REALLYCUTEPUPPIES.AI
Hardware · Part I · data-integrity · gpus · market-research

My Chart Had Estimates in It, and I Got Caught

A price-history chart mixed transaction data with remembered guesses. The web-sourced 'correction' was worse than the guess. Only sold listings survived.

September 5, 2026 · 3 min read

While deciding whether C$3,000 per mining card was a good price, I built a price-history chart from eBay’s completed listings: every 170HX sale the platform would show me, 81 transactions across the full 90-day window.

The sales data was genuinely interesting:

C$1500C$2000C$2500C$3000C$3500C$1,776 (n=49)Jul 16–31C$3,343 (n=20)Aug 17–Sep 2regime change ~Aug 9the two well-sampled windows of 81 total sales · +88%
Fig. 1 — Medians of the two well-sampled periods (69 of 81 sales; the remainder straddle the Aug 9 regime change). The move is a step, not a slope: OLS over all sales gives +C$231/week but R² is only 0.27 — quoting that slope as a trend would be indefensible.

Prices nearly doubled in six weeks — median C$1,776 in late July, C$3,343 by late August. A regime change, presumably unlock-driven demand meeting thin supply. Asks ran about C$500 above the sales fit, sellers pricing ahead of clearing. And the apparent 8 GB/10 GB price gap dissolved on inspection into a timing artifact: the 10 GB sales just clustered in the cheap July window.

So far so good. Then I added a comparison rail: where do the alternatives sit — A100s, A6000s, the current-gen cards? And here I did the thing this post is a confession about: I plotted remembered price estimates on the same chart as verified transaction data, visually indistinguishable from the real points.

I got called on it, correctly and bluntly. The first fix attempt made it worse. First correction pass: look the prices up on the web — buying guides, price-tracker articles. Second pass, after being pushed again: sweep actual eBay sold listings for all eight comparison cards, 115 completed sales, medians only.

CardMy estimateWeb “correction”Actual sold median
A100 40 GB PCIeC$6,500C$3,800C$6,059 (n=5)
A100 80 GB PCIeC$12,000C$7,600C$19,233 (n=5)

The middle column is the punchline. The web-sourced correction was further from reality than my original guess. Buying-guide prices for datacenter cards are aspirational, stale, or quoting a different market entirely. My gut, trained on months of adjacent browsing, beat the articles — and the sold-listing medians beat both by not being an opinion at all.

The full verified set, for anyone pricing this tier (eBay.ca sold medians, delivered, swept Sep 3–5, 2026): RTX A6000 C$5,634 (n=28) · A100 40 GB C$6,059 (n=5) · RTX 5090 C$6,668 (n=26) · A40 C$6,898 (n=6) · RTX 6000 Ada C$8,182 (n=14) · L40S C$10,979 (n=7) · A100 80 GB C$19,233 (n=5) · RTX PRO 6000 C$20,854 (n=24).

Two rules came out of this, now standing for everything I publish:

  1. A chart may not mix evidence grades without marking them. If a point is an estimate, it renders as an estimate or it doesn’t render.
  2. For hardware prices, only completed transactions count. Asks measure hope. Articles measure nothing. Sold medians with an n attached are the only numbers that survived contact with reality — and when n is 5, say so.

The rebuilt chart reversed my substitution analysis: at C$47/GB against a real C$117/GB floor, nothing threatens the mining card’s value proposition until it roughly doubles. The conclusion I nearly published — built twice on estimates — had said otherwise.