Support NeoGAF

[SportsFan581]

That's not how generational leaps traditionally occur. The $399 3060 Ti gave you superior performance to the $699 2080 Super. Whereas the $399 4060 Ti gives you inferior performance to the $499 3070. Same with the 1060 and 2060 that gave you performance of previous gen cards $250 more expensive. Whereas the 4060 gives you inferior performance to a previous gen card that's $100 more expensive. Nvidia is increasingly pocketing the generational gains.

You can be impressed by the 4060 losing to the 3060 Ti in 6/7 games at 1080p, but that's a poor generational leap. Even worse than the shitty 3060.

The fact that 3yrs of technological progress nets you only a 13-18% performance increase is a major disappointment to be sure. At least the base MSRP didn't go up though. Have to appreciate the tiny victories.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Anyone buying these cards (or any Nvidia GPU after the 1080ti is getting fleeced.

Are you implying AMD or Intel have a better deal on offer at that price point? Because I'm not seeing it.

 

[SF Kosmo]

I'm not impressed with the 4060 or 4060 Ti, but it is increasing performance per dollar compared to last gen Nvidia cards. The same probably can't be said for AMD's low to mid-range over AMD's 30% discounted last gen cards.

4060 series is a good generational leap in today's market if you consider inflation. Cost per transistor has increased. At least Nvidia increased value over their last gen cards...

RX 7600 launches in 2-3 days and AMD still doesn't want to give us the price... with no known date for anything between 7600 and 7900 XT.

Nvidia improved price/performance at every price point this generation.


7600 will drop in price shortly after launch if AMD gets greedy with the MSRP again. Why doesn't AMD launch it at $200-$230 so that it can have a decent price/performance gain over the $199-$209 6600 that you can pick up today and get great reviews? Instead AMD will probably choose to launch it at $280-$300, get panned, and then the market will force the price to drop as it has done with the overpriced 7900 XT, overpriced Zen4 and all the low end last gen 30% discounted RDNA2 cards.

Performance/$ improvement did matter for me for the 4070. I give Nvidia some slack over the $100 gen/gen price increase because of inflation and they increased VRAM by 50%.

The 4070 beats the mythical $699 3080 in terms of perf/$, and the 4070 is a better GPU overall since it has 12 vs. 10 GB of VRAM, is way more efficient, and has frame-generation.

Nvidia improved price/performance at every price point this generation. The only GPU company to do so.

Yeah, honestly, I think their big mistake was starting at the top price point and working down. If they launched their $800 card as their flagship, alongside a $600 card, and then launched a Titan and a mainstream $400 card a little after it probably would have gone over better, rather than making the 4090 the flagship, which is stupidly expensive and overpowered.

 

[LavitzSlambert]

Are you implying AMD or Intel have a better deal on offer at that price point? Because I'm not seeing it.

No, PC gaming as a whole has been a terrible value since the mining craze began. It’s just Nvidia has gouged like never before. It’s embarrassing they’re charging so much for an 8GB card that Is barely even mid range.

 

[SF Kosmo]

No, PC gaming as a whole has been a terrible value since the mining craze began. It’s just Nvidia has gouged like never before. It’s embarrassing they’re charging so much for an 8GB card that Is barely even mid range.

They definitely specced out their cards this gen before the collapse of crypto, and the upper range of their line are priced above what gamers will pay. They're also specced way beyond what gamers need, and I frankly don't think the 4080 and 4090 were meant to sell to gamers.

A lot of these decisions have to be made years in advance and it's obvious nVidia didn't correctly estimate the market's appetite for monster $1000+ video cards. And they have a lot of inventory sitting in warehouses as a result.

But I don't really get your argument when it comes to these new mainstream/mid-range cards. They are offering pretty decent gen-on-gen gains in features, efficiency, and performance for the same price (which is actually cheaper if you factor inflation). The $300-$400 price range is the historic sweet spot for what gamers will actually pay.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

They definitely specced out their cards this gen before the collapse of crypto, and the upper range of their line are priced above what gamers will pay. They're also specced way beyond what gamers need, and I frankly don't think the 4080 and 4090 were meant to sell to gamers.

A lot of these decisions have to be made years in advance and it's obvious nVidia didn't correctly estimate the market's appetite for monster $1000+ video cards. And they have a lot of inventory sitting in warehouses as a result.

But I don't really get your argument when it comes to these new mainstream/mid-range cards. They are offering pretty decent gen-on-gen gains in features, efficiency, and performance for the same price (which is actually cheaper if you factor inflation). The $300-$400 price range is the historic sweet spot for what gamers will actually pay.

you know when reviews drop for the 4060?

 

[Esppiral]

So between a 4070 and 4060ti what should I pick? Which one is the most powerful? Those naming conventions drive me crazy.

 

[Silver Wattle]

So between a 4070 and 4060ti what should I pick? Which one is the most powerful? Those naming conventions drive me crazy.

4070.

 

[SportsFan581]

But I don't really get your argument when it comes to these new mainstream/mid-range cards. They are offering pretty decent gen-on-gen gains in features, efficiency, and performance for the same price (which is actually cheaper if you factor inflation). The $300-$400 price range is the historic sweet spot for what gamers will actually pay.

It's true that they have typically improved 20% or so between 60 series generations (outside of the impressive 70% jump between 960/1060 spurred by AMD's Polaris), thus the 4060 isn't really positioned that bad assuming Nvidia hasn't cherry picked the benchmarks too aggressively. The jump between 3060ti and 4060ti seems really anemic though, if they had made the base card 16GB they might have had something that would really fly off the shelves.

They've done much better than I had expected with the lower part of the stack. At least cards still exist in this price range.

 

[Rickyiez]

Anyone buying these cards (or any Nvidia GPU after the 1080ti is getting fleeced.

I bought the RTX3080 at $699 during launch . Such a champ of price/performance back then .

 

[SF Kosmo]

I bought the RTX3080 at $699 during launch . Such a champ of price/performance back then .

30 series launch when you could actually get cards at retail was a fleeting glimpse of what could have been lol.

 

[LavitzSlambert]

They definitely specced out their cards this gen before the collapse of crypto, and the upper range of their line are priced above what gamers will pay. They're also specced way beyond what gamers need, and I frankly don't think the 4080 and 4090 were meant to sell to gamers.

A lot of these decisions have to be made years in advance and it's obvious nVidia didn't correctly estimate the market's appetite for monster $1000+ video cards. And they have a lot of inventory sitting in warehouses as a result.

But I don't really get your argument when it comes to these new mainstream/mid-range cards. They are offering pretty decent gen-on-gen gains in features, efficiency, and performance for the same price (which is actually cheaper if you factor inflation). The $300-$400 price range is the historic sweet spot for what gamers will actually pay.

Somewhere along the way, between 2018 and 2020 people either forgot how video card released used to be. Or it was taken over by new PC gamers with more money than sense. $300 to $400 used to be top of the line cards. Gains in features, power, and efficiency? All that is a given with any upgrade. It is expected. If you aren’t releasing a card with all of those things, you may as well not even put out a product. In fact history shows we used to get improvements in all of tiles ways, AND at the same price or lower every couple years.

 

[twilo99]

 

[SportsFan581]

Somewhere along the way, between 2018 and 2020 people either forgot how video card released used to be. Or it was taken over by new PC gamers with more money than sense. $300 to $400 used to be top of the line cards. Gains in features, power, and efficiency? All that is a given with any upgrade. It is expected. If you aren’t releasing a card with all of those things, you may as well not even put out a product. In fact history shows we used to get improvements in all of tiles ways, AND at the same price or lower every couple years.

Both AMD and Nvidia have literally re-badged video cards to fill out the lineups before so anything goes really. The amount of Nvidia cards based on the G92 is staggering ( https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/nvidia-g92.g58 ), that sucker just wouldn't die. It was a great card though, had the 9800GT Green version for years, they were even still releasing G92 specific patches for the first game in the TR trilogy.

No question the value has gotten really bad though. Eventually things might improve though, if enough buyers continue to vote with their wallets.