That's honestly too much when 5070 has $549 MRSP.
If It was $449 max, then with the extra 4GB Vram It would be somewhat acceptable.

499 is beyond DOA. No way its gonna be 499. NVIDIA isn't the brightest sometimes, but they're not THAT stupid, right?

I can excuse the 5080 and 5070Ti because they're not midranged products, even though they're still just, okay. The 5070 was disappointing.

But.. the xx60 Ti, xx60, and xx50 cards are the ones most people buy. So they better be good, in some capacity. And so far I'm not getting excited. If anything, I'm getting genuinely angry.

Someone correct me if I'm mistaken, but the 4060Ti 16GB was launched at $499 when the 4070 was $599, right? And it was a ridiculously hard sell, correct?
With the 5070 at $549, $449 for the 5060Ti 16GB would already be a stretch. $419 or $429 would be a little better, with the 8GB at $399.

RTX 5060 Ti is not gonna beat RTX 4070. It may have similar performance with 16 GB VRAM. For those who need DLSS4 and MFG this card is better choice than 4070. MSRP of $499? Buy RX 9070 instead.

wNotyarDSomeone correct me if I'm mistaken, but the 4060Ti 16GB was launched at $499 when the 4070 was $599, right? And it was a ridiculously hard sell, correct?
With the 5070 at $549, $449 for the 5060Ti 16GB would already be a stretch. $419 or $429 would be a little better, with the 8GB at $399.

The market for the 4060Ti 16GB was primarily for ill informed buyers (more VRAM = better and only nvidia exists kind of folk) and prosumers that need the extra VRAM (productivity, AI) and not actual gaming performance.
Nothing changes here because the 5070 has less VRAM.
The latter market is legit, but the former is much bigger because SI's can market that they have a current gen 16GB Nvidia card.
It just sucks for about everyone else though minus Nvidia themselves.

wNotyarDSomeone correct me if I'm mistaken, but the 4060Ti 16GB was launched at $499 when the 4070 was $599, right? And it was a ridiculously hard sell, correct?
With the 5070 at $549, $449 for the 5060Ti 16GB would already be a stretch. $419 or $429 would be a little better, with the 8GB at $399.

As 5070 in reallty is a ~700$ GPU, no promlems the 5060TI 16GB will be a "499$" aka 600$ GPU.

Just saw this video show on youtube home page:

Scattergrunt
499 is beyond DOA. No way its gonna be 499. NVIDIA isn't the brightest sometimes, but they're not THAT stupid, right?

I can excuse the 5080 and 5070Ti because they're not midranged products, even though they're still just, okay. The 5070 was disappointing.

But.. the xx60 Ti, xx60, and xx50 cards are the ones most people buy. So they better be good, in some capacity. And so far I'm not getting excited. If anything, I'm getting genuinely angry.

Try them

$100's for another 8GB of VRAM on the same bus speed smh yeah nice try...

InVasMani$100's for another 8GB of VRAM on the same bus speed smh yeah nice try...

NV know they can sell expensive.

How does "relatively aggressive" fit with "NVIDIA will repeat its (previous-gen) MSRP"???
So nVidia isn't playing the "$50 cost reduction" card with these GPUs?
Then they're overpriced trash, the 5060 Ti 8 GB overpriced by $50 and the 16 GB version by $100.

If however nVidia will lower MSRPs akin to 5070 Ti vs 4070 Ti (Super) and 5070 vs 4070 (Super), then the 5060 Ti 8 GB should be $349 and the 16 GB version $399. That would actually be pretty aggressive pricing in this context.
Because in the case of 4060 Ti 8/16 GB the market already determined that a $100 difference between the two is way too much. So a $50 difference would be reasonable, right?

The reviewers will surely dismiss these GPUs even more than their predecessors.

God damn, i did have a good laugh, 5060 ti for 500 xD. Upselling, then 5060 - 400 :D

If it were $400 I'd buy it and at $450 I guess I'd think about it but it'd still be a bad price, but at $500 it's absolutely DOA.

It'd be the only GPU in production near the $500 price market. But if it's like the others it's basically a paper launch and very few people will be able to get one. On the bright side, a smaller GPUs means more chips per wafer which means more of the people desperate for literally any GPU will get one and reduce the demand on the market a little.

ChaitanyaJust saw this video show on youtube home page:

This has been a topic the last few generations. Nvidia keeps moving the goal post on its product stack. Like he said in the video the 5070 based on specs lines up with what should of been a 5050 card.

This is what happens when sites and YouTubers take the bait on DLSS and frame gen etc and all that garbage. They moved the product stack but claimed software made it so much better. All the while a 50 series card that should be in the $200 or cheaper range has been called a 5070 and sold starting at $549. Any tech site, YouTuber etc that has pushed and praised DLSS and what is complicit in allowing this and helping this to happen.

If people don't push back at the prices Nvidia will be happy to continue down this course because they are likely rolling in the money and let's not pretend AMD isn't complicit with this as well.

Scattergrunt499 is beyond DOA. No way its gonna be 499. NVIDIA isn't the brightest sometimes, but they're not THAT stupid, right?

When your customers are stupid and willing to pay 50-100% inflated prices over a fake MSRP, the most stupid thing to do is, be honest and not take advantage of that stupidity to transform it to higher profit margins.

dlgh7This is what happens when sites and YouTubers take the bait on DLSS and frame gen etc and all that garbage.

This is what happens when Youtubers side with the monopoly. Gamers Nexus was (in my opinion) the channel Nvidia chose to use, thanks to their credibility, to silence everyone saying that the 12pin connector is a fire hazard. Steve was singing and defending the "user error" narrative for months after that video.

dlgh7let's not pretend AMD isn't complicit with this as well.

Definitely. The RDNA4 cards don't follow the MSRPs of the previous generation.
The 7900 GRE makes things confusing because AMD made it seem like 9070 XT is its successor, okay then but the GRE had a $550 MSRP why the increase?
And thus the 9070 was made to look like the successor of the 7800 XT which had a $500 MSRP, again why the increase?

When in reality the 7900 GRE is a heavily cut-down big chip, performance-wise it dips into the midrange but let's be true here, it was simply made to fill a performance gap.
The 7800 XT is the full midrange chip of the previous generation, just as the 9070 XT is the full midrange chip of the current generation, so the 9070 XT is the true successor of the 7800 XT. An MSRP increase of $100 -> justified by improved features. Which they are greatly improved but until now we were getting major improvements for the same MSRP.
The 7900 XTX had a $100 MSRP reduction compared to the 6950 XT, 50% more VRAM and 1/3 more performance.
Yep AMD is milking it harder than Greg Focker.

dlgh7This has been a topic the last few generations. Nvidia keeps moving the goal post on its product stack. Like he said in the video the 5070 based on specs lines up with what should of been a 5050 card.

Yes, and the 5060 should replace the venerable 1030 as a 5030 and should be sold for sub-100 dollars, yes. See, I too can male ridiculous statements that have no basis in reality.
Keeping it real though - sure, what NV is doing IS questionable at best, but anyone who did NOT expect that with further node shrinks there will be a rearranging of the stack for all GPU makers hasn’t been paying attention. Hell, back in the day of, say, Fermi the x70 card was based on the cut-down version of the top chip. This obviously isn’t tenable anymore. Not for the (theoretical) price of 550 bucks.

john_This is what happens when Youtubers side with the monopoly. Gamers Nexus was (in my opinion) the channel Nvidia chose to use, thanks to their credibility, to silence everyone saying that the 12pin connector is a fire hazard. Steve was singing and defending the "user error" narrative for months after that video.

Was he? It wasn't the impression I've got. I believe he showed the connector was very finicky and looked for a way to trigger a catastrophic failure. Now, while I can see how what he showed can be used for the purpose you stated, Steve doesn't strike me as the type who would do that. I also remember at the time that a lot of tech sites and YT-ers were looking into the issue and drawing wildly different conclusions from one another.

FasolaWas he? It wasn't the impression I've got. I believe he showed the connector was very finicky and looked for a way to trigger a catastrophic failure. Now, while I can see how what he showed can be used for the purpose you stated, Steve doesn't strike me as the type who would do that. I also remember at the time that a lot of tech sites and YT-ers were looking into the issue and drawing wildly different conclusions from one another.

That video that Gamers Nexus did back then, was looking so highly professional, that to me at least, looked strange, or should I say stagged? Combine that with the credibility Steve has and you have a winner. After that video, almost everyone stopped talking about Nvidia cards melting that connector. Any mention of a new incident was considered as another "user error".

Steve is someone who will do a video and trash companies in public if they seem to be offering dangerous hardware or use anti consumer tactics. I wonder what is he doing in the above video? Haven't seen really. Is he really blasting Nvidia, does he uses harsh language against Nvidia, or is he doing some obvious observations, while also expresses wishes that this will change? Is he saying "don't buy Nvidia, find alternatives" or is he saying "(don't buy competing products) wait for better availability and better pricing)"?

Why even bother with MSRPs anymore? They don't seem to mean anything.

john_That video that Gamers Nexus did back then, was looking so highly professional, that to me at least, looked strange, or should I say stagged? Combine that with the credibility Steve has and you have a winner. After that video, almost everyone stopped talking about Nvidia cards melting that connector. Any mention of a new incident was considered as another "user error".

Steve is someone who will do a video and trash companies in public if they seem to be offering dangerous hardware or use anti consumer tactics. I wonder what is he doing in the above video? Haven't seen really. Is he really blasting Nvidia, does he uses harsh language against Nvidia, or is he doing some obvious observations, while also expresses wishes that this will change? Is he saying "don't buy Nvidia, find alternatives" or is he saying "(don't buy competing products) wait for better availability and better pricing)"?

I've been watching GN for years and, I don't think that it was the first video in which he used a lab to look for the aftermath of some issue. You're free to draw whatever conclusion but to me it was just another video of GN trying to go as in-depth as possible. Never had the impression that he was pushing that the connector is fine and that users are doing it wrong, or that he's ever blamed users for any topic he's ever covered over the many years that I've been watching. But hey, maybe I'm wrong and my memory is the faulty.

I'm inclined to believe that it was just people drawing unintended conclusions. Everything is so partisan now and has been for a while. You can present irrefutable evidence on a topic and still be called a liar.

In the linked video he's using the CUDA core count to calculate the percentage that buyers get across the various SKUs and well as the price evolution. There are two relevant charts, which are showed in the first 30s of the video, after which he goes in depth, covering each tier across generations, but I'll paste them for convenience. As for his stance on NV (not just this particular video), I don't believe I've seen anyone as critical of NV's latest. There might be, but I don't know who. I hope he does a similar video for AMD as well as I'm curious how they stack up.

NostrasThe market for the 4060Ti 16GB was primarily for ill informed buyers (more VRAM = better and only nvidia exists kind of folk) and prosumers that need the extra VRAM (productivity, AI) and not actual gaming performance.

Are you saying gaming performance is never better on the 16GB card vs the 8GB? Because there are multiple cases where there is a big difference in minimums and/or averages. Not everyone who bought the 16GB is just stupid, some decided it was worth paying a bit extra to avoid the cases where an 8GB card came up short (yes even at 1080p). It costs a bit more but you can sell or trade it in for more when you come to upgrade. It just seems to have become an accepted truth that the 16GB card is just a con, which isn't remotely true.

Hopefully we'll see more games used in GPU reviews on this site which use over 8GB, and show the minimums too, so we can get the full picture. TLOU1 was one such game where the 16GB card was notably quicker than the 8GB even at 1080p, I expect TLOU2 may be the same.

john_When your customers are stupid and willing to pay 50-100% inflated prices over a fake MSRP, the most stupid thing to do is, be honest and not take advantage of that stupidity to transform it to higher profit margins.


This is what happens when Youtubers side with the monopoly. Gamers Nexus was (in my opinion) the channel Nvidia chose to use, thanks to their credibility, to silence everyone saying that the 12pin connector is a fire hazard. Steve was singing and defending the "user error" narrative for months after that video.

How paying 499$ for GPU makes ppls stupid?
Im sure 90% of gamers are poor ppls,why else there is so much whining about prices?