Why does everyone hate the 4080?

[the54thvoid]

They can't release the 4070 (Ti) before 30-series stock is gone from stores, otherwise they either 1. end up with a 4080-like fiasco, or 2. 30-series stock will never clear. As a matter of fact, they should have waited with the 4080 as well - they're just too greedy to do such a thing right before the RDNA 3 launch.

Yeah, the last gen is still being propped up at unreasonable prices, to keep Ada at it's crazy price point. In context, 3090ti, 3090, and generally, the 3080ti are all at or above £1k in the UK. That's three last gen, no longer top tier cards at £1k or above. Which, of course, means the humble 3080 is still not lower than it's original MSRP.

I appreciate Nvidia are beholden to make money for their shareholders but as a company, they have to be realistic and also wary of the backlash that is happening.

 

[AusWolf]

Yeah, the last gen is still being propped up at unreasonable prices, to keep Ada at it's crazy price point. In context, 3090ti, 3090, and generally, the 3080ti are all at or above £1k in the UK. That's three last gen, no longer top tier cards at £1k or above. Which, of course, means the humble 3080 is still not lower than it's original MSRP.

I appreciate Nvidia are beholden to make money for their shareholders but as a company, they have to be realistic and also wary of the backlash that is happening.

Agreed. I think they were expecting people to look at the 4080 and think "ooh, it's a bit too steep, I'll just get a 3090 instead". They never expected them to go "f*** you, Nvidia, I'm not playing this game anymore".

 

[GhostRyder]

They can't release the 4070 (Ti) before 30-series stock is gone from stores, otherwise they either 1. end up with a 4080-like fiasco, or 2. 30-series stock will never clear. As a matter of fact, they should have waited with the 4080 as well - they're just too greedy to do such a thing right before the RDNA 3 launch.

I thought I heard that card was expected Q1 2023, I think you are correct they are being slow because they have a ton of the old stock, but I think they are going to have their hands tied soon because of competition. I mean realistically, I think they have too much to really burn through in a reasonable amount of time (Just my opinion) and something has to give considering the used market for these cards.

Yeah, the last gen is still being propped up at unreasonable prices, to keep Ada at it's crazy price point. In context, 3090ti, 3090, and generally, the 3080ti are all at or above £1k in the UK. That's three last gen, no longer top tier cards at £1k or above. Which, of course, means the humble 3080 is still not lower than it's original MSRP.

I appreciate Nvidia are beholden to make money for their shareholders but as a company, they have to be realistic and also wary of the backlash that is happening.

Totally agree, I see prices on used are getting decent but the new cards seem to be holding firm on the top end. I mean I think at this point they really need to cut the old cards prices and just move on because with how tight people are holding onto their wallets and the fact 4XXX series is out people just arent going to drop money on previous generation stuff that is priced as high as it is. I mean I considered grabbing a 3090ti or something for a decent price if they came down but for the prices I might as well get a 4080 or 4090.

 

[ARF]

lol

Gaming PC with Radeon RX 6900XT GPU can still cost less than GeForce RTX 4080 alone - VideoCardz.com

Everyone must hate it now even more lol

 

[TriCyclops]

EDIT:
Since people continue commenting and sometimes recommend the same thing to me, please note the following message I had posted yesterday.
Regardless, feel free to continue discussing this matter as you please. Turned out to be an interesting topic.


Original post:
Hi everyone,

I've been seeing everyone BASHING on the 4080, honestly, for not apparent reason.
The main argument is: The 3080's MSRP is 699$, the 4080 is 1199$. nVidia is a greedy company.

Now here's my (logical?) counter-argument:

1. The 4080 is better than even a 3090 Ti which was released at an MSRP of 1,999$. People were not as negative towards the 3090 Ti as they are over the 4080.
2. The 4080 is much closer to the 3080 Ti in terms of CUDE Cores and VRAM, and then 3080 Ti was released at the exact MSRP of 1,199$ as the 4080.
   I assume the 4080 12GB was intended to be the "real" 4080, and the 4080 16GB the 4080 Ti? If nVidia would have simply called the 4080 16GB version a "4080 Ti" would people not be as pissed as they are?
3. The current market is awful, allowing nVidia to basically do whatever they want. Reality check, "courtesy" of pcpartpicker:
   1. Want a 3090? Pay 1,298$+ (only 1 card at that price). ~13-23% slower than the 4080 for ~8% more money.
   2. Want a 3090 Ti? Pay 1,639$+ (only 1 card at that price). ~9-14% slower than the 4080 for 36% more money.
   3. Want a 4090? Pay 2,079$+ (only 1 card at that price - the next one is 2,199$). ~5-25% faster than the 4080 for 73%-83% more money.
   4. Or frantically refresh websites until (maybe) some website sells them at MSRP. Maybe.

And on a more personal note and a bit more details about my thought process here:

Yes - it's very justified for companies to spike their prices. nVidia isn't some charity organization intended to give back to the community. They are here to make money and please the investors first and foremost. If that means increasing the prices dramatically due to numerous reasons, such as: extremely high demand, shortage of chips in the industry, increased prices of the workforce, materials, development process and shipment, no competition, and purely because they can - they will do it.

Whether you (the user) like it or not makes 0 difference to them, since they have done their research (they have people smarter than many of us working on exactly that) and know it will sell either way due to the current market situation. They can only make X GPUs a year, knowing very well the vast majority of them will sell. Why sell them for 699$ a piece if it'll sell the exact same way for 1199$ a piece?

Is it ethical / good for consumers? Nope and nope.

Is it something that was done in the past? Only a million times by a million different companies. Tesla has been doing it for years.. Does that stop people from buying Teslas? Not really. They are still selling far more than they can produce. Only now people with less money can't afford it. Did you see Elon Musk crying about all those people who can't afford Teslas? Didn't think so.

Until nVidia produces more GPUs than they can sell, prices will continue rising. Until AMD/Intel doesn't produce anything worthwhile and competitive, prices will continue rising. Until scalpers will be dealt with, price will continue rising. This is a very very basic demand and supply issue.

This problem won't be fixed just because xxx_insert_username_here_xxx can't afford a product, or thinks a private company is doing "unethical" things. They have enough customers without them, they've done their research. It being sold out very quickly just proves it they were not wrong.

Thoughts?

Full disclosure:
OP had bought 2 RTX 4080's at MSRP for 2 different builds and doesn't understand all the fuss and hate around it.

it's too expensive

 

[ARF]

Now here's my (logical?) counter-argument:

1. The 4080 is better than even a 3090 Ti which was released at an MSRP of 1,999$. People were not as negative towards the 3090 Ti as they are over the 4080.

This is the opposite of how things had worked before and the chain of events which led to progress.
If you think deeper, you will understand that what you are showing is extremely unsustainable and if they followed this logic, the RTX 480 should have cost 100 000 $ by now.

 

[sepheronx]

Agreed. I think they were expecting people to look at the 4080 and think "ooh, it's a bit too steep, I'll just get a 3090 instead". They never expected them to go "f*** you, Nvidia, I'm not playing this game anymore".

Not many people are telling Jenson to pound sand. Instead most are still on their knees and saying "please Jenson, all over my face!

We got members here who will buy the most expensive gaming gpu every 2 years. There are more than enough people all over like that. Nvidia doesn't care and will continue the trend of expensive GPU's. AMD will capitalize on selling it for slightly cheaper but still overpriced too.

Gaming PC's will either be for the rich or second hand. Even if Nogamestation 5 and Xbox Series NG (No games) has no real titles worth a damn, it is back to being a cheaper and better option now.

 

[Vayra86]

Not many people are telling Jenson to pound sand. Instead most are still on their knees and saying "please Jenson, all over my face!

We got members here who will buy the most expensive gaming gpu every 2 years. There are more than enough people all over like that. Nvidia doesn't care and will continue the trend of expensive GPU's. AMD will capitalize on selling it for slightly cheaper but still overpriced too.

Gaming PC's will either be for the rich or second hand. Even if Nogamestation 5 and Xbox Series NG (No games) has no real titles worth a damn, it is back to being a cheaper and better option now.

