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

Dayaks said:
$1000+ top gaming GPUs have been the around since 2013. I am pretty sure it’s solidly the norm now.
Click to expand...
It's all down to what people will pay, I generally hold off when you can't get that great of performance per dollar, I would be willing to pay around $800. I have plenty of games to play and the new Doom doesn't have RT but the smoke fire and effects in general are pretty impressive. Wolfenstein up next, maybe some Metro 2033 with max settings.

I've got a backlog of great games, maybe when the new Metro comes out and we see how it runs along with whatever else is out, I'll at least look and maybe they will sell all those 1080 TIs and ramp up 2080 TI fab.
 
The other aspects for me is I want a HDR monitor! The only GSync HDR monitor are from ASUS or ACER, they are 27" 4K brillant monitors but at $2000! 144hz is also a first except you would indeed need two 2080 Ti's to even hope to push it past 60 hz max settings for a number of games. Where are the 3440x1440 HDR monitors, even 2560x1440 HDR monitors with GSync? FreeSync monitors and UHDTV's with HDR come in all ranges, frequencies etc. It is not that Nvidia cannot support Adaptive Sync or FreeSync monitors so us gamers have more options - they choose not to support an open standard and restrict or control the version they laid out that would be best for you or is it for them? So as John Seed said "Yes" in FarCry 5, we can just say "NO!".

HDR is and can be a very important IQ booster, just as much as ray tracing but you can actually use it now.
 
Last edited:
Meh, this gen is simply too rich for me, at least at the moment. Maybe in six to 12 months or more, or maybe the next gen. Instead, I've actually been thinking about taking colon cleansing up as a hobby. It's a heck of a lot cheaper, typically provides repetitive results (but not always, mind you), and I'd feel a whole heck of a lot better about myself having not helped pay for someone else's more expensive leather jacket:

 
noko said:
The other aspects for me is I want a HDR monitor! The only GSync HDR monitor are from ASUS or ACER, they are 27" 4K brillant monitors but at $2000! 144hz is also a first except you would indeed need two 2080 Ti's to even hope to push it past 60 hz max settings for a number of games. Where are the 3440x1440 HDR monitors, even 2560x1440 HDR monitors with GSync? FreeSync monitors and UHDTV's with HDR come in all ranges, frequencies etc. It is not that Nvidia cannot support Adaptive Sync or FreeSync monitors so us gamers have more options - they choose not to support an open standard and restrict or control the version they laid out that would be best for you or is it for them? So as John Seed said "Yes" in FarCry 5, we can just say "NO!".

HDR is and can be a very important IQ booster, just as much as ray tracing but you can actually use it now.
Click to expand...
I'm right there with you, It's tough to know when to buy into a new monitor and system. Seems prices are going up on many components, $2K is quite a bit for a quality monitor plus a video card and whole new system to drive it getting close to at least $6k and up. I miss building a new $1k system and keeping the monitor.

That's a good link for HDR games, I don't have an HDR display yet. That will be good to check later.

I have Hitman, it runs really well on one of my systems with a 1070, fun game probably even better with HDR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
I think that there are three key missing data points on the charts: the 7800 GTX (June 2005), 8800 GTX (November 2005) and the 9800 GTX (April 2008). These were replacing old high end cards and had surprisingly reasonable price points for the time. These further highlight how much of an anomaly the 8800 Ultra was and that the RTX 2080 Ti is today. I'd also argue that the FE of the GTX 1080 and GTX 1080 TI could be removed from the list and replaced with the 3rd part MSRP of these cards. The only reason to get the FE of these cards was to be an early adopter as they were the only real initial source at launch but at a higher price point. Two months later there was no reason to pick these up as 3rd party cards were plentiful and priced lower (at least until the mining craze hit which wrecked all pricing).

There were some GTX 680 4 GB cards that were released in the later half of 2012 but also commanded a higher price than the 2 GB version listed on the chart. Everything else remained the same, hence product naming being sane for once. Not sure if this was an official product from nVidia or just card makers taking advantage of denser memory chips that became available.

This also highlights one trend in the graph: how quickly nVidia replaces high end parts. The 9800 GTX would be an excellent example as was nVidia's best single GPU card for a mere three months and everyone knew that the GTX 260/280 were on the horizon when it launched. And as predicted, the 9800 GTX price fell accordingly when those other two card came to market. Oh, and then a month after the GTX 260/290 arrived, the 9800 GTX+ comes out to further cloud things. Nowadays we barely get a new card every year.

