The GeForce RTX 2080 Ti is Too Damn High! @ [H]

[Ocellaris]

The 10% tariff on PC components goes into affect on Monday for items from China. Are most of these cards made in China? If so, the prices won’t look so bad when almost everything else goes up in price.

 

[kirbyrj]

I personally dont think the price is to damned high cause you see buying into research. I just applaud the idea that Nvidia has saturated the market enough that you can buy at your preferred price. From $50 to $3000 if you wanna pay it There's a product for it. I truly want amd to compete and sometimes they do, but their product line seems so meh and the cost of the Vega line to performance didn't win me over.

I did get a 980ti when it was new. Thought it was worth it. The 2080ti is too rich for me right now but I'm not gonna bitch that it's to high cause I personally can't afford it right now, cause it's a luxury and has a luxury price.

So Nvidia never did any R&D before this? Or never baked it it to the price of their cards? Suddenly, they needed $500 more in R&D money per card? I don't buy it.

I understand the concept of what you're saying but when the price of one model jumps from $699 to $1199 it makes you wonder

 

[Stoly]

1. AMD has switched production to TSMC. This will greatly narrow the silicon advantage Nvidia has enjoyed and is a huge threat to Team Green as we near the limits of current lithography tech.
2. .

IIRC nvidia has never had smaller silicon process than AMD. As a matter of fact, AMD has more than once been first on newer process. Actually AMD is already at 7nm with Vega instinct.

 

[Stoly]

[QUOTE="coconutboy, post: 1043844892, member: 207878"
Intel has been trying to bring a discrete ray tracing GPU to market for about a decade now. Supposedly they’re getting closer to doing so. Even Intel shareholders will be in disbelief should it actually happen before 2077 (the year, not the game. These are the timeframes Intel works with now. They’re the new IBM).[/QUOTE]

AFAIK Intel cancelled any RT development when larrabee was repurposed into Knights Ferry. I don't think they'll restart from scratch but surely there will be a lot of catching up to do.

 

[Driving Vertigo]

As if I needed yet another reason to not buy Nvidia.

 

[Criticalhitkoala]

So Nvidia never did any R&D before this? Or never baked it it to the price of their cards? Suddenly, they needed $500 more in R&D money per card? I don't buy it.

I understand the concept of what you're saying but when the price of one model jumps from $699 to $1199 it makes you wonder

They've done R&D before, and they've also charged astronomical prices before. Are we purposefully avoiding all the other higher end cards they have released? Maybe people are just trying it as a "By the name thing". I can understand that. If Toyota released a Camry LE at the average of $28,500 for over 2 decades, and they released on this year at $38,500, people will question that. So I'm taking [H]'s article as is. A 1080ti was this price, a 2080ti is this price...it's gone up. Slam door, case closed. But Nvidia is competing against themselves, and they still have non halo products that completely wipe the floor of the competition. I think the RTX component and the AI component, while a little early does justify the price increase. Some people will rightfully balk at it, as they should, maybe the performance doesn't justify the price. But early adopters may find a value from it that is well worth the premium. I know it was this way for some early Oculus and Vive buyers. They paid a MASSIVE premium where a lot of us thought they were stupid, and many of them felt it was justified.

It's not just R&D that's baked into the cards price, but also the premium of being first. Wanna try something new...pay for it...don't wanna try it or can't afford it (like me)?. Buy what you can afford.

 

[TheHig]

If DSSL takes off in 6 months and we see 35% performance increases
in AAA games ,will the prices still be awful?
I would think not.

Yes. The $500 increase from the 1080ti to the 2080ti is too much regardless of performance IMO.

3080ti at 1700? 4080ti at 2200? When does it stop? I get price creep over time. But this is a bit much.

2080ti is a powerhouse for sure. But 999 seems reasonable for the founders edition.

Also, not looking to start any kind of “can’t afford “ flame out with anyone here. Refusing to buy is way different from wanting to buy and just can’t.

 

[Stoly]

In a few years $1200 will be considered "CHEAP"

I mean everyone wants the RTX2080Ti to be more like $700, but that was considered very expensive just a couple of years ago. Remember when the 8800 Ultra retailed at $800?

At one point, the GTX1080Ti was around $1,000. And many people still bought it.

In the end, the market determines the price. So unless AMD and Intel release something that can go head to head with Turing (and problably not happening till late 2019 at the earliest), you'll just have to pay the price.

 

[Grimlaking]

QFT.

That day is long off. I expect that, before that happens, NVidia will drop the price as a result of:

1) demand dropping, and/or
2) they shrink the die to the next process and lower their costs.​

Remember, they're not trying to maximize profit per card, but total profit. You do that when sales*profit-per-card is maximized.
Since gross profit per card (without considering the need to recover your investment) equals roughly price - cost, and demand is usually elastic (lower price => more sales), if your costs drop (from a die shrink for example), your maximum profit may be at a lower price point. And demand also changes over time, so after all the rich early-adopters all have their RTX 2080Ti, the price/demand curve may change, and again the maximum profit may be at a lower price point.

So I think it's just a matter of time, regardless of what AMD and Intel do, before the prices drop.

One part you are missing is developers making games that utilize the technology of your cards to look better than the competition. So for instance if they get a large market share with rtx technology that will encourage more developers to write for it and seek partnerships with Nvidia to use their code.

That means more demand so lower margins work better. Right now they think they can do both.

 

[DooKey]

One part you are missing is developers making games that utilize the technology of your cards to look better than the competition. So for instance if they get a large market share with rtx technology that will encourage more developers to write for it and seek partnerships with Nvidia to use their code.

That means more demand so lower margins work better. Right now they think they can do both.

They know they can do both. Nvidia commands a huge market share advantage over AMD and they are leveraging that advantage. The more DXR and DLSS games that come out the more they'll sell their new line of RTX cards. With AMD AWOL until late next year it puts them in a real tough position.

 

[Nolan7689]

I would LOVE to see a cost breakdown.

As a whole nVidia makes shit margin compared to other industries I’ve seen so I chuckle at some of these posts. I’d love for them to do it for at cost too but... I also like how much they invest into R&D.

At the end of the day it costs the avg American 0.05% of their income to keep a top of the line rig. If this is your hobby that’s cheap.

Check your math. 0.05% of $60,000 (rounded up from the average of $58k in 2016) is $30. Just 30.

 

[Dayaks]

Check your math. 0.05% of $60,000 (rounded up from the average of $58k in 2016) is $30. Just 30.

Gotta be resourceful broski.

Whoops.

It's low anyways, 0.5%. For a dollar a day you could....

 

[bpizzle1]

I actually like the car analogy. This is very much like if Honda redesigned the Accord with a new engine next year and the price shot up to almost $40k base price. Would "10 years of engine research" be enough to justify that? The difference is, people could just go out and buy a Toyota while giving Honda the finger. We don't have that luxury with GPUs right now because AMD is so far behind.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

the thing is... even on this very forum, ppl are saying they ARE BUYING IT.... so clearly the milking has already happened.

Its just nvidia testing the limits of their customer base right now.

The price is high, for sure, but I am also seriously considering buying a 2080ti.

~30% greater performance than my Pascal Titan X at 4K is nothing to scoff at. It can take unplayable framerates and make them playable.

I am balking at the price a little bit, but at the same time I'm no stranger to high GPU prices. I bought the original Kepler Titan in 2013 for $1k (at that time I was fighting against getting playable framerates at 2560x1600). When I moved to 4k in 2015, I went with 2x 980ti's in SLI at a total price of $1,100. I hated the SLI experience so as soon as the Pascal Titan X came out, I jumped on that for $1,200.

So, compared to the above, a $1,200 2080 TI doesn't quite stand out that much. All I have to do is determine if $1,200 + $150 for a water block - whatever I can sell my Pascal Titan X and water block for, is worth the ~30% performance increase. I haven't decided yet. It certainly would make my life easier to get consistent 60+fps at 4k in my titles. I'm holding on for Kyle's review and making a decision then.

The 2080 TI is a price increase compared to the non-Titan line of GPU's, but those of us who need no-compromise performance for our high resolution screens have been paying this kind of money for GPU's for 5+ years, so we are kind of conditioned to it by now.

What makes absolutely no sense to me is the standard, non-TI 2080. I suspect most people would be better off with a used 1080 TI at a fraction of the price, providing pretty much the same performance.

 

[knowom]

This chart would be interesting if it also reflected bang for buck relative to when they were released and included a few mid range value cards like 6800/8800GT as well. Though that would likely too much effort than it's really worth, but just intriguing to look at from a inflation/price gouging standpoint.

 

[Chris_B]

What are the odds of nvidia taking the outrage of the pricing onboard and lowering the prices? Slim to none.

