260°

Details Regarding Nvidia Geforce GTX 790 Finally Surface – 4992 Cuda Cores and 10 GB of Memory

Details regarding the elusive Geforce GTX 790 have finally surfaced. It is rumored to have 2x 2496 Cuda Cores, 2x 5GB of GDDR5 Memory and 2x 320 Bandwidth.

Read Full Story >>
wccftech.com
HelpfulGamer3758d ago

The card going to be expensive, why not just add to it 16GB GDDR5?

Pandamobile3758d ago

10 GB of RAM in a GPU is still unprecedented. 16 GB is an even huger leap.

codelyoko3757d ago

Actually its 5GB Effective since vRam Doesnt Stack. 5gb x2

kB03757d ago

codelyoko is correct, so it's less ram than even The titan at this point.

For anything real world the "doubled" ram means nothing.

Either way looks like an interesting card, but I'm going to wait for the 800 series until I make investment.

The keplar card isn't as good at GPGPU and processing. The Fermi cards were absolutely amazing at GPGPU, so I'll wait and hope that the 800 series has better GPU computing:)

If this card is priced at 1000 (which I highly doubt, it will prob be around 1200-300). It could put a lot of strain on AMD to cut prices:)

It would make the Titan obsolete (although the 780 Ti should have done that), but the titan is still the best at double precision (which means nothing in real world).

ABizzel13757d ago

@kB0

I agree with you on most points except for:

"If this card is priced at 1000 (which I highly doubt, it will prob be around 1200-300). It could put a lot of strain on AMD to cut prices:)"

I agree the card will likely be $1199 or $1299, which is ridiculously overpriced and pointless to most consumers when you could just as easily buy 2x 780 Ti's and get better performance for around the same price.

However, with pricing that high it will have no effect on AMD, because most people aren't going to spend over $1,000 for a GPU. And NVIDIA has proven they don't care about pricing fairly or competitively, since they feel they're slightly better performance (on the enthusiast end) and superior cooling are worth the premium. AMD already stomps them on Pice:Performance ratio, and AMD is the way to go for any gamer looking to penny pinch or on a tight budget (especially budget - mid range GPU's).

"It would make the Titan obsolete (although the 780 Ti should have done that), but the titan is still the best at double precision (which means nothing in real world)."

As far as gaming goes the Titan is a complete waste compared to the 780 Ti, which offer equal and many time slightly better performance for $250 - $300 less. However, the Titan isn't really for gaming, it's more for rendering, modeling, and scientific calculations in which case the Titan would be better for someone who wants a gaming / Smart PC.

Titan has it's purpose, gaming just isn't it's main focus.

kB03757d ago

@ABizzel1

Your right, I'm merely stating that we will see competitive pricing from other cards as well (including Nvidia), but I also wanted to add that it will get lowered as tech becomes more available and mature.

I just can't edit my comment after a while:P

You make excellent point though!

The titan is good for calculations and it's ram availability is outstanding but not all computing takes benefit from it. Most do which is exactly your point:)

There is a market for everything, but the main thing is the size of market:P

Thanks for sharing your knowledge it's appreciated!

Bubble up+

AndrewLB3757d ago

ABizzel- How is AMD "stomping" nV on price/performance? Last i checked, GTX 780ti stomps the 290x and is only $80 more expensive than the cheapest 290x on newegg for example.

That doesn't even factor in how review websites were all given hand picked specially binned 290x GPU's by AMD which scored much higher than anyone seems to be getting from retail cards.

Anyways... cards this high end are such a niche market that they'll make just enough for the very small group of people who always buy such expensive cards. nVidia wont have a problem selling these cards.

Q3 of 2013 showed nVidia up 2% in shipped cards, and AMD was down 8%. Ouch...

http://jonpeddie.com/press-...

Guwapo773756d ago (Edited 3756d ago )

@AndrewLB

290x isn't suppose to cost that much but they are being bought so fast, places like Newegg and Tigerdirect have upped the prices. 290x MSRP is $549 - see if you can find one at that price.

