I was hoping for $399.

A&P211I was hoping for $399.

Thats wishful thinking, the 3070 is still selling for around 650$+ where I live and those are the worst models. :laugh: 'VAT included'
Couldn't even find a second hand 3070 for 400 actually..

SithaerThats wishful thinking, the 3070 is still selling for around 650$+ where I live and those are the worst models. :laugh: 'VAT included'
Couldn't even find a second hand 3070 for 400 actually..

Here in the States on the AMD side, you can get a 6750xt for $400 pre tax which is about the speed of a 3070. It is extremely wishful thinking to get performance above that for $400 pre tax and definitely post tax.

While I hate GPU pricing, everyone’s expectations are far from reality and the only way to change that is a GPU boycott. Of course, presenting a united front and boycotting AMD and Nvidia is even farther from reality.

DavenHere in the States on the AMD side, you can get a 6750xt for $400 pre tax which is about the speed of a 3070. It is extremely wishful thinking to get performance above that for $400 pre tax and definitely post tax.

While I hate GPU pricing, everyone’s expectations are far from reality and the only way to change that is a GPU boycott. Of course, presenting a united front and boycotting AMD and Nvidia is even farther from reality.

Personally I've stoped buying brand new GPUs cause their pricing is insane in my country and I'm not willing to pay that much for even ~mid range cards.
My last brand new GPU was a GTX 950 when it was new, only owned second hand cards since. 'I paid around 480$ for my current 3060 Ti in 2022 september and that was a good price here'

My guess for this is that they'll try for $650. Except Nvidia is constantly trying to beat its greed record, so they'll attempt 700. Just to see how much more they can push.

The push universe may have something to do with mining things creating this unreal demand again. It somehow refuses to die already with 4090 breaking even in 500 days, very concerning. Pc Gaming may be dead.

SithaerThats wishful thinking, the 3070 is still selling for around 650$+ where I live and those are the worst models. :laugh: 'VAT included'
Couldn't even find a second hand 3070 for 400 actually..

Where did Nvidia get these prices from? Already the RTX 3000 series was too expensive in the 3090 and 3090Ti cards. Why ? For depriving them of DLSS 3.0 and FG. This causes both strong models to age much faster. Secondly, the successors, i.e. the RTX 4000 series, often catch up with them in 4K thanks to DLSS 3.0 and FG and not in pure rasterization. The RTX 4070 Ti in 4K is...kinda weak or rather the memory bus and VRAM will probably make it age faster than it should. RTX 3090 and 3090 Ti the same due to the lack of the features, which is bit anti-gamers behavior.

Everything would be ok, even the price of the RTX 4090. However, so far 1080, 2080 - XX80s models have been much cheaper.
Pascal Series and Titan X 1199 US, 1080 Ti $699. GTX 1080 $599.
Ampere - GeForce RTX 3080 cost $699, RTX 3090 already $1499, RTX 3090 Ti $1999.
Ada Lovelace RTX 4090 $1599, RTX 4080 $1199 (WTF?!), RTX 4070 Ti (WTH?!). From 699$ to 1199$ ?!

Looking at the performance, I have no idea how the price of the RTX 4080 and weaker cards was set. In addition, each subsequent one is a smaller and smaller part of the whole chip and although it is obviously faster than the previous series. Both the GTX 1080 and 1070 cards had the same die size of 314 mm and transistors of 7.2 million, the GTX 1070 Ti as well(!). But in 4000 we can see:
RTX 4080 transistors 45.9M, die size 379mm
vs
RTX 4070 TI transistors 35.8M, die size 295mm.
However, by reducing eg CUDA cores and other specs for a given model 4080, 4070 Ti, 4070 etc - the cards will probably age faster, people pay more for worse cards / specs. And the rasterization results are the same as we have already achieved in the past like - RTX 3080 series to the 2080 etc, 2080 vs 1080, 1080 vs 980.
Unfortunately AMD has not shown a really strong cards for many years. Since Nvidia set up price the RTX 4080 $1,200, I would love to see what AMD can show for $ 1,200, even if the energy efficiency be worse.
tpucdn.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx/images/relative-performance_3840-2160.png
As if they added at least ~ 15% for this $ 200, because let's be honest AMD cards are not cheap either :mad: and in RT they lose. A 15-20% stronger card in rasterization up to 4K for the price of RTX 4080. Then Nvidia probably wouldn't price RTX 4080 and each subsequent one like that.

BIGMicroWhere did Nvidia get these prices from? Already the RTX 3000 series was too expensive in the 3090 and 3090Ti cards. Why ? For depriving them of DLSS 3.0 and FG. This causes both strong models to age much faster. Secondly, the successors, i.e. the RTX 4000 series, often catch up with them in 4K thanks to DLSS 3.0 and FG and not in pure rasterization. The RTX 4070 Ti in 4K is...kinda weak or rather the memory bus and VRAM will probably make it age faster than it should. RTX 3090 and 3090 Ti the same due to the lack of the features, which is bit anti-gamers behavior.

Everything would be ok, even the price of the RTX 4090. However, so far 1080, 2080 - XX80s models have been much cheaper.
Pascal Series and Titan X 1199 US, 1080 Ti $699. GTX 1080 $599.
Ampere - GeForce RTX 3080 cost $699, RTX 3090 already $1499, RTX 3090 Ti $1999.
Ada Lovelace RTX 4090 $1599, RTX 4080 $1199 (WTF?!), RTX 4070 Ti (WTH?!). From 699$ to 1199$ ?!

Looking at the performance, I have no idea how the price of the RTX 4080 and weaker cards was set. In addition, each subsequent one is a smaller and smaller part of the whole chip and although it is obviously faster than the previous series. Both the GTX 1080 and 1070 cards had the same die size of 314 mm and transistors of 7.2 million, the GTX 1070 Ti as well(!). But in 4000 we can see:
RTX 4080 transistors 45.9M, die size 379mm
vs
RTX 4070 TI transistors 35.8M, die size 295mm.
However, by reducing eg CUDA cores and other specs for a given model 4080, 4070 Ti, 4070 etc - the cards will probably age faster, people pay more for worse cards / specs. And the rasterization results are the same as we have already achieved in the past like - RTX 3080 series to the 2080 etc, 2080 vs 1080, 1080 vs 980.
Unfortunately AMD has not shown a really strong cards for many years. Since Nvidia set up price the RTX 4080 $1,200, I would love to see what AMD can show for $ 1,200, even if the energy efficiency be worse.
tpucdn.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx/images/relative-performance_3840-2160.png
As if they added at least ~ 15% for this $ 200, because let's be honest AMD cards are not cheap either :mad: and in RT they lose. A 15-20% stronger card in rasterization up to 4K for the price of RTX 4080. Then Nvidia probably wouldn't price RTX 4080 and each subsequent one like that.

You live in a world of hyperinflation. Get used to it.

If these numbers are reliable then this card will run about dead even with the 3080 10GB at 1440P. I was hoping for better. =/

BIGMicroLooking at the performance, I have no idea how the price of the RTX 4080 and weaker cards was set. In addition, each subsequent one is a smaller and smaller part of the whole chip and although it is obviously faster than the previous series. Both the GTX 1080 and 1070 cards had the same die size of 314 mm and transistors of 7.2 million, the GTX 1070 Ti as well(!). But in 4000 we can see:
RTX 4080 transistors 45.9M, die size 379mm
vs
RTX 4070 TI transistors 35.8M, die size 295mm.

Does it matter how they do it. disabling 2560 cores on the 379 die, or using a fully enabled 295 die. 4070 delivers 80% of the performance of 4070 Ti that is 80% of 4080 that is 80 % of 4090.

Why_MeIf these numbers are reliable then this card will run about dead even with the 3080 10GB at 1440P. I was hoping for better. =/

Maybe even slower because of 64 Rops. but it could be as fast as 3080 Ti in 1440p (considering 4070 Ti is on par with 3090 Ti in 1440)

TheinsanegamerNYou live in a world of hyperinflation. Get used to it.

For the love of all that is right, stop parroting “inflation” as the sole reason for obscene pricing on hardware or other consumer goods for that matter.
No, it is not and certainly not a hyperinflation (please look up actual hyperinflation events in history before using such a term again.)

Lots of companies priced their products to the moon during the past 3 years, scapegoating numerous crises for ridiculous short term profits.
They're still trying to present it as natural growth, hence the Lobbying and PR releases blaming inflation. It is and was corporate greed, plain and simple.

GTX 470 - 349,99€ (2010)
GTX 570 - 349,99€ (2010)
GTX 670 - 369,99€ (2012)
GTX 770 - 329,99€ (2013)
GTX 970 - 349,99€ (2014) adjusted for inflation 334,75€ (2013)
GTX 1070 - 399,99€ (2016) adjusted for inflation 339,85€ (2013), 355,32€ (2014)
RTX 2070 - 599,99€ (2018) adjusted for inflation 346,64€ (2013), 362,43€ (2014), 407,99€ (2016)
RTX 3070 - 499,99€ (2020) adjusted for inflation 357,86€ (2013), 374,15€ (2014), 421,19€ (2016)
RTX 4070 ~ 599,99€ (2023) adjusted for inflation 400,00€ (2013), 418,21€ (2014), 470,79€ (2016)

Just recentlyMichael Kagan, chief technology officer at NVIDIA, condemned Cryptocurrencies after they blew up prices and made billions by directly shipping to mining farms in bulk in the past years…

They made a giant mess, the RTX 4070 should reasonably be priced around 400-450. Just loved how, testing the waters with 749 (current RTX 3080 pricing) exploded in their face, thou.

Hopefully we'll see a good "Super" line this generation coming in 2024. With prices getting better I could see variants of the current models, 4070 ti and below, getting super models with higher VRAM and even lower prices than the current models.