NVIDIA ‘Ampere’ 8nm Graphics Cards

LoadsaMoney · 3 Dec 2019 at 14:51

Vince said:
Oi!!! the 7 is a very very good compute card, not the best gamer in the world but holds it's own. There isn't a game out there that it can't play and can't play well.

Vince · 3 Dec 2019 at 14:53

LoadsaMoney said:

I'll get my coat and wrap my 7 up warm on my way out the door

4K8KW10 · 3 Dec 2019 at 15:48

Rroff said:
The problem is when working within a desktop environment versus console or phone, etc. a lot of people are still working at a per-pixel level in applications, etc. - around 1440p or so you tend to cross over to a point where higher resolutions are most useful for increasing the density of objects (making curves look nicer, etc.) versus increasing available estate and you start to lose easy ability to work at a per-pixel precision and that isn't a universally useful use case unlike the adoptions of 1080p, etc. where that wasn't a factor.

I don't think UHD is going to be adopted at the same level like 1080p, etc. was in the desktop space any time soon - I specifically have multiple monitors (1440p and UHD) so as to get the best of both while for its time a 1440p monitor gave me the best of both and I won't be replacing my main monitor with anything higher res any time soon - despite having a UHD monitor and being able to afford a high refresh UHD one.

Well, the difference between 4K and 1080p is day and night, specifically for ergonomics - less eyes fatigue because of the higher image quality. And these details level optimisations:
https://www.humanscale.com/ergonomics/what-is-ergonomics/

Rroff · 3 Dec 2019 at 16:15

4K8KW10 said:
Well, the difference between 4K and 1080p is day and night, specifically for ergonomics - less eyes fatigue because of the higher image quality. And these details level optimisations:
https://www.humanscale.com/ergonomics/what-is-ergonomics/

Only you won't notice it like those images in person due to the smaller pixels on your average monitor sized display and sitting further back on a TV sized one.

Not saying there isn't a difference but you are missing the application side of it - increases up to 1440p were very useful for increasing screen estate for working with - at UHD/4K that becomes a less clear cut benefit.

Vertigo · 3 Dec 2019 at 18:06

Dave2150 said:
1440P will be the new peasant resolution sooner than most think.

Hahaha, total nonsense.

The latest Steam stats show over 64% of people are still using 1920x1080. 2560x1440 accounts for a mere 5.5% and 4K 1.9%.

Enthusiasts with high-end graphics cards and higher resolution screens are the exception, not the norm.

4K8KW10 · 3 Dec 2019 at 18:16

Vertigo1 said:
The latest Steam stats show over 64% of people are still using 1920x1080. 2560x1440 accounts for a mere 5.5% and 4K 1.9%.

Enthusiasts with high-end graphics cards and higher resolution screens are the exception, not the norm.

This is because 64% of the people are poor, and can only afford very cheap screens starting from $50 or so.
And the industry refusing to stop producing them in favour of the higher quality 4K screens.

Rroff said:
Only you won't notice it like those images in person due to the smaller pixels on your average monitor sized display and sitting further back on a TV sized one.

Not saying there isn't a difference but you are missing the application side of it - increases up to 1440p were very useful for increasing screen estate for working with - at UHD/4K that becomes a less clear cut benefit.

Ordinary users don't use screen estate - that's only for CAD/CAM designers and engineers. Photoshop gurus would also benefit from 4K because of the high detail and colour accuracy.
I do notice it, even more pronounced than on those images. Actually, I can't sit in front of a 1080p 24" screen. The pixels are like mosquitos large and the colours accuracy is gone.

Look at this comparison of how 1080p and 2160p look like at the level of the screen, between the pixels you have matrices of black lines:

james.miller · 3 Dec 2019 at 18:35

4K8KW10 said:
This is because 64% of the people are poor, and can only afford very cheap screens starting from $50 or so.

Grim5 · 3 Dec 2019 at 19:51

The actual reason is that 30% of the steam marketshare is Chinese internet cafes and they all run 1080p screens

CuriousTomCat · 3 Dec 2019 at 20:12

4K8KW10 said:
This is because 64% of the people are poor, and can only afford very cheap screens starting from $50 or so.
And the industry refusing to stop producing them in favour of the higher quality 4K screens.

So 64% of gamers are poor and the other 36% are average and rich combined? It doesn't make sense. Do you even know how percentages and averages work?

