schmidtbag:

I disagree. Nvidia's prices are annoying and ridiculous (at least for the 2080Ti and better), but as much as we might not like them, they are justified and they are very much working in Nvidia's favor. By the time either Intel or AMD come out with competition, Nvidia can lower their prices to a more competitive level, and by then it'll have been a long enough wait that their loyal customers won't get too angry over the major price drop. This is also assuming either Intel or AMD comes out with something truly competitive. Considering AMD's aging technology and Intel having practically no previous experience in making GPUs, I'm not feeling all too confident that Nvidia is going to get out-paced. I'd like it if they did (the last thing Nvidia needs is an ego boost - it's pretty much the 1 thing I hate about the company), but I'm keeping my expectations low.

I still think Nvidia screwed the pooch on this release. I see the cards already starting to have discounts on them. And people like me (see below) are many many Nvidia loyalists upset with Nvidia this release. I can buy a 1080ti, overclock it up to 2080 performance and save a few hundred dollars. I really have no interest in ray tracing, and to tell me I have to spend $1400 to implement it is a fatal mistake and an outrage to your average gamer. And from what I have been reading the 2080ti will not be equipped to even handle true ray tracing when it goes mainstream. So spend $1400 and MAYBE you can enable ray tracing in your game? Ok maybe Asus will sell the 2080ti card for $999 , but even at $1000 it's not worth it. No thank you! So this is why I think AMD can grab a large piece of the pie. You mention Nvidia will just lower their price along with AMD. Will they? Then they will have to admit their cards are not worth what they originally asked. Say Amd comes out with a gpu close to the 2080ti performance for $799. Will Nvidia really lower it that much? And don't count out Intel either, they are famous for pulling rabbits out of their deep pockets hat.

Elder III:

If AMD delivers a GPU that is competitive with my GTX 1080 Ti before the end of this year and is priced around where AMD usually prices their top end GPU then I will have a hard time not buying since I'm pretty pissed off with Nvidia right now. Unfortunately I don't have any realistic expectation of it happening in 2018. :/

You are not alone my friend!

NewTRUMP Order:

I still think Nvidia screwed the pooch on this release. I see the cards already starting to have discounts on them. And people like me (see below) are many many Nvidia loyalists upset with Nvidia this release. I can buy a 1080ti, overclock it up to 2080 performance and save a few hundred dollars. I really have no interest in ray tracing, and to tell me I have to spend $1400 to implement it is a fatal mistake and an outrage to your average gamer. And from what I have been reading the 2080ti will not be equipped to even handle true ray tracing when it goes mainstream. So spend $1400 and MAYBE you can enable ray tracing in your game? Ok maybe Asus will sell the 2080ti card for $999 , but even at $1000 it's not worth it. No thank you! So this is why I think AMD can grab a large piece of the pie. You mention Nvidia will just lower their price along with AMD. Will they? Then they will have to admit their cards are not worth what they originally asked. Say Amd comes out with a gpu close to the 2080ti performance for $799. Will Nvidia really lower it that much? And don't count out Intel either, they are famous for pulling rabbits out of their deep pockets hat. You are not alone my friend!

You got it wrong. While 2080 is like 10~15% more expensive than 1080Ti, if anyone buys 1080Ti now while 2080 is available, it will be mistake. I am not going to argue with you on your opinion on raytracing. But I'll tell you that it is apparently as far as you can see. Look on all other features/improvements in Turing. In year from now, new games made with Turing features enabled will run on Turing 2080 30~50% faster than on 1080Ti.

Killian38:

AMD Can take a huge part of the Graphics market with a card that matches a 2070 or passes it a little. While using the same power as the 2070 or less. If AMD's newer cards matched the 2070 or beats it at a good price point, AMD wins. AMD really wins if they add x-fire to the card and truly support it. AMD doesn't need to compete with the 2080.

I don't know about that. When facing the decision to choose between a new car (let's say a Mazda 3 to keep the price down) and a RTX 2080 some gamers might actually choose the 2080 😉

Fox2232:

You got it wrong. While 2080 is like 10~15% more expensive than 1080Ti, if anyone buys 1080Ti now while 2080 is available, it will be mistake. I am not going to argue with you on your opinion on raytracing. But I'll tell you that it is apparently as far as you can see. Look on all other features/improvements in Turing. In year from now, new games made with Turing features enabled will run on Turing 2080 30~50% faster than on 1080Ti.

Do we have real world bench though? Cause i swear XBox fans 2-3 years ago were all arguing that teh CLOUDTM technology would make the XBox so much more powerful. Still waiting ... I mean ray tracing have been around for a while. I remember reading an article about it like around 20 years ago in a magazine before the Internet was even a thing where it was presented as the future of gaming. If only a handful of games support it (via an agreement between nVidia and the maker of the game) or the support is just partial not sure it will amount to much. I mean i owned both AMD and nVidia in the last 15 years (mostly nVidia) and i did not see much difference with games supporting PhysX. Anyway certainly not enough to be a selling point. Anybody here is a game developer and tested those cards with real games? Anybody worked with the API? Is it easy to use? Is it a nightmare? Can you make a full game using it exclusively? If not is it worth using for just some part of it? How much cost does it add to development? Are the cards actually powerful enough for real-time ray tracing in games? Companies like EA and Ubi are lazy as hell. They tend to stick with what works which is releasing plain directx games in beta and fix them if they sell enough. I somehow doubt they'll fully get on board unless nVidia pays since only PC equipped with RTX cards will support it.

next year ill build new fully AMD machine, soon as new GPU arrives 🙂

MonstroMart:

Do we have real world bench though? Cause i swear XBox fans 2-3 years ago were all arguing that teh CLOUDTM technology would make the XBox so much more powerful. Still waiting ... I mean ray tracing have been around for a while. I remember reading an article about it like around 20 years ago in a magazine before the Internet was even a thing where it was presented as the future of gaming. If only a handful of games support it (via an agreement between nVidia and the maker of the game) or the support is just partial not sure it will amount to much. I mean i owned both AMD and nVidia in the last 15 years (mostly nVidia) and i did not see much difference with games supporting PhysX. Anyway certainly not enough to be a seeling point. Anybody here is a game developer and tested those cards with real games? Anybody worked with the API? Is it easy to use? Is it a nightmare? Can you make a full game using it exclusively? If not is it worth using for just some part of it? How much cost does it add to development? Are the cards actually powerful enough for real-time ray tracing in games? Companies like EA and Ubi are lazy as hell. They tend to stick with what works which is releasing plain directx games in beta and fix them if they sell enough. I somehow doubt they'll fully get on board unless nVidia pays since only PC equipped with RTX cards will support it.

Read it again. I think I was pretty clear that strength of RTX cards will not be in raytracing, but all other improvements. Take a look here.

Turing seems to be much closer to GCN that anything made before. The sum of the tech on it, disregarding fanboyisms from all sides, is frankly quite incredible, but it feels like a 7nm chip to me. That's probably what Ampere is.

Fox2232:

You got it wrong. While 2080 is like 10~15% more expensive than 1080Ti, if anyone buys 1080Ti now while 2080 is available, it will be mistake. I am not going to argue with you on your opinion on raytracing. But I'll tell you that it is apparently as far as you can see. Look on all other features/improvements in Turing. In year from now, new games made with Turing features enabled will run on Turing 2080 30~50% faster than on 1080Ti.

I am talking about this release. I am not spending the money on these cards for a technology that isn't even enabled yet. And to charge this premium for a non existent ability is a farce. When and IF ray tracing does become mainstream these cards won't be able to handle it. Down the road when and if ray tracing is common place then I will take a look at the gpu's available, from all companies, to use that technology. Navi is coming in 2019 let's see what AMD brings to the table before you plop down $1300. Remember the Gtx 970? Nvidia isn't the messiah of gpu's and the RTX is a snow job too.

Fox2232:

Read it again. I think I was pretty clear that strength of RTX cards will not be in raytracing, but all other improvements. Take a look here.

If this is true then these cards really are overpriced! Nvidia has tried to take advantage of a market that was starved for a new gpu. The 4k at 60fps promised turns out to be a farce, and what happens when ray tracing is enabled at 4k. These cards are nothing more than the kings new clothes at a ridiculous price. And Nvidia's stock has gone down 30% since the great RTX release. 😳 (Actually Nvidia is a really good buy now):D