Nvidia is "amped" up for a big reveal on May 14

mongeese

Posts: 386   +57
Staff member

The keynote -- delivered, presumably, to an empty room -- will be led by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, pictured above. It will cover the “latest innovations in AI, high-performance computing, data science, autonomous machines, healthcare and graphics.” Every field Nvidia is involved in except for gaming. Whether that’s them just trying to be subtle or not is unknown, but it needs to be said: they may or may not explicitly detail new gaming GPUs.

Even if Nvidia’s primary focus isn’t gamers, the keynote will be worth being amped up about. AI and high-performance compute paired with the new Ampere architecture means new Tesla or Quadro GPUs. Per a recent, online leak the next Tesla card is an 8000+ core goliath. It would be the most powerful GPU yet. (By the way, that's probably more cores than will be included in consumer hardware.)

The keynote will begin at the ungodly hour of 6 AM PT on a Thursday (9 AM ET, 1 PM GMT). I’d like to point out that in previous years when the presentation hasn’t been pre-recorded (it will be this year), they scheduled the event for 8 PM (2019) or 9 AM (2018). You know, times when people are actually awake. Nevertheless, TechSpot reporters willing to get up early (not me) or able to use time zone trickery will cover the event. Further, the keynote stream will be available here as soon as it’s live, and on YouTube, too.

Permalink to story.

 

Adi6293

Posts: 471   +512
I'm not a big fan of nVidia but if we get a jump of 50% per price range and not a price jump then I will pick up an RTX3080 if AMD fails to bring out a card that is at least 95% as fast in all games for the same price as long as the 3080 is not 8GB because I am not paying £750 for a 8GB card
 

mongeese

Posts: 386   +57
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #8
"... healthcare and professional graphics”, to be precise. That's how it's written on nvidia.com at the time of my comment.
It seems to differ between the article's subheading and body. "latest platform breakthroughs in AI, deep learning, autonomous vehicles, robotics and professional graphics" versus "latest innovations in AI, high performance computing, data science, autonomous machines, healthcare and graphics"
Either way, they seem to be saying not gaming but Nvidia is a bit cheeky so I'm not going to place bets.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 1,883   +2,249
Cant wait. We need SOMETHING new. The 2000 series was a dud IMO. Give us 2080ti performance for 2070 money, and now I'm paying attention.
AMD should release a card significantly faster then the 1080ti just to make this whole farce derail.
FTFY. Those who bought the 1080ti still have 0 reason to upgrade, and AMD now going on 4 years not being able to significantly beat a stock 1080ti is just sad. 15% faster then a stock 1080ti doesnt help when the 1080ti is an OC champ, and most cards run significantly faster then the stock design. They have a decent arch with rDNA, where is Big Navi?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reehahs

ShadowDeath

Posts: 146   +87
I will pick up an RTX3080 if AMD fails to bring out a card that is at least 95% as fast in all games
Sounds like some unrealistic expectations, in that one part alone. You forget that nvidia rules the market by forcing Gimpworks in all "nvidia supported titles". Remember why everyone tells you to turn tessellation down to 8x? Nvidia cranks that up to 64x for all their supported titles even if it means hurting their old cards. They don't care because it makes their older ones look slow while their newer ones run fine.

So when you have a large chunk of games that are geared towards Nvidia Gameworks and a chunk geared towards AMD.. AMD will not run 95% of the games faster than nvidia.... let alone at the same price. I mean it's got nothing to do with money.... just the way games are programmed to work with one specific card.

Then again the new console war may shove Nvidia to the sidelines as we find out more developers are refusing to use Gameworks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: m3tavision

Adi6293

Posts: 471   +512
Sounds like some unrealistic expectations, in that one part alone. You forget that nvidia rules the market by forcing Gimpworks in all "nvidia supported titles". Remember why everyone tells you to turn tessellation down to 8x? Nvidia cranks that up to 64x for all their supported titles even if it means hurting their old cards. They don't care because it makes their older ones look slow while their newer ones run fine.

So when you have a large chunk of games that are geared towards Nvidia Gameworks and a chunk geared towards AMD.. AMD will not run 95% of the games faster than nvidia.... let alone at the same price. I mean it's got nothing to do with money.... just the way games are programmed to work with one specific card.