One reason why is here: http://www.techpowerup.com/...

290x was to meant to match the Titan which it did and did so for $550. The Ti was brought out to make sure Nvidia reigned supreme which it did. You can check out the Anandtech review below.

http://anandtech.com/show/7...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3756d ago
badz1493757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

the card is powerful and all but, at least for now, what's the point of it? 4k gaming is still pretty expensive upfront and it's not even worth it considering so little support it's getting from the dev/publisher's side.

if you're thinking that 4k gaming is the future (I also think that it is, btw) and in the next couple of years it will be mainstream, doesn't it make more sense to wait until the scene is ready and by that time, 4k capable GPU would cost more affordable like mid-end GPU right now? so, why would anyone buy this?

and it seems like company like Valve and other pc makers are also looking to expand their gaming vision to be more "console-like" with the Steam Machines and Ultra high end cards like this is playing no role in this new grand scheme to lure gamers. it looks like they are acknowledging that consoles have stronger influence to the gaming trend than pc and based on the power of current consoles, 4k gaming will have wait another gen, which in turn will slow down progression into 4k by the devs knowing the majority is limited to 1080p. sure some devs might push the envelop but there won't be many of them especially those under big publishers with strict financial control.

so I don't see the point of this card as of now aside from showing off that you can throw away money for nothing!

EDIT: @kB0, "needed"? it might be "useful" to some but I don't think it's "needed". like you said, 780 Ti is plenty for now.

kB03757d ago

The point is that this is how tech advances, simply stating that 4k isn't widely available or even possible for some ppl is no excuse to stop progress.

Remember this is a dual card so basically 2 780 ti cards.

There are plenty of games that need a lot of horse power especially at 2560x1600, which is not 4k, and requires a LOT of power.

This especially the case if you want solid 60 fps across the board.

I can easily say that realistically speaking no card is ever enough for too long:P Who wouldn't want to run 100% of games at max at any resolution?

Also don't forget those that run 3 monitors, they need a lot of horse power too.

The card is needed, but the price might be a slight turn off for a lot of people:)

Most might just grab let's say 1 780 ti, then SLI it later.

thehitman3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

Well these cards are not meant for gaming purposes. They are for business purposes. The average PC gamer dont buy these high end cards and only the people who have money to throw away as well get these. Those people buy them initially and help lower the costs for the future until they be made more efficiently at cheaper prices.

Any PC gamer who boasts about these cards are most likely full of shit so keep that in mind.

badz1493757d ago

^^^

I like the way you think! :D

kevnb3757d ago

If I was rich I would buy stuff like this

ABizzel13757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

@badz149

What @kB0 said is exact right. Gaming is evolving and with with newer technology and engines game requirements are going to get more demanding for PC, so evolution in gaming hardware has to happen consistently to keep up. PC gaming is entering the 2k and 4k era, and even with this card barely manages to max out Crysis 3 in 2k @ 60fps, bumping up to 4k and you're hard-pressed to get a solid 30fps from what's likely to be a $1,000+ GPU.

As you basically said this GPU isn't for the masses, and the vast majority of gamers are better off sticking with 1080p. This is solely for enthusiast, and to show what the next boost in technology will be capable of. NVIDIAs refresh of Maxwell should offer similar performance to this GPU on a single card, and Volta is rumored to offer nearly twice this performance on a single card. This is simply the evolution of hardware, and thus the evolution of gaming.

These cards are more geared towards businesses and developers, who need PC's that are vastly more powerful than their target audience.

Edit

Perfect example, Intel's 5th-gen i3, i5, and i7 CPU's are rumored to be Dual-core hyperthreaded (i3), Quad-core hyperthreaded (i5), and 8-core hyperthreaded (i7). There's no point in a normal person or gamer walking into a store a buying an 8-core hyperthreaded CPU for $600+ because the majority of their applications and work still don't max out Dual-Core to this day, let alone Quad-Core.

For future gaming purposes the Quad-Core hyperthreaded CPU is more than enough, but the 8-core hyperthreaded CPU is there for; once again, businesses who need extreme rendering and development.

