Turkish website finally tests 2080 Ti vs 1080 Ti in 4K with benchmarks

[GoldenLag]

Just now, JediFragger said:

Nah, I got a realllllly good price for my Ti so it'll be almost a straight switch. No way are they going to let it be slower than the old Ti

benchmarks will tell, benchmarks will tell.............

[D13H4RD]

Seems like the typical generational leap. 

 

On one hand, I'm happy that it's not a miniscule jump but on the other hand, that price premium. 

 

 

[Stroal]

18 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

But its not though, as there is RTX and AI in there too.  Somebody has to pay for innovation and as always its early adopters.

Here is the truth, RTX isn't going to become popular unless the Xbox and PS get it. We might get a few AAA games a year that support it, but unless Nvidia is going to open it up and allow everyone to play, it's not going to be widely adopted for a long time. 

[pas008]

6 hours ago, GoldenLag said:

benchmarks will tell, benchmarks will tell.............

Exactly

6 hours ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Seems like the typical generational leap. 

 

On one hand, I'm happy that it's not a miniscule jump but on the other hand, that price premium. 

 

 

Which gen?

Maxwell and Pascal we got 30% increase

Others 15

But either still not enough for the bitching and nancies

[GoldenLag]

4 minutes ago, pas008 said:

Exactly

Which gen?

Maxwell and Pascal we got 30% increase

Others 15

But either still not enough for the bitching and nancies

I think the bitching is how Nvidia just moved up their cards in their tier system. Their 2080ti is now their Titak equivelent and they are pricing it accordingly.

 

And if you accept they have moved up a pricetier, then you compare it to cards from the older gen in the same pricetier, it is at that point it get slightly ugly. (Only a little bit, we dont know how the performance actually is at 1080p 1440p and so on)

 

Personally i dont like them moving up a tier in cost essentially removing the Titan card. It sort of tricks consumers (sort of)

[Brooksie359]

1 hour ago, GoldenLag said:

I think the bitching is how Nvidia just moved up their cards in their tier system. Their 2080ti is now their Titak equivelent and they are pricing it accordingly.

 

And if you accept they have moved up a pricetier, then you compare it to cards from the older gen in the same pricetier, it is at that point it get slightly ugly. (Only a little bit, we dont know how the performance actually is at 1080p 1440p and so on)

 

Personally i dont like them moving up a tier in cost essentially removing the Titan card. It sort of tricks consumers (sort of)

I honestly think it tricks them less. No more selling of titan cards that end up being replaced by the 80ti cards. Now it's very clear that the 2080ti is the top end card and they won't be releasing a slightly cut down version on the near future that replaces it. 

[Alex Atkin UK]

23 hours ago, cj09beira said:

they should have waited for the second 7nm gen to implement it, then you would be able to make something that can actually deliver which would lead to better results, Rt is cool and all but i will always take fps over quality, when you are having fun quality means nothing 

But by that logic they should never release a GPU as in a year or two they can release a better one.

Nothing happens if they don't make money to pump into R&D.  They no doubt spent a fortune on this so trying to get a return NOW while encouraging developers to tinker with it is hardly rocket science.

Its in a usable state now, so why should they wait?

[FloRolf]

Mh, not impressed at all. 

980ti to 1080ti was 70-80% improvement @4k.

 

Nvidia is just milkin' 

[solarflare]

dang sandbagers

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, FloRolf said:

Mh, not impressed at all. 

980ti to 1080ti was 70-80% improvement @4k.

 

Nvidia is just milkin' 

Oh well, I guess you can use that metric to judge and value every single GPU that gets released then.

[Paranoid Kami]

12 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Oh well, I guess you can use that metric to judge and value every single GPU that gets released then.

It's actually pretty normal. Most people wait several years before they upgrade and it has been 3-4 GPU generations by then, which is around that number.

[mr moose]

14 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

I mean we should still wait for big reviewers, and not marketing bs or view seeking channels, to review them.  As much as I blame Nvidia for the reactions they're getting, due to the marketing bs, I still find some people are overreacting due to a lack of information.  I mean I am still weighing a 2080ti as an option, but I'm going to wait for Navi because I need the memory amount and bandwidth for workstation tasks.  Another problem is that people are looking at 4k performance only, and they're bitching about that.  Well, Turing seems to be more likely to be able to push more consistent frames at around 60 at 4k.  I get they're disappointed that it might not push 120+ due to buyers remorse and a hype train, but that's also not the point of turing primarily.  There is going to be a performance increase, but again, that wasn't the primary focus and partly why people are overreacting.  I'm not going to make an assumption by how much, and I'm not going to early adopt because I'd rather weigh my options before spending like 1200 bucks.  Turing might not be for everyone, but it's also not unusual for a company to market the shit out of their card and overhype it.  Especially not in the tech world as that's kinda the norm.  I'm not saying that's a good thing, but people should be shitting on AMD for that too not just Nvidia.

 

12 minutes ago, Paranoid Kami said:

It's actually pretty normal. Most people wait several years before they upgrade and it has been 3-4 GPU generations by then, which is around that number.

 

That's all well and good, I get that people are hoping for outstanding improvements, but trying to define a product's value based on a different products performance is wishful thinking at best and delusional at worst.  Some products exceed well beyond their predecessors while some are barely faster.   Every product should simply be judged on what it is and what it costs, not what another product did in relation to the product before it.   It's as irrelevant as those who were trying to claim the price of the 600 series on its release is proof the 20 series is BS (that's just laughable).  

 

EDIT: it might be easier if I just say, there is a difference between hoping for big improvements and using that hope as a metric to decide the product is overpriced, sandbagged, shit etc. 

[leadeater]

7 hours ago, pas008 said:

Maxwell and Pascal we got 30% increase

Pascal was way more than 30% increase, more in the area of 70%+.

[pas008]

31 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Pascal was way more than 30% increase, more in the area of 70%+.

Huh 70?

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/30.html

35 43 46 increases here on ti to ti

 

 

[rawrdaysgoby]

We waited 2 and a half year for this?! and a ridiculous price increase? No you shouldn't compare the 2080ti with the 1080ti.... compare the 2080 to the 1080ti since that is suppose to be the "same pricing" Actually now the 1080ti is even cheaper then the 2080.

[leadeater]

14 hours ago, pas008 said:

Huh 70?

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080_Ti/30.html

35 43 46 increases here on ti to ti

 

 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11180/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review

 

Basically all tests show at least 70% increase from 980 Ti.

[leadeater]

9 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

@leadeater for clarity in case you find issue with the techpowerup article

Eh didn't really look at it, checked a few games vs Anandtech and it was roughly similar numbers. The two things you mentioned are where the difference comes from, percentage increase/decrease are actually different (mathematically) and that catches a lot of people out and 1440p and up is much larger difference.

[Tech Enthusiast]

23 hours ago, Stroal said:

Here is the truth, RTX isn't going to become popular unless the Xbox and PS get it. We might get a few AAA games a year that support it, but unless Nvidia is going to open it up and allow everyone to play, it's not going to be widely adopted for a long time. 

I know this has been said a lot, but it seems you missed it anyways:

 

There is nothing for NVidia to "open" here.

It is open. It is not a Nvidia thing. It is a DX12, Vulkan and Unreal thing. 

 

Nvidia is just the first GPU maker that implements these features.

[pas008]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11180/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review

 

Basically all tests show at least 70% increase from 980 Ti.

 

1 hour ago, VegetableStu said:

wait, did you just (1080ti) 100% - (980ti) 65%?  that's not how it works ._.

 

sure the graph puts the 1080ti at 100% absolute, but improvements is always with previous generation at 100%

which means the 980ti relative to 980ti would be 100%, and 1080ti relative to 980ti would be 100 /65*100 => 153.85%. a 53% increase.

 

4K performance is much larger. 100 /54*100 => 185.186% relative to 980ti. 85% increase in performance.

 

@leadeater for clarity in case you find issue with the techpowerup article

 

 

EDIT: to put it the "intended way", the 980ti has a 35% performance decrease relative to the 1080ti ._.

 

59 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Eh didn't really look at it, checked a few games vs Anandtech and it was roughly similar numbers. The two things you mentioned are where the difference comes from, percentage increase/decrease are actually different (mathematically) and that catches a lot of people out and 1440p and up is much larger difference.

 

Lol always forget to increases are relative to the old card 

Yeah i always look at it the difference

My bad

But that why i always look at tpu articles many games tested along with summary in resolutions 

 

 

[cj09beira]

On 8/31/2018 at 8:14 PM, Alex Atkin UK said:

But by that logic they should never release a GPU as in a year or two they can release a better one.

Nothing happens if they don't make money to pump into R&D.  They no doubt spent a fortune on this so trying to get a return NOW while encouraging developers to tinker with it is hardly rocket science.

Its in a usable state now, so why should they wait?

i am not saying that this is always the best course of action but this time they should have done it with at least 7nm, the wait would be small (6 months maybe) but the difference in performance would have been substantial, but i guess they needed to milk it 

[Linus_torvalds]

On 8/30/2018 at 11:32 PM, Alex Atkin UK said:

I feel the opposite, this is VERY promising considering the drivers will still be Beta or even Alpha, so far from optimised.

 

I don't expect even at launch it to perform at its best, it always takes them a while to optimise the drivers for new architectures.  Just look at how much Vega improved since launch.

Vega is different story. AMD does magic with it's drivers. I remember when i bought HD 7970 it was slower or on par with GTX 670. After a year it was better then GTX 680 Last time i checked before i sold it was on par GTX 770 (770 was same as 680 only 10% better but yeah)

[Trik'Stari]

Wish they'd do BF1 instead of BFV.

 

Considering that isn't out yet and some of us don't have any of those other games to compare with.

[Alex Atkin UK]

2 hours ago, mate_mate91 said:

Vega is different story. AMD does magic with it's drivers. I remember when i bought HD 7970 it was slower or on par with GTX 670. After a year it was better then GTX 680 Last time i checked before i sold it was on par GTX 770 (770 was same as 680 only 10% better but yeah)

I wouldn't call that magic, more that they are much more poorly optimised at launch than nVidia due to having less resources.  But even so, nVidia haven't had a new architecture in a while so it still takes time.

[MMKing]

3 hours ago, mate_mate91 said:

Vega is different story. AMD does magic with it's drivers. I remember when i bought HD 7970 it was slower or on par with GTX 670. After a year it was better then GTX 680 Last time i checked before i sold it was on par GTX 770 (770 was same as 680 only 10% better but yeah)

What more interesting is how poorly Nvidias 900 series GPUs perform in Strange Brigade. Guru3D looked at the game recently, did some benchmarks. At 1440p, the 980Ti is lagging 12% behind the Fury X, and is only 15% ahead of the RX 580.

 

The 970 is not even competitive with the 470.

 

https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/strange_brigade_pc_graphics_performance_benchmark_review,8.html

[jones177]

The performance difference looks about the same as between the GTX 980 ti & GTX 1080ti. 

 

I paid about $700 for my first GTX 980 ti

I paid about $760 for my first GTX 1080 ti 

 

Raytracing costs how much??????