Take a cursory glance at Nvidia’s share value and you’d think the ultimate business apocalypse had struck. And in some ways, it has. While Nvidia’s stocks have recovered slightly, Team Green is still only worth just over half what it was a couple of months ago. But will things suddenly get better? Possibly, but aside from the bursting of a crypto bubble, there’s an argument to be made that Nvidia has made the ultimate skippable graphics card generation with the GeForce RTX 20 series.
Recently we had a discussion on whether Nvidia is the current leading force for graphics card technology. On that front, and at this time, there can be little doubt. However, this comes at an immense cost, and mainly for the consumer. Real-time raytracing has been touted as the ‘Holy Grail’ of graphics. And sure, anyone’s watched some vids can attest it looks damned good. However, the technology for consumers is embryonic at best.
To buy a video a card that’s even capable of real-time raytracing will cost you $600, but even this won’t get you a stable 60 frames per second in Battlefield V at 1080p. In fact, nothing will, not even the $1200 GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, at least until you dial down the settings. And this is literally just for raytraced reflections in BFV. A single facet of the full capability of DirectX Raytracing (DXR), which otherwise includes raytraced shadows, global illumination, depth of field simulation, among other effects.
The end result is a prohibitively expensive graphical effect that’s only available on top-end Nvidia video cards and simultaneously cripples any hopes of the 4K dream. Raytracing is a fantastic-looking trade-off, but one which patient sorts will be all-too-aware will be much cheaper to run in a few years.
And so with the GeForce RTX 20 Series not offering anywhere near the performance leap we saw going from the GTX 900 Series to the GTX 10 Series, has Nvidia inadvertently created the ‘wait and see’ generation of GPUs? Knowing just how demanding it is to run DXR raytracing, and how comparatively slim the performance gain is outside of raytracing, there’s seldom been a better time to skip a graphics card generation and see what’s waiting around the corner. There’s no pressing need to upgrade; any and every game runs on the 10 Series just fine.
What are your thoughts, are you or have you upgraded to GeForce RTX series? Do you feel the need to upgrade, or are you happy to wait for the next-gen graphics cards with better ray-tracing capabilities? Let us know what you think below!
Login or Register to join the debate
PC Specs
https://www.guru3d.com/news_story/nvidia_physx_engine_now_is_open_source.html SEE THIS!!!!!!!!!
PC Specs
Wooo! I miss PhysX! It was such a nice thing to have :D
PC Specs
still needs nVidia cards, so business is flowing, right?
PC Specs
I m confused if I should buy GTX 1070 or wait for gtx
2060
PC Specs
they will be about equally as good, but the rtx 2060 will likely cost more and power consumption will likely be higher if there are RT cores and Tensor Cores, since we don't even know if it's actually going to be a RTX 2060 or GTX 2060 or both, since Nvidia hasn't given any official statement on that.
PC Specs
Knowing how RTX 2070 performs with Ray Tracing on, I sincerely doubt 2060 and below will have RT support of any kind. In that case It'd just be pointless waste of space on the die. That being said, 2060 will certainly cost more than 1060 did and does, otherwise there'd be a huge disparity between the prices of 2070 and 2060, and Nvidia ain't about that life.
PC Specs
gtx 1070 8gb is faster than gt 2060 5gb.
PC Specs
if you already have 1060, then wait for some 2060Ti at least :)
PC Specs
May be gtx 3060 ti will be a good upgrade for him.
PC Specs
for me too I guess xD
PC Specs
wait for the 30 series games wont get any better until the new consoles get released
PC Specs
GOOD POINT! :D
PC Specs
It's not the Raytracing tech that's skippable. I think it actually looks phenomenal. I'm excited for it to be incorporated into future games when the rest of the tech has caught up to it. But for now, it's the optimization/performance of this tech that makes it very skippable.
PC Specs
But is there a big deference?
I mean like hair works was never optimised so to use it y will need better card so y skip the weaker one which have the feature but is not usable,
So I guess it's both devs still don't know to implement RT in games properly and hardware is still to weak for it
PC Specs
It's a good point. But from what I've seen, ray tracing adds a lot more visual quality than wavy hair. (I had actually completely forgotten about Hairworks, hah)
PC Specs
yea but i never sayed that RT is skippable but this gpus are skipable bec we can wait for next 3000 serie which will(hopefully)be capable of RT or stay with curent get
PC Specs
I definitely agree with that.
PC Specs
For sure, performance wise they aren't much better than the 10xx generation.. Ray tracing is cool and all. but not worth to upgrade for
PC Specs
AMD made the right decision , no RT is better than a bad game experience !
PC Specs
But with RTX cards y can play without rt so it won't be bad experience, they put in RT just to increase prices
PC Specs
Prices(costs) increase for Nvidia as well, especially how much R&D they threw for RT...
PC Specs
R&Dcost which i'm pretty sure they made back by selling it to the deep learning guys. it mainly feels like they found a way to repurpose the tech for games. dlss? thats obviously a repurposed effort if anything at all no one would create it
PC Specs
They are useless, expensive, faulty, immature tech so YES!!! ITS TOTALLY A SKIPPABLE GPU FOR ALL
PC Specs
Aye, it is as skippable as they get. Though nVidia is trying to combat it by stopping production of 1080Ti and 1080, which does increase the price and removes a choice from "new" market. Though used market thrives and you can get both very cheap there.
PC Specs
Unless you really want to be early adopter and go for it for novelty reasons, raytracing doesn't look bad. But it does come at price in both performance and high monetary price. But cards really feel like stepping stone between series 10 and inevitably upcoming 7nm architecture.
PC Specs
7nm should help them with squeezing in more in smaller die. On 14nm, they really are struggling with huge die that has to take compromises. Since big die means a lot lower production yield and it has basically to squeeze in essentially 2 GPUs, RTX GPU and regular GPU, since both are completely different.
PC Specs
Which of course drives price up and makes card not really worth it for anyone who cares about value. RTX portion won't really be necessary for next 3years, since everyone will still do rasterization as before. Maybe 3-5 years, there will be some downgrade in rasterization, provided AMD will also make raytracing cards.
PC Specs
At that point it might be a lot more compelling to buy raytracing capable card, as more developers will want to utilize raytracing, since it does allow them to remove ton of hacky solutions they use with rasterization, to get similar effect. And to be fair to nVidia, it had to begin somewhere.
PC Specs
It was literally chicken and egg problem. Developers won't use RTX, because RTX cards aren't out. And hardware manufacturers won't make RTX cards, because games don't use RTX. So what comes first, RTX in games or RTX on cards. But through generations it will get ton better in terms of performance. It just had to start.
PC Specs
Got two, saw them to be of value to me (namely 2080Ti power + NVLink speed boost at high resolutions/framerates). Just my very unpopular opinion, obviously.
PC Specs
Ignore us we are jealous (upvote from me)
PC Specs
That would be the 1000 series
PC Specs
nVidia would need to drop prices by half to make RTX series worth buying
PC Specs
But like exactly half
PC Specs
Seeing that i come from my current 970, i already have skipped pascal, so no, i wont skip turing this time.
True that i can go for a pascal, but why if you have the money, then buying something that isnt the newest.
I believe that we sooner then later will see games with ray tracing and dlss, so for that i want a card that is capable of handling it.
So beginning next year a 2070 will come :)
PC Specs
I'm in similar shoes. Here the 2070 costs the same as the 1080, so no point buying an older card.
PC Specs
But paying extra for GPU that is not capable of using her main feature, no use if games start more and more having ray tracing compability when no GPU is capable of using it, that's why is this article saying that there is nothing much to be gained with this serie
PC Specs
If you want usable Ray Tracing then your best and only option at this point in time is RTX 2080Ti, and even that card can barely hold 60 in most cases.
I don't think anyone will be using RTX features on 2070 and 2080 for anything but screenshots.
PC Specs
I've seen that it's not a problem for 1080p, more like 1440p that it gets in the 50s sometimes. What sources are you looking at that say "2080Ti barely holds a 60"? The bandwagon?
PC Specs
Most of the reviews I've read show that RTX 2080Ti, with ultra settings and DXR turned on dips below 60, with an average framerate at around 70, while without DXR it jumps to 150ish. DXR settings seem to be adjustable, but if you crank everything at ultra, you won't be sitting at a stable 60fps.
PC Specs
yes rtx 2080 ti cannot give 60 fps on 1080.
check this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2Bs4HFxMsI&t=24s
PC Specs
Well, Nvidia/Dice did say that they're still working on the feature and DXR should be set to low for now. At which point you can hit and maintain 60fps+ at 1080p (more info) and even 1440p if you dial the settings down.
That being said - I smell another "DX12". Remember the hate for DX12 when nobody would release a game with it working fine, because all the priority and core development was always DX11 first? And how DX12 titles now smoke DX11 titles...
This is literally the first time anyone has done this. As much as I'd love to see a finished product - it's just impossible - nobody has experience with it!
PC Specs
I don't remember who's review it was for sure, but they said that the below 60fps with Ray Tracing on at 1080p was only during the single player campaign. On multiplayer they were getting like 80+fps. Over 100fps most of the time. I think it was JayzTwoCents that showed this.
PC Specs
Hmm but that make no sense.. maby there are more destruction in so so more reflections from every particle or something but multiplayer was always was more demanding then sp
PC Specs
Even the same video Lion94 posted at the end in MP the guy was getting way more fps. I think MP was always more demanding in terms of CPU, not GPU, for most people. That being said, I originally watched RTX multiplayer matches and the performance was well above expectation like LeadStarDude said 80+ fps. Hence why I originally said the cards CAN maintain above 60 no problem. Rotterdam level too - shiny floors, water, etc. Weird.
I still stand by my prediction that this is another "DX12" type of thing. It WILL get better. But whiny "gamers" (lately I started hating this term...) who lynch-mob the tech will probably make sure it's dead before arrival, as they do with everything else... :/
PC Specs
I understand that people want this tech to be ready and playable from day1, but it's almost never seen before in the tech world. Tech demos that Nvidia and Dice built around RTX from the start - those run very well. But products that have RTX as an add-on - that's DX12 all over again. Remember Hitman? Deus Ex MD? Rise of the Tomb Raider? DX12 support was garbage at first because those games were built on DX11 from the start. But later after all the patches and optimizations the games ran so much better on DX12 that DX11 is left in the dust. Devs need time with the tech.
But everyone looks at the world's first slap-on preview and they're killing it already without giving it a chance!
PC Specs
To me as a gamer, a techie AND a 3D artist - this hurts. The amount of false information and unfounded hate for the tech makes me pull my hair out... We're finally approaching the time where we're finally somewhat catching up to offline CG rendering world. 30 years behind, to be somewhat precise. But we're getting there. Yet the lynch mobs are making damn sure the tech won't even get a fighting chance... What would you do as a dev when you see overwhelming negativity about something you used in a game? You'd stop using it. "Gamers" killed PhysX, killed Hairworks, shat on DX12 and now raytracing. THIS is what I fear. The lynch mobs knowing fvckall about the tech and killing it in advance...
PC Specs
The RTX 20 series of GPUs are a beta test.
Of how high NVIDIA can raise the price and how RTX works.
PC Specs
Im happy with my card, i probably will upgrade my pc first and then a gpu, but that will happen when i cant play a game on low settings 1080p at at least 30 fps without any drops below that.So that could happen in 2 years or so.
PC Specs
I'm perfectly happy with my custom watercooled 1080Ti and 9900K. :-)
PC Specs
nice rig mate.. Tho i thought that a 9900k should be more then 27% better then my 1800x.. Truth to be told im a bit surprised to see that its only 27%
PC Specs
GD ranking system is not completely accurate truth to be told. Thanks by the way, yours as well!:-))
PC Specs
I really want a 9900K, especially if I could run it at 5.4GHz... just can't be assed to spend the money and essentially rebuild the PC with a brand new mobo... Would be a nice bit of kit to drive the 2080Tis :)
PC Specs
5.4 ghz wirh HT would be the most golden of the goldest, or if you use a phasecooling setup. :P
Custom loop is a must beyond 5 ghz IMHO.
PC Specs
Too much of an investment, considering how good the 5960X is already even at just 4.5GHz. Difference between my cinebench and yours was what, 17%? I can live with that for now :D
PC Specs
Sorry, it was 27% with HT, but you have yours disabled now. Still, not super major...I guess xD
PC Specs
You'd have to run a custom loop, and most certainly delid the CPU to reach those speeds. You'd also have to win the silicon lottery if you want to have those chances.
PC Specs
I mean, I can boot at 5.4 ghz with HT disabled on mine. These chips are solderes, so delidding might net you 8-10'C if you sand the DIE and IHS as well. Not really worth it for this gen.
But custom loop + a golden chip is required.
I have a MO-RA 420LT (external rad.) cooling my GPU and CPU with ease.
You'll also need a high-end motherboard with good VRMs. Gigabyte got unbeatable prices, but the high-speed mem. is lacking.. Getting 4000 mhz with tight CL17 timings is really difficult.
PC Specs
RTX is a step forward, something completely new and innovative.
But, like i already said it once, we are not quite prepared for this feature.
It feels like they rushed it.
PC Specs
We are but Nvidia is not lol
PC Specs
As the editor of another website said, "Just buy it" 4Head
PC Specs
What does ray tracing, dx12, and vulkan all have in common? Their all great things that game companies are too lazy to program for.
PC Specs
Good one.
PC Specs
While the new ray tracing is interesting, it's far from perfect at the moment and plus the GPUs themselves are nowhere near worth the price.
PC Specs
Definitely skipping. Not seeing any reason to jump on the whole ray-tracing deal, since it is still new, underdeveloped and the price doesn't justify it. Usually what I do is skip the gen and get the next one but I will most likely gonna skip next gen, too. Maybe the next-next gen will have enough processing power to deal with ray-tracing, so until then, 1080 Ti iT is.
PC Specs
yes even RTX 2080 TI on 1080p cannot give 60 fps on battlefield 5 ultra.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2Bs4HFxMsI&t=24s
PC Specs
May be RT 5080 ti can handle RTX on 1080p ultra 60 fps.
PC Specs
Although I will be skipping this gen, I am very happy that Nvidia is pushing new tech. It is a necessary first step, not the end goal.