UltraMega

Steam hardware surveys are not a representation of play time, just hardware running on machines with steam installed.

I was just listening to this podcast and the Moores Law is Dead guy thinks it's a strong possibility FSR3 will launch with Starfield.

For gaming, the 4090 kinda solves a problem that doesn't really exist yet. A GPU fast enough to do 4K at 200FPS+ in a typical modern game is cool, but even among enthusiasts there are very few people who have a screen that can even keep up with that. CP2077 Path tracing is cool, but it's just one game. I disagree that 4K 120hz+ adoption is currently high at all. You can find people on sites like this that do it, but it's a very tiny part of the overall market IRL. I mean, you need the $1600 GPU and then a screen that's probably even more expensive. But I totally agree that it is the first reliable 4K 120 GPU. The 3000 series is 100% for sure outselling the 4000 series right now. You're not going to see as much older stock in a store in person, and you won't see the used market at all. Best selling GPU on newegg is the 3060: Desktop Graphics Cards | Video Cards - Newegg.com Thinking about this subject, I can't help but think that until AMD is close to parity with RT, all they would do by releasing a card to compete with the 4090 would be add some price pressure on it, because people in that price bracket are not going to choose AMD to save $100 or so if it has less features. Maybe we would see the 4090 drop in price to $1500 and still no one would buy the AMD card lol.

I know the steam hardware survey is not a total picture of the market, but consider these numbers: The 4090 has 0.64% market share and a 0.1% adoption rate. The 3070 has a 3.15% market share and an adoption rate of .25% At least according to steam, the 3070, a last gen card with only 8GBs, is still selling 2.5x more than the 4090. The 3070 actually has the highest adoption rate of any GPU on steam right now. The entire 4000 series (not including mobile chips) has an adoption rate of .63%, which is less than the adoption rate of just the 3060, 3070, 3070Ti, 3080 and 3080Ti combined (.65%). If you were to add up 2000 series cards and 1000 series cards as well, it's clear that the used market is outselling the 4000 series by a lot right now. Since these are the only numbers we have, and they seem to suggest the 4000 series is losing badly to last gen cards still to this day, it seems reasonable to conclude that none of the 4000 series cards are selling well, including the 4090. Though the 4090 has the highest adoption rate of any card in the 4000 series, it's still very low compared to last gen cards. I would agree that the 4090 is selling well compared to other 4000 series cards, but I maintain that it's very likely selling less than a typical top tier card does, which... back to the topic at hand, suggest that AMD isn't missing much by not competing with the 4090.

Not sure why this is turning into a heated issue for you. We don't have sales numbers, so this is mostly speculative. I've said multiple times I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's hard to judge based on mere observations when price decoying is in effect because it somewhat skews the observational data. I totally agree Nvidia is dominating the market in terms of market share, no question. I never said otherwise. Nvidias biggest competitor right now is GeForce 3000 and AMD 6000 cards, and I suspect the entire 4000 series is losing hard to last gen cards. If I bring my own observations into this, as someone who buys a lot of used parts I can tell you the used market is definitely thriving. I suspect for every 4090 sold, half a dozen or so 3070s sell on the used market.

I think what you see at microcenters is probably just price decoying in effect. Doesn't mean the 4090 is selling well, just means it's selling better than the 4080 which is clearly intentional on Nvidia's part and therefore not at all a surprise. You can't really judge by stock supplies since the supply is being limited to keep prices high. Again, not saying your wrong but two people that have visited/watched microcenters is just not enough to go off of to have a well informed opinion on this.

They definitely priced the 4080 to push 4090 sales. It's the same reason no one ever gets a small or medium popcorn at the movie theaters. Why spend $4 for a small bag when $7 gets you a huge bucket. This is called "decoy pricing". Even if we take the observations of two microcenters as being representative of the entire market, all that really means is the 4080 is not selling. I doubt anyone here is going to microcenter so much that they are accurately tracking 4090 sales figures because of it. Nvidia has learned to control the GPU supply as well now, so they can keep prices high by controlling the scarcity of their products. They would rather sell less at a higher price than let the market reach equilibrium.

One microcenter sporadically browsed is not convincing data.

My thoughts on the video section was that it would be cool to see what kind of videos other people here would recommend, but since no one really used it that didn't work out. I posted some videos on it every now and then just to keep it from being totally dead but I don't care if it gets removed. Maybe we should have a thread for random videos kinda like the "what are you listening to" thread. A "what are you watching" thread.

Of course I am aware that people buy GPUs for workstations and other non-gaming related tasks. Still, we have no real data to go off of to get a good idea of real world 4090 sales. I don't think it's fair to say I've made any kind of mistake when we have no real data one way or the other. I simply think as prices go up, the number of people willing to pay those prices probably goes down and if that's the case, AMD probably isn't missing much. I could be way off but there is no good data to point to so we really just don't know. Based on what I can tell, it definitely sold well for the first few weeks of release which makes sense with it being the fastest consumer GPU available, but I can't find anything about ongoing sales. This is the only recent article I've found that is talking about 4090 sales, but it doesn't give any good data points. https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/rtx-4090-sales-trouble If it's true that Nvidia canceled a 4090Ti, it could be because AMD isn't competing at that price point and/or because the 4090 isn't selling well enough to suggest a more expensive card would do well. If I had to guess, the 4090 sales are probably not bad but probably a little worse than 3090 sales. There are always people who want or need the fastest hardware available, but I think GPU prices have risen faster than most people's willingness to pay. On a different note, one thing is for sure. Nvidia left the mid range wide open with its skimpy Vram. If AMD gets some cards out with similar performance in raster but with more Vram for a similar price, they will probably do very well in that market segment which is usually by far the largest segment. I think most gamers would take more Vram over better RT and DLSS if most other factors were about equal. It feels like AMD is still waiting for 6000 series cards to clear out though since they are already pretty good mid range cards.

