1 00:00:00,240 --> 00:00:06,400 Oo, really fast card. Hey. Ow. That 2 00:00:04,319 --> 00:00:12,400 price though. Turning back the clock on NVIDIA's biggest GPU releases, we find 3 00:00:08,720 --> 00:00:14,799 plenty of wins, but also some L's so big 4 00:00:12,400 --> 00:00:18,320 that NVIDIA's own marketing team openly mocked them, which got us thinking. Tear 5 00:00:16,880 --> 00:00:22,320 lists are easy views, right? Sorry, excuse me. Which got us thinking, with 6 00:00:20,240 --> 00:00:28,000 the benefit of hindsight, what were NVIDIA's best and worst generations? 7 00:00:25,760 --> 00:00:32,559 Have you been a savvy shopper or did you throw your money at the wrong horses? If 8 00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:39,760 our only consideration was performance, this would be a pretty simple exercise. 9 00:00:34,800 --> 00:00:41,840 Best, worst, rest. But there's a lot 10 00:00:39,760 --> 00:00:46,320 more to delighting gamers than frames per second. So, as we make our way 11 00:00:43,680 --> 00:00:49,760 through 17 generations of NVIDIA hardware, we're going to be looking at 12 00:00:47,920 --> 00:00:55,120 the bigger picture with particular attention to efficiency, new features, 13 00:00:52,640 --> 00:01:00,399 notable controversies, and of course, price. Let me set the stage for our 14 00:00:57,600 --> 00:01:04,640 first generation. It was 2003, cargo pants for everywhere. I cracked open a 15 00:01:02,800 --> 00:01:10,479 copy of the computer paper and was shocked to discover that anyone would be 16 00:01:06,799 --> 00:01:12,400 deranged enough to spend $500 17 00:01:10,479 --> 00:01:18,320 on a card that does nothing but make games run better. Oh, how naive I was. 18 00:01:15,920 --> 00:01:23,280 The good news is I kind of dodged a bullet there. To say that NVIDIA's first 19 00:01:20,799 --> 00:01:27,439 DirectX9 GPUs were controversial would be a gross understatement. Depending on 20 00:01:25,600 --> 00:01:32,720 the gamer benchmark, performance gains compared to the previous generation were 21 00:01:29,200 --> 00:01:35,840 up to 55% but could be as low as just 22 00:01:32,720 --> 00:01:39,280 10%. And that uplift came at the cost of 23 00:01:35,840 --> 00:01:41,360 noise. And the pain kept coming. NVIDIA 24 00:01:39,280 --> 00:01:46,399 marketed the FX series cinematic rendering capabilities as CineX. And 25 00:01:44,400 --> 00:01:51,360 image quality was indeed a big discussion point for this generation, 26 00:01:48,479 --> 00:01:55,680 just for all the wrong reasons. Not anticipating that new games would use 27 00:01:53,360 --> 00:02:02,079 the baseline 24-bit color precision mode of DirectX9 rather than 32-bit, FX cards 28 00:01:59,520 --> 00:02:06,719 ended up falling back to the 16bit mode to increase frame rates. The result was 29 00:02:04,799 --> 00:02:11,920 a noticeable degradation of image quality. Worse still, NVIDIA attempted 30 00:02:09,679 --> 00:02:16,879 to slip this little trick into driver version 43.45 31 00:02:14,000 --> 00:02:21,360 without acknowledging it until the obviously lower image quality forced 32 00:02:18,800 --> 00:02:26,160 them to come clean. Additionally, the implementation of MSAA on these cards 33 00:02:23,599 --> 00:02:30,239 was distinctly inferior to ATI's, leading to more pronounced stairstepping 34 00:02:28,000 --> 00:02:35,760 on the edges of angle geometry. To top it off, ATI's 9700 Pro not only 35 00:02:33,519 --> 00:02:41,599 performed better, but came out earlier and was the same price as the FX5800 36 00:02:38,879 --> 00:02:47,120 Ultra. The FX line of GPUs ended up being about as damaging to NVIDIA's 37 00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:50,560 brand as later FX CPUs were to AMD's. 38 00:02:47,120 --> 00:02:52,640 Clearly a cursed naming scheme. D tier. 39 00:02:50,560 --> 00:03:01,040 The good news is that after a less embarrassing mid-generation 5900 series 40 00:02:56,080 --> 00:03:03,200 refresh of the FX lineup in 2004, Ctier, 41 00:03:01,040 --> 00:03:08,239 NVIDIA would follow up with a real banger. The performance gains of the 42 00:03:05,200 --> 00:03:11,519 GeForce 6 generation were outstanding. 