- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,634
Damn phone keyboard. But that is pretty funny.Well, I think we can guarantee that they're not an immortal company. Not unless Jensen finds the fountain of youth or something.
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.
Damn phone keyboard. But that is pretty funny.Well, I think we can guarantee that they're not an immortal company. Not unless Jensen finds the fountain of youth or something.
Well, I think we can guarantee that they're not an immortal company. Not unless Jensen finds the fountain of youth or something.
Except 1060 (not 1070) was ~980 and 1070 (not 1080) was ~>980ti, while 1080 was > 980ti. Similar to how 900 series stacked against 700. But now we see 2080 ~>1080ti and 2070 slightly > 1080. So only this time it moved one level with significant price increase. Many 1080 boost above 2000 out of the box and could potentially match out of the box 2070 btw.
That sentence doesn't even make sense. Law = legal. No one is saying anything criminal happened.
Breaking contracts is breaking the law.
This presupposes that a contract is legal.
My comment was about people criticizing only Nvidia in the comment section. the article was great at calling out Vega 64 as as being a bad choice.
Hmm.
Double digit performance increase over the previous gen? Interesting!
The fact that it's only that way OVERCLOCKED? Meh.
And good on you for shitting on NVIDIA's shoes.
The biggest problem I have is when (if) ray tracing comes to fruition soon, the performance hit is going to drag these first-gen RTX cards through the mud, resulting in a huge loss on investment.
Nobody is going to want to pay the artificially inflated prices for a 30-50% hit in FPS, and that's also going to kill the used market values.
Huh? Check it again - both the 1080 and the 2070 were clocked at similar speeds (check clock speed consistency). Clock-for-clock, it's still better considering a deficit in cores and other resources.
I was talking vs the 1070.
Great review as always, thank you Kyle!
//Grammar Nazi mode ON
//Grammar Nazi mode OFF
There is nothing ethically wrong with that.I said there is something ethically wrong with doing anything where you know another person broke a contract to enable it. I have lots of analogies -- it's like dating a married woman, technically she's the one that is cheating right?
Stolen goods are something completely different. There was an actual crime involved. A breach of a civil contract and a criminal offense are to be treated much differently.Even if you didn't break a contract yourself, you were enabled by something that was legally wrong. It is like buying stolen property and saying "I wasn't the one who stole it".
Regarding the idea that NDAs are evil, it is important to contrast that with the alternative -- a free-for-all where reviewers scramble to get publicly available stuff.
With NDA: Hey reviewers -- you get preview hardware (possibly cherry picked so use grain of salt) and two weeks to write up thoughtful reviews and you can all publish at the same time along with all the excitement the company is trying to generate around the launch. All they ask is you coordinate the date.
Without NDA: Launch date arrives and reviewers wait, like everyone else, for their orders to arrive. Reviewers in far-flung places like Australia might get theirs days later than others. Then journalistic integrity will be sorely tested because you want to do a thorough review but are under intense pressure to not be scooped by other review sites. Even end customers are are scooping you with reviews before you get to publish yours.
Now certainly NDAs can be weird and onerous. I'm just saying the general hate and suspicion around NDAs is unwarranted.
I think people are getting confused between these NDAs (embargo to a specific, near-term date) and NDAs that apply forever (like a Stormy Daniel's hush contract).
That sentence doesn't even make sense. Law = legal. No one is saying anything criminal happened.
Breaking contracts is breaking the law.
Well, I think we can guarantee that they're not an immortal company. Not unless Jensen finds the fountain of youth or something.
Civil vs Criminal is what he probably intended to say.
There are a different evidentiary standard for each.
[H], having no legal tie to NVIDIA or any of their partners, has run afoul of NEITHER standard.
Honestly?
#0FucksGiven
Anyone buying VIDEO CARDS as "an investment" is both missing the point AND fully deserving of whatever comes to them...
Good job with review. If Nvidia is pissed it serves them well because they had opportunity to provide fair review terms like they used to for years instead they tried to play AMD and influence reviews.
Hmm I wonder if this card would be good upgrade over 980ti (reference) I have now. 1080 seemed a bit too small for the performance gained but this is another 10-20% faster.
Do you think for games where i have 60-70 fps at 1440p will it bring them to 90-100 ?
Perhaps you misunderstood. My underlying point is: investment meaning "the MUCH higher price for a mid-range GPU compared to the pricing of the same tiers of previous generations, but performance tanks massively (to the realm of completely unusable) when ray tracing is used, thus not giving any justification for the much higher pricing, which instantly tanks the value."
So because you didn't sign the NDA, you thought it was okay to undercut all the other reviewers who did? Because why? You want to spite Nvidia or something?
I'd like to mention that Steve (GamersNexus) didn't sign recent AMD NDA's, but still managed to source early Ryzen chips and chose not to publish until the NDA date out of respect for other reviewers.
This is a scummy move.
We don’t know much about RT yet except DICE thought there were easy ways to increase FPS. I also highly doubt nVidia would commit so much of their die (and basically double the price of their die) if that was true. I am not saying don’t be skeptical but it sounds like you are stating fact, which it’s not. “Wait for december for proper ray tracing games” is the advice I would give if RT is a deciding factor.
There’s also DLSS, which I am more excited for, if nVidia would just implement the damned thing...
Many 1080 boost above 2000 out of the box and could potentially match out of the box 2070 btw.
I'd say it is better to buy this card than a 1080ti brand new. But they need to lower the price to $500 to make it a compelling product for anyone to upgrade from an AMD 290 / nvidia 970 or below.
Yes, yes it was. Sorry for the confusion. I should not be making serious responses to posts when I tired.
I think you might be surprised. They are simply pricing many out of the hobby.fellas these are just founders prices
msrp will definitely be lower.... not that you'll ever get one at msrp.
Depends on the price of the 1080ti. At MSRP for both, it very well could be a better buy. It should come out around 10-15% slower for around $100, or so, less. However, if you run across a new 1080 ti for $650 or less then I'd say it makes the 1080 ti a better buy.
I think you might be surprised. They are simply pricing many out of the hobby.
Bit higher performance, bit higher price, loaded with new technology... How is that not value?
And for those repeating old information with respect to ray-tracing: we have examples of it struggling at 1080p and running well at 4k, from the same event that you are 'remembering'. We are very likely to see decent performance and the ability to tune that performance with respect to quality as needed, which the same devs have also said.
You may go back to bitching about NDAs.
Yes.
I'm posting here because there are multiple things to discuss. One of them is the general topic of NDAs.
You're totally mixing up the timing and the actors. There is no point in a reviewer signing an NVIDIA's NDA today (once boards are leaked). There was a point (getting hardware, drivers, support, etc.) to signing it previously. There especially is a point (get a quantity at launch) to MSI's resellers signing it previously.
A reviewer can choose to not sign the NDA and try to sneak equal privileges. But it is a risk, and relies on other people breaking contracts.
You really can't say that nothing was offered for these NDAs. I can totally agree that what is offered may not be worth it -- power to the people and journalists that resist these temptations. But these NDAs do offer something significant in return for towing the line.