An i7-5960k + GTX 790 desktop doesn't make any sense for a gamer regardless of how powerful it would be.

You'd get equal and in some cases better results with an i7-4770k + 2x 780Ti, and save around $300 - $500 in the process.

One if for editing and making content, the other is for running that content at the highest level it was programed for.

kingduqc3757d ago

Cause people do what the fuck they want. 4k 60hz monitor is 3-4 months away from dell priced under 1000$ A pair of ncie gpus is about 1000-1200$. It's not that expensive when you consider other hobbies. Go and try to get into racing that's like 10-15k just to get into it.

poor people think everyone has no money, this is all OPTIONAL.

badz1493757d ago

I think gaming needs to move forward too but games' requirement are not alligned with hardware advancement at all thus leaving cards like this to waste in terms of raw power. I'm talking strictly about gaming here. We don't want to admit it but the Titan is a flop sales wise and it's matched or outdone by cards a fraction of its cost not even a year after release.

Looking at current trends of powerful card getting cheaper very quickly as newer caeds are unveiled every 6 months, who intheir right mind still want to buy this?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3757d ago
come_bom3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

I just want to know one thing... is this card powerful enough to play Minecraft at 30fps/720p?

3-4-53757d ago

This will be a good $500 card in 5 months.

LAWSON723757d ago

GTX 690 is still around $1k so I doubt that very much. These cards have a select market that are willing to pay the price.

AndrewLB3757d ago

I don't think it will be as expensive as people are predicting. I just don't see them charging over $1k espacially since they're not using fully enabled Titan chips like in the 780ti. I think they'll sell it for exactly $1k like the GTX 690 cost.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3756d ago
XiSasukeUchiha3758d ago

64GB DDR5 is more likely a crazier option

JBSleek3758d ago

Holy Shit I want it but I don't need it. I already have SLI 770 but that thing is a best.

Talk about 4K gaming and future proof.

Pandamobile3758d ago

Yep. Nvidia is going to push 4K capability forward like crazy with these cards. My current GPU I've had for a year and a half, pretty much top of the line when it came out with 3 GB of RAM and 1560 CUDA cores. This has like 3.5x the power and RAM packed inside of it than my current GPU.

It's ridiculous how fast we are moving right now. The PS4 and Xbox One are going to be left in PC's 4K dust in no time.

Detoxx3757d ago

But we console gamers don't spend $500 every 2 years.

MidnytRain3757d ago

Detoxx

Nothing to do with anything. If you can't/don't want to buy it, that's you. Some people can, and the others will be left behind.

bromtown3757d ago

Detoxx how many games do you buy a year? If you buy 10 a year, and a PC gamer buys 10 a year the guy with the PC would have saved ~$500 in 2 years.

decrypt3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

"But we console gamers don't spend $500 every 2 years."

PC gamers dont either, however they do have the option should they choose to. Consolers dont have that option they are stuck with old tech regardless.

Dont forget consoles need replacement too, its not like they last more than 3 years. Meanwhile PCs tend to last alot longer.

Personally i have seen people go through 2-3 xbox 360s in 5 years and about 2 PS3s. You could pretty much upgrade the GPU on a PC with that money and end up with new hardware instead of the same old console.

I_am_Batman3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

I don't know why you are bringing the consoles up at all. You'll get both consoles for the price of that graphics card alone.

Not to take anything away from the graphics card. It's insanely powerful and people who are willing to pay the price will definately get a high end piece of hardware but it's not meant for the mainstream audience.

Edit:

decrypt: "Dont forget consoles need replacement too, its not like they last more than 3 years. Meanwhile PCs tend to last alot longer."

I've been gaming for over 20 years now. I still have all my consoles and they're all working like new (Sega Genesis is the one i own for the longest time but I even have a working Atari 5200). The only console I needed to get repaired is the PS3 but that was the 60GB version and the repair costed me less than 100 bugs.

