geekhack
geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: tp4tissue on Tue, 18 September 2018, 13:47:16
-
Sooo... benches are official, ~25-30% faster than 1080 Ti.
Worth 1,200 dollaridooz$ ??
Gekhak Thoughts ??
[attachimg=1]
-
Looks more 45% from that graph, but with an unknown resolution and CPU maybe it wasn't the best one to link.
$1000 for prettier games is never going to sound a good idea to me* but the old ones weren't cheap so probably worth it if you want to blame your ISP for the lag that made you lose rather than your computer :))
*Hyperinflation and long life not considered
-
Or you could get a PS4 Pro/X1X and have enough left over for another Kustom.
$1000 for a consumer grade display card is rude.
-
It's pretty common for each generation to be one tick faster than the last, so a 1080ti will equal a 2080 and an old 1080 will be close to a 2070. It can be a bit more or less, but that is the general rule.
"But they don't have ray tracing."
It will be a while before you "need" it, and while Nvidia has made it easy to implement, as a software developer you can't expect people to buy a $1000 card just to play your game if you want to be successful, but more importantly, you can't do full screen raytracing with a 2080ti, they don't have anywhere near the power to do everything on the screen. Which means it's only going to be bits and pieces. Also, Nvidia has rarely rolled out a major new feature like this and had it work smoothly right out the gate, it will need a revision or two before it really becomes usable for the masses.
Remember, other than refresh rate, video cards do not make the game faster or look better, they can only bottleneck what is there. If you are already on max settings and getting good frame rates, a newer, better card is going to be the most expensive, most boring upgrade you have ever made. You can say you are future proofing, but if you're not bottlenecked, why pay the tax for such a bleeding edge part when you could wait for the bugs to be worked out, games to support it and prices to settle.
If you can get a 10xx series card cheap, new or used, buy it.
If you want new, you may want to wait for Black Friday deals. If buying used, try and get cards that were not used for mining, and beware the cheap Chinese clones. Some work, but for how long, while others are disasters, with the wrong firmware being loaded, fake device ids and more. Also, try not to dismiss the used Radeons right out the gate if you're not using 4k, while not a GTX1080, you can get some killer deals on an RX580, which will run most anything (they sit between 1060 and 1070) and that could buy you some time waiting on an RTX card you can afford. I recently got a lightly used 580 for a less than I could get a 1060 that was used for mining, just watch out because the 580 was one of the preferred cards for mining.
-
Lieann
But Lesliann..
By Tp4's calculations..
2080Ti can finally run Overwatch at 4k downsampled from 8K resolution at Max settings..
Even 1080Ti can't do that..
-
honestly not worth it and truth be told. I think the next logical step in video card evolution will be pushing VR headsets to higher resolutions. I mean VR headsets are kinda the way things are going to go as technology matures. The Nvidia tax is obscene on the 2k series card's. I be sticking to my GTX 1080 for the time being and hoping that AMD/ATI bring out something worthwhile to complete with Nvidia.
-
Lieann
But Lesliann..
By Tp4's calculations..
2080Ti can finally run Overwatch at 4k downsampled from 8K resolution at Max settings..
Even 1080Ti can't do that..
who even plays overwatch anymore?
that ****'s so 2016
-
Lieann
But Lesliann..
By Tp4's calculations..
2080Ti can finally run Overwatch at 4k downsampled from 8K resolution at Max settings..
Even 1080Ti can't do that..
who even plays overwatch anymore?
that ****'s so 2016
Tp4 only just bought overwatch for $10.80 last week..
(https://i.imgur.com/qGg7oTJ.gif)
-
Lieann
But Lesliann..
By Tp4's calculations..
2080Ti can finally run Overwatch at 4k downsampled from 8K resolution at Max settings..
Even 1080Ti can't do that..
Would prefer 4k@120hz :P
-
noisyturtle is still rockin a GTX 770, you jelly? you should be.
-
Lieann
But Lesliann..
By Tp4's calculations..
2080Ti can finally run Overwatch at 4k downsampled from 8K resolution at Max settings..
Even 1080Ti can't do that..
Would prefer 4k@120hz :P
Well, for Overwatch 8k downsample to 4k you would need 2x 2080 Ti for 120fps
You can run poor people 4k vanilla with 1x 2080Ti @ 120fps
-
noisyturtle is still rockin a GTX 770, you jelly? you should be.
Hahahaha
-
This helpful Leanbean thread (https://www.villagevoice.com/2021/11/24/leanbean-review/) is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
Don't worry, I'm still running a single 4:3 :))
I played overwatch just the other day on my 19 inch crt.
Response time @ the speed of light. .. !!
This thread is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
-
This thread is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
Don't worry, I'm still running a single 4:3 :))
-
This thread is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
Don't worry, I'm still running a single 4:3 :))
I played overwatch just the other day on my 19 inch crt.
Response time @ the speed of light. .. !!
-
This thread is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
Typically nothing becomes common until it crosses the $300 mark, and even that is mostly enthusiasts, the general public starts to see it once it crosses $200.
Most people are still gaming at 1080, and a large many are gaming at even lower resolutions than that due to bad graphics cards.
As 4k started to get into gaming, higher refresh rates came into being and kind of undercut 4k gaming sales, even still, most people still have yet to really do it. 8k gaming isn't really a thing, it's SUPER expensive, you can buy a pretty nice used car for what it would cost, and most games aren't going to benefit from it.
-
This thread is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
Typically nothing becomes common until it crosses the $300 mark, and even that is mostly enthusiasts, the general public starts to see it once it crosses $200.
Most people are still gaming at 1080, and a large many are gaming at even lower resolutions than that due to bad graphics cards.
As 4k started to get into gaming, higher refresh rates came into being and kind of undercut 4k gaming sales, even still, most people still have yet to really do it. 8k gaming isn't really a thing, it's SUPER expensive, you can buy a pretty nice used car for what it would cost, and most games aren't going to benefit from it.
4K is def mainstream now that they got all these 4k tvs for ~$200..
-
noisyturtle is still rockin a GTX 770, you jelly? you should be.
Hackintosh didn't support my R9 280 and Linux didn't matter so I was mostly using an older Nvidia 750 until recently.
-
4K is def mainstream now that they got all these 4k tvs for ~$200..
TVs are not monitors.
-
4K is def mainstream now that they got all these 4k tvs for ~$200..
TVs are not monitors.
They got NON-hdr 4k monitors for ~$200 as well, those dell 4k Tn panels.. They're pretty decent,
(https://i.imgur.com/4eAqRU9.gif)
-
And what is the (actual) response time, viewing angle and color range? How about inputs, any freesync or gsync?
Tv's focus less on burn in, which is a serious concern for a monitor.
There is a reason monitors are twice the price.
-
And what is the (actual) response time, viewing angle and color range? How about inputs, any freesync or gsync?
Tv's focus less on burn in, which is a serious concern for a monitor.
There is a reason monitors are twice the price.
Mmmm.. i think that used to be the case.. Most Lcd tvs now are VA, which do not burn in easily, and they typically have 8bit+frc dithering these days, making burnin even less likely.
For the cheaper 4k dell panels, gamut is ~99% srgb, so that's more than enough for content consumption on the PC side.
Response time, the budget panels are TN, so pretty decent response.
Definitely no freesync or gsync, but that isn't important except for 120hz gaming panels.
-
And what is the (actual) response time, viewing angle and color range? How about inputs, any freesync or gsync?
Tv's focus less on burn in, which is a serious concern for a monitor.
There is a reason monitors are twice the price.
Mmmm.. i think that used to be the case.. Most Lcd tvs now are VA, which do not burn in easily, and they typically have 8bit+frc dithering these days, making burnin even less likely.
For the cheaper 4k dell panels, gamut is ~99% srgb, so that's more than enough for content consumption on the PC side.
Response time, the budget panels are TN, so pretty decent response.
Definitely no freesync or gsync, but that isn't important except for 120hz gaming panels.
I may be wrong, but I don't think color-depth has anything to do with burn-in issues.
G-sync and freesync only works well in a lower range of fps.
It's kinda unncessary on high-refresh rate monitors in my opinion, because you'd most likely want to be running games on higher frame rates. Otherwise, owning one would be kinda pointless.
Also, enabling g-sync or freesync will just introduce additional input lag (albeit lower than traditional vsync, but input lag nonetheless)
-
I may be wrong, but I don't think color-depth has anything to do with burn-in issues.
