Support NeoGAF

[llien]

Reviewers should have received their Radeon "Navi" review samples by now, so it's just natural that the number of leaks is increasing. WCCFTech has spotted one such leak in the 3DMark Time Spy database. The card which is just labeled "Generic VGA" achieved a final score of 8575 points, GPU score of 8719 and 7843 CPU points, which is almost identical to WCCFTech's own comparison benchmarks for the GeForce RTX 2070 Founders Edition (8901). The Vega 64 scored 7427, which leads WCCFTech to believe this must be Radeon RX 5700 XT. The result has since been removed from the 3DMark database, which also suggests it's for an unreleased product.

TechPowerUp

Note: nvidia cards normally score better than AMD's in 3D Mark Timespy (vs diff in actual games).

 

[thelastword]

This has been out for a while, but it looks pretty good, bodes well for a more balanced gaming arch, especially when benches are done on games that favor Radeon Arch...….The CU's are better, so expect even better performance in Wolfenstein, Dirt 2, World War Z, Forza's, Strange Brigade, Resident Evils, DMC's in DX11 (mind you, yes, RE2 and DMC performs even better in DX11 on Radeon cards),.....Then we have more games like; Kingdom Come, Rainbow Six will now have VRS on Radeon now (so even better performance in Rainbow Six), better perf in Division, Hitman, BF's, CODs etc.........And all the games where Vega did worse in, due to optimization and the geometry/pixel engine will be much better....like; Fortnite, CSGO, Overwatch etc...

Surely, the gaming results will be very interesting, especially when these devs will be able to put a top end Ryzen 3000 CPU with a Navi GPU combo, with no fear of losing frames due to the CPU in certain titles........

 

[Soltype]

What are the prices on the new.... RTX Super cards.....If Nvidia keeps their pricing in check....they could have real a winner on their hands....

 

[Mattyp]

I'll believe it when I see it. Might force Nvidia to drop 3000 series out the door sooner anyway.

 

[Leonidas]

I'll believe it when I see it. Might force Nvidia to drop 3000 series out the door sooner anyway.

Nvidia Super launching next week already has Navi beaten.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

1,600 higher on the graphics score than a Vega 64? I'm pretty doubtful.

 

[Armorian]

What are the prices on the new.... RTX Super cards.....If Nvidia keeps their pricing in check....they could have real a winner on their hands....

700 for 2080S, 500 for 2070S and 400 for 2060S.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Nvidia Super launching next week already has Navi beaten.

There are no reviews out so we don't know if that is true. But yes, the 2070 Super should be faster than the 5700XT, but that extra speed will come at an extra cost.

700 for 2080S, 500 for 2070S and 400 for 2060S.

That may not be correct as we don't know what the actual price the 2070 super will launch as. AIB Super cards have shown the 2070 super to launch at $599. If that's true then the 5700XT is back in the game.

Either way the 2070 Super should be faster than 5700XT. Whether it's worth the potential $150 price premium is another story.

However, the vanilla 2070 will remain at $500 for the low end models and only true independent reviews will tell us if it's better than the $449 5700XT.

EDIT: leaked image that has since been removed

 

[JohnnyFootball]

What are the prices on the new.... RTX Super cards.....If Nvidia keeps their pricing in check....they could have real a winner on their hands....

See my post above. It's not a given that the prices will be as competitive as people are hoping. AIBs are expected to charge a premium for Super versions, which could keep the 5700 and 5700Xt in the game.

 

[llien]

Nvidia Super launching next week already has Navi beaten.

Super in those cards stands for "super expensive", though.
I mean, xx60 card for $400, seriously?

I don't see how it could possibly "counter" 250mm^2 cards by AMD.
TSMC states that 7nm product yields are formidable, will reach 16nm levels by the end of the year.
If so, how much more expensive should 5700 cards be, compared to 235mm^2 480 (Polaris)?

AMD simply decided not to go aggressive on price, they should have no problem dropping it even by $100.

 

[llien]

What are the prices on the new.... RTX Super cards.....If Nvidia keeps their pricing in check....they could have real a winner on their hands....

Are you expecting nVidia to give you 15% faster version of 2060/2070 and not raise the price for them, chuckle?
Leaked prices show 15% "bump" on price for 2060/2070.
25% in case of 2080.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Are you expecting nVidia to give you 15% faster version of 2060/2070 and not raise the price for them, chuckle?
Leaked prices show 15% "bump" on price for 2060/2070.
25% in case of 2080.

