Nvidia RTX Discussion

Cuddlesworth

L wrote: »

Pretty impressive he got people to send in their failed cards to be tested - I'm hoping he'll do up some numbers on the various types of failures he's seeing. Could be very interesting.

A lot of people don't like them as they see him delivery as boring. I like their testing methodology as pretty good. But more importantly, their ability to be self critical about their own results and self aware of their own bias mean they command a level of respect from me.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

thats the problem wih pc's...so many variations and permutations.


Its it disappointing yes....is it unusual or unique to the 20 series, no, its it unique to Nvidia...no...remember all the issues with Ryzens launch.

Gamers Nexus do excellent work but by god you have to concentrate on the information. Delivery lacks a narrative, beginning middle and end and can get a little too dense with figures. Finding a lot of the tech media at the moment are trying to move from one "scandell" to the next. Seems that is what draws views.

Anima

Any thoughts on moving from a 1060 6gb to a 2070? Seems to be twice as fast almost according to userbenchmark. Recently moved to 1440p from 1080p and can feel it struggling.

~600 euro feels like a lot for a mid-tier card though. Hopefully black friday throws up some deals.

K.O.Kiki

Anima wrote: »

Any thoughts on moving from a 1060 6gb to a 2070? Seems to be twice as fast almost according to userbenchmark. Recently moved to 1440p from 1080p and can feel it struggling.

~600 euro feels like a lot for a mid-tier card though. Hopefully black friday throws up some deals.

Get a Vega 56 - Overclockers have them for €412, or a B-grade model for €343.

TerrorFirmer

I'd agree the Vega 56 is great value at the moment and a hefty upgrade on your 1060 too. OCUK also seem to still have the free games promo on that €420 model as well so it's a super deal.

GTX1070's are also going really cheap now 2nd hand, could grab one for around €250 on Adverts.

L

Anima wrote: »

Any thoughts on moving from a 1060 6gb to a 2070? Seems to be twice as fast almost according to userbenchmark. Recently moved to 1440p from 1080p and can feel it struggling.

~600 euro feels like a lot for a mid-tier card though. Hopefully black friday throws up some deals.

I think unless you're madly interested in ray tracing, I'd give it a skip as I figure price/performance is what you're after.

There's a few on Amazon and Scan a lot closer to the €500 mark (€530) or so. It's much of a muchness though - you're right that it's a big ask either way for a mid range card.

If I was on a 1060 and had that budget to spend, I'd probably go looking for a secondhand card - either a 1080 Ti (as I'm seeing a few going for €520-550 at the moment), or a GTX 1080 (~€350). New, you could get a 1070 Ti for ~€430, or see about stretching up to a new 1080 Ti (which would be somewhere in the 630-700 range I'd say).

The Vega 56 is also a very strong option especially if you're willing to tinker with it. The Vega 64 bios can be used on it to allow it to get it very close to the Vega 64's performance.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

1080ti second hand...your only man, a big upgrade from the 1060 just make sure your power supply is suitable. Agree unless you into the RTX stuff a 2070 doesnt make a lot of sense, its unlikely to be much good at ray tracing anyway.

SterlingArcher

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

GTX1070's are also going really cheap now 2nd hand, could grab one for around €250 on Adverts.

Wouldn't say so. Seen more 980tis than 1070s, and they are looking for 300+ ha adverts bless em.

K.O.Kiki

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Wouldn't say so. Seen more 980tis than 1070s, and they are looking for 300+ ha adverts bless em.

980 Ti beats 1070 though.

TerrorFirmer

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Wouldn't say so. Seen more 980tis than 1070s, and they are looking for 300+ ha adverts bless em.

I've seen about a dozen 1070's sold for 250-270 recently. A lot of it was mining stock obviously.

And you're right, for some reason people seem to think 980Ti's are magically worth more.....but a quick look on Adverts and you'll find tons of them for sale at that price, and zero offers on them!

Same with most of the GTX970's and 980's. People expecting to get way over their worth.

Odd great bargain. Was a reliable seller in Galway the other day selling a decent model GTX970 for €110 - and a lad selling EVGA 1070's with plenty warranty for €250.

TerrorFirmer

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

980 Ti beats 1070 though.

Only if you're comparing an OC'd 980Ti vs a stock 1070 or something similar, at stock speeds the 1070 is around 10% faster and has the advantage of being newer/consuming less power.

Obviously, a 980Ti at the right price could still be a great investment, but the problem is people are refusing to sell them at reasonable prices, which makes them a total non-bargain at the moment, particularly given their age.

Given the 2nd hand prices of the 1070 right now, a 980Ti would have to be around €220 2nd hand to make it an appealing investment.

Metric Tensor

I know this is meant to be a Raytracing/RTX thread but it has become a bit of a graphics card mega thread so I hope you guys don't mind of I ask this here:

There is a 8GB Powercolor RX580 for 200 sterling on Amazon at the moment which appears to be 30/40 odd quid cheaper than all the other 580s - I haven't heard of Powercolor before. Any experiences with them of thoughts on why their 580 is cheaper than all the rest?

K.O.Kiki

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Only if you're comparing an OC'd 980Ti vs a stock 1070 or something similar, at stock speeds the 1070 is around 10% faster and has the advantage of being newer/consuming less power.

Obviously, a 980Ti at the right price could still be a great investment, but the problem is people are refusing to sell them at reasonable prices, which makes them a total non-bargain at the moment, particularly given their age.

Given the 2nd hand prices of the 1070 right now, a 980Ti would have to be around €220 2nd hand to make it an appealing investment.

A 980 Ti for less than a GTX 1060 6Gb?
You'd have to be joking if you think anyone would put it up for that :rolleyes:

BloodBath

Vega is a terrible idea. I know Steve Burke and maybe a few others have been mentioning they are viable but I don't agree at all. You are always better off spending the little extra on the Nvidia cards atm.

Those Vega cards need a hefty overclock to compete and then they draw massive amounts of power so you end up paying for it in the long run anyway. On top of that it just performs worse. What is the point.

A 1070ti/1080 is just better in every way.

K.O.Kiki

BloodBath wrote: »

Vega is a terrible idea. I know Steve Burke and maybe a few others have been mentioning they are viable but I don't agree at all. You are always better off spending the little extra on the Nvidia cards atm.

Those Vega cards need a hefty overclock to compete and then they draw massive amounts of power so you end up paying for it in the long run anyway. On top of that it just performs worse. What is the point.

A 1070ti/1080 is just better in every way.

Vega 56 full system load in gaming will be under 400W, and you can lower that with undervolting further (and you can undervolt AND overclock).

1070 Ti is a bit more and not appreciably faster, 1080 is a lot more, and the Vega 56 also comes with 3 games.
Right now, it's simply better value.

TerrorFirmer

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

A 980 Ti for less than a GTX 1060 6Gb?
You'd have to be joking if you think anyone would put it up for that :rolleyes:

People are selling GTX1070's on Adverts for 250-300 price range lately.

Why would someone pay that price for an older, more power hungry 980Ti?

Have a look for yourself on adverts. Loads of 980Ti's up there for €300+, and no-ones even making offers on the vast majority of them.

Even CEX, not known for their amazing prices, sell the 980Ti for €340 with a full two-year warranty.

They're not worth anymore than €250 at best anymore. It's why no-one is buying them 2nd hand.

BloodBath

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

Vega 56 full system load in gaming will be under 400W, and you can lower that with undervolting further (and you can undervolt AND overclock).

1070 Ti is a bit more and not appreciably faster, 1080 is a lot more, and the Vega 56 also comes with 3 games.
Right now, it's simply better value.

I've seen Vega cards draw well over 300-350w on their own if you want to overclock to compete with a 1070ti and the 1070ti still wins even without an overclock on it. I've had enough toasty AMD cards. Not interested until 7nm.

Overclock the 1070ti and it's gg. While there are a good few titles where the performance is close there are others where the Nvidia cards come out well in front. Blame the devs for not optimising properly for Vega but that's the way it is.

Free games does not make it a better card in my eyes. Also 980ti's are worth 250 tops. You can get second hand 1070's for 300 and 1070ti's for 350. You could even argue some of those are overpriced as they can be got new for just a little more. If the 20 series followed the normal line of progression they would be worth even less.

L

BloodBath wrote: »

I've seen Vega cards draw well over 300-350w on their own if you want to overclock to compete with a 1070ti and the 1070ti still wins even without an overclock on it.

Overclock the 1070ti and it's gg. While there are a good few titles where the performance is close there are others where the Nvidia cards come out well in front. Blame the devs for not optimising properly for Vega but that's the way it is.

You're missing a trick here - Vega has issues with thermal throttling due to dodgy voltage settings at stock. Undervolting actually both drastically decreases power consumption and allows for significantly better overclocks. It's roughly comparable to the 1080 at that point (it seems to be very finicky about the tools you use to undervolt though).

It wouldn't be my choice, but I wouldn't call it a garbage card either.

BloodBath

It's not comparable though. There are a lot of titles that are just not optimised for these cards regardless of your overclock.

I'm not saying it's garbage either. It's definitely compelling but I would never pick it over a 1070ti.

For €110 more than a Vega 56 you can get an RTX 2070.

If buying new the 2070 is the best value high end card imo. Otherwise buy a second hand 1070ti/1080/1080ti.

K.O.Kiki

BloodBath wrote: »

I've seen Vega cards draw well over 300-350w on their own [...]

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3020-amd-rx-vega-56-review-undervoltage-hbm-vs-core

Paired with i7-7700K overclocked, total system power consumption was between 300-333W at stock, and the undervolt dropped that further still.

