Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Hardware & Software > PC Hard & Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12th September 2018, 19:26   #41  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
the rumor about no tensor cores for 2060 or just staying with pascal are getting more clear.

while i can totally understand that a slower GPU will not be able to do ray tracing i have a hard time understanding why they should not be able to do DLSS or other potential use cases for tensor cores.
You can't actually predict the behavior of such a greedy and ruthless company like nVidia.

But if 2080 or even 2080 Ti have so many performance problems with RT, I don't expect an RTX 2060 or lower card.

I'm not even sure that will see any 2060 or lower Turing cards (GTX or RTX) before Pascal sells every stock or ever.

Regarding DLSS, we don't know yet how much is taxing Tensor cores and if the general architecture of Turing is meaningful if everything is ON (RT cores, AI cores, CUDA cores)
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2018, 19:43   #42  |  Link
videoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 600
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
such a greedy and ruthless company like nVidia
It's called free enterprise, aka capitalism, buddy. Grow up.
videoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2018, 20:21   #43  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by videoh View Post
It's called free enterprise, aka capitalism, buddy. Grow up.
Hahahahaha.

There are a lot of differences in the implementation of capitalism.

AMD and Xiaomi for example are still companies seeking for profit but as the CEO of Xiaomi has already said too many times, their profit is around 8% and they are going to push it down to around 5%.

So, nVidia by eliminating competition all these years with unethical and actually illegal means, wants to enforce not some kind of rules of the free enterprise but rules of the jungle.

They want to be a covered monopoly in order to milk everyone as much as they can with no rules and no other choices (competition)

Intel and nVidia are among the most hated tech companies of the world for a reason.

And please, don't be a blind nVidia fanboy.

Grow up.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2018, 20:25   #44  |  Link
videoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 600
A Greek is lecturing us on economics. LOL!
videoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2018, 20:39   #45  |  Link
Gser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 387
Allow me to rain on both of your parades. Xiaomi is limiting short turn profits to starve out competition and grab as many customers into its app/cloud eco system which it sees as the real money maker (this comes directly from a Xiaomi press release). All the big companies that form the oligarchs have to resort to unethical business practices e.g. treat their employees inhumanely, destroy the environment by cheaply sourcing materials and manufacturing obsolescence, bribing politicians for favorable laws and kickback investments, resort to false marketing, to survive in our late stage capitalist world that is run entirely by the stock markets.
Gser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2018, 20:40   #46  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by videoh View Post
A Greek is lecturing us on economics. LOL!
Interesting...

So, besides a blind nVidia fanboy and fan of boundless capitalism you are a racist too.

I'm on Tapatalk right now and I can't see if you have any info regarding your country.

Where are you from ?
Germany ?
LOL!
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th September 2018, 20:52   #47  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gser View Post
Allow me to rain on both of your parades. Xiaomi is limiting short turn profits to starve out competition and grab as many customers into its app/cloud eco system which it sees as the real money maker (this comes directly from a Xiaomi press release).
No, Xiaomi can't eliminate the competition.

It's fourth after Samsung, Huawei and Apple and it will never reach them.

They give the best phones for their value , best VFM and they simply don't sell overpriced because they don't find a reason (!)

For all the other things that you said I agree with you, but what I'm trying to say is that not all companies are the same.

No AMD and Xiaomi are not nVidia and Intel.

You should probably study better the history of both companies to find out unbelievable facts about them.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2018, 14:05   #48  |  Link
Gser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
No, Xiaomi can't eliminate the competition.

It's fourth after Samsung, Huawei and Apple and it will never reach them.

They give the best phones for their value , best VFM and they simply don't sell overpriced because they don't find a reason (!)

For all the other things that you said I agree with you, but what I'm trying to say is that not all companies are the same.

No AMD and Xiaomi are not nVidia and Intel.

You should probably study better the history of both companies to find out unbelievable facts about them.
It's not aiming for Samsung or Apple because it can't compete with their R&D and brand value. It's trying to flush out other manufacturers at the same price point like oneplus, Huawei and motorola. It won't be successful of course because it's phones are not as good as oneplus, and motorola has better value for money and its cloud services are complete shit compared to Google's that most Android users use. It also faces stiff competition and an entrenched market filled by Huawei, Oppo and Vivo in the asian market. Pocophone is a good effort, we shall see if it makes any dent in the market.

You are right they are not like nVidia or Intel because they can't afford to be like them because they lag so much behind in market share and sales and technology. AMD and chinese phone makers are known as product suppliers of the poor for a reason.

Last edited by Gser; 13th September 2018 at 14:10.
Gser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2018, 16:53   #49  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gser View Post
It's not aiming for Samsung or Apple because it can't compete with their R&D ... AMD and chinese phone makers are known as product suppliers of the poor for a reason.
I have to disagree with you on most of your points.

Huawei is a huge company even bigger than Intel and is number two right now at smartphones just after Samsung.
Its aim is to surpass even Samsung in 2019, so it's out of the Xiaomi's targets.

AMD and Xiaomi are not making products for the poor.

They are making good products at sane prices for sane people.

EPYC CPUs and Threadripper CPUs are not cheap, but compared to Xeons they are cheaper for their performance and in sane prices for their value.

AMD has better CPUs now at all categories than Intel.
They are always faster on multithreaded apps and always cheaper.

