This part is odd for me. How is this not a monopolist leveraging their near-monopoly in desktop and android mobile browser markets to attack their competitors in advertising field which is their main money maker?
Additionally it wouldn't be surprising if there was a non-competition clause in nvidia's supplier contract, which prohibits nvidia from entering the market with a new device that would compete with the shield.
I completely agree that in the past, some games required patches from AMD to run properly. Same is true in reverse, where they needed patches from nvidia to run properly. This is mainly linked to each manufacturers "best played on our cards" campaigns, which tend to block the other GPU manufacturer access from the title to make relevant driver adjustments ahead of time.
As AMD's program is notably smaller than nvidia's, it tends to run into this problem more than nvidia.
If you can't find any reviews right now, when literally searching for name of the card and name of technology will get you countless articles and videos, I can't help you.
I'll literally point you to overwhelming majority of reviews of how the new cards work in the only game that actually supports nvidia's sorta kinda ray tracing. It addresses every single one of your questions in full.
That's straight up marketing BS. Reality is, unfixed bugs stay across multiple driver releases with remarkable consistency. In some cases, they persist for many months, even when they're so well documented that nvidia has to literally copy/paste it in documentation errata in each release for months, like the firefox cursor corruption issue.
"No marketing gimmicks, and drivers that are released when updates are relevant".
Where's the downside?
(Before you pretend that releasing drivers often lets them fix problems, tell us, how many driver releases did they kick the the firefox browser corruption bug down the road again?)
I play warframe at 120fps lock. TAA is fucking awful. It's like vaseline smeared all over your screen. I suspect the only people who like it are the people who really like motion blur. It produces a sorta kinda similar look.
Story isn't about methane. It's about diesel (vehicles) and kerosene (jet fuel). Basically people fly more and there are more products that need to be driven to the stores for people to buy. Not to even mention the whole amazon deliveries aspect. Basically rapid growth of economy leads to more flying to vacations by the wealthy city folks and more driving to get consumer products.
The reason why there's an attempt to spin this as "it's the methane" is because of increasing desperation in the green lobby with methane outcompeting pretty much everything in electricity generation in North America due to fracking phenomena. It's almost free as a by-product of fracking and it has only about half of CO2 emissions compared to coal per energy generated. So all the major wind and solar on grid is starting to run into the wall of "thanks, but unless there are massive subsidies and PR boost, we will just install a CCGT". And chemistry dictates that you'd need over double the installed capacity of methane over decommissioned coal to actually get to increase from this replacement process.
I must say, you make for a very in depth look at astroturfer's handbook on how to handle being caught astroturfing. Tacit attempt at feigning agreement, gentle attempt to guide discussion away from your astroturfing and noting that "you made the right choice to buy our product". Some serious psychology went into material that was used to train you.
Thank you for this interesting lesson in psychology. It was quite enjoyable.
Only some of them that just aren't selling and they have warehouses full of, like 1060s, and even then, many of them are still above MSRP at release. The cards they made for crypto miners basically.
1070s for example are still overwhelmingly far above MSRP, though well down from crypto boom pricing which added far more premium than is currently asked: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n...
Note how you didn't debunk any of my statements, you just made it look like you did. At no point did you argue that AMD expressed significant interest in implementing ray tracing in GPUs beyond token nod to Microsoft. At no point did you debunk the fact that this is a paid feature by nvidia that no one is willing to touch with a ten foot pole without nvidia paying for it.
And the current implementation is the "sorta kinda ray tracing" because it isn't actual ray tracing for most of the scene, and where it is present, it's severely limited and culled at every possible step in a desperate bid to make it light enough to be doable in real time. Because actual ray tracing in real time for the whole scene is simply not doable in real time without a modern supercomputer.
Which is noted by essentially every reviewer who isn't paid by nvidia, and even many of those that are. Improvements to visual quality are minimal to non-existent in current implementation for a massive performance impact. Which is why it's highly unlikely to be adopted any time soon on any meaningful scale.
