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

[krumme]

The power limit on these cards take them down.

Hit the max all the time while gaming so meager boost clock unlike pascal.
No zero fan at idle.

Man...was that the nv b team at work? A team probably working at pro business line. The stupid private consumers get the leftovers.

I was looking forward to excellent new cards and some uber gritty new bf 5. What i get after waiting 2 years is a woman with a prostatic in the bf5 trailer and just more expensive gfx cards.

Not a good day for gamers. This is depressing and a bit confusing.

 

[prtskg]

We love you Ryan, but you need to learn to under promise and over deliver.

Not everyone is Lisa!!

 

[ub4ty]

I am looking forward to : https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=RTX-2080-Ti-Today
Linux stats once Nvidia finally gets around to posting the Linux driver.

Furthermore, I have no clue why CUDA 10 is not being made available other than them possibly holding off on doing so until Quadro cards hit the market so they can try to milk sales through them. It seems it wouldn't be in Ngreedia's best practices to show what Geforce cards can do for compute before The 2x more expensive Quadros are available.

Other than that, with no RTX games and all of the other features still being unusable, this is reminiscent of Vega.
This is what consumers get when they reward companies for bad behavior. They're literally using consumers as beta testers now for non fleshed out features.

 

[DaveSimmons]

ArsTechnica: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...-a-tale-of-two-very-expensive-graphics-cards/

For existing games, 2080 is roughly a stock 1080 ti but with power use spiking issues in VR. Also, in their chart the TDP has been raised from 215-225 up to 250 watts.

Ouch.

It's a good thing my 980 ti is still fine for 1080p,. I think I'm going to skip this generation too.

 

[krumme]

It seems to me something went seriously wrong with the power consumption here as the powerlimit kicks in all the time. Really look like 10nm designed cards ported to 12nm?

 

[ub4ty]

The power limit on these cards take them down.

Hit the max all the time while gaming so meager boost clock unlike pascal.
No zero fan at idle.

Man...was that the nv b team at work? A team probably working at pro business line. The stupid private consumers get the leftovers.

I was looking forward to excellent new cards and some uber gritty new bf 5. What i get after waiting 2 years is a woman with a prostatic in the bf5 trailer and just more expensive gfx cards.

Not a good day for gamers. This is depressing and a bit confusing.

It's a cycle coming to a close imo.
People always ask how a cycle ends and think its by way of a new comer.
Nope, it's typically the barrons and titans of a cycle that end up sinking their own ship in the end... Making way for something new.

I'm completely exited about bold new approaches to computing and architectures across the board in the coming years.
Fresh new blood. Bold new ideas. A grand age like we had in the 90s. What we have now are matured products and companies hitting the upper limits and regressions.

To keep things 'fresh' they come up w/ these half baked ideas and movements that have no purpose or soul.
Give it some time, it will soon be over and a fresh new wave present.

 

[dlerious]

How is everyone not just trashing this crap 2080 card? So I could have gotten 2080 performance a year and a half ago for $100 less with 3GB more VRAM on a 1080 Ti and this card isn't a steaming pile of failure?

Check out Hardware Canucks review if you're looking for something shill worthy.

 

[LTC8K6]

ArsTechnica: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/201...-a-tale-of-two-very-expensive-graphics-cards/

For existing games, 2080 is roughly a stock 1080 ti but with power use spiking issues in VR. Also, in their chart the TDP has been raised from 215-225 up to 250 watts.

Ouch.

It's a good thing my 980 ti is still fine for 1080p,. I think I'm going to skip this generation too.

I think ARS has made a power reporting error. The 2080 is still rated at 215-225W and the Ti at 250-260W

The 650W PS recommendation is with an i7 3.2Ghz processor which has to be a 65W I7-8700, I think.

If you have a beefier CPU, then you need more PS watts, I think.

 

[zinfamous]

I'm actually having a struggle with myself to keep my ftw3 2080ti order or cancel it. I can afford it but at the same time do I really need it for 1440p?

Only reconsideration would be if I had a 4k screen.

I guess the argument for keeping it would be:

--performance @1440p with Ray Tracing
--games now/future with meaningful Ray Tracing functions, on current generation (is the hardware for this, specifically, going to be better with 3xxx and 4xxx?)
--potential for gaining performance with the current 2xxx with better drivers.

At 1440p only, I'm not sure you would be getting much benefit above your 1080ti which, I imagine, is giving you ~120-140fps with minimums above 100fps?

I think the weirdness in the numbers right now across games for this generation, is due to early gen drivers which, understandably, are going to need some ironing out with the brand new toys. I think it's possible driver improvements will give 10-15% better performance within a year or 1.5years for these cards, simply because there are a lot of new functions here unlike the previous generation (which were mostly foundationaly mature by Pascal).

So yeah, if raytracing does make for really good pretties within a year, and the games are there, and you are looking at minimum 30% uptick with potential of 45% off of what you have now, then it was a good purchase if you simply don't care about the cost.

 

[swilli89]

Funny thing about this graph is the 1080, which was 30% faster than the 980 Ti, is the exact same distance above the 980 Ti as the 2080 is above the 1080 Ti

 

[ub4ty]

I guess the argument for keeping it would be:

--performance @1440p with Ray Tracing
--games now/future with meaningful Ray Tracing functions, on current generation (is the hardware for this, specifically, going to be better with 3xxx and 4xxx?)
--potential for gaining performance with the current 2xxx with better drivers.

At 1440p only, I'm not sure you would be getting much benefit above your 1080ti which, I imagine, is giving you ~120-140fps with minimums above 100fps?

I think the weirdness in the numbers right now across games for this generation, is due to early gen drivers which, understandably, are going to need some ironing out with the brand new toys. I think it's possible driver improvements will give 10-15% better performance within a year or 1.5years for these cards, simply because there are a lot of new functions here unlike the previous generation (which were mostly foundationaly mature by Pascal).

So yeah, if raytracing does make for really good pretties within a year, and the games are there, and you are looking at minimum 30% uptick with potential of 45% off of what you have now, then it was a good purchase if you simply don't care about the cost.

Or because everything seems like amateur hour you don't buy now.
You wait until games are actually available that you can use these features on.
You ensure you actually play those games.
You wait until the drivers actually allow the card to perform.
You then arrive at a time when there is competition and 7nm and can make an intelligent purchase without having missed out on a single thing. When I do a new build, it's not like I dont have hardware lying around from my prior.
If a component isn't set yet, then I just ride it out.

Future proofing is a joke in the context of tech which obsoletes things continually.
There's really nothing more to be said to people who keep looking for a narrow range of excuses to 'just buy it'.
I fail to see any reasoning in buying something you can't fully exploit out the box when you already have comparable performing hardware. Within a year, this card will be obsolete. Enjoy the prototype is the new mantra of consumerism?

 

[ub4ty]

Funny thing about this graph is the 1080, which was 30% faster than the 980 Ti, is the exact same distance above the 980 Ti as the 2080 is above the 1080 Ti

Whenever a company dares post such foolishness, there should be immediate repercussions and call outs. When there isn't, you literally get the turd that was just launched. When a company dares insult my intelligence with such a graph, I know they have zero respect for me as a consumer and think I'm an idiot who will buy their product no matter what. I respond in kind

 

[AtenRa]

Check out Hardware Canucks review if you're looking for something shill worthy.

www.hardwarecanucks.com
You may have noticed I didn’t lump the vanilla RTX 2080 Founders Edition into those last statements and that’s because it actually looks like a pretty decent buy. Certainly not award worthy but still a card to recommend in this price range. With most custom GTX 1080 Ti’s still going for about $700, the $100 (~15%) jump seems very close to in line with the performance uplift without even taking RTX technologies into account.

Ehm, another one added to black list.

 

[thilanliyan]

2080Ti is blazing fast and I was seriously thinking of getting one but I think one Vega is good enough for now (for 1440p). $~1800 with taxes here in Canada is a bit too much IMO.

 

[swilli89]

I think at times like this, where the performance is nowhere near where it should be for a given asking price, its important to look back and see how obvious this was.

The fact that Nvidia has never done a full product "launch" with zero performance data, now in hindsight, was a very clear indication that these same-node products were going to underwhelm.

What's unfortunate is that for about 80% of us, the majority of buyers that spend $200-400 per GPU every few years, we got screwed. See, for us its not about the top end pushing another 25% performance increase. For us, it's about our $300 getting way more performance a few years down the road than it did last time. The increase in $/performance.

So for normal guys such as myself, this generation is going to absolutely do zero in terms of pushing things forward. We play older games at reasonable settings and usually around three years down the line a new stack of cards pushes everything down and yesteryear's top performance is now affordable. Ray tracing is a feature no one wants right now. Why couldn't Nvidia just save themselves a lot of money and respin Pascal on 12nm, and cut prices? The guys that spent $400 two years ago on a 1070, what exactly do they buy now? I know we are waiting on the $600 2070 but that is a totally different price bracket.

 

[AtenRa]

I think ARS has made a power reporting error. The 2080 is still rated at 215-225W and the Ti at 250-260W

The 650W PS recommendation is with an i7 3.2Ghz processor which has to be a 65W I7-8700, I think.

If you have a beefier CPU, then you need more PS watts, I think.

Even with a 5GHz 8700K the system will not draw more than 400W from the wall, why would you need more than 650W PSU ??

 

[LTC8K6]

Even with a 5GHz 8700K the system will not draw more than 400W from the wall, why would you need more than 650W PSU ??

I don't write the recommendations that Nvidia publishes.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Check out Hardware Canucks review if you're looking for something shill worthy.

I figured it when they started talking about how wrong everyone complaining about the $1200 price would be when the review embargo lifted. That channel is garbage except for case reviews.

 

[zinfamous]

To be fair, Anandtech usually has the most informative, in depth reviews. Of course, they could just publish benchmarks and a conclusion and go back and go into what makes it tick later on. They have actually done that a few times,

Yeah I think they released previous generation reviews for Nvidia and AMD on the NDA release day, but with follow-up, in depth commentary later. But I also recall those cards being out to reviewers for a much longer time than these, so they were afforded more time. IIRC, AT is historically several days to a week later with their reviews, because there is always way more detail. ....well except for those moments when nothing was ever released.

 

[Batmeat]

As expected, the 2080 is a lateral move from the 1080 Ti in traditional performance.

Also likely why big green had a tight lid on performance leaks and never provide any solid benchmarks prior to the RTX release

 

[AtenRa]

I don't write the recommendations that Nvidia publishes.

Well after today's reviews you should learn not to go by what NV marketing says

 

[JDG1980]

It seems to me something went seriously wrong with the power consumption here as the powerlimit kicks in all the time. Really look like 10nm designed cards ported to 12nm?

TechPowerUp's review shows the GTX 2080 only marginally beating the previous-generation GTX 1080 in perf/watt. Kepler->Maxwell and Maxwell->Pascal were much bigger jumps.

I agree that this was probably meant to be on a smaller node and was back-ported due to unavailability, immaturity, and/or cost. I think Nvidia wanted the full TU104 to draw 185W or so like all the other '4'-series chips before it, but had to bump that to 225W because of the node regression. That said, I think Nvidia does deserve at least some credit for doing a successful backport instead of just delaying or cancelling like Intel did with 10nm products.

 

[MrTeal]

Ehm, another one added to black list.

Well, they're not really wrong. If you're just looking at a $700 1080 Ti vs an $800 2080, the latter is probably the better choice. They were also cautionary on buying the new cards based on the promise of new features.

We're just not used to seeing a GPU released at almost the same price point and with similar performance and price/perf as a previous generation card released 18 months earlier. GM can get away with releasing a 2019 that has virtually the same price and performance as a 2018 model and people will still buy them because they need a new car. GPUs don't really wear out in the same way though, and there's only so many cards you can sell when you offer consumers no incentive to upgrade in their price bracket. We'll see how it works for Nvidia.

 

[n0x1ous]

Well, they're not really wrong. If you're just looking at a $700 1080 Ti vs an $800 2080, the latter is probably the better choice. They were also cautionary on buying the new cards based on the promise of new features.

We're just not used to seeing a GPU released at almost the same price point and with similar performance and price/perf as a previous generation card released 18 months earlier. GM can get away with releasing a 2019 that has virtually the same price and performance as a 2018 model and people will still buy them because they need a new car. GPUs don't really wear out in the same way though, and there's only so many cards you can sell when you offer consumers no incentive to upgrade in their price bracket. We'll see how it works for Nvidia.

What's your Pascal SLI experience been like? I am going back to SLI after skipping it for the first time in a decade last cycle due to 4k 144hz needs

 

[PeterScott]

Interesting. Going through them, I prefer the TAA image the majority of the time. Nvidia's exaggerations aside, that's fine because Ars says they get 31%+ more performance from the DLSS result. This will still be a great option when you cannot do native res + TAA.

edit: I'd say of the 5 comparisons, 1 favoured DLSS, 2 favoured TAA, and 2 were a draw imo. Anytime you want more frames this will be a pretty good method.

Another example from the FF demo:
https://www.kitguru.net/components/...idia-rtx-2080-founders-edition-8gb-review/13/

DLSS is more AA, but softer. Look at the instrument panel.