• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Question 'Ampere'/Next-gen gaming uarch speculation thread

Page 211 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,954
2,755
136
NVidia ultimately can't stop crytpocurrency mining because there's no singular currency or algorithm for it. If anyone really wanted to they could make a currency where the the proof of work is a frame rendered for a PC game among the top ten most popular titles at a given moment. Nvidia couldn't cripple that without making their cards effectively pointless for gaming.

Maybe that sounds like an utterly stupid basis for a cryptocurrency, but I'm pretty sure it's just a way of describing a distributed Google Stadia service.

Mining has created an alternative use for a product that was previously used for running computer games. Right now that alternative use is being valued much more highly than being able to use a GPU to play games. It's no different than the price of milk skyrocketing if people were willing to pay three times as much for cheese. Solutions that try to rely on people not turning milk into cheese are just doomed to failure.
 
Mar 11, 2004
21,266
3,451
126
NVidia ultimately can't stop crytpocurrency mining because there's no singular currency or algorithm for it. If anyone really wanted to they could make a currency where the the proof of work is a frame rendered for a PC game among the top ten most popular titles at a given moment. Nvidia couldn't cripple that without making their cards effectively pointless for gaming.

Maybe that sounds like an utterly stupid basis for a cryptocurrency, but I'm pretty sure it's just a way of describing a distributed Google Stadia service.

Mining has created an alternative use for a product that was previously used for running computer games. Right now that alternative use is being valued much more highly than being able to use a GPU to play games. It's no different than the price of milk skyrocketing if people were willing to pay three times as much for cheese. Solutions that try to rely on people not turning milk into cheese are just doomed to failure.
You really don't understand cryptocurrency if you think that's the case.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,954
2,755
136
You really don't understand cryptocurrency if you think that's the case.
Proof of work only requires solving a problem that can be quickly verified without having to perform a similar amount of work to arrive at the solution. It doesn't need to be cryptographic in nature. The problem with something like BitCoin is that the work is useless outside of serving as busy work for the purpose of the currency itself. The work for Etherium is similarly pointless, only shifted so that it's memory bandwidth bound instead of compute bound so that it's harder to create an ASIC to mine it.

There's absolutely nothing from stopping someone from developing a currency where the work done has nothing to do with cryptographic hashes. Those are just convenient because they're the sort of problem that requires a lot of work to solve, but very little to verify.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea and ozzy702

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,144
1,006
136

Some good looking stuff, getting to physical based rendering step by step. And performance with 3090 + DLSS is quite good too. Hard to pass 2x performance gains, for minor quality losses.

Nvidia seems to be working real hard in pushing their technologies to UE4 and Unity engines, to achieve parity it seems AMD will not only have to come up with their implementation of DLSS but also work on getting their stuff in game engines. For UE4 at least, some of this tech is "plugin" based, as easy as it gets.
 

scineram

Member
Nov 1, 2020
153
115
76
Proof of work only requires solving a problem that can be quickly verified without having to perform a similar amount of work to arrive at the solution. It doesn't need to be cryptographic in nature. The problem with something like BitCoin is that the work is useless outside of serving as busy work for the purpose of the currency itself. The work for Etherium is similarly pointless, only shifted so that it's memory bandwidth bound instead of compute bound so that it's harder to create an ASIC to mine it.

There's absolutely nothing from stopping someone from developing a currency where the work done has nothing to do with cryptographic hashes. Those are just convenient because they're the sort of problem that requires a lot of work to solve, but very little to verify.
Someone needs to invent Primecoin.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
7,545
2,355
136
You really don't understand cryptocurrency if you think that's the case.
Describing why he doesn't understand cryptocurrency would help. Otherwise you are saying nothing other than "I'm better than you".

I mean, there's Proof of Space that uses empty storage. And Proof of Network or whatever it's called that uses routers and being connected to other routers. Proof of Frames/Proof of Performance that uses performance in an actual game is viable too.

Of course transitioning majority of mining to first two would help with GPU demand.

