I though 50% more expensive. My bad... 😀

Hmm could be, 7nm and a different node than how AMD's doing it (Well did for Navi10 at least.) so lower power requirement seems possible, performance eh well it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable though 50% more than what the 2080 Ti ? (Well it's probably Turing -> Ampere not specific GPU's though it'll be interesting to see how these stack up once benchmarked whenever they're available.) EDIT: ...And well that and AMD doing this thing with 3 - 5% performance and some 200mv extra GPU core voltage and yeah. That's going to be tough to compete at too won't it if NVIDIA is also moving to a more efficient 7nm node now with Amp here. Well they're already having a bit of a time against Turing so well probably stating the obvious here far as this little metric goes at least. Performance-per-watt or hows it called? Anyways will be fun to see how things go between Ampy and Navy whenever AMD's and NVIDIA's next GPU's are on the market. 🙂

Undying:

I though 50% more expensive. My bad... 😀

Yes, try 100% more expensive 😛

There's no benefit for Nvidia to go for 50% more performance just like that. AMD can barely put up a fight, so Nvidia isn't threatened by the market situation, unlike Intel. If the performance really goes up by 50% throughout the product line, the already high prices will also jump majorly. If 3080 Ti really is 50% better than 2080 Ti, I guess it will cost full 2000 euros. Anything below the flagship, I'll be really surprised if they get the 50% muscle increase even if Nvidia could do it.

Kaarme:

There's no benefit for Nvidia to go for 50% more performance just like that. AMD can barely put up a fight, so Nvidia isn't threatened by the market situation, unlike Intel. If the performance really goes up by 50% throughout the product line, the already high prices will also jump majorly. If 3080 Ti really is 50% better than 2080 Ti, I guess it will cost full 2000 euros. Anything below the flagship, I'll be really surprised if they get the 50% muscle increase even if Nvidia could do it.

They compete only with themselves, that they beat AMD is a side benefit of competing with themselves. They will go for whatever more performance that they can get without concerns of 'too much' or 'too little'. the 8800 was 100% faster than the 7800 in some cases.

Kaarme:

There's no benefit for Nvidia to go for 50% more performance just like that.

50% increase is not unheard of, Pascal for example was about 50% faster then Maxwell, ie. a 1070 vs 970 (usually > 50% even), or a 1080 vs 980 (slightly below 50%). And real competition (on the high-end, not value market) hasn't been seen here for a while. In fact, when the 20-series launched, people complained rather loudly how the increase was not the 50% they got with Pascal. Even a 2080 Ti isn't enough to run 4K on max quality and at decent speeds, nevermind with RTX, the 50% increase is needed to make that a reality, and NVIDIA knows this. If they want to push RTX forward, they need to make it faster, so it makes sense for them to push as far as they can, and by the time the 30-series comes out, it will have been almost 2 years.

Its entirely possible for them to say 50% improvements in performance.... Guys... we already have "Super" lineup... and it adds quite few % to 60/70 lines... Ofcourse Nvidia will tell us that this 50% "Mega" jump will be from 2060/2070 to 3060/3070.. not from Super Lineup... and I doubt they would go 50% from 2080 to 3080.. as 2080Super adds ~5% and adding 40%+ to 3080 would leave 2080ti in shambles... Well I hope Nvidia won't be ... and give us ~30% resterization jump from Super lineup... atleast at their prices... 399$ 3060, 499$ 3070, 699$ 3080... without this f.... "FOUNDER" cr.. . Ofcourse 2x raytracing jump would be awesome aswelll...

Xron:

adding 40%+ to 3080 would leave 2080ti in shambles...

There is nothing wrong with that, thats how it used to work. Every generation the bar jumps up one slot. The new x70 beats the old x80, the new x80 beats the old x80 Ti. The 1080 destroyed the 980 Ti, and the world was happy.

How much faster was 2080 than 1080ti? It was something like 2% if any, it even had less vram. Everyone is talking older gen but pascal-turing was disappointing. This 50% jump in performance probably means using raytracing.

I can see people wetting already with thoughts of 10900k and 3080ti. The world goes on and on and on and on. The easiest spent 2000€ for only two pieces of hardware in history of purchases.

nevcairiel:

There is nothing wrong with that, thats how it used to work. Every generation the bar jumps up one slot. The new x70 beats the old x80, the new x80 beats the old x80 Ti. The 1080 destroyed the 980 Ti, and the world was happy.

You're right and I would be happy if that happened, but last gen showed us some bad signs from both Nvidia and Amd... They're saying... we're closing to the edge of what we can do with perf increase because of limits of silicon... and we will swallow it... though ofcourse most of us won't see a big need to upgrade our tech then and they might lose profits. Anyway I hope that Turing was just a scare after "Mining Hell".

They just doubled RTX cores which is the most underwhelming step possible. Price will be x 1.25 Enjoy

nevcairiel:

50% increase is not unheard of, Pascal for example was about 50% faster then Maxwell, ie. a 1070 vs 970 (usually > 50% even), or a 1080 vs 980 (slightly below 50%). And real competition (on the high-end, not value market) hasn't been seen here for a while. In fact, when the 20-series launched, people complained rather loudly how the increase was not the 50% they got with Pascal. Even a 2080 Ti isn't enough to run 4K on max quality and at decent speeds, nevermind with RTX, the 50% increase is needed to make that a reality, and NVIDIA knows this. If they want to push RTX forward, they need to make it faster, so it makes sense for them to push as far as they can, and by the time the 30-series comes out, it will have been almost 2 years.

Yeah, if the 50% is for RTX specifically, they would definitely do it if they can. As it is currently, I don't believe RTX card owners are too happy with the RTX performance. I should have said I was only considering the traditional performance. Perhaps I was too negative there as well. Who knows.

I want 100% more power, even if it's 300w tdp. Cooling GPU's is easy 😀 The old Evga 780ti classified could draw 650w with Evbot. Was possible to cool with cold water 😛

And maybe half the price 😀 A men can dream

If this turns out to be true, and for once I actually think it will be true to some degree then I see dejavue all over again. I just don't get it how AMD can be so slow with their GPU release dates? I mean if you loon at the current situation then AMD has the advantage. The same amount of streaming processors at the same clock currently Navi outperform Turning if you look at it from that perspective. This begs the question, why just not launch a GPU based on Navi with the same 4600 Shader cores as the 2080ti? Basically if this leak is true then AMD will find themselves in the very same bote as Vega vs 1080Ti.... Did they launch Vega when the 980Ti was on the top then AMD would have had a fighting chance. Looks like they have a hard fight on their hands. Props to Nvidia for bringing the best performance once again.

AlmondMan:

Yes, try 100% more expensive 😛

Try not...

Nvidia will be hooking up with both TSMC and Samsung to produce the company's 7nm graphics cards.

So they will have enough supply for chips in order to avoid the problems with RTX 2XXX.

50% more performance is possible, considering turning cards were underwhelming when it came to performance increase, they got a ton of other features instead. Price wise i'd like to say we would see a drop due to this no longer being new technology but we will have to see on that front, Would like the 3080ti to be back around the £800-900 mark (still more than id like but its easier to chew than the £1250+ we saw this generation. As for people saying why would they do this, well TBH guys nivida has been in a one horse race least on the very top end for quite awhile. they make money just competeting with itself since people want to upgrade, servers, streams, gamers, businessess all want to upgrade for extra work flows. If they double the RT cores id be surpirsed personally, i figured they jump it up to around 100ish, from the 78? or 72? the 2080ti had, but hey if they double and doesn't cost an arm and leg i wouldn't complain Still wish they would do an RT and non-RT version of the top end so people have a choice, though considering how consoles are going maybe forcing the RT isn't the worst thing in the world since it will become industry standard soon. If the rumours are true and price is okay, then think us 1080ti owners will have a worthly upgrade finally, since the 2080ti wasn't a huge increased specially when cost got involved

I'll believe it when I see it. Till then I'll just consider this generous marketing spiel.

Undying:

How much faster was 2080 than 1080ti? It was something like 2% if any, it even had less vram. Everyone is talking older gen but pascal-turing was disappointing. This 50% jump in performance probably means using raytracing.

I really hope its RTX performance (because honestly I dont care about it that much since its still in gimmick performance killing feature shelf). I just dont want them to be 50% overall because AMD won't be able to compete with that and will drive Ampere prices up high in the sky where the birds can't even fly.