So it seems I am not the only one who is fine with not having any aa on while playing at 4K on my 27” monitor. This is why I took issue with comparisons with DLSS where they said vs native and then applied Vaseline all over the image using either FXAA or TAA. To me that is not native no matter what anyone says. Yet when I say that some people automatically assume I am hating on DLSS, which is far from the truth as I will likely be even using it myself in games like Cyberpunk 2077, Dying Light 2 and Vampire Masquerades Bloodlines 2.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
NVIDIA ‘Ampere’ 8nm Graphics Cards
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
That explains why you se no value in TAA it makes sense now.
I also Play at 4K but on a 55 inch screen and for me without any AA games have a ton of jaggies all over the place so I would rather play with TAA than No AA.
So for me dlss tends to be a no brainer because it removes all the jaggies Id see with no AA and looks sharper than TAA and the frames per second is higher.
I can see the value of stuffing more pixels into a smaller size. I suspect that not this new generation of graphics cards, but the one after that in 2022/2023, I will upgrade to an 8K 55/65 inch screen at the same time so I can also play with no AA
I also Play at 4K but on a 55 inch screen and for me without any AA games have a ton of jaggies all over the place so I would rather play with TAA than No AA.
So for me dlss tends to be a no brainer because it removes all the jaggies Id see with no AA and looks sharper than TAA and the frames per second is higher.
I can see the value of stuffing more pixels into a smaller size. I suspect that not this new generation of graphics cards, but the one after that in 2022/2023, I will upgrade to an 8K 55/65 inch screen at the same time so I can also play with no AA
Yea, 8K is going to be awesome. But as an early adopter of 4K (2014) I will be staying well away from it due to lack of progress in price for performance in GPU’s. Back in the day we would get huge jumps in performance and prices would be reasonable, but if all the people saying post Turing card prices will remain the same or go up then I will certainly be in no rush to go 8K.
Also let’s see how many games get DLSS going forward. Right now I am happy that the top three games I am most looking forward are slated to use it, but I want to see it in most if not all triple a games. Will be interesting to see if the rumours of DLSS 3.0 pan out.
If DLSS takes off then it certainly will help me stay away from 8K for longer. I mean if next year LG release a 40” 4K OLED and I pick that up, I know for a fact that unless it went kaput I would keep it for the full duration of the 5 years warranty. So that means no 8K for me for about 6-7 years which should just about be enough time for cards that can handle it to come out.
4K 40” monitor here, I’m fine with it off I barely see the difference.
Im still running a 1080ti so... if I had a gpu with the grunt that didn’t cost over a grand I’d probably turn it up.. I’m getting tight in my old age
can I say tight or ?..... haha
Haha yeah, I am always tight4K 40” monitor here, I’m fine with it off I barely see the difference.
Im still running a 1080ti so... if I had a gpu with the grunt that didn’t cost over a grand I’d probably turn it up.. I’m getting tight in my old age
Hopefully next gen cards will offer the price for performance bump we all want.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,108
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Just saw this. Anahahahaha
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
What happens if Ampere is overall cheaper and faster then Turing?
I know a lot of people believe that Ampere will be just as expensive. But from the rumors out there the xx60/xx70/xx80 is said to be cheaper. Not sure about the TI variants.
What will that say for the Turing's resale-ability after Ampere release if that's true?
I know a lot of people believe that Ampere will be just as expensive. But from the rumors out there the xx60/xx70/xx80 is said to be cheaper. Not sure about the TI variants.
What will that say for the Turing's resale-ability after Ampere release if that's true?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,367
- Location
- Rollergirl
I can't believe you're asking that.
Turing will not have any "sale-ability" because it's EOL so don't be surprised to see a 2080ti selling brand new from retailers for around £550 for a short period of time (until stock is gone).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
I was referring used, not new. Should have clarified that. IE: resale of it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,367
- Location
- Rollergirl
Hard to tell with that, traditionally the previous Ti should be on a par with the new gen X70 so used 2080ti should be equal to 3070 minus a couple hundred quid.
Around £350.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,165
- Location
- South Wales
Good luck with that! That time will probably be the point where high hz 4K is doable with an upper/high end GPU, look at how some demanding games run maxed out at 4K now, not that well even with the best cards unless you're happy with 30/40FPS.
I only just bought a 4k 120hz TV last year so I gotta keep it for a few years before I can upgrade again, so for now I'm just doing 4k gaming with gsync on and letting the framerate run between 60 and 120fps. But I'm happy to downgrade to 60fps but at 8k when GPU's can manage that - I play 90% of my games using a controller and I struggle to see the difference of 120hz unless I use the mouse.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,841
I really don't think increasing the resolution all the time is the answer. 8k is ridiculous!!!
Surely game developers must be doing it wrong in the first place if the image needs 8k to remove jaggies?
A DVD movie has no jaggies at 480p and looks fantastic. Why does a game need 8k to look as good? I don't even think a 16k game would look at realistic as a 480p dvd to be honest. Resolution clearly isn't the correct answer.
1440p should be plenty. We just need games developers to have a board meeting and work things out properly in my opinion.
We need better solutions to these problems. 8k isn't the answer until games look at good as a movie. Then 8k can add extra detail to the movie.
Surely game developers must be doing it wrong in the first place if the image needs 8k to remove jaggies?
A DVD movie has no jaggies at 480p and looks fantastic. Why does a game need 8k to look as good? I don't even think a 16k game would look at realistic as a 480p dvd to be honest. Resolution clearly isn't the correct answer.
1440p should be plenty. We just need games developers to have a board meeting and work things out properly in my opinion.
We need better solutions to these problems. 8k isn't the answer until games look at good as a movie. Then 8k can add extra detail to the movie.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 2,657
I think 4k is going to be with us a long time
It also presents something of a problem for GPU manufacturers because once you are over the hump of being able to render 4K at good frames where is there to go for the mass market. Sure you could point to ray tracing or some other effects but the truth is its going to take years for the market to catchup and to convince developers to go all-in whilst supporting older platforms and hardware. I can see that really only the simmers and VR users stand to gain in this scenario with incremental jumps in performance and visual quality...
It also presents something of a problem for GPU manufacturers because once you are over the hump of being able to render 4K at good frames where is there to go for the mass market. Sure you could point to ray tracing or some other effects but the truth is its going to take years for the market to catchup and to convince developers to go all-in whilst supporting older platforms and hardware. I can see that really only the simmers and VR users stand to gain in this scenario with incremental jumps in performance and visual quality...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,192
This is where I stopped reading. Specsavers, pronto.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,165
- Location
- South Wales
I'm pretty happy with 1440p tbh, nice speed and quality.
Yea handling jaggies of certain objects etc has always been a strange thing in gaming, maybe they will come up with newer solutions or improve current methods further.
We are talking about games though. Plus we already have 8K TV's out now. Next year there likely will be many more, by 2022 they will start marketing hard I recon.
Yea, not even just that, I think he does not get how it all works. 1440p should be plenty, lol. I bloody wish that was true, my wallet would love that and that is coming from a wallet that has spring hinges on it!