Another interesting trend to look at is the size of the GPU dies being used in products. Larger dies are more expensive to manufacture so there is some correlation there, especially when only looking at fully functional dies and ignore binning. Pricing doesn't directly correlate with die size but it does indicate that the RTX 2080 TI is also an anomaly here too: 745 mm^2 is the second largest commercial chip ever, only dwarfed by nVidia's own GV100 at 815 mm^2. I have a feeling that the pricing now is a preview for when nVidia will start using chiplets and scaling performance upward by simply throwing more silicon into a package as if they were Lego bricks. The xx70, xx80, xx80 Ti would literally all be use the same base dies, just different quantities of them.

An argument could also have been made to include the 7900 GX2 (March 2006), 7950 GX2 (June 2006), 9800 GX2 (March 2008, $600), GTX 295 (January 2009, $500), GTX 590 (March 2011, $700) and GTX 690 (April 2012, $1000). These are clearly dual GPU cards and did command significantly higher prices than single GPU cards but often two high end single GPUs in SLI would generally out perform them, though at the same or slightly higher cost. This in itself would be an interesting comparison with SLI pricing as the cost of the RTX 2080 Ti today would have gotten you a SLI rig years ago, even with inflation. Now that SLI has been replaced with nvLink, I guess it is far to ask if two RTX 2080s are a much better experience than a single RTX 2080 TI and account for the $200 price difference? Multi-GPU scaling is supposed to be better now though I fear as with much of the RTX line up, it'll take a some time for developers to leverage and drivers to really show this off.
 
Why no dual chip cards? They are essentially the gp102 of today, otherwise known as the ultra high end.

The gtx590 was faster than a gtx580 as the gtx780ti was faster than a gtx780 and the first year with no dual chip card. The gtx780ti in my opinion was the replacement for dual chip cards because sli was/is being phased out.
 
happymedium said:
Yes you can.
Click to expand...


ok,ok so why was it i was remembering something from the demo saying either you could use tensor cores for raytracing or use them for performance boost or aa or something? idk i'm probably wrong. need to re-watch demo i suppose.
 
I think that the greedy little leatherjacket has been eyeing up Apple, and being very jealous over what they are able to achieve, so he thinks to himself, I want to be like that, but like so many other greedy little slightly aging wannabe rockers, he goes for glory, and makes the leap in to thinking that to be Apple, he just has to copy their marketing and pricing, as he already has the arrogance. This was also most likely fuelled by the prices the more affluent, less responsible gamers were willing to pay during the mining boom.

So basically, mining, and the fact that a certain amount of gamers were more than happy to pay double the MSRP price for a year old product has made him convinced that if they are willing to pay that kind of money for a year old card, then next gen is going to be a goldmine for him, and here we are. If this keeps up, and the pricing doesn’t go down, then AdoredTV is right, we will be looking at $1500+ for the next 3080Ti card in 18 months time, and all the lower cards will be another $200 for each tear. Gaming will be unaffordable to the vast majority of gamers, and RTX tech will not take off, as there will only be +-1% of gamers with a card fast enough to play any RTX titles.

Our only hope is that AMD can get in on this DirectX RT technology, and offer it at an affordable price. AMD has always been far superior to nVidia when it comes to compute, so it could be a game changer for AMD. But if Navi does not have RT capabilities, then RT in AAA games is doomed.
 
kirbyrj said:
The 2nd option
Click to expand...
i see well then it seems less impressive :p i would guess or alteast hope ppl having or buying these cards atleast run a 1440p+ screen lol, else i strugle to understand why even have 1080ti+++ sure as shit wont run 1080p under any circumstance on my monitor lol :p just as i dont run 200% res scale, even tho, there is some improvement. i guess it makese sense for a 2080ti on a 1080p then hehe, but who would pay this price just for that, when we have not even seen any rey tracing games yet xD and is not a given that most games will use it either. bf v and tomb raider, that i know of.
madcap magician said:
It’s free market people. And those people can buy whatever they want at whatever price. If I could get x amount of dollars for a widget I would too. That’s what makes America great. It’s almost like there is wealth envy on the forums. Not this forum. I mean alll those other forums out there talking about it. Not this one.

And btw does anyone on this forum know what the TOTAL manufacturing cost is for one of these cards.
Click to expand...
yeah greed is what makes a nation great, totally agree there. not really. but it works this way, not everyone can have a 2080ti its decided by who have money for it prety much.

dont think nvidia cares if its too damn expensive! but hopefully, prices will drop over time this time and not increase. and that all these bloody miners have burned at the fires of hell. not sure how worth these cards are to them at this point but given the price, it might not be all that atractive to them. ppl who dont use these cards for gaming sure as shit dont deserve them at all, because thats what they are made for.
 
You are paying for the technology that was put into it, but I don't know if games will be taking advantage of that any time soon. Just like how all our games are'nt faster now for async compute. But then again, aren't you always buying a new card because of what's new in it? Conflicted by these prices, I hope Intel can come out with something good.
 
I still can't understand there are people thinking that 4k hdr 144hz 27" monitor for $2K is a fair price.
BUT with 2 of these you can get about 120hz, and hdr sure but give me a break...99% of games you will say wow on day one and forget all about it after that.

yes I have a 1080 but if amd will put out a good gaming card and stop the bs $300 + charges for g-sync...I WILL BUY ONE TOMORROW AND N CAN GO F themselves
 
It’s funny how so many people here defend nGreedia, and say that they don’t mind the price, as it’s paying for R&D etc...

This is bullshit, have you seen just how much nGreedia are asking for their compute and pro cards? Yeah, those are the ones paying for your RT gamer features, as this tech is not designed for gamers, it’s just a happy coincidence that these compute cores are also great for RT use cases, and nGreedia have seen fit to pursue RT tech with game devs, so that they can milk that market too.
 
power666 said:
I think that there are three key missing data points on the charts: the 7800 GTX (June 2005), 8800 GTX (November 2005) and the 9800 GTX (April 2008). These were replacing old high end cards and had surprisingly reasonable price points for the time. These further highlight how much of an anomaly the 8800 Ultra was and that the RTX 2080 Ti is today.

This also highlights one trend in the graph: how quickly nVidia replaces high end parts. The 9800 GTX would be an excellent example as was nVidia's best single GPU card for a mere three months and everyone knew that the GTX 260/280 were on the horizon when it launched. And as predicted, the 9800 GTX price fell accordingly when those other two card came to market. Oh, and then a month after the GTX 260/290 arrived, the 9800 GTX+ comes out to further cloud things.
Click to expand...

Some minor points. 8800GTX wasn’t replacing anything in that product stack. It was the top card other than the Ultra (which I believe just had higher clocks?)

The 9800GTX however was literally just a refresh of the 8800GTX with higher clocks. Hence it’s lower pricing and the close release of the GTX280.
A further example can be the 8800GT (Which did replace the GTS for cheaper and similar performance.) which was refreshed with the 9800GT. Essentially identical though.

d3athf1sh said:
let's not forget that 8800GTX was a better more powerful card than 9800GTX.
Click to expand...
Pardon? How’s that
 
Since I bought my first PC in 1999 I never paid more than $300 for a new GPU. I can understand going higher if you want higher res and graphic settings but paying above $500 or $600 is ridiculous. I make good money and could afford a 2080 but I'm not stupid.
 
bpizzle1 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Stop with the stupid car analogies - they don’t work.
The Accord is a mainstream lower-end product. A better analogy would be an NSX that Honda decided to price 40% higher. That actually happens all the time on high-end, non-mainstream cars/products. 2080Ti is similar. That’s why Porsche Turbo Ss are ~$200K. Luxury items. 4K/2080Ti are luxury at this point, not quite mainstream. When 8K comes out, it’ll be luxury too. And you haven’t seen expensive graphics cards yet...
 
Lith1um said:
I game at 4k and I don't feel any need for any type of AA at 4k. Maybe my eyes are just getting old, but I can't see any jaggies and I'd rather have the performance.
Click to expand...
All depends on screen size / dpi and viewing distance...
43” 4K @ 2.5ft needs AA, but it’s a glorious experience. Truly immersive.
 
Nolan7689 said:
Some minor points. 8800GTX wasn’t replacing anything in that product stack. It was the top card other than the Ultra (which I believe just had higher clocks?)

The 9800GTX however was literally just a refresh of the 8800GTX with higher clocks. Hence it’s lower pricing and the close release of the GTX280.
A further example can be the 8800GT (Which did replace the GTS for cheaper and similar performance.) which was refreshed with the 9800GT. Essentially identical though.

Pardon? How’s that
Click to expand...

You're right on here. The 9800 GTX was just a higher-clocked 8800 GTX. There was a slew of "creative" nVidia renaming and pricing that generation e.g. 8800m GTX becoming 9800m GT for $100 more.
 
Brahmzy said:
Stop with the stupid car analogies - they don’t work.
The Accord is a mainstream lower-end product. A better analogy would be an NSX that Honda decided to price 40% higher. That actually happens all the time on high-end, non-mainstream cars/products. 2080Ti is similar. That’s why Porsche Turbo Ss are ~$200K. Luxury items. 4K/2080Ti are luxury at this point, not quite mainstream. When 8K comes out, it’ll be luxury too. And you haven’t seen expensive graphics cards yet...
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking there are car lines with larger engines they jack the price up on anyways. It’s like they took a Mustang normally at $26,000, put a 662HP engine in it and charged more than double!!!! Oh wait...

Maybe I am oddity but I never saw a luxury item and thought “they should have bought a pile of shit for 1/4 the price.” My response ranges from, “cool, but not for me, to each their own” to “that’s f’ing awesome, what do I need to do to get myself one.”
 
pfc_m_drake said:
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 .....
Click to expand...


Even that card looks horrified with the 2080ti pricing :p
 
PhoenixWings said:
NVIDIA's pricing hasn't been reasonable for a long time. And it's not capitalism, it's profiteering and market manipulation at its finest. Capitalism presumes that supply and demand are due to healthy market conditions. Manipulating the market during the mining craze to make more money on fewer GPUs instead of selling off your old supply of Pascal GPUs was short sighted, greedy, and stupid. Fuck You NVIDIA!
Click to expand...

You forgot “Fuck You AMD too!”
 
happymedium said:
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.
Click to expand...
Sure, but I can buy the card in 6 months if that happens, and without price gouging. /shrug
 
harmattan said:
You're right on here. The 9800 GTX was just a higher-clocked 8800 GTX. There was a slew of "creative" nVidia renaming and pricing that generation e.g. 8800m GTX becoming 9800m GT for $100 more.
Click to expand...

The 9800GTX was actually a higher clocked 8800GTS 512. Both had 128 cores, and had a 256bit bus w/ 512MB of VRAM. The 9800GTX had higher clocks.

While the 8800GTX had 128 cores, and had a 384bit bus and 768MB of VRAM. The 8800Ultra & 8800Ultra Extreme had higher clocks.
 
Brahmzy said:
Stop with the stupid car analogies - they don’t work.
The Accord is a mainstream lower-end product. A better analogy would be an NSX that Honda decided to price 40% higher. That actually happens all the time on high-end, non-mainstream cars/products. 2080Ti is similar. That’s why Porsche Turbo Ss are ~$200K. Luxury items. 4K/2080Ti are luxury at this point, not quite mainstream. When 8K comes out, it’ll be luxury too. And you haven’t seen expensive graphics cards yet...
Click to expand...

I'll bite...

Stop with this luxury item bullshit. The fact of the matter is you went from the 2016 model of the Ti card to the 2018 model of the Ti card and the price almost doubled. You want to line up to throw money at Nvidia? You are more than welcome to, but I want to see a compelling reason why ~30% more performance is worth nearly double the cost. In other words, it didn't used to be as much of a luxury item as it is now, and that's what people are pissed about.

And before anyone starts with the "this is a halo Titan part and priced as a Titan"....It's not a Titan. It clearly does not say Titan anywhere on it. To put in perspective, a 1070 performed near 980Ti performance for about $200 less. Now you have to pay $100 extra for the 2080 to get near 1080Ti performance. The whole naming vs. previous generations performance vs. price/performance is out of whack compared to recent Nvidia releases. If the 2080Ti comes in a $799, nobody bats an eye and people pay it. At $1199, fuck Nvidia.
 
kirbyrj said:
I'll bite...

Stop with this luxury item bullshit. The fact of the matter is you went from the 2016 model of the Ti card to the 2018 model of the Ti card and the price almost doubled. You want to line up to throw money at Nvidia? You are more than welcome to, but I want to see a compelling reason why ~30% more performance is worth nearly double the cost. In other words, it didn't used to be as much of a luxury item as it is now, and that's what people are pissed about.

And before anyone starts with the "this is a halo Titan part and priced as a Titan"....It's not a Titan. It clearly does not say Titan anywhere on it. To put in perspective, a 1070 performed near 980Ti performance for about $200 less. Now you have to pay $100 extra for the 2080 to get near 1080Ti performance. The whole naming vs. previous generations performance vs. price/performance is out of whack compared to recent Nvidia releases. If the 2080Ti comes in a $799, nobody bats an eye and people pay it. At $1199, fuck Nvidia.
Click to expand...

You did what NV wanted you to do and they're happy, and you are happy. Enjoy your 1080 Ti. It's a great card.
 
Rizen said:
Sure, but I can buy the card in 6 months if that happens, and without price gouging. /shrug
Click to expand...
Or you can buy the card now enjoy a 35% uplift in frames and enjoy another 35% in 6 month.
/ shrug and pay less now before the tax tariffs kick in.
 
I am glad the article brought up the inflation factor. Adjusted for inflation the 2080 is similarly priced to 1080ti launch. 2080 is essentially a little better and updated version 1080ti.

2080ti was always going to be priced like a Titan, hence the sticker shock adjusted even higher with inflation.

699 1080ti fe nvidia store at launch day
799 2080 nvidia store at launch day

Blame inflation...prices are going higher on everything and its alot more disturbing than the price of a video card!
 
kirbyrj said:
I'll bite...

Stop with this luxury item bullshit. The fact of the matter is you went from the 2016 model of the Ti card to the 2018 model of the Ti card and the price almost doubled. You want to line up to throw money at Nvidia? You are more than welcome to, but I want to see a compelling reason why ~30% more performance is worth nearly double the cost. In other words, it didn't used to be as much of a luxury item as it is now, and that's what people are pissed about.

And before anyone starts with the "this is a halo Titan part and priced as a Titan"....It's not a Titan. It clearly does not say Titan anywhere on it. To put in perspective, a 1070 performed near 980Ti performance for about $200 less. Now you have to pay $100 extra for the 2080 to get near 1080Ti performance. The whole naming vs. previous generations performance vs. price/performance is out of whack compared to recent Nvidia releases. If the 2080Ti comes in a $799, nobody bats an eye and people pay it. At $1199, fuck Nvidia.
Click to expand...
It would be interesting to see a study on how many people actually have the money to buy the 2080 or TI and because of your comment, the lack of competition, the future tech in the cards that is not totally proven although promising, plus maybe even needing to build a new PC, just made many people decide there were too many problems to buy.
 
triwolf said:
It would be interesting to see a study on how many people actually have the money to buy the 2080 or TI and because of your comment, the lack of competition, the future tech in the cards that is not totally proven although promising, plus maybe even needing to build a new PC, just made many people decide there were too many problems to buy.
Click to expand...


In a world where in the richest nation on earth, over 40% of Americans would have no way to pay for a $400 emergency expense, I'd say we are most definitely, even for mid range build, talking about PC gaming being a playground for the priveleged.

Most people simply can't afford this shit.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
In a world where in the richest nation on earth, over 40% of Americans would have no way to pay for a $400 emergency expense, I'd say we are most definitely, even for mid range build, talking about PC gaming being a playground for the priveleged.

Most people simply can't afford this shit.
Click to expand...

Not everyone can be a member of the Glorious PC Master Race. That's why we have the Console Peasants. Even they will run up the CC for a console.
 
Where else are you going to get ray-tracing? Surely that comes at a premium.

Also, I think nVidia might be placing hurdles in front of AMD. I wonder if RT caught AMD completely by surprise. Doubtful.

Does RT take years to develop as nVidia claims? I'm sure it does. Does AMD need that same amount of time and money?

Also. I wonder if AMD has made any public comments about nVidia's RT tech. I haven't followed AMD GPU's for going on 3 years now so I don't know.

Also, the comparisons to older nVidia cards and those costs don't exactly line up. I think RT is a big enough of an addition that it puts the newer cards in a class of their own.

Not saying any of this is fair, it sure doesn't feel that way.

Also, I wonder if nVidia is looking at all those $1,000 flag ship phones and thinking, hey, if the kids are buying those in the millions, they can buy this. Consider this ... having a cell phone and gaming is pretty damn popular.

So a few points to consider.
 
kirbyrj said:
And others can afford it but refuse to pay an astronomical price for the perceived relative value.
Click to expand...

You keep repeating yourself as if things are going to change.

I paid for ~$1,200 for 2 980 Tis to try n play at 4K. Sold those for ~$700. Now I paid ~$1200 for a single card with significant gains over that setup. I don’t really see the problem..
This hobby has never been cheap playing at the top resolution... So..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top