The GPU Sadness Index: Tracking eBay Pricing(tomshardware.com)
tomshardware.com
The GPU Sadness Index: Tracking eBay Pricing
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/gpu-pricing-index
166 comments
Off topic, but for those still wanting a new GPU the trick to still buying these cards at MSRP, and actually get one, is to utilize a custom built PC service and buy a new PC. Cheap out on all parts except the GPU. Then keep the good GPU, slap your old one in the "new" computer and sell the machine on ebay. That's how I got my 3090 in November. It was actually a bit cheaper than MSRP as I made a bit more on the PC on ebay than I paid for it and it took less than a week to get the custom pc and 2 days to sell the new one.
Ah, good advice. That gives me an even better ROI for my eth mining!
But how are the system integrators able to get GPUs at listed prices when nobody else is?
They get them the same way Alienware or Best Buy does, rather than buying them at retail
Delivery contracts make them first in line.
Why don't scalpers or miners sign up for the same contracts?
I saw a picture on Reddit of a wall stacked high with 3060’s. In the comments, the poster mentioned he placed a bulk order, the downside was it took a while.
Right - if they're reselling easily for massively over manufacturer price why isn't everyone placing these orders?
For the same reason anything that's profitable remains profitable for a while: It's risky to enter and there is a barrier to entry.
It probably took a while for the person on Reddit to get their order because they got it from a distributor who was filling all of their higher priority customers first. I bet Dell isn't even getting theirs from a distributor, I'd guess they get them directly from the manufacturer. There's a hierarchy to retail sales, and I'm sure even large miners aren't near the top of it.
Yup. I imagine it's similar to the inventory shortfalls ledger experienced a few years ago during the cryptocurrency price runup. I made a nice chunk of change placing bulk orders from Ledger, waiting a month for them to ship, and forwarding them to Amazon to resell.
Presumably they (scalpers and miners) are not buying in large enough bulk orders, far enough in advance.
This is a market inefficiency. These companies could be reselling the video cards without doing the extra work of putting together a full PC and everyone would be better off - you don’t have to resell parts as “used”, the company doesn’t have to ship you parts you don’t want, both of you don’t have to pay taxes on stuff nobody wants.
There's a 0% chance that Nvidia would allow them resell graphics cards. These cards are earmarked for specific OEM purposes. None of those companies want to bring down Nvidia's wrath on them, either.
They can't actually stop them can they? Right of first sale.
Or is there some custom in the supply chain by which these firms waive that right for priority in sourcing? In which case, this sounds like an unethical buisness practice solely intended to create market inefficiencies...
Or is there something else to it?
Or is there some custom in the supply chain by which these firms waive that right for priority in sourcing? In which case, this sounds like an unethical buisness practice solely intended to create market inefficiencies...
Or is there something else to it?
They can stop selling to them.
>There's a 0% chance that Nvidia would allow them resell graphics cards.
There is a difference between unilateral refusal to sell, and selling on condition of non resale. As far as I am aware, the practice of conditional sale like that isn't actually backed by any legal teeth outside the realm of a contract. Once you buy the thing, it is yours. Now the contract could cover the primacy of sourcing, but not the item itself, which would have the same badic effect I suppose.
Believe it or not, "we just won't sell to them" is a surefire way to stir up trouble, because then people start asking pesky questions like "why?", and if the answer given isn't satisfactory, leads to going about and collecting data; turning it into a public interest sort of thing. There is no way that blacklisting sales without a darn good reason is ever a good thing.
There is a difference between unilateral refusal to sell, and selling on condition of non resale. As far as I am aware, the practice of conditional sale like that isn't actually backed by any legal teeth outside the realm of a contract. Once you buy the thing, it is yours. Now the contract could cover the primacy of sourcing, but not the item itself, which would have the same badic effect I suppose.
Believe it or not, "we just won't sell to them" is a surefire way to stir up trouble, because then people start asking pesky questions like "why?", and if the answer given isn't satisfactory, leads to going about and collecting data; turning it into a public interest sort of thing. There is no way that blacklisting sales without a darn good reason is ever a good thing.
> Believe it or not, "we just won't sell to them" is a surefire way to stir up trouble
Companies are free to negotiate terms (prices, delivery guarantees, priorities, etc.) for selling things how they like, generally. If it's in their best interest to not sell to someone, or to charge them higher rates / offer fewer discounts, that's what they'll do.
Companies are free to negotiate terms (prices, delivery guarantees, priorities, etc.) for selling things how they like, generally. If it's in their best interest to not sell to someone, or to charge them higher rates / offer fewer discounts, that's what they'll do.
Never said that wasn't the case. What I said was that making that choice has a tendency to get people talking, and people talking effects the brand. Especially if reprters for whatever reason turn it into a public interest story.
They're effectively giving them a price below the going market rate though, and they can choose to raise that price any time. It would be more messed up for the govt to step in and insist they need to continue selling at their arbitrary MSRP well below the resale value, though I suppose anything is possible.
Yeah, no. It'd be laughed out of the court because Nvidia's reputation and brand among gamers would get hurt because of the short supply to them and if Nvidia selling to PC OEMs who are selling the cards at a huge markup or to miners. Thus, Nvidia has both the breach of contract plus public interest on their side.
They can stop selling GPUs to these OEMs or just deprioritize their contracts as a less extreme option.
These companies can earn higher margin by selling complete PC rather than just selling video card.
That’s really solid advice, thanks for sharing it! I’m not in the market for a new card at the moment but I’m sure there will be many other people here who can benefit.
That’s a lot of work. And shipping PCs is pretty risky and expensive. I’ve found buying the cards from Facebook Marketplace for a little over MSRP to be easier - although you’ll likely be supporting a scalper.
Interesting.
You can also do this somewhat risk-free if you either first sell on ebay, before actually buying the computer, or if you sell on ebay within the return period of wherever you bought the computer.
That way if you don't find a buyer at the desired price, you're just back to square one, and not stuck with hardware you don't need.
You can also do this somewhat risk-free if you either first sell on ebay, before actually buying the computer, or if you sell on ebay within the return period of wherever you bought the computer.
That way if you don't find a buyer at the desired price, you're just back to square one, and not stuck with hardware you don't need.
How does that work with shipping times though?
