Installa Steam
Accedi
|
Lingua
简体中文 (cinese semplificato)
繁體中文 (cinese tradizionale)
日本語 (giapponese)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandese)
Български (bulgaro)
Čeština (ceco)
Dansk (danese)
Deutsch (tedesco)
English (inglese)
Español - España (spagnolo - Spagna)
Español - Latinoamérica (spagnolo dell'America Latina)
Ελληνικά (greco)
Français (francese)
Indonesiano
Magyar (ungherese)
Nederlands (olandese)
Norsk (norvegese)
Polski (polacco)
Português (portoghese - Portogallo)
Português - Brasil (portoghese brasiliano)
Română (rumeno)
Русский (russo)
Suomi (finlandese)
Svenska (svedese)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraino)
Segnala un problema nella traduzione
Regole e linee guida per le discussioni
Segnala questo messaggio
I will be running better frames than you on a 2080s on 1440p, but with either no or minor, like 1-2% visual gain less compared to you. That is pretty funny ^^
If DLSS 2.0 did not actually have so much visual issues (some claim it has been fixed) that would do wonders, on benchmarks I get over double the FPS with it on, than off.. "on 1440p"
This what is mean by 'for science'.
Indeed.
With all the RTX and DLSS talk, I did some testing on my rig here from 2018 (I did get a free 2080s, so that ofc change the score a bit compared to my old 2080, it was due to rma)
But
RTX
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/50504598?
DLSS 2.0 on vs off - 1440p
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/50503585?
And a regular time spy run
https://www.3dmark.com/spy/13437336
While the new cards coupled with newer CPU´s and MB will outdo mine with the usual 12-45% depending on the game, the cost to ie upgrade is nigh... it is pointless for me with a 9700k ie and the investment I have to do.
As for games... who the..... runs games with ultra in all sections and on 4k... well... a tiny minority.. my very high/high settings will do more than enough FPS even in modern games, even with RTX on if I go dlss 2.0 (if it is implemented well, we might not see blurry and jagged edges etc)
People with older systems than me on 1080p wants a 3080 and think it will give them the edge in Fortnite, CSGO and whatnot... it is silly.. I understand people that want proper FPS on their 1440p and 4k.. but these other games, where you often just gimp graphics anyway.. well.. ohh well.
I will also note, that my build is build for silence !!! even on full load, I can´t hear anything..
You may well be right but one can't stop others from spending their money. Being a perennial tinkerer I hold up my hand as one of these who may be a little careless with their cash. I was done with the high end after the Pascal generation except the spending didn't really stop because I am running a number of builds with different configurations with a pool of spare parts that I swap in and out.
My latest build is a bedroom gaming machine in a mini-itx case hooked up to an old 22 inch 768p 60 Hz TV. I downgraded the GTX 1660 Super to a GTX 1050 Ti on realising the 1660 was hardly breaking sweat on 720p 4x DSR.
I am enjoying Death Stranding in all its glory in 720p resolution...sacrilege! Honestly doesn't look too bad on the old TV! Perhaps I will try it out on my 27 inch 1440p 144 Hz monitor some time...for science.
However in 2021, I may still succumb to the hype and impulse buy a 3080 tier gpu and the required system to be built around it...
Sure people are free to buy whatever they want, even when it makes little sense or bottleneck them galore.. But I think it is perfectly fine for me to atleast give a hint or even showcase valid arguments with sources to backup my point about it. But hey... it is up to people to do what they want and how they like.
https://youtu.be/M2LNCtEo2CY
There is no perceptible "bottleneck" at 1080p with current cpu or slightly old ones, at most tgose with old cpu will "bottleneck" the graphic card at worts by 10 fps and still surpass 120 fps if they have a 1080 120hz,monitor.
Even if you don't see "improovment " there is the fact that people who buy those new cards will have a good gpu to keep for at least 3 generations and that why they will buy it. Get over it already.
I already listed the difference if you use a high end new generation one or ie a older one (even 9700k see 10% change in fps compared to the 10900k.
They will almost if not same performance from a 3070 and save alot of cash, so much cash so they could buy a xx70 in 1 or 2 generation and still have done it cheaper than buying a 3080.. From a cost benefit perspective, it is "stupid" to buy a 3080 as a 1080p user and even more so if you have 2 generation old CPU and not highest tier.
But as I said.. if people wanna burn cash, they are welcome to do so.. I still believe that they would get a better experience by actually saving up, getting 1440p and then the card to power it (because if they have a high end CPU.. obviously they intend for it, else they might as well use less on the CPU as well)
It is a free world however.. so do what you want.. but don´t make it sound like investing in a 3080 for 1080p is a must or will give significant changes unless you have the newest and highers hardware to support it...
Looks like it's a good thing we waited.
And I think once the 3080 models with more memory are release the difference would be close while they'd still be cheaper than the 3090.
On AMD, the rumour of a 6900XT beating a 3090, seem kind of out there to be honest, but I am intrigued to see some reliable numbers from more reliable sources, but the issues I've had swapping back to a vega 64 from my 2080ti make me not want to go with AMD even if it is a bit faster (20% more on the other hand...)