|
cool fan vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwtPrG14uQk
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 09:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
Is there a way to dynamically control GPU fan speed in Linux? Specifically it's for an RTX 4070 Super. I can manually set the fan speeds using the NVIDIA control panel, but I'd rather set an actual fan curve instead of just having it on jet engine mode during heavy load times. I'll also check in the Linux thread for advice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 14:31
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I kinda want to see them continue to jack up prices to see what pricing would actually stop people from buying cards Nothing is going to stop people from buying cards as long as the more expensive ones are noticeably faster, but the higher they go the more interest will taper off. You can look at the Steam hardware survey and see easily that the most popular cards are the ones in the 300-500 range. 4060s and 4070s are both more than twice as popular as the 4090. Personally, I still think $300 is a great price for a card - I paid that for a 1060 last time, and 310 for a 6750 XT this time. I could consider 400 or even 500 if there was a really compelling value proposition, but there is absolutely no way I'm looking at anything close to $1000. Even if I can afford it, I can't justify it to myself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:25
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:Nothing is going to stop people from buying cards as long as the more expensive ones are noticeably faster, but the higher they go the more interest will taper off. You can look at the Steam hardware survey and see easily that the most popular cards are the ones in the 300-500 range. 4060s and 4070s are both more than twice as popular as the 4090. My value meter is 100% broken for the Pascal generation because I ended up with a 1060 for $170 after buying a reference RX 470 for $170 and then trading it to a rabid crypto miner for a still new in box 1060, because the 470 mined ethereum better than the 1060. 1060 was a $249 MSRP at launch, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:30
|
|
|
Yeah, cheaper 1060s went down to 250 at launch. I didn't get up early enough on launch day so I ended up just saying "gently caress it, at least I know this will be rock solid" and paying $300 to Nvidia for the FE. No regrets, I never had a single problem from it and ended up giving it to a friend who was still using a 750Ti after I upgraded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:32
|
|
|
If current trends continue I totally wouldn't mind spending $500 on a 5070 (assuming it's just a 220-watt 4080)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:33
|
|
|
Pascal is 8 years ago at this point
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:35
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:Nothing is going to stop people from buying cards as long as the more expensive ones are noticeably faster, but the higher they go the more interest will taper off. You can look at the Steam hardware survey and see easily that the most popular cards are the ones in the 300-500 range. 4060s and 4070s are both more than twice as popular as the 4090. The fact that the 4090 is as high as it is is kind of insane though. 0.9% represents well over a million owners. Has there ever been a $1000+ flagship that sold that many?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:35
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:The fact that the 4090 is as high as it is is kind of insane though. 0.9% represents well over a million owners. Has there ever been a $1000+ flagship that sold that many? I wonder how much the survey is skewed by enthusiasts choosing to fill out the survey much more than someone who just wants to play CS2 on their laptop and clicks "No" on the pop-up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:37
|
|
|
I have a 4090 and Steam hasn't reached out to me to do the survey 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:40
|
|
|
Inept posted:I wonder how much the survey is skewed by enthusiasts choosing to fill out the survey much more than someone who just wants to play CS2 on their laptop and clicks "No" on the pop-up. The Steam hardware survey is inherently unreliable and there are frequently large swings back and forth that seem downright impossible. Apparently there are 39% more 3060 owners on steam today than there were two months ago, which makes zero sense. But the 4090's been hovering around 0.9% for months now, which is kind of surprising. I wouldn't be surprised if there's something boosting its presence, but I dunno if it's selection bias.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:46
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:The fact that the 4090 is as high as it is is kind of insane though. 0.9% represents well over a million owners. Has there ever been a $1000+ flagship that sold that many? Well, we don't really have much of a sample set there. Prior to the 3090, your $1000+ flagship card category was just limited to the Titans and they tended to be openly a bad value for gaming. The 1080Ti was $700 and for gaming purposes had pretty much the same specs as the Pascal Titan X which was $1200, so the 1080Ti was very very popular (see GN's recent video calling it the GOAT) and everyone agreed that the Titan was there for people who were either also using the card for work or just wanted to waste money. Inept posted:I wonder how much the survey is skewed by enthusiasts choosing to fill out the survey much more than someone who just wants to play CS2 on their laptop and clicks "No" on the pop-up. IDK, but they decided to prompt me to take the survey on three different machines this month so I'll happily give them a data point from a Broadwell tablet with Intel HD Graphics 5300.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:47
