QOTW: Are you buying a GeForce RTX?

[HEXUS]

You've seen the benchmarks, have you made a choice?

Read more.

[3dcandy]

ran out of body parts to be fair

[Ferral]

You are having a giraffe at those prices. I am still sporting a Sapphire R9 380 Nitro (4Gb), it runs everything 1080p smooth, only just recently had to dial a few things down on some games. New stuff now I tend to go PS4 and use my PC for GOG stuff and Steam stuff when it lowers in price

[LeetyMcLeet]

I probably will.

Entire new rig inbound after Intel release 9th gen CPU's.

The 3770K and GTX 970 are starting to struggle a bit now. 5 Years is probably the longest I've kept a system. She's done well.

[Mapester]

I will skip this generation of GPUs and perhaps many more to come due to mainly the price increase combined with minimal performance increases is simply not worth investing in for the average PC enthusiast. My current GTX 1080 is still doing fine at 1440p and I think it will be good for a couple more generations of GPU's.

I think my personal purchasing habits with Gpus will move inline with my CPU ones. I had a Sandybridge cpu until recently as the performance gains had kind of plateaued over the years. So maybe my next gpu purchase will be in 5-7yrs time unless the Redteam release something that performs nearly the same but at a reasonably affordable price in which i wouldn't hesitate in switching to their cards.

[CAPTAIN_ALLCAPS]

If I was to buy a graphics card for ~£1250 then I would expect to run games at 3840×2160 max settings with decent morphological antialiasing and get 1% lows of 98 fps in a sizeable majority of graphically demanding games currently released. In other words, I would expect to max out DisplayPort 1.4 for 4K HDR gaming.

For games that fail that test, I would expect to hit close to a 98 fps average with a 1% low greater than 60 fps unless the game is poorly optimised or CPU bound.

These may be tough targets, but that is a lot of money. If that was 754 mm2 of pure graphics card I think these targets would probably be doable too. Besides, if the graphics card cannot do that today then where will it be in 12 months?

So in the Hardware Unboxed mega review I saw benchmark results at this resolution for 31 games. Eight passed the first test and five more passed the second. Of the 17 games left, the 2080Ti failed to get a 60 fps average in five.

As for the 2080, that gives us last year's performance at a higher price - only with less VRAM and less VRAM bandwidth. Better hope DLSS turns out to be really really good.

[Friesiansam]

Recently took advantage of a very good price on a GTX 1070ti so, won't be buying again for a few years.

[EvilCycle]

Still unsure! If DLSS is adopted on most games, meaning you could run a game with RTX enabled at 1080p and then upscale it to 4k so that it retains 60fps, I would consider it.

If that doesn't happen then they are far too expensive compared to the performance, you are paying a premium for the RTX cores with these cards and yet most people are already talking about RTX being unready and that they will turn it off for extra performance, so what is the point?

[Iota]

Aaaah, no. I'll pass.

When I do upgrade, I'll want a new 4K monitor and something that runs games at 4K with eye candy enabled. Ray tracing limited to 1080p as playable? Nope. Not at that price. Also DLSS isn't really supported yet so fail to see the need to upgrade to hardware that supports it?

I'll stick to 1080p gaming on my R9 290 that still copes happily at a refresh rate my eyes work at.

[GinoLatino]

Probably not.

[Phage]

Simple arithmetic. 40% uplift for 100% price increase.
No

[Nifl]

Hahahahaha... no.

[AndyM2012]

GTX 260 Ti, GTX 660 Ti, GTX 1060... so yes, an RTX 2460 when it has been out for a year or so.

[Nobull]

At 50% current prices...still probably not. Stupidly overpriced.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

All of you are wrong and entitled gamers - think of poor Nvidia's margins??

Think of the shareholders!!

[pastymuncher]

Not a chance. Ridiculous prices and nowhere near enough performance gains.