Actually in the short term EIP-1559 would help. But as long as lockdowns exist, shortages will not stop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozzy702
Mar 11, 2004
21,266
3,451
126
Describing why he doesn't understand cryptocurrency would help. Otherwise you are saying nothing other than "I'm better than you".

I mean, there's Proof of Space that uses empty storage. And Proof of Network or whatever it's called that uses routers and being connected to other routers. Proof of Frames/Proof of Performance that uses performance in an actual game is viable too.

Of course transitioning majority of mining to first two would help with GPU demand.

Actually in the short term EIP-1559 would help. But as long as lockdowns exist, shortages will not stop.
No matter what, it will involve cryptographic algorithms, which inherently is not graphics rendering type of processing (GPU compute capability is why GPUs are popular for crypto work). GPUs are being bought up because they're still pretty good at doing that type of processing.

But the entire point of any of it is that it involves blockchain work, so it will invariably require other processing. There is no value in any of this stuff without the crypto blockchains.

Plus, Nvidia isn't interested in stopping crypto mining, they're trying to push the people wanting the compute capability for it to pony up for more expensive Nvidia stuff, so that Nvidia gets that extra money instead of retailers and resellers.

Those things are essentially giving value for locking in hardware capability, but again is all tied to the crypto. Storage and network makes sense, as would crypto processing capability. Not sure that graphics rendering does.

So, sure someone could (and I'm sure someone will if they haven't already) tie it to some sort of graphics rendering (arguably many NFTs are already that), but that is largely meaningless. What its tied to essentially does not matter, it is the blockchain keys (tied to crypto) that the value of any and all of this stuff is actually derived. Linking it to graphics rendering will still require cryptographic algorithm work. Nvidia could still flag anything doing such.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,954
2,755
136
Cartographic algorithms aren't inherently required for proof of work, they're just simple to use, quick to verify, and often make it easy to adjust the difficulty of the problems being solved to show the proof of work. Some currencies, like Gridcoin are based around algorithms that can be used for scientific analysis where the work being done by the miners is useful because the problem it solves is potentially useful. The main issue is that it isn't always trivial or quick to verify solutions to some of these types of problems, whereas you can quickly tell if a particular input into a hash function produces the expected output.

Suppose you wanted to have a currency based around rendering frames as part of some Stadia-like service. There's an incentive to degrade the quality a little (or even a lot) in order to render more frames. Humans can subjectively tell if this has happened after a point, but verifying that the person doing the rendering isn't cheating the system would be a far more complex problem. The same goes for other things like a protein-folding problem. Some of those practically require a proof of stake to be used instead or in conjunction with that work because it's far easier to cheat than it is to catch someone at it, particularly if it's all decentralized.

Obviously anything involving transactions, etc. is still going to make use of cryptography, but it doesn't need to serve as the basis for determining who gets to mine a block. However, even with a blockchain there's a difference between using cryptographic algorithms to add to the blockchain and solving problems based on guessing the correct input to a cryptographic function to arrive at some output. One could just as easily create a blockchain that has no currency behind it at all. Of course that doesn't create a lot of incentive for anyone to participate in recording to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozzy702

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,546
2,025
136

Videocardz has details on the 3080 Ti - this QS (without the hash limiter) does 112 MH albeit with overclocked memory. Aparently the hash limiter was only added with the release version.
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
29,931
593
126

Videocardz has details on the 3080 Ti - this QS (without the hash limiter) does 112 MH albeit with overclocked memory. Aparently the hash limiter was only added with the release version.
The rumored prices are $1000-1100, and it just seems like too much for right now. The problem is that the 3090 just isn’t fast enough to warrant the > +100% premium. (Not that I need to tell anyone here that.) The 3080 Ti ought to be close to the 3090 in performance, so would ~10-15% performance increase be worth about a 60% increase in price? It still seems like the 3080 is the sweet spot for higher-end gaming.

Although, I’m liking the 3070 for my HTPC since it has a decently lower TDP.
 

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,104
775
136
The rumored prices are $1000-1100, and it just seems like too much for right now. The problem is that the 3090 just isn’t fast enough to warrant the > +100% premium. (Not that I need to tell anyone here that.) The 3080 Ti ought to be close to the 3090 in performance, so would ~10-15% performance increase be worth about a 60% increase in price? It still seems like the 3080 is the sweet spot for higher-end gaming.

