- Joined
- May 2, 2017
- Messages
- 7,762 (2.91/day)
- Location
- Back in Norway
System Name | Hotbox |
---|---|
Processor | AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, 110/95/110, PBO +150Mhz, CO -7,-7,-20(x6), |
Motherboard | ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax |
Cooling | LOBO + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14 |
Memory | 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14 @3800c15 |
Video Card(s) | PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UC@2250MHz max @~200W |
Storage | 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro |
Display(s) | Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary |
Case | SSUPD Meshlicious |
Audio Device(s) | Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3 |
Power Supply | Corsair SF750 Platinum |
Mouse | Logitech G603 |
Keyboard | Keychron K3/Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps |
Software | Windows 10 Pro |
Wait, what? I am explicitly arguing against overconsumption. On several levels, even. If you're reading what I'm saying as if I'm reading for "more people having more GPUs", you're misreading what I'm saying. More equal access to beneficial hobbies and pastimes, such as gaming, is generally beneficial, yes, and is an argument for democratizing access to gaming-capable computers in general. That amounts to a public good. So I'm arguing (although indirectly - there are more ways to game than by having a dGPU) for more people having access to GPUs, but not more people having more GPUs like you put it, as that strongly implies rapid replacement rates for said GPUs as well. I'm a strong proponent of keeping hardware in service as long as possible, which is also reflected in my own hardware choices - as I said before, my previous GPU was a Fury X, bought in 2015, and while I've done a relatively rapid system upgrade now (4 years, 2017 to 2021), my previous CPU and motherboard lasted me nearly a decade, from late 2008 to mid 2017, and I generally always advise against upgrading unless actually necessary (and if necessary, upgrading selectively and critically).Hm, we have more than enough gaming GPU for everyone on earth already, why do you think more people should have more GPUs, leading to more e-waste?
You are denoucing one aspect of capitalism while encourage the other: over consumption, that's why I brought out the 6500XT/6400 example.
If next gen GPUs are overpriced, what's to stop people from buying used GPU? Do you think buying used GPU is a sin or something.
Like I said many times now, if next gen don't bring any benefit in efficiency and price to performance, there is no reason to buy them, just look away. Nvidia and AMD will get the memo, they need customers, we don't need them.
In short, fighting for more accessible gaming GPU is just useless endeavour, completely meaningless IMO. Gaming is a luxury, not a necessity.
As for how this ties back into the 3090 Ti and its pricing: the knock-on effect of higher flagship prices pulling low-end and midrange pricing up will make gaming less accessible. This might have the unintended side effect of people keeping their GPUs for longer as they can't afford to upgrade, but that's both impossible to control and at best an indirect benefit of a larger harm. Relegating gaming to only the wealthy is not beneficial in any way - not to players, not to the game industry, not to gaming as a cultural phenomenon. And, of course, the potential cut in consumption from unaffordable lower end GPUs is likely offset by the increased prestige in higher end GPUs, leading to higher replacement rates among a larger wealthy audience (which we've already seen alongside the growth of gaming as a more broad-reaching activity). And, crucually, while many enthusiasts will sell or give their used GPUs to someone who will use them, massive amounts of fully usable, still decently performing hardware is discarded every year. More status and prestige surrounding high end hardware will only accelerate this, as the reverse of this will always be negative sentiments surrounding hardware perceived as out-of-date, even if these are rarely expressed. (Though looking around these forums, you won't have to look much to find these sentiments.)
I've never said anything against buying used GPUs whatsoever - I think a more active used hardware market is something PC gaming needs. But what stops people from buying used GPUs is, typically, the prevalence of scams, insecurity around hardware longevity, lack of warranties, lack of protections against scams or unscrupulous sellers, lack of knowledge, lack of maintenance skills, and of course the massive hype and status surrounding new hardware. IMO, anyone buying used rather than new hardware is doing the world a favor.
As for the "if next gen don't bring any benefit in efficiency and price to performance, there is no reason to buy them, just look away" - as has been pointed out plenty of times earlier in this thread, that's nothing more than a cop-out. The hype around new products is essentially always sufficient to ensure sales, as long as they aren't complete trash. And you don't need improvements in either efficiency or price/perf as long as absolute performance is higher and there are people with more money than sense out there - which is why the rumors of 600+W flagships are so scary. Of course, that's also part of what I think Nvidia is doing with the 3090 Ti (and, to some extent, was doing with the 3090) - readying the ground for a "better value" 4090 Ti by producing a predecessor that is such abominably bad value that it's laughable. Anything can be made to look good with sufficient planning.
As for that elitist spiel you end your post with: whether something is a "luxury" or a necessity is extremely dependent on context, and immensely variable, outside of basic needs like food and shelter. Nobody needs to game, but then nobody needs mechanised transportation either. Nobody needs electric lighting. Whatever your cut-off point for "luxury" is, it will always necessarily be arbitrary, making it a slippery slope towards ever-increasing demarcation of what other people don't deserve because it's a "luxury". IDGAF whether you think gaming is a "luxury" - what you're saying here is that you believe that you have the right to modes of enjoyment in life that others don't. That is an explicitly harmful stance, and of course a deeply unegalitarian one. In short: elitist. You're welcome to believe that your circumstances have somehow given you the right to enjoy life in ways that others don't, but that belief will always be predicated upon some deeply flawed and harmful logic.