I bought an art skateboard that had production problems (wont ship out to original buyers TBD) but it's already listed on ebay from scalpers.
I bought an art skateboard that had production problems (wont ship out to original buyers TBD) but it's already listed on ebay from scalpers.
The only thing I don’t understand is why Nvidia isn’t raising their prices. The supply and demand is clearly out of sync. Prices should rise until there is an equilibrium between demand and supply. Why is Nvidia content to feed the eBay market?
If we aren’t going to be able to buy GPUs I would at least prefer Nvidia make a profit instead of scalpers.
If we aren’t going to be able to buy GPUs I would at least prefer Nvidia make a profit instead of scalpers.
The prices have been raised. GPUs of the current gen are (relatively) a lot more expensive than they used to be. It's just the case that the scalpers make them even more expensive.
PR. Gamers would crucify Nvidia if they did it. All the hate towards scalpers would go to Nvidia doubled.
Right now there is a small chance to buy at MSRP. I managed to do it by calling around small stores in the area that didn't have a functioning online store - scalpers didn't bother with those..
Right now there is a small chance to buy at MSRP. I managed to do it by calling around small stores in the area that didn't have a functioning online store - scalpers didn't bother with those..
Price definitely impacts reviews as well. If you want to boost customer reviews on any product, cutting the price resets customer expectations to the downside. Raising prices for any reason also raises customer expectations.
This is funny observation. Before some recent hurricane, thousands of cars were shuttling between empty network gas stations, presumably guided by their apps, to no avail, while I was able to top the tank by going several streets into nearest small village and finding standalone "mom and pop" station.
What you mean is there is a small chance for a bot script to buy them that checks the sites for the 24/7 . There is no chance of a human clicking on the pages with a mouse of buying them
Smaller shops get some stock too. Smaller shops often don't have an online store or the one they have is broken or doesn't represent current their stock. Scalpers don't bother with those stores.
I literally entered "computer store toronto" into Google and started calling every small one in the results. I found what I needed in fewer than 15 calls and picked it up an hour later.
I literally entered "computer store toronto" into Google and started calling every small one in the results. I found what I needed in fewer than 15 calls and picked it up an hour later.
Gamers are already crucifying Nvidia. Nvidia is leaving billions on the table. I feel like they could win gamers back with that cash.
Personally, I have absolutely zero faith that any additional revenue would go towards improving their products or availability. It would go to their shareholders; NVidia (Intel) treats its customers like consumers.
If their prices aren't responding to supply/demand now, they weren't before either. The price of a NVidia GPU isn't set by market forces; never has been.
If their prices aren't responding to supply/demand now, they weren't before either. The price of a NVidia GPU isn't set by market forces; never has been.
Given the spike in demand right now, traditional supply and demand would suggest raising prices and using the money to produce more chips, which in the end would net more money and bring the price down. The reason that won't happen has more to do with the feasibility (or lack thereof) of scaling production of GPUs by throwing money at it and the transient nature of the spike than Nvidia being helmed by a shadowy cabal that responds to neither their own incentives nor the market.
This one cycle might not be enough to fund more production but if your business keeps running into these shortage cycles then given enough cycles it would become profitable to put more money into production. This isn't the first time it happened.
Of course it's not the first spike, but adding enough capacity to cover every spike in the future would mean far larger production than is needed for the vast majority of the time.
> NVidia (Intel) treats its customers like consumers.
nVidia's customers are literally consumers.
nVidia's customers are literally consumers.
Those words aren’t synonymous in denotation—who wants to be called a consumer? I think the term customer implies respect for those you do business with rather than viewing people who buy your product as numbers on a spreadsheet.
These are luxury items, where 95% of people will be using to play AAA video games at nice but but pretty extravagant 144hz 1440p/4K or as space heaters.
Its the very definition of a consumer
Its the very definition of a consumer
I am a consumer; it bothers me exactly zero as it’s literally and figuratively true.
“Treat like transactions” or “treat like cash flows” or “treat like wallets” would give me the pejorative meaning presumably intended.
“Treat like transactions” or “treat like cash flows” or “treat like wallets” would give me the pejorative meaning presumably intended.
Hell, raise prices and then rebate back if their drivers see you just running normal games and crap. Win/win.
Nope. You're still enshrining post facto control mechanisms by which the manufacturer controls what you do with the hardware after you recieve it.
Why is it so hard for businesses to just sell things? Why must they encroach? I'm not even a miner, but I'm not inviting anyone into my system to make a judgement call on whether my use of something I paid for is consistent with what they want. They sold it. They should not only have to part with the drivers, but with any semblance of software enforced binning too.
Why is it so hard for businesses to just sell things? Why must they encroach? I'm not even a miner, but I'm not inviting anyone into my system to make a judgement call on whether my use of something I paid for is consistent with what they want. They sold it. They should not only have to part with the drivers, but with any semblance of software enforced binning too.
Because the “gamer” customers will still be there after Bitcoin crashes and it makes sense to not piss your long term customers off to please the short term ones.
At least that’s the argument. We’ll see how it plays out.
At least that’s the argument. We’ll see how it plays out.
How about increase MSRP but offer a redemption via the web, one per user (ie only one per bank account OR email OR phone). Individuals could buy and get $X00 off, once. Scalpers would need a fresh email, bank account, phone number every time they wanted to get a GPU or would be stuck selling at $X00 above the true retail price?
I think there's a VAT penalty, but could it work??
I think there's a VAT penalty, but could it work??
Not enough, its super easy to create fresh email, card phone numbers. Only difficult thing to change is shipping address but only if that's strictly enforced to only USPS valid addresses which ive never seen anywhere
They can’t because they’re locked in with their partners. And if they raise it for consumers it will be considered price discrimination.
Dunno about Nvidia, but the usual approach here is to keep MSRP the same on paper, but distribute more devices to your distributors that jack up their price and get a rebate from them or some other favour.
And you can bet every other vendor is paying MSRP with possibly 0% markup, but shutting up about it unless they want 0 deliveries. Maybe even paying more than MSRP and expected to, on paper, treat it as a loss-leader.
And you can bet every other vendor is paying MSRP with possibly 0% markup, but shutting up about it unless they want 0 deliveries. Maybe even paying more than MSRP and expected to, on paper, treat it as a loss-leader.
