NVIDIA ‘Ampere’ 8nm Graphics Cards

scubes · 27 Aug 2020 at 14:36

kazuya1337 said:
Dunno where you read that but PS5 can not run 4K @ 120fps

Aye it medium detail lol so much for the 120fps 4K .

HRL · 27 Aug 2020 at 14:44

It was mentioned on AV Forums via https://www.pushsquare.com/news/202...s_cold_war_is_4k_120_frames-per-second_on_ps5

May not be true, I don’t know. Just wish Nvidia would give us a little something to go on rather than everyone’s constant speculation. Confirming HDMI 2.1 would hardly be deemed as letting the cat out of the bag early.

Pretty sure I read a while back that Sony did confirm HDMI 2.1 and VRR for the PS5.

VincentHanna · 27 Aug 2020 at 14:45

kazuya1337 said:
Dunno where you read that but PS5 can not run 4K @ 120fps

It can, it has HDMI 2.1

That's not to say any games other than very basic ones will run at 4k/120fps but Dirt 5 is confirmed already.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...firmed-120fps-games-for-ps5-and-xbox-series-x

tyler_jrb · 27 Aug 2020 at 14:55

scubes said:
Aye it medium detail lol so much for the 120fps 4K .

It will struggle to do 4k 60hz considering it has essentially an rx 2070 (at best). Sure 4k 120hz on games that don't require that much power and even then chances are it wont be a locked 4k 120hz. AAA titles no chance. Unless you want everything at potato settings.

Core09 · 27 Aug 2020 at 14:59

VincentHanna said:
It can, it has HDMI 2.1

That's not to say any games other than very basic ones will run at 4k/120fps but Dirt 5 is confirmed already.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...firmed-120fps-games-for-ps5-and-xbox-series-x

120fps is confirmed not 4k 120fps. The consoles will have an option for higher refresh rate or higher resolution not both! Not many AAA titles will run at 4k 60 let alone 120.

There will not be that much difference between a Xbox one X and series X imo.. Xbox one X got 30fps, series X 60fps if you're lucky. The whole "supports" 8k thing is just hilarious, it is a budget pc, do not expect it to run like a top tier graphics card.

LoadsaMoney · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:06

No way the PS5 will be doing 4K/120, when it can't even do 4K/60.

HRL · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:08

Core09 said:
120fps is confirmed not 4k 120fps. The consoles will have an option for higher refresh rate or higher resolution not both! Not many AAA titles will run at 4k 60 let alone 120.

There will not be that much difference between a Xbox one X and series X imo.. Xbox one X got 30fps, series X 60fps if you're lucky. The whole "supports" 8k thing is just hilarious, it is a budget pc, do not expect it to run like a top tier graphics card.

The 8K support on both of the next gen consoles is for video playback, not games. Don’t think anyone would ever expect either to play games at 8K.

However, both have confirmed some games will run at 4K/120. Checkerboarding again? Who knows.

Core09 · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:09

HRL said:
The 8K support on both of the next gen consoles is for video playback, not games. Don’t think anyone would ever expect either to play games at 8K.

However, both have confirmed some games will run at 4K/120. Checkerboarding again? Who knows.

Yes but 4k/120 will be indie games.

Chuk_Chuk · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:11

tyler_jrb said:
It will struggle to do 4k 60hz considering it has essentially an rx 2070 (at best). Sure 4k 120hz on games that don't require that much power and even then chances are it wont be a locked 4k 120hz. AAA titles no chance. Unless you want everything at potato settings.

Assuming no IPC gain between RDNA 1 and RDNA 2, the PS5 is a 5700xt at minimum (based on Tflops).

tyler_jrb · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:18

Chuk_Chuk said:
Assuming no IPC gain between RDNA 1 and RDNA 2, the PS5 is a 5700xt at minimum (based on Tflops).

it has 5700 specs, 2304 core vs 2560 on the XT. Even has the same TU's ROP's. So even with some IPC gain it will be around 5700xt/2070 levels. Sure depending on the ipc gain it may be slightly more than that. Still way below what is required to do both 4k 60 and 4k 120hz with decent settings though.

Even Titan rtx struggles doing 4k 60hz on some titles. That is coming on at nearly twice as fast as the 5700.

Poneros · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:20

https://videocardz.com/newz/palit-submits-geforce-rtx-3090-rtx-3080-rtx-3070-and-rtx-3060-to-eec

look at all those 3070 registered cards

holy schnaps

Twinz · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:25

ALXAndy said:
There is not such a thing as "over charging".

With Turing, they "charged over" what I was willing to pay for what little they offered. This is subjective, of course, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Intel did the same thing for a long time, so I sat on my 3770k until AMD caught up.

People talk about "mindshare" but Intel built up a "negative mindshare" with me. It got to the point where I was willing to wait for their competition to catch up...and then upgrade.

If Nvidia pulls another Turing, they will be going down that same path with me. I'm willing to consider that maybe Nvidia just couldn't find a cost-effective way to improve performance with Turing, but if they do it twice in a row, they will not get the benefit of the doubt with me. Nvidia will fall into the same category with me as Intel did at that point.

Don't get me wrong, I fully appreciate that they are free to charge as much as they want while offering as little as they care to. It is literally "their business". But they will give AMD a bigger opening to get "my money".

Jay85 · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:27

Poneros said:
https://videocardz.com/newz/palit-submits-geforce-rtx-3090-rtx-3080-rtx-3070-and-rtx-3060-to-eec

look at all those 3070 registered cards

holy schnaps

Just what we need... a heap load of cards to confuse the masses as to which variant of the card to buy! I really hate this kinda thing... Different if they varied a lot but a lot of the times its just the same card, slightly overclocked or with a slightly better cooler or has rgb etc etc. Nothing really sets it apart from the cheapest model a lot of the times that make it worth the extra premium.

Woodsta888 · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:29

Twinz said:
With Turing, they "charged over" what I was willing to pay for what little they offered. This is subjective, of course, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Intel did the same thing for a long time, so I sat on my 3770k until AMD caught up.

People talk about "mindshare" but Intel built up a "negative mindshare" with me. It got to the point where I was willing to wait for their competition to catch up...and then upgrade.

If Nvidia pulls another Turing, they will be going down that same path with me. I'm willing to consider that maybe Nvidia just couldn't find a cost-effective way to improve performance with Turing, but if they do it twice in a row, they will not get the benefit of the doubt with me. Nvidia will fall into the same category with me as Intel did at that point.

Don't get me wrong, I fully apricate that they are free to charge as much as they want while offering as little as they care to. It is literally "their business". But they will give AMD a bigger opening to get "my money".

I'm in exactly the same place as you with a 3800X coming from a 3770k and I have a 1080ti too. The prices for the 20 series was very steep for the perfromance uplift. If it isnt considerable for the money then like you, wait to see what AMD offers bang for buck.

Jay85 · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:35

Woodsta888 said:
I'm in exactly the same place as you with a 3800X coming from a 3770k and I have a 1080ti too. The prices for the 20 series was very steep for the perfromance uplift. If it isnt considerable for the money then like you, wait to see what AMD offers bang for buck.

With all that said though, you gotta admit a lot of the times with nvidia you just install it and it works, no driver issues or weird fps fluctuations etc. From my experience anyway, AMD experience is a little bit more varied for me personally but no major complaints.

Phixsator · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:39

ALXAndy said:
There is not such a thing as "over charging". That is not how business works. You can charge anything you like. Your success depends on who buys it. There is no such thing as too much profit. Never was, never will be.

Let me give you a real world example. At one point in my life (I was at a low I will admit) I was selling natural colon cleansing pills. Total farce, company was ran by a woman I will call only "Miss Information".

This colon cleansing product was $69.90. You took it over the course of a month and it made you poop your brains out. They claimed it wasn't a laxative, but I know a little about herbal ingredients and so on so I decided to look it up. It was totally a laxative. So it didn't clean anything, it just made you crap your brains out.

OK, $70 for a good crap. Not only that but it was auto ship. So you got it every 60 days, and they made it very hard to cancel.

Just before I packed it in I was on the night shift and I decided to do some spying. I went into the owner's office and I dug through her files. This particular product cost 50 cents to make per unit. Of course, you need to take into account all of the TV ads and gawd knows wherever else they were pushing this stuff.

But it just goes to show, you can charge whatever you like for something. No matter how bad it is, or how false your advertising. That, sadly, *is* business and it is how capitalism works. There are no laws on how much profit a company can make.

I don't blame Nvidia for that. If I could bottle up my belly button fluff and get someone to pay hand over fist for it I probably would. Remember, for a price to stick you need buyers, and they never seem to disappoint.

no different really from toner and ink cartridges. Cost like 5 bucks to create and ship and the end-user pays upwards of 80 dollars just for the consumer stuff and then there is the pro-market with insane margins on it. There is a reason they call it liquid gold. I don't really blame Nvidia either and I don't blame AMD. I point my fingers at the folks who are willing to bend over, but then again, I'm not exactly in any right to tell them not to bend over

. They cause price increases for products I'm interested in which I find rather annoying and I certainly don't understand why they don't just show a little bit of patience and then save some money themselves. However, it is what it is and if things get too pricey and I'm stuck buying xx60 class cards for 600 then I'm just not going to. I got other things I care about that could use some funds.

Chuk_Chuk · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:41

tyler_jrb said:
it has 5700 specs, 2304 core vs 2560 on the XT. Even has the same TU's ROP's. So even with some IPC gain it will be around 5700xt/2070 levels. Sure depending on the ipc gain it may be slightly more than that. Still way below what is required to do both 4k 60 and 4k 120hz with decent settings though.

Even Titan rtx struggles doing 4k 60hz on some titles. That is coming on at nearly twice as fast as the 5700.

PS5 has higher clocks, hence the Tflops being comparable to the 5700xt. Therefore it should deliver comparable performance at a minimum.

Achieving any framerate at a given resolution is up to the developer not the GPU.

Woodsta888 · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:43

Jay85 said:
With all that said though, you gotta admit a lot of the times with nvidia you just install it and it works, no driver issues or weird fps fluctuations etc. From my experience anyway, AMD experience is a little bit more varied for me personally but no major complaints.

Have to agree with that^^ too. I do remember frametime microstutter with a 7970 and some hitching I couldn't get rid of in FarCry3 or 4 on a 7990. ULPS requiring turning off etc. JUst depends how heinous the prices are from nvidia. In an OCUK poll I put £1200 max spend but it will have to have a very decent uplift over my 1080ti. It'll just make me wait if not to see the prices for AMD. CArds in same price AND perf bracket I'd still go Nvidia. It's just in case AMD manages a GPU winner like they have with Ryzen in the CPU arena. I can dream...

Jay85 · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:49

Woodsta888 said:
Have to agree with that^^ too. I do remember frametime microstutter with a 7970 and some hitching I couldn't get rid of in FarCry3 or 4 on a 7990. ULPS requiring turning off etc. JUst depends how heinous the prices are from nvidia. In an OCUK poll I put £1200 max spend but it will have to have a very decent uplift over my 1080ti. It'll just make me wait if not to see the prices for AMD. CArds in same price AND perf bracket I'd still go Nvidia. It's just in case AMD manages a GPU winner like they have with Ryzen in the CPU arena. I can dream...

I had the exact same issue with farcry 2 with the microstutters especially when i went xfire. It did scale nicely but the microstutter really put me off so ended up selling one. I remember picking up 5870 top tier card at the time for as little as £200 brand new!!!

benjii · 27 Aug 2020 at 15:55

Jay85 said:
Just what we need... a heap load of cards to confuse the masses as to which variant of the card to buy! I really hate this kinda thing... Different if they varied a lot but a lot of the times its just the same card, slightly overclocked or with a slightly better cooler or has rgb etc etc. Nothing really sets it apart from the cheapest model a lot of the times that make it worth the extra premium.

It's not as bad as it looks. Palit owns 7 other GPU brands that target markets all over the world, including Gainward, Galax and KFA2. As well as making GPUs for certain other companies too. They've most likely submitted product registrations for their entire umbrella.