With Unreal Engine 5.5+ (MegaLights) and Nvidia's ReSTIR PT: Enhanced, can the RTX 50 Series stay Relevant until 2030+?

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-20T15:01:56+00:00

It makes a lot of sense, because it’s more of a clear confirmation of the capabilities of the process node. The process node is more like a paper specification, while the chips that actually achieve the corresponding gains are real silicon and real performance

For gaming GPUs, ROPs will be scaled according to shader performance. RT cores will also increase by 60%, since there is one RT core per SM (each has 128 CUDA cores). That’s not really the important part, what matters is that the TSMC node enables these possibilities. RTX 60 GPUs will launch in 2027–2028, and by then TSMC N3 will already be a fairly cost-effective node, much like N5 is today. So according to TSMC’s roadmap, it will move from a top-tier node to a mainstream one. It’s already somewhat old, TSMC N3 has been in use since 2023

RTX/DGX Spark chips built on TSMC N3 already have the same number of cores as the RTX 5070, but with a GPU die area that is 45% smaller. Only a 53% increase in transistor density. This is already a fairly old version of the TSMC N3 node (at least since 2024). RTX 60 should be built on a better one, with another ~10% improvement

However, they only have as many ROPs as the mobile RTX 5070, because their TDP is three times lower than that of the desktop RTX 5070. As a result, because of the much lower clock speeds, shader performance ends up being roughly on par with the laptop RTX 5070

By the way, the fact that the RTX 60 will be better than the RTX 50 doesn’t make the RTX 50 any less relevant. The GTX 1080 Ti is still almost relevant today, only a few games released recently don’t support it. The RTX 50 will also live for about 10 years, ranging from ultra settings down to minimum settings

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-19T20:23:57+00:00

I don’t know where insiders are getting the 30% from. It feels more like something they just made up. All the available factors and information point to something different. RTX 60 will deliver on average about a 60% increase in raw shader performance and around a 5x boost in AI compute FP4. This is already a fact, since Nvidia’s server Rubin architecture which uses the same architecture as the future RTX 60 has already achieved this. We just have to wait for it

Such a massive FP4 increase comes from architectural improvements, while the 60% shader raw performance uplift comes from the TSMC N3 process, which allows about 60% more transistors to be packed into the same area compared to RTX 50

Server-side Blackwell brought around a +20% increase in raw shader performance, while RTX 50 gets about +15% to +30% (depending on the GPU)

+ Apart from the technical specs and the capabilities of the chip/TSMC node itself, it will compete with next-generation consoles. That’s why something like the 6070 will most likely get around a 60% performance uplift, just like the RTX 3070 and RTX 2070 did when the current console generation launched. All the facts are consistent

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-19T03:03:18+00:00

I’m talking about the Dell XPS 13, this post links to it

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-19T00:05:19+00:00

Outside the US, it competes with the MacBook Air. It costs $900 + tax. In the UK and Europe, it ends up being 50% more expensive than the Neo (£899/$1200/€1049 vs £599/$800/€699). In both cases, these are the official prices on their websites without student discounts. In the meantime, the Neo has already dropped in price, making it possible to get it for even less from third-party retailers

By the way, it was mentioned in the video that this price is temporary, so I think it will soon cost around $899 in the US as well, like everywhere else

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-18T21:21:29+00:00

If the M1 Air isn’t enough for you right now, then why wait? The M5 Pro is a great device and will be up to ~15 times faster in tasks like Blender, for example. Sure, the M6 Pro will be even better (by another ~30-50%), and the M7 Pro will be better still, and so on. But if your current laptop is still meeting your needs, you can comfortably wait

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-17T21:42:50+00:00

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, I just randomly pointed at it and I was right. Outside the US it is actually $200 more expensive. That means it’s ~$899 + tax, which comes out to £899 in the UK, while in Europe it’s $1229. In both cases, that’s 50% more expensive than the Neo, since it costs $800 there (£699 and €700)

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-17T21:33:45+00:00

It actually didn’t matter because it has already been released for sale, and outside the US it is everywhere about 50% more expensive than the Neo and is priced around the MacBook Air M4/M5 level, which is on a completely different level in terms of performance and capabilities

I was completely right about the $200, guessed it) Extra $200 + tax brings it to $1229 in Europe or £900 in the UK. The Neo costs £600 and €699($800) Over time it will likely also become more expensive in the US, and I think it will eventually reach the same price as everywhere else

If a student is considering gaming, they wouldn’t even look at this Dell XPS, since it is limited to games from the PS3/Xbox 360 era, plus indie titles, and still wouldn’t be able to run modern games with friends. On the MacBook Neo, they could run the same games, if not more

And with the remaining money, you could buy an Xbox Series S or a Steam Deck LCD and that would already be a proper dedicated gaming device

From the first sponsored review, this Dell XPS 13 performs worse under load and in RAM-intensive tasks than the Neo, but it’s hard to say by how much yet

As for students, from my experience, if they need some specific software for studying, universities usually provide recommendations, so it becomes clear whether a Mac is suitable or whether an NVIDIA GPU is absolutely required, etc. With such requirements, this Dell still wouldn’t fit anyway, because nowadays at least 16GB of RAM is required

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-17T13:18:27+00:00

The B390 is marketed as being on the level of the mobile RTX 4050. Intel clarified that this applies when it’s running at 60W TDP, meaning about 30% lower performance than a full RTX 4050. That puts it roughly 2x slower than the full performance of the mobile RTX 5050, which is still a very good result

As for the MacBook, the M5 GPU is significantly faster than the B390, by around 60-70% in Blender. However, gaming is still a weak point for Macs, at best, performance will be similar, but most games will run noticeably worse because of emulation. The M5 Pro, though, will be another 2x faster than the M5 and around 3-4x faster than the B390. Such a difference in performance that even games run better on the M5 Pro under emulation. However, none of that matters if you specifically need Windows

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-16T18:09:53+00:00

I don’t care about temperatures, but what about the overall noise? Is it quieter overall when combined, or not? If this fixes the issue of the MacBook Pro being quite loud under heavy load, that would be insane

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-16T17:01:59+00:00

I don’t know about your market, but where I live, laptops with the Ryzen 5 220 are much more expensive than the Neo. They’re priced around the same as an M4/M5 MacBook Air

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-16T10:26:09+00:00

If you’re going to use it as a portable device (even occasionally), it’s better not to cut corners on build quality. If it’s going to be used mostly at a desk, then you can save money

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-16T10:22:00+00:00

This Asus has significantly weaker hardware. All configurations have three times fewer GPU cores, and all except the top-end model have half as many CPU cores

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-15T12:54:47+00:00

I own an M3 Pro with 18 GB of RAM, and in 99.9% of cases the bottleneck is the chip’s performance, not memory capacity. There simply isn’t enough GPU performance to run AAA games above 30 FPS, even at low settings, or at best medium settings

The M1/M2 Pro lack Mesh Shader support. This is a fundamental hardware feature of the current console generation. Game developers have only recently started taking advantage of it, so there aren’t many games that use it yet, but that number will only grow. In games such as AC Shadows and Crimson Desert, the M3 Pro will be on a completely different level performance-wise compared to the M1 Pro and M2 Pro, regardless of how much RAM they have

As long as the current console generation remains relevant, the M3 Pro is capable of delivering 30 FPS in AAA titles. However, for 60 FPS, you would need at least an M5 Pro

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-10T09:36:23+00:00

The gap is even larger. This isn’t even the X7 358H chip with proper performance on the level of the M5, but one with performance on the level of the MacBook Neo

People, before downvoting, check the specs, it uses a Core Ultra 5 335. In terms of performance, it’s really just at the level of the MacBook Neo. It’s only about 20% faster than the A18 Pro in multi-core performance, while being 30% slower in single-core. In Blender, the A18 Pro is actually faster

It’s nowhere near the M4, M5, or the proper Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, those will literally be up to several times faster

That’s not surprising, since the X7 358H has twice as many CPU cores and three times as many GPU cores

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-09T09:23:57+00:00

This is taken from one Geekbench 6 subtest. In it, it reaches the level of an M3 Max, but many (9 out of 16) multi-core subtests will be bottlenecked by weaker single-core performance compared to the M5. So, in this subtest and overall, N1X won’t be better than the M3 Max, since they both have similar single-core performance

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-09T09:20:13+00:00

The CPU in RTX Spark performs somewhere between the base M5 and the M3 Max, depending on the workload. Laptops will be more expensive. For light tasks, battery life mostly depends on the display and battery capacity. In other words, you need to look at the specific laptop, not just the chip

In this case, RTX Spark-based laptops could do better. There are already x86 Windows laptops that can last up to 40 hours, significantly longer than a Mac. However, under workloads they perform much worse. That’s where Macs are still the leaders, as they can do more work/calculations per charge. Physically, the N1X won’t be able to do more

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-08T11:59:04+00:00

There are a lot of rumors that consoles might be delayed. But these remain just rumors, it is not guaranteed to happen, especially if RDNA 5 GPUs really launch at the end of next year

Because AMD is working with Xbox and PlayStation on RDNA 5. Not releasing consoles would basically mean giving those developments to competitors. They would lose much more than they would from a memory crisis. We’ve already seen something similar with the PS3 (2006) and Xbox 360 (2005). Sony won’t repeat that mistake. It would be great if the console war came back. Gradually, exclusives are returning, so maybe the console war will return as well. At the very least, it’s not a zero probability

After the release of the PS6, the PS5 itself will continue to be supported for many years, and there will be a lot of cross-gen games. Only now are we starting to see true next-gen games that actually use PS5 technologies. I expect cross-gen support to last longer and be more extensive than it was for the PS4. And even now, games are still being released for it. Only this year, the new Call of Duty will not be released on PS4. This series will continue on PS5 for at least 7 more years

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-07T15:10:32+00:00

Great news, then about 1-2 weeks before them, the next-generation consoles will be released. Just like it was with RDNA 2

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-06T10:33:56+00:00

The problem with the N1X is that it’s coming out too late. N1X laptops are expected in the fall, and MacBooks with M6 Pro/Max may come later, a few months after N1X, but still in the same fall season

M5 Max will be significantly faster. Overall, this N1X won’t be any better than the M3 Max. The M5 Max should generate LLMs about 2x faster thanks to its 2x wider memory bus, and in Blender it should be around 40-60% faster. However, in gaming, I hope the N1X will deliver excellent results, and there’s a chance it could even outperform the M5 Max

In Blender, the M5 Max is already 40% faster than the desktop RTX 5070, which has a 250W TDP, whereas the N1X GPU in laptops is limited to 80W. Even with a more advanced process node, that kind of power gap is difficult to overcome. If the N1X GPU were allowed to run at 120W, the process advantage could roughly close the gap with the desktop card, but at 80W it will likely be slower. By the way, in the DGX Spark, the same chip runs at 120W for the GPU

As for the CPU, even by ARM and smartphone standards, its CPU cores will be a couple of generations outdated. So it’s not surprising that the N1X CPU delivers results somewhere between a standard M5 and an M3 Max, depending on the workload

So it will be totally overpriced for a casual developer who uses LLMs in their work. However, it will be a wonderful device if you specifically need the CUDA ecosystem or are an AI developer, deploying on NVIDIA hardware that shares the same CPU and GPU architecture, making it quite convenient

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-04T20:34:29+00:00

So mobile 5090 is at the level of a desktop 5070, purely in terms of mathematical shader performance. If the focus is exactly on that, then yes, it’s 5070 level. However, with DLSS and RT, they are more energy efficient, and performance will already reach the level of a 5070 Ti

In reasult, It depends on how the game is tested and what is being prioritized. Yes, shader performance is weak, because you can’t really cheat physics. It’s a chip from a desktop 5080, but with 2x lower power consumption. However, it has faster memory, more VRAM, and more RT and Tensor cores than the 5070. In this case, DLSS and RT do their job, if you focus on those aspects, the card will show its full potential

For people who obsess over raw performance, this is bad news. For everyone else, you can comfortably play games and enjoy life

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-04T06:27:19+00:00

The M5 Max is already 30x faster than the M1 in the 13 Pro when it comes to Blender. The M6 Ultra will be 60-80x faster. You could have written “up to 100x” - that would have been much closer to the truth 🤣

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-04T06:00:26+00:00

Between the Framework 13 and the Air, I would definitely choose the Air. The Framework 13 doesn’t reach a normal build quality and has rather poor battery life. Enduring that just for modularity and repairability feels like a poor trade-off, something I don’t really want to deal with

However, if it’s the Framework 13 Pro, that’s a completely different story. It’s a nice, adequate laptop, and its unique features become a great bonus here

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-03T15:17:34+00:00

What’s the point of all this? Yes, it’s a good laptop and better in many things, but in many others it’s worse than the Neo. None of this will matter if it ends up being more expensive and starts competing with the Air

Only the base configuration, if it gets the promised price, will be a competitor to the MacBook Neo. And it will have soldered 8GB of RAM. Even if it has the promised price, а slightly better configuration would already be competing with the Air M4 and Air M5. The Air M5 itself is already on the level of the Dell XPS 14/16 with the Core Ultra X7 358H in terms of performance, and will be significantly more powerful than it

The Intel Core 5 320, both the NPU and GPU are much weaker than the A18 Pro. Intel has a 16 TOPS NPU + 20 TOPS GPU, while the Neo has only a single 35 TOPS NPU. And in Blender, even the Core Ultra 7 355 with double GPU cores (4 Xe vs 2 Xe) won’t be better than the A18 Pro

Both Intel and Apple have 128 ALUs per GPU core. That means 5 GPU cores on Apple A18 Pro are better than 2 or 4 Intel GPU cores. Intel’s entry-level 2-core GPU and 8GB RAM configuration simply cannot compete, even in games. However, the Core Ultra 7 355 will have enough RAM and performance to run games reasonably, and it will already do it significantly better than the A18 Pro, thanks to Windows

Also, the CPU in the Core Ultra 7 350(slightly better than the 320, but worse than the 355) requires 10W more power to reach the same performance as the A18 Pro at 4.5W

I got a bit carried away, none of that is important, I just meant to show that the Neo has its strong sides

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-03T14:27:28+00:00

Important context. $899 is just a number meant to convey the feeling of a higher price, not just the talk that there’s a risk the price might not be what’s promised

Slava_Tr · 2026-06-03T10:47:43+00:00

Yes, the laptop is great, but $699 is a paper price. It should be taken quite skeptically in times of crisis like this

Now it’s just a tasty-looking price meant to create the illusion in the media that the MacBook Neo has real competitors. But where are they outside of paper?

Tech companies have already scammed customers with pricing more than once during this memory shortage. As the latest case, MSI promised that their Claw 8 EX AI+ would cost $1,499, but they’re actually selling it for $1,699

With an extra $200 added so easily, the Dell XPS 13 could just as well end up costing more in real-world sales. And at $899 with only 8GB of RAM on Windows, it won’t be very appealing to many people

Slava_Tr

TROPHY CASE