The next generation will be more energy efficient than Ampere. If games do not need more performance then they can simply move back to their efficiency curve.
But because the premise that games do not benefit from more performance is flawed, they won't. The argument of "but who needs that much performance" is proven false by history. Software always expands to waste/exploit available hardware.
But because the premise that games do not benefit from more performance is flawed, they won't. The argument of "but who needs that much performance" is proven false by history. Software always expands to waste/exploit available hardware.
Last edited:
It doesn't mean the new games will actually look better though. They might just run poorly. Advances in game graphics have tapered off over the last few years as game engines have matured, and any major improvements from here require so much money to develop that the game cannot be profitable.
moonbogg
Lifer
- Jan 8, 2011
- 10,635
- 3,095
- 136
I bet lovelace will cost $1.00 per megahurt at the mid range. No, I'm not being hyperbolic. In fact, according to Moonbogg's 5th postulate, there exists no parallel between historical pricing and the stoopid fancy money that lovelace will cost. Prepare yourselves to have your sides blast open from laughter with truly cosmic force. They've seen what idiot gamers will pay for a GPU, so you better believe they're going for the jugular this time with no apologies or facial flinches.
GodisanAtheist
Diamond Member
- Nov 16, 2006
- 6,783
- 7,115
- 136
-Watching the "I'll wait till the RTX 4xxx series for prices to become sane again" crowd has to be the most depressing thing I've read in this forum for a while.
Guys, if people will by a $500 GPU for $1000, why in the everloving Christ would any company sell it for less than $1000?!
Next gen is just going to be another Turing from a Price/Performance standpoint.
- Sep 28, 2005
- 20,841
- 3,189
- 126
I completely agree with the first statement.
The second i don't as you could still buy Turing @ MSRP.
I do not hold my breathe in being able to get any GPU @ MSRP, unless Crypto finally realizes ASIC miners are the future, and someone manages to make one that does not scream louder then a 3 yr old asking for candy.
Crypto mining will be dead by the time these GPUs are available. Ethereum's merge to PoS is scheduled for late Q4 21' to late Q1 22' and has been prioritized. Miners aren't going to buy hardware that doesn't turn a profit. Crypto is a convenient scapegoat for industry wide shortages at this point.
Last edited:
I wouldn't assume that Proof of Stake will change anything. Only Ethereum's price.
It effectively ends GPU based crypto mining, removing the mining based demand for GPUs.
The problem is that there's going to be a lot of cheap infrastructure available at low prices that someone will buy up to try to continue the business. It's why a grocery chain might go out of business but the grocery store will still be there regardless of what name gets slapped on top of it.
I think Etherium already forked once so there's no reason a PoW-based version won't be established alongside the PoS version being proposed. Even if that didn't happen what stops miners from creating a new currency just like Etherium itself was created as a response to GPU miners being driven off of Bitcoin?
Ethereum wasn't created because ASICs drove GPU miners off, Ethereum was created because of the resistance to innovation and developing smart contracts natively on Bitcoin by core devs. Vitalik wanted to build on BTC but it became apparent that wouldn't happen.
PoW mining is dying and existing PoW crypto can't absorb even a small fraction of Ethereum's hashrate and remain profitable.
A fork is unlikely to succeed (all the value, users, developers, etc will be on PoS) meaning just like ETC, Ravencoin and other GPU based PoW cryptos, the fork won't be profitable enough to support but a very small fraction of current hashrate. Some existing hardware will migrate towards PoW chains, but most will be sold to retail.
No large PoW farms aren't going to invest in new 4000 series GPUs in large quantities so that leaves hobby miners. I just don't see it miners playing any role in 4000 series availability.
Last edited:
Grooveriding
Diamond Member
- Dec 25, 2008
- 9,108
- 1,260
- 126
Jokes aside, I expect 4000 pricing will be similar to current 30 series ti cards.
A 3080 at MSRP is probably the best deal on a high end GPU we'll see for years. This is nvidia, 4080 will be at least $1000 at release.
A 3080 at MSRP is probably the best deal on a high end GPU we'll see for years. This is nvidia, 4080 will be at least $1000 at release.
moonbogg
Lifer
- Jan 8, 2011
- 10,635
- 3,095
- 136
Similar is an interesting way to predict the coming price increases. If a card is $700 and you want to increase the price by $300, that creates an outrage because that's about a 40% increase. However, if the card is already $1200 and you want to increase it by $300, that's only a 25% increase. If the card is $1500, then $300 more is only a 20% increase. In fact, you might even consider a 20-25% higher price as being similar to the previous price of the product it replaces.
