JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
And both are more or less demos since the performance hit is so massive.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Trashes AMD New GPU Radeon VII: 'The Performance Is Lousy'.
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
DLSS improves performance. RTX 2060 can run BFV at over 60 FPS with ray-tracing so I'm not sure how you could say that's a demo.
Last edited:
Ivellios
Member
This. and without the DLSS patch, with it the performance will be much better.
My only problem is that we do not know if future games will support the combo of ray tracing+DSLL.
thelastword
Banned
Jensen Huang is so afraid, when was the last time the guy was so salty? I understand though........RTX just works....Well No Jensen, it does not, DLSS this DLSS that, it's just a lower rez image upscaled with severe aliasing issues and missing detail. Detail that TAA maintains.....It's funny too, because checkerboarding is much more impressive than DLSS, relative to the resolved image and the much superior IQ you get with CB+TAA, which works in tandem btw, but NO! DLSS and RTX is all the rage, just because Nvidia said so...So I take Jensen Huang's view on things just as I take his view on RTX "it just works" line, it's a lie, it's fake news.....
So why is Jensen so upset? +8GB, 128 rops,+ 2.1 bandwidth for 4k gaming and less stutter, a better productivity GPU @ 699.99....If I was Jensen I'd be sweating too......This is opposed to him launching an RTX lineup that is less than stellar, has an awful price to perf ratio, basically the line of cards was not received well and are not selling as well as prior NV GPU's……..People think folk are just lapping up 2080ti's out there by the millions, NO, at $1200.00, most people just watch JayzTwoCents et al bench those cards online and fight the war in the comments, when usually the hardest warmonger in the comment section are usually on 1050ti's or lower, but they're speaking the virtues of 2080ti performance like they own one or that it is the average user card out there....
I think Jensen is feeling the pinch after this subpar launch of turing……"It just works"........ 4 months later one RTX game and one dlss game, severe issues in both, but hey! pay that $800 for RTX2080, pay $1200 for the TI, because RTX this RTX that, ummm...NO, stop it Huang...….What makes it worse is that this one rtx game underperformed in sales, which makes it clear, nobody cares about RTX now, people rather play BLOPS 4 with no rtx, they bought that game in spades, they just want high framerates at high rez atm....When RTX is affordable for all at high rez and high frames the people will be there, till then, Jensen will continue to be in a state of bother......And he better not release a card with no RTX, because that will be the biggest hypocritical "I dont' believe it" in this GPU race, and would render Jensen a real bs'er, but Jensen said "RTX off" looks like ass, so how can you live without RTX, I mean "it just works"......So I better not see an 1180 on store shelves soon....ish...….
So yes, Radeon 7 now with great perf, high bandwidth and vram and less stuttering whilst you play, in other words "smooth gameplay". Navi in June on 7nm with a new arch, lots of perf, low TDP, the only thing they can attack AMD with will be gone....So what will be their argument then?...Till then, I will enjoy "smoother gameplay on a radeon 7" or any other AMD GPU for that matter, till Navi comes and make that aspect of gaming even better.....Yes, there's a reason why Jensen is shook....I remember when Ryzen came along and thread-ripper came along, Intel was just as uncomfortable and flinged a couple of that Jensen dump AMD's way, but Ryzen was able to do very well in the market and here is Ryzen about to launch the 3000 series and it's not looking good for intel.....So yes, Jensen know that the cores are aligning for both GPU's and CPU's at AMD's stable....
So why is Jensen so upset? +8GB, 128 rops,+ 2.1 bandwidth for 4k gaming and less stutter, a better productivity GPU @ 699.99....If I was Jensen I'd be sweating too......This is opposed to him launching an RTX lineup that is less than stellar, has an awful price to perf ratio, basically the line of cards was not received well and are not selling as well as prior NV GPU's……..People think folk are just lapping up 2080ti's out there by the millions, NO, at $1200.00, most people just watch JayzTwoCents et al bench those cards online and fight the war in the comments, when usually the hardest warmonger in the comment section are usually on 1050ti's or lower, but they're speaking the virtues of 2080ti performance like they own one or that it is the average user card out there....
I think Jensen is feeling the pinch after this subpar launch of turing……"It just works"........ 4 months later one RTX game and one dlss game, severe issues in both, but hey! pay that $800 for RTX2080, pay $1200 for the TI, because RTX this RTX that, ummm...NO, stop it Huang...….What makes it worse is that this one rtx game underperformed in sales, which makes it clear, nobody cares about RTX now, people rather play BLOPS 4 with no rtx, they bought that game in spades, they just want high framerates at high rez atm....When RTX is affordable for all at high rez and high frames the people will be there, till then, Jensen will continue to be in a state of bother......And he better not release a card with no RTX, because that will be the biggest hypocritical "I dont' believe it" in this GPU race, and would render Jensen a real bs'er, but Jensen said "RTX off" looks like ass, so how can you live without RTX, I mean "it just works"......So I better not see an 1180 on store shelves soon....ish...….
So yes, Radeon 7 now with great perf, high bandwidth and vram and less stuttering whilst you play, in other words "smooth gameplay". Navi in June on 7nm with a new arch, lots of perf, low TDP, the only thing they can attack AMD with will be gone....So what will be their argument then?...Till then, I will enjoy "smoother gameplay on a radeon 7" or any other AMD GPU for that matter, till Navi comes and make that aspect of gaming even better.....Yes, there's a reason why Jensen is shook....I remember when Ryzen came along and thread-ripper came along, Intel was just as uncomfortable and flinged a couple of that Jensen dump AMD's way, but Ryzen was able to do very well in the market and here is Ryzen about to launch the 3000 series and it's not looking good for intel.....So yes, Jensen know that the cores are aligning for both GPU's and CPU's at AMD's stable....
llien
Member
Yeah, and kinda high end flagship from couple of month ago too.
GPU market is tricky these days.
nVidia's CEO has reasons to be nervous.
The company's value has sinked in the past few months and both sales and reception of the RTX series haven't been particularly good. The cards are overpriced, the perfomance gains compared to the previous series are modest (if the R7 has shabby performance so have their latest cards...) and the ray tracing stuff is basically like T&L in the original Geforce 256 or the pixel shaders in the GTS2 series, a raw initial implementation that is more a marketing tool than a feature.
In this sense I can see him trying to smash any kind of positive momentum that AMD might get.
Still AMD isn't in any position to threaten them, VEGA VII is just an old chip based on a power inefficient architecture that thanks to a new advanced manufacuturing process has been pushed to try to match what the other company is doing on the high end. It's much better than nothing but they have a long road ahead of them. In any case AMD has been having a lot of success with their CPUs lately and on the graphics front they have both Sony and Microsoft choosing their chips for their consoles so they're not in the bad position they were a few years ago. They simply need to come out with a new architecture (Navi?) that is scalable and efficient enough to allow them to be competitive both in the high end and mid-range PC GPU market.
The company's value has sinked in the past few months and both sales and reception of the RTX series haven't been particularly good. The cards are overpriced, the perfomance gains compared to the previous series are modest (if the R7 has shabby performance so have their latest cards...) and the ray tracing stuff is basically like T&L in the original Geforce 256 or the pixel shaders in the GTS2 series, a raw initial implementation that is more a marketing tool than a feature.
In this sense I can see him trying to smash any kind of positive momentum that AMD might get.
Still AMD isn't in any position to threaten them, VEGA VII is just an old chip based on a power inefficient architecture that thanks to a new advanced manufacuturing process has been pushed to try to match what the other company is doing on the high end. It's much better than nothing but they have a long road ahead of them. In any case AMD has been having a lot of success with their CPUs lately and on the graphics front they have both Sony and Microsoft choosing their chips for their consoles so they're not in the bad position they were a few years ago. They simply need to come out with a new architecture (Navi?) that is scalable and efficient enough to allow them to be competitive both in the high end and mid-range PC GPU market.
Last edited:
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
Nvidia gets TONS of shit for their pricing and rightfully so. So don’t even pretend like people are unfairly singling out AMD here.