 

[madcap magician]

Lotta MBAs in this forum. Lmao

 

[Chris_B]

The price is high, for sure, but I am also seriously considering buying a 2080ti.

~30% greater performance than my Pascal Titan X at 4K is nothing to scoff at. It can take unplayable framerates and make them playable.

I am balking at the price a little bit, but at the same time I'm no stranger to high GPU prices. I bought the original Kepler Titan in 2013 for $1k (at that time I was fighting against getting playable framerates at 2560x1600). When I moved to 4k in 2015, I went with 2x 980ti's in SLI at a total price of $1,100. I hated the SLI experience so as soon as the Pascal Titan X came out, I jumped on that for $1,200.

So, compared to the above, a $1,200 2080 TI doesn't quite stand out that much. All I have to do is determine if $1,200 + $150 for a water block - whatever I can sell my Pascal Titan X and water block for, is worth the ~30% performance increase. I haven't decided yet. It certainly would make my life easier to get consistent 60+fps at 4k in my titles. I'm holding on for Kyle's review and making a decision then.

The 2080 TI is a price increase compared to the non-Titan line of GPU's, but those of us who need no-compromise performance for our high resolution screens have been paying this kind of money for GPU's for 5+ years, so we are kind of conditioned to it by now.

What makes absolutely no sense to me is the standard, non-TI 2080. I suspect most people would be better off with a used 1080 TI at a fraction of the price, providing pretty much the same performance.

Had this been a titan branded card with titan levels of performance (say 40% or so over 1080ti) nobody would have batted an eyelid at the price as its in titan price territory. But pushing everything up a pricing tier is taking the piss.

 

[CFOUR]

With your chart and my old invoices I came to this, these are customs variants, not reference ones though but it gives an idea

GTX 470 359.99€
GTX 580 429.99€ (500$)
GTX 780 679.99€ (650$)
GTX 1080 849.99€ (700$)
RTX 2080 849€ (700$) Nvidia's price on their site (869€ for the cheapest aib card up to 1079€)
RTX 2080Ti 1259€ (1200$) Nvidia's price on their site (1249€ for the cheapest aib card up to 1479€)

Prices on the 2080Ti seem a lot less inflated compared to the 1080/2080, guess the market for those is smaller here

as a side note, on amazon Germany I have seen 3rd party sellers are asking up to 12k€ for RTX cards

nVidia pricing is bad enough, here in Australia AIBs pricing is ridiculous.
2080 FE purchased from Nvidia direct = $1199 AUD (874USD)
2080 RTX2080 XC Ultra = $1499 AUD ($1093 USD)

2080 FE purchased from Nvidia direct = $1899 AUD (1385 USD)
EVGA RTX2080Ti XC Ultra = $2125 (1550 USD)

http://www.mmt.com.au/search/?manufacturer=&category=11G&search=evga+&stype=1&view=1&sort=​

 

[Chris_B]

nVidia pricing is bad enough, here in Australia AIBs pricing is ridiculous.
2080 FE purchased from Nvidia direct = $1199 AUD (874USD)
2080 RTX2080 XC Ultra = $1499 AUD ($1093 USD)

2080 FE purchased from Nvidia direct = $1899 AUD (1385 USD)
EVGA RTX2080Ti XC Ultra = $2125 (1550 USD)

http://www.mmt.com.au/search/?manufacturer=&category=11G&search=evga+&stype=1&view=1&sort=​

Consider yourself lucky you're not in the uk, the asus strix 2080ti is currently on pre order for £1500, or $1970 USD.

 

[Space_Ranger]

Consider yourself lucky you're not in the uk, the asus strix 2080ti is currently on pre order for £1500, or $1970 USD.

Is that with or without the KY?

 

[Oldmodder]

1500 USD here too for cheapest 2080ti ( Gigabyte 2080 ti Gaming ) most expensive is the EVGA Ti XC ultra at 1720 USD
This are of course current preorder prices, i am sure they will only go up for the foreseeable future.

The 700 USD for the cheapest vega 64 are pretty high even for my book, they would pick up volume if the lowered their price i am sure.

The current 2080ti prices are pretty much the price of a entire octo core mid range computer build i am planning to build ( all the other hardware )
I would not put a 1500 USD card in a 1500 USD computer, and i cant afford to splash the other 1500 USD i would need for just the CPU in a dream build.

