-
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.
** LAST ROUND OF DEALS FROM NVIDIA - LAST CHANCE BUY ON 1080/1080Ti!! **
Associate
- Joined
- 21 May 2010
- Posts
- 550
448gb/s in 2080 vs 484gb/s in 1080ti there is not much in that at all. That said 20% more pays for the RTX stuff and potentially an improvement of 35-45% in ipc which should make it 15-20% quicker.
Lucky, what's lucky about it, way overpriced if you can't see that i dunno what is.
I highly doubt that the 2080 will be 15-20% faster than the 1080ti.. Tom peterson himself said around 35-45 for the 2080ti vs the 1080ti and thats most likely founders vs founders and we know the 2080ti has a better reference cooler so it gets to stretch its legs more. That cap is most likely going to shrink to 25-30% outside of RTX enabled benchmarks/games if we compare a proper cooled 1080ti vs the 2080ti.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 6,003
I think it will be especially in new games. It'll be a bit of an embarrassment if not and NV aren't stupid. Of course you'll get the RT stuff too but NV knows there needs to be a decent gain at last from the 2080 vs the old Ti.
Getting closer now to the day we start finding out the real situation anyway
.
Associate
Personally I think, based on NVIDIA's benchmark 2080 vs 1080, that the 2080 should perform roughly 5% better than a 1080 Ti without DLSS and 30-37% better with DLSS active. They may even trade blows back an fourth given the 1080 Ti has more cores and memory i.e. 980 Ti vs 1070.
Edit: I mean an aftermarket 1080 Ti vs stock clock 2080 in the above
Associate
- Joined
- 21 May 2010
- Posts
- 550
Yup he said that he thinks it will be 35-45% when RTX & DLSS were not being used. A bit of optimisation and it could be better than that - these have skipped a generation after all so there must be a decent ipc increase. Upcoming games that use DLSS & the hardware functions of course will run far faster.
I even think a 2070 has a chance to best a 1080ti going forward, I don't think its a great purchase at £600 unless you have a very old card now.
Associate
It has been a very slow two weeks 
I can't believe people are suggesting that Tom Petersen doesn't know the exact performance of the cards. Like you, I think those figures are best case scenario. He seemed very reluctant to say the 2080 was going to be faster than the 1080Ti.
What do you mean by skipped a generation? This is the generation following the 1080ti so how can they have skipped one? These new cards are using 12nm which is just a slightly tweaked version of the previous gens 16nm node so there wont be a big IPC increase (if any at all).
If the 2080 handily beats the 1080ti then why would nvidia release both the 2080 & 2080ti simultaneously? Something they have not done for any other generation? The obvious answer is because the 2080 isn't fast enough.
@Gibbo Send me an order confirmation pretty please
You need post in CS I’m now out the UK until next week sorry.
A lot of wishful thinking there. A 2080 isn't looking it will beat a 1080Ti never mind a 2070. And not sure what you mean by Skipped a generation? There was no generation skipped. In fact, it's not even a proper node shrink, so the gains in performance won't even come close to the levels that happened between Maxwell and Pascal. And Maxwell to Pascal was a skipped generation, a double die shrink if you want, they went from 28nm to 16nm skipping 20nm.
Associate
Following that logic they should have released the 980 and 980Ti simultaneously, as the 980 was about +/-5% the 780Ti at launch.
Sorry it was a poorly worded post. My attempt was to highlight how we are told the prices will only go up, and we should buy. Then they actually go down we should buy coz it's a special deal.
Yo-yo rubbish on pricing.
You are keeping your feet very much on the ground. Good for you. Your posts have been very balanced.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 May 2010
- Posts
- 550
Pascal, Volta, Turing. Probably because they are pushing real time Ray tracing and they need a high end part to deliver it, also because the node is easier they might have a reasonable yield to provide ti volumes. I doubt there is one reason, there is probably many which have lead to it making sense for them.
It has been over 2 years since the release of Pascal and it appears this is still so new that they haven't got decent drivers and software support sorted so it's too early to write off it's performance based on a couple of throw away comments and some unknown benchmarks.
I'd be wary of naysayers upset about the price at this stage. I'd also avoid making conclusions about the future software support.
I'm not saying it will be substantially more powerful just that it could be. Equally it could be the rip off many are preaching. If it is that would be an uncharacteristic lack of form from Nvidia who have now smashed it out of the park for several years even competiting with itself when it doesn't have to. After all it would have been far easier for them to slowly drip slightly faster revisions onto the market every few months that perform better than AMD cards for the same money.
+1 Obviously he knows.
What throw away comments? The performance numbers are coming from Nvidia slides, Nvidia's demos, Nvidia's Marketing Manager, The developers themselves. The only two real unknowns are how much real time ray tracing are the developers going to sacrifice to get playable framerates and how well will DLSS will work and is it easily integrated into new games and is there any hope of it been used in older games. In my mind DLSS will be turn out to be the best feature of these new cards performance wise.