Tech Enthusiast

I am unsure if not using any encryption at all, ... or using the browser bar to pass around data is the worse offense.
Seriously, both are inexcusable.

I am unsure if not using any encryption at all, ... or using the browser bar to pass around data is the worse offense.
Seriously, both are inexcusable.

I am unsure if not using any encryption at all, ... or using the browser bar to pass around data is the worse offense.
Seriously, both are inexcusable.

I am unsure if not using any encryption at all, ... or using the browser bar to pass around data is the worse offense.
Seriously, both are inexcusable.

I am unsure if not using any encryption at all, ... or using the browser bar to pass around data is the worse offense.
Seriously, both are inexcusable.

Keep in mind, that this sample size is basically US only. Which is about 1/25th of the world population, not like some US peeps claim "the majority".
He could not include germany for example (one of the bigger tech countries, almost on par with the US alone) since Amazon did not offer any RTX cards for preorder there.
 
And, to make this less of a number thing and more of a "money talks" thing:
In germany there is almost zero reason to favour any Pascal cards if you are buying something new. 
The 2080 is faster than 1080ti AND cheaper, plus the new features.
The 2070 is faster than 1080 AND cheaper, plus the new features.
 
All the fuss about 1080ti being cheaper is not true all around the world. It may be in some regeions, but it most definitely is not in germany.
All the 1080ti has over the 2080 is 3gb of memory. And while that is nice indeed, it does not make up for the performance and added features. 
Don't forget how bad Pascal is at DX12 and Vulkan. Turing fixed those issues. And both do win market share compared to DX11, so this is an added bonus as well.
 
Reviews hated on the price and unexpected low performance gains, but if you buy something new, you don't care if it is only slightly faster. If it is the same price, is slightly faster, slightly better at DX12 and Vulkan and has more features coming, why would you buy a 1080ti? Only those that think a game can actually use 11gb of vram at once would do that. And not even skyrim with all mods you can find will be able to use 11gb at once. It will however make the 11gb appear "full". And that is where most people miss the point: Full memory is not indentical to "it uses all that textures at once".
 
So bottom line:
That chart shows only one market and also shows how reviews skewed sales in favour of Pascal, even when there is no real reason (for most countries at least).

Actually i did not see any FPS tanking at all in BFV when there was no reflections, nope.
The Videos i saw tried to go to areas without reflections (given BF makes it hard, they really make every damn wood piece reflective,...) and the FPS was well above 100 then.
 
The difference in RT global illumination is realism and ease of implementation.
Yes, you can fake light pretty well. No it won't look natural at all. Good looking != realistic looking.
 
With RT GI you can just put up a light source and "it just works". This is actually the thing leather jacket refered to when he said those words. They got taken out of context a lot, but GI actually IS the context he used the words in. And they fit 100% there. No need to fake lights, fake shadows, or fake whatever needs faking. Illumination will just work realistically out of the box.
And this part of DXR is not very demanding at all from what Enlisted showed as early as 2 days after Nvidia showed us RTX. It does however save a lot of programmer time, by not having to fake so many light sources.

Sad to see overdone reflections first and not global illumination.
Looking forward to Enlisted which will have other RTX Features, but running at 100fps@4k, demonstrating that not all RT has to butcher FPS.

We are not talking about ignoring here, we are talking about prefering to cater to good customers. And good does not nessessarily mean wealthy either.
 
Think about Amazon for example.
Person A is buying 3 products / month for the past 15 years and is only ever returning defect stuff.
Person B is buying a lipstick every 3 months and is returning every second for not liking the colour.
Person C is buying 10 mice, with the clear intention to return at least 9 after trying them. This person is doing the same for everything they buy.
 
Giving Person A more slack when an issue pops up, should just be natural and not considered "bad practice". And yes, that includes shorter waiting times, better offers, etc.
I wholeheartly agree with companies doing this, as way too many customers try to abuse every service they can get away with. And the people indirectly paying for that are the good costumers that don't try to cheat the system.
 
I am more than happy to consider myself Person A in this example (the stats are actually pretty close to reality) and i definitly noticed the support and service getting better over time. Now, when i call Amazon for whatever reason, they get out of their way to makeing sure i am happy. I can return stuff a year after buying it, i get discounted prices, a week after i bought it for a higher price. If i ever return something i get my money back before it even ships, i get it the moment DHL scans the return label after it leaves my hands. And if said item does not reach Amazon due to DHL screwing up, they don't bother me at all.
 
If this level of service would be done for Person B as well, Amazon would go bancrupt. Even with all the money they have right now. So again, i am very happy they are doing this to make sure good customers are top priority over scammers, abusers and jerks.

Well, no. But a person spending more is a better costumer.
The key point here is not to piss on "normal" customers, but on "poor" customers. And those usually don't include people not spending money, but abusing the system at the cost of good customers.
 
And if you like it or not:
If a company cuts you 10$ slack somehow, you should have spend at least 10$ there, no?
It would be pretty self centered to demand a company spending more money on you, then you spend on them. They need to make a profit somehow. So cutting high volume AND good customers more slack than a crappy customer that returns everything and spends nothing, is just plain obvious. Everything else would be bad for good customers. Just common sense really.

We are not talking about ignoring here, we are talking about prefering to cater to good customers. And good does not nessessarily mean wealthy either.
 
Think about Amazon for example.
Person A is buying 3 products / month for the past 15 years and is only ever returning defect stuff.
Person B is buying a lipstick every 3 months and is returning every second for not liking the colour.
Person C is buying 10 mice, with the clear intention to return at least 9 after trying them. This person is doing the same for everything they buy.
 
Giving Person A more slack when an issue pops up, should just be natural and not considered "bad practice". And yes, that includes shorter waiting times, better offers, etc.
I wholeheartly agree with companies doing this, as way too many customers try to abuse every service they can get away with. And the people indirectly paying for that are the good costumers that don't try to cheat the system.
 
I am more than happy to consider myself Person A in this example (the stats are actually pretty close to reality) and i definitly noticed the support and service getting better over time. Now, when i call Amazon for whatever reason, they get out of their way to makeing sure i am happy. I can return stuff a year after buying it, i get discounted prices, a week after i bought it for a higher price. If i ever return something i get my money back before it even ships, i get it the moment DHL scans the return label after it leaves my hands. And if said item does not reach Amazon due to DHL screwing up, they don't bother me at all.
 
If this level of service would be done for Person B as well, Amazon would go bancrupt. Even with all the money they have right now. So again, i am very happy they are doing this to make sure good customers are top priority over scammers, abusers and jerks.

We are not talking about ignoring here, we are talking about prefering to cater to good customers. And good does not nessessarily mean wealthy either.
 
Think about Amazon for example.
Person A is buying 3 products / month for the past 15 years and is only ever returning defect stuff.
Person B is buying a lipstick every 3 months and is returning every second for not liking the colour.
Person C is buying 10 mice, with the clear intention to return at least 9 after trying them. This person is doing the same for everything they buy.
 
Giving Person A more slack when an issue pops up, should just be natural and not considered "bad practice". And yes, that includes shorter waiting times, better offers, etc.
I wholeheartly agree with companies doing this, as way too many customers try to abuse every service they can get away with. And the people indirectly paying for that are the good costumers that don't try to cheat the system.
 
I am more than happy to consider myself Person A in this example (the stats are actually pretty close to reality) and i definitly noticed the support and service getting better over time. Now, when i call Amazon for whatever reason, they get out of their way to makeing sure i am happy. I can return stuff a year after buying it, i get discounted prices, a week after i bought it for a higher price. If i ever return something i get my money back before it even ships, i get it the moment DHL scans the return label after it leaves my hands. And if said item does not reach Amazon due to DHL screwing up, they don't bother me at all.
 
If this level of service would be done for Person B as well, Amazon would go bancrupt. Even with all the money they have right now. So again, i am very happy they are doing this to make sure good customers are top priority over scammers, abusers and jerks.

Sad to see overdone reflections first and not global illumination.
Looking forward to Enlisted which will have other RTX Features, but running at 100fps@4k, demonstrating that not all RT has to butcher FPS.

Can you link the memory error they found? Because i don't recall Steve talking about that at all.
The issue linked in this topic is basically Fox screwing over the QA step. They cheaped out on it and a few broken GPUs slipped trough.
 
That is also the reason why only FE are affected and nothing else, unless a board partner actually bought a preassembled FE and relabeled it. Usually board partner don't do that, so even reference designs from them are fine. Again, unless they did indeed buy a fully assembled FE and rebranded it. Which, judging from the RMA rates, noone did. 0.1 - 1.4% RMA rate is exeptionally low for a GPU, but those figures don't include the FE.
 
So, the issue is all with the FE only. The random broken cards from Partners are down to common issues that happen for every product in the universe. Just at a tiny 0.1-1.4% rate.

Apart from being ahead in 25% of found benchmarks, close behind on the others AND is 50 bucks less (well, at least in germany).

Screwing over users by giving more stuff out for free. That is such a funny way to see things.
 
I still can't use this free feature on my Google Home, because Developers need to implement the free connect feature in their software first.
Kinda crazy that this might make you happy.
 
I for one am happy about this change. I don't use any of the premium Features, but connect was indeed a consideration, just did not want to shell out a full premium for a feature i may use once every month or so. Also: I am always happy to see people get good stuff for cheap / free. My life does not get worse, just because others are happy.
 
Seriously, you should consider overthinking that attitude.

Screwing over users by giving more stuff out for free. That is such a funny way to see things.
 
I still can't use this free feature on my Google Home, because Developers need to implement the free connect feature in their software first.
Kinda crazy that this might make you happy.
 
I for one am happy about this change. I don't use any of the premium Features, but connect was indeed a consideration, just did not want to shell out a full premium for a feature i may use once every month or so. Also: I am always happy to see people get good stuff for cheap / free. My life does not get worse, just because others are happy.
 
Seriously, you should consider overthinking that attitude.

Screwing over users by giving more stuff out for free. That is such a funny way to see things.
 
I still can't use this free feature on my Google Home, because Developers need to implement the free connect feature in their software first.
Kinda crazy that this might make you happy.
 
I for one am happy about this change. I don't use any of the premium Features, but connect was indeed a consideration, just did not want to shell out a full premium for a feature i may use once every month or so. Also: I am always happy to see people get good stuff for cheap / free. My life does not get worse, just because others are happy.
 
Seriously, you should consider overthinking that attitude.

As a premium user, this is not fucking anyone, Spotify is giving a feature that I have never used to free users, it's simply a good business move.

I didnt even know this was a premium feature. I pay for premium and expect this feature of any service, free or not. 

If you're buying ANY Mac device to install another OS to, you need to reevaluate your life decisions.

Exactly that, yes.
It is just the cool thing to do really.
Hating on the top dog has never been more in fashion. Who cares if the reasons make no sense?! This is a principle thing!

So basically nvidia put in extra quality controls to ensure customers  get OC'd products that can actually OC and some people cry extortion?

So, people getting hurt over something that has happened for about,... forever.
 
NVidia doing the extreme binning now only means one thing:
Costumer now KNOW they will get a better chip if they pay more.
Before this, you could go out, buy a 1000$ 1080 ti and get the same value as that other guy, paying 750 for his 1080ti.
Sure, it could also go the other way and you could land a big silicone lottery win, but who enjoyed that "luck"?
 
I see no reason to get angry over this now. It is better for us costumers and not worse. 

That is not only unpopular but straight out delusional. 
You can't force a company to give away their products for free lol.
 
That being said: Kinda happy Google is doing this. The EU went too far. They opened up the most used OS on the planet for others, in order to allow more players in the market due to low costs. All they asked for was having their services preinstalled (but removeable!).
 
That was VERY LITTLE to ask from Google and they still got charged for that. The only logical step was to just flat out not make it open anymore, but letting OEMs pay.
Sure, it will reduce competition, but that is what the EU wanted, right? I mean,... they knew this was going to happen, right?
 
Just sad that I have to pay a premium for this satisfaction since I am from the EU, but still: Happy they are lifting the middle finger to these crazy silly EU courts.