purecainExactly, we're being forced to buy online due to covid and we have idiots using bots to buy what little stock there is, I'd of set my own bot up just to buy one for myself had i known it was going to be every single new product. This is going to have a terrible affect on the community. This would of been enough to put me off pc's all together when i was first starting. I cant stand dishonesty. Manufacturers should of made sure the public could get their products, we have shops using sister companies which basically prevent hardly any of us being able to buy at the msrp. If one shop had sold them at msrp no one would of been able to profit from scalped cards. That only works if people cant get them anywhere. It feels artificial, like this was planned and i'm sure it was. Call me paranoid. :nutkick:

purecainLets pray for decent amounts of stock over the next month

RedelZaVednoThat's how it is in duopoly which was illegal not that long ago. We need working antitrust legislation ASAP.

AusWolfPersonally, I think the real problem is Samsung's 8 nm node not being able to produce a reasonable number of GPUs for nvidia and board partners. Random fact: there is not a single fully unlocked GPU die either in the current, or rumoured 30-series product stack anywhere. Why is that? Is nvidia making room for a later coming Super series? Maybe, but I think yields are so low that they basically can't produce fully functional dies at all, and even partially functional ones are short on supply - that's probably why we're hearing rumours about the large GA102 seeping down into 3070 Ti territory and the GA104 into 3060 Ti, or even 3060 levels (instead of introducing new, smaller dies as usual).

ratirtI don't think so. 8nm Samsung is 2 years old news. How is that holding back production I have no idea since the yields are good.
If it really was Samsung's node, and the yields would be low due to defects for the 3090 and 3080, You could salvage those to get decent number of 3070 GPUs and these have problems with stock as well. Problem is elsewhere.

AusWolfMy theory is that the originally planned 3090 and 3080 produced defects, that's why we have those awkward numbers of cuda cores in those GPUs, and basically no fully unlocked chip anywhere in the product stack. Even the 3070 uses a GPU with disabled parts, and I'm pretty sure there isn't so much difference between the performance of 46 and 48 SMs that would make any sense for nvidia to have plans with the unlocked chip in the future. Even the 3070 Ti rumours suggest a highly watered-down version of the GA102 instead of a full GA104. If it is financially beneficial to manufacture such a large chip and disable parts for a card several tiers below the 3090, I can only assume that something is awfully wrong with the node or the design (or both).

AusWolfMy theory is that the originally planned 3090 and 3080 produced defects, that's why we have those awkward numbers of cuda cores in those GPUs, and basically no fully unlocked chip anywhere in the product stack. Even the 3070 uses a GPU with disabled parts, and I'm pretty sure there isn't so much difference between the performance of 46 and 48 SMs that would make any sense for nvidia to have plans with the unlocked chip in the future. Even the 3070 Ti rumours suggest a highly watered-down version of the GA102 instead of a full GA104. If it is financially beneficial to manufacture such a large chip and disable parts for a card several tiers below the 3090, I can only assume that something is awfully wrong with the node or the design (or both).

wolfBut, lets for arguments say you're totally right and they actually "wipe the floor" product vs product, by basically offering what is at best a respectable price to performance benefit, with some extra placebo VRAM and a minor perf;watt advantage. Nvidia adjust prices, actually officially announces SKU's that fit the gaps, and life goes on with both happily selling GPU's to happy consumers.

ratirtPrice drop for the 3090 would have been the way to go but since NV is releasing 3080 TI (slightly different spec) is to make the card cheaper which means price drop for the 3090 is not an option. Otherwise NV would have done it. This decision, is based on (probably), NV would lose money since it costs more to make the 3090 than sell it for $1k. $500 difference in price is massive for a product that performs equally.

WeeRabMore fool you then. The 3090 doesn't come with the production-specific drivers that would make it that good outside of gaming. (nor will a 3080ti)
All that will come with the £3000 Titan variant.

geoganWhere the hell did you get that idea from? I don't know why uninformed people think this. How do people not realise that 3080/3090 cards are more or less identical down to atomic levels of similarity.

It costs exactly the same to make a 3090 GPU die as it does a 3080 GPU die - they are the SAME THING - only difference is the 3080 has a few broken CUs in GPU die so they disabled them and sell it for less.

If they are able to make and sell 3080 for 800 PROFITABLY then they DEFINITELY could make the 3090 and sell it profitably for 800 too. Its just they don't have to - there are enough idiots around who will gladly give them another 700 in profit for the same thing.