G-sync and freesync only works well in a lower range of fps.
It's kinda unncessary on high-refresh rate monitors in my opinion, because you'd most likely want to be running games on higher frame rates. Otherwise, owning one would be kinda pointless.
Also, enabling g-sync or freesync will just introduce additional input lag (albeit lower than traditional vsync, but input lag nonetheless)
8bit+frc is a dithering process, it flashes intermediate colors to produce the necessary 10-bit colors.
Because of this persistent flashing and transition the crystals are more immune to burn in.
This has always been true of 6-bit+frc , and now today we have 8-bit+ frc
g-sync and freesync are useful beyond frame rate management .
Sync provides better motion clarity, while it doesn't help the super pr0 players much, because they react to memorized combat patterns / timings, it does help most scrub players so they could more precisely see their relative spacing.
-
noisyturtle is still rockin a GTX 770, you jelly? you should be.
I was using a GTX 760 until it died a few months ago. Now I'm using a GTX 660 until I can buy something better; although, I only need something better so that Deux Ex: Mankind Divided doesn't give me a headache. Other games seem to run adequately.
This thread is full of 1st world problems. Talking about 8k and stuff. I feel like a pleb still playing my games in 1080p. lol
Typically nothing becomes common until it crosses the $300 mark, and even that is mostly enthusiasts, the general public starts to see it once it crosses $200.
Most people are still gaming at 1080, and a large many are gaming at even lower resolutions than that due to bad graphics cards.
As 4k started to get into gaming, higher refresh rates came into being and kind of undercut 4k gaming sales, even still, most people still have yet to really do it. 8k gaming isn't really a thing, it's SUPER expensive, you can buy a pretty nice used car for what it would cost, and most games aren't going to benefit from it.
Plus the graphics are way better in a used car. They almost look real.
-
Plus the graphics are way better in a used car. They almost look real.
8K is coming soon.. it will be as good as real life..
-
Tv's focus less on burn in, which is a serious concern for a monitor.
Mmmm.. i think that used to be the case.. Most Lcd tvs now are VA, which do not burn in easily, and they typically have 8bit+frc dithering these days, making burnin even less likely.
Response time, the budget panels are TN, so pretty decent response.
Definitely no freesync or gsync, but that isn't important except for 120hz gaming panels.[/color][/size]
The new LG OLED panels are showing signs of early burn in even on tvs, recent cell phones have also had burn in problems (g5 or s6 s7?), so yes, burn in is very much still a concern.
More than one tv that said it had those response times only did it when you enable the overdrive function, which shortens the lifespan and is not meant to be left on on all the time. manufacturers also worry less about color drift over time.
You are reading response times for the panel itself, tv manufacturers put very little effort into fighting input lag, something you don't tend to think about on a monitor because it's not an issue. You would be surprised how much tvs can lag.
Inputs are another thing, despite what some people think, HDMI is not the end-all be-all they think it is, and the fact that it conducts sound is not only infuriating, but also points to what it's purpose is for. 4k on HDMI is severely limited when compared to other connections such as Displayport which was meant for computers and high resolution. HDMI spec is actually really not that great for higher resolutions and longer cords only make the problem worse. I spent hours with XFX trying to diagnose my connection issues which turned out to be monitor and cable related and HDMI didn't really like feeding my new higher res screens over good 10 foot cables.
As for the sound part being infuriating, I say that because it means your system is loading more drivers and can prioritize that sound system over the others, it's a waste of resources, a risk for conflicts, and just loading yrou stem with more useless junk. Also, some motherboard and speaker manufacturers have been short changing audio outputs because apparently no one uses the audio outputs they claim. Stop killing audio ports, WTF is wrong with you people. Go look and see how many new motherboards only have 3 jacks on the back i/o sheild.
-
Worth it is pretty subjective. Gaming is a hobby and can be as cheap or expensive as you want. A gtx1060 and a 1920x1200 monitor works for me. Someone else may want more and be willing to pay for it. I’m not.
-
If you're the type who buys the newest GPU every generation, regardless of cost or specs, then you're gonna buy this one. Is it worth it? Absolutely not, it's just another cash grab by Nvidia but people keep buying their **** so why stop?
