With ADA you're essentially paying for a software solution especially for a 4080 which isn't much faster than a 3090ti in raster and probably the reason it was locked out on 3000 series cards despite having the hardware built in to run it.
-
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 4000 Series
- Thread starter MrClippy
- Start date
This is what they said about upscaling DLSS, but now DLSS3 is out they're saying 'don't miss out on DLSS3 - only supported on our latest cards!'
So regardless of being able to still play games on a particular card (I still game on a 1060, go figure), people buying the latest this gen will feel like they also want to buy the next gen, and the one after. So I don't agree that the 4080/4090 is any more future proof than previous generations in that respect.
DLSS3 provides a far greater performance increases than DLSS2, so logically speaking of course it future proofs them more in terms of performance vs previous generations that cannot properly support DLSS3.This is what they said about upscaling DLSS, but now DLSS3 is out they're saying 'don't miss out on DLSS3 - only supported on our latest cards!'
So regardless of being able to still play games on a particular card (I still game on a 1060, go figure), people buying the latest this gen will feel like they also want to buy the next gen, and the one after. So I don't agree that the 4080/4090 is any more future proof than previous generations in that respect.
Last edited:
It doesn't though, does it? - when you're talking about longevity of a card you need to look at how it performs in the just about acceptable range, below which you give up and buy a new card. DLSS3 is absolutely not for such situations - if you're only just getting enough performance to have the game be responsive enough then adding more latency is not going to help you play the game, quite the opposite.
DLSS3 is great for CPU limited games. But you replace graphics cards when you are GPU limited.
This is where its stuck in a closed loop for me.
I am a 30/60fps player, I need to say this, so its important my requirements are not these triple figure framerates.
At those framerates pretty much all modern games I have played are not cpu bottlenecked as they tend to be good at multi threading, however a load of older DX9 games tend to have a heavily loaded thread and hence years ago everyone was raving about cpu's with good per core performance.
The problem is of course DLSS3 doesnt work on old DX9 games, if it did these GPU's would have a lot more interest from me.
Its sad but i always assumed DLSS was invented to help give older gen cards a longer life cycle and so to reduce e-waste so people don't need to throw out old gpu's as ofte. However it seems it's purely a selling point now to give new tech a better performance gap over the previous gen instead. I suppose i shouldn't be so naive!This is what they said about upscaling DLSS, but now DLSS3 is out they're saying 'don't miss out on DLSS3 - only supported on our latest cards!'
So regardless of being able to still play games on a particular card (I still game on a 1060, go figure), people buying the latest this gen will feel like they also want to buy the next gen, and the one after. So I don't agree that the 4080/4090 is any more future proof than previous generations in that respect.
Last edited:
Considering the impact of DLSS (2 or 3) is available for all to see and objectively results in performance gains on both low end and high end cards (including my 4090) at very high graphical fielity settings, then I absolutely do not understand or agree with your logic because in 2-3 years DLSS will clearly help my 4090 perform at a decent level vs no DLSS.
Lets just agree to disagree here.
How is it "purely" a selling technique? DLSS objectively and empirically gives a performance boost to cards that support it.
Last edited:
Its having better sales than the 4080 but that's still not a good yard stick, the 3080 sold about 10,000 units at ocuk on release day alone.
The 4080 owners thread has 9 people, the 3080 owners thread over the same time period had 101 and this was with pandemic supply issues and many thousands stuck on back order, so yeah the Nvidia cards are having terrible sales.
Last edited:
Talking more about DLSS 3.0 being locked out of 2000 and 3000 series due to some missing hardware or incompatibility on those series of cards. You'd think they would have this stuff planned way ahead of time to account for it.
Some only have a 2 year warranty though, palit\gainward\kfa2\ for a £1600+ card that's a joke. You do have options with pny\gigabyte\zotac, some of them have 3\4\5 years which is really good, 3 imo should be the bare minimum. Wouldn't touch msi suprim x as just about everyone that's got one of those say it squeals like a pig stuck under a gate.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,387
DLSS3 adds latency not just FPS, so whilst it does give an apparent performance boost on an fps counter/benchmark that isn't the whole story.
As an example one of the DLSS3 benches they were showing off showed 120fps but at 50-60ms latency. I have gamed on TV's with 120hz but 30-40ms input lag and that was unplayable to me, so I really don't see how dlss3 is going to be any good. It's like all those people who were saying consoles were fine and smooth, but to me unplayable.
Last edited:
Latest DF video (posted today) seems to suggest < 10ms lag in Cyberpunk DLSS3 update which they claimed was unnoticeable: https://youtu.be/WNRIwyHg4Ak?t=1633
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 2,775
DF wouldn't even notice Jensen robbing their house.
FG is tricky. On one hand, yes it adds latency. On the other hand, your options are playing without FG, which drops your framerate.
In CP2077, in the hypothetical scenario that there was no DLSS 2 at all, id much prefer playing with FG on then off, even with the increase in latency.
That makes little logical sense. DLSS3 has different hardware requirements and it was part of the design of the 4000 series... so why should that already be taped out many years earlier when the 2000 and 3000 series was being designed? I am not apologizing on Nvidias behalf and I certainly have no love for them as a company, money grabbing ****'s that they are, but in the end we should at least be reasonable in our criticism. Improvements often require changes in hardware and the 2000 and 3000 series have DLSS2 which still does give a large performance boost. They may also get support for DLSS3 later down the line but with reduced performance due to the missing additional hardware.
I need to pick up CP2077 with a cheap steam key, really want to try the VR mod too.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,387
I'd rather turn down settings than run 50ms of latency regardless of what a magic counter in the corner of the screen says