Quote from: King J on May 10, 2020, 05:14:46As I understand it, the analogy is about the performance jump between generations, not the circumstances. Back when RTX cards were released and ray-tracing frame rates were in, it was said that the next generation is going to be much better. It was an early implementation and a glimpse into the future. It facilitated development.
As for the comment about turing not aging well: It was a proof of concept for the RT cores, DLSS etc. They didn't have the formula figured out completely and you won't be able to use a lot of the features that even the xx60 series Ampere cards will. That doesn't mean those cards get slower all of a sudden, It just means they will start lagging in performance noticeably as new games take advantage of Ampere's significantly better RT performance. The performance won't scale linearly when comparing generations side by side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny he makes analogy between Nvidia's Kepler and DirectX12. Kepler was released in 2012 while Windows 10 was released in 2015 (Windows 10 is required in order to run DirectX 12). It was designed and sold as a native DirectX11 card. DirectX12 support was only added later on.
DirectX12 Ultimate is fully integrated into Turing Cards, unlike Kepler and DirectX 12. It runs it natively.
We currently have good Ray-tracing, but only for 1080p. Ampere should bring ray-tracing to 1440p and 4k.
QuoteIf the above information is indeed true, what this essentially means is that Turing will not age well in comparison to the upcoming Ampere cards. Those who have spent quite a lot for the high-end RTX 2080 Super and RTX 2080 Ti may find that a US$300-350 Ampere card might very well offer a similar performance incentive.