elmor Posted August 18, 2016 Share Posted August 18, 2016 I don't see what difference that makes All previous Titan's were ref with AIB stickers and very similar/ the same MHz Yes but that means the vendors still sell the products and have samples. As it is right now Nvidia is excluding everyone else, including distributors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted August 18, 2016 Share Posted August 18, 2016 I don't see what difference that makes All previous Titan's were ref with AIB stickers and very similar/ the same MHz Previous TITAN: vendors had branded cards. Current TITAN: vendors have no branded cards. It's only interesting to try to aim for OC marketing if you have branded cards (even if it's just a sticker). Man this idea would be incredible. Imagine being able to get globals with a 1070, 1060. I was also thinking the other day, AMD has behind now for so long isnt it time we maybe split amd and nvidia globals. Or find a way to make amd cards relevant in globals again. We should never adjust points based on a companies performance but this has been going on now for years. AMD has some really nice priced gpus, getting them back involved with globals would help so much. It almost doesnt make sense for them to compete for the same global points because they are so far behind. It would be so cool if we were all benching rx480's or something similar. I wish I could afford a titan x but I just cant. I would love to bench one. Hmmm ... maybe vendor globals is something to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strong Island Posted August 18, 2016 Share Posted August 18, 2016 Previous TITAN: vendors had branded cards. Current TITAN: vendors have no branded cards. It's only interesting to try to aim for OC marketing if you have branded cards (even if it's just a sticker). Hmmm ... maybe vendor globals is something to consider. ya I mean I hate making suggestions like that sometimes because I honestly dont know how it could all work. But opening up amd could help so much. Nowadays when trying to plan some global points, it's like amd doesnt even cross your mind. We are missing out on so many pretty cool gpu's. Especially since elmor and der8auer put out a ton of info on rx480. I still love Rauf's idea but just thought it was something worth mentioning. I guess it would be a problem if amd caught up one day. But if they could possibly be separate then it might not be such a big deal. I would grab a rx480 right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted August 18, 2016 Share Posted August 18, 2016 Am I being thick or too simplistic? Why does any of that matter? It's a legit card, available to anyone with the money. Same as any other previous card. Marketing doesn't factor into my considerations as to whether something is worthy or not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rauf Posted August 18, 2016 Author Share Posted August 18, 2016 Why was nothing reallllly said during the reign of previous Titans? Why now, after a few weeks and results from a few benchers on air/water? Because the community at hwbot is mostly made up from old overclockers who like things to stay the way they are. Whenever someone suggests something they are met with: "it has always been this way", or "can't be done" or the worst one, which is absolute silence a.k.a. no one cares. I mean, this is just the third time I bring this idea up... But if you are persistent sooner or later you get through The how to implement it needs to be thoroughly investigated. I don't think we should favour AMD to get them to make a comeback. Actually I don't think we will have to as the biggest points will never go to the latest highend cards. The lower end categories will have the majority of the submission and therefore the highest points. The key aspect in my opinion is to make 3D benching cheaper. Ideally most of the categories will evolve naturally so that each new generation of GPUs will reign in their respective category. We also need to make it so that it doesn't favour multi-gpu setups as that wouöd make it too expensive. Also we need to keep the categories to a minimum so that it doesn't kill the ranking system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickulty Posted August 18, 2016 Share Posted August 18, 2016 It's not impossible, but this will create a LOT of new global rankings. I just did a quick check with 3DMark03 and without verifying if all the graphics cards have their SP filled out correctly, there would be ~80 global rankings (instead of the 4 we have now). We'd also have to find a solution to group the older architectures that don't have the ROP/SP layout. Well, CPU rankings do go up to 96 cores... but more practical would be some grouping. There's no need for, say, a 970 to be in a different category to a 980 IMO. I don't think number of SPs should count towards it because performance per SP varies hugely with different architectures. The SP*ROP figure for a Fury X is 2x that of a 1080 for goodness sake! 5870 vs 480 is a good historical example of the pitfalls - going by ROPs alone the 480 would be one category up from the 5870 which is probably about right, going by SPs and ROPs the 5870 would be in the category above the 480! ROP count alone is not a perfect leveller but it's a pretty good one, it'd be simple to implement and would achieve the goal of opening up 3D globals to people on tight (even extremely tight) budgets. Newer generation products would still have a big advantage in their class but it would still be lessened compared to the current situation and in 1, 2, 3-4 and 5-8 ROP rankings it seems unlikely there will be any new products so they would end up like 1-core and 3-core CPU rankings. As for older architectures, just group them all under whatever the lowest category is (say, 1 ROP)? At that point they're so old, and faster cards are so cheap, it can't possibly be pricing anyone out of global rankings. BTW, IMO there shouldn't be a need for separate AMD and Nvidia rankings. If you classify products by ROPs then while there are some outliers (Fury X beating a 980 in the 64 ROP class, for example) everything is generally pretty close and I'm not sure it'd favour either. Nvidia's halo strategy means they will probably continue to have the fastest card most of the time but once that's kicked to the 65+ ROP rankings the rest of the competition between gpu designers will be very close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeropluszero Posted August 19, 2016 Share Posted August 19, 2016 Am I being thick or too simplistic? Why does any of that matter? It's a legit card, available to anyone with the money. Same as any other previous card. Marketing doesn't factor into my considerations as to whether something is worthy or not I completely agree Kenny. I dont see what the big deal is. Cost of top scores has always, and will always be high, unless you're vendor sponsored, and even then you still spend big. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 Regarding the AMD/NVIDIA split up. The reason why @Strong Island's idea resonates with me is because it's a separation which is more closer to how people segment graphics cards in real life. No one evaluates or buys a card based on the SP or ROP count. Mainly because it's not something that is really comparable across vendors and architectures. It would be like using a metric like pipeline length for processors (or any other metric related to architecture design). People do separate AMD and Nvidia in their segmentation. I agree it's less 'clean' or 'technical', but in this case I would prefer a more real-world segmentation. Just my opinion though, @Christian Ney has final word on this matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rauf Posted August 20, 2016 Author Share Posted August 20, 2016 If we have both amd and nvidia ranking it will be double the amuont of rankings. That will probably be problematic. I have previously suggested we could categorize into low end, mid end, high end and ultra high end. Might be easier and more "fair" as it reflects real world performance at the time they are released. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 I have previously suggested we could categorize into low end, mid end, high end and ultra high end. Might be easier and more "fair" as it reflects real world performance at the time they are released. I do like this, for exact the reason you gave, but I see it as a separation without the existing leaderboard. It is GLOBAL because it is just that Silly expensive stuff still wins, but maybe more limelight for the midrange... the stuff that actually sells in volume Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickulty Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 I have previously suggested we could categorize into low end, mid end, high end and ultra high end. Might be easier and more "fair" as it reflects real world performance at the time they are released. I defy you to think of a better way way of doing that than ROP count Other than manual categorisation which would become the subject of endless arguments. Regarding the AMD/NVIDIA split up. The reason why @Strong Island's idea resonates with me is because it's a separation which is more closer to how people segment graphics cards in real life. No one evaluates or buys a card based on the SP or ROP count. Mainly because it's not something that is really comparable across vendors and architectures. It would be like using a metric like pipeline length for processors (or any other metric related to architecture design). People do separate AMD and Nvidia in their segmentation. I agree it's less 'clean' or 'technical', but in this case I would prefer a more real-world segmentation. Just my opinion though, @Christian Ney has final word on this matter. The thing is there's no reason to think AMD might not also release an overpriced halo card, and the moment that happens we're back to square one. The Fury X still isn't all that cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolp1974 Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 I feel it would be good to see AMD and NVIDIA seperated, and i know globals are awarded generally to the latest and greatest but in this instance could they be awarded to both sides?? Or give half to both. Wouldn't it be a pita to categorise with a class idea, "low" too "ultra"?? An Amd card may start in mid end and after a year of driver optimisations could be classed as a high end card. Splitting and awarding globals to both sides would also enable a cheaper alternative to getting said globals instead of the points always going to the lucky few who can afford the top Nvidia cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Alberino Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 (edited) I have a strange idea but it's based on the big problems of Titans: Price... What about making launch price based categories? I say launch price because then they go lower after some time and it would be a mess to control that... I say something like: - Below 250 USD - 250 to 499 USD - 500 to 749 USD - Above 750 USD 1080Ti will possibly be priced at more than 750 USD since GTX 1080 FE price was 700 USD, so it will be in the same category than Titan X Pascal, and also in same performance category... EDIT: Maybe to not make so much changes to actual systems and not give global points to low end cards (below 250 USD) since like some said, it won't be really global, make two big categories: Under U$S 750 and above U$S 750 (This price obviously can be changed but it's the price between GTX 1080 and possible GTX 1080Ti Price) Edited August 20, 2016 by Alan_Alberino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 What about adding more search tabs alongside "region" for "AMD" "nVidia?" The globals can be separated by user interest.... ie... the user has to be interested in the search to do it and see the results Midrange card + expensive CPU is still a problem if the problem is cost. What if threshold is $750 and somewhere is selling card X for $745? (etc etc etc) What about special offers that are in region A and not region B? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Alberino Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 What if threshold is $750 and somewhere is selling card X for $745? (etc etc etc) What about special offers that are in region A and not region B? It's the price that AMD or Nvidia says when they launch the card... Nvidia said 700 dollars for GTX 1080 FE, that's the price to consider for every GTX 1080 in rankings... AMD said U$S 240 for RX 480 so that's the price for every RX 480 in rankings... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 It's the price that AMD or Nvidia says when they launch the card... Nvidia said 700 dollars for GTX 1080 FE, that's the price to consider for every GTX 1080 in rankings... AMD said U$S 240 for RX 480 so that's the price for every RX 480 in rankings... Sorry, I missed the first bit of your post I skimmed it too fast. Would the classifications drop as the official price drops? do the HWB servers have the power to re-class some/most/cards when that happens without the server being on its arse for two days? What about EOL cards? With enough CPU power, GTX580 can probably still rank alright globally in 3D01/ AM3. (if this is going to work, ALL possible situations must have an answer in place) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickulty Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 (edited) I really really don't think an AMD ranking would be a complete solution. The cheapest I can find a Fury X in the UK right now is £375 on ebay which really isn't all that accessible so if the goal is to make it possible to get global points without massive outlay then that wouldn't work. Maybe in the inevitable Matrox, SiS, 3DFX, S3 etc rankings but most of those will only run aquamark and the super early 3dmarks (not sure where 3dmark01 went?), plus that hardware is getting rare and it becomes a test of who can get the drivers to work. The problem with launch price is right now it's not clear what the launch prices are on some cards. Looking forward to the arguments when some card has an MSRP of $499 but an FE price (nvidia) or price it's actually available at (AMD) of $549? I wouldn't Also things like the 7970 and 280X are literally the same card to the point their rankings are in the process of being merged and launched at totally different prices. Also ROP count would help older cards stay relevant and worthwhile OC'ing because the lower ROP counts are obselete, same as how no-one makes a 1-core CPU. Launch price would make every single older card obselete the moment something else launched in that price range. It would still be better than the current situation and something I'd be happier to see than just a vendor split but I think it has issues. Maybe I'm biased because I own a radeon 7000, which is the fastest 1-ROP model, but really I just really like the idea of people being able to buy a truckload of dirt-cheap old cards because that was how I started out. Nice and relaxing voltmodding a £5 card that you don't give a crap about, rather than a £50+ card Cheapaz chips is good for that reason, but having a system that gave globals for ancient cards would be like having a constant, even cheaper cheapaz chips. Edited August 20, 2016 by mickulty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 Standard top-end cards were £400 for several years. Longer than I expected them to be. From 6800 series to Fermi 5! Calling a £375 card a poor price for global is wrong, IMO. I would be so happy if prices went back to that. nVidia and AMD pricing is at least global. After that, it becomes a regional lottery (in before Ronaldo complains about S.A. availability and prices) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Alberino Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 Sorry, I missed the first bit of your post I skimmed it too fast. Would the classifications drop as the official price drops? I say launch price because then they go lower after some time and it would be a mess to control that... Launch price would always be the price for the card for the ranking, even if it drops later, that's why I said launch price and not actual price... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 I don't think works long-term. No matter how obsolete the e.g... 780Ti gets, it will always be ranked against the latest top-end, but it would compare well against the mid-range of the next gen. I am still not reading posts properly, clearly. Fan noise + music + forums.... bad mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elkim Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 I like Rauf's and Strong Island thoughs. I also think, that good way of thinking about HWBOT is making benching more affordable to everyone, because above of all, its still kinda pay to win, even more these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rauf Posted August 20, 2016 Author Share Posted August 20, 2016 Long term is not an issue since it's globals we're talking. We don't reclassify an old 4 core CPU as a 2 core just because there is a new 2 core that performs as well as the old 4 core one. You want globals in high-end/mid-end whatever, buy a last gen GPU. You want to bench for longer lasting point, go hw-points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 @Rauf, how do you feel about using MSRP at launch as metric? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickulty Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 Standard top-end cards were £400 for several years. Longer than I expected them to be. From 6800 series to Fermi 5! Calling a £375 card a poor price for global is wrong, IMO. I would be so happy if prices went back to that. It'd definitely be a massive improvement over £1200 but it would still kinda suck having to chose between getting a decent amount of hardware to play with and only benching one thing every few months but getting more points. I'm also concerned that vendor division relies on having a situation where AMD don't have a superexpensive halo card which I'm not sure will always be the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Alberino Posted August 20, 2016 Share Posted August 20, 2016 I don't think works long-term. No matter how obsolete the e.g... 780Ti gets, it will always be ranked against the latest top-end, but it would compare well against the mid-range of the next gen. I am still not reading posts properly, clearly. Fan noise + music + forums.... bad mix. Now 780Ti competes in globals against Titan X Pascal, so it's the same than now, I think it's the best way to separe graphics card without changing too much the actual system and making a complicated system without ROPs or similar things that lot of new users don't know and will complicate the understanding of HWBOT rankings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.