Nvidia ,Rtx2080ti,2080,(2070 review is now live!) information thread. Reviews and prices

[Malogeek]

until they can be used for RT or more likely GI

They're not separate things when discussing RTX tech. GI can be achieved with raytracing. Whatever you're utilizing the RT cores for, the tensor cores are there to denoise the result.

 

[crisium]

Hmm, DLSS not looking all that hot so far eh?

It's a shame AMD software and dev relations isn't great. If they standardized console rendering techniques for PC games they could easily compete with this. Look at any PS4 Pro / Xbox 1 X footage of Red Redemption 2. 1920x2160 which is like ~1530p equivalent pixels. It looks damn good for being 1530p equivalent pretending to be 4k (naturally it has some artifacts). If DLSS, so far anyway, seems equivalent to 1800p performance hit then it can easily be competed with in this way. 1530p is much faster than 1800p.

 

[zinfamous]

https://www.techspot.com/amp/article/1712-nvidia-dlss/

I like this article, as for one thing, it comforts me in knowing that my new V64 Nitro really isn't rubbish, getting about ~55 FPS at 3440 x 1440 w/ TAA, compared to their 2560 x 1440 getting ~70fps on a 2080Ti, in FF XV.

I think they are right--this game is just rubbish from a performance perspective, especially TAA...which I actually turned off eventually because I preferred getting about 62-65 FPS and without all that blur, lol.

the V64 is LOUD though, trying to push all of that, and I *think* that I successfully undervolted a smidge...not sure, though.

(Oh I should mention: this is in real game play for me and not the benchmark. Guess my observations aren't all that comparable)

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, so far with not much to go on.

 

[Stuka87]

I like this article, as for one thing, it comforts me in knowing that my new V64 Nitro really isn't rubbish, getting about ~55 FPS at 3440 x 1440 w/ TAA, compared to their 2560 x 1440 getting ~70fps on a 2080Ti, in FF XV.

I think they are right--this game is just rubbish from a performance perspective, especially TAA...which I actually turned off eventually because I preferred getting about 62-65 FPS and without all that blur, lol.

the V64 is LOUD though, trying to push all of that, and I *think* that I successfully undervolted a smidge...not sure, though.

You can do the undervolting in Wattman for each individual stage. I think I have the top 3-4 stages adjusted down on my RX480. At the top I have it 100mV down. Made a HUGE difference in fan noise.

 

[zinfamous]

You can do the undervolting in Wattman for each individual stage. I think I have the top 3-4 stages adjusted down on my RX480. At the top I have it 100mV down. Made a HUGE difference in fan noise.

yeah, that's the thing....wattman won't let me adjust the first 5 stages (not counting state 0) and I don't know why. I've set 7 at 100mV down (1100) and stage 6 at 1050. I did set the allowable fan speed to highest setting, so I guess it is going as high as it will allow itself. I supposed I could try with leaving that at auto, but if it wants that air on my settings, then I'm not sure what difference it would make.

Anyway, that's something I need to take to the appropriate thread

 

[AtenRa]

[Hardware Unboxed] Forza Horizon 4 Benchmark

 

[sze5003]

Those of you that want the rtx Quadro it's here.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-quadro-rtx-6000-price-specs,37872.html

$6300 lol.

 

[alcoholbob]

Those of you that want the rtx Quadro it's here.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-quadro-rtx-6000-price-specs,37872.html

$6300 lol.

Seems kinda overpriced for what you get, especially since they gimped it with GDDR6, it only has 672GB/s memory bandwidth? If they went with HBM2 they easily could get around 1TB/s. The TDP also wouldn't need to be 295W.

 

[arandomguy]

More VRAM would be a design consideration for this target segment.

 

[alcoholbob]

More VRAM would be a design consideration for this target segment.

Well you can use 32GB HBM2 (like the Titan V CEO/GV100), and this SKU only has 24GB of DDR6. Now I'm sure the extra profit doesn't hurt as GDDR6 should be much cheaper than HBM2.

 

[arandomguy]

Well you can use 32GB HBM2 (like the Titan V CEO/GV100), and this SKU only has 24GB of DDR6. Now I'm sure the extra profit doesn't hurt as GDDR6 should be much cheaper than HBM2.

There is a 48 GB SKU that is not possible with HBM.

Profit margins on the memory type is unlikely to be a priority consideration for Quadro cards, they'd simply charge more if it were a HBM2 card if they wanted to maintain margins.

Just looking at a bandwidth comparison like that is an over simplified view of things.

 

[darkswordsman17]

There is a 48 GB SKU that is not possible with HBM.

Profit margins on the memory type is unlikely to be a priority consideration for Quadro cards, they'd simply charge more if it were a HBM2 card if they wanted to maintain margins.

Just looking at a bandwidth comparison like that is an over simplified view of things.

Would they not be able to do more than 4 stacks of HBM? There's some NEC chip that has 6 stacks (and 24/48GB configurations).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEC_SX-Aurora_TSUBASA

I'm not sure that HBM2 would save much power compared to GDDR6 to be honest. But the bandwidth would be higher. Complexity would go up though.

 

[darkswordsman17]

yeah, that's the thing....wattman won't let me adjust the first 5 stages (not counting state 0) and I don't know why. I've set 7 at 100mV down (1100) and stage 6 at 1050. I did set the allowable fan speed to highest setting, so I guess it is going as high as it will allow itself. I supposed I could try with leaving that at auto, but if it wants that air on my settings, then I'm not sure what difference it would make.

Anyway, that's something I need to take to the appropriate thread

This isn't the thread to go into detail (I think there are some about undervolting Vega on here), but have you checked out guides? There's different things you might have to play with, but if you follow some guides (maybe be a bit more conservative than theirs), and you should be able to lower voltage. I think you have to adjust the HBM/memory voltage in order to lower all the voltage states (as it sets the base voltage).

 

[mv2devnull]

http://www.cgchannel.com/2018/08/nvidia-unveils-quadro-rtx-5000-6000-and-8000-gpus/ writes:

The RTX 8000 is interesting: it has the same core specs as the RTX 6000, but at 48GB, twice the VRAM.

The Quadro RTX 5000 has an estimated street price of $2,300; the RTX 6000 has an ESP of $6,300; and the RTX 8000 an ESP of $10,000.

Okay, 24GB of additional "cheap" GDDR6 add "only" $3,700 to the price.

On the other hand RTX 5000 could be cheaper than P5000.

 

[LTC8K6]

Those of you that want the rtx Quadro it's here.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-quadro-rtx-6000-price-specs,37872.html

$6300 lol.

Doesn't look like anything changed from Anandtech's article a month and a half ago.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13217/nvidia-announces-turing-powered-quadro-rtx-family

 

[PrincessFrosty]

Still on the fence with the expensive 2080Ti, I'm currently running a 1080 and wondering about upgrade paths for supporting 4k, I'm not going to drop down from 4k for anything RT related, it's just not worth the trade off IMO.

I could sell the 1080 probably for about £300 and buy either a 1080Ti for £650, so a £350 upgrade.
Or i could sell the 1080 and buy a 2080Ti which is about £900 upgrade. I was also considering 1080 SLI, because the same card I have now brand new is £460. Looking at benchmarks for 1080 SLI and the scaling is far from 2x but it's still pretty competitive it seems to beat the 1080Ti comfortably, so is the only reason to avoid SLI the lack of support from some games? Last time I had SLI it was a similar deal but with 580's since most of the upgrade paths past the 580's were rubbish.

 

[LTC8K6]

1080ti or 2080 are about the same performance. Either would be a nice jump up from a 1080. With the 1080ti being cheaper, it seems like a good choice.

I would not consider SLI at this point.

 

[arandomguy]

Would they not be able to do more than 4 stacks of HBM? There's some NEC chip that has 6 stacks (and 24/48GB configurations).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEC_SX-Aurora_TSUBASA

I'm not sure that HBM2 would save much power compared to GDDR6 to be honest. But the bandwidth would be higher. Complexity would go up though.

Well in the same sense you could add more GDDR6 chips on a wider bus as well.

Maybe I should be more specific that 4 stack HBM vs. GDDR6 in terms of cost consideration for the Quadro market is very unlikely. The cost and therefore price difference is basically negligible if it did in fact provide real capability advantages. The 48 GB SKU for example has an insane premium (certainly well beyond the cost difference in terms of memory). But for people working with data sets that large a few thousand is trivial for this market basically, HBM cost could easily be passed on it it did provide value. At some point cost/complexity does come into play. A few tens of thousands difference for example would be a different matter especially if the benefit is marginal.

Also is the question in that does it in fact provide (and how much) more capability for the added cost/complexity? Nvidia's own HBM cards targeted for HPC tend to not even run it at full bandwidth. I think only one GV100 SKU has significantly more bandwidth then this. More bandwidth runs into diminishing returns at a certain point as well.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

1080ti or 2080 are about the same performance. Either would be a nice jump up from a 1080. With the 1080ti being cheaper, it seems like a good choice.

I would not consider SLI at this point.

Well I didn't bother considering the 2080, the 1080Ti is cheaper and I don't really care for RT stuff right now, and the 2080's aren't even out in the UK yet, most preorders are weeks away and most places are price gouging and will continue to do so until supply exceeds demand which will be months.

The main problem I have with the 1080Ti is that it's not much of an improvement over the 1080, I need a decent jump to get 4k playable ultra on the newer titles like KCD and SOTTR. SLI provides that extra, and I already have an SLI mobo with HB-Bridge and a 1kw PSU, so it's just the cost of a 2nd card.

 

[sze5003]

Well I didn't bother considering the 2080, the 1080Ti is cheaper and I don't really care for RT stuff right now, and the 2080's aren't even out in the UK yet, most preorders are weeks away and most places are price gouging and will continue to do so until supply exceeds demand which will be months.

The main problem I have with the 1080Ti is that it's not much of an improvement over the 1080, I need a decent jump to get 4k playable ultra on the newer titles like KCD and SOTTR. SLI provides that extra, and I already have an SLI mobo with HB-Bridge and a 1kw PSU, so it's just the cost of a 2nd card.

If ultra at 4k is a must for you then the 2080ti seems like the way to go. It's a true 4k card and but you could play at 4k with a 1080ti you just have to turn off some of the performance hogging tweaks like screen space shadows or reflections, motion blur, use less msaa if you use that in your games. After seeing how so many games are not truly optimised for sli, I never bothered with it.

If I had a 1080 I would probably consider a 2080ti. I had a 2080ti on order but I cancelled it after doing more research, seeing the benches, etc. My motivation to get one was that I'd upgrade to a 4k monitor but then I realized I don't want a 27 inch 4k since I already had a 1440p gsync 144hz panel that was the same size. I actually wanted more screen estate so I settled for 1440p ultrawide 120hz gsync. I got the monitor first and played the games I normally play. Seeing how I could still run ultra settings and still have high frame rates, I decided I'll sit this round out until the next Ti.

For example at 3440x1440 in shadow of tomb raider maxed out I'm getting 73-85 fps and it plays smoothly. Not using the games highest preset, I use custom and just maxed everything out that way but I turned off motion blur and screen space shadows as I didn't notice anything in terms of how it looked with those on, it just gave me low 70's fps.

But if you are set on sli, another 1080ti that you can get used may save you some cash.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well I didn't bother considering the 2080, the 1080Ti is cheaper and I don't really care for RT stuff right now, and the 2080's aren't even out in the UK yet, most preorders are weeks away and most places are price gouging and will continue to do so until supply exceeds demand which will be months.

The main problem I have with the 1080Ti is that it's not much of an improvement over the 1080, I need a decent jump to get 4k playable ultra on the newer titles like KCD and SOTTR. SLI provides that extra, and I already have an SLI mobo with HB-Bridge and a 1kw PSU, so it's just the cost of a 2nd card.

AFAIK, the 1080ti is a large jump over the 1080? 30-35% at 4K.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11180/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review/17

 

[PrincessFrosty]

If ultra at 4k is a must for you then the 2080ti seems like the way to go. It's a true 4k card and but you could play at 4k with a 1080ti you just have to turn off some of the performance hogging tweaks like screen space shadows or reflections, motion blur, use less msaa if you use that in your games. After seeing how so many games are not truly optimised for sli, I never bothered with it.

Well I've been running 4k on a 1080 for a while now and all games except the absolute latest AAA work well in 4k with a 1080, but the latest stuff like KCD and SOTTR specifically are first games I've taken a big hit on, with KCD I just had to drop to 1440p and upscale which isn't all that terrible, still looks very nice. With SOTTR 4k maxed with no AA and motion blur turned off as preference I'm getting something like 40-45 FPS which isn't quite playable. So i've just resorted to a very high preset instead of ultra.

I know a 2080Ti will nail 4k even in the most demanding games, but £900 after selling my 1080 is a lot of money, I can easily afford it, I dunno if I can justify it. The benchmarks I've seen for both those games show SLI 1080s being playable, they don't scale amazingly well but enough so that they're playable in 4k which is really the goal here.

I'm not really set on anything to be honest, just looking at alternatives for getting a lot of power that doesn't require spending a grand.

 

[alcoholbob]

AFAIK, the 1080ti is a large jump over the 1080? 30-35% at 4K.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11180/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-review/17

Closer to 40% if you are comparing AIB vs AIB (i.e. no thermal throttling)

 

[sze5003]

Well I've been running 4k on a 1080 for a while now and all games except the absolute latest AAA work well in 4k with a 1080, but the latest stuff like KCD and SOTTR specifically are first games I've taken a big hit on, with KCD I just had to drop to 1440p and upscale which isn't all that terrible, still looks very nice. With SOTTR 4k maxed with no AA and motion blur turned off as preference I'm getting something like 40-45 FPS which isn't quite playable. So i've just resorted to a very high preset instead of ultra.

I know a 2080Ti will nail 4k even in the most demanding games, but £900 after selling my 1080 is a lot of money, I can easily afford it, I dunno if I can justify it. The benchmarks I've seen for both those games show SLI 1080s being playable, they don't scale amazingly well but enough so that they're playable in 4k which is really the goal here.

I'm not really set on anything to be honest, just looking at alternatives for getting a lot of power that doesn't require spending a grand.

Yea I was in the same position. Affording it isn't a problem it was my internal struggle of feeling like a chump for paying that much for only a little bit more of a performance from my 1080ti. Rtx is cool and all but unusable at my resolution. If you want to play it safe a used 1080ti is the safest way if you absolutely must upgrade now without spending a grand or more.