In case you didn't notice, the 2020s have been tough for the PC community. The GPU pricing crisis that started in 2020 gave rise to the permanent inflation we suffer from today. PC hardware companies forgot the budget segment existed, resorted to shady tactics to offer less for more money, and got in bed with AI instead of working on real generational gains. The era of paper launches and fake MSRPs became all too real, and components across the board started coming out unfinished. There was legitimate outrage, but I feel we let all of this slide way easier than we should have.

The erosion of the budget segment

Who agreed to this?

It's not like we don't have "budget" components right now, but the value for money that we used to get has disappeared almost overnight. There was a time when $200 GPUs and $150 CPUs were all you needed to build a killer gaming PC. I remember enjoying my GTX 1660 Ti PC for over three years before I even thought about upgrading anything. In 2025, however, budget GPUs don't mean the same thing anymore.

GPU companies have conveniently stretched the definition of budget graphics cards, offering consumers far less value than just a few years ago. The $250 RTX 5050 is a joke, AMD's $300 RX 9060 XT looks better only by comparison, and true budget CPUs stopped being a thing long ago. It seems as if everyone silently agreed to push budget buyers out of the market. Sure, the used market is an option, but don't we deserve new budget products that aren't terrible?

Fake "HDR" monitors

Stricter standards can't come soon enough

HDR on gaming monitors has been a messy subject ever since it became popular. While you might find manufacturers slap "HDR" on almost every model, there are hardly any true HDR monitors in the affordable segment. Forget it if you want a decent HDR experience on a sub-$500 monitor from a reputable brand. Even the models sporting a DisplayHDR 400 certification can't display a worthwhile HDR image — without local dimming and a good color gamut, the certification doesn't mean anything.

And if you want a DisplayHDR 1000 monitor, you'll have to shell out a grand or more. OLED and QD-OLED monitors offer a decent HDR experience, but the $500–$1000 models only come with a DisplayHDR 400 rating. Whatever you buy, it feels like you're getting shortchanged in the name of HDR. Companies are simply slapping a label on their monitors to extract more money from you. It's high time stricter HDR standards were forced on manufacturers — I'm hoping DisplayHDR 1.2 gets more traction soon.

Paper launches and fictitious MSRPs

No one seems to be complaining enough

PC components being out of stock in the initial launch window isn't a 2020s thing, but it sure seems this decade is particularly unlucky. Even years removed from the pandemic struggles, we're still seeing paper launches for almost every single CPU and GPU launch. Even when components are in stock, they're significantly inflated over the MSRP, making the "suggested price" feel nothing more than a placeholder.

This happened with the RTX 40 series GPUs, and it happened again with the RTX 50 series GPUs. Even AMD's RX 9000 series wasn't immune to it, and on the CPU side, the much-awaited Ryzen 7 9800X3D stayed out of stock for weeks after its launch. The string of paper launches doesn't seem to be ending anytime soon, and we might have to become okay with this trend. MSRPs being meaningless, scalpers having a field day after every launch, and availability feeling like a luxury are probably the new normal.

Obsession with AI-powered "gains"

"We'll fix it in post"

It's hard to blame GPU companies for dabbling in AI-powered performance gains when it's the flavor of the season. However, AI-generated frames replacing raw generational gains was never in our bingo cards for this generation. Nvidia introduced frame generation with its RTX 40 series GPUs, and doubled down on it (literally) with the RTX 50 series and DLSS 4. AMD and Intel followed suit, and frame generation was forced upon us.

Frame generation, unlike upscaling, is a problematic tool, since it doesn't enhance the real responsiveness of a game. Sure, the FPS counter goes up, and you see a smoother image, but it doesn't "feel" more responsive, as the latency penalties are huge. Frame generation also lowers the base framerate because the technology is intensive on the GPU. If your base FPS isn't already high, frame generation doesn't produce worthwhile results.

Most gamers have accepted these AI-generated frames as normal, but the technology needs a lot of work before it can be applied universally. And we shouldn't have to use such crutches to show current-gen products in a favorable light against older-gen counterparts.

Abysmal QA standards

What's even going on?

PC hardware used to suffer from manufacturing flaws and bugs before, but the last few years have been hilariously unreliable. The most noteworthy example is Intel's 13th and 14th Gen CPUs suffering from a voltage bug that irreversibly damaged countless CPUs. Intel took months to get to the root of the issue, and concluded that motherboard manufacturers were running the chips at high voltage settings, but these were previously "within spec", so whose fault is it?

AMD, on the other hand, had Ryzen 7 9800X3D CPUs burning up on ASRock motherboards, and concluded memory compatibility was to blame. Even after a BIOS update, however, users continued to report dead CPUs and failure to POST. Nvidia, on the other hand, couldn't get rid of its burning GPU connectors even after modifying the earlier 12VHPWR connector. Its RTX 50 series GPUs even shipped with missing ROPs, which is a whole other level of QA failure.

Going back a few years, there were reports of Gigabyte power supplies blowing up, which damaged the brand's reputation, and even led to recalls for two of their models. Rigorous testing seems to have taken a backseat to getting products to market faster than the competition.

Shady tactics of GPU companies

They seem to get away with everything

PC hardware companies will always chase profits, but of late, it seems that GPU companies have taken things to new lows. Nvidia started skimping on VRAM with its RTX 30 series GPUs, and is still doing it five years later. High-end GPUs like the RTX 5080 have no business having a 16GB framebuffer. When $1,000 models aren't spared, what can you expect from the lower-tier products? Even AMD, the company that usually avoids doing this, launched an 8GB model of the RX 9060 XT recently.

Insufficient VRAM is one thing, but silently offering "less GPU" for the same or even more money is another level of pettiness. Nvidia GPUs are getting worse every year due to shrinkflation, featuring fewer CUDA cores, lower memory bandwidth, and smaller framebuffers for every GPU class. Then there are the confusing GPU names tricking people into buying something they don't want. The infamous RTX 4080 12GB was unlaunched by Nvidia, but many other models still have the same name for objectively different products.

These companies deserve more hate from the community

You might feel that the PC community has made its feelings known about these terrible trends, but maybe we should do more. Intel fanboys continue to buy its objectively inferior CPUs, AMD didn't get enough heat for its Ryzen 7 9800X3D fiasco, and Nvidia GPUs just keep selling no matter what. Even AMD's RX 9000 series hasn't slowed down the momentum of Team Green. PC hardware companies need to be told they can't get away with these practices, and no one but the community needs to take on the job.