NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Founders Edition

[W1zzard]

But it was the MSRP: the fact that crypto caused interference with that price is irrelevant.

Uh .. all the people who wanted to buy a card would disagree with you.

Reviewers started using real price points for their reviews, so that NVIDIA had to stop releasing fake MSRPs.

do you honestly believe one could get the 4080, or ANY card for that matter, @ MSRP as well?

Just checked.. here in Germany not a single card available at MSRP

edit: nothing nothing available on Newegg https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709 601408875&Order=1
edit: $1610 at amz https://www.amazon.com/s?k=rtx+4080&crid=1IYQEV8GKNNTD&sprefix=rtx+4080,aps,295&ref=nb_sb_noss_1
edit: best buy no cards
edit: ebay https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=rtx+4080&_sacat=0&LH_BIN=1&_sop=15

around $1650.. so if I write a review today about RTX 4080, the price will be $1610

That's how my pricing process works now, for all cards I have in my comparisons .. MSRPs are meaningless, let's not give GPU vendors the chance to start faking MSRPs again

 

[HTC]

Reviewers started using real price points for their reviews, so that NVIDIA had to stop releasing fake MSRPs.

I understand.

Still, you could use the MSRP solely for the "terrible value" badge, when applicable.

 

[trog100]

people seem to have conveniently forgotten the 2080ti which launched at £1200 quid...

i agree with wizard the 3080 price was entirely fake.. nvidia knew the card would never sell at that price..

its possible to put any price you like on anything.. but if that thing aint available at that price.. the price is fake..

as for the 4080 card.. there is no sign of it selling out in the UK.. its still readily available from the main retailers.

trog

 

[AusWolf]

That is simply not true, I have never seen any such NVIDIA guideline, nor has NVIDIA ever put any "or else" pressure on me.

The award is given, because it's the 2nd fastest card that exists, with the world's best power efficiency, with amazing performance in both raster and RT, and great features, at a terrible price. and like I said .. DO NOT BUY IT IF YOU DONT LIKE IT. It is still an unbelievably amazing card

If I give you a $1200 coupon for a GPU that expires next week, what would you buy today? Wait for the Radeons? Sure, definitely, you really should, and I'm surprised that so many people already know how well the product works... but I'm afraid that in the end most people will still buy NVIDIA (like in the last decade) or hope that AMD's success will force NVIDIA to lower their prices, which can definitely happen

I see your reasoning, but I kindly disagree with it.

It's a fast card, and it's more efficient than its predecessors, but the whole equation gets thrown out of the window when a card that's about 80% as fast as this one and doesn't need a fragile new power connector can be bought for half the price. The cheapest 3080 in the UK goes for £739.98, while the 4080 starts at £1,354.99 at the same store. That 20% difference in performance is on the border of what you can and cannot feel without an FPS counter on screen, and is not worth anywhere near the extra £6-700.

An award misleads people into believing that it's a great product at a great price, when in fact, it's an okay product at a terrible price. No one should be recommended to buy it.

 

[Dirt Chip]

That is an interesting idea

Edit: Now looking at this chart and wondering "what's good value? where's the cutoff? isn't its "value" (price/perf, and that doesnt take into account efficiency and other things like features) actually comparable to the competing options (3090 ti, 3090, 3080 ti), just "price" is very high" ?

http://imgur.com/wx2XhQd

It touches a the very elusive question of "what is value". And the answer is mostly subjective.
Many seems to determine value not by the cost\pref at present relative to the other options at present, but by what you could get computer to previous gens.
I don't think it's the right way to go, because the assumption based on the past may no longer be valid.
Many look at the die size, if it was cut down, memory bit and other spec that say nothing about imo about value. Pref\cost is the right term I think is right.
The problem is that today you have 1:1 ratio going gen to gen and not within the same gen in different tiers. That is pretty new, in a bad sense, and what makes the 4080 to be such a bad value to many. You don`s see the generational improvement you use to see (more fps for the same $$$), something most took for granted. Nobody care that today woofer cost is going in price close to exponential order where in the past it was mostly linear.
How do you factor that into conclusion with badges- I'm actually not sure.
Maybe sub devid the "highly recomended" to 3 categories of pref\cost (lats call it 'current value'), efficiency (pref\watt) and relative value (that is this product 'current value' vs last gen 'current value'). But that will turn into an academic artical very fast and will scare most.
Maybe just add an asterisk that say that it is only recommended IF you will surely fully use the new features (DLSS3 in this case) of the product and if not- it cannot be recommended.

