Sorry. Was addressing Jensen's quote, not you.Can't tell if you are addressing me as the poster, or Jensen as the marketer?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sorry. Was addressing Jensen's quote, not you.Can't tell if you are addressing me as the poster, or Jensen as the marketer?
What do people do when they're nervous? They lash out. Suddenly Jensen is lashing out a lot. Graphics architecture aside, AMD being on a lithography that's half the size of his, is making him nervous. As it should.
people are still downing amd for a release of a product that within range of their nv's high end gpu. yes it doesn't have feature parity with what nv offers and it does not matter not a single fucking game dev is looking at this extra eye candy shit in anything till the consoles support ray-tracing.
its been months since launch and less than 5 games use it. jhh needs to stop bitching and put up or shut up.Yeah they are, even then DLSS is where it is at, at least until they are more powerful than just lighting and reflections. Higher frame rates or uncanny valley hmmm let me see here.
Uh, sorry?Remember that the standard has been set by G-Sync, which has no ratio: it's simply 30Hz to whatever the max of the monitor is. The talk about ratios came about with the need to categorize the plethora of crappy "Freesync" implementations.
Not really, it's volume sales but the profit margin is pretty low to keep them cheap. However, it should give AMD some pulling power on developing standards.AMD is in both the next Xbox & Playstation, I'd say Nvidia is fucked. Sure, they'll sell $2000 dollar cards, but the console market is where the real money is.
AMD is in both the next Xbox & Playstation, I'd say Nvidia is fucked. Sure, they'll sell $2000 dollar cards, but the console market is where the real money is.
AMD probably makes 10-20 dollars per console sold, in gross profit currently, depending on the console.AMD is in both the next Xbox & Playstation, I'd say Nvidia is fucked. Sure, they'll sell $2000 dollar cards, but the console market is where the real money is.
Uh, sorry?
That is one of the standards Nvidia uses for certifying a VESA async monitor as “Gsync compatible”.
However, it should give AMD some pulling power on developing standards.
AMD is in both the next Xbox & Playstation, I'd say Nvidia is fucked. Sure, they'll sell $2000 dollar cards, but the console market is where the real money is.
"The standard is set" means that G-Sync is the standard. Every Freesync implementation falls short of G-Sync. A few are close.
Excluding Gsync Ultimate, the claim is dubious.
Especially with laptop displays being certified as Gsync displays. I’m very sure there are multiple Freesync monitors better than the “Gsync” Async panels in some laptops.
Do note those are Gsync, not “Gsync compatible”
You mean 7nm double triple patterning right, IF NVidia was smart they would wait for euv/uvl in 2020 and just crush them.
LOL! Crush who and how are they going to do it well overpricing their cards?
But are they overpriced if they sell...?
AMD probably makes 10-20 dollars per console sold, in gross profit currently, depending on the console.
A 2060 should gross profit somewhere between 80 and 120 dollars by my estimates. 60-75% margin.
2080? Probably 350-450 dollars gross profit. 80%+ margin
AMD’s profit per chip will rise with new consoles, but the margin will still be 15-20%.
Console business is good for AMD, and this generation saved AMD, but there is money to be made on both places.
let me be clear as possible consoles mean steady income selling one chip design over a 5-10 year life span. amd doesnt have to worry about making the greatest gpu in the world right now and maintain feature parity with nv in features and software why? it is console hardware that defines a generation of gaming and were devs allocate resources right now amd is in the drivers seat and will continue to be so.
It's console hardware that influences the beginning of the generation; however, developers and publishers have realized that properly supporting PC gaming can be very rewarding and move past the limitations set by consoles quickly. I fully expect AMD to ship ray tracing hardware in the upcoming console generation, but even if they fail to do that, PC gaming won't be held back.
to pretend that holding the consoles isn't a big win, or even possible game changer is silly
I have more than one PC. I usually employ a "trickle down" effect so I was hoping to place this 1080ti into my arcade PC(one of my arcade cabinets has a 4K display)With how underwhelming the 20xx cards are and how great the 1080ti is, why would you feel the need to upgrade? What game are you trying to play you can;t play maxed-out? Is Crysis 4 out or something?
"Tangible", right.RTX and DLSS are tangible features with tangible effects, also more future proof. You get support of DXR. Vastly less power consumption too.
