- Joined
- Jun 1, 2010
- Messages
- 281 (0.05/day)
| System Name | Very old, but all I've got ® |
|---|---|
| Processor | So old, you don't wanna know... Really! |
Excuse me, please for another long and retarded post.
Each generation, they say the very same marketing bullsh*t all over again. Each is just to be replaced with yet another "the very best ever" in couple of years. And each gen is somehow still not enough for native performance without frame "generation".
Thus I have been taught the hard way of how to pay for high-end/premium products. Now even lowest end ones priced as premium.
If I'm not mistaken, this was even said during with the announcement of the RTX lineup. Sorry, can't find the direct quote.
There's huge concern, that nVidia would repeat the same move as with original"Super" series. With H100 being bought out like hot cakes, there is no incentive to drop the prices. This Super stuff is just testing the waters. A desperate push of greed.
I even am somewhat sure, that NV will artificaly split classes and add as much artifical segmentation, as much and as long as they can. Who can stop them? Same goes for AMD.
This is the result, that people have bought into this hostile pricing pattern. People agreed to pay more for newer generation, that used to replace previous ones with the same price. Yes, newer nodes, R&D are expensive. But they were expensive always. The companies used pay millions if not billions into the development in all times.
And the one interesting thing to note: when everything becomes more expensive, like R&D, materials, logistics etc, it should eat up the profits and margins, not increase them by 60-70% plus numbers. No?
If that was/is that expensive, Nvidia wouldn't become a trillion bucks company. And AMD went to MCM for GPUs to make production cheaper. It should have lower the cost. They even did conferences how this should make GPUS even more affordable. Instead they just hiked prices, because they can.
The saddest thing, in many countries, the sellers place AMD products at the same pricing as Nvidia ones, despite they being much cheaper than the last.
"Welcome to RTX family"
People confused the support of the developers with nVidia's, basically bribes behind the curtains. And took that as granted. But... instead of finding out the problems, and demand the justice and equity, they joined the game.
Surely, development costs a huge lot of money. And optimising for various different HW is pain. However, none of the GPU makers should ever have any influence on developers. That should be prohibited altogether. Not even be in contact, unless the software/game developer asks for assistance, or notifies of a problem. They should make sure, that games work equally as good/not hindered, for all vendors and their HW that support the technologies the games are based on.
And yes, game devs want their game to be another Crysis, because this grants them "incentives" for pushing the GPU sales. Except this time they are utterly out of touch, and people won't run to buy the latest and greatest. Just because they cannot. The udders are dry.
Exactly! Remember this? A "holy grail" of Cyberpunk and Ray Tracing? Years have passed, and top nvidia cards still struggle with RTX in that game.
Each generation, they say the very same marketing bullsh*t all over again. Each is just to be replaced with yet another "the very best ever" in couple of years. And each gen is somehow still not enough for native performance without frame "generation".
I can't agree with that. Once I bought myself the mighty 4870X2. The most powerful card at the time, for $630, while the rest of the world had it for $550, couple month before crisis hit, and being fired. The worst VGA I ever used. Not to mention, that it was very faulty. It's been RMAed, and replacement ended up being defective as well.
Thus I have been taught the hard way of how to pay for high-end/premium products. Now even lowest end ones priced as premium.
Well. Yeah. Why should they lower prices, if they just can stack their price above older generation?
If I'm not mistaken, this was even said during with the announcement of the RTX lineup. Sorry, can't find the direct quote.
There's huge concern, that nVidia would repeat the same move as with original"Super" series. With H100 being bought out like hot cakes, there is no incentive to drop the prices. This Super stuff is just testing the waters. A desperate push of greed.
I even am somewhat sure, that NV will artificaly split classes and add as much artifical segmentation, as much and as long as they can. Who can stop them? Same goes for AMD.
This is the result, that people have bought into this hostile pricing pattern. People agreed to pay more for newer generation, that used to replace previous ones with the same price. Yes, newer nodes, R&D are expensive. But they were expensive always. The companies used pay millions if not billions into the development in all times.
And the one interesting thing to note: when everything becomes more expensive, like R&D, materials, logistics etc, it should eat up the profits and margins, not increase them by 60-70% plus numbers. No?
If that was/is that expensive, Nvidia wouldn't become a trillion bucks company. And AMD went to MCM for GPUs to make production cheaper. It should have lower the cost. They even did conferences how this should make GPUS even more affordable. Instead they just hiked prices, because they can.
The saddest thing, in many countries, the sellers place AMD products at the same pricing as Nvidia ones, despite they being much cheaper than the last.
"Welcome to RTX family"
Yes. They should have like one and a half decade ago. The another reason beyond bad drivers, ATI/AMD being accused of for ages, is "lack of game support".
People confused the support of the developers with nVidia's, basically bribes behind the curtains. And took that as granted. But... instead of finding out the problems, and demand the justice and equity, they joined the game.
Surely, development costs a huge lot of money. And optimising for various different HW is pain. However, none of the GPU makers should ever have any influence on developers. That should be prohibited altogether. Not even be in contact, unless the software/game developer asks for assistance, or notifies of a problem. They should make sure, that games work equally as good/not hindered, for all vendors and their HW that support the technologies the games are based on.
I'm not the developer myself, but I still consider as crime, when developers can "prefer" one vendor over other, as this directly affect the sales and brand recognition. Doesn't matter be it Nvidia, AMD, or Intel. The devs should instead use the universal technologies and instruction sets available in game industry.
The only interest the vendor should have for their HW to work as supposed. The only time when the performance may vary, is indeed due to lack of certain feature/instructions/technologies.
That worth mentioning, that it was AMD which first presented RT back in 2016. And this is AMD, that pushed the stuff, that is being called Vulcan and HBM nowadays.
The only interest the vendor should have for their HW to work as supposed. The only time when the performance may vary, is indeed due to lack of certain feature/instructions/technologies.
That worth mentioning, that it was AMD which first presented RT back in 2016. And this is AMD, that pushed the stuff, that is being called Vulcan and HBM nowadays.
And yes, game devs want their game to be another Crysis, because this grants them "incentives" for pushing the GPU sales. Except this time they are utterly out of touch, and people won't run to buy the latest and greatest. Just because they cannot. The udders are dry.
Yeah. Either they did reach their limits. Or considering the power and performance room of current hardware, the publishers just got lazy, and don't want for devs to fix and optimize games. Everyone wants to be Google Chomium.
Last edited:
They should (and will) keed the non "Super" versions & drop their prices to compete with AMD's better performing (rasterized) and better RAM equipped offerings.
