RTX 3080 Ti, RTX 3070 Ti rumored to feature Ethereum mining limiter

[Peter Farkas]

This is good news. I fully support the separation between gaming and mining equipment. Though I mine ETH with my 3060Ti when I am not gaming that gives me 150-200 bucks a month. I would be stupid not to capitalize on this.
Though I would still be absolutely happy with a great GPU for the MSRP if it was not capable of mining (like ever since in our lives).
Gamers should get GPUs first, one way or another.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Why the limit? Either remove it completely or don't touch it at all.

Because its a virtue signal. Nvidia makes money from miners buying cards, look at their recent profits. Gamers whining about not being able to play the latest vidya pales to the literal billions nvidia has made. Evenif they DID fully block it, that doest stop other alt coin mining (which coins? Well there are always new ones, etherium was brand new not too many years ago) and Etherium is moving to proof of stake anyway, which will make GPU mining obsolete. That's why there is this huge surge in etherium mining right now, to get in before the change.

It's really funny, if you look at Techspot's 680 revisit from 2018, every comment is whining about "muh GPU miners", no different from today. This kind of thing ebbs and flows. GPUs will return to stock eventually, and much like the last 2 times this has happened, prices will plummet as used cards arrive at 1/3rd MSRP. I look forward to my $400 6800xt or $400 3080.

 

[terzaerian]

This is good news. I fully support the separation between gaming and mining equipment. Though I mine ETH with my 3060Ti when I am not gaming that gives me 150-200 bucks a month. I would be stupid not to capitalize on this.
Though I would still be absolutely happy with a great GPU for the MSRP if it was not capable of mining (like ever since in our lives).
Gamers should get GPUs first, one way or another.

While in practical terms the hashing limiter doesn't make any real difference, seeing as by the time these cards even come out and are generally available, Eth may no longer be mineable, it's the principle being exercised here that disturbs me.

I wasn't previously really tuned in to the distinctions between Quadros and gaming cards in Nvidia's lines; I previously assumed that they were hardware that was targeted and designed towards professional use. Learning here that the difference was baked in at a software level, however, and that the mining vs gaming card distinction was an extension of that philosophy, was an eye-opener.

The idea that a manufacturer can decide at the software level to basically decide how you use the hardware should be disturbing no matter who you are - gamer, miner, video editor, whatever. It's the kind of Apple-tier bullshit that PC enthusiasts are trying to run away from.

For example: LGR, a retro gaming and tech YouTuber I follow, has on occasion showcased modern industrial PC components on his channel that are useful for him because they tend to use standards and ports that have become obsolete and removed in modern PCs. It would be incredibly shitty of a company if they released that kind of product but then locked it out at the firmware level for use outside of a CNC machine for no really good reason besides that's how they feel it should be used.

I have no problems with manufacturers building hardware with a specific use case, but when they build hardware whose use case is arbitrarily decided by software, then I start having issues.

 

[nodfor]

NVIDIA trying to shift the blame to miners for its own bad production choices.

They should have kept building Turing for RTX 2070 super - RTX 2060 super with a slight reduction in MSRP until ampere supply had stabilized, priced Ampere a bit higher, but no, they killed the line, created a shortage with this move, made a hype with low msrp on ampere they could not meet the supply curve at and now they blame scalpers, miners etc, everyone except themselves.

 

[Thretosix]

It's really just a supply issue. If they had enough to sell to gamers and miners there wouldn't be a problem. Hopefully they can fix their supply chain issues going forward.

 

[jonny888]

I dont mine, but must say, the selfishness of the gamers is something funny to read.

You have one device (gpu) that can be used for:

A- just play games and thats it or...

B- play games, then make money on the side, when not playing or...

C- simply make money.

Nobody ever said that GPU are exclusive to gamers and this is a scary maneuver, since it makes companies like Nvidia take your options away. As a matter of fact, Nvidia has already abused this before, when ATI had faster cards, people were using ATI cards as primary GPUs and Nvidia for PhysX. Good old Nvidia released a driver that would disable the GPU that you, the CUSTOMER paid for, just because their tiny pipp! pride was hurt.

As someone here has told me on previous occasions that he will never accept cloud gaming because he wants to own his games, which he is more than entitled to request, the same applies to miners.

If they want to spend their money on something that will generate income, then why not?

As I said again, blame COVID, blame the tariffs, blame the manufacturers for not making more chips, blame TSMC for not having capacity, whatever, but I believe that everyone is entitled to use their purchases as they see fit.

You're not entirely wrong, but you're not right either. The goal from nVidia is pretty clear. Let the GPUs designed for gaming (and yes, they ARE designed for gaming even if there are other uses) go to the gamers, while they introduce new solutions designed specifically for the miners, to go to the miners. If there wasn't a shortage, then sure, they may not need a solution like this. But there is, so they are (trying) to find a way to satisfy all and make the most of what they have.

And again, it's your money. You don't like, don't buy it. If they were taking away from existing purchases then that would be bad, but they aren't. Everyone has a free choice. I'm sure AMD would be happy to take your money (but you know, there's a shortage, so GL with that).

 

[jonny888]

While in practical terms the hashing limiter doesn't make any real difference, seeing as by the time these cards even come out and are generally available, Eth may no longer be mineable, it's the principle being exercised here that disturbs me.

I wasn't previously really tuned in to the distinctions between Quadros and gaming cards in Nvidia's lines; I previously assumed that they were hardware that was targeted and designed towards professional use. Learning here that the difference was baked in at a software level, however, and that the mining vs gaming card distinction was an extension of that philosophy, was an eye-opener.

The idea that a manufacturer can decide at the software level to basically decide how you use the hardware should be disturbing no matter who you are - gamer, miner, video editor, whatever. It's the kind of Apple-tier bullshit that PC enthusiasts are trying to run away from.

For example: LGR, a retro gaming and tech YouTuber I follow, has on occasion showcased modern industrial PC components on his channel that are useful for him because they tend to use standards and ports that have become obsolete and removed in modern PCs. It would be incredibly shitty of a company if they released that kind of product but then locked it out at the firmware level for use outside of a CNC machine for no really good reason besides that's how they feel it should be used.

I have no problems with manufacturers building hardware with a specific use case, but when they build hardware whose use case is arbitrarily decided by software, then I start having issues.

I agree with you at nearly every level, if it weren't for the fact there was a chip shortage. When 2 groups of people are both pulling from the same pool of hardware, it's much harder to try and make sure there's a roughly-even distribution between them. By making at least a token gesture to try and separate the two camps into their own products, it goes someway to helping ensure that different types of customer are able to get what they want, even if it means the overlap in the Venn diagram of groups is left feeling annoyed. But I would guess they've already done their business analysis to determine that the overlap is small enough as to not be a blocking factor in this decision.

 

[punctualturn]

Let the GPUs designed for gaming (and yes, they ARE designed for gaming even if there are other uses)

That is wrong.

Nvidia GPU's are designed to process certain calculations that are used by games, graphics designs, but in the end, they simply process that specific type more efficiently that a general oriented task, like a CPU.

Nvidia take one GPU and slice it among their targeted markets via their nefarious drivers. They only have one design.

AMD on the other hand does have two lines, RDNA and GCN that are tweaked for different needs, but in the end, is the same situation, very good for certain operations not suited for CPUs.

About is your money blah blah, thats not the only point being discussed here.

Is the dangerous precedence set, even though, its not the first time that Nvidia has done this and since brand loyalty and worshiping is a thing, they are simply getting away with it.

 

[jonny888]

That is wrong.

Nvidia GPU's are designed to process certain calculations that are used by games, graphics designs, but in the end, they simply process that specific type more efficiently that a general oriented task, like a CPU.

Nvidia take one GPU and slice it among their targeted markets via their nefarious drivers. They only have one design.

AMD on the other hand does have two lines, RDNA and GCN that are tweaked for different needs, but in the end, is the same situation, very good for certain operations not suited for CPUs.

About is your money blah blah, thats not the only point being discussed here.

Is the dangerous precedence set, even though, its not the first time that Nvidia has done this and since brand loyalty and worshiping is a thing, they are simply getting away with it.

nVidia has the Quadro line, the RTX/GTX line, and soon to be the mining line. So yes, they do have different use cases in mind, and RTX/GTX IS the gaming line.

And no, I'm not a brand loyalist. I've owned cards from both over the years, for whatever suited my needs best at the time,

 

[hahahanoobs]

As much as I hate Nvidia and would love nothing more than they losing money due to stupid moves or whatever, I have to say, they and AMD have to play a very dangerous game.

They cannot simply order a gazillion GPUs and then have them collecting dust in a warehouse.

The sad reality is, the gamers dont buy GPU's in the same numbers as miners.

And miners buying spree comes and goes, so in the end, both AMD and Nvidia have to be very careful in how many chips they order every quarter.

Agreed.
Gamers are at a disadvantage, because their incentive is fun. Miners' incentive is money, so they will invest in whatever it takes to get them and the more cards that become available will just incentivise them to work that much harder to get even more cards. For mining and for resale. They're like hackers. They'll find the holes. They are greedy. 100 cards is never enough. They won't stop until the profits dry up and it makes sense to do so.

