Wednesday, January 13th 2021

Following ASUS' Lead, EVGA and ZOTAC Increase NVIDIA RTX 30-series Pricing

ASUS was the first AIC partner to announce that due to increased costs in procuring supplies and components for PC component manufacture, it would be increasing prices on its motherboards and graphics cards. That announcement from ASUS seems to have opened the floodgates on other manufacturers, as now both EVGA and ZOTAC have increased pricing for their graphics cards - specifically for NVIDIA's RTX 30-series.

EVGA took a similar approach to ASUS, and announced via its website the changes in pricing and their effective date - January 11th. The company's announcement (which you can read in full after the break) sees pricing increase at around $70 across the board of already-launched NVIDIA RTX 30-series graphics cards. The company will still honor users in the queue system for a new graphics card with the previous pricing structure, should their orders complete through April 16th.
As for ZOTAC, the company seemingly decided to silently hike their RTX 30-series pricing with no announcement to users, and the increase are much more substantial on ZOTAC's side. The company originally had some of the lowest prices for custom cards on the RTX 30-series family, but has increased its pricing silently twice already since December. The price hikes that ZOTAC enforced are as follows:

ZOTAC Pricing on December 18th; January 3rd; January 13th
  • from $440 to $500 and now $530 for an RTX 3060 Ti
  • from $540 to $600 and now $640 for an RTX 3070
  • from $750 to $780 and now $840 for an RTX 3080
  • from $1550 to $1580 and now $1900 for an RTX 3090
I'd say that those ZOTAC price hikes - particularly for the RTX 3090) are egregiously high. A $400 expense increase in manufacturing components and tariffs for the RTX 3090? Sure.

Here is EVGA's full post on its website regarding the price increases:
Due to ongoing events, EVGA has made price adjustments on the GeForce RTX 30 Series products. This change was necessary due to several factors and will be effective January 11, 2021. EVGA has worked to reduce and minimize these costs as much as possible. For those who are currently in the EVGA.com Notify Queue system or Step-Up Queue, EVGA will honor the original MSRP pricing through April 16th, 2021 if your purchase position is processed before this date.

EVGA
Source: The Verge
Add your own comment

82 Comments on Following ASUS' Lead, EVGA and ZOTAC Increase NVIDIA RTX 30-series Pricing

#76
Vayra86
agentnathan009
I’m seeing a pattern here, you brush off any facts or logic when it doesn’t align with your personal belief about things or how you think the world operates.
The pattern I see is that you have no substance apart from 'you don't know jack all because I do' alongside numerous personal jabs.

You also seem to misunderstand the term 'margin'. First you defend Apple for high margins to 'get where they are now' and then you say there are all sorts of hidden expenses that force companies into such margins. Do you even logic? The sheet at the end of a fiscal year does tell us what the end result of all that nonsense is. You can't come back to that and yell 'but muh expenses' - if that was the case, you'd be committing fraud on your fiscal report.
Posted on Reply
#77
Chrispy_
BSim500
You are reading way more into my post than I wrote.


I got the obvious point that people don't like €500 cards (and I agree). My point was though, that the "PC Gaming is dead now and forever" crowd seem way too impatient / doom & gloomy. The same was said during the preview mining boom, the memory price spike before that, the HDD shortage before that, etc. Crypto-booms are cyclical in nature, ie, when +95% of Bitcoins mined are owned by 1% (already hilarious for a "decentralized" currency), the "big boys" behind most of the major market movements will naturally figure out there's more reliable money in "pump and dump" economics of regular small cycles of buying at $10k then selling at +$30k then rinse & repeat soaking up an even larger percentage of coins each time for better control of the next bubble than there is trying to inflate some one-off $100k super-bubble then sustain it over years on end only to have the whole lot collapse. In short, after a few "bumps", mining will fall again over the next year just like it did last time and the GPU market will be flooded with supply at the same time as demand falls (just like it was last time). If you want a console in the mean-time, then go for it. Speaking as someone with +2,000 PC games who knows full well how this works, I'm not going to suddenly slam the door with a shout of "That's it! I'm done with PC gaming! It's dead!" and throw them all away out of impatience as a substitute for waiting a few months (in a +30 year long hobby).
Yep. "PC Gaming is dead" will only be true when developers making the best games aren't supporting gaming PC hardware.

At the moment, every game on the market* runs just fine on a $200 card from five years ago, and most of the popular (highest concurrent player count) games will run on a potato. I'm talking decade old IGPs from the bad old days of IGPs being utter garbage (looking at you, Intel HD 4000). Not everyone has a 4K120Hz monitor and an RTX3080.

*except CP2077 which is an outlier; A $199 GTX960 from 5 years ago (almost to the day) is still capable of 1080p30 but I think that's the first time such a card has really struggled to hit at least 720p60.
Posted on Reply
#78
Turmania
I don`t know about some of you, and I`m not judging anyonre. but I would rather pay a premium than buying a product made in that country that we can not name for obvious reasons. I`m perfectly fine paying 1300 USD to a PC that could be perhaps be made for 1000 USD. What I`m not Ok, with is if I have to pay 1300 USD and it is still made in that country we can not name for obvious reasons.
Posted on Reply
#79
95Viper
Keep it on topic.
Stop attacking others.
You can debate the opinion... but, not the person.

Have a good day.
Posted on Reply
#80
agentnathan009
Vayra86
The pattern I see is that you have no substance apart from 'you don't know jack all because I do' alongside numerous personal jabs.

You also seem to misunderstand the term 'margin'. First you defend Apple for high margins to 'get where they are now' and then you say there are all sorts of hidden expenses that force companies into such margins. Do you even logic? The sheet at the end of a fiscal year does tell us what the end result of all that nonsense is. You can't come back to that and yell 'but muh expenses' - if that was the case, you'd be committing fraud on your fiscal report.
I’m not defending Apple, just using them as an example. They have some of the highest profit margins for a business.

A company could have a stellar year, they make 10 million in profit, and the next year a pandemic strikes and they are now facing using the extra cash to pay people to keep working while sales or down, or perhaps they want to keep the pile of cash and lay people off. The balance sheet is only for that year, who knows what next year will bring, maybe sluggish sales because someone else swoops in with a better product and you now have to use that 10 million for increased R&D to improve your products or develop new, more competitive products. Some of that 10 million may be payed to management in the way of bonuses for a great year. At the end of the next fiscal year that stuff would show up. So the following year their profit margin drops to 2 million. Company then has to figure out where to allocate to keep the business going. Maybe they lose a factory to flooding or an explosion. Now they have millions of dollars in cost to replace that factory and all of the equipment. Sometimes companies have a really bad year and they are in the red and have to take out loans to keep going. The loss of that business if they don’t raise prices to cover increased costs is loss of jobs for a few people to thousands of people if they never increased prices to cover supplier increases.
Posted on Reply
#81
Vayra86
agentnathan009
I’m not defending Apple, just using them as an example. They have some of the highest profit margins for a business.

A company could have a stellar year, they make 10 million in profit, and the next year a pandemic strikes and they are now facing using the extra cash to pay people to keep working while sales or down, or perhaps they want to keep the pile of cash and lay people off. The balance sheet is only for that year, who knows what next year will bring, maybe sluggish sales because someone else swoops in with a better product and you now have to use that 10 million for increased R&D to improve your products or develop new, more competitive products. Some of that 10 million may be payed to management in the way of bonuses for a great year. At the end of the next fiscal year that stuff would show up. So the following year their profit margin drops to 2 million. Company then has to figure out where to allocate to keep the business going. Maybe they lose a factory to flooding or an explosion. Now they have millions of dollars in cost to replace that factory and all of the equipment. Sometimes companies have a really bad year and they are in the red and have to take out loans to keep going. The loss of that business if they don’t raise prices to cover increased costs is loss of jobs for a few people to thousands of people if they never increased prices to cover supplier increases.
You're not wrong, but that alone does not excuse the margins you see in corporate more often than not. We know that these companies are filthy rich and have margins way too large for their own good and/or for any positive social impact wrt to their existence and presence in society. This relates to the ultimate goal you'd have with a company: is it 'to make money' or is it 'to add something to society'. I think the right of existence for companies lies with the latter and not the former and let's be fair as well: its the same message THEY tell US. Good example: crypto currencies: they only exist for the sole purpose of making money - their idea of adding something to society, to make payment easier and less controlled, is a long forgotten fairy tale. Its pure speculative material by now. Corrupted by greed. The easy trade is only a vehicle to trade it some more, not to actually dó something useful.

The fact is that a vast percentage of wealth is located in that same top few % these corporations are a part of. Its out of balance and that has no relation whatsoever to the much tighter margins of small and medium sized businesses. You saw the same mismatch at the start of covid. The big holdings just straight up stopped paying the rent for the places they were hiring for their stores... and the rest could suck it. They're playing with the law, with ethics, and with what should be considered proper ways of doing business without damaging others in the process. Because let's face it - thát is what good business really is - everybody feels like they're winning. This is NOT the case with the examples of Apple, or Amazon, or any of the other big ones. They are all corrupted by greed and way beyond 'healthy' margin to keep business afloat. Their margin exists not to stay in business, but to keep expanding their reach and power. Its a threat to us all, and we're seeing the repercussions of it unfold in front of us. The Capitol event recently could be posted as one.
Posted on Reply
#82
agentnathan009
Vayra86
You're not wrong, but that alone does not excuse the margins you see in corporate more often than not. We know that these companies are filthy rich and have margins way too large for their own good and/or for any positive social impact wrt to their existence and presence in society. This relates to the ultimate goal you'd have with a company: is it 'to make money' or is it 'to add something to society'. I think the right of existence for companies lies with the latter and not the former and let's be fair as well: its the same message THEY tell US. Good example: crypto currencies: they only exist for the sole purpose of making money - their idea of adding something to society, to make payment easier and less controlled, is a long forgotten fairy tale. Its pure speculative material by now. Corrupted by greed. The easy trade is only a vehicle to trade it some more, not to actually dó something useful.

The fact is that a vast percentage of wealth is located in that same top few % these corporations are a part of. Its out of balance and that has no relation whatsoever to the much tighter margins of small and medium sized businesses. You saw the same mismatch at the start of covid. The big holdings just straight up stopped paying the rent for the places they were hiring for their stores... and the rest could suck it. They're playing with the law, with ethics, and with what should be considered proper ways of doing business without damaging others in the process. Because let's face it - thát is what good business really is - everybody feels like they're winning. This is NOT the case with the examples of Apple, or Amazon, or any of the other big ones. They are all corrupted by greed and way beyond 'healthy' margin to keep business afloat. Their margin exists not to stay in business, but to keep expanding their reach and power. Its a threat to us all, and we're seeing the repercussions of it unfold in front of us. The Capitol event recently could be posted as one.
Ideally, a company should be in business to offer products and services for the benefit of society, not solely to gain money. Obviously not everyone or every company is greedy for gain. Does Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk have more money than they really need? Of course, but Amazon and Tesla both have benefitted society to some extent. Apple is working towards greener product packaging and environmentally friendliness with products and packaging, so they have to have cash to invest in such things. Things can get lop sided with the haves and have nots.

I work in the cellular industry and have heard about other smaller companies that have stopped paying their workers, sometimes owing them several months of pay. Any of us can be greedy, and it is incumbent upon it to reject being greedy and choose to be fair and responsible with choices that we make.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment