WEBVTT 00:00:00.120 --> 00:00:08.800 we did it Reddit NVIDIA was so embarrassed by the specs of the RTX 480 00:00:05.879 --> 00:00:16.480 12 gig that they unlaunched it and now in its place we've got the RTX 470 TI 00:00:13.360 --> 00:00:20.199 it's it's the same GPU but with a 00:00:16.480 --> 00:00:23.359 different name oh but it got a $100 00:00:20.199 --> 00:00:25.160 price drop which unfortunately isn't 00:00:23.359 --> 00:00:30.720 quite the double that you might think it is while theoretically there will be 47 00:00:28.279 --> 00:00:36.600 ETI for $700 there are no first party Founders 00:00:33.360 --> 00:00:39.320 edition cards meaning that that MSRP is 00:00:36.600 --> 00:00:44.120 really just that a manufacturers suggested retail price and later we're 00:00:42.640 --> 00:00:48.640 going to get into why no one really follows NVIDIA's suggestions anymore the 00:00:47.000 --> 00:00:55.359 card that we were sent for review for example is lightly overclocked and costs 00:00:52.719 --> 00:01:00.440 $850 meaning that I kind of have to evaluate this as a 40802 gig with a name 00:00:59.079 --> 00:01:05.400 change and a 5.5% 00:01:02.120 --> 00:01:08.640 discount this thing better be 00:01:05.400 --> 00:01:11.040 amazing amazing like our sponsor Ridge 00:01:08.640 --> 00:01:15.400 wallet Ridge wallet has redefined the traditional wallet with its compact 00:01:12.720 --> 00:01:20.479 frame and RFID blocking plates keep your wallet bulge down and use our offer code 00:01:17.880 --> 00:01:23.479 Linus to save 10% and get free worldwide shipping 00:01:30.799 --> 00:01:39.439 right out of the gate the 4070 TI is in trouble with specs that I might have 00:01:35.079 --> 00:01:41.399 imagined on a 4070 or even a 4060 super 00:01:39.439 --> 00:01:48.840 that puts its total bandwidth somewhere in between the RTX 3070 and 370 ti so 00:01:46.200 --> 00:01:54.320 its only chance is if its other specs can pick up the slack fortunately on 00:01:51.240 --> 00:01:56.920 paper the 470 TI's core performance 00:01:54.320 --> 00:02:01.079 should contribute to a sizable uplift it has 25% more Cuda course than its 00:01:59.039 --> 00:02:04.920 predecessor and they're clocked substantially higher that's a good sign 00:02:03.320 --> 00:02:09.440 even before the architectural improvements thanks to its adal love La 00:02:06.840 --> 00:02:14.640 cores this means improved Ray tracing and tensor cores and Shader execution 00:02:12.120 --> 00:02:20.360 reordering which optimizes the order of the data sent to the ray tracing cores 00:02:17.080 --> 00:02:23.160 NVIDIA called this as big an innovation 00:02:20.360 --> 00:02:28.160 for gpus as outof order execution was for CPUs though if our recent poll is 00:02:26.400 --> 00:02:32.000 any indication most of you won't be making use of it anytime soon of course 00:02:30.560 --> 00:02:37.560 how would you given the ongoing popularity of the 10 series gpus which 00:02:34.400 --> 00:02:40.519 are turning 7 years old this year 00:02:37.560 --> 00:02:46.239 NVIDIA's marketing push for the 470 TI is that it makes for a great upgrade 00:02:42.360 --> 00:02:48.480 from 10 and 20 series gpus which okay 00:02:46.239 --> 00:02:53.959 NVIDIA let's play along with that for a moment compared to the GTX 1080 and 1080 00:02:51.360 --> 00:02:58.519 TI at 4K we are looking at a staggering two to three times Improvement in Shadow 00:02:56.080 --> 00:03:03.720 of the Tomb Raider taking us from sub 60 FPS averages to over a 100 Modern 00:03:01.319 --> 00:03:09.000 Warfare 2 is even more impressive at up to 4 and 1 half times the performance 00:03:06.159 --> 00:03:14.640 we're talking cinematic to playable just like that 1440p does give our 