as much as I agree with you, I don’t think nvidia learned anything. GeForce GPUs comprise such a small portion of their profit at this point that even though sales weee likely a bit underwhelming on cards they’ll just continue selling them at inflated prices. I’d be shocked if the 5090 is less than 2 grand, and I can imagine the following cards are that much better. Get ready for the 5070 to be 700 bucks or something deranged like that.
RX 6600 has to be everyone’s go to entry-level GPU at this point. In some countries you could find them used for under $120 and there’s virtually no competition at that price point
@stipe1615 You might be interested in the next rx 8000 series from amd. I've heard the rx8800 will have the 4080's performance for 400$. This might be BS of course because leaks are never 100% true.
Have a 6600 (bought just before the gpu prices dropped from the mining/covid peak 😢🥺😅) and honestly it's an amazing card, runs most of the games I play at 1440p with high settings (except ray tracing obviously) and decent fps with fsr2. Obviously I'd rather have something better, but it's good enough for now.
I went from buying a card every gen to making them last as long as possible. In other words, I used to upgrade because I loved the new hardware. Now I only upgrade out of necessity.
Same here. I only upgrade the GFX card if there is a game that I really want to play. Same goes for the platform. That is why I am still on a 9900k CPU, it still has enough horsepower for gaming .... and lower latency than the modern chiplet stuff.
Whether I love the new hardware or not, I always upgrade out of necessity. My first build was 8700k 1080ti, sold it during the pandemic for a 3070 laptop and built a 4090 rig when it was launched.
I predominantly play esports games but loved new hardware and would typically upgrade each gen. I purchased a 7900XTX and now I’m done, honestly this GPU was stupid expensive and I simply won’t need more for half a decade
When the mid range was around $200-300, it wasn't that big of a decision, now that it is $500-900, it requires a bit more thought, especially since salaries haven't exactly kept up
The biggest Problem of the 3060 and the 4060 are, that they're RTX cards, although not capable of delivering good raytracing performance. And so they're completely overpriced, while promising a feature they can not properly provide.
Exactly!! RT just isn't a legitimate selling point for cards right now as the performance is shocking. Making people pay extra for something that doesn't perform well is bs.
If they removed their tensor cores, and any other silicon dedicated to raytracing, upscaling or frame generation, there would be more room for native rasterisation and a better memory interface.
The problem with the RTX 4060 is that it's actual an RTX 4050 in specs, labelled as a 4060 - as such doesn't really even beat the RTX 3060 in performance and loses in price-to-performance.
@@martineylesdumb comment so you want a gpu to be ol basic boring gaming only hardware ? Tensor core at this year and time and other dedicated hardware accelerator is much welcomed that's why AMD and Intel added their own dedicated hardware too, go buy old gpu if you love traditional gpu!!
@@Eleganttf2 Not dumb at all. If there aren't enough tensor cores to be useful they're a waste of silicon. There is a point having them on a high end card, but not on a low end card.
exactly my situation. sitting tight on my 1070. Couldn't get a hold of any GPU during the crypto boom, so waited out for 40 series. What a disappointment.
@@cideway Oh no, I am sorry to hear that, nothing worse then being forced to do it, so team Red or Green ? last Gen or this Gen ? New or Second ? If only Spock were here he'd be fascinated with this illogical dilemma, but not really much help besides a single raised eyebrow.
Also have 1070, bought PS5, now aiming for PS5 Pro end of this year. Am considering a new GPU when new gen comes out beginning of next year. But with EU prices it will be even more expensive than already crazy MSRP. I wonder how much would I need to pay for some 8800XT.
You could have grabbed a 6950xt for like 600 dollars after the crypto boom, but I guess you were speculating that nvidia will actually offering a good value generation while sitting on the biggest stockpile of inventory in the history of the company. That was not the best bet, right? Nvidia new they can't offer good value this generation, so they did not even tried to do so, but went hard on at least having a giant performance lead with the 4090 and 4080. That did work out pretty well for them and for a lot of gamers who just went for old AMD and Nvidia cards instead when there was still too much inventory with both brands.
That would be amazing. You could check instantly, if it really sucks or you just feel like it does. This gen definitely felt like it sucked pretty hard and... it does suck. Last gen felt amazing.... until prices exploded because oh Crypto and shortages.... and then it sucked as hard. And before that... lets just not talk about the rtx 2000 series shall we? Rx 5000 was a mixed bag. And before that was the golden age of GPUs with GTX 1000 series, which we all are nostalgic for.
What I'm thinking. Using inflation as an excuse isn't gonna work when you still get paid the same. If people can't afford your gpus they can't afford gpus.
This is the problem with using inflation. 1-Salaries aren't inflation-linked. So you earn more, and typically have less because other things also went up. 2-Items don't go up just because inflation does. Some things do, some things don't. The amount is also not the same as the average. Some things might go up by 50%, some drop by 30%. 3-Even if inflation does cause the item to go up, the item doesn't need to proportionately increase. £500 GPU with £300 profit, £200 costs, means that you have a 33% profit margin. 10% inflation pushes it to a £550 GPU with £220 costs, but your profit increased to £330. Which is larger than the amount required to counter the costs of inflation.
@@Patrick-y4d1z only salaries do follow inflation as they are its component too. In fact, save for shock events, salaries tend to outrun inflation across a few years.
@@thelazyworkersandwich4169 "using inflation as an excuse isn't gonna work when still paid the same " then sorry you have MUCH bigger problem than buying a computer hardware component and that's entirely YOUR problem
@@jensenhuangnvidiaCEO GPU's arent just for graphics anymore, in fact they changed the nomenclature to be "general processing units" These cards are not for consumers anymore. Get ready to be forced into cloud gaming, where even the consoles will live.
@@samserious1337 Correct, because people had choices of actually running the hardware on their own system. AI is like the bitcoin mining rush, without an end and can be done on any number of gpu's added to the proverbial pot. Most importantly, its here to stay compared to crypto mining. Nvidias moving into the top 3 largest companies in the world didnt happen because of the gaming industry, in fact AI is replacing that role for the company entirely.
Companies like nvidia had two possible paths to follow: Selling lots of video cards at a low price, or selling less video cards at a premium price and obtain the same net profit... obviously, they've chosen the latter. I've been building my own Pcs since early 2000s and I always upgraded my video card every christmas. The performance upgrade was always totally worth it. Now I'm just stuck with my 9th gen cpu and my 3060ti, why? because current prices feel like they're scamming you, I can easily pay for the greatest hardware out there, but I cant stop thinking than half of what I'm paying is going directly to some CEO's pocket who randomly put a price tag on a product that should be cheaper...
6:00 "But surprisingly, they've actually kept pace, offering the same level of terribleness each time." 👈👈 That sums up Nvidia pretty nicely. And why I haven't upgraded since 2016.
whats even worse is they've gone out of their way to keep people from buying last gen high end cards NiB after the next generation releases.. e.g. the 1080ti was a force buyback from retailers to get it off the market so it didn't compete with the RTX 2080 that was slower. the 3080/3080ti/3090 were pretty much gone within a month or so of the 40 series launch at most retailers even though we know they over produced them leading up to the 40 series launch. so where did the cards go? pretty much why i've stuck with AMD cards for the last 4 generations because i can't be bothered to buy the over priced crap being released when i can get last gen for half the price while only being 10-15% slower.
Another important thing to note is that while prices rose thanks to inflation, most people's wages didn't. So many people can't really afford to shop at the same performance tier anymore.
For most people increase in salaries outpaced inflation. If yours didn't whose fault is it? This is a perfect example of an average whining gamer - be a useless individual wasting half his life on living in fake reality, while b...ing about stagnating income in the real world. LOL
@@HunterTracks Obviously not here, since this room is overcrowded with whiners who can't connect the dots between their gaming addiction and lagging real life income, while complaining about GPUs they can't afford.
In a lot of cases it is even worse than that because local retailers (in Greece for example) add another 50/100 euros, or more, to already overpriced products, making them even less worthwhile.
Yep eu very often gets fuked over. Like for example right now the oled 4k monitors are going nearly 30-50% over what they're in us, even tax included. I saw people getting the msi 950$ one for 700-800$+- due to various discounts, meanwhile here it's around the equivalent of 1600-2000$ usd. Not everyone in Europe live in germant or Norway either, so the price increase for some of the poorer eu countries is extremely bad.
xx60 8GB - $250, xx60ti 12GB - $300 xx70 12GB - $400, xx70ti 16GB - $500 xx80 16GB - $700, xx80ti 20GB - $800 xx90 with 24GB+ - $1000 (but as a HALO product for semi-professional use for AI it could be $1200)
@@ornatus9616 I got a MSI Radeon HD 6950 for $300 back in the day.. Miss those GPU prices. Weirdly enough, now I have a 6800XT (which cost a hellofa lot more). AMD has been weird with their numbering schemes on their gpu's.
That was also back in the days of SLI, where it wasn’t unreasonable to expect someone to buy two of those 70 class gpus. I knew a few people with SLI 970’s for example.
My biggest struggle with Nvidia is that they lock their cards in every way possible (BIOS, Voltage, Power Level, PCI-E lanes, ect.) and only put the minimum amount of reasonable VRAM in. It is like paying extra to make it worse. Like buying a Lambo with 700hp but it is restricted to 100mph and the restriction is obligated and costs extra.
I bought a used RTX 3090 for €600 with 24 GB of VRAM and do not plan to upgrade for quite some time. The greediness of the duopoly is hard to cope with, no welcome atmosphere for buying.
Yep, but they already have a plan for you too. It is called: Software. There is no real reason why certain things would not work on a 3090 but they will restrict their future software to newer cards that performe the same as the last generation. @@astarothmarduk3720
There are certainly limits of the chip itself but after the 900 series Nvidia does not allow you to find out the limit by your own but give you a hard cap that you cannot exceed. There is no silicon lottery anymore. @@ПавелКисельков-ъ3ф
Sell the 1080 and for an extra $100 get a 2080 super. I got a 2080 super and just gave my 1080 to a friend. The performance increase is like 30% raw and even more when you factor in DLSS.
Laughing while seeing the 7900XT costing 1000USD and the 7900 XTX costing 1200USD, here in Brazil, even after AMD cut prices. Nvidia is even more expensive, im not buying any graphics card on these stupid prices anytime soon.
@Pidalin that's pretty high, but Brazil has it worse when it comes to tech. Their wages are lower, their currency is weaker, but gaming hardware is high anyways. Their games used to be cheaper, but they keep getting more expensive.
@@sodapopinksi667 It's the same here in Czech Republic, our salaries are like 1/3 of german ones, but we pay more for everything, our streaming services have regioblocked half of content, our food from western supermarket chains is second grade quality for higher price than in Germany etc....new PC game here was mostly for like 40 eur, that was for many years, it was cheaper in boxed version in local shops than on steam with global prices, but now, even prices of boxed versions are the same like on steam, which is mostly 60 eur for new game. I think it's really not fair and you pay even more because you have to pay in eur when your currency is not euro. From what I found, average salary in Brazil is very similar to my country, I don't know about housing prices, that skyrocketed here in last few years, especially after energy crisis after war in ukraine started.
This was one awesome analysis, well done! I only miss the same repricing done for the highest-end GPUs, so yes definitely that followup would be much welcome!
@@UltimateByte I'm usually the same with the "reasonable price" thing but I couldn't upgrade my Pascal card because of the mining boom, so ended up waiting two years longer than I wanted to. Then ideally I should have waited for the 50 series but I'd waited too long already, so I bit the bullet and got stung with a 4070.
