Aapje

There's probably a language issue here, because I never claimed that your price was only available for a second, but that the price of 679 euros in NL was only briefly available (at most a day). I'm still waiting for you to explain how anyone could have taken that deal you posted, when that shop only sends their products to a few countries, and even then, probably with much higher shipping than what you paid. And I'm still waiting for an explanation why your invoice states that the VAT is 0%, because that in itself makes around a 20% difference.

How is that a proper reply to my argument that we are having a temporary shortage issue, and that you are catastrophizing this situation by making claims that this fairly recent change is what the future will look like? If you get the flu, do you also assume that you will feel sick forever, or do you expect to get better again? Showing that we indeed are having a shortage right now, of the new Nvidia cards, in multiple markets, doesn't actually counter anything I said, or support your claims. How so? Is there something that greatly increases demand compared to a few months ago, like we had during the crypto boom? No. Is there something that limits production of cards for all suppliers in the future? No, plenty of capacity for TSMC N4. And AMD is still using GDDR6, so they can always just make more GDDR6 cards if there is a GDDR7 issue. So everything points to an execution issue at Nvidia. They messed up. This inherently is a temporary issue. Either they shape up in the next few months, or AMD will be laughing to the bank by ramping up their production a lot. And even then Nvidia will fix it eventually. That it's really just an Nvidia issue is visible in the 7800 XT pricing. You can still buy them for almost their lowest price over here. So there is not a general shortage, just a shortage of the new Nvidia cards, and the old Nvidia cards that they stopped producing. But we have competition, so if they keep failing, then AMD will take that market share. Although I don't expect Nvidia to keep failing for a very long time. So the logical outcome is that the prices and supply of GPUs will normalize and stabilize over time. Worst case is that Nvidia keeps having issues, and that the people who insist on getting an Nvidia card pay out of their nose, but that still doesn't mean that there won't be GPUs available, just perhaps not what people want. PS. If 9070 XT prices shoot up a bit after the initial shipment sells out, this still doesn't prove me wrong. I'm talking about longer term trends, not some fluctuations. Short term supply issues after launch are perfectly normal and not a sign of permanent issues.

Sorry, that part I bolded is just nonsense. That card you got never hit that price in The Netherlands (nor did any of the other 7900 XTs). The closest it got was a price of 679 euros for a millisecond. And that shop where you bought only ships to some EU countries. And how would non-Portuguese people even know about the pricing in that shop? Your invoice also looks super fishy with a 0% VAT. Did you order it as a person or as a company? A zero percentage VAT is certainly not viable for everyone. How can you be reasoned with when you make all these false claims?

We already saw with the 4080 that $1200 was too much for a high supply situation, and they had to reduce the price for the Super. So you are now speculating in a way that doesn't make much sense if you look at recent history. Common sense says that if they flood the market with 5080s, pricing needs to drop close to MSRP for them to sell in large numbers. 2500 or 3000 dollar/euros would be utterly unrealistic. With the 5080 being so little faster than the 4080, they may have to toss in that extra VRAM to stir up demand, because common sense says that demand will be lower than for the 4080. I think that you are catastrophizing, extrapolating short term issues that are almost certainly temporary, into a belief that things will always be bad. Computer parts have always experienced shortages/excess supply, and thus high prices or very low prices. Either you adapt to that reality, or you accept that you pay more if you buy in a period of shortages. I've been there, buying a CPU from a dodgy guy selling stuff from his home, to get a good price. I think they are, actually. I see pricing around 700-800 euro in my country and sold prices of $800-$1000 on the American Ebay. In general, second hand pricing for GPUs seems heavily influenced by the pricing of new cards. That's not actually reality, but merely your narrative. Fact is that there are a decent number people who are willing to spend big on gaming, although of course not a massive amount. But they do exist and are a factor. Yes, of course there is always the reality that a game needs sufficient buyers, and that the higher the demands of the game, the more people get excluded. But on the other hand, optimization cost money as well, and lowering quality results in fewer buyers as well. So it's always a balancing act. And if you want to look at the future in a reasonable way, you actually have to look at where the industry is going, and it is a fact that 3 GB modules are on the roadmap. The plan is for 3 GB (24 Gb) modules to be introduced somewhere between now and 2026, and them to completely move over to 3 GB modules in 2026: It's logical that in the lead-up to bigger modules, we will have cards with relatively low VRAM, or with suboptimal clamshell designs. But I predict that we'll see the 3 GB modules being used for the 2026 generation at the latest, because that is what the roadmaps say. But it makes a lot of sense for Nvidia to release Super cards with a VRAM-upgrade in a year, since this allows Nvidia to increase demand halfway through the life of the product, rather than have to accept that demand will drop off very sharply. And with the 50-series being so poor, I bet that they will need that Super-refresh.

