• 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

Doobedoo said:
Yeah would be better if you included the non super versions.
Click to expand...
Better to stick to dollars due to the changes in the exchange rate.

danlightbulb said:
If you list 'em, I'll chart 'em.

The pound prices are hard to find.

Im not sure they are relevant really. If we're trying to understand the relative positioning of performance between generations and between cards within a generation, then we need a consistent price base.
Click to expand...
Agree, stick to dollars. Btw great chart.

Here are some AMD prices (dollars)

Radeon VII. 700
Vega 64 Liquid 700
Vega 64 499
Vega 56. 400
5700XT. 400
5700. 349
5600XT. 279
 
Ok here is an updated chart this time with all release prices (in dollars) taken off wikipedia. Still using passmark performance scores.

d6xFC0T.png


It does look different however the movements and patterns are still very clear.

Its pretty clear that the high end Turing cards simply continue the price/performance trend line from Pascal. So whilst they are increasing in price, they clearly also are increasing substantially in performance as well.

The Super range then demonstrates a step change in terms of shifting the price to performance line over to the right.

RDNA1 and the Super range are on exactly the same profile, just that RDNA1 is sitting at the lower end and Turing at the higher. But they're on the same line.

As are GCN and Pascal.

The 2070 Super clearly shows the best price to performance on that chart - its the card the furthest to the bottom right. The 5700XT and 2060 Super aren't far behind, and the 2080 super is clearly better value than the 2080 Ti unless you need that extra 10% performance.

Overall, what I get from this chart is really that pricing is fairly predictable, and, in the main, consistent with performance and consistent across and between generations.
 
The 2080 was the most illustrative Turing card. -Basically 1080ti-performance for 1080ti-money, but years after the 1080ti launched. At least we got "ray tracing" at no extra charge.

Considering that the 2080Ti offered the uplift that previous generations had normally offered over their predecessors' price points, Nvidia basically gave us a "normal" generational upgrade, but charged $500 for "ray tracing".

Ray tracing is not yet worth $500 per card to me. (and I doubt that it will be any time soon)
 
danlightbulb said:
Ok here is an updated chart this time with all release prices (in dollars) taken off wikipedia. Still using passmark performance scores.

d6xFC0T.png


Overall, what I get from this chart is really that pricing is fairly predictable, and, in the main, consistent with performance and consistent across and between generations.
Click to expand...



The Pascal line and the non-super Turing line clearly have two different angles.
 
@Twinz the 2080 wasn't the same performance as the 1080Ti, not according to Passmark where it scores nearly 19000 points against 17500. You might not consider that much of a change and I agree, but its consistent with the trend line.
 
danlightbulb said:
@Twinz the 2080 wasn't the same performance as the 1080Ti, not according to Passmark where it scores nearly 19000 points against 17500. You might not consider that much of a change and I agree, but its consistent with the trend line.
Click to expand...
Is that latest with driver updates an stuff? At release the 2080 seemed a little ahead/even
 
danlightbulb said:
@Twinz the 2080 wasn't the same performance as the 1080Ti, not according to Passmark where it scores nearly 19000 points against 17500. You might not consider that much of a change and I agree, but its consistent with the trend line.
Click to expand...
LeMson said:
Is that latest with driver updates an stuff? At release the 2080 seemed a little ahead/even
Click to expand...

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwrevie...ders-edition-review-benchmarks-vs-gtx-1080-ti

Gamers Nexus said:

Conclusion: Is the RTX 2080 Worth It?
Click to expand...
Gamers Nexus said:
No -- not yet.

The card is fine, and what nVidia is trying to do is commendable and, we think, an eventual future for gaming technology. That does not mean that it's worth the price at present, however. The RTX 2080 is poor value today. NVidia's own GTX 1080 Ti offers superior value at $150 less, in some cases, or $100 less on average. The cards perform equivalently, and yet the 1080 Ti is cheaper and still readily available (and with better models, too). The RTX cards may yet shine, but there aren't any applications making use of the namesake feature just yet -- at least, not any outside of tech demonstrations, and those don't count. Until we see a price drop in the 2080, compelling RTX implementations in an actually relevant game, or depleted stock on the 1080 Ti, there is no strong reason we would recommend the RTX 2080 card.
Click to expand...
 
danlightbulb said:
Ok here is an updated chart this time with all release prices (in dollars) taken off wikipedia. Still using passmark performance scores.
Click to expand...

Good chart, but you really would be better ditching the AMD info in a Nvidia discussion. Why not chart the 700 & 900 series instead, and get a proper historical look at the Nvidia offerings?
 
Dirk Diggler said:
Good chart, but you really would be better ditching the AMD info in a Nvidia discussion. Why not chart the 700 & 900 series instead, and get a proper historical look at the Nvidia offerings?
Click to expand...
The amd info is still relevant as a comparison of price - performance: it's not like AMD are offering massively different bang for buck. They just don't have a high end to rival NVidia at this time. Now whether that makes a real-world difference is a different debate, and yes, not for here perhaps.
 
Simon Belmont said:
It's now the 3080 into 2080Ti pricing. £1500 at the lowest :( From what I'm hearing pricing will be crazy. I'm out this gen. Going PS5. Keeping my current gpu.
Click to expand...
It ain't confirmed. Just fake news floating about to get you to think the eventual release price to look like a bargain. Even though it really won't be.
 
Had the 2080Ti launched at ~$700, it would have been a "good" generational improvement and in line with previous generations.
 
@Twinz ok fair enough. Obviously there are multiple benchmarks available and as you say driver iterations. All I can do is pick a consistent benchmark across all cards otherwise it would be a complicated mess.

With respect to the 1080 Ti it shows that that card was good value. If it wasn't for that one card, there would be a more visible shift to the right between Pascal and Turing. Its the 1080 Ti that was the outlier here.

There is then a clear step to the right between the original Turing range and the super range. The super's clearly offer better value here.

If the Ti's were removed from this chart, the patterns would be much clearer. Its demonstated to me that I don't need to buy a Ti, and if I don't, then price and performance changes between generations are in fact very predictable and consistent, and the super range is clearly much better than the 1st Turing release. The super release is what the 1st Turing release should have been. Forget the Ti, it doesn't fit this pattern and you're clearly just paying for the very best which is only 10% ahead of the 2080 Super (in this benchmark).

rfpAweE.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom