NVIDIA RTX 2080 Ti 3DMark Score Allegedly Leaks, 35% Faster vs 1080 Ti

[DragonQ]

The point is the chart, which shows the high-end card pricing (excluding Halo products) for each generation taking into account inflation based on statistics found on CPI-U for the given time period. The most note worthy thing, however, is as mentioned in the article from which the snippet is taken.

When adjusted for inflation the 1080 Ti almost exactly matches the price of the GeForce 2 Ultra from back in 2000.

So? I don't understand your point. The chart shows the inflation-adjusted prices are rather all over the place, presumably due to what competition there was at the time (among other factors). In 2007 a new "Ultra" tier was introduced, pushing the top price up for two years. In 2009-2012 value improved (maybe due to aftermath of recession?), and then a new "Ti" top tier was introduced in 2013, bumping the price up again. Is there any point on that chart where the new flagship was worse value than the previous one in terms of raw performance? I honestly don't remember performance figures that far back but I'm assuming 2007 is the only time this might've happened. Was the 8800 Ultra more than 60% faster than the 7900?

Also, that chart doesn't actually include the 2080 Ti. That's $1200 - stands out a bit, no? Even if you believe nVidia's assertion that cards will be available for $999 (hint: the cheapest available on OcUK would be the equivalent of $1125 ex VAT), it'd still be the highest on the list.

 

[Kirby Wurm]

The devs have said they had 2 weeks with turing befire the demo - they've built their own raytracing code using DXRT instead of using RTX sdk, they've serialised the Raytracing instead of parrelising it as per nvidia's recomendation and they've identified an issue with their geometry which they think would represent a 30% improvement, they also say they didn't test 4k beforehand and were surprised it ran at all let alone at 30fps. They also plan on adding a detail slider for raytracing so that you can lessen the impact if you choose to. No I wouldn't go ahead with the purchase of a 2080ti if it can only do 1080p 60fps in the games I want to use it for, but realistically I don't think that is going to be the end result.

Is the target 60fps at 1080p on 2080Ti cards? If so what will performance be like on the more affordable and thus inevitably more popular 2070 cards which would appear to have 60% of the Ti's RT performance?

 

[Silent_Scone]

So? I don't understand your point.

That much is obvious

Also, that chart doesn't actually include the 2080 Ti. That's $1200 - stands out a bit, no? Even if you believe nVidia's assertion that cards will be available for $999 (hint: the cheapest available on OcUK would be the equivalent of $1125 ex VAT), it'd still be the highest on the list.

As of right now, the 2080Ti is a flagship product for enthusiasts. Halo products were excluded from that list. Perhaps you could go by 2080 pricing - although that wouldn't suit your argument as well, though. There is something dumbfoundingly contradictory about those that feel something isn't worth the money, and then proceed to moan about how expensive it is. Therein lies the rub, it's obvious that people want a new GPU - if people aren't prepared to pay the price then the market will accommodate. That's why the quote from a consumer 11 years ago still rings true now, the market doesn't need a fraction of the audience on a sub-forum to tell them that something is too expensive.

 

[DragonQ]

As of right now, the 2080Ti is a flagship product for enthusiasts. Halo products were excluded from that list. Perhaps you could go by 2080 pricing - although that wouldn't suit your argument as well, though. There is something dumbfoundingly contradictory about those that feel something isn't worth the money, and then proceed to moan about how expensive it is. Therein lies the rub, it's obvious that people want a new GPU - if people aren't prepared to pay the price then the market will accommodate. That's why the quote from a consumer 11 years ago still rings true now, the market doesn't need a fraction of the audience on a sub-forum to tell them that something is too expensive.

Huh, the 8800 Ultra, 980 Ti, and 1080 Ti weren't halo products? Are you suggesting Titans are the halo products then? How does the 2080 Ti not belong on that list as much as the 1080 Ti does?

Again, the price of the top tier product has a knock-on effect on the lower tiers. Just because I wouldn't buy a 2080 Ti doesn't mean I don't care about its price and it doesn't affect me.

I am also interested: do you believe that the 2080 Ti will offer a significant performance-per-dollar jump compared to the 1080 Ti? Do you care?

 

[Silent_Scone]

Huh, the 8800 Ultra, 980 Ti, and 1080 Ti weren't halo products? Are you suggesting Titans are the halo products then?

Do you want me to answer that honestly or would you prefer the less condescending answer?

I am also interested: do you believe that the 2080 Ti will offer a significant performance-per-dollar jump compared to the 1080 Ti? Do you care?

Don't have any concrete numbers to go by, but probably not.

 

[Silent_Scone]

dp

 

[Minstadave]

Yeah, at this price you would also expect them to bring support for the biggest game changer in almost 20 years or something /sarcasm



None of those were flagship cards, the flagship for those gens was the Titan Xp, Titan X and Titan Black/Z respectively. This is the first generation since the GTX500 series where there has been no gaming orientated Titan card (as it's been replaced in the lineup by the 2080ti).

Brave to call RT a gamechanger before performance is known. If performance is terrible and everyone just turns it off then it’s hardly gamechanging.

Also to justify the price increase by saying the 2080Ti is now the flagship/Titan of the range is dubious. A 35% increase is probably less of an increase of the 980Ti to 1080Ti. So nothing has really changed in terms of the positioning of the 2080Ti compared to previous generations.

 

[Silent_Scone]

Real-time ray tracing is a revolution at any playable framerate. Or at least it should be if you have any nous in all things rendering.

 

[DragonQ]

Do you want me to answer that honestly or would you prefer the less condescending answer?

OK so you are of the opinion that the Titans have been the halo products for the last 5 years or whatever but this time the 2080 Ti is a halo product, correct?

