Will you be Buying an RTX 3080?

[RCHeliguy]

Great!
Looking forward to getting a scalped $3,000 4080 card.

 

[RCHeliguy]

I just saw EVGA 3080Ti's available from Adorama for $1299.99. (Technically temporary backorder, but they claim they will be coming soon )

Given that it slightly outperforms the 3090, that's not deeply horrible.

https://www.adorama.com/ev12gp53955k.html

 

[R8pilot]

I just saw EVGA 3080Ti's available from Adorama for $1299.99. (Technically temporary backorder, but they claim they will be coming soon )

Given that it slightly outperforms the 3090, that's not deeply horrible.

https://www.adorama.com/ev12gp53955k.html

It says "you can order it now" ... except you actually can't. Just another tease.

 

[2stains]

For some crazy reason I just hit buy on a Gigabyte 3080. Pick it up tomorrow. I've waited to long on my 1080ti.

 

[brc19]

After 13 months in the EVGA queue I purchased a 3080 card. Price $893.

 

[2stains]

After 13 months in the EVGA queue I purchased a 3080 card. Price $893.

Im not saying what i paid then :o Congrtats mate, mine is freaking amazing!!!!

 

[2stains]

@RasmusP What are your settings in ACC? I seem to be now CPU bound again with only 85 fps with the new 3080!! GPU load is down in 70-80%, i even lowered everything and still not getting good FPS with DLSS??
3080 1850@0.812mV / 10600k@4.9.

 

[RasmusP]

@RasmusP What are your settings in ACC? I seem to be now CPU bound again with only 85 fps with the new 3080!! GPU load is down in 70-80%, i even lowered everything and still not getting good FPS with DLSS??
3080 1850@0.812mV / 10600k@4.9.

Hi,
Can't really help you, sorry.. I didn't really set up acc yet. I just clicked around until it looked okay but only did like 5 races in 8 months...

85 fps sounds like a normal number for the 10600k though. Acc is super cpu heavy as soon as you aren't alone on track.
Graphics settings barely help.

If you want more fps:
- lower shadows
- view distance
- visible opponents

 

[2stains]

Hi,
Can't really help you, sorry.. I didn't really set up acc yet. I just clicked around until it looked okay but only did like 5 races in 8 months...

85 fps sounds like a normal number for the 10600k though. Acc is super cpu heavy as soon as you aren't alone on track.
Graphics settings barely help.

If you want more fps:
- lower shadows
- view distance
- visible opponents

Yeah thanks, I just raised res scale till the GPU was in the 90's and that will do.
I had done quite a bit of AMS2 and was around 130 fps, so that 85 just felt slow. I understand ACC is a different animal so will just be happy I'm not still at 60.

AC and AMS2 are just so great with my PC, amazed how much cleaner things look at higher fps! Never thought more frames would make it not only feel smoother but the image is so much cleaner!

 

[RasmusP]

Yeah thanks, I just raised res scale till the GPU was in the 90's and that will do.
I had done quite a bit of AMS2 and was around 130 fps, so that 85 just felt slow. I understand ACC is a different animal so will just be happy I'm not still at 60.

AC and AMS2 are just so great with my PC, amazed how much cleaner things look at higher fps! Never thought more frames would make it not only feel smoother but the image is so much cleaner!

"the human eye can only see 24 fps".
Yeah sure haha.

I can second everything you've said! And I have to say I really dislike the "unclean" look of acc compares to ac and ams2. Acc does have "more eye candy" in theory but I don't want flickering/unsteady details that are only irritating instead of being pretty.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

@2stains, are you on Free/GSync monitor, surprised that you can see drastic difference between 85 and 130fps, to me they look pretty much the same. Of course there is a difference with temporal antialiasing in ACC and MSAA in AC.
With 3080Ti I am getting between 85 (race start in demanding conditions) and 130fps on G9 with everything maxed out (except shadows on High), and FSR sharpness enabled, HDR on too.
And I am CPU bound with i9-9900K as switching to DLSS does not bring any more fps.
I am adding my engine.ini and video settings.
@RasmusP, 24fps refers to "filmic" framerate standard, if anything it just has the right amount of blur our eyes find pleasant or just used to as all films are shot in this standard and anything over looks more "staccato".
More details if interested.

 

[RCHeliguy]

FWIW I find motion sequences at the movies running 24 fps excruciating. Watching something like a star ship jump in chunks across the screen ruins things for me.

Some people like the filmatic quality of 24 fps as a way to break reality and make it artistic. By the same token they find 60i to feel too real and take away from the artistic quality of what you are watching.

People obviously notice that difference.

