Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,154
- Location
- South Wales
That 20-30% extra performance is a hell of a cost for a 3090 from a 3080.. sod that if true
-
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
yeah if that is true it will put me off getting one
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 629
- Location
- The Nostromo
Yep, two years of waiting were very loooong
I got the 1080ti on launch and skipped 2080ti due to it being underwhelming
But im not gonna skip this gen if the 3090 is anymore than 1.4k tho im **** out of luck and will have to get a 3080
I have already sold my 1080ti today for £375 so im sat here waiting with a pc that at the moment is basically a potato because I needed the funds to put towards my 3000 series card before the market dropped out on the 1080ti prices and it ended up worth a lot less
I don't think they have a choice this time. I don't see the 3070 beating the 2080Ti. However, I do know that AMD are bringing some pressure onto them, which means they will release much more powerful cards this time around at given price points than Turing. Turing was TMSC, and it was expensive. I know every one continually goes on about Nvidia bending them over but really, Turing was expensive to manufacture. Mostly because the 2080Ti is a very large die (772?mm2 compared to 480mm2? something? on the 1080Ti) and also because it was TSMC. Who apparently are quite expensive, and on big dies the failure rates fly upward.
I think that is probably why they insisted on bringing in Samsung, and not using TSMC. Because to be frank a die as large as this 3090 could be would make it so expensive that I can promise you no one would buy it, no matter how good. How many bought Volta Titan? one I know of (kaap).
Fact is that for the first time in years they do have competition, and I have no doubt big Navi will be by far the best thing AMD have done in years. This means they need to beat them well (which it looks like they are planning doing) and that means pushing up £ to perf whether they want to or not (they don't, but if they lost to AMD they would be in big trouble).
I think the 3070 will perform like the 2080 Super, though that really is a wild guess as no spec has been launched yet and we really don't know anything solid abotu Ampere yet apart from the speculation.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,705
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
It is totally what they are about. Like mentioned already, they are not going to retrace (pun) their margins this gen as they feel sorry for punters, they will maintain the pattern of 20-30% progression over the last gen and through gritted teeth hang onto any price tier that they have created.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,705
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
I think this too, it will offer much better raytracing as its only value over the Turing stuff. Tough pill to swallow when there needs to be games you play that take advantage of it.
They will do what they have always done. Release stuff that beats AMD and is the fastest out there at a price. You don't have to buy it, and you don't have to like it.
The important part is that AMD have hung in there, and with Navi not only did they release affordable "good enough for any one" GPUs but also brought down the prices of the cards people *should* buy like the 2060 and 2070 Super.
No doubt big Navi will do that to some of the Ampere cards too. Not the 3090, but then like I said you have a choice no one is holding a gun to your head.
That's why when I bought my 2080Ti at the stupid price it was I didn't care. It's more than powerful enough for my needs (1440p) and will continue to be so for a long time to come. I'm glad I got it, because tbh? after three and a half years on my Titan XP I was desperate for a change. Mind you what am I saying? even that would be enough for another 2-3 years from now any way lol.
There won't be. The games, I mean. No game will be worth spending that sort of money on. Personally I don't give a toss about RT. I really don't. I have three RTX cards, and I have not been impressed by RT on any. It's grainy, bitty and looks off to me. I walk into a beautifully smooth room and there is film grain around the RT. That is off putting more than impressive. I really have no idea why it looks like that but tbh? I don't care either. On, off, makes no difference to me. For better or for worse (I've had it six months now) 2080Ti is where I will be at now for a long time to come. Until I either get very bored of it and buy an Ampere, or just ditch off PC gaming for one of the new consoles.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,705
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Its been refreshing to hear this @ALXAndy - most of the guys that respond on that will be die hards that think its needed, like Jensen said it himself.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,154
- Location
- South Wales
Well if it turns out to be true i will probably go for the 3080. Going to be disappointing if we're not getting as big a boost as we were hoping for.. Not great value. And not much choice for people wanting more performance for games like flight simulator and whatever else comes that's going to be demanding, AKA not great news (IMO) at least for those using 4K screens anyway.
Want and need are totally different things.
I wanted a current gen CPU for years. Didn't get one, because I didn't need it. Best CPU I ever had I got in January (12 core TR 1920x). And it's far from cutting edge. I downgraded my Titan XP to a 2070 (because as I said, I was bored) and I was very happy with that. More than good enough for my needs.
The 2080Ti rig? without getting into personal info I er, had a lottery win. So it cost me nothing, so I bought a 3950x and a 2080Ti. Which could never be stupid, because I use it every day and it will get used. I could have blown it on ale and whores of course, but you don't get much to show for that apart from STDs and a messed up liver
But yeah, needs? I didn't need to change out my Titan XP. If anything the 2070 is slower, but again that doesn't really matter when it is pushing out 100 FPS instead of 120 to me. As long as I meet the 60 at 1440p I am more than happy. I did need to change out my old Broadwell Xeon, because it was starting to creak with newer games, but the 1920x was a big jump for me.
No one needed a Titan. The 780 was good enough. No one needed a Titan Maxwell, or a Titan XP or anything else. There were plenty of lower priced GPUs that did the job more than good enough. I only got my Titan Maxwell because someone panic sold it and replaced it with a 1070 (which was really daft, given they sold it to me cheaper than the 1070 launched at and there was no difference) and the Titan XP cost me £30 less than a new 1080Ti so why not?
Expect it to be 10-15% faster than a 2080Ti at most for £500 less. Expect the RT to be better, if it really is important to you. Personally? I really don't like it. What it adds it takes away, and it kinda feels like I am playing Pong (if that makes sense) IE it's pretty basic as it sits, and takes away more than it adds. Most of what it adds you can't even see if you are playing the game and not looking at it any way. Raw performance is all that matters to me. So, in raw performance terms? 10-15% as rumoured for £500 less. I would say that's not bad, no?
I mean yeah, at 800 boys it's still not perfect but it's a whole lot better than 1300 of the same boys haha.
This will be two generations out from my 1080Ti. After all this time, the $700 price point should be 40-60% faster than it was two generations ago.
So, 60% faster than my 1080Ti @$700, I may buy now.
Just 40% faster for $700? I'll probably buy....after I wait a bit and give AMD a chance to make a better offer.
So, 60% faster than my 1080Ti @$700, I may buy now.
Just 40% faster for $700? I'll probably buy....after I wait a bit and give AMD a chance to make a better offer.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,154
- Location
- South Wales
I kept thinking 2080Ti was £999, or was supposed to be that or something wasn't it? Or was that the founders cards? But yes, checking prices now i see they are near £1,200.. so 800 for a 3080 is an improvement if it's 10-15% better, but I'm not saying that's a great improvement by any means.
Haven't played an RT game but from what I've seen so far I'd consider it more of an extra bonus
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,705
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
If nvidia just stuck to the x080Ti @ $700 format nobody would be blinking. However they mess about with all these flavours and supers and jack up the prices, thats why it gets the goat up.
I absolutely do
Much prefer it now.That price/performance is less bad than Turing, but not enough to make me "jump" and buy. If that's what they offer, I'll probably wait for AMD to put in a bid.
The absolute best thing about RTX is not the RTX itself. It's the DLSS, or rather their second version of it. It really does take up the strain, and add back in performance and it doesn't even look crap any more lol.
Of course the encoding and streaming abilities are off the charts too. So Turing really wasn't all bad.
I would see if you need to replace the 1080Ti first. Depends on your res etc. It may be wise to wait until Navi, even if you don't want it. Mostly because it will bring Ampere prices down there is no doubt about that either. Whatever AMD do it has to be cheaper, they don't have a choice. So as much as I didn't buy a Navi GPU I was so happy I waited before buying my 2070 Super and 2070. Simply because had I forked out what they wanted for the Super at first (before I got it for £418) I would have been peeved. Equally so if my 2070 hadn't cost me £350, but whatever the daft launch price was.
Just don't buy any GPU ever based on RT. None of them are worth it. It's far too early in the game, and it may not even catch on (like 3D TVs. Remember those? and Physx and....) yeah, all of that crap we got told would make our lives so much better and then up and vanished like a fart in the wind
BTW? strictly speaking Turing was just Pascal with some more bolted onto it and should never really have happened. It was Ampere then, remember? not Turing. They only did Turing because of Samsung, and Vega being so rubbish. They couldn't get Ampere done in time, so Turing was a side quest lol.
Associate
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2017
- Posts
- 1,196
Reflections and lighting are where this stuff rules completely. All of the existing rasterisation stuff falls down on reflections, particularly water reflections.
It may not be there in many games right now, it may not look that great in current games as it's really just an add-on, but make no mistake, as a technology real-time raytracing beats the pants off existing solutions.
(I also have no idea what you mean about it looking "grainy" in existing games, haven't noticed that at all)
I’ve been thinking about this GPU pricing business and trying to figure out why it’s so divisive and hard to compare to anything else.
so here goes...
Buy a £400 joystick. No problem, it will do the same thing it was bought for, forever, as long as it doesn’t break.
£10k camera lens...same
£100k car...say 10 yrs
£50 titanium camping fork...same
A GPU will eventually be worthless. Absolutely worthless. It’s horizon is constantly moving away.
Using the car analogy, the road is the gaming market. If the road gets harder to drive round, the better car provides more value.
they are just pieces of silicon that depreciate faster than most things.
that is why they shouldn’t be priced ridiculously high.
Even CPUs get a fairer deal as they can be used for more than just gaming
so here goes...
Buy a £400 joystick. No problem, it will do the same thing it was bought for, forever, as long as it doesn’t break.
£10k camera lens...same
£100k car...say 10 yrs
£50 titanium camping fork...same
A GPU will eventually be worthless. Absolutely worthless. It’s horizon is constantly moving away.
Using the car analogy, the road is the gaming market. If the road gets harder to drive round, the better car provides more value.
they are just pieces of silicon that depreciate faster than most things.
that is why they shouldn’t be priced ridiculously high.
Even CPUs get a fairer deal as they can be used for more than just gaming