10 series 00:03:12.400 --> 00:03:18.400 cards a better chance but we're still looking at two to four times the 00:03:16.480 --> 00:03:23.080 performance in both of these games making this truly an incredible upgrade 00:03:20.560 --> 00:03:30.480 over the 10 series GP no no no no this is stupid I don't need to spend $850 to 00:03:26.720 --> 00:03:33.280 upgrade a 7-year-old card Ah that's 00:03:30.480 --> 00:03:38.360 better to see how it really competes we tested the RTX 470 TI not against what 00:03:36.159 --> 00:03:43.640 NVIDIA wants but against a truly intimidating stack of gpus as an FYI 00:03:41.720 --> 00:03:48.319 even though our review was so recent we sanity checked our RX 7000 series GPU 00:03:46.239 --> 00:03:52.000 results since driver updates have actually changed their performance 00:03:49.799 --> 00:03:55.560 characteristics since launch we've also revalidated any of the numbers that 00:03:53.560 --> 00:04:00.040 we've reused and we'll talk a bit more about our plans for our GPU testing 00:03:57.400 --> 00:04:04.560 methodology in a future video even with the full lineup shadow of the Tomb 00:04:01.519 --> 00:04:07.959 Raider has the 47 ETI within about 8% of 00:04:04.560 --> 00:04:09.519 the RTX 3090 TI which is a fairly 00:04:07.959 --> 00:04:15.200 impressive achievement considering that it is nominally a 70 series GPU what's 00:04:13.400 --> 00:04:23.520 more impressive though is that it gets handily beat by the RX 7900 XT yes yes 00:04:19.759 --> 00:04:26.160 I'm aware that that GPU costs $50 more 00:04:23.520 --> 00:04:32.759 but it's the beginning of a pattern that repeats itself first in F1 2022 where 00:04:29.600 --> 00:04:35.160 the the 470 TI gets stomped well beyond 00:04:32.759 --> 00:04:40.400 what that price difference would suggest starting the 470 TI off on pretty Rocky 00:04:37.880 --> 00:04:45.240 ground Hitman 3 continues this floundering performance with frame rates 00:04:42.120 --> 00:04:48.479 nearly on par with the 3090 TI but well 00:04:45.240 --> 00:04:50.400 off of AMD and the RTX 480 that it used 00:04:48.479 --> 00:04:54.360 to share a name with and it's really more of the same story with Red Dead 00:04:52.000 --> 00:04:59.880 Redemption 2 Assassin's Creed valala Modern Warfare 2 and cyberpunk though 00:04:57.600 --> 00:05:04.639 cyberpunk is more of a beat down thing to that game's memory hungry nature we 00:05:01.960 --> 00:05:09.280 think thankfully for NVIDIA Forza Horizon 5 gives the 470 TI some 00:05:07.000 --> 00:05:15.880 breathing room as it meets or beats the 7900 XT and even beats the 3090 TI 00:05:13.160 --> 00:05:22.080 though it's still a good 133% off of the real 4080 it's a really good thing that 00:05:19.319 --> 00:05:27.759 they changed that naming for 4K gaming then the RTX 4070 TI ends up firmly 00:05:24.600 --> 00:05:30.560 behind both of AMD's Radeon 7000 series 00:05:27.759 --> 00:05:35.199 and everything from NVIDIA from the 3090 TI and up which seems to suggest that 00:05:32.919 --> 00:05:39.880 NVIDIA basically looked at 3090 TI pricing on eBay and said hm about like 00:05:38.120 --> 00:05:46.319 that sounds good maybe things will look a bit better at 1440p and they kind of do now that 00:05:44.400 --> 00:05:51.840 memory bandwidth is less of an issue shadow of the Tomb Raider sees the 470 00:05:48.319 --> 00:05:54.240 TI pull ahead of the 390 TI and close 00:05:51.840 --> 00:05:59.680 the gap on its bigger siblings though it still falls behind AMD if only slightly 00:05:57.240 --> 00:06:04.000 Hitman sees the 47 ETI backsliding a little in relation to the 7900 XT while 00:06:02.160 --> 00:06:09.680 maintaining its performance improvement over the 3090 TI but this doesn't carry 00:06:06.840 --> 00:06:14.120 over into cyberpunk Modern Warfare 2 and Assassin's Creed valhala where we're 00:06:11.520 --> 00:06:19.120 looking at pretty much the same relative performance as our 4K tests Forza 00:06:17.280 --> 00:06:24.440 however picks up spectacularly with the 47 ETI sitting firmly in third place 00:06:22.240 --> 00:06:30.360 contributing to a generally Rosier picture at 1440p overall with roughly 00:06:27.560 --> 00:06:34.960 equal performance to a 3090 TI and a small enough Gap from the 7900 XT it 00:06:33.160 --> 00:06:41.240 looks almost compelling in this overpriced GPU hellscape and that's 00:06:37.919 --> 00:06:44.400 before we turn on Ray tracing which 00:06:41.240 --> 00:06:46.919 works fine right I mean we knew it would 00:06:44.400 --> 00:06:51.639 be superior to the 7900 XT since that's a stronghold for NVIDIA at this point 00:06:49.960 --> 00:06:57.879 but what was surprising is that it wasn't by as much as we expected I was 00:06:54.759 --> 00:07:01.479 shocked to see the 7900 XTX actually 00:06:57.879 --> 00:07:03.440 outperform it at 4K in everything except 00:07:01.479 --> 00:07:09.400 for cyberpunk where the rate tracing course seemed to be doing a better job 00:07:05.879 --> 00:07:11.800 potentially thanks to SC at 1440p things 00:07:09.400 --> 00:07:16.520 again get a bit better for the 470 TI with only a mild loss against the 7900 00:07:14.120 --> 00:07:20.680 XTX in Shadow of the Tomb Raider and overall better performance in the rest 00:07:18.080 --> 00:07:25.599 of the suite cyberpunk hits AMD even harder here but that doesn't help the 00:07:22.759 --> 00:07:29.960 470 TI against its own brothers who pull away significantly that weak memory 00:07:28.039 --> 00:07:35.919 bandwidth seems to be really holding it back here interestingly when we turned 00:07:32.680 --> 00:07:37.759 on dlss 3.0 to test if the 470 TI's 00:07:35.919 --> 00:07:41.520 diminished tensor core count would prevent it from keeping up it did just 00:07:39.879 --> 00:07:46.479 fine in cyberpunk with a similar performance uplift to the 4080 and the 00:07:43.879 --> 00:07:49.479 4090 but then we did not see the same thing in 00:07:47.360 --> 00:07:53.479 f-122 we tried a bunch of different settings here and nothing we did change 00:07:51.360 --> 00:07:57.440 the outcome at all we think this could be a driver issue considering that 00:07:55.199 --> 00:08:00.440 cyberpunk of all games is fine so we've reached out to NVIDIA about it to see 00:07:58.919 --> 00:08:06.319 what they have to say say if they respond in time for this video we'll have their response on screen right now 00:08:04.120 --> 00:08:10.199 um and I'll just use this time to tell you all about how delicious water tastes 00:08:08.199 --> 00:08:16.680 from your LTD store.com water bottle it's great in rate tracing then the 470 00:08:13.039 --> 00:08:19.280 TI is looking a lot like an RTX 39 DTI 00:08:16.680 --> 00:08:23.479 when we look at the overall picture and as expected rate tracing performance for 00:08:21.440 --> 00:08:28.440 the price is superior to anything from team red unfortunately for NVIDIA the 00:08:26.479 --> 00:08:35.479 vast majority of our viewers have never once enabled r retracing and under 15% 00:08:31.960 --> 00:08:37.479 of you actively use it so at least for 00:08:35.479 --> 00:08:41.959 you guys it might not be the trump card that they were hoping it would be what 00:08:39.839 --> 00:08:46.120 might be though is productivity because remember as much as we like to talk 00:08:43.360 --> 00:08:51.000 about games these gpus for a lot of people end up used for work too starting 00:08:49.080 --> 00:08:57.600 with NVIDIA's current Ace