Path tracing implementations currently are quite noisy due to having to sample over several frames as well as not having the hardware for higher ray counts so would be a little amusing if the grain was due to the AI trying to fill in the blanks with noise due to seeing the need to reproduce more of the same as the ray tracing output heh.
-
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
Path tracing implementations currently are quite noisy due to having to sample over several frames as well as not having the hardware for higher ray counts so would be a little amusing if the grain was due to the AI trying to fill in the blanks with noise due to seeing the need to reproduce more of the same as the ray tracing output heh.
They don't need to push a lot of watts through GA100, it will beat any GA102 card with ease.
If they build a Titan card on GA100 with quite low TDP it will be fast enough and leave it to the benchers to get the rest.
Unfortunately this would mean that the Titan would be very expensive but they have done it before with the Titan V.
There are so many flaws in this kindargarten logic. Nvidia 1080TI's are still worth £250-£300... after 4 years that is a residual value of around 40% of the original £699 price. Nvidia 2080Ti's now selling for 60+% of their value after 2 years. Is that nothing?
If you want crazy depreciation then you need to be looking at things like TV's... the value of those drop like an absolute stone compared to GPU's. Buy a 3000 TV then within a year you are looking at a 60-70% reduction in value. Your examples of a £100k car then a £50 titanium fork within the same post are also completely daft and not even directly and logically comparable.
A GPU gets DAILY use and is used as the centrepiece for a major hobby for millions of people that spend a significant amount of their time indulging in it... gaming. If I spend £1200 on a GPU and get 3 years of DAILY USE out of it and then can still sell it for 40% of the original value then I consider my money well spent. It amounts to around 65p per day, or £4.50 per week, for a hobby that I greatly enjoy... if that's not worth it to you then I think you need to find a new hobby. People spend far more on crappy TV and media subscriptions for content they don't even own! Or going out spending hundreds or thousands on partying and alcohol without blinking an eye. There are so many things we do that provide less value and enjoyment for the time we spend doing it than PC hardware and gaming. So. Many. Things.
I get that people are annoyed about the Nvidia price increases, but the amount of melodramatic and illogical and immature guff people like yourself are posting is hilarious. Get some perspective and look at the many ways people spend and waste their money that make PC gaming look pretty sensible in comparison.
Last edited:
I'd have been more on his side if he hadn't included the car example - cars you tend to see a pretty big hit just driving them home from the dealer and depreciation over time is fairly similar to that of a GPU and spending more on a car does nothing to guarantee its suitability on the road.
But depreciation has never been a factor in my GPU buying tech always moves on - personally what doesn't sit right with me has been the increased move to charging high-end prices for what is realistically mid-range electronics and trying to alter via marketing, etc. people's mindsets (which sadly given some of the posts on this subject seems to be working) to think they are getting a high end product for their money (that or they can't admit the truth to themselves). Personally I find the melodrama over the prices of the actual top end cards, where they really are top end silicon, like the 2080ti funny but stuff like the move with xx80 cards is another matter.
But depreciation has never been a factor in my GPU buying tech always moves on - personally what doesn't sit right with me has been the increased move to charging high-end prices for what is realistically mid-range electronics and trying to alter via marketing, etc. people's mindsets (which sadly given some of the posts on this subject seems to be working) to think they are getting a high end product for their money (that or they can't admit the truth to themselves). Personally I find the melodrama over the prices of the actual top end cards, where they really are top end silicon, like the 2080ti funny but stuff like the move with xx80 cards is another matter.
The Pascal example only works to that extent because the crazy pricing of Turing. That loss on the Turing card will be a lot higher after 4 years. The rest of your points are totally valid though.
My latest hobby is highest end headphones and audio gear and if I get a good deal, the price doesn't bother me as the value will not drop too badly regardless of how long I keep it.
The demand is there and there are a gazillion examples of similar things that have happened in the electronics world. Look at mobile phones, arguably the biggest waste of cash in modern times. You can get a high-end phone for the same price as a 2080 Ti and yet that the amount that the phone does that is different to one of half the price is negligible. In comparison, GPU's give tangible and measurable performance improvements and many people worldwide are really willing to pay for that as PC gaming is their primary hobby that they spend a very significant amount of their free time engaging in, which means it is understandable that the price will keep rising until it hits some kind of economic ceiling.
Two wrongs don't make a right!
I don't have a problem with an actual high end product at the top of the stack commanding whatever price, if I need the best I will pay for the best, it is the tiers below that which don't sit well with me. It is kind of funny in that respect as I used to buy flagship phones, though that was before the price went totally silly, because I needed to to get the features I required - these days even a middle of the range phone does everything I need (depending a bit on the camera quality).
Phones, Photography, Hifi equipment... a similar scaling and pricing now applies to almost every significant area of luxury electronics. It's an unpleasant reality of our consumerism society that PC components have been working towards for a long time.Two wrongs don't make a right!
I don't have a problem with an actual high end product at the top of the stack commanding whatever price, if I need the best I will pay for the best, it is the tiers below that which don't sit well with me. It is kind of funny in that respect as I used to buy flagship phones, though that was before the price went totally silly, because I needed to to get the features I required - these days even a middle of the range phone does everything I need (depending a bit on the camera quality).
If anything, CPU's have historicallyfor many years, and until only recently with Zen2, been one of the biggest price/performance disasters in the PC world as you could easily pay many hundreds for a high-end Intel CPU that was hardly any faster in gaming or perceptible system performance than a CPU a third of its price. Now you can spend far less on the motherboard and CPU (like a B550 and 3600x) which will still give great performance and then spend the extra on a GPU and see far more benefit.
This is why Intel have been caught with their pants down, it's not so much their CPUs are bad it's the pricing that's causing them to fail. If Intel put out the 10600k for £180 the 10700k for £280 and the 10900k for £380 they would clean up, the same thing will happy to nvidia if they keep raising prices regardless of the performance.
Nvidia are objectively different to Intel... they are consistent technological innovators with a highly competent management and a great marketing team. Intel have been defined in the last 5 years by technological stagnancy and an incompetent management and marketing team.
No matter how people want to assign their own personal values to them, Nvidia and AMD are no different in principle, they are both corporations that want to squeeze as much money from us as possible... it's just that one of them is in the dominant position where it doesn't have to lower prices. AMD currently do have to compete with lower prices, but as their position improves their prices will also likely rise as they seek to make more and more profit for their shareholders, who are getting increasingly demanding given the crapton of value that AMD shares have gained in the last 18 months. AMD want to be in the position Nvidia is in, that's their goal, they aren't working for the betterment of mankind.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 2,584
What is good is more people waking up to what Nvidia are doing, and respected tech sites like Hardware Unboxed being embargoed by Nvidia for telling the truth and making comparisons with competing vendors. Says it all really...
The 3080 for example there is no good reason why that can’t be a 12GB GPU the cost to do that is tiny, its on a cheaper Samsung node, the Turing architecture is mature. Nvidia are giving you as little as possible whilst charging as much as they can get away with using marketing and market dominance to sell it to you.
I’d be more understanding if Nvidia was heavily investing and going back to titles to get DLSS working so we have 100’s of games enabled not a handful as it is today.
£600 for a new console with world leading storage and an 8 core - 2080+ APU no less, with power supply, Memory, MB, case, ports, controller(s) an OS
or
Nvidia 3070
Console gamer or not that is quite telling, marketing dept earning its keep I reckon mid-range silicon is really expensive apparently
What's puzzling me is it doesn't look like any of the Youtube reviewers have cards yet, at least from their comments and speculation. Granted they could be hiding it really well.
If this is the case though, and the "launch" is only nine days away, this suggests a very soft launch or announcement with not even any performance reviews, let alone availability soon after.
If this is the case though, and the "launch" is only nine days away, this suggests a very soft launch or announcement with not even any performance reviews, let alone availability soon after.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,247
Yeah, what I've meant is that the rays are too few to have a clean image, even with denoising algorithms. My post wasn't too clear.
Anyway, Jim talks a bit over it here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrF4k6wJ-do
RT/path tracing should make also the lives of developers easier and for us to get prettier games. Not every dev has the resources to make use every hack in the bock so that rasterization looks as good as possible.
Well it's nice to see you trying to insult me by talking about kindergarten logic then bringing alcohol into the discussion which literally evaporates.
Could you maybe engage your gigantic brain and consider I may have been under the effects of it when I posted this? The titanium fork example was supposed to give a clue about my less than serious intentions.
Anyway, you bring TVs into the equation which helps prove my point. A £3000 tv still does exactly what you bought it for until it breaks. You could buy a £500 TV that does the same job. Other than res, TV doesn't get harder to watch.
I'm not trying to say there's anything wrong with spending big money on pc gaming hardware, just trying to articulate what makes GPUs a difficult thing to compare other hobbies and hardware to.
If you can name another hobby where the equipment used to carry it out directly affects the hobby itself and its market, I will gladly shut up.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,739
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Yeah we get your point @Richdog but your examples have holes in them too. Give it a rest, wait till some real details get shared and save that energy. 
Yeah, what I've meant is that the rays are too few to have a clean image, even with denoising algorithms. My post wasn't too clear.
Anyway, Jim talks a bit over it here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrF4k6wJ-do
RT/path tracing should make also the lives of developers easier and for us to get prettier games. Not every dev has the resources to make use every hack in the bock so that rasterization looks as good as possible.
I was adding a little more nuance in that it would be a bit amusing if the AI instead of trying to fill in what the path tracing implementation was trying to achieve but not quite managing even with denoising was seeing it as intended noise and filling in more noise. Something that can ultimately be tuned though.
Eh? I was simply saying that people spend a lot of money on alcohol etc without blinking an eye and yet complain about the price of a GPU they will keep and use heavily for 2-3 years and then be able to sell for around 40% of the original price.
Sorry but I am not going to assume that a person that I do not know and have never seen post before is drunk and not in control of what he is writing. If you think about that statement then surely you have to realise how silly that is. If you can't control your drinking or what you write then that's your problem... I just judge and react based on what I read.
It's not about the eventual and inevitable performance degradation, this affects almost all PC components to some extent and is not just GPU-specific. It's about the value in terms of of what you get out of what you buy, which is objectively not bad when you take the typical levels of almost daily usage and eventual resale value into account. If you want a hobby that saves you money then why are even you PC gaming, because it's always been a luxury activity as long as I've been doing it, which is way before GPU's were invented in 1999. The first dedicated GPU that was introduced at a price of $300, a lot of money at the time and which aged like a Mayfly. In fact, all GPU's for subsequent years aged like mayflies and it is only in relative modern times where you could get good frames out of a GPU in modern games for a couple of years. PC gamers on a budget can nowadays can build with mid-range components and have relatively long-lasting rigs (4+ years) if they are willing to stick to 1080p (which is still not a 'bad' resolution) and sacrifice some settings.
PC gaming is far from 'terrible' value overall, particularly if you stop thinking only in terms of the bleeding edge. Even when taking into account the bleeding edge, it's no worse than many things.