BloodBath

That's impressive and all and amazing AMD engineers didn't make these optimisations themselves but at the same time why would I ever pay €400 for it with all that work when I could just buy an RTX 2070 that wipes the floor with it out of the box even without the RT and Tensor cores for only €120 more.

There is no compelling argument for buying these cards unless you really want all 3 of those game titles and you were going to buy them anyway.

K.O.Kiki

BloodBath wrote: »

That's impressive and all and amazing AMD engineers didn't make these optimisations themselves but at the same time why would I ever pay €400 for it with all that work when I could just buy an RTX 2070 that wipes the floor with it out of the box even without the RT and Tensor cores for only €120 more.

There is no compelling argument for buying these cards unless you really want all 3 of those game titles and you were going to buy them anyway.

It's 30% more money for 30% more performance. The question would be, does Vega give unuseable performance?
I'd argue no, it's pretty good.

Also, a used GTX 980 Ti would make just as much sense now I think on it :pac:

tuxy

I know not many people would do this but when I buy a card which is usually every 3 years I'd include the a roughly calculated cost of electricity for the lifetime of the card into my decision on what card to choose.

BloodBath

If you read what I said initially you would see I said to compete with a 1070ti it will use far more power. I was referring mainly to this article where Steve overclocks the bejesus out of Vega 56 and get's it quite close to a 2070 which is impressive but look at the power consumption.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3382-rtx-2070-versus-power-modded-vega-56


It's not a flat 30% either. There's a big variance depending on the titles. There are still titles that heavily favour Nvidia. There are virtually none that favour Vega. That is the main issue.

Second hand 980ti's are mainly overpriced and you still have only 6gb of memory. Modern games are using all of the gpu memory available these days. Most of my new game downloads have been well over 50GB in size. It's getting to the stage where all of these games need to be stored on an SSD because the loading times are atrocious even on a fast HDD. Luckily by this time next year 1TB ssd's will be under €100.

It also means there are generally well over 8gb of texture memory so memory swapping is occurring all the time which is why games are doing better with 16gb of ram and higher speed ram. I think we will even see an improvement going to 32gb in the near future unless the gpu's themselves massively increase their memory.

One thing I did overlook is if you have a freesync monitor the Vega is definitely more compelling.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

It think its unfair and confusing to compare an overclocked card to its stock competitor...its leads to weird conclusions. The kind of person that will undervolt and overclock their vega will overclock their nvidia card too.

Vega likes a sip of electricity alright, but I dont think many people care about that..if you by a vega sure your mums paying the leccy bill anyway...ha ha ha...thats a joke BTW before I get eaten alive...if AMD bring out a compelling innovative product tomorrow I will buy it.

TerrorFirmer

The only games I've seen where AMD has a strong advantage recently is Far Cry 5 and Wolfenstein 2.

In those games the Vega 64 sits in between the 1080 and 1080Ti.

BloodBath

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

The only games I've seen where AMD has a strong advantage recently is Far Cry 5 and Wolfenstein 2.

In those games the Vega 64 sits in between the 1080 and 1080Ti.

Nope it still falls behind the 1080. Barely. It's covered in that same article I linked. So best case scenario is it get's close but is still behind. Worst case it's quite a bit behind.

K.O.Kiki

BloodBath wrote: »

If you read what I said initially you would see I said to compete with a 1070ti it will use far more power. I was referring mainly to this article where Steve overclocks the bejesus out of Vega 56 and get's it quite close to a 2070 which is impressive but look at the power consumption.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3382-rtx-2070-versus-power-modded-vega-56

It's not a flat 30% either. There's a big variance depending on the titles. There are still titles that heavily favour Nvidia. There are virtually none that favour Vega. That is the main issue.

Second hand 980ti's are mainly overpriced and you still have only 6gb of memory. Modern games are using all of the gpu memory available these days. Most of my new game downloads have been well over 50GB in size. It's getting to the stage where all of these games need to be stored on an SSD because the loading times are atrocious even on a fast HDD. Luckily by this time next year 1TB ssd's will be under €100.

It also means there are generally well over 8gb of texture memory so memory swapping is occurring all the time which is why games are doing better with 16gb of ram and higher speed ram. I think we will even see an improvement going to 32gb in the near future unless the gpu's themselves massively increase their memory.

One thing I did overlook is if you have a freesync monitor the Vega is definitely more compelling.

How many games would even use more than 6Gb VRAM at playable settings?

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Titanfall 2 in insane texture detail (its a source engine of all things but heavily modified) uses 8gb and runs 100+ fps. 6gb min for insane texture detail.

BloodBath

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

How many games would even use more than 6Gb VRAM at playable settings?

Practically all new games use well over 6gb on the highest settings.

The engines are generally smart these days though and will dynamically reduce texture detail regardless of settings if it's going to bring you over budget.

The main reason console games look as good as they do is because they have plenty of GPU memory for high res textures. It also means devs are optimising around the 8gb mark but with additional memory hungry PC settings it can go well over.