-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Rumored specs for NVIDIA's upcoming "Ampere" RTX 3000 series graphics cards (RTX 3060, RTX 3070, RTX 3080 and RTX 3090)
- Thread starter Deleted member 3812
- Start date
- Rumor
- Status
I can't wait so long, I really hope something in June. Even an AMD event
No idea, honestly, I'm not aware of any particularly reputable rumors yet. AMD certainly has the talent to come up with a massively scaled architecture (see: 3900X/3950X) but they are way behind Nvidia in terms of flexible tech (Tensor/RT cores). So I get the impression they want to aim for some kind of massively parallel core architecture to beat Nvidia, but it's really unclear how possible that can be yet. I guess I would be surprised if there is a launch RDNA2 product that is 1:1 with RTX30, but that's only because historically they haven't tried to directly fight the 80/ti/Titan.
EDIT: They have had stabs in the dark though; Vega, 7970x2, and so on. But generally they have flopped, had massive heat output/stability problems, and so on. AMD's strength is not in shipping a thousand dollar video card, let's say.
AMD never seems to lean on their dominance in the home console space to secure any proprietary features on PC. Which we can be thankful for, but it makes it more difficult for them to differentiate themselves from Nvidia's offerings when they can't win on performance alone.
It's a shame AMD isn't up to NVIDIA's level with stuff like DLSS. I've thought before about how cool it would be if there was a crazy high-end AMD gaming laptop with a massive 7nm chiplet APU the size of the new Ampere GA100, 48GB of shared HBM3 and a 2TB version of the PS5 SSD, but then I remember that it would almost certainly be outclassed by cheaper Nvidia models due to DLSS.
I'm also upgrading from a 1070, but for the time being I'd probably still be playing games on a 1080p TV, with the expectation that I'll probably move up to a 4K set sometime in the next couple years. And so I'm wavering between a 3070 and a 3060, but it sounds like the 3060 might not make it out till next year. I'd still only be aiming for 60hz (really it's my CPU and RAM that are really long in the tooth) but right now I don't have RTX, I don't have integer scaling (which I'm very interested in), and I don't have all that other new shit aside from just graphics.
If I really finally do a new build this year though I'm going more expensive than my current, old 2500K build cost me in 2011 with planning on roughly doubling the budget since I'll be able to afford it while doing a couple other things to either save money or put that back into it with a Ryzen 3000 or 4000 build and aa 3080 or whatever AMD/RDNA2 may provide which will be the first time I even remotely consider and AMD/ATI product since the 2600XT, still wary about their drivers though, haven't particularly heard good things about them with the 5700 XT.
I still kind of regret listening to all the short sighted "all you need is ____" talk that went on back then and continues to go on now with its a lack of looking towards the future. The 2500K served well over the years but I still wish a bit that I would've chose a 2600K and went to 8GB of RAM right away instead of 4GB (2x2GB) which I ended up buying another 4GB nine months later anyway and then put off for months actually installing it because working around my monster cooler was such a pain in the ass that lead to me removing the heat spreader on one of the sticks. Learned my lesson when I upgraded again a few years later and went with low profile sticks. So now it's time to possibly go the other way. 😁
If you don't want to wait you can always buy a Zen 2 CPU with a B550 or X570 motherboard and upgrade to Zen 3 later if compelled enough.
That said, 1440p would almost certainly be fine depending on games and settings you choose as long as you're not aiming for ultra everything in games designed around the current gen consoles. The RTX 2080 Ti can't do a stable 144FPS with settings cranked up to their max either even at 1440p on a lot of current games. When the next generation gets rolling, forget about 100+ FPS, even at 1440p with similar settings to the PS5 and XSX. Maybe with Hopper's 4070 in 2022 but that's kind of going to be the "curse" of this GPU generation, in not seeing a repeat of what we did with the PS4 and XBO.
