142
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024
142 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
8668 readers
546 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because Intel is in a position where they would need to increase their market share first and foremost. They would not have any sort of benefit from offering overpriced GPUs that no one wants to buy.
So they're either in the "no one wants to buy" situation, with a product that doesn't quite measure up and a lower price is the incentive to buy, or they reach parity with AMD, and bring the price up to match as well.
Maybe there is a window in between where they're sacrificing some profit to grow their market share, and regular customers benefit, but I have 0 faith in this economic system.