JasonKCK3757d ago

PC gamers can buy a console in 2 years just on the savings of games and DLC alone. By that time consoles will be cheaper, and there will be a lot of 2nd hand games to choose from.

decrypt3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

@I_am_Batman

Please talk sense, consoles before PS3 and Xbox 360 were different. They never needed Fans, Heat sinks etc.

The current console gen are locked down PCs made from cheapest available parts. Infact the last gen was known for the highest failure rates in console history, are you now going to deny facts? Not many had their original boxes working after 3 years of usage, its a fact. Replace a console after 3 years of usuage you are stuck with the same old tech, replace a GPU after 3 years you end up with better hardware.

Baka-akaB3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

"its not like they last more than 3 years."

It's ridiculous ... of course they usually do . They already have an expiration date of sort , no need to exagerate about it to promote your pciste agenda .

"Not many had their original boxes working after 3 years of usage, its a fact. "

No it's not a fact . You can't even support that claim with data , even including a widespread issue of the past like the 360's rrod , so why go with that angle ?

Console got an expiration date already based on the hype of the upcoming one and the amount of game slowing down in between gens .

ps : any way believe what you will , i dont expect to change your views and argument on the matter , i'll just vouch for what i do see and actually deal with at work and everyday's life . While it's obvious for all to see that you'd pretend console are worthless in all aspect to flaunt an already superior pc model

Baka-akaB3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

"Personally i have seen people go through 2-3 xbox 360s in 5 years and about 2 PS3s. "

I see on a daily basis , even if many times due by the maintenance mistakes of their owners (or lack of) , fried Graphics cards , mainboards or screens , alongside dead consoles . Some of those pieces are literally between 1/3 or half the cost of their pcs .

You do have a point of sort , about the overall "cheapness" oriented optimisation and use of heat dissipation for more and more pc based consoles . But you vastly exagerate the consequences . If you are gonna argue that most people go through a second console every 3 years . others can easily argue about the cost of pc parts changes and repairs too . Let's not pretend there arent failure , both hardware and human based in the pc world .

Allsystemgamer3757d ago

@ Baka

I've had 3 360s and 3 ps3s because they've died. Only 1 of those was free. The rest were all paid for.

Mind you, it was spread across over 7 years but it's still a LOT of wasted money. Everyone I know has had at least 1 - 2 broken systems. More if they had both.

And detoxx...shut up. PC gamers don't have to pay for online services, console tax, and other silly little things. I'm a PC and console gamer and your ignorance is astonishing. I bought a rig 4 years ago. The card was 300$ and it's still maxing most games. So poof goes your invalid argument.

Baka-akaB3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

@Allsystemgamer

And i could say that mny people i know still got theirs . Wich would still be hardly receivable as proof of any kind . I'm not pretending there arent failure ... of coure not , but so far the arguments advanced here are just generalisations . Most likely even including my own tiny experience at repairs or in life

Beastforlifenoob3757d ago

This is 2 GPU's that means you can only SLI it once and it has horrible heat, conducting and noise levels on top of that it will cost atleast $1,200

According to Moore's law a GPU of similar capacity will cost about $300 in 2018... To spend 300 now is like buying a relatively mid range GPU.

pretty much no PC gamer is going to have something like this until 2017-2019

AndrewLB3757d ago

Detoxx- Why do you keep repeating that lie? I don't spend anywhere near $500 every 2/yr. My current i7-680, 16gb ddr3, gtx 680 4gb, etc system not including the video card is now almost 6 years old. By your math, i should have spent $1500 since then. The only purchase I made was in 2012 for the graphics card upgrade, replacing my previous card which was about 5-6 years old. The GTX 680 was $500, but MINUS the $250 i got for my previous card.
Heck, I spent less than $500 for my motherboard, ram, CPU, and power supply, not to mention that I also sold my old cpu/mobo/ram and got about 50% of of the cash i just spent on the new components. All the other parts came out of my previous computer.

Then when you factor in that PC games are far cheaper, they don't require $60+/yr to play.

