nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Nvidia RTX Discussion

K.O.Kiki

A new era in 3D graphics stands before us.

First-gen Raytracing GPUs:

Nvidia "Turing" - Quadro RTX 5000 / 6000 / 8000 (US$ 2'300 / 6'300 / 10'000)

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13214/nvidia-reveals-next-gen-turing-gpu-architecture
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13217/nvidia-announces-turing-powered-quadro-rtx-family

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Dcully wrote: »

We all know that lol but arent we talking rtx here.

Yes I know but all your requirements do not include RTX so your perspective is a little skewed. Same with the media, they have to virtue signal their interest in the average gamer and hence their conclusion are not aimed at RTX buyers. When you look through the mainstream lens RTX makes little value sense, when you look though the niche len of the people these cards are aimed at you start to see the point. I was given out to for suggesting I was a better enthusiast than others, which I deride. However I am interested in new tech, and shiny graphics. Now I have a reason to tweak my PC and upgrade. RTX has set a new bar for us to reach. We have all been so stagnant for so long.

Its not a 1000 euro cards...its a 1400 euro card. how dare you awec. It plays max setting in the first RTX title ever on launch-day, in ultra-wide 1440p at an average 50 fps. Thats quite an achievement. It looks awesome, and when I have finished fapping to puddles and windows, I can turn off the RTX if I want to PwN nOoBs at 60 FPS 4k, or 144htz or whatever arbitrary performance benchmark we have decided makes for a good experiance and anything below that is bad.

As I have said before, this thread alone has been worth the price of the card, such great memories. People are so easy to get a rise out of, and then once they realise I am a sarcastic fecker taking the piss another new one come along who has not read the thread and start it over again, the pure joy of it.

SterlingArcher

tuxy wrote: »

Well I guess there are three main types of people who got the 2080 ti.
Those that blindly buy the latest fastest card at any price, people who actully needed that level of rasterization performance
and those who know it's not good value but want to test RTX early.
I believe fitzgeme fits in to the latter(correct me if I'm wrong fitz)

No one was duped, I believe only one person on here decided to buy an RTX card and he got it for the right reasons or what was right for him at least.

Haha. This thread is hilarious. I'd like to bring yous all out for drinks and slap yous in the face with my monster dong.

Fitz ain't the first to overspend on pc parts and he won't be the last. Pretty sure any money spent on "pc gaming" makes you a loser. So let's just accept that y'all are losers.

Now I have made yous aware of your inadequacy, I'm off to go play some 1440p sweetness on my pc. So long losers.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Haha. This thread is hilarious. I'd like to bring yous all out for drinks and slap yous in the face with my monster dong. .

I am interested in this meeting, sounds good. Go to PM to discuss big boy.

Metric Tensor

I haven't seen BFV in "raster" mode but the graphics on that second video looked savage with RTX on.

BloodBath

They do look great and people are still disregarding DLSS.

How about nearly doubling the performance with little visual loss over rendering native? That makes RTX viable at 1440p with relatively high frames. Maybe even at 4k/60 with RTX. Yes it's cheating but who cares if the final result looks better than your native without RTX.

tuxy

Metric Tensor wrote: »

I haven't seen BFV in "raster" mode but the graphics on that second video looked savage with RTX on.

https://youtu.be/5SSU8o-bnR4?t=1982

Metric Tensor

To my untrained eye it looks a good bit better in RTX.

FPS has it's place in shooters but I'd personally take 50FPS and savage graphics in something like Skyrim or a Flight SIM or an F1 game. (Although it would hurt my soul to go back to 1080p - even if DLSS meant it was only in my head!)

TerrorFirmer

Metric Tensor wrote: »

To my untrained eye it looks a good bit better in RTX.

I don't think anyone would dispute that.

The fact is though that Nvidia effectively sold people a lemon; the RTX generation is priced as a premium product offering revolutionary new features yet delivers incredibly poorly on said features to the point of being effectively unusable.

I mean let's apply at least a veneer of logic here. A €1,400 card that struggles to deliver 60fps at 1080p. Fitzgeme said "it's not the tragedy people made it out to be" - if that's not tragic, relative to what consumers are expected to pay, and what is delivered, I don't know what is.

The RTX2080 would be in a normal competitive market a £350 card. It's not though, it's an €800 card, and the very reason that supposedly seperates it from the 1080ti - RTX - it peforms pretty horribly in.

This whole "sure the RTX2070 is great value, same price as the 1080 and performs better and has RTX" is such a cop-out because the card should've never been that price to begin with, notwithstanding it's effectively crap at RTX.

The price gouging begain with the GTX series when AMD ran out of steam. I don't understand why people seek to defend it, as I say that as the owner of a 1080ti.

I paid €360 for an R9 290 in 2013. To get a meaningful upgrade on that in 2018, five years later, I've to lay out about €450 on the table. That simply did not happen ever in the history of GPUs until AMD lost the competitive edge in the upper tier.

It's now becoming the new normal for 'upper mid-range' to be priced at €450-500 which is a joke.

