Next Gen GPU's will be even more expensive

[Apocalypsee]

I'll just buy things that a gen older...if it's nvidia. I'm looking forward to what Battlemage can do. RDNA4 doesn't look too promising but we'll see. Thinking of 'downgrading' my display but there isn't anything lower than 1080p with good display tech.

 

[Caring1]

Thanks Captain Obvious, new products cost more, do tell.

 

[AusWolf]

Thanks Captain Obvious, new products cost more, do tell.

They shouldn't, though. 20% more performance for a 20% higher price isn't progress, it's stagnation.

 

[Caring1]

They shouldn't, though. 20% more performance for a 20% higher price isn't progress, it's stagnation.

I'm not saying it's right, just that it happens.

 

[AusWolf]

I'm not saying it's right, just that it happens.

Ah, fair enough. This is where "vote with your wallet" comes into play, I guess.

 

[agent_x007]

They shouldn't, though. 20% more performance for a 20% higher price isn't progress, it's stagnation.

They (NV), just keep pushing for highest performance at ALL workloads.
People buy this type of cards, so NV keeps making more.
Should they change or buyers change first ? (chicken vs. egg situation going here)

"It shoulnd't be like this" - it's not enough to change NV mind.
I know it's bad, but if you don't like it - don't buy it.
That's the only advice I can give.

Also, manufacturers like ASUS/Gigabyte/MSI/etc. might have to change due to margins, but that's only if GPU prices start going down.
You can't have high ~200W TDP cards in under 300$ USD price range (not enough margin, and probably why EVGA quit GPU business).

 

[AusWolf]

Little does she know 500 is basically the entry level for not getting a shite gpu at least for 1440p gaming especially for one who has banned FSR from his house.....

Yep. In her eyes, gaming is an expensive hobby of mine. In my eyes, GPUs shouldn't cost as much as they do, so I kind of get it. Kind of.

Yeah man I told her I am getting a 4080 FE and she said pussy...... Did the same when I told her I thought the 2080ti was too expensive.... She even busted my balls when I grabbed the 7800X3D because it was much cheaper than my last 2 cpus lol.... Keep in mind she has no clue and only sees the price as how good or bad it is lol she also knows she will get it after 2-3 years typically so that is a factor in the PC she uses.

Funny thing though when I grabbed a 4070 and 5800X3D for my brother she didn't say anything lol.....

You must have one interesting wifey.

They (NV), just keep pushing for highest performance at ALL workloads.
People buy this type of cards, so NV keeps making more.
Should they change or buyers change first ? (chicken vs. egg situation going here)

That's an easy one - it's the buyer who should change first. We should be the ones saying "shove your 8K ultra high gaming experience up your backside, I'm fine with 1080/1440 medium-low". Like I said, these companies depend on us a lot more than we do on them. If I ran a company that made products that people bought no matter the price, of course I'd ask for exorbitant amounts myself.

 

[R-T-B]

They shouldn't, though. 20% more performance for a 20% higher price isn't progress, it's stagnation.

Yes but when you have process nodes moving slowly this is the forecast you should always expect. It's not rocket science really. You don't need to act like you have seen the "latest leaks" to predict this.

 

[AusWolf]

Yes but when you have process nodes moving slowly this is the forecast you should always expect. It's not rocket science really. You don't need to act like you have seen the "latest leaks" to predict this.

To be fair, prices hitting the skies during the crypto boom didn't surprise me - regular gamers buying stuff regardless did. I guess Nvidia/AMD have no reason to bring sanity back to their prices if people don't care.

 

[R-T-B]

regular gamers buying stuff regardless did.

I was one of those but I didn't pay above MSRP at least, good god you sent me on a PTSD flashback with those waitlists...

 

[AusWolf]

I was one of those but I didn't pay above MSRP at least, good god you sent me on a PTSD flashback with those waitlists...

I, on the other hand bought a 5700 XT for £480. Only a few months later, I sold it for £600. (I did buy a 2070 for £500 afterwards, but that's a different story)

As for now, I'll see how big Navi 4 turns out, probably get one (merely because I'm curious), and call my PC done for a good few years until something sensible comes out.

 

[AleXXX666]

wow, has someone surprised by obvious fact?

 

[AusWolf]

wow, has someone surprised by obvious fact?

Humans are a weird species. They never cease to surprise me with their unending herd mentality. For one, with COVID lockdowns which I thought would sooner turn into a global rebellion than actually work, and then with GPU prices which I thought would only last as long as crypto mining was around, because no gamer would ever spend a month's wage (in a Western country) on a freakin' toy, surely. Oh boy, was I wrong!

 

[R-T-B]

Never forget: It all makes sense when you remember you evolved from monkeys.

Embrace frog.

 

[igormp]

To be fair, prices hitting the skies during the crypto boom didn't surprise me - regular gamers buying stuff regardless did. I guess Nvidia/AMD have no reason to bring sanity back to their prices if people don't care.

Apart from that, even if gamers gave up on buying, Nvidia would keep selling the chips at a higher markup for the enterprise sector.
Gaming is just an afterthought for them at this point, they mostly use it to keep people locked in into their ecosystem (people learn CUDA with geforce products, and keep using it professionally later on).

 

[evernessince]

I don't believe in "take it or leave it" when it comes to entertainment. Everybody has a choice. You can buy the latest high-end GPU at a stellar price and target 4K or not. You can watch the latest Disney/Netflix/Amazon bullshit, or not. You don't have to do anything. If a lot of people go "nah, fuck it", then manufacturers will have no choice but to adapt. They rely on us way more than we rely on them.

I generally agree with this mentality but I believe Nvidia would have to take an extreme hit to their gaming GPU revenue to distract them enough from their AI focus.

No offense, but that's a wrong way to think, imo. A GPU being faster than everything else isn't a reason for the manufacturer to ask for more money than ever before. Every single GPU generation has always been faster than the last one. There is nothing new or revolutionary about that, it's called progress. If manufacturers had always asked for proportionately more money for their products, we'd be paying millions for a 4070.

Also, terms like "superflagship" are artificially invented terms to upsell some crap. It's a GPU like any other, what more do you want?

Yep, plus Nvidia's margins are at an all time high. It was funny when Jensen used increasing wafer pricing as an excuse for the 4000 series price increases when in fact it only represents a very small portion of Nvidia's costs. Material cost in total (not only including wafer pricing) makes up 10% of Nvidia's expenses, the lion's share of the cost of any GPU comes from R&D and the same has held true for any advanced CPU / GPU for a long time now. Certainly the cost of wafers has continued to go up as it always does and the designs are getting more complex but the market growth (AI, mining, and gaming) has been very strong and has continued to offset cost increases.

I agree on superflagship as well, as other's have pointed out the 4090 is more cut down than past flagship cards. If it was the full die then you could argue it might be a super-flagship, mostly because the full die nowadays is designed for enterprise and is huge. That's not the case though.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I agree on superflagship as well, as other's have pointed out the 4090 is more cut down than past flagship cards. If it was the full die then you could argue it might be a super-flagship, mostly because the full die nowadays is designed for enterprise and is huge. That's not the case though.

It's a halo gaming card and all it has to be for that distinction is faster than everything else and while it will last longer than any other gpu from the 4000 generation it's stupid to buy it thinking you'll be future proof.

Nvidia already makes sure that isn't the case with typically every other generation them adding somthing the previous generation doesn't support it's almost like the old Intel with the 2 cpu per socket strategy.

The other thing keeping it from lasting longer is UE5 being the primary gaming engine and while you'll be able to play UE5 games at 1440p a long time with it, 4k is already a struggle.

Super flagship isn't a thing though it never was lol. Not even sure where people game up with that. I'll still maintain that buying two 800 usd cards separated by 1 generation is going to give you more longevity than one 1600 usd one although Nvidia is trying really hard for that to not be the case lol. Soon it sounds like it will be 2x1000 vs 2000 usd lmao.

Obviously I can only speak for myself but I never once bought a flagship/halo card and went oh boy this is gonna last a half decade (3 generations) before I need to look for somthing new.

 

[igormp]

I generally agree with this mentality but I believe Nvidia would have to take an extreme hit to their gaming GPU revenue to distract them enough from their AI focus.

Given how their revenue in the gaming sector has only been increasing, I doubt such thing will happen.

 

[dirtyferret]

their pricing is only because of their infinite greed and disrespect towards their customers

infinite greed? 100%. Disrespect towards their customers? Actually they are looking out for their customers best interest. Their customers are stock holders and their product is the stock price. Nvidia is no different than AMD, Intel, Corsair, or any other publicly trading company that has a fiduciary responsibility to their stock holders. As @oxrufiioxo stated, your responsibility as a consumer is to yourself and not to any company. If company A puts out a crappy product, vote with your wallet. If company A raises prices, vote with your wallet. Don't go around saying Company A is all greed and company B is for the consumer when their products are market set because if the performance flips so will the prices and Company A will be cheaper and Company B just as greedy.

 

[hat]

I don't believe in "take it or leave it" when it comes to entertainment. Everybody has a choice. You can buy the latest high-end GPU at a stellar price and target 4K or not. You can watch the latest Disney/Netflix/Amazon bullshit, or not. You don't have to do anything. If a lot of people go "nah, fuck it", then manufacturers will have no choice but to adapt. They rely on us way more than we rely on them.

I dunno what your definition of "take it or leave it" looks like, but I'm agreeing with you otherwise. That's what I meant... you can choose to buy, or not to buy. There's not much choice in between.

 

[iameatingjam]

I think when it comes to nvidia the flagship will be expensive. Who knows... maybe even $2000. But for the non-flagship cards... I don't think they can get away with it. People don't want to pay $1200 and still not have the best. Hence the 4080 super face saver.

 

[Princess Garnet]

Never forget: It all makes sense when you remember you evolved from monkeys.

Embrace frog.

Only if they turn into princes, though!

On subject of the thread, @oxrufiioxo sort of states a lot of my thoughts on things when it comes to the modern graphics card market in general, so I'll sort of say I echo most of what they are saying as opposed to just repeating a lot of things.

While I was pretty disappointed in the state of things the last time I bought something, that was a year ago, so hopefully my next upgrade is far enough off that the immediately upcoming generation being mediocre (if it is) won't matter to me. That being said, I recall thinking that things looked disappointing as far back as after my prior upgrade (Pascal generation), and they've largely been mediocre since, so I won't be surprised if they are still mediocre when I have to upgrade again years from now. Getting improvements at the rate we used to, at least without ever rising costs (that people are disappointingly accepting), seems to be out of the cards now. We largely seem set for an nVidia monopoly for the indefinite future too. Graphics cards are a bit boring in the 2020s.

 

[Chrispy_]

There's a certain level of "who cares" around >$1000 graphics cards when the games are all getting made for consoles first.

PS5 Pro's GPU might get about a 50% bump in GPU from 36CU to 54CU, but that's still in the realms of a $400 graphics card. Game devs likely aren't going to bother building worlds with assets that cannot be run well on the best consoles, and the overwhelming majority of their customers are going to be rocking regular XBSX or PS5 consoles, or else the average PC gamer is likely rocking a sub-$500 GPU that's potentially 2-3 years old.

Sure, buying a 5090 for $2399 might just get you 400fps in the latest AAA title, or let you path-trace CP2077 at 4K native - but realistically the low-bar for gaming (console peasants) really isn't a low bar any more. 4K30 at max graphical settings and 4K60 performance modes look pretty good to me. Ratchet & Clank, or Horizon Forbidden West are two of the better looking PC games of the last year and honestly the PS5 absolutely nails them with what's effectively a cut-down 6700XT. I've been using a mix of 3090, 4060Ti, 4070S, Steam Deck, and 7800XT to run those two games, and with the exception of the Steam Deck, they all absolutely render the game so well at high enough frame rates that I was never wishing I had a higher resolution or higher frame rate.

Game devs will likely push graphical fidelity once the PS5 Pro arrives on the scene, but not by much, and certainly not enough to really justify spending more than the cost of said console on a GPU.

