@Sky-Knight I'm not particularly "thinking as I will" - I'm just laying out a case that seems to make more sense based on what is in public knowledge. This isn't about how I "feel" about it.
Honestly, can you really say NVIDIA is not competing with AMD?! Now that's "thinking what you will". Face it, going by your own logic.. if NVIDIA is competing against "consoles" and they're all made by AMD... that's kinda gotta be your competition. Otherwise, if you're telling me that NVIDIA's competitors are Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo... well, Mmmkay, but you're wrong. The investor statements don't convey that sentiment nor do the companies' actions and partnerships and portfolio.
The 30 series RIGHT NOW is more expensive, but it's on a process that's supposed to have deep price advantages as production ramps up. Those price advantages will never materialize with the launch like this...
No, you're misconstruing two different things. The, PRICE RIGHT NOW, is not set by NVIDIA corporation - it's set by the AIB board partners and venders/sellers of which their names do not have NVIDIA in them. The PRICE RIGHT NOW is being set by supply and demand and possibly
"fraud" by the likes of MSI. The PRICE RIGHT NOW has nothing to do with chip-fab yields or what happens in the next two years at Samsung.
The other thing that you're stating incorrectly is that price advantages in chip manufacturing are passed down to customers, often it isn't and wasn't intended to be... this is how companies make money.. it's a business, not a charity. This isn't an NVIDIA thing, it's an everybody thing. It's called "margin" - capitalism, and all that. Price advantages for customers are generally only realized by newer, faster tech... and the dropping the price of old, slower gear, because of it.
Now, you're going to have to explain how a "slow launch" (Not the first time this has happened in this industry for many companies) equates to not seeing price advantages (for the customer) over time - which I think you may be misinformed about anyways.. I see nothing about Samsung's 8nm process being cheaper in the future or getting better yields or any of that. In fact, what you say about price advantages vs. ramp-up doesn't make any sense. The entire reason NVIDIA stated their choice of Samsung's 8nm process is because it's already been "perfected". NVIDIA specifically stated they didn't go with Samsung's 5nm process because of current yields... see, Samsung isn't "spinning up 8nm", they're working on their newest 5nm stuff. Samsung has been spitting out 8nm silicon for
over three years at high yield.
The games they're playing right now just illustrate how they aren't worthy of being in that top spot. But, like Intel they remain there because they have no real competition.
No, sorry, you're wrong in your comparison and the premise is incorrect.
If "games they play" is the metric of top-spot, it can't be "like intel no real competition" It's a red-herring. Your incorrectly comparing two different metrics. "Competition" vs. "worthiness and games" - whatever that's supposed to mean(incorrect premise).
But, like Intel they remain there because they have no real competition.
So, now you're saying Intel doesn't have competition? C'mon... you must see the pretzel you're twisting yourself into, here.
If you just don't like NVIDIA, or you don't like the pricing (On par with their non-competition), or whatever, just say that.. there's no need to fling off into wild accusations and reasoning that makes no sense. Go buy the AMD and be happy. I, for one, am going to get the fastest of the bunch that has good/great raytracing performance, regardless of which brand it is.. because that's what makes the "
The top spot" in reality. Right now, it looks like that's NVIDIA.