The fact remains that:
A) TWO FULL YEARS later, AMD finally has a card that can compete with 1080 Ti
B) the only reason Nvidia can get away with charging $700-$1200 is because they have no real competition in the high-end/enthusiast market, and Radeon VII doesn’t do much to change that.
You better hope to god that Navi is a massive improvement, because if this is an indication of what to expect from AMD 7nm GPUs then the market is fucked for the foreseeable future.
nightmare-slain
Gold Member
well, he ain't lying.
it is lousy and underwhelming. AMD wtf are you doing?
Intel might actually give Nvidia some competition before AMD ever does. 2020 will be interesting. i doubt they will be able to compete straight away but give them a few years and hopefully they will light a fire under Nvidia's ass.
it is lousy and underwhelming. AMD wtf are you doing?
Intel might actually give Nvidia some competition before AMD ever does. 2020 will be interesting. i doubt they will be able to compete straight away but give them a few years and hopefully they will light a fire under Nvidia's ass.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insane Metal
Member
I expected more from this card since it has been sooooo long. But that dude from nVidia is really a piece of shit.
Shai-Tan
Banned
Using DLSS and RTX as a differentiator seems a bit laughable to me. I don't doubt it's effective marketing because it was for PhysX when it was performance destroying crap that almost everyone turned off.
"4K" DLSS performs and looks roughly equivalent to upscaling from 1800p and has artifacts such as shimmering in the one showcased game it supports. It's likely tensor cores will otherwise go unused unless Nvidia pays someone to use them. With textbook misleading advertising comparing it to actually running in 4k. Where's the DLSS support in games already announced? It seems like announcements are more like "maybe". Some devs that announced DLSS and didn't deliver it (Darksiders, Just Cause) can't even be bothered to support HDR and that probably has a larger install base than RTX.
RTX ray tracing is clearly not powerful enough for great hybrid rendering. The one game supporting it only traces reflections and even in that case it's heavily supported by screen space reflections. Artifacts from low ray count will be even more obvious in games that use it for shadows. I imagine it will be a novelty in a handful of games that most will turn off for performance.
I bought a 2080ti because of its 4k performance. I've been playing games on my 4k tv in locked 60fps. It's great. But for me those extra features are just bad in their current incarnations. DLSS is more suited to the 2080 that could get good performance with some overhead at 1440p but not great at 4k which highlights the fact that DLSS is not flexible. An RTX 2070 or 2060 still has to run in 1440p "scaled" with AI to 4k. So 2070 will get like high 30s in DLSS on Final Fantasy XV and good luck on the 2060. Hooray for DLSS.
"4K" DLSS performs and looks roughly equivalent to upscaling from 1800p and has artifacts such as shimmering in the one showcased game it supports. It's likely tensor cores will otherwise go unused unless Nvidia pays someone to use them. With textbook misleading advertising comparing it to actually running in 4k. Where's the DLSS support in games already announced? It seems like announcements are more like "maybe". Some devs that announced DLSS and didn't deliver it (Darksiders, Just Cause) can't even be bothered to support HDR and that probably has a larger install base than RTX.
RTX ray tracing is clearly not powerful enough for great hybrid rendering. The one game supporting it only traces reflections and even in that case it's heavily supported by screen space reflections. Artifacts from low ray count will be even more obvious in games that use it for shadows. I imagine it will be a novelty in a handful of games that most will turn off for performance.
I bought a 2080ti because of its 4k performance. I've been playing games on my 4k tv in locked 60fps. It's great. But for me those extra features are just bad in their current incarnations. DLSS is more suited to the 2080 that could get good performance with some overhead at 1440p but not great at 4k which highlights the fact that DLSS is not flexible. An RTX 2070 or 2060 still has to run in 1440p "scaled" with AI to 4k. So 2070 will get like high 30s in DLSS on Final Fantasy XV and good luck on the 2060. Hooray for DLSS.
Last edited:
nightmare-slain
Gold Member
lol yeah he's a total piece of shit because he's talking down his "competition". what do you expect him to say? "whoa...shit AMD wtf...you caught us off guard! the Radeon 7 is AMAZING!!!! shit....what do we do now?"
this is a business. the CEO can't just come out say stupid shit unless it's stupid shit that appeases the people who give them money.
