RTX 20 Series Cards Confirmed With Pricing

[Tech Enthusiast]

10 minutes ago, Underwrought said:

Want to know how I know you either preordered a 2080 ti or are seriously thinking about it?

Actually, I openly said it was an instant buy for me (if the mentioned stuff holds true outside of marketing), so I don't see why you are trying to make a story out of this?

I don't preorder before I see benchmarks backing up the claims tho, so no.

 

If benchmarks show that NVidia did not lie about performance, I will be buying two tho. As will my wife. 

I fail to see how this is of any importance to anyone tho. I doubt anyone has identical financial means or priorities as we do. Most people will have other priorities and more or less income. So they should come to a different conclusion whether or not they buy the new GPUs or not. I don't judge them.

[Daegun]

8 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Well I mean most people that complain about prices give a price that they "think is right", like $299 should be the highest for a 2080ti.

 

I would never call out someone for saying they're poor though

I don't mean you in particular, and anyone that thinks they should be that low is crazy. But all the people responding that we should just accept 20-50% price increase and give no other reasoning for it than 'you should be able to afford it in this hobby' are out of touch. 

[Underwrought]

10 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Well I mean most people that complain about prices give a price that they "think is right", like $299 should be the highest for a 2080ti.

 

I would never call out someone for saying they're poor though

Obviously nvidia is entitled to making a profit for delivering breakthrough and best performing technologies in their class.  And the problem is only they know what it cost them to make this tech to bring to market.  So there is no way we can know and make an estimate on what is a fair price.

 

What really pisses me off is seeing potentially that these new cards only perform about 10-30% better than current gen then pricing them as they are.  Which even that would be forgivable until you add in the fact next gen is likely only a year away and they knew this already and are 'making' people pay these sorts of prices to be an early adopter.  I mean really I guess I should just sit back and laugh at all the people who pre-ordered only to find out they've been shafted hard because in the end its up the the consumer to be informed and intelligent enough to see a sham.  Or in the end the joke will be on me for NOT preordering.

[MyName13]

So...why are they called RTX and not GTX?Because of Ray Tracing?Is this ray tracing based on Nvidia's proprietary technology like Gameworks?

[Underwrought]

8 minutes ago, Rattenmann said:

Actually, I openly said it was an instant buy for me (if the mentioned stuff holds true outside of marketing), so I don't see why you are trying to make a story out of this?

I don't preorder before I see benchmarks backing up the claims tho, so no.

 

If benchmarks show that NVidia did not lie about performance, I will be buying two tho. As will my wife. 

I fail to see how this is of any importance to anyone tho. I doubt anyone has identical financial means or priorities as we do. Most people will have other priorities and more or less income. So they should come to a different conclusion whether or not they buy the new GPUs or not. I don't judge them.

So you REALLY believe this new gen is somewhere between 6x times faster than current gen?

 

In fact here, I will call it right here and now as to what the performance will be for these new cards(assuming say 1080-1440p) ...

 

1080 ti to 2080 ti:

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = 10-30% improvement which will be like 10-20 FPS at best

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 40-80 FPS range

 

1080 to 2080

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = 5-10% improvement which will be like 5-10 FPS at best

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 20-65 FPS range

 

1070 to 2070

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = No improvement possibly worse

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 30 FPS range with probably lower ray tracing quality.

[Morgan Everett]

25 minutes ago, Rattenmann said:

The first half of the sentence you just quoted.

 

This part.

OK. Doesn’t that seem like a bit of a hasty inference?

[TahoeDust]

9 minutes ago, Underwrought said:

Wow man I am so impressed, no really you must be really well off and have a really good life.  I am so jealous I wish I were you.

 

 

And that's what I thought you're talking out of your ass.

My original statement was an exaggeration of the perceived tone of your posts.  Judging by other posters reactions, I was not alone.

[Underwrought]

4 minutes ago, TahoeDust said:

My original statement was an exaggeration of the perceived tone of your posts.  Judging by other posters reactions, I was not alone.

Sure buddy sure lol.