Strange then how did that work then when the average price of a gaming PC would easily reach above 1000 dollars 10-20 years ago? Somehow gaming (also on PC) is a growth market throughout the last two decades, and continues to be. You can build a much more capable gaming PC today for your 1200 dollars, in fact, you can hit straight for the sub top today. As shown above. You can even pick your resolution of choice, and if that is 1080p, you can run anything with a GPU from below midrange. That's unique in the last 20 years, by comparison; mid range would always mean dialing back settings. Today you can go ultra 1080p with a weaker card, and you could even run 1440p. I run 3440x1440 on a GPU like that (GTX 1080, now equal to the lowest parts in RDNA2) and its working just fine...

PC gaming is dead, Episode 167601610 - How PC gaming yet again didn't die

You have to understand that gaming performance has pretty much plateaud; almost every GPU can provide steady 60 FPS gaming, most can do high refresh at a resolution like 1080p, CPUs all carry sufficient threads to run anything throughout almost the entire product stack as well. The only real 'challenges' left for gaming PCs are running 4K and RT. So yeah, there is a small group jumping on every latest greatest to push that envelope, power to them. The immense, vast majority though is content not doing so at all, or at least, they will only do so if the price is right. Why do you think this 4080 backlash happens? Exactly because of that: peak pricing leaks to lower parts which kills upgrade paths for that larger group. But are they gaming less for it? I don't think so

The PC gaming market does NOT rely on hardware, the market has been heavily saturated hardware wise for decades. PC Gaming, relies on games. Content. And there has never been more content released than there is today and in the last 10 years or so. Nothing is slowing down here contrary to what some FUD mongerers might lead you to believe, to boost sales.

 

[Omga4000]

Today you can go ultra 1080p with a weaker card, and you could even run 1440p. I run 3440x1440

I'm running a GTX 1070 @ 1440p and even silly games like Dota / Path of Exile are a mess.
Definitely far from ultra settings for me.

 

[Vayra86]

I'm running a GTX 1070 @ 1440p and even silly games like Dota / Path of Exile are a mess.
Definitely far from ultra settings for me.

I run DOTA2 at 3440x1440 all maxed out at 70~100 FPS... Surely the gap can't be that large to call it a mess?
PoE runs fine too at native.

TW Warhammer 3 was the first game where I felt like falling short a little, dipping to 30-35 FPS on the map and 40 ish in combat. With a few settings backed down from ultra, as well.

I don't use AA anymore though at this PPI/view distance, the benefit is negligible.

Maybe a 1070 is short on VRAM/bandwidth at 1440p?

 

[Omga4000]

all maxed out at 70~100 FPS

I really have no idea why I can't get near it. I maxed out my settings just to take a picture for you.

All it takes is for me to open up the new Diretide 2022 Collector's Cache page (where it's showing all sets at once) and my entire PC goes to hell.

Interestingly, the FPS isn't "terrible", but I am experiencing such enormous stutters that I can't deal with it.
Big teamfights are also near-impossible to handle and I often find myself dead without ever seeing how it happened.

PC latency of almost 1.4 seconds (?)
That's the first time I'm actually seeing it, will dig deeper. Perhaps the GPU isn't the issue here.

Note: I'm using borderless window mode. Going exclusive fullscreen does help a bit, but I despise it.

 

[Vayra86]

I really have no idea why I can't get near it. I maxed out my settings just to take a picture for you.

All it takes is for me to open up the new Diretide 2022 Collector's Cache page (where it's showing all sets at once) and my entire PC goes to hell.
View attachment 271380

Interestingly, the FPS isn't "terrible", but I am experiencing such enormous stutters that I can't deal with it.
Big teamfights are also near-impossible to handle and I often find myself dead without ever seeing how it happened.

PC latency of almost 1.4 seconds (?)
That's the first time I'm actually seeing it, will dig deeper. Perhaps the GPU isn't the issue here.

Note: I'm using borderless window mode. Going exclusive fullscreen does help a bit, but I despise it.

This is just that godawful mess that DOTA 2 is now to peddle skins, more so than GPU performance I think. I've noticed slowdowns in DOTA since recently as well, but only in the menu screen/shops, and LOTS of buggy behaviour. I got errors returned from activating my free battle pass and the other goodies as well. It only confirms that I played the game right since Dota Allstars; not spending a cent on it. I just try to click the Play button after logging in, and don't dive into the horrible mess of screens, stats and armory. I have the battle pass now and indeed all menu behaviour is/feels heavier, slower. But in game its all peachy

Quite possible that it pushes a 1070 over the edge. I'm also on borderless btw

 

[Omga4000]

I appreciate Nvidia are beholden to make money for their shareholders but as a company, they have to be realistic and also wary of the backlash that is happening.

They are a monopoly, it's a very difficult situation for consumers.
People want to game at higher resolutions, using higher presets (high-ultra), play VR, enable ray tracing, etc..
AMD can't really compete with them at the high end, and Intel is not even worth mentioning here.
So consumers are forced to decide between giving up on their wishes or succumb to the monopoly that is nVidia.

The backlash on the 4080 was only the beginning, and it seems to be right at the edge of "we'll let that one slide".
What I mean by that is that the ridiculous pricing of the 4080 won't make people boycott the company and stop buying nVidia cards altogether, it'll just make them not buy the 4080 specifically.
That being said, if they continue pushing it (with the 4070 maybe) the community will definitely respond accordingly and it may lead to irreversible damages to the company.

I hope the shareholders are aware of what's going on.

 

[Vayra86]

They are a monopoly, it's a very difficult situation for consumers.
People want to game at higher resolutions, using higher presets (high-ultra), play VR, enable ray tracing, etc..
AMD can't really compete with them at the high end, and Intel is not even worth mentioning here.

This is a misconception, and its why we think there is non-elastic demand.
The demand for GPUs and computer parts overall is almost fully elastic. Especially in the gaming space. The numbers prove it. Inflation up, hardware sales down. This isn't a loaf of bread, its luxury goods.

Game PCs are versatile. The only thing that drives demand in a big way for hot GPUs is a killer app. Where are they? There is not a single game 'must play' right now with heavy RT/high quality assets, and those that are, can run sans RT just fine on the vast majority of GPUs since Turing. And even run playable frames with it. Even on RDNA2 offerings, btw.

If the price isn't right, people simply won't buy. They'll postpone, unless there is content they must play.
Nvidia can only control the market demand in two ways: they can bring attractive products, or they can push attractive content. On the latter, they've been dropping bags of money and engineer trips to developers to get them to implement RT features on top of their game. On the former, Nvidia prices itself out of the market.
Past generations Nvidia had a third way to push demand: mining. When GPUs recoup themselves over time, price is irrelevant. Apparently they took that principle for granted and ran with it for ADA.

This isn't going anywhere unless products get acceptable pricing; mining is unprofitable in most parts of the target markets now especially with current energy prices.

For consumers, its brutally simple. They just wait on a nice deal, one that feels right to them. Not difficult at all.

This sheds some light on where gaming 'volume' is truly at.

Most Played Games in 2024 - Ranked by Average Monthly Players

Well played.

twinfinite.net

Not a single one pushes hard on 'RT' or fantastic graphics; there's barely even 2022 released content in it. Graphics are truly an afterthought, first and foremost is gameplay/concept: multiplayer/shooter, competitive. Competitive gaming relies on high FPS, not high graphics, in fact, the more competitive you get, the less frills you want on screen.

I can only laugh at the epeen top-end that thinks they matter to the market. They're being played Nvidia even says 'meant to be'...

 

[QHNHL]

Why do people consider this to be such an enormous gap in performance? I mean - the price difference is 33%.