Kind of like how DX10 was the new "industry standard" and PhysX was the new "industry standard".No, DXR is an industry standard now, the industry is moving into the direction of ray tracing, AMD is just late to the party as usual.
But it really isn't. AMD is only supplying hardware IP. Microsoft and Sony are the big winners; Microsoft especially, given the commonality of architectures and that their API is similar to DX12.
So AMD gets a small stream of revenue, but they don't really gain any influence. Microsoft and Sony decide where the platforms go, as they are AMD's customers here.
its all amd's code and render path my friend.
So a freesync panel which met the 30-144/whatever refresh rate with quality panel... would be identical, yes? And hence better due to a lower price/lower power consumption.Every G-Sync monitor has every feature that the very best Freesync implementation has, and syncs from 30Hz to the panel max. Nothing dubious about it.
How dense are you?We're all aware that Nvidia went a different route for laptops. Using an off-topic point undermines your argument, and you'd have to show that G-Sync as implemented in laptops is actually inferior to G-Sync as implemented in desktop GPUs and monitors.
How dense are you?
But it really isn't. AMD is only supplying hardware IP. Microsoft and Sony are the big winners; Microsoft especially, given the commonality of architectures and that their API is similar to DX12.
So AMD gets a small stream of revenue, but they don't really gain any influence. Microsoft and Sony decide where the platforms go, as they are AMD's customers here.
It really is, on top of the other arguments made it makes AMD the standard to which titles are designed, the console market is huge compared to the PC.
When you say "above" 2080 performance ... are you just inventing this? I mean, the head of AMD said below"
So, you are trolling, or are a paid shill for Nvidia, or who knows what. Got a grudge? Is what you're saying the script that Nvidia or some 3rd-party middle-man PR company have given you to try to mislead people with?
To be clear, the information that we have shows that Radeon 7 is ABOVE the performance of an RTX 2080.
And a 1070 Ti isn't what comes below the performance of an RTX 2080, so it's absolutely ridiculous to even be mentioning it at all - and you've been corrected about this multiple times.
Here's a ranking of comparable performances to make this easy to follow:
(least performance) 1070 ti < 1080 < 1080 Ti < 2080 < Radeon 7 (most performance)
The only consumer Nvidia GPU that offers more performance than Radeon 7 is the RTX 2080 Ti.
The only benchmark I'm aware of is this:
View attachment 134251
Troll elsewhere, please.
Again, the Devils Advocate in me is going to "gently" remind you and others that for about $300 to $500 you can nearly if not possibly beat the performance of this new card. I am pretty damn sure the 1080 ti is going to be within 5 or so frames of the Radeon 7. And what's really cool is, and this is a real option for potential buyers is that the Radeon 7 is now considered a "dumb card" techwise by today's video card standards, in that the Radeon 7 doesn't have RT, A.I. or DLSS, etc. So there is no loss going to a 1070, 1070 ti, 1080 or 1080 Ti over a Radeon 7. Potential buyers do not have to sacrifice any tech between the two and that's great news.
Friendly reminder that I seem unable to find a new, in stock 1080ti for under $1000.
2080's are readily available at $699 though.
In regards to you calling me a troll, it just doesn't work like that. You really should not invent things off the top of your head. I said I was playing Devils Advocate ..... I clearly said this. I'm not sure of the intent here, or the tangent. But, I do get it. This Radeon 7 is not the best news that we were all hoping for, especially the price. People are disappointed, hurt, sensitive and a bit fragile at this news, and, I get it. And that's OK. I'm fine with the display of emotions. Just ...we all need to take a breath before calling someone a Troll. My post doesn't even remotely meet that definition.
For those of you that don't truly really know your numbers and there are a surprising amount of you on here, I witness it every single day and or you rely on 2nd hand hear-say ... the 1080 ti is actually 2% faster than the nVidia 2080. So AMD says this new card is just below a 2080 ... that put's it at about a 1070 ti ... right?
Proof - https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-RTX-2080-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1080-Ti/4026vs3918
But it really isn't. AMD is only supplying hardware IP. Microsoft and Sony are the big winners; Microsoft especially, given the commonality of architectures and that their API is similar to DX12.
So AMD gets a small stream of revenue, but they don't really gain any influence. Microsoft and Sony decide where the platforms go, as they are AMD's customers here.