I tried adding the Ti versions as well but they are too similar in price point to their non-Ti counterparts making the graphic harder to read.
Ceres2
I liked how they used the same color scheme as those promotional nvidia graphs.
Zenith251
I’ve posted this a few times. Extremely relevant.
So I recently made up a list of Nvidia halo level cards from every few years or so, adjusted for inflation. Pretty telling… Some are more than you’d think or remember, but still shows it how worse it’s gotten since 2017.
Geforce 3 Ti 500 in 2001 was $349 ($600.80)
GeForce 4 Ti 4600 in 2002 was $399 ($684.04)
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra in 2003 was $499 ($836.41)
GeForce 6800 Ultra in 2004 was $499 ($806.52)
GeForce 7800 GTX in 2005 was $599 ($945.94)
GeForce 7800 GTX 512 in 2005 was $649 ($1,024.90)
GeForce 7900 GTX in 2006 was $499 ($763.39)
GeForce 7950 GX2 in 2006 was $599 ($916.38) (2 GPU 1 Card)
GeForce 8800 Ultra in 2007 was $829 ($1,233.12)
GeForce 9800 GTX in 2008 was $299 ($424.57)
Geforce 9800 GX2 in 2008 was $599 ($850.75) (2 GPU 1 Card)
GeForce GTX 280 in 2008 was $649 ($929.68)
GeForce GTX 480 in 2010 was $499 ($705.78)
GeForce GTX 580 in 2010 was $499 (705.78)
GeForce GTX 680 in 2012 was $499 ($670.31)
GeForce GTX 690 in 2012 was $699 ($946.86)
GeForce GTX 780 Ti in 2014 was $699 ($914.27)
GeForce GTX 980 in 2014 was $549 ($715.23)
GeForce GTX 980 Ti in 2015 was $649 ($844.51)
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti in 2017 was $699 ($868.91)
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti in 2018 was $999 ($1,212.22)
Geforce RTX 3090 in 2020 was $1,499 ($1,764.79)
GeForce RTX 3090 Ti in 2022 was $1,999 ($2,081.29)
GeForce RTX 4090 in 2023 is $1,599.
Someone is going to mention Titan cards, to which I already have a response:
> I did not miss Titan cards. Hear me out here.
>
> Titan cards were, most of them anyway, faster or slightly faster running games than their equivalent xx80 or xx90 from that generation, but leaving them out for one very good reason; they’re not consumer cards with consumer prices, they’re Quadro cards at Business prices. They included Quadro driver features that were always kept locked away from GeForce cards for market segmentation reasons. 3090, 3090 Ti, and 4090 do NOT get the pro driver features. So you’re not paying an extra 30%-100% over the next-tier-down product for the Pro-Driver features anymore.
>
> They were unreasonably expensive from the perspective of someone who just wants to run games, because they weren’t sold for that.
>
> The Titans were a horrible turning point for NV anyway. Previously, the biggest die was your xx80 or xx90 or GTX or Ti, you get it. Starting with Titan X, now you can’t buy the largest die NV made in a generation without paying for a TON of extra VRAM and Quadro driver features you don’t need as a gamer.
etfvidal
Idiots love opening their wallets so you can’t blame Nvidia! Even if the GPU has a potential of burning itself, people still 💕 it!
vlken69
Performance > name
Emotional-Way3132
The competition can’t make a comparable GPU and always a couple of generations behind Nvidia in terms of features and that’s why Nvidia can ask for exorbitant prices
SwagChemist
the 4070ti super is sitting at the same spot as the 3080 point
senortipton
970 was a gift from the heavens, truly.
Brilliant_Cookie_202
The 970 was an excellent card. Mines still kicking, gave that rig to my girlfriend.
BIGFEETBIGMEAT6969
I think it is also important to remember that people were buying 2x of cards because of SLI
Gnome_0
but but Reddit told me the 4060 was overpriced!!
truecskorv1n
The only problem is 4060 being same performance as 3060
18 Comments
I tried adding the Ti versions as well but they are too similar in price point to their non-Ti counterparts making the graphic harder to read.
I liked how they used the same color scheme as those promotional nvidia graphs.
I’ve posted this a few times. Extremely relevant.
So I recently made up a list of Nvidia halo level cards from every few years or so, adjusted for inflation. Pretty telling… Some are more than you’d think or remember, but still shows it how worse it’s gotten since 2017.
Geforce 3 Ti 500 in 2001 was $349 ($600.80)
GeForce 4 Ti 4600 in 2002 was $399 ($684.04)
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra in 2003 was $499 ($836.41)
GeForce 6800 Ultra in 2004 was $499 ($806.52)
GeForce 7800 GTX in 2005 was $599 ($945.94)
GeForce 7800 GTX 512 in 2005 was $649 ($1,024.90)
GeForce 7900 GTX in 2006 was $499 ($763.39)
GeForce 7950 GX2 in 2006 was $599 ($916.38) (2 GPU 1 Card)
GeForce 8800 Ultra in 2007 was $829 ($1,233.12)
GeForce 9800 GTX in 2008 was $299 ($424.57)
Geforce 9800 GX2 in 2008 was $599 ($850.75) (2 GPU 1 Card)
GeForce GTX 280 in 2008 was $649 ($929.68)
GeForce GTX 480 in 2010 was $499 ($705.78)
GeForce GTX 580 in 2010 was $499 (705.78)
GeForce GTX 680 in 2012 was $499 ($670.31)
GeForce GTX 690 in 2012 was $699 ($946.86)
GeForce GTX 780 Ti in 2014 was $699 ($914.27)
GeForce GTX 980 in 2014 was $549 ($715.23)
GeForce GTX 980 Ti in 2015 was $649 ($844.51)
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti in 2017 was $699 ($868.91)
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti in 2018 was $999 ($1,212.22)
Geforce RTX 3090 in 2020 was $1,499 ($1,764.79)
GeForce RTX 3090 Ti in 2022 was $1,999 ($2,081.29)
GeForce RTX 4090 in 2023 is $1,599.
Someone is going to mention Titan cards, to which I already have a response:
> I did not miss Titan cards. Hear me out here.
>
> Titan cards were, most of them anyway, faster or slightly faster running games than their equivalent xx80 or xx90 from that generation, but leaving them out for one very good reason; they’re not consumer cards with consumer prices, they’re Quadro cards at Business prices. They included Quadro driver features that were always kept locked away from GeForce cards for market segmentation reasons. 3090, 3090 Ti, and 4090 do NOT get the pro driver features. So you’re not paying an extra 30%-100% over the next-tier-down product for the Pro-Driver features anymore.
>
> They were unreasonably expensive from the perspective of someone who just wants to run games, because they weren’t sold for that.
>
> The Titans were a horrible turning point for NV anyway. Previously, the biggest die was your xx80 or xx90 or GTX or Ti, you get it. Starting with Titan X, now you can’t buy the largest die NV made in a generation without paying for a TON of extra VRAM and Quadro driver features you don’t need as a gamer.
Idiots love opening their wallets so you can’t blame Nvidia! Even if the GPU has a potential of burning itself, people still 💕 it!
Performance > name
The competition can’t make a comparable GPU and always a couple of generations behind Nvidia in terms of features and that’s why Nvidia can ask for exorbitant prices
the 4070ti super is sitting at the same spot as the 3080 point
970 was a gift from the heavens, truly.
The 970 was an excellent card. Mines still kicking, gave that rig to my girlfriend.
I think it is also important to remember that people were buying 2x of cards because of SLI
but but Reddit told me the 4060 was overpriced!!
The only problem is 4060 being same performance as 3060
Guess I’am keeping my 3080 untill better days.
Got my evga 670sc for $320 direct from evga
[https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/catastrophic-gpu-shortage-a-chronological-history/](https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/catastrophic-gpu-shortage-a-chronological-history/)
SHortage =! MSRP bumps
Insane
No way justifying the price hikes, but frame gen was a game changer, lengthens the lifetime of the card
Hopefully my GTX 970 lasts another decade, and by then Intel Arc will be a big 3rd player so AMD/Nvidia get their shit together..