VOGONS

Common searches


Is anyone excited for Big Navi?

Topic actions

Reply 160 of 258, by havli

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 20:17:

And another: Why the need to buy a gfx card with that much power, if currently there are no games that require its FULL POWER to use? I can’t think of any game that needs the amount of memory that the 3080 (10GB) and 3090 (24GB) provides.

Actually pretty much any AAA game from the last 5 years needs this level of performance to run well with full details at 2560x1440 or higher resolution. Sometimes even older games. For instance in Crysis 3 max. details 2560x1440 + 8xMSAA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers 73 fps... which is ok, but I wouldn't mind even better performance to fully utilize the 144Hz LCD.

crysis3_2020_09_27_196ljru.png

HW museum.cz - my collection of PC hardware

Reply 161 of 258, by ZellSF

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 20:17:
Fair enough. Heres a question. Which features of these new cards can justify their expensive price, for games like first person […]
Show full quote

Fair enough. Heres a question. Which features of these new cards can justify their expensive price, for games like first person shooters, sim racing and e-sports games?

And another: Why the need to buy a gfx card with that much power, if currently there are no games that require its FULL POWER to use? I can’t think of any game that needs the amount of memory that the 3080 (10GB) and 3090 (24GB) provides.

Because I can see other less powerful but yet cheaper options from nvidia itself and AMD that can deliver good enough graphics x performance to justify the investment made to get the graphics you all want to pay for.

I think I have a good argument (and good advice too) when I say to buy exactly what you need for your game (or games), and for a fair price. Maybe in 3 or 5 years, when these games (thanks to their BAD developers) require such powerful Gfx cards, then you will need to buy a 3080 or 3090, but then maybe the prices will drop for them with newer generation being released. I just ask myself “do I need it? Is it good enough for my game? Is it a fair price to pay, from a cost/benefit point of view?”

I bolded your problem. When making hobby related purchases (and decorative items, and really a lot of things) need is not a factor. Want is.

Don't ask why people need expensive graphic cards, they don't need it any more than a hunter needs another expensive rifle, a fisherman needs another expensive fishing rod, a audiophile needs another expensive record player, etc.

I think the one who's being duped by the GPU industry's pricing here is you, who have been convinced that there's a magical line where toys are so affordable that you need them.

At any rate, I'm unsure what you're expecting to get out of this line of inquiry? Moving on from need to want, I want my games to look sharp, smooth and with minimal aliasing. Obviously a high end GPU helps with all those things.

Reply 162 of 258, by Bruninho

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
ZellSF wrote on 2020-10-12, 21:24:
I bolded your problem. When making hobby related purchases (and decorative items, and really a lot of things) need is not a fact […]
Show full quote
Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 20:17:
Fair enough. Heres a question. Which features of these new cards can justify their expensive price, for games like first person […]
Show full quote

Fair enough. Heres a question. Which features of these new cards can justify their expensive price, for games like first person shooters, sim racing and e-sports games?

And another: Why the need to buy a gfx card with that much power, if currently there are no games that require its FULL POWER to use? I can’t think of any game that needs the amount of memory that the 3080 (10GB) and 3090 (24GB) provides.

Because I can see other less powerful but yet cheaper options from nvidia itself and AMD that can deliver good enough graphics x performance to justify the investment made to get the graphics you all want to pay for.

I think I have a good argument (and good advice too) when I say to buy exactly what you need for your game (or games), and for a fair price. Maybe in 3 or 5 years, when these games (thanks to their BAD developers) require such powerful Gfx cards, then you will need to buy a 3080 or 3090, but then maybe the prices will drop for them with newer generation being released. I just ask myself “do I need it? Is it good enough for my game? Is it a fair price to pay, from a cost/benefit point of view?”

I bolded your problem. When making hobby related purchases (and decorative items, and really a lot of things) need is not a factor. Want is.

Don't ask why people need expensive graphic cards, they don't need it any more than a hunter needs another expensive rifle, a fisherman needs another expensive fishing rod, a audiophile needs another expensive record player, etc.

I think the one who's being duped by the GPU industry's pricing here is you, who have been convinced that there's a magical line where toys are so affordable that you need them.

At any rate, I'm unsure what you're expecting to get out of this line of inquiry? Moving on from need to want, I want my games to look sharp, smooth and with minimal aliasing. Obviously a high end GPU helps with all those things.

About the “magical line”, I think you are confusing me with the other guy in this discussion.

Need is a factor, yes. Want or Will, not so much.

I too want my games to look good, but performance is a much more important aspect for me than graphics alone. Price, fun factor, performance, graphics, in this order, from most to less important aspects to consider. I don’t even care about the resolution, be it 4K or not. Games are meant to be fun regardless of it.

I don’t play newest FIFA versions because “that player looks almost real”, I want the game to be fun and playable, so I don’t bother about the graphics if the game is unplayable. Newer FIFAs are unplayable, require new expensive hardware, and EA Sports ha been abusing with its price practices selling the same stuff every year, just with newer graphics, newer stadiums or team shirts and rosters. And their in-app purchase practices are ridiculous. I knew it was coming from them years ago when they started doing DLCs for games. But that is another subject and unrelated to the thread.

So, heres a better example: Imagine I want to buy the newest F1 2020 game. I want the same graphics they have been advertising on their social media accounts. But that requires newer hardware, more expensive graphics cards. And you have to take into account that USD 1,00 = 5,45 brazilian reais (as of last week).

Then I ask myself: do I need that graphics card so much to buy and play F1 2020? Is that card worth the price NVIDIA is asking me to pay for it? My answer for both was NO.

Then I look for other games with the same genre and stuff that I can play on my current hardware: F1 2010, rFactor 1, Grand Prix 4 (2002). Actually, Grand Prix 4 with a 2020 F1 season mod made by the GP4 fan community can match similar graphics to F1 2020 game, get the fun factor, run on my hardware at more than 100 fps, and the best fact is that I already own that game. F1 2020 is being sold with an expensive price too, and has DLCs to pay for.

So my choice was much easier, the only disadvantage is that I had to quit doing sim racing competitions online tournaments, which actually are run with iRacing and rFactor 2 or F1 2019/2020.

I could play iRacing with my current pc hardware, too. But wouldnt get +100 fps. rFactor 1 does get more than that, but rFactor 2 doesn’t even go beyond 50fps on the same hardware; the only difference between the two games is a new texture, and DX version (9 vs 11).

Basically, I made my choice based on what I WANT (emphasis on WANT) to play. I want to play F1 2020, but I don’t think the game is worth the investment required; and Codemasters release a new version every year, with new features or in app paid features, that keep raising the bar for hardware requirements. I do that decision thinking on what to buy, with all different kind of games I play, not just sim racing games.

"Design isn't just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works."
JOBS, Steve.

Reply 163 of 258, by ZellSF

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Those are just arbitrary decisions you made about what you want / feel you need. Not sure why you're shocked other people are making similar arbitrary decisions. I'm also still entirely unsure what you want to learn by discussing it?

You want to discuss it, so again. What exactly are you hoping to find out?

Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 22:15:

About the “magical line”, I think you are confusing me with the other guy in this discussion.

Nope, I wasn't.

Reply 164 of 258, by Bruninho

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
ZellSF wrote on 2020-10-12, 22:37:
Those are just arbitrary decisions you made about what you want / feel you need. Not sure why you're shocked other people are ma […]
Show full quote

Those are just arbitrary decisions you made about what you want / feel you need. Not sure why you're shocked other people are making similar arbitrary decisions. I'm also still entirely unsure what you want to learn by discussing it?

You want to discuss it, so again. What exactly are you hoping to find out?

Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 22:15:

About the “magical line”, I think you are confusing me with the other guy in this discussion.

Nope, I wasn't.

Yes, you are confusing me with the other guy. I want to pay less for new hardware, not more year after year. I dont need a 3070 when a 1070 or less powerful option can run my games at max resolution. Plus the others options are cheaper. That’s my point.

My decisions weren’t arbitrary, they were made based on games minimum and recommended requirements, price, fun factor, hardware performance.

I am shocked because these people are not doing the same “arbitrary” decisions, they are buying because of the “wow factor”, or like the other guy, “just to show off because I can”. Even though their games do not demand that particular card to run great and at max resolution. The games will run, but will not use the full potential of these cards. I see that as a bad investment. I think people are underestimating the real power of the other graphics cards available on the market when they go straight to the most expensive card available.

See, lets make an experiment: your computer currently runs with a Card C from some brand (doesn’t matter which one). So there are two newer cards, Card A and Card B. Card B is newer generation, more powerful, but outrageously expensive. Card A is newer than yours but older than B and is cheaper than B.

A new version of your favorite game is released. Also with an outrageously expensive price. But, no biggie, lets see the game requirements.

Ok, it will run on your hardware, but medium graphics settings thanks to Card C as a trade off for better perfomance. With both newer cards, you get the desired max ultra high super duper resolution.

So you want better graphics, and look for a new card. You buy Card A or Card B?

I prefer to run with Card C until Card A or B prices go down to a fair value. But what if the game doesn’t run well with Card C? Then I choose to run the older version of the game. Because it’s exactly the same fun factor for less $$.This, for me, is smarter thinking and good use of money.

“But before their prices go down, a new version of that game will already be out”. Fine, then when it does happen, you reconsider the prices. Again, in this scenario, I’d rather keep using Card C and an older version of the game. No new card is worth the value both NVIDIA and AMD are asking for.

And before I get called for being an Apple fan, I apply the same principle to my Apple devices. I do that for everything I buy, not just computer hardware. Even if I were a Billionaire, I would still do that.

"Design isn't just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works."
JOBS, Steve.

Reply 165 of 258, by ZellSF

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 23:13:

Yes, you are confusing me with the other guy. I want to pay less for new hardware, not more year after year. I dont need a 3070 when a 1070 or less powerful option can run my games at max resolution. Plus the others options are cheaper. That’s my point.

Not what the line you're referring to was talking about at all. It was talking about your implication that expensive GPUs aren't needed. That implies inexpensive GPUs are needed. That's false, and makes me think the higher prices of newer graphic cards have deceived you into thinking lower end GPUs are needed. Video games are not a necessity. At all.

Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-12, 23:13:

My decisions weren’t arbitrary, they were made based on games minimum and recommended requirements, price, fun factor, hardware performance.

Yeah, cause fun factor sounds totally unarbitrary! Wait what?

Why would you care about recommended requirements? Why do you think what acceptable hardware performance isn't an arbitrary value in your head? Or price for that matter?

You aren't going by any more objective criteria than anyone else. To some people, better performance is more important, or money is less important, than it is to you. That's just the way it is. I'm still unsure what you hope to get out of discussing how upset you are about it?

Reply 166 of 258, by ZellSF

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

To add something more meaningful to this thread, Gigabyte's power adapter solution was apparently rushed:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/threads … cerns.18900176/
Anyone who's ordered a Gigabyte card should probably read that.

Reply 167 of 258, by Bruninho

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

“ To some people, better performance is more important, or money is less important, than it is to you.”

“ the higher prices of newer graphic cards have deceived you into thinking lower end GPUs are needed.”

For such an incredible ridiculous and nonsense conclusion, I give up. I seem to be “talking to a door” here.

Have fun throwing money away for expensive hardware you don’t really need to play your favorite games instead of buying exactly what you need for the very same games and at a cheaper, better & competitive price. At least I’ve tried to teach some people try to make smarter buying decisions. Bye!

"Design isn't just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works."
JOBS, Steve.

Reply 168 of 258, by Hanamichi

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Ooof glad the name calling has stopped.
Well at least we prove how contentious the state of new hardware releases are 🤣

To the OP I guess it depends on what you will use your gaming PC for.

I'll summarize my points and run 😜

Excited for the 3070/3080/3090:
+ Decent performance boost on previous gen unlike 20X0 series
+ Probably maintains good legacy compatibility
+ Can ray trace in hardware somewhat
+ MSRP has come down to 10x0 series
+ The price drop proves consumers holding on to older gear and competition can get us better value for money

Not excited for the 3070/3080/3090:
- Power consumption is pretty bad especially compared to 10x0.
- A lot of heat to get rid of from your case and room.
- Price/value proposition is high no matter the buyers wealth when old cards are still very capable with a few options turned down.
- Few new games out there (imho) to really show it's worth (Cyberpunk may change that).
- Getting one in Europe sucks.
- VRM implementation woes.
- Still can't run old games as fast as you would expect.
- Ray tracing ability is quite limited for modern games.
- Modern NVIDIA lameness: You have a last gen card..even just a year old.. sorry we won't optimize for you any more, SLI..yeah we killed that, You bought our Titan class card.. thanks our 30x0 ti has just been announced 🤣

(Disclaimer long time NVIDIA user)

havli wrote on 2020-10-12, 21:07:

For instance in Crysis 3 max. details 2560x1440 + 8xMSAA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers 73 fps... which is ok, but I wouldn't mind even better performance to fully utilize the 144Hz LCD.

