Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080/ RTX 2080 Ti Review: True Next-Gen Graphics Architecture? 

DLSS has literally become a game changer. I recently built a pc, and despite Nvidias bullshit with their overpriced 4000 series cards, it was hard for me not to choose a Nvidia card. AMD makes some excellent cards - no doubt - but FSR is just not there yet . Upscaling tech is going to be a big part of gaming for the foreseeable future and Nvidia is simply ahead of the game at the moment. It's great to see FSR 3 turning out to be a really solid competitor to Frame Generation.

The key part of that sentence is the word "evolved" though. DLSS is great NOW, but it wasn't then. The original 1.x version of DLSS was pretty awful and everybody now admits as much (including Digital Foundry). Worse than FSR is today, certainly. Yet this video is full of nothing but praise for it and shilling for its benefits, essentially presenting it as free performance and a reason to buy a Turing card over a 1080 Ti. It's more a sales pitch and regurgitating Nvidia marketing than an objective review.

MrShit hahahaha

it took aprox 3 seconds to see how ignorant you are.

@@woodsy555 What? Why? Seems like you were having a bad day, mate.

It took me 10 seconds to order 2080ti from Amazon.

The clock can be changed though, I doubt he changed it but still the possibility exists.

If you watch one of their production vids, you'll see they have teleprompters in the cameras, the lines have already been written, Richard just reads it off the cameras and waves his hands around like a pimp

That’s kind of my point...reading from a teleprompter for 25 minutes straight, never missing a beat, never flubbing a line, never stumbling over words...even professional news anchors and audiobook narrators can’t often pull that off. This was a tour de force of presentation stamina. If he had been speaking extemporaneously, it would be easier to sound natural and to cover your screw ups...reading from a script is hard to do without sounding boring, or without your mistakes being super obvious. I was impressed to see this coming from a guy reviewing a graphics card, lol. Maybe other guys like Hardware Unboxed do it all in one take, too, but they don’t usually have a clock sitting behind them to prove it, so I don’t know. Anyhow, I don’t think I could do it...sure saves on editing time, I guess.

I would rather watch human not automated robot. I hate teleprompters. I want to see proper body language, too see what person is really thinking.

TheDragonfly256 If I had to choose between a teleprompter and improper cutouts via editing for many 'professional reviews'; I'll take the teleprompter.

Nice anime lewd face avatar right there. Makes me ask myself "what if zelda was a girl?".

Princess Zorldo looks so good in RTX.

Is LP an abbreviation or accronym for Link Pussy?

@@totty2524 do you mean link? Or is there a joke I am missing?

What about Halo? He's a pretty cool guy.

Ironically anyone who can afford to do this would be beheaded if the French Revolution happened again.

The sickening thing is they could have had the same performance at half the price if they would have released GTX cards instead of forcing useless RTX features on everyone.

Bad optimisation, the same for Wildlands...that game is crap

Well consoles runs at 900p 25/30 fps with sttutering so.......

2160P(4K) remains a crappy choice for gaming resolution, 1440P continues to offer the best Resolution / Performance balance.

daverhodus AGREED. ME TOO. EVGA FTW3 $749 under water.. I will wait for 30xx

Yeah, mine too. I'm gonna hold on to my 1080ti for at least another year. A 30-40% gain for a 70% price jump is not my idea of a good deal.

Naaaah you should get the (judging by the price) successor the 2080, virtually no performance gain for only $800! lmao

daverhodus I also have mine overclocked 2025mhz with a custom water loop 360 mm radiator just for the card stays pegged at 2025 megahertz,1440p ROG SWIFT 27"....I AM GOOD for one more year...... it murders every game I throw it at 1440p. I will not pay to be an early adopter of a technology that hasn't taken off yet although I think that it will. I just would rather wait until Things become more affordable and that we could use these Technologies right now there are no games that support dlss or Ray tracing. FUKOUTTHEAR

Vermillion hahahahahaaa

PC gamers eat up everything these days. Just look at the top 10 list on steam. Speaks more than enough.

