NVIDIA Readies New GeForce RTX 30-series SKU Positioned Between RTX 3070 and RTX 3080

[nguyen]

It's not just the settings, but the general assets of the game, texture quality, etc. You can lower your settings, but you can't lower them indefinitely. The fact that you can still play games fine with 4 GB VRAM has nothing to do with it. I currently play The Witcher 3 on my GT 1030 2 GB (since I sold my GTX 1660 Ti) and only use about 1.5 GB with 1080p medium settings. Microsoft Flight Simulator would be a totally different story, I guess. You can't say that 4 GB is enough just because it's enough for you.

Besides, if you're happy to play at lower settings, then why is it an issue for you if a graphics card doesn't have hardware-accelerated RT?

Not to mention, if you're lowering your settings right now, then what kind of future proofing are we talking about?

By your definition then the Radeon VII is the most future proofed GPU right now (except the 3090).
Future proofing means more than just VRAM, it's also the features set. Anyways the only people I know that correlate VRAM to performance are tech noobie.

Its not so much that, its that the first go at a new tech is never going to be worth it because what you buy it for its so new its not established yet and by the time it is, then we are 2 or so generations further which will be needed to handle it properly anyway.
RTX2000 series was the first go at RT, and even now with the 3000 series out RT is not even really a thing yet, so if you bought the RTX2000 series for RT then you were just being silly yet that is what you base your opinion on as to why the 5700XT was obsolete on release.

I really have no clue what you are talking about, I finished 4 RTX games just fine. Who said you need 100+ fps to enjoy single player games ? AMD owners ?
Btw I can probably max out CP2077 settings with my 2080 Ti and it would still be enjoyable.

 

[AusWolf]

By your definition then the Radeon VII is the most future proofed GPU right now (except the 3090).
Future proofing means more than just VRAM, it's also the features set. Anyways the only people I know that correlate VRAM to performance are tech noobie.

Don't put words into my mouth. If I want to define something, I will.

All I'm saying is, you have to differentiate between features that your game requires, and features that you want. If you want to "future-proof" yourself with all the shine available, then of course you buy a high-tier GPU with all the current feature sets. There is nothing wrong with that - in fact, that's what I'm planning with my next build.

On the other hand, your game still needs certain processing power and an amount of RAM/VRAM even on the lowest settings. If you aim for just playing a game on basically any setting, then in this case, a graphics card with RT is not going to be any more future proof than one without. But you still need processing power and VRAM whether you use RT or not.

I hope I was clear enough this time.

 

[Chrispy_]

See ? when you talk about RT and DLSS it's "only in a handful of games", yet they are obviously the future proofing features of that time. Do you know how many games require more than 10GB VRAM right now ? 0 ?
People who switch between price to performance then future proofing as they see fit really shouldn't comment on both matters.

Btw DX12 Ultimate is more than RT.

The best future-proofing by far is to buy something much closer to the performance/$ sweet spot and avoid the early-adopter/flagship/premium tax, then do the same thing again regularly, rather than blowing all of your saved budget once every 5-6 years.

• Two years ago you could have bought a "future proof" 2080Ti for $1200, or (at the time) a $400 1070Ti and put $800 aside.
• You'd still be using your "future proof" 2080Ti now, but if you'd bought the 1070Ti you could jump on the RTX3070 or 6800XL and still have enough cash leftover for another GPU two years from now.
• Going into 2023 I'm pretty sure the 2080Ti is going to be on the struggle bus, Meanwhile, the sweet-spot route still has $350 in the kitty for some RDNA3 or RTX5000 series card...

 

[rtwjunkie]

Is anyone else tired of this forum and its users propagating misinformation? I mean, you link/support/show, and yet here we are...users droning on about vram...

Crying shame that the reviews are so good, but when you hit the forum it's polarizing, toxic fanboy driven drivel.

You can count me in the Truth Brigade. I’m tired of correcting the FUD about VRAM though. These people are the ones that will buy anything as long as it has enough of whatever it is they think will increase their epeen, truth be damned.

 

[ZoneDymo]

I really have no clue what you are talking about, I finished 4 RTX games just fine. Who said you need 100+ fps to enjoy single player games ? AMD owners ?
Btw I can probably max out CP2077 settings with my 2080 Ti and it would still be enjoyable.

Ok this discussion is getting kinda pointless, but to sum it up:
1. rx5700 accourding to you was outdated upon release, your reasoning for this is the lack of RT support.
2. The RTX2000 is the first itteration of RT and thus is very inefficient at it, poor performance and mediocre looks, RT is not ready for prime-time so buying an RTX2000 series for RT is just silly.
3. RTX3000 is out now, much better at it and it can finally sorta properly play that handful of RT titles currently out, I mean sure if you liked mediocre framerate on a 700+ dollar card....enjoy I guess but I would say that is a poor investment for that experience.

Basically the RX5700 is a perfect purchase for the time period, when RT is nothing more then a gimmick, a techdemo, something to experiment with
By the time it actually becomes available properly the RTX2000 series wont be able to deal with that so you will have to upgrade anyway, and by that time people with an RX5700 will also upgrade.

You have to understand, for games to actually REALLY go for RT, the world has to be able to make use of it, OR Nvidia would have to pump a TON of money in the developer to compensate them for the low amount of sales due to the limited customers that can actually buy/play the game.
It wont be until everyone, low, med and high end can do RT, including consoles, that games can be build on RT tech and again, by that time RTX2000, probably 3000 as well will be just as obsolete as the rx5700.

And probably max out CP2077 on an RTX2080Ti just means they are holding back on the RT in favor of a larger playerbase making use of it.
That is kinda my problem with the whole Vram debate, you see sure, maybe games dont need more then 8gb of Vram today for 4k gaming....but lets keep in mind that the only reason they dont need more is because they dont have more so developers cant make use of it so games are held back.
If all new cards had like 12gb and up, then devs could use higher quality/resolution assets because the cards out there in the hands of players can support it, basically if you are sticking the cards with a relatively low amount, then we are just held back in that regard for the near future, which is not a good thing imo which is why im disappointed in that.

 

[Zach_01]

I've played a few games that overtime filled the 8GB VRAM of the 5700XT. Wasnt a problem and I really didnt notice lag or anything weird. As many said, just because all available VRAM is filled, does not mean that the GPU or the game need all that data at once. Brings us to the point that 10GB is fine now or the next year.

But, nVIdia has played it dirty as usually does. Previous flagship, the 2080Ti has 11GB VRAM. Why on earth the next flagship and replacement has 1GB less? Because 3080 10GB is not what nVidia anounced.
The 3090 24GB is the flagship and replacement of 2080Ti 11GB.
nVidia could have gone with TSMC 7nm and build a real monster GPU. Create a 2080s 8GB replacement with at least 12GB (1 side of PCB fully filled) if not 24GB, call it 3080, with a performance +30% of a 2080Ti 11GB and give it an 800$ price tag. 7nm could have give nVidia headroom to uplift performance another 30% from 3080 12/24GB and create the 3080Ti with 20/24GB, give it a price tag around 1000~1100$ and call it a day... RDNA2 could not reach that level of performance hence the crown and the 1000++ price is justified for the fastest GPU in the world with +60% perf above the 2080Ti. I bet those cards would sell like hot cakes.

Instead nVidia...
Deliberately chopped VRAM off the 3080 and make it 10. Call that a flagship GPU with 1GB less than previous...
Has created another GPU with insingificant perf uplift, call it 3090 instead of 3080Ti, to present as a whole other tier when in reality is not, gave it 24GB and disquise it under the "Titan level performance" just to give it the 1500$ price, and mislead users to a fake 1000$ Titan discount. When in reality is a 2080Ti replacement with a +300~400$ price hike.
Because was also planning to promote a 3080s/Ti 20GB with +5% and a 1000+$ price tag.

But we all know the outcome...

