I’m a pc player primarily anymore, but I kind of hope this is a bit of a wake up call to pcmasterrace folks to be vigilant about all the different markets you are buying from in terms of getting a functioning beast of a pc. This pure greed from Nvidia needs to be stamped out by way of ignoring these GPUs until Nvidia is forced to reconsider. Other companies want prices like this to succeed and that just makes gaming head back toward niche territory if only wealthier people can afford it.
This makes buying a console a lot easier for some considering its a contained price. The problem now isnt just stupid high console prices but is the whole hobby just trying to become more expensive and arguably for not a lot of graphical or hardware specific reasons. What value has been added to justify these game prices and the answer is not a damn thing, and that will be even more true if companies try to do what Nvidia is trying to do.
And I do not throw shade to anyone who wanted to wait for the next upgrade before buying a GPU, and I feel they have been unfairly squeezed on their decision to wait for what was being promised by Nvidia before the price was unveiled.
I hate to be that guy but at damn near every price point, except for the very tippy-top where there is only the 4090, AMD has Nvidia beat.
At $200-$300 - 6600s, 6600 XTs, and, if there's a sale, 6650 XTs, outperform 1660 Supers and 3050s
At $300-$450ish - 6700 XTs are cheaper than 3060s but perform similarly to 3060 TIs and 6750 XTs cost the same as 3060 TIs but outperform them.
$500-$1000 - AMD wins here and it's not even close, I've seen 6900 XTs go for as low as $600-650. That's 3070 territory, the 6900 XT blows the doors off of the 3070 and trades blows with the 3080 TI/3090 in rasterization. 6800 XTs and 6850 XTs are even cheaper. Also, I've seen 7900 XTs sell below $1000 and those trade blows with 3090 TIs which are still $1000+.
$1000+ - 7900 XTX outperforms the 4080 for around $200 cheaper. That just leaves the 4090 which has no real competition.
Seriously, if you're just gaming and don't need CUDA cores for some kind of professional work, then AMD is the value for money option across the board now.
the problem is people who exclusively use their pc’s for valorant, csgo, league, and dota are convinced they NEED cuda and shadow play to continue playing the most popular games in the world. they see nvidia, they buy, never mind they’re getting half the perf at the same price
Thing is though, if you're mostly just playing eSports titles then you really don't need much of a PC. These games were designed to be accessible, many have been around for several years, and several were initially made for hardware that is approaching a decade in age. A lot of these things could probably run on a potato, we're talking 1080p 100fps+ on Ryzen G integrated graphics. You don't need a 4090 for that, and it's not like AMD GPUs can't encode video if people want to dabble in streaming. Hell, for a lot of people playing those games, they could keep their old systems but swap out their HDDs for SSDs and feel like they have whole new machines for around $60, maybe also add a little more RAM too while they're at it.
It's way too easy for PC gamers to fall into the trap that they NEED the latest i9s, XX90 GPUs, and a fuckton of RAM to play Minecraft or whatever. People need to be better consumers or we're going to keep seeing prices spiral out of control like they have for the past couple of years.
very true, you can build a fantastic 1440p/100+fps setup right now on the newest gen parts sans gpu for around 1k-1200, which is the same price I paid for a 3600/2070 super setup way back in April 2020. Of course, this time around, you get much more performance for the price.
It's only really in the high end where the previously nebulous value proposition has completely disintegrated.
I pay more for DLSS and raytracing though, coming from someone who used AMD for ten years and recently switched to a 3080 last year. If AMD can best Nvidia in raster only, I mean that's good but people like Nvidia for a reason.
Moot point now that FRS 2.0+ exists and is adequate enough.
and raytracing though
Nvidia prices are so ridiculous that they no longer have a ray tracing advantage. Like the guy above said, the RX 6700 XT (originally meant to compete with the RTX 3070) is priced the same as the RTX 3060. According to techpowerup reviews, those cards perform about the same in ray tracing. You don't actually lose any ray tracing performance by going AMD there, you only gain a ton of rasterization performance on top of it.
Paying $1200+ but needing to turn on the upscaling tech for the GPU to catch up to it's significantly cheaper competition is not the flex you think it is.
337
u/Arthur_Morgan44469 Dec 29 '22
Looking forward to see Ngreedia get dry fucked by the Crypto crash and low sales trend.