Because the competition sucks. AMD doesn't put up a fight and Intel doesn't release their GPUs until 2020 or something. +R W At least PC gamers don't need to pay for online like a bunch of morons.

or you know, most of them that want high performance are buying the 1080ti, which nvidia is actively trying to get rid of the stock of

Because if you're not at 4K, the serie 10XX can already max out everything out there. It's not the GTX 1180 and 1180-ti, it's a new segment with hybrid raytracing and rasterized rendering. If you buy those GPU you are an early adopter like buyers of first generation VR headset.

That's the price the market is prepared to pay. I would buy one if I didn't already have a 1080 and RTX was more mature.

OVER 9000!!!!

He's smacking dem rayz out of da wei.

The technology isn't ready yet to answer that question, come back in 10+ years or so.

Come back when you're a little...mmmm...richer!

God damn I love him

Yea he is an idiot saying that. Apple is abusing consumers just like Nvidia and making the tech more about fashion and brands than actual features and performance. Also it's 800 dollars for the 2080, but if you mean the 2070 that's 600 yes. Nvidia are such slime, they lie about the msrp saying it's 100 dollars less and 200 less for the 2080ti,when they sell the FE cards for more. FE cards are always going to be worse and temp testing show that as well. So when board partners make better coolers, and have higher clocks, why the fuck would they sell them FOR LESS, than what Nvidia does? You cannot find any of these cards for "msrp" all of them are at the real msrp with 100-200 dollars extra. And reviewers should stop eating Nvidia shit and say the truth about that stuff

It's true, they're too expensive for the majority of gamers (myself included), and frankly I don't find them at all 'reasonable', but unfortunately it's logical. I don't think people realize the tremendous investments in R&D that these companies have to make to design new products, not to talk about the fact that an important part of the cost of a graphics card is the manufacturing cost of the GPU itself. In previous generations, Nvidia could take advantage of significantly improved production nodes to shrink the newer chips and lower the cost, but now with Turing the opposite is true: the 12nm node is barely an advance over 16nm, and with Turing's vastly increased transistor count the RTX 2080 is about 16% bigger than the GTX 1080 Ti and 74% bigger than the GTX 1080. It's literally impossible to make bigger chips that sell for the same price as the previous generation without hurting your own profits, so in order to keep them untouched the price needs to go up accordingly. Again, looking back at my first 'high-end' 3D card bought 20 years ago for about 120€, I find the current prices almost surreal, because we use these things to play, but as an engineer/investor it makes all the sense in the world.

Yeah Richard, look at the phones going above $1000. Specifically, look at how I didn't buy one of those either.

No, people understand that same research process has been used in generations past and made Nvidia a billion dollar company, so they aren't just getting by. We as consumers are well aware of what's reasonable pricing in this industry. This is just greed due to lack of competition.

At the risk of sounding pedantic, no, you don't understand if you think that they're simply using 'the same research' over and over. For Turing that's particularly untrue: this generation has the most important architectural changes that we've seen in more than a decade. And the numbers don't lie: Nvidia spent approx. $120 million in R&D in the first quarter of 2006, and now that cost has gone up to $581 in the quarter ending in July of this year. In other words, at the current pace they're going to spend around 2,4 billion dollars this year alone in R&D, so of course they're going to incorporate those expenses into their prices. Add to that the massive increase in manufacturing cost (2080 is 74% bigger than 1080) and you get the picture. Of course it sucks and I'd love to get an RTX 2080 Ti for half the price, but that's not how this works.

a beacon of hope for vulkan :)

Largely thanks to Vulkan. It looks like the architectural improvements in Turing have closed the gap with AMD.

Doom 2016 was the same. 1080 Ti could almost lock at 165 FPS at ultra in 1440p. Wish every game ran like it did.

That volumetric smoke tho...

DOOM 2016 on gtx 1080ti vulkan api I was locked at 200fps... it's an incredible game fast and nice looking I would take wolf2 for graphics purposes I played in ps4pro so I could tell differences as well

I agree with everything, except the 1060 vs 480 part. People bought the 1060 over the 480 because when they were most relavent the 480 was double the price because of miners.

Hmm. I spent the last 10 years with a Radeon 5850 and then an R9 290. Everything was great until Nvidia had the leg up in the VR department, then I had to get a GTX 1070.

" People bought the 1060 over the 480 because when they were most relavent the 480 was double the price because of miners." That was not the case for a year. Even when 480 was cheaper it sold less.

AMD made a lot of money because its cards were popular with miners...AMD is focusing on next gen consoles GPU's that is why VEGA graphics card sucked but it still sold a lot cause of miners....SO saying"Gamers deserve these prices, as they voted for them." is irrelevant..

I did the exact same, haha. Except I'm still on the R9 290X for VR.

It's easier when you get ad revenue. And repeat pr talking points.

@Dik dic you are the definition of sheeple

LMAO look at that butthurted fanboy

Difference is nvidia has the undisputed best product on the market so has a reason to charge what they do unlike apple

Exactly Sean.

That's got nothing to do with performance. The 2080s are the most powerful gaming GPUs right now.

1200 is cheap, stop crying

This right here. Thats the thing. Unless Nvidia will be taking 2 years to launch another gen which would be weird since AMD will be launching new hardware next year and i guess, they will going to take the lead on traditional software at least. I thing that the RTX 2000 series are a bad decision on the long term.

I don't see any tears just common sense.

DogsBark Please don't lie. you never ordered one.

Nima V ha. Yes i did. Knowing the embargo date i knew my rights for canceling. This card is a horrible investment, and i didnt get to this point making bad investments no matter how small. This gen has a year at best.

@SKEKMAL which is why I didn't go "all in" last gen. 3000 series, I might be willing to shell out $800 now. Not with the 2000 series though.

Lol

If you mean those animated porn. Yea, maybe? I don't know. I would find out for you but I'm too busy watching porn.

"Hey mom! I'm getting over 100fps in my hentai with Ray-Tracing enabled!!"

idk, would be strange to see camera guy in...

Oh hell yeah it'll be amazing.

But how can you go through life without experiencing Ray Tracing?

Except such a thing as 500$ 1080ti doesnt exist, the cheaper ones are about 700$

Yep, my guess before the first released benchmarks. Thanks to this video its clear now.

And if manufacturer don't sell cards for raytracing, developpers will never add this tech to their game, and we're going nowhere. Now , thanks to those cards, it's opening the door to the biggest innovation in real-time rendering in years.

Too bad no ones getting a 1080 ti new for $500 anytime soon

Or gtx 1060 6gb but agreed!

but still, everyone can't afford that

@@dans6117 gtx1070 for just 359€ here ,amazing price.

DANIEL PLAYER43: Take this from a 1060 6GB user - the card is beginning to show its age. For 1080p it's pretty decent, but everyone is starting to moving over to 1440p and 4K, so my advice is to look at getting a 1070 or over. But it really depends on what games you are playing; if you only play indie games or moba's then the 1060 is going to do you fine. But for the people who want to get into PC gaming and want to play the latest and greatest games like Metro: Exodus, Cyberpunk 2077, and M&B II, you are gonna need something like a 1070 or up. I'm just waiting for the RTX 2070 to launch. The upgrade from my 1060 is going to be staggering.

Persy 3100 that’s around $400

i just got a laptop with a 1070MQ (about 6 months ago) and im definitely ok with it

Especially for 1080p its fine for years to come.

@@andysledge yep, 1080p 144hz so games that run easy can be smooth

As far as I understand, these new cards only upscale for anti aliasing DLSS. It doesn't affect actual game resolution, it's just another, smarter AA type.

@@awesome9174 It does actually drop the native resolution then upscale to your target.

maziarkd checkerboarding is NOT upscaling!

YES! it is. It's a smarter version of upscaling that eliminates MANY of it's disadvantages, but it's still UPSCALING.

+kraenk12 Checkerboarding is upscaling.

It's not the GTX 1180 and 1180-ti, it's a new segment with hybrid raytracing and rasterized rendering. If you buy those GPU you are an early adopter like buyers of first generation VR headset. You can already max out everything out there with the serie 10XX. 1060/../1080-ti are all wonderful cards and still will be for years.

*"10 years of making"*

Just wait for the 3080ti these cards are not next gen can't even run 1080p 60 with ray tracing.

@@Xenthorx and if you listen to that comment you are a sheep and against consumer rights. But hey I'm proud of you, keep fighting the good fight for corporations, they desperately need your help taking more money from you

@@wile123456 i mean... He's right tho.

dlss is not a gimmick...

SmashStomp Inc lies. The 2080 ti was doing 4k 58 FPS on the Starwars demo, and the 1080 ti was getting 8 FPS.

Right now 4K is barely achievable in modern titles at ultra settings though. It's pretty clear that a 2080ti is not going to deliver a consistent 4K @60fps in upcoming titles, even if you don't use RTX. So your choices are 4K @ 40-60 FPS, 1440P @60FPS or DLSS @60FPS. If DLSS offers 80%+ of native 4K it starts to look like a pretty good deal.

"Right now 4K is barely achievable in modern titles at ultra settings though." Ultra settings are by their nature, not optimized. They exist to provide some improvements in graphics quality at a later date. If ultra settings run at 4k 60 FPS then the developers could have pushed harder for improvements in graphical fidelity. A very high setting vs. ultra is that very high was optimized for a currently available GPU. Ultra is a setting to max something that has a high cost or provides little improvement relative to cost. DLSS does look like a good deal. 4K for the cost of 1440p with improved image quality over native 4k with TAA. 120hz gamers will greatly appreciate it.

@@abram730 What you say about ultra settings is true right now, but it hasn't always been true and there is no guarantee that it will remain that way in the future. In the late 2000's/early 2010's even mid range cards could achieve Ultra settings at 1080p/1440p @50-60 FPS which were the standard resolutions of the time. Games at the time we're playing catchup to graphics hardware that had been advancing for 10 years while the games themselves were still limited by consoles that hadn't changed in a decade. Additionally AMD was much more competitive at the time and offered genuine alternatives to Nvidia's high end hardware, which obviously helped to bring down prices. The reason Ultra settings are unachievable at 4K 60 fps right now is less to do with the settings themselves being designed to be very demanding and more to do with the state of the industry. There's no reason for gamers not to push for cards that can achieve 4K ultra @60FPS, but DLSS could be a useful stopgap.

It is the ray tracing making them so expensive, particuarly since it is new for computer games and soon consoles. Next Gen GPUs may be cheaper, when the much cheaper consoles will do 4K with ray tracing. Right now it is exclusive to PC and one company. When the competition adds it for cheaper, it will go down. On a side note, they are even saying they will try for 8k on consoles, but I dont know if that is possible on a console. If it is, it is doable on PC then. Id wait for 2020/2021s GPus then anyways.

and that's the progress of 2 years

With a die much more bigger than the precedessor = 0 actual progress.

The 2080 is really the 2070 and the 2080 Ti is really the 2080. Considering this, it becomes clear they are way overpriced. DO NOT BUY.

BowGunner yeah that's what i said when i first saw the specs too. they remarked all of them one model up to try and hide just how fucking overpriced this garbage is. the jump is the same as it would be in that case.

For a low low price of 1300€ you can get a card better than the 1080 ti. Sounds like a great deal.

😂 lol

4k is more relevant in this testing scenario- comparing raw GPU power with the CPU basically out of the question.

I still can't even game in 4k... *Cries*

@SmashStomp Inc DLSS will make up the resolution. The Stars Wars demo is running in 4K with DLSS on.

@SmashStomp Inc clearly those of us who bought it are...

I'm still in 900p

"We all know" speak for yourself

I hope amd and intel does what amd did to cpu market and to intel

I'm not against capitalism, Nvidia has an obligation to maximise it's return for shareholders, I just wish there was more competition in the current market. Where are you AMD and Intel? We really need you now ;-(

REA Electric, you're probably right about the stock clearing, but criticising capitalism is incorrect. This has nothing to do with capitalism (we don't have a capitalist market; thinking we do shows a lack of understanding of what capitalism is, or rather was, since the market hasn't operated in that way since the Fed was set up a century ago); what you're actually critiquing here is freedom of choice; we already know the alternative to freedom is disaster. Nobody forces anyone to buy these products, they are not life essential, and although one can argue there's no rational value to a 2080 Ti purchase, or indeed a 2080 in terms of rasterisation performance (and cost/frame) for current games, if someone has the money and can afford to buy one of these cards then that's up to them, it's *their* money, nobody has the right to tell them what to do with it. What you're actually saying is that somehow other people should be able to control how an individual spends their own money, which is nuts. Early adopters' tax? What a daft expression, it's up to each individual whether they want to buy a product; calling a free purchase choice a "tax" is just crazy. Would I buy one of these cards? Heck no, I'd be in the market for a used 1080 Ti instead (used 1070 for those on a lower tier upgrade path, or indeed Vega), and that's what I've been telling friends, but if someone can afford a 2080 Ti and they want the extra speed, that's entirely up to them. If this occurs on a broad enough scale that NVIDIA can sell products for a higher price and make more money, that's up to NVIDIA, especially when they're making so much cash selling the same tech to Enterprise anyway. So we need competition? Sure, but at the end of the day, marketing funk aside, in the recent past AMD has failed to deliver a better product (both in terms of hw and drivers). This time round they have a chance to get it right, so taking advantage of the opportunity is up to them; however, whatever they release, the success of their products still depends on the free choice of those who buy them, and that can hinge on so many things, including social & peer pressures, how the marketing is done, etc. Even if they achieve necessary performance levels, AMD really needs more stable drivers because that's been their persistent failing for a very long time, and they need to get launch drivers at a decent level in the first instance; Vega showed that releasing a card with subpar performance due to driver issues doesn't work, ie. today Vega is qute a different animal to what it was at launch, but by now it's too late. Someone commented elsewhere that *gamers* are largely responsible for the state of the market now, and they're entirely right, as even when AMD did release competitive products, gamers didn't buy them, for all sorts of reasons. For reference, Capitalism is property rights, free speech, don't lie and don't steal (keep your word), that's *it*, hence why it's been dead for a hundred years, because the state breaks these notions every day, especially via massive national debt which is stealing from the unborn, and because companies use deceptive practices in their marketing and distribution, like NVIDIA with its 3GB 1060, the changing RAM in the 1030 or somesuch, GPP, etc. (people, especially young people, have been told in their leftist education brainwashing to believe that lying like this is capitalism, when infact capitalism entails the exact opposite of that - a genuine free market cannot operate upon a bedrock of dishonesty, which is why China's economy has real issues despite having imported so many aspects of free enterprise rather than real capitalism). One can call the corporate exploitation of falsehood and deception something else if desired, call it globalism or corporatism, but it absolutely isn't capitalism. Infact, in large part today how western economies are run is more communist, with huge state intervention and control, but with the connections to corporate power and ties to collectivist politics, hence the new word globalist which is more accurate - a push for no borders, low wages, the death of national identity, ethnic dilution and the loss of personal liberty. I don't think NVIDIA is globalist, they're not in that kind of market, but they're certainly taking advantage of customer gullibility, using really dodgy marketing and hype to encourage people to buy based more on emotion than any rational argument or value proposition, but in the end, the decision to buy is down to the customer, it's their choice. If these cards sell and sell well, blame gamers, not NVIDIA. Btw, one small side point, but noteable: nobody has commented on why the 2080 Ti doesn't have more RAM than the 1080 Ti (I've read many comments from those doing top-end 4K modded gaming who say 11GB isn't quite enough anymore at times), and likewise why the 2080 has gone down a notch compared to the 1080 Ti (given it's the same speed). I believe the reason is to discourage pro users from using these cards; I've talked to various people about them, the opinion seems to be they have the desired performance but the RAM isn't high enough. Some will buy them anyway, those who can't afford Quadros, but I did think it was odd that for a card which has been hyped as finally offering decent 4K speed, nobody was asking why it still only has 11GB RAM when the top tier pro cards are already at 48GB (Quadro RTX 8000). I wonder if the 2080 Ti had 16GB whether that would have given it at least some differentiation over the 1080 Ti which would be more encouraging to potential buyers. The 2080 though is the really bitter pill to swallow, the same performance at more cost, but a drop in RAM, that really does make no sense, unless that is NVIDIA can show RAM usage is lower when using techniques like DLSS (but I don't recall that being mentioned). Ian.

