Rumor: GeForce RTX 3090 Now Would Cost 1399 USD

25% over the 2080Ti across the board including Ray Tracing? If so that means 78T (RTX2080Ti) + 25% = 98T Ray Ops (rounded up).
Microsoft's slide yesterday about the X series APU shows 4T Ray OPS per CU. So 52 * 4 = 208T Ray Ops for the console!

Something doesn't add up.

 

I'm looking at replacing my 980s with two 3xxx early next year, but my absolute price limit is 1000 € per card, and I'd rather not even pay that.

 

If they give you a sli connector for cards below the top.

 

Again, Nvidia is crazy if they think that they are going to sell crap with this recession.

 

Prices won't go down anymore. Now they are used to build expensive cards, and at best you will have very fast cheap mid-low range card.

 

They will, the 1% that go with those high end cards lost nothing during covid times, they prob even made more money lol

 

Still too much! Best case scenario is that it costs no more than 1000$ (preferably a little bit less than 2080Ti which was immensely overpriced).

 

As much as I loathe the pricing, one cant ignore the fact that this is a lot more hardware than Turing. They cant manufacture this level of performance at the same cost it did Turing.

 

If the 3090 has the rumored 24GB of memory, then its more of a replacement for the Titan RTX, which makes the price actually go down in comparison.
The 2080 Ti might not have an immediate proper replacement - a 3080 Ti between the 3080 and the 3090 might come later. Remember older generations when they didn't launch with the Ti at the top right away?

The new GDDR6X memory is still going to be expensive, and 24GB of it to boot.

Would it feel better if they name it Titan instead of 3090, and change nothing else?

 

What's the next "rumor" ? $1199 ?

And since everybody seems to be spreading them, here's my set of "rumors" (which I pulled right out of my a... or maybe not)


This will be "21" series, not 30.

RTX Titan 21: $999 ( 24 GB ) - May be launched later
RTX 2190: $799 ( 20 GB ) - Same chip as Titan, some cut shaders
RTX 2180: $599 ( 16 GB ) - The usual "80" class chip, but now with double the memory
RTX 2170: $499 ( 14 GB ) - Cut "80" class chip
RTX 2160: $349 ( 8 GB ) - The "60" class chip now with 8 GB instead of 6
RTX 2150: $249 ( 7 GB ) - Cut "60" class chip

We'll see how close to (or far from) reality these will be ...

 

In my home country, back in the 20th century, there used to be these wise men, soothsayers, who would predict the weather of the upcoming summer well beforehand. They would say they based it on old knowledge of patterns, signs in the nature, behavior of animals (one guy was called the Frog Professor because he relied on frogs). These guys also had a reputation of being correct. It's because they worked for decades and everybody only remembered the few times they, amazingly, happened to be correct. All of these hardware spec leakers and rumour-mongers are exactly the same.

 

Well the rumor according to chiphell chatter was supposedly that Jensen Huang had set these prices himself (incl for the 3080, 3070). But yeah, anyone can pull numbers out their a$$, so I guess they had to inject a bit of 'legitamcy' by saying JHH was the one.

 

Makes perfect sense if they are going to market it as the first 8k capable gaming card

 

Another day, another rumor...

I'll take two!!!

 

There's literally changes all the time

x750
x850
x900
x950
GX2
GT
GTX
Ultra
GS
Ti
RTX
MX
LE
XT(Yes, nvidia has used XT, not just AMD)
GTO
SE
Super
Among many others

They are always changing what they name their cards, it's nothing new, to be alarmed by anything makes zero sense.

On this note as well: People expecting a x900 card to be a dual card because "it always has been before", i give you:

5900
5950
7900 (non-GX2)
7950 (non-GX2)

It's a more recent thing that x900 or x90 were designated dual-GPU cards, and can change at any time, which is why this is related to the above message as well.

 

Can't wait for the people who will inevitably call this pricing "reasonable" and "following inflation".

 

When you consider the fact that 14 years ago, the 8800 Ultra was released for an equivalent of $1060(and was intended to be released for an equivalent of $1300), with a die size of 484mm2, on a node that wasn't cutting edge (hence the reason the 7000 series has 90nm products on it, same as the 8800 ultra, and the 8000 series had 65nm products in it), as well as was not using a cutting edge memory technology (GDDR3 had been used for over 2 years by the time the 8800 Ultra was released)....yeah, you can make the argument that if it's even $1400, it's not that far off of reasonable, given historical information. There's many other reasons why costs would increase as well, bumping up prices, other then what i have listed.

Doesn't mean you have to like it.

Sometimes i really wonder about the technology world.

We want better, bigger, monstrous technologies. We want companies to push the boundaries. We want companies to look at what they have released before, and take it one step further at least every single time, but we never, ever want to pay more for it....no what we want to pay for is for companies to never increase die size, never put too much money into R&D, never figure out new ways to perform actions far better with dedicated hardware then just an "all-in-one" core. Basically, we have no desire to pay for innovation, but we do demand it.

I'm not saying i hope this rumor is true, either, i hope it's less then $1000. But, at the same time, if it is, then so be it. I feel like people on these forums act like no effort goes into these GPUs, like nvidia is #1 in the high end simply because they got lucky, and AMD is unlucky? Like is it really that simple? I love AMD, most people here know that, but they have yet to push Nvidia in awhile in the high end. It's that simple. I would love AMD to do that, but they, as of yet, have not. And the mentality around here is that nvidia should lower their prices to what AMD has to offer in their high end...when they've obviously done the work to keep their crown. It's not by accident that nvidia has kept the crown for so long, they aren't just sitting at their desks, doing absolutely nothing on their next product, and re-releasing the same thing every year.....

And really, would you want a RTX 2080 ti going up against the RX 5700 XT at the same price? Now before you go "YES YES!" I'm not asking would that be an amazing price for the RTX 2080 ti, i'm asking, do you really want nvidia to completely give every reason why you should never buy AMD and AMD simply decide to give up and make certain that Nvidia is a monopoly? Is that what we all want?

 

I do not believe it, if you look at Steam hardware stats, 20xx series is only about 10% where 10xx series has 40% and more..

Its because of the prices.

 

Looking at it that way 1400 quid for 24GB isn't too bad but I don't have any practical use for a Titan class card. 3080 now or wait for the 3080ti. My patience is wearing thin to be honest. I guess the best thing to do is wait for the ti.

 

Steam stats show 10 series at 37%, mostly in the lower end, not the higher end, which nvidia has fairly well been doing just fine with with the 16/20 series. And the 10 series has had 4 years to get to these numbers.

20/16 series 18%, and has only had 2 years at max, 1 year for 16 series, to get to 18%. (And put extra emphasis in the 16 series having only 1 year to get to these numbers, because the 16 series is what is leading the 20/16 series, the #1 and #2 16/20 series cards on this list, are both 16 series, followed by the RTX 2060, so the GPUs leading the pack have had the least amount of time to do it, and that's fairly impressive)

But again, making this pretty clear: The high numbers are in the lower, mid tier end of GPUs, something that is really not being complained about here....the 1080 for instance has a 2.37% stake in this, and 1080 ti at 1.52%, 2080 and 2080 ti are hovering around 1% each, not too far off from GPUs released twice as long then their competing parts.