But then the 40x0 products upon release will be at higher prices and inflated by scalpers etc then we're in the same position waiting on stock and prices to drop.
I guess they simply don't want to sell me a product at all then.
But then the 40x0 products upon release will be at higher prices and inflated by scalpers etc then we're in the same position waiting on stock and prices to drop.
Wow, that sounds like a major lifestyle change!My next graphics card will be under $200 and under 100w and there's a distinct possibility that it will never happen the way things are going.
Wow, that sounds like a major lifestyle change!
I'm sure Intel is reading this forum and has come to the conclusion that they need to disrupt pricing with their upcoming release. 3070 performance is worth, what, maybe $350? Thinking GTX 970 days here.
They seem serious to me. They've unified their installer to support everything Skylake and newer in one easy to find download. I noticed they fixed up Vulkan and it works with Dolphin now. And whenever I feel the urge to play some oldie it seems to work just fine on Intel HD. But performance on the latest releases? Will VR even work?? Who can say!!While I'm excited to see whether Intel can compete at least within the performance bracket on down (enthusiast level isn't really necessary for Intel, IMO) and how they will price it, I'm still concerned about whether they will finally have good driver support.
I'm sure Intel is reading this forum and has come to the conclusion that they need to disrupt pricing with their upcoming release. 3070 performance is worth, what, maybe $350? Thinking GTX 970 days here.
The 4070 won't be less than $600 MSRP because they know gamers will buy them.I would allow them $400. The 3070 is a solid 1440p card. 970 at $320 was more of a 1080p card that flirted with 1440p in some games. And wafers are more expensive these days. The 4070 needs to be a solid 1440p card with RT on for under $450.
Do they? Turing sales struggled because of being perceived as being too expensive.The 4070 won't be less than $600 MSRP because they know gamers will buy them.
I'm not sure it was just too expensive, but also a mistrust of paying higher price for additional features for raytracing and tensor cores with practically no perceived real world value. Several years on, gamers are now seeing the fruits of that investment in their games and are likely far more willing to pay a premium again.Do they? Turing sales struggled because of being perceived as being too expensive.
The slight problem with that is that 3080 was basically unavailable at it's MSRP during its lifetime. It may change by the time of 40 series launch of course.So yeah the 3080 MSRP and performance should really be the benchmark for the next gen
lIt is also long overdue for people to stop thinking that a random product name have some pricing range attached to it for some reason.
The slight problem with that is that 3080 was basically unavailable at it's MSRP during its lifetime. It may change by the time of 40 series launch of course.
It is also long overdue for people to stop thinking that a random product name have some pricing range attached to it for some reason.
The problem with that is that consistent naming exists for a reason. It's to more easily denote to the consumer (and sometimes more importantly retailers) the market segment the product is intended for. That in turn governs the prices that consumers expect to pay for it and retailers expect to charge for it.
Nope. It's there precisely to make a consumer spend more money than they probably would because "I'm always buying an x70 card!" Look at perf/price, forget the product names, they are there to confuse you.The problem with that is that consistent naming exists for a reason. It's to more easily denote to the consumer (and sometimes more importantly retailers) the market segment the product is intended for.
980 Ti $649, 1080 Ti $699, 2080 Ti $999, 3090 $1499