Clawedge:

8% increase in performance is now considered news worthy. This is the most pathetic state of gpus I have seen to date.

Welcome to pc gaming these days. Carefully crafted increments of performance "upgrades", while stuck waiting for next-gen consoles to dictate PC hardware, then surpass it ...in increments again. Same with CPU's.

Dribble:

All the ways of increasing visual quality suffer from diminishing returns as you get better and better. You can tell that res is one of those as you have to keep prefixing all your comments with the "proper screen size" - i.e. go huge or it's not worth it. The single biggest different between a pixar movie and what we have in games is not resolution (they film in 4k, the older films are 2k and that's for a cinema screen - we already have those res on PC) it's lighting.

Yeah the leap from raster to ray is going to be a fun one but it's a ways off yet at least for a full implementation and even longer for being something like a standard though accurate effects instead of approximate is going to be huge. Screen space and all it's downsides for a example although it's fast so it's not going away anytime soon. Game wise the older titles using varying forms of baked lighting and shadows are also good showcases though the often more static look of these is a downside, Assassin's Creed Unity though while it has it's flaws I am impressed Ubisoft got as good results as they did with Origins and Odyssey taking the engine further. 🙂 Though GI or global illumination is part of lighting and then the rest such as shadows and post-process and other effects less focus on simulating a broken camera and more on making it realistic though with the performance barrier for ray tracing it's not going to be a quick process for some time and these other methods will be good enough considering image quality and performance together. Getting there though, consoles are going to be a obstacle too I suppose but little by little. Will be interesting to see what NVIDIA will be doing for 2020 now that this little thing is out getting some more use of the current stock of GPU cores for the 2000 series though yeah 8% isn't that big but eh it's something depending on what you are upgrading to and budget and all that with the 2080 Ti remaining the flagship with a bit further lead over this card.

Dribble:

All the ways of increasing visual quality suffer from diminishing returns as you get better and better. You can tell that res is one of those as you have to keep prefixing all your comments with the "proper screen size" - i.e. go huge or it's not worth it. The single biggest different between a pixar movie and what we have in games is not resolution (they film in 4k, the older films are 2k and that's for a cinema screen - we already have those res on PC) it's lighting.

Size, viewing distance, resolution are all critically related to achieve optimum visual quality/impact. Diminishing returns set in when one of those variables is way off! ie, 24" 4k @ 18"? 40" 4k @ 10'? If you still havent grasped it, how about 8k on a 6" phone @ 18" away. Of course diminishing returns set in! You have to find a sweet spot to where it all gels or it quickly becomes pointless.

Well since it is still the 104 chip no surprises there just 128 cuda cores left untapped on the 2080 to begin with.