Pascal still gets driver support despite not having the same architecture as Turing so I have no idea what you are even saying with the first part of your post. As for the last part, when did I say it would "stop working"? It'll keep working, just nowhere as well as it should without proper drivers.
I remember that benchmark part, but gameplay shows higher settings and higher performance even compared to PC version running on 2080ti. Like I have mentioned before I expect Gears 5 on XSX is probably using something like VRS or dynamic resolution scaling, because XSX is certainly not faster than 2080ti.
Gameplay shows nothing of the sort. The benchmark compares them directly and tells us it is on par with a 2080, how can it be clearer?
I'm not talking about benchmark part, but gameplay segments when they talk about differences on each platform. Benchmark results are probably correct, but gameplay itself runs with higher settings and even better performance than 2080ti, because 2080ti dips below 60fps during cutscens and that's without additional features XSX is using (screen space shadows 5m25s, and GI 7m5s). I dont believe XSX is faster than 2080ti, and especially when benchmark suggest RTX 2080 like results, so I expect Gears 5 tech demo on XSX is using either VRS or dynamic resolution scaling.
Yes, so where are you getting it outperforming a 2080 when there are no apples to apples comparisons besides the benchmark and you readily admit you don't believe it exceeds a 2080 Ti when the example you're using is suggesting otherwise?
On gameplay segments it really looks like XSX is outperforming 2080ti because there are additional effects even compared to PC ultra settings, and locked 60fps even during cutscens (that's impossible on 2080ti).
Hm, how is 6 core Haswell at 3.3Ghz in a "very good position" against 8 core Zen2 (3?) at 3.2Ghz?
It obviously is, otherwise, why would it suddenly start performing worse during a benchmark with lower settings?
Cuz if the target is 60, it should be fine most of the time.
wccftech.com
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ampere Gaming Graphics Card Allegedly 20% Faster Than GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 3080 Ampere Gaming graphics card is allegedly 20% faster than the GeForce RTX 2080 Ti as per the latest rumors.
Updated chart with AMD's offerings and the speculated Big Navi, price is my speculation based on nothing (
The Gears 5 demo showed "very similar" results to a stock 2080. It was a "2-week port" not 1 day. The game has been out on PC since Sept. 2019, runs on the most widely used game engine that's constantly getting engine-side updates, and supported on hardware(Turing) that has nearly all the same features as the upcoming XSX.
That being said, XSX has pretty great hardware for what I expect will be $499. I'll be going with Lockharts for my boys this Xmas, and updating my PC. Gonna sell my 2060S and R5 1600 when the time is right and upgrade to a $500 Ampere or RDNA 2 GPU depending on who has the best RT. I haven't ruled out going up to around $600, but we'll see. Will upgrade CPU to either R5 3600 or R7 3700X and add another 16GB RAM. My out of pocket will be similar to the price of a new XSX.
Concerning the CPU discussion, we've seen the benchmarks for the PS5 CPU and it's more in line with a R7 1700 at 3-3.15GHz. I suspect they've stripped the gaming cache down substantially. People will be just fine with R5 3600-level and above.
The GPU Mark Cerny stealth-leaked during the Road to PS5 will probably be the successor to the RX 5700 and run $300-350. It's not going to be some world-beating hardware by the end of the year, but it's a nice jump above the beginning of this gen when 7850 2GB was ~$155 and 7870 was ~$175. I'm highly tempted to buy a PS5, play Ratchet and Clank, then sell it back to someone for the same price I got it before Xmas.
Anyway, I'm most interest in RT performance because I'll be spending most of my time with Cyberpunk and I want the best experience. Consoles won't offer that. That's why I'm in the market for a mid-high range Ampere card.
Nah, this is false. In the past you could see, like you can still see with AMD, where they explicitly say which cards get a performance increase in which game and the older ones pretty much were forgotten as soon as they could unless it was a game-breaking issue. A lot of the Nvidia performance crown comes from game-specific driver improvements, unlike AMD, so when they get new cards they shift focus and if you have an old card you'll not get the performance tier your hardware should get otherwise.
Nah, this is false. In the past you could see, like you can still see with AMD, where they explicitly say which cards get a performance increase in which game and the older ones pretty much were forgotten as soon as they could unless it was a game-breaking issue. A lot of the Nvidia performance crown comes from game-specific driver improvements, unlike AMD, so when they get new cards they shift focus and if you have an old card you'll not get the performance tier your hardware should get otherwise.
Let me give you a concrete example, because I've been collating GPU data for myself. Normally, a GTX 1080 was on-par with a Vega 64, sometimes slightly better, sometimes slightly worse, but they were in the same tier. Now, you can see more and more examples of where the Vega just blows it out of the water. Why? And keep in mind, the funny thing is The Surge 2 was actually developed on Pascal GPUs, you can see this in some of the behind the scenes videos. So it's not even a question of the devs not testing the hardware.
On the other hand, Nvidia pumped so many drivers for Maxwell & Pascal for Witcher 3, you can clearly see the result, and ofc it was a flagship title for Nvidia and got all the special treatment. So when I'm saying what I'm saying about the driver support, I'm talking to you about it from years of experience with this shit, because I've been reading driver notes since the 3dfx days. And ofc, if we compare other games you'll find the same pattern emerging (RDR 2 & Control to name 2 others).
Data is from TechPowerUp, the unreleased cards at the bottom are just something I was visualising for myself, obviously that performance is just an estimate. Shoulda cut them out but meh, forgot.
Nah, this is false. In the past you could see, like you can still see with AMD, where they explicitly say which cards get a performance increase in which game and the older ones pretty much were forgotten as soon as they could unless it was a game-breaking issue. A lot of the Nvidia performance crown comes from game-specific driver improvements, unlike AMD, so when they get new cards they shift focus and if you have an old card you'll not get the performance tier your hardware should get otherwise.
Let me give you a concrete example, because I've been collating GPU data for myself. Normally, a GTX 1080 was on-par with a Vega 64, sometimes slightly better, sometimes slightly worse, but they were in the same tier. Now, you can see more and more examples of where the Vega just blows it out of the water. Why? And keep in mind, the funny thing is The Surge 2 was actually developed on Pascal GPUs, you can see this in some of the behind the scenes videos. So it's not even a question of the devs not testing the hardware.
On the other hand, Nvidia pumped so many drivers for Maxwell & Pascal for Witcher 3, you can clearly see the result, and ofc it was a flagship title for Nvidia and got all the special treatment. So when I'm saying what I'm saying about the driver support, I'm talking to you about it from years of experience with this shit, because I've been reading driver notes since the 3dfx days. And ofc, if we compare other games you'll find the same pattern emerging (RDR 2 & Control to name 2 others).
Data is from TechPowerUp, the unreleased cards at the bottom are just something I was visualising for myself, obviously that performance is just an estimate. Shoulda cut them out but meh, forgot.
tech4gamers.com
That's not what happened with The Witcher 3 at all, that's what happened with Crysis 2 (hidden tessellation). For TW3 at launch if you enabled hairworks it had forced MSAA 8x which is what tanked performance (for both vendors), but in fact the AMD cards ran it (and HBAO+) just as well if not better than the Nvidia ones with some tweaks. It's just that AMD cards have worse MSAA performance than Nvidia ones (and that's a longer discussion).
The Witcher 3: HairWorks Tweaks For AMD GPUs, Huge Increament in Performance,
The Witcher 3: HairWorks Tweaks For AMD GPUs, Huge Increament in Performance, The Witcher 3 is released for PS4, Xbox and PC. NVIDIA has done the sugar coat
We can pick titles all day, but like your ACO example which fits my point perfectly: That's a pre-Turing game for which focus was on for Pascal cards (esp considering the engine is the same since Unity, which back then Ubi was Nvidia partner, you can look it up).
On aggregate you can look at games past-Turing and see that Pascal and others fall further behind their counterparts from both AMD and Turing. And that's even a best case due to how Pascal was structured and its long support etc. If you go further back it's even more of a bloodbath.
Makes little sense considering they have mobile CPUs like the Ryzen 9 4900HS at 35W, or even the stepped down version of Ryzen 7, that all perform well compared to the Ryzen 7 3700X desktop CPU (within 10-15%). HS is likely the basis for the consoles at 35W, but maybe they can do the H series at 45W. We'll see, but for mobile CPUs, they are truly revolutionary at this power envelope and crushes Intel CPUs using more than double the wattage.
wccftech.com
Is the 3090 supposed to replace the titan or the 2080Ti?NVIDIA RTX 3090 Will Allegedly Offer A Massive 50% Performance Increase
We have a very quintessential rumor on the alleged performance of the RTX 3090 with us today. A couple of credible leakers on twitter have commented that the performance of the upcoming NVIDIA RTX 3090 is shaping up to be as much as a 50% increase over the RTX 2080 Ti. According to the same...
Another leak pointing to 50% boost over 2080Ti.
Up to 36 TF!!! PC Master Race!
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti leaked specs teases an absolute monster GPU
NVIDIA's next-gen GeForce RTX 3080 Ti gets teased in leaked specs, packs an insane 8192 cores with Ampere.www.tweaktown.com
Bulldozer to zen 1.
PS5 CPU benchmarks? R7 1700? Where did you get that? Someone tell me when the PS5 CPU went backwards to Zen 1? Jeez this stuff never ends. Anyway, the new 3000 series from Nvidia seems like its gonna Hulk smash.The Gears 5 demo showed "very similar" results to a stock 2080. It was a "2-week port" not 1 day. The game has been out on PC since Sept. 2019, runs on the most widely used game engine that's constantly getting engine-side updates, and supported on hardware(Turing) that has nearly all the same features as the upcoming XSX.
That being said, XSX has pretty great hardware for what I expect will be $499. I'll be going with Lockharts for my boys this Xmas, and updating my PC. Gonna sell my 2060S and R5 1600 when the time is right and upgrade to a $500 Ampere or RDNA 2 GPU depending on who has the best RT. I haven't ruled out going up to around $600, but we'll see. Will upgrade CPU to either R5 3600 or R7 3700X and add another 16GB RAM. My out of pocket will be similar to the price of a new XSX.
Concerning the CPU discussion, we've seen the benchmarks for the PS5 CPU and it's more in line with a R7 1700 at 3-3.15GHz. I suspect they've stripped the gaming cache down substantially. People will be just fine with R5 3600-level and above.
The GPU Mark Cerny stealth-leaked during the Road to PS5 will probably be the successor to the RX 5700 and run $300-350. It's not going to be some world-beating hardware by the end of the year, but it's a nice jump above the beginning of this gen when 7850 2GB was ~$155 and 7870 was ~$175. I'm highly tempted to buy a PS5, play Ratchet and Clank, then sell it back to someone for the same price I got it before Xmas.
Anyway, I'm most interest in RT performance because I'll be spending most of my time with Cyberpunk and I want the best experience. Consoles won't offer that. That's why I'm in the market for a mid-high range Ampere card.
It's the PS5's CPU. This userbench leak came via Komachi a year ago. They quartered the L3 cache and it's paired with GDDR6.
PS5' CPU is Zen 2, dude. Your info is bogus. I honestly don't understand with all the information out there you actually think it's a 1700. Good lord. It's the exact CPU as Series X but doesn't reach the same clocks. Also, there's plenty of rumors that Sony's version of Zen 2 has one unified CCX for latency reduction. That hasn't yet been confirmed, but has been rumored for a while and could be the same for the Series X.
