Faked NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Performance Slides are making Rounds on the WWW
Click here to post a comment for Faked NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Performance Slides are making Rounds on the WWW on our message forum
kakiharaFRS
commenting for a laugh because I'm currently benchmarking
Port Royal on a 1080Ti : 2074points 10.07fps 😳
I don't know if it'll be 2x faster in ray-tracing than a 2080Ti but I sure hope it'll be 6x faster than my 1080Ti 😉
TheDeeGee
Saw them earlier, looked way too fishy.
Noisiv
Very weak fake having all kinds of problems.
Surprised it lasted this long. And that it got confirmed by a "reliable" leaker. WTH is going on; only 23 more hours.
Fox2232
I love when people make jokes... Like measured at 4K while DLSS enabled. (Means 1440p with DLSS upscaling to 4K.)
Legacy-ZA
Could be that the graphs were rendered with DLSS. 😛
Martin5000
Looks like AMD is doing the same to Nvidia than Nvidia did to AMD.
Raise expectations to get disappointment.
Its an old marketing tactic.
Denial
Or its just some random discord guy making a slide.. which is what it was.
Why does everything have to be weird 4D backgammon corporate espionage, when it's much more believable that some forum nerd will make stuff up and a bunch of sites will run with it for $$?
Exodite
Uh, maybe I'm an outlier here but a 2X performance increase at the top end using DLSS + RTX is hardly a high expectation.
I'd probably be disappointed if it isn't more than that, given than RTX with Turing has been a huge drag on performance and DLSS being improved with Ampere is definitely the expectation.
Now if we're talking 2X in pure raster performance, without DLSS, then yes - that would be a pretty high expectation!
neikosr0x
Doesn't matter if it looks equal or better.
Denial
If it's DLSS to DLSS then obviously some part of the increase is raster performance? You're basically comparing 1440p + DLSS impact (Turing) to 1440p + DLSS impact (Ampere) across two cards (if the slide was real).
I don't think you can make DLSS much faster.. I'd imagine the biggest portion of the increase in performance is just coming from the base resolution decrease, DLSS adds some latency on top of rendering the frame, but I'm sure it's really small. I doubt you could decrease it much. The only other thing would be increase the quality that DLSS can reconstruct, allowing you to drop the base resolution even further.
Fox2232
Does not look equal, nor better as even newest implementations stand. For now, it is always downgrade in fidelity.
In some cases visual downgrade is so big, that when applied to 1440p and then down-scaled to 1080p, you can still see that it is much worse.
But hey, you can always blame game developers... all of them. I would not touch DLSS for now, unless my HW was so poor, I could not play game without it.
Denial
Compared to TAA'd variant? Disagree.
sbacchetta
I am not saying those slide are legit, I personally don't care much (in less than 30 hours we will get real answers), but why some dirty artifacts due to bad jpeg compression are a proof of them being fake ? Unless there is other oddities not show in the article ?
sbacchetta
I would say the latest implementation of DLSS is superior 90-95% of the time, for really small detail (far away fence, inside of bicycle wheel in the distance) DLSS fail, but for anything else is better.
Astyanax
Because those aren't compression artifacts, they are incorrectly placed pixels artifacts.
kakiharaFRS
for anyone still reading comments here
fun fact : I managed to get my 1080Ti to generate 384Watts running 3DMark Timespy Extreme...a vision of the future ? 😛
devastator
it be fine when its clean up with dlss 2.0 😀:D
sbacchetta
Sorry but I have seen jpg image with that kind of artifacts in the past. The one on the upper part of the zoomed picture look a tad strange, but not impossible either.
PS I am a professional retoucher/photographer, you don't have to trust me, but I am not speaking out of my a##
Exodite
I suppose it's a bit silly to discuss made-up slides but my reasoning is that RT is by far the most significant limiting factor in certain situations, like Control.
And we're all expecting significantly higher RT performance with Ampere.
Hence, Ampere wouldn't need much more raster performance do significantly outdo Turing in the examples used - because what performance it does have won't be constrained by RT (or at least not to the same extent).
The DLSS aspect is less important, generally speaking it just means the comparison is made at a lower resolution. I would imagine that any performance hit from the technology to be lower with Ampere though.
Fox2232
Whatever that TAA in F1 2020 was, it won by miles.
And in any other game, it is sad to even read anyone wants to compare blurry TAA to DLSS. Sure, it can match it. But I would rather run no AA than blurry TAA.
Few crisp pixels around edges when no AA is used are still better than massive loss of fine detail across entire image with DLSS.
nVidia simply needs to do more work on it.