That's called a backdoor and it happens a lot. You sell it to a buddy that kicks back 150% then he sells for 200% on ebay you both win.
NVIDIA is fighting against it while pushing their own mining products: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2021/02/18/geforce-cmp/
They're not fighting against it at all.
That's a load of horseshit and anyone familiar with both PC gaming and cryptocurrency mining knows it.
Why would you divert chips that could be powering GeForce GPUs into mining cards and then also disabling the ability to mine on your gaming cards?
Unless, of course, you were scared shitless about an enormous secondary market forming for 3000 series cards when you release the GTX 4000 series... Why spend $699 for a GTX 4080 when you can buy a gently used GTX 3080 for $299-$399. Decent miners know you need to undervolt and underclock for maximum watt/hash performance - in other words, these chips weren't stressed intensively for months / years - they are the equivalent of a luxury car driven by a 70 year old Grandma to and from the grocery store and the department store.
I can guarantee you if NVIDIA had the capacity with Samsung to pump out a load of 3000 series cards, they'd do it, but they can't, so they're doing the next best thing - creating artificial scarcity.
Once these "mining cards" are no longer profitable, they have no secondary market. They go off to the landfill, or the e-waste processor.
This is about profit, pure and simple.
That's a load of horseshit and anyone familiar with both PC gaming and cryptocurrency mining knows it.
Why would you divert chips that could be powering GeForce GPUs into mining cards and then also disabling the ability to mine on your gaming cards?
Unless, of course, you were scared shitless about an enormous secondary market forming for 3000 series cards when you release the GTX 4000 series... Why spend $699 for a GTX 4080 when you can buy a gently used GTX 3080 for $299-$399. Decent miners know you need to undervolt and underclock for maximum watt/hash performance - in other words, these chips weren't stressed intensively for months / years - they are the equivalent of a luxury car driven by a 70 year old Grandma to and from the grocery store and the department store.
I can guarantee you if NVIDIA had the capacity with Samsung to pump out a load of 3000 series cards, they'd do it, but they can't, so they're doing the next best thing - creating artificial scarcity.
Once these "mining cards" are no longer profitable, they have no secondary market. They go off to the landfill, or the e-waste processor.
This is about profit, pure and simple.
> Why would you divert chips that could be powering GeForce GPUs into mining cards and then also disabling the ability to mine on your gaming cards?
Because you're using parts with defects which are irrelevant to mining (e.g. faulty video output, texturing, etc).
Because you're using parts with defects which are irrelevant to mining (e.g. faulty video output, texturing, etc).
That's only true now since the 30 series cards are relatively new. Once the process node improves soon, the yields are going to go up, and they're going to use fully functioning parts to create mining cards. It happens everytime where they first use parts with defects to create lower end GPUs or CPUs, and then yields improve so they disable the extra cores, memory and restrict frequency in firmware and drivers.
There were many hacks in the past to revert these nerfs and get more functionality of higher end products for free. On one graphics card in the past, all you had to do was just flash the higher end card's bios, and it had a success rate of 75%
There were many hacks in the past to revert these nerfs and get more functionality of higher end products for free. On one graphics card in the past, all you had to do was just flash the higher end card's bios, and it had a success rate of 75%
>Why would you divert chips that could be powering GeForce GPUs into mining cards and then also disabling the ability to mine on your gaming cards?
The current cryptomining chips are actually based on Turing (RTX 2000), not Ampere (RTX 3000).
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-repurposes-turing-s...
The current cryptomining chips are actually based on Turing (RTX 2000), not Ampere (RTX 3000).
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-repurposes-turing-s...
Not all, the high end is ga102 ampere
Unless they make the other GPUs less capable of mining or the mining hardware reall cheap no one cares
They did make the other GPUs less capable of mining.
Software is easily defeated.
Not when cryptographic signature verification is built into and enforced through the hardware. See Nouveau. The can't reclock post Maxwell GPUs because their firmware blobs would have to be signed by Nvidia. Think of it as Nvidia holding back the steering wheel to a car.
Wouldn’t this fall under the same kind of right to modify privileges that everyone is always complaining at Apple for?
Same reason baseball teams don’t raise season ticket prices to the levels sold by scalpers.
They want to preserve the long term revenue stream which is more important than what they may perceive is a short term demand spike.
They want to preserve the long term revenue stream which is more important than what they may perceive is a short term demand spike.
The prices are raised. The rtx 3060, released a few days ago, was not selling for MSRP. The only time there is an MSRP is for nvidia FE cards, but the majority of cards are not. The 3060 was called a "non existent card" by GamersNexus because the $320 price tag never happened.
What I don't understand is why gamers aren't petitioning their government to stop the trade tarrifs responsible for the price increases.
Gamers rise up /s
What I don't understand is why gamers aren't petitioning their government to stop the trade tarrifs responsible for the price increases.
Gamers rise up /s
>The rtx 3060, released a few days ago, was not selling for MSRP.
Anecdote: I actually got a 3060 for MSRP (well, MSRP + 6 euros with no separate charge for shipping). But the store was selling it as an "introductory offer while supplies last" and it sure isn't at MSRP anymore.
Anecdote: I actually got a 3060 for MSRP (well, MSRP + 6 euros with no separate charge for shipping). But the store was selling it as an "introductory offer while supplies last" and it sure isn't at MSRP anymore.
Right, there were some but effectively the MSRP was more around $500 usd, manufacturers like Zotac were selling for that as I recall.
But if you're buying in a different country you don't have the tariffs I would assume.
But if you're buying in a different country you don't have the tariffs I would assume.
I still think it would have been neat experiment for nvidia to auction 3000 series instead of attempting traditional sale channels. At least then the profits would go in the pockets of nvidia instead of scalpers. And if miners are willing to bid exorbitant sums then let them fund more gpu r&d then, eventually nvidia should be able to push the production quantity higher one way or another.
And then what happens to their channel sales partners who survive off events like GPU and CPU launches? They just go out of business?
Also: Nvidia couldn't increase production quantity if they wanted, this isn't a money problem. The only way for them to produce more GPUs at this point is to build fabs, and that will take years. TSMC isn't going to break their contract with Apple regardless of how much money Nvidia shows up to the table with.