Although, I’m liking the 3070 for my HTPC since it has a decently lower TDP.
If the actual price you paid was close to $1100, it wouldn't be terrible by any stretch. It's not not great compared to 3080 FE pricing for the performance uplift, but it's great compared to what 3080s are actually selling for.
 

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,335
412
136

Videocardz has details on the 3080 Ti - this QS (without the hash limiter) does 112 MH albeit with overclocked memory. Aparently the hash limiter was only added with the release version.
Do you know what the sad thing is?

GPU engineers have been straggling for decades, to make their designs smarter, more efficient, improve and enlarge caches, make the texturing units better, enhance the cores so they can do more and more, make the rops faster and do more per clock and here we are, having reached 2021, where for some people, the interesting part of a gpu, is how much MH a card can do.

This is beyond ridiculous and an insult to anything IT stands for.

I honestly don't know why the governments of the world are just standing there and don't ban the useless thing.

STOP BEING MONEY WHORES PEOPLE!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
8,896
3,591
136

Videocardz has details on the 3080 Ti - this QS (without the hash limiter) does 112 MH albeit with overclocked memory. Apparently the hash limiter was only added with the release version.
Even if the finally product come with a signed driver with hash limiting, how long before these older pre-release drivers are 'accidentally' released so that mining can continue on at full rate. The chain is already broken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,916
451
136
Even if the finally product come with a signed driver with hash limiting, how long before these older pre-release drivers are 'accidentally' released so that mining can continue on at full rate. The chain is already broken.
They don't need to be "accidentally" released, they are already out there. I would hope the release cards won't work with them however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

Krteq

Senior member
May 22, 2015
966
641
136
You can still simply modify .inf file with correct DevIDs etc., main binary/blob (and everything else) is the same as for other GA102 based cards
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
8,896
3,591
136
You can still simply modify .inf file with correct DevIDs etc., main binary/blob (and everything else) is the same as for other GA102 based cards
Supposedly there is a new hardware (on the ASIC ?) that locks down the hash rate (well, for ethereum).
 
Last edited:

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,954
2,755
136
Well if someone at Nvidia doesn't screw up and releases another driver that doesn't have limiter code in it we just might find out this time.

Considering that the 3090 is going for around $3k and this will have the same potential hash rate, it's market value to a miner is already $1.5k even with the limited hash rate, so it's already going to be botted and bought up by any miners who can get one at MSRP.

Presumably someone has already figured out how to crack it just from experimenting on a 3060. If they were successful, there's no reason for them to tip their hand to Nvidia or other miners right away because it puts them in a far better position to get the cards much cheaper than they otherwise might be able to.
 

Leeea

Senior member
Apr 3, 2020
874
1,033
96
Well if someone at Nvidia doesn't screw up and releases another driver that doesn't have limiter code in it we just might find out this time.

Considering that the 3090 is going for around $3k and this will have the same potential hash rate, it's market value to a miner is already $1.5k even with the limited hash rate, so it's already going to be botted and bought up by any miners who can get one at MSRP.

Presumably someone has already figured out how to crack it just from experimenting on a 3060. If they were successful, there's no reason for them to tip their hand to Nvidia or other miners right away because it puts them in a far better position to get the cards much cheaper than they otherwise might be able to.
Thing is, there is a great deal of $$$ motivation to "accidently" release the driver. If that is the cheapest solution, every employee at nvidia will be targeted.


But I feel you are right, odds are the someone already hacked the 3060, and kept it in house waiting for the next round. Competitive advantage and all that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mopetar

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,144
1,006
136

Some good info about sparse ops for Tensor cores. While focus is A100 and academia ML, there is an quite some detail about sparsity matrix generation overall.

As DLSS 2.0 is basically "generic" neural algorithm, that takes as inputs: low resolution image + motion vectors + previuos frame high resolution image and outputs new high resolution frame, there seems to DL amateur like me a lot of potential for using sparse operations. At the cost of additional image quality, but potentially speeding up performance.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY