• 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 rumour to be launching new GTX 11 series without ray tracing

I do wonder if Ray tracing is ever really going to take until they manage to get acceptance into the console market. With less than 1% of cards being able to use it no sane games maker is going to spend development money on something so niche - some of them won't even make a PC version of the games at all! If an 1180 comes in around the price of a 1080 with the rise in performance then it's going to be a very interesting card indeed. Lets say for sake of argument it retailed at the £600 - 650 mark I think it would be difficult for retailers to get enough stock !

Well this is the thing, and it's potentially a complex situation. Given PC gaming right now is largely console ports I'd concur that widespread ray tracing adoption is going to come from it's availability on consoles. But Nvidia don't make consoles, AMD do. So if adoption has to be driven by consoles, it's up to AMD to build ray tracing capability into their console APUs. And if they don't? Well, RTX may well go the PhysX route for the time being.

I think there would've been more of a rush for PC gamers to jump on ray tracing if the RTX cards weren't so woeful in their performance, there was actually more (some? any?) ray tracing-equipped games actually available on launch, and the RTX prices didn't take the absolute urine. But if Nvidia do a full GTX 11 series that has the same Turing raster performance as RTX then nobody is going to actually buy RTX. It's almost an admission that they've gone messed up.

And I don't see that happening.
 
I do wonder if Ray tracing is ever really going to take until they manage to get acceptance into the console market. With less than 1% of cards being able to use it no sane games maker is going to spend development money on something so niche - some of them won't even make a PC version of the games at all! If an 1180 comes in around the price of a 1080 with the rise in performance then it's going to be a very interesting card indeed. Lets say for sake of argument it retailed at the £600 - 650 mark I think it would be difficult for retailers to get enough stock !

AMD has the console market sewn up so it all depends on what they do really (or what MS/Sony spec for the next consoles).

If console makers decide they don't care about RT, then it's probably going to fade away until low end cards are capable of running it too. Or it could end up like 3d vision and physx and never get off the ground, then become obsolete before most people even experience it.
 
Last edited:
AMD has the console market sewn up so it all depends on what they do really (or what MS/Sony spec for the next consoles).

If console makers decide they don't care about RT, then it's probably going to fade away until low end cards are capable of running it too. Or it could end up like 3d vision and physx and never get off the ground, then become obsolete before most people even experience it.

Actually I think DLSS will be the saving grace for consoles, dramatically reducing the overhead of displaying on 4k Tv's.
 
https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/nvidia-gtx-1180-gfxbench-performance

Another site saying much the same as the others that if it's true RTX is at best postponed, but suppose NVidia isn't able to get developers to add it into their games, and they keep that info from buyers while still ask RTX prices knowing it's not the future? If that came out in the future it would cause all kinds of long lasting bad PR so maybe there's ,ore nehind the scenes that we are aware of.
 
It would be a strange move to release a GTX 1180 due to the mixed messages it would send out. But there is quite a big price gap between the 2070 and 2080 it could slot into. And then a similar price gap for an 1180 Ti.
 
Wondering if they are trying to make the most of failed silcon, chips with defects in the Tensor core area could just be turned off potentially, then badged as a GTX card rather than an RTX card.
 
https://www.pcgamesn.com/nvidia/nvidia-gtx-1180-gfxbench-performance

Another site saying much the same as the others that if it's true RTX is at best postponed, but suppose NVidia isn't able to get developers to add it into their games, and they keep that info from buyers while still ask RTX prices knowing it's not the future? If that came out in the future it would cause all kinds of long lasting bad PR so maybe there's ,ore nehind the scenes that we are aware of.


Occam's razor, by far the simplest explanation is the baseless rumours are bogus.

Nvidia would never, ever sell a GPU that competes with Turing but has no RTX capabilities. Never in a million years. It makes absolutely no sense in the slightest. If sales figures for Turing are low then Nvidia will simply lower prices.


the only realistic scenarios for an 11 series GPU are:
1) A cut-down Turing without Tensor cores or RTX to fill in the low level. A replacement for a 1050. Nvidia always try to release a top to bottom stack of a common architecture.
2) Re-badging Excess Pascal stock to clear supply chain, products liekly only for Asian markets. A 1080 could be renamed a 1170 for example and sold on the cheap in China.
3) Some other low end Turing salvage part without RTX also for Asian market.

ray-tracing is the future of gaming GPUs, and already has a significant market in content creation, professional, graphics design, and game developer communities. Nvidia have successfully shown that real time RT is possible with Turing, just. Performance in BFV is just acceptable, future titles will likely be better with more optimizations, and this is generation 1. This always happens with new technologies, the GPUs can only just make it viable in games. Things like Pixel shading were exactly the same.

With 7nm GPUS coming in about a year, Nvidia have a chance to more than double the ray tracing performance in a short time. By which point there will be many more games out there with RTX support.
 
Occam's razor, by far the simplest explanation is the baseless rumours are bogus.

Nvidia would never, ever sell a GPU that competes with Turing but has no RTX capabilities. Never in a million years. It makes absolutely no sense in the slightest. If sales figures for Turing are low then Nvidia will simply lower prices.


the only realistic scenarios for an 11 series GPU are:
1) A cut-down Turing without Tensor cores or RTX to fill in the low level. A replacement for a 1050. Nvidia always try to release a top to bottom stack of a common architecture.
2) Re-badging Excess Pascal stock to clear supply chain, products liekly only for Asian markets. A 1080 could be renamed a 1170 for example and sold on the cheap in China.
3) Some other low end Turing salvage part without RTX also for Asian market.

ray-tracing is the future of gaming GPUs, and already has a significant market in content creation, professional, graphics design, and game developer communities. Nvidia have successfully shown that real time RT is possible with Turing, just. Performance in BFV is just acceptable, future titles will likely be better with more optimizations, and this is generation 1. This always happens with new technologies, the GPUs can only just make it viable in games. Things like Pixel shading were exactly the same.

With 7nm GPUS coming in about a year, Nvidia have a chance to more than double the ray tracing performance in a short time. By which point there will be many more games out there with RTX support.


I'm sorry but you are looking through the wrng end of the telescope. Those who have RTX capable cards make up an infinitessimal number of people so what realistic incentive is there for developers to spend time and money on adding ray tracing to games which will not add one penny to the bottom line? Most games are designed for consoles and then ported to PC and not the other way around, and until ray tracing goes mass market it won't be worthwhile for manufacturers to include it.

Obvioulsy we don't know what discussions take place between NVidia and games studios, but just suppose they've said no to adding ray tracing? What then? Does NVidia carry on selling what it knows to be a failed technology to unsuspecting buyers? Imagine the fallout if and when that got out. On the other hand if they continue to offer both technologies and attempt to widen the spread as the tech gets cheaper then that would make a lot of sense.
 
On the other hand if they continue to offer both technologies and attempt to widen the spread as the tech gets cheaper then that would make a lot of sense.

But that will kill RTX. If you have identical raster performance between a GTX 11 and a RTX 20, would YOU pay a premium for the latter card which has features you simply cannot use?

Nvidia either have to go all-in on RTX and start paying game devs to implement it and develop the 2nd gen regardless of sales of the 1st gen, or AMD have to get a consumer-working version of Radeon Rays into the next generation of consoles. If neither one of these happen then RTX might as well join PhysX.
 
But that will kill RTX. If you have identical raster performance between a GTX 11 and a RTX 20, would YOU pay a premium for the latter card which has features you simply cannot use?

Nvidia either have to go all-in on RTX and start paying game devs to implement it and develop the 2nd gen regardless of sales of the 1st gen, or AMD have to get a consumer-working version of Radeon Rays into the next generation of consoles. If neither one of these happen then RTX might as well join PhysX.

There are currently just 4 RTX cards and the biggest sellers are all GTX without ray tracing. The number of potential buyers for games is tiny, and while it was probably worth while for DICE in terms of the extra advertising and being the one and only ray tracing game available, the also rans will not have such incentive. The only way this could ever work is not just if NVidia pay the developers, but the risk that they will also load the cost onto PC gamers, further compromising the market.

I think both of your conditions need to be met, NVidia have to pay developers and get the cost /performance of RTX cards right down and quickly, and AMD have to support it too, with consoles offering rat tracing, or the market is just too small to service in the **** term.
 
...consoles offering rat tracing, or the market is just too small to service in the **** term.

Well I do adore my rats ;) and from now until RTX gen2 really will be the **** term :p loving your typos

I do have to concur though. Nvidia alone can't push this worthless generation alone without investment in the ecosystem, and if that means financial assistance then so be it. If there's enough tangible shiny out there to coax console gamers into wanting the shiny too (and given they're perfectly happy to play FPS with a controller then they're obviously easily amused ;) ) then there will be a call for AMD to get ray tracing into consoles.
 
Looking on Google at the PC titles which support Ray Tracing, there hasn't been any update since the launch, with intentions but not hard copy. One would imagine if Ray Tracing was the great leap forward NVidia claimed games companies would be crowing about their inclusion of it in games launches, yet it's all quiet on the Western front. It all adds to the suspicion that NVidia might just quietly drop it and return to more conventional cards. Are they still pushing 'hairworks' ?
 
Looking on Google at the PC titles which support Ray Tracing, there hasn't been any update since the launch, with intentions but not hard copy. One would imagine if Ray Tracing was the great leap forward NVidia claimed games companies would be crowing about their inclusion of it in games launches, yet it's all quiet on the Western front. It all adds to the suspicion that NVidia might just quietly drop it and return to more conventional cards. Are they still pushing 'hairworks' ?

Developers won't push hard with Ray tracing until it's pretty much workable on the majority of gamers PC's. This won't happen until decent ray tracing gpu's become easily affordable to the mainstream (i.e. $250 and below) It will only be token gestures from the big studios for a while.

Games like BF5 only really ray trace reflections, and this already has a massive impact on performance. Imagine if they were doing global illumination or even worse, full ray traced rendering, it would cripple even the 2080Ti.
 
Lisa Su CEO of AMD addressing Jensen Huangs criticism of their new card said: "AMD isn’t all in on ray tracing just yet. “The consumer doesn’t see a lot of benefit today because the other parts of the ecosystem are not ready,” says Su. “I think by the time we talk more about ray tracing the consumer’s gonna see the benefit.”

The 'ecosystem' is the media, so it seems a little chicken and egg here.
 
because AMD would never dream of charging RTX 2080 prices for a card which performs similar to the RTX2080 but without ray tracing or DLSS right? ;)

Lol I wouldn’t pay close to that for an AMD GPU either. I’d rather compromise and do without, switch off some features or dial them down slightly. There’s just not enough content to justify the jump and the price tag + normalising spending £1200-£1500 on a gaming GPU is in no way helpful to the community.
 
Developers won't push hard with Ray tracing until it's pretty much workable on the majority of gamers PC's. This won't happen until decent ray tracing gpu's become easily affordable to the mainstream (i.e. $250 and below) It will only be token gestures from the big studios for a while.

Games like BF5 only really ray trace reflections, and this already has a massive impact on performance. Imagine if they were doing global illumination or even worse, full ray traced rendering, it would cripple even the 2080Ti.
this comment should be enough to put people off from purchasing a RTX 2080ti.
 
Back
Top Bottom