That's not the point.
The point is we went from a $699 card (RTX 3080) to a $1499 card (RTX 4080), and really the only notable difference between the two cards was the amount of VRAM (performance difference was negligible).
You said VRAM amounted to higher costs, and clearly Nvidia tries to perpetuate that BS rationale. Clearly that's the case, or there wouldn't be some ridiculous upcharge for the RTX 3090. Otherwise what exactly lends to that $800 premium?
You do know there's a
database with costs for RAM/VRAM that shows a cost of $3.55 per a 1GB module (or by association $7.10 for a 2GB module). And that's spot market costs, so it'd be even cheaper for Nvidia, since they have contracts in place with Samsung, Micron, SK Hynix. Yet somehow, some way "VRAM would just increase the price for no reason"?
I'm guessing you don't even have any real concept of how much VRAM costs. And are acting like it would add some substantial costs to those cards.