Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 OLED monitor review
ASUS Radeon RX 7600 STRIX OC review
Corsair RM1200X SHIFT 1200W PSU Review
Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Launch Date Set for April 13th: Leaker Confirms
NVIDIA's non-Ti version of the GeForce RTX 4070 might make its way to retail in April. Recent reports, citing the reputable Twitter leaker, hongxing2020, have specified the release date as April 13th. This leaker has previously been accurate in predicting the launch dates of the RTX 30 and RTX 40 series.
The GeForce RTX 4070 will be based on the same AD104 GPU as the RTX 4070 Ti, with slightly fewer cores but still boasting the same memory specification as the Ti version. According to speculations, this GPU will feature 46 streaming multiprocessors (SMs), resulting in 5,888 CUDA cores enabled. The memory capacity of this graphics card is expected to be 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit memory interface. There have been rumors about the possibility of NVIDIA offering three different SKUs for the RTX 4070, with 16 GB, 12 GB, and 10 GB of VRAM, but so far, there is no concrete information to support this. The TDP of this graphics card is rumored to be 200 W.
NVIDIA is working on completing the RTX 40 series lineup, and fans are eagerly anticipating updates on the RTX 4060 Ti and the RTX 4060. The company's founder and CEO, Jensen Huang, will be delivering the opening keynote at GTC on March 21st, where we may receive updates on the future GeForce lineup. Stay tuned for more updates on NVIDIA's latest offerings.
Nvidia GeForce 531.18 driver bug causes higher CPU usage; company acknowledges issue - 03/06/2023 04:49 PM
Nvidia has confirmed a bug in its recently released Game Ready driver version 531.18 that causes higher CPU usage. The issue has been added to the company's list of known issues, but there is no indi...
Download: NVIDIA GeForce 528.49 WHQL driver - 02/08/2023 04:26 PM
NVIDIA Unveils Latest Game-Ready Drivers: GeForce 528.49 WHQL. Gamers, get ready for some exciting news! NVIDIA has just released the latest GeForce 528.49 WHQL drivers, making sure you have the best ...
Quad-slot NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090Ti/TITAN 800W graphics card / cooler caught on camera - 01/30/2023 09:41 AM
An image has surfaced, purporting to show an upcoming NVIDIA flagship product positioned above the GeForce RTX 4090. Two names have been rumoured for this product: the GeForce RTX 4090 Ti and the NVID...
Download: NVIDIA GeForce 528.24 WHQL drivers - 01/24/2023 02:13 PM
The NVIDIA Game Ready Driver provides optimal performance and support for the latest games, including those that use NVIDIA DLSS 3 technology such as Marvel's Midnight Suns, Hitman 3, and Deliver Us ...
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Founders Edition packaging leaks - 01/10/2023 09:51 AM
A popular YouTube channel recently revealed exclusive images of the RTX 4070's packaging. Although no card was included, this does indicate that NVIDIA is considering introducing their design in conj...
H83
Senior Member
Posts: 4845
Joined: 2009-09-08
Senior Member
Posts: 4845
Joined: 2009-09-08
#6111567 Posted on: 03/14/2023 03:58 PM
By that measure, i could say an 8800 Ultra was a horrible card because it couldn't do 4K yet it was "priced like a 4k card"
What you're doing is just moving the goal post, if pricing of cards were based off of what resolution they could run, we'd have some HEFTY HEFTY priced cards, as $500+ use to be the 1080p range, heck 720p use to be the "omg i can't believe this card runs this game at 720p!" so by that measure i guess 4K cards should cost $4000+?
Not to mention that if the 3090 and 3090 ti were 4K cards at $1500 and $2000, and are similar in performance to the 4070 ti at 4K but is $800, then that means what you want is what you got: 4K performance, for less.
Again, not saying the card should or should not be cheaper, but just on a more realistic side, how about we all just look at what the 4070 ti was, rather then wasn't, it was:
A card that has similar performance to the 3090 and 3090 ti at all resolutions, lower resolutions really hitting the 3090 and 3090 ti hard, at $800 instead of $1500 or $2000. $800 not a price you want to spend? Alright, then the 3090 and 3090 ti are not cards you should be comparing it to since you wouldn't want to spend $1500 or $2000 on a GPU either.
I really kind of wish that we'd get away from the whole numbering schemes of graphics card, for one reason only: The whole "But it's a 70 series card! i could never spend that for a 70 series card!!!!" When realistically the only metric is: Price to performance
Because in the end who really cares what a card is named? The only thing that matters is the price to performance. Don't like the performance you are getting from the price? Don't buy it, simple as that. Don't like a card because of its naming compared to the price? This should absolutely never be a decision.
I'd buy a RTX 5010 if it fit my needs for the price, because who cares about the name.
If i`m moving the goal posts then you are playing a different game , because comparing a 8800 ultra to a 4070ti makes no sense. The first was an uber high card, capable of delivering the 4k experience of the time of it`s release, full HD at 60 frames, if i`m not mistaken. The later is a mid range card being sold at the same price of high end cards, without the specs and performance to match it`s price.
As for the 4070ti delivering the same performance of the 3090, that`s the expected with newer cards otherwise it wouldn`t make any sense to buy a new card if it offered the same performance of the card before.
And regarding the important metric of price to performance, the 4070ti delivers 50% of the performance of the 4090 at 50% of the price, but in the days of the 8800 ultra, we could buy a 8800gt that delivered 70/80% performance of the ultra at a third of the cost! I remember this well because i`ve bought a 8800gt on it`s release.
So the price performance of the 4070ti is actually very bad.
Even worse, the 4070 comes with a low amount of RAM and a low amount of memory bandwith, clear weak points that i think are going to make the card age badly, but i could be wrong about this.
Bottom line, i don`t dislike the 4070ti because of it`s name, i don`t like it because of it`s price and because Nvidia crippled the card to protect the status quo of the higher cards.
No problem if you disagree with me, but this is my opinion about this card.
By that measure, i could say an 8800 Ultra was a horrible card because it couldn't do 4K yet it was "priced like a 4k card"
What you're doing is just moving the goal post, if pricing of cards were based off of what resolution they could run, we'd have some HEFTY HEFTY priced cards, as $500+ use to be the 1080p range, heck 720p use to be the "omg i can't believe this card runs this game at 720p!" so by that measure i guess 4K cards should cost $4000+?
Not to mention that if the 3090 and 3090 ti were 4K cards at $1500 and $2000, and are similar in performance to the 4070 ti at 4K but is $800, then that means what you want is what you got: 4K performance, for less.
Again, not saying the card should or should not be cheaper, but just on a more realistic side, how about we all just look at what the 4070 ti was, rather then wasn't, it was:
A card that has similar performance to the 3090 and 3090 ti at all resolutions, lower resolutions really hitting the 3090 and 3090 ti hard, at $800 instead of $1500 or $2000. $800 not a price you want to spend? Alright, then the 3090 and 3090 ti are not cards you should be comparing it to since you wouldn't want to spend $1500 or $2000 on a GPU either.
I really kind of wish that we'd get away from the whole numbering schemes of graphics card, for one reason only: The whole "But it's a 70 series card! i could never spend that for a 70 series card!!!!" When realistically the only metric is: Price to performance
Because in the end who really cares what a card is named? The only thing that matters is the price to performance. Don't like the performance you are getting from the price? Don't buy it, simple as that. Don't like a card because of its naming compared to the price? This should absolutely never be a decision.
I'd buy a RTX 5010 if it fit my needs for the price, because who cares about the name.
If i`m moving the goal posts then you are playing a different game , because comparing a 8800 ultra to a 4070ti makes no sense. The first was an uber high card, capable of delivering the 4k experience of the time of it`s release, full HD at 60 frames, if i`m not mistaken. The later is a mid range card being sold at the same price of high end cards, without the specs and performance to match it`s price.
As for the 4070ti delivering the same performance of the 3090, that`s the expected with newer cards otherwise it wouldn`t make any sense to buy a new card if it offered the same performance of the card before.
And regarding the important metric of price to performance, the 4070ti delivers 50% of the performance of the 4090 at 50% of the price, but in the days of the 8800 ultra, we could buy a 8800gt that delivered 70/80% performance of the ultra at a third of the cost! I remember this well because i`ve bought a 8800gt on it`s release.
So the price performance of the 4070ti is actually very bad.
Even worse, the 4070 comes with a low amount of RAM and a low amount of memory bandwith, clear weak points that i think are going to make the card age badly, but i could be wrong about this.
Bottom line, i don`t dislike the 4070ti because of it`s name, i don`t like it because of it`s price and because Nvidia crippled the card to protect the status quo of the higher cards.
No problem if you disagree with me, but this is my opinion about this card.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Posts: 2533
Joined: 2011-05-19
I do what I can, good luck out there.