Insane Metal
Member
Be respectful, that's all. You don't need to shit on your competition.
LucidFeuer
Banned
Well he's right on the performance, hypocrite on the price but completely ridiculous on FreeSync statements.
Ascend
Member
Actually, it's because people pay for them. Why do people buy Titans for example? Those cards don't even have anything to do with AMD. Even though competition does help bring prices down, it's dishonest to blame AMD for this, especially when the crowd didn't support AMD when they had good products. People want AMD to be competitive so they can buy nVidia cheaper, and obviously, that can never work in the long run. If people want competition, they need to start buying AMD, rather than bashing everything they put out.
As for these statements that have been made by nVidia's CEO, all I can say is that they are immature.
kiphalfton
Member
Until the 2080 has some actual games that support ray tracing or dlss, it's in the same league as the Vega 7 and gtx 1080 ti.
Dontero
Banned
1 You can't ask people to doll out 1000$ if your technology at best gives you better reflection in few windows in some games.
Did you forget how luckwarm reaction to RTX has been ? And now AMD didn't actually release anything raytracing.
In other words no one outside of few devs will support it. Did you see how much of die tensor and rt cores take ?
They spend shitload of money for feature that is basically not used and it won't be unless AMD chooses to join game.
2. Win win ? Who will buy 200$ more super expensive G-sync monitor when you can buy 200$ less G-sync monitor ? Their whole G-sync shtick was to sell you nvdia chips which made profit for them in those monitors. Implementing G-sync without those chips will give nvidia $0
Not only they wanted to scalp people but also to lock them in into their ecosystem.
You know what happened ? It completely backfired when AMD released Freesync. Because from that point when you bought non-gsync monitor there was huge change it was actually freesync, which meant that you were given for free feature you can lose if you switch graphics card.
So now they were forced to support VRR. Losing money on G-sync which will not flow anymore and losing ecosystem argument.
It is more like lose lose to me.
3. This is completely wrong. And we have already seen effect of AMD controlling most of gaming industry hardware. Why do you think nvidia had such troubles with drivers past few years ? How AMD which was lauded as bug monger went from really shitty drivers situation to actually better than nvidia ? Go read pages and pages of people complaining about driver issues past 3-4 years. That didn't happen before because Nvidia effectively was dominant in industry. Now AMD when you look at total market holds basically 70-80% of that market because they are practically in everywhere. Those things matter and when you make game like Far Cry 5 you have to chose AMD or AMD.
But that is history. When current consoles were cooked AMD didn't have place or time to make something custom for those companies because apus were relatively new thing and AMD was in pinch looking for any money.
Imagine for a second that AMD will feature custom silicon in those consoles let us call it "notPhysX" and every single developer working on a game would use that as standard feature of their game (because all consoles use AMD hardware remember ?).
If that notPhysX would behave exactly like physX and like Nvidia did AMD would close drivers to Nvidia what do you think performance of Nvidia gpus would look like when every single game comes with "notPhysX" as standard part of game ? Can you you imagine releasing GPU with superior design and being hampered by "notPhysX" in almost every game by 40-50% ?
This is consequence of losing console business. For most developers consoles are platforms on which games are developed first.
They will not look at compatibility with pc but use console hardware to fullest.
Which means in case of port they will have to effectively either not release game (not going to happen) or release it with that feature and kill performance of nvidia gpus.
This is what Nvidia wanted when they released their physX/gameworks and throwing money to devs to implement it.
And now they will be victims of same thing.
It will be weird for me though defending Nvidia when that will happen. :/
Ray tracing that barely gives you anything of value and DLSS which looks like 1440p+small amount of aa.
Those two are non issues.
The biggest issue is that they released GPU on 7nm that can't beat even GPU at 12nm that wastes space for rt coresand tensors.
ethomaz
Banned
Can the GTX 1080TI do that?
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/digi...-1080p60-ray-tracing-really-possible.1470937/
No... so that alone put even the GTX 2060 over the GTX 1080TI.
AMD has a die-shrink (a bad one) for a card that they released over a year ago that match a card released by nVidia two years ago.
Last edited:
Dontero
Banned
DLSS does not improve performance. Game just runs at lower resolution with slightly better aa feature.
I guess you can say that you have better IQ at lower cost compared to running game at much higher resolution.
But that could be applied to any kind of AA not just DLSS.
For RTX.
It runs game that runs normally on that gpu 120-140fps and makes it 60fps. For what ?
Few shiny reflections in puddles of water and few reflections on some windows and cars ?
You will barely notice it when you play game and most of the time with simple cubemaps you would have to squint your eyes to see difference.
You know what makes bigger impact ? Running your game at 120fps instead. Which looks much better than puddle you will barely notice was there and PLAYS better.
Don't get me wrong. I am all rooting for ray tracing in games.
But me like everyone else thought that when they made separate silicon part especially for raytracing we all thought it would be costless.
That you would be able to turn this on at no cost (or maybe some slight cost).
Even performance hit would not be a huge thing IF games that featured it would actually look a lot better.
But what we got for basically 50-70% less performance ? few puddles of water and windows. Some singular shadows here and there.
In other words same as psyhX. Nice feature that wastes most of game performance giving you nice hair wobble for 30-40fps price.
Simply put it is not worth it. Right now at least.
Screamer-RSA
Member
DLSS this RTX that, please point to the 20+ games that support that. This tome next year I’ll be amazed if its supported by 5 games.
MightySquirrel
Banned
Idk I'm not impressed. 1080 Ti launched 2 years ago on 16 nm process and offered same performance and price. Vega 7 is on 7 nm and still only on par 2 years later.
Nvidia engineers can go to bed and relaunch Rtx 2080 in 6 or so months on 7 nm which will beat this by 25-30% with just die shrink. Only call it 3080. I hope that's not gonna happen , but it's sadly a possibility now.
Silver Wattle
Gold Member
Wow @ the DLSS and RT crowd, you guys are easy marks.
If you want to criticize AMD, please stick to them requiring 7nm to compete with Nvidia's 12nm and still consuming more power.
The DLSS and raytracing arguements are weaksauce.
If you want to criticize AMD, please stick to them requiring 7nm to compete with Nvidia's 12nm and still consuming more power.
The DLSS and raytracing arguements are weaksauce.
Jigsaah
Gold Member
From strictly a consumer standpoint, if I have $700 to spend on a GPU, I'm not spending it on a card that lacks next gen features. I'm going to just save to get the one with Raytracing, wait until a price drop or settle for the 2060 for half the price. It makes no sense to buy Radeon VII IMO. Add in that they are supporting Freesync monitors and it really just is the smarter decision.
The only reason I'd go with Radeon is if I'm doing more video editing than gaming, which I'm not.
The only reason I'd go with Radeon is if I'm doing more video editing than gaming, which I'm not.
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
RTX 2080 is lousy because it costs too much.
Radeon VII is lousy because it took them TWO DAMN YEARS to finally reach the performance of the 1080 Ti.
Radeon VII is lousy because it took them TWO DAMN YEARS to finally reach the performance of the 1080 Ti.
SonGoku
Member
So like the rtx 2080 then?
CuNi
Member
While I always preferred Nvidia cards over AMD, that's still a shit move to do. The 2080 doesn't "crush" the VII, they are quit on par when compared in raster performance. Then, saying "we invented it" is oh boy so wrong. Just because they released overpriced hardware doesn't mean you invented it Jesus. And I'm not even go for that bait with Freesync not working. That was... Wow.. How is he still running this company? This guy is a A-Class asshole. I bet whenever he goes to sleep, he dreams with raytracing on.. I mean.. It simply works!... Ridiculous.
ethomaz
Banned
You know GTX 2080 was launched at the same price of Radeon VII a year ago.
It still $699.
Ascend
Member
I assume you bought a bunch of GCN cards then, because they were packed with next gen features.
Last edited:
shark sandwich
tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
LOL. Just imagine if 2 years ago you told the AMD fanboys “it will be two full years until AMD will have a product that can match 1080Ti performance, and it’ll consume more power and cost $700.”
You would’ve been accused of being a troll.
You would’ve been accused of being a troll.
thelastword
Banned
Are people saying, they're in it for the next gen features?By the gods...! Vega had several next gen features when it debuted. How many of the disappointed, I love new features crowd supported Vega?
down 2 orth
Member
Nvidia deserves a good kick to the balls. Years of no competition has resulted in flagrantly invasive software and overpricing... their day of reckoning is long overdue.
You seen that Chinese MMO they showed? Looks equal to CGI from a few years ago. Ray tracing is the future of graphics. For too long gamers have been pushing for ever increasing resolutions, when what we really need are better quality graphics not more pixels.
I'm not convinced that Bobby Kotick even knows that his company makes video games at this point
Last edited:
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
Me! I was excited for Vega 56 till the launch pricing fiasco.
Did any games ever take advantage of those Vega features?
LordOfChaos
Member
While he probably knows little more about the performance than we do at this point, launching 5 months later, with a generations fab lead advantage, no silicon spent on tensor cores/RTX, and drawing more power, and only matching both the price and performance (by the graphs that they did show of hand picked titles showing them slightly ahead) of the 2080, is certainly underwhelming.
Seems like more of a baby compute card play with that 16GB of 60% faster memory than Nvidia has. It'll be popular for OpenCL/Vulkan/Metal users who want a cheaper compute card, while being pretty meh for gamers, who may as well get the 2080 with the same performance and price but also DLSS/RTX.
Plus Nvidia not being on a leading edge fab, if they just drop the price in response...
Seems like more of a baby compute card play with that 16GB of 60% faster memory than Nvidia has. It'll be popular for OpenCL/Vulkan/Metal users who want a cheaper compute card, while being pretty meh for gamers, who may as well get the 2080 with the same performance and price but also DLSS/RTX.
Plus Nvidia not being on a leading edge fab, if they just drop the price in response...
Last edited:
Lort
Banned
Very few people who buy a 2080 card will be happy enough with low res and low fps just to enable ray tracing.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Someone should tell Jensen that it's unsportsmanlike to kick a man when he's already down on the ground.
SonGoku
Member
The 2080 can't do that either at 4K, most people on the market for these cards plan to game at 4k
Schnozberry
Member
Regardless of how you feel about the new AMD card, Huang's comments come across as unnecessary and low class from a market leader. It's easy to get the impression he's spooked by actual competition in the 4k gaming space.
If Radeon VII is genuinely competitive at gaming for it's price point, and delivers big for content creators due to the large amount of HBM and Vega's already formidable OpenCL performance, it will find an audience among people who have mixed workloads. We'll have to see once people get their hands on the card where the dominoes fall. The most interesting part of the original Vega 56 and 64 was the success people had with undervolting and overclocking, and I'm curious how that will turn out on 7nm with 2nd Gen Vega cores.. There were some huge efficiency gains and performance improvements over stock configurations for people who managed to draw a winner in the silicon lottery.
I'm also interested to see if AMD pushes out a version of Vega 20 with fewer compute cores and 8GB of HBM2 that's more aimed at the mid range market. I think they would find a larger audience there, particularly if they can get the price down to under $400. But, maybe that audience will be served the introductory Navi parts.
If Radeon VII is genuinely competitive at gaming for it's price point, and delivers big for content creators due to the large amount of HBM and Vega's already formidable OpenCL performance, it will find an audience among people who have mixed workloads. We'll have to see once people get their hands on the card where the dominoes fall. The most interesting part of the original Vega 56 and 64 was the success people had with undervolting and overclocking, and I'm curious how that will turn out on 7nm with 2nd Gen Vega cores.. There were some huge efficiency gains and performance improvements over stock configurations for people who managed to draw a winner in the silicon lottery.
I'm also interested to see if AMD pushes out a version of Vega 20 with fewer compute cores and 8GB of HBM2 that's more aimed at the mid range market. I think they would find a larger audience there, particularly if they can get the price down to under $400. But, maybe that audience will be served the introductory Navi parts.
Krappadizzle
Member
I want some of what you're smoking. Anyone who'd take a 2060 over a 1080ti if price wasn't the main factor would be a crazy person. Raytracing is cool, but it's a VERY niche feature that we won't even see a wide support for at least another 2 or 3 years at least. It'll be pushed by some Dev's that are bleeding edge GPU/Tech people, but not by a good 85% of the rest of the entire industry. The hardware just isn't there yet.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Banned
Why is amd playing conservative? Who knows. But I don't think it unlikely that they could do a limited run of cards for 1200+$ with 2080ti~ performance.
Last edited:
sertopico
Member
...Said the guy who's selling defective RTXs.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Banned
BS from nvidia, indeed, isn't there certifications and standardizations+ actual reviews of these products in action?
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Member
No. The vast majority of Freesync monitors never undergo any actual testing or certification. They just say they support the standard and put the logo on the box.
Nvidia is basically doing what AMD can't afford to, which is actually test the things and see if they work as promised. And it turns out that most of them don't. I'm not shocked or anything about that either. G-Sync requires a lot of work to properly implement, variable refresh rate isn't something you just put in 10 lines of code and it magically happens. Unlike with Freesync, HDMI 2.1 VRR TV's will require extensive certification before they can be released because of the HDMI compliance requirements.
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Banned
Uhmm, at least big brand names are tested, I mean I'm sure I've seen quite a few freesync monitor reviews and comparisons to g-sync in action, in terms of performance.
Perhaps obscure no recognizable brand monitors are playing dirty, but the big names can't take the luxury of that because they're being actively reviewed on youtube and main pc hardware enthusiast sites.
CuNi
Member
Check the VII thread. I have been very vocal about the VII being a failed product but mainly because of its price tag and power consumption. This doesn't change the fact that they are on the same level performance wise. You can't deny that. I still wouldn't suggest buying it but the 2080 certainly isn't crushing it in any way when it comes to fps in games.
thelastword
Banned
I gave a potential breakdown of what a 2080ti beater could be on Vega arch in another thread. You see, AMD did not just take an instinct card and boost the ram and bandwidth, they did custom work for each variation of these cards. So Instinct has its custom features, but Radeon 7 got 128 rops, the boosting scheme was reworked etc....
Now, for a 2080ti beater, AMD could have given us 256 rops, rework the CU's to increase them or they could have done what they did with PRO, increase the number of instructions delivered per CU, but that means the physical units would be much larger than typical.
They could then place 32Gb hbm on there, which means ridiculous bandwidth, yet, what is clear to us is that hbm needs to be fed to deliver the higher bandwidth that we enjoy there, so tdp would be around 350w on such a card at 7nm. So here's your 2080ti beater......and AMD could probably deliver that at $1100, $100 less than a ti, and this card beats the rtx titan too......
So we have, +21Gb vram over Ti, +8Gb over Titan, much higher bandwidth over those cards. That card would beat everything, but a bit more work would be involved especially on an older arch.
Yet, let's say AMD delivered that, forget about the net plusses highlighted above, persons or detractors would focus solely on tdp, tdp, tdp.
Let's be honest though, such cards are more for marketing and muscle flexing, but maybe it's essential for that very reason and for mindshare.
However, most people would still buy a $700 dollar card over an $1100, $1200 or whatever exorbitant amount they are selling the Titan.... So maybe that's AMD's thinking there. Yet, I think the real reason they did not provide a Ti beater on Radeon 7 is because they would rather do so on a new arch, with new engineering, lower tdp and better yields, which would translate to a much cheaper card beating the Ti, maybe in the $800-1000 range.....
Isn't there a lawsuit or some such against Nvidia? I remember so many rtx cards dying, man, had that been Amd, the press and the forums would go nuts. Yet, I'm still looking to see the tdp and frame times on these Turing cards when they finally actualize the tensor+rt cores in tandem, even including dlss. They said dlss was free anti-aliasing and a better image, but it seems to be more pro-aliasing more than anything else.......
ethomaz
Banned
I don’t talk to everybody but I would never buy the GTX 1080TI over the GTX 2060 today.
The GTX 1080TI has more raw power but lacks in everything else.
GTX 2060 have good performace... around the GTX 1070 level... it is just a bit too pricey but we need to wait the non Founder editions.
Last edited: