Delivers Well Over 100 FPS at 4K Resolution and Ultra Settings

>tfw I'll finally be able to play every game in existence at 1440p with 144 FPS

Attached: 1525649464336.jpg (512x512, 37K)

You can finally play games at 90+ fps 1440p with 2x2 supersampling, say goodbye to jaggies forever.

That is what I say, for now 4k with decent hz is unicorn land. We are at same point as 1440 was 3 years ago and we don't reached 144hz yet on a single card

so if I buy a 1080ti for 1440p 120hz+ on Doom Eternal, Tomb Raider 3 and Metro Exodus I'm screwed?

Man, how time flies. When did Gaming Evolved fanboys turn their backs on currytech? Used to be the only site that had AMD GPU bias.

Yes.
t. someone who has a 1080 ti with a 1440p 144hz monitor

What the FUCK? Do you not get 120+fps on games like Tomb Raider 2 and Witcher 3 w/ mod?

Now to the dual 4k VR glasses.

>wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-performance-preview-4k-100-fps/

Probably only in IDTech5-6 and Unreal Engine 4 games.

Anything else it is probably closer to 60-75FPS.

No. Buy a G-Sync monitor if you want to play at highest settings.

It's not from wccftech

Attached: 1534624655080.jpg (1841x1227, 669K)

But how well does it run crisis

>"We also played a variety of other PC games that shall not be named"

Attached: 4db.png (860x650, 60K)

what is an nda

>1080ti barely manages 60 fps on a very few games at 4k
>2080ti goes well above 100 fps on a 157% perfomance increase!

yeah no

BUUULLSHIT.

>157% perfomance increase!
Oh no, he's retarded!

in which game?

>$1200 card isn't allowed to get 40 more frames than a $700 card
Really makes ya think

I have a 6700 and a gtx1080fe and i can hit 4k@60 on a few intense graphics games if i bump a few ultra settings down to high or turn some shit like hairworks off

This is with all AA off, because i frankly feel like its not needed with 4k. Most games seem to run 30-50fps maxed out.

I've heard only a few games dont hit 60 on the 1080ti @4k maxed out.

I don't get this. No other card can even run real time raytracing

I was getting solid 50fps on evil within 4k with a single 1080 3 years ago, so yeah its very possible.

based leather jacket man does it again

Attached: gdnvidia.png (991x695, 76K)

>fake news clickbait regurgitated through pajeettech

kys

What's even so special about real time ray tracing?
Haven't games already had real-time shadows and reflections before this?

as usual, wait for the benchmarks people

I still call it bullshit.
Forbes gone it right:
forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/08/21/nvidia-rtx-20-graphics-cards-why-you-should-jump-off-the-hype-train/

The fact as pointed, Nvidia showed zero benchmark comparison unlike pascal, and the incremental performance Titan v shows puts me on hold sbout it.
I really want a 2080ti that would provide over 40% perf even if it's 1200, but I seriously don't believe it's gonna happen.
All smokes and mirrors and fishy talk of jackrtman makes me uneasy

But these are benchmarks

>curry benchmarks
lol

>I WEAR THE LEATHER JACKETS AROUND HERE, PUNK!

Attached: 1527020149858.jpg (232x217, 7K)

>tfw 980Ti and 4K monitor

I upgraded from a 970 and 1080p around half a year ago, and it's enough for 40-70FPS on 4K at high/ultra in titles like HITMAN, GTA V and NFS Payback, but just not enough to get 60FPS lock even with a 1.45GHz overclock.

Hopefully the 2070 is on the level of a 1080Ti although I really doubt it.

Jew benchmarks

>Hopefully the 2070 is on the level of a 1080Ti
Yeah I wouldn't exactly hold out hope for that.

Do you are fine.
I played Doom on a single 1080 ( it's vulkan so no sli) and I was getting 130 fps on 1440p, vulkan performs like a monster and even with sub 100 fps Id engine feels incredible fluid.
Tomb raider never was kinda of super taxing on hardware.

I really love the fact that on 1080 sli I could run Witcher 3 at 130fps and kingdom come at 90-140 fps on med high, but for a lot of other games like ac origins I was limited to 70 fps comparing to a ti that could hit 100 fps.

Unless 2080ti is kinda of performance breaking, you are dealing with marginal gains over a 1080ti, so it's probably the best in perf/cost ratio

>upgrading from a 970 to a 980

Attached: ....webm (534x480, 2.62M)

I'll probably just hold on to my money for the 3070. I need to upgrade my X5650 anyway and getting 16 or 32 gigs of DDR4 right now would be ridiculous.

Even currytech says to not buy now and wait for benchs

what a joke. im guessing 100FPS+ was CS:GO or something dumb

Attached: .png (717x289, 44K)

Yeah upgrading right now would probably be the worst possible point in time in the last 20 years desu
>mfw I was forced to buy 64GB of RAM for a workstation last week

Attached: 1530450736557.jpg (1024x1005, 73K)

>it's vulkan so no sli
SLI works on the OGL version if you're running both cards on PCIe x16. Performs better than Vulkan with no SLI too, provided you're GPU bottlenecked in the first place.

