euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
I'm not being funny here, but have you missed a word or two out from the bolded part? Because if you meant "the best value card" then I could agree with you, but if you mean "the best performing card" then that's obviously wrong when we're talking about the 2080Ti or the previous-generation top-end cards.
The problem here is you're assuming what "best" means. The best card(s) are different for each people. Best can imply value, highest framerate at a given game, most memory... I understand what Pieter3dnow is saying. With Nvidia you do pay for the best marketed card, that's a fact you can't argue against - their marketing has instilled Geforce into the brains of millions of people, even when their products plain sucked (I don't know how old you are, but you might want to check their FX series and the 400 series). Yet people still bought them like hotcakes, though in those situations AMD's obviously way superior product did regain a bunch of ground. Even then, Nvidia has been dominant for a long time, despite some bad generations of products. AMD is now so weak. People say they're not performing, but aren't they? Does performing mean winning in the $700+ market? Because last time I checked, the great majority of GPUs out there are $150 to $300 territory. The RX480 was better value than the 1060 (I should know, I exchanged the 1st for the 2nd one, only because thanks to the mining explosion I bought my RX480 for $200 and sold it for $350, then bought a cheapie 1060 to keep gaming while making a nice profit... I can assure you the 480 performed way better than my 1060, but hey, I gained $150 for little effort). Likewise with the RX570s now, which are cheap as dirt, and yet people keep buying the 1060 or worse yet, the absolute trash 1050s!
So yeah, marketing definitely has a big impact, the concept of value has shifted because of it in the minds of many consumers these days, and "best" means many different things.