[jakeinspace]

Why should a top-of-the-line GPU cost similarly? GPUs in the late 90s were designed by tiny teams, with hardly anything spent on drivers, using fabrication processes which are like paper and glue compared to today’s TSMC processes. Just because an RTX 4090 is also top-of-the-line doesn’t mean there’s an equivalency between it and a Voodoo2, because the effort required is exponentially higher.

In 1910, the most expensive comercially available passenger automobile in the US was arguably produced by Lozier, and would be around $250k today inflation-adjusted. But these days, super cars and hyper cars can go well into the millions of dollars. There is no sense comparing the top 1910 automobile market segment to the top segment in 2023. Likewise, the 1998 GPU market just does not map to that of 2023.

[pie420]

Actually, those million dollar cars aren't really cars, they're collectibles. the real top of the line cars today are probably either a Porsche GT2 RS, an Aventador SVJ, or Cullinan if you only want comfort. And all of those only run about $300k-$500k

[nullindividual]

PC parts were generally quite expensive in the 90s. Most prices have fallen over time for all components when taking inflation into the equation (as well as absolute dollars, see storage/RAM), except GPUs.

> Intel’s popular 33 Mhz 486 CPU cost PC makers $1,056 in 1990 in quantities of 1,000.[0]

Let's not make this into a car comparison thread -- they're never valid comparisons.

[0] https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-12-23-fi-4940-s...