Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 776 posts

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#661

Post by Cumpiler69 »

ryao wrote: post #523
laweijfmvo wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started thinking today, when Nvidia seemingly keeps just magically increasing performance every two years, that they eventually have to "intel" themselves, where they haven't made any real architectural improvements in ~10 years and just suddenly power and thermals don't scale anymore and you have six generations of turds that all perform essentially the same, right?

Nvidia is a very innovative company. They reinvent solutions to problems while others are trying to match their old solutions. As long as they can keep doing that, they will keep improving performance. They are not solely reliant on process node shrinks for performance uplifts like Intel was.

>They are not solely reliant on process node shrinks for performance uplifts like Intel was.

People who keep giving intel endless shit are probably very young and don't remember how innovative Intel was in the 90s and 00s. USB, PCI-Express, Thunderbolt, etc., all Intel inventions, plus involvement in Wifi and wireless telecom standards. They are guilty of anti competitive practices and complacency in the last years but their innovations weren't just node shrinks.

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#662

Post by scotty79 »

shock-value wrote: post #567
UltraSane wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how so?

P and B frames are compressed versions of a reference image. Frames resulting from DLSS frame generation are predictions of what a reference image might look like even though one does not actually exist.

Compression and prediction are the same. Decompressing a lossy format is guessing how the original image might have looked like. The difference between fake frames and P and B frames is that the difference between prediction of fake frame and real frame is dependant on the user input.

... now I wonder ... Do DLSS models take mouse movements and keypresses into account?

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#663

Post by scotty79 »

UltraSane wrote: post #500
ThrowawayTestr wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The human eye can't see more than 60 fps anyway

i can tell up to about 144Hz but struggle to really notice going from 144 to 240Hz. Even if you don't consciously notice the higher refresh rate it could still help for really fast paced games like competitive FPS if you can actually generate that many frames per second by reducing input latency and if you can actually respond fast enough.

Same with me. At least on LCD. I'm still gonna get 480hz OLED display because I'm curious.

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#664

Post by perching_aix »

kllrnohj wrote: post #581
perching_aix wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Frame generation (FG)" was not a feature in DLSS 2 - the subthread starter was speculating about MFG (of DLSS 4) having worse latency than FG (of DLSS 3), on the basis of more interpolated frames meaning being more frames behind. To me this sounds not quite right, because while yes, you'll technically be more frames behind, those frames are also presented for a that much shorter period. There's no further detail ava…

Nobody is talking about DLSS 2 here so I don't know where that came from. The 2x, 3x, and 4x in my post are the number of generated frames. So 2x == DLSS 3, and 3x and 4x are then part of the new MFG in DLSS 4. Digital Foundry has actual measurements, so whether or not that matches your intuition is irrelevant. But I think the part you forgot is that generating the frames still takes time in and of itself, and you th…

Watched their coverage, not much in the way of details that would explain why the (slightly) increased latency. Your speculation about why MFG takes longer makes sense to me, although I have troubles picturing how exactly the puzzle all fits together. Will have to wait for more in-depth coverage.

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#665

Post by ryao »

SequoiaHope wrote: post #648
ryao wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already use capacitors for that.

Batteries and capacitors would serve different functions. Capacitors primarily isolate each individual chip and subsystem on a PCB from high frequency power fluctuations when digital circuits switch or larger loads turn on or off. You would still need to use capacitors for that. The purpose of the batteries would be to support high loads on the order of minutes that exceed the actual wall plug capacity to deliver ele…

It is the same function on different time scales. If you had a big enough capacitor, you could achieve the same thing. Not coincidentally, the capacitors in PSUs are huge, although not battery sized in terms of capacity. The purpose of the capacitors in the PSU is to keep things powered during a power outage to allow for a UPS to switch to battery. The technical term for this is PSU hold up time.

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#666

Post by ryao »

Cumpiler69 wrote: post #661
ryao wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nvidia is a very innovative company. They reinvent solutions to problems while others are trying to match their old solutions. As long as they can keep doing that, they will keep improving performance. They are not solely reliant on process node shrinks for performance uplifts like Intel was.

>They are not solely reliant on process node shrinks for performance uplifts like Intel was. People who keep giving intel endless shit are probably very young and don't remember how innovative Intel was in the 90s and 00s. USB, PCI-Express, Thunderbolt, etc., all Intel inventions, plus involvement in Wifi and wireless telecom standards. They are guilty of anti competitive practices and complacency in the last years b…

Those standards are plumbing to connect things to the CPU. The last major innovations that Intel had in the CPU itself were implementing CISC in RISC with programmable microcode in the Pentium and SMT in the Pentium 4. Everything else has been fairly incremental and they were reliant on their process node advantage to stay on top. There was Itanium too, but that effort was a disaster. It likely caused Intel to stop innovating and just rely on its now defunct process node advantage.

Intel’s strategy after it adopted EM64T (Intel’s NIH syndrome name for amd64) from AMD could be summarized as “increase realizable parallelism through more transistors and add more CISC instructions to do key work loads faster”. AVX512 was that strategy’s zenith and it was a disaster for them since they had to cut clock speeds when AVX-512 operations ran while AMD was able to implement them without any apparent loss in clock speed.

You might consider the more recent introduction of E cores to be an innovation, but that was a copy of ARM’s big.little concept. The motivation was not so much to save power as it was for ARM but to try to get more parallelism out of fewer transistors since their process advantage was gone and the AVX-512 fiasco had showed that they needed a new strategy to stay competitive. Unfortunately for Intel, it was not enough to keep them competitive.

Interestingly, leaks from Intel indicate that Intel had a new innovation in development called Royal Core, but Pat Gelsinger cancelled it last year before he “resigned”. The cancellation reportedly lead to Intel’s Oregon design team resigning.

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#668

Post by Arn_Thor »

danudey wrote: post #462
numpy-thagoras wrote: post #389

Similar CUDA core counts for most SKUs compared to last gen (except in the 5090 vs. 4090 comparison). Similar clock speeds compared to the 40-series. The 5090 just has way more CUDA cores and uses proportionally more power compared to the 4090, when going by CUDA core comparisons and clock speed alone. All of the "massive gains" were comparing DLSS and other optimization strategies to standard hardware rendering. Som…

> All of the "massive gains" were comparing DLSS and other optimization strategies to standard hardware rendering. > Something tells me Nvidia made next to no gains for this generation. Sounds to me like they made "massive gains". In the end, what matters to gamers is 1. Do my games look good? 2. Do my games run well? If I can go from 45 FPS to 120 FPS and the quality is still there, I don't care if it's because of f…

Any frame gen gains don’t improve latency so the usefulness is reduced

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#669

Post by itfossil »

Teever wrote: post #587
UltraSane wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there aren't many 8k monitors. I would rather have 300fps 4k

What is the draw to 300fps?

Well if they can reach 300fps at 4k then they can prove to everybody once and for all that their dick is bigger than everybody elses.

Cause it ain't about the gameplay or the usefulness. It's all about that big dick energy.

Re: Nvidia announces next-gen RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 GPUs

#670

Post by echoangle »

ryao wrote: post #534
abrookewood wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not on GPUs - think it all moved to ASICs years ago.

Mining on GPUs was never very profitable unless you held the mined coins for years. I suspect it still is profitable if you are in a position to do that, but the entire endeavor seems extremely risky since the valuation increases are not guaranteed.

> Mining on GPUs was never very profitable unless you held the mined coins for years.

If mining is only profitable after holding, it wasn't profitable. Because then you could have spent less money to just buy the coins instead of mining them yourself, and held them afterwards.

Post reply on HN