Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti Versus GTX 1080 Ti Benchmarks Are Out

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
19,842
According to Turkish tech website PC Hoc TV, they have conducted testing on the new Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti and compared it to an Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti at 4K resolutions. They experienced a 20% - 25% uplift in performance from the RTX 2080 Ti upgrade. Of course we don't know which driver version they were running during the testing and [remember that Kyle said "If you are seeing any benchmarks between now and the ~20th (we think the 2080 launch and 2080 Ti launch will be split on different days possibly), you are likely not seeing cards benchmarked with its launch driver. So keep that in the back of your mind as you see performance leaks come forward."

Tested on the system with 7700K processor, the RTX 2080 Ti showed 20% - 25% more performance than the 1080 Ti display card. NOTE: The test has been performed at 4K resolution, so the data is eliminated in this way. Test System: GPU: RTX 2080 Ti CPU: Intel i7 7700K Windows Version: Windows 10 RAM: 16 GB 3200 MHz.
 

J3RK

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
9,406
If nothing else, they look better than the old cards. :D

I like the simple lines over the "transformer look".
 

Dayaks

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
7,682
About the performance boost we've come to expect from one generation to the next. The sticking point is the 70+% increase in price from the 1080Ti.
It’s really just filling the Titan slot. I wonder if it’ll drop to ti levels in six months when the ti usually launches.

I wonder how much OC room this thing has. The base boost is really low.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
630
Well..

The 1080ti has 3584 CUDA cores, 224 texture units and 88 ROPs.
The 2080ti has 4352 CUDA cores, 272 texture units and 88 ROPs.

The 2080ti has approx 17% more cores than the 1080ti.. a 20-25% bump in performance could easily be accounted for by just the existence of the additional 768 cores.
 

Seventyfive

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
1,347
I'm going to guess this test doesn't use DLSS... that will be the really interesting thing with Turing. How many games is it compatible with and what is the actual real world improvement?
 

arestavo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 25, 2013
Messages
1,435
It’s really just filling the Titan slot. I wonder if it’ll drop to ti levels in six months when the ti usually launches.

I wonder how much OC room this thing has. The base boost is really low.
I'm betting it's likely around the same 2.0 to 2.1 GHz range the 1080 and 1080 Ti had. Perhaps a bit more, but with those TDP and core counts...
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,332
Their numbers are off. It's closer to 40%. Do you even statistics, bro?

upload_2018-8-30_16-6-1.png


This is inline with what I and others have been saying. The increased ROP count probably has a lot to do with the much improved minimums.
About the performance boost we've come to expect from one generation to the next. The sticking point is the 70+% increase in price from the 1080Ti.
980 Ti to 1080 Ti was 60-70%. The increase in price is primarily due to the size of the chip. They're likely only getting around 30 chips from a silicon wafer compared to 70-80 with the 1080 Ti.
I guess they should be available on ebay for about $1500. :ROFLMAO:
They're going for between $1,599 and $1,999 USD on eBay.
 

misterbobby

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
3,814
About the performance boost we've come to expect from one generation to the next. The sticking point is the 70+% increase in price from the 1080Ti.
Why not bother to do a few seconds of research before making ridiculous claims acting like 20 to 25% is what we normally get? Pascal gave us 75% over Maxwell and Maxwell gave 45% over Kepler.
 

viper1152012

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
1,025
Hope they can make their Titan replacement go faster against the small 1080ti card. Oh boy.

If the 2080ti was 700$ (what my 1080ti fe evga cost) I might upgrade. However for over 1k and having that same TitanXp gap I would agree to pass.

If they do some nodding on the driver and boost it to 50% I might bite.
 

SnowBeast

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
1,219
Their numbers are off. It's closer to 40%. Do you even statistics, bro?

980 Ti to 1080 Ti was 60-70%. .
Well your 980Ti one is way off bro. I paid 649.99 for mine, then 649.99 for the 1080Ti. I agree, the chip is bigger more expensive. But $550 dollars bigger? Not hardly.

People don't have patience any more. What won't a 1080Ti play till 2020 at 4K? Developers aren't going to hang themselves to give RT at 1080p/60fps priority over the general populace. Don't buy this 2080Ti bullshit, 2080 hmmm....yeah okay maybe.

But remember, we are 14-15 months away from a potential full blown GPU war at 7nm. Enter Godzilla/Chipzilla......AMD enters.......Nvidia lurches forward with second gen on 7nm......~~~~~Let them fight!~~~~

Save your money, buy a Evga 1080Ti and if you see a big difference between it and the regular 2080, then use Evga's 90 day step program. But honestly, I am done for now and going to invest in display technology now that projectors are coming out at IFA in True 4K not e-shift b.s. Still nothing like playing these games on a 4K 100 inch screen. :)
 

Ocellaris

Ginger @le, an alcoholic's best friend.
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
18,865
Their numbers are off. It's closer to 40%. Do you even statistics, bro?

View attachment 100279
The biggest news story here is some people can’t even do basic math.

Nvidia managed just under a 40% performance gain over what was already the best gaming card in the market. Is it expensive? Yes.
 

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,542
I'm betting it's likely around the same 2.0 to 2.1 GHz range the 1080 and 1080 Ti had. Perhaps a bit more, but with those TDP and core counts...
I couldn't tell if Tom Petersen said 2.13 or 2.3 ghz OC durin ght interview with hot hardware.
 

defaultluser

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
13,131
About the performance boost we've come to expect from one generation to the next. The sticking point is the 70+% increase in price from the 1080Ti.

No, it's not.

GTX 580 -> GTX 780 Ti was almost 90% (die shrink).
GTX 780 Ti to The 980 Ti was 45% (no die shrink).
GTX 980 Ti to GTX 1080 Ti was 85% (die shrink).

For no die shrink, this is a disappointment at half the performance increase of Maxwell's large chip. And that's because they wasted all the die space on raytacing dedicated units.
 

illli

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
1,293
I'm going to guess this test doesn't use DLSS... that will be the really interesting thing with Turing. How many games is it compatible with and what is the actual real world improvement?
One thing I am curious about is if DLSS is something built in hardware, and can be used on older games. Otherwise... I have a backlog of 100+ titles, that (if it requires developers to update their games to be able to use) won't ever be able to take advantage of DLSS
 

d8lock

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
684
No, it's not.

GTX 580 -> GTX 780 Ti was almost 90% (die shrink).
GTX 780 Ti to The 980 Ti was 45% (no die shrink).
GTX 980 Ti to GTX 1080 Ti was 85% (die shrink).

For no die shrink, this is a disappointment at half the performance increase of Maxwell's large chip. And that's because they wasted all the die space on raytacing dedicated units.
The 680 came before the 780. The 780 came before the 780 ti.
 

defaultluser

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
13,131
The 680 came before the 780. The 780 came before the 780 ti.

You don't understand big die transitions. This is comparing the largest to the largest, to show performance increase of the architecture at max affordable die size.

Largest, highest-performance Fermi = GTX 580.

Largest, highest-performance Kepler = 780 Ti.

Largest, highest-performance Maxwell = 980 Ti,

Largest, highest-performance Pascal =1080 Ti.

Largest, highest-performance Turing is the 2080 Ti. You can't make the die any larger withotu ti costing several thousand dollars.

We're not counting release cadence here, just because Nvidia went back to the Fermi years and released the biggest boy on day one. It's still important to compare the biggest dies from one generation to the next.
 
Last edited:

misterbobby

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
3,814
The 680 came before the 780. The 780 came before the 780 ti.
Well he's comparing the true large chip successors. But even the dinky 680 using a mid-range chip was still 35% faster than the previous big chip flagship 580.
 

Stoly

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,542
For god sake, wa
No, it's not.

GTX 580 -> GTX 780 Ti was almost 90% (die shrink).
GTX 780 Ti to The 980 Ti was 45% (no die shrink).
GTX 980 Ti to GTX 1080 Ti was 85% (die shrink).

For no die shrink, this is a disappointment at half the performance increase of Maxwell's large chip. And that's because they wasted all the die space on raytacing dedicated units.
Your numbers are wrong. Take a look at the recent article from [H] comparing the 780Ti vs 980Ti and 1080Ti
 

d8lock

Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
684
You don't understand big die transitions. This is comparing the largest to the largest, to show performance increase of the architecture at max affordable die size.

Largest, highest-performance Fermi = GTX 580.

Largest, highest-performance Kepler = 780 Ti.

Largest, highest-performance Maxwell = 980 Ti,

Largest, highest-performance Pascal =,1080 Ti.

Largest, highest-performance Turing is the 2080 Ti. You can't make the die any larger withotu ti costing several thousand dollars.

We're not counting release cadence here, just because Nvidia went back to the Fermi years and released the biggest boy on day one. It's still important to compare the biggest dies from one generation to the next.
Ah, my mistake.
 

defaultluser

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
13,131
For god sake, wa

Your numbers are wrong. Take a look at the recent article from [H] comparing the 780Ti vs 980Ti and 1080Ti

I just looked at them. For 4k gameplay,the performance of the GTX 980 Ti is about 10% faster than I was quoting (and thus the 1080 Ti 10% lower).

980 Ti = 55% faster than 780-Ti
1080 Ti = 75% faster than 980 Ti.

I was quoting launch-day reviews from TechPowerUp.

This doesn't change my original claim in the slightest - it just highlights how much shittier RTX is when Maxwell managed 55% performance with mature drivers. If the claim of just 20% speedup is true, then it's a dud.
 
Last edited:
Top