[Underwrought]

Lastly there is only ONE reason why nvidia wasnt boasting real FPS numbers over current gen, and instead was specifically talking about ray tracing applications, is because its about the same or only slightly better than current gen.  There is NO REASON why they wouldn't boast about it like they did with pascal unless it wasn't worth boasting.  They spent that whole first hour convincing you why you needed this card for ray tracing to justify the price to you.

[MrTiC]

Price in belgium 1249 - 1479 euro (1400 - 1700$) for a 2080ti

 

NOPE

[Tech Enthusiast]

12 minutes ago, Underwrought said:

So you REALLY believe this new gen is somewhere between 6x times faster than current gen?

 

In fact here, I will call it right here and now as to what the performance will be for these new cards(assuming say 1080-1440p) ...

 

1080 ti to 2080 ti:

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = 10-30% improvement which will be like 10-20 FPS at best

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 40-80 FPS range

 

1080 to 2080

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = 5-10% improvement which will be like 5-10 FPS at best

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 20-65 FPS range

 

1070 to 2070

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = No improvement possibly worse

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 30 FPS range with probably lower ray tracing quality.

No, I said I can see a 2x increase if the mentioned performance turns out to be true.

 

Not more, not less.

I don't understand why it triggers you so much. 

 

If your prediction is correct that is fine as well. I won't lose any sleep over it, but I don't see any hints on what you are basing those assumptions on, apart from pure guessing. The 2x figure was a guess too, but at least it has one metric to go by. I honestly don't think your guesses can be right, but no one knows before we see benchmarks.

[Tech Enthusiast]

11 minutes ago, Morgan Everett said:

OK. Doesn’t that seem like a bit of a hasty inference?

It is the only comparison we have from the presentation.

I clearly said it is a guess based on that, but honestly: We don't have ANYTHING else to base ANYTHING off.

 

So all we can do is take the single thing we know and go from there.

All the rambling about poor performance gains is 100% speculation without anything to base it on. So I rather go by something that has at least something to back it off. 

I guess we can agree, no matter the outcome, that basing guesses on information is more productive than basing it on nothing but anger towards a green color or prices.

[Morgan Everett]

Just now, Rattenmann said:

It is the only comparison we have from the presentation.

I clearly said it is a guess based on that, but honestly: We don't have ANYTHING else to base ANYTHING off.

 

So all we can do is take the single thing we know and go from there.

All the rambling about poor performance gains is 100% speculation without anything to base it on. So I rather go by something that has at least something to back it off. 

I guess we can agree, no matter the outcome, that basing guesses on information is more productive than basing it on nothing but anger towards a green color or prices.

It's hardly 100% speculation: we can, for example, look at the emphasis placed upon ray tracing and RTX during the presentation, and the corresponding lack of discussion of performance beyond this, as an indication that a doubling of performance is unlikely. We can also consider the TFLOPs of both the new and old cards, as well as how much of the die is devoted to RTX features. 

 

That said, Nvidia claims in a blog post that there is going to be such an 100% increase, so it's mixed messages indeed. 

[Unhelpful]

25 minutes ago, Underwrought said:

So you REALLY believe this new gen is somewhere between 6x times faster than current gen?

 

In fact here, I will call it right here and now as to what the performance will be for these new cards(assuming say 1080-1440p) ...

 

1080 ti to 2080 ti:

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = 10-30% improvement which will be like 10-20 FPS at best

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 40-80 FPS range

 

1080 to 2080

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = 5-10% improvement which will be like 5-10 FPS at best

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 20-65 FPS range

 

1070 to 2070

 

In normal games with ray tracing turned off = No improvement possibly worse

In games with ray tracing turned on = TERRIBLE performance in the 30 FPS range with probably lower ray tracing quality.

As with the launch of the last several generations 

2080 ti is the new king with no direct comparison in the last generation.

1080ti = 2080

1080 = 2070

1070 = 2060

 

Patches will result in the 10XX series performing worse and the 20XX series performing better in 3 months.

 

That's my guess.

