Really?

I wish they would have started putting out AMD products. Powercolor just doesn't feel like a flagship partner like evga was to nvidia.

You mean Nvidia GPUs? I got my 6750XT for 500€, and I think it's a good price for the performance I get.

The new mining is AI... TSMC is at max capacity. They're not going to waste too many wafers making gaming GPU when AI acceleratora are selling for $30k each

They're beating AMD at ray tracing, upsampling (DLSS vs FSR), VR, and especially streaming (NVENC). For the latter look at the newly announced beta partnership with Twitch and OBS which will bring higher quality transcoding and easier setup only for Nvidia for now and soon AV1 encoding only for Nvidia (at first anyway).

The raw performance is mostly there for AMD with the exception of RT, and FSR has gotten better. But Nvidia is doing Nvidia shit and using the software ecosystem to entrench themselves despite the insane pricing.

Couldn't agree more! Abstracting to a general economic case -- those hundreds of dollars are a double digit percentage of the overall cost! Double digit % cost increase for single digit % performance doesn't quite add up @nvidia :)

Especially with Google going with TPUs for their AI monstrosities it makes less and less sense at large scale for a consumers to pay the Nvidia tax just for CUDA compatibility. Especially with the entrance of things like SYCL that help programmers avoid vendor lock.

Not being a power of 2 gives me displeasure.

I have a 2060 super with 8GB. The VRAM is enough currently for FHD gaming - or at least isn't the bottle neck, so 12 GB might be fine with this use case BUT I'm also toying around with AI models and some of the current models already ask for 12 GB VRAM to run the complete model. It's not, that I would never get a 12 GB card as an upgrade, but you'd be sure, that I'd do some research for all alternatives and then it wouldn't be my first choice but a compromise, as it wouldn't future proof me in this regard.

Exactly, people get to caught up in the Digital Foundry-ification of ultra max settings running at a perfect ~120 unlocked frames. Relax my dudes and remember the best games of your life were perfect dark with your friends running at 9 FPS.

1080p is fine, medium settings are fine. If the game is good you won't sweat the details.

They clearly believe customers will always buy nvidia over amd so why bother competing just make an annoyingly segmented lineup.

Nope. Even my 3080 Ti has 12Gb. I was waiting for the 4000 series refresh but i think I'll just wait and see what the 5000 series looks like.

It can pull weight at 4k, but I'm not sure if that is justification to slam it for not having the memory for 4k.

There are many games that cut it awfully close with 12GB at 1440p, for some it's actually not enough. And when Nvidia pushes Raytracing as hard as they do, not giving us the little extra memory we need for that is just a dick move.

Whatever this card costs, 12GB of vram is simply not appropriate.

Is it weird that until I read this I forgot that GPUs can make graphics

An actual technical answer: Apparently, it's because while the PS5 and Xbox Series X are technically regular x86-64 architecture, they have a design that allows the GPU and CPU to share a single pool of memory with no loss in performance. This makes it easy to allocate a shit load of RAM for the GPU to store textures very quickly, but it also means that as the games industry shifts from developing for the PS4/Xbox One X first (both of which have separate pools of memory for CPU & GPU) to the PS5/XSX first, VRAM requirements are spiking up because it's a lot easier to port to PC if you just keep the assumption that the GPU can handle storing 10-15 GB of texture data at once instead of needing to refactor your code to reduce VRAM usage.

Lmao

We have your comment: what am I doing with 20gb vram?

And one comment down: it's actually criminal there is only 20gb vram