in theole blender the 470 TI manages a solid 43% 00:08:55.240 --> 00:09:03.360 improvement over its predecessor but falls behind the RTX 30 390 TI and 00:09:00.720 --> 00:09:07.200 especially the RTX 4080 with performance against the latter being a mostly linear 00:09:05.480 --> 00:09:11.399 relationship with the difference in Ray tracing core count things pick up a 00:09:09.320 --> 00:09:16.399 little with proon with the video editing Suite giving the 470 TI very close 00:09:13.959 --> 00:09:20.600 performance against the 39 DTI though still slightly behind both radon 7000 00:09:18.680 --> 00:09:24.800 series cards photo editing is interesting however most of the results 00:09:22.680 --> 00:09:29.079 are within a couple of percentage points which seems to suggest that any modern 00:09:26.600 --> 00:09:33.000 GPU will be sufficient but this doesn't tell the whole story as more machine 00:09:31.399 --> 00:09:37.360 learning effects and filters trickle into your workflow you can expect to see 00:09:35.079 --> 00:09:42.600 these numbers change and it could be a pretty solid Advantage for NVIDIA Da 00:09:40.160 --> 00:09:46.160 Vinci resolve gives the 470 TI and Bank encoders a run for their money with what 00:09:44.600 --> 00:09:50.320 looks to be a memory bandwidth bottleneck slowing it down considerably 00:09:48.160 --> 00:09:53.920 next to its bigger siblings it manages to be a little bit faster than its 00:09:51.680 --> 00:09:58.760 bandwidth difference would suggest but this unfortunately means that out of our 00:09:55.880 --> 00:10:05.040 test Suite it only really beats the RTX 36 60 in export speed topaz AI though is 00:10:02.800 --> 00:10:09.320 a better story for the 470 TI where its enhanced core architecture makes shorter 00:10:06.839 --> 00:10:14.839 work of this GP GPU workload than even the RTX 390 TI though AMD is the one who 00:10:12.880 --> 00:10:20.160 ends up stealing the show here with even the last gen 6900 XT putting up 00:10:17.360 --> 00:10:25.160 comparable numbers the spec Suites are another strong suit for NVIDIA ever 00:10:22.000 --> 00:10:27.600 since the 20 series and the RTX 470 TI 00:10:25.160 --> 00:10:32.120 trades blows with the 390 TI in a lot of these tests which is a good thing 00:10:30.279 --> 00:10:37.920 unfortunately though there are cases like 3ds Max and solid works that give 00:10:34.880 --> 00:10:40.200 the 470 TI some trouble likely again 00:10:37.920 --> 00:10:44.880 thanks to its relative shortage of cores and limited memory bandwidth however 00:10:42.720 --> 00:10:49.720 energy and medical end up being standout wins for the 470 TI and in all cases 00:10:47.680 --> 00:10:55.680 it's substantially faster than the RTX 380 let alone the 370 TI that ignores 00:10:53.600 --> 00:11:01.079 AMD of course though whose cards all spank it across the board with the 00:10:57.320 --> 00:11:02.760 exception of 3ds Max Seaman NX as usual 00:11:01.079 --> 00:11:06.279 will be ignored in our final performance Tellies since this version is old enough 00:11:04.680 --> 00:11:10.920 to not have proper support for NVIDIA gpus but we're putting the data in here 00:11:08.639 --> 00:11:16.519 in case you're interested finally the 470 TI outperforms the RTX 390 TI in 00:11:14.279 --> 00:11:21.079 every part of spec workstation although as with vew perf AMD maintains big wins 00:11:19.200 --> 00:11:25.760 over all of NVIDIA's cards across most of the suite with the exceptions of 00:11:22.760 --> 00:11:28.120 median entertainment and GPU compute so 00:11:25.760 --> 00:11:33.399 much for that stronghold overall performance looks like a 3090 TI but at 00:11:30.720 --> 00:11:37.399 a lower cost and hopefully a lower power draw but it really does depend on what 00:11:35.440 --> 00:11:42.240 you're doing if you're into 3D rendering or GPU compute you're going to get a lot 00:11:39.519 --> 00:11:46.600 more bang out of a 4070 TI than the 3090 TI which could make it an attractive 00:11:44.200 --> 00:11:51.079 option for the price and hopefully the power draw if you're into video editing 00:11:48.959 --> 00:11:56.079 however it's not a worthy upgrade over even the 3070 TI and you might want to 00:11:53.600 --> 00:12:01.000 consider a 7,000 series Radeon instead if you need a new GPU today preferably 00:11:58.440 --> 00:12:07.079 one with Hardware av1 encoding support so if we're looking at an RTX 390 or 390 00:12:04.320 --> 00:12:12.200 TI equivalent here surely the 470 TI should be more energy efficient too well 00:12:09.600 --> 00:12:16.519 in MSI combuster it pulled the lowest out of not only the 40 series family but 00:12:14.600 --> 00:12:21.320 also when compared to AMD's price competitors hovering at around 280 Watts 00:12:19.079 --> 00:12:27.320 most of the time and never breaking past its 285 watt rating when we switch to a 00:12:24.440 --> 00:12:31.320 more real world test f-122 the story stays pretty much the same this time 00:12:29.199 --> 00:12:36.240 with the card hovering at around 275 Watts that is well within spec even 00:12:33.720 --> 00:12:41.600 though our card is a factory overclocked model it's worth noting by the way guys 00:12:38.600 --> 00:12:43.399 that in our Radeon RX 7900 series review 00:12:41.600 --> 00:12:47.480 we made a mistake when we changed the way that we collected our data and we 00:12:45.160 --> 00:12:52.279 initially showed total Graphics power and total board power in the same chart 00:12:50.040 --> 00:12:56.040 those measurements are not comparable so this time we are strictly using total 00:12:54.120 --> 00:12:59.800 board power and in the future we're planning to use external equipment for 00:12:57.720 --> 00:13:04.360 better accuracy than board sensor or NVIDIA's pcap stay tuned for that 00:13:02.720 --> 00:13:08.839 when we zoom in on our power consumption results for fortza Horizon 5 at 1440p 00:13:07.240 --> 00:13:14.000 the power consumption without a frame rate cap is pretty much in line with the 00:13:10.880 --> 00:13:16.120 RTX 480 which actually is not a great 00:13:14.000 --> 00:13:21.560 thing considering that it ran about 5 to 10 FPS slower however when we cap the 00:13:19.240 --> 00:13:26.320 frame rate to 100 it actually lines up so perfectly I almost thought the graph 00:13:23.440 --> 00:13:30.920 only had three lines AMD's cards by comparison ran about 30 to 50 Watts 00:13:28.720 --> 00:13:37.079 higher most of the time that works out to about 17 watts per frame less than 00:13:33.880 --> 00:13:40.120 the radon 7900 XT when it's uncapped and 00:13:37.079 --> 00:13:44.000 a good 35 Watts when capped not a bad 00:13:40.120 --> 00:13:45.519 efficiency story and no high idle power 00:13:44.000 --> 00:13:50.880 consumption bugs when connected to different monitors like we saw with 00:13:47.440 --> 00:13:52.519 AMD's 7000 series now thermals are going 00:13:50.880 --> 00:13:58.040 to be a difficult conversation since there isn't a like a reference or a 00:13:55.079 --> 00:14:02.759 Founders edition of the RTX 470 TI with a standard cooler for us to test with 00:14:01.079 --> 00:14:07.399 that in mind then take these results with a grain of salt starting with 00:14:04.800 --> 00:14:12.959 combuster it's not looking great for our tough OC edition of the 470 TI which 00:14:10.160 --> 00:14:17.759 quickly ramps up past 80° and holds there throughout our run this is well 00:14:15.279 --> 00:14:23.839 above the RTX 480 with its Founders cooler and More in line with the 490 00:14:20.759 --> 00:14:26.560 f-122 pushes the 470 TI even higher 00:14:23.839 --> 00:14:30.800 relative to the 490 sticking again to around the 80° Mark to be clear this 00:14:29.240 --> 00:14:35.600 isn't the end of the world as long as the core clocks are high and stable at 00:14:33.079 --> 00:14:40.360 these temperatures and high they probably will be I suspect that the only 00:14:38.240 --> 00:14:44.199 470 TI that you will find readily available at launch will be Factory 00:14:41.959 --> 00:14:48.880 overclocked like ours which managed among the highest clocks that we've ever 00:14:45.959 --> 00:14:54.040 seen on a GPU even though it can't maintain full boosting combuster and has 00:14:51.279 --> 00:14:59.040 a little bit more wobble than the RTX 480 it's worth saying again though that 00:14:56.759 --> 00:15:05.560 your mileage will vary depending on a given cards cooling setup and vbios 00:15:02.079 --> 00:15:07.360 f-122 is a more realistic load and sees 00:15:05.560 --> 00:15:12.720 that variation calm down a bit with the 470 TI with it regularly hitting our 00:15:09.959 --> 00:15:17.079 Factory overclocked cards 2.7 GHz boost clock but again your mileage may vary 00:15:15.199 --> 00:15:21.040 once the first summer heat wave strikes because as you guys saw we're flying 00:15:19.079 --> 00:15:26.040 pretty close to the Sun on our thermals and that's in a temperature controlled 00:15:23.279 --> 00:15:31.079 room as the saying goes there's no such thing as a bad product only a bad price 00:15:28.720 --> 00:15:38.000 so so it's time to talk about that originally announced at $900 as the RTX 00:15:34.480 --> 00:15:40.800 4802 gig the current starting price now 00:15:38.000 --> 00:15:48.920 that it is the 47 ETI is $800 that's $100 less but not only is 00:15:45.199 --> 00:15:51.959 that $200 higher than the RTX 370 TI 00:15:48.920 --> 00:15:54.600 MSRP was at launch that price only 00:15:51.959 --> 00:16:00.360 barely puts it in a competitive position against the Radeon RX 7900 XT in typical 00:15:57.600 --> 00:16:05.399 raster gaming and it's not even guaranteed to net you 60 FPS if you do 00:16:02.920 --> 00:16:10.560 turn on rate tracing making some flavor of dlss a necessity unless you want to 00:16:07.680 --> 00:16:17.440 dial back the settings on an $850 card it's still a lot For What by 00:16:14.199 --> 00:16:21.279 its name should be a high mid-range GPU 00:16:17.440 --> 00:16:24.079 not a step down Enthusiast class one so 00:16:21.279 --> 00:16:30.720 how does NVIDIA justify its astronomical price tag for a 70 series GPU that as we 00:16:27.839 --> 00:16:35.959 said before really seems more like a 60 super to put it bluntly they don't and 00:16:34.319 --> 00:16:40.319 as far as they're concerned they shouldn't have to I mean you think they 00:16:38.160 --> 00:16:45.600 renamed the RTX 470 TI out of the goodness of their hearts and it was a 00:16:41.800 --> 00:16:47.720 big win no up until literally just last 00:16:45.600 --> 00:16:53.240 week it was still up in the air whether NVIDIA would drop the price at all 00:16:50.560 --> 00:16:58.600 compared to the announced $900 price for the RTX 4802 gig it took their business 00:16:56.319 --> 00:17:03.199 partners begging and pleading with them to make that happen and that was in 00:17:00.759 --> 00:17:09.559 spite of the reportedly atrocious sales figures for the RTX 480 and the radon 00:17:06.520 --> 00:17:12.720 7900 xt's existence at that very same 00:17:09.559 --> 00:17:15.160 price point it's good they yielded but 00:17:12.720 --> 00:17:18.480 they still have more work to do Invidia reportedly offered Partners some 00:17:16.760 --> 00:17:21.959 compensation for the work involved in the rebranding but at this point we 00:17:20.600 --> 00:17:27.600 haven't heard confirmation that they intend to do the same for this new 00:17:24.559 --> 00:17:30.080 MSRP that means that if this chart 00:17:27.600 --> 00:17:35.600 showing the meager scraps of margin that NVIDIA leads for its Partners is to be 00:17:31.960 --> 00:17:38.240 believed any MSRP cards that you see are 00:17:35.600 --> 00:17:43.160 going to be very limited in stock and essentially just for show so that media 00:17:41.000 --> 00:17:48.080 like us will be suckers and talk about how this card is$ 00:17:45.000 --> 00:17:49.480 799 board makers like any other business 00:17:48.080 --> 00:17:55.159 are not going to go out of their way to lose money if NVIDIA hasn't adjusted the 00:17:51.559 --> 00:17:58.840 pricing ASUS's top end stricks 470 TI 00:17:55.159 --> 00:18:01.400 then is just $150 less than a 480 00:17:58.840 --> 00:18:06.440 Founders Edition making even that card look good by comparison reports from 00:18:03.799 --> 00:18:10.159 ASUS suggest that the tough OC will be the most plentiful skew but from 00:18:08.799 --> 00:18:14.000 conversations we've had with Memory Express here in Canada that's actually 00:18:12.000 --> 00:18:19.280 been the opposite for the rest of the 40 series lineup where almost no tough 00:18:16.240 --> 00:18:21.679 cards exist so what it looks like is 00:18:19.280 --> 00:18:26.120 NVIDIA is pointing at the price saying but it can't be expensive we set it at 00:18:23.120 --> 00:18:28.039 $799 see but the partners have 00:18:26.120 --> 00:18:30.640 absolutely no way of achieving that in the real world 00:18:29.280 --> 00:18:34.520 I'm having a hard time figuring out NVIDIA's game here to be honest with you 00:18:32.679 --> 00:18:39.799 the GPU Market has reportedly hit a 20year sales low thanks to a combination 00:18:37.000 --> 00:18:44.559 of high prices the mining crash and extenuating economic circumstances and 00:18:42.360 --> 00:18:50.840 yet NVIDIA seems determined to pour water on the fire expecting a huge 00:18:47.320 --> 00:18:53.559 premium even on products in the high SL 00:18:50.840 --> 00:18:57.760 mid tier of their product stag I mean don't forget as much as we focus on 00:18:55.480 --> 00:19:03.200 desktop gpus and PC gaming on this channel the real competition for a card 00:19:00.320 --> 00:19:08.120 like this could easily be an Xbox or a PlayStation 5 either of which would 00:19:05.679 --> 00:19:12.760 frankly be a much more compelling value to the average gamer and I feel like 00:19:10.480 --> 00:19:18.760 NVIDIA if they don't turn things around is at risk of losing PC gaming customers 00:19:15.960 --> 00:19:23.919 long term to the console side it's starting to almost look like a a 00:19:20.520 --> 00:19:25.760 microsof Ian good bad good cycle that 00:19:23.919 --> 00:19:31.000 they've been on for the last few years here 10 series was great 20 series was a 00:19:28.720 --> 00:19:36.360 that fart 30 series kickstarted a whole new generation of PC gamers in spite of 00:19:33.559 --> 00:19:40.679 the pandemic price hikes and as product development Cycles run for longer and 00:19:38.320 --> 00:19:46.000 longer with each new generation the impact of this kind of please people 50% 00:19:43.600 --> 00:19:50.039 of the time piss them off 50% of the time starts to become more dramatic and 00:19:48.400 --> 00:19:54.360 NVIDIA clearly hasn't learned their lesson yet I mean apple and Tesla have 00:19:52.679 --> 00:19:58.919 proven that people will still buy your product even if you treat them badly but 00:19:56.679 --> 00:20:03.640 that only holds true if you have the absolute best products on the market it 00:20:01.000 --> 00:20:10.679 doesn't build loyalty so this strategy around the 4070 TI and especially the 00:20:06.640 --> 00:20:13.000 480 clearly isn't it for the long term 00:20:10.679 --> 00:20:19.200 it is time for NVIDIA to focus on squeezing out margins less and 00:20:15.559 --> 00:20:22.080 delighting customers more now AMD Is Not 00:20:19.200 --> 00:20:28.080 Innocent here to be clear while the RX 7900 series is a better value than the 00:20:24.919 --> 00:20:30.520 4080 the 4070 TI is content to price 00:20:28.080 --> 00:20:35.840 itself right in line with its performance against the 7900 XT a card 00:20:33.480 --> 00:20:41.280 that also should probably be more like $700 considering its 80 class 00:20:38.559 --> 00:20:45.440 performance level NVIDIA enabled AMD then to charge more themselves through 00:20:43.039 --> 00:20:50.679 their own astronomical pricing and AMD is in turn enabling NVIDIA to normalize 00:20:47.960 --> 00:20:55.960 those prices by providing a comparably fair price on this step down product 00:20:53.400 --> 00:21:00.320 which NVIDIA can then compete with as they both run down the stack as long as 00:20:58.360 --> 00:21:04.080 this continues and as long as NVIDIA keeps trying to kill Moore's law in the 00:21:02.080 --> 00:21:08.159 collective Consciousness things are never going to change nowhere is this 00:21:06.600 --> 00:21:13.960 attitude more apparent than NVIDIA's positioning for the RTX 470 TI not as 00:21:11.320 --> 00:21:22.120 competition for AMD or even against a 30 series card but as an upgrade from 20 00:21:16.960 --> 00:21:24.240 series and 10 series gpus and I mean yes 00:21:22.120 --> 00:21:29.640 it is an upgrade but it would also be an upgrade over a toaster or a lital potato 00:21:27.840 --> 00:21:34.360 especially if that potato is 7 years old I mean even an arc GPU would be an 00:21:31.880 --> 00:21:39.760 upgrade over a 10 series most of the time so like what's your point 00:21:36.880 --> 00:21:44.679 NVIDIA final word then it's a good product at a bad price from a company 00:21:42.559 --> 00:21:50.320 that is failing more and more to hide its ugly nature you're going to buy it 00:21:47.520 --> 00:21:54.159 you always do and you know what you'll probably be happy with it but I don't 00:21:52.200 --> 00:21:58.720 have to be happy about that what I am happy to tell you about is our sponsor 00:21:56.200 --> 00:22:02.520 Jacker jackary makes solar ready portable power stations designed to 00:22:00.400 --> 00:22:07.360 improve outdoor Life by providing power Outdoors whenever and wherever you need 00:22:05.039 --> 00:22:12.039 it before they used to use maple syrup for that their new solar generator 1000 00:22:09.880 --> 00:22:16.320 Pro is their fastest solar and wall recharging generator yet boasting three 00:22:14.159 --> 00:22:22.240 times faster charging than the normal sg1000 it consists of a jackary Explorer 00:22:19.159 --> 00:22:24.240 1000 Pro portable power station and 80 W 00:22:22.240 --> 00:22:28.360 solar panels plug it into the wall and get a full charge in under 2 hours and 00:22:26.320 --> 00:22:32.320 deliver up to 100 watts of power thanks to to the new 100 wat power delivery 00:22:30.120 --> 00:22:36.720 ports so check out the new jackary solar generator 1000 pro at the link below if 00:22:35.240 --> 00:22:41.240 you guys enjoyed this video go check out our review of the radon 7000 series for 00:22:39.120 --> 00:22:48.480 a little more on what NVIDIA is up against this generation AMD seems to be 00:22:44.159 --> 00:22:52.440 catching up slowly but surely even if um 00:22:48.480 --> 00:22:52.440 they too cost a fortune