NVIDIA RTX SUPER Lineup Detailed, Pricing Outed

[rtwjunkie]

Yeah, but you also said 1080 is not its predecessor.

Of course not!!! 1070 is. It is the SAME POINT IN NVIDIA’s lineup! Even Nvidia, whose products they are tell you that each model replaces itself. 60 to 60, 70 to 70, 80 to 80. Its not a hard concept to grasp.

If they did not get better than higher level models of previous gens, there would be no need to ever produce anything new.

 

[bug]

Of course not!!! 1070 is. It is the SAME POINT IN NVIDIA’s lineup! Even Nvidia, whose products they are tell you that each model replaces itself. 60 to 60, 70 to 70, 80 to 80. Its not a hard concept to grasp.

If they did not get better than higher level models of previous gens, there would be no need to ever produce anything new.

Ah, another one that can't see past numbers on the box. I can't fix that buddy.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Ah, another one that can't see past numbers on the box. I can't fix that buddy.

Let me make it easy for your obtuseness.

A BMW 3 series gets a new model year. The new model year is as powerful as last years 5 series. Does that make the new one a 5 series or a replacement for last year’s 5 series? No! It makes it a new and more powerful 3 series.

Same thing applies to video cards.

 

[bug]

Let me make it easy for your obtuseness.

A BMW 3 series gets a new model year. The new model year is as powerful as last years 5 series. Does that make the new one a 5 series? No! It makes it a new and more powerful 3 series.

Same thing applies to video cards.

That's a pretty poor analogy. Cars are segmented by features and options, something that doesn't really apply to video cards.

Still, following your line of thought, if 2060 is the successor to 1060, what does that make the 1660(Ti). Because all your reasoning seems to be built around ignoring those cards even exist.
We now have more model numbers. In my opinion, it's the 1660(Ti) that makes all other cards look like they were mislabeled.

 

[freeagent]

I only paid 200cnd for my 980 classified that had a loose fan, but someone paid 700usd for it. An 8800GTX launched at 600-650usd, the 8800ultra was like 850.. We had it easy from the 480 series up until 1080 series, non ti of course.

 

[64K]

That's a pretty poor analogy. Cars are segmented by features and options, something that doesn't really apply to video cards.

Still, following your line of thought, if 2060 is the successor to 1060, what does that make the 1660(Ti). Because all your reasoning seems to be built around ignoring those cards even exist.
We now have more model numbers. In my opinion, it's the 1660(Ti) that makes all other cards look like they were mislabeled.

But you do get features and options with cards.

For example the GTX 1060. All of which had the same die size of 200 mm² and 4.4 billion transistors and 192 bit Memory Bus. You could choose between:

1060 3GB 1152 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 192.2 GB/s bandwidth
1060 6GB 1280 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 192.2 GB/s bandwidth
1060 6GB 1280 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 216.7 GB/s bandwidth (higher clocked 9 Gbps VRAM)

Nothing changed on the size of the die or transistor count nor the size of the memory bus width. In short none of the improvements turned a 1060 into a 1070 overclocked versus overclocked.

1070 8GB 1920 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 256.3 GB/s bandwidth and 256 bit Memory Bus and Die Size 314 mm² and 7.2 billion transistors

Nvidia has turned everything into a confusing mess for consumers with the Super series and the naming conventions and they have done this before with the Kepler series 7 years ago.

 

[bug]

But you do get features and options with cards.

For example the GTX 1060. All of which had the same die size of 200 mm² and 4.4 billion transistors and 192 bit Memory Bus. You could choose between:

1060 3GB 1152 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 192.2 GB/s bandwidth
1060 6GB 1280 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 192.2 GB/s bandwidth
1060 6GB 1280 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 216.7 GB/s bandwidth (higher clocked 9 Gbps VRAM)

Nothing changed on the size of the die or transistor count nor the size of the memory bus width. In short none of the improvements turned a 1060 into a 1070 overclocked versus overclocked.

1070 8GB 1920 Shaders and GDDR5 VRAM 256.3 GB/s bandwidth and 256 bit Memory Bus and Die Size 314 mm² and 7.2 billion transistors

Nvidia has turned everything into a confusing mess for consumers with the Super series and the naming conventions and they have done this before with the Kepler series 7 years ago.

Ok, that's just dumber to the rescue of dumb.
You only get different GPUs which is akin to different engines. You don't get the equivalent of trims, safety features and whatnot.

 

[64K]

Ok, that's just dumber to the rescue of dumb.

When you start calling people dumb and dumber.......that's when the discussion starts to derail into shit.

Be better than that bug.

 

[bug]

When you start calling people dumb and dumber.......that's when the discussion starts to derail into shit.

Be better than that bug.

That may have been uncalled for.
But that doesn't change my argument. With Pascal, starting with the midrange at ~$200 we had:
1060 ($200-250)-> 1070 ($380-450) -> 1080 ($500-700)
With Turing, excluding the Supers, starting with the midrange at ~$200 we have:
1660 ($220-280) -> 2060 ($350) -> 2070 ($500) -> 2080 ($800)

The obvious nomenclature shift (and major snafu on Nvidia's part) seems to be something people try hard to miss.

 

[GoldenX]

The whole line is a mess of expensive products and cut down features. And the worst part is that it still is the best choice right now.

 

[bug]

The whole line is a mess of expensive products and cut down features. And the worst part is that it still is the best choice right now.

No, the worst part is they don't drop in price because of Navi. Which means a year from now, they'll still be the best option. Imho, the line-up, as I have described it above is ok. It's just that the 2080Ti should have never been made. And probably neither the plain 2080 (though the 2080 Super will shave $100 off the MSRP and that will make it more attractive to whoever buys high-end).

 

[64K]

That may have been uncalled for.
But that doesn't change my argument. With Pascal, starting with the midrange at ~$200 we had:
1060 ($200-250)-> 1070 ($380-450) -> 1080 ($500-700)
With Turing, excluding the Supers, starting with the midrange at ~$200 we have:
1660 ($220-280) -> 2060 ($350) -> 2070 ($500) -> 2080 ($800)

The obvious nomenclature shift (and major snafu on Nvidia's part) seems to be something people try hard to miss.

It's the RTX thing. The Tensor Cores and RT cores made the dies really large on Turings except for the 1660 and 1660 Ti which have neither and since Nvidia pays per wafer they get fewer GPU's per wafer and the cost increase is passed on to consumers and the faster GDDR6 for cards which is more expensive.

I can't say at this time whether Nvidia was right or wrong with pushing Ray Tracing. Time will tell but for now the prices are painful for most gamers looking to upgrade from Maxwells or even Keplers. Pascal owners should probably wait it out until next year if they can.

 

[bug]

It's the RTX thing. The Tensor Cores and RT cores made the dies really large on Turings except for the 1660 and 1660 Ti and since Nvidia pays per wafer. They get fewer GPU's per wafer and the cost increase is passed on to consumers and the faster GDDR6 for cards which is more expensive.

I can't say at this time whether Nvidia was right or wrong with pushing Ray Tracing. Time will tell but for now the prices are painful for most gamers looking to upgrade from Maxwells or even Keplers. Pascal owners should probably wait it out until next year if they can.

I know about the die size.
But I would have named everything differently:
1660 -> 2060*
2060 -> 2070
2070 -> 2080
2080 -> 2080Ti

And I'm sure there would have been much less complaints. Hell, I have written before if I were Nvidia I would have introduced RTX in Quadro cards first because of the large dies. But with AMD such a no-show, they must have seen an opportunity to milk the market.

*this would have been a GTX, of course

 

[Vya Domus]

The whole line is a mess of expensive products and cut down features. And the worst part is that it still is the best choice right now.

I can't see how the ultra mega super RTX 2060 at 400$ would be the better choice versus a 380$ 5700.

 

[bug]

I can't see how the ultra mega super RTX 2060 at 400$ would be the better choice versus a 380$ 5700.

It's going to be faster, that's how: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Vague...e-NVIDIA-GeForce-RTX-2060-Super.426572.0.html

But that's just MSRP, we'll have to see where the prices settle.

 

[Xzibit]

I know about the die size.
But I would have named everything differently:
1660 -> 2060*
2060 -> 2070
2070 -> 2080
2080 -> 2080Ti

And I'm sure there would have been much less complaints. Hell, I have written before if I were Nvidia I would have introduced RTX in Quadro cards first because of the large dies. But with AMD such a no-show, they must have seen an opportunity to milk the market.

*this would have been a GTX, of course

They did.

 

[Fluffmeister]

So is the RX 5700 replacing the RX 570?

 

[GoldenX]

I can't see how the ultra mega super RTX 2060 at 400$ would be the better choice versus a 380$ 5700.

The fact that the Navi one should have went against Pascal, not Turing.

 

[Vya Domus]

The fact that the Navi one should have went against Pascal, not Turing.

So, the history of what should have went against what is more relevant than the here and now ? I don't think this is about what's the better choice any longer but AMD seems to have understood that thankfully

 

[GoldenX]

So, the history of what should have went against what is more relevant than the here and now ? I don't think this is about what's the better choice any longer but AMD seems to have understood that thankfully

They want to enter the battle without being on par on features (mesh shaders, any sort of RT). Nvidia could do that before because they had the market share, AMD doesn't.

 

[Vya Domus]

Nvidia could do that before because they had the market share, AMD doesn't.

And they don't plan to. Undercutting your competitor while trying to offer a better product has been a losing strategy for them. Whether or not they've done all that was possible with that doesn't matter, they've opted out of that battle, the 450$ 5700XT is a clear indication of that. We are looking a complete reversal of mindset from AMD, they are letting Nvidia fight itself trying to sell more cards to the masses of people who already have them.

They want to enter the battle without being on par on features (mesh shaders, any sort of RT).

We both know stuff such as mesh shaders and RT mean jack shit if market share is your goal.

 

[GoldenX]

We both know stuff such as mesh shaders and RT mean jack shit if market share is your goal.

If you aren't on feature parity on the long run, you end up like SiS, VIA, Matrox, etc.

 

[Vya Domus]

If you aren't on feature parity on the long run, you end up like SiS, VIA, Matrox, etc.

Not when the features are found in <1% of the software recently released (being generous here).

 

[Deleted member 177333]

and really, these prices are just ridiculously high and have been from the start.

For the folks questioning why the quick-poll is showing so many people in disfavor of the new lineup - , just see above ^ - that is why people dislike it. Turing is just a bad deal. It has been since launch. The performance does not even come close to justifying the astronomical price tag.

2nd hand market is where it's at right now for folks who desperately need an upgrade from Maxwell / Kepler. I myself have been ready to upgrade for about a year but the pricing is just so bad that even though I have borderline unlimited funds for an upgrade, I simply will not endorse what NVidia is doing by pulling the trigger on a pair of 2080 Ti cards.

 

[Anymal]

Not when the features are found in <1% of the software recently released (being generous here).

Similar situation as in 1999 with T&L and Geforce 256. Maybe nvidia is not that stupid. People hates what they dont understand. BTW, 1660 for 220€ and 1660ti in DE are great p/p against 1060 3gb and 1060 6gb. Peace out!