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

Shlippery

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Well at least I can agree on one thing with Fitz, played a few hours of the new Battlefield and I don't really dig it, and I say that as a major BF fan and someone who even thought Hardline was alright.

And as of today BFV is free with RTX cards, so maybe my patience wlil be rewarded...!

TerrorFirmer

Well at least I can agree on one thing with Fitz, played a few hours of the new Battlefield and I don't really dig it, and I say that as a major BF fan and someone who even thought Hardline was alright.

Inquitus

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

Honestly I dont think we would for one simple reason nobody could care less about the rx590. At least people seem to care about the RTX cards be it good of bad, even if you dont like them we cant stop talking about them.

FYP...you have to admit...the reporting on RTX has been very dodgy and the glee with which people lap it up attests to a certain wish for early adopters to crash and burn, and a chance to tell them "told ya". I am very happy with mine and look forward to better RTX titles which I enjoy playing more than BF5, I am sorry if that annoying but its the truth and most people online seem happy with theirs. The end of the video K.O.Kiki posted sums it up very well.

People just think its a terrible value proposition, and RTX has failed to deliver anything worthwhile to date, the prospects of it delivering anything in the medium term are fairly remote, same goes for DLSS. It's not a personal attack on you, this whole thread seems to be one man's quest to justify his purchase.

You can pretty much build a fairly high end AMD gaming PC with a 2nd hand 1080TI for the cost of one of these cards, given what RTX is likely to deliver gamewise in the next 6 months it a fairly stark comparison.

BloodBath wrote: »

I simply asked you and others for proof of your statements, something not 1 of ye have done yet. I have not attacked you or terror. I'm just sick of this non story "RMA issue". I have never seen it brought up and mentioned so many times with anything else in the past.

You demanded proof of things I hadn't said or implied bloodbath.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

, all I said was that if the RX590 had much higher failure (should've said RMA) rates than the RX580 that we'd also be talking about it.

Honestly I dont think we would for one simple reason nobody could care less about the rx590. At least people seem to care about the RTX cards be it good of bad, even if you dont like them we cant stop talking about them.

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

The other side of the coin is that some people are so seemingly desperate to attack the RTX and/or their purchase (a new old stock pascal for instance ) that completely valid, logical reasoning gets dismissed as 'RTX fanboism', bragging, or whatever.

FYP...you have to admit...the reporting on RTX has been very dodgy and the glee with which people lap it up attests to a certain wish for early adopters to crash and burn, and a chance to tell them "told ya". I am very happy with mine and look forward to better RTX titles which I enjoy playing more than BF5, I am sorry if that annoying but its the truth and most people online seem happy with theirs. The end of the video K.O.Kiki posted sums it up very well.

TerrorFirmer

I think to be fair, all I said was that if the RX590 had much higher failure (should've said RMA) rates than the RX580 that we'd also be talking about it. I also was only pointing out the much higher return rate of the 2080ti comparitive with that of the 2080 as it is interesting, I didn't make any other remark on it. I've contribued almost nothing to the RMA discussion as frankly I don't care about it, I think everyone knows my main gripe with the RTX series is the outrageous pricing and aggressive marketing justifying said pricing despite inability to deliver anything other than an almost unusable novelty factor.

The other side of the coin is that some people are so seemingly desperate to defend the RTX and/or their purchase (and I am not saying this about you Bloodbath at all in case you think I'm being specific) that completely valid, logical reasoning gets dismissed as 'RTX bashing', jealousy, or whatever.

BloodBath

L wrote: »

I'd normally agree with you on this one Fitz, but Friday night I had to deal with someone else here jumping down my throat on something that bore no resemblance to what I'd actually written.

I normally enjoy (politely ) arguing around things as it gives me a reason to sharpen up my knowledge and break a few of my own preconceptions. That I really didn't enjoy.

I simply asked you and others for proof of your statements, something not 1 of ye have done yet. I have not attacked you or terror. I'm just sick of this non story "RMA issue". I have never seen it brought up and mentioned so many times with anything else in the past.

The worst part is it's completely untrue. I don't know if you know how the media works these days. There's an appetite for negative RTX stories so there's a lot of negative RTX stories out there. Truth and facts come second to that.

I've seen a lot of crap posted here from normally spot on posters but RTX seems to have soured their normally unbiased views. I don't have a bloody RTX and I don't intend on getting 1 either but I can still remain unbiased and objective.

