Rumor: NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 3000 video cards launch delayed to September
Click here to post a comment for Rumor: NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 3000 video cards launch delayed to September on our message forum
jbscotchman
That $1200 is gonna get me some shiny new upgrades. 😉
sykozis
I know you're not replacing that 1660Ti already....
jbscotchman
I'm thinking RTX 3060, 27" curved monitor, and 1 TB NVME.
sykozis
I really want a 3060....but then I'd have to buy 2....lol No way the kid is gonna let me get away with upgrading my system and not his....and I can't do 2 graphics cards. He knows what the Radeon Settings and NVCP both look like, so he'll know if I swap out cards. Especially with how much time I spend in Radeon Settings.....
Matt26LFC
Oh well, I'm sure the RTX 2080 Ti will do me just fine at 3440*1440 for a while. Got plenty of older games to play yet too, still haven't even touched the Witcher series lol Picked up Withcher 3 Game of the Edition to complete the series and Metro Exodus last night on Steam sale 🙂 Will get Prey when it's on sale too and Doom Eternal
H83
Is that a challenge? Because if it is Nvidia may accept it! And then Intel will probably try to beat Nvidia at it...
MonstroMart
I'm in the same boat. The last time i owned a console and played console games was the early days of the original XBox. But with the price of PC hardware right now and the state of the GPU market i'm thinking of moving back to console next gen until ray tracing is more mature.
I plan to eventually upgrade to a used Zen 2 (or 3 if my mb supports them) and probably a ray tracing card when it will be good enough to clearly beat shaders without tanking the fps. I also have a back log of games to play on PC.
Stormyandcold
PS4 exclusives on/coming to PC;
Street Fighter 5
Horizon Zero Dawn
Detroit: Become Human
The Last Remnant: Remastered
Death Stranding
Nier: Automata
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice
Yakuza 0/Kiwami/Kiwami 2
MLB: The Show (latest one)
Final Fantasy VII: Remake
----------------------------------------------------
Dreams (rumoured as next after HZD)
There's actually loads of PS4 exclusives that are on PC, I just pulled a few of the bigger names out.
As for the expected PS5 exclusives situation, I don't think you've been keeping-up with what's happening. Sony is taking a leaf from Microsoft and will be releasing more of their in-house exclusives on PC. This is due to the high costs involved in making these games. Porting to PC is the perfect way for them to recoup some of the costs, while also expanding their audience. We also know that for the first 2yrs after launch, PS5 exclusives will be few and far between and more likely to also be available on PS4. This is well reported on already.
Knowing this, I'd be amazed if you got even 2 true exclusives a year on PS5 in the first 2yrs (and of those 4 games, I'd bet on 2 of them being sequels). Most 3rd party exclusives will likely be timed and ported to PC like it has been for a while now.
Don't be surprised if Spiderman comes to PC and Spiderman 2 a timed 1st party exclusive. Loss-leader exclusives have helped Sony/PS4 become the console market leader, but, it's becoming too expensive to sustain.
On the otherhand, there's also PS Now if anyone wants to play PS games on PC, so, PC will continue to have many options available.
Neo Cyrus
I'm just sitting here hoping more companies will be bring decent upsampling to PC ports so GPUs costing as much as cars won't be mandatory. The implementations on consoles are more than good enough, the checkerbox upsampling and whatever the modern versions of it are, are something we need. Whatever the Watch Dogs 2 PC port was doing was even passable.
Fox2232
What if they got hands on samples of new XBOX/PS and did not like their standing.
Denial
They didn't like 2080 levels of performance?
It's not like RNDA2 is doing anything radical - it's performance is basically exactly where everyone predicted for a given size.
kings
Delayed? Maybe, maybe not. These cards never had a release date to begin with.
The only thing we have are just rumors based on more rumors.
alanm
Yep. This rumor sounded very odd and unprofessional to begin with. Like somebody made it up. I doubt any major tech corp would be planning some release date during very uncertain times where things could be derailed by unfolding events.
Fox2232
Wrong question asked. It is not about what AMD is delivering, but about what nVidia is. What manufacturing process. How many transistors. At what power draw.
When you have plans for for 10nm and competitor delivers 7nm EUV, where they can get higher clock at lower power draw and make GPU with 50% more transistors (which they do not even need) to be competitive...
When RDNA1 proved to be about equal in performance at same clock and same transistor count as RTX, nVidia had "Advantage" in making much bigger GPUs. They lost clock advantage as that was about equal.
Now you have RDNA2 with similar leap in performance improvement per clock as did RDNA1 over GCN. And you already know that they are going to clock quite high. Because clock which PS5 uses is under minimum stable clock for all chips.
Take mere 15% improved general IPC and 10% higher sustained clock. That's 26% higher performance which one can expect from GPU "sized" as 10,3B RX 5700 XT.
That's RTX 2080 S right there with conservative expectation. Moment we get power draw numbers, it will start to hint actual sustainable clock within reasonable TDP.
Best case scenario is 2080Ti performance with 30% fewer transistors. I am sure that nVidia took Samsung's 10nm because it was power efficient, cost efficient and clocked well.
AMD may not have clock advantage, or it may be quite small. But there is still going to be higher performance at same clock and same transistor budget.
Then there is quite some chance, that COVID panic made people slow down HW upgrade cycle. And nVidia has figured out that they need to sell more RTX cards before they are going to be smashed by both AMD and themselves.
