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

[zinfamous]

I have seen DLSS screens from a number of reviews now. Slight edge to TAA, but it is very sensitve to precise shot alignment and motion. Here is one that has three shots: TAA/DLSS/OFF:
https://pclab.pl/art78828-21.html

Both TAA and DLSS soften textures. Look at the girls jacket/jeans with AA off vs either AA method.

While actually playing the game, I doubt much difference would be spotted between DLSS/TAA. They both soften things and reduce Aliasing by a similar amount.

So, more softening was the answer? reminds me of going unsharp mask on speed in the old Photoshop(s). Remember that?

Yeah, that was never the right way to go.

 

[realibrad]

yes, I agreed as well (first!)

DLSS seems to deal (sorta) with one problem, at the expense of creating more by removing generational gains in fidelity.

The more you think about it, this release is just nothing but swallowing compromises in order to accept some unproven "new hotness."

--Oh look at the 30% gains at 4k! which, really, is great....but at what price?

--Yeah, but we added these gigarays that bring giga to your rays and according to our scientists, are powered by dliethium crystals (but seriously, don't ask them). Oh, you want the new effects? They are great! You will love them! You will especially love them at SHOCKING! 2010 resolutions @60fps minimums! 1080p never looked so great!

--Oh hey, that AA was never perfect and always very resource intensive. So here's this new one called DLSS, which is, like, 20% closer to perfect (seriously, don't look too closely at the lines, boss!) and with LESS performance hit (seriously--there are some numbers somewhere!)! How much, like, almost less that what was previously basically none! And it's great! Almost less jaggies and none of those bothersome sweet textures that you were getting used to over the last 10 years. KEEN!

I mean, it's exactly like an AMD release, and all of things that AMD is constantly piled on about, but at shockingly intolerable prices. Just bring the prices back to reasonable and this would be a boring, if not good (ti only) release. Considering that the new hotness really seems to be kinda bad in the worst case, a bit of a dud in the best, it would at least give some sort of value to 2080 and the as-yet-unknown 2070 if the prices had remained equal or, at least, rational.

...I'm starting to wonder if the 2070 is going to come out significantly below the 2070ti in overall performance, and maybe match 2070 AIB cards.

I worry that the avg consumer is going to just see the improved performance and not understand what they are giving up.

 

[PeterScott]

So, more softening was the answer? reminds me of going unsharp mask on speed in the old Photoshop(s). Remember that?

Yeah, that was never the right way to go.

Not what I am saying. Just that TAA/DLSS have similar detrimental effect on image sharpness. I doubt anyone could tell the difference in actual play. TAA and FXAA (even worse) seem to the predominant AA methods today. So a DLSS option of similar quality, but with a big performance boost is a good addition.

I really want to see the DLSS 2X, which should be the high quality AA method. But the performance cost is entirely unknown.

 

[Kenmitch]

NVIDIA GeForce Game Ready 411.63 WHQL Drivers For GeForce RTX 2080 Ti and RTX 2080 Launched

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-game-ready-411-63-whql-drivers-geforce-rtx-20/

Nobodies going to look in this thread for the drivers. You should make a new thread in the nvidia sub-forum. I don't think you have one in there yet.

 

[dogen1]

What is "Turing Advanced Shading"? Does that refer to mesh shaders, content/motion adaptive shading or texture space shading? All three?

 

[LTC8K6]

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

Specifications aren't really marketing though, are they?

I suppose they could be.

At least they told us what CPU was in use.

 

[tviceman]

I haven't bothered to read the opinions post launch, but mine is this:

Power hungry (not in a good way) and prohibitively priced. I thought Nvidia moved past Fermi. DLSS looks better than TAA, but definitely not worth the die space tensor cores are taking up. I won't be buying from Nvidia this generation unless prices are cut in half by the start of summer next year (which is, of course, not going to happen).

 

[tviceman]

...I'm starting to wonder if the 2070 is going to come out significantly below the 2070ti in overall performance, and maybe match 2070 AIB cards.

The 2070 will be closer in performance to the 2080 than the 1070 was to the 1080. The 2070 will be about 10% faster than the 1080.