I saw this thread by accident. When I saw 33% price different, the math failed so hard that I had to create an account just to comment
It is a 72% price hike. < 30% up lift, but coat 70% more I'd rather not get robbed by Jensen. It must be his leather jacket addiction that he's blatantly trying to rob us with 4080 =))
I mean paying stupid money for a flagship is fine. It's a flagship. It's meant for people with stupid money, enthusiast grade for the same price per performance as a flagship is a different matter. In addition, Jensen would have gotten away with being scummy too, until 408012gb failed in performance that is
CPU's are the perfect example of why Nvidia's logic for these prices is utter horsecrap. For the past 5 years, AMD and Intel have traded blows with CPU's, and every generation we've seen double digit gains. How much is an 8 core CPU today, vs 5 years ago? Roughly the SAME price as it was in 2017, for EXPONENTIALLY faster CPU's! Flagship cards being expensive is a non-issue, if lower down the stack cards are affordable, but this is not going to be the case. They already showed their hand with the "other 4080" that was "unlaunched." They literally tried to sell you a 4070 for $900. These prices are an issue.

Doodoo card , doodoo performance , doodoo price Once again, I'd rather not get robbed by Jensen.

I now noticed that comment was made a while ago. Hopefully the math got cleared up.

 

[thejynxed]

They are a monopoly, it's a very difficult situation for consumers.
People want to game at higher resolutions, using higher presets (high-ultra), play VR, enable ray tracing, etc..
AMD can't really compete with them at the high end, and Intel is not even worth mentioning here.
So consumers are forced to decide between giving up on their wishes or succumb to the monopoly that is nVidia.

The backlash on the 4080 was only the beginning, and it seems to be right at the edge of "we'll let that one slide".
What I mean by that is that the ridiculous pricing of the 4080 won't make people boycott the company and stop buying nVidia cards altogether, it'll just make them not buy the 4080 specifically.
That being said, if they continue pushing it (with the 4070 maybe) the community will definitely respond accordingly and it may lead to irreversible damages to the company.

I hope the shareholders are aware of what's going on.

I wouldn't quite count Intel down and out, with their first discrete card posting respectable 5600x-5700x performance numbers using barebones drivers. I think they really want to put a dent into this market, and they keep poaching talent away from both AMD and nVidia.

 

[Bomby569]

lol

Gaming PC with Radeon RX 6900XT GPU can still cost less than GeForce RTX 4080 alone - VideoCardz.com


Everyone must hate it now even more lol

We all get it, but at these prices only the whales are getting them, and that's the wrong crowd to be convinced to buy a last gen card.

 

[Vayra86]

There isn't a shortage?
How come 3080's, 3090's and 3090 TI's are still being sold well above MSRP, then?
Even second-hand cards aren't that much of a steal.

The last point makes sense, but I once again raise the question: What are my options?
Wait another 4 years in the hopes the market stabilizes (maybe)?
New card, current market prices, right here and right now - what's the best bang for the buck?


That's the sad truth, yes. Do you foresee this changing anytime soon and GPUs going back to their low prices?


I would agree this is true if people hadn't tried convincing others not to purchase the 4080.
It's not a matter of "hey, the price-to-performance ratio is the same as a 3080 so if you have the money go buy it", it's strictly a "whoever buys this card is a clown".
That's just pure hate right there, and I am having this discussion in more than 1 forum.

Well, yes. I had mentioned lack of competition in my original post.
All the things you've mentioned are valid points for the price spike, isn't it?
You pay for things you may not receive elsewhere. You can't expect a Cadillac to cost as much as a Chevy.
If AMD made truly competitive cards we wouldn't be having this discussion right now and everyone would be happy

I disagree with your disagreement
All I want is to see the numbers, really. I am very open to change my mind.
So far I was only given 1 valid point, which is the awful 16-pin connector.
Everything else I am just too dumb to understand, I guess. If you show me the numbers I'll probably agree.
I am not here to fight / say that I am right, I am truly here to expand my knowledge, discuss and hear other peoples' opinion.
Sorry if my original comment appeared harsh, that was not the intention.


As someone who isn't fully invested into the fine details, this doesn't tell me much.
I am looking at the end results - how much FPS am I getting? How does it compare to other things on the market?
If it's an 128-bit or 256-bit doesn't matter all that much to me, as long as the final result is good.
Do you mind explaining why this one is bad?