I still kind of regret listening to all the short sighted "all you need is ____" talk that went on back then and continues to go on now with its a lack of looking towards the future. The 2500K served well over the years but I still wish a bit that I would've chose a 2600K and went to 8GB of RAM right away instead of 4GB (2x2GB) which I ended up buying another 4GB nine months later anyway and then put off for months actually installing it because working around my monster cooler was such a pain in the ass that lead to me removing the heat spreader on one of the sticks. Learned my lesson when I upgraded again a few years later and went with low profile sticks. So now it's time to possibly go the other way. 😁
The 10-15% increase is only in IPC, that doesn't take into account potentially increased clock speeds (though they may be relatively minor) or the potential performance increase from the core count per CCX going up from 4 to 8, that's going to eliminate the two 4 core chiplets with split L3 cache on their 8 core CPUs and reduce the splits for higher core CPUs, should significantly reduce memory latency for 8 core CPUs (and hopefully with higher core counts too where again, hopefully "infinity fabric" can be clocked higher) which along with the higher frequencies is why Intel has largely remained ahead of AMD in games and other apps that more so favor single core performance over multi-core. With how close Zen 2 was to Intel's 9000 series CPUs, they're going to come even closer if not finally at least match Intel and the 10000 series with its ridiculously high clocks while using significantly less power/generating less heat and despite not matching Intel's CPU clock speeds. It's almost like the early 2000s again.
If you don't want to wait you can always buy a Zen 2 CPU with a B550 or X570 motherboard and upgrade to Zen 3 later if compelled enough.
Taking into account the underwhelming raw performance increase from Pascal to Turing thanks to NVIDIA's change in priorities, that would be pretty disappointing after two generations, four years after the 10 series saw such a big bump over the 900 series or even the 900 series did over 700 thanks to the architectural changes in Maxwell over Kepler. At least RT might be better but still, that seems a little low with the die shrink and density increase. If this turns out to be accurate though I could see where NVIDIA might be a lot more aggressive in pricing compared to the last couple generations while looking at where RDNA2's performance per watt is looking to be.
Yep, seems like the Twitterer Kitty has solid sources. That means, this is very likely going to be the Ampere lineup:
GA102 = 3080 Ti
GA103 = 3080
GA104 = 3070
GA106= 3060
GA107= 3050
Assuming the 3070 does indeed boost to 2.2GHz that'd be a ~65% performance increase to my 1070 at 2.124GHz, would hope there's a good bit more room for the 3070 to be overclocked because at least IMO it's again underwhelming for two generations worth of advancements, that's about what my performance increase was from my 970 to 1070. Though again, there could be some architectural changes to make it greater and hopefully outside of the RT and Tensor cores.
That said, 1440p would almost certainly be fine depending on games and settings you choose as long as you're not aiming for ultra everything in games designed around the current gen consoles. The RTX 2080 Ti can't do a stable 144FPS with settings cranked up to their max either even at 1440p on a lot of current games. When the next generation gets rolling, forget about 100+ FPS, even at 1440p with similar settings to the PS5 and XSX. Maybe with Hopper's 4070 in 2022 but that's kind of going to be the "curse" of this GPU generation, in not seeing a repeat of what we did with the PS4 and XBO.
Last edited:
Yes absolutely. You don't need to reach 144 fps to feel the benefits of 144hz. Even 60 fps feels way better than on a 60hz monitor
I don't think they'll do a Ti this soon. gotta save something for the next year mid-grades
So gaming Ampere is going to be on 10nm? Atleast if KatCorgi is correct and he was spot on for GA100 die size 3 months ago.
I don't think Nvidia is using 10nm for that. Most likely it's either TSMC 7nm or Samsung 8nm.
the current word is that most Ampere cards will be on 7nm by TSMC while a smaller amount would be on 10nm. if that chart has truth to it, then the two lower end cards could be Samsung
I'm so excited.
I wonder how big of a jump a Ryzen 4000 + 3070 desktop will be in terms of performance when compared to my laptop (i7 9750H + 2070)
I think that's a fair assumption. 2070 being so sucky compared to a 1080ti was a bit of an anomaly.
Pretty low I think. It'll probably be 3070/3080 first, 3080ti after (Q4 2020 or Q1 2021), then 3060 after that.
I hope so, that's the one I was planning on getting, I might splurge for the 3080 is the performance is right, however.
I have to wonder which chip the 3060 is going to use. Hopefully it's a cut down GA1040 because the GA106 is worse than the 2060S in CUDA cores & VRAM. That would result in a big gap between the 3060 & 3070.the current word is that most Ampere cards will be on 7nm by TSMC while a smaller amount would be on 10nm. if that chart has truth to it, then the two lower end cards could be Samsung
Edit: ah you think the full GA104 is the 3060?
How do you get 65% more performance? Isn't a 2080Ti 2x as fast as a 1070 so if the 3070 is 95% of a 2080Ti then it's 95% more performance, right? I know your OC is another 15% but still.
That 3060 timing lines up nicely with my expected PC upgrade time. I'd be coming from a 1060, so that should be a nice upgrade.
well, the chart only lists 3 cards (ignoring the other two). with turing, the whole stack was repped by 3 dies: the Titan & 2080TI with the 102, the 2080 & 2070S with the 104, and the 2070, 2060S, and 2060 with the 106. even cutting out the supers, you're left with 5 cards. hence why I assume we won't be getting a Ti yet. the GA 102 could provide the Titan and 2080, the 103 being the 3070, and the 104 being the 2060. they all can be cut down for future Super/Ti cards next year
I really hope I don't have to wait for the Ti, ready to upgrade from my 1080ti now but I don't want to pay $3000 for it.
If you're at 60hz you probably don't need anything about a 2060 for a while. If you're at 144hz then yeah may be worth it for next-gen stuff.
3070 if it boosts to 2.2GHz
3072*2*2200 = 13,516,800.
1070 at 2.124GHz.
1920*2*2124 = 8,156,160
Just going off just raw FLOP numbers which to be fair doesn't show the whole picture and I know shouldn't be taken as "gospel" since it's, not taking into account other factors that could make the performance gap higher and do mostly at 4K (probably memory bandwidth?) which yeah, at 4K from what I've seen the benches are roughly 2x.
Ugh, it seems the console Tflops comparison have crossed over to PC GPU comparisons. It's stupid to compare Tflops over different architectures. It tells you nothing. According to your logic a 2070 would be about on par with your OC'd 1070.
They changed a bunch with Turing. You can read the Turing white paper if you're interested in the differences: https://www.nvidia.com/content/dam/...ure/NVIDIA-Turing-Architecture-Whitepaper.pdf
The 2080Ti isn't only 2x better at 4K. The reason why the difference is lower at lower resolutions is mainly because the CPU pulls down the average of the 2080Ti. The lower the resolution the more the CPU influences the results. Take 2 very GPU intensive games and you'll see the same results (2080Ti >= 2x 1070) at 1080p as in aggregate 4K results:
Red Dead Redemption 2 PC Graphics Benchmark
Launched on PC a year after it debuted on consoles, Red Dead Redemption 2 is still a big release that deserves a detailed benchmark analysis, much like...
www.techspot.com
Control Benchmark Test & RTX Performance Analysis
Control by Remedy Games is an open-world third-person shooter set in a building. Besides the interesting setting, graphics are great, and the game has support for multiple NVIDIA RTX raytracing technologies, probably making this the first game where RTX is really worth it.
Sidenote, but I was so salty when I finally upgraded my GPU to a GTX 970 (from a Radeon HD8670!), only for it to be noticeably outclassed by the lower-tier 1060 a few months later :(.
Don't get me wrong, it's great to get such a boost in performance, and that 970 'only' cost me about €200, but still.
With the info we supposedly have does the 3070 look like it'd be a good card for 1440p gaming for the foreseeable future? Or is it gonna be a case where I build my new pc with the 3070 in it and a game like rdr2 runs at sub 60 at 1440p?
I second this question my 4 year old PC with 5 year old parts is in need of an upgrade. 480 was nice, but I'm ready for an upgrade.
Which is why I mentioned not accounting for architectural changes which makes it moot, I haven't kept up what changes have been made outside the RT and Tensor cores, didn't think there would be so much of a CPU bottleneck in the benchmarks I saw holding the 2080 Ti back so much. That changes my outlook for what's coming in the 3000 series if those more recent leaks are accurate.Ugh, it seems the console Tflops comparison have crossed over to PC GPU comparisons. It's stupid to compare Tflops over different architectures. It tells you nothing. According to your logic a 2070 would be about on par with your OC'd 1070.
They changed a bunch with Turing. You can read the Turing white paper if you're interested in the differences: https://www.nvidia.com/content/dam/...ure/NVIDIA-Turing-Architecture-Whitepaper.pdf
The 2080Ti isn't only 2x better at 4K. The reason why the difference is lower at lower resolutions is mainly because the CPU pulls down the average of the 2080Ti. The lower the resolution the more the CPU influences the results. Take 2 very GPU intensive games and you'll see the same results (2080Ti >= 2x 1070) at 1080p as in aggregate 4K results:
Red Dead Redemption 2 PC Graphics Benchmark
Launched on PC a year after it debuted on consoles, Red Dead Redemption 2 is still a big release that deserves a detailed benchmark analysis, much like...Control Benchmark Test & RTX Performance Analysis
Control by Remedy Games is an open-world third-person shooter set in a building. Besides the interesting setting, graphics are great, and the game has support for multiple NVIDIA RTX raytracing technologies, probably making this the first game where RTX is really worth it.www.techpowerup.com
Still, I doubt the 3070 is going to make it into the next generation still running those games at 100+ FPS at 1440p at at least console settings.
Last edited:
Heres the thing with GPUs, they run on the 12v rail and most PSU are way over qualified. 650W doesn't really mean shit when the CPU/GPU runs on a specific12v rail offering. That's what you shoud be looking at for CPU/GPU. Not the total watts on a PSU.
What I'm saying is, look at 12V specs, not total watts.
How does the 680 perform these days? I loved mine but upgraded to the 1080 in 2016...I still have mine in my closet.
With all the next gen console talk, and new CPUs and GPUs, I'm wondering what everyone's position on building a new PC this year vs next year (or possibly later?) I've been listening to a bit of Moore's Law is Dead youtube channel, and it looks like we're going to get a lot of stuff in a hurry over the next couple of years. He says 5nm Zen 4 is pretty likely in 2022.
CPUs - I feel like Zen 4 would be a good release to get vs Zen 3, as it seems like Zen 3 release will be over pretty quickly. Things like DDR5 ram would be in Zen 4 as well. Also I'm assuming if you buy a CPU and you want to at least match the next gen consoles - 3700X would be the minimum?
GPUs - If AMD can bring out big Navi and it hits 17.5Tflops as its rumored - that could help pricing from RTX 3080 onwards and down. But that would probably mean at least another 12 months from now before all the variants are out and there's a price war. I assume RTX 3080 Ti will still be the King and there might even be a 3090, for people who need Titan performance.
SSDs - I think this is the big one - i see ALOT of talk about PS5's SSD and how Sony are so 'smart' etc, but anyways PCs have to catch up a bit if they want to match 5.5GB/9GB/s I/O. Moore's Law Is Dead also pointed to new GPUs, that would have high speed SSD type memory with fast transfer so it operates a bit like PS5. I suppose an NVMe SSD would suffice for now?
Honestly with so many variables - it feels like an awful time to build a PC except given that everyone is getting a next gen console, it makes me want to build/upgrade. Even waiting 12 months for GPU pricing to be competitive after both sides release stuff, it'd only be closer to newer, better hardware anyways. It might just be best to build something when the Ryzen 4000/Nvidia 30 Series releases.
What does everyone else think?
CPUs - I feel like Zen 4 would be a good release to get vs Zen 3, as it seems like Zen 3 release will be over pretty quickly. Things like DDR5 ram would be in Zen 4 as well. Also I'm assuming if you buy a CPU and you want to at least match the next gen consoles - 3700X would be the minimum?
GPUs - If AMD can bring out big Navi and it hits 17.5Tflops as its rumored - that could help pricing from RTX 3080 onwards and down. But that would probably mean at least another 12 months from now before all the variants are out and there's a price war. I assume RTX 3080 Ti will still be the King and there might even be a 3090, for people who need Titan performance.
SSDs - I think this is the big one - i see ALOT of talk about PS5's SSD and how Sony are so 'smart' etc, but anyways PCs have to catch up a bit if they want to match 5.5GB/9GB/s I/O. Moore's Law Is Dead also pointed to new GPUs, that would have high speed SSD type memory with fast transfer so it operates a bit like PS5. I suppose an NVMe SSD would suffice for now?