Once $1200+ becomes the new standard cost of the mid range and higher GPUs, they can just add $300 every gen and it won't be a big deal. They had to break that $1000 ceiling first though with the GTX 690. Anyone who wasn't lying to themselves knew it all went to hell with Kepler when they called a literal mid range die a high end and charged high end money for it and also charged $1000 for the first time ever. Now here we are with Ti models coming in at 12-$1500 on the regular with routine, generational price increases and product stack shifting being the expected norm.
Even without crypto, the prices would still be in the toilet. The toilet is an appropriate place for the pricing to be, considering so many people have **** for brains and continue to pay these prices without a second thought.
High-end PC hardware isn't going to be a mainstream hobby anymore. It's going to be an expensive hobby. A high-end GPU is going to cost $5000 and everyone else will have APUs and consoles.
Last edited:
El Salvador just made BitCoin legal tender.
https://www.reuters.com/business/fi...yptocurrency-bitcoin-legal-tender-2021-09-07/
I don't think it's going away at this point.
https://www.reuters.com/business/fi...yptocurrency-bitcoin-legal-tender-2021-09-07/
I don't think it's going away at this point.
JTsyo
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2007
- 11,718
- 877
- 126
They might be able to get away with price creep for the higher end cards but once supply returns they'll have to compromise for the mainstream. Especially with Intel joying the fray. Intel will trade profits for marketshare for the first generation of cards.
Ajay
Lifer
- Jan 8, 2001
- 15,429
- 7,849
- 136
Too bad Samsung's first GAA was looking horrible and left NV with no choice. Would have been nice for both NV and AMD to have a larger wafer share.
Fallen Kell
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 6,036
- 429
- 126
I hope it forks, and that the forks fork, and the forks of the forks fork. The more and faster things fork the faster people will finally realize that there is no scarcity of the coins, but an infinite supply, and as supply/demand dictates, the price will plumet to nothing and we will be done with this exercise in futility.
The reality is that only one side of the fork holds any real value and one collapses as to be worthless. There's also a chance that a fork reduces the total net value of both forks which limits the tendency for it to occur.
But it fundamentally isn't any different than a stock split. Where once there was one share, now there are two. That doesn't mean the value of the company doubled though.
Fallen Kell
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 6,036
- 429
- 126
Except this isn't a stock. It is a line in an electronic ledger that is simply agreed by over 1/2 the network of systems that have access to the ledger to belong to your cryptographic signature (please note the careful use of specific words). All it takes is for someone to have more than 1/2 the systems out there to make a change to the ledger stating that someone else "owns" it or someone to gain access to your cryptographic key.
So again, what do you own and how is it limited when anyone can create an electronic ledger, or even hundreds of thousands of ledgers? It has no value other than the value that someone thinks it has. It is a ponzy scheme where-in the last person left holding the bag loses and all the people who had it before keep the earnings that they made from the suckers behind them that bought it from them. The value only "grows" because it needs to grow in order for the last person to be able to "sell" it off to someone else and prevent the collapse from happening sooner, and thus it is in everyone's interest that has currently already bought into it to promote it like it is the second coming so that they arn't the one left holding the bag.
I suspect that with the switch to TSMC supply will be somewhat improved. I can’t imagine NVIDIA will kill off the 3xxx line on Samsung. If they don’t rebrand, they will likely sell both concurrently.
Ajay
Lifer
- Jan 8, 2001
- 15,429
- 7,849
- 136
I really doubt that NV will have more capacity on TSMC 5N. So, as you point out, I expect them to keep putting out Ampere based GPUs till/if GPU mining slows down.
That's certainly true. However the thought is that anyone that invested in the market has no reason to destroy their own value. You could buy a bunch of gold coins and throw them in an active volcano. Equally foolish.
I'd personally be more worried about someone being able to break the cryptography behind it the protocol, which wouldn't be so obvious. I guess there are people working on algorithms that are resistant to quantum computing. Otherwise someone can steal your identity with classical banking and identity theft happens all the time.