If ye want to cherry pick certain stats to try and sell a negative narrative so be it. I will just counter it every time with some unbiased facts. Partner 2080tis have a 1.4% return rate, far below the norm and slightly higher than the exceptionally low 0.1% of the 1080. I like how ye don't mention the 1080ti's return rate was above 5%. Where was the outrage over 1080ti returns?

Also note these are return rates, not failure rates. Some people just have buyers remorse and decide to refund which seems to be more common with the top tier cards.

tuxy

awec wrote: »

The story in the last few battlefield games has been garbage.

They will never beat the story from Battlefield 1942!

awec

tuxy wrote: »

But what about the story that's an integral part of every battlefield?

The story in the last few battlefield games has been garbage.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Dcully wrote: »

the skill ceiling is high too which is a huge plus.

It makes it so hard to get into the game for a newcomer, you just spawn and run to your death from a unsceen source, its get boring. I know with games I am good at its fun to be good, but its no fun to be a noob and be cannon fodder.

tuxy

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I outright hate COD at this point but Battlefield is nothing like it at all, it's really just its own thing. Looking forward to getting to grips with BFV tonight.

But what about the story that's an integral part of every battlefield?

TerrorFirmer

I outright hate COD at this point but Battlefield is nothing like it at all, it's really just its own thing. Looking forward to getting to grips with BFV tonight.

tuxy

I like roblox

K.O.Kiki

I prefer Arena FPS (Quake, UT) to CODfests myself.

Dcully

On a side note. BF5 is a crap game, the story is derivative and the gun play is weird.

:eek: the gunplay is fantastic imho easily the best of any games in the series.
I didnt like the alpha or beta but they really pulled it off since then.
As a diehard BF fan to me its a great multiplayer experience,the skill ceiling is high too which is a huge plus.
Ofcourse there are some things that needs changing but overall at this early stage it has huge potential to develop into a classic.
I dont get why they turned their back on some of the historic WW2 theaters of war, what a missed opportunity, a really shocking oversight actually.

K.O.Kiki

Have to say, it does look pretty nice when it's on.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

A good back and forth is what its all about, and I feel exactly the same. We need to look at this with a dispassionate eye. RTX is what Nvidia said it would be, most of the negativity is around what people had wished or assumed it would be, rather than the reality. The media are really being total noobs around this, there are only a few outlets that are giving reliable information. There is a strong appetite for negative RTX news and gets such traction that the media outlets are jumping on anything at this stage to get the scoop. For instance with the 2080ti is delisted story, it took me 1 minute to find the page on Nvidia website that listed it as out of stock, why on earth was it reported as delisted?....because thats the news people want to read. People prefer the dramatic and the negative than the boring reality.

On a side note. BF5 is a crap game, the story is derivative and the gun play is weird.

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

Comprehension here is fine, its detail and nuance that people are missing.

I'd normally agree with you on this one Fitz, but Friday night I had to deal with someone else here jumping down my throat on something that bore no resemblance to what I'd actually written.

I normally enjoy (politely

) arguing around things as it gives me a reason to sharpen up my knowledge and break a few of my own preconceptions. That I really didn't enjoy.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Serephucus wrote: »

And here I said I wasn't going to get drawn into this.

Those €2,000 CPUs are workstation-aimed. RTX is being marketed at consumers (gamers). You've the makings of a fruit salad there with all your apples and oranges.

The i9-9980XE EXTREME EDITION is overclockable. Workstation users use Xeon processors. Its like the titan, they call it one thing to circumvent the value metric, but its mostly purchased by rich gamers and enthusiasts or people who claim to be content creators but are not really. I think its an apples to apples comparison.

Metric Tensor

Price £|10 Series|20 Series|Vega|Radeon 500
120|1050|-|-|RX 560 (ish)
150|1050 ti|-|-|RX 570
200|1060 3GB|-|-|RX 580
250|1060 6GB|-|-|RX 590
350|1070|-|Vega 56|-
400|1070 ti|-|-|-
500|1080|2070|Vega 64|-
650|1080 ti|-|-|-
750|-|2080|-|-
1200|-|2080 ti|-|-

* Updated table for recent RX price drops

Once the 1080ti cards run out there is a perfect spot on the table for the 2070ti.

Have to keep every price point covered!

Serephucus

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

The value proposition is one thing but a lot of the attention it gets is mostly virtue signaling. We have had several 2000 euro CPU launches in the interim that have attracted much less attention.

And here I said I wasn't going to get drawn into this.

