-
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
His backside, just like everyone else so far
Not long left now for Jensen to reveal his hand.
If he is serious about scooping up sales before AMD release their cards, he will not price the 3070 at $599.
£600 will be the 8GB version too
The rumoured 16 GB will probably be +£100.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 1,033
- Location
- Norwich, UK
It is much slower but how much that actually matters is not obvious. vRAM is insanely quick but it's only that fast because the GPU reads data out of vRAM to process it and then puts it back into vRAM, it's that fast to keep up with the GPU so it's not a bottleneck. Loading assets from disk is far slower as a raw comparison as you rightly say, but for a user waiting it's next to no time at all especially with modern SSDs. Developers have always had to work around vRAM limitations and engines are built for prefetching assets that will be needed in future and dumping old unnecessary data out of vRAM so even if we were still only on HDDs or really slow
I run 2x Samsung 960 Pros in RAID 0 as my primary and that nets me sequential read/writes which are actually just bottlenecked by PCI-E 4x at a bit under 4GB/sec, but even 1 of these disks alone is about 3.5GB/sec sequential read anyway. In terms of loading game assets from disk having to wait 1 second to load an extra 4Gb of textures is not a big deal and in fact a disk that quick could in theory fill 10Gb of vRAM in 2.5 seconds, although im sure with various bottlenecks it'd be maybe a bit longer. Loading games from super fast disks is of zero benefit in general anyway, there's no games I've ever played or seen that benefit from 4GB/sec SSD vs say a 700MB/sec SSD bottlenecked by SATA, everything is CPU limited, initializing the engine and all that.
The case where you have a point is where the GPU needs an asset immediately that it does not have in vRAM and needs to fetch from disk in which case you're going to get stuttering in the game, but stuff has gone catastrophically wrong if that's the case. Typically a modern game engine can handle that by fetching assets ahead of time, developers zone maps and the engine catalogues what assets are needed in each zone and can release/fetch assets before they're needed. Games are broken up by loading zones and other clever tricks.
His backside, just like everyone else so far
Not long left now for Jensen to reveal his hand.
If he is series about scooping up sales before AMD release their cards, he will not price the 3070 at $599.
Ah sorry. Im the sucker who got hooked into that one
Not been following this thread, just jumped in.
Associate
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 628
The main difference is we accept Nvidia are a profit driven corporation who will maximise those profits, while on the "other" thread they are still dancing around with flowers in their hair waiting for the second coming of the messiah. We green boys accept what we are going to get, which is not as powerful and more expensive as we would like GPU's
In the real world, we've seen what happens when you hit the VRAM limit. Engine design theorycraft or not.
Having 8 GB VRAM (in 2020 still, like back in 2015) when the consoles are about to make one of the biggest generational leaps every, is really asking for trouble.
Additionally there's no reason to settle for less. nVidia is just being super cheap. Expecting people to pay through the *** and giving the bare minimum VRAM in return.
Not going to fly. £600 with 8GB is not going to fly. £800+ with 10 GB is not going to fly.
Nah don’t be too hasty mate dig down the back of the sofa I’m sure you’ll find another £600 from somewhere.
Haha, I can afford it but there comes a point where it's not worth it.
Depending on your current gfx card you could prolly get a 3070 AND a console or two
What a shame that as consumers you have no way of sending Jensen a message, and must eat from his trough no matter how rancid the dish
Go Team Green
I know but I'm kinda 'all or nothing'. I want the best the format can offer so won't settle for a 3070. I've done this before, I moved to console after the 980ti and never played it. Then bought a 2080ti rig and sold the consoles. Feels like dejavu.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
Are Nvidia really going to drop the Ti or are we going to see a Ti card 2 or 3 months after launch? That 3090 seems so OTT on memory, wouldn't a Ti with 12-14gb seem more a gaming card?
I’d have thought that threshold would be well below £1400 but hey if it’s super doper good you may as well go the whole hog.
You'll be waiting for the 48gb titan then, not the lowley 3090
Seems like most things i buy are not worth it...I just like spending money
You should see people faces when i tell them i paid almost £1000 for my dish washer and another £1000 for the washing machine
You'll be waiting for the 48gb titan then, not the lowley 3090
Seems like most things i buy are not worth it...I just like spending money
Forgive me mods, I reached the 15 daily post limit and didn't know who to contact. If someone knows how to remove this then please do!
Haha to a certain degree. The gaming performance increase with the titan is not worth it for me. But yeah £1400 does feel a lot better than it being £2000