I'm not against capitalism, Nvidia has an obligation to maximise it's return for shareholders, I just wish there was more competition in the current market.? Please AMD or Intel surprise us with the next generation of 7nm products. One can dream ;-)

REA Electric That’s what happens when you don’t have any competition

Anything temporal and dependent on velocity information (so DLSS) can't be implemented generically in a driver.

They should just open-source their training model and package formats so people can build their own models folding@home style

Look at the video here: 22:12 DLSS is clearly lacking any capability in resolving the real problems with sub-4K rendering. At native 4K you have a perfectly crisp and stable image where DLSS does NOTHING to reduce the shimmering and moire of its 1440p image. You're better off just buying a cheaper card and not using DLSS, or better yet Nvidia should release GTX cards that actually target 4K. No game should ever run below 4K ever again.

Realistically, people just can't afford that. I'll take a mid-end and moire patterns over the insanity of 1200€ and still not be hitting the target. For the next few years, upscaling IS gonna be the order of the day. After that, it's still gonna be a patwork solution to get HFR gameplay for people who are competitive, but sitting on a 4k native screen. I find that reviewers and people discussing this tech really fail to keep this in mind. So does the kind of comment you left. Some people just can't afford the full-fat elite tax. Some people can only do a new build every five years. DLSS can help both in attaining higher resolutions OR extending the life-span of a system that is starting to get past its prime. Scaling to native is better than having to let the monitor handle it and Nvidia have refused to replace their current up-scaling algorithm with something actually good. No matter how you cut it, DLSS at 4k will always be better than a plain upscale of 1440p to 4k. I wish we'd hear more reviewers discuss this side of the tech. But then, this discussion is moot as long as it's still a per-game implementation.

"I'll take a mid-end and moire patterns over the insanity of 1200€ " This insanity is entirely artificial. Nvidia has been raising the price per-frame over the last three generations. In fact the "value" of a 900 series card is still the same as what you get buying a 1000 or 2000 series card. Nvidia's profit margins are HUGE, but there is no competition to drive them to dip into any of that margin and offer consumers a better deal.

It's not the GTX 1180 and 1180-ti, it's a new segment with hybrid raytracing and rasterized rendering. If you buy those GPU you are an early adopter like buyers of first generation VR headset. Raytracing will never be supported by developpers if GPU manufacturer don't sell the appropriate hardware. The serie 10XX can already max out everything out there if you're not running at 4K, i don't know what people expected.

Let's hope it's more successful than VR, lol.

It should only take three years. The BF developers are already see ways to improve RT performance by 30% with simple changes.

...this isn't rushed. Raytracing is extremely intensive, far more than raster rendering. I wouldn't buy the card, but I'm surprised they can do raytracing above 30fps.

Also to add, there was a lot of talk about raytracing back in 2007, which was quickly found to be impossible without massive graphical downgrades or low FPS.

Nobody without a top end CPU is likely to be looking at a top end GPU.

You need to do some reading. 1. You don't need a 4K monitor or the latest CPU to see the benefits of these cards. Any reasonable gaming CPU from the last 3 years or so will be fine, and shockingly enough GPU's aren't resolution dependent. 1440P users will see substantially higher framerates as well, although 1080P users will probably be better off waiting for the 2070 simply because the 2080 plus cards will likely be overkill and deliver higher framerates than they need. 2. The cards don't need DirectX updates to use their increased performance at all. That doesn't even make sense. Why would microsoft need to update a graphics API for new graphics cards? One of the main reasons DirectX exists is so that they don't have to do that. 3. Temps. Yes everyone, don't forget that GPU's can get hot in use!

Actually, playing at a higher resolution tends to shift more of the load to/the bottleneck becomes the GPU vs. CPU. Unless you're using a truly ancient CPU, you shouldn't have any issues in the vast majority of games at 4K due to a less-than-stellar CPU.

Well 980ti is in some Games better.

GTX 980ti shows it real power when overclocked,980ti at 1450mhz~1070 at 2100mhz

The 2080Ti should be the 2080, the 2080 should be the 2070 and the 2070 should be the 2060

6

Yeah, their last few videos on RTX have been more effusively praising and less objective than I'd expect for DF. Very disappointing.

It's going to penetrate nothing more than our wallets for a while.

I'm talking about penetration beyond the veil of the flesh! A deep penetrating dive into the plasma pool!

You think your 4am was bad? At 4am, I woke up on the floor next to a puddle of my own vomit. That was fun.

for sure....would be cool if they did some monitor reviews or analysis once and while too, but still good stuff

Richard is shilling for Nvidia. Of course he's not getting paid, but most of of these people still hate 4K because they're stuck with the horrible mindset that games should look like movies.

Its also the only channel which doesnt do the OMG TOO EXPENSIVE THIS IS A BAD CARD throughout the entire video

It is a bad card (half the potential is non-functional, that absolutely makes this worse than Vega) and it is overpriced. If Nvidia would have had working gameplay at launch then everyone could at least say it does something, RTX just does NOTHING! It's POINTLESS! These cards will be out of date before Ray Tracing is of any practical value, buying this is the same as sending Nvidia cash in the mail just for LoLs.

Games looking like movies is the dream though. Photorealism, or at least the option to achieve it where appropriate is the holy grail of real time rendering. If games don't look like movies what should they look like? Worse than movies?

Console is holding games back in general since most games are made with console in mind and then ported to pc

Because the average consumer doesn't care about shit like 60fps they just want to play the game

@@dddddddddddddddadddddddddddddd so you dont mind playing a headache inducing 15-20 fps as long you can play the game

They do care they just don't know why it feels better to play. For years in the last gen console gamers would prefer COD many times because it just "felt smoother", I know it's because it's the only franchise that gen that targeted 60fps through and through on consoles, but to them, all they knew was it "felt smooth".

just here to say that the xbox one x is leagues faster than the average pc on the steam hardware survey. so is the ps4 pro. so no, it's not just consoles "holding gaming back". it's money. no one wants to invest in tech that only 3% of gamers could use. and by gaming you mean useless eye candy, because games are doing just fine. botw is one of the best games of all time and it would literally run absolutely fine in the pc i had 10 years ago if it was made for it.

Titan XP has 1080Ti performance. The Titan V at £3000 even gets crushed by the 2080Ti in the benchmarks

@@FounderX9 salty

That card is a beast! I have a 1080 but it struggles with 4k so these new cards are looking real good lol

He's an idiot because he wants 4K/60fps?? There's no card on the market that offers that kind of performance at that resolution. Stop being salty and let people buy what they want with their money.

@UCEButGFOZHx3Vov0_AcBpKw damn right. It's funny to watch.

Animate: Again, if he wants to be an "idiot" by purchasing the single most powerful GPU on the market that can actually do 4K/60fps, let him. And i'm a bit confused: what tf is up with your profile pic if you hate Nvidia so much? Lol.

DeadPhoenix86: Yeah, i'm expecting 5% faster than GTX 1080.

thinking: 200$ more for same performance and rtx which wont be in games for a few years lol

Daniel Nugent: If the 2070 costs 50% more than the 1080 for only 5% better performance, then it simply is not worth it. DLSS and Ray-Tracing be damned.

I wonder if RTX range will even reach lower than 80-series. As it stands now, it seems that even 2080 Ti is just about powerful enough to run games with ray tracing enabled at some kind of reasonable resolution and frame rate. So it would make sense to 70-series and lower to be sold as GTX cards without the RTX cores.

RTX 2070 has already been confirmed by Nvidia. It will have 2304 Cuda cores, and power 8 Giga Rays/sec. Same as RTX 2080. Not sure on how many tensor cores it will have though.

Cause rtx is a gimmick atm and most people are more into the overal performance

When you review a car all you should do is to check out fast it can go? Or maybe you should also check air con/additional features/quality of life stuff/ABS/traction control/handling etc. One of the reason why 2**** series is so overpriced is RTX so yeah, I think many people wonder about its impact on performance. Gimmick or not it is whan you are paying for. So why not call this video - Review in progress or Preview ?

Yeah but aint reviewers fault that there aren't any rtx games out blame nvidia cause bf v had like 2 weeks to make something with it before gamescom. And it will take years before games adept this concept so your pretty much buying a early prototype. Rather have high fps then better shadows since that is one of the first things that i lower to get more fps. But that is my opinion. And i get where your coming from, but i would say wait till next gen if your into rtx

Dude, that's not the point. I agree - RTX is nothing but a gimmick. I agree that it's not devs/reviewers fault etc. But THAT'S why I don't see the point of those reviews. Look at Linus Tech review of this card - They openly said that it's incomplete due to the lack of proper content. You can't review incomplete product and again - It's Nvidias fault but Digital Foundry should have pointed it out in the title or something. Instead they are using clickbait (and it's been going on since the infamous "Fortnite engine" video they posted a while ago)

Derguncik 26 +10-15 over itself without that new AI yeah. Why would that be a joke? Every card has features you can turn off.

its not 15fps, it's 30 percent

It is, a really bad joke. Buying 2080 you're paying more than for 1080ti for about the same performance and 3GB less memory. You could say - what about futureproofing? 2080 is able to use raytracing and DLSS! 1. We don't know if it's not better to have 3GB more memory than DLSS option, working only in some games. 2. Raytracing looks nice with youtube compression, so you can compare it to no-RT and see the difference. My guess is that it's better to run the game with higher resolution/higher graphics options. 3. In 2012 Intel had Sandy Bridge, which was so much better than AMD buldozer and previous generation. They didn't increase prices, so buying Intel CPU back then was a great choice. Here Nvidia, even if the hardware is innovative, futureproofing and overall the best, increased the price. In best case scenario it's just worth the money, but not better than previous generation. Some people say that it has been made to sell 1000 series...

4k is like twice as much fps

Am I blind? For the same price you get the about same performance in current games. Now founders editions are overclocked and should be compared to factory overclocked 1080ti. If you have 1080 ti, it's a big nono to buy a new card. If you build a new rig, then they are worth considering. If you're looking for upgrade, wait for 7nm cards.

I'm also willing to bet the performance increase won't be anywhere close to the stuff we're seeing in the pre-baked benchmarks. Smells awfully of something concocted to give them a benchmark advantage.

DLSS doesn't even do what it's supposed to do. Low Resolution Rendering just has too many fundamental problems that are impossible to fix in post. All games need to run 4K native at minimum, and hopefully we'll be getting 8K support in the near future. Checkerboarding actually does a much better job than DLSS at fixing aliasing. Proper Checkerboard 8K would look absolutely amazing and still only cost twice as much as native 4K. Given that DLSS+RT is consuming half the silicon space on the GPU, we could have easily had an 8K card instead of Ray Tracing.

waking00one I'd be inclined to believe that the performance benefits will be exactly as good as we're seeing. I'm more concerned about the quality and stability of the supersampling when used on actual games.

dlss runs faster than no AA, because it's an upscaler. it probably runs at fake 1440p just as fast as 1080p with no anti aliasing

Thanks, AMD.

No, blame nvidia, they're the ones setting the prices. Asinine argument.

Navi is coming. Sony had a bunch of R&D pushed off of Vega onto Navi because they wanted PS5 to be the focus of all the new tech in development. 2019 will be a turning point in the GPU industry and AMD is about to do to GPUs what they've done with CPUs.

@@budthecyborg4575 why then...your in for a disappointing surprised when you find out what it is they are working on.

It doesn't matter if AMD "supports" Ray Tracing as long as they actually do it in a balanced manner. Nvidia is holding gamers hostage by forcing you to pay an extra $500 for 350mm of useless RT cores just to get access to the 20% rasterization upgrade that people actually care about. All AMD has to do is give people the option for a truly fast card instead of acting like the whims of a crazy man in a leather jacket are the one sole source of all good things in gaming.

its still needed.....

In final Fantasy XV u will need it make sure about that

sadly you still have visibal temporal aliasing at 4K, and FXAA isn't cutting it. Also lots of game (Battlefield, battlefront, R6S,.. ) don't even allow you to disable TAA in the first place.

final Fantasy XV outdoors has a lot of jagged edges (specially on trees) if you don't use TAA

Animate, you did not play FFXV ?! The game looks shit if you turn off TAA

That's a very short-sighted way of looking at things. Never trust a single outlet. That's a dangerous precedent you're setting for yourself.

lol cmon man did i say i didnt watch any other reviews