2080 chump?

DarrenM343 · 24 Nov 2018 at 17:44

Cavallino said:
Cheers fella.

Incidentally, Im just curious about people going with the TI, from what I can see and understand it doesnt give you best bang for buck but also appreciate its luxury product for some who are willing to buy it.

But at the current price is it really worth the extra 25% going for a 2080 TI?

(I was seriously contemplating it but for the extra grunt, for me I just felt its not worth the extra but can fully understand that perhaps, maybe for more deeper enthusiasts it is?)

I think I answered my own question!

If you want the best, the Ti is currently it is the simple fact, whether it's worth it is up to the individual. I pre-ordered but later decided this gen hit the middle-ground. A few times have thought "Should have just got the Ti" I must admit. Happy with non-Ti at 1440P tho

Cavallino · 24 Nov 2018 at 19:42

Any reason why you had second thoughts about your 2080?
Whats your monitor and refresh rate may I ask?
Were the instances where you felt you wish you had more grunt to keep up with the refresh of your monitor perhaps?

DarrenM343 · 24 Nov 2018 at 19:53

Cavallino said:
Any reason why you had second thoughts about your 2080?
Whats your monitor and refresh rate may I ask?
Were the instances where you felt you wish you had more grunt to keep up with the refresh of your monitor perhaps?

Not really second thoughts. Because I was originally planning on getting the 2080 Ti it's natural to later think that way. And I've had the previous two Titans so am more used to just buying top end but this time gone 2080 only, not even Ti

. I'm not a heavy gamer so being honest with myself the 2080 makes better sense.
Monitor refresh is 144, it's g-sync.
Very happy with the 2080. The RT performance has been better than I was expecting too to be honest and it should get better from here.

Kaapstad · 24 Nov 2018 at 21:04

DarrenM343 said:
If you want the best, the Ti is currently it is the simple fact, whether it's worth it is up to the individual. I pre-ordered but later decided this gen hit the middle-ground. A few times have thought "Should have just got the Ti" I must admit. Happy with non-Ti at 1440P tho

NVidia do sell something a little faster @2160p but for the money it is not worth it for gaming.

Cavallino · 25 Nov 2018 at 10:46

Like many things it becomes a question of wanting the best irrespective of cost.
If you have the money and that is your thing then power to you.
A PC enthusiast in me wanted to go for the TI so much

Not sure if it would go down well with the boss though

Oh well 2080 will suffice

Look forward to playing some games at a faster frame rate (although I will be going from 1920 x 1200 to 3440 x 1440, so not sure if I am going to see much frame rate benefit to be honest consider the higher resolution. What do you think folks?

Shaz12 · 25 Nov 2018 at 11:03

I just wish raytracing wasn't so demanding for a 2080. I play at 144hz and nothing short of the 2080 Ti can handle it but its price is ridiculous.

Cavallino · 25 Nov 2018 at 12:12

Do you reckon that since the RTX element is so new that perhaps the drivers/software are not yet optimised efficiently to make use of the hardware?
Or can we expect that the demand of raytracing in games like BFV to be pretty much representative of what we can expect for the years to come?

kevman · 25 Nov 2018 at 15:41

Cavallino said:
Do you reckon that since the RTX element is so new that perhaps the drivers/software are not yet optimised efficiently to make use of the hardware?
Or can we expect that the demand of raytracing in games like BFV to be pretty much representative of what we can expect for the years to come?

Drivers / software will improve over time yes however the scope of bfv rtx is quite limited as it's only doing reflections at the minute with 1 Ray per pixel - v low resolution. I think that metro exodus is pushing occlusion as well so see how that does.

20 series Ray tracing is just a taster really and more rt cores are needed as this is the bottleneck

DarrenM343 · 25 Nov 2018 at 16:19

kevman said:
Drivers / software will improve over time yes however the scope of bfv rtx is quite limited as it's only doing reflections at the minute with 1 Ray per pixel - v low resolution. I think that metro exodus is pushing occlusion as well so see how that does.

20 series Ray tracing is just a taster really and more rt cores are needed as this is the bottleneck

I'd like to see a Titan T with 2080 Ti cuda core total,well maybe a few more, but double the RT cores

.

I must be easily pleased. Using a 1070 Ti in FarCry 5 I was getting 73FPS at 1440P and DX11. BFV looks far superior using DX12 and RT on low and I;m getting over 60FPS now with the settings recommended by GFE. Sure the GPU is a lot more expensive than the 1070 Ti, but I dunno, for a taster of the new tech I'm pretty happy with it. If Dice/Nvidia can bring some performance improvements, which apparently is something being work on, that'll be great.
I've yet to try my current settings and RT off to see what the RT hit is.

30 series is bound to offer a huge jump in RT performance as will the next few gens after that I think.

Cavallino · 25 Nov 2018 at 17:22

Does RTX really add much to the atmosphere and overall effect of the game do you think?

(I have no clue yet as I have yet to receive my card and new monitor - cant wait

)

BubbySoup · 25 Nov 2018 at 17:45

kevman said:
20 series Ray tracing is just a taster really and more rt cores are needed as this is the bottleneck

I agree, and if the current performance is an indicator of the number of cores needed, we need a lot more.

Now if only they had put all the RT stuff on a separate board and let consumers decide if they wanted it or not - they could have called it RayX

kevman · 25 Nov 2018 at 18:04

Cavallino said:
Does RTX really add much to the atmosphere and overall effect of the game do you think?

(I have no clue yet as I have yet to receive my card and new monitor - cant wait )

All these things are subjective really some people wowed others think its just a few extra reflections. Plenty of footage of BF5 on the web so have a look. I must admit I think it looks impressive but im still on the fence about jumping in this gen.

DarrenM343 · 25 Nov 2018 at 19:10

Subjective, I agree. Yesterday playing MP I suddenly noticed the team members ahead of me reflecting in a window along with the building opposite. Could live without it too but even this early stage is a nice to have, it's adding additional realism. Will try to check later how much FPS it's currently eating. At least you don't notice any slowdown if you for example run over a large puddle - the framerate I think stays pretty consistent. Maybe g-synch is helping that, I dunno. Am impressed by the frame rate consistency anyway, given what it's doing .

Shaz12 · 25 Nov 2018 at 19:12

Yup. You aren’t noticing the drop because of gsync. This game would be a nightmare without it. I turned off the FPS counter and had a blast not worrying about the FPS.

Cavallino · 25 Nov 2018 at 20:58

DarrenM343 said:
Subjective, I agree. Yesterday playing MP I suddenly noticed the team members ahead of me reflecting in a window along with the building opposite. Could live without it too but even this early stage is a nice to have, it's adding additional realism. Will try to check later how much FPS it's currently eating. At least you don't notice any slowdown if you for example run over a large puddle - the framerate I think stays pretty consistent. Maybe g-synch is helping that, I dunno. Am impressed by the frame rate consistency anyway, given what it's doing .

Now thats interesting....
Would someone with an RTX GFX card would have a competitive advantage over someone who doesnt because of the very reason you mentioned? E.g. say coming round a corner you could see the reflection of an enemy in an object infront of you (say a car or something like that)...

Nasher · 25 Nov 2018 at 21:02

Battlefield is so random pewpew these days I don't think it's going to make a lot of difference.

Cavallino · 1 Dec 2018 at 20:54

So I installed the Inno3D 2080 upgrading from Inno3D 1070

3DMark goes fro 5.7k up tro 8.4k.

Does this sound reasonable?

Looking at some reviews of 1440p BF1 theyre claiming FPS of around 130FP, but Im getting around 80-90 on Ultra.

Cavallino · 3 Dec 2018 at 12:30

I checked the benchies page....
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/time-spy-standard-dx-12-bench.18740536/

Not many 2080 (non-TIs) it seems?

:confused:

melmac · 3 Dec 2018 at 13:02

Cavallino said:
I checked the benchies page....
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/time-spy-standard-dx-12-bench.18740536/

Not many 2080 (non-TIs) it seems?

It depends on what area they are testing. If you aren't playing the same section of the map that they are then you won't be able to compare numbers really. Try a few sites using the static in game benchmarks and see what you are getting.

oops, lol, I replied to the wrong post, was supposed to be a reply to your BF1 post above.

There will be more 2080's sold when the 1080Ti's are all gone.

kevman · 3 Dec 2018 at 13:05

Cavallino said:
So I installed the Inno3D 2080 upgrading from Inno3D 1070

3DMark goes fro 5.7k up tro 8.4k.

Does this sound reasonable?

Looking at some reviews of 1440p BF1 theyre claiming FPS of around 130FP, but Im getting around 80-90 on Ultra.

Remember that 1440p test will be standard screen size. You have UW 1440p ( same as me) so perf should be between 1440p and 4k