If the 3090 is a Titan call it a Titan, give it Titan performance and Titan drivers and be done with it.
But no...
The master of deceptive marketing strikes again, and making plans to maximize profit margins without giving real performance uplifts beyond 3080 10GB, but taking a few hundread $$$ for every +5% of perf uplift.

The dumbest (rather cheap) decision of all was the choise of Samsungs 8nm(10++++) which lead them to terrible(small) perf/watt gains over Turing and that lead them to push TBP to unpresedent levels of power draw (for nVIdia) and... guess what... lead them to over sized and over engineered and expensive coolers for both FE and AIBs. Thus with the combination of GDDR6X diminishes profit for the 700~800$ price range. Thats why they wanted the 3080s/Ti 20GB and the fake 3080Titan/3090 24GB.

That was a real good plan and business.

 

[nguyen]

Ok this discussion is getting kinda pointless, but to sum it up:
1. rx5700 accourding to you was outdated upon release, your reasoning for this is the lack of RT support.
2. The RTX2000 is the first itteration of RT and thus is very inefficient at it, poor performance and mediocre looks, RT is not ready for prime-time so buying an RTX2000 series for RT is just silly.
3. RTX3000 is out now, much better at it and it can finally sorta properly play that handful of RT titles currently out, I mean sure if you liked mediocre framerate on a 700+ dollar card....enjoy I guess but I would say that is a poor investment for that experience.

Basically the RX5700 is a perfect purchase for the time period, when RT is nothing more then a gimmick, a techdemo, something to experiment with
By the time it actually becomes available properly the RTX2000 series wont be able to deal with that so you will have to upgrade anyway, and by that time people with an RX5700 will also upgrade.

You have to understand, for games to actually REALLY go for RT, the world has to be able to make use of it, OR Nvidia would have to pump a TON of money in the developer to compensate them for the low amount of sales due to the limited customers that can actually buy/play the game.
It wont be until everyone, low, med and high end can do RT, including consoles, that games can be build on RT tech and again, by that time RTX2000, probably 3000 as well will be just as obsolete as the rx5700.

And probably max out CP2077 on an RTX2080Ti just means they are holding back on the RT in favor of a larger playerbase making use of it.
That is kinda my problem with the whole Vram debate, you see sure, maybe games dont need more then 8gb of Vram today for 4k gaming....but lets keep in mind that the only reason they dont need more is because they dont have more so developers cant make use of it so games are held back.
If all new cards had like 12gb and up, then devs could use higher quality/resolution assets because the cards out there in the hands of players can support it, basically if you are sticking the cards with a relatively low amount, then we are just held back in that regard for the near future, which is not a good thing imo which is why im disappointed in that.

Well for you RTX, DLSS, VRS, Mesh Shaders are all gimmick, yet bigger VRAM than necessary is not a gimmick . How many game benefit from >10GB VRAM right now ? that's 0.

Turing GPUs are very capable of handling RT and Ultra details at 1440p and below, not sure why you declare it dead when 4K gaming is still a long ways off.

Ultra details which require massive VRAM are rarely worth it visually, rasterization has long past its diminishing return. That why everyone is flocking to RT now, a less costly RT effect like Reflection and Transparent Reflection can make bigger visual impact than Ultra detail.

The best future-proofing by far is to buy something much closer to the performance/$ sweet spot and avoid the early-adopter/flagship/premium tax, then do the same thing again regularly, rather than blowing all of your saved budget once every 5-6 years.

• Two years ago you could have bought a "future proof" 2080Ti for $1200, or (at the time) a $400 1070Ti and put $800 aside.
• You'd still be using your "future proof" 2080Ti now, but if you'd bought the 1070Ti you could jump on the RTX3070 or 6800XL and still have enough cash leftover for another GPU two years from now.
• Going into 2023 I'm pretty sure the 2080Ti is going to be on the struggle bus, Meanwhile, the sweet-spot route still has $350 in the kitty for some RDNA3 or RTX5000 series card...

