3 ms·
> So while the graphics card formerly known as RTX 4080 12GB might perform about the same as the RTX 3090, it's no better value. So you'd get the same price, j
by izacus 4y ago
> So while the graphics card formerly known as RTX 4080 12GB might perform about the same as the RTX 3090, it's no better value.
So you'd get the same price, just newer chip, newer encoder and DLSS3 support and all that at lower MSRP than what 3090 cost when it was new and launched?
That sounds like same value to me... or even a slightly better deal.
- philliphaydon 4y agoDLSS3 looks pretty bad so far so that’s definitely not worth it.
- Eisenstein 4y agoIt is a great deal for 3 years ago, but tech is supposed to get cheaper as time progresses. No one says that a 42" 1080p LCD HDTV for $300 is a great deal because they were $800 8 years ago. It is a decent price but for $800 you can 60" 4K display with HDR. (prices made up, I have no idea how much TVs cost right now)
- neogodless 4y agoIf you only compare those two cards it might be a better deal, but there's a spectrum of cards, including soon to be released next generation from competitors. At any rate, $900 is too much! Of course different buyers have different budgets and tolerance for rapidly increased pricing. Two years ago I increased my $220 budget for GPUs to $300. Maybe next year I'll go as high as $350.
- izacus 4y agoIf paying for this performance is too much, what's stopping you from buying the cheaper cards with 350$ budget? There will be cards in that budget, they just won't be faster than the 1500$ card from last year.
- neogodless 4y agoWhat is your point exactly? I said the main issue was naming of products designed to confuse consumers, not my anecdotal preference for price point? But additionally, we'll see if the market at large bears such price inflation.