That's the thing that hurts the most with only having one option and no real competition you've waited for the 50 series and it's kind of meh but what other options do you have waiting another 2 years sucks and sure you can wait another year hoping for a Super refresh but that also sucks. When people have waited 4+ years for a new generation and they have only 1 gpu maker option to get a meaningful improvement this is what we get.
I don't even care about what they want to charge I would rather have a 1200 usd 5080 that came with an actual generational improvements over a side grade over what we've had for the last 2 years.... The 5090 is whatever it does what it needs to do giving More vram and decent enough performance at 4k sure 2k+ sucks but that's just the price of having the best of anything value isn't all that important... I do wish it offered a more meaningful improvement over the 4090 though.
This generation doesn't really move the ball forward though you still need to kill your latency generating a ton more frames to use path tracing and even heavy RT crumbles on anything below the 2k flagship even path tracing with all the tricks is barely fast enough on the 5090 prior to kicking on frame gen to not have a console like experience latency wise and that is the real shame the sad thing is that is running a 4 year old game at this point...
When the generation defining feature makes latency and image quality worse and gamers gobble it up like Apple pie à la mode you know Nvidia has won.
That being said expensive hardware that offers minor generational improvements isn't even the biggest issue in gaming it's that we get at most a couple games worth a shite every year and even less that I would classify that even push the boundaries visually the only thing developers seem to want to do is use all these technologies Nvidia provide as a crutch instead of using them to make a game meaningfully better.
Yeah, i agree with all your points... especially your last point. But yeah, had 5080 been 1200 usd and essentially a 4090, i reckon people would have been able to accept that better.
Regarding the 5090 and it being a decent improvement over 4090 - after launch i've had a chance to look more into it, and while there are games that would now be playable at 8k vs 4090 being sub 60 fps in that scenario, in the most demanding games the 5090 wouldn't actually give that much of an improvement over the 4090. Take cyberpunk for instance - at native 4k with pathtracing the 5090 is 40% faster than 4090... but even the 5090 is only at 40 fps at that point. So you'd enable dlss quality, which brings 5090 advantage down to 25%. And if you were to use dlss performance, the advantage goes even further down to 20%.
So i feel like the 5090 is mostly alot faster when you don't need it / scenarios where fps is too low regardless, and not that much faster when you actually need more performance.
The above along with the now insane pricing has firmly made my mind up that i am skipping 5000 gen.