Similarly I believe Linus did an actual test of fps and shooting accuracy and found that they could in fact hit the target more accurately on a 120 fps screen vs. a 60 fps screen.

"the authors of a 2014 study out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that the brain can process an image that your eye sees for only 13 milliseconds — a very rapid processing speed.

That’s especially rapid when compared with the accepted 100 milliseconds that appears in earlier studies. Thirteen milliseconds translate into about 75 frames per second."

"once you get up above 200 fps it just looks like regular, real-life motion,” DeLong says. But in more regular terms he feels that the drop-off in people being able to detect changes in smoothness in a screen lies at around 90Hz. “Sure, aficionados might be able to tell teeny tiny differences, but for the rest of us it’s like red wine is red wine.”

Why Do We Need 120Hz/144Hz Monitors If The Human Eye Can't See Beyond 60Hz?

If human eyes cannot see things beyond 60Hz, why are 120Hz/144Hz monitors better? This question was originally answered on Quora by Joyce Schenkein.

www.forbes.com

 

[2stains]

are you on Free/GSync monitor

Yeah mate, triple Gsync supported screens that work great now I'm finally on the RTX card. Shadows are one of the thing that bother me so I want them on epic and can finally do the latest.
Yeah the 85 fps looks good at race start and does build to 110 plus once the field spreads and 130 alone on track
Thanks for your settings, I will have a go and post back.

 

[2stains]

@2stains, are you on Free/GSync monitor, surprised that you can see drastic difference between 85 and 130fps, to me they look pretty much the same. Of course there is a difference with temporal antialiasing in ACC and MSAA in AC.
With 3080Ti I am getting between 85 (race start in demanding conditions) and 130fps on G9 with everything maxed out (except shadows on High), and FSR sharpness enabled, HDR on too.
And I am CPU bound with i9-9900K as switching to DLSS does not bring any more fps.
I am adding my engine.ini and video settings.
@RasmusP, 24fps refers to "filmic" framerate standard, if anything it just has the right amount of blur our eyes find pleasant or just used to as all films are shot in this standard and anything over looks more "staccato".
More details if interested.

You know WOT (lol) these settings look nice. I did turn off FSR and bump shadows to epic but left everything else with your settings. Still 85 fps but i think it looks clearer. Thanks mate. I will leave it like this for now on.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

So what sharpening method do you use. I personally found FSR the best, like the better version of Tonemapper sharpening, plus with it you don't need. to enable Temporal Upsampling to mitigate flickering lights at night. Advanced Sharpening is nice but too strong, wish they had slider.

 

[2stains]

So what sharpening method do you use. I personally found FSR the best, like the better version of Tonemapper sharpening, plus with it you don't need. to enable Temporal Upsampling to mitigate flickering lights at night. Advanced Sharpening is nice but too strong, wish they had slider.

I don't like the artifacts that come with sharpening, I have your settings, don't use FSR, DLSS or Temporal upsampling, just have Adv sharpening on default.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

I don't like the artifacts that come with sharpening, I have your settings, don't use FSR, DLSS or Temporal upsampling, just have Adv sharpening on default.

If FSR quality is set to Custom, it doesn't do down/upsampling, only CAS Sharpening AND its strength is fully adjustable.
I used to prefer Advanced sharpening myself over Tonemapper (standard Sharpness slider), but at the moment FSR to my eyes seems to serve as a perfect replacement for both, Advanced sharpening adds some grain and may look artificially sharp at times and it's only ON or OFF without ability to tune.
Of course it's all highly subjective and depending on monitor resolution.
I also still flip between them occasionally to see which one works better.
Why on Earth Kunos gave us so many options to choose from. LOL
I feel like "Coffee, Coffee, Coffee" scene from "Moscow on the Hudson".

 

[2stains]

If FSR quality is set to Custom, it doesn't do down/upsampling, only CAS Sharpening AND its strength is fully adjustable.
I used to prefer Advanced sharpening myself over Tonemapper (standard Sharpness slider), but at the moment FSR to my eyes seems to serve as a perfect replacement for both, Advanced sharpening adds some grain and may look artificially sharp at times and it's only ON or OFF without ability to tune.
Of course it all highly subjective and highly dependable on monitor resolution.
I also still flip between them occasionally to see which one works better.
Why on Earth Kunos gave us so many options to choose from. LOL
I feel like "Coffee, Coffee, Coffee" scene from "Moscow on the Hudson".

Maybe i haven't spent enough time getting sharpening right, loading up your settings was an improvement though so im pretty happy as is, i may play around more once i adjust to how it is now.

 

[Deleted member 197115]

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/nvidia-announces-rtx-3090-ti-gpu/1100-6499318/

 

[Bob Gnarley]