vlatkozelka wroteTech Guru wrote
I usually state my inputs as a hardware enthusiast based on actual facts / numbers / benchmarks - not a subjective way of presenting things.
Do you realize that this makes no sense?
Stating
your opinion explicitly means the content is
subjective
And for the 1000 time, drop the "hardware enthusiast" act. Your post is the usual "look at the shiny new thing that I bought, that makes all of your things look bad".
If you want to talk about hardware, in a "hardware enthusiast" fashion. Start talking about the hardware, without bashing everything that you didn't chose to buy, and stop using lines like "I am going for the best gaming experience and Nvidia nail it in all area. Ironically , it is monoply asking high prices with lack of serious AMD competition. #Innovation wins let us give Nvidia this credit."
Whenever you say "I" it stops being objective, and a lot of the people on here are starting to catch wind of you Facebook-like posts.
If you wanna actually be that helpful hardware enthusiast who actually cares about technology. Maybe start making your own benchmarks, write something (IN YOUR OWN WORDS) to explain to us what those fancy numbers and terminologies you always use mean, stop bragging about owning a product from X company and bashing anything from Y company,etc... I'm not forcing rules on you, I am no place to do so. I'm just pointing out to you why you receive all the comments that you do.
You want a serious reply?
YES, AMD is behind Nvidia in gaming performance. I personally have been on the green team's side for quite so time now. But unlike you, I am not happy about it, especially when Nvidia relies on gimmicks to get the edge in some situations (I am talking value for price here, not best vs best) and inflates prices from 400$ to 1300$.
We will most likely continue to buy Nvidia cards for now (at least when looking for high end cards), but it's only because we have no other choice. We, actual hardware enthusiasts, don't brag about some foreign company winning over another foreign company where we have no input in the development process.
We watch, we wait, we read... but most certainly we don't brag nor bash anything that isn't Nvidia.
Yes, we waited for Vega64 and for Vega 2 for a long time, and both were "disappointing" (64 more than vii). But on the other hand, we actually want AMD to improve so that things go back to normal.
I agree with you and I add:
Economically , Nvidia created a monoply in the gaming graphic cards line. This has been causing a repercussion of Nvidia setting their own prices. Simply due to the following reasons:
Continuous underwhelming performance of AMD
Lack of New Features / Innovations (Regardless of whether of added value to the gamer end or no - that is a matter of preference , but they are there and new ) - Sure AMD in the near future will ride the train of Real Time Ray Tracing & DLSS equivalent - using WindowsML or DirectML, which is a "software solution". Yet to be seen if it will be effective or no.
Compared to the Previous generation Pascal
Raw Rasterization Boost
New Techonological Features
New Cores (RT + Tensor Cores)
Hybrid Rendering
Dedicated HDR Processing HW pipeline to reduce HDR latency
GDDR6
DP 1.4a with DSC
Mesh Shading , Adaptive Shading , and texture space shading
More Efficient Cuda Cores
New execution unit (INT32). This unit enables Turing GPUs to execute floating point and non-floating point processes in parallel.
For budget oriented gamers they can grab either an Rtx 2060 or RTX 2070 , and have all these new features. I highly recommend the RTX 2070 with a mid way 1080 and 1080ti class rasterization performance.
Let us give Nvidia #credit on these. On the other hand , sadly it is a " monoply" for now. I was hoping that AMD , from their "7nm" marketing , will create a crack in the wall. However , this didn't happen until now. "Maybe" future drivers may turn the table on the RTX 2080 , but I highly doubt that.