RTX Sales Reported as Disappointing

Oct 27, 2006
19,562
99
106
#1
In a shock to basically nobody, Nvidia is facing some downturn here, blaming it on delayed 2060 and such.

I think the 2070 and 2080 are fairly unappealing products, and of course 2080ti is even more ludicrously expensive. Beyond any metrics like delays and such, the worst issue facing Nvidia is competition from their own 10xx owners who honestly have nothing worth buying at the same price segments. Buyers typically hang about in their comfortable zone, eg a $250 buyer isn't suddenly going to feel like tossing $500+, a $500 buyer isn't suddenly feeling great about dumping $1200, etc.

The failure to increase performance per $ is going to make this a dark time for Nvidia, gamers, and the state of PC gaming as a whole until this cloud passes.

Shocking ... well, not that shocking
 
Apr 20, 2015
185
15
71
#2
It's interesting they went this route rather than try and pummel AMD into the ground with their superior performance. I guess they spent huge money on the Tensor cores and wanted to get as big a return on this as possible.

It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years. AMD being unable to provide decent competition is partially what let to Intel's stagnation. Remains to be seen if Nvidia is falling into the same trap.
 
Nov 16, 2006
1,368
103
106
#3
It's interesting they went this route rather than try and pummel AMD into the ground with their superior performance. I guess they spent huge money on the Tensor cores and wanted to get as big a return on this as possible.

It will be interesting to see what happens over the next few years. AMD being unable to provide decent competition is partially what let to Intel's stagnation. Remains to be seen if Nvidia is falling into the same trap.
-On the contrary, they figured now is the safest time for them to launch a pipe-cleaner product for a host of new tech as AMD is essentially a non-entitity in the price segments tageted by their RTX products.

Imagine if RTX launched against a highly competitive AMD that offered the same or more traditional raster performance for less money and higher margins...
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,370
191
126
#4
I think this was exactly what NV expected when introducing Ray Tracing. They knew it would take more than one card generation.
 
Jun 2, 2016
240
43
86
#5
I don't think anyone can argue with a straight face that the 20XX series isn't a turd sandwich. Stagnant perf/$, no raytracing-ready games on launch (how many are even out now, three?), dying cards and the much-hyped DLSS being a slightly-improved TAA that only works at certain resolution/card combos. The only people who are happy with it are people who want the best card no matter what who can eat the $1200 pricetag. Even then, 30% over the last generation isn't bad, but it's also not some phenomenal leap.
 

Guru

Senior member
May 5, 2017
530
126
76
#6
Let's face it,m Nvidia jumped the gun with the whole raytracing scam sandwich and released big, expensive turds that have little value. Apart from the RTX 2060 their whole lineup is terrible. Even the RTX 2060 only serves as an upgrade option if you have something like 1050ti or RX 560 or older gen cards like a 970 3GB or R9 390 or worse.

Real time ray tracing able to be done properly and without needing to run on 720p with minimal settings and barely 60fps is years away. DLSS is just a worse TAA, that blurs everything.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,413
346
126
#7
It's interesting they went this route rather than try and pummel AMD into the ground with their superior performance.
They have no incentive to do so. Suppose they went this route and Turing has incredibly tempting prices, say $250 for a 2060. NVidia would likely gobble up the bulk of AMD's sales, but their overall profitability might not increase much if at all.

Furthermore, they'd only end up competing with themselves and have to work to provide a better value for the next generation. This inevitably leads to stagnation as they settle with a strategy to extract the most profit they can.

The only way for consumers to get maximum value is for them to have multiple choices which forces companies to compete for their business, typically at the expense of their own profit margins.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,005
638
126
#8
The only way for consumers to get maximum value is for them to have multiple choices which forces companies to compete for their business, typically at the expense of their own profit margins.
Better hope Intel comes through next year. AMD isn't doing much to change things.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,005
638
126
#10
Dunno if it's a sign of pending changes or someone feeling the pressure, but got a flyer for a damn good priced RTX 2080 Ti
People have paid more than that for Radeon VII on eBay.
 
Jun 8, 2003
14,081
107
126
#11

guskline

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2006
5,281
30
126
#12
I remember when I bought my Gigabyte Aorus GTX1080TI with the WC block it was a premium price because the WB was included but wasn't more than $150 more than the stock GTX1080TI even including the nice OC and a full waterblock. Then the mining craze hit and what I paid @ $875 became $1500-1600. I already had a GTX1080 which has served me well.

I credit Nvidia for bringing the 2000 series to market so soon with ray tracing ability but from what I read the only card worth jumping to with playable ray tracing ability is the GTX2080TI.

Very salty price for very limited additional features. No doubt it is the fastest GPU out there but the price was just too high.

The GTX2080 went neck and neck with the GTX1080TI generally but ray tracing is a real performance hit.

I actually was able to snag a Radeon VII from Newegg for $699 (Tax jacks it up to 750). Why you ask would I buy this instead of a 2000 series Nvidia card?

Curiosity, HBM memory and finally a robust solid card able to speed-wise closely match a GTX2080.
I know it doesn't have Ray tracing but everything I read appears to point that ray tracing will be limited for the next year AND the GTX2080 isn't the card to show case it.
 

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
8,204
166
126
#13
I'm interested in how the 1660ti does. I suspect that at most price points, people are more excited about improved raster perf/$ than 720p raytracing or tensor cores that NVidia is still struggling to find a gaming use for.
 

daveybrat

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Jan 31, 2000
4,948
43
126
#15
I'm interested in how the 1660ti does. I suspect that at most price points, people are more excited about improved raster perf/$ than 720p raytracing or tensor cores that NVidia is still struggling to find a gaming use for.
My thoughts exactly. If the price is right this card could be a fantastic value.
 
Jun 23, 2004
27,190
429
126
#16
I credit Nvidia for bringing the 2000 series to market so soon with ray tracing ability but from what I read the only card worth jumping to with playable ray tracing ability is the GTX2080TI.
If one wants RTX, even a 2060 achieves 60 fps in BFV.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
4,027
58
106
#17
If one wants RTX, even a 2060 achieves 60 fps in BFV.
Only if RTX is used on low at 1080P. Soon as you go over that FPS drops below 60 and you can run into memory limitations with its 6GB. If you turn RTX off, then it performs great, and the 6GB is for the most part fine.

I think if nVidia had not put RTX features onto these cards, which would enable them to price them correctly, they would have sold much better.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
6,784
355
96
#18
Better hope Intel comes through next year. AMD isn't doing much to change things.
I will be looking for an upgrade of my video card, the GTX 970 once I get newer games. I've been a long time Nvidia user since 2000 due to supporting Linux with great drivers. However due to having Open Source drivers and almost catching up to Nvidia along with having more reasonable pricing, I'm now considering going AMD.

Intel? Well that will have to be a wait and see depending on Performance, Pricing, and Features.
 

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
3,969
108
126
#19
If one wants RTX, even a 2060 achieves 60 fps in BFV.
Yeah i pay $300 bucks to play at 1080p 60 fps in 2019. sure yeah.

First issue is that dx12 in BFV and probably in general is broken. So simply enabling dx12 is already a huge fps penalty and then RT on top of that. No thx.

At this point only hope for dx12 left is that a pure dx12 engine finally delivers on the promises but I have my doubts we will ever see such an engine and if that it actually delivers.
 

railven

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2010
6,380
68
126
#20
People have paid more than that for Radeon VII on eBay.
Dat Supply and Demand! There is a clear thirst for AMD products!

Oh yeah, I keep forgetting NV does this two price tier thingy and everything falls somewhere in between. Dat Marketing!

Funny thing is even that reddit thread is full of surprised posters haha.
 
Jun 8, 2003
14,081
107
126
#21
Jul 12, 2006
93,338
1,710
136
#22
Jul 12, 2006
93,338
1,710
136
#25
Only if RTX is used on low at 1080P. Soon as you go over that FPS drops below 60 and you can run into memory limitations with its 6GB. If you turn RTX off, then it performs great, and the 6GB is for the most part fine.

I think if nVidia had not put RTX features onto these cards, which would enable them to price them correctly, they would have sold much better.
Yeah, it rather boggles the mind that they didn't limit the RTX hardware to a vastly more expensive Titan tier for this generation, which could have absorbed an even greater MSRP increase if aimed specifically at the prosumer/dev crowd. The same YOLO nVidia fans would never complain about price, and would consider it worth it to pay for the only RTX-capable card of that generation....maybe make a ton of them? Basically a current 2080Ti, but split them into two cards where the one with the RTX cores would be RTX Titan X or something, at $2k-3k. The non-RTX 20180 Ti could have dropped at that ~$700 price point for current 1080Ti owners and it would have been perfect, with the expected +30% performance, clock for clock in the software that exists.

Hindsight being what it is, I guess, Nvidia still had to have known where they were with the devs and actual RTX performance when JHH was presenting this turd on stage, so they really only have themselves to blame for misleading consumers the way they have, RTX clearly not ready at this tier for another generation or two. The negative sales and negative opinion they received from this release can't possibly be worth the alternative lower margins (and high revenue they might have received) from keeping RTX at a much higher tier in an ultra premium class. I mean--this could have been a game-ending throat punch to AMD if nVidia had simply given their customers exactly what they expected, with a rosier look into the future of development and the honest representation of that tech.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Graphics Cards 6

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS