Intel had a pretty decent product for their first launch with good gains in market share. Hopefully their next gen will keep the market in check with a good price/performance target for high end GPUs.Yay, can't wait for $4000+ top of the line gaming GPUs and $800+ low end!
If AMD can't bring reasonable price/performance in the coming wave of BS... then PC gaming might truly be done for.
Even if something like this will eventually happen it will happen due to production realities and not because of demand on AI market products.Yay, can't wait for $4000+ top of the line gaming GPUs and $800+ low end!
It took 25 years for high-end prices to become low-end prices.
Low end isn't a relative term, you can't just call a $800 product "low end" because there's nothing cheaper.
I don't. 25 years ago $200 was high-end.
Yay, can't wait for $4000+ top of the line gaming GPUs and $800+ low end!
If AMD can't bring reasonable price/performance in the coming wave of BS... then PC gaming might truly be done for.
'Production realities' is not why the prices are what they are currently. You know this, we know this. I dont know why you keep trying to dishonestly argue otherwise. Nvidia is simply seeing what they think they can get away with.
But it's arguably the lower-mid end of the GPU market that is getting hammered the hardest lately. It's the most price sensitive part of the market, and we're getting GPU's that previously would have been sold at like $150 for $400 now. And it also means being relegated to low amounts of VRAM and whatnot, which ages GPU's faster.
I know what I've said, and this is corroborated by literally every chipmaker on the planet. So please stop trying to push something which doesn't exist as a known fact.
"It's corroborated by the people selling us the chips, who are a totally reliable source!". And no, even they do not actually corroborate this at all. It suggests there's price hikes of course, but nothing to justify the insane level of pricing increase(an effective 100%+ for most of 40 series) that Nvidia is trying to greedily get away with.
That segment is still very significant, though. It routinely dominates the Steam hardware survey, for instance. AAA gaming is still what mostly drives the industry forward and there's an enormous market for people who want to play those games and need an adequate GPU to do so.
Right. So there are price *increases* on products using chips on advanced processes and everything is fine, it's just Nvidia's issue.
You are now just deliberately avoiding the 'not even that nuanced' part of the argument where the point isn't that some level of price increase is understandable, it's the extreme level of price increase that is absolutely insane and not remotely justified. A sub 200mm² GPU selling for $400/500? This is simply not defensible. You'd have to resort to clearly dishonest or nonsense arguments to try and do it.
I'm not avoiding anything. You're the only one here who claims that Nvidia has a unique production capability which is completely different from everyone else's and thus they somehow are responsible for the current pricing - which is the same for all IHVs on the market but hey, this is seemingly a big ask to notice.
Yeah, I'll repeat: the size of the die means absolutely nothing for the pricing of a product using that die.
This is just absurd. You're again doing what I just accused you of and absolutely ignoring the nuance of my argument. It's not some black and white 'are price increases justified, yes or no?' question as you are so desperate to try and frame it.
Yes, you repeat a lot of completely ridiculous things in order to defend Nvidia at all costs.
I agree. Completely ignoring all the facts around you because your agenda is just to paint Nvidia in a bad light is absurd. Nothing more to add here.
