NVIDIA CEO Says Buying a GPU Without Ray Tracing "Is Crazy"

[Deleted member 177333]

He is trying to justify keeping the gpu prices inflated over 400 USD across the board.

Ngreedia.

Yep. That was how I translated it. If they want more people to buy Turing GPUs, they might consider getting the prices out of the stratosphere to something reasonable.

 

[dicktracy]

...blah blah blah Ray Tracing lowers performance... yeah just like increasing graphic settings lower FPS.

 

[Steevo]

...blah blah blah Ray Tracing lowers performance... yeah just like increasing graphic settings lower FPS.

Does it improve visual image quality in a quantified way? Is said cost worth the tangable benefits?

 

[Mephis]

Does it improve visual image quality in a quantified way? Is said cost worth the tangable benefits?

The answer to the first question is a resounding yes. Otherwise they wouldn't use ray tracing for Hollywood movies and it wouldn't be the holy grail of graphics. The answer to the second question is not simple. It is up to every user, just like lowering graphical settings for more fps or raising settings for better visuals.

 

[John Naylor]

Isn't that what he's paid to say ? ... welome to capitalism

 

[Trompochi]

Does he think people grow money on trees?
This don't make any sense .

In some countries, they do, trust me.

 

[Anymal]

lmao. he's crazy and delusional. even your cards get a huge amount of performance penalty while playing with raytracing on.

meh.

crazy and delusions sells.

 

[efikkan]

Please clean up this thread, too much trolling.

-----

Does the man not realize that everyone's laughing at him right now?

And everyone who's not just didn't get the memo yet.

Future proofing with GPU And then mentioning 2-3-4 years. What? Isn't that just 'using the product you bought'?

Do you realize that every CEO will cherry-pick or even stretch arguments to favor the sales of their company? Always take any CEO or marketing department with more than a grain of salt.

Obviously, Nvidia's claim here about ray tracing becoming a "deal breaker" anytime soon is BS. It will take many years, and most buyers of cards in the next two years will probably replace their cards again before we see any major ray tracing usage.

Still, I would kindly ask many of you who makes fun of ray tracing to look in the mirror, many of you have fueled the narrative that GCN was somehow superior in Direct3D 12 and would be better in the long run. Now, many years later, what we are left with is crappy Direct3D 12 ports and very slow adoption rates, and a claimed advantage which never materialized. We should expect something similar for ray tracing; many years of gradually turning from a "gimmick" to "somewhat useful" and eventually becoming widespread, and by then, Turing cards will no longer be relevant.

Nvidia is in panic mode, their products aren't in the majority of gaming devices, and the few they are in aren't focused on the visual fidelity, the complete and opposite of their marketing for PC gaming, while their direct competition is in the majority of gaming devices that are setting the standards. Must really suck to know and live with.

Nvidia's dominance in the PC market have never been stronger. Anyone who thinks Nvidia is in panic mode must be nothing short of delusional. What we should worry about is AMD's lack of willingness to prioritize the PC gaming market.

 

[Manoa]

My first thought on reading the headline was this. Taking a dump on people who recently bought one of these cards, which are great for 1080p, is a crazy thing to say. As if the AIB of AMDs newest offerings didnt already look great, now you have the added incentive of not giving money to man who is actively giving you the finger.

crazy ?

The answer to the first question is a resounding yes. Otherwise they wouldn't use ray tracing for Hollywood movies and it wouldn't be the holy grail of graphics. The answer to the second question is not simple. It is up to every user, just like lowering graphical settings for more fps or raising settings for better visuals.

1. this isn't movies
2. it's not holy grail, just go watch toy story it's easy to see how synthetic it is
3. this RT is so fake, you can't even call it RT
4. "lowering graphical settings" ? absolutely 0 games using this crap give you ANY control of it what so ever
5. you my dear are full of sht

 

[net2007]

Copout. 1080ti still the best advancement.

 

[Mephis]

crazy ?

