistaken and someone out there does sell it for less. Would appreciate a link.
No one is actually selling them for that price, so whether the MSRP was 1$ or 50,000$ makes no difference right here and right now.
As it stands, the 4090 is 811$ more than I had paid for the 4080.

You're arguing a point I really didn't make. Both cards are way overpriced for gaming cards. You don't have to justify your purchase to me or anyone else. Don't care.

 

[JATownes]

AMD and Intel have been doing the same thing for years. That's not necessarily bad, it's similar to a tick-tock model.
Another full disclosure, I'm a past Intel employee and have been responsible for verifying the programs which end up verifying the CPUs. So to say I'm not fully invested may have been a misstatement.
I definitely understand the fine details, I just haven't been following them when it comes to GPUs.
Thanks for sharing that detail though, was interesting to know

What? I'm so confused. What does the Intel arch revision/node cadence have to do with anything?

"Verifying the programs which end up verifying the CPUs." Again, what?

Are you talking about verifying from a lithography standpoint? Binning? Most of us here are pretty tech literate, and this statement is so vague it borders on jibberish.

 

[Omga4000]

What? I'm so confused. What does the Intel arch revision/node cadence have to do with anything?

"Verifying the programs which end up verifying the CPUs." Again, what?

Are you talking about verifying from a lithography standpoint? Binning? Most of us here are pretty tech literate, and this statement is so vague it borders on jibberish.

Nevermind, scratch that. I misunderstood you.
You were saying that the 103 dies were originally used by xx70 series cards, and I had assumed 103 is the actual name of the architecture - thinking they simply took that architecture and made it better.
I now understand you meant 103 as in the specific chips within a certain architecture - i.e. Pascal / Ampere / Ada Lovelace, etc..
My bad.

My second sentence is fairly clear, though. At least it is to me, but I ain't here to discuss my past work. Moving on

You're arguing a point I really didn't make. Both cards are way overpriced for gaming cards. You don't have to justify your purchase to me or anyone else. Don't care.

I'm not justifying it, why would I need to justify something to a stranger online?
I am trying to understand your point and make a decision based on your experience.
You said it's better to buy a 4090 at this point, I argued against it. If I misunderstood your point I apologize.
If both cards are way overpriced then I honestly don't know how to continue discussing this.
I guess the answer is "wait". Alright.

To wrap up this post:
I've decide to cancel one of the orders of the 4080 and wait for the 7900 XTX. If it disappoints, I'll just wait another damn year and see what'll happen to GPU prices. Sigh.
I'll discuss this with the person I had bought the 2nd GPU for and try to convince them to give it up and wait for the 7900 XTX as well.

Thank you very much to all of you who were actually useful and trying to help and educate me.
Greatly appreciate the assistance!

 

[Hyderz]

your title thread is why does everyone hate the rtx 4080?
i dont think people actually hate the card and how it performs, people hate the pricing of it..
$1199 is alot of money no matter how you look at it...

 

[R-T-B]

People were not as negative towards the 3090 Ti as they are over the 4080.

Someone wasn't paying much attention.

 

[Omga4000]

Someone wasn't paying much attention.

I wasn't in the US when the 30xx series was launched and I have no idea what was going on here at the time. What I said is still valid, just doesn't apply to the US.
GPUs were always extremely expensive in my home country, so it probably didn't affect us as much.
Sorry I had failed to mention this before.

 

[ratirt]

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.

With that logic, in 5 years time you will be paying $2500 for the same tier of GPU. You buy faster card for more cash. It is called stagnation. You get 2 times faster card for which you have to pay double the price. The amount you get for your money has not changed thus no improvement.

3090 Ti price was ludicrous. That is because this one was the top tier card you could have bought. So obviously the margins were low due to huge die and yields were not there. So the company charges more since these are hard to produce and the price to produce them is very high.
4080 on the other hand are not that big. Half of what the 3090ti die size is. You should not take the 3090ti's price into account for the 4080 pricing.
The pricing for the 3000 series was screwed and that shit started from Turing.
Now if you look closer, the 4090 is twice as fast as 3080. What about the price? Twice as much?
3080 MSRP $699, 4090 MSRP $1599 that is more than a half. Where is value for you? There isn't one.
It does not matter what you want to call the cards. the 4090 can be called 4070 but that makes no difference. you would still pay twice as much for double the 3080's performance.

BTW. People do not hate the 4080 but instead they hate NV pricing for the card which is very bad and not talking about it or point it out would have been even worse.

 

[The King]

Steve from Gamers Nexus says it best in his review. MEH!