 

[AusWolf]

It touches a the very elusive question of "what is value". And the answer is mostly subjective.
Many seems to determine value not by the cost\pref at present relative to the other options at present, but by what you could get computer to previous gens.
I don't think it's the right way to go, because the assumption based on the past may no longer be valid.
Many look at the die size, if it was cut down, memory bit and other spec that say nothing about imo about value. Pref\cost is the right term I think is right.
The problem is that today you have 1:1 ratio going gen to gen and not within the same gen in different tiers. That is pretty new, in a bad sense, and what makes the 4080 to be such a bad value to many. You don`s see the generational improvement you use to see (more fps for the same $$$), something most took for granted. Nobody care that today woofer cost is going in price close to exponential order where in the past it was mostly linear.
How do you factor that into conclusion with badges- I'm actually not sure.
Maybe sub devid the "highly recomended" to 3 categories of pref\cost (lats call it 'current value'), efficiency (pref\watt) and relative value (that is this product 'current value' vs last gen 'current value'). But that will turn into an academic artical very fast and will scare most.
Maybe just add an asterisk that say that it is only recommended IF you will surely fully use the new features (DLSS3 in this case) of the product and if not- it cannot be recommended.

I think it's simpler than that. If a product sits right at the bottom of the price/performance chart, it doesn't deserve a recommendation, unless it offers something truly remarkable that other products don't. And the 4080 doesn't. It's just a graphics card like all the rest.

 

[64K]

people seem to have conveniently forgotten the 2080ti which launched at £1200 quid...

i agree with wizard the 3080 price was entirely fake.. nvidia knew the card would never sell at that price..

its possible to put any price you like on anything.. but if that thing aint available at that price.. the price is fake..

as for the 4080 card.. there is no sign of it selling out in the UK.. its still readily available from the main retailers.

trog

The 2080 Ti was a high end Turing. The 4080 isn't a high end Ada so you can't compare the MSRPs in any relevant way.

A more accurate comparison would be the 2080 which had an MSRP of $700 versus the 4080 with a $1,200 MSRP.

 

[trog100]

The 2080 Ti was a high end Turing. The 4080 isn't a high end Ada so you can't compare the MSRPs in any relevant way.

A more accurate comparison would be the 2080 which had an MSRP of $700 versus the 4080 with a $1,200 MSRP.

performance wise a 2080ti compared roughly to a 3070 card.. which is why i said at the time the 3xxx series card prices were fake..

trog

 

[Dirt Chip]

I see your reasoning, but I kindly disagree with it.

It's a fast card, and it's more efficient than its predecessors, but the whole equation gets thrown out of the window when a card that's about 80% as fast as this one and doesn't need a fragile new power connector can be bought for half the price. The cheapest 3080 in the UK goes for £739.98, while the 4080 starts at £1,354.99 at the same store. That 20% difference in performance is on the border of what you can and cannot feel without an FPS counter on screen, and is not worth anywhere near the extra £6-700.

An award misleads people into believing that it's a great product at a great price, when in fact, it's an okay product at a terrible price. No one should be recommended to buy it.

I partially agree- the answer is not clear cut in this case. Mostly not worth to buy, but not in all cases.
The product can have variable 'value' compared to last gen- that is you pay 1$ for every extra 1 FPS going gen to gen - but still be worth your buy if you really need the upgrade.
If I had the budget and needed an upgrade with max performance than 4080 is a terrific product- no one can deny it. Wonderful efficiency, feature rich, suprim build quality, strong drivers and only second to the mighty 4090 in absolute performance.
It all flip in a sec if you don't really need the upgrade or under constrained budget.
If you decide weather to buy or not based on relatedness to previous gens than you probably dont really need to upgrade. Maybe you want to, because you like to feel you to have 'the best' in your rig, but in this case any purchase - no matter how 'good value' it is relative to the past - will be a waste. In that case you better save, wait and upgrade when you really need it - that is you can`t technically game even when copremising on setting - or as much as your patience allow.

Every one have different patience tank and each individual has different amount of copremesis he willing to make before it turn to a clear cut unacceptable. Each one can also change those "parameters" within himself and by that one can change his own definition of what is 'good value'. It is not a fixed value and things are changing fast nowadays. Learn to adapt.

 

[AusWolf]

I partially agree- the answer is not clear cut in this case. Mostly not worth to buy, but not in all cases.
The product can have variable 'value' compared to last gen- that is you pay 1$ for every extra 1 FPS going gen to gen - but still be worth your buy if you really need the upgrade.
If I had the budget and needed an upgrade with max performance than 4080 is a terrific product- no one can deny it. Wonderful efficiency, feature rich, suprim build quality, strong drivers and only second to the mighty 4090 in absolute performance.
It all flip in a sec if you don't really need the upgrade or under constrained budget.
If you decide weather to buy or not based on relatedness to previous gens than than you probably dont really need to upgrade. Maybe you want to, because you like to feel you to have 'the best' in your rig, but in this case any purchase - no matter how 'good value' it is relative to the past - will be a waste. In that case you better save, wait and upgrade when you really need it - that is you can`t technically game even when copremising on setting - or as much as your patience allow.

Every one have different patience tank and each individual has different amount of copremesis he willing to make before it turn to a clear cut unacceptable. Each one can also change those "parameters" within himself and by that one can change his own definition of what is 'good value'. It is not a fixed value and things are changing fast nowadays.

A need to upgrade doesn't necessitate the need for an extra 20% performance for double the price. If you needed to upgrade, I'd suggest the 3080 or the 6900 XT. The 4080 and 4090 are only good buys if (as W1zzard said) you get thrown a coupon for a free graphics card. But nobody has one of those. That's why these cards don't deserve any award. They can only be recommended for buyers with infinite cash.

 

[Wasteland]

It was a fake price, and everybody knew that, the card really wasn't available at this price point. NVIDIA just though it would make people happy if they gave them a bs pricing. Soon after that I changed my reviews to use actual pricing that has availability, even if that means buying from eBay/scalpers

The (RTX 3080 MSRP) price wasn't fake from Nvidia's point of view, though. Nvidia certainly wasn't pocketing the difference until much later in the crypto-boom, when they started releasing cards with ludicrous MSRPs (or no MSRP at all). How do I know this? Because 3080 FE cards, though rare as hen's teeth, did sell at MSRP from Best Buy. The scalpers were the only ones making signficant money over and above the MSRP, at first. Then the AIBs joined in at some point by simply setting their retail prices skyward (earlier for AMD, IIRC--$1,000+ 6700 XT cards at retail); then Nvidia got into the act.

So I'm not entirely sure what your argument is with regard to Nvidia "faking" the MSRP. Every time a new GPU launches, there's a shortage for a month or two or three. We're all used to that. We're also used to scalpers exacerbating shortage conditions. It makes sense to reference the "real street price" from a consumer perspective, and I applaud your doing that in your reviews during the shortage, but imputing some sort of ulterior motive to Nvidia in this case seems bizarre. Clearly Nvidia expected the cards to go for about $700 at the outset, just as prior generation *80 series cards had gone for more-or-less their MSRP after the initial rush. The Crypto-boom/COVID-era shortage took everyone by surprise.

That is what makes this 4080/4090 release look so terrible. Nvidia wants the crypto-boom feast to continue forever, or at the very least they want the consumer to pick up the tab for Nvidia's decision to over-commit with Ampere stock. I feel like Nvidia sort of hacked the tech-enthusiast press by starting with the halo card, then waiting a month to release this 4080 monstrosity; tech-media outlets thrive on hype, so they graded these cards on a curve for lack of anything else to look at. No offense to W1zzard; I love the guy's work, best tech site on the web, etc--but his comments here speak to my point: he's comparing the 4080 to prior-gen halo products that were explicitly terrible value (3080 Ti and up), and then declaring, "huh, the 4080 doesn't look so bad!"

Ordinarily we would have started with an 80-class card in the 6-700 dollar range. Or let's say $800 to be generous. That then would be measured against prior "mainstream high end" 80-class cards, not measured against ludicrously bad value propositions.

 

[W1zzard]

did sell at MSRP from Best Buy

Absolutely, there's always a small volume set aside for the MSRP, these are smart people. They also demand this from their board partners, yet the reality for the vast majority of people is different

 

[trog100]

The price wasn't fake from Nvidia's point of view, though. Nvidia certainly wasn't pocketing the difference until much later in the crypto-boom, when they started releasing cards with ludicrous MSRPs (or no MSRP at all). How do I know this? Because 3080 FE cards, though rare as hen's teeth, did sell at MSRP from Best Buy. The scalpers were the only ones making signficant money over and above the MSRP, at first. Then the AIBs joined in at some point by simply setting their retail prices skyward (earlier for AMD, IIRC--$1,000+ 6700 XT cards at retail); then Nvidia got into the act.

So I'm not entirely sure what your argument is with regard to Nvidia "faking" the MSRP. Every time a new GPU launches, there's a shortage for a month or two or three. We're all used to that. We're also used to scalpers exacerbating shortage conditions. It makes sense to reference the "real street price" from a consumer perspective, and I applaud your doing that in your reviews during the shortage, but imputing some sort of ulterior motive to Nvidia in this case seems bizarre. Clearly Nvidia expected the cards to go for about $700 at the outset, just as prior generation *80 series cards had gone for more-or-less their MSRP after the initial rush. The Crypto-boom/COVID-era shortage took everyone by surprise.

the price of a product needs to be based on what the market will bear.. if it isnt one of two things can happen.. the product is always out of stock (unavailable) or it gets scalped up to a price the market will bear..

trog

 

[Wasteland]

Absolutely, there's always a small volume set aside for the MSRP, these are smart people. They also demand this from their board partners, yet the reality for the vast majority of people is different

Right, but what does Nvidia get out of that prevarication if they're not profiting from the difference between MSRP and real market price? This is my quibble here. The scalpers were the ones who profited for the first few months. As I said, even the Nvidia AIBs appeared to move much slower in adjusting prices in response to the bull market than AMD's AIBs--quite possibly due to Nvidia policy, as you suggest. So the MSRP originally wasn't fake from the perspective of the people selling the cards.

It was absolutely a "fake" price as far as consumers were concerned. But that isn't what we're discussing here. The question is whether there's a legitimate relationship between e.g. the MSRP for the 3080 and its predecessors, and the MSRP for the 4080, and whether there's a worthwhile discussion to be had about that relationship. The answer, to me, is an obvious "YES."

 

[AusWolf]

It was absolutely a "fake" price as far as consumers were concerned. But that isn't what we're discussing here. The question is whether there's a legitimate relationship between e.g. the MSRP for the 3080 and its predecessors, and the MSRP for the 4080, and whether there's a worthwhile discussion to be had about that relationship. The answer, to me, is an obvious "YES."

I second that.

Right, but what does Nvidia get out of that prevarication if they're not profiting from the difference between MSRP and real market price? This is my quibble here. The scalpers were the ones who profited for the first few months. As I said, even the Nvidia AIBs appeared to move much slower in adjusting prices in response to the bull market than AMD's AIBs--quite possibly due to Nvidia policy, as you suggest. So the MSRP originally wasn't fake from the perspective of the people selling the cards.

Personally, I don't really care about Nvidia or AMD's perspective. I only care about my perspective as a buyer. And my quibble as a buyer is that people who bought graphics cards from ebay scalpers at 2-3x store prices are stupid. If you were in dire need of a graphics card, you could always find a store or two where you could place a pre-order, or call them up and reserve a unit, or in the US, get on Evga's waiting list, or something. Or just buy a cheaper second-hand unit as an intermediate solution. Anything. Everybody knew that the crypto boom wouldn't last forever. Considering real store prices instead of MSRP is fair, but ebay scalper crypto prices are only for stupid people who will buy anything for any price regardless of recommendations. And when I compare store prices of the 3080 and 4080 right now, I see that you have to pay double for 20% more performance.

 

[64K]

I second that.


Personally, I don't really care about Nvidia or AMD's perspective. I only care about my perspective as a buyer. And my quibble as a buyer is that people who bought graphics cards from ebay scalpers at 2-3x store prices are stupid. If you were in dire need of a graphics card, you could always find a store or two where you could place a pre-order, or call them up and reserve a unit, or in the US, get on Evga's waiting list, or something. Or just buy a cheaper second-hand unit as an intermediate solution. Anything. Everybody knew that the crypto boom wouldn't last forever. Considering real store prices instead of MSRP is fair, but ebay scalper crypto prices are only for stupid people who will buy anything for any price regardless of recommendations. And when I compare store prices of the 3080 and 4080 right now, I see that you have to pay double for 20% more performance.

I suspect that the majority of the cards being bought at 2 to 3 times MSRP were miners during the mining boom. I even saw them say that they did that and why they did that on TPU forums. They were making so much money that it was worth it and it was the only way to get a lot of cards quickly unless they knew how to use bots like the scalpers did.

 

[Wasteland]

I second that.


Personally, I don't really care about Nvidia or AMD's perspective. I only care about my perspective as a buyer. And my quibble as a buyer is that people who bought graphics cards from ebay scalpers at 2-3x store prices are stupid. If you were in dire need of a graphics card, you could always find a store or two where you could place a pre-order, or call them up and reserve a unit, or in the US, get on Evga's waiting list, or something. Or just buy a cheaper second-hand unit as an intermediate solution. Anything. Everybody knew that the crypto boom wouldn't last forever. Considering real store prices instead of MSRP is fair, but ebay scalper crypto prices are only for stupid people who will buy anything for any price regardless of recommendations.

Agreed. The only reason I care about Nvidia's motives is that I don't think it's fair to wave away all MSRPs as irrelevant. The 3080's MSRP meant something at the time it was set, just as the MSRPs for its predecessors meant something. Nvidia was as surprised as the rest of us were when the cards started selling for 3-4 times their original asking price during the height of the COVID/crypto-boom era.

Honestly some of the talk on this forum seems to take it as given that the crypto-currency GPU shortage is still at its height. "Prices are what the market will bear!" Really? Wow, excite me with more Econ 101 bromides. Needless to say, Nvidia controls the supply for these cards, and given their absurdly high price point and the reportedly extensive leftover stock of Ampere cards, there's no downside for Nvidia in releasing 40-series cards in a trickle to inflate perceived demand for them. We'll see how things shake out, but the real test would be what Nvidia has thus far refused to do: release mainstream cards at mainstream price points--i.e. volume business. Then, if "real" prices skyrocket, scalpers thrive, etc, only then can you say that the traditional pricing scheme for the GPU market is hopelessly out of date due to insane market demand.

Until then, you're just looking at a sociopathic megacorporation that is butthurt about crypto-boom profits going away. And those profits did go away, incidentally; this is a matter of record.

 

[AusWolf]

Agreed. The only reason I care about Nvidia's motives is that I don't think it's fair to wave away all MSRPs as irrelevant. The 3080's MSRP meant something at the time it was set, just as the MSRPs for its predecessors meant something. Nvidia was as surprised as the rest of us were when the cards started selling for 3-4 times their original asking price during the height of the COVID/crypto-boom era.

Honestly some of the talk on this forum seems to take it as given that the crypto-currency shortage is still at its height. "Prices are what the market will bear!" Really? Wow, excite me with more Econ 101 bromides. Needless to say, Nvidia controls the supply for these cards, and given their absurdly high price point and the reportedly extensive leftover stock of Ampere cards, there's no downside for Nvidia in releasing cards in a trickle to inflate perceived demand for them. We'll see how things shake out, but the real test would be what Nvidia has thus far refused to do: release mainstream cards at mainstream price points. Then, if "real" prices skyrocket, scalpers thrive, etc, only then can you say that the traditional pricing scheme for the GPU market is hopelessly out of date due to insane market demand.

Until then, you're just looking at a sociopathic megacorporation that is butthurt about crypto-boom profits going away.

Besides, if you wave away MSRPs as irrelevant, then you shouldn't be looking at the 4080 at its MSRP, either. Saying that the 4080 is a lot cheaper in stores now than the 3080 was on ebay during the crypto boom is an extremely biased statement that has no value for a present-day buyer. One should always compare real prices at the time of writing. Right now, the 3080 costs half as much as the 4080, but only performs 20% worse. That's the reality of it.

 

[W1zzard]

One should always compare real prices at the time of writing.

That's what I always do. I look up all the price points 1 or 2 days before the review

Right now, the 3080 costs half as much as the 4080, but only performs 20% worse. That's the reality of it.

http://imgur.com/XjevCDW

Source for 20%? I see 33% or 49%, depending how you look at the difference

 

[AusWolf]

That's what I always do. I look up all the price points 1 or 2 days before the review

That's nice. That's why I think that your price-to-performance graph speaks for itself.

Source for 20%? I see 33% or 49%, depending how you look at the difference

The source is the relative performance graph at 1080p. I know, 1080p isn't really relevant at this price point, but even at 4K, the 3080 delivers 67% of the performance of the 4080 while only costing half as much. If the 3080 costs £739.98 at Scan UK, the 4080 should cost £1,100* at most. Instead, the cheapest model actually costs £1,354.99, which is £250 more than its worth. This value increases as you decrease resolution, making the 4080 an even worse value.

Edit: *It should only cost this much if we assume a 1:1 price-to-performance ratio in the generational leap, which shouldn't be the case. Around £900 would be more realistic.

 

[HTC]

How about checking the previous 2 generation cards and their respective increases, when applicable?

For example, in the case of the 4080: check the price difference between 1080 and 2080, 2080 and 3080 and compare it to the price difference between 3080 and 4080.

- if the difference is roughly similar in all cases, then the value is roughly the same
- if it's much smaller, then it's great value
- if it's much larger, then it's poor value

 

[N3M3515]

That is simply not true, I have never seen any such NVIDIA guideline, nor has NVIDIA ever put any "or else" pressure on me.

The award is given, because it's the 2nd fastest card that exists, with the world's best power efficiency, with amazing performance in both raster and RT, and great features, at a terrible price. and like I said .. DO NOT BUY IT IF YOU DONT LIKE IT. It is still an unbelievably amazing card

If I give you a $1200 coupon for a GPU that expires next week, what would you buy today? Wait for the Radeons? Sure, definitely, you really should, and I'm surprised that so many people already know how well the product works... but I'm afraid that in the end most people will still buy NVIDIA (like in the last decade) or hope that AMD's success will force NVIDIA to lower their prices, which can definitely happen

I see, so in your world the card can cost whatever, as long as it is fast, efficient, has features, you give it the highest award. Price has no meaning or no inherence in the score.
I thought price was one of the most important metrics when one has to qualify a product.

 

[ThrashZone]

That is an interesting idea

Edit: Now looking at this chart and wondering "what's good value? where's the cutoff? isn't its "value" (price/perf, and that doesnt take into account efficiency and other things like features) actually comparable to the competing options (3090 ti, 3090, 3080 ti), just "price" is very high" ?

Hi,
Don't you use different color editor choice awards ?

 

[Gica]

Relevancy? I have no idea where you are going with this? How is this a justified means to stop people from voicing their disappointment with current prices? Stick to the same page please and stop skipping to page 324 where skippy skipped one too many skips and lost his way home.

Below you have a material in which I used the minimum video card (100W power, probably performance of GTX 1660 non Ti) and the processor set with Turbo OFF, PL1&2 65W (performance ~i5-10400). In captures you have a ~600$ configuration for cpu, gpu, MoBo and RAM, a configuration of components that definitely offers more performance than the chosen solution for video. New, not second hand.
Don't understand what you don't understand? How many times do I have to repeat that you don't need a mega-ultra-insane system to play?
Does something seem expensive to you? Choose a cheaper option. And you play!
Tragedy is when you need an organ for transplant, it costs $100,000 and you don't have the money. Then, the cheap option is the trick.
It's tragic when you can't pay bills, food, education. Then, the cheap option is the street.
What is so hard to understand?

 

[Bwaze]

@W1zzard, how do you comment the fact that days after the RTX 4080 launched almost every model is still in stock and available?

Geizhals.eu RTX 4080 availability

WCCFTech has an article about that:

Nobody Wants NVIDIA’s $1199 US GeForce RTX 4080: Despite Lower Shipments, Retailers & Stores Are Stocked With Cards

It seems like nobody really gives a damn if the card is recommended from TechPowerUp...

That is simply not true, I have never seen any such NVIDIA guideline, nor has NVIDIA ever put any "or else" pressure on me.

The award is given, because it's the 2nd fastest card that exists, with the world's best power efficiency, with amazing performance in both raster and RT, and great features, at a terrible price. and like I said .. DO NOT BUY IT IF YOU DONT LIKE IT. It is still an unbelievably amazing card

That is simply playing ignorant. Yes, the card is fast, second fastest in the world, woo hoo! But that happened with every GPU release so far from the early 1990' on. How do you comment on the fact that if we had such price increases every generation, a mid to high end card from Nvidia would now cost approximately half a million dollars? How unbelievably amazing would that be, right?

Again, conclusion paints the release if it's something miraculous - when in fact it offers the same kind of uplift as most of the releases in past 10 years, apart from Turing. But saying it like that kind of paints the $500 price hike in a bad light, doesn't it?

If I give you a $1200 coupon for a GPU that expires next week, what would you buy today? Wait for the Radeons? Sure, definitely, you really should, and I'm surprised that so many people already know how well the product works... but I'm afraid that in the end most people will still buy NVIDIA (like in the last decade) or hope that AMD's success will force NVIDIA to lower their prices, which can definitely happen

Where do I send you the address for the coupon? I can't say what I'll do, I'm terrible with hypothetical situations. ;-)