Time to break out the old Fermi memes...Nearly 400w dumped in the case is big trouble. Might be the generation where reference card is smarter choice than 3rd party.
IF NV cooling is exhausting large percentage of the heat via backplate, and does so at reasonable noise levels i don't really care about power as long as performance lead is there.
What i am worried is 3rd party cards, that are "cool" by virtue of having 3 large fans and massive heatsinks, but dump 100% of heat in the case...
Agreed. It has to be 1.9x in some very specific situation like RT or DLSS. Outside of that I'd be happy with a 50% bump across the stack. We'll see...Yes, upping the performance per watt with 1.9x AND adding 100W might give us a good ride. Sounds too good to be true though.
I'm a bit saddened. "With DLSS" dosent tell us anything useful. Are they upscaling from 540p? of course they could show figures like this then. I feel they have found a loophole to circumvent the need to tell us in which resolution they are measuring things. Hope that Ian can poke a bit in this issue in an upcoming review.I believe that the 1.9 has been already mentioned previously in this thread, as 1.9 with RTX and DLSS.
I really feel sad for you and the others, months of negative publicity on Ampere, downplaying every aspect of it based on false rumors, only to see it all crumbling down in the last few hours, at least try to have some tehcnical dignity and wait for the final reveal before spewing nonsense.The 1.9x will most likely be with RT and DLSS, with a frame cap of 60fps. Under those conditions using less power is pretty easy.
Of course i meant overall image quality and not a single scene - because it goes both ways. For some pictures/scenes DLSS2.0 has advantages for other TAA. Most reviewers consider consider both on even level image quality wise. In the particular case, the review where the unfavorable example for DLSS2.0 was taken from has many more samples where DLSS2.0 edges out TAA - but of course these were not posted to make a point.You just posted about how there is no loss in quality. Somebody posts loss of quality, and you say people should ignore that?
I would think it would be reasonably fair to at least 'give' them raytracing? There really won't be that much point in these insanely big cards unless you're doing that.So you're claiming 1.9x power efficiency gain, with 100W TDP increase leading to 2.6x the perfomance (in scenarios with no DLSS nor Raytracing). Can i quote you on that?
Seeing that these performance target decisions were made years ago, I have to wonder why they would they change strategy so radically from the past several years, which have been very beneficial financially for them.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|S||Question GPU or integrated GPU for everyday use and mid gaming||Graphics Cards||4|
|L||Question Recommend me a low to mid level graphics card for "light" gaming (new or used)||Graphics Cards||56|
|F||Question Interesting thing about requirements for video games||Graphics Cards||6|
|Question Dawid tests the Ryzen 7600X versus the 200GE in an iGPU gaming comparison.||Graphics Cards||10|
|Question Why does the overall gaming GPU market treat AMD like they have AIDS?||Graphics Cards||426|
|Question GPU or integrated GPU for everyday use and mid gaming|
|Question Recommend me a low to mid level graphics card for "light" gaming (new or used)|
|Question Interesting thing about requirements for video games|
|Question Dawid tests the Ryzen 7600X versus the 200GE in an iGPU gaming comparison.|
|Question Why does the overall gaming GPU market treat AMD like they have AIDS?|