Those €2,000 CPUs are workstation-aimed. RTX is being marketed at consumers (gamers). You've the makings of a fruit salad there with all your apples and oranges.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

But return rates are a non issue. Anybody coming in would be scared to death with people going on about them. Yes the return rates on the 2080 are less than the 2080ti, but neither is significant. I could suggest the return rates are far better than the 1080ti, but that would be a cheap shot and simply not valid.

Cards going on fire is again a thing that happens and is not a significant issue that should colour your purchasing decision.

Nvidia didnt pull cards over "test escape" issues as was reported. People used to say RTX on would not play 1080p 60 Htz...but when the (to be honest horrible implementation in BFV which can only get better) came out and it did, the bar was raised suddenly.

1080ti pricing has been artificially lowered in the minds of posters to colour the value proposition and the raster speed increases of the new cards has been chosen to show it in the poorest light.

Nvidia stock price has decreased and this is suggested to be due to RTX which its not.

Final Fantasy has discontinued PC support but the new is that DLSS will not come to final fantasy.

The value proposition is one thing but a lot of the attention it gets is mostly virtue signaling. We have had several 2000 euro CPU launches in the interim that have attracted much less attention.

Its fair to say people are making throw away comments, and its difficult to counter them without seeming ranty and fanboish giving people the oppertunity to attack the poster rather than the issue.

No there is no conspiracy either way. RTX does exactly what is says on the tin, its a card for richer gamers and the next card will be better, but thats hardly a point. The lack of 1080ti's will make people even more angry going forward.

Comprehension here is fine, its detail and nuance that people are missing.

Revoker88

Jaysus comprehension in here is awful.

He said the 2080 ti return rates were high in comparison to the 2080.

L's comments the other day had noting to do with rates of above 5% either. Mearly commenting that the rate was consistent with the one we saw a few weeks ago ie ~1.7%

There is no conspiracy.

BloodBath

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Exactly - RTX has delivered exactly what was expected of it from the get-go. I don't think anyone could claim to be dissappionted in the slightest.

People have been accused of wanting to sabotague RTX on this thread, or whatever the reason, being simply jealous.

If RTX had been priced realistically, no-one would've batted an eye at the poor RTX showing, which is to be somewhat expected for an emerging tech.

However, it's the consumer being expected to pay radically over the odds for a new era of cards that are minorly faster conventionally but struggle to be anything other than a meaningless novelty in said new tech that's the gripe.

If RTX2070 was a £349 card, RTX2080 a £449 card, and RTX2080ti a £599 card, bobs your uncle, no complaints at all really. The new tech could be a novelty but the value would remain for the raw speed of the generation, whose primarily purpose would still be the 99% of current games.

And that's exactly what they would've been in a competitive market. As I've said before, ray tracing is not the first leap in visual fidelity and won't be the last. Imagine if when Shader Model 3.0 came out, games only ran at 720p 30fps? But back then AMD and Nvidia were competitive.

But Nvidia aggressively marketed RTX as something way beyond what they are - little different than the GTX series with a novelty, destined to be rarely used feature (due to inability to run said feature) bolted on....and we're expected to pay mad price premiums.

But in 'They live' style, Nvidia was pushing this narrative of "Ray Tracing, Buy, Buy Buy the future"!

As for claims that people are looking for reasons to pick on RTX...hardly. A few pages back it was a discussion point that based on RMA rates, those for the 2080Ti are radically higher than those for the 2080.

There's no conspiracy, it's simply interesting? If people starting posting links that showed RX590's with a a much higher failure rate of RX580's, you think people here wouldn't post about it?

I still think the RTX2080Ti is understandable ala the Titan models. There'll always be a mad premium for the fastest consumer card on earth, no quibbles there at all.

But the RTX2070 and 2080 are just cash-scraping exercises for Nvidia because they can.

We've entered a weird place where people are saying "But the GTX1080 is the same price as the RTX2070, ergo the 2070 is great value!". By saying that, we've basically following Nvidia's strategy like sheep. The 2070 should be a £349 card in a normal competitive market.

They're laughing all the way to the bank with the RTX series.

I have no issue with people focusing on the lack of the RTX titles and the fact the cards are overpriced but not as much as you seem to think.

Considering the die size and GDDR6 alone there is no way in hell the cards were going to be priced the same as last gen. You would have the cut the RT and Tensor cores to that. They should definitely be cheaper though.

Again the return rates are not radically higher. Prove your statement. They are 100% within the normal range. 1.5% - 3.5% are the actual figures. This is people latching onto any click bait article they see when the actual facts go in the face of it.

