this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
85 points (96.7% liked)

PC Gaming

8555 readers
472 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hmmmm... I wonder why....

Over $1000 for latest gen GPU that still has the same 16GB VRAM as the last generation

[–] Ranvier@lemmy.world 44 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'm not sure what you mean? This article is about AMD. Nvidia is the one that skimps on the vram. Amd's 7800 xt has 16 gb of vram and is $500. Their most expensive gpu is the 7900 xtx for about $950 currently and it has 24 gb.

Nvidia 4080 is over $1000 and has 16 gb of vram though.

I agree gpus are too expensive, but if amd gpus go under, Nvidia will have even more power to price gouge. I'm rooting for Intel too to bring even more competition in.

[–] 30p87@feddit.de 11 points 6 months ago

Also, when AMD goes under, Linux users are fucked even more.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 2 points 6 months ago

I'm rooting for Intel too to bring even more competition in.

I really hope the next generation can push into the midrange too. That's kinda where the meat is at in regards to the market size. Unfortunately I feel they'd likely steal more from AMD than from Nvidia.