The mistake is wanting to buy cards AT launch, when the market is about to gain new movement. Right now you pay the novelty premium, and older cards are as you correctly said, the basis for this pricing.

I was looking at a €789,- Asrock formula 6900XT earlier today. Looks great right.. but then you consider there is an 899 and 999 msrp successor coming out with major perf increase. Not so great then.

Im waiting and with Christmas coming up (inflated demand!) it looks like January/Feb is the best moment: AMDs cards have had their launch bump, inventory is restocked post holiday, and the market dies down.

Edit: lol just realized this was a page 1 post anyway.

 

[the54thvoid]

Your mistake is wanting to buy cards AT launch, when the market is about to gain new movement. Right now you pay the novelty premium, and older cards are as you correctly said, the basis for this pricing.

I was looking at a €789,- Asrock formula 6900XT earlier today. Looks great right.. but then you consider there is an 899 and 999 msrp successor coming out with major perf increase. Not so great then.

Im waiting and with Christmas coming up (inflated demand!) it looks like January/Feb is the best moment: AMDs cards have had their launch bump, inventory is restocked post holiday, and the market dies down.

Ninja'd my thinking. I was trying to find the right forum to say just that - it's crazy that etailers are pricing 6900's and 6950's at £850-950 when the cards that will undoubtedly thrash them are coming in at roughly the same price point. I think there's still an ASrock 6950XTU for £1999 on one of the sites. I mean.... wtf?

Edit - my mistake - it was a 6900XTU (there was no 6950XTU). Also it's finally dropped from £1999.99 to £1199.99.

 

[AnotherReader]

Ninja'd my thinking. I was trying to find the right forum to say just that - it's crazy that etailers are pricing 6900's and 6950's at £850-950 when the cards that will undoubtedly thrash them are coming in at roughly the same price point. I think there's still an ASrock 6950XTU for £1999 on one of the sites. I mean.... wtf?

Edit - my mistake - it was a 6900XTU (there was no 6950XTU). Also it's finally dropped from £1999.99 to £1199.99.

Over here, the prices are much more reasonable. The Sapphire Pulse 6800 XT could be found as low as $700 during the current sale and the ASRock Phantom Gaming D 6900 XT was $850. That works out to USD 522 and 634 respectively.

 

[AusWolf]

This is a misconception, and its why we think there is non-elastic demand.
The demand for GPUs and computer parts overall is almost fully elastic. Especially in the gaming space. The numbers prove it. Inflation up, hardware sales down. This isn't a loaf of bread, its luxury goods.

Game PCs are versatile. The only thing that drives demand in a big way for hot GPUs is a killer app. Where are they? There is not a single game 'must play' right now with heavy RT/high quality assets, and those that are, can run sans RT just fine on the vast majority of GPUs since Turing. And even run playable frames with it. Even on RDNA2 offerings, btw.

If the price isn't right, people simply won't buy. They'll postpone, unless there is content they must play.
Nvidia can only control the market demand in two ways: they can bring attractive products, or they can push attractive content. On the latter, they've been dropping bags of money and engineer trips to developers to get them to implement RT features on top of their game. On the former, Nvidia prices itself out of the market.
Past generations Nvidia had a third way to push demand: mining. When GPUs recoup themselves over time, price is irrelevant. Apparently they took that principle for granted and ran with it for ADA.

This isn't going anywhere unless products get acceptable pricing; mining is unprofitable in most parts of the target markets now especially with current energy prices.

For consumers, its brutally simple. They just wait on a nice deal, one that feels right to them. Not difficult at all.

This sheds some light on where gaming 'volume' is truly at.

Most Played Games in 2024 - Ranked by Average Monthly Players

Well played.

twinfinite.net

Not a single one pushes hard on 'RT' or fantastic graphics; there's barely even 2022 released content in it. Graphics are truly an afterthought, first and foremost is gameplay/concept: multiplayer/shooter, competitive. Competitive gaming relies on high FPS, not high graphics, in fact, the more competitive you get, the less frills you want on screen.

I can only laugh at the epeen top-end that thinks they matter to the market. They're being played Nvidia even says 'meant to be'...