The only thing missing from AMD is giving money to tech journalists in order to write reviews in a form of propaganda.

Like what Intel always did in the past and does even now with Zen architecture.

They are literally buying time to catch up with Zen architecture and 7nm of TSMC but of course even Intel's brand name and huge money can't buy everything.

So, these days Intel has only money and brand name and AMD has the best x86 CPUs ever.

Regarding Xiaomi, it has some cheap but very good smartphones and also some expensive ones but like AMD in sane prices for their hardware.

Intel and Nvidia are very well known of overpricing their products in insane levels, just because there are people with various psychological problems who actually buy them.

And because they have done everything they can - illegally - to eliminate competition and to become covered monopolies in order to sell at such high prices.

Now that Intel has competition after more than ten years, it has lost a good share in desktop and HEDT markets and next year is going to lose around 25% in server market.

But AMD is a small company and can't compete at the same time with nVidia and Intel.

Maybe the big failure of Turing and 7nm of Vega20 could make a difference.

We 'll see about that.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th September 2018, 18:03   #50  |  Link
Gser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 387
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
AMD has better CPUs now at all categories than Intel.
They are always faster on multithreaded apps and always cheaper.
Except for gaming and all other low threaded use cases. Even their Xenons have higher core clocks. I am not a fan boy of either just hoping AMD would step up their gaming performance of their CPU's and GPU's. Otherwise I'll just pay the nvidia and intel tax.

Last edited by Gser; 13th September 2018 at 18:19.
Gser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th September 2018, 13:24   #51  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,090
the gaming performance deficit comes mostly from the slower infinity fabric that has higher latency than the ring bus from intel.

that's why high speed low latency ram give an AMD more speed boost than an intel CPU because that closes the gap.

the clock speed difference shouldn't be anything more than a worse process and this should be fixed with TSMC 7nm and not a design problem from AMD.

especially for high 120+ FPS gaming intel CPUs are still far better and the reason i still don't have a new CPU...
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2018, 07:40   #52  |  Link
Blue_MiSfit
Derek Prestegard IRL
 
Blue_MiSfit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,420
Mind the toxic behavior, guys. Rule 15 and Rule 4 are both being broken.
Blue_MiSfit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2018, 11:51   #53  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
Especially for high 120+ FPS gaming intel CPUs are still far better and the reason i still don't have a new CPU...
So, you are telling us that the reason of not buying Ryzen is because it can play games at 1080p at 140 fps instead of 155 fps of Intel.

Interesting...
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2018, 12:08   #54  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,090
yes because your example is the difference between tearing and no tearing using a 144 screen run by fast sync and a ghosting free experience using BFI/back light strobing.

and the difference can be 20 % or more FPS.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2018, 12:14   #55  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
I knew that you would use the 144 Hz excuse, that's why I gave you that example...

So many people nowadays are using ultra expensive displays and ultra expensive GPUs in order to play games at 1080p resolution to reach 144 or more fps.

Right ?
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2018, 12:27   #56  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,090
144 hz screen have no special price tag any more and no you don't need expensive GPU it is relative easy to tweak the GPU usage but not the CPU usage at high frame rate.

and yes i personally plan to get a 240 hz screen.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2018, 20:15   #57  |  Link
ShogoXT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 90
https://www.nvidia.com/content/dam/e...Whitepaper.pdf

Bitrate efficiency and quality has gone up! This is a big deal see page 29.
ShogoXT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th September 2018, 20:26   #58  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,090
"typical CPU"

there tests shows results where pascal is supposed to be close to x264 using PSNR. but it in term of visual quality it is not even close. x264 CPU utilisation 13 % good job nvidia...

and the 25% bitrate savings on HEVC well maybe they added b frames...
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2018, 15:29   #59  |  Link
NikosD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,475
Ok.

After all the reviews been released to the public, my original assumption still stands alive and kicking.

Turing RTX cards is the worst release ever for nVidia and maybe their biggest mistake.

I don't personally believe that RTX pseudo-raytracing is going to last if AMD doesn't support it.

Regarding RTX cards:

2080 Ti vs 1080 Ti is ~10% at 1080p, 25% at 1440p and 30% at 4K

2080 vs 1080 is ~ 35%

2080 vs 1080 Ti is almost a tie ~ 5%

1080 Ti had an MSRP around 50$ more than 980 Ti but ~ 70% more performance

1080 had an MSRP around 50$ more than 980 but ~ 60% more performance.

The actual difference in price of 2080 Ti vs 1080 Ti is ~ 500$

What a disastrous combination!

Stay away from this fraud.
__________________
Win 10 x64 (17763.55) - Core i3-4170/ iGPU HD 4400 (v.5058)
HEVC decoding benchmarks
H.264 DXVA Benchmarks for all
NikosD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2018, 15:44   #60  |  Link
videoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 600
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
Turing RTX cards is the worst release ever for nVidia and maybe their biggest mistake.
It's so bad that no-one wants these things:

https://www.nowinstock.net/computers...dia/rtx2080ti/

/sarcasm

Take a look at the 5 year stock price history of nVidia to get the true picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikosD View Post
I don't personally believe...
Get over yourself, nobody cares.

NikosD can't afford the world's premiere GPU, so he goes the sour grapes route. What a joke!

Last edited by videoh; 21st September 2018 at 16:04.
videoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:57.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.