"Leaked" 2080 benchmark

[Plutoburn]

"NVIDIA RTX 2080 Time Spy preliminary benchmark leaked – 37% faster than a GTX 1080 and 6% faster than a GTX 1080 Ti without using AI core (DLSS)"

 

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-3dmark-timespy-score-leaked-clocked-at-2ghz-and-beats-a-gtx-1080-ti-without-ai-cores/

 

I think this creates more questions than it answers.  Really muddies the water for consumers as to the values of the new gpu vs the old.

[ChernobilChuck]

Considering this is true(which it might not be, let's wait for benchmarks), it doesn't feel like a new generation to me, the price to performance is the same, it has ray tracing which seems to run awfully so quite pointless in this generation. 

[.Apex.]

the only selling points are DLSS and Ray Tracing, i'm gonna wait for good implementations (which should be soon) and see how well that does.

if the graphic improvements are revolutionary (which seems to be the case) and the performance impact is little, then ill buy the new cards, if not, then i rather buy a GTX 1080Ti and call it a day.

 

what's the point of having DLSS and Ray tracing if the performance is gonna be shit? that's the question i'm waiting to answer.

[Firewrath9]

yeah considering that the 1070 was as good as the 980 ti, the 2080 being as good as the 1080 ti doesn't seem like an improvement when the 2080 is more expensive. you can get a 1080 ti for under 700$.

[Chett_Manly]

The pricing is outrageous, its offering worse performance per dollar!

 

I can get a 1080Ti off NewEgg for $650 that is only 6% slower than the $800 founders edition 2080. 6% faster than a 1080Ti, and that is Overclocked, and it costs  ~20% more.

 

We actually had size-able drop in performance per dollar here. All in exchange for features which while cutting edge clearly are not ready for primetime if you cannot play above 1080 60 with them on. 

 

Part of me really wants to go in on a 2080Ti, so I can take full advantage of my new ultrawide monitor, get that full 120 fps at 3440x1440 on Ultra. Yet part of me says that Nvidia is price gouging, and F#$% That!

 

 

[dizmo]

Sooo basically if you're in the market, grab a 1080Ti. Got it.

[xg32]

the 1080 ti is only clocked around 1825...and alot of the wording etc. in the article sound like someone with a bias to push the new cards, let's wait for actual benchmarks on release.

[A_Sid]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true because the rtx 2080 (despite having a better newer architecture) has less Cuda Cores than the 1080Ti and produces less Teraflops . But if it is true then this 2080 in the benchmark overclocked, as the it says 2000 Mhz and not the founders stock 1800 Mhz, which actually means normal 2080s will be even less impressive. 

 

That said, benchmarks should not be the only things people look at with these new cards. The RTX series has two new types of Cores (Tensor and Ray Tracing) which bring added benefits. For example (and we have to wait to see how this performs in action) but potentially Tensor Cores can be used (on games that support this) to do the Anti-Aliasing which would decrease the load on the Cuda Cores and lead to higher frame rates. Now me personally, I  always Turn on AA, so the benchmarks a this will be a significant benefit that could improve performance 20% or more. Then we have Deep Learning Super Sampling that is also still untested but super promising in that it basically upsamples content not in post-processing (as 4k TVs do) but in actual processing using Neural Networks that are fed Hi-Rez images of the game by Nividea till they learn to upres properly. But I presume most people that buy a 2080 will want to play in normal 4k mode instead of DLSS but its still a cool feature for future proofing and for 144hz gaming (for those lucky enough to have a 4k 144Hz monitor). 

 

 

[Shrepto]

I don't think there is much purpose talking about speculation.  When the benchmarks come out they'll come out.  

[Plutoburn]

Pure speculation here but I wonder if this scenario is true, how people would react:

 

20xx gen card performs in terms of fps, marginally better than the 10xx gen (within 10%) but provide much better quality graphics (RT, DLAA, etc...)

 

I think the previous generations are easier to understand from a $ per frame point of view.  But I think what nvidia are selling this time is that you might be getting just a little bit more frames, but you are getting better quality ones.  And this is what is frustrating for the consumers because it's not the same as before.

[Danoniero]

Well I'll be here waiting for 7nm cards unless my 1080 won't be able to run 2k with minimum 60fps anymore which I really doubt gonna happen this year looking a games. New metro might be the only challenge here but I definitely won't buy £700+ gpu for one game. Plus I would have to buy stronger psu which adds extra so I rather wait one year get some extra cash and than go for the Ti version of whatever Nvidia spits out next year