Alleged GeForce RTX Turing "SUPER" Refresh Specs Leaked (Update 2)

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Make RTX On actually do nothing 

I mean, I'm not gonna say ray tracing is stupid. It certainly has its qualities. The problem is, cards are not really fast enough, there aren't many games for it and those that do use it usually overdo it to a point where it doesn't even look good. Like, those mirror finished cars in BF V. Nothing looks like that ffs. I don't care if reflection is 100% accurate, it just doesn't look good even when compared to "fake" graphics.

 

I think we could see higher leaps in image quality if everyone adopted CryEngine's method that works on any GPU and intentionally dumbs reflections. Which has a double effect. It works on any half capable GPU and actually looks better because reflections are never 1:1 of reality except with mirrors.

 

If NVIDIA used lower sampling, they'd also get more realistic reflections and even higher performance.

 

What I'd personally prefer above all would just be perspective correct screen space reflections. Currently they don't account for perspective which is why windows glow on the room flooring doesn't line up right with actual windows. If they could solve that at small compute expense, I'd be much more thrilled. Sure it's fake, but when fake is so good no one could tell it apart, who really gives a damn?

[Trixanity]

9 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I mean, I'm not gonna say ray tracing is stupid. It certainly has its qualities. The problem is, cards are not really fast enough, there aren't many games for it and those that do use it usually overdo it to a point where it doesn't even look good. Like, those mirror finished cars in BF V. Nothing looks like that ffs. I don't care if reflection is 100% accurate, it just doesn't look good even when compared to "fake" graphics.

 

I think we could see higher leaps in image quality if everyone adopted CryEngine's method that works on any GPU and intentionally dumbs reflections. Which has a double effect. It works on any half capable GPU and actually looks better because reflections are never 1:1 of reality except with mirrors.

 

If NVIDIA used lower sampling, they'd also get more realistic reflections and even higher performance.

 

What I'd personally prefer above all would just be perspective correct screen space reflections. Currently they don't account for perspective which is why windows glow on the room flooring doesn't line up right with actual windows. If they could solve that at small compute expense, I'd be much more thrilled. Sure it's fake, but when fake is so good no one could tell it apart, who really gives a damn?

It seems like every time they come up with a new visual effect they overdo it in order to really drive home the point of showing it off (I wonder if Nvidia tells them to RTX all the things). I remember when light bloom got introduced like 15 years ago. Suddenly everything was fucking glowing whether it needed to or not.

 

If they stopped using it like a crutch perhaps it'd actually run reasonably well.

[SeraphicWings]

And I just literally bought their RTX 2070 not even a week ago

 

F*ck you Nvidia

[leadeater]

23 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

It seems like every time they come up with a new visual effect they overdo it in order to really drive home the point of showing it off (I wonder if Nvidia tells them to RTX all the things). I remember when light bloom got introduced like 15 years ago. Suddenly everything was fucking glowing whether it needed to or not.

 

If they stopped using it like a crutch perhaps it'd actually run reasonably well.

I remember Caesar IV having huge amounts of bloom and it's just a city builder game. 

[RejZoR]

@Trixanity

I think that is the case. Which is why I often still prefer faked graphics. Like, screen space reflective parquet flooring in games, sure, faked one has a messed up perspective at some angles, but it looks realistic. Where ray traced one looks like a mirror. Sure, it looks perspective correct, but it looks nothing like parquet. So, what would you prefer, something that looks 90% correct and only 10% off at certain angle or something that looks 90% off, but 10% of it is always correct at any perspective? And that's just stupid.

 

I also hate it how they say uh oh you can only do it with ray tracing. Bitch, I've seen shadows that are per pixel correct, they drop across various objects correctly and they even have a sharpness rolloff correct depending on distance from light source as well as distance of surface from the shadow casting object. All before ray tracing was even a thing. And then they show Tomb Raider and it's "realistic" shadows and I was like, what's even a difference?

[pzspah]

25 minutes ago, SeraphicWings said:

And I just literally bought their RTX 2070 not even a week ago

 

F*ck you Nvidia

 

Its been 23 days since the super tweet, you should have known something was up and waited. 

[ACatWithThumbs]

4 hours ago, SeraphicWings said:

And I just literally bought their RTX 2070 not even a week ago

 

F*ck you Nvidia

Can't you return it?
I bought an RTX2070 a week before the teaser and as soon as I saw the video and the rumors pop up I returned it.
At least in Europe, we have 14-day return right and Amazon even offers a 30-day return period.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

so basically scaled down versions are called super now? 

[melete]

I’m interested in the 2080 Super but I’m not even sure it’s worth it. 4% more CUDA cores? That faster memory better be doing work here if Nvidia thinks this card is worth significantly more than a base 2080.

[CiBi]

On 6/15/2019 at 8:28 PM, melete said:

I’m interested in the 2080 Super but I’m not even sure it’s worth it. 4% more CUDA cores? That faster memory better be doing work here if Nvidia thinks this card is worth significantly more than a base 2080.

It would be nice if the 2080 Super had more VRAM at the price point of the current 2080. Cause I feel like 8GB is just not enough if you want to use the card for a few years.

[Stormseeker9]

On 6/15/2019 at 3:17 PM, pzspah said:

 

Its been 23 days since the super tweet, you should have known something was up and waited. 

not everyone follows everything that happens in the tech space... especially Twitter..

[exetras]

Well I now have many options to replace my R290. This is great year to get a GPU.

 

Also the prices are dropping on all the older hardware like Vega 56 and 1070 ti.

[Reytime]

So apparently Nvidia is getting ready to release a ''Super'' Nvidia Shield? So no Super cards afteral?

[TempestCatto]

This seems great and all, but why not add mor vram too? I guess Im just greedy.

[Spotty]

19 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

This seems great and all, but why not add mor vram too? I guess Im just greedy.

Cost? I would also argue that the current cards have enough vram for gaming.

 

There is that empty memory spot on the 2080ti though so who knows, maybe they will.

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, Spotty said:

I would also argue that the current cards have enough vram for gaming.

Allocated ram and active ram are different things also. VRAM usage is only reported as allocated ram which doesn't mean a lot without extra information.

[BiG StroOnZ]

As we get closer to the supposed reveal of these products, we have an update on the "expected" prices of the SUPER cards:

Quote

• RTX 2080 SUPER - $799
• RTX 2070 SUPER - $599
• RTX 2060 SUPER - $349-429

Here's what an update to the prices of the "old" pre-SUPER variants, combined with the new SUPER cards, would look like (according to TweakTown):

• GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER - $799
• GeForce RTX 2080 - $549-$600 (possible price drop price)
• GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER - $599
• GeForce RTX 2070 - $449-499 (possible price drop price)
• GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER - $349-429
• GeForce RTX 2060 - $299 (possible price drop price)

 

Source: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/66332/nvidia-geforce-rtx-super-pricing-799-599-429/index.html

[pzspah]

If those prices are accurate used 1080tis are going to be become dirt cheap

[leadeater]

37 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

• GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER - $799
• GeForce RTX 2080 - $549-$600 (possible price drop price)
• GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER - $599
• GeForce RTX 2070 - $449-499 (possible price drop price)
• GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER - $349-429
• GeForce RTX 2060 - $299 (possible price drop price)

RTX 2080 won't be the same cost or cheaper than the RTX 2070 SUPER etc

[BiG StroOnZ]

15 minutes ago, leadeater said:

RTX 2080 won't be the same cost or cheaper than the RTX 2070 SUPER etc

 

Well, what I wonder is if the regular variants are simply going to go EOL. Otherwise, it is simply an estimation by TweakTown. Since a regular 2080 will still be around 15% faster than a 2070 SUPER. But, the 2080 standard @ $600 and the 2070 SUPER @ $529-550 could work.

[Taf the Ghost]

8 minutes ago, leadeater said:

RTX 2080 won't be the same cost or cheaper than the RTX 2070 SUPER etc

I've been laughing about people thinking Nvidia will drop prices. They can't. They have to maintain their margins. All they are doing is adding more bins to the stack to eat up the spare dies they have.

[BiG StroOnZ]

5 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

I've been laughing about people thinking Nvidia will drop prices. They can't. They have to maintain their margins. All they are doing is adding more bins to the stack to eat up the spare dies they have.

This is possible too. I mean, it is fitting NVIDIA is going to wait for AMD to show their cards first.

 

Additionally, something to keep in mind, that I distinctly remember. Was that when the 1070 Ti was launched, 1070 and 1080 prices were all over the place. It almost killed both of those SKUs in many instances, price to performance wise. 

[Taf the Ghost]

3 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

This is possible too. I mean, it is fitting NVIDIA is going to wait for AMD to show their cards first. 

AMD and Nvidia are pretty static for their market share and have been for a few years. This result is really about the fact they put 2 SKUs on the TU106 die, so their orders are imbalanced. They need to spread out the bins more. Especially as the 2070 ends up eating up dies that'd go to Pro Cards.

[leadeater]

8 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

Well, what I wonder is if the regular variants are simply going to go EOL. Otherwise, it is simply an estimation by TweakTown. Since a regular 2080 will still be around 15% faster than a 2070 SUPER. But, the 2080 standard @ $600 and the 2070 SUPER @ $529-550 could work.

Very unlikely to go EOL, no OEM would allow that and the product investment by Nvidia and all other involved would be terrible if done.

 

There's plenty of price gap between current models to put new SKUs in with minor to no changes of existing prices. Pricing follows a pretty basic principle, it's aligned to performance, and performance is aligned to pricing. So I can say with 99.99% confidence that Nvidia would not make the RTX 2070 SUPER faster than the RTX 2080 and the RTX 2080 won't be cheaper than the RTX 2070 SUPER.

 

Unless I'm not correct about the products going EOL but I just can't see that happening.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

AMD and Nvidia are pretty static for their market share and have been for a few years. This result is really about the fact they put 2 SKUs on the TU106 die, so their orders are imbalanced. They need to spread out the bins more. Especially as the 2070 ends up eating up dies that'd go to Pro Cards.

I'm guessing Nvidia was calculating that more people would buy higher end cards than they are, seems Nvidia didn't quite get the pricing quite right for that.