People are expecting the Super cards to launch for what the original versions did and then for those originals to drop in price.

Nope

 

[Self_Destructive]

The super cards will fulfill their purpose... and that is to completely nullify the 5700 series. Doesn't really matter what Nvidia does with pricing. These Navi cards aren't enough, aren't priced well enough... and don't have the features of Nvidia's RTX line up. Only the Radeon faithful will care.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

The super cards will fulfill their purpose... and that is to completely nullify the 5700 series. Doesn't really matter what Nvidia does with pricing. These Navi cards aren't enough, aren't priced well enough... and don't have the features of Nvidia's RTX line up. Only the Radeon faithful will care.

This is not true.

The 5700 and 5700XT stand a decent chance to be successful IF they accomplish their original promise: The $379 5700 being faster the vanilla 2060, which it HAS to be given it's more expensive. And the $449 5700XT being on par/competitive with the $500 vanilla 2070.

I know there is the "But RTX" argument, but RTX is virtually useless on the 2060 and 2070 unless you want minimal RTX at 1080p or less resolutions. Even on my 2080 Ti, it's really hard to justify the performance cost for RTX. Very few titles allow for RTX above 1440p, even on my 2080 Ti.

I don't disagree that these could be priced better. $329 and $399 would be far more competitive, but it remains to be seen until we get actual benchmarks.

 

[Self_Destructive]

This is not true.

The 5700 and 5700XT stand a decent chance to be successful IF they accomplish their original promise: The $379 5700 being faster the vanilla 2060, which it HAS to be given it's more expensive. And the $449 5700XT being on par/competitive with the $500 vanilla 2070.

I know there is the "But RTX" argument, but RTX is virtually useless on the 2060 and 2070 unless you want minimal RTX at 1080p or less resolutions. Even on my 2080 Ti, it's really hard to justify the performance cost for RTX. Very few titles allow for RTX above 1440p, even on my 2080 Ti.

I don't disagree that these could be priced better. $329 and $399 would be far more competitive, but it remains to be seen until we get actual benchmarks.

It is true though.

And it's quite clear how successfully Nvidia has marketed Ray tracing as a "must have" technology, despite a complete lack of games that supported it at launch, and relatively few games that have incorporated it to this day. People are using "RTX" synonymously when referring to ray tracing. "Does/Will Navi support RTX?", "Will next gen consoles have RTX?" The fact that it is known that Next gen consoles will have hardware accelerated RT tech puts AMD in the position where they have to downplay RT support for their 5700 series GPUs while at the same time hype up their next generation console tech and having Sony and MS tout their RT capabilities.

It makes these PC Navi GPUs look like a waste of time and not very future proof, while at the same time Nvidia looks good as people wonder if even the next gen consoles will have similar RT capability as the first gen Nvidia RTX cards.

If RT isn't all appealing to someone, Nvidia's got options there too.. and hell, at least they are capable of utilizing RT through DXR, unlike AMD's GPUs... though it remains to be seen if they will enable it for their 5700 series Navi GPUs.

Radeon products have a huge uphill battle.. and I simply don't believe the first gen Navi PC parts are going to do anything to convert people, which is what AMD has to do. They'll sell as well as Radeon products do, but nothing more imo. We need the "full RDNA" experience, and we need it now.. Not early to mid next year when Nvidia is ready with their 2nd gen RTX cards on 7nm EUV.

I'm not saying these wont be decent cards.. but they're not what AMD needs them to be. That's all.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

It is true though.

And it's quite clear how successfully Nvidia has marketed Ray tracing as a "must have" technology, despite a complete lack of games that supported it at launch, and relatively few games that have incorporated it to this day. People are using "RTX" synonymously when referring to ray tracing. "Does/Will Navi support RTX?", "Will next gen consoles have RTX?" The fact that it is known that Next gen consoles will have hardware accelerated RT tech puts AMD in the position where they have to downplay RT support for their 5700 series GPUs while at the same time hype up their next generation console tech and having Sony and MS tout their RT capabilities.

It makes these PC Navi GPUs look like a waste of time and not very future proof, while at the same time Nvidia looks good as people wonder if even the next gen consoles will have similar RT capability as the first gen Nvidia RTX cards.

