nVidia Super?

[Nunz]

Looks like it’s in that 10-15% area. Not bad for a $700 card that cost $400+ less. I don’t regret my TI (especially at the speeds I’m running) but that’s a pretty good deal. I don’t see the reason to upgrade from a 1080TI yet though, that’s the real disappointment. Pascal has to be one of the most amazing architectures in terms of longevity we’ve seen in at least a decade.

I’m wondering if this will become the norm, with the old flagship lasting much longer as a viable option for a year into the newer architectures release.

I don’t know why fortnite is even benched. The game looks like complete ass; it’s a lack of optimization that makes the raw power of the 2080TI perform better. There’s no reason that game shouldn’t be 100% CPU limited.

[demo]

Originally Posted by Exposed

Except in newer games of course, unless you want people to think the performance they get in Far Cry New Dawn is going to translate over to Dirt Rally 2.0 (where a 2080Ti FE is at least 19% faster at 1440p)?

Tech power up benched a bigger array of games and found the discrepency to be a bit deeper.

They are newer games with Techspots 12% result.

TPU has older games in their suite. Even so, they still have the Super at only 13.8% slower.. or the TI is only 16% faster, whichever makes you feel better. Plus they squeezed 8% uplift out of it.

[demo]

Originally Posted by Nunz

Looks like it’s in that 10-15% area. Not bad for a $700 card that cost $400+ less. I don’t regret my TI (especially at the speeds I’m running) but that’s a pretty good deal. I don’t see the reason to upgrade from a 1080TI yet though, that’s the real disappointment. Pascal has to be one of the most amazing architectures in terms of longevity we’ve seen in at least a decade.

I’m wondering if this will become the norm, with the old flagship lasting much longer as a viable option for a year into the newer architectures release.

I don’t know why fortnite is even benched. The game looks like complete ass; it’s a lack of optimization that makes the raw power of the 2080TI perform better. There’s no reason that game shouldn’t be 100% CPU limited.

They should have dropped the price by $50 too imho. It's a 9% gain over 1080TI for the same money.. boring.

[Exposed]

Originally Posted by demo

They are newer games with Techspots 12% result.

TPU has older games in their suite. Even so, they still have the Super at only 13.8% slower.. or the TI is only 16% faster, whichever makes you feel better. Plus they squeezed 8% uplift out of it.

Again you're still hung up on average percentages (which can be artificially inflated/deflated based on number of games) vs raw framerates. The 2080Ti is generally faster but there's a significant difference between Far Cry New Dawn (small difference) vs Kingdom Come deliverance (in which there's a 25-30 fps discrepency at 1440p). You seem to be trying to convince potential purchasers that they will get near 2080Ti performance.

Anandtech found the 2080S to be 15% slower than an 2080Ti at 1440 in their test suite on average. Bigger differences especially in newer games like Division 2 (purchasers should only really care about newer Dx12 performance. Older titles will always have that performance that even a 1080ti can still handle)




It's a good card no doubt, but you're painting a picture that is misleading.

Lastly, if you want to compare OC, then OC the founder editions (which is good for 8-10% also) and that value proposition disappears if performance is what the user is looking for in whatever game they want that performance in.

[SSXeon]

Originally Posted by Exposed

Again you're still hung up on average percentages (which can be artificially inflated/deflated based on number of games) vs raw framerates. The 2080Ti is generally faster but there's a significant difference between Far Cry New Dawn (small difference) vs Kingdom Come deliverance (in which there's a 25-30 fps discrepency at 1440p). You seem to be trying to convince potential purchasers that they will get near 2080Ti performance.

Anandtech found the 2080S to be 15% slower than an 2080Ti at 1440 in their test suite on average. Bigger differences especially in newer games like Division 2 (purchasers should only really care about newer Dx12 performance. Older titles will always have that performance that even a 1080ti can still handle)




It's a good card no doubt, but you're painting a picture that is misleading.

Lastly, if you want to compare OC, then OC the founder editions (which is good for 8-10% also) and that value proposition disappears if performance is what the user is looking for in whatever game they want that performance in.

Btw DX12 is a broken mess on Division 2, crashing and random studders. DX11 works just fine, . They need to fix it as it does increase performance by alot.

I said screw it and ordered a FE version, hoping it comes Thursday. Still cheaper than Amazon for most regular 2080s.

[demo]

Nice one, let us know how it goes. I'd get one if I didn't already have pascal.

Originally Posted by Exposed

……….

Oh I'm sorry for quoting the average difference across a wide spectrum of games. I'll cherry pick individual games in future.

I'm not trying to convince anyone to purchase anything. More like you're trying to convince yourself of something..

btw - your division2 image has the Super at only 16% slower..

edit: Oh you edited your post. OK then we agree, it's only 12 to 15% slower than TI. After OC it seems like it can get within 10%. Huh.

[Exposed]

Originally Posted by demo

Nice one, let us know how it goes. I'd get one if I didn't already have pascal.




Oh I'm sorry for quoting the average difference across a wide spectrum of games. I'll cherry pick individual games in future.

I'm not trying to convince anyone to purchase anything. More like you're trying to convince yourself of something..

btw - your division2 image has the Super at only 16% slower..

When have I deviated from the bigger differences being from newer (especially DX12) games?

Wait, are you saying individual games don't matter to the purchaser? Just the blanket average from games across the board that includes games that aren't really gpu limited at 1440?

So, with that logic, why haven't you put in your purchase for a 2080S yet? You're getting near 2080ti performance!

[SSXeon]

Originally Posted by demo

Nice one, let us know how it goes. I'd get one if I didn't already have pascal.

Yeah anyone who has a 1080ti can honestly skip the RTXs unless you wanted a 2080ti for more performance. Also hope I'm not very CPU limited @1440p might have to oc my CPU.

[Exposed]

Originally Posted by demo

edit: Oh you edited your post. OK then we agree, it's only 12 to 15% slower than TI. After OC it seems like it can get within 10%. Huh.

You should sell your 1080Ti and get a 2070S. It's only 12-15% slower than a 2080S and after OC it seems like it can get within 10%. Or get the 5700XT and after OC get within 12-15% of the 2080S. Nevermind the actual framerates

[Nunz]

Can you ever have a discussion and not turn into a complete dick dude? Come on.

It gets within 10-15% of the 2080TI, which he said it would. He never argued actual framerates or mentioned anything of the sort. You pulled that out of thin air. Considering how much less the 2080S costs, it's not a bad deal for the performance you're getting. It's a solid 1440P card, which is what the discussion started out as.

In the Division2 image you posted that is apparently one of the "larger differences," 99.5 fps vs 83.0 is roughly 17% if you round the 99.5 to 100. it's right in margin of error of what he originally claimed to begin with.

[demo]

I'll make sure to only discuss the games you approve of in future. Not reviewers results. OK?

I don't need to buy a 2080S, I already have a 1080TI.

I do know I'd rather buy the 2080S than a non-A TI, considering the price difference.

Good night Exposed.

[Nunz]

Yeah I don't know what the point of the non-A TI's are anymore. Who the hell would buy a non-A today? The fact that a card as expensive as the 2080TI had two different chips is ridiculous to begin with.

[DeathKnight]

[Exposed]

I've said in the beginning the bigger differences will be newer games, which so far I am correct. I am just pointing out that aggregating older games or games that aren't that stressed at 1440p is going to lower that overall difference.

I posted some benchmarks in the other thread a while back of Anthem and Apex Legends in which the performance delta was larger between a 2080 and 1080Ti, which also showed larger performance delta between a 2080 and 2080ti as well.

So yes, game selection is important. I don't think you need a 2080 or higher to run Far Cry New Dawn at 1440p for example.

Tis all I'm saying. Good night to you as well. Don't take anything I say personally.

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by DeathKnight

hahahaha i ****ing love gamer's nexus

[Nascar24]

This looks like a flop if you still have a 1080 Ti, Only upgrade path is still a 2080 Ti from that. Hell, with Microcenter with a couple at $999 I think your better off spending the extra $300 on the 2080 Ti.

[GSGRUNT]

The RTX2080FE card is $100 less than the nonSuper 2080 FE card. Seems like a good upgrade for me(still running a 1080 here )

I wont buy it now because I don't game in the summer.

[SSXeon]

Originally Posted by GSGRUNT

The RTX2080FE card is $100 less than the nonSuper 2080 FE card. Seems like a good upgrade for me(still running a 1080 here )

I wont buy it now because I don't game in the summer.

Same, and you get 2 free games, so it's not a horrible deal, and should run about 60% faster then my 1080. The 2080ti is about $300 more for 20% more performance soooo.

[KAC]

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/m...x-trio/27.html

13% slower than 2080 Ti FE. Not bad for 700-780 if price holds.

[bill dennison]

NVIDIA RTX 2080 Super Review: We Get It, NVIDIA, You Can Make a 1080 Ti

between 4% and 9% faster than a 2080

[GSGRUNT]

Originally Posted by KAC

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/m...x-trio/27.html

13% slower than 2080 Ti FE. Not bad for 700-780 if price holds.

FE in stock for $699 on nvidia.com now.

[Nascar24]

Originally Posted by KAC

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/m...x-trio/27.html

13% slower than 2080 Ti FE. Not bad for 700-780 if price holds.

Hardly seeing that from what I'm seeing, any where in the 2 to 7 frames over a 1080 Ti

[Munkus]

Originally Posted by Nascar24

Hardly seeing that from what I'm seeing, any where in the 2 to 7 frames over a 1080 Ti

Aside from ray tracing, I'm not missing anything by sticking to my 1080 Ti then. Maybe if I used > 2560 x 1080 resolution...

[bill dennison]

the 2080 ti is still the only one to buy if you have a 1080 ti .

[acroig]

Originally Posted by bill dennison

the 2080 ti is still the only one to buy if you have a 1080 ti .

Sadly, yes.

[SIrPauly]

Solid 4k card without spending an arm-or-leg, if ya can receive a solid oc with the core and memory.

[Nunz]

Definitely not a 4K card. Solid 1440P card, that’s about it, and even at that if you’re running a 165Hz monitor it’s not enough.

[Munkus]

Originally Posted by bill dennison

the 2080 ti is still the only one to buy if you have a 1080 ti .

Gonna have to wait until I can collect $1100 worth of pennies from under the sofa cushions, sadly.

On my i7 7700K, 1080 Ti, 2560x1080 resolution I haven't found a single game that makes my hardware struggle. Not bad for 3 year old tech. Then again, I haven't tried turning on RTX.

[Megaman]

This release is all about having NV stay at the top of the benchmark leader board. Nothing more.

You’re getting more performance for the same price. It’s only good for those who decided to skip an upgrade.

[SIrPauly]

Originally Posted by Nunz

Definitely not a 4K card. Solid 1440P card, that’s about it, and even at that if you’re running a 165Hz monitor it’s not enough.

I disagree, some gamers may enjoy 4k, with some setting sacrifices. I agree with Techpowerup's conclusion, disagree with yours.