It's that time of the month when we look at the GPU market and see what's been happening. The big news for April is the launch of Nvidia's GeForce RTX 4070, which has been met with mixed reviews overall.
It's that time of the month when we look at the GPU market and see what's been happening. The big news for April is the launch of Nvidia's GeForce RTX 4070, which has been met with mixed reviews overall.
I'm starting to think the Intel ARC could serve a large % of gamers, who like me still game at 1080p. They are priced the way things should be priced.
This, and other comments make TechSpot’s 90/100 score for the RTX 4070 all the more perplexing. 90/100 implies “strong value/good buy”. Reading the comments here and on GamersNexus’ YouTube review of the 4070, it seems like the community overwhelming feels that this product is not great value at $600 compared to prior gens (which I concur with). I think the 90/100 score should be revised accordingly, similar to other recent reviews.The big news for April is, of course, the launch of Nvidia's GeForce RTX 4070, which has been met with mixed reviews overall. The new GPU offers somewhat better value than the previous-gen GPUs it's replacing, but it's hardly an exciting uplift
20A and 18A won't be ready for mass production for a couple more years and given that these specific fabs are going to be heavily used for Intel's primary focus for them (and its hawking for foundry business with outside customers), it doesn't leave much scope for its dGPUs. Even if Intel has sidelined 20/18A output for such dies, it's not going to them make any headway into the dGPU market share until that time, at which point, it may well be too late.When Intel actually moves away from using 3rd party to make their GPUs, they can probably get highly competitive on perf per dollar. This is what they need to eat up dGPU marketshare.
Intel 4, 20A and 18A should allow them to make GPUs themselves, while still be competitive in the low to mid-end market.
Won't take years before 20A is ready for mass production, Intel said it was ahead of schedule and ready for 2024.20A and 18A won't be ready for mass production for a couple more years and given that these specific fabs are going to be heavily used for Intel's primary focus for them (and its hawking for foundry business with outside customers), it doesn't leave much scope for its dGPUs. Even if Intel has sidelined 20/18A output for such dies, it's not going to them make any headway into the dGPU market share until that time, at which point, it may well be too late.
Besides, Intel needs to seriously re-think its dGPU design before it can truly compete in the mass volume sector -- the current ACM-G10 is huge (406 mm2) for the performance it offers. The closest GPU to that, on roughly the same node, is the Navi 22 (335 mm2) and the likes of the RX 6700 XT noticeably out-performs the best Arc model using the G10.
100% agree, but I think a lot of people will still be influenced by the score.Just don't read the TS score and just the article, you can score it yourself after reading/viewing 4-6 reviews.
I for one don't make purchases after TS scoring, hope you guys don't either.
As prices fluctuate and time goes they would need to update scores a lot cause a bad deal GPU can drop in price and become a good deal so it's probably just better to remove it. It never made any sense to me.100% agree, but I think a lot of people will still be influenced by the score.
I think TechSpot needs to review their scoring methodology; either eliminate the score, or provide some context for how it was derived (e.g., value, features, performance, efficiency, etc.).
I think you need to go do your own research on the TSMC pricing subject.Won't take years before 20A is ready for mass production, Intel said it was ahead of schedule and ready for 2024.
Intel 4 Q4 this year
Intel 20A next
Intel owns the iGPU market, they would not enter dGPU market if they thought it was impossible - TMSC needs to be cut off tho - if not Intel will not be able to make good money on this
TSMC is a big part of why AMD chips are more expensive than ever, TSMC raised prices, because without TSMC, AMD would be out of business. AMD relies 100% on TSMC to deliver.
Without Intel in competition with TSMC, TSMC would just increase prices more and more over time. Samsung probably won't be up to the task.
Samsung 8nm = more like 10nm TSMC
That's not really true though. Annoyingly, the 6800 / 6800XT still make a lot of sense in the current market. Maybe they'll tick down by another $20 when the 4060 cards come out, but they're already priced to where the market says they should be for the performance.What's really lacking at the moment is an AMD competitor in the $500 range.
Maybe people are holding out to see what the 7800 XT\7700 XT has to offer. Seems like there has been dead silence from AMD though. Not even any recent rumors on the 7800 XT. Techpowerup has the 7800 XT at 60 CUs and only 12GB of VRAM though (sounds like this should be the 7700 XT specs not 7800 XT). If that is the case, you'd probably be better off with a 6800 XT. I really hope that is not the case. Hopefully it gets 72 CUs and 16GB of VRAM like the previous generation.That's not really true though. Annoyingly, the 6800 / 6800XT still make a lot of sense in the current market. Maybe they'll tick down by another $20 when the 4060 cards come out, but they're already priced to where the market says they should be for the performance.
4070 uses 200 watts in gaming (50-60% less than 3080 and 6800XT) while delivering same perf, I don't want one, but I understand why it's selling.
I'm starting to think the Intel ARC could serve a large % of gamers, who like me still game at 1080p. They are priced the way things should be priced.
I know at least 5 people IRL that picked one up so far, I bet the 4070 will show up on Steam HW Survey in bigger numbers than the entire AMD 7900 series in 3-6 months.You're saying the 4070 is "selling"?? Are you really reading this article??
It plains states: "The bad news for Nvidia, which is good news for consumers, is that the RTX 4070 is selling badly even at the MSRP. "....!!!!!!
Try reading the article again before posting.
PC is not just a stupid locked ecosystem, where you have to buy overpriced games in a single store. Also, you can actually do work on a PC.Really hope these things rot in a warehouse.
600$ for mid range - just no.
Nvidia and AMD are doing a fine job building up the console market.
Games wise beyond online multiplayer what offering does PC have that can’t be had from a PS5 Xbox series ?