 

[Porter_]

Good article

 

[fadedlogic]

Any excuse to use that photo, is a good excuse. Nice analysis and it certainly appears, at this time, that Nvidia has misplayed their hand. I really hope AMD can up their graphics card game ASAP. Nvidia keeps letting them get up off the mat.

 

[tajoh111]

I posted this in another forum, but I think there is a reason prices are too high.

The reason these chips are so expensive this generation is because there is too much Pascal stock on shelves and in inventory. The inventory situation can be confirmed by looking online or going to places like microcenter and they will confirm there is a huge amount of pascal cards left.

A couple weeks prior to this release, the prices of pascal cards were falling, as was the price of used cards(and the supply was growing). The reason for this is people were waiting for Turing cards and were expecting an overhaul in last gen pricing like usual and as a result didn't buy. With so much inventory on store shelves, ultra low prices along with Nvidia over supply of old inventory at their headquarters/partners/shelves can lead to huge inventory write offs along with sending reimbursement to AIBs to make price drops possible(if they don't they are going to be supper pissed off to take a loss on the card). This would have happened if Turing launch pricing more typical of their old launches.

After RTX launched with performance and price confirmed, the prices of used cards and the price of new pascal cards started going up again to the point where we are just about 50 dollars under MSRP.

This is what Nvidia wants. They would rather have pascal stock depleted at higher prices than have to write rebates to retailers/AIB partners even if it takes a few months. I suspect once Pascal stock is depleted, we will see something like a 100 to 200 dollar price drop for the rtx 2080 and 2080 ti.

At around 599 for a gtx 2080 and 850 for an rtx 2080 ti, I suspect there will be buyers who own gtx 980 ti or original 1080 owners willing to upgrade.

The difference between doing an aggressive price as the case with the gtx 1080 ti/ gtx 980 ti/gtx 1070/ gtx 970, is those cards were priced as such not only to sell well but to hurt AMD sales and product launch. They were competing against the competition, not themselves.

As is the case right now, pricing too aggressively hurts Nvidia just as much as AMD. Earlier launches had largely depleted the past generation stock leading to little write off. This time around there is simply too much inventory where if any of Turing cards were priced aggressively, it would big price drops on old inventory and big writeoffs on what is likely a huge inventory pile. If you don't think this has happened before, look at the original 290x around the time of maxwells launch.

When maxwell launched and mining had recently ended, Hawaii cards could be found for 220 dollars for a 290 and 300 dollars for something like a 290x lightning.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/xfx-dd-r9-290-220-after-30-mir-newegg.2419353/

This was loss pricing for AMD and it took months for AMD to clear their inventory build up which is not as sizable as the one with Pascal. AMD wrote down big inventory writedown which they report as a loss on their quarterly report.

The reason it fell to such pricing was an over supply of Hawaii cards from AMD making too many cards anticipating mining demand would be longer(Nvidia has made this mistake now) and the launch of the gtx 970/980 which depressed pricing further because of the price/performance, the nvidia brand and the case that the cards were new.

If Nvidia were to price their turing cards too low, they would basically inflict the damage they did to AMD with the Gtx 970/980 launch, but onto themselves and it would make the AIB partners really pissed off. So what I suspect will happen is once cards are depleted which I can suspect will be sometime in November, they will drop the price of turing down to let say 850-799/590-550/399 which is more in line with their old pricing. As a consequences of Turing cards not selling until the price drops do occur, Nvidia is able to built up an oversupply of turning cards and with the price drop, be able to supply the market with far more volume and combined with the higher price of turing cards, generate revenue that is up to spec with their more recent quarters.

 

[Chris_B]

Is that with or without the KY?

WITHOUT!!!! raw dawgin all the way!

 

[LuxTerra]

It's expensive for sure. However, it's basically a linear price increase per square mm over a 1080Ti. That's historically considered a bargain on what amounts to the same process since larger dies hurt yields.

As for value, well that depends on the purchaser.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Had this been a titan branded card with titan levels of performance (say 40% or so over 1080ti) nobody would have batted an eyelid at the price as its in titan price territory. But pushing everything up a pricing tier is taking the piss.

It's really difficult to do comparisons like thidäs though, because in the end what is an xx80 card, or an xx70 or xx60 card is just a manufacturing name. They don't design them to be these things.

They start out designing a next gen arch, then through a combination of process yields, arch performance and what the competition is doing they decide which marketing names to give a chip with x number of compute units disabled, etc. Etc.

xx% faster than 1080 is a meaningless metric, because the performance of an xx80 card is not a universal standard.

These things change from generation to generation.

So, I agree the pricing this generation is high, but I'm not going to get too worked up about whether it's a 2080ti or it's a Titan. They name these things differently every gen.

Would you have been happier if they launched the 2080ti as a Titan brand? The marketing name is really an arbitrary choice on Nvidias marketing departments behalf. It doesn't really mean anything.

When it comes down to brass tax, here is what really matters to me right now. I want a single GPU that is faster than my Pascal Titan X.

I have a few choices. Titan Xp, which isn't much of an upgrade. Titan V which is WAY too expensive, or a 2080ti which is a bit overpriced, but suddenly seems.like the rational choice.

What other choice do I have? AMD has nothing in this performance range, and both crossfire and SLI suck donkey balls, so I'm not doing that again...

The real problem here is the lack of competition. I hope AMD gets their act together, but it's too late for this gen.

 

[Iratus]

I'm in Australia atm, the 2080 standard, costs $550 AUD (400US) more than my 1080Ti did 18 months ago.

In the absence of a killer app, or a 4K HDR high refresh monitor that isn't BS, I'm really not seeing the point. First time I've ever had that and I've had cards since the Voodoo 2 days and working at McDonalds to pay for it.

 

[funkydmunky]

No clue on how to add it to a graph, but I bet this has a LOT to do with what the competition (now just AMD) is doing for prices and how competative they are in the high end. AMD basically didn't even try for highest end cards last generation, at least based on 4K and VR perfomance.

I would have to agree. After giving the chart a quick glance it appears the peaks are when AMD was not competing in the upper enthusiast space.

 

[coconutboy]

IIRC nvidia has never had smaller silicon process than AMD. As a matter of fact, AMD has more than once been first on newer process. Actually AMD is already at 7nm with Vega instinct.

Not all fabrication processes are equal; 10nm at company A does not spin nearly the same as company B. I think it was David Kanter who wrote a pretty good article about this a few years back. Global Foundries has been inferior to TSMC since at least the mid-2000s, and TSMC in turn trails Intel and Samsung. Problem for companies using TSMC (including AMD/Nvidia) is the Taiwanese company tends to over-promise a lot on their new processes. This has caused Nvidia numerous headaches and botched/missed launches in the past.

My main point was, now AMD and Nvidia are on mostly equal footing in terms of silicon production. For now, Nvidia is still the more important customer to TSMC, but that could change. There was a time when Intel and Microsoft seemed unbeatable and 3dfx ruled the graphics roost.

Intel has been trying to bring a discrete ray tracing GPU to market for about a decade now. Supposedly they’re getting closer to doing so. Even Intel shareholders will be in disbelief should it actually happen before 2077 (the year, not the game. These are the timeframes Intel works with now. They’re the new IBM).

AFAIK Intel cancelled any RT development when larrabee was repurposed into Knights Ferry. I don't think they'll restart from scratch but surely there will be a lot of catching up to do.

You’re right. I just brought up Intel’s previous ray-tracing efforts because of the current gpu climate. Intel announcing a new discrete gpu (that’s not due for at least 1.5 years rofl ) just before Nvidia announces ray-tracing is hilarious considering Intel failed to ship any of their own vid cards. At this point, if Intel ships anything that will be a surprise.

 

[Denpepe]

nVidia pricing is bad enough, here in Australia AIBs pricing is ridiculous.
2080 FE purchased from Nvidia direct = $1199 AUD (874USD)
2080 RTX2080 XC Ultra = $1499 AUD ($1093 USD)

2080 FE purchased from Nvidia direct = $1899 AUD (1385 USD)
EVGA RTX2080Ti XC Ultra = $2125 (1550 USD)

http://www.mmt.com.au/search/?manufacturer=&category=11G&search=evga+&stype=1&view=1&sort=​

I just want to say I did not convert to USD I put the US price for comparison

so e.g. RTX 2080Ti 1259€ = 1477.37$ (1200$ in the US) Nvidia's price on their site (1249€ = 1465.38$ for the cheapest aib card up to 1479€ = 1735.22 USD)

 

[Elios]

love the tech but yeah PRICE is nuts blame the market people where paying near this for 1080ti's for almost a year nv wanted some of that pie and its clear the market will bear that on a high end GPU

 

[dragonstongue]

these things are not exactly "low cost" to produce, that is a given, but, likely the cost of them is "pretty much" what is always has been with very rare exceptions...lower the nm of the transistors, lower the cost of them, more can fit per die, you get more dice per wafer etc.

I like the 285 listed in ther, was the same time that people claimed "radeon" was not impacting Nv pricing at all, and yet the 4850/4870 coming from the 3k generation "took them by surprise" shame AMD did not keep the sweet spot rolling as long as they should have, I think the next one was the 6870...

akward times as of late, peddling wares that few people actually have need of, not giving people what they can effectively use, cutting back what can benefit others, and slapping on a bigger price tag...

Almost as bad a "flagship" phones/mobile using dinky size battery capacity and smashing a large price tag on them anyways ^.^

 

[pfc_m_drake]

Did somebody say 8800GTX? Launch day SLI purchase baby!!!
Wonder if they'll still honor the lifetime warranty...

edit: Remember buying a PC Power&Cooling 1kw Power Supply to power those things...

edit #2: I just took that pic 5 minutes ago.. Wonder if I can sell them to erek .....

 

[coconutboy]

I remember reading these types of comments back when I bought my 1080FE for $699 at launch. I then laughed for nearly 2 years when most paid 2x that during the mining craze. And I was playing hearthstone on my killer rig. LOL


Point is if you want it and can afford it. Fucking buy it and never look back.

Agreed. A lot of the long-term value from buying high-end cards is nearly impossible to deduce till long afterwards. Ditto when a card is a relative bust. I remember when the 8800gtx/gts came out. I balked at the price because I was still content with my 6800gt, instead opting to buy an Xbox 360 and Wii. But for those who did take the plunge early, those 8800 series cards were golden for about 4 years after launch making them an excellent value. Same with the gtx 980, and especially, the gtx 970. 1080/1440p gamers who bought those early on have reaped excellent bang-for-the-buck.

Contrast that with buying the wrong high-end card, or even the right card, but at the wrong time; 6-12 months later you realize you paid a huge markup versus after the hype is gone. Remember Nvidia’s response to the Radeon 5870/5850? People who skipped buying AMD’s launch products ended up seeing increased msrp for the same AMD cards and noisy Nvidia alternatives. And I think it was Nvidia’s fx 5800 ultra that was hairdryer loud while being mostly inferior to ATI’s Radeon 9700/9800 pro cards?

Despite these RTX cards seeming overpriced to many people (myself included), maybe in the long run this will turn into a similar situation as the Nvidia 8800 gts/gtx. When they were released, those cards, too, were using massively sized silicon with at-the-time-insane-pricing. And just like then, rather than reward Nvidia for thinking I wanted a $400,000 Ferrari, I’ll spend my money elsewhere till AMD or Nvidia (Intel?) offer a Porsche/Corvette/Nissan that offers 85-90% of the performance for about half the price. Back in 2006-2007, I bought a Couple new consoles. This time around, I’ll pick up a Switch since I’ve been itching to play the latest Zelda and Mario.

 

[TheHig]

Did somebody say 8800GTX? Launch day SLI purchase baby!!!
Wonder if they'll still honor the lifetime warranty...

edit: Remember buying a PC Power&Cooling 1kw Power Supply to power those things...

edit #2: I just took that pic 5 minutes ago.. Wonder if I can sell them to erek .....

Nice! After years of Radeon cards I went Nvidia on a build and could only afford the 8800GT but it was freaking great. Love the BFG cards. I still have a BFG 7950GT running in an arcade emulator for a buddy. Still kicking after all this time.

 

[noko]

I posted this in another forum, but I think there is a reason prices are too high.

The reason these chips are so expensive this generation is because there is too much Pascal stock on shelves and in inventory. The inventory situation can be confirmed by looking online or going to places like microcenter and they will confirm there is a huge amount of pascal cards left.

A couple weeks prior to this release, the prices of pascal cards were falling, as was the price of used cards(and the supply was growing). The reason for this is people were waiting for Turing cards and were expecting an overhaul in last gen pricing like usual and as a result didn't buy. With so much inventory on store shelves, ultra low prices along with Nvidia over supply of old inventory at their headquarters/partners/shelves can lead to huge inventory write offs along with sending reimbursement to AIBs to make price drops possible(if they don't they are going to be supper pissed off to take a loss on the card). This would have happened if Turing launch pricing more typical of their old launches.

