MiskyBoyy wrote: » You must be one of the only ones. Reddit is full of people complaining about their scummy tactics. I myself went to pre-order one with them but had my revolut card frozen just to see, and they tried to take the full amount. Even tho it could be months before they deliver.
Squaredude wrote: » I'd rather they take the money honestly. Stop me from spending it in the mean time. I'm sure the money will be taken in the next day or two.
Cuddlesworth wrote: » I never would have though there were this many sharks in the water willing to spend 700 quid on a gfx card.
MiskyBoyy wrote: » I'd be afraid they'd take the money, without having a card to ship for a long time.
Hyzepher wrote: » With those recent 3090 leaked benchmarks its hard to see how any card released between the 3080 and 3090 could be worth it, for gaming. The prospect of 8k gaming is at least another generation away so I can't see how that's a thing. People might prefer a 20G 3080 for some type of furture proofing but that's probably going to come in around the €1200 mark - especially AIB models, and I'm not really sure 20G is going to make any difference.
Thor wrote: » Totally agree. I don't see any real advantage to having more vram, especially 20GB, unless your workload requires it. Gaming simply won't need that much, even at 4K. VRAM speed is far more important for performance overall. Pricing on the 3090 is simply horrible. It's really aimed at those that absolutely need the VRAM and can't go lower. A 3080 with 20GB will most likely be priced over €1000, offer not performance increase over the 3080 10GB. The no idea that is future proofing makes no sense to me. Developers won't suddenly start pushing more VRAM usage as they still have to aim at the middle. Designing a game and levels around higher VRAM would ruin the game on the majority of gamers setups. Console's might be a concern since they have 16GB, but OS and other factors are in play there, so not all is available to the developer. Ultimately, I feel more than comfortable with a 10GB card, and I think Nvidia have ruined hype for any 3080Ti/super, since it will again fall in the middle of a 10-percent jump.
bobbyy gee wrote: » if amd bring in good prices NVidia will drop its prices or bring out slightly better cards they will make them 10% better than existing NVidia cards it will probably take a year to buy as people are using computer bots to buy up the cards
Homelander wrote: » What wrecks my head with Nvidia is their blatant anti-consumer allocation of vram based purely on their status as market leader, knowing that the inevitable upgrade will likely lead to another Nvidia purchase. They could easily, so easily, allocate the cards better vram, but clearly their long-term strategy was beat down AMD - which they largely did - and then go into cruise control, artificially limiting GPU longevity to secure future purchases.
BloodBath wrote: » It's rumored the ti or super versions will be switching over to TSMC's 7nm process so there may well be room for more performance than the 3090.
Hyzepher wrote: » People might prefer a 20G 3080 for some type of furture proofing but that's probably going to come in around the €1200 mark - especially AIB models, and I'm not really sure 20G is going to make any difference.
Thor wrote: » Totally agree. I don't see any real advantage to having more vram, especially 20GB, unless your workload requires it. Gaming simply won't need that much, even at 4K. VRAM speed is far more important for performance overall.
H3llR4iser wrote: » VRam usage goes up in a deceptively fast way - Linus Tech Tips made a video, a few days ago, where they're running Crysis (yep, the old one) in 4k at max settings, and it's sucking 4GB of Vram. That's a game from 2005, when cards had 512MB of memory. More interestingly perhaps, is the of these cards outside of gaming; I do some 3D rendering as an hobby - and I can assure you even a relatively simple scene can run out of the 8GB of VRAM very very easily, all you need are a bunch of high-res textures. And this is at an after work, amateur level - there are plenty of professionals who use gaming cards instead of Quadro ones due to the sheer cost of the latter; Anyone I know, in fact, that's a designer or architect runs GTX or RTX cards in their rigs. In these regards, really, one needs to wonder how much a 16GB 3080 would affect Quadro sales.
TheChrisD wrote: » Given it's a lower price point than the previous gen, a massive leap in power over the previous gen, and there's still people out there (like me) with a 900 seires or 10 series card looking to upgrade... it kinda makes sense, doesn't it?
Cuddlesworth wrote: » Nvidia has been inflating prices for a few generations now. This is the first time in 5 or 6 years that a new generation simply didn't come in at a higher price point. And even then, its over priced. This is the mid end card, the 3090 is the "high end" part.
errlloyd wrote: » I find the "rebenchmarking" of premium card pricing really interesting. I have only rekindled my interest in Pc Gaming during Lockdown. But I wonder if any of you have any observations about how that has changed over the past 15 years or so? It seems that a premium card would have been €250e at launch in 2005. Nvidia monopoly and an aging cohort of gamers with more money seems to have inflated that hugely. But the other aspects of a gaming build would have been more costly - for example Processors, MBoards and Ram have come down in price or stayed the same because they are also used by non gamers? Is that perception correct?
