Speculation: GPU Performance Comparisons of 2020 *Spawn*

2080Ti is more than 50% faster than 5700XT @4K. Doubling 5700XT will barely get you above 2080Ti @4K.

 

Their RTRT gear hangs off the same infra as texturing and I doube they've engineered it in a way that might tank pure raster perf.

N10 breaks at 4k (did anyone ever figure out why?).
N21 does not.

 

2080ti also has more bandwidth than the 5700xt too. Theoretically doubling the 5700xt also theoretically doubles the bandwidth too

 

@1440p it's not that different, the 2080Ti is a beast of a GPU, it's almost 50% faster than 5700XT too at that resolution. Even if big Navi achieves double performance it's still barely above 2080Ti.

We also need to factor in RT performance, which is now tremendously fast with Ampere, I don't even think big Navi will reach Turing level of RT with the way they've designed their RT hardware.

 

Nah.

I have some bad news for you.

Okay, even worse news.

 

There's a clue in the graphs you posted. Look at the gap between 2080 and 2080Ti.

In this video you'll see some circumstances where 8GB "cripples" 4K performance (poor 2080):

 

There is no nah about this: the 2080 is 20% faster than 5700XT, the 2080Ti is 25~30% faster above that. Even @1440p, the 2080Ti is close to 50% faster, the margin just becomes even bigger @4K. Big Navi needs more than double the performance of 5700XT to exceed 2080Ti comfortably.

Yeah, but that was just one special game which were not even featured in that TechPowerUp review I quoted.

Please elaborate, RT performance is a match to Turing, Ampere or in between? considering the Xbox numbers it's even worse than Turing.

 

Yes there is.

Be patient, AMD is opening a housefire hunting season early October.

 

5700xt has improved a bit since those launch results.

 

Is it though? There's simply no way NVIDIAs claimed "Microsoft RT-TFLOPS" are actually the same Microsoft reported themselves, there's simply no way even 2080 would be nearly 3 times faster than XSX in raytracing, they wouldn't have bothered if it was that slow.

 

better, puny PS5 with 40CU does raythrowing just fine in the new GT

 

With severe concessions, such as low RT resolution, selective RT and missing effects.

Microsoft and NVIDIA designed DXR together, they know better than anyone. Microsoft was keen to show Series X is equivalent to 2080 in rasterization, but they never cared to show how it stacks up against in RT, now we know why.

At the same time, I find it hard to believe that an RT system such as the one found on consoles with it's shared resources is even close to match to a dedicated solution like the one in Turing. It looks like AMD approached this the same way they approached Tessellation back in the days.

 

That's about what I'd expect from a 40CU (fuck, no, 36!) GPU trying to do that while also trying to hit 4k@60.

 

Ampere can do several ultra RT effects together (not just reflections) and achieve 4K60.

Turing can do the same 4K60 with absolute ease if you tone down RT effects to the bare minimum like the PS5.

 

Not 40SM one.

SHOW ME

SHOW ME.
Show me.
Just do it.

We all have vendor allegiance, but you can't win against Her Highness.

 

lol you want him to make a game containing all the same compromises in 5 mins on his own??

 

Which is why I don't talk anything about RTRT impl difference for now.
For a damn good reason.

 

Wolfenstein Young Blood can run 4K60 with low reflections, On an RTX 2060 no less. Call of Duty Modern Warfare achieves the same thing too with a mix of low RT shadows and high settings.

 

Those are not equal to new GT.
Let us all carefully postpone FF shitflinging until N21 actual crawls onto the stage (which is soon enough anyway).
Then we can continue our fancy e-fistfight.

 

Wolfenstein Youngblood runs at 4K/60FPS with a 2080TI and reflections. And the quality of the reflections is a step up from Ratchet.

GT7 has low geometry, not every geometry is in the BVH and runs at 1/4 of the resolution. And i bet the ingame cutscenes are 30FPS.