Does anyone want two rows? IMO two rows makes sense because I like to see user subs for random videos as well as user made videos, but if no one is using it... lets just delete it. No point in keeping it if it doesn't work.

I mean, that is one data point. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seems like we don't have any real info to base sales on. I just find it really hard to believe that the $1600 gaming GPU buyers club is significant in the overall market. I could be wrong, but there is little to go off of.

I think there is a technical factor being missed in this discussion. I'm not technical enough to say I fully understand this, but I have seen a lot of info from people who are, and as I understand it, Nvidia actually made comments to the same effect before AMD, they just phrased it differently. Nvidia makes monolithic GPUs while AMD has moved to chiplets. As I understand it, there is sort of a hard limit on how big a monolithic GPU can be, and Nvidia is close to hitting that limit. They have said they face challenges with their monolithic design going forward from where they are now. Monolithic GPUs are more efficient, but they have a limit on how large they can get relative to their node. Chiplets are the way around this issue, but they come with a power cost as it's less efficient to move data around on chiplets vs a monolithic GPU. Both companies are facing similar challenges as GPUs get so big and nodes get so small that the physics starts to become an overwhelming obstacle.

Where are you getting this information? Is Nvidia posting sales figures?

I know the Steam survey leaves out a lot of potential 4090 owners, but I still would bet it's one of the slowest moving cards on the market. The only card that I would think sells less is the 4080 simply because it's a terrible value. I bet every GeForce 3000 card and every AMD RDNA2/3 card that isn't an entry level card like the 3050 or 6400 sells more than the 4090 does.

I agree there should be a clear category for member made videos and other videos and member made content should be prioritized. Would it not be possible to have two rows on the home page with the first row being member content and the second being other stuff? If the other types of videos are not visible, might as well remove them completely since they will probably get no traction.

Interesting. I guess it makes sense that people who want the best really want the best. 600w+ on a GPU seems crazy to me, but I guess it's not far off from what people used to do with SLI. Still, I think 4090 buyers are a pretty small percentage of the market. It has 0.64% of the market on Steam's hardware survey. Back to the topic at hand, if AMD had released a 600w 4090 competitor, presumably people would want to mod that as well and with 600w being the starting point... Maybe in time there will be a lot more 4090 buyers but ultimately if AMD just thinks it's too small of an audience to target when they don't have a great showing for it, it doesn't seem like they'll be missing much.

Wait so is anyone actually running a 4090 with a custom bios? I know lots of people use custom bioses in general, but is anyone doing it on a 4090 here?

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-confirms-fidelityfx-super-resolution-3-fsr3-will-be-open-source I've heard rumors that AMD might release FSR3 with the upcoming 7800 and 7700 GPUs. Would be great if it coincided with the Starfield release. I noticed this new is a bit old after I posted it. The link I was it on had the wrong date. I don't think it was posted here though, and it could be relevant in the near future if rumors about an august announcement are true.

Is there anyone here doing that? Even if there are, people on sites like this running bios mods are far from average users. The 4090 is a niche product compared to the overall market, and people happy to run 600w GPUs are and subset of a niche market. GPU prices have crept up a lot. It wasn't so long ago that a 1080Ti was seen as being over the top on pricing with its $700 MSRP. On some level it just makes sense that there is a limit to what AMD wants to charge for a GPU given what they can realistically offer.

AMD has been ahead on performance before, but not for a long time.

Do we know how much of their gaming revenue is from consoles vs the PC market? I think the most likely truth to this has to do with the power draw of their current design not scaling well into the ultra-high end. If they could release a 4090 competitor that people would actually want to buy and make a profit, they would. Right now, they simply can't. If this is true for their next line up of card too, then I suspect they simply don't have a solution to the power draw issues yet. It doesn't make sense that AMD would decide to leave any part of the market open arbitrarily. It's got to be because of design issues. AMD saw what NVIDIA unveiled and simply thought it best to avoid the performance crown this time around. Matter of fact is, RDNA3 always takes a significant power penalty as the data has to physically move between the GCD and the MCD. This introduces higher power consumption, which explains why the RTX 4080 consumes lesser power than the RX 7900 XTX. AMD Could Have Developed an RTX 4090 Competitor APPUALS.COM AMD states that it was very much possible for them to develop an RTX 4090 competitor, though they chose not to do so. I'd imagine if AMD had released a $1600 600-watt GPU that more than likely still wouldn't have great RT performance, it would have received a lot of negative reviews. The only reason to spend that much on a GPU right now is for RT, there's just nothing else that needs that much performance for raster these days.

I would never sell a prebuilt PC to a non-local customer that was overclocked. It would be a major risk factor as far as issues cropping up after the sale. In the past it might have made sense when intel had more headroom, but it would be somewhat non-sensical now unless it was a very high end PC where overclocking was the only way left to gain performance. I don't see what these fans would do that the included fans do not other than having remote control. I appreciate the suggestion, but I don't see any logic replacing the case fans that are already RGB. The customers that would appreciate brand name fans are probably not buying PCs on Etsy. The fans that come with the case are quiet and work just fine. If I did add any RGB, it would just be a cheap light strip.

This time around I had actually lined up a local buyer thinking it would be a while before the one on Etsy sold, so I have already reordered parts for that sale. In a sense I am now behind by two PCs, because the local buyer has to wait for me to get parts and build that PC, and I don't have anything up on Etsy right now.