Denial
They don't have plans for 10nm with their main GPUs - even the original 10nm rumor stated it was both companies. Nvidia has been telling both investors and media ,TSMC and 7nm. Stop using rumors when the company is saying the opposite. Stop using rumors at all - this is why I hate rumors. People forget what's rumor and what's real like two months after the rumor is posted.
Also AMD isn't using 7nm EUV for RDNA2.
The rest of this post - idk.. the 15% improved IPC is just a guess on your part - maybe it's true but then you're just ignoring any potential gains Nvidia has with Ampere. I'm not even sure you're right about RDNA1 being equal (I know you're wrong for FP16/INT8/INT4).
Everyone knew what the Xbox Series X performance was going to be - Microsoft stated for over two years now they wanted double the Xbox One X aka 12tflops. RDNA1 has been on the market for a year. There was multiple posts on Guru3D putting two and two together and speculating the performance. You're telling me Nvidia's engineers - with decades of experience, with the spec/engineering samples/etc on 7nm from TSMC, and a guess that AMD would improve anything over RDNA1, they couldn't do what you just did? They needed the console to see it? And now you're telling me they are delaying their launch a few months - to do what exactly? The rumor was Nvidia was going to announce their cards at GDC - launch sometime after. So at best, if this rumor is even true, they delayed their cards by a couple months. It's not enough time to do anything, even if somehow RDNA2 surprised them. (I highly doubt it did, it didn't surprise me, it didn't surprise you, I doubt it surprised Nvidia).
The economy across the world is garbage right now. I'm not spending any money, no one I know is spending any money - most people I know don't even have jobs. The pandemic is 100% why they delayed the cards, if they even did delay them.
Astyanax
amd has been on a smaller process before and still lost.
its less about the process size and more what you're doing with it.
but i'm 100% in the camp where Ampere is on 7nm EUV.
Fox2232
You have missed the point. I hope it was not intentional. Not about freaking TFLOPs on some particular chip in XBOX/PS. It could have been 2 or 50.
It is about transistor count and clock at which given performance is achieved. Secondly, have you seen size of XBOX's new chip?
Maybe check it to transistor density for RDNA1 GPUs on 7nm and Zen2 on 7nm. Density seems to be quite higher.
If we ignored that transistor budget per CU went likely up from RDNA1 to RDNA2 due to DX-R implementation, and 4/8-bit operations and took just RDNA1, 56CUs in GPU would end up having entire area of XBOX's chip alone... leaving 80mm^2 Zen2 part floating in open with all extra things that are usually not in GPU, but MS requested for I/O.
One has to stop and take a look at transistor density. You have 8C/16T Zen2 which is roughly 4B transistors. GPU that would have around 14.5B transistors if it was RDNA1. That's without counting in I/O die that Zen 2 has separate.
Minimum, you would be looking at 18.5B transistors in 360mm^2... ~51M/mm^2. (Ignoring all the I/O or additional transistors for improvements.)
Zen2 ... 48M/mm^2.
RDNA1 ... 41M/mm^2.
Realistically, with all transistors counted in, you are looking at more transistors in that area or AMD doing changes that result in fewer transistors per CU while delivering all those new features.
Or you can go and take other route around it. Taking given 15.3B transistors (which is likely just GPU) and think that it is entire chip with CPU included. Then remove CPU part and i/o which comes with it. What transistor budget would remain for GPU with 56CUs? How does it compare to RDNA1? That would not tell story of any IPC improvement, but it would say that AMD can deliver around 56CUs at same transistor expense as RX 5700 XT.
Would you take a while to extrapolate with tiny 15% IPC improvements, known reachable (and stable) clock of 10% higher and suddenly 35% higher count of CUs at same transistor budget?
From my point of view, XBOX's chip either uses at minimal 25% higher transistor density than RDNA1 GPU. Or its CPU and GPU delivered all included improvements while reducing transistor budget drastically.
As you can see, I took very mild route with everything. Stated only 15% IPC improvement while AMD said that RDNA2 is to deliver around same improvement over RDNA1, as RDNA1 had over GCN. I stated mere 10% higher sustainable stable clock over RDNA1. And went with more denser manufacturing process instead of taking official transistor count on face value and saying that AMD has really scary improvements and removed a lot of transistors in process.
So, what would it look like if we took bad route from nVidia's point of view? 25% higher performance at same clock per CU than RDNA1. 15~20% smaller CUs. 15% higher clock. And not yet known if AMD will use EUV for desktop GPUs.
Are you getting the pattern? I say best case scenario for nVidia, that AMD already used all things available. And you kind of feel it is scary and want to disprove it. But disproving makes underlying technology much better.
I am pretty sure nVidia had their hands on sample consoles and know what to expect from desktops. And I am pretty sure that with RDNA2, people will start looking at AMD's GPUs same way as they are looking on their CPUs now.
- - - -
On other hand, who cares if nVidia delays their GPUs by half a year. This time it does not matter. People will have excellent alternative.
Stormyandcold
Time of 2yrs wait isn't a problem at all. However, I think you're under-estimating the financial burden that's pushed Sony to do it in the first place. By the time PS5 comes out the world is going to be a different place than in the PS4 generation. Sony is going to need to change their business strategy, the writing is already on the wall. You're going to be surprised what happens.
Fediuld
You forgot what PS4 exclusive is? Only Horizon was PS4 exclusive, the rest were released on windows the same day.
Stormyandcold
This isn't youtube-land. Do some research before posting.