I don't really agree with this. First of all, due to the AI boom, there is great demand for high-VRAM cards, and Nvidia has released their top tier card with a very large bus and 32 GB. So I'm not sure where this idea comes from that we won't get high-VRAM cards. The big issue for the 5080 and down is the lack of 3GB VRAM modules, combined with Nvidia's desire for more economical bus sizes for these cheaper chips. With the newer production nodes, connectivity scales very poorly, so a large bus is getting more expensive to make. Just like the 40-series was extremely poor and the Super-refresh was OK, we may see a decent Super-refresh for the 50-series, with a 24 GB 5080 Super and a 18 GB 5070 Super.

I see the move to UDNA as the way for AMD to return to high-end cards. This would then be the same as what Nvidia does. All the best binned GB102-chips go into the professional cards that sell for big money, and the poorer chips get sold as 5090s and 5090Ds. This reduces risk, since if the professional cards sell poorly, you can sell more of these chips to gamers, and vice versa. And it also saves on development. I do think that it will drive up the prices for the lower end, as the chips will get bigger due to the professional stuff on the chip.

My guess is that he wears a thumb ring.

Not really sure why you are claiming to have been right. Your reasoning was and is still flawed. The actual 'best card' for DCS is the 5090. Everything else is weaker, and has less VRAM, but is also cheaper and uses less power. Over where I live, you can get a dual-fan 7900 XTX for 914 euros. So compared to the 9070 XT MRSP and the performance metrics you posted, the 7900 XTX is 14% faster for a 30% higher price. And from what others posted, my local market is probably one of the better ones and in many places, that gap is even bigger. And 16 GB of VRAM is still a very solid amount for DCS. If anything, what is DOA for DCS is the 5070, because I would definitely suggest that people get the 9070 XT or non-XT instead, because the extra 4 GB is a big deal.

GamersNexus pretty much told us that it is very close to the 7900 XT, so I would not assume that it will reach XTX levels (without very hard overclocking).

They had two models at the time with a very similar name, where one had this issue and the other did not. Demand dropped like a stone for either one, so they discounted them and I did buy the good one for half price. But I like a good deal and quadruple checked that this was the good one.

First of all, any brand that makes both AMD and Nvidia cards is to be avoided for AMD cards, since all the good technical guys will want to be on the Nvidia side that gets all the attention and praise, so the AMD side will have the losers. Similar to how these companies made great motherboards for Intel and poor ones for AMD, back when Intel was king. For Sapphire, Powercolor and XFX, the AMD cards are the flagships. For the brands that make both, AMD cards are just a side hustle to make a few bucks on the cheap. As for Gigabyte specifically, they made poorly designed cards for the 30-series and then refuses to warranty their cards, blaming consumers: Their initial versions of the 4090 and 4080 had the same issue, until they released a revision that was strengthened. This slow response and unwillingness to honor warranties is not great. They also used poor thermal pads in the past that would 'sweat' oil and there was the PSU debacle, where they also refuses to admit to poorly made PSUs that could catch fire. Instead they tried to force people to buy them by bundling them with GPUs, back when video cards were in short supply (as well). The practice of bundling poorly selling hardware with products that are in high demand, is already really scummy, but bundling dangerous products takes it to another level. That said, all of these companies make products that work for most buyers, if only due to the strict rules from Nvidia and AMD, and them going bankrupt if they really take it too far. But the risks are quite a bit bigger that you get a bad experience with some companies than with others, although it is still a smaller chance vs a small chance.

Testing with these headsets in a competing flight sim shows that the Quest 3 has less overhead, so with weaker hardware, you get a better result with that headset. But then the Pimax Crystal Light pulls ahead with a better GPU+CPU. The 4090 Mobile should be strong enough to give the advantage to the Pimax Crystal Light.

I would stay away from Gigabyte unless they have a really good deal. They have messed up too many times in the past. I'd take Asrock over them. For AMD, Sapphire, Powercolor and XFX are usually considered to be the best AIBs for GPUs. But of course, it's always best to look at the reviews of the specific model if possible, since any company has stinkers now and then.

No, it's 4K per eye. Two times 4K is 6K, not 8K. It is easy to be confused, because if you take a single screen and increase the vertical and horizontal resolution by two times, you'd think that the resolution doubles, but since the screen area increases by a multiplication of the vertical and horizontal resolution, it actually increases by 2 to the power of 2, which is 4 times the increase. And the fact that they use 4K and 8K as names doesn't help, because that makes it seem like a doubling, when 8K is actually 4 times as many pixels as 4K. And the answer is no. Not even a desktop 5090 can run these headsets with maxed out settings. So you are going to have to run it with lowered settings, for example, by using DLSS 4, foveated rendering, lowered graphics settings, etc. Ultimately, no one can tell you if you consider the end result to be acceptable. There are people who have been happy with much weaker hardware, and people who are not happy with much stronger hardware.

The mobile 4090 is actually a 4080 with a lower TDP, so it actually performs more like a desktop 4070 Super or 3080. So you can look at people's experiences with those GPUs.

The TDP matters a lot. The 5090 has almost no safety margin with 12VPWR, but the 9070 XT has a solid margin. I would still advise an undervolt with nearly all modern GPUs.

Something is grinding. Probably needs some bearings.

Unfortunately, Moza doesn't have the best software team. On the racing sim side it also took them a long time to catch up to the state of the art.

I also watch the Nvidia reddit to see what issues people report and also only update if there is a reason. If you don't have a recently released GPU, there is typically rarely a good reason to upgrade. Although there is now a good reason with DLSS 4.

A little search suggests that real pilots who were passengers have assisted as co-pilot when the captain got ill or died, but no cases where they had to take over on their own, let alone cases where a flight simmer landed the plane. There was one situation where a flight attendant took to the controls when there was an oxygen issue and that person was the only one who got to the portable oxygen in time. This person had a pilot license, but no qualification for the plane. He couldn't land the plane, but he got to the controls at the same time that the plane ran out of fuel, so it was a tough ask anyway. He did steer the plane away from Athens. This was Helios Airways Flight 522.

@SharpeXB I was thinking more about a scenario where both pilots ate the fish and got sick, and they ask a passenger to land it. In that case it's not about having fun, but about getting the plane down safely.

Modern airliners with autoland are probably fairly easy to land if one knows the procedures for configuring it (which can be practiced in a sim), assuming a suitable airfield + weather conditions and an emergency declaration so everyone stays out of the way.

I think that they are pretty much equal. J vs K on the other hand...

I see clear signs that we are in a strong downward movement on the pricing of the 7800X3D, so I would just hang tight for a bit. In my local market, the price went down by 55 euros in a little over a month. And in the US, it seems that the price just dropped by $50, bringing it lower than the pricing in my local market. Typically, US pricing is a bit ahead of pricing elsewhere. Turkey is probably a bit behind the EU in pricing changes. My expectation is that prices will drop by 50-100 dollars/euros in the next 1-3 months. Basically, they tend to gradually lower the pricing to get more buyers, while trying to get people to pay as much as possible. AMD seems to have miscalculated that many people switched over to AMD as Intel's Arrow Lake is a major flop. But AMD is increasing production a lot to catch up, and we should mostly see a normalization of pricing once that happens (probably a bit higher pricing than usual due to the lack of competition, but not as much as now).

Back to the good old tradition of using bicycle parts for planes.