Nvidia Turing Product Reviews and Previews: (2080TI, 2080, 2070, 2060, 1660, etc)

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Ike Turner, Aug 21, 2018.

  1. Ike Turner

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Fun fact. Radeon Pro drivers now officially support Non Pro regular Radeon cards since version 18.Q4.1.
    https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/release-notes/rn-pro-win-18-q4-1

     
  2. pharma

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    2,696
    Likes Received:
    1,433
    Moderators: When you get the time please clean up this thread.
     
    A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y likes this.
  3. Frenetic Pony

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2011
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    71
    But the fixed function hardware costs money, which is why they're removing that in a new set of GPUs, so they can sell it at a lower price.
     
  4. no-X

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,251
    Likes Received:
    185
  5. Ike Turner

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Which is common sense. Unlike Radeon Pros which are all reference SKUs build buy AMD (and can be easily tested by them and also have additional hardware like ECC memory) while there are 100s of variants of Radeons from 10s of AIBs on top of the re-badged reference boards. Doesn't change the fact that those pro drivers are now fully compatible with all Radeon products at no additional cost.
     
  6. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,392
    Likes Received:
    4,034
    Of course they're not. Otherwise they might as well just be insulting the people who paid for Radeon Pro cards.
    Even this move to supporting Pro drivers into normal Radeons is a bit too bold IMO.
     
  7. OCASM

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    709
    And if they removed the compute units they would be even cheaper!
     
  8. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    7,917
    Likes Received:
    1,636
    Location:
    Finland
    Removing compute units would remove features and hurt performance, removing fixed function hardware only hurts performance
     
  9. OCASM

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    709
    Features running so poorly nobody uses them are effectively the same thing as lacking those features altogether.
     
  10. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,392
    Likes Received:
    4,034
    Are you talking about the current state of videogame RT in general?
     
  11. OCASM

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    709
    No, I'm saying programmability without performance also leads to a lack of features.
     
  12. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,392
    Likes Received:
    4,034
    And if the features can't have decent performance even when using fixed function units, then those fixed units are redundant.

    Hence TU116.
     
  13. OCASM

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2016
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    709
    They key term being decent.
     
  14. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,392
    Likes Received:
    4,034
    Well the Free Market has spoken and declared the current implementation not decent enough.
     
  15. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,392
    Likes Received:
    4,034
    Double post please delete.
     
  16. Ike Turner

    Veteran Regular

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    FYI: OptiX 6 (with Turing support) is finally available.
     
    ToTTenTranz, CarstenS and pharma like this.
  17. N00b

    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    84
    Is that really the case here? I think you are donating the patient's organs here well before he is dead.

    We currently have a single RTX-enabled game. There is not much reason to buy a RTX card right now apart from the modest performance increase. Let's wait at least till the end of the quarter when more RTX-enabled will be available, Metro Exodus being the elephant in the room, of course.

    To clarify, I don't think you are necessarily wrong, you may very well be right, but it is to early too tell.
     
    #677 N00b, Feb 7, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
    Shifty Geezer likes this.
  18. ToTTenTranz

    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,392
    Likes Received:
    4,034
    It's not decent enough at its current state. I didn't declare RTX dead.
    Just that there's a clear message from the consumers saying the RTX line isn't a valuable proposition. It's the same message we saw from most reviewers beforehand, so there isn't much of a surprise here IMO.

    Battlefield V was a controversial title, and Metro Exodus is on its way to become one too, especially on the PC where the dev decided to adopt Denuvo and then their publisher (Deep Silver) took Epic's money to make the game exclusive to the Epic store. And then one of the devs deciding to do The Stupid.
    Even worse, Deep Silver decided to make the game exclusive to Epic after it had been on pre-sale at Steam for months, prompting a commentary even from Valve. They basically used Steam's storefront to promote the game and then bailed at the last minute.
    Things may not go well for Metro Exodus on the PC.
    Of course none of this is nvidia's fault, but if Metro tanks like Battlefield did, RT effects on AAA titles aren't going to reach a lot of people.
     
    Lightman likes this.
  19. Shifty Geezer

    Shifty Geezer uber-Troll!
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    39,581
    Likes Received:
    9,605
    Location:
    Under my bridge
    The market hasn't declared the current implementation not good enough, but that the offering for these cards for them at the moment isn't good enough. RTX in its current form with software that actually uses it, or in notably cheaper cards (lower profit margins) may see consumers voting in favour with their dollars.
     
    Malo likes this.
  20. N00b

    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    84
    1) What Shifty said.
    2) I'm not convinced that Metro will be held back by Denovu (points to Resident Evil 2 sales). If Metro turns out to be a great game AND RTX-enabled visuals are a level above regular visuals (at adequate performance), I can see people buy RTX cards to play this game. Even so, more game will be needed for Turing to take off. I don't see the Epic Store being such an Issue if the game picks up enough steam (pun intended) and get's hyped all around. If someone is already considering buying a RTX card and Metro is great, they won't be hold back by the Epic Store. Valve fueling the controversy is just pursuing their interests. It shows that Epic has kicked them where it hurts.
     
    vipa899 and DavidGraham like this.
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...