fluffything

many things is: ray tracing, tensor cores (for DLSS), and normal shaders (which is essentially everything).

Even if you don't value ray tracing, DLSS is the difference between playing at 1080p ultra settings, and doing the same thing at 4k.

Now, if you say you don't value Ray Tracing and DLSS, then I'd agree that it makes little sense to upgrade from a 2080 Ti to a 3070 or up. But DLSS is quite useful for any 3D application (CAD, 3D modelling, gaming, ...), and the tensor cores it uses are useful for ML, so if someone is not doing either of these with a GFX, I wonder what do they use the GFX for where DLSS makes no difference. Maybe as a heating stove :D

nvidia drivers work just fine on wayland with kde and gnome, both of which support EGL and GBM.

Gnome and KDE on Wayland support both EGS and GBM, and they have for a while, so the nvidia binary driver "just works" with either of them.

Some distros include nvidia drivers.

That something else is to use an eGPU if you need to, or to buy a desktop.

I mean, the constraints of a laptop and a desktop are as different as that of a car and a plane.

Laptops with dual-GPUs are as efficient as both as those car-plane convertibles.

I've also ran into this. Disabling Nouveau is a must.

> How many people are really going to drop their 2080 just because a new thing is out there?

Pretty much everyone who paid for a 2080 Ti on launch and always need to have the latests bestest thing.

> I really just wish Nvidia would get its shit together with Linux drivers. Ubuntu has done some great work making things easier and just work,

This has been my experience. Ubuntu "just works". What would get better with what you propose? (speaking from ignorance)

Or they'll just move the 3070 and 3080 to 7nm TSMC to lower the price. Or both.

For VR 60 FPS is not enough, but maybe in the next generation with another 2x leap we'll have 120 FPS at 8k.

Indeed.

The naming is super confusing. The 100 versions are essentially HPC chips on a PCI-express board, while 10x are completely different products.

The 3070 appears to have better perf than the 2080 TI at many things though.

Sure, but who buys a 1080 Ti or 2080 TI today for 400$ when a RTX 3070 costs 499$ ?

Like, really, if you know somebody, let me know. I have a 1080 that I want to sell.

All previous generation Titan models have been cut down chips as well TU102, GV102, etc.

With one exception: the Titan V card that I mentioned which comes with the GV100 chip. But as I mentioned, that one targets a very different market segment with HBM memory, which the "RTX 3090" obviously doesn't target, since otherwise it would come with HBM2 memory like all the GA100 products.

> I wouldn't consider BSD layer from NeXTSTEP an example of success for BSD's market adoption, given that not everything goes upstream, by now it hardly represents the current state of affairs.

Its essentially what happens if (1) only one company wants to use the open source product, and (2) the open source product has a tiny community where no development happens.

In that scenario, there is no benefit from anybody forking the open source project (a private company or an individual) for upstreaming anything. It just costs time, but adds no value for them.

Linux and GCC never was like this (not even early days), and I think this is independent of its license. LLVM never was like this either.

In fact, there are many private companies that maintain a GCC fork, like arm, and due to the GPL need to provide its sources with a copy, which they do. But they are not required to reintegrate anything upstream, which they very often don't, and ARM support in gcc-arm from ARM is much better than on GCC upstream. A volunteer can't merge (review, rebase, ...) a 200k LOC patch on their free time, so once these forks diverge, its essentially game over. You'll need a team of volunteers equal in man power to what the private company provides.

So while the license affects which companies can use an open source project in practice, and what they can or cannot contribute. The GPL2 and GPL3 licenses are not a good tool to actually allow everybody to benefit from those contributions.

Maybe a GPL4 could require companies to upstream and get their contributions accepted, but IMO that would just get even less companies to use those projects.

It was mentioned in the video.

The 2080 TI are going to overflow the used market, at 100-200$ at best, so... if AMD can't top that significantly, a used 2080 TI might be much better value than anything AMD can offer.

> Everything was awesome except the 3090. $1500?!?!?!?! That's a big jump from the 2080Ti pricing of $1200.

Since its a Titan model (for machine learning work, not for gamers), and the last gen "RTX Titan" costs 2500$ today, its actually a big jump, but in the opposite direction. Almost half the price...