Every currency only has value because people think it has value due to being a useful medium of exchange. Officially recognized currencies get an added benefit of being able to pay taxes. Otherwise it's worthless if no one will accept it. Similarly any government could make a new currency. It doesn't really devalue the existing ones.
Also, if you do think something like BitCoin is just a scam, at what point did the scammers decide to get out, assuming they have? If they all did already and the people left holding the bag are all that's left doesn't it just become a functional currency at that point? Are you purporting that it's all just scammers selling to other scammers who will in turn sell to other scammers? There isn't anyone who may have had other reasons for using it? I don't really get the argument and the longer a currency sticks around the less merit I think it has. I does certainly sound appealing to anyone who doesn't like crypto though.
I don't use crypto and have no desire to, but I do find it fascinating for several reasons. But neither you or I have to use it or even like it for it to be valuable. It's still in its infancy though, but I suspect the idea is going to stick around.
Fallen Kell
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 6,036
- 429
- 126
Currencies have value because the government that created those currencies accepts the currency for payment of obligations/services to/from the government. People in those countries can pay their taxes, purchase electricity, water, land, land rites (minerals/mining, oil prospecting, licenses to airway frequencies such as tv/radio/cellphone). These are the bedrock that creates the value for the currency. When governments start accepting a cryptocoin as currency is when you can start believing it is something other than a ponzy scheme.
From my understanding, only one government has attempted to do this with an existing coin that they didn't fork and create their own version). And from my understanding it was a disaster with the citizens who bought in then losing 20% of value within the first week as the government kept changing the exchange rates of their own currency to/from the cryptocoin.
As for when do the scammers "get out", it depends on the coin. Many of the early coins were hoarded by the developers and a small set of people who had early access. And many of those with those hoards sold only small amounts and have bought more over the initial years to keep the prices from ever crashing, and just selling some as the demand hit peeks. The scam ends when all those coins get dumped once they see enough buy demand to be able to sell all of those early stashes without crashing the price below what they invested when they bought the coins for fractions of pennies and recoup the costs of advertising the coins.
Yes taxes are what ultimately makes people have to trade for a country's currency at some point, but there's no reason that any other transaction need be done in that currency.
Other currencies can be valuable for their utility as a means of conducting commerce or as a store of value. Because BitCoin by definition has a limit to the number of coins that can exist (and because idiots keep losing access to their wallets permanently and taking coins out of circulation) the relative value of a coin only increases because all other fiat currencies have a small amount of inflation by intent.
There's also plenty of examples of governments that have basically ruined their own currencies due to rampant inflation which leads to alternatives being used by common people.
Also you can't dump all of your coins at once beyond what the market will buy. If there's one person willing to buy a single BitCoin for $1,000,000 then the price will go up, but if no one else will buy at that price or that purchaser won't buy another for that same price, the cost of BitCoin goes right back to where it was. Of course this is silly because several people will sell a coin for much less than a million dollars, so the price the buyer will pay is that of the lowest seller.
Flooding a market doesn't work because anyone trying to sell in mass at a specific price can only do so as long as there are buyers looking to purchase at that price. Once they're exhausted the price must drop to entice the next buyers who weren't willing to pay as much. You can probably do a pump and dump with some crappy crypto with a low total valuation, but not with anything large. There just aren't enough buyers.
Other currencies can be valuable for their utility as a means of conducting commerce or as a store of value. Because BitCoin by definition has a limit to the number of coins that can exist (and because idiots keep losing access to their wallets permanently and taking coins out of circulation) the relative value of a coin only increases because all other fiat currencies have a small amount of inflation by intent.
There's also plenty of examples of governments that have basically ruined their own currencies due to rampant inflation which leads to alternatives being used by common people.
Also you can't dump all of your coins at once beyond what the market will buy. If there's one person willing to buy a single BitCoin for $1,000,000 then the price will go up, but if no one else will buy at that price or that purchaser won't buy another for that same price, the cost of BitCoin goes right back to where it was. Of course this is silly because several people will sell a coin for much less than a million dollars, so the price the buyer will pay is that of the lowest seller.
Flooding a market doesn't work because anyone trying to sell in mass at a specific price can only do so as long as there are buyers looking to purchase at that price. Once they're exhausted the price must drop to entice the next buyers who weren't willing to pay as much. You can probably do a pump and dump with some crappy crypto with a low total valuation, but not with anything large. There just aren't enough buyers.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter