#3 player just released something that compares well with price/performace ratio compared to #1 player's release from a year and a half ago... yep

▲

tinco 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

No. The A1000 was well over $500 last year. This is the #3 player coming out with a card that's a better deal than what the #1 player currently has to offer.

I don't get why there's people trying to twist this story or come up with strawmen like the A2000 or even the RTX5000 series. Intel's coming into this market competitively, which as far as I know is a first, and it's also impressive.

Coming into the gaming GPU market had always been too ambitious a goal for Intel, they should have started with competing in the professional GPU market. It's well known that Nvidia and AMD have always been price gouging this market so it's fairly easy to enter it competitively.

If they can enter this market successfully and then work their way up on the food chain then that seems like good way to recover from their initial fiasco.

▲

colechristensen 3 days ago | parent [-]

NVIDIA is looking for profit, Intel is looking for market share, the pricing reflects this. Of course your product looks favorable to something released April 2024 when you're cutting pricing to get more attention.

	▲	apwell23 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		helps to be funded by govt that doesn't care about profits

▲

blagie 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well, no. It doesn't. The comparison is to the A1000.

Toss in a 5060 Ti into the compare table, and we're in an entirely different playing field.

There are reasons to buy the workstation NVidia cards over the consumer ones, but those mostly go away when looking at something like the new Intel. Unless one is in an exceptionally power-constrained environment, yet has room for a full-sized card (not SFF or laptop), I can't see a time the B50 would even be in the running against a 5060 Ti, 4060 Ti, or even 3060 Ti.

▲

magicalhippo 4 days ago | parent [-]

> There are reasons to buy the workstation NVidia cards over the consumer ones

I seem to recall certain esoteric OpenGL things like lines being fast was a NVIDIA marketing differentiator, as only certain CAD packages or similar cared about that. Is this still the case, or has that software segment moved on now?

	▲	blagie 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I don't know the full set of differentiators. For me (not quite at the A1000 level, but just above -- still in the prosumer price range), a major one is ECC. Thermals and size are a bit better too, but I don't see that as $500 better. I actually don't see (m)any meaningful reasons to step up to an Ax000 series if you don't need ECC, but I'd love to hear otherwise.

▲

KeplerBoy 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"release from a year and a half ago", that's technically true but a really generous assessment of the situation.

We could just as well compare it to the slightly more capable RTX A2000, which was released more than 4 years ago. Either way, Intel is competing with the EoL Ampere architecture.

▲

tossandthrow 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

... At a current day cheaper price.

There are huge markets that does not care about SOTA performance metrics but needs to get a job done.