And the whole "but developing RTX costs money, they need to recoup costs"- this is not the first time GPU's have taken a revolutionary step forward and won't be the last, the only reason the cards are priced as they are is 101% due to lack of competition.

I do at least understand the logic behind the 2080ti, as RTX aside, it's an outrageously fast card and is top dog, and there will always be a mad premium attached to that and always was, as long as we can remember.

But the 2070 and 2080 are to my mind a vastly overpriced total joke that were peddled on empty promises that the cards cannot even vaguely deliver on.

Don't misunderstand me - I understand that RTX is an important feature and step forward for visual fideltiy. But it's not this gen, and the RTX series is simply an over-priced gouging exercise....as well suspected from the moment they unveiled them and the pricing structure.

But you'd want to be inhaling deep on the Nvidia crack pipe to try and defend the RTX series, it's marketing strategy and their pricing as reasonable.

tuxy

Just some more info for everyone on how the cards are dealing with running both cuda cores and tensor cores simultaneously.
DXR on actually takes loads of stress off the cards as a whole, the cuda cores are underutilised waiting for the tensors cores to do their things. So you can expect lower temperatures and power consumption while using DXR!

Dcully

I think we all accept RTX is the future but imo its nowhere near ready yet and wont be for another couple of years atleast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpZmH0_1gWQ

Shlippery

Shlippery wrote: »

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/battlefield-v-rtx-ray-tracing-out-now/

Well, that's Nvidias targets for the 'first release'

Interesting to note this change to Nvidia's page;

cursai

I asked Wifey for an RTX 2080ti. She told me to pretend I had it and that RTX was already on. I'm delighted with my purchase.
Now everytime she does something behind my back, she blames it on RTX.

Cuddlesworth

It could have been worse.

Venom

Revoker88

Have to say the quote of the thread has to be that PC gamers should be happy with 30fps.

Pretty much goes against the reason for gaming on PC in the first place for most people.

[Deleted User]

EoinHef wrote: »

Have to say the quote of the thread has to be that PC gamers should be happy with 30fps.

Pretty much goes against the reason for gaming on PC in the first place for most people.

Nail on the head. The only reason I built a gaming pc in the first place,

btkm8unsl0w5r4

EoinHef wrote: »

Have to say the quote of the thread has to be that PC gamers should be happy with 30fps.

Pretty much goes against the reason for gaming on PC in the first place for most people.

Ah the straw man arguement again, what I find interesting is that thats not what Tuxy said. He said that 30 fps was gold standard on CONSOLES, and that PC games may need to be more realistic with their expectations. He was more hinting at the fact that these new features will degrade pure FPS performance and that as PC gamers we cannot expect such a computationally expensive feature to allow us to continue to game at 144htz, or 60 fps at very high resolutions. 4k couldnt get 60 fps until recently and nobody was loosing their minds. I would agree 60 fps gives a better feel, but as I said smoothness and frame times is more important for me. Gsync IMHO smooths it all out.

Just like dx12 or per pixel shaders, it will take time to realise the potential of this technology. Its the law of diminishing returns, small improvements are more expensive computationally and economically at the bleeding edge. I have no regrets, but if I did I would rather regret things I have than thing I dont. I am excited about the push this will give the PC hardware market. Here is an application that kicks the crap out of hardware, we will look back on 20 series as the somewhat difficult birth of the next graphical era. But can it play RTX?

Again an RTX card does not preclude you playing CS:GO at 244htz...does anyone regret their 1080ti because they cannot 4k 60 all their games? And if not why is your acceptance of a compromise more valid than somebody elses?

Revoker88

I think clutching at straws is a more appropriate term for whats happening here....

btkm8unsl0w5r4

EoinHef wrote: »

I think clutching at straws is a more appropriate term for whats happening here....

Argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument.........

Any reply to my post, I though it was well thought out and reasoned. Genuine discussion appreciated. Why were we tolerant of 4k low FPS but not of RTX low fps...how is it different?

Venom

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

Argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument.........

Any reply to my post, I though it was well thought out and reasoned. Genuine discussion appreciated. Why were we tolerant of 4k low FPS but not of RTX low fps...how is it different?

Maybe, just maybe, because 4K gaming offers a HUGE visual upgrade when compared to 1080p and 1440p unlike what RTX has offered thus far, which at best is a very minor graphical boost to certain lighting conditions. There is also the small fact that the cards needed to push 4k gaming didn't cost the best part of a €1500 and could be used to play said games at 4k the moment you installed it into your PC, unlike RTX cards which currently only support a single game!

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Venom wrote: »

Maybe, just maybe, because 4K gaming offers a HUGE visual upgrade when compared to 1080p and 1440p unlike what RTX has offered thus far, which at best is a very minor graphical boost to certain lighting conditions. There is also the small fact that the cards needed to push 4k gaming didn't cost the best part of a €1500 and could be used to play said games at 4k the moment you installed it into your PC, unlike RTX cards which currently only support a single game!

ok, but that same RTX card also play your 4k games @ 60 where as previously there was no mainstream card pushing that rate, so is 60 important or not?. Only a 3k titan V could, making the 2080ti a bargain by that metric. 4k really offers no visual improvement for gaming over 1440p so I would. contend that ray tracing offers a lot more than 4k, espically in certain games, competative games turn it off and get your high refresh rate.

Very timely video uploaded 1 hour ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehvz3iN8pp4

Venom

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

ok, but that same RTX card also play your 4k games @ 60 where as previously there was no mainstream card pushing that rate, so is 60 important or not?. Only a 3k titan V could, making the 2080ti a bargain by that metric. 4k really offers no visual improvement for gaming over 1440p so I would. content that ray tracing offers a lot more than 4k.

Very timely video uploaded 1 hour ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehvz3iN8pp4

A 1080Ti handles 4k@60 and cost's almost half the price of a 2080Ti.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Venom wrote: »

A 1080Ti handles 4k@60 and cost's almost half the price of a 2080Ti.

Lol, no sir, it doesn't, only maybe in older games, and only with setting turned down. You can rtx at 1440p with setting turned down at 60 if thats your game.....do you see the inconsistencies in peoples logic I am highlighting. The problems levelled at RTX (I acknowledge an immature technology) are not equally applied to other more mainstream technologies like 4k monitors also an expensive technology that most see as pointless in gaming. I while I acknowledge that peoples priorities differ, others seem not to share that realisation and accept that people dont all want the same thing. If its not what your into then its pointless, stupid and a waste of time...but we must also disregard that RTX does everything you want (irregardless of which side your on), better than you got, and the things you dont want as well. I would still rather a 2080 than a 1080ti. If you cant come up with another 80 euro you shouldn't be forking out that much on a gaming computer in the first place (hides under desk giggling).

https://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/1080-ti-still-isnt-enough-for-4k60fpsmax-settings-33392389/

Navi pushed to Q3 2019 and RX590 is totally boring and average. No saviour on the horizon. If your waiting for 7nm, you will be waiting. Hope the 1080ti dont need to be RMA'ed, a lot of them fail I hear.

K.O.Kiki

4K with AA is dumb.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

4K with AA is dumb.

No sir this is not correct. Only if the game textures are very high res and the polygon count is very high do you not need some sort of AA (MSAA is usually better) and even then fense's, windows and very straight geometric objects viewed at an angle are the usual culprits and your still get "shimmering" or flickering which is awful. Some game engines like Cryengine benefit greatly from AA even at high res. DLSS would be ideal for this as it wont take precious FPS away from the 4k gamer while maximising image quality (4k suffers badly with any sort of temporal aa), surely a priority for anyone who invested in a 4k display.

RobertKK

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/11/15/nvidia-confirms-rtx-2080-ti-problem-the-same-day-one-bursts-into-flames/amp/

I recently covered a suspiciously high number of reports from Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti owners complaining that their new graphics cards were causing blue screens of death, exhibiting ugly artifacting or straight up dying. Well, there’s a new development in this story. Nvidia just admitted the RTX 2080 Ti does indeed have a problem. In a case of tragically hilarious timing, this occurred on the same day one gamer’s card literally burst into flames.

Seems they sold some RTX 2080 Ti cards that had parts that were faulty that made it past quality control.

RobertKK wrote: »

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/11/15/nvidia-confirms-rtx-2080-ti-problem-the-same-day-one-bursts-into-flames/amp/

Seems they sold some RTX 2080 Ti cards that had parts that were faulty that made it past quality control.

I really didn't expect the RTX cards to double up as a lighter. 0_o

btkm8unsl0w5r4

]Nothing new, a certain percentage of GPU's are defective as discussed at length a few pages back. Interestingly I had two of the 1080 EVGA cards that had the furmark heat issue with furmark...I never had a problem., EVGA were shipping upgraded thermal pads to customers and changed the bios to increase the fan profile. But look...it carries forward the narrative so I am sure people are delighted. How does the RTX song go..Ac cent uate the negatives....E lim inate the positives...Latch on to the disapproving....Don't mess with Mister In-Between.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-3531955/bad-gpu-caught-fire-troubleshooting.html

https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/8m7zo3/my_graphics_card_just_lit_on_fire_and_i_dont_know/

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1011023/gpu-on-fire-literally-/

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/11/3/13510238/evga-geforce-1080-1070-1060-graphics-card-fire

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAbl0fLY06U

Fitz, stop that. We can discuss card problems without it being an attack.

It's bloody ridiculous - you've two separate posts there in one. One good about 'these aren't new issues' and one painfully aggravating about how everyone just wants to pick on RTX.

Knock it off please.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

L wrote: »

Fitz, stop that. We can discuss card problems without it being an attack.

It's bloody ridiculous - you've two separate posts there in one. One good about 'these aren't new issues' and one painfully aggravating about how everyone just wants to pick on RTX.

Knock it off please.

I stand by my post although I admit I do assume the motivation of the poster.