43 00:03:08,239 --> 00:03:13,760 The mid-range 6600 GT outperformed the 44 00:03:11,519 --> 00:03:18,080 previous flagship for less than half the price. And if you went from flagship to 45 00:03:16,480 --> 00:03:24,319 flagship, you could double your performance or more. That's right. It 46 00:03:21,200 --> 00:03:26,959 was in 2004 that SLI made its triumphant 47 00:03:24,319 --> 00:03:32,080 return from the dead. Early adopters had gotten a taste of this dual GPU wizardry 48 00:03:29,040 --> 00:03:33,920 under the 3DFX name back in 1998, but it 49 00:03:32,080 --> 00:03:38,560 would take NVIDIA 4 years after acquiring their rivals to reintroduce 50 00:03:36,159 --> 00:03:42,879 this technology to a much larger gaming audience. The competition with ATI 51 00:03:40,879 --> 00:03:47,120 though was tight in this generation. Flagship cards were neck andneck in both 52 00:03:45,040 --> 00:03:51,760 price and performance with ATI's Crossfire offering similar dual GPU 53 00:03:49,440 --> 00:03:56,560 capabilities, though Team Red's solution was flakier and required a special 54 00:03:54,319 --> 00:04:00,879 master card along with a silly external dongle. Furthermore, the best board 55 00:03:59,040 --> 00:04:05,519 partners were definitely available on the NVIDIA side with many offering 56 00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:11,439 lifetime warranties. This has got to be S tier. Moving on, as we saw with FX, 57 00:04:09,040 --> 00:04:18,000 the GeForce 7 family got multiple flagship GPU launches. First came the 58 00:04:14,400 --> 00:04:19,440 7800 GTX built on the same 110 nanometer 59 00:04:18,000 --> 00:04:24,240 manufacturing process as its predecessor, but with a larger die, 60 00:04:21,840 --> 00:04:30,000 higher clock speeds, and graphics optimized GDDR memory, contributing to a 61 00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:35,919 healthy 60% uplift in performance, even if it did come at a higher price. But 62 00:04:32,479 --> 00:04:38,000 then we got the 512meg version with 63 00:04:35,919 --> 00:04:44,479 vastly higher clock speeds and performance and a super misleading name. 64 00:04:40,960 --> 00:04:46,400 Then we got the 7900 GTX that cranked 65 00:04:44,479 --> 00:04:51,520 clock speeds to 11 thanks to a more advanced 90 nmter manufacturing process, 66 00:04:49,040 --> 00:04:58,880 but then barely managed to outperform the 7800 GTX. No, no, not that 7800. 67 00:04:56,000 --> 00:05:04,320 That one. Oh, and then the 7900 was at a lower price. Do we have an M tier for 68 00:05:01,199 --> 00:05:06,240 mixed bag? Um, you know what though? 69 00:05:04,320 --> 00:05:10,160 NVIDIA clearly won every mid-generational battle with ATI this 70 00:05:08,240 --> 00:05:15,440 time around. This was the last generation to be available for both PCIe 71 00:05:12,800 --> 00:05:20,080 and AGP slot motherboards, and it was full of fun oddities like the uh sample 72 00:05:18,240 --> 00:05:27,600 that we have from this generation, the 7950 GX2 that Frankensteined two SLI 73 00:05:24,320 --> 00:05:31,360 GPUs together into a single PCIe slot. 74 00:05:27,600 --> 00:05:33,360 Oh yeah, and the 7900 GTO. 75 00:05:31,360 --> 00:05:37,680 That's right. NVIDIA used to bless us with limited run cards as a way of 76 00:05:35,440 --> 00:05:41,759 clearing out old or not quite peak performance inventory. And in this case, 77 00:05:39,840 --> 00:05:47,120 many GTO cards could actually be unlocked to full GTX specifications. It 78 00:05:44,880 --> 00:05:52,880 was also the last time we saw a flagship GPU offered in a single slot form 79 00:05:49,120 --> 00:05:54,320 factor. And fun fact, the 7800 GTX was 80 00:05:52,880 --> 00:06:00,160 used as the starting point for the PlayStation 3's RSX GPU. I'm going with 81 00:05:57,759 --> 00:06:05,840 A tier this time around. And as for you 7900, 82 00:06:01,840 --> 00:06:08,400 you get a B. GeForce 8 was, in a word, 83 00:06:05,840 --> 00:06:13,919 revolutionary. S tier. I'm doing it right now. But we got to talk about it a 84 00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:22,319 bit more before we move on. First up, a single 8800 GTX was able to outperform a 85 00:06:17,440 --> 00:06:24,479 pair of 7900 GTXs running an SLI. It is 86 00:06:22,319 --> 00:06:30,080 still the single biggest generational leap in performance we have ever seen. 87 00:06:26,880 --> 00:06:34,319 And it cost only $100 more than a single 88 00:06:30,080 --> 00:06:37,360 7900 GTX, leaving the ATI 2900 XT, 89 00:06:34,319 --> 00:06:39,919 absolutely in the dust, crying to its 90 00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:43,280 mama. Its new mama, AMD, who was probably feeling like entering the ring 91 00:06:41,440 --> 00:06:48,560 with NVIDIA, might not have been a very good idea. The Tesla architectures big 92 00:06:46,160 --> 00:06:52,800 innovation was doing away with the fixed pixel pipelines of previous micro 93 00:06:50,240 --> 00:06:57,440 architectures. So instead of separate vertex and pixel shaders, we got unified 94 00:06:55,520 --> 00:07:02,080 shaders, meaning that any one of them was able to handle any type of shading 95 00:06:59,440 --> 00:07:06,639 task. This flexibility was extremely important as GPUs made the transition 96 00:07:04,240 --> 00:07:10,880 from graphics accelerators to the generalpurpose accelerators that power 97 00:07:08,560 --> 00:07:15,039 workloads like simulation and machine learning today. Also key to that 98 00:07:13,120 --> 00:07:19,280 transition was the release of the CUDA API, which is still in use today and 99 00:07:17,199 --> 00:07:24,240 enables developers to run generalpurpose code on GPUs. Less in use today, but 100 00:07:22,960 --> 00:07:28,800 certainly interesting, was the introduction of three-way SLI for 101 00:07:26,319 --> 00:07:33,039 enthusiasts with more dollars than cents and plenty of patience for tinkering. 102 00:07:31,120 --> 00:07:40,000 And if all that wasn't enough, this generation also welcomed NVIDIA's first 103 00:07:35,280 --> 00:07:42,400 GPU using TSMC's 65nm process. The 8800 104 00:07:40,000 --> 00:07:47,440 GT was less than half the price of its big brother GTX but offered anywhere 105 00:07:44,560 --> 00:07:52,400 from 70 to 90% of the performance depending on the application. And this 106 00:07:49,440 --> 00:07:56,319 was in a single slot form factor. It was such a clear winner in terms of value 107 00:07:54,240 --> 00:08:00,639 that NVIDIA has never offered anything similar since. Now I already declared 108 00:07:58,639 --> 00:08:05,360 GeForce 8 to be S tier, but it's worth saying it again. S tier, which is how 109 00:08:03,919 --> 00:08:09,919 you'll feel and look in our underwear from ltstore.com. 110 00:08:07,039 --> 00:08:14,720 Take it from me, I would know. After a wild previous generation, 111 00:08:11,919 --> 00:08:19,120 GeForce 9 was a bit of a rest on the old laurels time for NVIDIA. We went 112 00:08:17,039 --> 00:08:24,240 straight from the largest generational performance jump to the smallest one. 113 00:08:22,000 --> 00:08:31,120 The G92 core that was at the heart of the 9800 GTX, I mean, it was no slouch. 114 00:08:27,680 --> 00:08:33,039 It handily dispatched the ATIHD 3870, 115 00:08:31,120 --> 00:08:39,680 but it was based on the same Tesla architecture and in fact based on the 116 00:08:36,000 --> 00:08:42,719 same die as the 8800 GT, just shrunk for 117 00:08:39,680 --> 00:08:45,040 a smaller 55nm process node, which was 118 00:08:42,719 --> 00:08:49,440 good for a healthy clock speed bump, but only about a 10% performance increase 119 00:08:47,200 --> 00:08:55,519 versus last gen, unless of course you sprang for the dual GPU 9800 GX2 120 00:08:53,200 --> 00:08:59,440 sandwich edition. I guess we also got PCIe Gen 2 support across the entire 121 00:08:57,600 --> 00:09:04,000 range, but it would be a while before cards, and it wouldn't be these ones, 122 00:09:01,680 --> 00:09:08,880 managed to saturate that connection. I'm going with C tier. What was next? 123 00:09:07,360 --> 00:09:14,959 Right. Nothing. All five cards from the GeForce 124 00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:19,519 100 generation, yes, it existed, were OEM only. We've seen recent examples of 125 00:09:17,680 --> 00:09:24,480 GPUs that were sold exclusively to system integrators. The GTX 1065 gig is 126 00:09:22,480 --> 00:09:29,680 one that comes to mind, but an entire generation NVIDIA. The good news is we 127 00:09:27,519 --> 00:09:34,560 didn't miss out on anything because every 100 series card was rebadged from 128 00:09:32,240 --> 00:09:41,040 either the previous or the following generation. You get a big fat D tier. 129 00:09:37,920 --> 00:09:43,600 But ooh, this is new. NVIDIA's Tesla 130 00:09:41,040 --> 00:09:50,080 architecture is back again with the 200 series, but the GTX goes before the 131 00:09:46,640 --> 00:09:52,320 numbers now. Ooh. 132 00:09:50,080 --> 00:09:58,160 In all seriousness though, the flagship GTX 280 and its mid-gen refreshed 285 133 00:09:56,160 --> 00:10:03,600 used what NVIDIA called their second generation Tesla architecture on TSMC's 134 00:10:00,880 --> 00:10:09,519 65 and 55 nanmter process nodes respectively. And they were hefty mamas 135 00:10:06,720 --> 00:10:14,800 topping over 1 billion transistors for the first time ever. This was also the 136 00:10:12,320 --> 00:10:20,160 first and only time that we saw NVIDIA use a whopping 512-bit memory bus. 137 00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:26,560 granting gamers a very respectable 60ish% performance bump. And while the 138 00:10:23,680 --> 00:10:31,279 ATI HD4870 managed to take the frames per dollar crown, NVIDIA's top tier was 139 00:10:28,880 --> 00:10:36,480 in a different league altogether and still hovering around that $500 flagship 140 00:10:33,839 --> 00:10:42,240 price point. SLI had also matured significantly by this point, allowing 141 00:10:38,079 --> 00:10:44,560 gamers to drive highresolution 2560x600 142 00:10:42,240 --> 00:10:49,200 displays. And it was even beneficial for lower resolutions with scaling that 143 00:10:46,079 --> 00:10:51,360 could reach 70 to 80%. That means that 144 00:10:49,200 --> 00:10:54,959 two mid-range cards was a great value option compared to a single high-end 145 00:10:53,040 --> 00:11:02,399 one. I personally went that route with two GTX 260s. I'm going A tier. As for 146 00:10:59,200 --> 00:11:04,959 the GTX 300 series, 147 00:11:02,399 --> 00:11:10,320 but this again, another generation of five cards that was OEM only. thrilling 148 00:11:08,160 --> 00:11:16,640 except that no, it's actually worse than last time because they were all rebadged 149 00:11:12,959 --> 00:11:19,680 from the previous generation. Let's say 150 00:11:16,640 --> 00:11:22,480 F tier for forgettable. This next one 151 00:11:19,680 --> 00:11:27,680 wasn't. The first DirectX11 capable generation arrived 5 months later than 152 00:11:24,560 --> 00:11:30,480 planned, but with over 50% performance 153 00:11:27,680 --> 00:11:35,519 gains relative to the GTX 280, and it managed to edge out ATI's HD 5870. So 154 00:11:33,600 --> 00:11:40,320 clearly all those CUDA cores were worth waiting for. GPUs still use thousands of 155 00:11:38,399 --> 00:11:43,839 these computing cores for everything from rendering scenery to drawing 156 00:11:42,240 --> 00:11:49,600 character models to calculating lighting and shadows in a game environment. And 157 00:11:46,079 --> 00:11:53,440 all this performance came cheap. Okay, 158 00:11:49,600 --> 00:11:55,680 not cheap, but at an even $500. The GTX 159 00:11:53,440 --> 00:12:02,399 480 was priced identically to the flagship FX GPU from 7 years prior, 160 00:11:58,640 --> 00:12:04,640 making it $120 cheaper in today dollars 161 00:12:02,399 --> 00:12:11,120 if you account for inflation. Oh yeah, and it also cost $150 then dollars less 162 00:12:08,160 --> 00:12:15,279 than the GTX 280 that it replaced. It wasn't all rainbows and sparkles, 163 00:12:12,560 --> 00:12:20,880 though. It was also blazing inferno. The GTX furnace, uh, barbecue card, and 164 00:12:18,800 --> 00:12:25,279 thermy jokes were so common that even AMD joined in on the mockery. In terms 165 00:12:23,519 --> 00:12:29,360 of tech though, we got two big new arrivals. First, thanks to NVIDIA's 166 00:12:27,440 --> 00:12:33,839 acquisition of AIA, who up until this point had made, I think, PowerPoint 167 00:12:31,360 --> 00:12:38,560 presentations and promises. No, sorry. Uh, a weird standalone physics card. Um, 168 00:12:36,560 --> 00:12:43,279 well, yeah, that technology runs on the GPU now. And second was support for 169 00:12:40,880 --> 00:12:48,480 tessillation, a technique used to add detail to surfaces that might otherwise 170 00:12:45,519 --> 00:12:53,200 be rendered flat. Unfortunately, it was still early days for Tessellation and it 171 00:12:50,320 --> 00:12:58,880 incurred a 20% hit to frames per second, making it one of those features that 172 00:12:56,000 --> 00:13:03,760 doesn't really run so much as walk on first generation hardware 173 00:13:01,360 --> 00:13:09,440 or TX, excuse me. Sorry. Uh, we're going to go B tier here. The GTX 500 series, 174 00:13:07,200 --> 00:13:14,240 though, was a solid tick in that it focused heavily on improving rather than 175 00:13:11,839 --> 00:13:17,760 revolutionizing NVIDIA's existing Fermy chip micro architecture. This is a 176 00:13:16,160 --> 00:13:22,399 strategy they borrowed from Intel that resulted in lower temperatures, noise, 177 00:13:20,079 --> 00:13:27,440 and power consumption and also less mockery. Performance gains in the 20% 178 00:13:25,040 --> 00:13:31,839 range were a little on the low end, but NVIDIA did widen the gap compared to 179 00:13:29,440 --> 00:13:37,120 AMD's best, and pricing stayed the same at 500 bucks for the top-end single GPU 180 00:13:34,399 --> 00:13:42,000 card. Notably, GeForce 500 saw the reintroduction of the TI moniker, which 181 00:13:39,600 --> 00:13:47,519 hadn't been used since 2002. We're still not sure how to pronounce it. GTX 560 182 00:13:44,320 --> 00:13:49,360 Tai Ti. But we are sure that at the time 183 00:13:47,519 --> 00:13:53,040 cards with this designation represented incredible performance for the price. 184 00:13:51,600 --> 00:13:57,519 Fun fact, if you've ever had the misfortune, by the way, of buying a fake 185 00:13:54,880 --> 00:14:01,440 GPU from a site like Wish or AliExpress, you probably got a card from this 186 00:13:59,040 --> 00:14:06,000 generation with a modified BIOS. I'm going to go A tier. Now, one of the most 187 00:14:03,839 --> 00:14:10,639 notable things about our next generation GTX 600 is that NVIDIA's Kepler 188 00:14:08,720 --> 00:14:16,800 architecture was the first time they tried to pass off a mid-tier GPU as a 189 00:14:13,839 --> 00:14:22,959 flagship. See, here's the thing. The GTX 680 uses a GK 104 chip, but the flagship 190 00:14:20,720 --> 00:14:27,519 die of each generation almost always ends in a zero. And then the higher that 191 00:14:25,279 --> 00:14:31,680 last number goes, the smaller the die and the lower end the part. What that 192 00:14:29,920 --> 00:14:37,279 means is whether it was for cost concerns or an utter lack of competition 193 00:14:33,920 --> 00:14:38,800 from AMD, the GTX 680 that we got was a 194 00:14:37,279 --> 00:14:43,600 lesser version of what it could have been. But if you were expecting it to 195 00:14:40,800 --> 00:14:49,360 come with a discount, think again. To be fair, overall performance was up 20% and 196 00:14:47,199 --> 00:14:53,920 it was an enormous leap in performance per watt thanks to a risky strategy of 197 00:14:51,920 --> 00:14:58,000 dramatically shrinking the process node and significantly altering the 198 00:14:55,440 --> 00:15:01,600 architecture in one generation. And this is the point where NVIDIA's strategy of 199 00:14:59,519 --> 00:15:06,399 differentiating based on features starts to really make its mark with the 600 200 00:15:04,160 --> 00:15:12,720 series. Then we got some basics like support for PCI Express Gen 3 and 201 00:15:08,959 --> 00:15:15,120 DisplayPort 1.2, but we also got GPU 202 00:15:12,720 --> 00:15:20,880 boost, Envank hardware accelerated video encoding, G-Sync, less demanding FXA and 203 00:15:18,480 --> 00:15:24,959 TXA anti-aliasing, and support for the Vulcan API. And that's not all. A 204 00:15:23,600 --> 00:15:30,720 personal favorite of mine was the introduction of Gamestream. RIP NVIDIA's 205 00:15:28,560 --> 00:15:37,120 endto-end solution for streaming games from your GeForce powered PC to a Shield 206 00:15:33,279 --> 00:15:39,360 handheld device. So cool. It wasn't all 207 00:15:37,120 --> 00:15:43,680 roses, though. Driver issues that caused stuttering with adaptive VSYNC were 208 00:15:40,959 --> 00:15:49,199 widely reported. And confusingly, the total number of SKUs ballooned from 15 209 00:15:46,560 --> 00:15:54,959 to 27. And that's without factoring in the superc clocks and super super clocks 210 00:15:51,759 --> 00:15:57,120 of the world. Making matters worse, AMD 211 00:15:54,959 --> 00:16:00,880 sayanara ATI branding took its first performance crown in some time with the 212 00:15:58,959 --> 00:16:04,800 HD7970. I think we can go B tier, but I also 213 00:16:03,040 --> 00:16:10,240 think I'm being kind of generous here. GTX 700, on the other hand, can be best 214 00:16:07,120 --> 00:16:12,240 summarized as more Kepler. Due to the 215 00:16:10,240 --> 00:16:16,320 slowdown of Moore's law, NVIDIA was stuck with the same 28 nmter 216 00:16:14,160 --> 00:16:22,399 manufacturing process and Kepler architecture, but this time bigger, much 217 00:16:19,279 --> 00:16:24,399 bigger. That GK 110 chip that was 218 00:16:22,399 --> 00:16:28,480 exclusive to enterprise compute cards last time around finally made its first 219 00:16:26,560 --> 00:16:34,320 appearance for consumers in the form of the GTX Titan. And boy was that thing 220 00:16:31,120 --> 00:16:36,240 ever interesting. Depending on who you 221 00:16:34,320 --> 00:16:41,120 asked at the time, NVIDIA would tell you that Titan was intended for gamers or 222 00:16:38,560 --> 00:16:45,920 for professionals or for somewhere in between. And it did have two key 223 00:16:43,199 --> 00:16:51,839 advantages over GeForce GPUs. namely, it had a whopping 6 gigabytes of high-speed 224 00:16:48,639 --> 00:16:53,120 GDDDR5 memory and eight times better 225 00:16:51,839 --> 00:16:57,839 double precision floatingoint performance. But then in subsequent 226 00:16:55,360 --> 00:17:02,000 iterations of these Titan cards, those advantages would ultimately disappear. 227 00:16:59,759 --> 00:17:06,079 And in retrospect, I think the Titan project was simply a way for NVIDIA to 228 00:17:03,759 --> 00:17:12,880 test gamers tolerance for much higher prices. $1,000 for a GPU. We said, "Oh, 229 00:17:10,640 --> 00:17:18,000 young Lionus, you ain't seen nothing yet." Anywh who, the definitely for 230 00:17:16,160 --> 00:17:23,439 gamers real flagships for this generation were the GTX 780, which 231 00:17:20,319 --> 00:17:27,039 managed a 25% increase over last gen for 232 00:17:23,439 --> 00:17:29,120 $150 more, and the 780 Ti, which came 233 00:17:27,039 --> 00:17:33,679 only 6 months later and managed a similar performance jump for only a 234 00:17:31,200 --> 00:17:38,559 marginal increase in price. Meanwhile, AMD's code name Hawaii cards were hot 235 00:17:36,720 --> 00:17:42,240 and loud with the bigger issue being that they were plagued by driver issues 236 00:17:40,480 --> 00:17:46,880 and wouldn't really catch up in terms of performance for a couple more years. 