Bit more thinking how bad the 4080 12GB looks in the stack. The SM ratio between the cut down AD102, 128 SM 4090 and AD104, 60 SM 4080 12GB is absolutely wild, 46.9% rounded up. Previous gens for perspective:
3090 82SM -> 38.4, 3060 Ti has 38
2080Ti 68SM -> 31.9, 2060 has 30, 2060S 34
1080Ti 28SM -> 13.1, 1060 6GB has 10, 1070 15
980Ti 22SM -> 10.3, 960 has 8, 970 13
So saying it should be a 4070 is actually generous, it's more like a 4060 Ti compared to every other gen's ratio which is partially re-affirmed by the 192 bit bus. The 4070 is probably going to be 52 or maybe 54 if they have a 4070 Ti, which would make the 4070 more like an x60 non-Ti vs x80Ti/x90 in previous gens purely by ratio. Yes AD102 is a big leap over GA102 but you could park a bus in that gap. Business wants money etc but $900 for a 4080 12GB which by their own slides is slower than a 3090Ti in raster, making it maybe 15-20% faster than a 3080 for 30%/$200 more 2 years later? Take a bow 104, you have peaked
Also confused with their "
191 RT Tflops" claim for the 4090 (and the "
200 RT Tflops" they gave in the presentation). 2.52GHz * 512 tensor FP16 ops per SM/clock * 128 SM = 165 "RT Tflops", for some reason there's a 15-20% modifier applied. They said SER was a
"up to 2-3x increase in RT and 25% in overall game performance" so that's not it either