I agree, so why people are bothered with future proofing 3070/3080 when they are just gonna upgrading to RTX 4000 anyways . Adding useless VRAM would just destroy 3070/3080 price to performance advantage.

I've played a few games that overtime filled the 8GB VRAM of the 5700XT. Wasnt a problem and I really didnt notice lag or anything weird. As many said, just because all available VRAM is filled, does not mean that the GPU or the game need all that data at once. Brings us to the point that 10GB is fine now or the next year.

But, nVIdia has played it dirty as usually does. Previous flagship, the 2080Ti has 11GB VRAM. Why on earth the next flagship and replacement has 1GB less? Because 3080 10GB is not what nVidia anounced.
The 3090 24GB is the flagship and replacement of 2080Ti 11GB.
nVidia could have gone with TSMC 7nm and build a real monster GPU. Create a 2080s 8GB replacement with at least 12GB (1 side of PCB fully filled) if not 24GB, call it 3080, with a performance +30% of a 2080Ti 11GB and give it an 800$ price tag. 7nm could have give nVidia headroom to uplift performance another 30% from 3080 12/24GB and create the 3080Ti with 20/24GB, give it a price tag around 1000~1100$ and call it a day... RDNA2 could not reach that level of performance hence the crown and the 1000++ price is justified for the fastest GPU in the world with +60% perf above the 2080Ti. I bet those cards would sell like hot cakes.

Instead nVidia...
Deliberately chopped VRAM off the 3080 and make it 10. Call that a flagship GPU with 1GB less than previous...
Has created another GPU with insingificant perf uplift, call it 3090 instead of 3080Ti, to present as a whole other tier when in reality is not, gave it 24GB and disquise it under the "Titan level performance" just to give it the 1500$ price, and mislead users to a fake 1000$ Titan discount. When in reality is a 2080Ti replacement with a +300~400$ price hike.
Because was also planning to promote a 3080s/Ti 20GB with +5% and a 1000+$ price tag.

But we all know the outcome...

If the 3090 is a Titan call it a Titan, give it Titan performance and Titan drivers and be done with it.
But no...
The master of deceptive marketing strikes again, and making plans to maximize profit margins without giving real performance uplifts beyond 3080 10GB, but taking a few hundread $$$ for every +5% of perf uplift.

The dumbest (rather cheap) decision of all was the choise of Samsungs 8nm(10++++) which lead them to terrible(small) perf/watt gains over Turing and that lead them to push TBP to unpresedent levels of power draw (for nVIdia) and... guess what... lead them to over sized and over engineered and expensive coolers for both FE and AIBs. Thus with the combination of GDDR6X diminishes profit for the 700~800$ price range. Thats why they wanted the 3080s/Ti 20GB and the fake 3080Titan/3090 24GB.

That was a real good plan and business.

So you prefer another 1200usd 3080 Ti 11GB ?
Not sure if it's a better sell better than the 3080 at 700usd, probably a bit better than 3090.
People whine about Turing high price points too, but what are high end PC gamers gonna do, buy an AMD GPU ? . Let just hope Big Navi bring big performance back to the table so high end PC gamers will have more choices this time.

 

[John Naylor]

Nvidia must be bloody terrified of what AMD has if its moving GA102 down to 70 Ti levels

I'd guess as terrified as they were for the 7xx, 9xx, 10xx and 20xx series ... the fact they they are dropping the VRAM versions says nothing other than ... "it wasn't bringing anything to the table". AMD hasn't had a horse in the race since the 6xx series. AMD slogan should "AMD is gonna".... the 290 / 290x lost to the 780 with both cards overclocked, never threatened the Ti ... the 970 outsold all AMD cards combined by more than 2 to 1 ... the Fury, Vega and Radeon VII were a flop. I'd love to see it be competitive ... it's not like when you saw the Globetrotters play the Generals you expected a close game ... but every new generations ... it's AMD is gonna and it has yet to happen. Same with the VRAM...the 480 / 580 w/ more RAM couldn't compete with the 1060 .... we have seen the same VRAM argument thru 6xx, 7xx, 9xxx, 10xx and it never pans out. I hope it does this time, but with 7xx nVidia held the top 2 tiers, with 9xx the top 3, 10xx the top 4.

