News GeForce RTX 4060 May Consume More Power Than a RTX 3070

[spongiemaster]

Comparing consoles 1:1 to PCs is awkward. They aren't that comparable, but as you can see, it's still easily viable if you didn't buy midrange or lower back then in 2015. Even 8 years is usable. You get only into "unusable" territory with 2012. 2013 is stuff like R9 290X, which is also still usable for 1080p mid to high. Only 780 Ti will be awkward, as it has the power but not vram for today. That's 9 years.

PS4 launched at $400 in 2013. In 2013, Nvidia's $400 offering was a GTX 770. That card was not a good pick for 1080p gaming in 2020, plus the 2GB of RAM was quite limiting,

 

[spongiemaster]

And again you didn't seem to read my comment. You said lifetime of a console and 7 years, I'm talking about 9 years. As I already explained, with that, I'm "over" your point and thus i can easily counter your argument by saying, use a R9 290 then from 9 years ago, or 290X. I also already made this point two posts ago, ignore it all if you want, but you don't have a point in 9 years, much less 7 years in your argument.

You're the one missing the point. You're trying to argue that AMD's flagship card from x number of years ago is still usable. Who cares? Whether or not that is true is irrelevant. What does a flagship card retail for today? The 290x msrp'd at $550. $550 won't even get you a 4070, at best the 3rd fastest launch card in the series. You're probably looking at a 4060Ti AIB board at $550. The useful life of the 4th card down in the launch stack is going to be much shorter than the flagship. The mass market is getting priced out of PC gaming, leaving consoles as the better option for the masses.

 

[InvalidError]

The RX 6500 which is brand new, maybe. You yourself have trashed this card repeatedly. How useful is it going to be in 5+ years?

I lumped those three together because they trade positions in benchmarks depending on title and settings. When the RX470 or GTX1650 runs out of steam, the RX6500 usually isn't far behind. If developers optimize their PC games/ports for PCs and target RX6500-like performance for the minimum spec, the RX470 and GTX1650 should also manage for about as much longer.

I'd be surprised if we see any 4000 series card msrp below $250 next year. What are all the current gamers looking for a decent sub $200 GPU going to upgrade to?

Hopefully the same thing I'm buying: nothing.

Companies cannot charge more for stuff than what people are willing to spend. If enough people vote with their wallet this way, companies will eventually have to take the hit to their grossly inflated profit margins to avoid a collapse in sales and profits like the one that manufacturers are starting to worry about as excess inventory piles up everywhere from people holding new purchases until next-gen or the seemingly imminent flood of used crypto-mining GPUs from ETH PoS. This is how we got the 15% average month-on-month GPU price decline in May and may very well get more double-digit drops in the coming months.

 

[KananX]

I also wanna add something : No you will not have a 7 year old PC that only cost 500$ be comparable to a console, 7 years later. Of course not. But a console costs much more than the initial investment, so do not think, the PC that WILL be playable 7 years later, and costs way more, is that much more expensive, because it isn't. The naive console fans like to believe this fairy tale, but the truth is, console games are very expensive, anything about consoles is expensive beside the console itself, which is heavily subsidized by all these other things that ARE expensive. PC's on the other hand are the exact opposite, a good one is expensive, but all later investments will be cheap, like games, etc.

That and the fact that PC's can do much more than consoles, make your argument entirely moot. Any smart person will prefer a PC over a console, even if the investment is initially higher. PC's do office work and literally run all games ever made, consoles do not, especially not recent ones. The best console in this regard was the PS3 (original), as it could run PS2 and PS1 games, as far as i know, which is still terrible compared to PCs, that can run many thousand games more and emulate everything.

This whole discussion is entirely dumb and already debated to death as well, and every time, the PC usually won this argument, it's such a easy and obvious one.

 

[KyaraM]

As I said, the PS4 was a current generation console for 7 years and thus fully supported for that length of time. Released in 2013. Replaced in 2020.