Also, most of us actually MAKE MONEY with our computers.

btw... aren't you using a PC right now to post on this site? How is it "extra spending" when most of you console guys ALSO have a PC? Some sort of PC is pretty much required in life nowdays, so the truth is, Console owners spend more money to keep current

Since everyone pretty much has a PC, the cost of the base PC, minus the video card of course, should not even be factored in. The choice you need to make is whether or not you're going to buy a Console (ps4/xbone) OR a Video card for your PC. I spend about $300 every 3 years on video cards, but by selling my old card, I typically get 50-60%

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 3757d ago
ABizzel13757d ago

@JBSleek

It's not really pushing 4k gaming at all, especially once games start getting more demanding, thus it's definitely not future proof. Most 4k games aren't PC optimized, but instead are PS360 console ports. Those that are (for example Crysis 3) this card will struggle to hit a consistent 4k @ 30fps. And now that many of those ports will be of PS4 quality, it's only going to be more demanding.

For 2k gaming it's perfect, 4k no.

elweon3757d ago

lol ps4 and xbone obsolete already? poor bastards gonna have their consoles for 10 years

DxTrixterz3757d ago

Thing is those 'poor bastards' will not have to spend a single penny while if you want to keep up with newest games you'll have to upgrade your PC hardware few times during those 10 years you said.

jackanderson19853757d ago

While i generally take the same line when talking to PC elitists, it balances out when you consider console games are generally 15-20 euro/dollar more expensive so after a 3 years or so of buying roughly 15-20 games a year they're pretty much paying less than console gamers

Baka-akaB3757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

Yeah it balances out for each side people throw in too much variable about used games , free games , f2p , the cost of screen monitors , mouse , keyb , pads , online subs , mmos or whatever .

Bottom line is :

the initial upfront of a pc is bigger but you can do much more than gaming , and can excel in most area of gaming that console can't

- PC games are usually cheaper

- Consoles still got their lower upfront cost , and of course they own set of exclusives , just like pc .

mushroomwig3757d ago

@elweon, few problems with your statement

1) New consoles are usually released 5-7 years, not 10. You're confusing that with how long they're usually supported for.

2) You seem to be implying that just because somebody owns a console they can't also have a gaming PC

3) You also seem to be forgetting the biggest factor, cost. Consoles don't cost $1000 for a reason.

JBSleek3757d ago

They cost so low sure but the price for software is outrageous. I bet a PC game who spends $1000 on a PC saves in not having to pay yearly for online and cheaper game prices over five years.

ABizzel13757d ago

@elweon

Very childish.

1. They also get exclusives that PC will never have, while at the same time leeching away at the PC's library of games.

2. They also have a low entry price of $400 for an entire "CAPABLE" gaming platform, compared to buying a $1,000+ GPU alone.

3. HDTV's best seller are 1080p, there's no point in buying a $1,000 GPU that's designed for maxing games at 2k, when you're TV can't display the resolution thus forcing you to buy a monitor / new TV that can.

4. PS+ is a great service offering free games across 3 platforms. XB Games for Gold is.......at least off to a decent start for 2014.

5. Local co-op / multiplayer (although it's happening less and less).

And there's more. Each platform has it's own advantages. If you want top end gaming and have the money to dish out then you should have a gaming PC. If you want a simple, easy to use, easy to set-up, affordable, experience then a console is good enough.

JBSleek3757d ago

4. PS+ is a great service offering free games across 3 platforms. XB Games for Gold is.......at least off to a decent start for 2014.

How are these free games when you have to pay $50 a year for the subscription service. PS+ is subscription service those games aren't free. As soon as the subscription is over you don't have access to those games. How is that free?

I don't get when people say that it's like Netflix. You don't say Netflix movies are free.

webeblazing3757d ago

$400 console is compareable to a $1000 gpu LMAO. your second point is dumb. i guess your never gonna buy a 4k tv. and every platform have exclusives even if pc exclusives are making its way to consoles, most pc gamers are not gonna care. they will still have exclusive and not put them on a pedestal like console gamers do for every exclusives.

i have other systems, but exclusives are dime a dozen. theyre good but not beat all end all like people on this site make them out to be.