This is the part I have an issue with. Your statement is verifiably false. I don't know the source for it but it's bull**** and you're still saying it.

A lot of the initial returns were on based on a driver level issue which has been fixed. Maybe stick to reliable sources that do actual testing and verification before printing bull**** click bait articles.

We don't have a normal competitive market. You can blame AMD for that instead of expecting Nvidia to be anything other than they are. A huge corporation trying to please their shareholders by squeezing as much profit out of their products as they can while they have a significant lead. AMD would do the same.

Serephucus

^ That.

(Excluding the Ti, because Titan) the RTX cards aren't terrible, they're just terrible value.

TerrorFirmer

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

It is and its everything it was expected to be.

It looks nice.
Its limited in functionality.
It tanks FPS.
Most people won't care.
Most games won't do it.

Exactly - RTX has delivered exactly what was expected of it from the get-go. I don't think anyone could claim to be dissappionted in the slightest.

People have been accused of wanting to sabotague RTX on this thread, or whatever the reason, being simply jealous.

If RTX had been priced realistically, no-one would've batted an eye at the poor RTX showing, which is to be somewhat expected for an emerging tech.

However, it's the consumer being expected to pay radically over the odds for a new era of cards that are minorly faster conventionally but struggle to be anything other than a meaningless novelty in said new tech that's the gripe.

If RTX2070 was a £349 card, RTX2080 a £449 card, and RTX2080ti a £599 card, bobs your uncle, no complaints at all really. The new tech could be a novelty but the value would remain for the raw speed of the generation, whose primarily purpose would still be the 99% of current games.

And that's exactly what they would've been in a competitive market. As I've said before, ray tracing is not the first leap in visual fidelity and won't be the last. Imagine if when Shader Model 3.0 came out, games only ran at 720p 30fps? But back then AMD and Nvidia were competitive.

But Nvidia aggressively marketed RTX as something way beyond what they are - little different than the GTX series with a novelty, destined to be rarely used feature (due to inability to run said feature) bolted on....and we're expected to pay mad price premiums.

But in 'They live' style, Nvidia was pushing this narrative of "Ray Tracing, Buy, Buy Buy the future"!

As for claims that people are looking for reasons to pick on RTX...hardly. A few pages back it was a discussion point that based on RMA rates, those for the 2080Ti are radically higher than those for the 2080.

There's no conspiracy, it's simply interesting? If people starting posting links that showed RX590's with a a much higher failure rate of RX580's, you think people here wouldn't post about it?

I still think the RTX2080Ti is understandable ala the Titan models. There'll always be a mad premium for the fastest consumer card on earth, no quibbles there at all.

But the RTX2070 and 2080 are just cash-scraping exercises for Nvidia because they can.

We've entered a weird place where people are saying "But the GTX1080 is the same price as the RTX2070, ergo the 2070 is great value!". By saying that, we've basically following Nvidia's strategy like sheep. The 2070 should be a £349 card in a normal competitive market.

They're laughing all the way to the bank with the RTX series.

Dcully

Great video from Gamers Nexus on raytracing in BFV.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaUP4LucmZM

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

Seems we need more RTX cores, and I think scaling up that core count is the next step....

I know I've said it a lot, but the really low transistor density @12nm seriously surprises me.

I really wonder if these were supposed to be smaller, cheaper dies (direct drop ins for their 10 series counterparts) and there was some architectural complication that made it impossible to reliably hit their minimum core counts without effectively having ablative cores to knock out.

It would explain quite a bit of the odd features, and suggest RTX 2 could be much cheaper (or much more powerful).

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

It is and its everything it was expected to be.

It looks nice.
Its limited in functionality.
It tanks FPS.
Most people won't care.
Most games won't do it.

Thats exactly what I was told to expect and exactly what I got, just like 4k tanks FPS so does RTX, add em together and you have got unplayable. Interested to see a title with both DLSS and raytracing. Tomb raider will show us the hit with ray traced shadows. It would appear that card run cooler when RTX is on because its raytracing core limited. Seems we need more RTX cores, and I think scaling up that core count is the next step....If you turn it off these cards fly, so if your in the dont care camp there is your answer. Oh and the card are more expensive than the last generation but they are a bit to a lot faster depending on how much extra you pay.

Cuddlesworth

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

In fairness, turns out Raytracing is NOT here.

It is and its everything it was expected to be.

It looks nice.
Its limited in functionality.
It tanks FPS.
Most people won't care.
Most games won't do it.