|
|
|
In 2019 I bought a 1070 for $125 and I don't think I'll ever top that video card deal
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:47
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:Nothing is going to stop people from buying cards as long as the more expensive ones are noticeably faster, but the higher they go the more interest will taper off. You can look at the Steam hardware survey and see easily that the most popular cards are the ones in the 300-500 range. 4060s and 4070s are both more than twice as popular as the 4090. Notably, the 4060 was barely beating the 4090 until the price cuts earlier this year
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 15:57
|
|
|
change my name posted:If current trends continue I totally wouldn't mind spending $500 on a 5070 (assuming it's just a 220-watt 4080) This is what I'm hoping for too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:00
|
|
|
no way nvidia is going to go back to $500 for the X070 cards. $600 min
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:11
|
|
|
What are the historical reasons GPUs have the different partner models and their own tweaks? Like, not just the single company model as CPUs
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:19
|
|
|
nVidia was always a fabless company, so they eventually figured they could outsource all production and not just the silicon. ATI made first party boards for way longer but eventually they too realized doing their own manufacturing wasn't worth the trouble. CPUs do it too in the sense that you buy the motherboard and RAM separately.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:27
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:What are the historical reasons GPUs have the different partner models and their own tweaks? Like, not just the single company model as CPUs Current GPU makers still remember what happened when 3dfx purchased STB and went bust afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:04
|
|
|
SlowBloke posted:Current GPU makers still remember what happened when 3dfx purchased STB and went bust afterwards. What was the causal link there? I’m not familiar with that history.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:06
|
|
|
The tradition goes all the way back to the DOS days. A company would make a chip that fulfilled a specific purpose (like, say, accelerating 2D graphics) and other companies would buy those chips and put them in add-in boards that would be named and configured however the AIB manufacturer wanted. This tradition carried through the early 3D accelerator days, where you had all kinds of weirdly named and configured cards using Voodoo chips and such. It's not too different from Realtek, Intel, etc, selling networking chips nowadays that end up in PCIe boards made by all kinds of random companies like Fenvi. Eventually as GPUs became bigger and more profitable, the major companies have tried to exert more control. 3Dfx tried to get heavily restrictive (or go entirely in-house?) with their card manufacturing, but it was too soon and that move was what led to their downfall. Nowadays, Nvidia and AMD approve board designs, restrict memory configurations, place restrictions on the naming and branding, while still offloading most of the risk to their AIB partners.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:11
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:3Dfx tried to get heavily restrictive (or go entirely in-house?) with their card manufacturing, but it was too soon and that move was what led to their downfall. Entirely in-house, yeah. Which had the knock-on effect that all their old partners just sold nvidia or ati chipsets instead and further exacerbated the effect. Pile on that the Voodoo line had stagnated feature-wise while nvidia surpassed them in just a couple years and yeah, dumb as poo poo move for the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:3Dfx tried to get heavily restrictive (or go entirely in-house?) with their card manufacturing, but it was too soon and that move was what led to their downfall. 3dfx purchased STB systems to own the whole production pipeline from chip to final box, thinking the other partners wouldn't react, they instead went all nvidia and left them for dead with piling debt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:25
|
|
|
Plus, even if you'd make more profit, why saddle a high margin business with a much lower margin manufacturing arm? When NVidia was smaller it made more sense to lean on other parties, and now that they're huge it makes way more sense to build in sweetheart deals and play the manufacturers off each other.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 20:33
|
|
|
Historically, the companies that designed the silicon didn't have the staff, capability, cash, or desire to also be the ones dealing with PCB assembly, final product design, packaging, managing the channel, end user sales, marketing, support etc. In the early era, they were mostly just general purpose parts. So other companies stepped up to fill the void. Some design houses did try to integrate early, like Matrox, ATi, and 3dfx. 3dfx bungled the whole thing by buying a bad board partner and saddling themselves with debt, Matrox bungled it with a single bad product that drank all of their cash reserves. ATi/Nvidia realized that the AIBs help them shift their risk. They give the AIBs a few percentage of margin and in exchange, the AIBs shoulder an outsized portion of the risk and costs, both in the manufacturing, design, support, and marketing sides. They are able to insulate themselves from a lot of the volatility (bubble bursts, over ordering, dead inventory, even flop product launches) by making it the AIBs problem. And that volatility put a great number of AIB brands out of business, including basically all of the big brands in the early era. But the AIBs die without Nvidia/AMD, and Nvidia/AMD explicitly divided up the board partners in an anti-competitive way to try to break up their leverage with only the biggest partners allowed to market both, so there isnt a lot they can do about it. They either take the scraps that Nvidia/AMD throw them, or they exit the market. Or they go make Intel cards, i guess. In the long run, with Nvidia having such massive cash now, it wouldn't surprise me if they decide that they want those few percentage of margin back and start squeezing the AIBs even harder, which is what the CEO of evga explicitly talked about when they made the choice to essentially go out of business (minus branding other peoples PSUs). Cygni fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 21:02
|
|
|
with the power dynamic as abusive as it is, why are AIBs still in business? High risk/stress, low reward...is some money better than no money then?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 03:57
|
|
|
I've only ever heard of Sapphire, XTX, etc because of their graphics cards. I'm sure they make other stuff, but I dunno what it is
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:08
|
|
|
buglord posted:with the power dynamic as abusive as it is, why are AIBs still in business? High risk/stress, low reward...is some money better than no money then? It's still a very reliable, good market, even if the margins aren't the same as NVidia sees. And NVidia still takes risks that their AIB partners don't necessarily need to take. NVidia makes a bad bet on silicon they could flush 100s of millions down the drain, the AIBs are only going to be dealing with the market ready stuff. But sometimes it doesn't go! EVGA basically gutted their business instead of being in bed with NVidia anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:14
|
|
|
Lockback posted:It's still a very reliable, good market, even if the margins aren't the same as NVidia sees. And NVidia still takes risks that their AIB partners don't necessarily need to take. NVidia makes a bad bet on silicon they could flush 100s of millions down the drain, the AIBs are only going to be dealing with the market ready stuff. Plus, the AIBs can aesthetically design the coolers/etc. to match their motherboards, etc., knowing that it's likely to lead to greater tie-in sales, and I'd fully assume/expect that they're making much greater margins on motherboards, cases (where applicable), etc. Edit: Cygni posted:In the long run, with Nvidia having such massive cash now, it wouldn't surprise me if they decide that they want those few percentage of margin back and start squeezing the AIBs even harder, which is what the CEO of evga explicitly talked about when they made the choice to essentially go out of business (minus branding other peoples PSUs). Eh... they've got a giant Eye of Federal Sauron on them currently because  , so if anything, it makes more sense to just go with the flow and continue to allow the AIBs to have involvement and make a pittance off of cards. Otherwise, I would not at all be surprised to see the DOJ turn around and slap a giant Sherman Act violation on Nvidia given their market dominance.
Canned Sunshine fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Apr 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:32
|
|
|
buglord posted:with the power dynamic as abusive as it is, why are AIBs still in business? High risk/stress, low reward...is some money better than no money then? For the ASUS/Gigabyte/MSI of the world, this sort of final design/manufacturing/support is their bread and butter and they are huge companies with billions in revenue. They take parts from suppliers, put em together, and sell them to end users, and they have like a bazillion products they make and take a cut of, all of which is dependent on other peoples silicon. They can leverage their own scale to get better deals out of their own suppliers, they own their own assembly lines, their own design houses, their own testing labs, etc. And ultimately, they aren't beholden to any one supplier. If LG's LCD panels are uncompetitive, they buy someone elses. They don't make a ton of margin on each GPU, but they sell a lot of them and they are by far the most expensive part of any DIY PC these days. 9% of a $1600 4090 is more profit than selling a literal crate of some of the other stuff they make. And for the smaller AIBs, they don't have much choice. Money is money, and Nvidia/AMD are selling the pick axes. Nissin Cup Nudist posted:I've only ever heard of Sapphire, XTX, etc because of their graphics cards. I'm sure they make other stuff, but I dunno what it is Not anymore, they are basically GPU only for the consumer market. They used to make other stuff many years ago, and i've got an XFX AM2 motherboard from years back that is actually really great (minus the part where Nvidia and XFX broke up halfway through the life cycle and it never got BIOS updates again).
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:33
|
|
|
Cygni posted:9% of a $1600 4090 is more profit than selling a literal crate of some of the other stuff they make. I would genuinely be shocked if their O&P on a 4090 was anywhere near 9%; I would expect it to be closer to probably 2-3%.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:36
|
|
|
Canned Sunshine posted:I would genuinely be shocked if their O&P on a 4090 was anywhere near 9%; I would expect it to be closer to probably 2-3%. Yeah, the evga CEO suggested it was closer to that 3% number for them, but I was factoring in the ability of ASUS/MSI/Gigabyte to likely be able to pressure their own suppliers more than evga and eek our a few more points. As well as save some bucks with their terrible support!  But yeah, its somewhere in the single digits for sure, i was just makin up a number.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:41
|
|
|
I still don't fully buy all of the whining from EVGA when they were pulling out. There was clearly a lot going on within that company that led to that decision, and I think they played up how bad it was for them. Especially since EVGA was blatantly one of the AIBs selling cards on the grey market directly to crypto miners. (there was a period of 9 - 12 months where they didn't ship a single card to retailers lmao)
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 04:59
|
|
|
EVGA had a huge backlog of people buying cards at prices well below markup rates for the 30-series, all through their official store, so I don't know if the not shipping to retails really means crypto. One of the reasons people liked them is that they cut out the retail middleman, even if you paid for it in shipping fees.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 06:24
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:EVGA had a huge backlog of people buying cards at prices well below markup rates for the 30-series, all through their official store, so I don't know if the not shipping to retails really means crypto. One of the reasons people liked them is that they cut out the retail middleman, even if you paid for it in shipping fees. They paused that queue for a good year too. They weren't shipping poo poo to regular customers. People realized when upset customers set up a spreadsheet to track queue progress and they realized nobody got a new card for most of 2021. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Apr 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 13:07
|
|
|
I think some of that was because they prioritized the FTW versions and the lower-tiers basically saw no production; I never saw that it was because they were shipping those non-FTW cards to crypto customers, but maybe. They were definitely continuing to crank out FTW versions the entire time though, including to some stores like Newegg, Best Buy, etc. For the record, I was following the tracking spreadsheets consistently at the time in the hopes of grabbing a 3080 FTW for awhile.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 17:07
|
|
|
I too was a spreasheet follower, as my card came out of that. The issue really was a combination of SKUs (it varied by card, lower tier cards it was not FTW versions getting made) plus Nvidia adding the ti refresh partway through.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2024 19:26
|
|
|
in other graphics news, it looks like ff14 might actually get dlss 2.0. not sure how they painstakingly added motion vectors to the whole thing, but sounds promising. wouldn't be surprised if square-enix keep only implementing fsr 1 instead of 2 for whateve reason sucks if you bought an arc gpu and hoped for xess, i guess! maybe directsr will make all our wildest dreams come true some day  https://old.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comments/1c2uf9v/70_comes_with_fsr_dlss_20/kzd996h/ they are also upgrading fxaa with ... whatever tscmaa is. it's explained in the linked comment for the news. no dlaa for now by the sound of it, because of course kliras fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Apr 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 17:32
|
|
|
TSMC aquatic aliasing Instead of getting rid of jagged edges, it is like looking at the screen through Lake Michigan's water after it gets plumbed to Arizona. Blurrier. E: nvm I can't read.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 30, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
kliras posted:in other graphics news, it looks like ff14 might actually get dlss 2.0. not sure how they painstakingly added motion vectors to the whole thing, but sounds promising. wouldn't be surprised if square-enix keep only implementing fsr 1 instead of 2 for whateve reason it's FSR 1.0 and DLSS 2.0
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2024 19:40
|
|