Beastforlifenoob3757d ago

sooooo. you are going to buy this probalby $1,000-1500 GPU.... Yeah sure you are.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3757d ago
AnteCash3757d ago

Well im buying ps4 and a new PC, it must be a shock for you who post above me, a man having 2 gaming platforms,,,,,

ABizzel13757d ago (Edited 3757d ago )

I'm thinking about skipping XBO all together once my PC is finished. It really depends on the exclusives. A good 98% of the Xbox library is on PC, and 90% of the PS library as well. But the PS has more and IMO better exclusives to me. While the XB has had some decent exclusives none of them are games that would make have to own the console, so I have to see what new exclusives they bring over time. On to flip side the situation would be the same had the PS3, not shown that Sony is all about exclusives, and I have to have my Uncharted, God of War (although it needs a new wind), Quantic Dream, a possibly Last of Us sequel, Yakuza, and the niche exclusives they often have.

From now on, I'm running multiplats on PC, and exclusives and multiplayer on PS4 (or the occasional exclusive on PS3, Vita, 3DS, Wii U, and 360 for L4D2).

Show all comments (70)
330°

Nvidia DLSS 3.7 drives a further nail in the coffin of native performance

Nvidia DLSS 3.7 is the latest update to the long-running AI upscaling technology, and it further shows native performance doesn't matter.

DustMan7d ago

I think hardware development is at a point where they need to figure out how to draw less power, These beefy high end cards eat wattage, and I'm curious if using DLSS & AI in general will lower the power draw. It would seem like the days of just adding more VRAM & horsepower is over. Law of diminishing returns. Pretty soon DLSS/FSR will be incorporated into everything, and eventually the tech will be good enough to hardly notice a difference if at all. AI is the future and it would be foolish to turn around and not incorporate it at all. Reliance on AI is only going to pick up more & more.

Tapani7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

DLSS certainly lowers power consumption. Also, the numbers such as the 4090 at 450W does not tell you everything, most of the time the GPU stays between 200-350W in gameplay, which is not too different from the highest end GPU of 10 years ago. Plus, today you can undervolt + OC GPUs by a good margin to keep stock performance while utilizing 80% of the power limit.

You can make the 4090 extremely power efficient and keep 90% of its performance at 320W.

However, in today's world the chip manufacturing is limited by physics and we will have power increases in the next 5-10 years at the very least to keep the technology moving forward at a pace that satisfies both businesses and consumers.

Maybe in 10 years we have new tech coming to the markets which we are yet to invent or perhaps we can solve existing technologies problems with manufacturing or cost of production.

On the other hand, if we were to solve the energy problem on earth by utilizing fusion and solar etc. it would not matter how much these chips require. That being said, in the next 30-40 years that is a pipedream.

MrBaskerville6d ago

I don't think fusion is the way forward. It will mosy likely be too late when it's finally ready, meaning it will probably never be ready. Something else might arrive before though and then it becomes viable.

Firebird3606d ago

We need to stop the smear campaign on nuclear energy.
We could power everything forever if we wanted too.

Tacoboto7d ago

PS4 Pro had dedicated hardware in it for supporting checkerboard rendering that was used significantly in PS4 first party titles, so you don't need to look to PC or even modern PC gaming. The first RTX cards released nearly 6 years ago, so how many nails does this coffin need?

InUrFoxHole7d ago

Well... its a coffin man. So atleast 4?

Tacoboto7d ago

PSSR in the fall can assume that role.

anast7d ago

and those nails need to be replaced annually

Einhander19727d ago

I'm not sure what the point you're trying to make is, but PS4 Pro was before DLSS and FSR, and it still provides one of the highest performance uplifts while maintaining good image quality.

DLSS is it's own thing but checkerboarding om PS5 still is a rival to the likes of FSR2.

Tacoboto7d ago

Um. That is my point. That there have been so many nails in this "native performance" coffin and they've been getting hammered in for years, even on PS4 Pro before DLSS was even a thing.

RaidenBlack6d ago

Don't know what's OP's point is either but ... checkerboard rendering was good enough for its time but in terms of image quality its wayy behind what's DLSS 3 or FSR 3 is currently offering.
The main point of the article and what OP missed here is that DLSS 3.7 is soo good that its nearly undisguisable from native rendering and basically throws the "its still blurry and inferior to native rendering" debacle, (that's been going around in PC community since 2019), right out of the window.

Einhander19726d ago

RaidenBlack

DLSS is as i said a different thing from FSR and checkerboard.

But you're talking about FSR 3 which probably is better than checkerboard, but FSR 3 has only started to get games this year, so checkerboard which was the first hardware upscaling solution was and is still one of the best upscaling solutions.

Give credit where credit is due, PlayStation was first and they got it right from the get go, and PSSR will almost certainly be better than it will be given credit for, heck digital foundry is already spreading misinformation about the Pro.

Rhythmattic6d ago

Tacoboto
Yes... Its amazing how many talekd about KZ2 deferred rendering, pointing out the explosions were lower res than the frame itself..
And of course, Then the idea of checkerboard rendering, not being native....
For sure, maybe this tech makes it minimal while pixel counting, but alas, seems performance and close enough , and not native now matters.....
I want to see it run native without DLSS.. why not?

RonsonPL7d ago

Almost deaf person:
- lightweight portable 5$, speakers of 0,5cm diameter are the final nail in coffin of Hi-Fi audio!

Some people in 2010:
- smartphones are the final nain in the console gaming's coffin!

This is just the same.
AI upscalling is complete dogshit in terms of motion quality. The fact that someone is not aware of it (look at the deaf guy example) doesn't mean the flaws are not there. They are. And all it takes to see them, is to use a display that handles motion well, so either gets true 500fps at 500Hz LCD TN or OLED (or faster tech) or uses low persistence mode (check blurbusters.com if you don't know what it means) also known as Black Frame Insertion or backlight strobing.

Also, image ruined by any type of TAA is just as "native image" as chineese 0,5$ screwdriver is "high quality, heavy duty, for professional use". It's nowhere near it. But if you're an ignorant "journalist", you will publish crap like this article, just to flow with the current.

There's no coffin to native res quality and there never will be. Eventually, we'll have enough performance in rasterization to drive 500fps, which will be a game changer for motion quality while also adding other benefit - lower latency.
And at 500fps, the amount of time required for upscalling makes it completely useless.
This crap is only usable for cinematic stuff, like cutscenes and such. Not for gaming. Beware of ignorants on the internet. The TAA is not "native" and the shitty look of the modern games when you disable any TAA, is not "native" either as it's ruined by the developer's design choice - you can cheat by rendering every 4th pixel when you plan to put a smeary TAA pass on it later on. When you disable it, you will see a ruined image, horrible pixellation and other visual "glitches" but it is NOT what native would've looked like if you'd like to honestly compare the two.

Stay informed.

RaidenBlack6d ago

Main point of the article is how far DLSS has come with v3.7 since 2018. If this is what we're getting already, then imagine what we'll get within next ~3 years. Yes parity will obviously be there compared to the then native rendering tech but it'll slowly narrow down to the point it'll be indistinguishable.
Something similar is like the genAI Sora ... AI generative videos were turd back when they were introduced (the infamous Will Smith eating video) ... but now look at Sora, generating videos that just looks like real life.

6d ago
Yui_Suzumiya6d ago

How much VRAM is standard today? My laptop has a 1080p QLED display but only an Intel Iris Xe with 128MB of VRAM. I currently do all my gaming on it but certain titles do suffer because of it. I plan on getting a Steam Deck OLED soon to play the newer and more demanding titles.

purple1016d ago

Maybe better to get a budget gaming laptop and link a dualsense to it

= Portable console with far better graphics than a steam deck! + bigger screen and able to use it for work / etc

170°

Why I'm worried about the Nvidia RTX 50 series

Aleksha writes: "Nvidia has established itself as a dominant force in the world of AI, but I can't shake the worry of what this means for the RTX 50 series."

