Nvidia RTX Discussion

L wrote: »

So, in the cold light of day, I think it's pretty obvious to everyone at this point that Nvidia wasn't changing its card naming conventions - just doubling their price points.

Do we reckon its a bold (if ugly) strategy with a captive market, or are we expecting Navi with PCIe 4.0 and a die shrink to eat their lunch next year?

People have a lot of faith in 7nm....for no particular reason IMHO but time will tell.

As for naming you could make the point that the new titan is similar to the quadro rtx 6600 but half the price...so maybe if you take Nvidia at their word that this is aimed at professionals then its a bargain.

So far 7nm has given TDP improvement but no performance improvements. Who actually cares about power draw for desktop gpu's...exactly nobody. Yeild issues will abound. Cramming transistors closer together does not improve performance significantly only archecteture changes really do that....like RTX but thats bad right?

Titan is for rich gamers IMHO, if its too expensive your not rich enough to be a rich gamer. Nvidia now decide what a rich gamer is (and there is a vocal minority of people who were once rich gamers that have been priced out of the market, saltyness abounds), not the public. Nvidia now decide that the performance increases per generation are, not the public. Lot of people decided what a valid generational increased would be and when RTX did meet it they gave out, and often when it did meet expectations they changed their expectations to again validate theit anger. RTX works well, it pushes 60fps at 1080p, at UHD is you tweek settings and is playable in single player games at 4k with tweaked settings. This will improve in time.

If AMD can come along with a 7nm working class hero that great but there is not even a hint of a whiff that they are next nor near that in the gaming space.

Here is a video that demonstrates everything which I think is wrong with the media on this topic. A non issue is proved to be a non issue, but its created several videos and a 48 hour live stream all with titles designed to generate views from those that dont bother with detail but only headlines.

Will check the BF5 update this evening, god I wish it was a better game albeit very pretty.

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Vega 64 was slated because its performance was below the 15-month older GTX 1080 AND it draws more power.

Exactly when performance improves people dont mind power draw (assuming suitable cooling) its like a car thats faster using more petrol...well thats par for the course. Vegas problem was that it was slow, and even heavily overclocked it still can only get close to a 1080ti stock. Cost a lot too.

tuxy wrote: »

Don't think you will be much help to him in BF V with those frame rates

Frame rates are pretty good now, hell even the 2070 can DXR at 1080p now...or...now wait for it....turn it off and soak up the framerates....mind blown.

Shlippery wrote: »

Ah, I saw the improvements made to RTX, a diehard Battlefield fan, I've a Rift at home and have never owned a 'high-end' GPU in my life, so happy to treat myself this one time!


:pac:

Well if you coming from something older and lower end it will be a mighty upgrade. Lot of pipeline improvement for VR too with the new architecture and all the fancy rendering technologies. VR is one situation where very night frame rates can be make or break for a title. I remember the nausia with RawData with a 1080....You will be happy.

https://uploadvr.com/rtx-2080-performance-benchmark/

Another click bait title video, and a conclusion that somehow manages to be negative.

Tech media " there is not DXR content available RTX is pointless, we need DXR content right away"
Dice " OK here is DRX in BF5 but performance will improve in time"
Tech media "performance sucks"
Dice "ok here is an update with better performance"
Tech media "ok thats fine now but why couldn't you have waited and given us the good performance at the start"

RTX Titan review....not much raster improvement, RTX seems not to be ready yet. I shall stick where I am.

L wrote: »

6 months is a good long life for a focused thread about a specific graphic card lineup.

There's also just not very much to say - the bells and whistles haven't arrived in force, and the raw performance doesn't justify the price tags.

What I would be very curious to see is a comparison between DLSS and a framerate equivalent resolution with TAA enabled. It'd make a nice comparison point to go with 4k and pre-upscale resolution TAA.

Threads only up 3 months and the release schedule is going as advertised. Suppose we will see a good few titles first quarter 2019 maybe people will be interested then.

We are as close to 3 as we are to 6 so ( 3 since the actual launch) so like with everything on this thread I am as right as you are wrong and vice versa.

DLSS in BFV didnt know that was a thing, I am a bit dubious on that source.