Steam installeren
inloggen
|
taal
简体中文 (Chinees, vereenvoudigd)
繁體中文 (Chinees, traditioneel)
日本語 (Japans)
한국어 (Koreaans)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgaars)
Čeština (Tsjechisch)
Dansk (Deens)
Deutsch (Duits)
English (Engels)
Español-España (Spaans - Spanje)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spaans - Latijns-Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Grieks)
Français (Frans)
Italiano (Italiaans)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Hongaars)
Norsk (Noors)
Polski (Pools)
Português (Portugees - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Braziliaans-Portugees)
Română (Roemeens)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Fins)
Svenska (Zweeds)
Türkçe (Turks)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamees)
Українська (Oekraïens)
Een vertaalprobleem melden
Regels en richtlijnen voor discussies
Dit bericht rapporteren
I'm talking A-A-A games.
You were bragging about your "high end 1080 TI" and 4K resolution and all you're showing are games like Elden Ring, Resident Evil and Subnautica.
I can run all these games with my old R9 270 too.
What about blockbusters ? What about Cyberpunk, Ac Valhalla, Legions, Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, Red Dead Redemption 2, Control and all those games ?
How do these games perform on 1440p and 4K. You know what I mean ? A 1080TI isn't capable of such things anymore.
What if OP wants Ray Tracing ?
What if he wants DLSS ?
Why don't you speak just for yourself ?
There are many people here who even use much older GPU's than you do and you don't seem them speaking for other people. Everyone owns a GPU for his needs and nobody doubts that your 1080 TI is enough for you own needs but why the hell wouldn't you mention this at the very beginning ?
YOU are fine with it. Speak for YOURself and try to help OP.
Ask him at least which games he wants to play.
and no i don't use 4k i use 1080p so again you've got that wrong.
they are newer games as your post asked for even if elden ring is fixed to 60fps it's still new and a, a\a\a and so is resident evil village
also if he needs or would like to use rtx tech then he'd be going for a rtx card if not there isn't a need as of yet
also no Red Dead Redemption 2 isn't a aaa game and one from 2018 and Cyberpunk you gotta be joking, when that came out, no one not even with the best cpu and the best gpu could run that well.
and last but lest that's not what he asked, he asked if it'd be fine to keep using it or upgrade, and the card is fine to keep using there is no game it can't run as of yet, unless the game is fully made for rtx.
there you go https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zmkd-nK2SA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ssjocWFi04
I really don't know where to start and to be honest, I don't even understand half the things you're saying.
It seems that you don't even know yourself what you're talking about. There are more than enough people who called you out for your bullsht.
Talking to a dry wall would make more sense than doing this here. I wish you the best.
You don't need someone else to tell you it's good or isn't good, which is sort of my initial post in this thread to OP was saying the same thing that it matters not what anyone thinks. Some arbitrary measure, like what it's termed as, is the most silly thing to hinge "is it still good enough" on. And that is what matters, not some label. It doesn't matter how much performance it offers versus what is possible through what is available in newer products; it matters what it offers relative to the demand you ask of it. And, if it's still holding up and you haven't naturally come to the impression that you want more, then nothing else matters.
Relative to the a snapshot limited to the latest generation, it's firmly mid-range at worst as it compares roughly to the RTX 3060 which is firmly THE mid-range each generation. You might consider it lacks tensor cores for RTX and DLSS and thus situate a bit lower I guess, but still.
Relative to what the market actually looks like in reality though, despite what is available, it offers a level of performance that puts it in a far higher percentile than the aforementioned perspective may lead one to believe. When most people have things like GTX 1050s, GTX 1650s, GTX 1060s, etc., and the GTX 1080 is something like twice the performance of best of those, and still plays games very well if you're not after 4k and/or no compromises, then there's certainly an argument it offers a relatively "high end experience" if you're not being semantic about it.
In other words, the level of performance a GTX 1080 offers when compared to the latest and greatest will result in it being placed quite down the stack, but the performance offered is, despite that, above what most people have and therefore above what most games need now, and likely will for some time. It's mostly if you're after uncompromising visual, higher resolutions, or higher frame rates in more demanding titles that you might want to upgrade. The gaming market has already been trending towards less, not more, for YEARS now, and few games are going to ask for hardware the market doesn't have because, you know, that means lost sales. So, yeah, unless you already came to the conclusion it's not enough, then yeah, it's still okay. You'll know the day it isn't.
You dont make any sense and its really hard to follow you. You got almost all your facts wrong, beginning with the RTX features which you would call " trash ", all over to the performance gap between the 1000 and 3000 series.
Im sure your 1080TI fullfills all your needs and why shouldnt it ? Its a great card and it fits to the games youre playing but this wasnt the point of this thread was it ?
You're using hierarchical system terms, which are objective, so yeah it does matter that you are using it wrong. I understand why, though. Just like how so many people refer to current generation of hardware as "next gen". You hear these terms and don't know exactly what they mean, so you come up with a subjective meaning.
Related side note, I hate that humans develop "slang". Makes for learning other languages a PITA.
Using fancy terminology doesn't mean that the 1080 Ti is *still* a high end GPU. It's not anymore. The hardware pecking order changes every generation, high end GPUs older than Maxwell aren't even considered entry level anymore. They lack the power and VRAM.
You're missing the point that you are taking objective terms and using them subjectively.
I get it, you want to use some words to describe relative performance. Nothing wrong with that. However, doesn't change the fact that they have objective meaning.
...but again, nothing wrong with doing so. I just wanted to get the subjective terms out there, as many people don't understand the hierarchical system. Get the brain juices flowing, per say.
It's nothing that helps anyone, leave it at that. That's not what they're looking to know.
Well, I disagree. If they can learn what "high end" truly means, then they can use this knowledge to understand that it is meaningless when comparing performance metrics and not get scammed.
Instead of using terms that actually have an objective meaning completely wrong, why not just categorize them on performance? Just say "GTX 1080 is relative to RTX 3060 performance"? When you start using terms that already have objective meaning, and try to give it your own subjective meaning, that is exactly why people will get confused and scammed.
what i was calling junk, or a waste of time was from the rtx 20th series
qt from my post at the point rtx 20 was ♥♥♥♥, the Rtx tech wasn't any good at the time, it was later it improved upon in the 30th gen making it lots better for those that like to use it qt
i do think the 30th series is really good,a real big improvement.
but for the op's case it's better to wait for the 40th series.
mayhaps it'll be cheaper or be more then 50% better over all
but at any rate i do think we all agree that the, 1080 non ti is still good to be used for one more year at lest, or so i think, unless im wrong
ps you deleted your post i did mine as well to all fairness
better no, faster yes
rtx cards have shortcuts to do it quicker
a gtx 1080 is as fast as a rtx 3060, even at rt tasks
This is factually incorrect, a 1080ti does not have tensor or rt cores and doesn't even outperform a 2060 in actual rt accelerated workloads such as Optix. This does not make the 1080ti a bad card for the majority of games as they don't utilize modern APIs like Vulkan, but when API support is there you can realize a massive performance uplift through DLSS and other hardware acceleration.
There are arguments to be had about whether a 1080ti is worth upgrading from if the games you play don't utilize Vulkan or latest DX12, but raw FP/Shader performance is becoming all the less valuable of a metric with performance gains largely coming from offloading tasks to dedicated compute units.