Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Aug 5, 2020.
I saw another news story earlier on this week - the one that listed a TITAN model - that rumoured that there would NOT be an RTX 3080 Ti but this story says there is. To be honest, I would be extremely surprised if there wasn't a 3080 Ti as it would the only viable upgrade path for people with 2080 Tis since the other 3000 models had 10 GB of VRAM or less. I expect the 3080 Ti to have 12 GB at least, possibly more but it may be a weird odd number (13 or 15 GB).
The problem for me though is how much this will cost. I do not want to buy a 2080 Ti, in fact, I held off buying one for two reasons: (1) it was simply too expensive at £1,100 to justify upgrading from my GTX 1080 Ti for the ray-tracing features, which even now are used in very few games; and (2) the actual rasterisation performance increase over the GTX 1080 Ti is disappointing given the £400+ price increase.
The Ampere cards are rumoured to be 50% faster than the Turing equivalents which would equate to even more vs. my GTX 1080 Ti making the purchase of the card better value even if it costs £1,000+. I should be able to get £200 for my 1080 Ti which would offset the cost a bit.
Thing is though I need to build a new PC which is going to be pricey but I am waiting for the new AMD Ryzen 4000 CPUs (I think I will be ditching Intel for next build as they have become too expensive, what with requiring new motherboards for every processor series they release etc).
I know if I got a 3080 Ti that it would offer faster performance than my 1080 Ti even on this 2013 i7-4770K and 1,600 MHz RAM build because I play at 1440p and not 4K but I will be missing out on the super fast SSDs and PCI-e 4.0 which is usually the reason I upgrade. When I built my Haswell PC in 2013 it was to have PCI-e 3.0 and SATA3 not because I just wanted a faster CPU.
I guess I could buy the card this year and build a new PC next when Ryzen 4000 is out.
I remember the days when I used to get excited about new nvidia releases. I can't make myself care about $1200+ cards. Honestly though, they could charge $2000 for the 3080Ti and people would still be buying them in pairs like crazy.
You do realize that it's usually the other way around, right? The higher the resolution the more it's GPU-Bound. The lower the resolution the more it's CPU-Bound.
But no doubt to properly run a 3080ti etc. one needs a very fast cpu
Well at 4K, not really. In most games my 3600 is dumping out 120fps+, some exceptions of course like most Ubisoft games but at 4K I still think these new GPUs will be the limiting factor, not my CPU.
Should have jumped on GOG sale!! $80 got you CP2077 and everything they've ever made from them.
I didn't get it as I've got everything already from them except CP2077
would rather have it free
What an utterly ridiculous thing to say. First of all, that's a double-edged sword. Paying Nvidia for these stupidly high prices validates to them that the price tag is worth it. It's rather sobering that you can build a whole 1080p gaming PC with very good performance for the price of a 2080Ti by itself, which can't even play all games maxed out at 4K@60FPS.
But putting all that aside, what you said only happens when you pre-order a product, or, if a product that is overall inferior is selling better than it should.
AMD is selling competitive products, just not at the high-end. The reason Nvidia is so expensive is because of the lack of high-end competition. Their prices will likely drop should "Big Navi" be a threat.
Anyway, competition can't happen if all of the money is going toward the winner. This isn't rocket science.
I couldn't agree more.., the Diamond Pro monitor was a beast in its day... ridiculously heavy, made my computer desk bow under its weight and helped make my little flat nice and toasty warm..
I still remember the day I first played GLQuake on it with a 12MB Voodoo2 (I needed to upgrade from the 8MB version to take full advantage, the extra cost for 4MB make nvidia's current prices seem quite fair in comparison)
Agreed; as far as that "prosumer" upgrade path is concerned the requirements for VRAM only increase every few generations
Yes but less so during global pandemic, global recession, global unemployment & it's an election year in the US. People may be focused elsewhere than NVIDIA gaming video cards. I know I am (reg. buying them)
If you had any idea how companies are encouraged to evolve their products you'd know that you just spouted a bunch of bs.
Throwing "less" money at the underdog company that produces less capable parts both in hardware and drivers is the same thing as encouraging stagnation of product evolution (aka, what AMD did with their CPU's that allowed Intel to stay on the same architecture for 10 years)
AMD's market decline was because people did buy the chips as die hard fantards instead of giving amd the finger and saying "these aren't good enough"
Isn’t there a massive amount of more to it than that though? If not that at all? Like poor contractual decisions surrounding the Bulldozer architecture between AMD & GlobalFoundries that gimped on for years effectively cutting the company’s legs out from under them? I can find the news sources if you two want, this is fan boys aside. Poor management. Or just unfortunate at the very least.
EDIT: Home again for the night, will look for those news articles...
Ok I found some of the news articles and yes I believe that what you are saying was a component of it.
Some really good reading if anyone’s interested
“The Rise Fall & Revival of AMD” https://www.techspot.com/article/2043-amd-rise-fall-revival-history/
“A Critical Analysis of AMD’s Multi-Year Amendment to The Wafer Supply Agreement 2016” https://wccftech.com/analysis-amd-multi-year-amendment-2016-wafer-supply-agreement/
That is giving it away. In my country people are still expecting at least €500-600 EURO for a 1080Ti which is about £540. I think they are being ridiculously greedy myself. But hopefully those prices will drop when 30x0 comes out.
If you had any idea how major corporations work you'd realize that was just a bunch of spouted bs. Their #1 priority is your money, and you appear to be justifying an artificially inflated price.
How could you possibly be that short-sighted? When AMD went stagnant, so did Intel. Intel's net revenue was substantially greater than all of AMD's total assets. They were raking in more money than they knew what to do with, and guess what: that money wasn't used to improve anything.
Showing support with your wallet only works when there's competition. That's why Nvidia's mid-range GPUs are reasonably priced, yet still profitable.
Riiiight... because money grows on trees and all those crappy bulldozer CPUs are totally free to R&D and manufacture. Surely, AMD wouldn't have neared bankruptcy if they made no sales at all! Kinda gets you to wonder - why don't they just simply give away their products? That way, everyone can spend their money on Intel and everyone wins!
Nvidia doesn't care about YOUR money, the consumer graphics card market is just pocket change compared to the enterprise business they actually make most of their earnings from.
This is the inverse of AMD where rejecting their consumer product is damaging to their earnings and quite readily tells them their product is not up to the task.
both bulldozer and the dark period for RTG where they weren't getting appropriate RND funding because "our fans will buy anyway" was negative reinforcement, giving them the misconception that things were adequate.
Nvidia doesn't care about beating AMD or Intel, they compete only with themselves so they only have the problem of needing their next enterprise product utterly dominating the last one.
And I suppose you think they release a comparatively cheap 2080Ti out of the kindness of their hearts? If it generated so little revenue, why bother making anything below enthusiast-grade?
You're not understanding the situation:
Ryzen would not have existed if it weren't for people who pitched in earlier. AMD was steadily getting deeper in debt. They were in that debt because people were telling them the product wasn't worth buying, including from most of their fans. So, if none of their products were being sold, they'd have gone bankrupt. Where exactly do you think they'd have the money to do better? One of the core reasons Bulldozer failed is because of insufficient funding to make it better.
You claim to know why companies are driven to evolve their products, yet you somehow think evolution happens when a company only has themselves to compare to.
AMD (and soon, Intel) takes away sales from Nvidia. How do you prevent this from happening? By making a more competitive product. It's naive if you think Nvidia would continue the rate of their evolution if AMD didn't exist. Ever noticed how Nvidia almost always has a GPU ready to go within weeks (sometime days) of AMD releasing a product? Do you seriously think Nvidia didn't already have the capability of releasing that better model earlier?
Everything they do is for competition, and I say that as a good thing. Even exclusive technologies like G-Sync are meant to entice customers to come to them. Speaking of which - why would they bother spending so much time and money researching and producing a niche product like G-Sync, which has no financial benefit to their server market? Sure seems like a hefty investment for pocket change...
If the 3080 is September i'm gonna start saving now and keep this 1030.
Was gonna get something more beefier next week to tide me by till 3070 but it would just be a waste /hassle.
I feel like a fool spending £700+ on a gpu but whatever ..( CP2077 better be good is all i'm sayin)
Considering nvidia only sells chips to card manufacturers and the profit for founders barely covers the cost of paying the contracted manufacturer (foxconn i think?)
On the contrary, Ryzen would have existed SOONER after AMD would have had to liquidate the assets unnecessary to designing and manufacturing a new cpu architecture. (GloFo for example).
AMD was not too big to fall, but it was necessary to retain a secondary chip and gpu vendor for the PC market, bankruptcy would have been a kick in the teeth to the idiots on top that lead them into obscurity and given them a clean slate and restructuring to boot.
Would have been the perfect opportunity to cut away dead weight and seperate AMD from RTG.
Right... they sell the chips to card manufacturers and Nvidia gets most of the profits. Even though they could do it themselves, they can maximize their profits if they don't. Therefore, they're taking this specific path for the money.
Nvidia (as well as AMD and Intel for that matter) make their own server-grade stuff because the price tags are so much higher, and, because the products are [ideally] in a controlled environment. They can cheap out on things like cooling solutions that would not work in a consumer-grade PC.
How? With what money could they do that? Do you think AMD wanted to keep their failed project going to 5 years? They did it because there was nothing left to develop something better. So if their measly income wasn't enough to produce Ryzen, how was a complete lack of income supposed to accomplish anything? They were running out of things to liquidate that actually had any significant value with a long-term benefit.
When Lisa Su became CEO, she deliberately put the company deeper into debt, because it was a last-ditch effort. Ryzen needed to succeed or else the company was done for. They could not develop Ryzen sooner, probably because they were in too much debt at the time. Besides, Ryzen wasn't a ground-up redesign. It was just an overhaul of their previous architecture.
AMD had years of poor sales. Their fans were not covering R&D costs. So, I don't understand how you think they were told "mediocrity is ok" when they were very obviously failing as a company because of a product, and you're naive if you think they weren't aware that their products weren't as good as their marketing claimed.
Exactly the point - AMD wasn't too big. They were too small. Who do you think was going to bail them out and keep them going?
That would have been a stupid idea because at the time, RTG had the better product. Only until recently has AMD been able to pay off debts and start putting some real investment into GPUs.