please just stop it, stop buying

[jonneymendoza]

There are many reasons to buy the fastest consumer graphics card available. Value for money is not one of those reason.

I bought mine because i came from 980gtx sli which was begining to show its age especially for games with no sli/poor sli support.

i have at 2560x16500 and that is my res i play in a 30 inch monitor.

I upgraded to a 2080ti because i tend to skip a generation and buy the next one.

i have had 7800gtx 980gtx and now 2080 ti which "touch wood" has been working fine over the past few weeks since i got it

 

[TNA]

I bought mine because i came from 980gtx sli which was begining to show its age especially for games with no sli/poor sli support.

i have at 2560x16500 and that is my res i play in a 30 inch monitor.

I upgraded to a 2080ti because i tend to skip a generation and buy the next one.

i have had 7800gtx 980gtx and now 2080 ti which "touch wood" has been working fine over the past few weeks since i got it

Update your sig

Tried battlefield yet? Just had a look at benchmarks for the first time and you would be getting 20-25fps with RayTracing reflections on at your resolution.

That means at 4K it would be about 15fps or something. Bloody hell. Seems the tech is not here yet. Not even convinced it will be for 7nm stuff next year. I am going to forget about ray tracing, seems like 5 years away to be honest and that’s not even for full ray tracing games, that is more like 10 years away. Unless they come up with crazy software optimisations.

 

[Gregster]

There are many reasons to buy the fastest consumer graphics card available. Value for money is not one of those reason.

Spot on and good response.

 

[easyrider]

There are many reasons to buy the fastest consumer graphics card available. Value for money is not one of those reason.

Exactly my point! You buy the fastest and you don't care about cost...Thats fine....But now people are defending the 2080ti to the hilt and even defending the BF5 rubbish performance.

Why not just admit the issues rather than brushing them under the carpet?

Is one of the reasons to buy the fastest card available to run at 1080p on your 3440x1440p monitor? Is it?

Is one to run RT effects at 40 fps on your 100hz monitor?

If it is then good luck to you all

 

[Prozn]

Exactly my point! You buy the fastest and you don't care about cost...Thats fine....But now people are defending the 2080ti to the hilt and even defending the BF5 rubbish performance.

Why not just admit the issues rather than brushing them under the carpet?

You are spending all day on a forum attacking the 2080 Ti every chance you get. Why? People aren't "defending it to the hilt" - they are explaining the positive reasons for buying one rather than acting as if FPS/£ is the only metric people care about.

Is one of the reasons to buy the fastest card available to run at 1080p on your 3440x1440p monitor? Is it?

Is one to run RT effects at 40 fps on your 100hz monitor?

If it is then good luck to you all

No, it is to:

• Run existing rasterisation tech at ultra settings in 4K 60fps or 3440x1440 120fps
• To experiment with exciting new emerging technologies

Enthusiasts in an area can pay the premium to try new tech, even though it is sub-standard in performance compared to old tech, and enjoy experimenting with it. Much like early adopters of electric cars paid a large premium over petrol cars for much reduced range and lengthy recharge times. Now as a result of those early adopters we are seeing the build out of infrastructure and car industry investment to bring out affordable vehicles with sufficient fast charging points for general consumers.

Maybe because of these early RTX adopters you will be able to buy an affordable RTX GPU in a few years with good games industry backing.

In the meantime I will enjoy the rasterisation part of my 2080 Ti and you can enjoy your 1080 Ti.

 

[melmac]

I still say we don't know how much the cards would've cost without the TrueAudio DSP chip. Maybe AMD would've still charged the same if they didn't include it, maybe they just added it for free and decided not to re-coup any of the money they spent on R&D and manufacturing.
Did I pay more for TrueAudio? I paid more for getting it before and TrueAudio games were out than I was able to after TrueAudio games were out.

As for the 2070 not being powerful enough to use RT, currently it barely seems like the 2080Ti is either!

And yes, this doesn't seem like defending AMD to you?
Are you feigning outrage now to seem like a victim? Bravo, how very AMD of you!

LOL so it wasn't a throw away jokey comment you made, you actually believe you made some kind of witty statement in response to Foxeye's post? Sorry to say it wasn't witty or accurate.

Prove to me that the DSP chip caused the prices of the 290 to be more expensive. I stated facts, the 290 and 290x cards were the same price as the 7970 and 7950 at launch. So no price rise because of extra hardware or newer features. Unlike the Turing cards which are more expensive because of the hardware they have used.

Fact number 3: the 270x came out before the 290 cards.

Fact number 4: The 280x was a rebranded 7970Ghz edition and it cost the exact same as the card it replaced. so no increase due to any extra features there.

You can't argue against those facts. So please show me exactly how you worked out how much the DSP cost and how you worked out you paid extra for it?

And no, you didn't pay more for True Audio before any game with True Audio came out. Because the when Thief came out in March 2014, the mining boom of that time was in full swing and the 290 cards were more expensive than that at launch.

And lastly, did you buy the 290 for the True Audio chip? Was that your sole reason for buying the card? I bet you didn't even care about it. Most of the people buying the Turing cards are doing so because of the RTX features, that's the justification they are giving for paying the high price.

Your attempts to prove you have any sort of valid point are beyond silly. Comparing True Audio to Ray Tracing, is that some kind of joke?

EDIT: Would it have saved us arguing if I'd used HBM as an example instead of TrueAudio?

No, lol, it would have just made your argument even more ridiculous.

I'll let you have the last word since that's what you want.

 

[McGraw]

If the 2080ti came out after BF5 and the 2080 had exactly the same performance as the 2080ti without any RTX features, hardly anyone would have bought the 2080ti.

Nobody is seriously suggesting they would spend around 50% more just to play around with ray tracing are they?

Some serious defending of a very weak feature going on here.

 

[melmac]

Lol. It’s like you don’t want see what he is saying and would rather have the last word or something.

Talk about moving goal posts and going to the extremes to prove a point, like buying cards at the EOL because they are cheaper LOL.

Not me. I am just munching on my popcorn watching

You can put away the popcorn Sorry!! I have wrote my last post on it and I will let him have the last word.

 

[AMB73]

I'd have bought mine even if the wife said no, in fact, i'd have sold her to get it if i had to....

I work, i earn, i spend.....Period

 

[Darujhistan]

I'd have bought mine even if the wife said no, in fact, i'd have sold her to get it if i had to....

I work, i earn, i spend.....Period

 

[McGraw]

I'd have bought mine even if the wife said no, in fact, i'd have sold her to get it if i had to....

I work, i earn, i spend.....Period

What sort of bang for buck does she give?

Promised performance?

 

[easyrider]

If the 2080ti came out after BF5 and the 2080 had exactly the same performance as the 2080ti without any RTX features, hardly anyone would have bought the 2080ti.

Nobody is seriously suggesting they would spend around 50% more just to play around with ray tracing are they?

Some serious defending of a very weak feature going on here.

70% more and yep you only have to check out Gregsters thread lol

£1300 to get a menu option in a game and kill your framerate while looking at yourself in a puddle then getting a cap in the ****

Priceless

 

[BriT]

lol Not sure why people care so much about ray tracing, I'd rather have more FPS..

 

[Legend]

70% more and yep you only have to check out Gregsters thread lol

£1300 to get a menu option in a game and kill your framerate while looking at yourself in a puddle then getting a cap in the ****

Priceless

What's even more hilarious is the defence I've seen someone put forward of 30FPS performance with RTX ON because that's what consoles get, therefore it's perfectly fine. HA! Genius.

 

[easyrider]

lol Not sure why people care so much about ray tracing, I'd rather have more FPS..

I actually used to respect @Gregster but his sycophantic posts about RT worry me

It’s a shame

 

[easyrider]

I'd have bought mine even if the wife said no, in fact, i'd have sold her to get it if i had to....

I work, i earn, i spend.....Period

Upgrade your cpu then

 

[easyrider]

What's even more hilarious is the defence I've seen someone put forward of 30FPS performance with RTX ON because that's what consoles get, therefore it's perfectly fine. HA! Genius.

Classic !

 

[TrixX]

I actually used to respect @Gregster but his sycophantic posts about RT worry me

It’s a shame

Isn't that just the sunk cost fallacy hitting right where it hurts??? Man I get told that a lot for getting a Vega. Many of those making said assertion are assuming I expect 1080Ti performance from it. I bought it in place of a 1080 though, so if in some arena's I get 1080Ti performance isn't that a benefit???

 

[jonjay]

There are many reasons to buy the fastest consumer graphics card available. Value for money is not one of those reason.

People who can afford these luxuries are generally the people who are smart with their money. Therefore value for money on any item is paramount.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

LOL so it wasn't a throw away jokey comment you made, you actually believe you made some kind of witty statement in response to Foxeye's post? Sorry to say it wasn't witty or accurate.

Prove to me that the DSP chip caused the prices of the 290 to be more expensive. I stated facts, the 290 and 290x cards were the same price as the 7970 and 7950 at launch. So no price rise because of extra hardware or newer features. Unlike the Turing cards which are more expensive because of the hardware they have used.

I didn't say it had made it more expensive, I said you can't prove it didn't. We don't know. The prices compared to the previous gen don't tell us what they would've charged for a 290 without the chip. I just find it hard to believe AMD would give away the DSP chip. When they released the 290X with 8GB VRAM they charged more for that, so I don't see why we would believe that they wouldn't charge more for adding a DSP chip.

Fact number 3: the 270x came out before the 290 cards.

OK, don't see how that changes anything. The 270X was probably cheaper later on too. So waiting rather than being an early adopter would've saved you money.

Fact number 4: The 280x was a rebranded 7970Ghz edition and it cost the exact same as the card it replaced. so no increase due to any extra features there.

You can't argue against those facts. So please show me exactly how you worked out how much the DSP cost and how you worked out you paid extra for it?

I don't know, AMD didn't make a 290 or 290X without the DSP chip so we can't know how much it would've cost. We can speculate, but we can't know.

And no, you didn't pay more for True Audio before any game with True Audio came out. Because the when Thief came out in March 2014, the mining boom of that time was in full swing and the 290 cards were more expensive than that at launch.

I suspect later on 290s were cheaper than at launch, the 290Xs I bought were cheaper when I bought them than at launch. They were cheaper then the 290s I bought at launch.

And lastly, did you buy the 290 for the True Audio chip? Was that your sole reason for buying the card? I bet you didn't even care about it. Most of the people buying the Turing cards are doing so because of the RTX features, that's the justification they are giving for paying the high price.

Your attempts to prove you have any sort of valid point are beyond silly. Comparing True Audio to Ray Tracing, is that some kind of joke?

I'll agree with that, I doubt many people bought an AMD card for TrueAudio (I suspect a few bought the TrueAduio games because of TrueAudio, but probably not the cards). I also doubt that everyone that bought a RTX card bought it just for RT. I suspect a lot of people would've bought them anyway as a lot of people do that every generation anyway, even if there's not a new technology being offered. People bought the titan cards despite them not having any special tech over the normal Nvidia cards, some people just like to have the best even if it's not the best bang-for-buck graphics card. I think that's fine, I don't think everyone should have to buy the best bang-for-buck graphics card or be labelled an idiot with more money than sense.

I'm not defending the RTX cards, I was never really arguing in favour of the RTX cards, just mentioning that being an early adopter is usually expensive. Also it's probably quite often not the best experience. I picked TrueAudio to be jokey because TrueAudio never really got going did it? Hard to be an early adopter of something so short-term. You were an early adopter or you didn't get it because AMD stopped it. It managed, according to Wikipedia, 4 games. One of them is Star Citizen, which hasn't been released yet and it wouldn't surprise me if it's actually using TrueAudio Next rather than TrueAudio.

Let's consider 4K monitors. I'm sure the early monitors weren't great. I seem to recall something about split panel where the left and right sides were sort of separate left and right sides. I don't recall them being cheap either. Also actually running things at 4K was tricky. If you waited and got one more recently, they'd probably be cheaper, might have HDR, probably have better selection of connection and GPUs might have enough grunt to drive them at higher settings in more games. But that's the price of being an early adopter.

VR is another one. VR still isn't cheap, easy to run well or high resolution, but I believe it was worse back when it first came out. The early Rifts that had a single camera and no controllers. The DK2 was really not great resolution either. Then later you could buy a 2nd (and 3rd camera) and the touch controllers, but that was all extra. Then there was the VIVE, that wasn't cheap either. Then they released a new headstrap and headphones for it, that was extra. But then, more recently the prices have started to come down and there are higher resolution headsets. And things will probably continue to improve and probably get cheaper. But again, early adopters paid more.

I suspect you'll probably argue this isn't the case for 4K or VR either and that it's only Nvidia and the RTX cards that have ever done this, but we're going around in circles and we're probably a bit off topic, so maybe we just agree to disagree?