Heck at work I have a server with 2x epyc 64-cores and an A100 and ssd storage and that cost 20k. SO yeah I agree. That was however before the AI hype took off so that A100 was "cheap" compared to today's cards.Oh, yeah. Nobody is building $10,000 computer and THEN adding GPU cost on top of that. I don't even see how you can get to $10k with client hardware.
Yeah it's DOA to me. It's the price range I'm interested in but 12 gb is just not enough as I tend to keep my gear for prolonged times. And if I'm getting NV over AMD then also maybe to play around with AI / stablediffusion and the likes and 12 gb is also not ideal for that.Still think it's kinda cheap that NV only put 12GB vram on a 5070.
-Beautiful thing about NV marketing is conning folks into unloading their current gen hardware for fire sale prices before the next gen lands.
There are definitely guys out there selling their 4090's for $1000 thinking they got a killer deal cause "5070 is 4090 for $550".
only 25% moar TSE score? rough.
the 5090 is also used for AI and apps. It’s gives much more meaningful results there.Yeah but to this extent? Getting 2X at the end is like they blew all the RTX 5090 raw performance improvement just for the extra fake frames, no real FPS boost, lol.
That's ridiculously MEH if true, I can't see this being real.
That's more MEH than I would have ever expected (or hoped for as an AMD fan).
They blew their transistor budget on RTX and Tensor cores. Looks like they only care about raster to the extent of it generating a real frame for them that they can take as input for their fake frame generation engine.Yeah but to this extent? Getting 2X at the end is like they blew all the RTX 5090 raw performance improvement just for the extra fake frames, no real FPS boost, lol.
Far Cry 6 was without any DLSS, very small increasePlague Tale - the only game that doesn't cheat
It seems believable. A real shame if true, though. I still have hope that membw will do something in real games.only 25% moar TSE score? rough.
that's rough.That kinda matches their official performance results in Plague Tale - the only game that doesn't cheat via DLSS 4 (DLSS 3 only).
very rough given 50% more SM and a TON more membw.It seems believable. A real shame if true, though.
NV got away with the bumpgate and with 3.5 gigs. They're kinda invulnerable to marketing or product disasters.I was always convinced that AMD would never have gotten away with DLSS3 and the frame generation and it would be called cheating and fake marketing to this day. And now Nvidia puts it in most of their official benchmarks...
Don't feel bad. I'm here supporting Hulk and others expressing skepticism toward fake frames.I was always convinced that AMD would never have gotten away with DLSS3 and the frame generation and it would be called cheating and fake marketing to this day.
CyberPunk has not gone up much without fake frames, so looks like 50% ray tracing not really helping much even where it would have mattered, something clearly not right here, but if even Nvidia stays away from non DLSS perf info then it can't be goodThey blew their transistor budget on RTX and Tensor cores.
I would assume it's like the 4090 again. Typical gaming power use much lower than total board power.Maybe it uses only 300W if you turn off RT and DLSS4? That would be nice and if so, they should release a 5090 Authentic edition with none of the fakery.
not true at all, the GPU has massively more bandwidth, compute units went from 144 to 192 (full config). There absolutely is raw resources boost besides tensor cores etc.They blew their transistor budget on RTX and Tensor cores. Looks like they only care about raster to the extent of it generating a real frame for them that they can take as input for their fake frame generation engine.
The RT stuff changes are very very incremental, they've doubled tri-rate again (but it's rarely the limit) and saved on some mem ops but that's pretty much it.so looks like 50% ray tracing not really helping much
Adaptive shading? I believe also Nvidia, not sure.This kind of trickery has been tried before. I forget who it was but the idea then was to only render the top layer visible part of the game fully. No need to put textures and such on things that are obscured. Or maybe this is how it's done today?
You are remembering this: https://www.anandtech.com/show/735/3Or maybe this is how it's done today?
I was always convinced that AMD would never have gotten away with DLSS3 and the frame generation and it would be called cheating and fake marketing to this day (probably would be more popular to complain about than "muh poor volta"). And now Nvidia puts it in most of their official benchmarks...