Also: Nvidia couldn't increase production quantity if they wanted, this isn't a money problem. The only way for them to produce more GPUs at this point is to build fabs, and that will take years. TSMC isn't going to break their contract with Apple regardless of how much money Nvidia shows up to the table with.
>Also: Nvidia couldn't increase production quantity if they wanted, this isn't a money problem.
There is a problem with this logic. If there is no money problem why haven't they expanded production ahead of time? Well, probably because there is no money in expanding production, so yes it's a money problem.
If it takes 5 years to build a fab and there is no reason to build a fab since there is no money to be made then why would you build a fab in any situation, even if you are willing to wait 5 years? The answer is you don't build the fab and accept that there will be a shortage in the future. Since there are not enough GPUs that's what you will have to live with instead of complaining that there aren't enough GPUs.
There is a problem with this logic. If there is no money problem why haven't they expanded production ahead of time? Well, probably because there is no money in expanding production, so yes it's a money problem.
If it takes 5 years to build a fab and there is no reason to build a fab since there is no money to be made then why would you build a fab in any situation, even if you are willing to wait 5 years? The answer is you don't build the fab and accept that there will be a shortage in the future. Since there are not enough GPUs that's what you will have to live with instead of complaining that there aren't enough GPUs.
> Also: Nvidia couldn't increase production quantity if they wanted, this isn't a money problem. The only way for them to produce more GPUs at this point is to build fabs, and that will take years. TSMC isn't going to break their contract with Apple regardless of how much money Nvidia shows up to the table with.
That is very short-term thinking; taking years is still eventually.
That is very short-term thinking; taking years is still eventually.
Nvidia doesn't need more money for R&D, the limited supply has absolutely nothing to do with lack of resources to invest in manufacturing capacity. They have a combination of two things:
There's no planet on which they are going to base their future plans on crypto mining. End of story. The market is far too volatile for them to bet the company on it. Another couple million in the bank from auctioning off cards isn't going to change that. You're talking 10s of BILLIONS of dollars for fabs all to meet crypto mining demand? And oh, by the way, the faster they ramp up supply, the faster demand for the GPU goes down due to increased complexity of mining.
They have yield issues with the current generation chips. The only way that solves itself is through time, money won't improve the process, experience is the only fix.
You also failed to address what happens to all their retail partners who you've conveniently decided should be cut out.
There's no planet on which they are going to base their future plans on crypto mining. End of story. The market is far too volatile for them to bet the company on it. Another couple million in the bank from auctioning off cards isn't going to change that. You're talking 10s of BILLIONS of dollars for fabs all to meet crypto mining demand? And oh, by the way, the faster they ramp up supply, the faster demand for the GPU goes down due to increased complexity of mining.
They have yield issues with the current generation chips. The only way that solves itself is through time, money won't improve the process, experience is the only fix.
You also failed to address what happens to all their retail partners who you've conveniently decided should be cut out.
This is the same logic people applied in the last crypto mining shortage. There will be more and more of those in the future as Bitcoins valuation becomes dumber and dumber. But I don't have to care since I am not an angry person on the internet who insists on buying a high end GPU for low prices while there aren't enough of them around. I bought an overpriced RX 570 years ago during the last mining boom and I am happy with it.
Of course it's short term thinking, the spike in demand is short term. If it's raining out, people will want umbrellas. That doesn't mean that you should invest your life savings and 10 years into building an umbrella factory because it's rainy for two days in a row. Consistent demand spikes result in supply increases over the long run, but bumps in the road like this just don't.
If this analysis is correct then be happy with the lack of GPUs.
Indeed, I hate that the MSRP is far below the market determined pricepoint. The invites shortages and opens the door for scalping.
I have been trying to get an Xbox Series X for months. I would like to have a new one, with a warranty. However, I finally gave up and "won" one with a $606 bid on stockx.com. After fees, shipping, etc, its close to $170 over the unrealistic $500 MSRP, which just shows how out of touch the MSRP really is.
I have been trying to get an Xbox Series X for months. I would like to have a new one, with a warranty. However, I finally gave up and "won" one with a $606 bid on stockx.com. After fees, shipping, etc, its close to $170 over the unrealistic $500 MSRP, which just shows how out of touch the MSRP really is.
> I hate that the MSRP is far below the market determined pricepoint. The invites shortages and opens the door for scalping.
For some reason, this combination of sentences confuses me. The scalpers determine the market price by buying almost the entire volume. The only way to beat scalpers is to raise prices beyond what people are willing to pay, which forces scalpers to charge more to turn a profit, further raising the total price.
I guess I don’t see how an initially higher price would stop scalpers at all, they’d just keep buying the entire stock, anyway.
For some reason, this combination of sentences confuses me. The scalpers determine the market price by buying almost the entire volume. The only way to beat scalpers is to raise prices beyond what people are willing to pay, which forces scalpers to charge more to turn a profit, further raising the total price.
I guess I don’t see how an initially higher price would stop scalpers at all, they’d just keep buying the entire stock, anyway.
What you are describing isn't scalping. Scalping isn't about buying the entire supply. That's something completely different, namely market manipulation and this requires a huge amount of capital and you are not guaranteed to sell all your stock which makes it highly risky since the artificial demand could be outstripping regular demand. If you buy 100k GPUs and consumers only want to buy 75k GPUs then you would be stuck with 25k in this market manipulation scheme.
However, since there is actually more than 100k demand for GPUs there aren't enough GPUs for regular customers. Meaning that a large portion of consumers are actually getting ahold of GPUs which would make it impossible for market manipulators to buy the entire supply. You can't have both things at the same time. You can't be angry that stupid idiots get stuck on inventory because you aren't actually buying GPUs while at the same time being angry for there not being enough inventory because people are actually buying GPUs.
The reality is that people are buying GPUs and thus there is a lack of supply. Scalpers try to get ahold of the supply and auction it of fairly so that anyone who wants a GPU can get it since Nvidia failed to make sure that everyone who wants a GPU can get it.
>The only way to beat scalpers is to raise prices beyond what people are willing to pay, which forces scalpers to charge more to turn a profit, further raising the total price. I guess I don’t see how an initially higher price would stop scalpers at all, they’d just keep buying the entire stock, anyway.
As I said, if scalpers keep buying the supply while nobody wants the GPU they will simply be stuck with the excess stock and since they are in it to make money they will be forced to sell the GPU at market rates which is a net loss for them since they bought above market rate and a net gain to Nvidia. For the customer there is no difference.
