Tuesday, November 29th 2022
$700-800 Ideal Price for GeForce RTX 4080: TechPowerUp Poll Surveying 11,000 Respondents
The ideal price for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 "Ada" graphics card is around USD $700 to $800, according to results from a recent TechPowerUp Front-page poll surveying our readers. Our poll "How much would you pay for RTX 4080 at most?" received over 11,000 responses. At the number 1 spot with 22% of the vote is $800, closely followed by $700. Together, this range represents 44% of the voters. 14% of our readers think $600 is an ideal price, followed by "less than $400" at 13%. 9% think $500 seems fair, followed by 7% willing to spend as much as $900. 5% is happy to spend $1,100. 2% or less feel that the current $1,200 MSRP is justified or are willing to spend more than MSRP. There's more to a majority finding sanity with the $700 to $800 price-range.
With NVIDIA cancelling the RTX 4080 12 GB, the RTX 4080 16 GB became the only SKU to bear the name "RTX 4080." This $1,200 MSRP GeForce RTX 4080 is the successor to the RTX 3080, which debuted at $700, marking a $500 MSRP increase generation-over-generation (or +71%). You begin to see why most readers prefer the $700-800 range to be the ideal MSRP, and are willing to tolerate a $100 increase. For even more context, the RTX 3080 "Ampere" launched at the same $700 MSRP that its successor, the RTX 2080 "Turing" launched at. The GTX 1080 "Pascal" came out at $600 ($700 for the Founders Edition), which explains the interest for $600 in our poll.
And then there's a sizable chunk of our readers who simply seem disillusioned with GPU pricing, and feel that either $500 to $400, or something lower, is the max that they would be willing to pay for the RTX 4080. Can NVIDIA even break-even at such prices? NVIDIA's own quarterly financial results reference vague margins as high as 60% (not specific to any product, but as a general rule, margins tend to be proportionate to MSRP, with the higher priced products generally having a fatter margin). At 50% to 60% margins for its $1,200 MSRP, we'd be in the neighborhood of $500 to $600. We've seen examples in the past of NVIDIA cutting its prices in sharp response to competitive AMD products, with both brands fiercely locked in price-wars, and their products selling at less than half their MSRPs. So a $500 to $600 price for the RTX 4080 still seems possible on paper, and cannot be easily dismissed as "impossible."
On the other hand, prices have been going up everywhere: we've got inflation, higher prices for gas and power, and no doubt, TSMC is charging more for a 4 nm wafer than what Samsung has been charging for their 8 nm technology. NVIDIA was also Samsung's biggest customer—today there's plenty of competition for allocation on TSMC's latest and greatest nodes. Apple, Qualcomm, AMD, everybody wants their chips made on the best process in the world, so prices will end up higher for that reason, too.
A tiny fraction of our readers thinks that the $1,200 MSRP is fair, or is willing to pay more than $1,400. This probably aligns with the demographic that is actually buying the RTX 4080 at its current prices—or are willing to spend top-dollar for any other high-end graphics card. The poll results indicate that NVIDIA will be able to push more volume by lowering the price, but given the current inventory levels of GeForce 30 cards it could be that they rather be content selling the RTX 4080 at ≥$1,200 at high margins to a tiny fraction of people.
With NVIDIA cancelling the RTX 4080 12 GB, the RTX 4080 16 GB became the only SKU to bear the name "RTX 4080." This $1,200 MSRP GeForce RTX 4080 is the successor to the RTX 3080, which debuted at $700, marking a $500 MSRP increase generation-over-generation (or +71%). You begin to see why most readers prefer the $700-800 range to be the ideal MSRP, and are willing to tolerate a $100 increase. For even more context, the RTX 3080 "Ampere" launched at the same $700 MSRP that its successor, the RTX 2080 "Turing" launched at. The GTX 1080 "Pascal" came out at $600 ($700 for the Founders Edition), which explains the interest for $600 in our poll.
On the other hand, prices have been going up everywhere: we've got inflation, higher prices for gas and power, and no doubt, TSMC is charging more for a 4 nm wafer than what Samsung has been charging for their 8 nm technology. NVIDIA was also Samsung's biggest customer—today there's plenty of competition for allocation on TSMC's latest and greatest nodes. Apple, Qualcomm, AMD, everybody wants their chips made on the best process in the world, so prices will end up higher for that reason, too.
140 Comments on $700-800 Ideal Price for GeForce RTX 4080: TechPowerUp Poll Surveying 11,000 Respondents
high end or near high end has never been cheap to me for a long time.. nvidia got rid of sli on mid range cards for a reason.. so that they double the price for a high end card as opposed to buying two cheaper cards in sli mode..
trog
This is part of the reason Nvidia can charge whatever it wants, people buy them regardless. Nvidia's pricing of the 4000 series isn't dumb from a business perspective because this will clearly continue.I really don't think AMD's pricing is that good either, especially the $900 7900 XT. AMD just did a demonstration on how much cheaper chiplets make their chips and yet they jacked up the price of their 2nd best GPU and priced the much smaller 7900 XTX the same as the 6900 XT. AMD isn't going to start a price war with Nvidia, they are joining right in.