 

[Silent_Scone]

OK so you are of the opinion that the Titans have been the halo products for the last 5 years or whatever but this time the 2080 Ti is a halo product, correct?

Given the product stack at this moment in time, yes. Why do I get the impression you're about to propel the goalposts into space here lol.

 

[ubersonic]

OK so you are of the opinion that the Titans have been the halo products for the last 5 years or whatever but this time the 2080 Ti is a halo product, correct?

That's correct, various tech sites have confirmed as much (the Titan as a gaming card dying with the Titan Xp).

 

[andybird123]

Is the target 60fps at 1080p on 2080Ti cards? If so what will performance be like on the more affordable and thus inevitably more popular 2070 cards which would appear to have 60% of the Ti's RT performance?

I don't believe thats the target no, the devs have said there are several things they know they can do to improve performance already, they had it running at 1080p and it never dipped below 60fps iirc, so that 60fps minimums, not 60fps avg. Which again makes things sound worse when we are used to talking about averages.

It was dipping to 50's and a bit of 40's at 1440p and 30's for 4k, but again, that isn't the target, its completely unoptimised.

 

[Minstadave]

Real-time ray tracing is a revolution at any playable framerate. Or at least it should be if you have any nous in all things rendering.

To be a revolution not only does it have to be at decent frame rates buts it’s also got to be more than just shiny reflections. So I’ll wait and see before getting too excited.

If it fails on either performance or visual fidelity then I can’t see any true justification on that front for the price hike.

 

[Silent_Scone]

I don't believe thats the target no, the devs have said there are several things they know they can do to improve performance already, they had it running at 1080p and it never dipped below 60fps iirc, so that 60fps minimums, not 60fps avg. Which again makes things sound worse when we are used to talking about averages.

It was dipping to 50's and a bit of 40's at 1440p and 30's for 4k, but again, that isn't the target, its completely unoptimised.

I'm of the same mindset, for the time being. I think people will be surprised (albeit maybe not pleasantly). To achieve what they did in a couple of weeks is a feat in itself. The computation needed to pull something like this off, even with a sample rate as low as one or two pixels is nothing short of a miracle.

 

[DragonQ]

Given the product stack at this moment in time, yes.

I disagree but fair enough. So to follow that trend we'll be adding the 2080 to that chart at $799, correct? So $100 more than the previous entry and who knows what the performance improvement will be like. Typical generational difference is, what, 30-40%?

 

[rossiboy001]

Im deff in the market for that upgrade from my 1080ti, but only worth no more than £800 cash ready, at that price i will skip the generation, save myself £1200 and perhaps put some towards next years when i would expect around 50% jump from my 1080ti.

 

[bemaniac]

Im deff in the market for that upgrade from my 1080ti, but only worth no more than £800 cash ready, at that price i will skip the generation, save myself £1200 and perhaps put some towards next years when i would expect around 50% jump from my 1080ti.

I'd be expecting more like 75% on a 1080ti by next gen.

 

[Curlyriff]

35% from 1080Ti to 2080Ti would be minimum average I would like to see if they priced it the same as the 1080Ti retail UK price of £699 (which is what Nvidia said the founders edition should be at press release). The fact it is 57% increase over that figure I would expect a further % increase on the 35% accordingly to account for that.

The 2080 doesn't fair any better with that retailing at £715. That is where the the 35% increase should be compared to the 1080Ti since that is relative price it's competitor it needs to beat out to make it the same range. Nvidia can call it what they want but I always compare gen to gen at the relevant price brackets and then see what their % increase is.

If the % for purchasing goes up to match the performance then we would always have the same performance at the same price point and it just keeps getting exponentially more to get more performance which is what Nvidia are doing this gen. They have always done it mind (pretty much) but those % were not generally double digits let alone over 50% increase.

So yeah no, performance would have to be close to double what the current gen is to see that price make sense. You would need your standard 35% increase so from say 100fps to 135fps and then a further 57% increase on top of that to justify the price increase in my view. The 2080 should be performing 35% greater than the 1080Ti for the release price and that would justify itself since it is then actually giving you a performance increase at the same value, regardless of it being a 2080 or whatever.

 

[r7slayer]

So does that mean that actually the 70 and 80 series were in actual fact enthusiast cards then? and the cards below we high then mid? because that totally screws what i was led to believe.

 

[Flake87]

Well, the net is now full of this story with Forbes asking the question in its headline:

"Did Nvidia Just 'Leak' This RTX 2080 Ti Benchmark Result?"

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasone...is-rtx-2080-ti-benchmark-result/#516939b97148

"Here's a truth about the tech industry that may or not be difficult to swallow depending on your level of cynicism: companies leak their own embargoed or confidential information all the time as a shrewd marketing tactic." Judging by the responses to that as a marketing tactic I'd call that an enormous failure!

Forbes are however calling it as genuine:

"As for the legitimacy of this leak, I think it's valid because it was an offscreen photo of the benchmark result, and because it's realistic. a 35% increase in standard performance generation-over-generation is really decent -- even if perhaps the asking price for that increase is not."

They then confirm that reviewers are as suspected still under a NDA and speculate why NVidia would leak this:

"For starters, it's an easy way to generate another news cycle and round of likely positive headlines during a period when reviewers themselves are under embargo and can't discuss it" 'positive headlines?' It seems right at the very minimum of the performance gain NVidia were quoting at the launch.

The conclusion is this - and quite in line with some of the thinking here:

"Still, I'm holding firm with my advice. Real-time ray tracing is phenomenal technology, but we won't see wide adoption until the second or even third generation of Nvidia's RTX cards. Looking at the price/performance argument, a GTX 1080 Ti is an outstanding purchase right now."