NVIDIA ‘Ampere’ 8nm Graphics Cards

TNA · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:11

Jacky60 said:
Then AMD, just like Elvis, left the building.

Lol

smilertoo · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:12

I've never paid over £500 for a gpu, no plans to start unless the speed jump is enormous. (1070).

TNA · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:14

smilertoo said:
I've never paid over £500 for a gpu, no plans to start unless the speed jump is enormous. (1070).

Would a 3070 that is under £500 and is 80% or faster fit the bill? Because I recon if Nvidia have any sense at all that is what we will be getting.

Twinz · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:24

opethdisciple said:
Yes, but enough people did for Nvidia not to feel the need to lower prices.

If there where any market pressure or sales weren't good, we would have seen better prices.

Unless the R&D on the cards was so high they actually couldn't afford to sell them cheaper.

Which could bode well for the 3000 series.

It could be that it simply cost them too much to make Turing profitable at decent price points.

It's not like they would come out and admit it. I expect them to pretend everything is fine either way.

Twinz · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:30

TNA said:
Would a 3070 that is under £500 and is 80% or faster fit the bill? Because I recon if Nvidia have any sense at all that is what we will be getting.

After all these years, 80% more performance over my 1080ti would be good...at my 1080ti's price point.

But then, I also don't care who's name is on the GPU. I'll buy AMD if they get the job done well.

Nvidia does NOT hold all the cards in this.

Grim5 · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:34

opethdisciple said:
But surely Nvidia are not immune to market conditions.

They are only able to squeeze us 'until the pips squeak' because they have no competition at this tie or the market conditions allow them to do so.

Why are we all buying their over priced products then?

trying to get 4K 120hz gaming, amd got nothing for me - what about you, why'd you buy Nvidia?

TNA · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:37

Twinz said:
It could be that it simply cost them too much to make Turing profitable at decent price points.

It's not like they would come out and admit it. I expect them to pretend everything is fine either way.

If that is the case and I am not saying it is, then let’s hope they don’t make the same mistake twice.

They need to launch the 3070 that is 2080Ti or there about’s performance with much better RT for £499 or less. And I don’t want to hear no excuses about the 2080Ti’s current inflated price tag. That card has been a rip off from day one. Did not even achieve the 50% uplift from the 1080Ti. So it was less of an uplift and they wanted 50% or so extra for it vs what we got the generation before.

The only worry I have is the question mark that is Samsung 8nm. Let’s hope it can deliver the performance uplift needed.

Twinz said:
After all these years, 80% more performance over my 1080ti would be good...at my 1080ti's price point.

But then, I also don't care who's name is on the GPU. I'll buy AMD if they get the job done well.

Nvidia does NOT hold all the cards in this.

Yea, that is unlikely. For that they will no doubt want to charge more.

Twinz · 4 Jul 2020 at 20:44

TNA said:
If that is the case and I am not saying it is, then let’s hope they don’t make the same mistake twice.

They need to launch the 3070 that is 2080Ti or there about’s performance with much better RT for £499 or less. And I don’t want to hear no excuses about the 2080Ti’s current inflated price tag. That card has been a rip off from day one. Did not even achieve the 50% uplift from the 1080Ti. So it was less of an uplift and they wanted 50% or so extra for it vs what we got the generation before.

The only worry I have is the question mark that is Samsung 8nm. Let’s hope it can deliver the performance uplift needed.

Yea, that is unlikely. For that they will no doubt want to charge more.

Prior to Turing, more performance was expected at each price point with every generation. That's what progress looks like. They dropped the ball on that last generation and need to get back on track with this gen.

TNA · 4 Jul 2020 at 21:29

Twinz said:
Prior to Turing, more performance was expected at each price point with every generation. That's what progress looks like. They dropped the ball on that last generation and need to get back on track with this gen.

+1

Joxeon · 4 Jul 2020 at 21:45

Twinz said:
It could be that it simply cost them too much to make Turing profitable at decent price points.

It's not like they would come out and admit it. I expect them to pretend everything is fine either way.

Sales were down yet profits were up so I'm guessing there was a big mark up on Turing.

opethdisciple · 4 Jul 2020 at 23:38

Grim5 said:
trying to get 4K 120hz gaming, amd got nothing for me - what about you, why'd you buy Nvidia?

I have a Gsync monitor. I like the Nvidia ecosystem (physx, dlss, RT)

Another thing I dislike about AMD is the fact the last drivers always seem to be betas. Where as with Nvidia the drivers are WHQL.

See here for example. The latest AMD drivers are 'optional' whilst the older set are the WHQL. No thanks!

TNA · 5 Jul 2020 at 00:26

opethdisciple said:
I have a Gsync monitor. I like the Nvidia ecosystem (physx, dlss, RT)

Another thing I dislike about AMD is the fact the last drivers always seem to be betas. Where as with Nvidia the drivers are WHQL.

See here for example. The latest AMD drivers are 'optional' whilst the older set are the WHQL. No thanks!

Why do you care about whql so much? All it means is it spent a week or what not with Microsoft to be certified. Nothing else. To my knowledge anyway. Plus, do you really upgrade drivers every month?

Also, is Physx still a thing? Thought that was long gone.

aoaaron · 5 Jul 2020 at 00:33

opethdisciple said:
I have a Gsync monitor. I like the Nvidia ecosystem (physx, dlss, RT)

Another thing I dislike about AMD is the fact the last drivers always seem to be betas. Where as with Nvidia the drivers are WHQL.

See here for example. The latest AMD drivers are 'optional' whilst the older set are the WHQL. No thanks!

to be fair, nvidia drivers arent all that. gta v was broken on nvidia for ages and used to crash 30 mins into game.

Rroff · 5 Jul 2020 at 05:19

TNA said:
Also, is Physx still a thing? Thought that was long gone.

Loads of games still use software PhysX including a good few new releases very few however use hardware PhysX which is a shame.

TNA · 5 Jul 2020 at 09:02

Rroff said:
Loads of games still use software PhysX including a good few new releases very few however use hardware PhysX which is a shame.

But do you need an Nvidia graphics card for the software version? Don’t think you do. So basically it is not a reason to want an nvidia card is what my thoughts are.

keyser · 5 Jul 2020 at 10:32

Radical plans to give all adults £500 and children £250 in vouchers to spend in sectors of the economy worst hit by the Covid-19 crisis are being considered by the Treasury.

That will come in handy

free graphics cards for everyone!

Link. If there's one thing this thread needs, its politics.

Rroff · 5 Jul 2020 at 11:03

TNA said:
But do you need an Nvidia graphics card for the software version? Don’t think you do. So basically it is not a reason to want an nvidia card is what my thoughts are.

No it is purely CPU.

TNA · 5 Jul 2020 at 11:04

Rroff said:
No it is purely CPU.

As I thought, so not really a key selling point like he was suggesting it is.

Quartz · 5 Jul 2020 at 11:16

Is PhysX still not hardware-accelerated if you have a Nvidia card? Sure it passes through a software layer, but then does it get passed through to hardware?

Rroff · 5 Jul 2020 at 11:49

Quartz said:
Is PhysX still not hardware-accelerated if you have a Nvidia card? Sure it passes through a software layer, but then does it get passed through to hardware?

Depends how the application developer has implemented it and/or features used.