I agree, except for two things: top-end Nvidia products will always sell. People buy them because they're the fastest, and not because it makes sense. The second thing is, there are people who will always buy Nvidia, because they don't like change. There aren't many folks who would say the same about AMD. The question is, how much can Nvidia build on top-end product buyers, and other fans?

My end line is what you said about playability. Modern games don't need you to have the fastest of the fastest. With a 1080p monitor, even a 1060 is still fine most of the time. It's easy to hate these companies because of their overly expensive products, but the thing is, we don't really need them (and that's probably why they're so expensive).

I wouldn't quite count Intel down and out, with their first discrete card posting respectable 5600x-5700x performance numbers using barebones drivers. I think they really want to put a dent into this market, and they keep poaching talent away from both AMD and nVidia.

For Intel GPUs to be competitive, they have to be available first.

Ninja'd my thinking. I was trying to find the right forum to say just that - it's crazy that etailers are pricing 6900's and 6950's at £850-950 when the cards that will undoubtedly thrash them are coming in at roughly the same price point. I think there's still an ASrock 6950XTU for £1999 on one of the sites. I mean.... wtf?

Edit - my mistake - it was a 6900XTU (there was no 6950XTU). Also it's finally dropped from £1999.99 to £1199.99.

It might not be a good time to score a 6900 or 6950 XT right now (unless you get it discounted), but I'm happy with my recent purchase of the 6750 XT, as the 7700 XT is still at least half a year away.

 

[MarsM4N]

Percentage difference between first and second case is 71.4% vs. 97.1%. Improvement but not that large.

I still think that we don't need ray-tracing at this stage with available technologies only "4nm" and worse.

Exactly. The only 2 selling points Nvidia has going is superior gaming performance (at eye watering prices) & Ray Traycing.

The latter, Ray Tracing, might soon be lost when game developers switch to Software Raytracing. It has better performance and doesn't need any Nvidia RT cores (hardware raytracing). Only rasterization performance matters then. Nvidia has tons of RT supported games, but it only delivers in a handful of games. And remember, most games are cross developed for consoles. Consoles (PS5 & xBox X) got no RT cores, so they have to put their horses on software raytracing in the future. It will for sure be a game changer.

Unreal Engine 5 Lumen vs Ray Tracing: Which One is Better?

Epic’s Unreal Engine 4 was one of the most popular game engines of the last generation. It was widely used by AAA giants like EA, Ubisoft, and Microsoft, as well as tons of indie studios. With Unreal Engine 5 and its Lumen and Nanite technologies, Epic is looking to extend its dominance in the...

www.hardwaretimes.com

 

[bug]

Exactly. The only 2 selling points Nvidia has going is superior gaming performance (at eye watering prices) & Ray Traycing.

The latter, Ray Tracing, might soon be lost when game developers switch to Software Raytracing. It has better performance and doesn't need any Nvidia RT cores (hardware raytracing). Only rasterization performance matters then. Nvidia has tons of RT supported games, but it only delivers in a handful of games. And remember, most games are cross developed for consoles. Consoles (PS5 & xBox X) got no RT cores, so they have to put their horses on software raytracing in the future. It will for sure be a game changer.

Unreal Engine 5 Lumen vs Ray Tracing: Which One is Better?

Epic’s Unreal Engine 4 was one of the most popular game engines of the last generation. It was widely used by AAA giants like EA, Ubisoft, and Microsoft, as well as tons of indie studios. With Unreal Engine 5 and its Lumen and Nanite technologies, Epic is looking to extend its dominance in the...

www.hardwaretimes.com

That only handles a subset of Global Illumination. As noted in the article, it can't handle BVH very well, precisely because of "missing" hardware. And Global Illumination itself is just one part of RTRT.

 

[eidairaman1]

Pricing over 500 for a top gpu is a waste of time.

 

[bug]

Pricing over 500 for a top gpu is a waste of time.

That's my general feeling, too. I mean, build luxury GPUs and sell to those who can afford them for whatever you wish. But do not force the casual player to pay more than $500 (ok, maybe $600).