09-06-2018, 06:50 PM
Nikos,
do you have any proof of what you're telling?
"The 12nm architecture of Turing cards is incompetent in terms of GPU clock and power efficiency and not really denser than 16nm Pascal."
Can you define "incompetent"? A boost clock of 1800MHz for the RTX2080 is not shabby at all. The TDP is not tell
Sure, the RTX2080 has less cores than the GTX1080Ti. But it also has way more cache (triple L1 and double L2), a different architechture and a newer instruction set. The latter made all the difference from Kepler to Maxwell. We will not know its performance under hashcat until someone has run a -b.
It might also have a worser pp-ratio in the beginning, but it still will be faster chip-chip-wise.
You can speculate and do your guessing, of course.
But giving people advice like "...so for hashcat like games, the new architecture is going to be slower."
is completely untrustworthy. Because you don't know that.
As you don't know if "the 7nm Vega20 which is going to be a monster in terms of performance with low power consumption and better clocks."
Especially AMD has been promising a lot with Fury and Vega over the last years. And I've been defending them (here)! But they never really delivered. Like NVidia instead, at least in the recent years.
The rumoured plus in gaming performance differs from 25-50% from Pascal to Turing. Even if it ends up being only 25% faster, oh boy, calling that "the biggest failure of all time for nVidia" only shows you're obviously too young to remember the disastrous Geforce 9800 GTX, the unviable FX 5000 series or Windows-crashing chipset drivers
NVidia has a killer feature at their hands with real time raytracing and the competitor has to watch out if it's not being swept of the market.
do you have any proof of what you're telling?
"The 12nm architecture of Turing cards is incompetent in terms of GPU clock and power efficiency and not really denser than 16nm Pascal."
Can you define "incompetent"? A boost clock of 1800MHz for the RTX2080 is not shabby at all. The TDP is not tell
Sure, the RTX2080 has less cores than the GTX1080Ti. But it also has way more cache (triple L1 and double L2), a different architechture and a newer instruction set. The latter made all the difference from Kepler to Maxwell. We will not know its performance under hashcat until someone has run a -b.
It might also have a worser pp-ratio in the beginning, but it still will be faster chip-chip-wise.
You can speculate and do your guessing, of course.
But giving people advice like "...so for hashcat like games, the new architecture is going to be slower."
is completely untrustworthy. Because you don't know that.
As you don't know if "the 7nm Vega20 which is going to be a monster in terms of performance with low power consumption and better clocks."
Especially AMD has been promising a lot with Fury and Vega over the last years. And I've been defending them (here)! But they never really delivered. Like NVidia instead, at least in the recent years.
The rumoured plus in gaming performance differs from 25-50% from Pascal to Turing. Even if it ends up being only 25% faster, oh boy, calling that "the biggest failure of all time for nVidia" only shows you're obviously too young to remember the disastrous Geforce 9800 GTX, the unviable FX 5000 series or Windows-crashing chipset drivers
NVidia has a killer feature at their hands with real time raytracing and the competitor has to watch out if it's not being swept of the market.