The RTX 2080Ti Thread

7nm production is going to be delayed for awhile....

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13277/globalfoundries-stops-all-7nm-development

 

Cyberpunk 2077 will support both real-time ray tracing and NVIDIA’s Hairworks

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/cybe...-real-time-ray-tracing-and-nvidias-hairworks/

 

nvidia doesn't use GloFo for any of its gpu's, its either samsung Korea or TMSC Taiwan.

 

Seems like 1080p is the new 4K... a huge step backwards in resolution to accommodate the advances in real-time rendering (ray-tracing). Will their AI-enhanced anti-aliasing solution prove useful in these scenarios? Seems like I won't need to upgrade to a 4K monitor after all.

 

4k offer far better overall picture quality increase across the board compared to 1080p+RayTracing.

Raytracing is the future, however in its current iteration by the looks of it its too fresh, expensive and IMO not worth it yet.

 

It depends on the viewing distance. At longer viewing distance human eyes cant see much difference between 1080p and 4K

 

It had to be introduced at some point. If ray-tracing was introduced in the era of 8K graphics your statement would read:

"8K offers far better overall picture quality increase across the board compared to 4K+RayTracing."

If ray-tracing heavily impacts performance then this will always be the case, and those gamers who want the highest resolution will always find it lacking.

My beef with Turing is not the technology, but the pricing. Even with the large size of the chip, I don't think Nvidia needs to price these cards the way they do. The company is massively profitable as it is, and both the 1080 Ti and the Titan Xp use the same GP102 chip but are priced very differently. Like with the Titan, Nvidia wants to collect that monopoly money before offering these products at a more reasonable price.

 

Won't agree with your statement. Higher resolution = larger pixel density = sharper image both close up and on long distance.

 

Human eyesight has limits and that's a fact. If your eyes cant see higher pixel density at certain distance then pixels will start to blend the same way as you would watch lower resolution image. All screen size guides mention you have to sit at certain distance in order to see 2160p benefits relative to you screen size. 4K is insane resolution, well above human eyesight limits at normal distances from tv. I have one friend who bought 4K HDTV and he watch his tv at 1'5 meter distance in order to really see 4K benefits, but I watch my tv from 3 meters and above and I really cant see any difference between 1080p/1440p/2160p content. If I would have to choose playing shadow of the tomb raider on my PC monitor from close distance, then I would prefer higher resolution image over RTX effects, but at longer viewing distance (and that's my normal distance) from tv I would choose RTX effects over higher resolution, because I would not see 4K benefits anyway, while I will see RTX effects for sure. On my samsung S8 pixel density is so high I have troubles to see the difference between 1440p and 1080p even from up close and I have good eyesight (20/20).

 

@LuckyNumber8
Your argument is incorrect. Yes human eyesight has limits, but those limits are dependant on the quality of vision of each individual.
Secondly image quality is dependant on two factors - it's resolution and size of screen you are looking at. A 1080p image will look good on 20inch screen, and it will look blurry on 32inch screen. While 4k image will look nice and crisp all the way to 40 inch (and potentially above) due to pixel density, regardless of which distance you sit away from the screen.

Also, we are talking about monitors, not TV so not sure why you switched to that suddenly. Everyone sits next to their monitor during gaming/ usage on a more or less similar distance.

 

my 1080p 40in tv I could see pixels but my 4k 42in tv is awesome image is so crisp I don't use AA anymore I sit right in front so up close 4k is so much better at 40/42 than using a 1080p TV up close

 

You are totally ignoring extremely important factor, the viewing distance. If you sit at longer distance the amount of pixels that your eyes can see will decrease because of eyesight limits (pixels will start to blend), it's very simple concept yet you still dont understand it.

Below article in regards to resolution and screen sizes
https://www.rgb.com/display-size-resolution-and-ideal-viewing-distance
and interesting quote

So like I have said, viewing distance is very important factor.



Distance, tv size, and pixels density are all equally as important factors, and that's why optimal viewing distance charts take all of them into consideration.

I know very well limits of human vision and that's why I have mentioned people with good vision (20/20) only, not some blind people (some poeple cant even see 20/200 line!). Average people (healthly people who dont wear glasses) with good eyesight can see 20/20 line on the snellen table, and because of that optimal distance charts are based on people with 20/20 vison also because they measure ideal conditions. So normal healthy people with good eyesight need to sit at least 2.2m from let's say 55 inch (it's the most popular screen size) HDTV to even begin seeing 4K benefits at all, and preferably at 1m in order to resolve (see) ALL details (pixels) and of course people with worse vision will have to sit even closer than that.

Also no one said we are talking about monitor displays only, it should be obvious to you people play games on either monitors or HDTV these days. However in my last post I have mentioned specifically I cant see 4K benefits on my own HDTV from my normal viewing distance while on monitor the difference is very apparent because I sit at close. So depending on the viewing scenario some people may choose 1080p (RTX on) over 4K (RTX off) settings simply because they will not see 4K benefits anyway.

 

Going to copy and paste the reddit post from that video:

 

Thanks for sharing interesting info, so basically there's a big room for performance improvement, and when games will start using RTX effects rendered at lower resolution performance should be much better at 1440p/4K

 

Take a stand by buying AMD which has nothing competitive with your 1080 Ti never mind Turing? I literally don't get all the emotional baggage in this post and thread. It's electronics, it's an optional purchase for a hobby. You've tricked yourself into believing this is more important that it is. Relax.

 

Yeah...but remember the 8800 Ultra? That released at ~$800.

 

@LuckyNumber8
Too much text, for a too obvious topic. Once again I'm talking about PC Monitors, not TV's, while you keep blabbing about TV's. Of course, you won't sit next to a TV 1m away till your eyes bleed.

Other than that, be my guest and use 480p screen for all I care. End of convo.

 

I have sat less than 1m away from a TV for years for gaming no bleeding eyes but going from 1080p to 4k has been an awesome improvement in image quality

 

And that's my point!