I replaced my old 1070 system just this year. And it still produces reasonable frame rates in any game I play, after 5 years, is still in use, and will stay in use for the next couple years as a secondary system for when I visit my parents, and I'm pretty sure it will continue to do a good job. I might upgrade the CPU at one point, though, since that's the actual weak point in the system, not the GPU. Not by a veeeeery long shot.

Meanwhile, my PS4 is collecting dust and despite all your statements about the PS5 being so great and awesome and cheap, contrary to what you seem to believe, it's not available at MSRP in the majority of the western world. Those 800 bucks someone else named are far closer to the truth, and for that money, you can get a 3070, likely a 4070 later on, or equivalent.

Btw, I still use a laptop with a 1650 when I'm not at home. Works great in almost all games I play, and those I cannot name as running, I literally didn't even test on it yet. PC will always have a place no matter what you want to believe. The really superfluous things are consoles, but sadly, we won't get rid of that crap any time soon...

 

[KananX]

The really superfluous things are consoles, but sadly, we won't get rid of that crap any time soon...

They can absolutely stay, not everyone is able to, or wants to mess around with a PC and I respect that, I also respect couch gaming, it's totally fine. But it's funny to me, that someone starts this argument in a forum that is 99% about PC tech.

 

[InvalidError]

Any smart person will prefer a PC over a console, even if the investment is initially higher.

You can be a smart person and prefer consoles for gaming because you don't like having to mess around with options on a game-by-game basis to make them playable with whatever hardware is in your PC. Many smart people also like to keep their work and play separate, especially when the PC and the TV you like to play games on are in different rooms. There is also the whole thing about console exclusives forcing people to buy into whichever walled garden features their favorite franchises if they want to play them.

Consoles have their places.

 

[KananX]

You can be a smart person and prefer consoles for gaming because you don't like having to mess around with options on a game-by-game basis to make them playable with whatever hardware is in your PC. Many smart people also like to keep their work and play separate, especially when the PC and the TV you like to play games on are in different rooms. There is also the whole thing about console exclusives forcing people to buy into whichever walled garden features their favorite franchises if they want to play them.

Consoles have their places.

You’re not saying anything new here.

They can absolutely stay, not everyone is able to, or wants to mess around with a PC and I respect that, I also respect couch gaming, it's totally fine. But it's funny to me, that someone starts this argument in a forum that is 99% about PC tech.

 

[spongiemaster]

Hopefully the same thing I'm buying: nothing.

Companies cannot charge more for stuff than what people are willing to spend. If enough people vote with their wallet this way, companies will eventually have to take the hit to their grossly inflated profit margins to avoid a collapse in sales and profits like the one that manufacturers are starting to worry about as excess inventory piles up everywhere from people holding new purchases until next-gen or the seemingly imminent flood of used crypto-mining GPUs from ETH PoS. This is how we got the 15% average month-on-month GPU price decline in May and may very well get more double-digit drops in the coming months.

The last couple of years have demonstrated that Nvidia and AMD won't sell lowend products if they don't have to. They don't care if you don't want to spend more than X amount of dollars, they'll just ignore you and sell to someone who will pay that amount. AMD used to try to buy market share by selling low, in the last few years they have abandoned that strategy and are pulling in record revenue and profits. It's all about ASP now, and companies are fine selling fewer products at higher prices that generate more revenue and have better margins. You are correct that companies can't charge more than people are willing to pay. Unfortunately, for budget PC gamers, there are enough people willing to pay a whole lot more now than in the past that prevents Nvidia and AMD of having to pad revenue numbers by selling millions of $150 cards at low margins. What has already started, and will likely continue for the foreseeable future is the PC gaming market shifting to a smaller number of high end users.

 

[KananX]

The last couple of years have demonstrated that Nvidia and AMD won't sell lowend products if they don't have to. They don't care if you don't want to spend more than X amount of dollars, they'll just ignore you and sell to someone who will pay that amount. AMD used to try to buy market share by selling low, in the last few years they have abandoned that strategy and are pulling in record revenue and profits. It's all about ASP now, and companies are fine selling fewer products at higher prices that generate more revenue and have better margins. You are correct that companies can't charge more than people are willing to pay. Unfortunately, for budget PC gamers, there are enough people willing to pay a whole lot more now than in the past that prevents Nvidia and AMD of having to pad revenue numbers by selling millions of $150 cards at low margins. What has already started, and will likely continue for the foreseeable future is the PC gaming market shifting to a smaller number of high end users.

I don’t know what you’re on about. There’s a 6500XT, RTX 3050 and RX 6600, cheap enough GPUs. Prices have gone up, yes, because of external reasons, 7nm, and other things that are simply more expensive than before, including the boards itself. Neither of both companies is interested in not servicing the low end or lower midrange as I like to call it. And AMD also has APUs which are a bit slow but still able to game. With new APUs also coming in that are way faster.

 

[spongiemaster]

Meanwhile, my PS4 is collecting dust and despite all your statements about the PS5 being so great and awesome and cheap, contrary to what you seem to believe, it's not available at MSRP in the majority of the western world. Those 800 bucks someone else named are far closer to the truth, and for that money, you can get a 3070, likely a 4070 later on, or equivalent.

I bought a PS5 in April of this year at MSRP. Target, Walmart, Amazon, and Best Buy all have regular drops at MSRP. If you don't like any of those, you can sign up with Sony to be put on a waiting list to buy one. Unlike the EVGA Ampere waiting list, many people have reported getting their PS5 that way. You can't walk into any store and buy a PS5 off the shelf, but it is not hard at all to get a PS5 at MSRP with a bit of patience. Over 17 million PS5's have been sold so far, based on how many are getting sold on Ebay and other auction sites, only a select few idiots are paying more than MSRP.

 

[spongiemaster]

I don’t know what you’re on about. There’s a 6500XT, RTX 3050 and RX 6600, cheap enough GPUs.

PS5 is estimated to be about as fast as a 6600 XT. The Xbox is a bit faster. 6600XT is currently selling for $400. Same price as a PS5. Pretty much everyone I know has at least one 4K TV at home. I don't know anyone that uses a 4k monitor for their pc. For the average household, the better gaming experience will be on a current gen console.

 

[spongiemaster]

Any smart person will prefer a PC over a console, even if the investment is initially higher.

Bull. Any smart person wouldn't pigeon hole themselves into one option and would recognize the strengths of both and use both.

 

[KananX]

PS5 is estimated to be about as fast as a 6600 XT. The Xbox is a bit faster. 6600XT is currently selling for $400. Same price as a PS5. Pretty much everyone I know has at least one 4K TV at home. I don't know anyone that uses a 4k monitor for their pc. For the average household, the better gaming experience will be on a current gen console.

The better gaming experience doesn’t depend onto having a bit more or a bit less GPU power, it depends what the person wants to do with the system, so you can’t even generalize that. That’s a extremely naive approach.

 

[InvalidError]

The last couple of years have demonstrated that Nvidia and AMD won't sell lowend products if they don't have to.

The last couple of years weren't about having or not having to, they were about chip shortages combined with a bunch of simultaneous high-profile launches (Zen 3, RX6xxx, PS5, SBX-SX, RTX3000, etc.), supply chain disruption from COVID and a return of massive-scale GPU-mining making it impossible to come anywhere near meeting demand. Now that demand is coming down, COVID is mostly over, supply chains are returning to a somewhat more steady state and ETH may be going PoS for real a few months from now, the channel is overflowing with GPUs and prices are steadily coming down as the market searches for its new equilibrium.