They mentioned its 10K cooler than RTX Titan, and 10x less noise (not sure which scala they use for noise, dB are logarithmic...).

No HBM2 though.

> As always, wait for the benchmarks before deciding to buy (or return).

Why would you keep a 1200$ RTX 2080 Ti or a 2500$ Titan when you can get at least the same perf for 50-75% of the price with the new products, and much better RTX perf ?

This assumes that with RTX off the new gen won't be slower than the old one, but I think that's a fair assumption, and if it isn't, you can always return the 30xx card in 2 weeks, and buy an used 2080 Ti or Titan on ebay for pennies, once the market overflows from people upgrading for the 30xx series.

People were still asking for 900$ for a used 2080 Ti on ebay this morning, and the 3080 700$ price just destroys that offer. Many owners are going to try and dump these cards for as much as they can get in the next two weeks. I wouldn't buy a used 2080 Ti for more than 250$ today. In one month, these cards are going to sell used for 100-200$. If AMD can only match the 2080 Ti perf, they are going to have a very hard time pricing against the used 2080 Ti market.

> And let's not forget the huge power draw, requiring a new power connector and a 3 slot cooler.

That's only for the 3090 IIUC. All other cards were announced as being actually much smaller than the 20xx series ones.

Yeah, naming is confusing, the RTX 3090 is the non-HPC "Titan" model of this gen, and, if I understood correctly, is 1.5x faster than the previous gen RTX Titan, which costed this morning 2500$.

There is also a previous gen HPC "Titan V" with HBM memory, but AFAICT no Ampere Titan card with HBM2 was announced.

* RTX 3070, 499$, faster than RTX 2080 Ti

* RTX 3080, 699$, 2x faster than RTX 2080

* RTX 3090 (Titan), 1500$, 1.5x faster than RTX Titan, 8k resolution @ 60 FPS with RTX on Control.

---

I hope that if somebody bought an RTX 2080 or similar in the last 2-4 weeks, that they bought it over Amazon, and can return it.

> On the contrary, the claim is that without the GPL, commercial UNIXes would still be around.

I'm not sure this is true. See LLVM as an example. GCC existing and being GPL only meant that, e.g., Apple couldn't properly use it. Apple could have bought LLVM and kept it private, or develop their own proprietary solution and not make it open source, or fork the open source project into a private project and never contribute anything back, etc. There were many options.

Open source software has always existed, if anything, the GPL demonstrated that a particular open source model does not work well for a big part of the industry, while it works well for other parts, and non industrial usage.

Linux being successful seems incidental to it being GPL'ed, at least to me. Other open source OSes, like BSD 4.x, have also been quite successfull (powering the whole MacOS and iOS ecosystems, after a significant frankenstransform into Mach). Maybe Linux would have been even more succesfull with a BSD license, or maybe it would be dead.

Upstreaming non-GPL code is much easier for these companies to upstream GPL code, because a GPL upstream can "accidentally" leak all the IP of that company by requiring that company to publish all of its software.

So the current options are: these companies don't open-source anything (which is what you get with GPL), or they open-source something (which is what you get with BSD, and in practice they open source a lot).

The claim that with the GPL they would open source _everything_ isn't true; they would just not open source anything instead. I also don't see any current legal framework that would allow them to opens ource everything without loosing a significant competitive advantage, and am very skeptical that such a framework can be conceived.

MSCI ACWI IMI, FTSE ALL-WORLD, etc.

For that to fail, the whole world economy would need to fail as well, and at that point, no money on any currency is worth anything.

Typical scam is: hack into a real state agency, observe all emails with customers, send email to customer to deposit some funds on some account on the day of the downpayment, 4-5 hours before the real state agency worker would have done the same. Collect 1 day worth of downpayments, and run.

Yes, electrum.org maintains a blacklist. That won't stop a phisher that just made 16 million dollars though. Spawning a new server costs cents.

Bitcoin does not provide a trust-less alternative, at best, it requires you to trust yourself.

The internet is full of people that have lost their wallets due to hardware failures and no backups, scams, phishing, ...

How much revenue does pinterest generate?