Yes, I'm disappointed with the GTX 2080 Ti too. Not only is its hyped ray-tracing feature for games all but absent in the reviews but the card's pricing is absolutely ridiculous considering the 25%-35% increase in performance in rasterized games over the GTX 1080 Ti. That is not something extraordinary; that's the kind of performance increase we would expect from newer hardware released 18-24 months after the previous ones! That pricing really has put things into perspective for me though. I paid £700 for the GTX 1080 Ti which I was initially uncomfortable with have only paid £550 tops for previous generation GPUs but over the last 18 months it is proven to be a great buy. In fact, the card is so good that I really do not need the RTX 2080 Ti anyway as I am already gaming in excess of 60 fps in most games at maxed out 2560x1440 settings on a G-SYNC monitor. Had I bought one then really I would have been wasting my money. By the time enough games have come out that actually make use of ray-tracing and DLSS then there will be better, hopefully cheaper cards available. When we need in the meantime is some serious competition from AMD to drive those ludicrous prices down. Still, I can't help thinking that the computational heavy performance hit of ray-tracing even with these RTX cards is going to be too high for most people to use and that support for it will be sparse like hardware PhysX, HairWorks and the like. Unless AMD come up with their own variant of ray-tracing then I fear this technology might prove to be short-lived. It is almost certain that the PS5 and next Xbox will not feature ray-tracing so what incentive will there be for developers to support it in PC games outside of a few sponsored NVIDIA titles? I would rather have had a GTX 2080 Ti personally at £700, i.e. a card with a 25%-35% performance increase but without the ray-tracing and DLSS features. Sure, I still wouldn't really need one right now but I may have more tempted to upgrade at that price point.