View attachment 129612



1. this isn't movies
2. it's not holy grail, just go watch toy story it's easy to see how synthetic it is
3. this RT is so fake, you can't even call it RT
4. "lowering graphical settings" ? absolutely 0 games using this crap give you ANY control of it what so ever
5. you my dear are full of sht

1. Never said it was the movies.
2. If it isn't the holy grail, I'll ask again, why does every cgi movie use it? They have millions of dollars and months to throw at the problem, if rasterazation was better, they would do that.
3. I made no claims about the quality of RTX. Of course it isn't full RTRT, that is impossible at this point in real time.
4. I never claimed they did. That point was about tradeoffs in quality vs speed. Like how you can turn down rasterazation quality to gain fps or turn it up for visual quality.
5. If you really don't think ray tracing is better for quality than rasterazation, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Xzibit]

1. Never said it was the movies.
2. If it isn't the holy grail, I'll ask again, why does every cgi movie use it? They have millions of dollars and months to throw at the problem, if rasterazation was better, they would do that.
3. I made no claims about the quality of RTX. Of course it isn't full RTRT, that is impossible at this point in real time.
4. I never claimed they did. That point was about tradeoffs in quality vs speed. Like how you can turn down rasterazation quality to gain fps or turn it up for visual quality.
5. If you really don't think ray tracing is better for quality than rasterazation, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

Reminds me of RTX tech unveiling

The realistic budget is 1-2 samples per pixel (which is insufficient to get anything reliable) with real-time rendering

 

[Fluffmeister]

Copout. 1080ti still the best advancement.

But that was just Paxwell people said, die shrunk, clocks up... ngreedia!

But yes, still a beast.

 

[GreiverBlade]

...blah blah blah Ray Tracing lowers performance... yeah just like increasing graphic settings lower FPS.

oh my... ok
1. does RTX on versus RTX off bring massive visual improvement over the cost of the fps? (answer: no... not really)
2. does a 1440p ultra settings versus a 720p low settings has the same impact as RTX? (answer: no)
3.does the difference in visual improvement over the fps lost is equivalent? (answer: no)
4. will lowering graphic settings to alleviate the fps loss from RTX make the game using it on the same level as high/ultra settings in term of image quality? (answer: no)

i can achieve 1440/1600p 60/75fps (nope no need for 100hz+ for me ) at high or ultra settings ... but a 2080Ti in a RTX enabled game with the same detail level and goes to .... 30fps at 1080p ... and the visual quality difference is ... not that much different, yet that 2080Ti has a huge chunk of hardware dedicated to handle RTX, that alone make me think my 1070 replacement will not be green.

RTX is just like PhysX ... for now ... and the need to get a 1200$+ card t get it done with the same level of detail and resolution as my actual setup is a pure no go (well 1200 for you, not for me ... it's even a tad higher ) i think i will pay half/third the price and skip RTX until it's really something more than a hindrance in game that use it or a demo worthy gimmick that use a baffling amount of RT core for that little improvement.

 

[Chomiq]

Stock went up by $10 since yesterday's RTX Minecraft announcement, I guess Jensen was right.

 

[geogan]

"Almost 4.6 Billion-aire says not buying a €1,500 GPU would be crazy"

 

[64K]

"Almost billionaire"

Actually he is a billionaire. His net worth was 4.6 billion dollars in US dollars as of Apr this year.

 

[geogan]

Actually he is a billionaire. His net worth was 4.6 billion dollars in US dollars as of Apr this year.

Oh FFS... he's richer than I thought... so €1,500 is him practically giving them away for loose change then.

 

[Kapone33]

I feel that this response is directly linked to the fact that the 5700XT is competing with the 2070 Super and is cheaper. I also believe it is a response to all of the positive announcements that AMD have made in the past few months and the rumours that we are getting a large Navi card coming soon. In terms of ray tracing I have a funny feeling it will go the way of Physx as well.

 

[FinneousPJ]

Yeah, here's a thing: he might be biased.

 

[Manoa]

kapone you might whant to wait see how AMD does it, they made several patents about it, if AMD can do it significantly better, it might not be another physx

 

[InVasMani]

I bet the Leather Jacket himself did not actually "BUY" any graphics cards from Nvidia, so technically he is CRAZY.

Ray traced leather jacket coming to a Nvidia demo near you...

 

[Fluffmeister]

Actually he is a billionaire. His net worth was 4.6 billion dollars in US dollars as of Apr this year.

And to think, he used to work for AMD.... they can't all be stupid over there.

 

[JustAnEngineer]

By the time that ray tracing is useful, all but the $1100+ GeForce RTX cards will be too slow to use it effectively.

Buying a GPU without 7 nm is crazy. At the high end, we should wait for Ampere or Navi 23 if we have the patience.

 

[bug]

By the time that ray tracing is useful, all but the $1100+ GeForce RTX cards will be too slow to use it effectively.

Buying a GPU without 7 nm is crazy. At the high end, we should wait for Ampere or Navi 23 if we have the patience.

Absolutely. No new DX feature was ever playable on first-gen hardware. This is just for early adopters and developers for the time being.