So a lot of the 4090s were sold when the H100 peaked at about 60k each. Those trying to save money were buying 4090s instead of a rack full of H100s since the 1 rack would cost $500,000 for 6 and you could buy ~30 4090s at the time for that much. If you didn't need access to all of nVidias software and other features, it was a great option. Something similar went on with the 7900xtx. The extra 4 gigs of memory on the 7900xtx makes a large difference over the 7900xt, hence the price drop. The 7900xtx is being sold by the pallet to startups on a budget but the 7900xt is being sold almost entirely to gamers.
But the H100 is down to about 20k each now and many of the 4090s are 2k+.
So I don't know if what you're saying is true, but steam hardware survey has different information than GPUz so that would be my explanation for the discrepancy.
That explanation though makes even less sense, As I highly doubt people buying H100's, the first thing they do is open up GPU-Z. If anything, the GPU-Z results is quite telling how many gamers/enthusiasts actually bought the 4090.
Yes, it also has a major marketshare VS all of the 7000 series on steam.
Yeah just had a look, it's mad, more people are playing games using Steam with a 4090 than a 2070, or a 1080, or 3080 Ti, hell it's substantially higher than the 4080.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, it is important to have a high end GPU.
The truth is, AMD could have gotten some of those sales, If they can produce a GPU that performs better than the 4090, it would fly off the shelves.
As a side note, I'm going to try to daily drive a steam deck for a month.
I actually really like my Steam Deck, Still amazes me how good it is for the money and power restrictions. The OLED is particularly impressive.
I also think that the power requirements some of the hardware that's being used for gaming is getting out of hand. Reminds me of the 2 powersupply days back in the 2000s but the largest one you could get was like 600 watts. Now it feels like I would need to wire a seperate breaker just for the PC to run on. It will be really interesting what can be done to lower power requirements and make smaller form factors in the future. If we could get to 7800xt levels of performance in APUs within the next 4 years I will probably never buy another GPU again
It needs to be said, I had a 1080Ti and 8700K before my 4090, now paired with a 7950X3D.
I use less power on average now. The CPU uses nearly 100 watts less whilst being MUCH quicker. the 4090 can absolutely use more power than the 1080Ti, Cyberpunk is a bit unfair as the 1080Ti can't even do path tracing but the 4090 can eat about 120-150 watts more.
HOWEVER, on average, I use far less power with the 4090, World of Warcraft, Valheim, Overwatch, really any game that was easy(ish) to run the 1080Ti, uses considerably less power on the 4090. Some games are now so easy to run, the 4090 barely wakes up when the 1080Ti would at least be half stressed.
I don't think power usage is a problem, I don't think efficiency is going out the window either. I think both companies are just pushing their chips hard to get that performance crown, Similar to Intel with their latest CPU's.