It should be discredited at every turn and people who use this site for information need to be told that this site is unreliable and shouldn't be used for anything at all. And there can be billions of rays being cast at the same time in a single frame. I'm a dick to people that are willfully ignorant, that's just how I am. I would wait until all the cards are on the table. Though that's what I was expecting when I saw the specs. I'm going to stay put with my 2016 setup I yet to have troubles i7 6850k 6 core 3. I pre-ordered one at Microcenter, actually a few to make sure I get one but if numbers are only 25% faster.
Exercise patience and in about a week less than you will see what Vega has to say to Nvidia. Less shaders vs more clock speeds, memory bandwidth close though different kinds, not sure about latency etc. Basically it means needing to do something as or more intensive as a square root to traverse down and find the source and direction of each ray. This industry cannot afford that yet and the technology you want does not exist yet. Performance in rasterized games could either completely surprise or disappoint us.
I was in the same Kirkland dorm as Mr. Some people are dicks, that's just how it is. Nvidia has worked on developing Turing and its ray tracing capabilities for a decade, which would put the date on this project as kicking off not long before Intel started publicly talking about Larrabee, its own aborted push to move to a real-time ray tracing rendering system. I wouldn't have said anything else to anybody if people didn't decide to make themselves look stupid by misrepresenting what my original comment was about. I'm expecting Ray Tracing to be pointless for 5 years or so, I hope I'm proved wrong.
I'm just gonna pick up a cheap 1080 ti. Unless you're dead set on 100fps 2160p + Ultra Settings. Clock speeds stayed roughly the same. Granted a lot of games but not all of them. Whilst current generation headset displays are limited in terms of overall pixel density meaning a visible panel structure , one of the biggest immersion breakers are jaggies aliasing caused by a low target render resolution. That might be even more awkward than the original.
There are multiple companies working on advanced micro display technology which we the consumer know nothing about. Is it just software on the tensor cores or something unique? Parallax Parallax occlusion mapping Stones 366 fps 647 fps Much better peak texture detail. Turing is newer production but otherwise same vendor s and node I think? There is much to learn after the release. Also you're just being really annoying and trying to be right. So next time don't try to correct rumors because that's just retarded. Up until now shaders have been doing simpler math that involved mostly multiplication operations on just a few million pixels every frame.
It's actually not that good of source for how well the cards actually perform they just use benchmarks instead of real world tests like games,video editing or rendering. In other words, the 1080Ti just made the Titan X effectively obsolete. If I had to put money anywhere, the 2080Ti will not beat the Titan-V outside of ray tracing and that might only be due to software limitations. I think Titan V will probably tend to be just a bit faster than a 2080Ti on average, but not in all cases more cores versus clock speed. Are you in some kind of drama play where unless you get the absolute maximum that's not even noticeable for the eye, you're not happy? It's a whole new architecture, so hard to say.
But the Titan X can also clock to 2038. A card is obsolete when there is a card that performs better and uses less power while costing the same or less. I give people back what they give me. He nailed that shit to the t, minus one thing. The 980Ti has been superseded by the 1080Ti offering 100% more performance in under 2 years after its release. And given that core counts went up like they did, I think that's how they are going to get the bulk of their generational improvements. Using the highest settings and running in 1440p, the Titan V averaged 66fps in Tomb Raider, 158fps in Gears of War, and 88fps in Ashes of the Singularity.
Parallax occlusion mapping Stones 307 fps 541 fps Much better texture detail. Putting either under great cooling could change it up a bit. Do people think that when overclocked the 1080 Ti is going to be a bigger beast? Force Splatted Flocking Swarm 184 fps 270 fps Much faster complex splatting. Google me and you will find my work on Customer Service Differentiation published in the Harvard and Oxford Business Journal. That's a big enough change in itself, but I have no data as to how much performance that will bring to the table. The only one that is stupid here is you for saying something is not correct when nothing is final until release. The rx vega sucks balls so bad the only people who bought it were fan boys, and retard miners.
I agree with another poster that it will be closer to 5 years before we see full 4K being supported. Add up all the yearly ~30% performance gains, and you get the equivalent of a new console generation every 5-7 years. This website is for people who are uninformed. Please calm down, I did not mean to offend you. I also never told anybody to trust my judgment, but to use actual tech sites to get real information, and that was after the fact anyway. And out of the box he's completely right.
The Titan X obviously isn't aimed at value conscious buyers but if you are in the market for the fastest single consumer graphics card money can buy, then the Titan X will hit the spot perfectly. I think its unfortunate we have to supersample when we could be running native resolution. The gtx 980 Ti is beaten by the 1070. Sony makes a crazy expensive 0. A 970 is perfectly capable of lasting you for another 6 months and, from personal experience, you will wish you waited when you see the increases in performance the Volta xx80 card will have. They showed no numbers so performance is more or less unknown at the minute. Age Newest 51 Months 26 Months Much more recent.