Sure about that? Anandtech has the Geforce 1080Ti smashing 100fps.
And Anandtech is still one of the most credible sites on the internet, more so than that link you provided which I have never heard of. :P
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11717/the-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-and-56-review/14

That is the general consensus.

And with the price of electricity trending towards 43cents kwh here... That could cost a fair bit of coin over the course of a year.

AMD did come up short with Ryzen as well. It looses in clock rate and single threaded performance remember.

But what AMD did do is provide "Good enough" performance at the right price, right power consumption and gave us more CPU cores across their entire lineup... And they were rewarded for that. And rightfully so.
They shook up the entire CPU market.

Vega however gets close-enough to nVidia in terms of performance, but consumes a crap-ton more power and at the end of the day, isn't dramatically cheaper.

I am of the firm belief that there is no such thing as a "bad product" but just a bad price... And Vega is priced badly.

But with the prior rumors, the performance level of Vega was slightly better than expected, many thought Vega wouldn't beat the Geforce 1080.

I prefer a good TN over a Bad IPS/VA.
But I would opt for IPS (IPS Glow, slow response) every day of the week over VA (Ghosting, but amazing blacks.).

A decent 8-bit/10-bit quality TN can shit all over a 6-bit IPS/VA in almost every aspect except for viewing angles.

That is *if* you can match the clocks.
Somtimes you need to pump extra volts in, which blows that wattage figure out.

Vega isn't what I would call a "failure" but it is worst than expected. It's just badly priced.

Hopefully with Navi AMD can step things up a little, but I have my doubts, especially with Volta looming.

The Radeon Group got restructured only a couple years back... And GPU's take years in the development pipeline, so we probably still need to wait a few more years to see the benefits of the Radeon Group being independent again.

I doubt RTG having 'pseudo independence' will bring any benefits ...  

The biggest problem RTG faces is arguably a software issue rather than hardware ... 

AMD needs to pay the biggest studio's to use their technology in order to win in benchmarks ... (The hope is that AMD should get the next GTA, AC, COD, Elder Scrolls, Batman, Bungie or Tom Clancy's 'whatever' games to sponsor their technology and keep an eye out for Square Enix Japan.) 

Anandtech only tested the game in "very high", PCGH with all options but shadows maxed out in an problematic area with much foliage.

Don't get me wrong, "very high" is a great preset for GTA 5 and the smarter choice than pulling all sliders to the right with diminishing returns... but IF you want all bells and whistles turned on in GTA 5, a 1080 TI ain't wasting its potential on a 1080p or 1440p screen.

And even if you stay at the "very high" preset, you don't get solid 60 fps in every situation with anything below a 1080 Ti in 1980x1080:

Those are 99th Percentile scores. - You do know what that is right? right?

There is room for movement between 100fps and 60fps to bolster image quality.

And let's not forget that is also a Geforce 1080Ti "Founders Edition". - It's not the fastest Geforce 1080 Ti.

Badum tish. So my last post still maintains it's relevence.

1080P is a waste with a Geforce 1080Ti. Plus GTA 5 is only one game.
There are 17,000 games on Steam.

Also.
Tom's hardware (Owned by Purch, sister site of Anandtech) is using the absolute max settings possible. And gets similar performance to Anandtech.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti,4972-3.html
"Our Grand Theft Auto V benchmark is made more demanding by the use of 4xMSAA (instead of 2x) and 4x Reflection MSAA (rather than Off). The rest of the settings are still maximized to whatever extent is possible."

But don't take my word for it:


I rest my case? Otherwise I still have another half-dozen websites to throw your way.

Of course I know what 99th Percentile scores are, but thanks for asking.

Sure there are 17,000 games on Steam, but why are you throwing these numbers around? Are all/most of these as good as GTA 5? Do they also keep you entertained for hundreds of hours on a high level?

All I'm saying is that there are some great games with a lot of content (f.e. GTA 5, The Witcher 3, Ghost Recon Wildlands, Watch Dogs 2) which can take use the extra performance of a 1080 Ti over a 1080 or 1070 even on a 1080p monitor... especially if it is a 1080p monitor with 120 Hz or above. And if some demanding games are someone's favorites, I can totally understand if he wants to play them with all bells and whistles activates (f.e. hairworks in The Witcher 3).   

I really don't get why you are getting that upset about it.

Personally I'm totally fine with my GTX 1070 for now... but if someone wants to spend extra money to enhance the experience a bit: let them.

Quality is subjective. I personally found GTA 5 to be a bore. Which is the same way I felt about every GTA game since they went 3D with GTA 3.

The 1080Ti is a waste for 1080P.
The benchmarks prove it. And ignoring the strange pricing right now... The Geforce 1070/Vega 56 is more than sufficient.

Heck I would even argue the case for the Geforce 1060 for 1080P gaming, then pocket the hundreds of dollars you save and upgrade in a year or two.

This isn't my upset face.

I honestly don't care what anyone elses purchasing decisions are.

But if someone makes a claim that I do not agree with, you can bet your ass I will argue against it.

Fact is. The evidence proves that a Geforce 1080 Ti is a waste for 1080P gaming.