However, since there is actually more than 100k demand for GPUs there aren't enough GPUs for regular customers. Meaning that a large portion of consumers are actually getting ahold of GPUs which would make it impossible for market manipulators to buy the entire supply. You can't have both things at the same time. You can't be angry that stupid idiots get stuck on inventory because you aren't actually buying GPUs while at the same time being angry for there not being enough inventory because people are actually buying GPUs.
The reality is that people are buying GPUs and thus there is a lack of supply. Scalpers try to get ahold of the supply and auction it of fairly so that anyone who wants a GPU can get it since Nvidia failed to make sure that everyone who wants a GPU can get it.
>The only way to beat scalpers is to raise prices beyond what people are willing to pay, which forces scalpers to charge more to turn a profit, further raising the total price. I guess I don’t see how an initially higher price would stop scalpers at all, they’d just keep buying the entire stock, anyway.
As I said, if scalpers keep buying the supply while nobody wants the GPU they will simply be stuck with the excess stock and since they are in it to make money they will be forced to sell the GPU at market rates which is a net loss for them since they bought above market rate and a net gain to Nvidia. For the customer there is no difference.
> The only way to beat scalpers is to raise prices beyond what people are willing to pay, which forces scalpers to charge more to turn a profit, further raising the total price.
No, this can't happen. If you raise prices beyond the market-clearing point, scalpers would need to charge prices higher than that -- and sell all their inventory -- in order to turn a profit. This can't be done; the higher prices prevent them from selling everything they bought.
> I guess I don’t see how an initially higher price would stop scalpers at all, they’d just keep buying the entire stock, anyway.
Again, this can't happen. Scalpers are not able to keep buying products they can't sell. You can only buy the entire stock if your revenue from selling the amount you can sell exceeds your cost of buying the entire stock. Exceeding your cost of buying the amount you can sell isn't enough.
Your economic model implies that all goods are controlled by scalpers who can never be dislodged. That's not even close to the truth. Why do you think that might be?
No, this can't happen. If you raise prices beyond the market-clearing point, scalpers would need to charge prices higher than that -- and sell all their inventory -- in order to turn a profit. This can't be done; the higher prices prevent them from selling everything they bought.
> I guess I don’t see how an initially higher price would stop scalpers at all, they’d just keep buying the entire stock, anyway.
Again, this can't happen. Scalpers are not able to keep buying products they can't sell. You can only buy the entire stock if your revenue from selling the amount you can sell exceeds your cost of buying the entire stock. Exceeding your cost of buying the amount you can sell isn't enough.
Your economic model implies that all goods are controlled by scalpers who can never be dislodged. That's not even close to the truth. Why do you think that might be?
I'm assuming they don't want to look like they're profiting on a shortage, which could also make the shortage look intentional.
One workaround would have been to set up a system where the additional profit from auctioned GPU's went to charities.
One workaround would have been to set up a system where the additional profit from auctioned GPU's went to charities.
Which is such a very good idea since they’ll often capture a significant percentage back on their taxes.
Ethereum moving to full proof of stake (vs. proof of work which is what mining is) should fix a lot of this. So hang tight if gpu prices have you down. What is the timetable for that?
There will be a glut of graphics cards the likes of which has never been seen, once Ethereum is no longer mined.
There will be a glut of graphics cards the likes of which has never been seen, once Ethereum is no longer mined.
Proof of stake is a quarter away. It’s been that way since 2018, and it’ll probably be that way at the heat death of the universe.
Sometimes it feels like these processes work like radioactive decay. They don't make progress, they just suddenly happen.
It is already partially implemented now. Just waiting on the full rollout.
https://ethereum.org/en/eth2/staking/
https://ethereum.org/en/eth2/staking/
As an outsider, what’s stopping further progress in this? I would have thought, proof of stake is “it”, why hasn’t it taken over?
It is highly controversial and plagued with unsolvable security drawbacks compared to Proof of Work.
As someone that's been watching the process fairly closely, that's not my read on the situation. I think it's moreso just a new technology that takes time to perfect, and Ethereum is a large ship, hence "changing course" take a lot of effort.
In an Ethereum echochamber it may seem like that. More generally on 'why hasnt it taken over?' a lot of projects have communities that laugh at the security properties of PoS; they will never consider it
An incentive for anyone to switch.
It's very new technology so it has taken years to refine and test.
Why is it people think Ethereum mining is what's driving this?
The mass mining farms don't give a shit about Ethereum. They literally mine whatever coin is most profitable to then be exchanged into Bitcoin. Everyone's going after BTC. There's a Bitcoin ATM in a service station convenience store near my house.
No one is going to give a shit when Ethereum moves to proof of stake, because they'll just switch to some other coin that still uses proof of work and thereby mines easily on their GPU farm and can then be exchanged for BTC.
The mass mining farms don't give a shit about Ethereum. They literally mine whatever coin is most profitable to then be exchanged into Bitcoin. Everyone's going after BTC. There's a Bitcoin ATM in a service station convenience store near my house.
No one is going to give a shit when Ethereum moves to proof of stake, because they'll just switch to some other coin that still uses proof of work and thereby mines easily on their GPU farm and can then be exchanged for BTC.
It's possible that soon whatever coin is most profitable to mine won't be profitable enough to justify buying more GPUs. There's always a limit.
> whatever coin is most profitable to mine won't be profitable enough to justify buying more GPUs
This is exactly where I'd like to see it all go.
This is exactly where I'd like to see it all go.
If there is a significant gap between Ethereum and the second most profitable coin, taking Ethereum out of the market will make the whole mining business less profitable.
(This will in turn make some operations no longer economically viable, dropping GPU demand)
(This will in turn make some operations no longer economically viable, dropping GPU demand)
Well Ethereum has massive hash rate and is still mined on GPUs largely. No one mines btc on GPUs.
[deleted]
"Never"?
The Ethereum PoS chain is already active today and giving "staking" rewards. PoW is still active too but both chains are mining ETH at the moment and the plan is to switch to PoS only.
As the PoS did actually launch and is actually working, I'm not sure it's going to be "never".
They may be late like so many software projects, but they seem to be serious about the switch to proof of stake.