I think when it comes to nvidia the flagship will be expensive. Who knows... maybe even $2000. But for the non-flagship cards... I don't think they can get away with it. People don't want to pay $1200 and still not have the best. Hence the 4080 super face saver.

I think there's a psychological barrier that prevents most people from spending over $/€/£1000 on a graphics card. You basically need to have an extreme surplus disposable income to buy high-end PC hardware because at that point you're so deep into diminishing returns that there almost aren't any returns at all.

It doesn't help that a lot of the AAA releases of 2023 and 2024 ran like total ass at launch, no matter your system. Overclocked 13900KS and 4090 SLI? It didn't matter - Fallen Order or The Last of Us Part I were still a stuttery, crashy mess with serious quality and performance issues, to name just two examples.

 

[mb194dc]

I don't think the market will take it, but we need the proper bubbles to pop first.

 

[AusWolf]

Only if they turn into princes, though!

On subject of the thread, @oxrufiioxo sort of states a lot of my thoughts on things when it comes to the modern graphics card market in general, so I'll sort of say I echo most of what they are saying as opposed to just repeating a lot of things.

While I was pretty disappointed in the state of things the last time I bought something, that was a year ago, so hopefully my next upgrade is far enough off that the immediately upcoming generation being mediocre (if it is) won't matter to me. That being said, I recall thinking that things looked disappointing as far back as after my prior upgrade (Pascal generation), and they've largely been mediocre since, so I won't be surprised if they are still mediocre when I have to upgrade again years from now. Getting improvements at the rate we used to, at least without ever rising costs (that people are disappointingly accepting), seems to be out of the cards now. We largely seem set for an nVidia monopoly for the indefinite future too. Graphics cards are a bit boring in the 2020s.

I just think that instead of spending 300 quid every 2-3 years, we're fine spending 600 every 4-6 years. At the end of the day, it's the same amount of money spent on GPU upgrades per year. If improvements are incremental, we just don't need to upgrade, we can keep what we have for longer. No need to complain.

There's a certain level of "who cares" around >$1000 graphics cards when the games are all getting made for consoles first.

PS5 Pro's GPU might get about a 50% bump in GPU from 36CU to 54CU, but that's still in the realms of a $400 graphics card. Game devs likely aren't going to bother building worlds with assets that cannot be run well on the best consoles, and the overwhelming majority of their customers are going to be rocking regular XBSX or PS5 consoles, or else the average PC gamer is likely rocking a sub-$500 GPU that's potentially 2-3 years old.

Sure, buying a 5090 for $2399 might just get you 400fps in the latest AAA title, or let you path-trace CP2077 at 4K native - but realistically the low-bar for gaming (console peasants) really isn't a low bar any more. 4K30 at max graphical settings and 4K60 performance modes look pretty good to me. Ratchet & Clank, or Horizon Forbidden West are two of the better looking PC games of the last year and honestly the PS5 absolutely nails them with what's effectively a cut-down 6700XT. I've been using a mix of 3090, 4060Ti, 4070S, Steam Deck, and 7800XT to run those two games, and with the exception of the Steam Deck, they all absolutely render the game so well at high enough frame rates that I was never wishing I had a higher resolution or higher frame rate.

Game devs will likely push graphical fidelity once the PS5 Pro arrives on the scene, but not by much, and certainly not enough to really justify spending more than the cost of said console on a GPU.


I think there's a psychological barrier that prevents most people from spending over $/€/£1000 on a graphics card. You basically need to have an extreme surplus disposable income to buy high-end PC hardware because at that point you're so deep into diminishing returns that there almost aren't any returns at all.

It doesn't help that a lot of the AAA releases of 2023 and 2024 ran like total ass at launch, no matter your system. Overclocked 13900KS and 4090 SLI? It didn't matter - Fallen Order or The Last of Us Part I were still a stuttery, crashy mess with serious quality and performance issues, to name just two examples.

Consoles work with hugely cut-down graphics and a lot of upscaling. Buying better PC hardware is all about circumventing those limitations and enjoying better graphics. Of course it's a luxury, though.