How are those gaming performance numbers measured? The 4K results in particular seem quite low compared to those listed in the 2080 Ti review, and most other performance numbers I've seen for this card.
islandwalker :
The only glaring omission here is the lack of a VirtualLink/USB-C port for future VR headsets. While there aren’t yet any headsets available that take advantage of this port, it exists on most Nvidia 20-series graphics cards, so it might be a feature you’ll regret missing out on in the future, should you delve into the realm of VR gaming.
While I agree that it might be a good thing to add for convenience, it's unlikely to be a requirement for VR devices anytime soon. So far, VirtualLink only appears on Nvidia's 20-series cards, and is only common on the high-end ones. Almost no RTX 2060s bother to include the port, so it seems unlikely to appear on their more mid-range to lower-end offerings either. It will be years before a reasonable portion of gaming systems have VirtualLink. VR headset manufacturers are not going to limit their audience to those with support for that connection when so few people have it, so it's reasonable to assume that they will continue to support connecting their devices via multiple cables, as they do now. The cable coming from the headset may switch to USB-C, but a little box converting that to separate USB, video and power cables will likely continue to be included.
Of course, this system doesn't appear to have HDMI in back either, so one might need wires running around to the front if the headset doesn't support DisplayPort. And the limited number of USB ports might be more of a concern with existing headsets. The Oculus Rift uses 3 to 4 USB ports for the headset and tracking cameras, though that will likely change with their next-generation devices. At least the system has PS/2 though, in case someone has a 90s-era mouse that they want to connect to their enthusiast-level gaming system. : D
islandwalker :
The days of the massive tower PC may be numbered. Both Nvidia and AMD are de-emphasizing multi-card gaming setups, due in part to limited game support. Storage is getting denser and cheaper seemingly by the day. And if Corsair’s One line of compact PCs are any indication, bulky cooling setups with lots of fans are no longer necessary to keep the temperatures of high-powered components under control.
On the other hand, it's becoming harder to shrink components and improve efficiency of chips, so unless there's some major breakthrough in chip design, eventually we're going to reach the point where if you want more performance, you might need to go larger. Although I suppose if the parts are not getting significantly faster from one year to the next, upgrading an already high-end system might be less of a concern. And if the system isn't built around being user-serviceable, you can get away with more compact designs like this. That first photo is a bit misleading though, since initially I thought the system might have fancy gull-wing doors with hydraulics for easy access to the internals. Instead, it's quite the opposite, and accessing anything inside is significantly more complicated than with a typical case.
Price-wise, eh... It's rather high for a gaming system, but then again I would consider the 2080 Ti and 9900K to be overpriced themselves, so it stands to reason that anyone willing to put them in a gaming system might not care so much about paying a bit extra for it. I can see where the others are coming from about the pricing though, as it should be possible to put together a build offering the same level of performance for significantly less, so long as we ditch the small form factor. Sure, we're also not using a water-cooled graphics card, but you shouldn't need a water-cooled card in a regular ATX case. So yeah, you're paying a lot for the form factor. It's cool that they managed to pack that level of hardware into such a small case, but ultimately, how much benefit does a small case provide for a desktop PC?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram