Nvidia RTX graphics cards
Discussion
essayer said:
Will that be miners buying them all up? I don't know what's minable on a GPU with all the different coins now
No chance when this card draws 250W. That power consumption will eat into any profits. AMD cards are the miners choice and as we can now see card availability going up that is a good sign of mining demand or lack of.Nvidia know what they are doing. High cost low availability elitism.
Partner cards will have a lot more availability.
scorp said:
bloomen said:
I have a 1080ti on my desktop. I'm not going to bother upgrading until a card can do 4k ultra at high frame rates. I'm not sure how many generations that's going to take but it doesn't sound like this one is going to be it yet.
It's going to be a few generations, 4k@144 is around 9 times the bandwidth of 1080p@60.jackfrags was running 4k@100fps on battlefield 5 (a game that's it beta so not optimised) earlier this week, using i9 and 1080ti SLI hardware..
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Not really my area of knowledge. I was just postulating (from a position of ignorance) that if miners are using GPUs for mining then they might want a GPU-derived product that better suits their needs, thus freeing up the supply of GPUs for those of us who actually want one for graphics. Clockwork Cupcake said:
Monty Python said:
Isn't Hz "per second", so 144Hz is 144 times per second?
Oops. You are completely correct. Well, even so, I'm not sure that my eyes update even 144 times per second.
Going from a 60hz monitor to a 120hz monitor means your screen is refreshing twice as often.
bloomen said:
scorp said:
Definitely. After using 100/120/144hz, 60hz looks prehistoric and jerky. 1080p is fine for action games.
I got a 144hz laptop the other day. Though it is just about possible to tell it's smoother in general operations I truly can't say I care in the slightest. Edited by scorp on Saturday 25th August 07:42
Rawwr said:
With regards to frame rates, the optimum range for the human eye is around 70-90fps, depending on how jacked up on stimulants you are. If you can happily pump out 100fps to a Free/G-Sync monitor, you'll be happy.
Tests have shown that it's actually close to 150fps. Physiologically it can "see" 1000fps, based on the speed of nerve impulses from the eye to the brain. The US Air Force testes pilots by showing them an image of a plane for 1/220 of a second, and they were still able to correctly identify it.Monty Python said:
Tests have shown that it's actually close to 150fps. Physiologically it can "see" 1000fps, based on the speed of nerve impulses from the eye to the brain. The US Air Force testes pilots by showing them an image of a plane for 1/220 of a second, and they were still able to correctly identify it.
That's not really relevant though, surely? There is a difference between image capture time (the minimum time needed to see an image, as per your example) and the ability to discern individual images. I would suggest that past a certain point, the fps / refresh rate becomes irrelevant due to Persistence of Vision. Clockwork Cupcake said:
Monty Python said:
Tests have shown that it's actually close to 150fps. Physiologically it can "see" 1000fps, based on the speed of nerve impulses from the eye to the brain. The US Air Force testes pilots by showing them an image of a plane for 1/220 of a second, and they were still able to correctly identify it.
That's not really relevant though, surely? There is a difference between image capture time (the minimum time needed to see an image, as per your example) and the ability to discern individual images. I would suggest that past a certain point, the fps / refresh rate becomes irrelevant due to Persistence of Vision. Then again, I tend to think that 4K is essentially worthless, especially for gaming.
Rawwr said:
Then again, I tend to think that 4K is essentially worthless, especially for gaming.
Depends on the type of games you play. For action games, I agree. But for "walking around, exploring, marvelling at how lovely everything looks" type games, the more detail and resolution, the better. anonymous said:
[redacted]
Yes, spotted that last week and treated myself to one of these. https://www.ebuyer.com/749710-msi-gtx-1080-gaming-...
OK, a tad over £450, but almost 35% off isn't to be sniffed at. Got to say, its an epic improvement over my old R9 Fury X and absolutely loads quieter.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff