Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Trashes AMD New GPU Radeon VII: 'The Performance Is Lousy'.

Mar 26, 2015
1,002
344
280
Brazil
#53
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.
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.
 
Apr 7, 2006
7,403
1,106
1,055
#54
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....
 
Likes: Bolivar687
Jun 30, 2004
14,514
76
1,440
#56
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.
 
Last edited:
Jun 9, 2012
3,258
700
455
#57
So Nvidia also matched their own 2 year old card with their 2080 for a similar price then, but you single out AMD >_>
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.
 
Likes: blly155
Aug 3, 2014
8,888
524
340
#58
well, he ain't lying.

it is lousy and underwhelming. AMD wtf are you doing?

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.
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:
Likes: Leonidas
Mar 16, 2009
5,369
209
790
#60
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.
 
Last edited:
Aug 3, 2014
8,888
524
340
#61
I expected more from this card since it has been sooooo long. But that dude from nVidia is really a piece of shit.
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.
 
Likes: Yakuzakazuya
Mar 11, 2006
20,127
770
1,385
Br
#62
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.
Be respectful, that's all. You don't need to shit on your competition.
 
Jul 23, 2018
247
164
180
#64
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.
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.
 
Apr 19, 2018
976
848
245
#66
1 Nothing of that is relevant to nVidia market at all.
- GTX 2000 is selling to spread ray-trying... AMD adopt it or not have nothing to them... the opposite their RTX will probably be standard before AMD release whatever with ray-tracing.

2 - They are still selling G-Sync monitor at premium price plus they are now making people with Freesync monitor buys GeForce instead AMD... win win.

3 - Console market won't affect nVidia market.
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. :/


2080 has ray-tracing and DLSS. 1080 Ti does not. So Nvidia more than matched their 2 year old card.
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.
 
Mar 19, 2013
22,116
1,102
520
Brazil
#67
Last edited:
Apr 19, 2018
976
848
245
#68
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.
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.
 
Jan 7, 2018
337
140
195
#70
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.
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.
 
Likes: Yakuzakazuya
Jan 31, 2018
1,064
549
315
#72
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.
 
Sep 4, 2014
573
293
390
Germany
#76
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.
 
Mar 19, 2013
22,116
1,102
520
Brazil
#77
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.
You know GTX 2080 was launched at the same price of Radeon VII a year ago.

It still $699.
 
Jul 23, 2018
247
164
180
#78
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.
I assume you bought a bunch of GCN cards then, because they were packed with next gen features.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Bolivar687
Oct 27, 2013
1,670
168
380
#81
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.
 
Apr 11, 2010
2,289
44
570
#82
I don’t get the outrage. He is not wrong. The new card is not competitive with the 2080. And many of AMD’s graphics tech team are now at Intel. I wish AMD could have used their 7nm advantage for a graphics performance lead. Lost opportunity.
 
Apr 11, 2010
2,289
44
570
#83
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?
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.
 
Sep 16, 2016
1,627
47
230
#84
It would be fun if CEOs did more of this. Can you imagine?

“Samsung phones are plasticky and ugly” - Tim Cook, Apple

“God of War is a boring checkpoint quest like all the Assassins Creeds and Red Deads of the world” - Shuntaro Furukawa, Nintendo

“We didn’t even bother with a campaign, and yet still Call of Duty Black Ops IIII crushed Battlefield V.” - Bobby Kotick, Activision
I'm not convinced that Bobby Kotick even knows that his company makes video games at this point
 
Last edited:

Leonidas

"Ask me about computers"
Mar 6, 2007
1,426
770
1,235
#85
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?
Me! I was excited for Vega 56 till the launch pricing fiasco.

Did any games ever take advantage of those Vega features?
 
Mar 31, 2014
8,476
443
525
#86
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...
 
Last edited:
Likes: Yakuzakazuya
Nov 9, 2012
4,795
3
420
#90
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.
 
Oct 4, 2011
12,068
386
595
#91
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.
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.
 

OSC

Banned
Jun 16, 2018
1,184
467
215
#92
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:
Oct 30, 2012
589
140
400
www.youtube.com
#93
Dec 14, 2008
32,377
196
955
#95
BS from nvidia, indeed, isn't there certifications and standardizations+ actual reviews of these products in action?
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.
 

OSC

Banned
Jun 16, 2018
1,184
467
215
#96
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 pu
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.
 
Sep 4, 2014
573
293
390
Germany
#98
You know GTX 2080 was launched at the same price of Radeon VII a year ago.

It still $699.
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.
 
Apr 7, 2006
7,403
1,106
1,055
#99
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.
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.....

...Said the guy who's selling defective RTXs.
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.......
 
Mar 19, 2013
22,116
1,102
520
Brazil
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.
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:
Likes: OSC