7 237 00:17:45,200 --> 00:17:54,000 series then comes away with the score the 6 series should have gotten a tier. 238 00:17:50,960 --> 00:17:57,280 As for GTX 800 series, 239 00:17:54,000 --> 00:18:00,559 once again, it did exist, but instead of 240 00:17:57,280 --> 00:18:02,640 more Kepler, the theme was less Kepler 241 00:18:00,559 --> 00:18:08,400 in your laptop. Dt tier. Now, there were plans actually 242 00:18:05,840 --> 00:18:12,640 for a desktop line of 800 series cards apparently, but they were intended to be 243 00:18:10,400 --> 00:18:19,120 based on NVIDIA's new Maxwell architecture, which would instead make 244 00:18:15,280 --> 00:18:21,440 its debut as the GTX 900 series. Maxwell 245 00:18:19,120 --> 00:18:25,919 is notable for a number of reasons. It was the second time that NVIDIA passed a 246 00:18:23,440 --> 00:18:31,520 mid-tier GPU off as a flagship. It was the third desktop generation that was 247 00:18:28,160 --> 00:18:33,840 stuck on TSMC's 28 nanmter process. 248 00:18:31,520 --> 00:18:38,160 Moore's law was looking well and truly dead at this time. And it was the last 249 00:18:36,400 --> 00:18:43,280 time that we would see a new generation launch on a close enough to yearly 250 00:18:40,880 --> 00:18:51,360 cycle. Impressively though, Maxwell offered a 30% performance increase for 251 00:18:46,000 --> 00:18:54,640 wait less. Yes, the 980 was a $550 card 252 00:18:51,360 --> 00:18:56,799 at launch, $100 less than the 780. On 253 00:18:54,640 --> 00:19:02,160 top of that, it was AMD's turn to phone it in with a rebrand of their 290X to 254 00:18:59,200 --> 00:19:06,480 390X, leaving NVIDIA essentially alone at the top of the performance charts. It 255 00:19:04,400 --> 00:19:13,200 was also so efficient that for the first time ever, NVIDIA used the same desktop 256 00:19:09,440 --> 00:19:14,799 GPU dies in 900 series laptops. They had 257 00:19:13,200 --> 00:19:19,120 some interesting ideas for how to use their performance leadership. One was 258 00:19:16,799 --> 00:19:23,679 dynamic super resolution, which was possible to do before, but simplified 259 00:19:21,679 --> 00:19:28,080 and allowed you to render your game at a higher than native resolution, then 260 00:19:25,600 --> 00:19:32,480 downsample it for a smoother appearance. Another was to push gaming on 261 00:19:29,840 --> 00:19:38,720 highresolution monitors and TVs. Less demanding MFAA or multi-frame 262 00:19:34,559 --> 00:19:40,720 anti-aliasing and HDMI 2.0 made 4K 60 Hz 263 00:19:38,720 --> 00:19:46,320 gaming a major marketing point for NVIDIA. But with that said, even the 264 00:19:43,600 --> 00:19:51,760 properly high-end 980 Ti that came as a $750 midcycle refresh struggled to 265 00:19:49,280 --> 00:19:56,480 deliver a playable 4K experience in AAA games. I mean, to be clear, these were 266 00:19:54,000 --> 00:20:00,799 fast cards and shockingly efficient considering that the transistors were 267 00:19:57,919 --> 00:20:05,039 the same size as Kepler, but NVIDIA set our expectations maybe a little bit too 268 00:20:02,799 --> 00:20:09,760 high. Notable too from this generation was the introduction of VXGI, even if 269 00:20:07,840 --> 00:20:14,080 Voxal global illumination would ultimately give way to path-raced RTX 270 00:20:12,080 --> 00:20:18,240 lighting, which we'll get to later. And finally, it's impossible to talk about 271 00:20:16,080 --> 00:20:23,600 this generation without bringing up the 3 1/2 gig GTX 970 debacle for which 272 00:20:21,600 --> 00:20:28,240 NVIDIA eventually had to settle a class action lawsuit. The cards did have 4 273 00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:34,240 gigs of RAM as advertised. It's just that only 7/8 of it was actually 274 00:20:30,720 --> 00:20:36,000 accessible at full speed. Whoops. Yeah, 275 00:20:34,240 --> 00:20:42,000 you know what? It's still A tier in my book. Though maybe not as A tier as the 276 00:20:39,360 --> 00:20:48,080 GTX 10 series. We finally got a new manufacturing node, guys. Let's go. 277 00:20:45,039 --> 00:20:51,679 TSMC's 16 nmter process meant a healthy 278 00:20:48,080 --> 00:20:53,840 bump in well, everything. At launch, 279 00:20:51,679 --> 00:20:57,440 gamers could pick up a top tier card. Sort of. They did that thing again where 280 00:20:55,440 --> 00:21:02,960 they withheld the biggest die for a TI refresh with a very respectable 60% 281 00:21:00,640 --> 00:21:07,840 increase in performance for 600 bucks while drawing less power and producing 282 00:21:05,200 --> 00:21:12,640 less heat. 10 series also gave us our first taste of GPU Boost 3.0, which 283 00:21:11,120 --> 00:21:17,440 could best be described as self-overclocking, allowing the GPU to 284 00:21:14,960 --> 00:21:21,760 scale its clock speed well beyond base clock depending on available power and 285 00:21:19,280 --> 00:21:27,520 thermal headroom. For their part, AMD's flagship RX 480 was the value king at 286 00:21:25,600 --> 00:21:32,400 the time, but thanks to NVIDIA's investments in GPU encoding and the 287 00:21:29,679 --> 00:21:39,039 explosion of online game streaming, it was well overshadowed by the mid-range 288 00:21:35,280 --> 00:21:41,280 GTX 1060. Which one, you ask? Ah, good 289 00:21:39,039 --> 00:21:46,159 question. In another example of NVIDIA using extremely misleading product 290 00:21:43,200 --> 00:21:50,320 names, the 3 gig and 6 gig version of the 1060 have performance differences 291 00:21:48,159 --> 00:21:55,679 that go way beyond their frame buffer size. For shame 292 00:21:53,120 --> 00:22:00,559 three and four-way SLI were dropped, as was SLI altogether on mid-range cards, 293 00:21:58,400 --> 00:22:06,320 but NVIDIA did introduce a high bandwidth bridge as a bit of a swan song 294 00:22:03,360 --> 00:22:10,640 to two-way SLI. Speaking of bandwidth, the new DisplayPort 1.4 4 standard also 295 00:22:08,880 --> 00:22:15,760 continued the trend of catering towards high resolution, high refresh rate, and 296 00:22:13,120 --> 00:22:21,840 shiny new high dynamic range monitors. 4K 120 Hz HDR, anyone? I mean, not at 297 00:22:19,360 --> 00:22:25,440 that time, but it was so close. We could smell it. I think I'm going to go S tier 298 00:22:23,840 --> 00:22:28,960 here. It's just too bad that in hindsight, it turns out that what I 299 00:22:27,039 --> 00:22:35,760 smelled was the wet fart that was around the next corner. Alongside the 300 00:22:31,200 --> 00:22:39,280 confusingly named RTX 20/GTX16 301 00:22:35,760 --> 00:22:41,360 series came ray tracing. I don't know if 302 00:22:39,280 --> 00:22:46,240 I can remember the last time gamers paid so much for so few frames in return. 303 00:22:44,559 --> 00:22:50,400 Remember that really cool marble demo that NVIDIA put together to show off the 304 00:22:47,840 --> 00:22:55,039 capabilities of these new cards. Yeah, that ran at 25 frames per second at 305 00:22:53,280 --> 00:23:01,679 720p. And with these capabilities came a $100 306 00:22:57,919 --> 00:23:04,240 price hike. That's right, $700 for a, 307 00:23:01,679 --> 00:23:09,520 yes, they did it again, mid-tier GPU diet launch with the proper big TI one 308 00:23:06,960 --> 00:23:12,880 coming later. After the huge leap forward last generation, NVIDIA's 309 00:23:11,280 --> 00:23:18,480 performance gains in traditional games cooled to a more tepid 30-ish%. But I 310 00:23:15,679 --> 00:23:22,880 mean, hey, alongside our ray tracing RT course, we got Tensor course for cool 311 00:23:20,960 --> 00:23:27,039 machine learning accelerated features like background noise removal and deep 312 00:23:25,039 --> 00:23:31,840 learning super sampling, which kind of sucked at launch, but is like freaking 313 00:23:29,360 --> 00:23:36,320 amazing. Now, it's kind of wild seeing what a long game NVIDIA plays sometimes. 314 00:23:34,080 --> 00:23:40,240 Ray tracing is still making its way into the mainstream gaming space, but they 315 00:23:38,000 --> 00:23:44,000 were so sure it was the future of immersive, realistic in-game lighting 316 00:23:42,320 --> 00:23:48,799 that they went as far as to change their whole gaming brand. It's too bad the RTX 317 00:23:47,039 --> 00:23:53,760 20 series never ended up being capable of powering full-fledged rayraced games. 318 00:23:51,440 --> 00:24:00,640 Newer demos like RTX Racer and the new RTX Portal look amazing, but they only 319 00:23:57,520 --> 00:24:03,200 really run on newer cards. and RTX Remix 320 00:24:00,640 --> 00:24:08,159 looks set to rewrite the history books for people who skipped RTX 20 series. 321 00:24:06,320 --> 00:24:14,960 Sorry buddy, you're gonna have to be Ctier is what I would say about the 322 00:24:11,120 --> 00:24:18,559 RTX30 series in hindsight, but man, at 323 00:24:14,960 --> 00:24:20,159 launch this generation was lit. Gamers 324 00:24:18,559 --> 00:24:24,080 were so hyped to get their hands on these cards that our announcement 325 00:24:21,679 --> 00:24:29,360 coverage was the most viewed GPU announcement video we have ever done. 326 00:24:26,720 --> 00:24:34,400 The comments were so full of hope. More than double the total transistors and 327 00:24:31,440 --> 00:24:41,279 CUDA cores at the top end. The 3070 was outperforming the 2080 Ti at less than 328 00:24:37,600 --> 00:24:43,919 half the price. What? Too bad it was not 329 00:24:41,279 --> 00:24:48,559 to be. After the initial availability issues dampened our enthusiasm, the 330 00:24:46,080 --> 00:24:53,039 subsequent crypto mining boom completely dissolved. Secondary sellers, 331 00:24:50,960 --> 00:24:59,200 they're called scalpers, drove those coveted $500 RTX 3070s and 332 00:24:57,279 --> 00:25:05,360 every other card this generation to prices beyond double their MSRP. And 333 00:25:02,400 --> 00:25:09,120 there they stayed. I mean, on the plus side, AMD returned to competitive form 334 00:25:07,520 --> 00:25:14,000 and was able to offer similar performance at lower prices, unless it 335 00:25:11,919 --> 00:25:18,720 came to real-time ray traced lighting. And then, I mean, they too were shipping 336 00:25:15,919 --> 00:25:24,480 cards by the boatload to Cryptoarm. So, boo AMD as well. SLI also officially b 337 00:25:22,320 --> 00:25:30,559 us farewell at this stop in our journey, but we got to say hello to PCIe Gen 4, a 338 00:25:27,679 --> 00:25:35,679 stop gap 12 pin power connector, and support for direct storage, which allows 339 00:25:32,720 --> 00:25:39,279 your GPU and your SSD to talk directly, basically eliminating loading times, 340 00:25:37,600 --> 00:25:42,880 assuming any games ever show up with support for it. As for our tier 341 00:25:41,279 --> 00:25:47,120 assignment, I feel like we need to kind of split this one up. For anyone who got 342 00:25:45,200 --> 00:25:53,200 one of these legitimately ray tracing capable cards for MSRP, 30 series is an 343 00:25:49,919 --> 00:25:55,039 easy A. No, you know what? S tier. S 344 00:25:53,200 --> 00:26:00,159 tier. It delivered on the promises of last gen, but did it at attractive 345 00:25:56,960 --> 00:26:03,039 prices for everyone else though, I think 346 00:26:00,159 --> 00:26:08,559 a C is pretty generous. Oh, bringing us to the present day. Technically, 347 00:26:05,919 --> 00:26:12,559 NVIDIA's 40 series offerings aren't all out yet, but based on what we've seen so 348 00:26:10,960 --> 00:26:16,960 far, we can make some pretty safe guesses. In the coming months, we'll 349 00:26:14,559 --> 00:26:20,159 probably see some unlaunches. Just kidding, that was weird. Probably won't 350 00:26:18,480 --> 00:26:25,679 happen again. More likely, we'll see some yes launches, fleshing out the 351 00:26:22,080 --> 00:26:28,320 lineup with presumably RTX 4060 and 352 00:26:25,679 --> 00:26:32,240 4050s of some sort. And we also wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of new 353 00:26:30,080 --> 00:26:37,039 Halo card launch farther down the road, similar to how the 3090 Ti arrived a 354 00:26:34,880 --> 00:26:40,640 year and a half after its non-TI brother. We're going to have the ones 355 00:26:38,400 --> 00:26:46,000 that are out linked down below. Similar to last generation, we saw a pretty nice 356 00:26:43,200 --> 00:26:51,279 40% increase in performance. It's just that unlike last gen, prices didn't stay 357 00:26:49,200 --> 00:26:56,559 the same. They didn't even increase a little. They increased to a degree that 358 00:26:53,840 --> 00:27:04,400 I I don't think we've ever seen before. Like really, NVIDIA from $700 the 359 00:27:00,320 --> 00:27:06,159 previous two generations to $1,200. 360 00:27:04,400 --> 00:27:10,000 I think you guys got hooked on that pandemic Kool-Aid and haven't figured 361 00:27:08,000 --> 00:27:15,600 out that outside of the really wacky buyers who have always existed buying 362 00:27:12,640 --> 00:27:19,520 Titan Z's and the like. Gamers are not going to spend that kind of money to 363 00:27:17,039 --> 00:27:25,760 play video games. Hence, the shelves full of 4080s and 4070 Ti. For their 364 00:27:23,360 --> 00:27:31,120 part, AMD has retained a strong value proposition, but hasn't been able to 365 00:27:27,520 --> 00:27:33,520 match the insanity of the RTX 4090. and 366 00:27:31,120 --> 00:27:39,360 we got to meet a new power connector again. The 12volt high power connector 367 00:27:36,559 --> 00:27:42,799 has been a hot topic of conversation. It theoretically offers some cool benefits 368 00:27:41,039 --> 00:27:47,200 like allowing the GPU and power supply to communicate their power requirements 369 00:27:44,559 --> 00:27:50,640 and capabilities to each other. But uh with all the melted connectors and 370 00:27:48,960 --> 00:27:55,360 adapters that got me'd all over the internet, it's been a bit of a PR 371 00:27:52,480 --> 00:27:59,919 nightmare for NVIDIA who hit back saying that user error was the problem with 372 00:27:57,919 --> 00:28:03,279 pretty much everything that happened, which may actually be true. Please do 373 00:28:02,000 --> 00:28:09,120 make sure you plug things in all the way. In summary, if we're going by the 374 00:28:05,840 --> 00:28:13,679 kilogram, 40 series offers a fine value, 375 00:28:09,120 --> 00:28:15,679 but we aren't. So, Btier at best, and 376 00:28:13,679 --> 00:28:20,640 I'm generously baking in some future price drops once NVIDIA regains their 377 00:28:17,600 --> 00:28:23,120 senses. All that remains then now is for 378 00:28:20,640 --> 00:28:26,559 you to come at me, bro. Seriously, we couldn't get into the nitty-gritty of 379 00:28:24,559 --> 00:28:30,320 performance or talk about every new feature for all these generations. So, 380 00:28:28,320 --> 00:28:34,000 let me know on our forum or in the comments down below if you agree or 381 00:28:32,320 --> 00:28:37,679 disagree with our reasoning. What's your tier list and how does this video rank 382 00:28:36,000 --> 00:28:42,159 for you? If you guys enjoyed this video, you'll also probably like the full 383 00:28:39,279 --> 00:28:47,120 review we did of the RTX 470 Ti. That is unless you bought one, in which case you 384 00:28:44,000 --> 00:28:47,120 might not enjoy that review that