> The difference is 8 more GB of RAM that comes at a steep premium
This is incorrect. The RTX 6000 has 24GB of VRAM and is $4000, and the RTX 8000 has 48GB of VRAM (double the amount) and is $5500. Is it worth the price increase? For a lot of people I know it is.
Also, the RTX Titan is $2500 and is identical to the RTX 6000 (at the chip level) and also with 24GB of VRAM, with the only difference being software enabling of additional H.264/5 encoding features on the Quadro. Definitely not worth the cost increase, especially for anyone doing ML.
If you reason as a consumer the RTX Titan makes a lot more sense than the RTX 6000, however datacenters are forbidden by Nvidia to use consumer cards [1], therefore their choice makes sense.
Except datacenter is not defined by NVIDIA in their EULA at all, and plenty of large and small datacenters continue to use "consumer cards" regardless of NVIDIA's fear mongering. I know that Tesla, OpenAI, Microsoft, Apple, and many others all continue to primarily buy primarily 2080Ti's, RTX Titans, and Titan V's since the EULA change.
Companies make unenforceable claims all the time. That's why we've got courts. Theyr'e almost certainly never going to take any one to court, because if they did, it would get tossed out. They can't pull the same "it's a license to a product" bs media services do. Though they still try with the driver. I think for now, they've just run the numbers and figured out it gives them slightly higher datacenter card sales.
This is incorrect. The RTX 6000 has 24GB of VRAM and is $4000, and the RTX 8000 has 48GB of VRAM (double the amount) and is $5500. Is it worth the price increase? For a lot of people I know it is.
Also, the RTX Titan is $2500 and is identical to the RTX 6000 (at the chip level) and also with 24GB of VRAM, with the only difference being software enabling of additional H.264/5 encoding features on the Quadro. Definitely not worth the cost increase, especially for anyone doing ML.