I game at 1080p and I'm certainly not poor. I'm also fully aware of the differences in quality between 1080p, 1440 and 4k.

Richdog · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:14

4K8KW10 said:
This is because 64% of the people are poor, and can only afford very cheap screens starting from $50 or so.
And the industry refusing to stop producing them in favour of the higher quality 4K screens.

The vast majority of even the most expensive gaming laptops are 1080p, that's because it is the sweet spot for current games to hit high framerates at maximum detail. Every time a new technology like Ray Tracing is released this also makes 1080p more relevant due to the increased GPU power needed even at lower resolutions.

4k screens not only use way more battery and need more GPU power, they also cost more for standalone PC desktop monitors, so you don't have to be "poor" not to be able to afford one, when having one means that you also need to spend way more on other components to drive it.

4K8KW10 · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:16

CuriousTomCat said:
So 64% of gamers are poor and the other 36% are average and rich combined? It doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense because those 36% include all types of resolutions, 1440p and 2160p in total are reported as 7.4%.

CuriousTomCat said:
I game at 1080p and I'm certainly not poor.

I own a 4K monitor and do my best to game at 3840x2160 every time it is technically possible. Sometimes, because of graphics card hardware limitations I am forced to stick to 1080p

Richdog said:
The vast majority of even the most expensive gaming laptops are 1080p, that's because it is the sweet spot for current games to hit high framerates at maximum detail. Every time a new technology like Ray Tracing is released this also makes 1080p more relevant due to the increased GPU power needed even at lower resolutions.

4k screens not only use way more battery and need more GPU power, they also cost more for standalone PC desktop monitors, so you don't have to be "poor" not to be able to afford one, when having one means that you also need to spend way more on other components to drive it.

It's a trade-off - either economics or ergonomics, in which case the end user doesn't know their own interest and puts their health on the hazards and toxicity table.

Gregster · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:23

4K8KW10 said:
This is because 64% of the people are poor, and can only afford very cheap screens starting from $50 or so.

You are the guy that keeps on Giving. Are you Santa by chance?

Woodsta888 · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:30

Gregster said:
You are the guy that keeps on Giving. Are you Santa by chance?

Oh This^^^^

Runs 4k with his laptop as the 'gaming rig'. Then advises what everyone else should be buying.

4K8KW10 · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:31

Gregster said:
You are the guy that keeps on Giving. Are you Santa by chance?

This is a good question. I am not but I do support all people in their pursuit of better life and better conditions. It goes through better computer hardware and quality monitors, yes!

aoaaron · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:41

i think i might just get a 3080ti on release if they offer it.

this cycle has lasted way too long for my liking and with VR hopefully kicking off next year a bit more, i'd like a bit more GPU gruntpower. part of me wants to stick with my 2080 for one more year though as I hardly game as it is.

malachi · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:46

aoaaron said:
i think i might just get a 3080ti on release if they offer it.

this cycle has lasted way too long for my liking and with VR hopefully kicking off next year a bit more, i'd like a bit more GPU gruntpower. part of me wants to stick with my 2080 for one more year though as I hardly game as it is.

I'm going to bite the bullet and buy it on release.

Going to start saving now, wont look so bad on my wallet then

Gregster · 3 Dec 2019 at 21:48

Woodsta888 said:
Oh This^^^^

Runs 4k with his laptop as the 'gaming rig'. Then advises what everyone else should be buying.

TNA · 3 Dec 2019 at 22:53

Gregster said:
You are the guy that keeps on Giving. Are you Santa by chance?

Lol.

Careful there Gregster my boy, you may end up in his sig

Woodsta888 said:
Oh This^^^^

Runs 4k with his laptop as the 'gaming rig'. Then advises what everyone else should be buying.

Richdog · 4 Dec 2019 at 05:27

4K8KW10 said:
It's a trade-off - either economics or ergonomics, in which case the end user doesn't know their own interest and puts their health on the hazards and toxicity table.

You are either on a wind-up, or a young man with very little life experience and/or common sense.

D.P. · 4 Dec 2019 at 05:56

CuriousTomCat said:
So 64% of gamers are poor and the other 36% are average and rich combined? It doesn't make sense. Do you even know how percentages and averages work?

I game at 1080p and I'm certainly not poor. I'm also fully aware of the differences in quality between 1080p, 1440 and 4k.

The wealth distribution is not Gaussian so it it is quite possible for 64% of people to be below the mean.

50% would only apply to the median value.