I truly hope they can make a top tier version of the 5600 XT .... but every new generation it's been "AMD is gonna". They were the Chicago Cubs of the technology world.... hadn't won it in all in 100 years ... but this was gonna be there year. After 100 years, you couldn't help but root for the cubbies and Im sitting here rooting for AMD ... I would love to see them do it.. But I just can't get invested in the same ole hype we see every new generation only to be left with disappointment ... yet again .... I don't know how peeps can go thru this every generation .... shouting to the rooftops for 2 months before the release how "this is gonna change everything" and than ya gotta show ya face when it's another 290x, Fury, vega or Radeon VIIl.

Its going to begin and end with the GPU ...every time 2 VRAM versions of a card have come out it's been shown that uness you work really hartd to create a special situation, VRAM only makes a significant difference in fps when the frame rates are so low as to make the game unplayable.

Video Card Performance: 2GB vs 4GB Memory

Similar video cards are often available in versions with more than one memory size. The GeForce GTX 680 is an example, and comes in both 2GB and 4GB variants. With computer components more is often better, but does doubling the memory on a video card like this actually help with game performance...

www.pugetsystems.com

GTX 770 4GB vs 2GB Showdown - Page 3 of 4 - AlienBabelTech

Do you need 4GB of ram? We tested EVGA's GTX 770 4GB versus Nvidia's GTX 770 2GB version, at 1920x1080, 2560x1600 and 5760x1080.

alienbabeltech.com

Gigabyte GeForce GTX 960 G1 Gaming 4GB review

In this review we check out the 4GB version of the Gigabyte G1 Gaming GeForce GTX 960. The GTX 960 is the mainstream product that we figured has too little memory, will this 4GB version resolve our co... VRAM Analysis 2GB vs 4GB - Alien Isolation

www.guru3d.com

Is 4GB of VRAM enough? AMD's Fury X faces off with Nvidia's GTX 980 Ti, Titan X

Is 4GB enough for a high-end GPU? We investigated and tested 15 titles to find out.

www.extremetech.com

Yes ya can find a game that appears to show a difference... a poor console port ... but most games are unaffected ... you can also find games where the performance difference between same cards w/ different VRAM goes DOWN when you increase resolution ... which makes no sense.

 

[Zach_01]

So you prefer another 1200usd 3080 Ti 11GB ?
Not sure if it's a better sell better than the 3080 at 700usd, probably a bit better than 3090.
People whine about Turing high price points too, but what are high end PC gamers gonna do, buy an AMD GPU ? . Let just hope Big Navi bring big performance back to the table so high end PC gamers will have more choices this time.

I think you are smarter than this. Because I can’t believe that this is what you have understood from all I wrote, which I didn’t say anything like that.

But I will play the “broken record mode” and try to break it down for others to understand it better. You understood it just fine, but trying to confuse public. Couldn’t care less why.

nVidia should have gone with 7nm to have better perf/watt ratio so could increase performance even higher on the same/less TBP.

And do...

3080 (at least)12GB, 250W, 30+% perf over 2080Ti 11GB, 700~800$
3080Ti 20/24GB, 300+W, 30+% over 3080 10GB, 1100 or even 1200$.
Titan, 48GB, 2500~3000$, with real Titan performance and drivers.

Instead, they did...

3080 10GB, 320W, +20~30% perf over 2080Ti 11GB, 700~800$
3090 24GB, 350+W, +10% perf over 3080 10GB, 1500+$
Also wanted...
3080Ti 20GB, 320+W, +5% perf over 3080 10GB, 1000+$
So they want/ed after 3080 10GB to charge +300~500$ for every +5% perf uplift.

So to sum up.
Gone cheap with Samsung, forced to over engineer coolers, restrict 3080 to 10GB because they can’t make good enough profit margins, and so push users to 1000+~1500$ GPUs with insignificant (+5%, +5%) perf uplift.
The canceled “3080Ti 20GB” and 3090 24GB.

Faked the 3090 24GB as the next Titan with a fake 1000$ discount, with no Titan performance or drivers. That is no Titan...

As I said, it was a good business plan to maximize profit margins. Sure they will find a way to survive this. But their original plan back-fired pretty much everywhere. From their faces to Jensen’s arse...

They could have won the “fight” single handed and be the clear King of performance and features, still with good enough margins.
But no... they choose lies, fake titles and user exploitation to the max level.

 

[nguyen]

I think you are smarter than this. Because I can’t believe that this is what you have understood from all I wrote, which I didn’t say anything like that.

But I will play the “broken record mode” and try to break it down for others to understand it better. You understood it just fine, but trying to confuse public. Couldn’t care less why.

nVidia should have gone with 7nm to have better perf/watt ratio so could increase performance even higher on the same/less TBP.

And do...

3080 (at least)12GB, 250W, 30+% perf over 2080Ti 11GB, 700~800$
3080Ti 20/24GB, 300+W, 30+% over 3080 10GB, 1100 or even 1200$.
Titan, 48GB, 2500~3000$, with real Titan performance and drivers.

Instead, they did...

3080 10GB, 320W, +20~30% perf over 2080Ti 11GB, 700~800$
3090 24GB, 350+W, +10% perf over 3080 10GB, 1500+$
Also wanted...
3080Ti 20GB, 320+W, +5% perf over 3080 10GB, 1000+$
So they want/ed after 3080 10GB to charge +300~500$ for every +5% perf uplift.

So to sum up.
Gone cheap with Samsung, forced to over engineer coolers, restrict 3080 to 10GB because they can’t make good enough profit margins, and so push users to 1000+~1500$ GPUs with insignificant (+5%, +5%) perf uplift.
The canceled “3080Ti 20GB” and 3090 24GB.

Faked the 3090 24GB as the next Titan with a fake 1000$ discount, with no Titan performance or drivers. That is no Titan...

As I said, it was a good business plan to maximize profit margins. Sure they will find a way to survive this. But their original plan back-fired pretty much everywhere. From their faces to Jensen’s arse...

They could have won the “fight” single handed and be the clear King of performance and features, still with good enough margins.
But no... they choose lies, fake titles and user exploitation to the max level.

Not sure what Nvidia own you but you are demanding something that are quite outrageous there.
Anything more outrageous that you are demanding in the process ? world peace ? end of pandemic ?

The current 3080/3090 are not good enough ? don't buy it, problem solved.
FYI TSMC is also charging ridiculous prices for their foundry, nothing wrong with supporting Samsung foundry to bring in competition, sounds very much like people want AMD to be competitive eh
Also AMD is not a charity either, they will try to increase their margins once they have the performance crown, Zen 3 would like to say Hi

 

[Zach_01]

Not sure what Nvidia own you but you are demanding something that are quite outrageous there.
Anything more outrageous that you are demanding in the process ? world peace ? end of pandemic ?

The current 3080/3090 are not good enough ? don't buy it, problem solved.
FYI TSMC is also charging ridiculous prices for their foundry, nothing wrong with supporting Samsung foundry to bring in competition, sounds very much like people want AMD to be competitive eh
Also AMD is not a charity either, they will try to increase their margins once they have the performance crown, Zen 3 would like to say Hi

It’s not unethical to claim profit margins. Of course AMD, nVidia or Intel doesn’t owe anything to anyone.
My 2 examples of nVidia of what should have done and what has done has a meaning.
They’ve choose to do what they have done, and try to present it as my “should” option. That’s was all about.

At least the last 3-4 years any price uplift from AMD was attended by something. A nice performance uplift, and not fake titles(not all but some of them).

 

[Anymal]

I was shocked that 128mb 4200ti was slower than 64mb in 2002.