3 ms·
NVDA also has a significantly higher market share than AMD does right now, that doesn't change that $200-300 is still the most common price point for consumer G
by snuxoll 8y ago
NVDA also has a significantly higher market share than AMD does right now, that doesn't change that $200-300 is still the most common price point for consumer GPU purchases.
Current Steam user survey results (now that the over-counting issue has been fixed) shows the GTX 1060 as the single most popular GPU installed by active Steam users with a 12.5% market share, the GTX 1050 Ti and 1050 take second and third place with ~9.5% and ~6% respectively that means about 30% of Steam users have a current-gen GPU in the $200-300 price range.
So yes, volume != profit, but the consumer obviously trends towards more reasonably priced cards. Cards in the Titan price-point that NVidia is trying to sell the RTX 2080 Ti at are so uncommon that they get lumped into the 'other' category of the Steam survey - and since I highly doubt magic like doing integer operations in tandem with FP32 operations is going to bring that much of a performance improvement to the majority of gaming workloads in tandem with the really weak raw numbers of the just-announced cards (fewer TFLOPS on the 2080 than the 1080 Ti selling in the same price bracket) it's obvious Nvidia is really taking the piss with their pricing. You're paying more for raytracing, that's it - and while it's certainly a cool feature I don't really see gamers caring that much until it becomes usable at that $200-300 price point.
- ajsalminen 8y agoWhere are the TFLOPS figures from? I don't think Nvidia has officially released those but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.
- bitL 8y agohttps://old.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/98xzfb/geforce_rtx_information_megathread/ https://old.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/98xzfb/geforce_rtx_...
- ajsalminen 8y agoThanks. Not sure where they got it from. The Anandtech article that is linked to there does contain some TFLOPS numbers but I think they came up with those numbers somehow based on the CUDA core count so could well not be accurate.
- ajsalminen 8y agoI guess it's just simply twice the number of Cuda cores times the operating frequency and so it's accurate as such but lots more goes into gaming performance of a GPU.