GDDR6 VRAM Prices Falling According to Spot Market Analysis - 8 GB Selling for $27

[kawice]

If you are buying a 4060ti and not a 4090, then you are making a compromise.
If you compromise, you are ready to lower the settings.
If you lower the settings, you don't need much video memory.
If you do not need a lot of video memory, 8 GB can easily be enough.

The 4060ti is a weak card and a terrible $400 purchase, with 16GB it remains the same crap, because same

A 12 GB card on a 192-bit bus is already here - 4070, although it would be exactly 4060ti, because the presented 4060ti in its pure form is a simple 4060

Clearly you do not know what you're talking about.

The 4060 Ti is at the performance level of 2080 Ti or 3070 and that is even before you enable DLSS2.
Moreover 40xx has DLSS3 frame generator. While this is some image quality compromise, you're really are not limited to play at 1080 low / medium settings with those cards.
You can actually play 1440p with high settings at >= 60FPS. Texture quality is the least performance penalty setting. It just needs VRAM to store those textures near GPU.

But with 8GB you will be limited very soon by VRAM in near future, since current games easily require 6GB - 7GB VRAM already. So buying a card with 8GB VRAM is not future proof at all.
Considering how cheap VRAM is these days it is purely a SCAM by Nvidia.


And your glorious 4090 for $2000 will be replaced by 50xx series in a year or year and a half.

 

[dgianstefani]

This article is false; Nvidia said 8GB costs $100.
They wouldn't lie to you or scalp you, would they? They're kindhearted, generous, pro-consumer, and fair, right?


I'd buy a 16GB 4060Ti if it only cost $29 more than the 8GB variant.
It's still not a great deal, but I'd buy it as a midrange card that has a future, instead of a midrange card that doesn't.

8 GB of VRAM costs $27. That's based off the 8 Gb chip price, so you'd need eight chips, for 8 Gb. Adding 8 GB extra to the 4060 Ti costs more than $27, guaranteed.

I don't know what the 16 Gb (2 GB) chips cost, but the article states they aren't getting cheaper at the same rate.

To get 16 GB on the 4060 Ti, they'd need to use memory chips on both sides, as the PCB uses 4x 2 GB (16 Gb) chips. So you can't directly assume that costs $27 in raw materials, as that would be adding another eight for a total of 16 instead. You also need to account for BOM of a more complex PCB, power delivery etc, as others have stated.

 

[R0H1T]

These are spot prices, Nvidia almost certainly gets a major discount on them. Exact pricing would also be a secret but after Apple they probably have the biggest clout in terms of pricing here!

 

[Wirko]

I'd actually expect such a large consumer of chips to buy them by the wafer, then take care of packaging, testing and binning themselves (and branding of course). That's what is often done with NAND chips, and at least in the past, system memory RAM chips.

These are spot prices, Nvidia almost certainly gets a major discount on them. Exact pricing would also be a secret but after Apple they probably have the biggest clout in terms of pricing here!

They buy based on long term contracts, which probably allow both parties to re-negotiate the prices and quantities on certain conditions, for example when a big change in free market prices occurs.

 

[ixi]

And here we are. Paying fot 8GB more than 600 peso

 

[Chrispy_]

I don't know what the 16 Gb (2 GB) chips cost, but the article states they aren't getting cheaper at the same rate.

To get 16 GB on the 4060 Ti, they'd need to use memory chips on both sides, as the PCB

My comment was tongue-in-cheek, but either way, spot cost of 16Gbit chips is irrelevant, Nvidia aren't paying spot pricing. Nvidia's profit margins are about 70% based on the latest report. 70% more than spot pricing still gives us a 16GB 4060Ti for only a $50 price hike, so the $499 MSRP is a 200% insult over Nvidia's already silly 70% profit margin.

I get it, adding more VRAM to a card isn't as simple as magicking more packages onto a PCB, but it's also not an unsolved problem and both AMD and Nvidia have been offering multiple VRAM sizes for a decade without such a ridiculous pricing gap.

 

[Totally]

My comment was tongue-in-cheek, but either way, spot cost of 16Gbit chips is irrelevant, Nvidia aren't paying spot pricing. Nvidia's profit margins are about 70% based on the latest report. 70% more than spot pricing still gives us a 16GB 4060Ti for only a $50 price hike, so the $499 MSRP is a 200% insult over Nvidia's already silly 70% profit margin.

I get it, adding more VRAM to a card isn't as simple as magicking more packages onto a PCB, but it's also not an unsolved problem and both AMD and Nvidia have been offering multiple VRAM sizes for a decade without such a ridiculous pricing gap.

I was debating on whether to chime in on this but your comment came very close to what I was about to say. It is a simple affair for AMD/Nvidia bc they do take a modular approach to designing their pbc. yeas there added costs to increasing the RAM but it's negligible since provisions for doing so are already in place it's not like they are doing a complete retrofit to an existing design, might as well design a new card at that point.