@@Sid-Cannon Doesn't astonish me that you agree, probably like most people, otherwise everyone would have a 4090. For now I'm stuck as well with no reasonable upgrade to make.. I had a good deal on the RX6800 during cypto boom, at 500€. I'd go with a 4080Ti/Super if it didn't cost more than twice what I paid for my previous card, there is no way I'm paying 1200€ for an upgrade, that doesn't make any sense.
@@UltimateByte Yeah same here, and though the 4070 Ti Super does acheive that twice as much performance or more as my current card in pretty much every situation at 1440p I just couldn't justify spending almost double the amount of money as I payed for my 2070S to do so.
I upgrade every 4-5 Years~. My goals are not based on % of the GPU performance jumps per generation. My expectations are linked to FPS. I do not upgrade unless i get under 60 FPS regularly on different games. Example: If i can play 4 out of 5 games (tripple A) at 60 FPS or higher i see no reason to upgrade. At 2 out of 5 games under 60 FPS...its time to think about upgrades. Currently running a 6900 XT Nitro and a R5 5600x for 3 Years now and they are both still going super strong in 1440p. Might swap with RX 8000 and new R5 8000 CPUS.
I basically do the same. Perhaps tweaking settings like shadow quality down a bit some times, as it barely impacts quality, whist pumping a few % up on the FPS. I've also got a 6900 XT (Sapphire Toxic), and originally had a 3800X when I built my system a few years ago, but upgraded this to a 5800X 3D, the 3D cache gives a nice boost in performance, and was way cheaper to do than switching to AM5 (as that would need new motherboard and RAM as well of course). I've no intention of going to 70xx XT/X (or 40xx) cards, as there isn't enough of a performance increase, and poor monetary value anyway atm.
It's not about a set number of generations before upgrading. I have a GTX 1080Ti that I came much closer to upgrading to the 3080 when it came out, than anything after that. I don't like to feel fleeced, and at 1440p the GTX1080ti is still a monster. I won't upgrade until I get a 600 USD card (what I paid for the GTX1080Ti) that doubles the framerate, which isn't much to ask when you're upgrading from a 2017 card, no?
I got a used RTX 3090, even an Asus ROG Strix model, for €600 which is in that price range. 250W power consumption at 1680MHz/0.731V, the frequency slighty under stock and reachable with any model.
@@moldetaco2281fuck the 7800XT. Yes it's a good upgrade but this entire generation is trash value. I'm holding out for another unicorn like the GTX1080Ti maybe 5000/8000 series. Every AMD/Nvidia GPU I've bought since 1998 has been a legendary hit, won't stop now.
Hi Tim, awesome analysis, it really gave a great visualization to a feeling of lackluster products and too high prices. Id really love a high end analysis too since there expectations are even higher and small percentages can result in quite a lot of money. And you already showed that the low to mid tier products are about 20% too expensive.
Well, today you can take RX6600 and have enough performance to run games in 1080p mostly on high preset. But if you go for good productivity in 2K/4K your wallet will scream)
@@X_irtz I'm not sure of exactly when he's referring to, but my first three GPUs in the late 90s were all $100-200, and they were high end models at the time. I believe that you could still buy decent GPUs for under $200 well into the 2000s.
I went the whole hog and jumped from GTX1060 6GB (£210) to a 6950XT (£540) after 6 1/2 years... I'm hoping it'll last me until intel becomes competative and the duopoly collapses.
Broke my monitor this time last year, so replaced a 1440p with a 4k and my 5700XT was not liking it at all (cracking card, keeping it around as a backup). Got a 7900XT (Sapphire Pulse) to replace it for £750, which I think was a decent price for the time.
It is great to see that you tackle such a complex data-driven content. I think you did a great job in presenting the data without letting the amount of numbers overwhelm the viewer.
From the perspective of a statistician (me), the way this data has been interpreted isn't quite correct. You are measuring Upgrade Cycle (Independent Variable), Relative Performance Uplift (Mediator/Moderator), and Satisfaction (Dependent Variable). You need to keep this in mind. Your Demographics look as follows using cumulative percentages for 80% of Population Satisfied: Every Generation: 150% (because this is how you scaled your later graphs) Two Generations: 180% Three Generation: 200% Four Generations: 200% Five Generations: 300% You only have 3 upgrade cycles mapped to your graphs over 4 years, so we can't test Four Gen and Five Gen (Although Four is the same as three so we can say a little about that). The constant shifting of the trend line to new baseline positions is interesting, but the way the interpretation continues to roll along with the shift isn't quite interpreting this data correctly. You need to interpret the effect of Upgrade Cycle choice on Satisfaction with this type of data (also use cumulative % for your graph at 1:40 - it took me two minutes to convert it). The mechanism driving this is Relative Performance Uplift - but remember that this is not your dependent variable so you shouldn't be interpreting it like a dependent variable (it is probably a moderator). Across all of the graphs, products released immediately after the previous one have a lower chance of meeting the requirements for "satisfaction" year-on-year (because this is 150%) and meeting this requirement on a rolling basis will fall short for all low performing years. This doesn't mean that these cards are a "bad buy", because that is not what you are testing here. It means that people who buy every generation are less likely to be satisfied with the Performance Uplift, compared to those who upgrade every three generations or four generations (who both require 200%). Even two year upgraders are more likely to be satisfied (at their 180%). This is because graphics card performance uplift is always going to be unstable year on year. There will be some bad years and some good years, as you have pointed out. You should resist the urge to use this data to conflate "bad buy" with a particular generation (if you are indeed basing this on satisfaction rates). If "good buy" is linked with satisfaction, then the lag between purchases is the thing to talk about. You should recommend that to avoid this "good year/bad year problem", people upgrade every 3 or 4 years, which you definitely do start alluding to at 19:25! You are overstretching to suggest that the data is telling GPU companies to change their approach (as only 9% of buyers are year-on-year buyers). Two-year, Three-year, and Four-year buyers are 75% of the market (at 0:59)! Your graphs suggest that these buyers are very likely to meet their thresholds for satisfaction (at 80% of population thresholds). More respect should be shown for your 4-year timeframe - use it! This is a good move you have made! Many fields use 5-year cycles to create rolling norms for performance data, because year-on-year is often invalid, and you can see here why. So you are following an approach approximating good practice here, but you should interpret this as testing the relationship between Upgrade Cycle (Independent Var), Relative Performance Uplift (Mediator/Moderator), and Satisfaction (Dependent Variable) - not GPU performance. Whether a GPU is a good buy (in the absolute sense), relative to other factors is highly context sensitive, and your normal approach to reviews are a far superior means of making such a judgment. Feel free to reach out to me if you want to work on your methodology.
Just a random response - great explanation! I however did a similar analysis in Oct 2023 for the last gen to the current gen where I set the baseline comparison as the 3080 and 6800 XT and came to very similar conclusions, even though I did not have the issue of a dependent variable. I just set my conditions for a "Good Uplift" at 30%, which is great coincidence with the polled community! Based on my analysis, my hit prices line up with Tim's for the X60 to X70 class. Here are my hit prices for the high-end: - RTX 4070 Ti /RX 7900 XT - ~$650 - RTX 4080 / RX 7900 XTX - ~$850 - RTX 4090 - ~$1100 Would be cool to see what Tim calculates for his high-end GPUs.
For a rough comparison, he did ok. Comparing a niche product to average for everything inflation increases does create a false picture. Probably a thesis paper for a statistician showing all the variables that go into making a GPU.
1.5 years ago i found a small shop that was going bankrupt and he was selling most of his stuff for literally whatever prices i got a 6700xt for 280 euros a 5700x for 210 32 gig ram for 68 euros
unfortunate that the only way you could get pc hardware for a reasonable price at the expense of a person's business but given the state of the pc hardware market back then nobody can blame you for taking advantage of that
Very nicely done, Tim. I do enjoy a good data session! You should do the high-end GPUs too :D. Just to toot my own horn for a minute - I did the same analysis last October and came to very similar conclusions when comparing RX 7000/RTX 4000 with RX6000 and RTX 3000; only problem was I shared my data with a different RUclips channel, not you guys, lesson learned there! For my high-end analysis, I concluded the following based on gaming performance compared to the RTX 3080 for NV and RX 6800 XT for AMD. IMO those two GPUs reset the expectation for what high end performance should provide. I did not account for AI/Compute applications of the higher end GPUs or extra cost for VRAM: - RTX 4070 Ti /RX 7900 XT - ~$650 - RTX 4080 / RX 7900 XTX - ~$850 - RTX 4090 - ~$1100 I would also be interested in a similar analysis for CPUs, understanding that this would be more difficult with changes in chipset and platform, but I think it would be quite interesting and doable.
I'm starting to think that Nvidia and AMD are not really in competition and more so price fixing. The head of each company are actually family members. These prices are just out of control. The Ultra budget list seems to be the only one close to realistic pricing, the rest just go into the stratosphere with the prices.
A duopoly is basically just a monopoly assuming the companies decide to communicate at all. They fake competition, gouge pricing, and then can hide behind the argument that it isn’t a monopoly, while they both put their focus into entirely opposite sides of the gpu space. AMD focuses on consoles and custom SKUs, Nvidia focuses on productivity and AI. The hope here is that Intel can actually shake the market up with their next launch. Otherwise these prices aren’t going to get better. Watch the 4090 still hold a 1300 dollar price tag even after the new generation due to insane pricing.
They are def not competitors. One holds 90 percent of the dedicated GPU market. The other is for those people who insist on getting the value/budget/store brand. Small loud group that will insist they are just as good, while the rest of the world knows the difference. I gave radeon a try, with the Rx 6800. Using that card has made extremely excited that my 4070 Super will be delivered tomorrow. No more dealing with trash AA, and feeling like I have hardware from the PS4 era.
One of your charts hit me right on the nose - I have an RX570 in one machine, a GTX1650 super in another, and an RX6600 in the newest one. That being said, I didn't pay those kind of prices for some of these cards. The GTX1650 super I got near the beginning of the crypto rush, and managed to get it for 180USD. The next year I got an RX6400 for 150USD to put in a rescued Dell Optiplex. Last year I got the RX6600 for 180 USD (only 10 more than I paid earlier that year for a GTX1650 oc). It's not easy, but sometimes you can get a deal - if you're patient and always on the lookout for it.
@@KremsonKhanThat was so in the GTX era. I always buy a **80 Ti card for about 4-5 years and price totally matters. I have a 2080 Ti atm bought a couple months after launch, there was no point upgrading to 3080 Ti and the 40 series doesn't have one yet, but more importantly, the prices are absurd. I don't have high hopes for 50 series.
You forgot to observe that the highest end cards hold their value much better than they did in the past. I bought a 4090 last year for $1600 and just sold it for about the same right now, as I'm temporarily switching to 6950x before 50-series launch. I basically used a 4090 for free. You can easily buy and hold a xx90 card for a year or two and recoup most of your money ahead of the next launch. @@KremsonKhan
@@Navi_xooAs far as ordinary people are concerned 3000 series didn't exist though. All we could do is watch videos about them from people the AIBs sent the cards to. It doesn't matter to me anyway since I don't upgrade every generation. Also: I'll complain about anything, just try me :P
Next gen prising? That is easy! 5060 96 bit memory bus $500 5070 128 bit memory bus $800 5070 ti 128 bit memory $999 5080 192 bit memory bus $1500 5090 256 bit memory bus $3000 That was easy!
I needed an upgrade but wasn't happy with current gen prices, so I just bought used last gen. Best decision for me. Saved money and happy with the performance
I had a GTX 1660 Super for about 5 years, and was so demoralized when I started looking to upgrade last year. I finally budged for an RX 7800 XT, and made the leap to 1440p gaming. It looks great, but the satisfaction of upgrading is pretty hollow after seeing my total build cost. The excitement has been sucked out of the hobby
This current pricing of the GPU market is driving away from PC gaming and actually spend more time with family, friends and personal upskilling for work which is a good thing actually. I don't want to feel stressed and spend $1000 for a GPU that probably won't last 3 years if games are going to have really bad optimizations. The world has gone sideways and I guess I will take a step back and think what's best for myself. I hope PC gamers will too and hopefully that will force them to lower the prices down until the old norm again.
Nice video , but I don’t see the point of doing the 2 charts with and without inflation. The only point of that is generating confusion or giving haters something to rant about. The inflation-less chart is absolutely pointless and confusion inducing. Inflation is not “optional”. It’s not something that only affects some but others not. Inflation affects the prices of everything for everyone. And when talking about any topic , from house prices back in time , to average wages in the past etc , it’s always compared taking inflation into account. The inflation chart is the only one necessary to have an idea of what this GPUs should cost , ignoring inflation is as stupid as comparing prices of old GPUs vs new GPUs with different coins, like US dollars for the old ones and Canadian dollars for the new ones. Those coins have different values , what’s the point?
Really, the only people who should be buying the 3050 6 GB are those who are building on an extreme budged with something like an office pc that doesn't have any supplemental power, in that scenario, it's a great option, for EVERYTHING else, almost anything is better.
@@Pachupp85And yet, the 3050 6 GB, as much as I hate to say it will give better performance than even a 8700G would give you. And, if you add in a dedicated GPU, the APUs lack of enough L3 cache will hamstring you later on. The only reason to go with an APU is if you're only going to do some light gaming. Yeah, the upgrade path is better with AM5, but you also can't build something for $300 with it either. So, on an extreme budget, buying a old Lenovo or other office PC, will give you more bang for your buck. If you've got $600 to build something with, then by all means, the APU route can work.
1070 here, was aiming to upgrade to a 3070 or even a 3080 But need we discuss what happened there. So waiting for 5000 or maybe just bite the Bullet with a 7800, the prices in OZ are still crap, second hand 6700 xt if the price is right. Thank you Tim, brilliant break down of the misery we have all felt, Cheers.
As someone who is currently trying to upgrade from a 1070, this generation has been abysmal to me. I originally was blindly planning on just getting a 4070 since the 1070 was plenty enough for me. Then I started looking into stuff and just... nothing is attractive to me atm. Sure, I could get pretty much anything and it be an upgrade, but I also want future proofing, staying power, etc. and the 4060s don't have that and the 4070 and AMD equivalents are overpriced. This generation is definitely pushing me more into AMD though even though I've used NVidia since the 660. Might just wait for next gen cards and hope and pray they are better, but it's hard to have hope for that after this gen.
I got a Vega 64 back when it launched at below the price of a new Vega 56. That's still the best PC hardware purchase I've ever made. Card lasted up until late last year when i upgraded.
So dont buy cards. Do you think prices will stay the same if lets say Nv sales drop even 40-50% for a month or two? A product cost is what people are willing to pay for it, nothing more and nothing less. If enough(from Nvidia and sellers point of view) people are ready to pay 2000-2500 for 4090 its going to cost 2000-2500.
Nvidia users don't understand common sense at this point, they're completely brainwashed exactly like apple users hence both companies can do whatever they want and their sheep will auto buy it
>A product cost is what people are willing to pay for it, nothing more and nothing less This fallacy ignores that companies *all the time* price products incorrectly for their actual profit target. Too low demand, too high supply costs, too high demand, etc. Companies are run by imperfect supply-demand machines that only sometimes compete (which is the only incentive to decrease prices).
@@mspenelopyYes they do. Data center sales accounted for 80% (14.51 Billion) of the company’s revenue. You then break down the remaining 4ish billion and of that, around 1-1.5 Billion is switch sales so that leaves 2.5-3 Billion for PC GPUs. That’s barely 10% of the companies revenue. By the time you further break out laptop sales (where Nvidia dominates thanks to superior efficiency), desktop GPUs are a small fraction of total revenue. Also these aren’t truly separate markets. If consumer GPUs like the 4080 and especially 4090 are too cheap it absolutely will cut into AI sales. They don’t want to hurt the golden goose for a small potential profit. As long as they have AI sales, nothing changes.
I bought a used 1080ti for 500€ in 2018. I have a 1440p 144hz Monitor and a 9900k. Time to time there is a game i would like to play with RT or with higher refresh than what the card can do. I look at prices, performance and vRam of high-end and mid range cards but can´t really justify buying any. I will ride the machine until some game i really want to play runs at less than 60 fps. After that i will build a new high-end pc.
I would say no, the 1080Ti is still fast enough to play most titles well IMO. Like baldurs gate, CS2. It runs fine with FSR/XeSS. You should really wait one more gen imo. You can still get like 100$ for those 1080ti's as well so factor that in to your next upgrade. I'd be looking at a 5070 (if it has at least 16GB or vram) or the equivalent AMD card in early 2025. Good luck.
Now do the same for CPUs, go even back as far as 2009 if you want, and see what the difference is. I can tell you: Trying to adjust GPU prices for inflation is trying to lessen buyer's remorse. Typically, products sell for similar or even lower prices. People used to call this "progress." With most technology, they still do. GPU makers meanwhile successfully sold you that sinking prices were a thing of the past, that "the more you buy the more you save". And that progress was dead. Would you like to know more?
would buy a 4060ti - If it had a min 192bit bus and 16gb ram at about 300$ usd problem is the standard 4060ti has 8bg ram 128bit bus at 440$ where its cheapest (my region)- thats a shit card at a shit price. not that anyone should buy a card with 8gb vram in 2024, thats just not enough anymore.
Great video, just a few remarks I have to get of my chest: Inflation hits double hard on luxury items like graphics cards. The more of my monthly income I have to spend on groceries, the less money I have for unnecessary stuff like PC hardware, which forces me the shop further down the price range, leaving me with less of a performance increase. Simply comparing fixed price ranges seems like it's not capturing the reality of high-inflation times enough. I don't know if this can or should be included in graphs, though. The price suggestions at the end seem reasonable, if they _include_ taxes (19% over here). Wealth is slowly running out, and way too many people in higher-up positions don't seem to realize or care.
The GTX 1070 situation is PEAK nvidia rip of mentality back firing. Everyone who had a 1070 saw how good the 3060ti was, saw that the 4060 ti is the same crap, and went and bought a used 3060ti for much cheaper, thus saving money.
Great video and a lot of good information here. This concept was well thought out and helpful. I'm down to see you do the same graphs for the high end/enthusiast cards as well.
I’m afraid that this is an irreversible trend. Remember when the first $1000 smartphones got released and everyone on the internet said lol nope? Flagship phones are still $1000+ today and sells very well. I really really hope this is reversible for pc parts but I’m skeptical.
Overall smartphone market shipments declined for 27 months straight. iPhones are predicted to continue to decline even more this year. There are obviously people who buy expensive stuff, but is that enough to carry the company? For Nvidia, they may not care. They have deep pockets paying for their chips. And they'll continue to dip into one pocket after another.
Yeah but a 1000€ smartphone lasts twice as long as a 500€ smartphone back in the day. Compare I dunno an iPhone 4 or 4S against a X. iPhone 4 was unusable after 2-3 years, iPhone X is still usable today even if it's not updated anymore. So in the end the "price per year used" has gone way down!
Yeah, even with a "price correction" with those "super" cards, they all still 5-10% overpriced to be a reasonable choice for upgrade even if we take in mind inflation. Nvidia don't care at all - they now get a lot of money from AI after miners in 2021-2022 and also from those, who decide to buy overpriced RTX4000 vanilla from the start. So they can release RTX5000 with a ridiculous pricing and don't care at all about desktop GPU market.
Great video! I would love to see the same type of video for the high end because prices get really interesting for the top end products, and that's also the market segment that I purchase from
Someone still waiting since 1000 series, but it's only gets worse and more expensive, so people tends to stick with 1060/1080 Ti, trying the golden middle with 3060-12 or desperately going for 4060-8 or 4060 Ti-16 if they can afford it. No, it's will only gets worse, rumours about RTX 5070 are already saying it will be even more expensive and on the level with 4060, so...
This gen I decided to skip a generation. I usually upgrade to a 80ti class every generation. I've noticed I haven't been playing very demanding games or gaming that much in general because I've been busy.
I feel like the people who upgrade less frequently will care more about VRAM, so even if you're on a 10 series card, the regular 4060ti and below are dead in the water.
This is why the 12GB 3060 is doing so well even in 2024. That nonsensical 12GB of VRAM on release became its main selling point later. For hobbyist rendering workloads it's the best card you can get from Nvidia that's still in stock new. To get more than 12GB of VRAM you have to spend hundreds more.
Great video! Thx Tim! The visualization was a bit confusing and it felt rushed. I would like to ask for more videos like this, with more visualization, more time spent explaining the charts and less gpus focused on.
I don't think that you've put enough weight on VRAM, given that you've shown us that 8GB is not enough to properly load textures in recent games. Why would anyone replace their existing 8GB RX480 with an RX 6600, RX 7600 (non xt) or RTX 4060 with the same amount of VRAM, when part of the purpose of upgrading is to prevent any issues displaying textures in new games. The replacement for a RX 480 needs to be a 6700xt or a 7600xt, so these are the cards that need to be well priced against it. The 4060ti 16gb is really the cheapest current gen nvidia card that can be considered as an upgrade over the rx480.
I am on a 1060, its OLD, it doesn't play new games even with EVERYTHING turned off... but new games haven't been worth buying so I haven't worried about it. For me BG3 is a reason to finally upgrade, or rather it is the thing that pushed me over the line since I have been wanting to upgrade for years. I am also one of those who mods games, like Skyrim, it's amazing what can be done with Skyrim with new textures... but that requires Vram, much more than you might expect for a 12-year-old game.... Some of the texture packs can put the Vram use on par with 2023 titles... They also make the game LOOK (not play, just look) like a 2023 game. In other words, for me, for the old games I love and for the freedom to texture mod the hell out of new games I might buy I need Vram... Lots of Vram... The problem is my choices are 7600XT... on a 192-bit bus... clamshell... overpriced... or jump up to 7700XT, more money for less Vram... Slower card with a bus that really isn't wide enough and will become a bottleneck in the future, or a $400 USD card with 12GB Vram... Neither is an acceptable choice. I could accept 12 GB Vram at $300 USD but the 7600XT is really an 8GB card with extra memory on the back of the PCB, it was never really intended to be a 16GB card... it still has the 192-bit bus... and that will be a problem a few years from now. I won't accept 12 GB Vram at $400+ USD, for that much money I want 16GB... The ARC A770 is prefect, $300 USD price (currently, not at launch) 16GB Vram, 256-bit bus... but even after all the driver improvements it's still only really a 6600 XT competitor isn't it... that card is 4 years old now. Do you see the dilemma here, there is nothing in any of the 3 manufacturers lineups that appeals to me... I would stretch the budget up to $400 USD but at that price I am not happy with 12 GB Vram and the cards below $400 USD are crap... I am really hoping that Intel's Battlemage will offer something in the approximately $400 USD price range with a 256-bit bus and 16GB Vram, something with the speed to match at least the 7700XT. The lower end of the market should have moved up to 12 GB Vram, and the middle segment should have moved to 16 GB Vram but neither happened, 8GB might be enough for 2023 but it won't be enough for 2025...
I upgrade when the next GPU I buy is approximately double the performance and around $200-300. It's getting more and more difficult to do that even buying used.
This was a really interesting way to visualize the data. It makes a lot of things that made sense intuitively make sense from a data-driven perspective. I'd love to see more content where you explore these price dynamics. The higher end of the market might be interesting, but I'd personally be interested in seeing your takes on what the next generation has to provide.
Really great video. Would have been cool to overlay what things currently cost vs what they should cost to really clearly visualize the price discrepancies
Coming for a gtx960, I was pondering what to buy. I settled for a 2nd handed rx6600 for 130 euro. Damned, I don't see any reason to spend more on this generation.
Great video Tim, and thanks to the people who filled out the survey. had 960 2GB, looked at used 1660S 6GB before boom, got used 3070 8GB postcrash w/ -100msrp on a good aib model, nvidia hasn't seen my money directly since 2015. hope the new 6000/used 5000 series are both good.
Great Video ! It's funny recently i made a similar check with prices atm and inflation compared to MRSPs. I could find in old news articles, put them in an Inflation calculator for my country and was relatively surprised that most of the price increases only compared to naming were okeish, 50/60/70 Series were all not to overpriced in Germany compared to the last years( i started with the GTX 200 Gen) some generations had better uplifts and some worse the 1000er Series was a golden Gen so only comparing to that one is not really fair. the 70 Series overall was the first where really some discrepancy showed, but man the 80/90/95 or High end Series were the ones where it got wild with the corporate greed, that was the silly part I detected, the price increases are insane there compared to all generations i directly compared.
I was using a second hand GTX 980ti from 2017 to 2022, still a good card. manage to pick up a GTX Titan XP with 12GB of VRAM in 2022 and still very good today with plenty of VRAM. forgot the last time i brought a new GPU, i just buy a second hand one, give it a clean, apply new heatpaste, overclock it for heavy games. I also use a 1440p 144hz Display, for Smooth framerate i cap to 72 or 48 FPS depending on what graphics i want to use. No interest in paying those prices.
Very interesting data cruching video (but I'm biased, I love data crunching). What is tintersting to see is that some products were/are outliers in a good way for each generation. One small criticism though: you only bundled data by price range buckets, I think it would have been interesting to also show the same data by aggregating data by "series" (X050/X060/X070 for Nvidia, X600/X700/X800 series for AMD) as I think a lot of people are reluctant to "go down the stack" when changing their GC (Ie: going from a 1070 to a 3060 "feels" like a downgrade). That doesn't mean the data you showed are interesting, on the contrary, this is, as always with you guys, amazing work.
I didn't pull the trigger on the 3060 or 3060ti because crypto boom prices persisted here long after the boom, and pushed next gen prices up with them. That and hearing about all the VRAM problems made me think even if a 4060 were "fast enough", it would age terribly as a card i want to keep for the next 4 years or so. I would definitely go AMD if I didn't also want the card for the occasional Blender Cycles render. Crossing my fingers for ZLUDA support.
Another important consideration is that with the 10 and even the 20 series many gamers were still playing on a 1080p screen while nowadays high-refresh 1440p or even future proofing with a 4k OLEDs are a thing. I'm still on a 1070 and while this gen would have been okay to upgrade by your metrics, I now want more. The GPU development has not kept up with monitor or game development and I think this is also a part of why people are hesitant to buy these current products. Looking at your old benchmarks the 1070 was a 1440p/~80-100fps card. So based on the monitor develoment I want my next card to deliver at least 1440p/240Hz (~2.5x). Even the upgrade to 4k without further framerate increases would be 2.25x which is a reasonable expectation after 8 years. But it feels like GPUs are simply trailing behind the increase in visual fidelity without much performance improvement. The 7800XT still only does 108fps average in 1440p according to your benchmark and that just seems disappointing when my 8 year old 1070 could already do that in the games of its time. To name an example: it gets nearly the same framerate in BF2042 as the 1070 did in BF4 and I'm just not seeing where the visual development went in all these years. Sure, the latest battlefield looks better but is it really that much better?
amazing video! At the beginning of February I switched from a garbage 1080p 60 screen to a 1440p 165Hz display and swaped my then GTX 1060 for a 4060Ti(16GB) @475€. That upgrade alone was really really cool. Tho it was not sufficient to power my new display on max refresh in all games so I swaped again for a 4070Super @652€ and that card is lovely. I love the new features like VSR or RTX HDR, like thats the stuff I wanna buy a card for, making clever use of existing hardware to enhance the experience beyond just FPS. I payed 330€ for my 1060 back in the days so 652 seems high but not only did the price double, so did minimum wage here so I am okay with that.
Definitely interested in the upper end of the market. Also would be interesting to see this data with the prices corrected for the ‘onshelf’ prices rather than the RRP (from memory there was a site tracking sale prices of cards) as particularly the 30 series suffered from not existing at rrp for much of the world
Other than what I believe is the oldest GPU I currently have in the house (which is fanless GT520) I've held on to a modest 1050 Ti until very recently, which at the time replaced a similarly priced budget GPU (a GTX 750 Ti) I took the plunge and managed to get a 3070 for a decent price (with warranty) and far better pricing than the current cards would cost. And since I use stuff which requires Nvidia's proprietary tech a Radeon card wasn't an option.
Good video. I guess the only missing info was the TSMC increasing prices in general, and further increasing in particular for Nvidia after they tried using Samsung for the 3xxx series.
I think it would also be interesting to look into how good the current cards are at their release date. How well do they do in their current games? For example Witcher 3, how good fps did you get with a then current GPU at a relevant resolution. I know resolutions and monitors have also gotten better, maybe 1440p is now around the same as 1080p was 5 years ago. How much fps did you play at back then ?
I got a GTX 1080 in a system when the street price of a 1080 was $1200 US (February 2018) for $1800 system price (the 1080 was bought at retail price by the SI), then in the next boom, a friend had a 3060Ti that he got for $965 US, so i traded him my 1080 (because his system had a poor PSU with a 190W PCIE rail) and $300. My current GPU is a 7900XT that i got for $773 shipped. Performance increases were 28% and 180%.
When new GPU first came out, I found in past that "normal" after 6 months to 12 months, the price drops, and any hardward issues are known about ex. vapour chambers, melting power plugs, etc. I normally only upgrade out of necessity and try to keep my GPU for as long as I can, for as long as it plays the games I wish to play. I tried to get the best GPU I can afford when do upgrading back in 2018; this was the RX580, which I got 6 years out of, and in the bad GPU market early in 2023, the RX7900XTX, after the first big price drop to was just under £900 for a sapphire pluse in the UK The AM4 socket in way pay for this I need to upgrade and testing from Hardward Box show me that 5800X3D was very good bet for the last best upgrade on AM4, and this CPU saved me having to moving to a AM5 base system so extra cash when into getting just a upgrade on my GPU.
im just ignoring this gen because its so absurdly priced. $1000 USD for an 80 class card??? screw that, ill wait for something actually good thx
I fear that the next gen won't be any cheaper.
@@stuartthurstan true, Nvidia's market cap is through the roof, AMD being AMD and Intel still solving driver issues.
You're going to have to wait forever.
@@JoeMama-yl1owyou trolling? Because you need to be real thick to think that’s always the case.
Cheers mate.
as much as I agree with you, I don’t think nvidia learned anything. GeForce GPUs comprise such a small portion of their profit at this point that even though sales weee likely a bit underwhelming on cards they’ll just continue selling them at inflated prices. I’d be shocked if the 5090 is less than 2 grand, and I can imagine the following cards are that much better. Get ready for the 5070 to be 700 bucks or something deranged like that.
RX 6600 has to be everyone’s go to entry-level GPU at this point. In some countries you could find them used for under $120 and there’s virtually no competition at that price point
I bought the 6600 XT from a miner for 140€, bless the mining crash.
i built a new pc recently with 7800x3d but kept my old rx 6600 because i feel nothing is worth buying right now, hoping 5000 series will be good
They are still 200 used in Europe..
@stipe1615 You might be interested in the next rx 8000 series from amd. I've heard the rx8800 will have the 4080's performance for 400$. This might be BS of course because leaks are never 100% true.
Have a 6600 (bought just before the gpu prices dropped from the mining/covid peak 😢🥺😅) and honestly it's an amazing card, runs most of the games I play at 1440p with high settings (except ray tracing obviously) and decent fps with fsr2. Obviously I'd rather have something better, but it's good enough for now.
I went from buying a card every gen to making them last as long as possible.
In other words, I used to upgrade because I loved the new hardware. Now I only upgrade out of necessity.
I went from being enthusaistic about new hardware releases to be completely non-chalant and unexcited.
Same here. I only upgrade the GFX card if there is a game that I really want to play. Same goes for the platform. That is why I am still on a 9900k CPU, it still has enough horsepower for gaming .... and lower latency than the modern chiplet stuff.
Whether I love the new hardware or not, I always upgrade out of necessity. My first build was 8700k 1080ti, sold it during the pandemic for a 3070 laptop and built a 4090 rig when it was launched.
I predominantly play esports games but loved new hardware and would typically upgrade each gen. I purchased a 7900XTX and now I’m done, honestly this GPU was stupid expensive and I simply won’t need more for half a decade
When the mid range was around $200-300, it wasn't that big of a decision, now that it is $500-900, it requires a bit more thought, especially since salaries haven't exactly kept up
Oh absolutely do a follow up on the High End too. Also "predict" what the next Gen "should or could be" if you take those Numbers.
The biggest Problem of the 3060 and the 4060 are, that they're RTX cards, although not capable of delivering good raytracing performance. And so they're completely overpriced, while promising a feature they can not properly provide.
Exactly!! RT just isn't a legitimate selling point for cards right now as the performance is shocking. Making people pay extra for something that doesn't perform well is bs.
If they removed their tensor cores, and any other silicon dedicated to raytracing, upscaling or frame generation, there would be more room for native rasterisation and a better memory interface.
The problem with the RTX 4060 is that it's actual an RTX 4050 in specs, labelled as a 4060 - as such doesn't really even beat the RTX 3060 in performance and loses in price-to-performance.
@@martineylesdumb comment so you want a gpu to be ol basic boring gaming only hardware ? Tensor core at this year and time and other dedicated hardware accelerator is much welcomed that's why AMD and Intel added their own dedicated hardware too, go buy old gpu if you love traditional gpu!!
@@Eleganttf2 Not dumb at all. If there aren't enough tensor cores to be useful they're a waste of silicon. There is a point having them on a high end card, but not on a low end card.
exactly my situation. sitting tight on my 1070. Couldn't get a hold of any GPU during the crypto boom, so waited out for 40 series. What a disappointment.
yep me too, and as someone else said , " I will not bend over and pay these prices "
My 1070 was going strong but it coughed the other day so now having to look at buying a replacement in this market 😢
@@cideway Oh no, I am sorry to hear that, nothing worse then being forced to do it,
so team Red or Green ? last Gen or this Gen ? New or Second ?
If only Spock were here he'd be fascinated with this illogical dilemma, but not really much help besides a single raised eyebrow.
Also have 1070, bought PS5, now aiming for PS5 Pro end of this year. Am considering a new GPU when new gen comes out beginning of next year. But with EU prices it will be even more expensive than already crazy MSRP. I wonder how much would I need to pay for some 8800XT.
You could have grabbed a 6950xt for like 600 dollars after the crypto boom, but I guess you were speculating that nvidia will actually offering a good value generation while sitting on the biggest stockpile of inventory in the history of the company.
That was not the best bet, right?
Nvidia new they can't offer good value this generation, so they did not even tried to do so, but went hard on at least having a giant performance lead with the 4090 and 4080. That did work out pretty well for them and for a lot of gamers who just went for old AMD and Nvidia cards instead when there was still too much inventory with both brands.
Really unique video proposition. We need to keep doing this every release. Good job!
That's a lot of work, also new drivers appears time to time) Probably might be great to see such graphics after full launch of a new generation.
That would be amazing. You could check instantly, if it really sucks or you just feel like it does. This gen definitely felt like it sucked pretty hard and... it does suck. Last gen felt amazing.... until prices exploded because oh Crypto and shortages.... and then it sucked as hard. And before that... lets just not talk about the rtx 2000 series shall we? Rx 5000 was a mixed bag. And before that was the golden age of GPUs with GTX 1000 series, which we all are nostalgic for.
Maybe not every release, but I'd love these as a late-gen "look back" upon value after most of a generation's releases are all out and done.
It seems like my salary doesn't even bother catching up to inflation
What I'm thinking. Using inflation as an excuse isn't gonna work when you still get paid the same. If people can't afford your gpus they can't afford gpus.
If you're not getting a pay bump when most people clearly are then whose fault is it? @@thelazyworkersandwich4169
This is the problem with using inflation.
1-Salaries aren't inflation-linked. So you earn more, and typically have less because other things also went up.
2-Items don't go up just because inflation does. Some things do, some things don't. The amount is also not the same as the average. Some things might go up by 50%, some drop by 30%.
3-Even if inflation does cause the item to go up, the item doesn't need to proportionately increase.
£500 GPU with £300 profit, £200 costs, means that you have a 33% profit margin.
10% inflation pushes it to a £550 GPU with £220 costs, but your profit increased to £330. Which is larger than the amount required to counter the costs of inflation.
@@Patrick-y4d1z only salaries do follow inflation as they are its component too. In fact, save for shock events, salaries tend to outrun inflation across a few years.
@@thelazyworkersandwich4169 "using inflation as an excuse isn't gonna work when still paid the same " then sorry you have MUCH bigger problem than buying a computer hardware component and that's entirely YOUR problem
I will not bend over and pay these prices
Don't worry, there is still plenty of framerate queens who will
THANKS FOR THE LEATHER
Most people won't, but nvidia targets are people with deep pockets.
@@jensenhuangnvidiaCEO GPU's arent just for graphics anymore, in fact they changed the nomenclature to be "general processing units" These cards are not for consumers anymore. Get ready to be forced into cloud gaming, where even the consoles will live.
@@J.erem.y "cloud gaming" completely failed a few years ago.
@@samserious1337 Correct, because people had choices of actually running the hardware on their own system. AI is like the bitcoin mining rush, without an end and can be done on any number of gpu's added to the proverbial pot. Most importantly, its here to stay compared to crypto mining. Nvidias moving into the top 3 largest companies in the world didnt happen because of the gaming industry, in fact AI is replacing that role for the company entirely.
Companies like nvidia had two possible paths to follow: Selling lots of video cards at a low price, or selling less video cards at a premium price and obtain the same net profit... obviously, they've chosen the latter. I've been building my own Pcs since early 2000s and I always upgraded my video card every christmas. The performance upgrade was always totally worth it. Now I'm just stuck with my 9th gen cpu and my 3060ti, why? because current prices feel like they're scamming you, I can easily pay for the greatest hardware out there, but I cant stop thinking than half of what I'm paying is going directly to some CEO's pocket who randomly put a price tag on a product that should be cheaper...
6:00 "But surprisingly, they've actually kept pace, offering the same level of terribleness each time." 👈👈 That sums up Nvidia pretty nicely. And why I haven't upgraded since 2016.
whats even worse is they've gone out of their way to keep people from buying last gen high end cards NiB after the next generation releases.. e.g. the 1080ti was a force buyback from retailers to get it off the market so it didn't compete with the RTX 2080 that was slower. the 3080/3080ti/3090 were pretty much gone within a month or so of the 40 series launch at most retailers even though we know they over produced them leading up to the 40 series launch. so where did the cards go? pretty much why i've stuck with AMD cards for the last 4 generations because i can't be bothered to buy the over priced crap being released when i can get last gen for half the price while only being 10-15% slower.
Another important thing to note is that while prices rose thanks to inflation, most people's wages didn't. So many people can't really afford to shop at the same performance tier anymore.
My wage went from $27/hr 5 years ago to $30/hr last year. Good thing I’ll be done with my engineering degree in a year.
For most people increase in salaries outpaced inflation. If yours didn't whose fault is it? This is a perfect example of an average whining gamer - be a useless individual wasting half his life on living in fake reality, while b...ing about stagnating income in the real world. LOL
@@michael.petraeus statistics for many countries would disagree with you
@@michael.petraeus Are those "most people" in the room with us right now?
@@HunterTracks Obviously not here, since this room is overcrowded with whiners who can't connect the dots between their gaming addiction and lagging real life income, while complaining about GPUs they can't afford.
In a lot of cases it is even worse than that because local retailers (in Greece for example) add another 50/100 euros, or more, to already overpriced products, making them even less worthwhile.
Yep eu very often gets fuked over. Like for example right now the oled 4k monitors are going nearly 30-50% over what they're in us, even tax included. I saw people getting the msi 950$ one for 700-800$+- due to various discounts, meanwhile here it's around the equivalent of 1600-2000$ usd. Not everyone in Europe live in germant or Norway either, so the price increase for some of the poorer eu countries is extremely bad.
@@GFClocked Now try buying pc parts in Africa, in my country its 4x the price.
A $1000 card is over $4000 here.
@@GFClocked yeah I'm talking extra charges on top of currency exchange rates and taxes. It can get ugly really fast
@@heru_ur6017 yeah... It can quickly take something already expensive and make it just not attainable for large groups of people
It's not that bad, considering it's price with taxes.
xx60 8GB - $250, xx60ti 12GB - $300
xx70 12GB - $400, xx70ti 16GB - $500
xx80 16GB - $700, xx80ti 20GB - $800
xx90 with 24GB+ - $1000 (but as a HALO product for semi-professional use for AI it could be $1200)
Nostalgically looking back at an age when a mid xx70 card was just £300.
Which would be, umm, maybe 700 series?
@@samiraperi467 My MSI 970 was £280.
Thank the WEF and Western Governments, instituting policies that are deliberately creating inflation.
@@ornatus9616 I got a MSI Radeon HD 6950 for $300 back in the day.. Miss those GPU prices. Weirdly enough, now I have a 6800XT (which cost a hellofa lot more). AMD has been weird with their numbering schemes on their gpu's.
That was also back in the days of SLI, where it wasn’t unreasonable to expect someone to buy two of those 70 class gpus. I knew a few people with SLI 970’s for example.
My biggest struggle with Nvidia is that they lock their cards in every way possible (BIOS, Voltage, Power Level, PCI-E lanes, ect.) and only put the minimum amount of reasonable VRAM in. It is like paying extra to make it worse. Like buying a Lambo with 700hp but it is restricted to 100mph and the restriction is obligated and costs extra.
I bought a used RTX 3090 for €600 with 24 GB of VRAM and do not plan to upgrade for quite some time. The greediness of the duopoly is hard to cope with, no welcome atmosphere for buying.
Yep, but they already have a plan for you too. It is called: Software. There is no real reason why certain things would not work on a 3090 but they will restrict their future software to newer cards that performe the same as the last generation. @@astarothmarduk3720
так вся мощность видеокарты ограничена именно чипом. Вы же не покупаете gtx 980ti, потому что там стоял лучший чип на то время.
There are certainly limits of the chip itself but after the 900 series Nvidia does not allow you to find out the limit by your own but give you a hard cap that you cannot exceed. There is no silicon lottery anymore. @@ПавелКисельков-ъ3ф
It's starting to look like Apples product segmentation, doesn't it?
I upgrade every 7 years unless the card itself commits seppuku
😂
😂
Don't give them ideas what to ,,improve" :p
I upgrade twice in the past 3 years cause i bought a 1050ti during the mining craze
Yep this is me. Still running on GTX 1080 even though I already upgraded everything expect of GPU/Monitor :DDDD
Great video Tim! I upgraded from a GTX 970 to a GTX 1080 for about $130US this year. Nothing seems to be worth it for 3x the cost or more.
Sell the 1080 and for an extra $100 get a 2080 super. I got a 2080 super and just gave my 1080 to a friend. The performance increase is like 30% raw and even more when you factor in DLSS.
@@josephlozano7792 so you payed 100% for 30%?
Laughing while seeing the 7900XT costing 1000USD and the 7900 XTX costing 1200USD, here in Brazil, even after AMD cut prices. Nvidia is even more expensive, im not buying any graphics card on these stupid prices anytime soon.
I honestly don't blame Brazilians for being pirates until things get better.
well, thats on your Tariffs, not on AMD/Nvidia.
I checked Czech shops and 7900XTX is pretty much exactly for 1200 USD with today exchange rate.
@Pidalin that's pretty high, but Brazil has it worse when it comes to tech. Their wages are lower, their currency is weaker, but gaming hardware is high anyways. Their games used to be cheaper, but they keep getting more expensive.
@@sodapopinksi667 It's the same here in Czech Republic, our salaries are like 1/3 of german ones, but we pay more for everything, our streaming services have regioblocked half of content, our food from western supermarket chains is second grade quality for higher price than in Germany etc....new PC game here was mostly for like 40 eur, that was for many years, it was cheaper in boxed version in local shops than on steam with global prices, but now, even prices of boxed versions are the same like on steam, which is mostly 60 eur for new game. I think it's really not fair and you pay even more because you have to pay in eur when your currency is not euro.
From what I found, average salary in Brazil is very similar to my country, I don't know about housing prices, that skyrocketed here in last few years, especially after energy crisis after war in ukraine started.
This was one awesome analysis, well done! I only miss the same repricing done for the highest-end GPUs, so yes definitely that followup would be much welcome!
When I upgrade my GPU I just want something that is twice as good as what I've got, and it's the same with my CPU upgrades as well.
Kind of the same. Except I would add "at a reasonable price". Which is why I'm sticking with my RX 6800 for now.
@@UltimateByte I'm usually the same with the "reasonable price" thing but I couldn't upgrade my Pascal card because of the mining boom, so ended up waiting two years longer than I wanted to. Then ideally I should have waited for the 50 series but I'd waited too long already, so I bit the bullet and got stung with a 4070.
@@Sid-Cannon Doesn't astonish me that you agree, probably like most people, otherwise everyone would have a 4090.
For now I'm stuck as well with no reasonable upgrade to make.. I had a good deal on the RX6800 during cypto boom, at 500€.
I'd go with a 4080Ti/Super if it didn't cost more than twice what I paid for my previous card, there is no way I'm paying 1200€ for an upgrade, that doesn't make any sense.
I’m good with a 50% upgrade.
Going from 120FPS to 180FPS in a game is good enough for me.
@@UltimateByte Yeah same here, and though the 4070 Ti Super does acheive that twice as much performance or more as my current card in pretty much every situation at 1440p I just couldn't justify spending almost double the amount of money as I payed for my 2070S to do so.
I upgrade every 4-5 Years~. My goals are not based on % of the GPU performance jumps per generation. My expectations are linked to FPS. I do not upgrade unless i get under 60 FPS regularly on different games. Example: If i can play 4 out of 5 games (tripple A) at 60 FPS or higher i see no reason to upgrade. At 2 out of 5 games under 60 FPS...its time to think about upgrades.
Currently running a 6900 XT Nitro and a R5 5600x for 3 Years now and they are both still going super strong in 1440p. Might swap with RX 8000 and new R5 8000 CPUS.
I basically do the same. Perhaps tweaking settings like shadow quality down a bit some times, as it barely impacts quality, whist pumping a few % up on the FPS. I've also got a 6900 XT (Sapphire Toxic), and originally had a 3800X when I built my system a few years ago, but upgraded this to a 5800X 3D, the 3D cache gives a nice boost in performance, and was way cheaper to do than switching to AM5 (as that would need new motherboard and RAM as well of course). I've no intention of going to 70xx XT/X (or 40xx) cards, as there isn't enough of a performance increase, and poor monetary value anyway atm.
It's not about a set number of generations before upgrading. I have a GTX 1080Ti that I came much closer to upgrading to the 3080 when it came out, than anything after that. I don't like to feel fleeced, and at 1440p the GTX1080ti is still a monster. I won't upgrade until I get a 600 USD card (what I paid for the GTX1080Ti) that doubles the framerate, which isn't much to ask when you're upgrading from a 2017 card, no?
A £500 AMD card would decimate that 1080ti by around 60%
I was gonna say, by now you can decimate the 1080ti with upgrades around that price range
1080Ti is equivalent to an RX 6600 these days
I got a used RTX 3090, even an Asus ROG Strix model, for €600 which is in that price range. 250W power consumption at 1680MHz/0.731V, the frequency slighty under stock and reachable with any model.
@@moldetaco2281fuck the 7800XT. Yes it's a good upgrade but this entire generation is trash value. I'm holding out for another unicorn like the GTX1080Ti maybe 5000/8000 series. Every AMD/Nvidia GPU I've bought since 1998 has been a legendary hit, won't stop now.
Hi Tim,
awesome analysis, it really gave a great visualization to a feeling of lackluster products and too high prices. Id really love a high end analysis too since there expectations are even higher and small percentages can result in quite a lot of money.
And you already showed that the low to mid tier products are about 20% too expensive.
Pretty cool research and graph work! Love to see it.
I miss the time when 200$ buys you a decent GPU, and budget segment was 150$ or below.
Well, today you can take RX6600 and have enough performance to run games in 1080p mostly on high preset. But if you go for good productivity in 2K/4K your wallet will scream)
Same. I also miss that that affordability allowed you to upgrade every year and that the gains were worth it.
When was that lol?
@@X_irtz I'm not sure of exactly when he's referring to, but my first three GPUs in the late 90s were all $100-200, and they were high end models at the time. I believe that you could still buy decent GPUs for under $200 well into the 2000s.
@@X_irtzI bought a 560ti 1gb in 2011 for 230 USD.
Title gets a thumbs up from that alone. Yes the prices do indeed suck.
Everything about PC sucks
@@SWOTHDRA yes but the gpus suck more than everything else.
Buy used or don't buy at all. Maybe look into another hobby. You don't have to play by their rules.
@@SWOTHDRANot really. Aios & air coolers, ssd, mobo are good. Cpu arguably.
@@GeneralS1mba mayb but still being on X86 for almost 40 years sucks ass ARM and RISC are the future
man, Thank you for this video, its great to see validation in our minds to see how things haven't really kept up!
I upgraded to 6800 XT from 1660 super after around 3 years and i could not be happier as the performance leap for the price paid is so worth it.
Depends when you got it. My 6800XT cost an arm and a leg.. and a kidney... and i think my first born, not sure yet.
great upgrade
I went the whole hog and jumped from GTX1060 6GB (£210) to a 6950XT (£540) after 6 1/2 years... I'm hoping it'll last me until intel becomes competative and the duopoly collapses.
Broke my monitor this time last year, so replaced a 1440p with a 4k and my 5700XT was not liking it at all (cracking card, keeping it around as a backup). Got a 7900XT (Sapphire Pulse) to replace it for £750, which I think was a decent price for the time.
Exactly the same for me. I'm loving the 6800 XT.
It is great to see that you tackle such a complex data-driven content. I think you did a great job in presenting the data without letting the amount of numbers overwhelm the viewer.
From the perspective of a statistician (me), the way this data has been interpreted isn't quite correct. You are measuring Upgrade Cycle (Independent Variable), Relative Performance Uplift (Mediator/Moderator), and Satisfaction (Dependent Variable). You need to keep this in mind.
Your Demographics look as follows using cumulative percentages for 80% of Population Satisfied:
Every Generation: 150% (because this is how you scaled your later graphs)
Two Generations: 180%
Three Generation: 200%
Four Generations: 200%
Five Generations: 300%
You only have 3 upgrade cycles mapped to your graphs over 4 years, so we can't test Four Gen and Five Gen (Although Four is the same as three so we can say a little about that).
The constant shifting of the trend line to new baseline positions is interesting, but the way the interpretation continues to roll along with the shift isn't quite interpreting this data correctly. You need to interpret the effect of Upgrade Cycle choice on Satisfaction with this type of data (also use cumulative % for your graph at 1:40 - it took me two minutes to convert it). The mechanism driving this is Relative Performance Uplift - but remember that this is not your dependent variable so you shouldn't be interpreting it like a dependent variable (it is probably a moderator).
Across all of the graphs, products released immediately after the previous one have a lower chance of meeting the requirements for "satisfaction" year-on-year (because this is 150%) and meeting this requirement on a rolling basis will fall short for all low performing years. This doesn't mean that these cards are a "bad buy", because that is not what you are testing here. It means that people who buy every generation are less likely to be satisfied with the Performance Uplift, compared to those who upgrade every three generations or four generations (who both require 200%). Even two year upgraders are more likely to be satisfied (at their 180%). This is because graphics card performance uplift is always going to be unstable year on year. There will be some bad years and some good years, as you have pointed out. You should resist the urge to use this data to conflate "bad buy" with a particular generation (if you are indeed basing this on satisfaction rates). If "good buy" is linked with satisfaction, then the lag between purchases is the thing to talk about. You should recommend that to avoid this "good year/bad year problem", people upgrade every 3 or 4 years, which you definitely do start alluding to at 19:25! You are overstretching to suggest that the data is telling GPU companies to change their approach (as only 9% of buyers are year-on-year buyers). Two-year, Three-year, and Four-year buyers are 75% of the market (at 0:59)! Your graphs suggest that these buyers are very likely to meet their thresholds for satisfaction (at 80% of population thresholds).
More respect should be shown for your 4-year timeframe - use it! This is a good move you have made! Many fields use 5-year cycles to create rolling norms for performance data, because year-on-year is often invalid, and you can see here why. So you are following an approach approximating good practice here, but you should interpret this as testing the relationship between Upgrade Cycle (Independent Var), Relative Performance Uplift (Mediator/Moderator), and Satisfaction (Dependent Variable) - not GPU performance.
Whether a GPU is a good buy (in the absolute sense), relative to other factors is highly context sensitive, and your normal approach to reviews are a far superior means of making such a judgment.
Feel free to reach out to me if you want to work on your methodology.
Just a random response - great explanation! I however did a similar analysis in Oct 2023 for the last gen to the current gen where I set the baseline comparison as the 3080 and 6800 XT and came to very similar conclusions, even though I did not have the issue of a dependent variable. I just set my conditions for a "Good Uplift" at 30%, which is great coincidence with the polled community! Based on my analysis, my hit prices line up with Tim's for the X60 to X70 class. Here are my hit prices for the high-end:
- RTX 4070 Ti /RX 7900 XT - ~$650
- RTX 4080 / RX 7900 XTX - ~$850
- RTX 4090 - ~$1100
Would be cool to see what Tim calculates for his high-end GPUs.
For a rough comparison, he did ok. Comparing a niche product to average for everything inflation increases does create a false picture. Probably a thesis paper for a statistician showing all the variables that go into making a GPU.
The trend of manufacturers ignoring the 200-300 dollar range has made me completely abandoning building a"midrange" PC altogether.
1.5 years ago i found a small shop that was going bankrupt and he was selling most of his stuff for literally whatever prices
i got a 6700xt for 280 euros a 5700x for 210 32 gig ram for 68 euros
unfortunate that the only way you could get pc hardware for a reasonable price at the expense of a person's business but given the state of the pc hardware market back then nobody can blame you for taking advantage of that
@@jaketakenobreak technically it's not taking advantage, the shop owner chose to sacrifice his business and the guy honoured it
@@harrytarded7002 Technically saving the guy. If he didn't get to stuff sold he would be in way more troubl financially.
Your point is...?
@@OutOfNameIdeas2 yup
Very nicely done, Tim. I do enjoy a good data session! You should do the high-end GPUs too :D.
Just to toot my own horn for a minute - I did the same analysis last October and came to very similar conclusions when comparing RX 7000/RTX 4000 with RX6000 and RTX 3000; only problem was I shared my data with a different RUclips channel, not you guys, lesson learned there! For my high-end analysis, I concluded the following based on gaming performance compared to the RTX 3080 for NV and RX 6800 XT for AMD. IMO those two GPUs reset the expectation for what high end performance should provide. I did not account for AI/Compute applications of the higher end GPUs or extra cost for VRAM:
- RTX 4070 Ti /RX 7900 XT - ~$650
- RTX 4080 / RX 7900 XTX - ~$850
- RTX 4090 - ~$1100
I would also be interested in a similar analysis for CPUs, understanding that this would be more difficult with changes in chipset and platform, but I think it would be quite interesting and doable.
I'm starting to think that Nvidia and AMD are not really in competition and more so price fixing. The head of each company are actually family members. These prices are just out of control. The Ultra budget list seems to be the only one close to realistic pricing, the rest just go into the stratosphere with the prices.
Bruh now that you mention it, there should be family members throughout the whole hierarchies of both companies.
A duopoly is basically just a monopoly assuming the companies decide to communicate at all. They fake competition, gouge pricing, and then can hide behind the argument that it isn’t a monopoly, while they both put their focus into entirely opposite sides of the gpu space. AMD focuses on consoles and custom SKUs, Nvidia focuses on productivity and AI.
The hope here is that Intel can actually shake the market up with their next launch. Otherwise these prices aren’t going to get better. Watch the 4090 still hold a 1300 dollar price tag even after the new generation due to insane pricing.
It's always was like this, competition among big corporations are fake, they're all on the same side.
@@solkvist8668 notice how AMD prices their own cards one step below and in between Nvidia's. It's not a coincidence.
They are def not competitors. One holds 90 percent of the dedicated GPU market. The other is for those people who insist on getting the value/budget/store brand. Small loud group that will insist they are just as good, while the rest of the world knows the difference. I gave radeon a try, with the Rx 6800. Using that card has made extremely excited that my 4070 Super will be delivered tomorrow. No more dealing with trash AA, and feeling like I have hardware from the PS4 era.
One of your charts hit me right on the nose - I have an RX570 in one machine, a GTX1650 super in another, and an RX6600 in the newest one. That being said, I didn't pay those kind of prices for some of these cards. The GTX1650 super I got near the beginning of the crypto rush, and managed to get it for 180USD. The next year I got an RX6400 for 150USD to put in a rescued Dell Optiplex. Last year I got the RX6600 for 180 USD (only 10 more than I paid earlier that year for a GTX1650 oc). It's not easy, but sometimes you can get a deal - if you're patient and always on the lookout for it.
I would love a part 2 for the high end
Yes yes yes!
i dont think high-end user would actually care what the price really is or should be,
most of them buy first then check the price later!
@@KremsonKhanThat was so in the GTX era. I always buy a **80 Ti card for about 4-5 years and price totally matters. I have a 2080 Ti atm bought a couple months after launch, there was no point upgrading to 3080 Ti and the 40 series doesn't have one yet, but more importantly, the prices are absurd. I don't have high hopes for 50 series.
You forgot to observe that the highest end cards hold their value much better than they did in the past. I bought a 4090 last year for $1600 and just sold it for about the same right now, as I'm temporarily switching to 6950x before 50-series launch. I basically used a 4090 for free. You can easily buy and hold a xx90 card for a year or two and recoup most of your money ahead of the next launch. @@KremsonKhan
@@Navi_xooAs far as ordinary people are concerned 3000 series didn't exist though. All we could do is watch videos about them from people the AIBs sent the cards to. It doesn't matter to me anyway since I don't upgrade every generation.
Also: I'll complain about anything, just try me :P
Please make a next gen pricing video based on these calculations 🙏
Yes please! This will leave us better prepared, and even give them a suggestion already! Even if they ignore it, we would have done our part.
Next gen prising?
That is easy!
5060 96 bit memory bus $500
5070 128 bit memory bus $800
5070 ti 128 bit memory $999
5080 192 bit memory bus $1500
5090 256 bit memory bus $3000
That was easy!
With all these booms I simply forgot what a new good offering looks like.
Love this video and data comparison. Would love to see the higher side of the market. Love your guy's channel. Keep up the great work.
Please do a prediction of what the 50 and 8000 series cards need to offer, that would be super interesting to compare when they actually hit shelves
Great video, you should do this every new generation!
I needed an upgrade but wasn't happy with current gen prices, so I just bought used last gen. Best decision for me. Saved money and happy with the performance
I'm trying to do the same, but all the sellers around me want like 8-900 for 3080s and 1000-2000 for 3090s... its honestly laughable
@@shawnpepin7890 Something like ebay can be better than local marketplaces for sure
same shit happened with cars, just get something used so the manufacturers don't get any of your money (that's a plus) and you get a good deal.
@@solmariuce5303 buy used so the tax man doesn't take your money
I had a GTX 1660 Super for about 5 years, and was so demoralized when I started looking to upgrade last year. I finally budged for an RX 7800 XT, and made the leap to 1440p gaming. It looks great, but the satisfaction of upgrading is pretty hollow after seeing my total build cost. The excitement has been sucked out of the hobby
This current pricing of the GPU market is driving away from PC gaming and actually spend more time with family, friends and personal upskilling for work which is a good thing actually. I don't want to feel stressed and spend $1000 for a GPU that probably won't last 3 years if games are going to have really bad optimizations. The world has gone sideways and I guess I will take a step back and think what's best for myself. I hope PC gamers will too and hopefully that will force them to lower the prices down until the old norm again.
Nice video , but I don’t see the point of doing the 2 charts with and without inflation.
The only point of that is generating confusion or giving haters something to rant about.
The inflation-less chart is absolutely pointless and confusion inducing.
Inflation is not “optional”. It’s not something that only affects some but others not.
Inflation affects the prices of everything for everyone. And when talking about any topic , from house prices back in time , to average wages in the past etc , it’s always compared taking inflation into account.
The inflation chart is the only one necessary to have an idea of what this GPUs should cost , ignoring inflation is as stupid as comparing prices of old GPUs vs new GPUs with different coins, like US dollars for the old ones and Canadian dollars for the new ones. Those coins have different values , what’s the point?
Really, the only people who should be buying the 3050 6 GB are those who are building on an extreme budged with something like an office pc that doesn't have any supplemental power, in that scenario, it's a great option, for EVERYTHING else, almost anything is better.
waste of money. just take ryzen with integreted graphics
@@Pachupp85And yet, the 3050 6 GB, as much as I hate to say it will give better performance than even a 8700G would give you. And, if you add in a dedicated GPU, the APUs lack of enough L3 cache will hamstring you later on. The only reason to go with an APU is if you're only going to do some light gaming. Yeah, the upgrade path is better with AM5, but you also can't build something for $300 with it either. So, on an extreme budget, buying a old Lenovo or other office PC, will give you more bang for your buck. If you've got $600 to build something with, then by all means, the APU route can work.
1070 here, was aiming to upgrade to a 3070 or even a 3080 But need we discuss what happened there. So waiting for 5000 or maybe just bite the Bullet with a 7800, the prices in OZ are still crap, second hand 6700 xt if the price is right. Thank you Tim, brilliant break down of the misery we have all felt, Cheers.
One of your best videos! good work
As someone who is currently trying to upgrade from a 1070, this generation has been abysmal to me. I originally was blindly planning on just getting a 4070 since the 1070 was plenty enough for me. Then I started looking into stuff and just... nothing is attractive to me atm. Sure, I could get pretty much anything and it be an upgrade, but I also want future proofing, staying power, etc. and the 4060s don't have that and the 4070 and AMD equivalents are overpriced. This generation is definitely pushing me more into AMD though even though I've used NVidia since the 660. Might just wait for next gen cards and hope and pray they are better, but it's hard to have hope for that after this gen.
Ngreedias next gen gpus will be made on the disappointwell architecture.
Nah!
Wewillripyouwell architecture!
Had laptop with GTX 1060 6gb and upgraded it last year to RTX 4080 laptop, performance upgrade is incredible but so was the price so there's that
Got my Vega 56 for $240 in 2019, I've yet to find a better price/performance card with more and faster vram
7700 XT or 6700XT 12gb when they're being sold off maybe your upgrade path.
I got a Vega 64 back when it launched at below the price of a new Vega 56. That's still the best PC hardware purchase I've ever made. Card lasted up until late last year when i upgraded.
Loved the video and especially the in depth analysis and inclusion of so many graphics cards. Can't get content like this anywhere else on YT!
So dont buy cards. Do you think prices will stay the same if lets say Nv sales drop even 40-50% for a month or two? A product cost is what people are willing to pay for it, nothing more and nothing less. If enough(from Nvidia and sellers point of view) people are ready to pay 2000-2500 for 4090 its going to cost 2000-2500.
Nvidia users don't understand common sense at this point, they're completely brainwashed exactly like apple users hence both companies can do whatever they want and their sheep will auto buy it
>A product cost is what people are willing to pay for it, nothing more and nothing less
This fallacy ignores that companies *all the time* price products incorrectly for their actual profit target. Too low demand, too high supply costs, too high demand, etc. Companies are run by imperfect supply-demand machines that only sometimes compete (which is the only incentive to decrease prices).
I don't think that would even hurt Nvidia, they're making too much from AI to care.
@@mspenelopyYes they do. Data center sales accounted for 80% (14.51 Billion) of the company’s revenue. You then break down the remaining 4ish billion and of that, around 1-1.5 Billion is switch sales so that leaves 2.5-3 Billion for PC GPUs. That’s barely 10% of the companies revenue. By the time you further break out laptop sales (where Nvidia dominates thanks to superior efficiency), desktop GPUs are a small fraction of total revenue.
Also these aren’t truly separate markets. If consumer GPUs like the 4080 and especially 4090 are too cheap it absolutely will cut into AI sales. They don’t want to hurt the golden goose for a small potential profit. As long as they have AI sales, nothing changes.
I bought a used 1080ti for 500€ in 2018. I have a 1440p 144hz Monitor and a 9900k.
Time to time there is a game i would like to play with RT or with higher refresh than what the card can do.
I look at prices, performance and vRam of high-end and mid range cards but can´t really justify buying any.
I will ride the machine until some game i really want to play runs at less than 60 fps.
After that i will build a new high-end pc.
Is it safe to upgrade from the 1080Ti yet?
Only if you can afford 4060 Ti 16Gb or better, everything lower or older will be worse, especially DLSS 3 focused titles.
Nope
no, and i hate it.
I would say no, the 1080Ti is still fast enough to play most titles well IMO. Like baldurs gate, CS2. It runs fine with FSR/XeSS. You should really wait one more gen imo. You can still get like 100$ for those 1080ti's as well so factor that in to your next upgrade. I'd be looking at a 5070 (if it has at least 16GB or vram) or the equivalent AMD card in early 2025. Good luck.
yes, get the discounted 7900XT.
Now do the same for CPUs, go even back as far as 2009 if you want, and see what the difference is.
I can tell you: Trying to adjust GPU prices for inflation is trying to lessen buyer's remorse.
Typically, products sell for similar or even lower prices. People used to call this "progress." With most technology, they still do. GPU makers meanwhile successfully sold you that sinking prices were a thing of the past, that "the more you buy the more you save". And that progress was dead.
Would you like to know more?
would buy a 4060ti - If it had a min 192bit bus and 16gb ram at about 300$ usd
problem is the standard 4060ti has 8bg ram 128bit bus at 440$ where its cheapest (my region)- thats a shit card at a shit price. not that anyone should buy a card with 8gb vram in 2024, thats just not enough anymore.
Great video, just a few remarks I have to get of my chest:
Inflation hits double hard on luxury items like graphics cards. The more of my monthly income I have to spend on groceries, the less money I have for unnecessary stuff like PC hardware, which forces me the shop further down the price range, leaving me with less of a performance increase. Simply comparing fixed price ranges seems like it's not capturing the reality of high-inflation times enough. I don't know if this can or should be included in graphs, though.
The price suggestions at the end seem reasonable, if they _include_ taxes (19% over here). Wealth is slowly running out, and way too many people in higher-up positions don't seem to realize or care.
The GTX 1070 situation is PEAK nvidia rip of mentality back firing.
Everyone who had a 1070 saw how good the 3060ti was, saw that the 4060 ti is the same crap, and went and bought a used 3060ti for much cheaper, thus saving money.
Great video and a lot of good information here. This concept was well thought out and helpful. I'm down to see you do the same graphs for the high end/enthusiast cards as well.
I’m afraid that this is an irreversible trend. Remember when the first $1000 smartphones got released and everyone on the internet said lol nope? Flagship phones are still $1000+ today and sells very well. I really really hope this is reversible for pc parts but I’m skeptical.
Overall smartphone market shipments declined for 27 months straight. iPhones are predicted to continue to decline even more this year. There are obviously people who buy expensive stuff, but is that enough to carry the company?
For Nvidia, they may not care. They have deep pockets paying for their chips. And they'll continue to dip into one pocket after another.
Yeah but a 1000€ smartphone lasts twice as long as a 500€ smartphone back in the day. Compare I dunno an iPhone 4 or 4S against a X. iPhone 4 was unusable after 2-3 years, iPhone X is still usable today even if it's not updated anymore. So in the end the "price per year used" has gone way down!
Yeah, even with a "price correction" with those "super" cards, they all still 5-10% overpriced to be a reasonable choice for upgrade even if we take in mind inflation. Nvidia don't care at all - they now get a lot of money from AI after miners in 2021-2022 and also from those, who decide to buy overpriced RTX4000 vanilla from the start. So they can release RTX5000 with a ridiculous pricing and don't care at all about desktop GPU market.
My s24 ultra is 1300 even 😂
@@marrow94facts
Great video! I would love to see the same type of video for the high end because prices get really interesting for the top end products, and that's also the market segment that I purchase from
Nvidia got greedy...
Definitely show the high end. I would really like to see the top end exposed like you've done here.
so we just wait for the next generation...
Someone still waiting since 1000 series, but it's only gets worse and more expensive, so people tends to stick with 1060/1080 Ti, trying the golden middle with 3060-12 or desperately going for 4060-8 or 4060 Ti-16 if they can afford it. No, it's will only gets worse, rumours about RTX 5070 are already saying it will be even more expensive and on the level with 4060, so...
get a used 3080 brro
I'm stretching my current cards life till 6060 and that'll be it till 3 gen later.
Next Generation we will pay a 1000 for a 70 class GPU.
@@Soddus. 3080 isn't so great with the 10GB VRAM.
This gen I decided to skip a generation. I usually upgrade to a 80ti class every generation. I've noticed I haven't been playing very demanding games or gaming that much in general because I've been busy.
I feel like the people who upgrade less frequently will care more about VRAM, so even if you're on a 10 series card, the regular 4060ti and below are dead in the water.
This is why the 12GB 3060 is doing so well even in 2024. That nonsensical 12GB of VRAM on release became its main selling point later. For hobbyist rendering workloads it's the best card you can get from Nvidia that's still in stock new. To get more than 12GB of VRAM you have to spend hundreds more.
Great video! Thx Tim!
The visualization was a bit confusing and it felt rushed. I would like to ask for more videos like this, with more visualization, more time spent explaining the charts and less gpus focused on.
I don't think that you've put enough weight on VRAM, given that you've shown us that 8GB is not enough to properly load textures in recent games. Why would anyone replace their existing 8GB RX480 with an RX 6600, RX 7600 (non xt) or RTX 4060 with the same amount of VRAM, when part of the purpose of upgrading is to prevent any issues displaying textures in new games. The replacement for a RX 480 needs to be a 6700xt or a 7600xt, so these are the cards that need to be well priced against it. The 4060ti 16gb is really the cheapest current gen nvidia card that can be considered as an upgrade over the rx480.
I am on a 1060, its OLD, it doesn't play new games even with EVERYTHING turned off... but new games haven't been worth buying so I haven't worried about it. For me BG3 is a reason to finally upgrade, or rather it is the thing that pushed me over the line since I have been wanting to upgrade for years. I am also one of those who mods games, like Skyrim, it's amazing what can be done with Skyrim with new textures... but that requires Vram, much more than you might expect for a 12-year-old game.... Some of the texture packs can put the Vram use on par with 2023 titles... They also make the game LOOK (not play, just look) like a 2023 game. In other words, for me, for the old games I love and for the freedom to texture mod the hell out of new games I might buy I need Vram... Lots of Vram... The problem is my choices are 7600XT... on a 192-bit bus... clamshell... overpriced... or jump up to 7700XT, more money for less Vram... Slower card with a bus that really isn't wide enough and will become a bottleneck in the future, or a $400 USD card with 12GB Vram... Neither is an acceptable choice.
I could accept 12 GB Vram at $300 USD but the 7600XT is really an 8GB card with extra memory on the back of the PCB, it was never really intended to be a 16GB card... it still has the 192-bit bus... and that will be a problem a few years from now.
I won't accept 12 GB Vram at $400+ USD, for that much money I want 16GB...
The ARC A770 is prefect, $300 USD price (currently, not at launch) 16GB Vram, 256-bit bus... but even after all the driver improvements it's still only really a 6600 XT competitor isn't it... that card is 4 years old now. Do you see the dilemma here, there is nothing in any of the 3 manufacturers lineups that appeals to me... I would stretch the budget up to $400 USD but at that price I am not happy with 12 GB Vram and the cards below $400 USD are crap...
I am really hoping that Intel's Battlemage will offer something in the approximately $400 USD price range with a 256-bit bus and 16GB Vram, something with the speed to match at least the 7700XT. The lower end of the market should have moved up to 12 GB Vram, and the middle segment should have moved to 16 GB Vram but neither happened, 8GB might be enough for 2023 but it won't be enough for 2025...
Lost interest in gaming due to inflated prices of these GPUs might as well spend my money on other things TBH.
I upgrade when the next GPU I buy is approximately double the performance and around $200-300. It's getting more and more difficult to do that even buying used.
Damn, algorithm knew exactly what I wanted to see. Never been this early before.
This was a really interesting way to visualize the data. It makes a lot of things that made sense intuitively make sense from a data-driven perspective. I'd love to see more content where you explore these price dynamics. The higher end of the market might be interesting, but I'd personally be interested in seeing your takes on what the next generation has to provide.
As a corporate guy I would read it as "don't make too good products because that raises expectations".
Really great video. Would have been cool to overlay what things currently cost vs what they should cost to really clearly visualize the price discrepancies
F You Nvidia
- Linus Torvalds
Coming for a gtx960, I was pondering what to buy. I settled for a 2nd handed rx6600 for 130 euro. Damned, I don't see any reason to spend more on this generation.
Every 10 generations is the sweet spot.
Great video Tim, and thanks to the people who filled out the survey.
had 960 2GB, looked at used 1660S 6GB before boom, got used 3070 8GB postcrash w/ -100msrp on a good aib model, nvidia hasn't seen my money directly since 2015. hope the new 6000/used 5000 series are both good.
wow this is super informational for consumers!! can you do more of this kind of stuff with the other cards of that generation too please?
Great Video !
It's funny recently i made a similar check with prices atm and inflation compared to MRSPs.
I could find in old news articles, put them in an Inflation calculator for my country and was relatively surprised that most of the price increases only compared to naming were okeish, 50/60/70 Series were all not to overpriced in Germany compared to the last years( i started with the GTX 200 Gen) some generations had better uplifts and some worse the 1000er Series was a golden Gen so only comparing to that one is not really fair. the 70 Series overall was the first where really some discrepancy showed, but man the 80/90/95 or High end Series were the ones where it got wild with the corporate greed, that was the silly part I detected, the price increases are insane there compared to all generations i directly compared.
I was using a second hand GTX 980ti from 2017 to 2022, still a good card.
manage to pick up a GTX Titan XP with 12GB of VRAM in 2022 and still very good today with plenty of VRAM.
forgot the last time i brought a new GPU, i just buy a second hand one, give it a clean, apply new heatpaste, overclock it for heavy games.
I also use a 1440p 144hz Display, for Smooth framerate i cap to 72 or 48 FPS depending on what graphics i want to use. No interest in paying those prices.
Very interesting data cruching video (but I'm biased, I love data crunching). What is tintersting to see is that some products were/are outliers in a good way for each generation.
One small criticism though: you only bundled data by price range buckets, I think it would have been interesting to also show the same data by aggregating data by "series" (X050/X060/X070 for Nvidia, X600/X700/X800 series for AMD) as I think a lot of people are reluctant to "go down the stack" when changing their GC (Ie: going from a 1070 to a 3060 "feels" like a downgrade).
That doesn't mean the data you showed are interesting, on the contrary, this is, as always with you guys, amazing work.
Definitely loved this and wouldn't to see other analysis on products from the pandemic.
I would like to see more of these kinds of viideo's on all PC components. Very informative when compared this way. Thank you!
I didn't pull the trigger on the 3060 or 3060ti because crypto boom prices persisted here long after the boom, and pushed next gen prices up with them. That and hearing about all the VRAM problems made me think even if a 4060 were "fast enough", it would age terribly as a card i want to keep for the next 4 years or so.
I would definitely go AMD if I didn't also want the card for the occasional Blender Cycles render. Crossing my fingers for ZLUDA support.
I wish you could include the super models and 80-90. Just because their discrepancy in terms of pricing would have been higher
A very interesting analysis! A funny extra datapoint: I've just realised I paid almost exactly the same amount (
Another important consideration is that with the 10 and even the 20 series many gamers were still playing on a 1080p screen while nowadays high-refresh 1440p or even future proofing with a 4k OLEDs are a thing.
I'm still on a 1070 and while this gen would have been okay to upgrade by your metrics, I now want more. The GPU development has not kept up with monitor or game development and I think this is also a part of why people are hesitant to buy these current products. Looking at your old benchmarks the 1070 was a 1440p/~80-100fps card. So based on the monitor develoment I want my next card to deliver at least 1440p/240Hz (~2.5x). Even the upgrade to 4k without further framerate increases would be 2.25x which is a reasonable expectation after 8 years.
But it feels like GPUs are simply trailing behind the increase in visual fidelity without much performance improvement. The 7800XT still only does 108fps average in 1440p according to your benchmark and that just seems disappointing when my 8 year old 1070 could already do that in the games of its time. To name an example: it gets nearly the same framerate in BF2042 as the 1070 did in BF4 and I'm just not seeing where the visual development went in all these years. Sure, the latest battlefield looks better but is it really that much better?
amazing video! At the beginning of February I switched from a garbage 1080p 60 screen to a 1440p 165Hz display and swaped my then GTX 1060 for a 4060Ti(16GB) @475€. That upgrade alone was really really cool. Tho it was not sufficient to power my new display on max refresh in all games so I swaped again for a 4070Super @652€ and that card is lovely. I love the new features like VSR or RTX HDR, like thats the stuff I wanna buy a card for, making clever use of existing hardware to enhance the experience beyond just FPS. I payed 330€ for my 1060 back in the days so 652 seems high but not only did the price double, so did minimum wage here so I am okay with that.
Definitely interested in the upper end of the market. Also would be interesting to see this data with the prices corrected for the ‘onshelf’ prices rather than the RRP (from memory there was a site tracking sale prices of cards) as particularly the 30 series suffered from not existing at rrp for much of the world
Other than what I believe is the oldest GPU I currently have in the house (which is fanless GT520) I've held on to a modest 1050 Ti until very recently, which at the time replaced a similarly priced budget GPU (a GTX 750 Ti) I took the plunge and managed to get a 3070 for a decent price (with warranty) and far better pricing than the current cards would cost. And since I use stuff which requires Nvidia's proprietary tech a Radeon card wasn't an option.
Good video. I guess the only missing info was the TSMC increasing prices in general, and further increasing in particular for Nvidia after they tried using Samsung for the 3xxx series.
The way you show (and thus sum up) the problem on these charts is great.
Thank you!
I think it would also be interesting to look into how good the current cards are at their release date. How well do they do in their current games? For example Witcher 3, how good fps did you get with a then current GPU at a relevant resolution. I know resolutions and monitors have also gotten better, maybe 1440p is now around the same as 1080p was 5 years ago. How much fps did you play at back then ?
I got a GTX 1080 in a system when the street price of a 1080 was $1200 US (February 2018) for $1800 system price (the 1080 was bought at retail price by the SI), then in the next boom, a friend had a 3060Ti that he got for $965 US, so i traded him my 1080 (because his system had a poor PSU with a 190W PCIE rail) and $300. My current GPU is a 7900XT that i got for $773 shipped. Performance increases were 28% and 180%.
When new GPU first came out, I found in past that "normal" after 6 months to 12 months, the price drops, and any hardward issues are known about ex. vapour chambers, melting power plugs, etc. I normally only upgrade out of necessity and try to keep my GPU for as long as I can, for as long as it plays the games I wish to play.
I tried to get the best GPU I can afford when do upgrading back in 2018; this was the RX580, which I got 6 years out of, and in the bad GPU market early in 2023, the RX7900XTX, after the first big price drop to was just under £900 for a sapphire pluse in the UK
The AM4 socket in way pay for this I need to upgrade and testing from Hardward Box show me that 5800X3D was very good bet for the last best upgrade on AM4, and this CPU saved me having to moving to a AM5 base system so extra cash when into getting just a upgrade on my GPU.