Mira Yurizaki

https://twitter.com/Tidux
 
Looks like a video game commenter. i.e., probably nobody that important.

Before getting all up in arms worrying about PCIe standards and whatnot, it helps to see performance scaling with various PCIe lane configurations. Thankfully, TechPowerUp does just that and what a better card to test it with than the RTX 2080 Ti? (Okay, technically RTX Titan would be better, but the 2080 Ti is the upper limit for many people)
 
The short of it is, even at PCIe 3.0 x8 speeds, the RTX 2080 Ti barely loses performance on average. Even at PCIe 3.0 x4 speeds I would say is the cusp of what's appreciable.
 
PCIe 3.0 has plenty of life left unless you're on the bleeding edge.

https://twitter.com/Tidux
 
Looks like a video game commenter. i.e., probably nobody that important.

Before getting all up in arms worrying about PCIe standards and whatnot, it helps to see performance scaling with various PCIe lane configurations. Thankfully, TechPowerUp does just that and what a better card to test it with than the RTX 2080 Ti? (Okay, technically RTX Titan would be better, but the 2080 Ti is the upper limit for many people)
 
The short of it is, even at PCIe 3.0 x8 speeds, the RTX 2080 Ti barely loses performance on average. Even at PCIe 3.0 x4 speeds I would say is the cusp of what's appreciable.
 
PCIe 3.0 has plenty of life left unless you're on the bleeding edge.

Then make a video scientifically proving that Quake gives players a significant advantage, as you say ?

Before getting all up in arms worrying about PCIe standards and whatnot, it helps to see performance scaling with various PCIe lane configurations. Thankfully, TechPowerUp does just that and what a better card to test it with than the RTX 2080 Ti? (Okay, technically RTX Titan would be better, but the 2080 Ti is the upper limit for many people)
 
The short of it is, even at PCIe 3.0 x8 speeds, the RTX 2080 Ti barely loses performance on average. Even at PCIe 3.0 x4 speeds I would say is the cusp of what's appreciable.
 
PCIe 3.0 has plenty of life left unless you're on the bleeding edge.

Why not kill crypto mining first?

It's not full ray tracing though. They're basically just doing reflections. If you look closely, they seem to have zero dynamic shadows or other lighting effect anywhere in the scene.
Ray tracing can do a lot more than just reflections. If you add global illumination/photon mapping/caustics stuff will get even more "expensive" in terms of hardware requirements. Ray tracing has never been about speed, it's always been about quality. I've never understood why they chose fast paced action games for their initial implementation.
 
As @xAcid9 said, we'd have to see a full blown game to compare. Ideally we'd get a game that can utilize both, this technology and DXR/RTX so we can compare hardware requirements and visual quality in the same engine.

Windows' scheduler is also such that it if a task pegs a single core a lot, it'll rotate it around to another core. This is done as a potential heat spreading measure. Given that data synchronization latency increases with more cores, one could expect depending on what cores Windows chooses to put the task on, it'll run worse.
 
Though I don't expect it to run that much worse.

The primary feature of RTX, hardware accelerated ray tracing, is still in its infancy. Developers are still figuring out the best practices for it so that there's a compromise between the quality it brings and the performance hit. And like most other graphics features, it may be not be used as realistic lighting isn't the main issue. However, considering that both Sony and Microsoft have seemed to put some emphasis on ray tracing as a feature of their new consoles, I'd imagine it'll be used more in the future.
 
Also spoiler because side rant:
 

The primary feature of RTX, hardware accelerated ray tracing, is still in its infancy. Developers are still figuring out the best practices for it so that there's a compromise between the quality it brings and the performance hit. And like most other graphics features, it may be not be used as realistic lighting isn't the main issue. However, considering that both Sony and Microsoft have seemed to put some emphasis on ray tracing as a feature of their new consoles, I'd imagine it'll be used more in the future.
 
Also spoiler because side rant:
 

Not to mention the people who upgrade their CPUs on the same motherboard tend to be few and far between. 
 
On top of this, if we demanded a company to support a platform for a long time in computer time, it's likely the new CPU won't shine to its fullest because the rest of the system is holding it back.

My point is:
 
The only way Intel are going to go back and test/verify/put tighter requirements on mobo manufacturers for power delivery is if there is a market big enough to demand that.  There isn't right now and likely will never be one.  You are literally demanding a company test and guarantee a product for a niche market that should already know how long that platform will be supported for.
 
There is nothing anti consumer in what Intel have done with their platform support,  you buy a motherboard and PC now it will last well long enough that regardless what brand you get you will have to upgrade ram, mobo with the CPU.   If you like owning the latest and greatest you already know that today's gen 8 motherboards are not very likely going to support gen 11 CPU's in the future, so getting upset when they don't is unfair, not anti consumer.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Then make a video scientifically proving that Quake gives players a significant advantage, as you say ?

As a terminal to SSH in to a Linux server yea ?

Intel.
 
Before PCI came along, the then slot standard was ISA, which had the cards installed with the components facing up. You can see it in this video (at around 27:00 if the time stamp thing doesn't work)
 
But when it came time to roll out PCI, which was invented by Intel, they had a concern: how do you split the number of slots between ISA and PCI? Rather than make the motherboard manufacturers choose how to allocate 7 slots, Intel decided to make the PCI cards install upside down. This allows a slot to fit either an ISA or PCI card. Like in this motherboard:

Although in practice, I don't know how many motherboard manufacturers actually put in more than one slot where it could fit an ISA or PCI card. After that, it was just convention.

I think overall this will make very little difference to the wider computing space. The number of existing Mac users who have recent nvidia GPUs is... I'm guessing, not significant. Hackintosh is basically irrelevant.
 
The question of choice isn't really much of one. If you are in the Apple ecosystem, you know you don't have the flexibility other platforms allow. It's Apple's way, or no way.

oh yeah it does, it kicks in when I play games. thanks chap

NVIDIA's drivers support a wide range of video cards. For example, 442.10 supports:

 
So say you had 442.10 installed. Since both the Titan X and 2080 Ti are supported, you don't have to do anything. The drivers work for both.

If the current drivers you have support the video card you're going to, you don't need to do anything. Generally speaking, if your drivers are as old or newer than the card you're going to, it'll support the video card.
 
If they don't, uninstall the ones you have using the uninstaller in Control Panel -> Programs and Features, install the new card, then install the drivers that are compatible with it.
 
Also in agreement with @Ryan_Vickers, you don't need to run DDU. DDU is only if you have a problem. It even says in the website:
 

thankyou for giving me the answer i was looking for!
thankyou lol

Intel.
 
Before PCI came along, the then slot standard was ISA, which had the cards installed with the components facing up. You can see it in this video (at around 27:00 if the time stamp thing doesn't work)
 
But when it came time to roll out PCI, which was invented by Intel, they had a concern: how do you split the number of slots between ISA and PCI? Rather than make the motherboard manufacturers choose how to allocate 7 slots, Intel decided to make the PCI cards install upside down. This allows a slot to fit either an ISA or PCI card. Like in this motherboard:

Although in practice, I don't know how many motherboard manufacturers actually put in more than one slot where it could fit an ISA or PCI card. After that, it was just convention.

A separate computer with a VM works. But I'd also be heavily cautious with network security. Even if these guys don't really know what they're doing, I'd rather them not know my actual external IP address and/or know what's on my home network.

A separate computer with a VM works. But I'd also be heavily cautious with network security. Even if these guys don't really know what they're doing, I'd rather them not know my actual external IP address and/or know what's on my home network.

You don't have to have two partitions with a Windows install on each. You can make another Standard Level user account on Windows and simply deny them access to whatever folders you want via security permissions.