 

[24601]

Looks like Nvidia hit a hard TDP and Memory Bandwidth (and CPU bottleneck) wall.

TDP wall can be bypassed, but end consumers cannot do much about the memory bandwidth wall that Nvidia put on themselves by forcing XX104 die to live with 256 bit bus so that it fit in laptops.

CPU bottlenecks everywhere, Icelake plz save us.

(Also apparently turing is hard-capped at 1.06-1.09v again like pascal)

Just FYI, most custom PC building is getting a 25% tariff in a few weeks, so finish all your build purchases soon.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I worry that the avg consumer is going to just see the improved performance and not understand what they are giving up.

You're probably not far off. This is a feature I'm not ever going to use when the hit to visuals is that much.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Not what I am saying. Just that TAA/DLSS have similar detrimental effect on image sharpness. I doubt anyone could tell the difference in actual play. TAA and FXAA (even worse) seem to the predominant AA methods today. So a DLSS option of similar quality, but with a big performance boost is a good addition.

I really want to see the DLSS 2X, which should be the high quality AA method. But the performance cost is entirely unknown.

Rumors are that DLSS 2x is a big performance penalty compared to other methods. Now if the visual quality matched the performance hit, it could be acceptable in some titles.

 

[24601]

You're probably not far off. This is a feature I'm not ever going to use when the hit to visuals is that much.

You should say that about all the garbage post AA as well.

At least with DLSS you get garbage post AA results with faster performance.

DLSS seems to be higher quality than SMAA + warpsharp (the best post AA currently IMO) at higher performance than AA off at target resolution.

Also lol at all the hypocrites here that all of a sudden hate post AA when i personally have argued with you all in the past that post AA is garbage and you yelled at me for having that factual outlook.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Opening the images for each one of the 3 in that link, woof at TAA and DLSS. Those two are both horrendous to me.

TAA - the trees/rocks in the background are smeared so bad, it looks the worst to me.
DLSS - textures on Cid are definitely smeared, but compared to the TAA the background looks a bit crispier.

I'd personally use neither of these and let the edges cut my eyes.

Actually, looking again - is there some DoF screwing things up? The no-AA screen shot also has rather muddy background, but then looking at Cid's bag on her belt, the DLSS doesn't smear as much as TAA.

Glancing over the 3 images, I can't tell which of the 3 is better to be honest. Each one has weird muddy textures at different spots, but just using those 3 images, TAA is by far the worst to me.

That's because of the timing of the shot. In the benchmark the background blurs via motion blur at certain moments. Those two shots were taken with motion blur visible.

 

[PeterScott]

Rumors are that DLSS 2x is a big performance penalty compared to other methods. Now if the visual quality matched the performance hit, it could be acceptable in some titles.

More like speculation than even a rumor. DLSS 2X wasn't even rumored to exist until NVidia revealed it.

But there is obviously a performance hit. NVidia itself stated that it runs a bigger DL Network, and they have been very quiet about the performance implications, which tend to indicate they will be significant. Even regular DLSS might have a performance hit, if it weren't being buried in the performance boost from running at a lower resolution.

 

[cmdrdredd]

You should say that about all the garbage post AA as well.

At least with DLSS you get garbage post AA results with faster performance.

DLSS seems to be higher quality than SMAA + warpsharp (the best post AA currently IMO) at higher performance than AA off at target resolution.

Also lol at all the hypocrites here that all of a sudden hate post AA when i personally have argued with you all in the past that post AA is garbage and you yelled at me for having that factual outlook.

I don't use AA at 4k though. I want texture sharpness not blur lol. Seriously though it's probably not terrible in motion but standing still I can notice. I remember applying 3rd party FXAA to Skyrim with sharpening filters that seemed to alleviate some of the texture blur, at least to a more or less acceptable level. It seems though that as I moved up in resolution from 1080p to 1440p and now 4k I can see the differences in texture sharpness more readily than before and I've become somewhat jaded about it. Personally I'll take a bit of aliasing if it retains the sharp visuals.

 

[24601]

I don't use AA at 4k though. I want texture sharpness not blur lol. Seriously though it's probably not terrible in motion but standing still I can notice. I remember applying 3rd party FXAA to Skyrim with sharpening filters that seemed to alleviate some of the texture blur, at least to a more or less acceptable level. It seems though that as I moved up in resolution from 1080p to 1440p and now 4k I can see the differences in texture sharpness more readily than before and I've become somewhat jaded about it. Personally I'll take a bit of aliasing if it retains the sharp visuals.

Currently the only post AA i can tolerate is SMAA + warpsharp. Anything less and it's objectively worse than post AA off IMO.

Going by the samples shown, DLSS will be better than SMAA + warpsharp while also giving a FPS boost by technically being an upscale from lower res.

That the people here that throw praises at garbage post AA left and right for the last years to be saying that they hate DLSS (because it's Nvidia) is just chuckle worthy.

 

[Muhammed]

I don't use AA at 4k though. I want texture sharpness not blur lol.

Who said DLSS blurs anything? just watch the video! All those sharp rocks and ground details are not good enough for you?!

 

[Muhammed]

That the people here that throw praises at garbage post AA left and right for the last years to be saying that they hate DLSS (because it's Nvidia) is just chuckle worthy.

DLSS is not only providing these big improvements to performance, but it's delivering more detail and fewer artefacts than the game's standard TAA.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-9-19-geforce-rtx-2080-2080-ti-review?page=2

Member/Forum callouts are not allowed
nathanddrews
AnandTech Moderator

 

[cmdrdredd]

Who said DLSS blurs anything? just watch the video! All those sharp rocks and ground details are not good enough for you?!

You're comparing to TAA which is known to blur textures. I said I don't use AA. Can you read?

Check the link and see the comparisons to when AA is off.,..notice how suddenly texture detail returns on the girl's clothing when you turn post AA off. My complaint is that BOTH methods reduce texture detail.

https://pclab.pl/art78828-21.html

 

[Malogeek]

Who said DLSS blurs anything? just watch the video! All those sharp rocks and ground details are not good enough for you?!

Both TAA and DLSS produce a blur over no AA. If you can't see that then ok but it doesn't mean it's not there.

 

[Muhammed]

Both TAA and DLSS produce a blur over no AA. If you can't see that then ok but it doesn't mean it's not there.

I acknowledge that. I just mean DLSS is better than TAA in that regard.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Both TAA and DLSS produce a blur over no AA. If you can't see that then ok but it doesn't mean it's not there.

I long for the day that there's an AA method that works in all games or at least most, doesn't have a huge performance hit, and does not blur any of the picture detail at all. We're just not there yet.

 

[24601]

Both TAA and DLSS produce a blur over no AA. If you can't see that then ok but it doesn't mean it's not there.

You must not have looked at the comparison shots.

DLSS is sharper than the AA off in Final Fantasy XV Windows Edition demo.

This is due to DLSS basically deconstructing the effective blur filter the game has due to being a heavily deferred rendered pipeline.

I do agree that DLSS textures look slightly lower resolution (not blurry), as they literally are lower resolution.

 

[cmdrdredd]

You must not have looked at the comparison shots.

DLSS is sharper than the AA off in Final Fantasy XV Windows Edition demo.

This is due to DLSS basically deconstructing the effective blur filter the game has due to being a heavily deferred rendered pipeline.

I do agree that DLSS textures look slightly lower resolution (not blurry), as they literally are lower resolution.

No it isn't. The key is looking at the girl in the foreground and her clothing. You lose all the detail with either AA method. The blurring in the background is the timing of the screenshot. The game has motion blur applied to the background.

 

[24601]

No it isn't. The key is looking at the girl in the foreground and her clothing. You lose all the detail with either AA method. The blurring in the background is the timing of the screenshot. The game has motion applied to the background.

That's a result of literally being lower resolution, not "blur" or "blurriness"

Basically i'm making the distinction between blur sort of like the distinction between 0 AF (anistropic filtering), bilinear AF, Trilinear AF and x4-16 AF.
Higher AF technically is "softer" than lower AF, but it isn't doing it by reducing original entropy, it's doing it by more accurately mapping the texture.

In this example, the DLSS is not "blurring" the picture as it is literally sampling from a lower resolution. It is not noticeably losing "entropy" (information) like a typical post AA does (aka blur)