 

[terzaerian]

nVidia has the Quadro line, the RTX/GTX line, and soon to be the mining line. So yes, they do have different use cases in mind, and RTX/GTX IS the gaming line.

And no, I'm not a brand loyalist. I've owned cards from both over the years, for whatever suited my needs best at the time,

You're missing the heart of his post:

Nvidia take one GPU and slice it among their targeted markets via their nefarious drivers. They only have one design.

AMD on the other hand does have two lines, RDNA and GCN that are tweaked for different needs, but in the end, is the same situation, very good for certain operations not suited for CPUs.

Nvidia has one design that they then split out to different use cases on a software basis alone. AMD, by contrast, has cards that are physically designed to serve different use cases. I.E., you could turn a Quadro into a GTX with the right drivers and firmware (and vice versa), but you can't turn RDNA into GCN because they're physically distinct.

The former is a scummy practice that has massive ramifications outside of mining, that's reminiscent of the bad practices of companies like Apple.

 

[Mister_K]

I say we take them to court, this is discriminations against gamers and miners, many gamers IE. me have not paid for a graphics card for gaming in over 5yrs as the cards pay for themselves when mining and not gaming.

I would like to know if there is a lawyer willing to take the case and lets fight back, this is NOT RIGHT, I don't pay for people to limit me in any place, way or form in my life, what I pay for is mine and does not belong to the manufacturer.

Aren't there actually dedicated mining hardware which performs better in the first place?

 

[jonny888]

You're missing the heart of his post:

Nvidia has one design that they then split out to different use cases on a software basis alone. AMD, by contrast, has cards that are physically designed to serve different use cases.

The former is a scummy practice that has massive ramifications outside of mining, that's reminiscent of the bad practices of companies like Apple.

Hmm, until there's a physical mining card in the wild, it's speculation to say that the mining card isn't better suited to the task (unless there's some info I've missed)

 

[terzaerian]

Hmm, until there's a physical mining card in the wild, it's speculation to say that the mining card isn't better suited to the task (unless there's some info I've missed)

In the past, the difference of Nvidia's mining cards to their graphics cards has basically been that the latter are just missing a display output. Linus was actually able to get them to work with games using some workarounds:

I presume the main difference with this generation is that it will have firmware designed to prevent this exploit.

 

[jonny888]

In the past, the difference of Nvidia's mining cards to their graphics cards has basically been that the latter are just missing a display output. Linus was actually able to get them to work with games using some workarounds:

I presume the main difference with this generation is that it will have firmware designed to prevent this exploit.

We'll have to see I guess. If the end result (this time) is an identical card with the ports chopped off then sure it's a bit dodgy. If there's a legitimate difference/split/improvement for the use case, then seems justified. Either way I still understand their own want to split the user base. The gamers are the stable source. The miners are the spikey source. Both have their business value.

 

[punctualturn]

Hmm, until there's a physical mining card in the wild, it's speculation to say that the mining card isn't better suited to the task (unless there's some info I've missed)

But given how Nvidia operates and already shown on the post above, there are not such things as a mining card, just one placed there via an artificial means.

Now, this is how such a card would be attractive, they are priced lower, since they are missing the the display connectors and whatever other reasons. But then, comes the greed and "discrimination".

Discrimination? you will say. Well yes, because in the end, its the same GPU, simply re-labeled, so gamers can genuinely complaint that the price is not fair, again assuming they are cheaper than their equivalent gamer versions.

Greed? Nvidia being who they are, they will actually charge more for these cards and if thats the case, except for the artificial limit created by the drivers, there is no reason for a miner to buy them.

In the end, the solution is complicated.

 

[Austinturner]

That is wrong.

Nvidia GPU's are designed to process certain calculations that are used by games, graphics designs, but in the end, they simply process that specific type more efficiently that a general oriented task, like a CPU.

Nvidia take one GPU and slice it among their targeted markets via their nefarious drivers. They only have one design.

AMD on the other hand does have two lines, RDNA and GCN that are tweaked for different needs, but in the end, is the same situation, very good for certain operations not suited for CPUs.

About is your money blah blah, thats not the only point being discussed here.

Is the dangerous precedence set, even though, its not the first time that Nvidia has done this and since brand loyalty and worshiping is a thing, they are simply getting away with it.

Its funny to watch. A bunch of angry gamers turned up at Nvidias door, Nvidia deftly redirected the pitchfork waving horde at “miners” and “scalpers” while achieving a more profitable product structure by introducing more segmentation. Pretty clever really!

When anger clouds your vision, you are easy to distract and redirect.

When desire leads you to beg to buy something, you are going to get fleeced.