As the PoS did actually launch and is actually working, I'm not sure it's going to be "never".
They may be late like so many software projects, but they seem to be serious about the switch to proof of stake.
So at what point do they throw the switch that invalidates millions of dollars of investment in mining Etherum? Or is it all transferrable? And who is the "they" that throws the switch?
I only see your comment now, sorry for the late reply.
Well as I understand I it was clear from day one that Ethereum would switch "one day" to PoS so miners knew, from the start, what they were in for.
> ... that invalidates millions of dollars of investment in mining Etherum...
Well the GPUs will not be able to mine ETH anymore but the ETH already mined aren't lost: the PoW chain is going to merged inside the PoS one.
I take it this all decided by the "Ethereum foundation"?
Well as I understand I it was clear from day one that Ethereum would switch "one day" to PoS so miners knew, from the start, what they were in for.
> ... that invalidates millions of dollars of investment in mining Etherum...
Well the GPUs will not be able to mine ETH anymore but the ETH already mined aren't lost: the PoW chain is going to merged inside the PoS one.
I take it this all decided by the "Ethereum foundation"?
For those that don't know, staking is a dedicated computer + 32 ETH in escrow, then you get your ETH back + 1/2 ETH payment at the end of the month but fewer if you were offline including possibly losing some of your escrowed ETH.
What is the computer doing during that time?
Voting on block proposals as part of a randomly assigned committee.
Validating or creating blocks, which to be clear is _significantly_ less work than mining.
[deleted]
Huh, well that's cool that they took my source code and modified it! Glad to see it's being used!
It's kind of amazing, the macro view that's going on here.
Computational capacity has become so much of a commodity, that gamers can't get it for their graphics, because they're being crowded out in the market by someone else (cryptocurrency miners) who can use it for something more profitable.
Computational capacity has become so much of a commodity, that gamers can't get it for their graphics, because they're being crowded out in the market by someone else (cryptocurrency miners) who can use it for something more profitable.
Nvidia could easily fix all this by allowing customers to preorder cards at MSRP and ship them when they become available. We can blame the scalpers and miners all we want, but nvidia is at best complicit.
This is acceptable, but only if you blame people for their failure to not preorder the card in time. Since you decided the allocation mechanism to be based on time rather than money that's the only valid conclusion.
Why would scalpers and miners not order years of production ahead?
Scalpers are always a short term thing. None of them ever order supply that will last years, usually 3-6 months at most. If you end up being caught holding the bag with a normal amount of demand, you then break even at best or likely lose a little re-selling them at the prices you paid for.
A year from now nvidia will have new GPUs and the 3000 series will be relatively easy to buy.
A year from now nvidia will have new GPUs and the 3000 series will be relatively easy to buy.
Try pricing 1070 or 1080. You know, 5 year old GPUs.
Limit to 1 card per person and requiring a deposit might help address that.
I thought it would be cool if you could pre-order one through a local library. Here, at least, getting a library card requires visiting in person, so scalpers would have trouble getting multiple unless the librarian were in on it.
I don't think that sort of relationship between manufacturers and libraries exists, though, and I'm not sure it should.
I don't think that sort of relationship between manufacturers and libraries exists, though, and I'm not sure it should.
Require customers' Steam usernames and validate that they are true gamers. Oh, you just play pixel art indies? Back of the line.
> Oh, you just play pixel art indies? Back of the line.
At least there's some originality there.
At least there's some originality there.
If this were easy, it would have been solved already. It has not been solved.
Limiting one card per mailing address or credit card? You're telling me this is hard?
Unique fingerprinting is completely solved. Retailers just have no motivation because the craze is driving huge traffic to their sites.
how? i have seen zero implementations of this.
Why would any retailer implement this? Oh please don’t repeatedly come back to my site.
As far as how, there are dozens of things companies could do. Require a credit card verification, don’t allow digital credit cards, don’t ship to PO Boxes, don’t allow VOIP phone numbers, require an account with the retailer, do browser/machine fingerprinting, don’t allow purchasing on a VPN, scan the secondhand market for barcodes and ban people, require linking social media accounts and check for matches, don’t allow different billing and shipping addresses, require phone number verification, and on and on and on.
If retailers wanted to make sure it was one customer per video card, they could absolutely, trivially, do it.
But why would they? That’s a lot of commotion, and things people would probably get upset about. It will lead to less traffic on their site. And, at absolute best, they will get the exact same revenue.
As far as how, there are dozens of things companies could do. Require a credit card verification, don’t allow digital credit cards, don’t ship to PO Boxes, don’t allow VOIP phone numbers, require an account with the retailer, do browser/machine fingerprinting, don’t allow purchasing on a VPN, scan the secondhand market for barcodes and ban people, require linking social media accounts and check for matches, don’t allow different billing and shipping addresses, require phone number verification, and on and on and on.
If retailers wanted to make sure it was one customer per video card, they could absolutely, trivially, do it.
But why would they? That’s a lot of commotion, and things people would probably get upset about. It will lead to less traffic on their site. And, at absolute best, they will get the exact same revenue.
They should offer places when you can buy cards in a queue using normal pricing instead of these fleecers trying to make a profit on shortages.
I remember during the last run in GPUs, my friend was going to “throw away” an “old” computer. I pulled the ancient GPU and sold it for $40.
Good times.
Good times.
Rather than throw out this stuff, I list it on a buy/sell site for free and then when someone asks if they can pick it up I stick it out on the curb so I don’t have to put any effort in to meeting them.
Here's a crazy idea: What if Nvidia raised the prices to the current scalper prices, but every additional dollar was returned as credit that you could spend on indie games or hardware?
(You would probably have to restrict the hardware to just hardware that's not useful for mining, e.g. monitors)
(You would probably have to restrict the hardware to just hardware that's not useful for mining, e.g. monitors)
That is an interesting idea, but I assume you'd see things like scalpers using the credits and selling the "useless" extra hardware or games to recover much of the cost. Maybe the extra friction and losses for the scalpers would be enough to push things in the right direction?
Yeah, good point.
Maybe it could be restricted to physical goods sent to the same address as the card (which miners could still flip, but it's better than nothing)
Maybe it could be restricted to physical goods sent to the same address as the card (which miners could still flip, but it's better than nothing)
I want to experiment with deep learning by training on the GPU, but the price even for used cards just makes me put it off. :-O. If it doesn't come down soon tho, I might cave and buy one.
Have you considered cloud services? For example you have GCloud compute engine: https://cloud.google.com/compute/gpus-pricing
The GCE free tier is nice but ran out for me after just about a month of continuous use of one (cheap) GPU. Maybe some people have deeper pockets than I do but I can’t afford to pay $300 CAD/month on a single cloud GPU for hobbyist purposes.
Kaggle seems to offer a lot of free GPU services if you want to have your notebooks be public.
vast.ai is also an option, which is cheaper (though also not as nice as GCP)
Well how much VRAM do you feel you need for your projects? Because there's a lot of 16 GB cards out there that are still perfectly serviceable for that.
Vega Frontier Editions (16 GB HBM2) are going for around $600-700 on eBay and Craigslist, also Facebook Marketplace in some areas.
Radeon VIIs (16 GB HBM2) are going for around $650-1000 on the same platforms.
You can easily put two of those into a machine and have a pretty impressive deep learning rig.
Vega Frontier Editions (16 GB HBM2) are going for around $600-700 on eBay and Craigslist, also Facebook Marketplace in some areas.
Radeon VIIs (16 GB HBM2) are going for around $650-1000 on the same platforms.
You can easily put two of those into a machine and have a pretty impressive deep learning rig.
Thanks for the suggestion, will check those out!
My pleasure and happy hunting.
Here's the original article that reminded me of this. Its four years old, but I still feel its a worthwhile read: https://medium.com/intuitionmachine/building-a-50-teraflops-...
Here's the original article that reminded me of this. Its four years old, but I still feel its a worthwhile read: https://medium.com/intuitionmachine/building-a-50-teraflops-...
Am I the only one who couldn't get their mobile browser to actually view the graphs at a legible resolution? Tom's hardware is not a small blog, they should have that figured out.
I turn my phone sideways and the video jumps to full screen (which I didn't request) and I hide the video and the graphs are half-cropped. I refresh in landscape and the graphs are still small. I click the graphs and they pop into modal view, still small.
I have to fuss with View Image to actually read them.
I turn my phone sideways and the video jumps to full screen (which I didn't request) and I hide the video and the graphs are half-cropped. I refresh in landscape and the graphs are still small. I click the graphs and they pop into modal view, still small.
I have to fuss with View Image to actually read them.
I couldnt even get past trying to set the cookie preferences, spent several minutes then gave up on viewing the page on mobile
Good of Nvidia to split their product line in the future with one made for gamers and one for miners. That should help drive the price back down for the gaming crowd.
It's actually not. It's just yet another anti-consumer tactic masked as being consumer-friendly.
First, it doesn't change the fact that the amount of available silicon is limited. Instead of every card potentially becoming a gaming card now only a subset of them will, with the rest going exclusively to miners. How is that a good thing?
Second, it kills the second-hand market. Remember a few years back when used mining cards flooded the market and you could get a decent GPU dirt cheap? Yeah, NVidia didn't like that. Well, this won't happen anymore with those mining-only cards, since they're useless for anything other than mining. More e-waste, yaaay.
First, it doesn't change the fact that the amount of available silicon is limited. Instead of every card potentially becoming a gaming card now only a subset of them will, with the rest going exclusively to miners. How is that a good thing?
Second, it kills the second-hand market. Remember a few years back when used mining cards flooded the market and you could get a decent GPU dirt cheap? Yeah, NVidia didn't like that. Well, this won't happen anymore with those mining-only cards, since they're useless for anything other than mining. More e-waste, yaaay.
https://www.pcinvasion.com/nvidia-mining-cards-turing-lineup...
Mining cards look to be Turing and 12nm. This should resolve concerns that it will affect 3000 series(Ampere) availability. People will still hate on Nvidia tho because why not...
Mining cards look to be Turing and 12nm. This should resolve concerns that it will affect 3000 series(Ampere) availability. People will still hate on Nvidia tho because why not...
There's a sliver of hope that the mining cards will be reusable as general purpose gpus by having the card stream its output to an integrated gpu.
I first heard about using the p106-p90 cards on Windows with a modified driver via a LTT video [1]. I later read a blog post where someone claimed that the card was plug-and-play on Pop!_OS (a Linux distro) [2].
I think this is fairly well known at this point. I would be very curious to see how many were actually reused, though. I remember seeing a listing for a large number of p100 cards a few months ago, but I don't see any listings now. Were they scooped up and reused, or did the sellers give up and trash them?
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY4s35uULg4
[2]https://ncrmnt.org/2019/08/04/linux-gaming-with-p106-100/ (search for "following up")
I first heard about using the p106-p90 cards on Windows with a modified driver via a LTT video [1]. I later read a blog post where someone claimed that the card was plug-and-play on Pop!_OS (a Linux distro) [2].
I think this is fairly well known at this point. I would be very curious to see how many were actually reused, though. I remember seeing a listing for a large number of p100 cards a few months ago, but I don't see any listings now. Were they scooped up and reused, or did the sellers give up and trash them?
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY4s35uULg4
[2]https://ncrmnt.org/2019/08/04/linux-gaming-with-p106-100/ (search for "following up")
> Remember a few years back when used mining cards flooded the market and you could get a decent GPU dirt cheap?
No, not at all. Any references?
No, not at all. Any references?
You don't remember when GTX 1080 Tis could be had on eBay for as cheap as $400-$450??
Because I sure do... I should have bought two. Now you can sell one - today, right now - for $700-800. I haven't seen an auction with a final bid less than $650, and I've been watching. Most "Buy It Now" options are $700-800, and aren't having all that much trouble selling.
We're talking two generations old cards, released almost four years ago, that are selling for what brand new GTX 3080s are supposed to MSRP at.
Because I sure do... I should have bought two. Now you can sell one - today, right now - for $700-800. I haven't seen an auction with a final bid less than $650, and I've been watching. Most "Buy It Now" options are $700-800, and aren't having all that much trouble selling.
We're talking two generations old cards, released almost four years ago, that are selling for what brand new GTX 3080s are supposed to MSRP at.
> You don't remember when GTX 1080 Tis could be had on eBay for as cheap as $400-$450??
That's slightly above half of its retail price (when it was new) and roughly in the same ballpark as RTX 2070 MSRP. Is this really "dirt cheap"? Do you expect video cards to never depreciate then?
More to the point, I don't remember the market being saturated with used video cards in way that could put a dent in retail prices. They always seem to sell at comparable performance/$ ratio to new cards. I'm genuinely curious if I missed any trends.
That's slightly above half of its retail price (when it was new) and roughly in the same ballpark as RTX 2070 MSRP. Is this really "dirt cheap"? Do you expect video cards to never depreciate then?
More to the point, I don't remember the market being saturated with used video cards in way that could put a dent in retail prices. They always seem to sell at comparable performance/$ ratio to new cards. I'm genuinely curious if I missed any trends.
> I'm genuinely curious if I missed any trends.
Yes, you genuinely missed the trend. When BTC prices cratered awhile back, a lot of miners starting dumping their cards because they couldn't even break even on power consumption / mining costs.
eBay was flooded with cards.
Yes, you genuinely missed the trend. When BTC prices cratered awhile back, a lot of miners starting dumping their cards because they couldn't even break even on power consumption / mining costs.
eBay was flooded with cards.
Sorry, that's just not how it works.
What makes a card good at gaming (floating point operations per second) makes it good at mining, and vice versa. If the price/performance of the gaming variant is more favorable than the mining variant, why would any miner not buy the gaming one? They'll also have better resale value.
Real world equivalent: if Toyota made a special car for dog owners that costs 10% less but is useless for anything else, why would the dog owners bother with it?
Nvidia is trying to limit the hashing rate of the gaming variant, but it won't take long before someone figures out a way around it. There are billions at stake here. Also, the limitations only affect Ethereum hash rate, altcoin mining is untouched.
What makes a card good at gaming (floating point operations per second) makes it good at mining, and vice versa. If the price/performance of the gaming variant is more favorable than the mining variant, why would any miner not buy the gaming one? They'll also have better resale value.
Real world equivalent: if Toyota made a special car for dog owners that costs 10% less but is useless for anything else, why would the dog owners bother with it?
Nvidia is trying to limit the hashing rate of the gaming variant, but it won't take long before someone figures out a way around it. There are billions at stake here. Also, the limitations only affect Ethereum hash rate, altcoin mining is untouched.
Miners consider the resale value of GPUs since it is an inherently risky business venture. So you're right. They won't buy the mining cards.
Actually, what matters isn't FLOPs, but rather the memory bandwidth.
GPU mining is just 10% slower than the theoretical memory-bound maximum (if compute was infinitely fast) - https://www.vijaypradeep.com/blog/2017-04-28-ethereums-memor...
A more interesting thing for mining would be to hook up a (relatively) cheap ASIC, with cheaper voltage regulation, to the same high-bandwidth GDDR6X memory.
GPU mining is just 10% slower than the theoretical memory-bound maximum (if compute was infinitely fast) - https://www.vijaypradeep.com/blog/2017-04-28-ethereums-memor...
A more interesting thing for mining would be to hook up a (relatively) cheap ASIC, with cheaper voltage regulation, to the same high-bandwidth GDDR6X memory.
Maybe unrelated but is it really possible to automatically grab a graphics card with the use of scraping bots? I have been seeing a number of 24/7 livestreams on Twitch.tv that are literally tracking the latest stock status from major e-shopping platforms. I'm not sure though if they're doing this to grab one before anyone else or about its chances of working as intended. I'm really curious about it.
Yes. Take a look at https://twitter.com/SnailBotIO
Huh... Bots are making it difficult to purchase a gpu, so the solution is for everyone to bot. But presumably a retailer would block you if you constantly pinged their site, so the solution is to pay someone else $99/month to bot for you.
All of this seems so strange.
All of this seems so strange.
The lack of production makes it difficult to purchase a GPU. Since there aren't enough GPUs for everyone you will have to live with that and accept it or you engage in some game theoretic shenanigans and make someone else feel that way.
If there's money to be made, you can guarantee someone has a bot to capitalise on it. Doesn't matter if it's stocks, domain names, or ecommerce, there's a bot out there doing most of the work.
How much of world semiconductor fab capacity is cryptocurrency mining using?
EIP1559 and ETH2 will kill miners, hopefully, and I have no sympathy. Miners can go to hell.
Thanks, Elon.
By the way, doesn't Tesla use GPU cards in their cars for the autopilot functionality?
By the way, doesn't Tesla use GPU cards in their cars for the autopilot functionality?
This isn't Elon Musk's fault.
It doesn't make sense to use off-the-shelf graphics cards. They're not designed for the environment of cars, and aren't made to have that reliability. The medium older Tesla Autopilot uses Nvidia platform meant for self-driving. The newer Autopilot uses Tesla-designed SoCs that have fancy neural network accelerators.
Everything important in cars needs to be high-reliability. Between that, the form factor, added redundant cost, and the reduced integration of having a separate PCIe card instead of something integrated in an SoC, it doesn't make sense to use a graphics card.
It doesn't make sense to use off-the-shelf graphics cards. They're not designed for the environment of cars, and aren't made to have that reliability. The medium older Tesla Autopilot uses Nvidia platform meant for self-driving. The newer Autopilot uses Tesla-designed SoCs that have fancy neural network accelerators.
Everything important in cars needs to be high-reliability. Between that, the form factor, added redundant cost, and the reduced integration of having a separate PCIe card instead of something integrated in an SoC, it doesn't make sense to use a graphics card.
Tesla's future infotainment will have an AMD 6xxx GPU so that will take some supply away from gamers.
Tesla is famous for using off the shelf parts.
I have no idea why people speculate this kind of stuff so much, when a 5 second google search will find the answer for you https://www.zdnet.com/article/nvidia-takes-aim-at-teslas-cus...
So no, the claim that Elon is somehow responsible for the scaling/shortage of Nvidia gaming cards does not seem to hold up.
I dont even understand why the claim that Tesla uses off the shelf parts even matters when its simply verifiable either way.
So no, the claim that Elon is somehow responsible for the scaling/shortage of Nvidia gaming cards does not seem to hold up.
I dont even understand why the claim that Tesla uses off the shelf parts even matters when its simply verifiable either way.
I didn’t say they use off the shelf video cards. But they absolutely do use off the shelf parts.