Nvidia CEO says next gaming GPUs won't come for "a long time"

[Zeed]

Vega has a lot of features that make it attractive for many tasks, but this work station focused card manages to beat almost every Nvidia gaming card it competes against...

lets be honest, AMD are beating whoever they compete against right now. AMD are "owning" the crap out of everyone

Its like Gamers care that theirs New AMD card is good for cad 3d modeling and rendering.
You know what gamers like... FPS.
Vega can do loads of things problem is it does em in Good way not Best way.
If someone needs card for productivity will buy one made for that
If one wants card for gaming will buy fastest gaming one.

If someone does both on 1 pc like Me will buy Vega frontier or Titan.

If someone fot money to burn will buy titan V for gaming

 

[JediFragger]

****

You know me so well Mr Mann

 

[TonyTurbo78]

Vega 64 with a nice Freesync display provides a much better experience than a 1080 without Gsync. 1080 with Gsync is another price bump over Vega + Freesync, yet provides only the same experience.

I've two gaming rigs at the moment, one with an RX Vega 64 and one with a 1080ti. Being in a position to compare directly side by side, I prefer gaming with the RX Vega rig way more because of Freesync. The 1080ti does obviously hit higher fps but even running at 144fps with the 1080ti, the experience is horrible in comparison to the Vega rig.

And another thing. Image quality appears to be more pleasing on the eye with Vega. Gaming on the 1080ti seems blurrier whereas Vega looks cleaner, sharper and pops more in certain on screen moments.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Industry watchers said that most gaming notebook makers are optimistic about the market demand in the second half of 2018, particularly with the rollout of Nvidia's new-generation GPU platform probably in late third quarter expected to fuel replacement demand for gaming PCs in the fourth quarter.

https://digitimes.com/news/a20180620PD202.html

 

[jigger]

Its like Gamers care that theirs New AMD card is good for cad 3d modeling and rendering.
You know what gamers like... FPS.
Vega can do loads of things problem is it does em in Good way not Best way.
If someone needs card for productivity will buy one made for that
If one wants card for gaming will buy fastest gaming one.

If someone does both on 1 pc like Me will buy Vega frontier or Titan.

If someone fot money to burn will buy titan V for gaming

Vega beats most of the competition in gaming scenarios too. You totally missed the point.

 

[DarrenM343]

I've two gaming rigs at the moment, one with an RX Vega 64 and one with a 1080ti. Being in a position to compare directly side by side, I prefer gaming with the RX Vega rig way more because of Freesync. The 1080ti does obviously hit higher fps but even running at 144fps with the 1080ti, the experience is horrible in comparison to the Vega rig.

And another thing. Image quality appears to be more pleasing on the eye with Vega. Gaming on the 1080ti seems blurrier whereas Vega looks cleaner, sharper and pops more in certain on screen moments.

For fair comparison you'd need to be running the 1080ti on a g-sync monitor which I assume you're not? hence the horrible experience? Interesting observation on the image quality.

 

[Martini1991]

Vega beats most of the competition in gaming scenarios too. You totally missed the point.

1080ti beats everything.

But then again, you're just making another pro AMD post. Because you're nothing more than an unsophisticated troll.

 

[4K8KW10]

Interesting observation on the image quality.

Everyone knows that GeForces provide worse image quality (back in the Matrox days, it was painful obvious), washed out colours and kind of dull image. But some nVidia users prefer to pretend it didn't happen. Maybe it doesn't irritate/annoy them like the member who you quoted, me or many other people.

Only one of many conversations:
Bad image quality for NVIDIA GPUs at default settings
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/bad-image-quality-for-nvidia-gpus-at-default-settings.214048/

 

[Robin Gregg]

I thought the 11 series had already been announced?

 

[bigmike20vt]

Agreed. I love my monitor Asus PG348Q but at £1200, it hurt the wallet but on saying that, I can see me using it for a number of years, as it is pretty awesome.

Yeah the telly was not cheap but I checked out the HDR on cheaper sets and it was rubbish in comparison. Shame really the UI of the far cheaper LG sets blows my Sony out of the water but for screen quality and gaming at 4k I love the Sony set. I wish pc games made more use of HDR... Esp when the console port has it.

I considered going 55inch oled but coming from a 70 inch set it was too small. I do miss 3d on the new TV though. Yes I am one of the half dozen folk who like 3dtv.

 

[JediFragger]

I thought the 11 series had already been announced?

No, you were on the 'shrooms again.

 

[Robin Gregg]

No, you were on the 'shrooms again.

it would seem so, it looks like the sceptical release date has been made more sceptical, just googled Nvidia Turing: GTX 1180 again.

 

[4K8KW10]

it would seem so, it looks like the sceptical release date has been made more sceptical, just googled Nvidia Turing: GTX 1180 again.

Did you find that article: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/20...phics-cards-release-date-specs-price-rumours/

So we don’t really know what’s going on with Turing’s release date at the moment. When it’s come from the CEO’s own mouth, I’d say our previous estimate of a fuzzy autumn release is looking incredibly unlikely, and I’d even hazard a guess that we may not even see them until next year now – despite previous rumours stating that the new Turing cards were set to go into mass production by September at the very latest and a supposed Founders Edition of the GTX 1180 was due to arrive this July.

 

[Robin Gregg]

I didn't but I have now, is this likely anything to do with the drop in graphic card prices?

 

[T.Kay]

Everyone knows that GeForces provide worse image quality (back in the Matrox days, it was painful obvious), washed out colours and kind of dull image. But some nVidia users prefer to pretend it didn't happen. Maybe it doesn't irritate/annoy them like the member who you quoted, me or many other people.

Only one of many conversations:
Bad image quality for NVIDIA GPUs at default settings
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/bad-image-quality-for-nvidia-gpus-at-default-settings.214048/

I never knew about this! Is it really that bad?

 

[bigmike20vt]

I never knew about this! Is it really that bad?

My mate went from a r290x to a gtx 1080ti

Other than the amd card having much better triple screen support (ie ease of set up) visually afaik there was nothing between the 2 ( obviously performance difference is massive)

 

[FoxEye]

I've had a variety of AMD and nV cards over the years (tho never side-by-side), and I can't honestly say I've ever noticed differences in colouration or vibrancy, or any of the other image quality concerns that get levelled at nV.

Maybe it's real, but I have never swapped from one to the other and noticed a difference (in either direction).

 

[yashiro]

The complaints about dull colours and excessive banding on Nvidia cards have been around for a long time.

 

[Gregster]

Having used both many times, the default colours do seem to be a little better on AMD but a fiddle in the NCP sorted that out.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Having used both many times, the default colours do seem to be a little better on AMD but a fiddle in the NCP sorted that out.

Digital vibrance +63
Hue +2