After RTX launched with performance and price confirmed, the prices of used cards and the price of new pascal cards started going up again to the point where we are just about 50 dollars under MSRP.

This is what Nvidia wants. They would rather have pascal stock depleted at higher prices than have to write rebates to retailers/AIB partners even if it takes a few months. I suspect once Pascal stock is depleted, we will see something like a 100 to 200 dollar price drop for the rtx 2080 and 2080 ti.

At around 599 for a gtx 2080 and 850 for an rtx 2080 ti, I suspect there will be buyers who own gtx 980 ti or original 1080 owners willing to upgrade.

The difference between doing an aggressive price as the case with the gtx 1080 ti/ gtx 980 ti/gtx 1070/ gtx 970, is those cards were priced as such not only to sell well but to hurt AMD sales and product launch. They were competing against the competition, not themselves.

As is the case right now, pricing too aggressively hurts Nvidia just as much as AMD. Earlier launches had largely depleted the past generation stock leading to little write off. This time around there is simply too much inventory where if any of Turing cards were priced aggressively, it would big price drops on old inventory and big writeoffs on what is likely a huge inventory pile. If you don't think this has happened before, look at the original 290x around the time of maxwells launch.

When maxwell launched and mining had recently ended, Hawaii cards could be found for 220 dollars for a 290 and 300 dollars for something like a 290x lightning.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/xfx-dd-r9-290-220-after-30-mir-newegg.2419353/

This was loss pricing for AMD and it took months for AMD to clear their inventory build up which is not as sizable as the one with Pascal. AMD wrote down big inventory writedown which they report as a loss on their quarterly report.

The reason it fell to such pricing was an over supply of Hawaii cards from AMD making too many cards anticipating mining demand would be longer(Nvidia has made this mistake now) and the launch of the gtx 970/980 which depressed pricing further because of the price/performance, the nvidia brand and the case that the cards were new.

If Nvidia were to price their turing cards too low, they would basically inflict the damage they did to AMD with the Gtx 970/980 launch, but onto themselves and it would make the AIB partners really pissed off. So what I suspect will happen is once cards are depleted which I can suspect will be sometime in November, they will drop the price of turing down to let say 850-799/590-550/399 which is more in line with their old pricing. As a consequences of Turing cards not selling until the price drops do occur, Nvidia is able to built up an oversupply of turning cards and with the price drop, be able to supply the market with far more volume and combined with the higher price of turing cards, generate revenue that is up to spec with their more recent quarters.

Memories seem to be so short (not you, in general that is). If Nvidia has a glut of Pascals (they do) then what the hell was the ultra high prices that everyone (most I should say) blamed on mining? Also how Nvidia was so concerned about the gamers and those high prices yet behind the scenes stockpiles of Pascals were ready to sell at ultra high prices .

We calculated out the number of GPU's going for mining and it was almost insignificant compared to gamers and data centers (to no avail). Now with Nvidia making a killing profit from Pascal how ever they achieved it, it may not look too good if Turning took a nose dive in the ground on the bottom line. Just some thoughts.

There is some very cool tech in Turning no doubt, the high price also may indicate that Nvidia would not be able to supply the normal demand for the Ti big chip and full mid level chip.

 

[triwolf]

Seriously , some of you need to stop defending this price point. Greed is the best description and how about the unsold last gen 300,000 units or whatever that # maybe. Due to you guess it more greed. This card is ok for 4K. Ray tracing not this gen not next gen.
DLSS is a gimmick and as for no competition. I don't remember paying $1200 for the first 3DFX Voodoo card I bought. It is the fastest GPU, but it is not $1200 fast.

I agree, this level of pricing hopefully won't be the new normal, we will see. There was a time when the Voodoo2 was about $200 over MSRP due to high demand for a product that was basically twice as fast as the Voodoo 1, I saw them on the shelf and saw others buying them. 3dfx wasn't gouging that time though, it was retailers, and it came back down to MSRP fairly quick when the production increased.

 

[Dayaks]

I agree, this level of pricing hopefully won't be the new normal, we will see. There was a time when the Voodoo2 was about $200 over MSRP due to high demand for a product that was basically twice as fast as the Voodoo 1, I saw them on the shelf and saw others buying them. 3dfx wasn't gouging that time though, it was retailers, and it came back down to MSRP fairly quick when the production increased.

$1000+ top gaming GPUs have been the around since 2013. I am pretty sure it’s solidly the norm now.