>tfw 150fps at 1080p in DOOM on R9 290x 4gb

Those techniques are very poor approximations or sometimes out right tricks, like reflections often are just a second model rendered at some spot. Raytracing is closer to the real deal so it looks more realistic. No more screen space ambient occlusion that floats, post processing subsurface scattering that looks like candles, second model reflection tricks, it'll look much more realistic when implemented using raytracing. Shadows shouldn't flicker, ambient occlusion will be part of an accurate shadow model and not floating shit, reflections will be real, skin will look more real, etc.

What is "many games"? I can run BF1 maxed in 4K with 75-90 FPS on my 1080 Ti.

>20% faster memory
>20% more "cuda cores"
>same IPC
>somehow 40% faster
Nice damage control.

He said 980 Ti user. A small detail that you might have missed.

The 1070 have less cores it's faster than 980ti

I didn't miss it, I didn't feel like typing it out. Still fucking stupid to upgrade within a generation.

I don't care as long as it runs League of Legends at 60fps

>cores = performance
wasted quads on a retard

980ti is Maxwell, 1070 is Pascal.
20xx is Pascal with meme rays.

>same IPC
But they claim it's improved by 50% in rasterization, not that it's the same.

Then tell me what is different, retard.

Architecture, retard

Go back to Jow Forums fag. Indiana are the highest average household income race in the US.

Reminder that posting wcctech links outside of /b/ is trolling and against the rules.

Nvidia won.

Good for them, now why can't they make their own country as good as the U.S to live in?

Buy it and use it for 1080p

Other cards aren't $1200

>the damage controlling AMD shills who claimed this wasn't a big upgrade from the 1000 series.

Attached: download.jpg (225x225, 7K)

You're delusional. AMD did it 10 years ago. youtube.com/watch?v=V0TyhQiY2pQ

There's many other demos running ray tracing on the 7970, 780ti, and newer cards as well that aren't the RTX ones.

dem traces though

Attached: traces.jpg (2560x1165, 846K)

Nvidia is the only one doing it in real time in video games.

Honestly what is this? Tech noob here

lol even the author of the article said this release is disappointing, questions the secrecy of useful benchmarks, and is telling people to wait for real performance benchmarks before they preorder

>in minecraft

Attached: 1520001631774.jpg (311x317, 11K)

Yes everyone should wait for real benchmarks.

traces from the memory to the GPU.

They are fucking squiggly...

Is this a fucking joke?

>20xx is Pascal
[citation]

So the idea is because it's squiggly, it'll take longer?

>costs more than my PC
It would fucking want to.

Yes, this is clearly to keep data travel times as equal as possible. Nothing new, just, well, uglier.

now divide the speed of light by the distance of the squiggly traces add and you get... nano seconds? feels futuristic my man

Real time shadows in games today is a trick.

Basically you render the scene again, but from the perspective of the light source you want to cast shadows.
And then you project this new rendered texture onto the surface(s) you want the shadows to appear on.
This is why shadows often look blocky in games, because the game is rendering the scene from the lights perspective at a lower resolution for better performance.

But with raytracing, you actually mathematically model the paths of individual photons/rays in the scene. Light sources emit photons, if there is a shadow it's because the photons hit something else and bounced away. Much more visually accurate to how real world lighting works.

Attached: 13_shadowmap.jpg (950x475, 66K)

>Clueless retards of Jow Forums reveal themselves as they question equally routed traces

Yeah but it's fucking important.
Look at any motherboard from the past 20 years and you'll see the same thing round the cpu socket, equal latency is real important.

fucking Jow Forums is so stupid I swear to god

Attached: TgHS9Sg.png (913x488, 1.05M)

Electrons are not photons, sweetie.

>But they claim it's improved by 50% in rasterization, not that it's the same.

citation needed

what's the signal velocity in copper?

c*VF, where VF=sqrt(permittivity of copper)^-1

should be pretty close to c

holy shit walter white, cool it with the chemistry crap.

He's wrongish.
It's Volta with a raytracing accelerator ASIC to find ray-triangle intersections. Same process, as well.
And we know how the 5120 core Titan V compares to the 1080Ti and how it clocks. Turing might have a bit better raster performance, but it doesn't look like it.

soon TM
>buy more to save goy
>benchmark of 1080ti sli vs 2080ti nvlink is shown
>see goy 50% performance increase for only 2x the price

which card can deliver over 60 minimum fps at ultra settings in 1080p?

It's a shitty low quality version that barely even qualifies as raytracing.
Raytracing is done for shrpness and quality while this shit make the image super blurry and devoid of any detail

it doesnt exist

None of them.
2080Ti was dropping near 30fps at 1080p in that ugly Tomb Raider game.

Meanwhile, consoles running on what is basically an RX570 GPU have graphics like youtube.com/watch?v=Fwq_2geuW-A
The same real time non-screenspace reflections which tank performance on the RTX work fine on an old Polaris console.
Amazing. Nvidia is embarrassing the fuck out of PC gaming.

Why isn't this thread deleted yet for being a currytech thread, anyway?

Realtime raytrace/hybrid rendering is in its infancy. That feature is going to suck. I have my doubts whether the 2080ti will deliver enough performance boost over the 1080ti to justify the price hike. It's also likely to be a short product cycle with 7nm not far off, so it's probably best to hold off if you already have a 10-series card that's already good enough.

>price makes all the difference

whats next titan rtx will be 500% faster than titan v?

>Infancy
Was a thing for over a decade now

It's not only about the speed, but about the phase too.