-
If you're the type who buys the newest GPU every generation, regardless of cost or specs, then you're gonna buy this one. Is it worth it? Absolutely not, it's just another cash grab by Nvidia but people keep buying their **** so why stop?
Well, the pricing makes sense given inflation and no competitor..
If you want 30% more performance, you pay 50% more money.. That's logical for the producer..
I think it's fine to argue that more graphics fidelity at least of current technologies doesn't really improve the gaming experience all that much..
And because the improvements arn't very tangible the expense isn't worth it to casual-consumers..
However the PRICING itself is spot on.. it's priced correctly for What it IS..
-
If you're the type who buys the newest GPU every generation, regardless of cost or specs, then you're gonna buy this one. Is it worth it? Absolutely not, it's just another cash grab by Nvidia but people keep buying their **** so why stop?
Well, the pricing makes sense given inflation and no competitor..
If you want 30% more performance, you pay 50% more money.. That's logical for the producer..
I think it's fine to argue that more graphics fidelity at least of current technologies doesn't really improve the gaming experience all that much..
And because the improvements arn't very tangible the expense isn't worth it to casual-consumers..
However the PRICING itself is spot on.. it's priced correctly for What it IS..
I agree on no competitor at that price range, but the 1080ti came out barely more than 2 years ago so inflation is a bull**** reason. Nvidia just wants to capitalize on their shrinking market dominance as AMD has been finally closing the gap after 10 years of Nvidia dominating, and so they buy out the reviewers and have them hype every new card even if it's not much of an improvement, and then the fanboys do the rest!
-
Well, with no direct competition for the GTX1080 Ti/RTX2080/RTX2080 Ti forthcoming from AMD, nVidia can basically price their cards whatever way they want to. I'm an AMD fanboy, but even I recognize that fact, which was why I'd snagged a Leadtek GTX1080 to connect to my 4K TV on my HTPC rig. Yes, I know my i7 2600K @4ghz may still be something of a CPU bottleneck, but I ain't interested in benchmarks, just good framerates in games which I believe the 2600K is capable of.
I'd also gotten an RTX 2080 Ti last Friday for my main gaming rig, a dated i7 3960X rig but hey, at least it's a 6c/12t CPU at 4ghz as well. I use the RTX on a 21:9 3440x1440 monitor and my 2x R9 290X are being held back by the 4G VRAM.....seems modern games chew up memory like a mad mutha. I concede that it is a powerful card, tested it on Metro LL benchmark in DX12, 3440x1440, PhysX, Tessellation and SSAA enabled and it tore through that benchmark run with average fps of >70fps.
-
Congrats on dat God-Tier Card..
Tp4 so jelly
(https://i.imgur.com/unzzYFl.gif)
The 2600k should be able to hit 4.7ghz pretty easily
the 39x mmm.... gonna need pretty stout water cooling.
If anything the 2600k at high clock will be the better Main PC for gaming w/ the exception of battlefield and GTA, both of which imho aren't that FUN to play, and function more as demos you show off to your friends..
Could you test Overwatch for us ?
w the highest resolution max settings and the 200% render scale turned on.
-
Well, with no direct competition for the GTX1080 Ti/RTX2080/RTX2080 Ti forthcoming from AMD, nVidia can basically price their cards whatever way they want to. I'm an AMD fanboy, but even I recognize that fact, which was why I'd snagged a Leadtek GTX1080 to connect to my 4K TV on my HTPC rig. Yes, I know my i7 2600K @4ghz may still be something of a CPU bottleneck, but I ain't interested in benchmarks, just good framerates in games which I believe the 2600K is capable of.
I'd also gotten an RTX 2080 Ti last Friday for my main gaming rig, a dated i7 3960X rig but hey, at least it's a 6c/12t CPU at 4ghz as well. I use the RTX on a 21:9 3440x1440 monitor and my 2x R9 290X are being held back by the 4G VRAM.....seems modern games chew up memory like a mad mutha. I concede that it is a powerful card, tested it on Metro LL benchmark in DX12, 3440x1440, PhysX, Tessellation and SSAA enabled and it tore through that benchmark run with average fps of >70fps.
So uhhh, what you doing with those old 290Xs... ;)
-
So uhhh, what you doing with those old 290Xs... ;)
Well, I'd thrown away the boxes which contained the stock coolers, so I guess I'll have to buy some 3rd party cooler and mount it onto one of the cards. Don't need two as it'll be going into my rig with 2x GTX Titan 6GB (intend to sell these) since a single R9 290X can manage 2560x1080 (my 29" AOC 21:9 monitor).
-
So uhhh, what you doing with those old 290Xs... ;)
Well, I'd thrown away the boxes which contained the stock coolers, so I guess I'll have to buy some 3rd party cooler and mount it onto one of the cards. Don't need two as it'll be going into my rig with 2x GTX Titan 6GB (intend to sell these) since a single R9 290X can manage 2560x1080 (my 29" AOC 21:9 monitor).
Nice, good to hear they're being put to good use! I got my 290X just after the 3XX series dropped and it's ran everything I've thrown at it so far with no real issues, just hoping it hangs on for a bit more until the next upgrade.
-
Nice, good to hear they're being put to good use! I got my 290X just after the 3XX series dropped and it's ran everything I've thrown at it so far with no real issues, just hoping it hangs on for a bit more until the next upgrade.
Amazing card, isn't it? It's about 5 years old now, but the R9 290X is still quite relevant today, it can handle a truckload of games at pretty decent setting at 1080P. I'm confident that that it'd run the games I play on that rig @2560x1080 well enough.
-
Nice, good to hear they're being put to good use! I got my 290X just after the 3XX series dropped and it's ran everything I've thrown at it so far with no real issues, just hoping it hangs on for a bit more until the next upgrade.
Amazing card, isn't it? It's about 5 years old now, but the R9 290X is still quite relevant today, it can handle a truckload of games at pretty decent setting at 1080P. I'm confident that that it'd run the games I play on that rig @2560x1080 well enough.
ehhh. idk, it's like they lowered the speed limit, and yea now all cars are faster relative to the newer speed limit as a percentage, but it's relevant due to the lack of advancement more so than having ever been fast in the first place.
-
Nice, good to hear they're being put to good use! I got my 290X just after the 3XX series dropped and it's ran everything I've thrown at it so far with no real issues, just hoping it hangs on for a bit more until the next upgrade.
Amazing card, isn't it? It's about 5 years old now, but the R9 290X is still quite relevant today, it can handle a truckload of games at pretty decent setting at 1080P. I'm confident that that it'd run the games I play on that rig @2560x1080 well enough.
That was a solid generation, with the 970 still kicking pretty good too (minus the 3.5gb VRAM issue).
-
Nice, good to hear they're being put to good use! I got my 290X just after the 3XX series dropped and it's ran everything I've thrown at it so far with no real issues, just hoping it hangs on for a bit more until the next upgrade.
Amazing card, isn't it? It's about 5 years old now, but the R9 290X is still quite relevant today, it can handle a truckload of games at pretty decent setting at 1080P. I'm confident that that it'd run the games I play on that rig @2560x1080 well enough.
That was a solid generation, with the 970 still kicking pretty good too (minus the 3.5gb VRAM issue).
780 was the cuttoff, 9xx , nvidia got Greeeedy..
-
Nice, good to hear they're being put to good use! I got my 290X just after the 3XX series dropped and it's ran everything I've thrown at it so far with no real issues, just hoping it hangs on for a bit more until the next upgrade.
Amazing card, isn't it? It's about 5 years old now, but the R9 290X is still quite relevant today, it can handle a truckload of games at pretty decent setting at 1080P. I'm confident that that it'd run the games I play on that rig @2560x1080 well enough.
That was a solid generation, with the 970 still kicking pretty good too (minus the 3.5gb VRAM issue).
780 was the cuttoff, 9xx , nvidia got Greeeedy..
970 launch price was quite a bit lower than the 290X at $329 vs $549, but the 290X also came out almost a full year before the 970. When I purchased my 290X the 970 was still neck and neck with the 290X, but I ended up getting it for less than a comparable 970, not to mention that I dislike Nvidia so if it's that close, I'm going AMD every time.
-
Man.. want to buy 2080 Ti..
But I just spent monies on this Spin-Mop here..
Cleans floors great.. !!