Next-Gen GPUs: What Matters Most to You?

[W1zzard]

With next-gen GPUs arriving on the horizon, we're wondering. What are you most interested in? Do you want more performance, RT? Better upscalers or just lower prices?

 

[SL2]

Laptops with GPU's having more than 8 GB VRAM for much less than current €2000.

Notebooks mit GPU - Speichergröße ab 8.0009765625GB, GPU - Architektur: Ada Lovelace Preisvergleich Geizhals EU

Preisvergleich und Bewertungen für Notebooks mit GPU - Speichergröße ab 8.0009765625GB, GPU - Architektur: Ada Lovelace

geizhals.eu

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

I'd love to see much more aggression from Intel and especially AMD. NV continue to launch past-gen products for next-gen pricing and get away with that due to Intel not being ready for this market and AMD doing essentially the same thing as NV but with no flying colours. Essentially, I'd love to see prices going down.

But not only prices but also availability of tiny sized GPUs is currently very low; also line-ups themselves don't make enough sense (RTX 3060 had 12 GB but 4060 only got 8? WTF?). Speaking of VRAM, we definitely need to slot 12 GB onto 1080p-oriented devices and ~20 GB onto mid-high end GPUs (xx70/lower xx80 and equivalents). About darn time.

Upscaling tech is nuts efficient already, don't see much they can do about it. More performance outta the same mode I guess. RT... we're not even close to that being a massively available thing (what we see in current games, even by the name of Path Tracing, is not real ray tracing, it's a raw tech demo) but this definitely needs to evolve. This technology is also sick.

But overall, the most needed thing is AMD getting real and declaring a price war.

 

[Tomorrow]

Price/Performance for me. I want previous high end performance at lower price point. For example 7900 XT performance for 500 or 4080S performance for 700 or below.

Raster and RT perf increase is meaningless to me if price for this performance is higher than before. That being said i care more about raster perf as none of the games i play regularly even use RT. I dont really care for top end performance or price. So whether 5090 is 10, 25 or 50% faster or what price it will cost as i'll never buy that anyway.

Energy efficiency i feel is good enough now. It could be lower but it's ok. I hope AMD sticks with regular 8pin power connectors and will not adopt the new 12WHPWR with small safety margins. I also hope than consumer cards from both vendors finally receive DisplayPort 2.1 UHBR20 80Gbps full speed ports.
For the PCIe interface i feel there is no need for 5.0 but if they include it then i wont complain either.

In terms of Upscaling and FrameGen i dont much care for upscaling unless it's native res like DLAA/FSRNAA. In terms of FrameGen i hope fore more latency reduction for current 2x modes and introduction of a new 3x mode at current latency (Lossless Scaling program already has it.)

VRAM is ok if it will be 8GB minimum. 12GB midrange. 16GB-20GB high end and 24GB enthusiast. Not many complaints here against AMD, but Nvidia seriously needs to step it up and stop nerfing the memory bus width creating oddities like 16GB 4060 Ti where 4070 series has mostly 12GB (Except 4070 Ti Super 16GB).

Also i dont expect much from Intel. They're still a very distant third and no impact on the market.

 

[SL2]

NV continue to launch past-gen products for next-gen pricing

4080 Super for $200 less.
4070 Super 14% faster for same launch price.

How can that be next generation pricing if not priced higher than the predecessors?

I'm not saying they're cheap, and I'd love for the prices to go down.

 

[Tomorrow]

4080 Super for $200 less.
4070 Super 14% faster for same launch price.

How can that be next generation pricing if not priced higher than the predecessors?

I'm not saying they're cheap, and I'd love for the prices to go down.

4080S prices were the same or higher than 4080 for months. At least in the EU. Now it's cheaper. But that's now, 9 months later.
Also those are not next gen prices. Super series was a mid-gen refresh. Basically Nvidia took 3 steps too far and with the Super series they walked back 1 step. But it's still 2 steps too far. That's exactly what they wanted and you seem to have fallen perfectly into this trap.

It's the same people who celebrated that 4090 was "only" 1600 (real prices have pretty much always been 1700-1800) when 3090 was 1500.
And on the face of it, it does look good that you are getting a massive performance upgrade for only 100 bucks more.
Until someone reminds you that 2080 Ti before that was 1200 (the 999 prices never materialized in any meaningful way) and 1080 Ti before that was 699.

By raising prices not at one, but in small increments people can rationalize it away as higher production costs, inflation or whatever.
We already have the fastest (non-Titan) card that costs 128% more than the top end card from 8 years ago. If this keeps up we will have $3600 (non-Titan) 90 class card in 2032, maybe even earlier. And if that costs $3600 then what will the 70 and 80 class cards cost? Not the same 800 and 1000 they are now but $2800 and $3000?

 

[dirtyferret]

value for my dollar is all I care about

 

[Daven]

If it runs cool while busting out real raster frames then I’m all in. I voted for energy efficiency. Fake frames and RT can go home.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

4080 Super for $200 less.

Yeah. From $600 too expensive to $400 too expensive. Just a reminder: RTX 4080 is factually an xx70 tier GPU (don't believe me? Fine but you still wanna check the die size and transistor count out) that's sold for 4 figures only because NV can get away with it.

 

[hsew]

What, no AI compute choice??

 

[DaemonForce]

It would be nice if the packaging shrunk a bit.
Cheaper 4070s/4080 performance is a good target too.
I just don't want to be dealing with another massive chonker.

 

[chrcoluk]

Pricing isnt everything but I voted it as its clearly the most important thing, a GPU can be a tech marvell, but I still wont be buying it if the price is unaffordable.

 

[Onasi]

Pricing. More concretely - having actually respectable potentially long-lived options in the 200-400 dollar market. I am not even approaching this from said angle for myself - the PC gaming market NEEDS this to remain a viable one. There’s a reason why 1060 and 1070 stuck around for so long in such numbers - they were a great entry point to the hobby and brought a lot of new people. The market needs such options again. Ultra-high end is all nice and good, but isn’t what actually the majority of people use and buy.

 

[SL2]

Yeah.

So when they raise the price it's wrong, and when they lower it, it doesn't count?

Also those are not next gen prices.

Don't tell me lol.

don't believe me?

I thought performance was key here, silly me.

49 % faster than a 3080 at 4k = not good enough to be called 4080.

 

[Tomorrow]

So when they raise the price it's wrong, and when they lower it, it doesn't count?

Not if the lowered price is still way too high for the class and performance.
Like i said - 3 steps forward with price. 1 step back, and you celebrate it without seeing the bigger picture.

49 % faster than a 3080 at 4k = not good enough to be called 4080.

Also 71% more expensive. Thus price/perf actually regressed.

52% faster for 4080S while being 43% more expensive.
Hey look: price/perf actually improved by massive 9% after 3+ years. Yay.

 

[usiname]

Price/Raster/Power Consumption
Combination of this three is my choice, I don't care about RT and the memory size doesn't matter because it will correspond to the Raster anyway.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

So when they raise the price it's wrong, and when they lower it, it doesn't count?

Yes because it's not lowered enough.

 

[bug]

You can't raise performance as fast as sloppy developers can squander it. So I voted price. I also care about efficiency, but the poll is not multiple choice...

 

[SL2]

Not if the lowered price is still way too high for the class and performance.

No it's not. Prices go up, like it or not. There are cheaper cards to buy, give it a rest.

and you celebrate it without seeing the bigger picture.

What a sad flamebait lol, you know I was leaning the other way.

Yes because it's not lowered enough.

That doesn't make any sense. Lower price is always good

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

Lower price is always good

This is a typical Black Friday trap.

Let's say we got goods that cost $500 on any given day and on Black Friday, sellers pretend that they used to cost $1500 and now it's a humongous 50% discount so you can "only" spend $750 on said goods. You're ripped off $250 more than usual and you also consider yourself lucky to buy it for "cheap."

We had middle class GPUs for 200 dollars 8 years ago. Now, these are sold for south of 500. Everything gets shrinkflated as well as, for example, RTX 4060 is generally parring RTX 3060 and for all intents and purposes cost about the same. Next-effin-gen, that's for sure.

And cherry on top: what do AMD do? They shitpost RX 7900 XTX for about 100 to 200 dollars cheaper than RTX 4080. Sure, it grants better raster performance per dollar. But every other aspect is a floorwiping. And it gets even worse in lower end where upscaling is needed the most and FSR being behind is a much bigger problem.

This is why NV move the bar. 3 gens ago, xx70 was 400 USD. 1 gen ago, 500 USD. Today, 600 USD. Tomorrow? Probably $750. With, apparently, less performance than in 4080 (xx70 GPUs traditionally had a perk of matching last-gen xx80 Ti/90 SKUs in performance with 4070 being the first to trail behind).

 

[Hecate91]

This is a typical Black Friday trap.

Let's say we got goods that cost $500 on any given day and on Black Friday, sellers pretend that they used to cost $1500 and now it's a humongous 50% discount so you can "only" spend $750 on said goods. You're ripped off $250 more than usual and you also consider yourself lucky to buy it for "cheap."

We had middle class GPUs for 200 dollars 8 years ago. Now, these are sold for south of 500. Everything gets shrinkflated as well as, for example, RTX 4060 is generally parring RTX 3060 and for all intents and purposes cost about the same. Next-effin-gen, that's for sure.

And cherry on top: what do AMD do? They shitpost RX 7900 XTX for about 100 to 200 dollars cheaper than RTX 4080. Sure, it grants better raster performance per dollar. But every other aspect is a floorwiping. And it gets even worse in lower end where upscaling is needed the most and FSR being behind is a much bigger problem.

This is why NV move the bar. 3 gens ago, xx70 was 400 USD. 1 gen ago, 500 USD. Today, 600 USD. Tomorrow? Probably $750. With, apparently, less performance than in 4080 (xx70 GPUs traditionally had a perk of matching last-gen xx80 Ti/90 SKUs in performance with 4070 being the first to trail behind).

Exactly, it's the usual ripoff "sale" while Nvidia is making over 70% margins on these cards, even if the price is slightly lower.
Nvidia has mostly abandoned the midtier GPU class since the RTX 20 series I don't expect them to care about it with the next gen cards, not when they can sell Geforce now.
And the $200 segment for AMD seems to be dead as well, although it seems they're going to fill that price range with more powerful APU's.
As for AMD, I don't blame them for moving their prices up, especially when Nvidia has a near monopoly, of course AMD is going to try pricing their cards higher even though reviewers always bash AMD for higher prices, Nvidia gets away with it because their software features always get touted as being worth it. I personally refuse to pay extra for software.
I would expect the next gen xx70 card to be at least $700usd, and Nvidia will claim it has xx80 performance while using DLSS+ frame gen.

 

[Solid State Brain]

To be a significant update from my RTX3090, I would want at least 40-48GB of fast VRAM. Before anybody asks, I'm mainly using my GPU to run large language models. At this rate we'll probably get "fast enough" DDR/LPDDR RAM before that happens, though.

 

[SL2]

This is a typical Black Friday trap.

No. I checked pcpartpicker a few days after 4080 Super was launched. The new models started at 1000, the older ones were 1150 (and no, they hadn't gone up, I checked the history).

3 gens ago, xx70 was 400 USD. 1 gen ago, 500 USD. Today, 600 USD.

You conveniently left out 2 generations ago, nice try.

FE -

4070: $600

3070: $500

2070: $600

1070: $450

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

2070: $600

My brother in chrome...

The new models started at 1000, the older ones were 1150.

When it should've been priced not a penny over $650 at the launch in 2022.

 

[Hecate91]

The 4080 shouldn't have been over $800, the 3080 launched at $700 with a much larger die size and higher bus bandwidth.
If the poll were multiple choice, pricing, raster performance, and VRAM are important, power consumption is nice but I'd be fine with higher power consumption if it uses 8 pin power connectors.