This is actually a bad example in my book, no disrespect. A £800 latest gen card to run a 2013 game at 73fps in 2020 while consuming more than 300w of power as we deal with climate issues. I guess that's the curse of LCDs.

I really do understand the want for high 100+ framerates at good resolutions but this highlights the problem.

Is this flagship card able to crush old (inefficient) game engines to give us amazing performance? - Not really. Is it equipped for the next few years to give high framerates in new games since so few are available now, well I'm not confident on that.

End wall of text

Reply 169 of 258, by Unknown_K

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Ray tracing is nice but it won't be common until much cheaper hardware can do it without low FPS.

I am kind of wondering what the AMD cards can do and at what price point.

Cutting edge is very expensive and has been for as long as I remember. If you wait a few years those cutting edge cards are now just old and much cheaper.

Collector of old computers, hardware, and software

Reply 170 of 258, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Unknown_K wrote on 2020-10-13, 01:34:

Ray tracing is nice but it won't be common until much cheaper hardware can do it without low FPS.

I am kind of wondering what the AMD cards can do and at what price point.

Cutting edge is very expensive and has been for as long as I remember. If you wait a few years those cutting edge cards are now just old and much cheaper.

I miss the days of the 500$ top-of-the-line video card with sane thermals/power envelope .

Reply 171 of 258, by Unknown_K

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
darry wrote on 2020-10-13, 05:04:
Unknown_K wrote on 2020-10-13, 01:34:

Ray tracing is nice but it won't be common until much cheaper hardware can do it without low FPS.

I am kind of wondering what the AMD cards can do and at what price point.

Cutting edge is very expensive and has been for as long as I remember. If you wait a few years those cutting edge cards are now just old and much cheaper.

I miss the days of the 500$ top-of-the-line video card with sane thermals/power envelope .

Well I think $500 is a bit nuts to me for a GPU but looking back at what I paid in the 90's for 3dfx cards and inflation its pretty much even. My last new GPU was an RX580 just before the bitcoin craze blew them up and I only game at 1080p anyway.

There are some people who will buy whatever is top dog at whatever price it is offered at. If you must play the latest and greatest game with full max settings on a 4k monitor with above 60hz then you will pay dearly for that. The vast majority of people will just drop the resolution and or settings until it works on their current hardware.

Can you even tell the difference between 1080p and 4K on a fast moving FPS?

Collector of old computers, hardware, and software

Reply 172 of 258, by luckybob

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Can you even tell the difference between 1080p and 4K on a fast moving FPS?

by that logic, we should still be playing @640x480. I went from 1440 to 4k, and yes, you can tell the difference when you stop and look around.

It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.

Reply 173 of 258, by havli

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Hanamichi wrote on 2020-10-13, 00:33:

This is actually a bad example in my book, no disrespect. A £800 latest gen card to run a 2013 game at 73fps in 2020 while consuming more than 300w of power as we deal with climate issues. I guess that's the curse of LCDs.

Well, the power consumption can be solved easily. When I undervolt and underclock a bit, then instead of 73 fps @ 320W I get 71 fps @225W. While I agree >300W is too much, when tuned between 200 and 250W with very small performance impact, RTX 3080 is quite ok.

I upgraded from GTX 1080 and that one did 42 fps in Crysis 3. So I went from barely playable to a good gaming experience. And in modern DX12 games RTX 3080 gains even more.

HW museum.cz - my collection of PC hardware

Reply 174 of 258, by Bruninho

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
luckybob wrote on 2020-10-13, 07:20:

Can you even tell the difference between 1080p and 4K on a fast moving FPS?

by that logic, we should still be playing @640x480. I went from 1440 to 4k, and yes, you can tell the difference when you stop and look around.

I only game at 1080p on modern titles. For a racing or any e-sport game, the details practically don’t matter. All that matters is fps. The more the better for the e-racer to clock faster lap times due to reaction times at the wheel (edit: in an online racing game, taking into account the lag to the server). I cannot tell the difference when driving because of focus on racing, so why would I stop and look around in a racing game or football game?

I have even raced at much lower resolutions for that. I don’t really care about details like crowd animation, wind effects, trees and trackside objects at 330 kph...

https://youtu.be/Kq0wcj8Ysf0
F1 2020 with RTX 3080

https://youtu.be/mBuRpSWGjiQ
F1 2020 with GTX 1070

Can you really tell a BIG difference?

Last edited by Bruninho on 2020-10-13, 14:29. Edited 2 times in total.

"Design isn't just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works."
JOBS, Steve.

Reply 176 of 258, by vetz

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Since we're still receiving multiple reports on this thread I'll step in and just say that yes, people have a view and opinion like Bruninho that he only buys what he perceives as his need. Respect that. Same goes for Bruninho, respect that someone want to spend money on the latest and greatest. This thread have evolved into an offtopic discussion from its title and starting point which is the Nvidia 3000 series launch. Please stop this offtopic discussion, or let us mods know if you want to split it out into a separate thread.

3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)
3D Acceleration Comparison Episodes

Reply 177 of 258, by Shagittarius

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

You can't compare YouTube videos, Youtube's compression makes it very difficult to tell 720P from 8k.

https://petapixel.com/2020/10/12/can-you-even … en-1080-and-8k/

I'm enjoying my 3090 and anticipating the 40x0 series.

Reply 178 of 258, by ZellSF

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Unknown_K wrote on 2020-10-13, 06:24:

Can you even tell the difference between 1080p and 4K on a fast moving FPS?

Regardless of if you're talking about rendering resolution or display resolution: yes, easily.

Hanamichi wrote on 2020-10-13, 00:33:

- Getting one in Europe sucks.

Makes it sound like getting one in Europe is harder than elsewhere, and I haven't heard much indication that's the case: getting one anywhere sucks.

Hanamichi wrote on 2020-10-13, 00:33:

This is actually a bad example in my book, no disrespect. A £800 latest gen card to run a 2013 game at 73fps in 2020 while consuming more than 300w of power as we deal with climate issues. I guess that's the curse of LCDs.

Well two things, first if you want to be green you really shouldn't get a graphic card at all. Even if the card didn't consume any power, the production of them does and they often don't end up being properly recycled. Of course, like other things discussed we all have our own illogical thresholds for this sort of thing.

Second is "the curse of LCDs". There's really nothing about LCDs that makes me want to render at higher quality. If I had a CRT, I would still go for the highest rendering resolution I could.

havli wrote on 2020-10-12, 21:07:

Actually pretty much any AAA game from the last 5 years needs this level of performance to run well with full details at 2560x1440 or higher resolution. Sometimes even older games. For instance in Crysis 3 max. details 2560x1440 + 8xMSAA GeForce RTX 3080 delivers 73 fps... which is ok, but I wouldn't mind even better performance to fully utilize the 144Hz LCD.

I'm hoping you know how expensive MSAA is? Because you can probably get significant framerate improvements without much noticeable harm to image quality just by lowering that to 4x.

Bruninho wrote on 2020-10-13, 13:33:
https://youtu.be/Kq0wcj8Ysf0 F1 2020 with RTX 3080 […]
Show full quote

https://youtu.be/Kq0wcj8Ysf0
F1 2020 with RTX 3080

https://youtu.be/mBuRpSWGjiQ
F1 2020 with GTX 1070

Can you really tell a BIG difference?

That's not a comparison between the two graphic cards:

  1. Youtube compression is more aggressive at 1080p.
  2. Motion blur is on in one of the videos.
  3. Framerate for both videos are capped at 60 FPS, while both cards perform very differently.

Reply 179 of 258, by Bruninho

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
ZellSF wrote on 2020-10-13, 17:26:
That's not a comparison between the two graphic cards: […]
Show full quote

That's not a comparison between the two graphic cards:

  1. Youtube compression is more aggressive at 1080p.
  2. Motion blur is on in one of the videos.
  3. Framerate for both videos are capped at 60 FPS, while both cards perform very differently.

1) OK
2) I can’t really tell that difference. I’d never know if you haven’t mentioned that. For me it is one more reason not to get a 3xxx and keep a 1xxx series card.
3) my question this time was directed towards graphics quality, not performance, and I cannot really tell the difference between the image quality in them. After that, I’d still get a 1070 because of the price (cheaper than a 3080) and because it can run that game with its max graphics settings, be it capped or not (gives to me the same look and speed feeling in the car).

One of my friends has a 1070, and is running FS 2020 and F1 2020 as well as Euro Truck Simulator 2 with very good graphics. I checked it myself in person on his computer before the pandemic started. I will check his YouTube account for the ETS videos and ask him to do a F1 2020 video.

"Design isn't just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works."
JOBS, Steve.