 

[emmzo]

The 3060RTX (limited mining TM) came out with a triple MSRP price and disappeared in a couple of days. How the f. is this problem still only about mining? ETH will soon go PoS, but they will still blame mining and rile up angry gamers, instead of addressing the real issue which is poor supply and massive scalping, on such scale that if not regulated, we will NEVER get close to decent prices again.

 

[Peter Farkas]

While in practical terms the hashing limiter doesn't make any real difference, seeing as by the time these cards even come out and are generally available, Eth may no longer be mineable, it's the principle being exercised here that disturbs me.

I wasn't previously really tuned in to the distinctions between Quadros and gaming cards in Nvidia's lines; I previously assumed that they were hardware that was targeted and designed towards professional use. Learning here that the difference was baked in at a software level, however, and that the mining vs gaming card distinction was an extension of that philosophy, was an eye-opener.

The idea that a manufacturer can decide at the software level to basically decide how you use the hardware should be disturbing no matter who you are - gamer, miner, video editor, whatever. It's the kind of Apple-tier bullshit that PC enthusiasts are trying to run away from.

For example: LGR, a retro gaming and tech YouTuber I follow, has on occasion showcased modern industrial PC components on his channel that are useful for him because they tend to use standards and ports that have become obsolete and removed in modern PCs. It would be incredibly shitty of a company if they released that kind of product but then locked it out at the firmware level for use outside of a CNC machine for no really good reason besides that's how they feel it should be used.

I have no problems with manufacturers building hardware with a specific use case, but when they build hardware whose use case is arbitrarily decided by software, then I start having issues.

I agree that the ETH limiter was not an effective solution. And here is why: 3060 Non Ti Release Miners Are Still Buying This Card!! Heres Why - YouTube

I truly believe crypto is the future but am having concerns with mining it. If eth 2.0 will fly this year and if that is really the end of mining it.... too many IFs but we will see but that is only ETH. However, there will still be other mineable coins and as long as it is so profitable like today there is no other way to ensure that gamers can buy these cards. If mining was done only by gamers in their downtime and not on an industrial scale, then things would have been sustainable. It has become such a lucrative business that it is having a very negative impact on the chip making and gaming industries in my opinion.

 

[pcnthuziast]

People just need to accept that no time soon will there be tons of cards 'on shelves' for months or even just days consecutively. There will be very small windows of opportunities for typical gamers and enthusiasts to buy cards and will require actively following and watching any and all sources for availability because it might literally be hours, not days. It will be rare for a highly desirable card of any tier to be available readily for an entire 24 hour periods or consecutive days. This is the new norm. Notice the influx of prebuilts, those account for a huge amount of the available card stock. Then all your big brand and board partner desktops and laptops. It's a new era and going to be harder to just get a card to drop into a build, unless you plan ahead and keep watch.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

Why are they wasting resources with new variants when they can't even ship the standard versions. Ti versions of exisiting cards that are impossible to buy are as useful as t!ts on a bull.

 

[Danny101]

While I understand it, nerfing a product to cater to gamers is the wrong move in my opinion. What I would urge them to do is to create a card that is more power efficient for mining which I believe they have already done. Those who haven't secured a graphics card will just have to wait. It sucks bigly, but it isn't the end of the world to wait it out. Sounds like a first world problem of the spoiled. Would you believe that there are cultures around the world who wouldn't know what you're talking about when you mention a graphics card? All products have ebb and flow. Pick up another hobby while you wait. It'll be good for you. Might even be a turn key move. There's so much more to life than video games. I waited for five years before I built my current system. In fact, unfortunately, it's sitting in storage several states away right now due to life's changes. How messed up is that? Waited all of that time, spend all of that money, and I still can't enjoy it, but I'm really not complaining. I'll just have to wait some more.

 

[Reehahs]

Would a temporary limit be better? Something that stays in place until the next generation is released?

Will the limit affect other legitimate uses of computational power like machine learning, fluid dynamics, and stress analysis?

 

[Rayneofpayne]

I say we take them to court, this is discriminations against gamers and miners, many gamers IE. me have not paid for a graphics card for gaming in over 5yrs as the cards pay for themselves when mining and not gaming.

I would like to know if there is a lawyer willing to take the case and lets fight back, this is NOT RIGHT, I don't pay for people to limit me in any place, way or form in my life, what I pay for is mine and does not belong to the manufacturer.

You would only have a case if they nerfed cards they didn't say had the limiter, they can chose what product to sell and to what market segment to market it to, just so you understand it has been common practice to separate skus for different market segments using similar methods and court cases like you are suggesting have failed in the past.
It's a gaming card, not a mining card, that is not the intended purpose of the product, just like small business using gaming cards for workstation uses grant it the market is more blurred now but In the past things were different.

 

[Thom Vee]

By the time any current generation video cards become available to the general public, the next generation will be rolling out.