Honestly with so many variables - it feels like an awful time to build a PC except given that everyone is getting a next gen console, it makes me want to build/upgrade. Even waiting 12 months for GPU pricing to be competitive after both sides release stuff, it'd only be closer to newer, better hardware anyways. It might just be best to build something when the Ryzen 4000/Nvidia 30 Series releases.
What does everyone else think?
Samsung 8nm is just a refined 10nm node, maybe why it gets listed or talked about that way...
I'd say that it depends a lot on how often you are upgrading. As a general rule, postponing an upgrade because something new is on the horizon is usually an exercise in frustration because something new is always on the horizon. That said, the current time period is somewhat of an exception to that rule because new consoles are just a few months away. I expect the increased competition resulting from the launch of these consoles to push prices down in a significant way. So I'd say that at the very least you should wait until Nvidia and AMD release their new products before evaluating a possible upgrade.
Build it when you need it, don't wait* for next year or the year after that etc. There will always be something better on the horizon. Having said that, generally machines built early in a generation tend not to last the whole generation, at least until the cross generation games have ended.
*Except, for example, if you have a 980 Ti you want to upgrade from this year, wait for the 3000 series.
This fall is going to be a good time with new GPUs from AMD and Nvidia, as well as Zen 3 vs Comet Lake cpus being a known quantity. Its a new LGA 1200 socket (still cooler compatible with intel stuff that came before) and the last hurrah of AM4 with B550 and most likely x670 (usb 4.0, more pcie lanes, and a chipset that doesn't need a fan are *possible* for x670). 16GB/32GB DDR4 is hitting the sweetspot of 36000C16 for good prices and getting way faster (4000-4400MHz) at not too insane prices - Crucial Ballistix/Ballistix Max. 64GB can be had for between $250 for an average 3000MHz+ bin to $400 for a sweetspot 3600Cl16 bin. 20TFlops GPUs are lined up for the XX80 Ti tier this time around. There's a fresh rumor that Zen 3 is looking really good at 15-17% IPC over Zen 2.
After that, its an unknown amount of time until Rocket Lake, Zen 4, Alder Lake, and Meteor Lake - up to 2+ years. GPUs could be 18 months to 28 months. Intel 7nm and TSMC 5nm are being put to the test during this period. Socket 1700 (Alder Lake(?)) has a new rectangle dimension, meaning cooler support might get reset. AM5 is unknown. DDR5 is a lock for these future platforms but at what latency and speed? Capacities are 32GB per dimm standard, irrc. PCI-E 5.0 is a back and forth limbo - it might make it by 2022, it might not. There's a lot of unknown factors for 2021 and beyond.
It depends on whether you are happy with your PC. As someone on a 4770k/2000Mhz DDR3 1080 Ti rig, I'm honestly tired of wating - the HTC Vive Wireless adapter has been hammering my CPU since September 2018, and now I'm also doing Folding@Home on CPU and GPU 24/7. I also want to move to a smaller sff footprint.
Last edited:
While I can agree somewhat I'm still set on going with Zen 3 and the new cards they drop because my 2500K isn't lasting much longer and I don't know if I can or want to wait another year plus from Zen 3's release for Zen 4 and while AM4 as at the end of its road with Zen 3 I think I'd rather do a build on a matured platform with good RAM prices than pay the early adopter tax with AM5 and DDR5 which going by history will probably take time before it really becomes worth it. I'd feel like with Zen 4 that I'd be better off waiting for Zen 5 and the next update to AM5 motherboards, possibly PCIE5.
I doubt multi-platform games are going to be taking full advantage of the PS5's or XSX's set ups, SSDs will (finally, hopefully) become a system requirement but the minimum on it is going to probably be SATA ones for awhile before maybe NVMe drives become standard (and possibly recommended) since video cards are still going to have almost as much dedicated VRAM than the PS5 or XSX's total that will probably have a big chunk reserved for other things like with the PS4 and XBO.
Am definitely hoping for a bit of a price war on the video card end later this year. I'd kind of love AMD to finally get back to putting up a real fight and doing to NVIDIA what AMD has been doing to Intel lately.
- Status