If Nvidia cards are sitting on shelves it's because people literally can't pay. As evidenced time and time again, people will buy Nvidia even when they are getting significantly less.Most people don't have an expensive flagship card. The problem lies in the fact that price hikes have been pushed down the entire stack, often in dramatic fashion like the 4080.
Hell, they even did try to sell an x80 as something it's not, the 12GB version. That didn't go quite so well for them either, and that's exactly the same thing: interpretation of that marketing backfired massively - the specs didn't align with the model number.
babeltechreviews.com/vr-wars-the-rtx-3070-vs-the-rtx-2080-ti-fcat-vr-performance-benchmarked/
babeltechreviews.com/vr-wars-the-red-devil-rtx-6900-xt-versus-the-rtx-3090-founders-edition-part-2/
The 6900 XT wins by a large margin. Aside from the poor performance you are getting with the 3070, it's small VRAM size is going to be a restricting factor given VR tends to consume more of it. I really don't see a positive here, you are forcing yourself into another upgrade in short order.
1. We are in a deep recession post-pandemics and energy transition.
2. Consumers are getting poorer by the day, so no more money for not vital purchases.
3. PC market in all segments is in an astonishing downward spiralling.
Radeon prices today - fluctuating like nothing happens and the market is in a normal situation which is extremely weird and unnatural.
Euro:
Wrong prices:
Radeon RX 6400 - 133.99
Radeon RX 6500 XT - 170.00
Radeon RX 6600 - 279.00
Radeon RX 6600 XT - 345.49
Radeon RX 6650 XT - 329.00
Radeon RX 6700 XT - 399.99
Radeon RX 6750 XT - 482.86
Radeon RX 6800 - 549.00
Radeon RX 6800 XT - 662.92
Radeon RX 6900 XT - 749.00
Radeon RX 6950 XT - 849.00
Correct prices:
Radeon RX 6400 - 89.99
Radeon RX 6500 XT - 119.00
Radeon RX 6600 - 189.00
Radeon RX 6600 XT - 225.49
Radeon RX 6650 XT - 229.00
Radeon RX 6700 XT - 299.99
Radeon RX 6750 XT - 362.86
Radeon RX 6800 - 419.00
Radeon RX 6800 XT - 479.92
Radeon RX 6900 XT - 559.00
Radeon RX 6950 XT - 629.00
But at the same time, the absence of SLI in a world where API's can do mGPU makes not quite a lot of sense, except when you use a perspective of maximizing profit; after all:
- the performance cap is now fixed to a single card as opposed to multiple, AND
- you're working to reduce the pressure on memory capacity to get performance (since Turing-), AND
- you consider that the overall performance level of cards is enough to make people actually move down the stack for decent gaming
Seems like a perfect world to keep buying two cards with better perf/$ for great performance. We've seen Nvidia move the way it does the past three to four generations. They've adjusted their strategy, their product stack, their time to market between generations and their grasp on AIBs and selling their own FE's. All of this supports the idea that they certainly did apply some strategy and SLI removal fits in nicely with increased margins - do less to get more. Its also an absolute fact that to get maximum performance, you need to move higher up the stack, destroying perf/$.
Plus, the 1600 to 7600 is a bad example. Since AMD uses chiplets now the expensive CPU portion is only ~70mm2 compared to a much bigger 213 for the 1600 though the io die being 120 makes it much closer in total. AMD is still taking a margin cut over their 1600 most likely.
RTX 4080 is a 20% larger chip at 100% higher cost per chip.
So, its contribution to the bill of materials in that asking 1200$+ is mere 20-30%, too.
Today, a shrink enables an immediate maxing out of the silicon and then it is still not enough, so we need retarded power targets.
Although, as little as possible materials, sure, if you look at the 12VHPWR adapter lol
608 sq. mm for nvidia is a relatively small chip.
Obviously the creator asked about what the reasonable price of a 4080 would be, not actually meant how much would you pay for that.
No one cares how much you would pay for a gpu.
Below 500 and over 1200 answers are ridiculous.
Look, if nvidia says " you pay as much as we wish", you answer: "F**k you, nvidia!" and buy something else for a normal asking price ;)
AMDs gpu prices are irrelevant.
This and this:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Specs | TechPowerUp GPU Database
Prices are crazy now but I remember one of my friends buying the GTX 690 for around 650 bucks and I told him he was crazy. I can't name all of the GPU's that I've bought over the years because this would be a really long post.. lol One of my favorite ones was the ATi 9700 Pro. I'm totally derailing the thread with my poor buying decisions... haha