Tal16910d ago

Echo sentiment here - I think the way GPUs are going, gaming could be secondary to deep learning. Wonder if the 40 series was the last true generation of GPUs?

Number1TailzFan10d ago

No.. Jensen believes GPUs should stay expensive. Those wanting a top end GPU will have to splash out for it, or play at just 1080p and 60fps or something if you can only afford a low end option.

On the other hand if you don't care about RT or AI performance then there's always AMD that are doing ok at the mid range.

Christopher10d ago

***or play at just 1080p and 60fps or something***

My over 2-year-old laptop GPU still runs fine. I think this is more a reason why GPUs are going to other things in priority, because the market reach for new users is shrinking as more PC gamers focus less on replacing older and still working parts that run RT/AI fine enough as it is. Not to say there aren't people who still do it, but I think the market is shrinking for having the latest and greatest like it has been the past two decades. Problem is we aren't growing things at a rate as we were, we're reaching the the flattening of that exponential curve in regards to advancement. We need another major technological advancement to restart that curve.

D0nkeyBoi10d ago

The irremoval ad makes it impossible to read article

Tzuno9d ago (Edited 9d ago )

I hope Intel takes some lead and do a big dent to nvidia sales

Jingsing9d ago

You also need to consider that NVIDIA are heavily invested in cloud gaming. So they are likely going to make moves to push you into yet another life subscription service.

Kayser819d ago

NVIDIA will never change their price point until AMD or intel makes a GPU that is comparable and cheaper than them .
it happend before in the days of gtx280 which they changed the price from 650$ to 450$ in a matter of 2 weeks because of rx4870 which is being sold at 380$.

Show all comments (8)
230°

Nvidia AI Demo Unwittingly Proves that Human Voice Actors, Artists, and Writers are Irreplaceable

Nvidia presented Covert Protocol, a tech demo aiming to showcase the "power" of the Nvidia Ace technology applied to video game characters.

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
Eonjay30d ago (Edited 30d ago )

They look like they are in pain. Almost begging to be put down. It was uncomfortable to watch.

PRIMORDUS31d ago

The tech. is too early. Come back in 10+yrs and see what it can do then.

N3mzor31d ago

That presentation sounds like it was written by an AI using corporate buzzwords.

CS731d ago

I don’t know why people keep thinking of it as AI vs no AI.

A much more likely scenario is the use of AI alongside human work.

Eg. AI voices used during side quests or banter to boost the lines of dialog.

AI generating additional pre determined branches in dialog tree options for more freedom in conversations with NPCs

Smellsforfree30d ago

"AI generating additional pre determined branches in dialog tree options for more freedom in conversations with NPCs"

I'm wondering about that last one. Will that make a game more fun or more immersive? In the end, how can it possibly be more than filler content and then if it is filler content how much do I really want to engage with conversing with it if I know it will lead no where?

MrBaskerville30d ago

It's one of those things that sounds cool on paper. But will probably get old fast.

DivineHand12530d ago

The tech is now available, and it is up to creators to create something unique with it.

Profchaos31d ago (Edited 31d ago )

The biggest thing to talk about here is that every interaction requires communication to inworld servers so there's three big impacts here
1) games are always online no question about it
2) delays in processing on inworld servers, outages or unexpected load as a result of some astronomically popular game will cause real time game delays ever wait for a chat got response this will be similar as the context must be pulled via the llm.

Now as for the other impact the artistic one no I don't think writers can be replaced I've mentioned before often AI generated writing is word soup I still standby that it's also evident in the video to.
AI can not convery accurately human emotions and I don't think ever will.

I know publishers are looking to cut down on development costs but what happens when inworld decide to charge per interaction or update their pricing a year after your game goes live you have no choice but pay it or shutter it.

Ive felt for a while that we are heading towards this place of games being disposable entertainment and now it's feeling more and more accurate

Show all comments (23)