[TacoSenpai]

1 minute ago, JoeyDM said:

As with the launch of the last several generations 

2080 ti is the new king with no direct comparison in the last generation.

1080ti = 2080

1080 = 2070

1070 = 2060

 

Patches will result in the 10XX series performing worse and the 20XX series performing better in 3 months.

 

That's my guess.

Moral of the story don't update your nvidia drivers when the new GPUs release.  Life hacks

[lvh1]

16 minutes ago, MrTiC said:

Price in belgium 1249 - 1479 euro (1400 - 1700$) for a 2080ti

 

NOPE

Prices in the USA do not include taxes though (which is very stupid if you ask me), so it's slightly closer to the 999$ that it is supposed to be

[Tech Enthusiast]

Just now, Morgan Everett said:

It's hardly 100% speculation: we can, for example, look at the emphasis placed upon ray tracing and RTX during the presentation, and the corresponding lack of discussion of performance beyond this, as an indication that a doubling of performance is unlikely. We can also consider the TFLOPs of both the new and old cards, as well as how much of the die is devoted to RTX features. 

 

That said, Nvidia claims in a blog post that there is going to be such an 100% increase, so it's mixed messages indeed. 

I don't count that as valid points for speculation.

They showed the holy grail of graphics. Of course, they focus on that. 

Also, they only have their own lineup to compare it against, why would they cannibalize their own cards?

 

All these points are based on guesses about guesses about intentions. That does not sound like a good basis for further guesses. 

A solid guess should always be based on a measurable metric, otherwise, it is useless. 

 

Then they had a flat out 2.5x claim on stage when he said a 1080ti would get 32fps, while the 2080ti had 78fps.

I don't fully buy that claim, but judging from Reddit it may actually be true. I mean 32fps for a stock card can easily go to 45fps on water and with OCs.

This will really be interesting to follow. 

 

On a related guess, you can order all the GPUs by performance and usually conveniently end up with ordered pricing.

Meaning I fully expect NVidia to know how the relative performance is and pricing accordingly (minus Titans). They always did that, but it remains a guess if they also do it this time around, or not.

 

Based around this two kinda metric factors, I much rather believe in 2x performance, than I do in marginal improvements. But we can't know for sure, before we see it.

[cj09beira]

15 minutes ago, Rattenmann said:

It is the only comparison we have from the presentation.

I clearly said it is a guess based on that, but honestly: We don't have ANYTHING else to base ANYTHING off.

 

So all we can do is take the single thing we know and go from there.

All the rambling about poor performance gains is 100% speculation without anything to base it on. So I rather go by something that has at least something to back it off. 

I guess we can agree, no matter the outcome, that basing guesses on information is more productive than basing it on nothing but anger towards a green color or prices.

we have the cuda core amounts and the clock speed so unless there has been an big ipc increase we have a good idea of how it will peerform

[Morgan Everett]

4 minutes ago, Rattenmann said:

I don't count that as valid points for speculation.

They showed the holy grail of graphics. Of course, they focus on that. 

Also, they only have their own lineup to compare it against, why would they cannibalize their own cards?

 

All these points are based on guesses about guesses about intentions. That does not sound like a good basis for further guesses. 

A solid guess should always be based on a measurable metric, otherwise, it is useless. 

 

Then they had a flat out 2.5x claim on stage when he said a 1080ti would get 32fps, while the 2080ti had 78fps.

I don't fully buy that claim, but judging from Reddit it may actually be true. I mean 32fps for a stock card can easily go to 45fps on water and with OCs.

This will really be interesting to follow. 

 

On a related guess, you can order all the GPUs by performance and usually conveniently end up with ordered pricing.

Meaning I fully expect NVidia to know how the relative performance is and pricing accordingly (minus Titans). They always did that, but it remains a guess if they also do it this time around, or not.

 

Based around this two kinda metric factors, I much rather believe in 2x performance, than I do in marginal improvements. But we can't know for sure, before we see it.

Sure, of course they're going to focus on that: but there was almost total silence about performance beyond this "holy grail" scenario, which is odd if an 100% performance improvement is really going to happen, but perfectly explicable if it isn't. So, this is good reason to suspect that an 100% performance improvement is unlikely, along with the other factors I mentioned. Certainly, we're along way from pure speculation that this is unlikely.

 

Personally, I suspect the cards will offer less than this, though more than a paltry 10-15% improvement, which is a figure I've heard bandied about also. 

 

 

[asus killer]

19 minutes ago, LordOTaco said:

Moral of the story don't update your nvidia drivers when the new GPUs release.  Life hacks

it only works if you don't play new games. For games released after you may run into problems 

[TacoSenpai]

Just now, asus killer said:

it only works if you don't play new games. For games released after you may run into problems 

Well then...

 

Spoiler

fuck my feelings.

 

[Tech Enthusiast]

4 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

we have the cuda core amounts and the clock speed so unless there has been an big ipc increase we have a good idea of how it will peerform

From the presentation, it looked like they totally changed how the GPU handles tasks. I mean,.. it has 5 cores in parallel.

I am not an engineer guy, more of a side interest, but can we really compare a new architecture that does all things differently, to the old stuff?

 

I seem to remember a discussion that we can't even compare AMD TFLOPS to NVidia TFLOPS due to differences in architecture.

 

Are we, for example, sure the RT cores are idle and don't do some work even in non-RT situations?

Are the Tensor cores idle as well?

 

I would guess all those fancy new things would be used for something and not just sit there, collecting dust.

Could be wrong here, as I said: Not an engineer myself. Just unsure if I would buy it if "random other non-engineer" claims that more than half the GPU is idle all the time, and just compare the remaining stuff on the die. That sounds like a terrible design. Not that I would know if NVidia uses terrible design hehe.

[cj09beira]

1 minute ago, Rattenmann said:

From the presentation, it looked like they totally changed how the GPU handles tasks. I mean,.. it has 5 cores in parallel.

I am not an engineer guy, more of a side interest, but can we really compare a new architecture that does all things differently, to the old stuff?

 

I seem to remember a discussion that we can't even compare AMD TFLOPS to NVidia TFLOPS due to differences in architecture.

 

Are we, for example, sure the RT cores are idle and don't do some work even in non-RT situations?

Are the Tensor cores idle as well?

 

I would guess all those fancy new things would be used for something and not just sit there, collecting dust.

Could be wrong here, as I said: Not an engineer myself. Just unsure if I would buy it if "random other non-engineer" claims that more than half the GPU is idle all the time, and just compare the remaining stuff on the die. That sounds like a terrible design. Not that I would know if NVidia uses terrible design hehe.

they will unless nvidia plans on sacrificing quality to improve performance  a bit

[Blademaster91]

2 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

Honestly the size of the dies are pretty inline with the prices. 

A lot of people were really upset over the "Nvidia tax" with Pascal, the current prices on the 20 series is just driving quite a few gamers out of being able to upgrade to the next 80 or 80Ti series, plain greed that the 2070 is what the 2080 should be priced at. The prices are up because AMD doesn't have anything to compete, if the 2080Ti were priced at $799 Nvidia would still likely be making profits even with the larger die, inflated DRAM prices, and the custom Founders Edition cooler.

[Blademaster91]

3 hours ago, JoeyDM said:

...If the cost of the hobby would break your bank, it's not a hobby you can currently afford. I'm not saying you can't make the purchases, obviously nobody can give or take away that right, I'm saying it's a braindead financial decision if you're that broke.

 

This is common sense. If you can't afford a hobby, you shouldn't dump money into the hobby.

Yet that kind of bullshit elitism while the hardcore fans rush to pre-order these because "it's 10X FASTER LOOK GUYS RAYTRACING" without even seeing real world testing is what keeps giving Nvidia the excuse to raise prices with every new card. It isn't about "breaking the bank" over getting a shiny new GPU, the extra $300-400 RTX tax Nvidia wants breaks a budget that about everyone has to put towards the rest of their build.