Then again the new console war may shove Nvidia to the sidelines as we find out more developers are refusing to use Gameworks.
I do know how the industry works and I still remember the DX11 patch for Crysis 2 and its "amazing" tessellation of the road blocks etc and for that reason I haven't bought a new nVidia GPU in many years since the GTX660Ti I've had a R9 280X > R9 390X > second hand GTX980Ti > RX Vega 64 > Radeon VII but I can't be bother paying for a worse product anymore and that's what AMD cards are atm, no RT, no DLSS, still higher power draw, drivers have been a hit and and a miss past few months so next time around AMD better tick all the boxes or I will just have to get a RTX card and trust me, I don't want to because nVidia is winning by cheating basically but obviously nobody cares so F It : - )
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 646   +364
Sounds like some unrealistic expectations, in that one part alone. You forget that nvidia rules the market by forcing Gimpworks in all "nvidia supported titles". Remember why everyone tells you to turn tessellation down to 8x? Nvidia cranks that up to 64x for all their supported titles even if it means hurting their old cards. They don't care because it makes their older ones look slow while their newer ones run fine.

So when you have a large chunk of games that are geared towards Nvidia Gameworks and a chunk geared towards AMD.. AMD will not run 95% of the games faster than nvidia.... let alone at the same price. I mean it's got nothing to do with money.... just the way games are programmed to work with one specific card.

Then again the new console war may shove Nvidia to the sidelines as we find out more developers are refusing to use Gameworks.
You have just described exactly why most people pick Nvidia over AMD.

Although Nvidias older cards actually hold up quite well these days, I have a 970 that still runs almost any game at 1080. And the 980ti still humiliates the Fury X.
 

Rayneofpayne

Posts: 130   +153
You have just described exactly why most people pick Nvidia over AMD.

Although Nvidias older cards actually hold up quite well these days, I have a 970 that still runs almost any game at 1080. And the 980ti still humiliates the Fury X.
Honestly, most people pick NVidia because driver stability, scaling non-issues, and they are faster at any given TDP, Laptops there is no choice NVidia or low powered crap.
High power users with money prefer them due to features Freesync based on the open standard has issues especially with cheaper monitors and no cert. Process, Gsync actually is better but you pay for what you get same goes for all their feature sets.
NVidia is more software than Hardware they said so as much themselves, AMD can't and won't have the capital for that kind of development for some time, right now they need a non piece of crap GPU arch. Hopefully RDNA2 will provide that u til though it's on shelves and real it doesn't count even for the fanboy speculation.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 646   +364
Honestly, most people pick NVidia because driver stability, scaling non-issues, and they are faster at any given TDP, Laptops there is no choice NVidia or low powered crap.
High power users with money prefer them due to features Freesync based on the open standard has issues especially with cheaper monitors and no cert. Process, Gsync actually is better but you pay for what you get same goes for all their feature sets.
NVidia is more software than Hardware they said so as much themselves, AMD can't and won't have the capital for that kind of development for some time, right now they need a non piece of crap GPU arch. Hopefully RDNA2 will provide that u til though it's on shelves and real it doesn't count even for the fanboy speculation.
I mostly agree with you. Although AMD have a pretty massive revenue. Certainly enough to secure a better software dev team. Of course the board will only agree to spending that money if it offers a return on investment. (Which I think it would but their board probably know better than me).

I don’t think cash flow is AMD’s problem when it comes to software support. And companies can spend and spend away on support and it still not be very good. If I knew how to create the sort of culture you need to get a great software team I’d probably be getting paid more.
 

Red999

Posts: 100   +36
Cant wait. We need SOMETHING new. The 2000 series was a dud IMO. Give us 2080ti performance for 2070 money, and now I'm paying attention.
FTFY. Those who bought the 1080ti still have 0 reason to upgrade, and AMD now going on 4 years not being able to significantly beat a stock 1080ti is just sad. 15% faster then a stock 1080ti doesnt help when the 1080ti is an OC champ, and most cards run significantly faster then the stock design. They have a decent arch with rDNA, where is Big Navi?
Because 1080 ti has 11.8 billions transistors while 5700xt only has 10.3 billions.
 

Adi6293

Posts: 471   +512
Cant wait. We need SOMETHING new. The 2000 series was a dud IMO. Give us 2080ti performance for 2070 money, and now I'm paying attention.
FTFY. Those who bought the 1080ti still have 0 reason to upgrade, and AMD now going on 4 years not being able to significantly beat a stock 1080ti is just sad. 15% faster then a stock 1080ti doesnt help when the 1080ti is an OC champ, and most cards run significantly faster then the stock design. They have a decent arch with rDNA, where is Big Navi?
Well nVidia themselves didn't bring a card that is significantly faster than 1080Ti apart from 2080Ti and that cost extra $500. RX5700XT its a $400 card while GTX1080Ti was a $699 card, there is only 10% performance difference between them but 5700XT is almost 50% cheaper so I think AMD is doing well here : - )
 

Red999

Posts: 100   +36
Looking at the transistor count compared to benchmark results, amd navi actually performs better than nvidia turing.
Amd rx 5700 xt has lower transistor count than rtx 2060 super but the rx performs better.
 

krizby

Posts: 375   +250
TechSpot Elite
Well nVidia themselves didn't bring a card that is significantly faster than 1080Ti apart from 2080Ti and that cost extra $500. RX5700XT its a $400 card while GTX1080Ti was a $699 card, there is only 10% performance difference between them but 5700XT is almost 50% cheaper so I think AMD is doing well here : - )
Might as well compare 5700XT to 980 Ti while you are at it too, oh look a 400usd state-of-the-art AMD card beating the 650usd Nvidia card that came out ages ago, what an achievement.
The next 400-500usd Ampere GPU will certainly put the 5700XT and the rest of next gen consoles to shame though. After all we a looking at about the same transition as 980 Ti to 1080 Ti in fab advancements (>50% efficiency improvement).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adhmuz

m3tavision

Posts: 513   +302
Might as well compare 5700XT to 980 Ti while you are at it too, oh look a 400usd state-of-the-art AMD card beating the 650usd Nvidia card that came out ages ago, what an achievement.
The next 400-500usd Ampere GPU will certainly put the 5700XT and the rest of next gen consoles to shame though. After all we a looking at about the same transition as 980 Ti to 1080 Ti in fab advancements (>50% efficiency improvement).

The 1080ti was nVidia's flagship Gaming dGPU, based on Pascal architecture. Which is still superior to Turing in Games. Turing ins bloated with transistors that do nothing for Gamer's and cost 20% more...

That is why nobody with a 3 year old 1080ti is upgrading to a $800 rtx2080 SUPER. And if they have less than a 1080ti, then most aren't going to upgrade to a 2060, etc... when the $369 5700xt is the best bang for the buck.



Secondly, there is no new dGPU for gamers coming. Ampere is like Volta, not for gaming. Read the press brief again.

Thirdly, the new rdna2 xbox will have 2080 SUPER level's of gaming performance. That is why nVidia right now is pushing DLSS so badly, because they do not want to be embarrassed when the consoles come out beating nVidia's $800 dGPU @ 4k.

rdna2 dGPU are also coming & nVidia has to worry more about them, than the rdna2 consoles. If Turing can't compete with pascal, and has a hard time with rdna1... how is nVidia going to handle rdna2..?

Bigger Turing won't do anything for nVidia's price/performance.
 

Rayneofpayne

Posts: 130   +153
I mostly agree with you. Although AMD have a pretty massive revenue. Certainly enough to secure a better software dev team. Of course the board will only agree to spending that money if it offers a return on investment. (Which I think it would but their board probably know better than me).

I don’t think cash flow is AMD’s problem when it comes to software support. And companies can spend and spend away on support and it still not be very good. If I knew how to create the sort of culture you need to get a great software team I’d probably be getting paid more.
Keep in mind now they do, thanks to RYzen and how well they are doing with the processor family, still though it's a drop In the bucket to Intel and NVidia and that makes it a challenge for them of the worst kind, they can't give any slack to Intel CPU side but they have to fund R&D into the defunct GPU side to refine a none garbage arch, splitting gaming and workstation arch for the sake of better optimization and performance GCN unfortunately had the downfall of having to cover both sectors, it starts with the hardware development then it's up to programmers for support and to get it used. NVidia just does a better job software side after Vista it made them rethink alot of what they need to focus on. Don't get me wrong NVidias marketing department is the worst and really needs a rethink, but AMD has a long fight ahead of them fighting wars on 2 fronts Lisa Su isn't dumb but she has to make the hard choices to make the company profitable, and honestly it could take a while before they are GPU competitors again.
 

Adi6293

Posts: 471   +512
Keep in mind now they do, thanks to RYzen and how well they are doing with the processor family, still though it's a drop In the bucket to Intel and NVidia and that makes it a challenge for them of the worst kind, they can't give any slack to Intel CPU side but they have to fund R&D into the defunct GPU side to refine a none garbage arch, splitting gaming and workstation arch for the sake of better optimization and performance GCN unfortunately had the downfall of having to cover both sectors, it starts with the hardware development then it's up to programmers for support and to get it used. NVidia just does a better job software side after Vista it made them rethink alot of what they need to focus on. Don't get me wrong NVidias marketing department is the worst and really needs a rethink, but AMD has a long fight ahead of them fighting wars on 2 fronts Lisa Su isn't dumb but she has to make the hard choices to make the company profitable, and honestly it could take a while before they are GPU competitors again.
Yeah a lot of people forget that AMD is fighting 2 much bigger competitors and that can not be easy especially when they still as a whole make less cash than nVidia alone never mind Intel :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rayneofpayne