Problem being that DXR implementation that exists is nvidia only at the moment, and we're not aware of any interest from AMD in implementing it on nvidia's terms any more so than any other proprietary nvidia's features in the past that they "sorta kinda" opened to others.
Considering that essentially every single game with ray tracing had the feature essentially paid for by nvidia, and even then there's almost no one that did it, and those that did had to tone it down hard and go back to rasters because anything that was beyond half baked "sorta kinda" ray tracing simply didn't work properly.
That moment when you get caught astroturfing, and try really hard to pretend you're not. Because this most certainly isn't xx60 series in anything but name. It's xx70 in terms of price and maybe, perhaps, performance.
Except that it's 1070-ish, while pretending to be next gen, selling point being new rendering mode that isn't implemented pretty much anywhere where nvidia hasn't paid for. 1060 is still where value proposition is. 2060 sold at xx70 prices has the value proposition of xx70 series, which is significantly worse than xx60 series. Something I can say with authority as someone who bought both x60 and x70 cards depending on needs in the past.
GTX 1060 3 GB had 200 USD MSRP two years ago. This one is 75% more expensive while being positioned as similar mid end product this generation. We didn't have anywhere near that much inflation over two years, we had low single digits one.
The ass hat. Which you will likely put on your head, being as dumb as you are in thinking that 75% price increase in a single generation for the mid end product is something you can extrapolate from historic numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
This part is odd for me. How is this not a monopolist leveraging their near-monopoly in desktop and android mobile browser markets to attack their competitors in advertising field which is their main money maker?
Additionally it wouldn't be surprising if there was a non-competition clause in nvidia's supplier contract, which prohibits nvidia from entering the market with a new device that would compete with the shield.
I completely agree that in the past, some games required patches from AMD to run properly. Same is true in reverse, where they needed patches from nvidia to run properly. This is mainly linked to each manufacturers "best played on our cards" campaigns, which tend to block the other GPU manufacturer access from the title to make relevant driver adjustments ahead of time.
As AMD's program is notably smaller than nvidia's, it tends to run into this problem more than nvidia.
Having seen price charts on the various board components, I have to disagree with that assessment.
If you can't find any reviews right now, when literally searching for name of the card and name of technology will get you countless articles and videos, I can't help you.
I'll literally point you to overwhelming majority of reviews of how the new cards work in the only game that actually supports nvidia's sorta kinda ray tracing. It addresses every single one of your questions in full.
That's probably about what mid range costs. Just the dedicated chip of course. The board is extra.
That's straight up marketing BS. Reality is, unfixed bugs stay across multiple driver releases with remarkable consistency. In some cases, they persist for many months, even when they're so well documented that nvidia has to literally copy/paste it in documentation errata in each release for months, like the firefox cursor corruption issue.
"No marketing gimmicks, and drivers that are released when updates are relevant".
Where's the downside?
(Before you pretend that releasing drivers often lets them fix problems, tell us, how many driver releases did they kick the the firefox browser corruption bug down the road again?)
I play warframe at 120fps lock. TAA is fucking awful. It's like vaseline smeared all over your screen. I suspect the only people who like it are the people who really like motion blur. It produces a sorta kinda similar look.
Story isn't about methane. It's about diesel (vehicles) and kerosene (jet fuel). Basically people fly more and there are more products that need to be driven to the stores for people to buy. Not to even mention the whole amazon deliveries aspect. Basically rapid growth of economy leads to more flying to vacations by the wealthy city folks and more driving to get consumer products.
The reason why there's an attempt to spin this as "it's the methane" is because of increasing desperation in the green lobby with methane outcompeting pretty much everything in electricity generation in North America due to fracking phenomena. It's almost free as a by-product of fracking and it has only about half of CO2 emissions compared to coal per energy generated. So all the major wind and solar on grid is starting to run into the wall of "thanks, but unless there are massive subsidies and PR boost, we will just install a CCGT". And chemistry dictates that you'd need over double the installed capacity of methane over decommissioned coal to actually get to increase from this replacement process.
Which is obviously not occurring.
It's not just nvidia though. They sold those chips ages ago. It's board partners and resellers too who're trying to get their share.
I must say, you make for a very in depth look at astroturfer's handbook on how to handle being caught astroturfing. Tacit attempt at feigning agreement, gentle attempt to guide discussion away from your astroturfing and noting that "you made the right choice to buy our product". Some serious psychology went into material that was used to train you.
Thank you for this interesting lesson in psychology. It was quite enjoyable.
Only some of them that just aren't selling and they have warehouses full of, like 1060s, and even then, many of them are still above MSRP at release. The cards they made for crypto miners basically.
1070s for example are still overwhelmingly far above MSRP, though well down from crypto boom pricing which added far more premium than is currently asked: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n...
Something that is obviously relevant and related to performance and cost, which is the observable reality for those not desperately astroturfing?
BS. The price rise that followed was about crypto boom. And no, we didn't have double digit inflation in two years.
Note how you didn't debunk any of my statements, you just made it look like you did. At no point did you argue that AMD expressed significant interest in implementing ray tracing in GPUs beyond token nod to Microsoft. At no point did you debunk the fact that this is a paid feature by nvidia that no one is willing to touch with a ten foot pole without nvidia paying for it.
And the current implementation is the "sorta kinda ray tracing" because it isn't actual ray tracing for most of the scene, and where it is present, it's severely limited and culled at every possible step in a desperate bid to make it light enough to be doable in real time. Because actual ray tracing in real time for the whole scene is simply not doable in real time without a modern supercomputer.
Which is noted by essentially every reviewer who isn't paid by nvidia, and even many of those that are. Improvements to visual quality are minimal to non-existent in current implementation for a massive performance impact. Which is why it's highly unlikely to be adopted any time soon on any meaningful scale.
Problem being that DXR implementation that exists is nvidia only at the moment, and we're not aware of any interest from AMD in implementing it on nvidia's terms any more so than any other proprietary nvidia's features in the past that they "sorta kinda" opened to others.
Considering that essentially every single game with ray tracing had the feature essentially paid for by nvidia, and even then there's almost no one that did it, and those that did had to tone it down hard and go back to rasters because anything that was beyond half baked "sorta kinda" ray tracing simply didn't work properly.
That moment when you get caught astroturfing, and try really hard to pretend you're not. Because this most certainly isn't xx60 series in anything but name. It's xx70 in terms of price and maybe, perhaps, performance.
Except that it's 1070-ish, while pretending to be next gen, selling point being new rendering mode that isn't implemented pretty much anywhere where nvidia hasn't paid for. 1060 is still where value proposition is. 2060 sold at xx70 prices has the value proposition of xx70 series, which is significantly worse than xx60 series. Something I can say with authority as someone who bought both x60 and x70 cards depending on needs in the past.
GTX 1060 3 GB had 200 USD MSRP two years ago. This one is 75% more expensive while being positioned as similar mid end product this generation. We didn't have anywhere near that much inflation over two years, we had low single digits one.
Which by definition is the opposite of extremist, as that's the mainstream view across overwhelming majority of humanity.
The ass hat. Which you will likely put on your head, being as dumb as you are in thinking that 75% price increase in a single generation for the mid end product is something you can extrapolate from historic numbers.
>I presents a far better value proposition than the 2070 and 2080, and both of those cards are selling very well.
It's rare to see such a direct admission of being an astroturfer. Thanks. I laughed.
What do you think Moore's law is?
This card is priced almost the same as 1070 on launch two years ago. Linear time exists, as does moore's law.
This is a "mid end card" with high end pricing. Ergo, it's massively overpriced. Ergo current state of nvidia stock.