Once the market for higher-end SKUs nears saturation, AMD and Nvidia will have no choice but to seriously cater to people looking for ~$200 GPUs since they will be the only largely untapped potential customer base they will have left to spend their wafer allocation on. Netting $30 from low-end customers who will never SKUs you make $70+ a pop from is still $30 more than you will ever get when those customers go with the competition or second-hand market.

 

[spongiemaster]

Then learn to read first , before trying to teach basic things to other people.

And not only that, I said on multiple occasions what I think about consoles and it wasn’t all negative, try to paint your nonsense agenda onto someone else.

When you outright said, anyone who is smart wouldn't choose a console, you have zero ground to try a backtrack and claim you respect both options.

 

[spongiemaster]

The last couple of years weren't about having or not having to, they were about chip shortages combined with a bunch of simultaneous high-profile launches (Zen 3, RX6xxx, PS5, SBX-SX, RTX3000, etc.), supply chain disruption from COVID and a return of massive-scale GPU-mining making it impossible to come anywhere near meeting demand. Now that demand is coming down, COVID is mostly over, supply chains are returning to a somewhat more steady state and ETH may be going PoS for real a few months from now, the channel is overflowing with GPUs and prices are steadily coming down as the market searches for its new equilibrium.

Once the market for higher-end SKUs nears saturation, AMD and Nvidia will have no choice but to seriously cater to people looking for ~$200 GPUs since they will be the only largely untapped potential customer base they will have left to spend their wafer allocation on. Netting $30 from low-end customers who will never SKUs you make $70+ a pop from is still $30 more than you will ever get when those customers go with the competition or second-hand market.

AMD just got around to releasing a $200 5000 series CPU. Remember the 3300x? Released to huge fanfare. Fantastic value. Complete vaporware that predated the chip shortage. AMD never had any interest in selling that chip. Just a marketing stunt to make them look like value champs in review comparisons. We saw what a piece of garbage the 6500XT was at an MSRP of $230. How stripped down do you think a $150 GPU released within the next year would be? You can say companies will be forced to release something that cheap, but there is nothing forcing them to make it actually worthwhile buying.

 

[KananX]

You can say companies will be forced to release something that cheap, but there is nothing forcing them to make it actually worthwhile buying.

Yea sure, AMD and Nvidia are in the market to produce trash nobody wants and along the way ruin their own reputation. 🤣 Ah the good old rofl smiley back in action.

When you outright said, anyone who is smart wouldn't choose a console, you have zero ground to try a backtrack and claim you respect both options.

The issue is, you didn’t understand me, not me backtracking anything. It’s a bit typical with you, you’re not really good with this.

Anyway, I’m out of this nonsense discussion, wasted enough time. 😀

 

[InvalidError]

Remember the 3300x? Released to huge fanfare. Fantastic value. Complete vaporware that predated the chip shortage. AMD never had any interest in selling that chip. Just a marketing stunt to make them look like value champs in review comparisons. We saw what a piece of garbage the 6500XT was at an MSRP of $230. How stripped down do you think a $150 GPU released within the next year would be?

The Ryzen 3300 was launched at about the same time AMD was starting to get squeezed for wafers in preparation for the Zen 3, PS5 and XBX-SX launches. It effectively only existed long enough to clear the dregs of still usable reject dies.

The RX6500 is fundamentally the same GPU as the $160 RX6400 apart from the disabled SMs, which means they also cost fundamentally the same to make. The only major difference is how much extra money AMD and its middlemen get to put in their pockets for two SKUs that are ~30% apart on performance. For the RX6400 to retail for $160, it needs to cost no more than about $100 to manufacture as packaging, shipping, distribution, marketing, markups, etc. typically add about 60% total to commodities.

 

[spongiemaster]

The RX6500 is fundamentally the same GPU as the $160 RX6400 apart from the disabled SMs, which means they also cost fundamentally the same to make. The only major difference is how much extra money AMD and its middlemen get to put in their pockets for two SKUs that are ~30% apart on performance. For the RX6400 to retail for $160, it needs to cost no more than about $100 to manufacture as packaging, shipping, distribution, marketing, markups, etc. typically add about 60% total to commodities.

You said you're waiting for a sub $250 GPU to upgrade to. How come you haven't picked up an RX6500 or RX6400 yet?

 

[InvalidError]

You said you're waiting for a sub $250 GPU to upgrade to. How come you haven't picked up an RX6500 or RX6400 yet?

I don't buy half-baked products. Navi 24 is missing video encode, some video decode, only has two outputs when I need a minimum of three, only has 4.0x4 which is almost guaranteed to become a bottleneck in the not very distant future. As far as I am concerned, it is a no-go even if it was given to me for free.

 

[spongiemaster]

I don't buy half-baked products. Navi 24 is missing video encode, some video decode, only has two outputs when I need a minimum of three, only has 4.0x4 which is almost guaranteed to become a bottleneck in the not very distant future. As far as I am concerned, it is a no-go even if it was given to me for free.

Well, now you're just being pedantic and focusing on the negative. KananX swears AMD wouldn't release a trash product no one would want. If you ignore the minor details that its performance is underwhelming, requires a current gen enthusiast level platform you wouldn't normally pair with an entry level card like this to avoid potentially cratering performance, it's missing basic features you would expect even an iGPU would have, and the fact it is overly handicapped because it's a mobile GPU that was designed to be paired with an iGPU, it's a really solid buy for your money. KananX wouldn't lie to you. Like I said, you may be able to bring companies down to a price range, but you can't force them to make the product any good.

 

[KyaraM]

I bought a PS5 in April of this year at MSRP. Target, Walmart, Amazon, and Best Buy all have regular drops at MSRP. If you don't like any of those, you can sign up with Sony to be put on a waiting list to buy one. Unlike the EVGA Ampere waiting list, many people have reported getting their PS5 that way. You can't walk into any store and buy a PS5 off the shelf, but it is not hard at all to get a PS5 at MSRP with a bit of patience. Over 17 million PS5's have been sold so far, based on how many are getting sold on Ebay and other auction sites, only a select few idiots are paying more than MSRP.

I wasn't aware the US is the only country in the "western world"-category, and that still doesn't say jack about the world at large. You are coming across as extremely haughty and entitled here, you know. I talk to people from places like Europe or even Israel, Asia and Australia regularly. Only two of them got one and 20+ want one, and they are sold out literally all the time everywhere. Patience? Means jack when they sell out in minutes at one random afternoon when everyone is at work. Yeah, it's SO easy to get one at MSRP. 17 million sold units is nothing if 40 million or more want one. I tried for two. Whole. Years. Don't give me this bs about only needing patience. Waiting for two years for a bloody console is just ridiculous. It's seriously an insult to anyone with a brain to release games for that console exclusively as long as a majority of people can't even get it. But hey, you got one, that means anyone can get one, huh. LOL

 

[InvalidError]

Like I said, you may be able to bring companies down to a price range, but you can't force them to make the product any good.

If a product is really no good, it won't sell and if it doesn't sell enough, you make losses so you want even your worst product to at least be good enough to make a modest profit. Adding all of the missing features to the Navi 24 die would cost ~$1, putting the extra components on the GPU card to hook up the extra DP output and PCIe lanes would add another $1, that is about it. It wouldn't have taken much at all to make the RX6500 a whole lot more palatable. Even bumping the memory to 128bits of whatever the cheapest GDDR6 is available while still sticking to 4GB total would only add about $5 to possibly make the RX6500 actually worth $200.

 

[edzieba]

Those "hacks" are what are known as "optimizations", allowing for notably better visuals and more performance than what a given level of hardware could otherwise support.

No.

An 'optimisation' is taking an existing system, simplifying it whilst getting the same or indistinguishably similar output. That is not the case with non-RT rendering. There, you are taking a simplified rendering system and adding complexity in order to change the output to imitate more closely an RT output.