If RT isn't all appealing to someone, Nvidia's got options there too.. and hell, at least they are capable of utilizing RT through DXR, unlike AMD's GPUs... though it remains to be seen if they will enable it for their 5700 series Navi GPUs.

Radeon products have a huge uphill battle.. and I simply don't believe the first gen Navi PC parts are going to do anything to convert people, which is what AMD has to do. They'll sell as well as Radeon products do, but nothing more imo. We need the "full RDNA" experience, and we need it now.. Not early to mid next year when Nvidia is ready with their 2nd gen RTX cards on 7nm EUV.

I'm not saying these wont be decent cards.. but they're not what AMD needs them to be. That's all.

I disagree that ray tracing right now is the end all be all. That can change, but last we heard, RTX hasn’t been selling all that well mainly due to the high costs of the RTX cards and these SUPER versions are doing nothing to change that. Yes, RTX is getting talked about and may well be a bigger deal sooner rather than later.

As for AMD, reviews will determine if these cards can move the needle. If they do beat the performance of the cards they are competing with then they will do fine. Now I do think that Nvidia pricing their cards so high gave the suits at AMD the idea that they too could price their cards high too.

AMD has their most recent true success with the Radeon 4850 not because that card was the fastest because that card offered such exceptionally good value.

Navi has an up hill battle in that the 5700 cannot simply trade blows with the 2060, it needs to win almost every benchmark and by at least 10%. I’ll believe it when I see it.

The 5700XT can afford to trade blows with the 2070 since it’s $50 cheaper.

 

[Pagusas]

I really miss the days when a high end card cost $500 . I normally don’t care at all about price, anything under $600 is an impulse purchase, but damn if it’s not hard to drop 1k+ on a graphics card that doesn’t have workstation/pro capabilities.

 

[Self_Destructive]

I disagree that ray tracing right now is the end all be all. That can change, but last we heard, RTX hasn’t been selling all that well mainly due to the high costs of the RTX cards and these SUPER versions are doing nothing to change that. Yes, RTX is getting talked about and may well be a bigger deal sooner rather than later.

I'm not saying it is though. I simply said it's another feature that Nvidia's RTX lineup has over the 5700 series Navi GPUs. Regardless of what RT it is right now in this moment, Nvidia have done an exceptional job at selling it's importance to the future of rendering video games. Despite all of the stumbling with regards to not having any RTX enabled games at launch, and at the same time the challenge of educating people of the technology.. why it's so performance intensive, and how it's a fundamentally different way of rendering, they've done an excellent job at getting ahead of the conversation and controlling the discussion of it.

Next gen consoles supporting RT further pushes this home. Games WILL support it in the future.. so if you're buying a card today.. it makes sense to go with Nvidia. You're getting very similar raster performance, while at the same time getting support for RT.

People who buy 5700 series Navi GPUs will feel burned by AMD when their RT cards come around next year. Even if they think they won't care about the technology in the future, or are worried about the performance.. they'll feel it when next gen consoles have RT effects and they can't enable them on their recently purchased AMD Navi GPUs. (or maybe they will be able to but will run like garbage)

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I'm not saying it is though. I simply said it's another feature that Nvidia's RTX lineup has over the 5700 series Navi GPUs. Regardless of what RT it is right now in this moment, Nvidia have done an exceptional job at selling it's importance to the future of rendering video games. Despite all of the stumbling with regards to not having any RTX enabled games at launch, and at the same time the challenge of educating people of the technology.. why it's so performance intensive, and how it's a fundamentally different way of rendering, they've done an excellent job at getting ahead of the conversation and controlling the discussion of it.

Next gen consoles supporting RT further pushes this home. Games WILL support it in the future.. so if you're buying a card today.. it makes sense to go with Nvidia. You're getting very similar raster performance, while at the same time getting support for RT.

People who buy 5700 series Navi GPUs will feel burned by AMD when their RT cards come around next year. Even if they think they won't care about the technology in the future, or are worried about the performance.. they'll feel it when next gen consoles have RT effects and they can't enable them on their recently purchased AMD Navi GPUs. (or maybe they will be able to but will run like garbage)

But here is the part you are neglecting:
The nvidia cards that Navi is competing against have ray tracing support in pretty much name ONLY. As someone who owns a 2080 Ti, RTX is playable in 1440p in some games you can get around 1600-1800p (Metro Exodus). On the 2060 and 2070 you can use RTX at its lowest settings and maybe at best 1080p.

RTX on the 2060 and 2070 is basically the same as saying you own a toyota corolla, but it has the same type of spark plugs as Ferarri.

 

[Self_Destructive]

But here is the part you are neglecting:
The nvidia cards that Navi is competing against have ray tracing support in pretty much name ONLY. As someone who owns a 2080 Ti, RTX is playable in 1440p in some games you can get around 1600-1800p (Metro Exodus). On the 2060 and 2070 you can use RTX at its lowest settings and maybe at best 1080p.

RTX on the 2060 and 2070 is basically the same as saying you own a toyota corolla, but it has the same type of spark plugs as Ferarri.

I'm not neglecting it at all. Again, I said it's another feature the RTX cards have over 5700 series Navi. RT at lowest settings at 1080p will perform much better than on those Navi GPUs. Navi doesn't have the raster performance over the competing RTX cards to make up for that.

It's like having a vehicle which drives as fast as the competitors product on the road while also being able to off-road much better.. regardless of how slow you might have to take it.

Ray tracing is new.. developers are learning best practices and engine support, driver support, and API support will improve. We haven't even had any games yet built from the ground up with RT in mind for PC. I completely get what you're saying.. but AMD isn't making up for lacking it in any meaningful way.. thus it's a no brainer.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I'm not neglecting it at all. Again, I said it's another feature the RTX cards have over 5700 series Navi. RT at lowest settings at 1080p will perform much better than on those Navi GPUs. Navi doesn't have the raster performance over the competing RTX cards to make up for that.

Navi will be significantly faster in raster performance than a 2070 or 2060 will be in RTX mode. Thats not up for debate.

In raster mode for both they should be comparable. We will know for sure next week.

 

[Self_Destructive]

Navi will be significantly faster in raster performance than a 2070 or 2060 will be in RTX mode. Thats not up for debate.

In raster mode for both they should be comparable. We will know for sure next week.

lmao.. do I really have to spell out that I was referring to as if those Navi GPUs supported DXR through software? RT at lowest settings at 1080p is better ray tracing performance than "not supported" don't you think??

And the fact that they will be comparable is the same song and dance that it's always been for AMD. Being comparable isn't good enough. That's typical at this point. They need to be better and cheaper, or better with more features. Which is exactly my point. Navi isn't enough to cause any change. And these Super GPUs are just an added touch just because Nvidia can.

 

[Flying Toaster]

Gotta wait till we see everything in tests. I am all for some competition to team green but everytime AMD releases a GPU it always falls a little short in the high end department.

 

[llien]

The super cards will fulfill their purpose... and that is to completely nullify the 5700 series

What a weird argument.
If you go "because RTX", uh, why do you even need "supers" if RTX is so important to the consumers?
I mean, RT enabled are what, 1% of the games (I'm being generous)? Yay.

For the rest, 5700XT is a 250mm^2 chip. It could easily cost $100 less. 7nm yields are (ok, rumored to be) on par with 16nm FF. So, uh, how do you beat that, let alone "nullify" that?

Oh, and given the size, more is to come:

[HH] AMD Radeon RX 5800 And RX 5900 Navi GPUs Documented...

www.overclock.net

RT at lowest settings at 1080p is better ray tracing performance than "not supported" don't you think??

If even in that less than 1% of games that support it, you end up disabling it, because performance sucks, that's hardly a useful feature, is it?

 

[thelastword]

How can people still go on about RTX on any of these NV cards really, even the 2080ti, tell me? at what rez and frames are they're playing Quake 2 on the 2080ti, far less the 2080, 2070 and 2060, the extra RT cores in the super cards won't make a huge difference, maybe 2-5 frames at the same low resolutions...

Yet, so many NV fans are quick to say RTX RTX RTX, despite its putrid performance, despite not much support, despite consumers not caring...…..The concensus is that consumers would rather high frames and rez, that's why 1080ti still sells, Vega 64, 56 and Radeon 7 still sells very well, that's why the RX 570 is still declared by Youtube techies as the best bang for your buck on the lower end....Clearly, Nvidia is not convinced that RTX is ready for primetime because they would have never introduced Non RTX cards after that CES RTX fellatio session......They promoted it as be all end all, in mouth but not in deed....Based on what Jensen said at CES, only RTX cards should exist in their lineup atm.....but we all know why that's not so...

As for the weak argument that, 5700, 5700XT is a waste of money because of no RTX, because AMD's Navi 20 will support RT and Nvidia will be on 7nm EUV in 2020........It's just that, it's weak....What do you prefer, buying super expensive NV RTX cards now for a shitshow/slideshow of a feature with no support? or buying a non RTX card now as cheap as you can to play your games at high rez and high frames? I know what the answer is for most, they've already shown Nvidia where they stand on this....

Nvidia RTX and Super cards is just a high tax for a feature that is currently unimpressive on a visual to performance ratio, it's not game changing in it's current form......You would need much more GPU processing to make RT viable, and I'm not talking just shadows or reflections or G.I...I'm talking fully raytraced games......The real battle for RT will start in late 2020, I'll advise folk to save their money and avoid the NV tax on their RTX cards......Non RTX cards are cheaper and will give you all the performance you need till RTX becomes viable for all and is actually supported by all devs….

 

[Self_Destructive]

What a weird argument.
If you go "because RTX", uh, why do you even need "supers" if RTX is so important to the consumers?
I mean, RT enabled are what, 1% of the games (I'm being generous)? Yay.

For the rest, 5700XT is a 250mm^2 chip. It could easily cost $100 less. 7nm yields are (ok, rumored to be) on par with 16nm FF. So, uh, how do you beat that, let alone "nullify" that?

If even in that less than 1% of games that support it, you end up disabling it, because performance sucks, that's hardly a useful feature, is it?

I already said the Super exist... simply because Nvidia CAN. It's not even about RTX... it's about launching "new" products and taking the limelight away from the competition's launch. That's the only reason they exist. That's the only thing Nvidia "needs" them for.

Sure RT enabled games are currently less than 1% of the games... So? Look at the next generation console discussions and everyone was wondering just how they will support RT if at all. Sony and MS seem to both understand the importance of supporting hardware accelerated RT so much that they are willing to implement some form of it, be it AMDs upcoming implementation, or some different variation. Like it or not.. more support is coming, and this is gonna skyrocket when the new consoles are finally here.

I mean, do you need convincing that RT effects in games isn't the next step? Does Nvidia basing their new and future architectures around it not convince you... or AMD scrambling to support it with their future RDNA gpus, or Sony and MS both incorporating it into their next gen boxes? Downplay it all you want currently, but if you have the option to buy one of two GPUs which perform essentially the same or close in raster performance, plus it also supports RT... why wouldn't you? Especially if you're the budget type which holds onto a GPU for 3+ years.

As for your next comment.. I'm not sure what you're trying to say? We know the price of the 5700XT.. and we know the size. It costs what they're selling it for. Consumers don't give a shit about what it costs AMD to make their GPUs and what their yields are.. they care about the price is sells for. Nvidia beats that by releasing something which makes people wonder why they would even bother with the 5700XT when it doesn't support features the other has. Do you think we'd be having this conversation if the 5700XT performed as good as it does and was $100 cheaper? LOL no.

Historically, "close in performance" and "close in price" hasn't ever been good enough for AMD... even when they are at "feature parity". Again, outside of the AMD faithful, who's really going to give a shit about an RT-less Navi GPU that costs about the same as Nvidia's GPUs? These aren't what AMD needs.

 

[Self_Destructive]

Nvidia RTX and Super cards is just a high tax for a feature that is currently unimpressive on a visual to performance ratio, it's not game changing in it's current form......You would need much more GPU processing to make RT viable, and I'm not talking just shadows or reflections or G.I...I'm talking fully raytraced games......The real battle for RT will start in late 2020, I'll advise folk to save their money and avoid the NV tax on their RTX cards......Non RTX cards are cheaper and will give you all the performance you need till RTX becomes viable for all and is actually supported by all devs….

Yea.. that will be the PERFECT time for budget gamers to buy their budget GPUs which will still also "suck" at RT... I mean, you say even the 2080Ti sucks at RT.. yet you're advising that people wait until 2020 for "viable" ray tracing? Are you expecting mid ranged GPUs or consoles to beat 2080ti ray tracing performance by next year? LOL So my question is when is RT viable to you? Oh wait, I don't need you to answer that.. I already know it's "when AMD finally gets around to supporting it"...

I suggest people hold off too though. In early 2020 7nm AMD gpus will still be battling against 12nm Nvidia GPUs from 2018, by mid-late 2020 Nvidia will have 7nm EUV GPUs with 2nd generation RT support which will embarrass whatever AMD is offering.

I only hope that AMD's Fine Wine™ technology has kicked in by then.

 

[llien]

Sure RT enabled games are currently less than 1% of the games... So? Look at the next generation console discussions and everyone was wondering just how they will support RT if at all.

The mentioned consoles will launch in 1.5 years from now with god knows what RT solution.
People are disabling RT on 2060 right here and now.

I mean, do you need convincing that RT effects in games isn't the next step?

RT allows to drastically reduce DEVELOPMENT COSTS on certain types of effects.
In that sense, it is definitely the next step.
But:
1) you'd need something much faster than 2060 to actually enjoy it
2) we are years away before RT becomes mainstream
making it a "nice to have, but who cares if isn't there".

We know the price of the 5700XT.. and we know the size. It costs what they're selling it for

The point is AMD will have no issues "adjusting' the price, because 5700/5700XT should be quite cheap to produce.

Nvidia beats that by releasing something which makes people wonder why they would even bother with the 5700XT when it doesn't support features the other has.

Dude, do you mean RTX again? If so, nvidia released that quite a while ago, what does that have to do with "super"s?

 

[Self_Destructive]

The point is AMD will have no issues "adjusting' the price, because 5700/5700XT should be quite cheap to produce.


Dude, do you mean RTX again? If so, nvidia released that quite a while ago, what does that have to do with "super"s?

Yes, because we all know that AMD needs to sell their GPUs cheap to... actually sell their GPUs.

The Supers are for nothing other than to assure Nvidia's general performance advantage and to rob AMD of having the news cycle all to themselves. Not sure what's so hard to understand about that.

I mean, if you're satisfied with 7nm AMD parts competing with 12nm Nvidia parts a year later at a similar price... then good for you. I'm saying it's simply... not enough.. regardless of the ray-tracing shit.

 

[llien]

Yes, because we all know that AMD needs to sell their GPUs cheap to... actually sell their GPUs.

As 570 vs 1050/1050Ti/1650 shows, nope, it matters not so they should perhaps stop it.

The Supers are for nothing other than to assure Nvidia's general performance advantage and to rob AMD of having the news cycle all to themselves.

Given the pricing of supers, I don't see the rubbing. And that before 5800 and 5900 are even out (they were just trademarked).

I mean, if you're satisfied with 7nm AMD parts competing with 12nm Nvidia parts a year later at a similar price...

Perf/$ is stale for years by now.
AMD historically was the first to embrace new process node.

I expect actual on the street pricing to look better than MSRP in AMD's case. But even as is it's not bad, just not great.

 

[Ascend]

I'm not neglecting it at all. Again, I said it's another feature the RTX cards have over 5700 series Navi. RT at lowest settings at 1080p will perform much better than on those Navi GPUs. Navi doesn't have the raster performance over the competing RTX cards to make up for that.

It's like having a vehicle which drives as fast as the competitors product on the road while also being able to off-road much better.. regardless of how slow you might have to take it.

Ray tracing is new.. developers are learning best practices and engine support, driver support, and API support will improve. We haven't even had any games yet built from the ground up with RT in mind for PC. I completely get what you're saying.. but AMD isn't making up for lacking it in any meaningful way.. thus it's a no brainer.

At this point you have to ask yourself what is more important.

1 - Losing 50% of your performance for slightly better graphical effects
or
2 - Lower input latency at the same visual fidelity

 

[JohnnyFootball]

At this point you have to ask yourself what is more important.

1 - Losing 50% of your performance for slightly better graphical effects
or
2 - Lower input latency at the same visual fidelity

Not to mention that the level of RTX that is playable on those cards might as well be straight up raster.

Id argue that out of all the titles Metro Exodus makes the best use if ray tracing.

On my 2080 Ti I played the game with RTX between 1440p and 1800p and it looked amazing. NO DLSS.

The funny thing about RTX is that even in a game like Metro Exodus I could play the game without RTX enabled and 95% of users probably couldn't tell whether it was enabled or disabled.

 

[grfunkulus]

Are you expecting nVidia to give you 15% faster version of 2060/2070 and not raise the price for them, chuckle?
Leaked prices show 15% "bump" on price for 2060/2070.
25% in case of 2080.

Actually, yes. Leaked price of the 2070 super for the founder's edition is $500 not $600.

So that's a 1080ti performance level with rtx and a new warranty for $50 more than a used 1080ti with God knows how many hours? I'd say that's a pretty good deal. And yeah 5700xt is DOA if this is true as reported (but we'll know tomorrow so everyone needs to just chill out for one more day)...

 

[llien]

Actually, yes. Leaked price of the 2070 super for the founder's edition is $500 not $600.

So kind of them, chuckle, at least one price will have better perf/$ than older cards.

And yeah 5700xt is DOA if this is true

If 15% faster card is sold at $500, AMD will simply drop price on (much cheaper to produce) 5700XT, from 10% cheaper to 20% cheaper.

 

[grfunkulus]

So kind of them, chuckle, at least one price will have better perf/$ than older cards.


If 15% faster card is sold at $500, AMD will simply drop price on (much cheaper to produce) 5700XT, from 10% cheaper to 20% cheaper.

Will they simply do this? Let's find out. I'm sure if it's as easy as you say and the company with a lot less financial flexibility can afford to sell a 2070 level card at $50-100 less to regain marketshare, they will.

On the other hand, Navi could be the wet fart that I've been saying it would be for the last year when my friends were holding off building their rigs on the unwarranted hope of saving tons of cash. There's no reason to believe, given what we know of PRE-RDNA Navi, that these cards are going to be anything but a pace keeping 'success'

 

[GermanZepp]

So, i'm sorry to be "that guy" but, what this means for PS5?

 

[llien]

Will they simply do this? Let's find out. I'm sure if it's as easy as you say and the company with a lot less financial flexibility can afford to sell a 2070 level card at $50-100 less to regain marketshare, they will.

I'm pretty sure a company that can afford selling 8Gb HBM2 equipped 495 mm² Vega 56 at 248 Euros, can surely go much lower with 5700XT.
If benches/claims from both sides are true, 5700 non-XT doesn't even need price adjustment to be better perf/$.

So, i'm sorry to be "that guy" but, what this means for PS5?

Good news.

Faster than Vega 64 is a given.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

Actually, yes. Leaked price of the 2070 super for the founder's edition is $500 not $600.

So that's a 1080ti performance level with rtx and a new warranty for $50 more than a used 1080ti with God knows how many hours? I'd say that's a pretty good deal. And yeah 5700xt is DOA if this is true as reported (but we'll know tomorrow so everyone needs to just chill out for one more day)...

Except that Amazon leaks have shown the 2070 Super selling for $599. Saying it will be $500 is premature.

 

[grfunkulus]

Except that Amazon leaks have shown the 2070 Super selling for $599. Saying it will be $500 is premature.

Amazon leaks vs actual reporting that says the $500 figure was told to the press (for the founder edition, which the picture is not). A number of sites already commented that the Amazon price should be taken with a grain of salt.

Again, we will know tomorrow so this is all a bit pointless.

 

[WhiskeyDiver]

Edit: Ok. It took 6 fucking tries using the upload image feature. I was wondering why it wasn't working. I didn't see the insert button. I am retard.


Edit 2: I would say the near 1200 point advantage my 2070 has over the leaked 5700xt timespy score means my card whooped its ass a bit, but I'm going to go with the logical reasoning that more mature drivers will make the scores much closer.


And mine. A 6 core with no hyperthreading..........

 

[pawel86ck]

I know there is the "But RTX" argument, but RTX is virtually useless on the 2060 and 2070 unless you want minimal RTX at 1080p or less resolutions. Even on my 2080 Ti, it's really hard to justify the performance cost for RTX. Very few titles allow for RTX above 1440p, even on my 2080 Ti.

If I would have something like 2060 SUPER 8GB I would still use RTX feature from time to time, just to see differences, and probably even play some RT games on gamepad at 30fps 1080p on HDTV (console like experience).

1.5 year from now more and more games will start using RT effects (because of consoles) and also 3080 series should offer much improved RT performance, so IMO with time RTX will adopt like Shaders. On geforce 4 games run great even at 1600x1200, but with shaders performance penalty was extreme (20-30 fps in splinter cell 1 just at 1024x768), yet more and more developers started using shaders.

 

[llien]

Ref cards "look and feel" with a joke at the end: