Question What's up with GPU pricing?

[Magic Carpet]

Competition is badly needed in this segment. Just looked up, GTX 580 8 years ago was ~$500 and now Titan is nearly 3 grand. AMD is not much better, the 270 I bought was $175 and now the current equivalent 5700 is ~$400. Pretty sure it's not all down to inflation and the increased cost of manufacturing.

A friend recently upgraded to an ultra wide monitor (3x1440) and even 2080 ti can't drive RDR2 at 60 fps. Maan, this market is really **********, no wonder people are migrating to consoles. Wish 3dfx had still been around and not bought up by nVIDIA. Tough times.

About a hundred of ex-3dfx employees continued to work for nVIDIA.

 

[Thunder 57]

I'll disagree on the CPU front. While there has been no single core performance improvements over the past 5 years, we can now get 8 cores for the same price we paid for 4 cores just two years ago. It's a very welcome change for those of us who could use more cores.

The GPU situation however, is dire. We've had zero improvement in the performance per dollar metric over the past 3 years. I've skipped Fury because I decided to wait for Vega. Vega didn't move performance/dollar metric so I decided to wait for Navi. Well, Navi didn't move performance/dollar metric either. So I guess I'm waiting again? I don't have high hopes for Intel disrupting the market, but maybe nVidia 30XX series will finally bring some pricing relief. Maybe by same time next year I'll be able to get aftermarket 5700 for $200 and flash it with XT BIOS and finally get a worthy upgrade to my aging RX480.

Right there with you on the "Where's my Rx 480 upgrade"? They just launched a smaller Navi that beats it a by 10-15% maybe while getting their power draw much more in line with the competition. At a slightly lower price. I've read they priced them high so they can clear out Polaris inventory. Who knows? I was expecting something like a 5700 for $250 by now.

We used to get nice things in a timely manner. Geforce 3. Radeon 9700. 8800GT. I could go on. It's like NVIDIA realized they could charge more and now AMD is saying they can as well now that they are more competitive.

 

[guachi]

The GPU situation however, is dire. We've had zero improvement in the performance per dollar metric over the past 3 years.

1070 introduced at about $400 or so. 5700XT is $400. 5700XT is about 50% faster in modern games.

Compared to a 1080Ti, which launched at $700, the 5700XT is a smidge slower at 1440 but is $300 cheaper for a 70% increase in FPS/$.

The low end hasn't moved as much. I think AMD's own slide for the 5500XT was that it was 12% faster than a 480. The 4 GB model is 15% cheaper ($170 vs $200). This is a 30% increase in FPS/$.

None of these is "zero improvement" over the last 3+ years.

 

[lobz]

Not completely on topic, but man...how seriously dissapointing can AMD be right after they amaze me with 3950X and TR3? This 5500XT is completely worthless at its price point.

 

[serpretetsky]

Competition is badly needed in this segment. Just looked up, GTX 580 8 years ago was ~$500 and now Titan is nearly 3 grand.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I'm always curious when people make some of these comparisons. The titan is a very high end card, and I'm curious why you chose to compare the titan to your GTX 580 instead of for example a 2080ti (still very expensive obviously).

I guess I'm curious if you will always compare to the highest end card the manufacturer has? For example, say in 2020 Nvidia releases a $20k card that is absolutely the best of the best. Nvidia could feasibly design a an absolute massive, beastly clocking chip, with HORRIBLE yields, that 99.99% of the population could not afford. They would probably need mount an entire water cooling system onto this card. Would you compare the GTX 580 to that card?

 

[Magic Carpet]

The titan is a very high end card, and I'm curious why you chose to compare the titan to your GTX 580 instead of for example a 2080ti (still very expensive obviously).

2080 Ti is based on a cut down version of the TU102 chip that powers the RTX Titan, similarly as to how GF100 was used with 480/580, therefore I chose Titan RTX for my comparison.

I guess I'm curious if you will always compare to the highest end card the manufacturer has?

Personally, I find it interesting of comparing all tech especially over the time.

For example, say in 2020 Nvidia releases a $20k card that is absolutely the best of the best. Nvidia could feasibly design a an absolute massive, beastly clocking chip, with HORRIBLE yields, that 99.99% of the population could not afford. They would probably need mount an entire water cooling system onto this card.

Why not? After all, you do have supercars made in single digit numbers. Now what would be the price for such a card, theoretically?

Would you compare the GTX 580 to that card?

You can compare it to anything really, it doesn't have to be 580. I only picked that because NV started doing its naming shenanigans with the 600 series. Obviously, AMD just wasn't strong enough at the time to mount proper competition to Nvidia's offerings. Brilliant business/marketing tactics, indeed.

 

[serpretetsky]

What argument could you make from such a comparison?
Your nvidia 580 costs $500.
The nvidia 3080 Zeus released in 2020 costs $20k.

Therefore prices are too high?

I think what I would do instead is try to choose some benchmarks to graph general performance of each generation and choose a fixed price segment ($450 to $550?), and see how the relation looks.

Or try to choose cards that have similar performance from each generation and graph there overall performance.

 

[DeathReborn]

2080 Ti is based on a cut down version of the TU102 chip that powers the RTX Titan, similarly as to how GF100 was used with 480/580, therefore I chose Titan RTX for my comparison.


Personally, I find it interesting of comparing all tech especially over the time.


Why not? After all, you do have supercars made in single digit numbers. Now what would be the price for such a card, theoretically?


You can compare it to anything really, it doesn't have to be 580. I only picked that because NV started doing its naming shenanigans with the 600 series. Obviously, AMD just wasn't strong enough at the time to mount proper competition to Nvidia's offerings. Brilliant business/marketing tactics, indeed.

View attachment 14361

Sorry to burst your bubble but surely you should have used the GTX 590 as that was the top gaming SKU of that generation for Nvidia.

 

[Head1985]

Sorry to burst your bubble but surely you should have used the GTX 590 as that was the top gaming SKU of that generation for Nvidia.

GTX590 was dual GPU.Two GTX580 flagship SKUs at one pcb and only 699usd.
Its like 2x TITAN RTX at one PCB for 699usd today too bad it cost 5000usd instead 699 LOL.