# [VC] First GTX 1080 benchmarks



## iLeakStuff

8GB GDDR5X running at 2500MHz memory clock.
Cores is running at 1860MHz+

As always look at graphics score

*3DMark11 Performance*


GTX 980Ti in comparison


*Firestrike Extreme*


GTX 980Ti in comparison


http://videocardz.com/59558/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-benchmarks


----------



## TK421

So, it's still slightly slower than a 980Ti / Titan X? :|

Wonder if the OC ability would make up for the performance.


----------



## Defoler

The numbers will not surprise me. The 980 was also pretty similar if not a bit better than the 780 TI.
The question is wether polaris 10 will be able to rival it or not.


----------



## iLeakStuff

15% faster in 1080p and 30% faster in 4K


----------



## Yetyhunter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> So, it's still slightly slower than a 980Ti / Titan X? :|
> 
> Wonder if the OC ability would make up for the performance.


How is it slower than the Ti ?? 27k vs 24k score


----------



## headd

1080 is 26% faster than reference GTX980TI.Stock reference 980TI have 8000points in firestrike extreme GPU score.
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages...review,24.html

And 980TI at 1500/8100 have 9900points so its even slightly faster than 980TI 1500/8000.


----------



## carlhil2

Beats my OCed Classy 3dmark11 score @1500+/8000 by a very little....might hit 2000 core?


----------



## Gilles3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> So, it's still slightly slower than a 980Ti / Titan X? :|
> 
> Wonder if the OC ability would make up for the performance.


Slightly faster actually, graphics scores are what you should be looking at. Although the difference isn't huge.


----------



## Eastrider

Where do these benchmarks come from anyway? Can't find them in 3DMark data base.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gilles3000*
> 
> Slightly faster actually, graphics scores are what you should be looking at. Although the difference isn't huge.


Dont compare old 3dmark 11 witch is run in 720P OMG.Look at firestrike extreme.Firestrike is 1440P benchmark and 1080 is 26% faster than reference 980TI.Its even faster than 980TI 1500/8100.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Looks like we get the same performance increase as GTX 680 over GTX 580 actually.
25% ish over GTX 980Ti.

Its something but for $650??


----------



## headd

I am more interested for GTX1070 results.


----------



## Mhill2029

I'd rather see Firestrike Ultra numbers....


----------



## Olivon

My scores with a 980Ti G1 overclocked :

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/11109652



[http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11433856?



Dunno if the card is already overclocked or not but for the moment, nothing impressive for GTX 980Ti owners.


----------



## XCalinX

Here are my 980 Ti @ 1500mhz results, as you can see it does NOT beat the 1080 in GPU score. Also how on earth did my 6700k beat that 5820k?
https://i.gyazo.com/4a6718618cec0cd54f3b4cd62e29584f.jpg


----------



## alawadhi3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> The numbers will not surprise me. The 980 was also pretty similar if not a bit better than the 780 TI.


GTX980 and GTX780 Ti were both 28nm cards, the GTX1080 is 16nm.


----------



## carlhil2

I am assuming that the 1080 is at stock...also, some being doing stunts with their benching, so, take that in consideration.....


----------



## kingduqc

Looks like the 980ti stay in the rig for a while... Eggh, this 2 year upgrade cycle is such a drag. You get nothing out of your old card and it takes 2 years to see meaningful upgrade..


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I am assuming that the 1080 is at stock...


It is. They are comparing an overclocked 980Ti with a stock 1080.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Overclocked GTX970 - 17,800 3dmark11P score
GTX 1080 - 27,600 3dmark11P score

55% increase in performance!

I'd say its also around a 25% increase over an overclocked GTX980... Still pretty impressive!


----------



## Mudfrog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Looks like we get the same performance increase as GTX 680 over GTX 580 actually.
> 25% ish over GTX 980Ti.
> 
> *Its something but for $650??*


Isn't that still speculation?

I really want to see the numbers for the 1070. I'm trying to decide between the 1070 or the 980TI now that the prices are dropping rather quickly.


----------



## maarten12100

Depending on if there is a lot of headroom this could be either really good. Good in terms of efficiency relative to the 980 Ti or good in terms of value.
I think it's going to be good efficiency and quite a nice boost versus the 980 Ti once OC-ed.

Polaris will come in just below the 980 Ti so Nvidia will probably have a significant performance advantage. (they have a bigger die so no real surprise)


----------



## FLCLimax

lmao, better cost $499 at most.


----------



## Mhill2029

I find it interesting that no Firestrike Ultra test was shown, the 256bit bus might be a problem for higher resolutions.


----------



## Hequaqua

Looks like I will be holding out for the bigger chip.

My 970's for less than 700.00 1506/8000:


EDIT: Unless AMD has something to offer.


----------



## cowie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Looks like we get the same performance increase as GTX 680 over GTX 580 actually.
> 25% ish over GTX 980Ti.
> 
> Its something but for $650??


why would you think the 980 replacement would be 650?

as for the benches 3d11 is hard to compare because even just looking at the graphics scores the cpu speed has a lot to do with it.
for 3dmark fsx ok its what you would expect from a "new" 980.


----------



## TopicClocker

If it's only 25% faster I'm disappointed. Hopefully this isn't real.

I was hoping for 30%


----------



## corky dorkelson

Here is your chance, AMD. If you are going to make something happen, the time is now!


----------



## Mhill2029

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> If it's only 25% faster I'm disappointed. Hopefully this isn't real.
> 
> I was hoping for a minimum of 30%


Does anyone know the CPU clockspeed on those tests? Since that has a large impact on graphics score. Also I think those numbers should be taken with a pinch of salt since we don't have access to that driver being used.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mudfrog*
> 
> Isn't that still speculation?
> 
> I really want to see the numbers for the 1070. I'm trying to decide between the 1070 or the 980TI now that the prices are dropping rather quickly.


Yes, you are right. Still speculation on the price part.
Like FLCLimax says, I think a GTX 1080 with +25% over GTX 980Ti is worth $499 max. Thats my buying limit for a card with this performance.


----------



## carlhil2

Lol, here comes the drama....


----------



## Mudfrog

After the reference models are released, how long before we start to see the factory OC'd models?


----------



## cowie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maarten12100*
> 
> Depending on if there is a lot of headroom this could be either really good. Good in terms of efficiency relative to the 980 Ti or good in terms of value.
> I think it's going to be good efficiency and quite a nice boost versus the 980 Ti once OC-ed.
> 
> *Polaris will come in just below the 980 Ti* so Nvidia will probably have a significant performance advantage. (they have a bigger die so no real surprise)


huh? you think so?
I think it will come in around fury performance at most but its all just a guess at this point


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Looks like we get the same performance increase as GTX 680 over GTX 580 actually.
> 25% ish over GTX 980Ti.


27K vs 24K is 25% ? Oc'd 980Ti scores 29K.

Lol, used 980Ti's have been dropping prices, but if this is launched at $650 I hope they won't go up again.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> 27K vs 24K is 25% ? Oc'd 980Ti scores 29K.


Look at the Firestrike Extreme scores


----------



## Sleazybigfoot

I'll take the AMD version for 300.

Even if the 300 dollar price from AMD is fake, which I think it most likely is, I wouldn't pay more than 400 for these cards.


----------



## TUFinside

I'm still in love with my 780Ti


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Look at the Firestrike Extreme scores


Look at 3D mark scores.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> 27K vs 24K is 25% ? Oc'd 980Ti scores 29K.
> 
> Lol, used 980Ti's have been dropping prices, but if this is launched at $650 I hope they won't go up again.


People will cherry pick what is needed to see that %25 they are dreaming of.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> Look at 3D mark scores.


Oh grow up.
The average of those two is around 20-25%


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> 27K vs 24K is 25% ? Oc'd 980Ti scores 29K.
> 
> Lol, used 980Ti's have been dropping prices, but if this is launched at $650 I hope they won't go up again.
> 
> 
> 
> People will cherry pick what is needed to see that %25 they are dreaming of.
Click to expand...

If you are buying a GTX1080 for 1080p gaming then more power to you.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> People will cherry pick what is needed to see that %25 they are dreaming of.


well if you've been waiting for that long to see 1070 beat 980Ti at 970 price point


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Oh grow up.
> The average of those two is around 20-25%


look at the firestrike score that olivon posted, it's 980TI after OC = stock 1080.


----------



## killerhz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> My scores with a 980Ti G1 overclocked :
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/11109652
> 
> 
> 
> [http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/11433856?
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno if the card is already overclocked or not but for the moment, nothing impressive for GTX 980Ti owners.


wow that's impressive. i have a similar set up with a 980Ti Classified and only can get a score of 17k ish overall in fire strike. only difference would be our OS and maybe drivers. I am using windows 10


----------



## Klocek001

well, I'm not surprised by 1080 results.
what is really interesting is *DX12* performance vs 980Ti and Fury X.


----------



## KarathKasun

Also, GP overclocking will likely be smaller percentage wise, that has been the trend over the years. I remember GTX 470 hitting %50 overclocks with the reference cooler, doing that from a 1400 base clock requires a stupidly high clock like 2100.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> look at the firestrike score that olivon posted, it's 980TI after OC = stock 1080.


Yes, but its stock 1080 vs heavy overclocked 980Ti at 1600Mz.


----------



## Smanci

Gimmie some power consumption numbers.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killerhz*
> 
> wow that's impressive. i have a similar set up with a 980Ti Classified and only can get a score of 17k ish overall in fire strike. only difference would be our OS and maybe drivers. I am using windows 10


He tested on 3dmark 11 P test.


----------



## Ace01

im very curious as to how well Pascal will overclock, and if it can match the 900 series capabilities. That will be a deciding factor for me.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes, but its stock 1080 vs heavy overclocked 980Ti at 1600Mz.


I think this 1080 is little overclocked, cant be with this stats.
Maybe 1600-1700 at stock but 1800+......


----------



## NvNw

It isn't what we always get? The new flagship card replace the last flagship with a slightly improvement and give the space to an unknown TI to improve further the generation. Bleh, I think i'll skip this gen, changing gpu and wb for 15% faster don't seem be worth it...


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> I think this 1080 is little overclocked, cant be with this stats.
> Maybe 1600-1700 at stock but 1800+......


Its actually underclocked according to Chiphell.
Runs at 1823MHz up to 1962MHz.

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1579388-1-1.html


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ace01*
> 
> im very curious as to how well Pascal will overclock, and if it can match the 900 series capabilities. That will be a deciding factor for me.


Agreed. Although the 980 Ti can OC like 25% more. That would be like 2300 MHz on the 1080 (from 1860) for a 25% OC. Can it do +450 MHz? That seems like a stretch.


----------



## pompss

Want to see 4k gaming benchmarks.
60 fps ? i really hope so


----------



## cowie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ace01*
> 
> im very curious as to how well Pascal will overclock, and if it can match the 900 series capabilities. That will be a deciding factor for me.


well if the power use has stayed the same(or gotten better)it should be similar.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> I think this 1080 is little overclocked, cant be with this stats.
> Maybe 1600-1700 at stock but 1800+......


That must be boost? why OC it, that wouldn't show anything....OCed 980Ti vs stock 1080 gives us something...


----------



## Zero989

Very impressive. Can't wait to use it in my notebook.


----------



## KarathKasun

The purpose of the 1080 is to replace the 980 Ti and bring the price for that level of performance down. If the price is the same, it has zero purpose in the desktop market.


----------



## Ace01

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Agreed. Although the 980 Ti can OC like 25% more. That would be like 2300 MHz on the 1080 (from 1860) for a 25% OC. Can it do +450 MHz? That seems like a stretch.


If it can do 2300 on a non water cooled card I'm sold and upgrading off my 750ti for sure. Can't really afford to water cool it so temps and clocks will be judges as well as other reviews. As of now my 750 is happily running at 1260 MHz


----------



## TUFinside

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The purpose of the 1080 is to replace the 980 Ti and bring the price for that level of performance down. If the price is the same, it has zero purpose in the desktop market.


This


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The purpose of the 1080 is to replace the 980 Ti and bring the price for that level of performance down. If the price is the same, it has zero purpose in the desktop market.


But it's like 30% faster than the 980 Ti... Edit: I foresee $650 launch price.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> But it's like 30% faster than the 980 Ti...


It is not 30% faster than the 980 Ti's that are available.


----------



## cowie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The purpose of the 1080 is to replace the 980 Ti and bring the price for that level of performance down. If the price is the same, it has zero purpose in the desktop market.


oh really then what happened to the 980 replacement?
imo its the 970/980 price segment they are replacing and 1080 should have similar numbers as the 980ti,all the dies that were shown were smallish for top end cards but who really knows right?


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> It is not 30% faster than the 980 Ti's that are available.


Reference is pretty much what the review websites go by. Now we just need to see how well they can OC for a large number of cards and what type of performance gains result from the average attainable OC.


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *killerhz*
> 
> wow that's impressive. i have a similar set up with a 980Ti Classified and only can get a score of 17k ish overall in fire strike. only difference would be our OS and maybe drivers. I am using windows 10


980Ti G1 is a hell of a card but the CPU score on 3DM11 was plagued by an AV problem (Bit Defender taking 25% all the time on an OC 4790K, skipped to KAV and no more problems on next runs).
And yes, I'm stil rollin' the same old 7 64-bit Pro install since 5 years








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Its actually underclocked according to Chiphell.
> Runs at 1823MHz up to 1962MHz.
> 
> https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1579388-1-1.html


Impressive clocks if true. If the 1080 got the same overclocking margin than GM200, we will see some crazy frequencies on air.
Curious about the LN² clocks too








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes, but its stock 1080 vs heavy overclocked 980Ti at 1600Mz.


I have to admit that's pushed to the max, a little more and it was a driver reset


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> But it's like 30% faster than the 980 Ti... Edit: I foresee $650 launch price.


Most likely 550$ or a bit less than 600$, similar to the 980 release price.
At the end of the year, we will most likely see a 980 TI (pascal+HBM2) for 650$.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Reference is pretty much what the review websites go by. Now we just need to see how well they can OC for a large number of cards and what type of performance gains result from the average attainable OC.


AIBs with higher stock clocks will also arrive for GTX 1080 for sure.


----------



## Yvese

Don't worry. Give it a few driver releases and the 1080 will be the undisputed king as Nvidia slowly gimps the 980ti


----------



## Fuell

The longer this thread goes, the higher the % increase people talk of gets. 20%, 20% to 25%, 25%, now last few posts 30%. Magical performance /s

Not really sure what to think of this. I was expecting big increases from both sides for a bit, hoping to see a performance/price brawl with us as winners. AMD's next stuff rumored to be meh, this isn't looking great, tho we lack info... And increases of the last few gens have been nothing spectacular... Feels like both sides are slowly forcing us to get used to minimal increases while prices go further north. Hopefully all the rumours about both sides looking to bring prices back down to earth have at least some truth to it... but I'm worried we'll see the same old trend.


----------



## Ace01

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Impressive clocks if true. If the 1080 got the same margin overclocking than GM200, we will see some crazy frequencies on air.
> Curious about the LN² clocks too


Ln2 clocks on this may have a chance to break records. Plus if MSI puts out a Lightning edition to the 1080 or 10xx it would be godlike.


----------



## Glottis

comparing probably what is thermal and power throttled reference 1080 model to custom heavily overclocked high power limit 980Tis. these benchmarks are useless.

reference to reference. custom to custom. oc to oc. this is how you compare.


----------



## L36

Watch people pay $650-700 for this little die card while in 9-12 months later will come the big daddy die which will blow this out for the same price point.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> comparing probably what is thermal and power throttled reference 1080 model to custom heavily overclocked high power limit 980Tis. these benchmarks are useless.


I sure hope the 1080 isn't thermally throttling, if it is something is wrong. Pascal is supposed to be drastically lower power consumption and the die size is similar to that of a small die Maxwell 970-980... If there's thermal throttling the card is gonna suck...


----------



## skawster

Probably a 550$ card by the looks of it but who is willing to bet that the Titan X^2 or whatever they decide to name it is going to be 1200$+?


----------



## xzamples

comparing OC cards to reference cards needs to stop


----------



## KeepWalkinG

AMD will reach this performance after 6 month or more...
So the price on 1080 will be 650$ becouse no competition.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> Look at 3D mark scores.


You know 3d mark 11 is 720P test and its cpu bottleneck?
3d mark 11 is irrelevant.Look only at Firestrike GPu score.
1080 is there 26% faster than reference 980TI and 980TI at 1500/8100 have 9900points


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> comparing OC cards to reference cards needs to stop


If the OC cards are available at the same price with the same performance, it needs to continue.

I give GP 200-300mhz OC room, so highly doubting overclocking is going to help it as much.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yvese*
> 
> Don't worry. Give it a few driver releases and the 1080 will be the undisputed king as Nvidia slowly gimps the 980ti


Don't update your drivers....


----------



## Matthew89

Seems like a pretty fast card for reference clocks.
Gonna hold out and wait to see what the 1080 Ti brings


----------



## iLeakStuff

Added Firestrike Extreme from reference GTX 980Ti launch review


----------



## carlhil2

Man, the trolling over at VC is as bad as that other place, wowzers...


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Don't update your drivers....


ANd how he will play the new games without optimization?


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> Most likely 550$ or a bit less than 600$, similar to the 980 release price.
> At the end of the year, we will most likely see a 980 TI (pascal+HBM2) for 650$.


I doubt that because of the huge leap over the 980. It even beats the 980 Ti by a hefty margin. Look at the 980 release. Like 5% over the 780 Ti, big leap over the 780. Here we have a big leap over the 980 Ti and even bigger leap over the 980.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> look at the firestrike score that olivon posted, it's 980TI after OC = stock 1080.


I find it interesting that when comparing 980Ti to FuryX, it is imperative to run the 980Ti at stock clocks, but when comparing the 1080 to the 980Ti, the 980Ti needs to be OC'd.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> ANd how he will play the new games without optimization?


I was kidding, I am not into conspiracy theories....


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I find it interesting that when comparing 980Ti to FuryX, it is imperative to run the 980Ti at stock clocks, but when comparing the 1080 to the 980Ti, the 980Ti needs to be OC'd.


i know, crazy how this forum works, eh?


----------



## gooface

So it's like we all assumed. If you own a 980ti or Titan x this is nothing to be excited about, next year folks we will have something worth waiting for.

It's the 680/780ti 980/980ti all over again.

This is how nvidia has been operating lately.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Agreed. Although the 980 Ti can OC like 25% more. That would be like 2300 MHz on the 1080 (from 1860) for a 25% OC. Can it do +450 MHz? That seems like a stretch.


That won't matter once the driver team gets involved ...


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I find it interesting that when comparing 980Ti to FuryX, it is imperative to run the 980Ti at stock clocks, but when comparing the 1080 to the 980Ti, the 980Ti needs to be OC'd.


Certainly because GM20X got tremendous OC capabilities not as the Fury-X.
The gain you can have by OCing your 980Ti is very relevant.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ace01*
> 
> Ln2 clocks on this may have a chance to break records. Plus if MSI puts out a Lightning edition to the 1080 or 10xx it would be godlike.


Not to burst your bubble, but I think MSI give a miss on all mid range chip for its lightning edition. At least for NV chip.


----------



## amlett

https://es.msi.com/Graphics-card/N680GTX_Lightning.html


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> So it's like we all assumed. If you own a 980ti or Titan x this is nothing to be excited about, next year folks we will have something worth waiting for.
> 
> It's the 680/780ti 980/980ti all over again.
> 
> This is how nvidia has been operating lately.


Unless we can get 25-30% more performance from OCing it, then that would be exciting. For regular users who end up just getting a reference card or a slightly better than reference card (and who don't OC), this is a big upgrade. If they can price it like a 980 instead of a 780, that's even better. I highly doubt it though since it's much better than the 980 Ti which easily justifies the $650 cost.


----------



## renx

I'd still point out a couple of things about these benchmarks.
Quote:


> Additionally, the GDDR5X modules are clocked at 2500 MHz (which is shown as 5000+ MHz in 3DMark). However the effective clock is 10000 MHz, which means the bandwidth is somewhere around 320 GB/s (assuming it's 256-bit wide).


Quote:


> At the time of writing we are not able to confirm the exact reference clock. For such reason I decided to avoid making comparison charts, so this post will essentially tell you what GTX 1080 is capable of and nothing more.


This shouldn't be overlooked. They don't have software readings, and can't even tell the exact reference clock. Not even the memory bandwidth.
And to me it's obvious that they don't have proper drivers.

In conclusion, what we are seeing here is the absolutely worst possible scenario. It may change drastically, and for the better.

.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I find it interesting that when comparing 980Ti to FuryX, it is imperative to run the 980Ti at stock clocks, but when comparing the 1080 to the 980Ti, the 980Ti needs to be OC'd.


it doesn't need to be oc'd, it doesn't need to be stock as well.
why not compare both ? oc'd does matter to me as well as other 980Ti owners. I personally would not pay $100-150 just for the performance delta of 1080 stock vs overclocked.I might end up selling the 980Ti for $500 (or less) and getting a 1080 for +$600, and then you never know how the card will oc. It might be 20%, it might be 5% as well.
Anyway, that 1.86GHz clock is cray cray







GP104's big brother will be a monster.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *amlett*
> 
> https://es.msi.com/Graphics-card/N680GTX_Lightning.html


That was the last since MSI face a fiasco for 780 from 780 Ti.

You do not see them doing a 980 Lightning.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Unless we can get 25-30% more performance from OCing it, then that would be exciting. For regular users who end up just getting a reference card or a slightly better than reference card (and who don't OC), this is a big upgrade. If they can price it like a 980 instead of a 780, that's even better. I highly doubt it though since it's much better than the 980 Ti which easily justifies the $650 cost.


I don't agree. This card would need to be 50% faster IMHO to justify a $650 price tag. Top price for such a small die with only 25% increase in performance should be $549. But certain individuals would buy it even if Nvidia priced it at $749, so what do I know.

Especially with prices like this now: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00Z9D1AIE/ref=s9_simh_gw_g147_i5_r?ie=UTF8&fpl=fresh&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=desktop-1&pf_rd_r=0GER3AJCXTWMWRYA3MVW&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=2437869742&pf_rd_i=desktop


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Unless we can get 25-30% more performance from OCing it, then that would be exciting. For regular users who end up just getting a reference card or a slightly better than reference card (and who don't OC), this is a big upgrade. If they can price it like a 980 instead of a 780, that's even better. I highly doubt it though since it's much better than the 980 Ti which easily justifies the $650 cost.


Matching the performance of a year old $650 card does not justify pricing at $650. You can get those cards at less than $650 now. I can get a GTX 980 Ti for ~$530 now.


----------



## Pro3ootector

My Xeon E5 awaits. I was going to get 390X but we shall see.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I don't agree. This card would need to be 50% faster IMHO to justify a $650 price tag. Top price for such a small die with only 25% increase in performance should be $549. But certain individuals would buy it even if Nvidia priced it at $749, so what do I know.


If its just as fast as a OCed 980 Ti, it probably be just $499 - $549.

$650 is not going to entice ppl to buy it.


----------



## Gunslinger.

Not impressed with these numbers, I hope it's just a driver issue at this point.


----------



## Klocek001

it's just 3D mark anyway.


----------



## fewness

Isn't it like FuryX leading 980Ti ~ 20% in all new DX12 games?
So 1080 just catches up with FuryX, with 80% higher core Hz?


----------



## renx

I remember the first Maxwell underground benchmarks with early drivers. They completely underrated the videocard.
I suggest to wait one more day.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I remember the first Maxwell underground benchmarks with early drivers. They completely underrated the videocard.
> I suggest to wait one more day.


was the same with early 980Ti reference benchmarks. people had no idea what power it had until it was unshackled with custom designs.


----------



## Zero989

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gooface*
> 
> So it's like we all assumed. If you own a 980ti or Titan x this is nothing to be excited about, next year folks we will have something worth waiting for.
> 
> It's the 680/780ti 980/980ti all over again.
> 
> This is how nvidia has been operating lately.


Maximum profits. I'm enjoying the discussion lately about notebook video cards.


----------



## Clocknut

1070 will price very aggressively and 1080 will price higher due to ddr5x


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Matching the performance of a year old $650 card does not justify pricing at $650. You can get those cards at less than $650 now. I can get a GTX 980 Ti for ~$530 now.


Funnily enough, that's not the logic that was used when the 390X came out. Then a slight clock increase and 8GB VRAM was used as justification for just that kind of pricing.

I firmly believe the 1080 will be $550, same as the 980. Probably limited availability though, due to the GDDR5X.


----------



## CasualCat

If legit I'm not impressed, unless it also has some nice OC headroom (which who knows at those already high stock clocks).

The GM200 can OC to over 9000 on Firestrike Extreme already (with a high 9000 graphics score). Honestly this feels a bit like the 980/780Ti all over again. 1080 should really be the 1070 even it it means they have no 1080 product initially.


----------



## Chargeit

The 970/980 didn't look so good compared to the 780/780ti at first. Now compare them.

I'll still wait for GP100 myself.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Actually if one look at GTX 980 where the performance was very similar with GTX 780Ti, they sold the 980 for $549 while 780Ti cost $700.
Now when the performance is 20-30% faster than GTX 980Ti, they keep the price the same.

Almost like they follow a certain ratio where you can get this % better performance/money with new architecture and nothing more.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> The 970/980 didn't look so good compared to the 780/780ti at first. Now compare them.


Absolutely. And this is not even "at first".
These benchmarks shown didn't get to that stage, yet. Totally underground, without specs reading, and without nvidia saying a word about drivers.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Funnily enough, that's not the logic that was used when the 390X came out. Then a slight clock increase and 8GB VRAM was used as justification for just that kind of pricing structure.
> 
> I firmly believe the 1080 will be $550, same as the 980.


That case was a little more extreme, the 290x price had been cut in half from it's original price. If they decided to charged $549 for the 390x it would be like this (possible) situation.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> The 970/980 didn't look so good compared to the 780/780ti at first. Now compare them.
> 
> I'll still wait for GP100 myself.


compare them on dx11 or dx12? because if you bring dx12 970 is getting destroyed till 2k by 780ti.........especially on qb and aots..


----------



## jincuteguy

Guys, obviously if you already have a 980Ti, you wouldn't be upgrading to the 1080. GTX1080 is for ppl who doesn't have a 980Ti yet. If you want more performance from ur 980Ti, wait for the new Titan X.

Also, the performance increase is always like this from Nvidia as expected, why do ppl think it's a 10X faster? there is no way it's 10x faster, it's only slightly faster whenever Nvidia introducing a new card. And you guys know it.

The way Nvidia doing is to introduce a new card that is slightly faster than the last generation so that they can get as much profit as they can, instead of releasing a 10x faster card, then they wouldn't be able to get as much profit as they would. You guys know they actually have a 10x faster card already, it's just that they not gonna release it right now, they're going slowly to introduce a new card every year or so. You get my point.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

From the 970/980 will be good upgrade !!!


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> Guys, obviously if you already have a 980Ti, you wouldn't be upgrading to the 1080. GTX1080 is for ppl who doesn't have a 980Ti yet. If you want more performance from ur 980Ti, wait for the new Titan X.
> 
> Also, the performance increase is always like this from Nvidia as expected, why do ppl think it's a 10X faster? there is no way it's 10x faster, it's only slightly faster whenever Nvidia introducing a new card. And you guys know it.


The 1080 probably uses like 100w less than the 980ti to produce a slightly higher benchmark score... if performance per watt is your goal then these new cards will be it


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I don't agree. This card would need to be 50% faster IMHO to justify a $650 price tag. Top price for such a small die with only 25% increase in performance should be $549. But certain individuals would buy it even if Nvidia priced it at $749, so what do I know.
> 
> Especially with prices like this now: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00Z9D1AIE/ref=s9_simh_gw_g147_i5_r?ie=UTF8&fpl=fresh&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=desktop-1&pf_rd_r=0GER3AJCXTWMWRYA3MVW&pf_rd_t=36701&pf_rd_p=2437869742&pf_rd_i=desktop


It's technically replacing the 980. When the 980 replaced the 780, it was 5% faster than the 780 *Ti* and came in @ $550. I agree the price for this small die is way too absurd if it's $650 but Nvidia hasn't been pricing it based on die sizes for a while . Just like the small die 680 beating the large die 580 before it, and coming in at $499, we have a small die beating the previous generation's big die by a good amount. That's why I don't see it being less than $650 although I agree in that it's too much and Nvidia shouldn't be gouging.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> Guys, obviously if you already have a 980Ti, you wouldn't be upgrading to the 1080. GTX1080 is for ppl who doesn't have a 980Ti yet. If you want more performance from ur 980Ti, wait for the new Titan X.
> 
> Also, the performance increase is always like this from Nvidia as expected, why do ppl think it's a 10X faster? there is no way it's 10x faster, it's only slightly faster whenever Nvidia introducing a new card. And you guys know it.


10X faster? What?

The old way before the 980 was the X70 was comparable to the old top end X80.

edit: I'd argue that even upgrading from a 980 (unless you resell it) is a poor upgrade as the net cost of both cards over so short of a time is high. My $.02.

edit: I'd add that perhaps the 980 was excusable given they were still stuck on 28nm, but I would have expected the new node X80 to go back to the old way.


----------



## renx

I'm wondering, if you'll do a paper launch tomorrow, and the video card goes to the stores 30 days later...
How do you know that you have some proper drivers?

I honestly don't understand why most people is labeling Pascal's performance according to that benchmark only.


----------



## Serandur

I wonder how 980 Ti resale values will look in about a year (when the real high-end chips arrive). Can't go wasting my energy upgrading at every new power-sipping mid-sized die, but the resale value hit is painful to watch.

The only potentially demanding game of this year that I'm even interested in is the new Deus Ex, so... just give the old "wait and see" method a try or preemptively sell for a decent price while I can? I appreciate any advice, fellow GPU addicts.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I'm wondering, if you'll do a paper launch tomorrow, and the video card goes to the stores 30 days later...
> How do you know that you have some proper drivers?
> 
> I honestly don't understand why most people is labeling Pascal's performance according to that benchmark only.


You can never know. Just ride the waves of new drivers and everything will works itself out.
You are right, benchmark is one thing. Games could be another


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I wonder how 980 Ti resale values will look in about a year (when the real high-end chips arrive). Can't go wasting my energy upgrading at every new power-sipping mid-sized die, but the resale value hit is painful to watch.
> 
> The only potentially demanding game of this year that I'm even interested in is the new Deus Ex, so... just give the old "wait and see" method a try or preemptively sell for a decent price while I can? I appreciate any advice, fellow GPU addicts.




If you don't game at 4K or [email protected] Hz, I'd say stick with the 980 Ti.


----------



## EightDee8D

Funny, now everyone learned to look for right benchmark scores (graphics). just shows how people hype one thing over another, just to cry on it later.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Funny, now everyone learned to look for right benchmark scores (graphics). just shows how people hype one thing over another, just to cry on it later.


I saw the original score and was like "whoa that card sucks" then I saw the CPU and was like "oh, gotta look at graphics since they decided to bench it on a toaster".


----------



## skline00

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I wonder how 980 Ti resale values will look in about a year (when the real high-end chips arrive). Can't go wasting my energy upgrading at every new power-sipping mid-sized die, but the resale value hit is painful to watch.
> 
> The only potentially demanding game of this year that I'm even interested in is the new Deus Ex, so... just give the old "wait and see" method a try or preemptively sell for a decent price while I can? I appreciate any advice, fellow GPU addicts.


Serandur, you make a great point. I paid $629 last June for my EVGA GTX980TI SC which I watercool (it's my hobby expensive but my hobby) and at present I run it at stock for this card (1102 core). It powers a 3440x1440 ultrawide Dell U3415W.

I know my gpu will drop @$100 at least on resale but to sell it now, I would be lucky to clear $575 (very lucky), I would have an unused gpu waterblock and would end up paying another $649 for a 1080 plus another $125 for a waterblock.

How much performance will I gain for about another $200 outlay???? I might be able to narrow it to $150 outlay if I can hustle the gpu block for @$50 but that is sometimes a stretch.

I'm just going to start OCing my gpu some to stay current and get off the uograde train awhile.

If I was using a GTX970 and wanted to make a big jump that makes sense to upgrade.

Hurts to watch the 980TI drop in price but such is life.


----------



## prjindigo

Looks to me like there are some odd discrepancies if the ram was running at 2500 why was it reading only 5000?

Suspicious garbage is suspicious is all I can say. I doubt the drivers work right for it yet either.


----------



## julizs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I wonder how 980 Ti resale values will look in about a year (when the real high-end chips arrive). Can't go wasting my energy upgrading at every new power-sipping mid-sized die, but the resale value hit is painful to watch.
> 
> The only potentially demanding game of this year that I'm even interested in is the new Deus Ex, so... just give the old "wait and see" method a try or preemptively sell for a decent price while I can? I appreciate any advice, fellow GPU addicts.


I sold mine some days ago for 550 Euros, enough to buy the new 1080. I believe that history will repeat itself and the 1070 will be almost as fast as 980ti, plus it will have 8gb vs 6gb Vram, so prices will drop massively on ebay, just like with the 780ti. There's no point believing otherwise.


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> You guys know they actually have a 10x faster card already, it's just that they not gonna release it right now, they're going slowly to introduce a new card every year or so. You get my point.


I'm just going to assume you're using hyperbole to make a point, because thinking they have a 10x faster card sitting on the shelf ready for release would indicate a belief that it's all just done by magic.


----------



## prjindigo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> The 970/980 didn't look so good compared to the 780/780ti at first. Now compare them.
> 
> I'll still wait for GP100 myself.


You mean Volta?


----------



## gooface

The only thing I am excited for is the GTX 1080M.

The only thing nvidia has been really improving lately is their laptop cards since the die shrinks seem to effect those more than the desktop cards.

That might be a card worth selling my 980M laptop for. If these benchmarks are true I have another year to enjoy my 980ti.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

I'm looking forward to a mini GTX1070 or 1080... very low power draw and very small size..can't beat that


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prjindigo*
> 
> You mean Volta?


There will be a large die Pascal chip aka GP100. Or it could be GP102. That's what he/she was referring to.

Are you still on a mission to suggest there won't be a large die Pascal chip?


----------



## CalinTM

Haha, kinda fail. But its a good start. The drivers are nor mature at all.

And firstly, this could be entirely FAKE. Need to wait and see.

If true, this for 650$ ? No thanks. I shall wait for big pascal. I can put 200$ on the table, just for a true chip.

Also, these scores does not translate in gaming performance like a 1:1 ratio. In games will be different. 980 was almost like a 780 Ti at performance, after some time, 980 is better in games than 780 Ti + driver nerf.


----------



## Olivon

Tommorow live event will be on twitch :

https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320/photo/1


----------



## Noufel

I hope those are refference boost clocks cause if not it doesn't beat my 980tis by a huge margine.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Tommorow live event will be on twitch :
> 
> https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320/photo/1


That's a different time that the countdown timer though, wonder what each event is?


----------



## CalinTM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> I hope those are refference boost clocks cause if not it doesn't beat my 980tis by a huge margine.


Oooo, boo hoo...lol best comm ever...


----------



## cowie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> If legit I'm not impressed, unless it also has some nice OC headroom (which who knows at those already high stock clocks).
> 
> The GM200 can OC to over 9000 on Firestrike Extreme already (with a high 9000 graphics score). Honestly this feels a bit like the 980/780Ti all over again. 1080 should really be the 1070 even it it means they have no 1080 product initially.


compare it to a card like the 980
I think it would be better and make more sense since both have same amount of cores(according to rumor)
even a 980 at 2000+ ln2 on the core gets beat by a little bit


----------



## Fresh Sheep

Well it would be a pretty good upgrade for me at least. I'll wait and see how polaris turns out before buying anything though.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> I hope those are refference boost clocks cause if not it doesn't beat my 980tis by a huge margine.


don't you mean margarine ?

Anyway, I thought it was a general consensus on this site that $550 for 980 was overpriced. Now we've got a xx80 selling for $650, no HBM2, probably no hardware async shader support (that's still unknown tho so plz don't devour me in your replies).
That's why I think $650 would be not only overpriced, it'd be so ridiculous it should deserve a line on Riff Raff's album.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *julizs*
> 
> I sold mine some days ago for 550 Euros, enough to buy the new 1080. I believe that history will repeat itself and the 1070 will be almost as fast as 980ti, plus it will have 8gb vs 6gb Vram, so prices will drop massively on ebay, just like with the 780ti. There's no point believing otherwise.


With a 6GB frame buffer and amazing OC headroom, the 980 TI in SLI (and hopefully better mGPU support in DX12 and vulkan) will still suffice for [email protected] The sore point with the 780 TI was its 3GB frame buffer being a limit to such high resolutions. I for one, will welcome another cheaper 980 TI for SLI, seeing as nothing but only GP100 or GP102 may have the potential for single GPU capability at [email protected]


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> don't you mean margarine ?
> 
> Anyway, I thought it was a general consensus on this site that $550 for 980 was overpriced. Now we've got a xx80 selling for $650, no HBM2, probably no hardware async shader support (that's still unknown tho so plz don't devour me in your replies).
> That's why I think $650 would be not only overpriced, it'd be so ridiculous it should deserve a line on Riff Raff's album.


Being $220 more expensive than the 970 and only ~12% faster didn't help things.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Being $220 more expensive than the 970 and only ~12% faster didn't help things.


now it's AMD's move. If they deliver on their "near 980Ti for $300" then nvidia's only 1080 sold will be one for Knucklehead47


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> don't you mean margarine ?
> 
> Anyway, I thought it was a general consensus on this site that $550 for 980 was overpriced. Now we've got a xx80 selling for $650, no HBM2, probably no hardware async shader support (that's still unknown tho so plz don't devour me in your replies).
> That's why I think $650 would be not only overpriced, it'd be so ridiculous it should deserve a line on Riff Raff's album.


Has Nvidia confirmed the $650 price? This thread is moving so fast, I must have missed that announcement.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Has Nvidia confirmed the $650 price? This thread is moving so fast, I must have missed that announcement.


sorry, that was my mistake to take what ppl say as granted. of course they didn't confim it.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> now it's AMD's move. If they deliver on their "near 980Ti for $300" then nvidia's only 1080 sold will be one for Knucklehead47


I doubt it. There were more accurate leaks that it's closer around 390X.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Has Nvidia confirmed the $650 price? This thread is moving so fast, I must have missed that announcement.


Not confirmed. I think it's a safe bet that it will be $650. Not only is it a new node, it's over 50% better than the GTX 980 and features a *new* memory type with 8 GB VRAM.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> now it's AMD's move. If they deliver on their "near 980Ti for $300" then nvidia's only 1080 sold will be one for Knucklehead47


Speak for yourself. I've got $2,100 dropped into Gsync monitors right now. AMD could release a GPU at 2x the performance and half the price. I'd just sit it out until the Nvidia price drops. I knew what I was getting into when I invested so heavily into Gsync.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Has Nvidia confirmed the $650 price? This thread is moving so fast, I must have missed that announcement.


No, but for some reason people seem to be taking that leak/rumor as gospel, even though pre-release price rumors are *always* high ($1350 Titan X, $850 Fury X, etc). Somehow people are simultaneously expecting a $650 1080 that is 20% faster than a 980 Ti, and a $300 P10 that is close to a 980 Ti.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Speak for yourself. I've got $2,100 dropped into Gsync monitors right now. AMD could release a GPU at 2x the performance and half the price. I'd just sit it out until the Nvidia price drops. I knew what I was getting into when I invested so heavily into Gsync.


well I'm on a gsync one too, but hell if I stayed on nvidia gpus if they were that much behind amd. If amd gave me a card that can run 1440p at 120 fps then I would surely take it over a nvidia one that runs 90 fps regardless of the fact it will let me use gsync. I'd have to be crazy not to.


----------



## jdstock76

I have a single G1 980ti FSX graphics score of 10200~ish. That's overclocked a smidge. So it appears the reference 1080 will be faster than the 980ti. I'm excited for the 1080ti if they do one.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jdstock76*
> 
> I have a single G1 980ti FSX graphics score of 10200~ish. That's overclocked a smidge. So it appears the reference 1080 will be faster than the 980ti. I'm excited for the 1080ti if they do one.


I'm waiting for HBM2, and buy a Titan if they don't release a xx80Ti. 2GHz on the core and HBM2, it'd be worth that money.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Speak for yourself. I've got $2,100 dropped into Gsync monitors right now. AMD could release a GPU at 2x the performance and half the price. I'd just sit it out until the Nvidia price drops. I knew what I was getting into when I invested so heavily into Gsync.


Thats a single brand only ecosystems for ya. IMHO, buying into anything that is so locked down is a bit short sighted. PhysX and G-Sync are great examples of tech not designed to move anything forward, they are there to lock you in.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> well I'm on a gsync one too, but hell if I stayed on nvidia gpus if they were that much behind amd. If amd gave me a card that can run 1440p at 120 fps then I would surely take it over a nvidia one that runs 90 fps regardless of the fact it will let me use gsync. I'd have to be crazy not to.


I'd have to give it a gen or two to settle up. The pain of buying my X34 is still too near.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Thats a single brand only ecosystems for ya. IMHO, buying into anything that is so locked down is a bit short sighted. PhysX and G-Sync are great examples of tech not designed to move anything forward, they are there to lock you in.


you don't agree it's good and think it's short sighted, he disagrees it's a reason not enjoy g-sync.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Thats a single brand only ecosystems for ya. IMHO, buying into anything that is so locked down is a bit short sighted. PhysX and G-Sync are great examples of tech not designed to move anything forward, they are there to lock you in.


You know. I tried out a few monitors without Gsync, and after the experience I had to go back. It just makes life so much easier. Especially if you're running higher res with a single GPU.

Too bad they don't have Gsync/Freesync monitors. Hell, I'd of paid more for my current monitor to have access to both.


----------



## KarathKasun

I dont understand that myself. The monitor manufactures should support both on the same hardware as one is an open standard.

Have a G-Sync input and a variable refresh DP input.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> I dont understand that myself. The monitor manufactures should support both on the same hardware as one is an open standard.
> 
> Have a G-Sync input and a variable refresh DP input.


Freesync is as open as North Korean borders.


----------



## KarathKasun

Is just uses DP variable refresh on the GPU -> monitor connection. The GPU side implementation is closed of course, its driver level.


----------



## Bogga

I want more performance than 980Ti performance or even 30% above that, so I'm looking at two cards. When I read about 980Ti-performance for 300$ (which I suppose will be 400$ here in Sweden) I thought that it would be awesome. But when I saw the review on the duo and saw the graphs on frame times it made me rethink...





I've been quite satisfied with SLI with both the 680's and the 970's and I suppose I'll stick to Nvidia and go for two 1080/x180/x80. I'm counting on approx 1800$ for two cards, two blocks, two backplates and one terminal.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> I want more performance than 980Ti performance or even 30% above that. So I'm looking at two cards, when I read about 980Ti-performance for 300$ (which I suppose will be 400$ here in Sweden) I thought that it would be awesome. But when I saw the review on the duo and saw the graphs on frame times it made me rethink...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been quite satisfied with SLI with both the 680's and the 970's and I suppose I'll stick to Nvidia and go for two 1080/x180/x80. I'm counting on approx 1800$ for two cards, two blocks, two backplates and one terminal.


The Pro Duo has higher variance than two card CF due to power limits.

R9 390(x) and Fury(X) CF frame times are better from what I have seen.


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Maxwell driver support. Farewell...

That's the worst thing for us who want to wait for the big chips from Nvidia/ AMD.


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Speak for yourself. I've got $2,100 dropped into Gsync monitors right now. AMD could release a GPU at 2x the performance and half the price. I'd just sit it out until the Nvidia price drops. I knew what I was getting into when I invested so heavily into Gsync.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats a single brand only ecosystems for ya. IMHO, buying into anything that is so locked down is a bit short sighted. PhysX and G-Sync are great examples of tech not designed to move anything forward, they are there to lock you in.
Click to expand...

Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.


What happens when NV announces G-Sync 2.0, rendering all of those expensive "gaming" monitors sporting OG G-Sync obsolete over a simple checkbox feature? Monitors tend to have a VERY long lifespan.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.


That's not entirely true. While I wouldn't care as much if they were the same price I still care that there is another adaptive sync option in place that Nvidia is denying me access to for no other reason than they want me to buy into g-sync.


----------



## Kokin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I wonder how 980 Ti resale values will look in about a year (when the real high-end chips arrive). Can't go wasting my energy upgrading at every new power-sipping mid-sized die, but the resale value hit is painful to watch.


Nothing compared to cars.







My car is depreciating in value each day and I have to pay extra each month for interest.


----------



## xP_0nex

Probably going to be over my budget anyway... Guess a used 980 or 980 Ti is all I'll be getting.


----------



## jdstock76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xP_0nex*
> 
> Probably going to be over my budget anyway... Guess a used 980 or 980 Ti is all I'll be getting.


That's not a bad idea really. You may be able to find a used 980ti for less than $500. That's a steal for the performance you get.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xP_0nex*
> 
> Probably going to be over my budget anyway... Guess a used 980 or 980 Ti is all I'll be getting.


No, you can get new GP106(GTX 1060 TI)


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.
> 
> 
> 
> What happens when NV announces G-Sync 2.0, rendering all of those expensive "gaming" monitors sporting OG G-Sync obsolete? Monitors tend to have a VERY long lifespan.
Click to expand...

Well, they won't just stop working.

People do tend to keep monitors longer than video cards. I would say I buy a new video card every 2-3 years and a new monitor every 5-6 years or so. I guess it would be more painful for some than others, but I wouldn't see much chance of Nvidia not making new GPU's would be backward compatible with G-Sync "1.0".


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.


Any technology that locks you into a single ecosystem is bad in my opinion. If you buy a G-Sync monitor you are essential locked into buying only Nvidia cards and paying whatever price they see fit to charge. I would rather deal with a little bit of tearing than let a monitor dictate what graphics card I can buy.


----------



## prjindigo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> There will be a large die Pascal chip aka GP100. Or it could be GP102. That's what he/she was referring to.
> 
> Are you still on a mission to suggest there won't be a large die Pascal chip?


Never was. Was saying that the Tesla P100 was not gonna appear on a pcie card due to wattage, clock, extra circuitry and the methodology of the HBM2 on it.

It has literally 50% more power than a GP104-300 but they can't get the clock up for some reason.

But after all the Spewgulls saw Dr Mumbles hold up a PCIE device (a dual K40) someone's chart fed them laxatives and mm^2's and they started swooping in squirting "titan" all over the web.

Neither the P100 nor any chip highly similar to it will be released for desktop gaming - just too much wattage for the slot. Articles like http://wccftech.com/nvidias-gp100-pascal-flagship-pack-4096-bit-memory-bus-8hi-hbm-stacks/ became bibles to the Spewgulls. Shame is that was all semi-educated speculation.

Hey, maybe we'll see a nice _TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR_ pcie card labled "Titan P" in November! Who knows!


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.
> 
> 
> 
> That's not entirely true. While I wouldn't care as much if they were the same price I still care that there is another adaptive sync option in place that Nvidia is denying me access to for no other reason than they want me to buy into g-sync.
Click to expand...

I suppose there is that. Still, there really aren't *that* many monitor options we're locked out of by choosing G-Sync. Similar feature sets are available for both.

Before this goes any further, let me just say that sure, it would be preferable if both Nvidia and AMD used the same adaptive sync standard, and absolutely it would be better if we could still use any monitor with either brand of GPU. I've just always been an Nvidia guy, so I'm not particularly bothered by the way things have developed, though it would be nice if G-Sync were a bit less expensive.


----------



## Testier

The higher clockspeed was expected as I said before...
Wondering how much headroom is left in them. I think we will all be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> Gotta respectfully disagree there. G-Sync most certainly moved things forward. People get bent out of shape when companies release proprietary tech, but many times it makes for better products. G-Sync is just one example. Blu-Ray would be another. I think it's been well enough established that, all things being equal, G-Sync would be the logical choice over FreeSync. Unfortunately it is more expensive, so it comes down to individual preference. If they were the same price, no one would care that G-Sync is proprietary tech.
> 
> 
> 
> Any technology that locks you into a single ecosystem is bad in my opinion. If you buy a G-Sync monitor you are essential locked into buying only Nvidia cards and paying whatever price they see fit to charge. I would rather deal with a little bit of tearing than let a monitor dictate what graphics card I can buy.
Click to expand...

I think it's been pretty clear that Nvidia is driven by market forces just like AMD.

We have always paid more for performance. This is no different.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> What happens when NV announces G-Sync 2.0, rendering all of those expensive "gaming" monitors sporting OG G-Sync obsolete over a simple checkbox feature? Monitors tend to have a VERY long lifespan.


The monitor keeps working of course. As for current Gsync, I'd be amazed if they dropped whatever support is required within a 10 year time span. Likely long after many who get such monitors have moved onto something else.

I know what got me back on Gsync was this,

I tried out a few 4k screens without Gsync over a 2 month time span. Every game I played I had to spend 30 minutes + tweaking settings in game, and in Nvidia control panel using a combination of Triple buffering, Adaptive, or frame rate limiting to get the game to run stutter/screen tear free at such a high res. Sometimes I'd get things setup only to have to do it again once I hit a more demanding part. This was a constant thing. Sure, I would end up getting games running well, but, it took a lot of time/effort.

Now, repeat that over 10, 20, 30 games, whatever. Update a driver. Now suddenly if you do a fresh driver update all of that tweaking is gone and you have to start the process all over again. Or, maybe the driver alters the games performance in some way and you have to start over again.

Toss Gsync into the mix. Suddenly I don't have to spend 30 min getting a demanding game to run without stutter/screen tear. At best I might have to drop a setting or two to keep the fps up. A driver update is no longer something I dread since I just do fresh installs of it. I don't have to repeat the tedious process of tweaking every game I play after each driver up date. Games just tend to run pretty well. It becomes almost plug and play.

So that's it. Gsync turns gaming at demanding res from a laborious process of trail trial and error, into basically plug and play. No it's not perfect, but, damn it just makes life so much easier at demanding res.


----------



## KarathKasun

I dont care what brand a GPU is as long as it provides the best performance for the price range I need at the time.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> I suppose there is that. Still, there really aren't *that* many monitor options we're locked out of by choosing G-Sync. Similar feature sets are available for both.
> 
> Before this goes any further, let me just say that sure, it would be preferable if both Nvidia and AMD used the same adaptive sync standard, and absolutely it would be better if we could still use any monitor with either brand of GPU. I've just always been an Nvidia guy, so I'm not particularly bothered by the way things have developed, though it would be nice if G-Sync were a bit less expensive.


That makes sense. I just despise the way these companies play that game.... and I just don't feel like playing it. I am not such a snob that I can't deal with a little tearing. I guess that applies to 4K as well. I know what kind of money I would be required to spend to really take advantage of 4k, so I just choose not to do it. I love this hobby, but this hobby isn't going to dictate my spending habits and choices that much.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> The monitor keeps working of course. As for current Gsync, I'd be amazed if they dropped whatever support is required within a 10 year time span. Likely long after many who get such monitors have moved onto something else.
> 
> I know what got me back on Gsync was this,
> 
> I tried out a few 4k screens without Gsync over a 2 month time span. Every game I played I had to spend 30 minutes + tweaking settings in game, and in Nvidia control panel using a combination of Triple buffering, Adaptive, or frame rate limiting to get the game to run stutter/screen tear free at such a high res. Sometimes I'd get things setup only to have to do it again once I hit a more demanding part. This was a constant thing. Sure, I would end up getting games running well, but, it took a lot of time/effort.
> 
> Now, repeat that over 10, 20, 30 games, whatever. Update a driver. Now suddenly if you do a fresh driver update all of that tweaking is gone and you have to start the process all over again. Or, maybe the driver alters the games performance in some way and you have to start over again.
> 
> Toss Gsync into the mix. Suddenly I don't have to spend 30 min getting a demanding game to run without stutter/screen tear. At best I might have to drop a setting or two to keep the fps up. A driver update is no longer something I dread since I just do fresh installs of it. I don't have to repeat the tedious process of tweaking every game I play after each driver up date. Games just tend to run pretty well. It becomes almost plug and play.
> 
> *So that's it. Gsync turns gaming at demanding res from a laborious process of trail trial and error, into basically plug and play.* No it's not perfect, but, damn it just makes life so much easier at demanding res.


Sounds like you need to get a console...


----------



## Ithanul

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> 27K vs 24K is 25% ? Oc'd 980Ti scores 29K.
> 
> Lol, used 980Ti's have been dropping prices, but if this is launched at $650 I hope they won't go up again.


I know if they launch for that price I am not touching them. Considering I got my used Ti cheaper than that with the waterblock.







Plus, this small die anyway, I want big die.

Though this is a benchmark, I want screens of one folding and gaming. Though, be nice if one tested at throwing its compute performance around.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smanci*
> 
> Gimmie some power consumption numbers.


Indeed. Especially at 100% load.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Sounds like you need to get a console...


----------



## camry racing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> I suppose there is that. Still, there really aren't *that* many monitor options we're locked out of by choosing G-Sync. Similar feature sets are available for both.
> 
> Before this goes any further, let me just say that sure, it would be preferable if both Nvidia and AMD used the same adaptive sync standard, and absolutely it would be better if we could still use any monitor with either brand of GPU. I've just always been an Nvidia guy, so I'm not particularly bothered by the way things have developed, though it would be nice if G-Sync were a bit less expensive.


The thing is that Vesa made a deal with freesync so there is going to be more freesync monitors that Gsync ones. I own a Gsync monitor and love it and dont plan to change it in the near future also I dont Plan changing my titan x either


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pompss*
> 
> Want to see 4k gaming benchmarks.
> 60 fps ? i really hope so


Same here. I will be picking up a 4k tv. To replace my 1440p monitor.


----------



## maltamonk

Can someone chime in on a question for me? If the 950 replaced the 750ti and not the 750, why would it not be reasonable for the 1080 to replace the 980ti and not the 980?


----------



## Mudfrog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jdstock76*
> 
> That's not a bad idea really. You may be able to find a used 980ti for less than $500. That's a steal for the performance you get.


The Zotac 980ti Amped is only $539 brand new atm (no rebates). The price is falling fast.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

The core clock is scary high. Is there a reason for this? I know in CPUs you usually got higher clock speed but you had to have longer pipelines.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Can someone chime in on a question for me? If the 950 replaced the 750ti and not the 750, why would it not be reasonable for the 1080 to replace the 980ti and not the 980?


I don't think the 950 really replaces the 750 ti. The 750 ti has a base TDP of 60w. The 950 has a base TDP of 90w. Basically the 750 ti can exist with the 950 since it makes such a great HTPC card.


----------



## twitchyzero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I wonder how 980 Ti resale values will look in about a year (when the real high-end chips arrive). Can't go wasting my energy upgrading at every new power-sipping mid-sized die, but the resale value hit is painful to watch.
> 
> The only potentially demanding game of this year that I'm even interested in is the new Deus Ex, so... just give the old "wait and see" method a try or preemptively sell for a decent price while I can? I appreciate any advice, fellow GPU addicts.


it's simple

if you buy computer hardware, don't even bank on resale value. Just assume you'll get minimal returns when the new stuff is out.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mudfrog*
> 
> The Zotac 980ti Amped is only $539 brand new atm (no rebates). The price is falling fast.


950$ over here


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Can someone chime in on a question for me? If the 950 replaced the 750ti and not the 750, why would it not be reasonable for the 1080 to replace the 980ti and not the 980?


I don't think it is an unreasonable expectation, but the truth is Nvidia isn't consistent about it. The only thing they are consistent on is that a higher number or Ti within a product family means it is faster relative to the lower non-ti in that product family. That's it.

Just like how people were incorrectly insisting there wouldn't be a 980ti because it'd be a different chip than the 980.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Can someone chime in on a question for me? If the 950 replaced the 750ti and not the 750, why would it not be reasonable for the 1080 to replace the 980ti and not the 980?


Its too early for a 1080Ti release. Midrange comes out first. This has been the trend from the previous cycle. Judging by the rumored numbers, this is the 1080. We are expecting monster numbers from the Ti, this is not it.


----------



## Mudfrog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> 950$ over here


Ouch.

I'm half tempted to pick up a 980ti now that it's falling. I only game at 1080 / 60 and I really don't want to wait a couple of months for the aftermarket cards to be released.


----------



## TUFinside

I'll put my money on HBM2, i feel like those 1070/1080 are just here to fill a gap...with money.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I don't think the 950 really replaces the 750 ti. The 750 ti has a base TDP of 60w. The 950 has a base TDP of 90w. Basically the 750 ti can exist with the 950 since it makes such a great HTPC card.


Any idea if the 950 does 4k 60hz 4:4:4. Thinking of picking this up for my HTPC.


----------



## TranquilTempest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Can someone chime in on a question for me? If the 950 replaced the 750ti and not the 750, why would it not be reasonable for the 1080 to replace the 980ti and not the 980?


gtx 950 is a 54% bigger die than the 750 Ti, 1080 is a smaller die than 980 Ti(exact numbers would be speculation, but probably close to half the area). While there are complications like increasing wafer cost, they aren't really the same class of product.


----------



## Mudfrog

Since the 980ti is a larger die than the 1070 / 1080. Are there any benefits to going with a 980ti?


----------



## marik123

Hmmm, maybe it's time to sell my GTX980 now


----------



## jdstock76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> The higher clockspeed was expected as I said before...
> Wondering how much headroom is left in them. I think we will all be pleasantly surprised.


I would assume since this is the first of Pascal there will much more headroom than was available with the 980ti. At least we can hope.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Can someone chime in on a question for me? If the 950 replaced the 750ti and not the 750, why would it not be reasonable for the 1080 to replace the 980ti and not the 980?


The 1080 is a replacement for the 980. 1070 the 970. The 1080ti, if they do one, will most likely be released early spring 2017 after the Titan variation, if they do one. At least if they follow what they have been doing.


----------



## darealist

So a year later... meh. Now it takes around 2 years to get an actual upgrade.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Any idea if the 950 does 4k 60hz 4:4:4. Thinking of picking this up for my HTPC.


The 950 should have an HDMI 2.0 port so yea. You're going to want to make sure you have a new high speed HDMI cable capable of 18Gbs for 60hz 4k 4:4:4 to run without issues.


----------



## Creator

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUFinside*
> 
> I'll put my money on HBM2, i feel like those 1070/1080 are just here to fill a gap...with money.


Possibly.

But consider that mid-range upgrades hold the best performing GPUs for half the cycle now (ignoring the Titans). Is it really all the different upgrading from a 680, to a 980, to a 1080, versus a 780 Ti, 980 Ti, and eventual 1080 Ti? You're pretty much getting the same jump in performance from your previous GPU in about the same amount of time.

But I guess you are referring to those who will go 980 Ti -> 1080 -> Ti, in which case I would agree.


----------



## TranquilTempest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mudfrog*
> 
> Since the 980ti is a larger die than the 1070 / 1080. Are there any benefits to going with a 980ti?


Well, you can buy it right now, but other than that we don't know how good a deal it will be.

The point is that people shouldn't be paying more for it if it costs less to make. Hopefully AMD is competitive enough to make that the case.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> The 950 should have an HDMI 2.0 port so yea. You're going to want to make sure you have a new high speed HDMI cable capable of 18Gbs for 60hz 4k 4:4:4 to run without issues.


Thanks.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TranquilTempest*
> 
> Well, you can buy it right now, but other than that we don't know how good a deal it will be.
> *
> The point is that people shouldn't be paying more for it if it costs less to make.* Hopefully AMD is competitive enough to make that the case.


Exactly. They should be paying the same damn amount if it costs less to make. That's how it's always been in America.


----------



## szeged

yep definitely waiting for pascal titan then if this is all we get for another $700


----------



## jdstock76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> yep definitely waiting for pascal titan then if this is all we get for another $700


I don't think it will be $700. Worse case $650. Imo


----------



## Woundingchaney

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jdstock76*
> 
> I don't think it will be $700. Worse case $650. Imo


Well that would be 700 after tax for most people.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Clock to clock the 1080 appears to be slower than the 980Ti. If that's true the only real advantage is in the clock speed increase...


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Clock to clock the 1080 appears to be slower than the 980Ti. If that's true the only real advantage is in the clock speed increase...


Just like Maxwell 980 over Kepler 780Ti.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Clock to clock the 1080 appears to be slower than the 980Ti. If that's true the only real advantage is in the clock speed increase...


And for that reason I don't care about that benchmark.
It shows slower clock to clock, indeed. And that won't happen.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Just like Maxwell over Kepler.


Which is kind of shocking considering the massive node shrink this time.


----------



## szeged

and thats why we dont judge performance across architectures on a clock vs clock basis.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Why not? I mean, ultimate performance of the card is all I'm really interested in. If the clock to clock difference is negligible then that would mean the 1080 would have to clock to something crazy like 2000 MHz in order to significantly beat an overclocked 980 TI.


----------



## EightDee8D

Even if it performs just as 980ti clock vs clock, that would be 40% more IPC assuming this card has 2048cc, or 10% more IPC if it has 2560cc.


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Why not? I mean, ultimate performance of the card is all I'm really interested in. If the clock to clock difference is negligible then that would mean the 1080 would have to clock to something crazy like 2000 MHz in order to significantly beat an overclocked 980 TI.


because 2000mhz sounds crazy for the 980ti...but seeings as usually new architectures clock a lot higher than previous gens then 2000 might end up being just a +50 on the core type deal without having to even bump the fan speed.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Even if it performs just as 980ti clock vs clock, that would be 40% more IPC assuming this card has 2048cc, or 10% more IPC if it has 2560cc.


No, mate. Cores are included into the IPC.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> because 2000mhz sounds crazy for the 980ti...but seeings as usually new architectures clock a lot higher than previous gens then 2000 might end up being just a +50 on the core type deal without having to even bump the fan speed.


That' going to be crazy if that happens! I can't imagine seeing a 24/7 core clock on a gpu being 2000 or more...lol


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Even if it performs just as 980ti clock vs clock, that would be 40% more IPC assuming this card has 2048cc, or 10% more IPC if it has 2560cc.


Yeah but who cares? I mean if these benchmarks are accurate then this is the card we are going to get. And it doesn't look like it's going to be any major upgrade over the 980 TI. Which is the point. Now when we get the true big Pascal next year that IPC difference will be huge. You are also not taking into account the benefits of the GDDR5X memory.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *szeged*
> 
> because 2000mhz sounds crazy for the 980ti...but seeings as usually new architectures clock a lot higher than previous gens then 2000 might end up being just a +50 on the core type deal without having to even bump the fan speed.


That's still just pure speculation though. You can just assume that it will clock to 3000 MHz if you want to but that doesn't make it realistic.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> No, mate. Cores are included into the IPC.


Yeah, IPC isn't right word to use here.


----------



## szeged

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> That's still just pure speculation though. You can just assume that it will clock to 3000 MHz if you want to but that doesn't make it realistic.


and you can ignore the fact that this has happened almost everything single time we get a new gen all you want, doesnt make it false.


----------



## renx

I'm counting on Huang this time.
Tomorrow he will show up all in leather, and will put this benchmark to shame.


----------



## jincuteguy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Tommorow live event will be on twitch :
> 
> https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320/photo/1


so what is this livestream for?


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Tommorow live event will be on twitch :
> 
> https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320/photo/1
> 
> 
> 
> so what is this livestream for?
Click to expand...

To stream the Jen-Hsun leather jacket fashion runway event.


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Sounds like you need to get a console...


Aww, now you've gone and done it!
_
[rumages around for pitchfork...]_


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Yeah but who cares? I mean if these benchmarks are accurate then this is the card we are going to get. *And it doesn't look like it's going to be any major upgrade over the 980 TI*. Which is the point. Now when we get the true big Pascal next year that IPC difference will be huge. You are also not taking into account the benefits of the GDDR5X memory.


Its not for 980TI owners.
GTX560TI-GTX680-GTX980-GTX1080 -GX 104cads
GTX580-GTX780TI-GTX980TI-GTX1080TI- flagships


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Why not? I mean, ultimate performance of the card is all I'm really interested in. If the clock to clock difference is negligible then that would mean the 1080 would have to clock to something crazy like 2000 MHz in order to significantly beat an overclocked 980 TI.


Not sure what was expected. It is clock for clock about the same speed with significantly fewer cores, so the per core improvement is still pretty large. When you get a core count equivalent 1080 Ti, it'll be massively faster than the 980 Ti.


----------



## Yungbenny911

same thing happens all the time, new GPU matches older GPU LN2 clocks on air lol. people complain it's not much of an upgrade (clock for clock argument) until prices are revealed. You would think by now people would learn, but seems like some people are allergic to all things logical...


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yungbenny911*
> 
> same thing happens all the time, new GPU matches older GPU LN2 clocks on air lol. people complain it's not much of an upgrade (clock for clock argument) until prices are revealed. You would think by now people would learn, but seems like some people are allergic to all things logical...


You tell em Yung B


----------



## Slomo4shO

As expected, under 10% performance deltas between new "top tier" midgrade chip and previous generation top tier chip.

Anyone expecting GTX 980 prices for this card is delusional.


----------



## Blackvette94

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> As expected, under 10% performance deltas between new "top tier" midgrade chip and previous generation top tier chip.
> 
> Anyone expecting GTX 980 prices for this card is delusional.


Where are you seeing 10% performance advantage? It looks like more then that...


----------



## iLeakStuff

For those that waited, no matter if its $500 or $600 for the GTX 1080, it will still be a much better buy than GTX 980Ti.
These people shouldnt complain. Those with GTX 980 or anything below. It will be a much better deal than Maxwell cards.
GTX 980Ti/Fury X owners, maybe have a tiny reason to be a little dissappointed. But Nvidia seems to stick with +25% for midrange cards over previous flagship cards. So this was expected.


----------



## czin125

Is that Stock vs 50% OC?


----------



## s1rrah

That's not bad ...

But not good enough. Dual Ref 980's staying in my rig till the high end cards are released. Whenever that is (and if) ...


----------



## iLeakStuff

Getting myself GTX 1070 SLI or single GTX 1080 here most liklely. It all depends on price


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Many people are unhappy but 1080 percent to 980 Ti is better than GTX 980 to GTX 780 Ti.








*You are all agree with me ?*


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> As expected, under 10% performance deltas between new "top tier" midgrade chip and previous generation top tier chip.
> 
> Anyone expecting GTX 980 prices for this card is delusional.


Why delusional? That's what we got with the 680 and the 980.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> Many people are unhappy but 1080 percent to 980 Ti is better than GTX 980 to GTX 780 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *You are all agree with me ?*


Two weeks ago people thought it was going to be slower than the 980 Ti. Now it's faster than an overclocked one, and it's a disappointment.


----------



## iLeakStuff

GTX 1080 cooler is confirmed. This is our upcoming flagship card
http://videocardz.com/59583/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-cooler-confirmed


----------



## xentrox

1080 numbers are on par of what I was expecting. Time to wait for the superior Ti.


----------



## jbmayes2000

Can we expect 90+ FPS from one of these cards on 1440 with Ultra/Maxed out Settings?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Core being 1860MHz means % OC is going to be a lot lower. My old HD 7950 was 800MHz stock and did 1200MHz. Thats a 50% OC. Now this card has to OC 2600MHz+ to archive similar % OC. I find it hard to bealive this card will OC much pass 2GHz.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> GTX 1080 cooler is confirmed. This is our upcoming flagship card
> http://videocardz.com/59583/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-cooler-confirmed


It looks ok to me, as if it was an after market cooler.

Looking forward to see how the new ACX looks like.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> It looks ok to me, as if it was an after market cooler.
> 
> Looking forward to see how the new ACX looks like.


I`m getting MSI or Asus versions anyway with better cooling


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> GTX 1080 cooler is confirmed. This is our upcoming flagship card
> http://videocardz.com/59583/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-cooler-confirmed


Awful


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Why delusional? That's what we got with the 680 and the 980.


The 680 replaced the $580 price point which the Titan raised to $1000. The 980 replaced the GTX 980 Ti at around the same performance and was priced competitively to directly compete with the R9 290X. The Fury X is already slower than the GTX 980 Ti. Nvidia will be replacing their top chip with the midgrade chip. They will milk it for all it is worth before competition forces them to release their big chip.


----------



## HAL900

FEJK


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jbmayes2000*
> 
> Can we expect 90+ FPS from these cards on 1440 with Ultra/Maxed out Settings?


With SLI yes!


----------



## magnek

SLI can go die in a fire for all I care


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Core being 1860MHz means % OC is going to be a lot lower. My old HD 7950 was 800MHz stock and did 1200MHz. Thats a 50% OC. Now this card has to OC 2600MHz+ to archive similar % OC. I find it hard to bealive this card will OC much pass 2GHz.


Food for thought:

First Kepler Tesla card based on GK110: 706MHz
Geforce Kepler card based on GK110: 993MHz (40% higher)
(and it could easily be overclocked to 1100MHz)

First Pascal Tesla card: 1500MHz
Geforce Pascal card: 2100MHz (40% higher).

I think that there is still good overclock potential with GTX 1080 at 1860MHz


----------



## lahvie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes, you are right. Still speculation on the price part.
> Like FLCLimax says, I think a GTX 1080 with +25% over GTX 980Ti is worth $499 max. Thats my buying limit for a card with this performance.


ah I'm thinking the same @ 500$
Maybe we will see some better more solid numbers soon, guess we will tomorrow.
How much these TI's going to be going for if this is true


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> SLI can go die in a fire for all I care


Buy enough Nvidia stock to own the company and you can hire the AMD driver team to work on your SLI support to make your dream into a reality


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I think that there is still good overclock potential with GTX 1080 at 1860MHz


3dmark 2013 reads steady 3d clock and no clock boost or max est clock
If in 3DMark 2011 it is the same that there may be 2000 Mhz +
But this is jpg. And if so, I think it's Fejk


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 3dmark 2013 reads steady 3d clock and no clock boost or max est clock
> If in 3DMark 2011 it is the same that there may be 2000 Mhz +
> But this is jpg. And if so, I think it's Fejk


Yep, Chiphell says the GTX 1080 runs up to 1950MHz so that may be something 3DMark isnt reading.
No it isnt fake. Its in their database


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Why delusional? That's what we got with the 680 and the 980.
> Two weeks ago people thought it was going to be slower than the 980 Ti. Now it's faster than an overclocked one, and it's a disappointment.


Lol, true.I remember that. it's the wishy-washy syndrome...


----------



## DETERMINOLOGY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Looks like the 980ti stay in the rig for a while... Eggh, this 2 year upgrade cycle is such a drag. You get nothing out of your old card and it takes 2 years to see meaningful upgrade..


im sorta thinking the same thing though...If the numbers isnt right i can hang on to my 980Ti with no problem


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Two weeks ago people thought it was going to be slower than the 980 Ti. Now it's faster than an overclocked one, and it's a disappointment.


Hah, this is what I was talking about earlier with iLeak in a PM. Not only is it a huge increase over the 980 Ti, it's a massive increase over the 980 as well.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yep, Chiphell says the GTX 1080 runs up to 1950MHz so that may be something 3DMark isnt reading.
> No it isnt fake. Its in their database


If so, then the card is the oc to 99% and should be compared with maxwell oc
980 TI 1455MHZ has the same performance 720p and 20% lower in FHD

Only you invoke the server and I do not agree throughput. 10 GHZ and gddr5x it should be unless 640GB not 320


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Hah, this is what I was talking about earlier with iLeak in a PM. Not only is it a huge increase over the 980 Ti, it's a massive increase over the 980 as well.


Yes, but still, chances that the card is being underrated by improper drivers are huge.
Mostly because the gap existing between tomorrow's event, and the real launch date.
I don't think they have proper drivers.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> But this is jpg. And if so, I think it's Fejk


But all those "1070" vids were legit?


----------



## carlhil2

Reference vs reference....OC vs OC....OC 980Ti vs reference 1080....reference 980Ti vs OCed 1080....it's all good....


----------



## DNMock

Fact check this for me someone:

Someone help me here a bit, but if memory serves, the way Firestrike is coded Nvidia GPU's turn out higher numbers. Not in a conspiracy theory kind of way, but in a "that's just how it ended up" kind of way. AMD GPU's (barring failworks settings) usually tend to close the gap (or widen the gap if they are in the lead) with their Nvidia counterparts when tested in games as opposed to the firestrike score differences.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> No it isnt fake. Its in their database


link??


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Reference vs reference....OC vs OC....OC 980Ti vs reference 1080....reference 980Ti vs OCed 1080....it's all good....


Just not 980Ti OC vs FuryX


----------



## tweezlednutball

I have the feeling AMD is going to take the performance/watt crown, and by a large margin.


----------



## nakano2k1

Well, we'll find out in T-minus 22 hours 55 minutes...

Should be interesting to see if it checks all the boxes in performance and price.


----------



## HAL900

XD


----------



## WhyCry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 
> 
> XD


That's fake, 3dmark never recognizes GPUs before release, also it would never be a valid score. Not sure why PCTuning made this.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Two weeks ago people thought it was going to be slower than the 980 Ti. Now it's faster than an overclocked one, and it's a disappointment.


Who ever said that? All I've ever said was that when comparing max OC to max OC the 1080 would likely only be 10-15% faster than a 980Ti and these leaks would seem to bear that out. In other words, it looks like mostly a side grade for those who have a 980Ti or Titan X already, just like the 980 was (maybe a little stronger than the 980 was).


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WhyCry*
> 
> That's fake, 3dmark never recognizes GPUs before release, also it would never be a valid score. Not sure why PCTuning made this.


Unless the tester used an unreleased driver with the correct ID written in the driver...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Unless the tester used an unreleased driver with the correct ID written in the driver...


I thought somebody said they couldn't find that score on the 3dmark site?


----------



## WhyCry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Unless the tester used an unreleased driver with the correct ID written in the driver...


Then it would go under 'driver name', but title would still say 'Generic VGA'. Some GTX 950 are still shown as Generic, in fact most Pro Duos too.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Unless the tester used an unreleased driver with the correct ID written in the driver...


But then 3dMark would have to have the update to be able to correlate the driver with their database to produce "GTX 1080" in the field.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Ok, but are we sure 3DMark havent added support for the GPUs? Not saying it isnt fake, just asking.
If we can`t find the result anyway, then its probably fake


----------



## renx

Huang will claim nearly 2X performance gain over the last generation (GTX1080 vs GTX980).
You guys wait and see. We're gonna have to wait for more benchmarks.


----------



## HAL900

jpg is always Fejk


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WhyCry*
> 
> Then it would go under 'driver name', but title would still say 'Generic VGA'. Some GTX 950 are still shown as Generic, in fact most Pro Duos too.


Gotcha.


----------



## CalinTM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Food for thought:
> 
> First Kepler Tesla card based on GK110: 706MHz
> Geforce Kepler card based on GK110: 993MHz (40% higher)
> (and it could easily be overclocked to 1100MHz)
> 
> First Pascal Tesla card: 1500MHz
> Geforce Pascal card: 2100MHz (40% higher).
> 
> I think that there is still good overclock potential with GTX 1080 at 1860MHz


Yep. That i wanted to say right now. Probably +350 avg to max'ish, manual OC from this 1080. If its 1800mhz at stock boost.

So, if on maxwell the default OC was 1500, here will be 2000mhz+

And plus mature drivers in time, even more performance. Also we need to keep in mind this 3dmark test, if its true, doesn't translate really good in real life gaming performance. It could be even higher in gaming vs. maxwell cards. With better drivers, more. And we need to see how they will perform in dx12.

DOOM game i think will have a setting for async shaders. Use Compute Shaders, thats the name they called it.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

So recap, possible no oc headroom, this is a $550 flagship card tops..

What else im missing?


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> So recap, possible no oc headroom, this is a $550 flagship card tops..
> 
> What else im missing?


You missed an optimistic attitude.


----------



## Silent Scone

I chuckled at how many people are viewing this thread right now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> SLI can go die in a fire for all I care


Ah all in good time my friend, have patience. You may not be saying that in a month or two.


----------



## TrueForm

Disappointing for 980ti users, great for a person like me


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I chuckled at how many people are viewing this thread right now.


How come? I expect the potential buyers here want 980Ti performance at a 970 price tag.


----------



## HAL900

Memory Bandwidth 320 GB/s

Why in 1080 Memory Bandwidth is 320 ??


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> So recap, possible no oc headroom, this is a $550 flagship card tops..
> 
> What else im missing?


Probably missing that it'll be $650, not $550.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

This thread is moving so fast today. Can't wait to see what tomorrow will bring... Guaranteed 50 page thread 30 minutes after release...


----------



## DarkBlade6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alawadhi3000*
> 
> *GTX980 and GTX780 Ti were both 28nm cards*, the GTX1080 is 16nm.


398mm² vs 561mm² tough...


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> This thread is moving so fast today. Can't wait to see what tomorrow will bring... Guaranteed 50 page thread 30 minutes after release...


indeed. tomorrow people will cry disappointment, but a month later they'll be mashing F5 button on newegg trying to get their card in good OCN fashion


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> indeed. tomorrow people will cry disappointment, but a month later they'll be mashing F5 button on newegg trying to get their card in good OCN fashion


Sounds about right. Email notification is better though. Less stressful.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkBlade6*
> 
> 398mm² vs 561mm² tough...


Yes, but Maxwell had a performance 40% higher , pascal only 10%+
Here the greatest a new lithography . Performance per watt and high clock


----------



## CalinTM

They milk it on purpose.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Probably missing that it'll be $650, not $550.


This is not a $650 card sorry, But you always see the one that justify it..


----------



## KeepWalkinG

The price will be 500$ max if this is OC 1080.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

8GB is nice. 4K will not be a problem.


----------



## FatalProximity

How badly would my CPU (2500k @4.5) bottleneck a 1080? Is it time for a full upgrade?


----------



## HAL900

Additionally, the GDDR5X modules are clocked at 2500 MHz (which is shown as 5000+ MHz in 3DMark). However the effective clock is 10000 MHz, which means the bandwidth is somewhere around 320 GB/s (assuming it's 256-bit wide).

Even though there is nothing to read it as there is 320 GB / s


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> indeed. tomorrow people will cry disappointment, but a month later they'll be mashing F5 button on newegg trying to get their card in good OCN fashion


So far so good this far. What will be disappointing?


----------



## Asus11

my thoughts are

1070 will be GTX 980 TI performance or even 5% better once optimized @ 399

1080 will be 599 with 20% better performance than 980 ti

they will only give the 1080 GDDR5X so they can make it plausible to charge an extra 200 for a little gain

not sure how it will all good down though.. my 980 ti is still a great card


----------



## Asus11

del


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> my thoughts are
> 
> 1070 will be GTX 980 TI performance or even 5% better once optimized @ 399
> 
> 1080 will be 599 with 20% better performance than 980 ti
> 
> they will only give the 1080 GDDR5X so they can make it plausible to charge an extra 200 for a little gain
> 
> not sure how it will all good down though.. my 980 ti is still a great card


Not a bad guess. I`m hoping for
GTX 1080 +30% over 980Ti
GTX 1070 +10% over GTX 980Ti

My other thoughs are:
Why can 1070 function with normal GDDR5 but 1080 is coupled with GDDR5X?


----------



## zealord

just came home. So what's up guys

is this a stock 1080 vs OC 980 TI or what is going on here?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Not a bad guess. I`m hoping for
> GTX 1080 +30% over 980Ti
> GTX 1070 +10% over GTX 980Ti
> 
> My other thoughs are:
> Why can 1070 function with normal GDDR5 but 1080 is coupled with GDDR5X?


its probably just done so they can fit the 1070 in that sweet spot price bracket

no doubt it will be the one that sells the most


----------



## renx

I keep reading and tying up loose ends, and I don't spot chances of disappointment coming tomorrow.
This benchmark shown by videocardz is already interesting, and it can only improve.
We put the GTX1080 side by side with the GTX980 (since that's the card it means to replace!), and it's over 50% faster.
And it's still the worst possible scenario.
Drivers are not only not mature, but not even official. Hard to tell if the GPU is working properly.
We don't even have reliable information.

.


----------



## Bogga

Call me crazy... but I will be tapping F5 like crazy on various swedish sites on release day. Just got ordered in for overtime which gives me approximately half the cost of a 1080. So sign me up for two!


----------



## Maintenance Bot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> just came home. So what's up guys
> 
> is this a stock 1080 vs OC 980 TI or what is going on here?


Seems to be the case I think.


----------



## madpav3l

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FatalProximity*
> 
> How badly would my CPU (2500k @4.5) bottleneck a 1080? Is it time for a full upgrade?


Well I had [email protected] with OC GTX 980 Ti and after upgrade to 6700K 4.5GHz my fps increased significantly like buying a new GPU... Before the upgrade Witcher 3, 1440p medium details 40-50fps with drops to 30fps., after the upgrade max. details 60+ fps no drops.
So I think it will be limited.


----------



## SSJVegeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marik123*
> 
> Hmmm, maybe it's time to sell my GTX980 now


Sold mine over a week ago for £350. They are going tor £300/£310 now.

Be quick if you want more money for yours.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> The price will be 500$ max if this is OC 1080.


If this is an OC 1080 and not a standard 1080, it'll probably be closer to $750.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I keep reading and tying up loose ends, and I don't spot chances of disappointment coming tomorrow.
> This benchmark shown by videocardz is already interesting, and it can only improve.
> We put the GTX1080 side by side with the GTX980 (since that's the card it means to replace!), and it's over 50% faster.
> And it's still the worst possible scenario.
> Drivers are not only not mature, but not even official. Hard to tell if the GPU is working properly.
> We don't even have reliable information.
> 
> .


If this card is $650, it's replacing the 980Ti, not the 980, no matter what they name the card.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> If this is an OC 1080 and not a standard 1080, it'll probably be closer to $750.
> If this card is $650, it's replacing the 980Ti, not the 980, no matter what they name the card.


But who's saying it will be $650?
I doubt they'll price it as a high end, knowing that AMD is focusing on a beastly mid range segment.
Maybe it will be more like 550, at most.


----------



## Bogga

What was the release cost of the 980 over there? It was 650$ here


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> What was the release cost of the 980 over there? It was 650$ here


549 in the US.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> Sounds about right. Email notification is better though. Less stressful.


I always get email notification after the cards are already sold out.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Not a bad guess. I`m hoping for
> GTX 1080 +30% over 980Ti
> GTX 1070 +10% over GTX 980Ti
> 
> My other thoughs are:
> Why can 1070 function with normal GDDR5 but 1080 is coupled with GDDR5X?


GDDR5X is to justify the huge price increase over the 1070.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> But who's saying it will be $650?
> I doubt they'll price it as a high end, knowing that AMD is focusing on a beastly mid range segment.
> Maybe it will be more like 550, at most.


From this thread.


----------



## Bogga

Those benchmarks need to be fake to justify that price...


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> From this thread.


Seen that. Let's find out in 19 hours from now.
They'll probably show us a better benchmark, or a better price.


----------



## zealord

The GTX 1080 being overly expensive means it'd be easier to wait for ZEN, VEGA and Big PASCAL


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Those benchmarks need to be fake to justify that price...


Does anyone really expect a 330mm~ die size this early on TSMC 16nm to be a bargain?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Does anyone really expect a 330mm~ die size this early on TSMC 16nm to be a bargain?


YES

theyve had enough milking with 28nm .. shouldn't expect the consumer to get less value because it just so happens to cost them more than they'd like


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> YES
> 
> theyve had enough milking with 28nm .. shouldn't expect the consumer to get less because it just so happens to cost them more than they'd like


28nm is cheap. 16nm is not. If Maxwell was originally Pascal without compute, there is nothing they can do to justify what it would take for them to outperform their previous Maxwell cards. Going from 28nm to 16nm does not reduce the transistor per dollar cost.


----------



## Mhill2029

Nvidia has been upping price tags for a good while, i expect Pascal to be the most expensive generation in the last few years. And a Pascal Titan with HBM2 is going to be insanely expensive, mark my words lol


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mhill2029*
> 
> Nvidia has been upping price tags for a good while, i expect Pascal to be the most expensive generation in the last few years. And a Pascal Titan with HBM2 is going to be insanely expensive, mark my words lol


Simple solution. Don't buy it. I know BF5 will run good even with 290X. Overwatch was the only game i cared about and can MAX it out @ 4K with single 290X. AMD and Nvidia can keep their cards if they are expensive.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> 28nm is cheap. 16nm is not. If Maxwell was originally Pascal without compute, there is nothing they can do to justify what it would take for them to outperform their previous Maxwell cards. Going from 28nm to 16nm does not reduce the transistor per dollar cost.


28nm wasn't cheap when it was new. Every time there is a shrink you will have a cost increase and smaller margins until the process matures. This is the cost of being in the business they are in and is not something new that they have to deal with.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> 28nm wasn't cheap when it was new. Every time there is a shrink you will have a cost increase and smaller margins until the process matures. This is the cost of being in the business they are in and is not something new that they have to deal with.


The difference was transistor cost would go down. Now its the same. Before if toy wanted 1B Transistors with 40nm you would pay $50. If you wanted 1B with 28nm you would pay $40. Now if you wan 12B with 16nm you would pay $100 but the same would cost with 28nm. If Titan X costs $100 for 7B Transistors then getting a card with 12B would require for the price to scale linearly up. The whole idea of new stuff getting faster and cheaper is dead.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> The GTX 1080 being overly expensive means it'd be easier to wait for ZEN, VEGA and Big PASCAL


What does Zen have to do with the price of tea in China?


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The difference was transistor cost would go down. Now its the same. Before if toy wanted 1B Transistors with 40nm you would pay $50. If you wanted 1B with 28nm you would pay $40. Now if you wan 12B with 16nm you would pay $100 but the same would cost with 28nm. If Titan X costs $100 for 7B Transistors then getting a card with 12B would require for the price to scale linearly up. The whole idea of new stuff getting faster and cheaper is dead.


I don't think the concept of getting faster and cheaper is gone completely, but it heavily relies on new architecture design. Before it relied on just a shrinking die without much effort.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> What does Zen have to do with the price of tea in China?


dude - if you by a 1080 now, you'll be buying a full die pascal shortly after...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dude - if you by a 1080 now, you'll be buying a full die pascal shortly after...


Me? I'm not buying anything!









I was just asking the poster what bearing an AMD CPU had on the theoretical purchase of an nVidia GPU. Seems like a strange connection to make.

I'm pretty sure I can struggle by until Big Pascal or Volta rolls along, I don't Upgrayedd all that much.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> I don't think the concept of getting faster and cheaper is gone completely, but it heavily relies on new architecture design. Before it relied on just a shrinking die without much effort.


To get the same performance improvement price has to give. Now we are at a point where we might lose that big performance upgrade and still have high pricing.


----------



## jdstock76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mudfrog*
> 
> The Zotac 980ti Amped is only $539 brand new atm (no rebates). The price is falling fast.


And every other brand? ...... still at full price.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> For those that waited, no matter if its $500 or $600 for the GTX 1080, it will still be a much better buy than GTX 980Ti.
> These people shouldnt complain. Those with GTX 980 or anything below. It will be a much better deal than Maxwell cards.
> GTX 980Ti/Fury X owners, maybe have a tiny reason to be a little dissappointed. But Nvidia seems to stick with +25% for midrange cards over previous flagship cards. So this was expected.


I'm not disappointed at all. I hope the 1080 does surpass the 980ti in all aspects. That means technology is moving forward and more importantly the 1080ti variant will be REALLY nice!


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> What does Zen have to do with the price of tea in China?


Oh. Maybe I should've expanded

I plan a new rig and I either go with Broadwell -E + Pascal this year or I will wait for ZEN / whatever intel has + big GPU in 2017.

And that depends on the price/performance of the GTX 1080 mostly


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Oh. Maybe I should've expanded
> 
> I plan a new rig and I either go with Broadwell -E + Pascal this year or I will wait for ZEN / whatever intel has + big GPU in 2017.
> 
> And that depends on the price/performance of the GTX 1080 mostly


Gotcha!


----------



## i7monkey

What do you guys think of upgrading every new flagship and selling a month or two before launch so you won't take a huge price hit? You'd only have to worry about a price drop in between launches or competition from AMD. Dumb? Smart?


----------



## chuy409

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dude - if you by a 1080 now, you'll be buying a full die pascal shortly after...


ooooohhhhhhh nooooooooo!!! Im not falling for that again. Bought a 980 for 550 (610 after taxes) 2 MONTHS before the 980 ti. I was full of sodium chloride for sure.


----------



## Novakanedj

I'll wait for the 1080Ti and see what the benchmarks are like.


----------



## Xuvial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Novakanedj*
> 
> I'll wait for the 1080Ti and see what the benchmarks are like.


Same here. Made that mistake with my 780, not falling for that again









It's going to be a HUGE upgrade for you from a 580, bet you cant wait


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Novakanedj*
> 
> I'll wait for the 1080Ti and see what the benchmarks are like.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xuvial*
> 
> Same here. Made that mistake with my 780, not falling for that again


GP100 won't be out until Q1 next year, and Titan comes first. You'll be looking at Q2 2017 if you want a GP100 1080Ti.


----------



## jdstock76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> GP100 won't be out until Q1 next year, and Titan comes first. You'll be looking at Q2 2017 if you want a GP100 1080Ti.


My guess is April, early May for the 1080ti variation.

Edit: Looking at my 980ti purchases 6/1/15 was 980ti release. And the G1's were two week later.


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> What do you guys think of upgrading every new flagship and selling a month or two before launch so you won't take a huge price hit? You'd only have to worry about a price drop in between launches or competition from AMD. Dumb? Smart?


What do you do during that two months between selling your card and the next one launching? After getting used to a top end GPU, I don't think I could do without one for a couple months.


----------



## Clovertail100

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> The numbers will not surprise me. The 980 was also pretty similar if not a bit better than the 780 TI.
> The question is whether polaris 10 will be able to rival it or not.


It looks like it might be able to, considering the Polaris benchmarks were run at 800Mhz and sitting around Hawaii's performance.

If the $300 price tag rings true, these might be worthwhile for some folks. Not me.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> What do you do during that two months between selling your card and the next one launching? After getting used to a top end GPU, I don't think I could do without one for a couple months.


I know a couple of people that do the resale-upgrade-resale cycle and it seems like they spend as much time playing on potato GPU's as they do the high-end stuff. To each their own though, I don't judge!


----------



## Account Banned

Pascal is just a government ploy sheeples. It's obviously fake.

Jk this is an expected improvement over Maxwell + GDDR5X. Welcome to the realm of Pascal.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Me? I'm not buying anything!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was just asking the poster what bearing an AMD CPU had on the theoretical purchase of an nVidia GPU. Seems like a strange connection to make.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I can struggle by until Big Pascal or Volta rolls along, I don't Upgrayedd all that much.


Dude you gotta lay off the Brawndo man. It's good bad for plants and even badder for you
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I know a couple of people that do the resale-upgrade-resale cycle and it seems like they spend as much time playing on potato GPU's as they do the high-end stuff. To each their own though, I don't judge!


I tried it once with 970 SLI and 980 Ti; never again lol. Way too much hassle and down time.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chuy409*
> 
> ooooohhhhhhh nooooooooo!!! Im not falling for that again. Bought a 980 for 550 (610 after taxes) 2 MONTHS before the 980 ti. I was full of sodium chloride for sure.


I know the feeling!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> GP100 won't be out until Q1 next year, and Titan comes first. You'll be looking at Q2 2017 if you want a GP100 1080Ti.


nah - not that long.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> What do you do during that two months between selling your card and the next one launching? After getting used to a top end GPU, I don't think I could do without one for a couple months.


I sold my 970's in the end of march since no new games of any interest to me was on the horizon. Just played gta v and bf4 every now and then. It's been tough every now and then when I've felt the urge for some gaming. But I've been telling myself "it's worth the wait, it's worth the wait... I made the right choice... I saved lots of money"


----------



## Unkzilla

Go to bed, wakeup, new 34 page thread.

Performance to be expected. Nothing above or below expectations. Hopefully overclocks like a beast - will be a worthy upgrade for sure.

Will sell my 980 very soon and hopefully upgrade for a small amount of $$

Don't see the need to wait for the 1080ti , will probably be another linear priceerformance hike vs the 1080.. guess if you had a 980ti you would wait however.


----------



## i7monkey

I'll tell you guys my purchase history you can judge if it's stupid or not









780 in May/June 2013, sold it a week before the launch of the 780Ti

780Ti in Nov 2013, sold it in July/August 2014 waiting for 980

Bought 980 in Sept 2014 and returned it a week later because it felt like a sidegrade

Bought 980Ti in June 2015 and sold it a few week ago

Went almost a year without a gpu between summer 2014 and summer 2015.

In the past 3 years I've barely used the cards I've bought. The 980Ti I just sold was used for benching a few times and 10 hours of gaming.

lol


----------



## magnek

Yeah it's stupid sorry.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Yeah it's stupid sorry.


Is it stupid cause I barely used them or continuously selling/upgrading?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Is it stupid cause I barely used them or continuously selling/upgrading?


\
Both?
..but my history is even worse.


----------



## i7monkey

i don't think it would be a bad strategy if i actually used them, but i agree, total waste of money.


----------



## 12Cores

If this if true its good news for anyone wanting a 1070, Nvidia lately has been using the x80 cards as a halo product to let people think that they are getting a great deal on the x70 cards. It is great marketing really. What this tells us is that the 1070 will be about 10% slower than this card with a tiny die and minuscule tdp at a much lower price. 1070 could put AMD out of business, lets hope the 480x has some fight in it.

Looking forward to tomorrow.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Dude you gotta lay off the Brawndo man. It's good bad for plants and even badder for you


Sorry, as the greatest and most relevant documentary of our time, I might toss in a few too many references.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> i don't think it would be a bad strategy if i actually used them, but i agree, total waste of money.


You can only do it on US and get some return. People here in Canada that spend $500+ for GPU are going to buy new. A GTX980 TI costs over $850 CAD here + 13% TAX. How much do you think you can sell it used? Even if you sold it 1 month after the cards is out you lose ~ $150 strait up. Even now its probably impossible to sell for $600. You already lost 50% of the money you have paid. Right now best thing to do is skip a generation.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Is it stupid cause I barely used them or continuously selling/upgrading?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> i don't think it would be a bad strategy if i actually used them, but i agree, total waste of money.


You pretty much answered your own question.









I guess just for reference, I got my 980 Ti in Sep 2015, and I've logged over 600 hours on this thing and it keeps increasing by the day.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You can only do it on US and get some return. People here in Canada that spend $500+ for GPU are going to buy new. A GTX980 TI costs over $850 CAD here + 13% TAX. How much do you think you can sell it used? Even if you sold it 1 month after the cards is out you lose ~ $150 strait up. Even now its probably impossible to sell for $600. You already lost 50% of the money you have paid. Right now best thing to do is skip a generation.


I sold it for $750 about a month ago. But ya, our weak dollar and 13% doesn't make it very fun.


----------



## variant

1860M
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> GP100 won't be out until Q1 next year, and Titan comes first. You'll be looking at Q2 2017 if you want a GP100 1080Ti.


The GP100 won't ever become a consumer graphics card. You might see it in a Tesla card.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> 1860M
> The GP100 won't ever become a consumer graphics card. You might see it in a Tesla card.


History tells us that a x80 Ti version comes out 3 months after the Titan version based on the same chip. Not sure why it's different this time, but you guys know more than me so I'm all ears. GP102?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> History tells us that a x80 Ti version comes out 3 months after the Titan version based on the same chip. Not sure why it's different this time, but you guys know more than me so I'm all ears. GP102?


Skip it all together and get a new chip with no DP for gaming?


----------



## coelacanth

GTX 1080 is not that exciting other than seeing what Pascal can do. Many GTX 1080 buyers are going to feel remorse when the Ti drops.


----------



## Clovertail100

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> So, it's still slightly slower than a 980Ti / Titan X? :|
> 
> Wonder if the OC ability would make up for the performance.


Considering it's running over 1.8GHz in this benchmark, I'd say zero.

I could be wrong, but I don't see many people running these far beyond that.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coelacanth*
> 
> GTX 1080 is not that exciting other than seeing what Pascal can do. Many GTX 1080 buyers are going to feel remorse when the Ti drops.


I won't feel remorse if the Ti is based on GP100 and drops in Q2 2017.

It would hurt if they released it in Q4 this year based on GP102 or something like that.

How many "high end" cards do you see Nvidia giving us?

If a 1080Ti comes in a GP102 chip, will that be slower than the Titan Pascal?

If it is, couldn't they screw over GP102 Ti users by releasing a consumer version of GP100 that's faster?

So not only do 1080 users get screwed over, but 1080tI users too


----------



## Valkayria

GTX 1080 should be a nice upgrade for me @1440p. Fortunately I already have a buyer for my GTX 980. Got to time it just right. I wish Nvidia would've picked a different naming scheme for Pascal, but if they perform who gives a hoot.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Skip it all together and get a new chip with no DP for gaming?


My feeling a chip with no DP will be Volta. They are going to repeat the whole Kepler / Maxwell cycle again.


----------



## d3v0

This is exciting news! 30% faster in 4K and that's just the beginning! After driver enhancements and AIB OC cards...then the Ti version


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coelacanth*
> 
> GTX 1080 is not that exciting other than seeing what Pascal can do. Many GTX 1080 buyers are going to feel remorse when the Ti drops.


GTX980 was one of the worse cards when it comes to that. Had worse price/performance than a new faster cards and more expensive card. Usually P/P improves are you go down the stack.


----------



## LBear

Hope to see a decent boost coming from a GTX970 to a 1080 especially gaming at 1440p. Just wondering what the prices will be.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LBear*
> 
> Hope to see a decent boost coming from a GTX970 to a 1080 especially gaming at 1440p. Just wondering what the prices will be.


Two fold should be more or less granted over the 970, even with this benchmark and its suspicious driver.
So yes, it would be more than just a decent boost.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You can only do it on US and get some return. People here in Canada that spend $500+ for GPU are going to buy new. A GTX980 TI costs over $850 CAD here + 13% TAX. How much do you think you can sell it used? Even if you sold it 1 month after the cards is out you lose ~ $150 strait up. Even now its probably impossible to sell for $600. You already lost 50% of the money you have paid. Right now best thing to do is skip a generation.


850CAD ~ 650USD which is what the better 980Tis were going for. The top 980Tis where 750USD and up. Currency exchange is a wash. 13% Tax... that's a "local" problem.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> 1860M
> The GP100 won't ever become a consumer graphics card. You might see it in a Tesla card.


GP100 w/o DP will (that's a shame - the DP in my OG titans was very useful). This round, Nvidia is thinking twice about launching a full die first (eg, the TitanX). Too bad. A true halo product like the TX is/was (crushing any other single gpu cards) certainly made folks very hungry for a more "mainstream halo" product like the 980.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LBear*
> 
> Hope to see a decent boost coming from a GTX970 to a 1080 especially gaming at 1440p. Just wondering what the prices will be.


oh you'll see a great boost! Price? < 600USD. Hopefully. Considering a FuryX is still ~ 650USD.


----------



## umeng2002

Come on, this is nVidia. Never buy the x80 cards. Stick with the x70 until the Ti x80 variant is released.


----------



## drop24

I guess it all comes down to how well it can OC. 20-30% over 980 Ti is nice but I can OC my 980 Ti 20-30% to match it. I have a feeling I'll be waiting a year for the 1080 Ti unless this thing can OC that well.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drop24*
> 
> I guess it all comes down to how well it can OC. 20-30% over 980 Ti is nice but I can OC my 980 Ti 20-30% to match it. I have a feeling I'll be waiting a year for the 1080 Ti unless this thing can OC that well.


If Nvidia is trying to brute force performance with clockspeeds as this benchmark suggests, there may not be any overclocking headroom.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drop24*
> 
> I guess it all comes down to how well it can OC. 20-30% over 980 Ti is nice but I can OC my 980 Ti 20-30% to match it. I have a feeling I'll be waiting a year for the 1080 Ti unless this thing can OC that well.


To make it a true 20%-30% Ti successor card. It might be able to OC 40% like 980 Tis did.

That means hitting a clock of 2.3GHz for it to be valid. lols.


----------



## drop24

Good points. It doesn't seem like this will be a valid 980 Ti successor. I agree with the fellow that said stick with x70 or x80 Ti cards. It's going to be tough waiting while people have fun with theses 1080s though.


----------



## ViTosS

I'm gonna buy one as soon as them are available, jumping from a 980, I need more FPS in The Division @1080p, and I'm not even playing with everything maxed out (including HBAO+ and PCSS), sometimes it drops to 35fps.


----------



## variant

So if this benchmark is real, the 1080 is a card that will perform at about the level of an overclocked 980Ti without any major capability to overclock. If the pricing rumor is true, this card will also cost the same as an overclocked 980Ti...


----------



## drop24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> So if this benchmark is real, the 1080 is a card that will perform at about the level of an overclocked 980Ti without any major capability to overclock. If the pricing rumor is true, this card will also cost the same as an overclocked 980Ti...


We are only guessing it might not overclock well do to the already high clocks. It very well might though. One other advantage may be lower wattage and heat output. A highly overclocked 980 Ti with a custom bios runs quite hot.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Is it stupid cause I barely used them or continuously selling/upgrading?


I was like that up til I got my OG Titans. Since March 2013 I have resisted the urge to get anything new and I feel much better for it tbh. I don't play many games anyway and have all but quit benching as well. At least I feel like I'm actually getting my money's worth out of these cards and they show no signs of slowing down anytime soon. Maybe when the 1080Ti drops (or Vega) it will finally be time to start considering replacements but for now I am still enjoying these three year old cards just fine and certainly have zero interest in this jumped up 980 replacement...


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> So if this benchmark is real, the 1080 is a card that will perform at about the level of an overclocked 980Ti without any major capability to overclock. If the pricing rumor is true, this card will also cost the same as an overclocked 980Ti...


But it's already about 20% faster than a stock 980Ti.
That with a benchmark that may be real, but hardly reliable.

In a few more hours we may be enlightened.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> But it's already about 20% faster than a stock 980Ti.
> That with a benchmark that may be real, but hardly reliable.
> 
> In a few more hours we may be enlightened.


Where are you getting 20% from? At 1440p the difference is not really that much. Heck its only 60% faster than my 3 year old Titan.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Where are you getting 20% from? At 1440p the difference is not really that much. Heck its only 60% faster than my 3 year old Titan.


Depends on what you consider to be a "stock" 980 Ti, I guess. It scores pretty close to a 1500/2000 980 Ti, so is 1250/1700 considered stock?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Depends on what you consider to be a "stock" 980 Ti, I guess. It scores pretty close to a 1500/2000 980 Ti, so is 1250/1700 considered stock?


In the era of GPU Boost nailing down exactly what "stock" is is a challenge. My own personal criteria for what is "stock" is whatever the card will run at without any additional voltage. But I'm sure many would consider stock whatever it runs at out of the box...


----------



## carlhil2

But, but, the review sites only sow "reference" gm200 in their results, bet that changes this go round....







if they were to show all AIB results, it would have just been MORE devastating ...980Ti is a BEAST..


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I'm gonna buy one as soon as them are available, jumping from a 980, I need more FPS in The Division @1080p, and I'm not even playing with everything maxed out (including HBAO+ and PCSS), sometimes it drops to 35fps.


It is just a 980 with a very high clock speed.

Basically they reduce the option of LN2 cooling to the general air cooling. I dont see any great feat in that. Good luck jumping to an almost identical cores.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> In the era of GPU Boost nailing down exactly what "stock" is is a challenge. My own personal criteria for what is "stock" is whatever the card will run at without any additional voltage. But I'm sure many would consider stock whatever it runs at out of the box...


I'd say it's whatever it runs at with +0 on the clock speed slider, but you'd need to read the actual clock speed in operation, not just whatever GPU-Z says on the main tab. That's where the trouble comes in, people thinking the listed boost clock is the actual clock speed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> It is just a 980 with a very high clock speed.


If it's 40-50% faster than a 980 out of the box, at the same price and equal or lower power consumption, I'd say that's pretty decent no matter what the reason for the increase.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> It is just a 980 with a very high clock speed.
> 
> Basically they reduce the option of LN2 cooling to the general air cooling. I dont see any great feat in that. Good luck jumping to an almost identical cores.


I think that the 1080 has the same amount of CC that the 980 has, just a higher ipc/base clock/faster ram.....


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> It is just a 980 with a very high clock speed.
> 
> Basically they reduce the option of LN2 cooling to the general air cooling. I dont see any great feat in that. Good luck jumping to an almost identical cores.


You are so blind to the fact that a performance increase is a performance increase, and nearsighted to this whole more cores thing that it is literally frustrating. If you think you have the right to judge Nvidia's engineering work then please get a degree, and try to work for them. Then when they tell you that they can't produce your chip, because they won't be able to make a profit after everyone has bought one come tell us how you feel.

/rant


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> You are so blind to the fact that a performance increase is a performance increase, and nearsighted to this whole more cores thing that it is literally frustrating. If you think you have the right to judge Nvidia's engineering work then please get a degree, and try to work for them. Then when they tell you that they can't produce your chip, because they won't be able to make a profit after everyone has bought one come tell us how you feel.
> 
> /rant


Yes since you are so supportive of them please go ahead and pay them $10000 so that the rest of us can have it slightly cheaper.









If you are my customer, I will give u 1% performance increase every 1 years with 5% inflation each time cos you like that I guess. I would have love you if I am Nvidia.


----------



## RJacobs28

What if GP100 never comes to GeForce?
I want to move from 2x 980's to 2 of the full die cards. But if I wait for something that never comes, that will suck.

Maybe this is a repeat of the 600 series where Gx104 is as good as it gets for consumers. -_-


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> If it's 40-50% faster than a 980 out of the box, at the same price and equal or lower power consumption, I'd say that's pretty decent no matter what the reason for the increase.


Yes definitely decent, but that is all leverage from the transition to 16nm, if there is anything we need to thanks, its TSMC actually. We haven't gotten ourselves any conclusive evidence about the IPC increase since we do not event know the exact cores count, but we shall see.

TBH, the boost from 28nm to 16nm is so nice, it allows NV to rebrand Maxwell at a 40% speed increase. It gave them the option not to do anything at all. At least for the first generation.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Yes since you are so supportive of them please go ahead and pay them $10000 so that the rest of us can have it slightly cheaper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are my customer, I will give u 1% performance increase every 1 years with 5% inflation each time cos you like that I guess. I would have love you if I am Nvidia.


I'm so glad that you provided an informative post with a counter argument, other than skepticism. Please see the other thread for my comment.

Thanks.


----------



## i7monkey

Intel's been sitting on their butts coasting for the past 5 years and it looks like Nvidia's doing the same.

OG Titan had an 8 month lead against the 290x.

Titan X had a 4 month lead against Fury.

If the rumors are correct Polaris will be ~20% slower than Nvidia's midrange GTX 1080 and Vega will get stomped by GP100 if we're allowed to extrapolate.

AMD's got nothing.

If they could compete, Nvidia would be forced to give us real flagships like GP100 for $500 like they used to. Until that happens we'll be paying $550-$700 for midrange junk.

Pretty disappointing tbh.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I'd say it's whatever it runs at with +0 on the clock speed slider, but you'd need to read the actual clock speed in operation, not just whatever GPU-Z says on the main tab. That's where the trouble comes in, people thinking the listed boost clock is the actual clock speed.
> If it's 40-50% faster than a 980 out of the box, at the same price and equal or lower power consumption, I'd say that's pretty decent no matter what the reason for the increase.


If it has the performance of the 980Ti OC and the price of a 980Ti OC, it doesn't matter what they call it, it's a replacement for the 980Ti.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> I'm so glad that you provided an informative post with a counter argument, other than skepticism. Please see the other thread for my comment.
> 
> Thanks.


My counter argument are simple. We used to pay $500 for flagship, now we are going into the territory of $700 for midrange "junk", as I7 pointed out.

Now the junk are getting even worst cos at least Kepler has a 36% performance lead and a whole new architecture, and cost $150 less.

The problem is you are satisfied with 1% performance increase for 20% more price, I am not. Its just so simple. You can share your opinion, but dont tell ppl to follow yours. Or give them names for that matter.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> If it has the performance of the 980Ti OC and the price of a 980Ti OC, it doesn't matter what they call it, it's a replacement for the 980Ti.


No, its a replacement for a 980. Performance is supposed to go up at each price point each generation, not remain stagnant.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> No, its a replacement for a 980. Performance is supposed to go up at each price point each generation, not remain stagnant.


Right. I think sometimes people miss why we compare something like a 1080 to the 980 Ti as opposed to the 980.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> My counter argument are simple. We used to pay $500 for flagship, now we are going into the territory of $700 for midrange "junk", as I7 pointed out.
> 
> Now the junk are getting even worst cos at least Kepler has a 36% performance lead and a whole new architecture, and cost $150 less.
> 
> The problem is you are satisfied with 1% performance increase for 20% more price, I am not. Its just so simple. You can share your opinion, but dont tell ppl to follow yours. Or give them names for that matter.


1. The prices aren't confirmed, but i'd bet my GTX 970 that it's going to be $550. It will NOT be $650. Yes the prices used to be $500 5+ years ago for the XX80 series, but 2% inflation per year and you'll see everything costs 10% more. It just appears to be exaggerated on these cards because they are large purchases. I'm sure eggs, and milk costs 10% more than 5 years ago.

2. You are obviously exaggerating numbers here. It is more like 25% more performance than the GTX 980 Ti, and this card is meant to compete with the GTX 980 so the costs are even. Even if its $579 now instead of $550 its because of inflation, not because of NVIDIA. They need to clear that extra 2% each year to provide raises, etc so their employees are making equal pay to the year before, and can still afford eggs etc.


----------



## i7monkey

Are reviews going up tomorrow or are they introducing it first and we get benches next month?


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Are reviews going up tomorrow or are they introducing it first and we get benches next month?


I mean, we did see some shipping things about them shipping pascal cards to north america. So its possible that it might get reviewed tomorrow. I am about 50-50 on that one though.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> 1. The prices aren't confirmed, but i'd bet my GTX 970 that it's going to be $550. It will NOT be $650. Yes the prices used to be $500 5+ years ago for the XX80 series, but 2% inflation per year and you'll see everything costs 10% more. It just appears to be exaggerated on these cards because they are large purchases. I'm sure eggs, and milk costs 10% more than 5 years ago.
> 
> 2. You are obviously exaggerating numbers here. It is more like 25% more performance than the GTX 980 Ti, and this card is meant to compete with the GTX 980 so the costs are even. Even if its $579 now instead of $550 its because of inflation, not because of NVIDIA. They need to clear that extra 2% each year to provide raises, etc so their employees are making equal pay to the year before, and can still afford eggs etc.


From the leaked benchmark so far, its is less than 25%. Granted we haven seen the actual game benchmark so I will hold my opinion on that. But I dont expect any miracle jump suddenly.

I really hope its is $499-549 like you suggesting, but so far accordingly to a few sources, that isnt the case. Another few hrs to know the truth I guess.


----------



## Bogga

Any of you believe there will be no ti-version? Remember reading that nvidia would launch cards that would replace 970, 980 and 980ti this summer. If that just meant that those cards would be eol and that the 1070 and the 1080 was first out followed later on by the ti or if it meant that those two would replace all the 900-cards wasn't really clarified (well rumours)


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> From the leaked benchmark so far, its is less than 25%. Granted we haven seen the actual game benchmark so I will hold my opinion on that. But I dont expect any miracle jump suddenly.
> 
> I really hope its is $499-549 like you suggesting, but so far accordingly to a few sources, that isnt the case. Another few hrs to know the truth I guess.


The Firemark i looked at had a graphics score with the GTX 980 Ti at 8K, and the GTX 1080 at 10K. I believe that's 25%.

If they priced this at $650 i would be astonished. The die is really small, and probably costs the same to produce as the GTX 980. All of the gains, you've guessed it are from the frequency increase from the better die shrink.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> The Firemark i looked at had a graphics score with the GTX 980 Ti at 8K, and the GTX 1080 at 10K. I believe that's 25%.
> 
> If they priced this at $650 i would be astonished. The die is really small, and probably costs the same to produce as the GTX 980. All of the gains, you've guessed it are from the frequency increase from the better die shrink.


I really hope there is still some IPC improvement that separate Pascal from Maxwell, not just the clock boost from 16nm


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I really hope there is still some IPC improvement that separate Pascal from Maxwell, not just the clock boost from 16nm


Honestly, they are probably on a tick tock schedule like Intel, they just don't disclose it.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> 1. The prices aren't confirmed, but i'd bet my GTX 970 that it's going to be $550. It will NOT be $650. Yes the prices used to be $500 5+ years ago for the XX80 series, but 2% inflation per year and you'll see everything costs 10% more. It just appears to be exaggerated on these cards because they are large purchases. I'm sure eggs, and milk costs 10% more than 5 years ago.
> 
> 2. You are obviously exaggerating numbers here. It is more like 25% more performance than the GTX 980 Ti, and this card is meant to compete with the GTX 980 so the costs are even. Even if its $579 now instead of $550 its because of inflation, not because of NVIDIA. They need to clear that extra 2% each year to provide raises, etc so their employees are making equal pay to the year before, and can still afford eggs etc.


2% inflation for 5 years does not equal 10%. I think you should be looking at this instead [((1 + 0.02)^5) - 1] = 10.41%. You can't just take the sum of the annual inflation rates.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> 2% inflation for 5 years does not equal 10%. I think you should be looking at this instead [((1 + 0.02)^5) - 1] = 10.41%. You can't just take the sum of the annual inflation rates.


I wasn't trying to confuse the guy


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> What do you guys think of upgrading every new flagship and selling a month or two before launch so you won't take a huge price hit? You'd only have to worry about a price drop in between launches or competition from AMD. Dumb? Smart?


If you're talking about high end cards, that's not really the best idea IMO. Firstly, you'll be without GPU for a month or two before the launch. Then, the launch and price of the new card might be totally disappointing (Fury X). Last but not least: *don't buy sth you don't want just because it's new.*
It seems a better idea to stick to mid-range cards like x70 series (or x60Ti) rather than that. They are always the best price/performance, you don't lose as much in resale value (20% drop for a $350 card isn't nearly as bad as for a $700 one), you don't have to be without gpu for a single day...
I was gonna sell too, but changed my mind. Gonna try a different approach. Use the new release as an opportunity to buy a second card cheap to last me till big Pascal. See how that works out for me.
Still, the #1 best idea for me is buying a used 780Ti after 980 launch, 980Ti after 1080 launch etc. You get a card that overclocked can match a new release for considerably less money. Only drawback is shorter warranty.


----------



## guttheslayer

Something suddenly comes across my mind, and this is some speculation (yes it is by me), but is definitely food for thought:

GTX 1080 Ti
GPU: GP104-400
CUDA: 2560
Clock Speed: ~1.5GHz
Memory: GDDR5X
Effective Bandwidth: 12gbps or 384 GB/s
MSRP: $649
*Status: MIA, not revealed*

GTX 1080
GPU: GP104-200
CUDA: 2048
Clock Speed: ~1.6GHz
Memory: GDDR5X
Effective Bandwidth: 10gbps or 320GB/s
MSRP: $499
*Status: First benchmarked leaked, cut down GP104. Everyone go crazy with the mediocre performance*

What if this turn out to be the case, From what I see the Micron Specs sheet, there is a 12gbps variant. And the leaked benchmark showed it was 1080, but not the Ti. We dont even know if that is the flagship GP104 in the first place or just a cut down.

We might have been trolled by the leaked benchmark.


----------



## erocker

Nvidia won't compare this card against a 980Ti. They'll compare it against the 980 that it's replacing.


----------



## Klocek001

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Something suddenly comes across my mind, and this is some speculation (yes it is by me), but is definitely food for thought:
> 
> GTX 1080 Ti
> GPU: GP104-400
> CUDA: 2560
> Clock Speed: ~1.5GHz
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 12gbps or 384 GB/s
> MSRP: $649
> *Status: MIA, not revealed*
> 
> GTX 1080
> GPU: GP104-200
> CUDA: 2048
> Clock Speed: ~1.6GHz
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 10gbps or 320GB/s
> MSRP: $499
> *Status: First benchmarked leaked, cut down GP104. Everyone go crazy with the mediocre performance*
> 
> What if this turn out to be the case, From what I see the Micron Specs sheet, there is a 12gbps variant. And the leaked benchmark showed it was 1080, but not the Ti. We dont even know if that is the flagship GP104 in the first place or just a cut down.
> 
> We might have been trolled by the leaked benchmark.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> Nvidia won't compare this card against a 980Ti. They'll compare it against the 980 that it's replacing.


Which is what I am trying to say in my above post. There might be a Ti variant although it could be unlikely.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Something suddenly comes across my mind, and this is some speculation (yes it is by me), but is definitely food for thought:
> 
> GTX 1080 Ti
> GPU: GP104-400
> CUDA: 2560
> Clock Speed: ~1.5GHz
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 12gbps or 384 GB/s
> MSRP: $649
> *Status: MIA, not revealed*
> 
> GTX 1080
> GPU: GP104-200
> CUDA: 2048
> Clock Speed: ~1.6GHz
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 10gbps or 320GB/s
> MSRP: $499
> *Status: First benchmarked leaked, cut down GP104. Everyone go crazy with the mediocre performance*
> 
> What if this turn out to be the case, From what I see the Micron Specs sheet, there is a 12gbps variant. And the leaked benchmark showed it was 1080, but not the Ti. We dont even know if that is the flagship GP104 in the first place or just a cut down.
> 
> We might have been trolled by the leaked benchmark.


The cutdown GP104 will be using regular GDDR5. The GDDR5X is how we know this benchmark is full size GP104.


----------



## supergamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> Nvidia won't compare this card against a 980Ti. They'll compare it against the 980 that it's replacing.


Nope.
They'll compare it against the titan X.. and show you how it's 10% faster for $400 less money..
and how uses its 8GB vRAM more efficiently than Titan's 12GB which mostly goes waste anyway.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> The cutdown GP104 will be using regular GDDR5. The GDDR5X is how we know this benchmark is full size GP104.


The number dont add up. This is so frustrating.

320mm sq is too big for a 2048 cores, yet it perform like one. I long seen the rumor that the 2nd tier onward will have GDDR5. But I find it abit fishy to take that rumor as truth.

Still something is missing.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*


Just to let you know it might be a ES as denoted by its part number ES:A. At least that is what I understand


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The number dont add up. This is so frustrating.
> 
> 320mm sq is too big for a 2048 cores, yet it perform like one. I long seen the rumor that the 2nd tier onward will have GDDR5. But I find it abit fishy to take that rumor as truth.
> 
> Still something is missing.


There's a couple possibilities. The first is that yields are absolutely terrible. There are 2560 cores on the thing, but they can only produce them in any number with 2048 of them working. This means that Nvidia made a gamble with the larger die size and that gamble simply didn't pay off like they wanted. The other option is that a large portion of that 320mm² is made up of non-gaming compute units.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> There's a couple possibilities. The first is that yields are absolutely terrible. There are 2560 cores on the thing, but they can only produce them in any number with 2048 of them working. This means that Nvidia made a gamble with the larger die size and that gamble simply didn't pay off like they wanted. The other option is that a large portion of that 320mm² is made up of non-gaming compute units.


Your first possibility is highly probable, which means there might be a GP104-500 chip coming at Q4 and renamed it as 1080 Ti.

May seem far fetched, but given the 16nm yield, as well as the limited volume and availability of GDDR5X as of now, its not too crazy for that to happen. Who know NV intend to slap a 2560 cores variant with the fastest 12gbps GDDR5X variant. which is the MT58K256M32JA 120:A chip.

In this case what I previously assumed could still stand:
Quote:


> GTX 1080 Ti
> GPU: GP104-???
> CUDA: 2560
> Clock Speed: ~1.5GHz (?)
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 12gbps or 384 GB/s
> MSRP: $649 (?)
> *Status: MIA, not revealed*
> 
> GTX 1080
> GPU: GP104-400
> CUDA: 2048
> Clock Speed: ~1.6GHz
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 10gbps or 320GB/s
> MSRP: $499 (?)
> *Status: First benchmarked leaked, cut down GP104. Everyone go crazy with the mediocre performance*


Let not forget there is a GP104-750 for the Tesla family. It could be full blown chip for all we know. (I don't want to be reading too much into number but generally bigger number means more cores.)


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Your first possibility is highly probable, which means there might be a GP104-500 chip coming at Q4 and renamed it as 1080 Ti.
> 
> May seem far fetched, but given the limited volume and availability of GDDR5X timeframe, its not too crazy for that to happen. Who know NV intend to slap a 2560 cores variant with the fastest 12gbps GDDR5X variant. which is the MT58K256M32JA 120:A chip.
> 
> In this case what I previously assumed could still stand:
> Let not forget there is a GP104-750 for the Tesla family. It could be full blown chip for all we know. (I donwant to read too much into number but generally bigger number means more cores.)


However, I think my second option is very plausible. The GP104 is suppose to have about 8 billion transistors, the same number as the 980Ti and Titan X. However, the 980Ti has 2816 CUDA Cores and the Titan X 3072 CUDA cores. The full GP104 is only suppose to have 2560 CUDA cores. If the GP104 benchmarks simply reflects this, it makes sense they compensate for it with higher clock speeds.


----------



## Klocek001

given the 1.86GHz clock speed vs 1.2GHz on 980Ti, the 2048 version is plausible.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> given the 1.86GHz clock speed vs 1.2GHz on 980Ti, the 2048 version is plausible.


You are comparing normal speeds of the 980Ti to boost speeds of the 1080.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> However, I think my second option is very plausible. The GP104 is suppose to have about 8 billion transistors, the same number as the 980Ti and Titan X. However, the 980Ti has 2816 CUDA Cores and the Titan X 3072 CUDA cores. The full GP104 is only suppose to have 2560 CUDA cores. If the GP104 benchmarks simply reflects this, it makes sense they compensate for it with higher clock speeds.


Having 8 billion transistor doesnt really means anything, if there is, it just mean there is more transistors to the bigger cache, improved registry etc. 2560 and 3072 cores are pretty close to allow for margin of difference. It not the exact architecture hence there should be some differences.

Also the 2560 cores variant could come with a smaller ratio of DP. Something in the configuration of 1:4 or 2560:640 (as opposed to GP100 1:2). But as far as I rmb none of the GXX04 comes with a massive amount of DP units. So your 2nd option isnt that viable unless NV went something different this time.

FYP having 2560:640 is not entirely impossible especially its possible to pack in 3072 cores for a space of 320mm sq.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> given the 1.86GHz clock speed vs 1.2GHz on 980Ti, the 2048 version is plausible.


It might be a cut down GP104. In that case it gonna cause alot of rage for charging it so expensive.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> It might be a cut down GP104. In that case it gonna cause alot of rage for charging it so expensive.


I never bought the GTX 980 Ti because i wouldn't pay $650 for a cut chip.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> I never bought the GTX 980 Ti because i wouldn't pay $650 for a cut chip.


At least that was the cut down of big chip for maxwell.

Imagine a cut down of mid range chip and yet still $500 or more. Gonna be the worst day for the high end consumer


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Having 8 billion transistor doesnt really means anything, if there is, it just mean there is more transistors to the bigger cache, improved registry etc. 2560 and 3072 cores are pretty close to allow for margin of difference.
> 
> Also the 2560 cores variant could come with a smaller ratio of DP. Something in the configuration of 1:4 or 2560:640 (as opposed to GP100 1:2). But as far as I rmb none of the GXX04 comes with a massive amount of DP units. So your 2nd option isnt that viable unless NV went something different this time.
> 
> FYP having 2560:640 is not entirely impossible especially its possible to pack in 3072 cores for a space of 320mm sq.


2560 to 3072 is a 20% difference, that's hardly a small margin.

My 2nd option is viable with the knowledge that the PX2 Drive will be using GP104 and it needs FP64 for AI.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> At least that was the cut down of big chip for maxwell.
> 
> Imagine a cut down of mid range chip and yet still $500 or more. Gonna be the worst day for the high end consumer


Yeah. I still won't buy a used GTX 980 Ti because i can't bring myself to spend $500 on a cut chip, even if it is used. IDK. If the GTX 1080 is cut, which like 99.9% chance it isn't then i wouldn't buy it.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> I never bought the GTX 980 Ti because i wouldn't pay $650 for a cut chip.


but you'd pay $350 more for 8% more shader cores (less than 290X-290 difference) and 6GB more vram,which will never be utilized.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> but you'd pay $350 more for 8% more shader cores (less than 290X-290 difference) and 6GB more vram,which will never be utilized.


I don't understand your point.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> I don't understand your point.


He is comparing the value of 980 Ti against the Titan X, but the funny thing is I am unsure why he used the 290 as reference. Its like comparing Orange to Apple.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> He is comparing the value of 980 Ti against the Titan X, but the funny thing is I am unsure why he used the 290 as reference. Its like comparing Orange to Apple.


I see. His point doesn't matter because i wouldn't have spent 1k on a card either. Lol.


----------



## FlailScHLAMP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> There's a couple possibilities. The first is that yields are absolutely terrible. There are 2560 cores on the thing, but they can only produce them in any number with 2048 of them working. This means that Nvidia made a gamble with the larger die size and that gamble simply didn't pay off like they wanted. The other option is that a large portion of that 320mm² is made up of non-gaming compute units.
> 
> 
> 
> Your first possibility is highly probable, which means there might be a GP104-500 chip coming at Q4 and renamed it as 1080 Ti.
> 
> May seem far fetched, but given the 16nm yield, as well as the limited volume and availability of GDDR5X as of now, its not too crazy for that to happen. Who know NV intend to slap a 2560 cores variant with the fastest 12gbps GDDR5X variant. which is the MT58K256M32JA 120:A chip.
> 
> In this case what I previously assumed could still stand:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> GTX 1080 Ti
> GPU: GP104-???
> CUDA: 2560
> Clock Speed: ~1.5GHz (?)
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 12gbps or 384 GB/s
> MSRP: $649 (?)
> *Status: MIA, not revealed*
> 
> GTX 1080
> GPU: GP104-400
> CUDA: 2048
> Clock Speed: ~1.6GHz
> Memory: GDDR5X
> Effective Bandwidth: 10gbps or 320GB/s
> MSRP: $499 (?)
> *Status: First benchmarked leaked, cut down GP104. Everyone go crazy with the mediocre performance*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Let not forget there is a GP104-750 for the Tesla family. It could be full blown chip for all we know. (I don't want to be reading too much into number but generally bigger number means more cores.)
Click to expand...

NV is really on glue if they thing they can get away with an XX80 Ti class part with a 104 class chip.

if we see a Ti this Gen it won't be a 1080ti... , Not very likely

no big daddy pascal for consumers this gen (tesla have to be made, then quadros, then titans, then maybe big daddy cut down TI chip)

if we get a TI product this gen my money is on 1050 and 1060 getting the TI moniker.


----------



## variant

Someone on Guru3D forums marked the benchmark as being close to a 980Ti clocked at 1.5Ghz. I think that's well within the margin of 2560 CUDA cores clocked at 1.86Ghz.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Someone on Guru3D forums basically marked the benchmark as being close to a 980Ti clocked at 1.5Ghz. I think that's well within the margin of 2560 CUDA cores clocked at 1.8Ghz.


Yes, but what if it turns out that they are sandbagging the clockspeeds on the 1080 and the 1080 is not overclocked.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Someone on Guru3D forums marked the benchmark as being close to a 980Ti clocked at 1.5Ghz. I think that's well within the margin of 2560 CUDA cores clocked at 1.86Ghz.


That is still lower ipc especially talking about a new architecture with better fine graining on the SM. Early driver might indicate poor performance but its more likely a 2048 cores with better ipc. As well as better clock.

1.8ghz on a gtx 980 should net similar performance


----------



## FlailScHLAMP

2560 cores? i'd be surprised.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Someone on Guru3D forums marked the benchmark as being close to a 980Ti clocked at 1.5Ghz. I think that's well within the margin of 2560 CUDA cores clocked at 1.86Ghz.


i don't think you are accounting for gddr5x

looks very similar to 780 ti vs 980

betting on 2048 1.9ghz range with low to mild overclocking headroom 17%-25% if the slope continues


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> That is still lower ipc especially talking about a new architecture with better fine graining on the SM. Early driver might indicate poor performance but its more likely a 2048 cores with better ipc. As well as better clock.
> 
> 1.8ghz on a gtx 980 should net similar performance


980 on 1.8ghz???







Kingpin and LN2 maybe.

And r9 390X on 1.8ghz will be faster than Gtx 1080 too but no one can reach that speed


----------



## LoLomgbbq

Will wait for benches from everyday users a few months after release when drivers have had a few releases and game specific drivers get dropped for newer games.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Will also keep an eye on the perf of last gen cards to see if their performance drops mysteriously


----------



## FlailScHLAMP

you say it like you expect it not to happen. in nvidia's mind their own cards are the onlything that can beat their cards


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



that being said the "nerf" was a matter of single Digit % and mostly not noticeable outside of benchmarks, Drivers that act like a bucket of worms on the other hand...


----------



## FlyingSolo

So its basically for people with 970,980. And not for the people with titan,980 ti. Just like last year when Jen-Hsun gave a speech. Can the 1070 be around for $350 and beat a 980 ti. If that happens this thing will sell like hot cakes again. But remember the 1070 is not a 8gb card its a 7.5gb card.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> So its basically for people with 970,980. And not for the people with titan,980 ti. Just like last year when Jen-Hsun gave a speech. Can the 1070 be around for $350 and beat a 980 ti. If that happens this thing will sell like hot cakes again. But remember the 1070 is not a 8gb card its a 7.5gb card.


The rumored pricing is $650 for the 1080 and $500 for the 1070.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> The rumored pricing is $650 for the 1080 and $500 for the 1070.


no it isn't.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> no it isn't.


Yes it is.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> *And r9 390X on 1.8ghz* will be faster than Gtx 1080 too but no one can reach that speed


Actually, the 14nm process allows for 40% higher clockspeeds as well, would not be surprised if we see something similar coming out of AMD (high clock speeds). Except they might leave much of the overclocking on the table for the user (which will make the buyers happier for sure) and not implement it nearly as much as NVIDIA with 16nm clockspeed boosts.


Quote:


> The 14nm FinFET process is an important part of AMD's plans around such upcoming products as the "Zen" CPU. The company's current chips are manufactured via a 28nm process, but for the next generation of processors, AMD is skipping the 20nm step and going right to 14nm as it looks to catch up with rival Intel, which already is rolling out 14nm processors. The chip maker will use Globalfoundries' 14nm Low Power Plus (14LLP) process across its CPU, GPU and accelerated-processing units (APUs)-which integrate the compute and graphics on the same piece of silicon-according to Mark Papermaster, senior vice president and CTO at AMD.


http://www.eweek.com/pc-hardware/amd-globalfoundries-reach-milestone-in-14nm-finfet-development.html

From a non-reference clocked 390X you start at 1100MHz, add a 40% increase in clockspeeds (because of 14nm) and now you are at 1540MHz. So Polaris is also going to see a huge jump in clockspeeds as well. So there might definitely be some 1.8GHz Polaris cards out there.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Yes it is.


and? anyone can write anything on the forum.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

This thread is great. New process, new/better VRAM, more VRAM, and if this leak is true, a huge performance leap.

*Yeah it will be $500. $550 tops.*


----------



## TrueForm

$500 USD = $800NZD here (retail price) So silly!


----------



## jincuteguy

So after the 1080 are out, when will Nvidia release the next wave? is it going to be 1080 Ti version? or the Titan version?


----------



## Kana Chan

Any improvements from the new arch or just higher clocks?

1.860 / 1.500 x 2560 / 2816 = 1.12x


----------



## Scrimstar

"8GB GDDR5X running at 2500MHz memory clock.
Cores is running at 1860MHz+"

Is this overclocked, and how much faster is it over a 1500/8000 980ti


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> Any improvements from the new arch or just higher clocks?
> 
> 1.860 / 1.500 x 2560 / 2816 = 1.12x


There is no indication of 2560 cores as of now. Could be a cut down, we shall see.


----------



## cainy1991

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TrueForm*
> 
> $500 USD = $800NZD here (retail price) So silly!


Or higher...

It tends to be the way it goes in this corner of the world.


----------



## Mhill2029

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erocker*
> 
> Nvidia won't compare this card against a 980Ti. They'll compare it against the 980 that it's replacing.


Indeed.... I don't know why people are selling their cards when it's not a replacement for the card they are selling. The 1070 and 1080 are successors to the GTX970 and GTX980. If you have a 980Ti or better then it's waiting until Q4 2016 at the earliest.

Also these benchmarks don't seem right to me, too much missing information. CPU clockspeed for one.... since this has a quite an impact on graphic scores. That CPU could be pushing beyond 5Ghz for all we know. Not to mention unreleased drivers that could be doing wonders for it.

And another thing, why is the best test shown only Firestrike Extreme? It has 8GB of vram and they are running a 1440p bench test. That much vram is directly aimed at 4K+ gaming you would think. Oh that's right....it has a 256bit memory interface. Maybe the card falls flat on it's face at 4k?

Makes you wonder...

Most likely it's fake, since it's only a screenshot and not a direct link to the result.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mhill2029*
> 
> And another thing, why is the best test shown only Firestrike Extreme? It has 8GB of vram and they are running a 1440p bench test. That much vram is directly aimed at 4K+ gaming you would think. Oh that's right....it has a 256bit memory interface. Maybe the card falls flat on it's face at 4k?


Probably more like most people don't play at 4K so why bench at 4K. 980's in SLI averaged 50fps @ 4K in Crysis 3 with everything on Ultra with 2XSMAA, if you dropped that down to 1XSMAA surely you would be able to hit 60FPS. So clearly if on the 980 the 256-bit memory interface was not a bottleneck for 4K gaming performance, surely it will not be a bottleneck with 1080 either. Most cards are VRAM limited @ 4K not bandwidth starved. Which doesn't really matter because the card has GDDR5X which should be making 320 GB/s which is plenty of bandwidth anyway.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mhill2029*
> 
> Most likely it's fake, since it's only a screenshot and not a direct link to the result.


You sure about that:

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8370501

Pretty much as real as it gets...


----------



## Mhill2029

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Probably more like most people don't play at 4K so why bench at 4K. 980's in SLI averaged 50fps @ 4K in Crysis 3 with everything on Ultra with 2XSMAA, if you dropped that down to 1XSMAA surely you would be able to hit 60FPS. So clearly if on the 980 the 256-bit memory interface was not a bottleneck for 4K gaming performance, surely it will not be a bottleneck with 1080 either. Most cards are VRAM limited @ 4K not bandwidth starved. Which doesn't really matter because the card has GDDR5X which should be making 320 GB/s which is plenty of bandwidth anyway.
> You sure about that:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8370501
> 
> Pretty much as real as it gets...


Ta very much


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mhill2029*
> 
> Indeed.... I don't know why people are selling their cards when it's not a replacement for the card they are selling. The 1070 and 1080 are successors to the GTX970 and GTX980. If you have a 980Ti or better then it's waiting until Q4 2016 at the earliest.
> 
> Also these benchmarks don't seem right to me, too much missing information. CPU clockspeed for one.... since this has a quite an impact on graphic scores. That CPU could be pushing beyond 5Ghz for all we know. Not to mention unreleased drivers that could be doing wonders for it.
> 
> And another thing, why is the best test shown only Firestrike Extreme? It has 8GB of vram and they are running a 1440p bench test. That much vram is directly aimed at 4K+ gaming you would think. Oh that's right....it has a 256bit memory interface. Maybe the card falls flat on it's face at 4k?
> 
> Makes you wonder...
> 
> Most likely it's fake, since it's only a screenshot and not a direct link to the result.


Oh here comes the excuses from GTX 980Ti Dream Team









Sorry if you dont understand why anyone wouldnt want a better card than 980Ti and sell their cards before 1080 is released and selling 980Ti becomes harder and selling price decrease.

The benchmark is not fake. Its in 3DMark database for anyone to find.

Sorry if times will become hard for people that are unable to accept that their card isnt the fastest anymore. Life is hard









1080 may not be the direct replacer of 980Ti but its still faster by a good amount. So its a matter how you look at things, replacement for 980 or not


----------



## Mhill2029

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Oh here comes the excuses from GTX 980Ti Dream Team
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if you dont understand why anyone wouldnt want a better card than 980Ti and sell their cards before 1080 is released and selling 980Ti becomes harder and selling price decrease.
> 
> The benchmark is not fake. Its in 3DMark database for anyone to find.
> 
> Sorry if times will become hard for people that are unable to accept that their card isnt the fastest anymore. Life is hard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1080 may not be the direct replacer of 980Ti but its still faster by a good amount. So its a matter how you look at things, replacement for 980 or not


980Ti Dream Team? What?

I don't have the time to sit and read through 450 pages. Sorry if I kinda skip through stuff....









Then i'd buy faster ones.....no biggy to me.


----------



## badtaylorx

eerily similar to crossfired 290x results!!!

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/9649506


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Oh here comes the excuses from GTX 980Ti Dream Team
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if you dont understand why anyone wouldnt want a better card than 980Ti and sell their cards before 1080 is released and selling 980Ti becomes harder and selling price decrease.
> 
> The benchmark is not fake. Its in 3DMark database for anyone to find.
> 
> Sorry if times will become hard for people that are unable to accept that their card isnt the fastest anymore. Life is hard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1080 may not be the direct replacer of 980Ti but its still faster by a good amount. So its a matter how you look at things, replacement for 980 or not


when a big die with HBM2 launches in 9 months that $650 300mm 256-bit card will be in the toilet.
But it's a matter of perspective. I don't know myself if I decide to get a second 980Ti or a new 1080.


----------



## Mhill2029

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> when a big die with HBM2 launches in 9 months that $650 300mm 256-bit card will be in the toilet.
> But it's a matter of perspective. I don't know myself if I decide to get a second 980Ti or a new 1080.


Well this was kinda what I was getting at, people rushing around like headless chickens for the latest thing, and boom you get stung hard in 6months with something far superior. People need more patience and buy at the right moment, not jump onboard as soon as you see the earliest snippet. Nvidia are more brutal than ever when it comes to early adopters.


----------



## Glottis

I suspect a lot of 980Ti owners will want to upgrade to 1080. I have a 980Ti but it's some of the lowest ASIC ever, also it's rather loud when under 100% load because of full chip and custom cooler being not sufficient enough on my MSI card. 1080 should run MUCH quieter and cooler and will be perfect for ppl who want quiet air cooled systems.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> I suspect a lot of 980Ti owners will want to upgrade to 1080. I have a 980Ti but it's some of the lowest ASIC ever, also it's rather loud when under 100% load because of full chip and custom cooler being not sufficient enough on my MSI card. 1080 should run MUCH quieter and cooler and will be perfect for ppl who want quiet air cooled systems.


what is your oc on that 980Ti ?
The one thing I'm sceptical about is selling my 980Ti for $500, then getting a 1080 for $650. If my 980Ti (82% asic, 1510/7800) can match a stock 1080, then it'll be $150 invested just in the performance difference between the stock 1080 and overclocked one. What if I get one that doesn't oc well ? I'll see my reflection in the screen laugh at the sucker in front of the monitor for spending $150 for the tiniest performance gains you can imagine


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> what is your oc on that 980Ti ?
> The one thing I'm sceptical about is selling my 980Ti for $500, then getting a 1080 for $650. If my 980Ti (82% asic, 1510/7800) can match a stock 1080, then it'll be $150 invested just in the performance difference between the stock 1080 and overclocked one. What if I get one that doesn't oc well ? I'll see my reflection in the screen laugh at the sucker in front of the monitor for spending $150 for the tiniest performance gains you can imagine


like i said my 980Ti has horrible ASIC just 59% and OC is really poor, I can barely hit 1400Mhz WITH custom bios.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> when a big die with HBM2 launches in 9 months that $650 300mm 256-bit card will be in the toilet.
> But it's a matter of perspective. I don't know myself if I decide to get a second 980Ti or a new 1080.


And a year from that another card will launch that will be better than the 1080Ti...
What is your point exactly?

Wait for GP102? Why not wait for volta instead? They have already added support for GV100 in the drivers 6 moths ago. They are already testing it as we speak. Its a neverending battle


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> like i said my 980Ti has horrible ASIC just 59% and OC is really poor, I can barely hit 1400Mhz WITH custom bios.


my 980 ti hits 1500/2000 on the stock Nvidia reference cooler @ low volts all game stable

I got lucky with this badboy but im thinking to myself if im going to get a 1080 I need to buy it on the day of release

because you all know.. well (I always think) the day 1 cards overclock the best imo

if I was going to get a day one card hmm would have to be either EVGA SC reference of MSI ref


----------



## maynard14

hmmm here is my 980 ti oc also to 1500 core clock and 2000 on memory


----------



## zetoor85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> my 980 ti hits 1500/2000 on the stock Nvidia reference cooler @ low volts all game stable
> 
> I got lucky with this badboy but im thinking to myself if im going to get a 1080 I need to buy it on the day of release
> 
> because you all know.. well (I always think) the day 1 cards overclock the best imo
> 
> if I was going to get a day one card hmm would have to be either EVGA SC reference of MSI ref


lucky & 1500mhz? baaah







i hit 1600mhz on air with stock bios. and i dont even think i got lucky. cmon


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> And a year from that another card will launch that will be better than the 1080Ti...
> What is your point exactly?
> 
> Wait for GP102? Why not wait for volta instead? They have already added support for GV100 in the drivers 6 moths ago. They are already testing it as we speak. Its a neverending battle


my point is out of all maxwell cards, 980 has seen the biggest drop in resale value, but it launched in late 2014 so it's kinda paid off. But if they price 1080 at $650 and big pascal and vega hit in q1 2017 trashing it in performance then the drop will be even bigger in less than a year.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Not bad... GTX970 with 4.5GHz 2500k can still do pretty well...

1455MHz core 8GHz memory


----------



## Ghoxt

I'll be just watching from the sidelines. Can't give up my system yet with 1500Mhz Titan-X SLI on water and custom Bios. /LOTRmeme "One does not replace a Titan with a X80".







j/k. Seriously I hope the die shrinks from both companies blow us out of the water and Push GPU's much farther than an incremental 25% - 40% etc.

I mean I'd expect that with just 16nm Maxwell. We are looking at \ Die shrink, New memory "potentially", and new architecture. Unless Nvidia smells blood in the water...







If we don't get a quantum leap this will truly suck, and if performance for the cards released within the next 5 months from either camp don't put Maxwell to shame I'm not buying a damn thing this year.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> my point is out of all maxwell cards, 980 has seen the biggest drop in resale value, but it launched in late 2014 so it's kinda paid off. But if they price 1080 at $650 and big pascal and vega hit in q1 2017 trashing it in performance then the drop will be even bigger in less than a year.


The 1080 card is about to launch and you are already thinking about price drop? LOL you are funny.

First GTX Titan P will launch in 2017.
Then it will take some time before GTX 1080Ti will come out since its cheaper.
Then its the point that GTX 1080 will cost $600-650. Which means GTX 1080Ti will cost more than $650 this time.

Maybe it isnt such a stupid idea after all to sell 980Ti now to get most money back to get the 1080.
Maybe its actually smarter than holding on to 980Ti and missing out on a year of gaming with 1080 before being forced to get a $799 1080Ti...


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> I'll be just watching from the sidelines. Can't give up my system yet with 1500Mhz Titan-X SLI on water and custom Bios. /LOTRmeme "One does not replace a Titan with a X80".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> j/k. Seriously I hope the die shrinks from both companies blow us out of the water and Push GPU's much farther than an incremental 25% - 40% etc.
> I mean I'd expect that with just 16nm Maxwell. We are looking at \ Die shrink, New memory "potentially", and new architecture. Unless Nvidia smells blood in the water...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we don't get a quantum leap this will truly suck, and if performance for the cards released within the next 5 months from either camp don't put Maxwell to shame I'm not buying a damn thing this year.


Good insights.

Lets see what happens today.
Huang has been hyping Pascal for the last two years. According to him, it's supposed to be something special. Even game changing.
These benchmarks here are just ok, but it would be just another usual upgrade.

I still believe that these benchmarks are far from being reliable, and we may be pleasantly surprised today.
These tests shown here are quickly done with borrowed videocards from an asian factory, and then sold. Bad drivers may literally kill the GPU performance.
Actually the IPC looks more than suspicious to me.

Just a few more hours. I can't wait!


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> I'll be just watching from the sidelines. Can't give up my system yet with 1500Mhz Titan-X SLI on water and custom Bios. /LOTRmeme "One does not replace a Titan with a X80".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> j/k. Seriously I hope the die shrinks from both companies blow us out of the water and Push GPU's much farther than an incremental 25% - 40% etc.
> I mean I'd expect that with just 16nm Maxwell. We are looking at \ Die shrink, New memory "potentially", and new architecture. Unless Nvidia smells blood in the water...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we don't get a quantum leap this will truly suck, and if performance for the cards released within the next 5 months from either camp don't put Maxwell to shame I'm not buying a damn thing this year.
> 
> 
> 
> Good insights.
> 
> Lets see what happens today.
> Huang has been hyping Pascal for the last two years. According to him, it's supposed to be something special. Even game changing.
> These benchmarks here are just ok, but it would be just another usual upgrade.
> 
> I still believe that these benchmarks are far from being reliable, and we may be pleasantly surprised today.
> These tests shown here are quickly done with borrowed videocards from an asian factory, and then sold. Bad drivers may literally kill the GPU performance.
> Actually the IPC looks more than suspicious to me.
> 
> Just a few more hours. I can't wait!
Click to expand...

The "game changing" part of this pascal equation might just be power consumption rather than actual raw performance... Game changing would be like 30% higher performance than a 980ti with like a 140w tdp card... That's where I think nvidia is leaning toward. Which is great for sff builds but not so much for the 4kers In the room


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zetoor85*
> 
> lucky & 1500mhz? baaah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i hit 1600mhz on air with stock bios. and i dont even think i got lucky. cmon


thats game stable probably can do more









I did do like 1580/8400 in valley a few times


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> The "game changing" part of this pascal equation might just be power consumption rather than actual raw performance... Game changing would be like 30% higher performance than a 980ti with like a 140w tdp card... That's where I think nvidia is leaning toward. Which is great for sff builds but not so much for the 4kers In the room


Well of course, that would count as a pleasant surprise as well. Specially if a better thermal design leads to a decent pricing.

But now that you mention, how come they're showing a benchmark and not telling anything about power connectors.


----------



## stryker7314

meh, waiting for big pascal.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Maybe its actually smarter than holding on to 980Ti and missing out on a year of gaming with 1080


oh lol dude.
who don't you and that 3dmark leak get a room.
but srsly, that'd cost me about $150, which I'd rather invest in G900 chaos or a new stereo.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Does adaptive sync depend on driver support?

I have a Freesync monitor, maybe nVidia will magically support the adaptive sync part of DP standard.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> oh lol dude.
> who don't you and that 3dmark leak get a room.
> but srsly, that'd cost me about $150, which I'd rather invest in G900 chaos or a new stereo.


I will if you and your precious outdated 980Ti will









Its quite telling that you still dont trust the benchmark because 1080 is better.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> when a big die with HBM2 launches in 9 months that $650 300mm 256-bit card will be in the toilet.
> But it's a matter of perspective. I don't know myself if I decide to get a second 980Ti or a new 1080.


lol

And when a small die launches 9-12 months later, the $999 card will be in the toilet.
When the big die launches 9-12 months after that, that small die card will be in the toilet.
Repeat.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> lol
> 
> And when a small die launches 9-12 months later, the $999 card will be in the toilet.
> When the big die launches 9-12 months after that, that small die card will be in the toilet.
> Repeat.


So just change the card on every 9-12 months


----------



## davidelite10

Depending on how this overclocks this will be a great upgrade for 980ti owners till the 1080ti/pascal titan releases.
Don't see why you guys are up in arms being disappointing. I mean stock it's faster than a 1550mhz 980ti without any real drivers.
And most likely an Engineering sample.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> So just change the card on every 9-12 months


Yep, that's what I do.


----------



## EightDee8D

Nvidia users talking about prices, just lol.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I will if you and your precious outdated 980Ti will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its quite telling that you still dont trust the benchmark because 1080 is better.


the main problem is that I do believe the benchmark. If that card comes at $650 it's a $500 card + $150 tax on ppl who get hyped for 16nm.


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Nvidia users talking about prices, just lol.


AMD users polluting hardware forums, just lawl.


----------



## guttheslayer

Great, now OCN has degrade into the fanboy comment section in WCCFTECH?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> AMD users polluting hardware forums, just lawl.


thank god i'm not an amd user. Lawl


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Great, now OCN has degrade into the fanboy comment section in WCCFTECH?


it was an honest joke, if someone cant take it, they shoud not make it in first place on every amd thread.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> AMD users polluting hardware forums, just lawl.
> 
> 
> 
> thank god i'm not an amd user. Lawl
Click to expand...

You laugh at nVidia users and you are not an AMD user.

What are you then? Intel iGPU masterrace?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> You laugh at nVidia users and you are not an AMD user.
> 
> What are you then? Intel iGPU masterrace?


I laugh at myself too.


----------



## Lee Patekar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> You laugh at nVidia users and you are not an AMD user.
> 
> What are you then? Intel iGPU masterrace?


You don't need to be a fanboy to buy one brand or another. Some of us want performance at a certain price point and we don't care which company hits the sweet spot. Personally I'm not looking forward to another 680 cash grab scenario.. mainstream die (<300 mm^2) at enthusiast die pricing (>500 mm^2) ? No thanks. I'll wait for the real McCoy.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lee Patekar*
> 
> You don't need to be a fanboy to buy one brand or another. Some of us want performance at a certain price point and we don't care which company hits the sweet spot. Personally I'm not looking forward to another 680 cash grab scenario.. mainstream die (<300 mm^2) at enthusiast die pricing (>500 mm^2) ? No thanks. I'll wait for the real McCoy.


Exactly , i say what i see, and buy what i find best in my use case with p/$. That doesnt make me a fanboy or something, and i also see nvidia isnt that good as people make it to be.

I made an honest joke which is kinda true, but if someone takes it too personaly that means they are what they hate and just dont wanna admit. Take a chil-pill its just a GPU ffs.

That said, i think it will cost 600$ at most, with same jump as 580 to 680.


----------



## ebduncan

i'll wait till later today for real benchmarks.

NDA is lifted soon.


----------



## maarten12100

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lee Patekar*
> 
> You don't need to be a fanboy to buy one brand or another. Some of us want performance at a certain price point and we don't care which company hits the sweet spot. Personally I'm not looking forward to another 680 cash grab scenario.. mainstream die (<300 mm^2) at enthusiast die pricing (>500 mm^2) ? No thanks. I'll wait for the real McCoy.


The cash grab was with a 200mm^2 die though back then. I think the prices will be fair this time around after all 14nm isn't cheap just yet.


----------



## fisher6

If it turns out to be considerably better than a 980 Ti @1500 then I will get one with a water block and then upgrade again once big pascal hits


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> You laugh at nVidia users and you are not an AMD user.
> 
> What are you then? Intel iGPU masterrace?


no he just likes to comment on other people bying things he goes window shopping in online stores.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> no he just likes to comment on other people bying things he goes window shopping in online stores.


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> What do you do during that two months between selling your card and the next one launching? After getting used to a top end GPU, I don't think I could do without one for a couple months.
> 
> 
> 
> I sold my 970's in the end of march since no new games of any interest to me was on the horizon. Just played gta v and bf4 every now and then. It's been tough every now and then when I've felt the urge for some gaming. But I've been telling myself "it's worth the wait, it's worth the wait... I made the right choice... I saved lots of money"
Click to expand...

"Lot's" of money? I've thought about it, and I figure it would net me perhaps $100 in savings. MAYBE $150, if I were really lucky. That's a pretty big deal to some, I suppose. As for me, it's not worth going a couple months, gaming with sub-standard graphics. To each their own.


----------



## Klocek001

I guess he owned a 290 and a 290X but they got reposessed after he couldn't afford his power bill so all he got left is a gt210 and a glass of bile.


----------



## Oj010

Two of these on LN2 beat four 980 Tis on LN2
10 GHz RAM will be a possibility with some of these cards
Frequencies will hit CPU-like speeds in LN2


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> i'll wait till later today for real benchmarks.
> 
> NDA is lifted soon.


if you noticed all hardware reviewers were invited to the event, meaning they don't have the cards to benchmark/review. the only "real" benchmarks we'll get today i'm afraid will be only from nvidia.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> if you noticed all hardware reviewers were invited to the event, meaning they don't have the cards to benchmark/review. the only "real" benchmarks we'll get today i'm afraid will be only from nvidia.


Review cards are out.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> I guess he owned a 290 and a 290X but they got reposessed after he couldn't afford his power bill so all he got left is a gt210 and a glass of bile.


This guy gets it.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Did this thread break? "post #501 of 500"


----------



## y2kcamaross

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Did this thread break? "post #501 of 500"


A lot of threads do that for some reason


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *y2kcamaross*
> 
> A lot of threads do that for some reason


Mods probably yanked some inappropriate posts, which reduces from the total.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> if you noticed all hardware reviewers were invited to the event, meaning they don't have the cards to benchmark/review. the only "real" benchmarks we'll get today i'm afraid will be only from nvidia.


some of the press will be there, but they have shipped cards out to reviewers as well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Review cards are out.


----------



## zealord

about 10 1/2 hours.

I think I will stake awake for the disappointments and LULz.

Atleast the new Xbox will be 10TFLOPS and outperform everything on the face of the earth

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/51972/new-xbox-5-times-more-powerful-ps4-neo-rocks-10-tflops/index.html

or this could be a total rubbish rumor


----------



## iLeakStuff

Just a reminder:

*
2.5 hours* guys til we see Huang up in stage with his leather jacket, holding a GTX 1080 in his hand, and telling this is the first mist efficient and powerful graphic card made on 16nm FinFET in the world.

Tech sites are probably ready with slides to release after the announcement


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Just a reminder:
> 
> *
> 2.5 hours* guys til we see Huang up in stage with his leather jacket, holding a GTX 1080 in his hand, and telling this is the first mist efficient and powerful graphic card made on 16nm FinFET in the world.
> 
> Tech sites are probably ready with slides to release after the announcement


I thought it was later for the benchmarks and stuff.

Does the event really take place exactly when the timer runs out?


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> "Lot's" of money? I've thought about it, and I figure it would net me perhaps $100 in savings. MAYBE $150, if I were really lucky. That's a pretty big deal to some, I suppose. As for me, it's not worth going a couple months, gaming with sub-standard graphics. To each their own.


Well not loads... but at least a couple of bucks. Bought them for 740$ (which was a really low price here in Sweden) and sold them for 525$. Now when I look at the market on sweclockers there are no 970's, 980's and almost no 980Ti's. The price of used Ti's have gone from 740-800$ down to ~560$ in 1-2 months...

I'm not poor and if I had lost 100-150$ on them it still wouldn't have been a problem. But since I just recently upgraded it for ~1230$ and will do another upgrade this summer for ~3100$ I don't have money to just throw around. And as I said, it's been frustrating from time to time, but I've managed quite alright since GTA V, F4 and BF4 have been out for so long and I've done everything in those games and there were no new exciting games coming out.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I thought it was later for the benchmarks and stuff.
> 
> Does the event really take place exactly when the timer runs out?


Are there two different times stuff will happen?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I will if you and your precious outdated 980Ti will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its quite telling that you still dont trust the benchmark because 1080 is better.


loooooool








nvidia users battling nvidia users ..... continue plz it's so good








i've been more used to red vs greend dm than green civil war


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Just a reminder:
> 
> *
> 2.5 hours* guys til we see Huang up in stage with his leather jacket, holding a GTX 1080 in his hand, and telling this is the first mist efficient and powerful graphic card made on 16nm FinFET in the world.
> 
> Tech sites are probably ready with slides to release after the announcement


I'm sure you've got your lotion and tube sock ready and waiting...

Hopefully some compelling products will be presented. I have a feeling that This is too going to be a paper launch with availability in late June or early July. I'm really interested in how the yields @16nm are going for Nvidia with tmsc. I guess we'll know by the initial price/performance numbers.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Are there two different times stuff will happen?


I just read on some site that benchmark streams will be at 3 am my time 7th may.

Would be 6PM PST if I am correct


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Just a reminder:
> 
> *
> 2.5 hours* guys til we see Huang up in stage with his leather jacket, holding a GTX 1080 in his hand, and telling this is the first mist efficient and powerful graphic card made on 16nm FinFET in the world.
> 
> Tech sites are probably ready with slides to release after the announcement


----------



## Sheyster

The only thing threads like this are useful for is troll squashing and popcorn eating. And the Troll-of-the-year award goes to ...


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*


----------



## Quasimojo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Quasimojo*
> 
> "Lot's" of money? I've thought about it, and I figure it would net me perhaps $100 in savings. MAYBE $150, if I were really lucky. That's a pretty big deal to some, I suppose. As for me, it's not worth going a couple months, gaming with sub-standard graphics. To each their own.
> 
> 
> 
> Well not loads... but at least a couple of bucks. Bought them for 740$ (which was a really low price here in Sweden) and sold them for 525$. Now when I look at the market on sweclockers there are no 970's, 980's and almost no 980Ti's. The price of used Ti's have gone from 740-800$ down to ~560$ in 1-2 months...
> 
> I'm not poor and if I had lost 100-150$ on them it still wouldn't have been a problem. But since I just recently upgraded it for ~1230$ and will do another upgrade this summer for ~3100$ I don't have money to just throw around. And as I said, it's been frustrating from time to time, but I've managed quite alright since GTA V, F4 and BF4 have been out for so long and I've done everything in those games and there were no new exciting games coming out.
Click to expand...

Ouch! I would likely do the very same thing in that situation. I guess I tend to take the buy/sell frenzy in this country for granted sometimes.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> loooooool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nvidia users battling nvidia users ..... continue plz it's so good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i've been more used to red vs greend dm than green civil war


Isnt it always like this?
Graphic card owners on their high horses desperately defending their card because something better comes along? No more king of the hill.

We saw it yesterday, their pathetic defence being built:
(They of course didnt say the bold)
"My *massive* overclocked *350W* GTX 980Ti can *barely* match *stock 160W* GTX 1080"

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> I'm sure you've got your lotion and tube sock ready and waiting...


Popcorn, lube and keyboard ready


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> And the Troll-of-the-year award goes to ...


it ain't official yeat but we got Leaks


----------



## zealord

btw I was talking about this : https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320

Looks like it is the special live stream unveiling of Pascal.

I don't know what happens when the countdown on the humanityshallbeenlightened site runs out, but I doubt it is the big unveiling of the GTX 1080 with specs etc.

I think the big unveiling will happen at 6PM PST tonight.


----------



## BigMack70

Looks like midrange paschal might be a bit better than midrange maxwell was... I doubt I'll be able to resist upgrading to big paschal when it drops


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Two of these on LN2 beat four 980 Tis on LN2
> 10 GHz RAM will be a possibility with some of these cards
> Frequencies will hit CPU-like speeds in LN2


OMG

And when you know that Oj010 is alway right. Wow, impressive !


----------



## zealord

What 5GHZ core clock for GTX 1080 or what is ojo10 talking about?


----------



## lahvie

ughh 2.5 hours or 6pm tonight??

I'm at work and was planning my lunch around that but looks like lunch as usual?

Don't know how I'm going to break it to my wife that no we will not be going to the early movie because I have to watch one of my role models in a leather jacket on stage talking about graphics cards

Woe is me

edit - captain America ^^


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> btw I was talking about this : https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320
> 
> Looks like it is the special live stream unveiling of Pascal.
> 
> I don't know what happens when the countdown on the humanityshallbeenlightened site runs out, but I doubt it is the big unveiling of the GTX 1080 with specs etc.
> 
> I think the big unveiling will happen at 6PM PST tonight.


I told you all already, ISIS attacks the world at that time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> ughh 2.5 hours or 6pm tonight??
> 
> I'm at work and was planning my lunch around that but looks like lunch as usual?
> 
> Don't know how I'm going to break it to my wife that no we will not be going to the early movie because I have to watch one of my role models in a leather jacket on stage talking about graphics cards
> 
> Woe is me
> 
> edit - captain America ^^


That's OK. She's going with me and says she'll see you in the morning.


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> What 5GHZ core clock for GTX 1080 or what is ojo10 talking about?


Dunno, maybe 3-3.5GHz.
And yeah, Oj010 is one of the most reliable person I know.
A real guy "in the know" for sure.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> ughh 2.5 hours or 6pm tonight??
> 
> I'm at work and was planning my lunch around that but looks like lunch as usual?


I get off at noon on Fridays, and have a few errands I want to run before heading home, so I'll miss whatever happens in 1:10 from now. Might be able to catch that later event, but Friday evenings can be a bit unpredictable, too.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> btw I was talking about this : https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320
> 
> Looks like it is the special live stream unveiling of Pascal.
> 
> I don't know what happens when the countdown on the humanityshallbeenlightened site runs out, but I doubt it is the big unveiling of the GTX 1080 with specs etc.
> 
> I think the big unveiling will happen at 6PM PST tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> I told you all already, ISIS attacks the world at that time.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> ughh 2.5 hours or 6pm tonight??
> 
> I'm at work and was planning my lunch around that but looks like lunch as usual?
> 
> Don't know how I'm going to break it to my wife that no we will not be going to the early movie because I have to watch one of my role models in a leather jacket on stage talking about graphics cards
> 
> Woe is me
> 
> edit - captain America ^^
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's OK. She's going with me and says she'll see you in the morning.
Click to expand...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> What 5GHZ core clock for GTX 1080 or what is ojo10 talking about?


Not quite







More I can't say, but it will be a lot higher than we've seen before but below 5 GHz (on LN2 of course). Air frequencies are going to give 980 Ti LN2 frequencies a run for their money.


----------



## Maintenance Bot

May the well wishes of enthusiasts be answered by sundown


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Not quite
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More I can't say, but it will be a lot higher than we've seen before but below 5 GHz (on LN2 of course). Air frequencies are going to give 980 Ti LN2 frequencies a run for their money.


Hmm, sounds like about 2200ish....


----------



## MNiceGuy

I've been out of the game for a while so forgive the stupid question.

Typically, how long from the x80 launch do we see the x80 Ti?


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MNiceGuy*
> 
> I've been out of the game for a while so forgive the stupid question.
> 
> Typically, how long from the x80 launch do we see the x80 Ti?


Noone knows... we don't even know if there will be one. But it was 9 months between the 980 and the 980Ti


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MNiceGuy*
> 
> I've been out of the game for a while so forgive the stupid question.
> 
> Typically, how long from the x80 launch do we see the x80 Ti?


Who knows if there will even be one. The Ti version of the X80 version of cards have always come as a response to AMD and their top tier card. If AMD brings nothing that falls in between the 1080 and Halo card that NVidia introduces, then you may never see one.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MNiceGuy*
> 
> I've been out of the game for a while so forgive the stupid question.
> 
> Typically, how long from the x80 launch do we see the x80 Ti?


id say 13 months

imo

gives the gtx 1080 to reign until (9months) 2017 march titan pascal then 3 months later cut down


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> Who knows if there will even be one. The Ti version of the X80 version of cards have always come as a response to AMD and their top tier card. If AMD brings nothing that falls in between the 1080 and Halo card that NVidia introduces, then you may never see one.


Whatever it will be it will be stupid expensive if GTX 1080 cost $600-650...


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MNiceGuy*
> 
> I've been out of the game for a while so forgive the stupid question.
> 
> Typically, how long from the x80 launch do we see the x80 Ti?


So far the non-Titan high end chips have come out ~3 months after Titans.

OG Titan GK110 (Feb 2013) ---> GTX 780 GK110 (May 2013)

Titan X GM200 (Mar 2015) ---> GTX 980Ti GM200 (May 2015)

If Nvidia is going to follow the same release date, it'll come several months after Pascal Titan. If Pascal Titan is rumored to be a Q1 '17 release, expect it in Q2.

But who knows what they're going to do. They might have a bunch of ways to screw early adopters.

Personally, I expect the same release schedule. P Titan will sell incredibly well because of the added compute, and Nvidia will sell a ton of non-compute GP100s for gamers at a cheaper price. What the prices will actually be, who knows but I'm guessing not good.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Whatever it will be it will be stupid expensive if GTX 1080 cost $600-650...


It's all up to the competition really. If AMD doesn't want to compete in the high end with NVidia and instead would prefer to focus on the 1070/1060 and lower where the majority of market share is, then NVidia is going to have free reign to bang the enthusiasts as they feel fit.

Given that it's a new process node I would be trying to get out as many chips (smaller die sizes = better chance of viable chips per wafer) and make them cheaper to gain market share.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> It's all up to the competition really. If AMD doesn't want to compete in the high end with NVidia and instead would prefer to focus on the 1070/1060 and lower where the majority of market share is, then NVidia is going to have free reign to bang the enthusiasts as they feel fit.
> 
> Given that it's a new process node I would be trying to get out as many chips (smaller die sizes = better chance of viable chips per wafer) and make them cheaper to gain market share.


True but Im pretty sure Nvidia gave talked with insiders or AMD when they decided the 600 price for GTX 1080.
Because even if AMD would launch Vega for $650, Nvidia could never launch a bigger and faster card with expensive HBM for the same price as GTX 1080.

AMD maybe having any competitors against GTX 1080 until 2017 is probably one of the reason for the high price like you say. No doubt


----------



## bigjdubb

Well we are only 20 minutes away from the first event. I am not sure what this Order of 10 event is going to be about but maybe we get some gpu info.


----------



## Illusive Spectre

Wow, that's damn impressive considering that 980Ti is heavily overclocked in this comparison.


----------



## Illusive Spectre

Order of 10 webpage shows nothing.


----------



## bigjdubb

It went dead when the countdown finished.


----------



## Espen83

epic fail.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> It went dead when the countdown finished.


Too much traffic, DDoS, or epic troll attempt?


----------



## nakano2k1

Wow... So the live stream doesn't start until 6pm PST. Damn, this is gonna be at night??

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?p1=224&iso=20160506T18&msg=NVIDIA%20Livestream%20on%20Twitch.TV/NVIDIA


----------



## Asus11

AMD TROLLERMEN


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I was like that up til I got my OG Titans. Since March 2013 I have resisted the urge to get anything new and I feel much better for it tbh. I don't play many games anyway and have all but quit benching as well. At least I feel like I'm actually getting my money's worth out of these cards and they show no signs of slowing down anytime soon. Maybe when the 1080Ti drops (or Vega) it will finally be time to start considering replacements but for now I am still enjoying these three year old cards just fine and certainly have zero interest in this jumped up 980 replacement...


THe OG Titan was an epic card...









(So was the titanX)


----------



## Illusive Spectre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Too much traffic, DDoS, or epic troll attempt?


I want my 3 days back!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> The 1080 card is about to launch and you are already thinking about price drop? LOL you are funny.
> 
> First GTX Titan P will launch in 2017.
> Then it will take some time before GTX 1080Ti will come out since its cheaper.
> Then its the point that GTX 1080 will cost $600-650. Which means GTX 1080Ti will cost more than $650 this time.
> 
> Maybe it isnt such a stupid idea after all to sell 980Ti now to get most money back to get the 1080.
> Maybe its actually smarter than holding on to 980Ti and missing out on a year of gaming with 1080 before being forced to get a $799 1080Ti...


"Missing out on a year of gaming with the 1080..."???? Dudes got a 980Ti, I think he will be fine without the "mystic" qualities of a midrange gpu that is only 15% faster for another year. You act like the 980Ti is going to lose performance or something (then again this is Nvidia we are talking about)! God Nvidia must adore people like you!


----------



## bigjdubb

I think the countdown website was just a countdown website. Once the countdown was complete it serves no other purpose.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> THe OG Titan was an epic card...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (So was the titanX)


the OG titan was the best card imo released in the past 5 years

who ever was first day buyers.. I envy you


----------



## fisher6

Got this but doesn't load: http://orderof10.com/nvidiaspecialevent


----------



## Rickles

Looks like I'll be skipping Pascal...


----------



## Death Saved

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> I think the countdown website was just a countdown website. Once the countdown was complete it serves no other purpose.


for me "advance now" showed up and when i click on it it sends me here http://orderof10.com/nvidiaspecialevent still nothing shows up, guess to many people are hammering it.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rickles*
> 
> Looks like I'll be skipping Pascal...


makes sense


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Lame.


----------



## Death Saved

Live Now
Austin Scavenger Quest

Follow the trail to win an exclusive t-shirt from the ORDER of 10. The first 50 to finish will also earn a pair of VIP tickets to tonight's top secret NVIDIA event!
Join the Hunt Now

*Hurry! Scavenger Quest will only last until supplies run out.
Tonight
Special Event 8pm CDT

Tune in to watch the LIVE stream of NVIDIA CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang, as he shares the very latest about the future of gaming.
NVIDIA Live Stream

Official Rules


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Lame.


If I rolled my eyes any harder they'd pop out of my sockets


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> the OG titan was the best card imo released in the past 5 years
> 
> who ever was first day buyers.. I envy you


Hey, that would be me! They've been water cooled since day one as well!


----------



## Death Saved

seriously even if i was interested the damn thing is in austin!


----------



## Olivon

http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt

But it doesn't work for me

edit :


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Death Saved*
> 
> Live Now
> Austin Scavenger Quest
> 
> Follow the trail to win an *exclusive t-shirt* from the ORDER of 10. The first 50 to finish will also earn a pair of VIP tickets to tonight's top secret NVIDIA event!
> Join the Hunt Now
> 
> *Hurry! Scavenger Quest will only last until supplies run out.
> Tonight
> Special Event 8pm CDT
> 
> Tune in to watch the LIVE stream of NVIDIA CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang, as he shares the very latest about the future of gaming.
> NVIDIA Live Stream
> 
> Official Rules


Change that to "Jen-Hsun's leather jacket" and I might actually consider it.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt fyi


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Hey, that would be me! They've been water cooled since day one as well!


dont think they'll ever be a card that releases now that could match their longevity


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx




----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt/trail/1
http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt/trail/2
http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt/trail/3
http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt/trail/4
http://orderof10.com/tessellationhunt/trail/5


----------



## bigjdubb

That is lame lame lame. I want to buy an AMD card more than ever now.


----------



## nakano2k1

Damn, those websites are getting hit harder than a red headed step child!!


----------



## Malinkadink

Is this the iPhone 7 launch event?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> Is this the iPhone 7 launch event?


no its fashion week


----------



## Death Saved

Haha the orderof10 twitter account got suspended!


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Where is the paper launch to GTX 1080 ??????????


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Server bandwidth fail...


----------



## fewness

So countdown, much fail.....


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> So countdown, much fail..... Wow so hype, such countdown, much fail


FTFY


----------



## Asus11

after the event ... be like


----------



## TUFinside

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Lame.


I laughed at TOP SECRET, are they kids or what?


----------



## fewness

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> FTFY


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TUFinside*
> 
> I laughed at TOP SECRET, are they kids or what?


They think we are kids!


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> They think we are kids!


ben10


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Well this event is dumb...
Quote:


> 3. HOW TO PARTICIPATE: There will be a Tessellation Triangle Symbol ("Symbol") located in six (6) separate locations in/around the Austin, TX area during the Promotion Period. As a participant, you must locate all six (6) Symbols in the Austin, TX area and take a photo of yourself with each Symbol ("Photo") during the Promotion Period for a chance to win. A photo of the location of the Tessellation Triangle Symbol #1 will be posted at www.OrderOf10.com/TessellationHunt (the "Website"). Once you find Symbol #1 and take your Photo with the Symbol, look for the Official Code ("Code") indicated on the Symbol, go back to the Website and enter it as instructed to receive a clue to the location of Symbol


Wow so the locals only win...nice


----------



## iLeakStuff

A countdown to something we already knew.

Dammit. Guess it means everything will be revealed at 6PM or 3AM here :/


----------



## nakano2k1

LOL...

Forget staying in on a Friday night to watch a technology live stream. Time to go out and have some fun!


----------



## TUFinside

Hey Nvidia !?...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Hmm, sounds like about 2200ish....


On air? Or LN2? One will be lower, the other significantly higher


----------



## Woundingchaney

Do we have an estimate on when we are going to see gaming benchmarks?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> On air? Or LN2? One will be lower, the other significantly higher


Hoping at least 2100+ on water, that's if the boost clocks are true.....


----------



## GoLDii3

Where's all the people who said that AMD's marketing sucked? Guess what.


----------



## Death Saved

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Woundingchaney*
> 
> Do we have an estimate on when we are going to see gaming benchmarks?


What i read is that review will go up 7-10 days after this reveal, but we may get some leakes.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

No, this is edgy and hip, or whatever the Nvidia marketing team thinks the cool kids are saying these days...


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> Where's all the people who said that AMD's marketing sucked? Guess what.


No one said they were mutually exclusive









Marketing team in action for this event?


----------



## fewness

kids like running on the street looking for T-shirt during working time?


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> kids like running on the street looking for T-shirt during working time?


Well it is a college town. My guess is that it is more for the media folks who are in town for the event.


----------



## guttheslayer

So what did I miss, no 1080 news?


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> So what did I miss, no 1080 news?


If you live in Austin you missed the start of a scavenger hunt. If you don't live in Austin you missed out on a moment of disappointment when it was revealed that the countdown was for the start of a scavenger hunt.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> Where's all the people who said that AMD's marketing sucked? Guess what.


They got all the medias attention, huge threads with discussion on overclock and other tech forums.

Id saythey know what they are doing although the surprise of the riddle was crap


----------



## Alwrath

I really hope pascal geforce cards have the same household cooking features Fermi did, I want to cook eggs in the morning since my oven broke.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> If you live in Austin you missed the start of a scavenger hunt. If you don't live in Austin you missed out on a moment of disappointment when it was revealed that the countdown was for the start of a scavenger hunt.


My time zone is same as HK and JKT, +8 GMT.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> So what did I miss, no 1080 news?


6.5 hours til the real deal. Middle of the night here


----------



## DunePilot

Will wait see what kind of standard Firestrike scores you can get with a 1080 Gigabyte design.
Have a feeling I will be sticking with the 980Ti G1 though until the X80 Ti or Titan X80 though.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alwrath*
> 
> I really hope pascal geforce cards have the same household cooking features Fermi did, I want to cook eggs in the morning since my oven broke.


LOL... Are you gonna post the same thing on multiple threads?? Man...


----------



## Alwrath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> LOL... Are you gonna post the same thing on multiple threads?? Man...


Sorry I am stuck at work and really bored.


----------



## Mudfrog

So will they go over pricing during the reveal?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> the OG titan was the best card imo released in the past 5 years
> who ever was first day buyers.. I envy you


true - the TX is right up there with the OG Titan IMO. I'm hoping consumer GP100 will be the same.

Another epic card... the R295x2. Still the best single slot solution there is.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Hey, that would be me! They've been water cooled since day one as well!


I was right there with ya bud... my mistake was selling them (and then struggling with DP compute







)


----------



## WhyCry




----------



## Espen83

intredasting.


----------



## guttheslayer

Yawn.... 2560 cores or none.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WhyCry*


Awww yeah.
AIBs already lining up their Pascal cards?
Awesome


----------



## WhyCry

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Awww yeah.
> AIBs already lining up their Pascal cards?
> Awesome


I know right, but orange theme? eew.


----------



## DunePilot

I'm a Gigabyte fanboy I will admit... that gives me a huge grin.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> No, this is edgy and hip, or whatever the Nvidia marketing team thinks the cool kids are saying these days...


Too edgy for me - said you needed a smart phone/camera. I don't have a cell phone, much less smart phone.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> No, this is edgy and hip, or whatever the Nvidia marketing team thinks the cool kids are saying these days...
> 
> 
> 
> Too edgy for me - said you needed a smart phone/camera. I don't have a cell phone, much less smart phone.
Click to expand...

Do you carry a beeper?


----------



## Cyclonic

If GigaByte is already making statements like these, then it might be possible that there in stores within 2 weeks


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> If GigaByte is already making statements like these, then it might be possible that there in stores within 2 weeks


Unless they are just hopping on the hype train while the ride is being paid for by Nvidia.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chuy409*
> 
> Bought a 980 for 550 (610 after taxes) 2 MONTHS before the 980 ti. I was full of sodium chloride for sure.


If you had been loaded up on potassium iodide, you may have made better decisions to begin with


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> If GigaByte is already making statements like these, then it might be possible that there in stores within 2 weeks


There isn't even a picture of the other reference cards besides the GTX 1080 cooler pic. I highly doubt that.

I wouldn't take as anything but a confirmation that the event is about consumer VGA's.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alwrath*
> 
> Sorry I am stuck at work and really bored.


Here's a crazy thought: ACTUALLY DO YOUR WORK.















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Too edgy for me - said you needed a smart phone/camera. I don't have a cell phone, much less smart phone.


I honestly can't tell if you're joking or serious. But if serious,








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> If you had been loaded up on potassium iodide, you may have made better decisions to begin with


pffft cesium fluoride > all


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> pffft cesium fluoride > all


If your aim is to kill yourself


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Awww yeah.
> AIBs already lining up their Pascal cards?
> Awesome


well yes, that was confirmed weeks ago with GP104-400 picture being from MSI GeForce GTX 1080 GAMING 8G

btw funny thing. all articles that talked about it were taken down


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I honestly can't tell if you're joking or serious. But if serious,


Serious. I buy a 30 day burner when I travel, but if I'm not at home or work, I don't do phone.


----------



## bigjdubb

I wish I didn't need to have my cell phone, I hate that people act as though we are supposed to be "on call" all the time now that most people have cell phones.


----------



## lahvie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Do you carry a beeper?


My beeper only vibrates... I guess you could say I have a...?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> If your aim is to kill yourself


Well someone paid attention in chemistry class
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> My beeper only vibrates... I guess you could say I have a...?


Vibrat*e*r


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> My beeper only vibrates... I guess you could say I have a...?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Vibrat*e*r


Or a beeper that just happens to be mute.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alwrath*
> 
> I really hope pascal geforce cards have the same household cooking features Fermi did, I want to cook eggs in the morning since my oven broke.


TDP is low this time around. A little down the line there will be custom 1070s without a PCIE power connector.


----------



## Alwrath

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> TDP is low this time around. A little down the line there will be custom 1070s without a PCIE power connector.


Yeah its crazy to think how much of a difference nvidias power saving techniques and the move to 16nm will be on these graphics cards. Some gamers can get away with a cheap 500w power supply even with a cpu overclock ???


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> TDP is low this time around. A little down the line there will be custom 1070s without a PCIE power connector.


And GTX 1070 lies where vs GTX 980Ti?


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alwrath*
> 
> Yeah its crazy to think how much of a difference nvidias power saving techniques and the move to 16nm will be on these graphics cards. Some gamers can get away with a cheap 500w power supply even with a cpu overclock ???


1080 with the power consumption of a 980. That'd be sweet.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alwrath*
> 
> Yeah its crazy to think how much of a difference nvidias power saving techniques and the move to 16nm will be on these graphics cards. Some gamers can get away with a cheap 500w power supply even with a cpu overclock ???


I was running an i5-2500k @ 4.6 with a R9 290 at 1100 on a 550w PSU with no problems. PSU requirements are way overblown.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> 1080 with the power consumption of a 980. That'd be sweet.


It will be much lower than that.

GTX 1080 is 320mm²~ and GTX 980 is like 390mm² or something.

GTX 980 pulls more than it's TDP though.

I think the GTX 980 is around 175-200 W and the GTX 1080 will be 125-150 W


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> It will be much lower than that.
> 
> GTX 1080 is 320mm²~ and GTX 980 is like 390mm² or something.
> 
> GTX 980 pulls more than it's TDP though.
> 
> I think the GTX 980 is around 175-200 W and the GTX 1080 will be 125-150 W


TDP is heat though, not power consumption.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> TDP is heat though, not power consumption.


TDP is closely related to power consumption, dont lie to yourself.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Here we go...again.....
I`m out


----------



## zealord

he knows what I mean I guess








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Here we go...again.....
> I`m out


what happened?


----------



## iLeakStuff

PLACE YOUR BETS ON WHAT WILL HAPPEN:

iLeakStuff`s guess:
GTX 1080: 30% over GTX 980Ti. $599
GTX 1070: 10% over GTX 980Ti. $499
GTX 1060Ti: 10% faster than GTX 980. $349


----------



## magnek

Jen-Hsun's leather jacket: Priceless


----------



## bigjdubb

Rose colored glasses guess: $549, $399, $299

Realistic/Negative guess: $599, $449, $349

Since I have no idea how they will perform that is a genuine guess. Who knows what they will be.

What I really care about is how Polaris performs and where it's priced.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> PLACE YOUR BETS ON WHAT WILL HAPPEN:
> 
> iLeakStuff`s guess:
> GTX 1080: 30% over GTX 980Ti. $599
> GTX 1070: 10% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: 10% faster than GTX 980. $349


My guess

GTX 1080 $550
GTX 1070 $450
GTX 1060 $300


----------



## bazh

Oh crap, event at 4AM, I'm going to have to catch up with the news later


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Rose colored glasses guess: $549, $399, $299
> 
> Realistic/Negative guess: $599, $449, $349
> 
> Since I have no idea how they will perform that is a genuine guess. Who knows what they will be.
> 
> What I really care about is how Polaris performs and where it's priced.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> My guess
> 
> GTX 1080 $550
> GTX 1070 $450
> GTX 1060 $300


Guess performance too you cowards.








We have something to go by now that we found 3DMark scores.


----------



## KarathKasun

1080 $600 = %15 over available 980 Ti's
1070 $450 = available 980 Ti's
1060/Ti $300 = available 980's


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Guess performance too you cowards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have something to go by now that we found 3DMark scores.


GTX 1080: 28.317% over 980 Ti, $625

GTX 1070: 13.014% over 980 Ti, $450

GTX 1060: 22.6% over 980, $300


----------



## FlyingSolo

At the end Jen-Hsun says. He has a big surprise and shows a GTX Titan P. And it only cost $2500 and its the world fastest GPU. But before all that he talks about AI for like 30 minutes.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Guess performance too you cowards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have something to go by now that we found 3DMark scores.


link


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> I was running an i5-2500k @ 4.6 with a R9 290 at 1100 on a 550w PSU with no problems. PSU requirements are way overblown.


just because PSU manages certain load doesn't mean it's efficient at doing so. if you like having PSU sweat nearing 100% where efficiency curve tanks, and it heating up and fan spinning then yeah you can say "no problems". i personally prefer when under full system load PSU usage hovers around 50% sweet spot where it's the most efficient and doesn't heat up and fan doesn't spin.


----------



## Eldan

Meh, I wasn't planning on sleeping anyways.
My worst-case scenario guess:
1080 - 25% over 980Ti - 599$
1070 - 5-10% over 980Ti - 499$
1060(Ti?) - equal to 980 - 399$


----------



## Maintenance Bot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> PLACE YOUR BETS ON WHAT WILL HAPPEN:
> 
> iLeakStuff`s guess:
> GTX 1080: 30% over GTX 980Ti. $599
> GTX 1070: 10% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: 10% faster than GTX 980. $349


Fixed it for you









GTX 1080: 60% over GTX 980Ti. $599
GTX 1070: 20% over GTX 980Ti. $499
GTX 1060Ti: 20% faster than GTX 980. $349


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> just because PSU manages certain load doesn't mean it's efficient at doing so. if you like having PSU sweat nearing 100% where efficiency curve tanks, and it heating up and fan spinning then yeah you can say "no problems". i personally prefer when under full system load PSU usage hovers around 50% sweet spot where it's the most efficient and doesn't heat up and fan doesn't spin.


Highest efficiency is usually at a much higher load point than %50. Usually its around %80 loading.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Highest efficiency is usually at a much higher load point than %50. Usually its around %80 loading.


haven't seen that, maybe it's for very low wattage PSUs? all PSUs i had which were around 650-850W have peak efficiency at around 50%, have never seen one with peak at 80%.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maintenance Bot*
> 
> Fixed it for you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *GTX 1080: 60% over GTX 980Ti. $599*
> GTX 1070: 20% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: 20% faster than GTX 980. $349


God damn you are putting some serious faith into Nvimoney


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> 1080 $600 = %15 over available 980 Ti's
> 1070 $450 = available 980 Ti's
> 1060/Ti $300 = available 980's


God no. That would make me disappointed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> GTX 1080: 28.317% over 980 Ti, $625
> GTX 1070: 13.014% over 980 Ti, $450
> GTX 1060: 22.6% over 980, $300


The heck









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eldan*
> 
> Meh, I wasn't planning on sleeping anyways.
> My worst-case scenario guess:
> 1080 - 25% over 980Ti - 599$
> 1070 - 5-10% over 980Ti - 499$
> 1060(Ti?) - equal to 980 - 399$


Almost the same guess as me. I also hope this happens. Might consider 1070 SLI if true.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Maintenance Bot*
> 
> Fixed it for you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GTX 1080: 60% over GTX 980Ti. $599
> GTX 1070: 20% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: 20% faster than GTX 980. $349


Whaaat? 60% over 980Ti with the benchies on OP? Wont complain if true but sounds very optimistic


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> haven't seen that, maybe it's for very low wattage PSUs? all PSUs i had which were around 650-850W have peak efficiency at around 50%, have never seen one with peak at 80%.


Anything with a bronze rating or higher is at least %80 efficient from %20-%100 load.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Anything with a bronze rating or higher is at least %70-%80 efficient.


yes but i was talking about efficiency curve. different thing.


----------



## nakano2k1

I'm gonna say

1080 for 650USD and 20% over 980ti
1070 for 550USD and close to 980ti (+/- 3%)
1060 for 425USD and equal to a 980

It all depends on how good the yields are on 16nm TBH


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> I'm gonna say
> 
> 1080 for 650USD and 20% over 980ti
> 1070 for 550USD and close to 980ti (+/- 3%)
> 1060 for 425USD and equal to a 980
> 
> It all depends on how good the yields are on 16nm TBH


That would put the GTX 1070 at a terrible terrible position in my opinion. I am not saying you are wrong, because we kind of have that situation with the GTX 980 and 980 Ti where the 980 is very expensive and the even more expensive 980 Ti has a better price/performance ratio, but I'd be very surprised to see the GTX 1070 being 550$ and that much slower than the GTX 1080.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

$650-700 1080 @ the 30% we've seen. That's my prediction. Hoping it's $550 like the 980 though. That price would be pretty sweet.


----------



## Glottis

everyone putting 1070 at 450-550 price point, that's crazy even for nvidia.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> yes but i was talking about efficiency curve. different thing.


Yeah, 80+ give you at least %80 efficiency @ %20, %50, and %100 load.

Titanium is also %90 down to %10 load, where most PSU's are only ~%50 efficient or less at low load.

From the 80+ wiki...
Quote:


> For a given power supply, efficiency varies depending on how much power is being delivered. Supplies are typically most efficient at between half and three quarters load, much less efficient at low load, and somewhat less efficient at maximum load. Older ATX power supplies were typically 60% to 75% efficient. To qualify for 80 Plus, a power supply must achieve at least 80% efficiency at three specified loads (20%, 50% and 100% of maximum rated power). However, 80 Plus supplies may still be less than 80% efficient at lower loads. For instance, an 80 Plus, 520 watt supply could still be 70% or less efficient at 60 watts (a typical idle power for a desktop computer).[9] Thus it is still important to select a supply with capacity appropriate to the device being powered.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> everyone putting 1070 at 450-550 price point, that's crazy even for nvidia.


I totally agree but the recent price rumors said $499 for 1070 and $650 for 1080.
Could be completely hoax of course but there are two different sources saying the above


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> That would put the GTX 1070 at a terrible terrible position in my opinion. I am not saying you are wrong, because we kind of have that situation with the GTX 980 and 980 Ti where the 980 is very expensive and the even more expensive 980 Ti has a better price/performance ratio, but I'd be very surprised to see the GTX 1070 being 550$ and that much slower than the GTX 1080.


I know. I just don't know how much the Maxwell architecture was starved for memory bandwidth and will benefit from the GDDR5X. Also, I have no clue on power consumption or whatever. I'm kinda just shooting in the dark with what my gut tells me. New node, large(ish) die and lack of info to go on.

TBH, i'm setting my expectations on the mid to low side price to performance wise. So hopefully i'll be pleasantly surprised when I find out about just what pascal has to offer.


----------



## Bogga

Do you believe that the 1070 will perform slightly better than the 980Ti? That would mean 100% improvement on its predecessor...


----------



## iLeakStuff

Guys, I think we are in for a


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



pleasant


surprise.

Holy crap


----------



## _Killswitch_

Being on GTX 680 still the GTX 1080 will be decent upgrade for me. Not going to get one soon it comes out. Forget all that stalking newegg refreshing the page all day crap lol. ill wait until the rush is over and we get more than ref cards.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I totally agree but the recent price rumors said $499 for 1070 and $650 for 1080.
> Could be completely hoax of course but there are two different sources saying the above


It was one rumor. It's not like there's tons of evidence or anything.


----------



## iLeakStuff

There might be something to that $650 price...
I understand it now...


----------



## bigjdubb

Hopefully the price rumors are over exagerated the same amount the 980ti was ($150), that would mean $300 and $500.


----------



## nakano2k1

Does anyone know if there will be added technologies with the "new" architecture / node? Besides the new memory and node shrink.

Improved memory compression algorithm? Prefetch like AMD is doing with polaris? Anything?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> Hopefully the price rumors are over exagerated the same amount the 980ti was ($150), that would mean $300 and $500.


And the Titan X ($1350) and the Fury X ($800) and every pre-release video card ever.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> Does anyone know if there will be added technologies with the "new" architecture / node?
> 
> Improved memory compression algorithm? Prefetch like AMD is doing with polaris? Anything?


They mentioned compute preemption at the GP100 announcement, but they didn't say what it meant exactly.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> Does anyone know if there will be added technologies with the "new" architecture / node? Besides the new memory and node shrink.
> 
> Improved memory compression algorithm? Prefetch like AMD is doing with polaris? Anything?


http://www.nvidia.com/object/gpu-architecture.html


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> Does anyone know if there will be added technologies with the "new" architecture / node? Besides the new memory and node shrink.
> 
> Improved memory compression algorithm? Prefetch like AMD is doing with polaris? Anything?


We will hopefully find out that sort of information tonight.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> They mentioned compute preemption at the GP100 announcement, but they didn't say what it meant exactly.


"In computing, preemption is the act of temporarily interrupting a task being carried out by a computer system, without requiring its cooperation, and with the intention of resuming the task at a later time. Such changes of the executed task are known as context switches. It is normally carried out by a privileged task or part of the system known as a preemptive scheduler, which has the power to preempt, or interrupt, and later resume, other tasks in the system."

So essentially task / compute priority scheduling?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> "In computing, preemption is the act of temporarily interrupting a task being carried out by a computer system, without requiring its cooperation, and with the intention of resuming the task at a later time. Such changes of the executed task are known as context switches. It is normally carried out by a privileged task or part of the system known as a preemptive scheduler, which has the power to preempt, or interrupt, and later resume, other tasks in the system."
> 
> So essentially task / compute priority scheduling?


I should have been more clear - we know what it is, but not how it is implemented, what kind of impact/penalty it has, and how much (or if) it benefits performance. In other words, is it Nvidia's answer to async compute?


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> http://www.nvidia.com/object/gpu-architecture.html


Doesn't really say anything...

Of the five "miracles" three are at a hardware level (node, HBM2 and architecture) and the other two don't really affect mainstream users like you and I (nvlink and deep learning).


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I should have been more clear - we know what it is, but not how it is implemented, what kind of impact/penalty it has, and how much (or if) it benefits performance. In other words, is it Nvidia's answer to async compute?


Ah... Yeah, I was wondering if it was an answer to AMDs Async. +Rep


----------



## bigjdubb

Well it answers the question doesn't it?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> Does anyone know if there will be added technologies with the "new" architecture / node? Besides the new memory and node shrink.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> http://www.nvidia.com/object/gpu-architecture.html


I guess the answer is no, no one knows yet.


----------



## iLeakStuff

New guess from me

GTX 1080: 40% over GTX 980Ti. $650
GTX 1070: 15% over GTX 980Ti. $499
GTX 1060Ti: Damn close to 980Ti. $350


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> New guess from me
> 
> GTX 1080: 40% over GTX 980Ti. $650
> GTX 1070: 15% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: Damn close to 980Ti. $350


it will be very good if the 40% more perf for the 1080 is real


----------



## sledge

Haven't really followed GPU news over the past year or so. How much of an improvement was the 980 Ti over the 780 Ti?


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> it will be very good if the 40% more perf for the 1080 is real


Worth that $650 price right...?
I think Nvidia have a killer.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Worth that $650 price right...?
> I think Nvidia have a killer.


I think 649$ might be a bit too much for me.....

Since its only GP104, IF I am buying, I am buying a pair at least.


----------



## jincuteguy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> New guess from me
> 
> GTX 1080: 40% over GTX 980Ti. $650
> GTX 1070: 15% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: Damn close to 980Ti. $350


Comon man, you know it's not gonna be 40%, ppl already showed the performance whic is around 10% or so, not 40% dude.


----------



## TUFinside

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> New guess from me
> 
> GTX 1080: 40% over GTX 980Ti. $650
> GTX 1070: 15% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: Damn close to 980Ti. $350


GTX 1060Ti ? where did that come from ?


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> I think 649$ might be a bit too much for me.....
> 
> Since its only GP104, IF I am buying, I am buying a pair at least.


So get GTX 1070. 20% above it will be 50% above GTX 980 for the same price


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Worth that $650 price right...?
> I think Nvidia have a killer.


if it's the full gp104 yes ( but i consider that 650$ is high even for the 980ti







)
PS: sometimes i hate the PCMR thing


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> Comon man, you know it's not gonna be 40%, ppl already showed the performance whic is around 10% or so, not 40% dude.


Are you sure you have seen everything?
(And it was 25% above before)

Hint: Chiphell and clocks. Compare with OP


----------



## Bogga

Show still on at 03:00 cet?


----------



## YpsiNine

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Show still on at 03:00 cet?


Yes but that would be 03:00 CEST, not CET.


----------



## disq




----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *YpsiNine*
> 
> Yes but that would be 03:00 CEST, not CET.


Yeah of course... but you knew I meant that!


----------



## sugalumps

It's basically going to be the 980 to the 780ti again, about equal or slightly better at launch but cheaper and more power efficient then pulls ahead over time. Made them a ton of money before and it will again.

I am tempted to sell my 980ti for one though as I dont want my card gimped


----------



## Cyclonic

1080 35% at 1440p/4k over 980ti 10-20% at 1080p price 749 $ You guys really think N$idia would give you 16nm + gddr5x for the normal prices? I would even say more 799.
1070 = 980TI with 16nm 599

No 1060 till August


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> 1080 35% at 1440p/4k over 980ti 10-20% at 1080p price 749 $ You guys really think N$idia would give you 16nm + gddr5x for the normal prices? I would even say more 799.
> 1070 = 980TI with 16nm 599
> 
> No 1060 till August


Cyclonic == cynical? If thats not looking at the glass half empty i dont know what is


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> New guess from me
> 
> GTX 1080: 40% over GTX 980Ti. $650
> GTX 1070: 15% over GTX 980Ti. $499
> GTX 1060Ti: Damn close to 980Ti. $350


Pricey for the 1070. Isn't 2x 970 a bit better than a 980 Ti? Seems like the future 1070 might be as fast as two 970s now that I think about it. 1060 card at $350 might be high depending on how Polaris 10 performs but I think we're looking at around 390Xish which is terrible. Can't wait to see the news in the morning. Sleep time for me.


----------



## i7monkey

The GTX 680 (GK104) was 36% faster than a GTX 580 and cost $499, which is ridiculous itself because GX104 chips used to sell for $199 and $229.

A GTX 1080 that's 40% faster than a 980Ti should be $499, not $650. Have you guys forgotten?


----------



## YpsiNine

I want to replace the 980Ti that I use in my HTPC (madvr) to get something using less power and generating less heat.
If the 1080 goes above $500 that would be a no no.
So I guess my hope is towards the 1070. But it would need to be a fast card...

I have a strange feeling I might move to the red camp this year for the first time in roughly 6 years.


----------



## Dirgeth

GTX1080 > 10-15% over GTX980Ti 650$
GTX1070 > -5% or same GTX980Ti 450$


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> The GTX 680 (GK104) was 36% faster than a GTX 580 and cost $499, which is ridiculous itself because GX104 chips used to sell for $199 and $229.
> 
> A GTX 1080 that's 40% faster than a 980Ti should be $499, not $650. Have you guys forgotten?


It should be as expensive as people will pay for it.

There were people that paid $400 for GTX260, you forgot?

EDIT: I'll stick to my old prediction of 1080 ~+10% over 980ti /1070 ~980ti and will guess that either it's ~$600/$450 or $50 more for each.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> It should be as expensive as people will pay for it.


We are consumers, the lower the price the better.

Everyone seems so _*content and even proud*_ on arguing on behalf of Nvidia for higher prices.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> We are consumers, the lower the price the better.
> 
> Everyone seems so _*content and even proud*_ on arguing on behalf of Nvidia for higher prices.


True, the lower the price for us the better.

But nV's a company, not a charity. If you don't like the price, don't freaking pay for it, like any consumer would.


----------



## ebduncan

you can guys can buy the new "high end" geforce I will wait 3-4 months for Vega or Pascal with HBM2, then laugh at your benchmark scores.

650$ for a glorified mid-range card. no thanks.


----------



## lukart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> We are consumers, the lower the price the better.
> 
> Everyone seems so _*content and even proud*_ on arguing on behalf of Nvidia for higher prices.


Not sure about lower prices when nvidia wont have any competition on high end until next year...
Vaseline?


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> But nV's a company, not a charity.


So why are consumers going against their own interests and going to bat for Nvidia in almost every thread?

The rationalizations and justifications for insane pricing from consumers is what confuses me.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> So why are consumers going against their own interests and going to bat for Nvidia in almost every thread?
> 
> The rationalizations and justifications for insane pricing from consumers is what confuses me.


How about you lead by example and stop buying nVIDIA, show us how it's done......


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> you can guys can buy the new "high end" geforce I will wait 3-4 months for Vega or Pascal with HBM2, then laugh at your benchmark scores.
> 
> 650$ for a glorified mid-range card. no thanks.


Will you still laugh if you end up spending more money per point on the bench?


----------



## Cyclonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> you can guys can buy the new "high end" geforce I will wait 3-4 months for Vega or Pascal with HBM2, then laugh at your benchmark scores.
> 
> 650$ for a glorified mid-range card. no thanks.


3-4 months lol.... make that next year arround this time.


----------



## 19DELTASNAFU

If nVidia offers what seems like a great deal on price vs performance on launch, I'd wait until Polaris has to offer. No other reason than they well/are worried what the red team is bringing to the table and at what cost.


----------



## lahvie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> you can guys can buy the new "high end" geforce I will wait 3-4 months for Vega or Pascal with HBM2, then laugh at your benchmark scores.
> 
> 650$ for a glorified mid-range card. no thanks.


I'll be sure to laugh back


----------



## TrueForm

Waiting for Zen + Polaris/Pascal. Knowing how the computer market is in NZ, I better start saving.


----------



## Pragmatist

Just 1 hour to go boys.


----------



## 19DELTASNAFU

I'm more interested in the 980ti price drop.............................. hehe. Recon they'll drop below $500????


----------



## Espen83

considering they have pretty much remained at the same pricepoint forever i'd expect them to take a nice hit.


----------



## Ding Chavez

Think I'll wait for the GTX 1160 will probably be $500 lol. On the plus side with Pascal and Polaris launching so close together there might actually be some competition on price. And no I don't mean GTX 1060.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Will you still laugh if you end up spending more money per point on the bench?


so? i have a 290 at high clock speeds, going to something that beats the 980ti by a small margin vs something that smokes it completely for maybe a little bit more than 650$

i have no reason to upgrade, unless the cards can do 4k 60fps+ on a single card. Since i normally still play a 1080p

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> 3-4 months lol.... make that next year arround this time.


well however long it is. Vega/Greenland has been taped out for quite some time...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> I'll be sure to laugh back


not sure what you mean
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *19DELTASNAFU*
> 
> I'm more interested in the 980ti price drop.............................. hehe. Recon they'll drop below $500????


980ti is EOL after these new cards are released, the price will likely stay around the same until they run out of stock.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> so? i have a 290 at high clock speeds, going to something that beats the 980ti by a small margin vs something that smokes it completely for maybe a little bit more than 650$


What has that got to do with what you said earlier?


----------



## Asus11

useless comments be like

ill wait for the 1360ti

this gt 210 will last me


----------



## NihilOC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> So why are consumers going against their own interests and going to bat for Nvidia in almost every thread?
> 
> The rationalizations and justifications for insane pricing from consumers is what confuses me.


I think it would probably take some form of regulation to actually generate real competition in the GPU market (same goes for CPUs). Something that isn't likely to happen.

At the moment NV / Intel own the high performance market, and given the prohibitive costs involved in entry to the market no one is going to challenge them.

The choices boil down to either buying NV / Intel or buying slightly less powerful hardware to support AMD. Can't really blame people for buying NV / Intel under though circumstances, even if they are abusing their market positions (what monopoly wouldn't?).


----------



## headd

1080 25-30% faster than 980TI
2560SP
160TMU
64Rops
256bit with GDDR5X
320-384GB/s

1070 5-10%faster than 980TI
2304SP
144TMU
64Rops
256bit with 8Ghz DDR5
256GB/s

1060TI 5-10% slower than 980TI
2048SP
128TMU
48Rops
192Bit with 7Ghz DDR5
168GB/s


----------



## The-Beast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> We are consumers, the lower the price the better.
> 
> Everyone seems so _*content and even proud*_ on arguing on behalf of Nvidia for higher prices.
> 
> 
> 
> True, the lower the price for us the better.
> 
> But nV's a company, not a charity. If you don't like the price, don't freaking pay for it, like any consumer would.
Click to expand...

When idiots pay for it, you decrease the chance of a company realizing a mistake in the price point. There's no reason to allow for performance based inflation.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> 1080 25-30% faster than 980TI
> 2560SP
> 160TMU
> 64Rops
> 256bit with GDDR5X
> 320-384GB/s
> *$549*
> 
> 1070 5-10%faster than 980TI
> 2304SP
> 144TMU
> 64Rops
> 256bit with 8Ghz DDR5
> 256GB/s
> *$329*
> 
> 1060TI 5-10% slower than 980TI
> 2048SP
> 128TMU
> 48Rops
> 192Bit with 7Ghz DDR5
> 168GB/s
> *$249*


You forgot the prices so i added them for you


----------



## SSJVegeta

I'd maybe buy 2x 1070 at that price!


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SSJVegeta*
> 
> I'd maybe buy 2x 1070 at that price!


Yeah, if that were true, the x70 would be the winner again....


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> You forgot the prices so i added them for you


Those prices will be nice, but i think it will be:
1080-500-550USD
1070-400USD
1060TI-300-350USD


----------



## Malinkadink

At most the 1070 may be $349, but if i'm wrong and its $399 (or more), then i'm really content to wait it out and maybe pick it up when it gets cheaper, although i wouldn't expect any price cuts until several months after release in which case i'd be better off just waiting for big pascal. We'll see very soon.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Would not get 2 x GTX970s ever. Better off saving the money and getting 1080 Ti.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Would not get 2 x GTX970s ever. Better off saving the money and getting 1080 Ti.


I'm pretty sure that x2 970s OCed are relatively on par with a single 980 TI oced, in which case the single card is the far far better option. SLI/CF just isn't worth the headache, and i can say that without even having ever ran dual cards myself. I did have a friend who did a couple x2 card setups and it always causes more problems than it solves. Maybe DX12 will help make multi-gpu setups less painful, but again its still too soon to tell.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that x2 970s OCed are relatively on par with a single 980 TI oced, in which case the single card is the far far better option. SLI/CF just isn't worth the headache, and i can say that without even having ever ran dual cards myself. I did have a friend who did a couple x2 card setups and it always causes more problems than it solves. Maybe DX12 will help make multi-gpu setups less painful, but again its still too soon to tell.


Yeah. GTX1070 will be fast enough until 1080 Ti. You can sell it once GTX1080 Ti comes out and not lose much.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that x2 970s OCed are relatively on par with a single 980 TI oced, in which case the single card is the far far better option. SLI/CF just isn't worth the headache, and i can say that without even having ever ran dual cards myself. I did have a friend who did a couple x2 card setups and it always causes more problems than it solves. Maybe DX12 will help make multi-gpu setups less painful, but again its still too soon to tell.


Funny that so many have opinions on stuff they haven't tried. I've not had any major issues with any of my dual card setups. Some games had to be tweaked, but it's been just fine 99% of the time. Especially SLI


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> 1080 25-30% faster than 980TI
> 2560SP
> 160TMU
> 64Rops
> 256bit with GDDR5X
> 320-384GB/s


There is no way, absolutely no way for a 2560 cores clock at 1.8GHz to be just 30% faster than 980Ti. Its either 2048 cores or its going to be higher % up.


----------



## Death Saved

5 minutes left to start!

http://videocardz.com/59592/watch-nvidias-geforce-gtx-10801070-annoucement-here


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Funny that so many have opinions on stuff they haven't tried. I've not had any major issues with any of my dual card setups. Some games had to be tweaked, but it's been just fine 99% of the time. Especially SLI


Well technically i have tried it when i had to set up the friends PC since he's not entirely computer literate. He first had dual 290x's which like you say needed tweaks here or there in order to work for some games. Then theres games that come out without CF support at all until weeks/months later when AMD releases a driver.

His second setup was dual Titan X's and SLI i'll admit was far less troublesome, but its still not perfect. With a single card its normally just plug it in and pass go, collect $200, have a nice day.


----------



## guttheslayer

It will be more fun to see from NV twitch directly and see all the troll comment

https://www.twitch.tv/nvidia


----------



## fewness

Why can't any of these start on time! Never on time!


----------



## Cyclonic

Already running late


----------



## guttheslayer

I thought was starting


----------



## Lee Patekar

At lest they have "music" now


----------



## fewness

started


----------



## i7monkey

get your lube/wallets ready


----------



## Cyclonic

Dem Tunes bro Dem Tunes


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> get your lube/wallets ready


READY!


----------



## Dirgeth

this is what Huang lisening at home?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> It will be more fun to see from NV twitch directly and see all the troll comment
> 
> https://www.twitch.tv/nvidia


I flipped over to the channel earlier, the comment chat was evidently restriced to 7th graders.


----------



## LBear

Is there another link? Cant watch twitch on work PC.


----------



## stoker

CHAT going crazy


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I flipped over to the channel earlier, the comment chat was evidently restriced to 7th graders.


Its so sad to see all the troll fanboy are kids.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Its so sad to see all the troll fanboy are kids.


You seem surprised!


----------



## guttheslayer

That leather jacket!


----------



## fewness

Isn't he hot in that jacket in Texas in May?


----------



## Tobiman

HAHAHAHAHA! He said," what makes the PC platform great is that it's OPEN". I literally fell off my chair. The irony.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fewness*
> 
> Isn't he hot in that jacket in Texas in May?


My thoughts exactly haha


----------



## SuperZan

Oh Jen-Hsun, you maverick renegade.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> That leather jacket!


Kids notice fashion?


----------



## Serandur

News at 11, GTX 1080 confirmed to be faster than 980 Ti.









#NewKing


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> News at 11, GTX 1080 confirmed to be faster than 980 Ti.


He said New King TWICE!


----------



## fewness

Is he rewinding or the stream rewinding?


----------



## fewness

Oh ***** this Ansel is my dream! Thank you Huang! I'm writing your name in for president 2016!


----------



## Tobiman

So Trueaudio gets noticed by Nvidia. Maybe we'll finally see it being used in games.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> News at 11, GTX 1080 confirmed to be faster than 980 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #NewKing


The king is actually Titan X.


----------



## Tobiman

Just show the damn card already. Need me a birthday present!!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Love how Nvidia tries to create new stuff got gamers.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> You forgot the prices so i added them for you


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The king is actually Titan X.


omg im calling it now

dual TITAN X


----------



## ZealotKi11er

VRWorks Audio.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> omg im calling it now
> 
> dual TITAN X


TITAN DUO.


----------



## ebduncan

In before the boring "true audio" comments


----------



## guttheslayer

CONFIRM GTX 1080!


----------



## Serandur

He didn't say at what resolution though.


----------



## Cyclonic

*** faster then 980 SLI


----------



## Eldan

20-30% faster than Titan X. Now we know for sure the price won't be low.


----------



## jprovido

RIP amd?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> RIP amd?


Yeah RIP AMD. After the price I dare you to buy it.


----------



## carlhil2

Told dudes that they were sleeping on pascal...


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yeah RIP AMD. After the price I dare you to buy it.


500usd please


----------



## guttheslayer

I see the graph is about 25% faster.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 500usd please


I will buy it too if its that much. Got 600 USD stashed.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I see the graph is about 25% faster.


I got 22%.

Should be twice as fast as my R9 290 once overclocked.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 500usd please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will buy it too if its that much. Got 600 USD stashed.
Click to expand...

+tax?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I got 22%.
> 
> Should be twice as fast as my R9 290 once overclocked.


More like 2x because CFX does not work







.


----------



## carlhil2

Titan Pascal is going to be a monsta....


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> RIP amd?


Until Vega at least >_>


----------



## Asus11

everyone who doubted pascal is quiet haha


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Faster than 980 SLI sounds like more than 10%


----------



## Lee Patekar

I wonder how much of this is Pascal and how much of it is the two node shrinks.


----------



## Dragon 32

Meh. So nothing shocking. The 25% that was widely predicted pretty much. But will they overprice it?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> everyone who doubted pascal is quiet haha


I mean G5X so it will match 980 Ti with memory. A bit less cores but much higher clock speeds and you have 20-30% faster speeds. Nothing unexpected. Price will be key.


----------



## Scrimstar

are they trying to show off 1080, or shame SLI scaling


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I mean G5X so it will match 980 Ti with memory. A bit less cores but much higher clock speeds and you have 20-30% faster speeds. Nothing unexpected. Price will be key.


cleaner power delivery should also result in greater overclocks for the 1080


----------



## Noufel

we need the actual card not over**** stuff


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> are they trying to show off 1080, or shame SLI scaling


Funny how 980 Ti is ignored so far. I think it has to do that GTX980 Ti did not sell anywhere close to GTX980 levels. He also said GTX980 was best GPU they have build.


----------



## Asus11

2114 mhz!!!


----------



## Cyclonic

2114mhz







:thumb:


----------



## Dirgeth

2,1GHZ aircooled confirmed


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> 2114 mhz!!!


God dam. Thats how they got the performance.


----------



## jprovido

2.1ghz damn son


----------



## Phixit

RIP AMD.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dirgeth*
> 
> 2,1GHZ aircooled confirmed


Based on boost clock only? what the hell? 67 deg C.


----------



## stoker

1080 Clock speed 2100Mhz


----------



## Shaded War

Check those speeds!


----------



## carlhil2

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1080


----------



## The Stilt

Poor AMD








This is pretty hard if not impossible to better or even match...


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shaded War*
> 
> 
> 
> Check those speeds!


That is boost clock alone. Using reference cooler.

I dont think Pascal overclock worst than Maxwell. That is pretty confirm. 2.4-2.5 is possible with high end WC system.


----------



## Shiftstealth

2560 Cores. 2.1Ghz.

Nice.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Phixit*
> 
> RIP AMD.


Nah, this 1080 ain't got no async compute, AMD FTW.


----------



## guttheslayer

Hahaa, for Free...

1080 free confirmed. lol.


----------



## Shaded War

Oh man this surround fix is going to be awesome for me. This alone means Polaris is already inferior regardless of specs and performance.

Simultaneous multi-projection is going to be an awesome update.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Hahaa, for Free...
> 
> 1080 free confirmed. lol.


free!! just buy this 700$ gpu


----------



## Shogon




----------



## HMoneyGrip

Poor Tom....


----------



## carlhil2

Good sign that he is comparing it to the 980...


----------



## Asus11

DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI


----------



## Scrimstar

The leaked benches were at 1860, can you really get to 2100 on air?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shogon*


Where do I get the specs sheet? Link?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Where do I get the specs sheet? Link?


http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1080


----------



## Sheyster

Single 8-Pin, 180w TDP.


----------



## Tobiman

He said, "the GTX 980 is way way faster than the Titan X"


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> The leaked benches were at 1860, can you really get to 2100 on air


Unless he was flat lying you can.


----------



## guttheslayer

omg the terrible shroud is real also.


----------



## disq

$599

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-launch/


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> omg the terrible shroud is real also.


Not really interested in his coat or the shroud. More interested in hardware.


----------



## Shogon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *disq*
> 
> $599
> 
> http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-launch/


If that's true I wonder what the price drops for the Fury lineup will be like.


----------



## Asus11

game over


----------



## Dragon 32

Oh damn, that single pass stereo is going to be a killer feature for VR.


----------



## steveTA1983

Considering these are stock speeds, a heavily overclocked 980ti/TX should tie or beat a stock 1080


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Not really interested in his coat or the shroud. More interested in hardware.


It's possible to be interested in all of the above.


----------



## guttheslayer

EH, the graph show 50% over Titan X?

Is this for real, or I am dream???


----------



## carlhil2

Compared to what we have been geeting from nVidia lately, $600.00 isn't too bad....


----------



## jprovido

damn 599


----------



## SuperZan

For what we're seeing here from Nvidia, AMD's decision to aim for the low-end and pursue high-end with Vega makes more sense. I don't think the tack they're taking with Polaris would allow direct competition with the 1080.

My $625 estimate was a bit high as well, but I'm sure we'll see non-reference models at that price.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Claims 2x faster than Titan X!


----------



## carlhil2

Ooohh, 1070 the true king, lol


----------



## guttheslayer

1070 FASTER than TX. HAHAHA.


----------



## Dragon 32

So what's special about the founder's editions?


----------



## jprovido

omg RIP AMD


----------



## stoker




----------



## Tobiman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> So what's special about the founder's editions?


The angular shroud design.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tobiman*
> 
> The angular shroud design.


Huh?

The founder edition is just the shroud? Better binned chip?


----------



## mercs213

I think founders edition are binned chips too for more OC headroom.


----------



## Dragon 32

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tobiman*
> 
> The angular shroud design.


Oh good. I thought we'd have to pay extra to not get that.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> 1070 FASTER than TX. HAHAHA.


And $379, that'll put their head in a vice.


----------



## Asus11

think he meant 2 x faster than Titan x in VR??


----------



## Tobiman

$379 for better than Titan X performance isn't bad but it's not exactly surprising given the node shrink.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tobiman*
> 
> $379 for better than Titan X performance isn't bad but it's not exactly surprising given the node shrink.


its actually amazing

considering 28m process was so mature


----------



## NFL

$379...hmmmm, that does make my decision interesting

Your move, Polaris


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tobiman*
> 
> $379 for better than Titan X performance isn't bad but it's not exactly surprising given the node shrink.


it blew me away tbh. that's really impressive


----------



## Rickles

That's relative performance, and probably based on perf per watt.

If you have a 970 and lower it might be worth the upgrade, if you've got a 980 or better it's probably better to wait for the titan/Ti variants.

Unless you love to bench..


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> So what's special about the founder's editions?


I want to know this too... $100 more for better binned cards maybe?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tobiman*
> 
> $379 for better than Titan X performance isn't bad but it's not exactly surprising given the node shrink.


At 6.5 Tflop, if the 1070 is faster than TX, den the 1080 at 9 Tflop is truly a beast, we are talking about 38% performance uplift from 1070 -> 1080.


----------



## TrueForm

Getting a 1080. 3 weeks baby!


----------



## jprovido

im buying it in day 1. never done it before. im so happy I sold my 980 Ti


----------



## 12Cores

AMD what say you, they will need to deliver 980ti performance for $299 to stay in this race, the 1080 is still overpriced for a die around the size of a 560. I wonder what AMD will do with the fury cards now, price drop?


----------



## Asus11

my guess is the leaked benchmark is from a normal 1080

and the 1080 just shown with 2114mhz is a founders edition

could be all a joke though like kingpin cards ASIC rating


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rickles*
> 
> That's relative performance, and probably based on perf per watt.
> 
> If you have a 970 and lower it might be worth the upgrade, if you've got a 980 or better it's probably better to wait for the titan/Ti variants.
> 
> Unless you love to bench..


The fact that JH said its 3 times more energy efficient already show everything. Meaning at 180W this thing is equal to a 540W Maxwell. Given Titan X is around 250-300W


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The fact that JH said its 3 times more energy efficient already show everything. Meaning at 180W this thing is equal to a 540W Maxwell. Given Titan X is around 250-300W


he also said 2 x performance of titan x

did he mean in VR only?


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> he also said 2 x performance of titan x
> 
> did he mean in VR only?


vr only. 25-30% faster than titan x


----------



## Scrimstar

Ummm do you guys think 980ti will be $300?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> vr only. 25-30% faster than titan x


And that's Nvidia benchmarks. We will have to wait. Either way these cards are better then what was available before at the very least.


----------



## Malinkadink

So can the gtx 1080 finally make dreams come true of 1080p ultra settings 100+ fps in demanding titles?


----------



## Jpmboy

looks like a great GFX card!


----------



## Asus11

dont like how theyve got a founders edition

its too much milking for me


----------



## jprovido

i need this so bad. my gtx 970 is even struggling at [email protected] with dota 2


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> dont like how theyve got a founders edition
> 
> its too much milking for me


Don't buy it.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> And that's Nvidia benchmarks. We will have to wait. Either way these cards are better then what was available before at the very least.


The teraflop value dont lie. 9 Teraflop is around 35% above Titan X.

All the leaked benchmark is probably due to a very poor driver utilization.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> dont like how theyve got a founders edition
> 
> its too much milking for me


I really doubt the $100 more is justifiable, maybe 100mhz more on the core? And even that sounds much, but maybe not. Either way thats only gonna net you a couple more fps, which isn't worth $100. Get the $599 card and be happy imho.


----------



## Shaded War

I'm hoping we have some non reference options available on launch because I'll be ordering one on the 27th. I'v never bought a gpu right on release like this, but the surround monitor and VR fixes are a must for me. Plus, this performance jump will be massive for $600


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I really doubt the $100 more is justifiable, maybe 100mhz more on the core? And even that sounds much, but maybe not. Either way thats only gonna net you a couple more fps, which isn't worth $100. Get the $599 card and be happy imho.


The 2.1GHz is most likely the founder edition. Basically it should be based on binning and ASIC.

Compared to how EVGA is doing with its kingpin, its actually slightly cheaper.


----------



## steveTA1983

Just listed my TX on eBay. Hopefully someone who hasn't been paying attention buys it lol. I'm only gaming on one screen, so it should be a big improvement (1080)


----------



## Derp

Nvidia, when are you going to remove the huge G-sync tax and just support variable refresh rate the same way AMD does? Variable refresh rate is a game changer, anyone buying 2016 cards should be making it a priority to have it which means take the advertised prices of the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 and add $200 for the G-sync tax that AMD users don't have to pay.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> dont like how theyve got a founders edition
> 
> its too much milking for me


We can thank EVGA for putting that idea in their head.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The teraflop value dont lie. 9 Teraflop is around 35% above Titan X.
> 
> All the leaked benchmark is probably due to a very poor driver utilization.


T-flops have a non-linear scaling if you are a gamer. Compute is a different issue.


----------



## Tobiman

The ball is in AMD's court now. Polaris needs to be really special.


----------



## Bogga

27th is the same day I get my double salary, he knew that before I did. Thanks! Now give me two of those


----------



## guttheslayer

Now if Jen whatever he say is true, den the teraflop just show its muscle against the TX.

6.5 Tflop is not hard to believe it will be faster on a more efficient architecture as compared to 6.7 Tflop Titan X.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> 27th is the same day I get my double salary, he knew that before I did. Thanks! Now give me two of those


There is even a new HB SLI. LOL. So much poison.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> There is even a new HB SLI. LOL. So much poison.


Yes... "I WANT MOAAAR"









Edit: Selling those two 970's wasn't such a bad move after all. They'll drop in price like crazy now...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The 2.1GHz is most likely the founder edition. Basically it should be based on binning and ASIC.
> 
> Compared to how EVGA is doing with its kingpin, its actually slightly cheaper.


Every mother's brother just saw 2100 on the screen, they are all going to be expecting 2100. Make more sense to do the demo with the reference gear. Do we even know the founder's is a higher binned chip, was that posted on the website?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Every mother's brother just saw 2100 on the screen, they are all going to be expecting 2100. Make more sense to do the demo with the reference gear. Do we even know the founder's is a higher binned chip, was that posted on the website?


NOt that I've seen. eh, for $600 I may add one (or 2) to the collection.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Every mother's brother just saw 2100 on the screen, they are all going to be expecting 2100. Make more sense to do the demo with the reference gear. Do we even know the founder's is a higher binned chip, was that posted on the website?


The leaked benchmark are a better indication of the speed. There is no way a reference card is going to boost from 1.6GHz to 2.1GHz out of the box.

Its definitely the founder edition.

The most interesting thing is, This monster seem to comes with a *BACKPLATE*


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Now if Jen whatever he say is true, den the teraflop just show its muscle against the TX.
> 
> 6.5 Tflop is not hard to believe it will be faster on a more efficient architecture as compared to 6.7 Tflop Titan X.


Does not work like that plus 1070 is only G5 not G5X.


----------



## zealord

With only 1 x 8pin I can see the reference card overclocking quite badly compared to future cards with additional power


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The most interesting thing is, This monster seem to comes with a *BACKPLATE*


Would save me a couple of bucks since I had two of those in my budget/plans


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> NOt that I've seen. eh, for $600 I may add one (or 2) to the collection.


Probably in for 2 myself. Not sure about the Founder's Edition though.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Does not work like that plus 1070 is only G5 not G5X.


Its doesnt work like that but the operational computation is true at least.

Either way 1070 can be doable with a GDDR5 since TX uses GDDR5 as well. Problem is, does it come with a .5GB segmented? lol.


----------



## SuperZan

Depending on the performance of Pol 10, I may finally retire the 470 in the backup rig with a nice 1070. AIB 1080's will tempt but I'm gonna hold out for big Pascal / Vega before deciding what to do with the Furies. I am really very glad that Nvidia came up with nice gains though, it bodes well for the future of 16/14nm.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Would save me a couple of bucks since I had two of those in my budget/plans


I am not sure if those backplate were only exclusive to the founder edition though.









FE seem to be like the AMD GHz edition. or something along the line.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Probably in for 2 myself. Not sure about the Founder's Edition though.


looks better than I expected... Nvidia considered the 1080 has enough wow factor for buyers... wil power to wait for full die is gonna fade (as NV planned







)


----------



## steveTA1983

Someone just offered me $750 private sale for my TX. Would you do the deal????


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steveTA1983*
> 
> Someone just offered me $750 private sale for my TX. Would you do the deal????


Brace yourself, all the TX flooding the online stores.


----------



## Scrimstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steveTA1983*
> 
> Someone just offered me $750 private sale for my TX. Would you do the deal????


2 l8


----------



## 12Cores

AMD still has a chance to compete here, they should just ignore the 1080 and attack the $300 price point with a card => Fury x. They seem to think that they can regain market share with Polaris, so that $300 price point will be important. Lets hope they show us something before 5/27.


----------



## steveTA1983

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Brace yourself, all the TX flooding the online stores.


But would you sell one for that price if someone offered it to you?


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derp*
> 
> Nvidia, when are you going to remove the huge G-sync tax and just support variable refresh rate the same way AMD does? Variable refresh rate is a game changer, anyone buying 2016 cards should be making it a priority to have it which means take the advertised prices of the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 and add $200 for the G-sync tax that AMD users don't have to pay.


Its actually more like $100 more for gsync, on average now i would say, with some exceptions being $200, mostly the very high end premium monitors. $100 for Gsync which arguably does work a little better than AMDs freesync still, and supports windowed mode which for me at least is a huge benefit is worth that bit of extra cost. For anyone that wants bleeding edge performance its Nvidia or nothing until AMD launches Vega. If theres anything that i've learned about waiting for the next best thing when it comes to computers, you'll be waiting forever because theres always something better around the corner. I prefer to have the best NOW, not later


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Its doesnt work like that but the operational computation is true at least.
> 
> Either way 1070 can be doable with a GDDR5 since TX uses GDDR5 as well. Problem is, does it come with a .5GB segmented? lol.


It was only segmented when they cut the memory bus. This doesn't have a cut memory bus since the performance drop is already from g5x to g5


----------



## bfedorov11

So how are the founder editions going to work with third parties? No more silicon lottery


----------



## SOCOM_HERO

Still a lot of money for a card. Really wish these prices would come down on release, would be a nice surprise. Oh well...I have no intent to buy as the games I play are so CPU bound this would make literally NO difference for me.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SOCOM_HERO*
> 
> Still a lot of money for a card. Really wish these prices would come down on release, would be a nice surprise. Oh well...I have no intent to buy as the games I play are so CPU bound this would make literally NO difference for me.


Yeah, $379 is pretty steep for a card that just mopped the floor with every other card out there.


----------



## lvl86noob

Gonna pickup a 1070 after i get back from Fiji (no AMD intended lol) in November for COD Remaster


----------



## renx

I've been saying that we may have a pleasant surprise. I feel like it was.
Performing better than a 980 SLI is no joke, since that's the card it's supposed to replace.
And with that stereo projection for VR, making it twice as fast as a Titan X. Even when I'm not interested this VR generation, the card should be a no-brainer for many people.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I've been saying that we may have a pleasant surprise. I feel like it was.
> Performing better than a 980 SLI is no joke, since it's the card it's supposed to replace.
> And with that stereo projection for VR, making it twice as fast as a Titan X. Even when I'm not interested this VR generation, the card should be a no-brainer for many people.


I think saying stuff like "performing better than 980 SLI" is something that has too many variable factors in it, because 980 SLI is not twice the performance of a 980.

It looks more like 70% better than a 980. This is not bad, but it's still nothing that makes 4K 60fps maxed out a reality for all modern games.

It does look like a GTX 1080 is a great card for 1440p G-Sync though


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> vr only. 25-30% faster than titan x


Has nobody really thought about that statement? I mean, think about it, 25-30% faster than a Titan X. That is likely not taking OCing into account at all right? So we already know that at stock the Titan X is running at a 500MHz or so deficit in clock speed meaning that unless the 1080 OC's at least as much as the Titan X does it will NOT actually be 25-30% faster. Say the Titan X is clocked at 1500MHz and the 1080 at 1900MHz, I would assume that the difference would only be 10-15% or so, right? Sorry, I just got home from work and haven't been able to follow any of the release news yet so let me know if this has already been answered...

EDIT - Also I did forget to factor in memory OCing which could play a big role with GDDR5X but we really don't know anything yet in terms of OCing potential for the 1080, core or memory...


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Has nobody really thought about that statement? I mean, think about it, 25-30% faster than a Titan X. That is likely not taking OCing into account at all right? So we already know that at stock the Titan X is running at a 500MHz or so deficit in clock speed meaning that unless the 1080 OC's at least as much as the Titan X does it will NOT actually be 25-30% faster. Say the Titan X is clocked at 1500MHz and the 1080 at 1900MHz, I would assume that the difference would only be 10-15% or so, right? Sorry, I just got home from work and haven't been able to follow any of the release news yet so let me know if this has already been answered...


You're pretty much right. Hype just has a way of preceding logical analysis. The Titan X and its reference cooler leave a really large relative amount of headroom on the table. Doubtful that the 1080 has the same percentage of headroom vs stock/reference.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> You're pretty much right. Hype just has a way of preceding logical analysis. The Titan X and its reference cooler leave a really large relative amount of headroom on the table. Doubtful that the 1080 has the same percentage of headroom vs stock/reference.


To be fair, I am not in any way claiming that it won't be able to OC just as well as the Titan X, in which case the 25-30% figure would be accurate. I am just saying that we still don't know how the 1080 will OC and shouldn't just accept it as a given that it will have that much headroom (especially with an already very high boost clock). For all we know Nvidia used most of the headroom in the boost clock to get the best numbers for launch reviews...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Yet as we speak, (some) TitanX owners are freaking out with $450 being tossed around as a reasonable selling price.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> To be fair, I am not in any way claiming that it won't be able to OC just as well as the Titan X, in which case the 25-30% figure would be accurate. I am just saying that we still don't know how the 1080 will OC and shouldn't just accept it as a given that it will have that much headroom (especially with an already very high boost clock). For all we know Nvidia used most of the headroom in the boost clock to get the best numbers for launch reviews...


I bet everyone is currently thinking :

"I definitively want to have atleast 2000MHZ because that looks better in MSI Afterburner monitoring than 199XMHZ"








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Yet as we speak, (some) TitanX owners are freaking out with $450 being tossed around as a reasonable selling price.


I said in a different thread that I wouldn't buy a Titan X for 450$ currently. I hope I didn't gave people the wrong impression. That is just my personal view on it and a price I wouldn't pay

(I am pretty sure you are talking about me)


----------



## steveTA1983

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Yet as we speak, (some) TitanX owners are freaking out with $450 being tossed around as a reasonable selling price.


Just sold mine literally right now for $750 ($727 after PayPal fees)


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I think saying stuff like "performing better than 980 SLI" is something that has too many variable factors in it, because 980 SLI is not twice the performance of a 980.
> 
> It looks more like 70% better than a 980. This is not bad, but it's still nothing that makes 4K 60fps maxed out a reality for all modern games.
> 
> It does look like a GTX 1080 is a great card for 1440p G-Sync though


That's correct, and I took it into account. A 70% is more or less the average performance increase in SLI.
Still very good, isn't it? I believe that's more than what Maxwell did to Kepler.
I wasn't counting on 4K @60fps, but that's just me. I guess people will have to wait for the Ti, or perhaps Volta in order to achieve that.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> That's correct, and I took it into account. A 70% is more or less the average performance increase in SLI.
> Still very good, isn't it? I believe that's more than what Maxwell did to Kepler.
> I wasn't counting on 4K @60fps, but that's just me. I guess people will have to wait for the Ti, or perhaps Volta in order to achieve that.


I would say it's "okay" considering the competition.

In a perfect world the price and performance of the GTX 1080 (the one we have here) would be considered horrible, but we are not living in a world where a GTX 1080 is a 3840 cuda core card with 16GB HBM2 for 499$


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steveTA1983*
> 
> Just sold mine literally right now for $750 ($727 after PayPal fees)


RIP that guy.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *steveTA1983*
> 
> Just sold mine literally right now for $750 ($727 after PayPal fees)


Thats an amazing price you got there. You can buy a GTX 1080 for that and lots of tacos with the money left


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> To be fair, I am not in any way claiming that it won't be able to OC just as well as the Titan X, in which case the 25-30% figure would be accurate. I am just saying that we still don't know how the 1080 will OC and shouldn't just accept it as a given that it will have that much headroom (especially with an already very high boost clock). For all we know Nvidia used most of the headroom in the boost clock to get the best numbers for launch reviews...


The 1080 comes with 2560 cores, with account for 80% of the cores count of TX. With that kinda high clock the muscle is there...

Just imagine when driver matures and each Pascal core outperform a Maxwell core clock to clock. 50% over TX is not impossible, and you dont need 2GHz to do that.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The 1080 comes with 2560 cores, with account for 80% of the cores count of TX. With that kinda high clock the muscle is there...
> 
> Just imagine when driver matures and each Pascal core outperform a Maxwell core clock to clock. 50% over TX is not impossible, and you dont need 2GHz to do that.


You mean Maxwell Gimp? I mean Nvidia stops optimizing Maxwell?


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I would say it's "okay" considering the competition.
> 
> In a perfect world the price and performance of the GTX 1080 would be horrible, but we are not living in a world where a GTX 1080 is a 3840 cuda core card with 16GB HBM2 for 499$


I'd wait for AMD now, because if they can match or improve this, then we may suddenly have good prices.

Also, if I remember correctly, you and I will be tuned for the E3. Looking forward for a Polaris based Nintendo NX.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

If anything this performance reveal makes it even more likely that the rumors of a $300 Polaris 10 with the performance around that of a 980 TI is true. That's almost what AMD is going to have to release now if they want the card to have any chance at all.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> To be fair, I am not in any way claiming that it won't be able to OC just as well as the Titan X, in which case the 25-30% figure would be accurate. I am just saying that we still don't know how the 1080 will OC and shouldn't just accept it as a given that it will have that much headroom (especially with an already very high boost clock). For all we know Nvidia used most of the headroom in the boost clock to get the best numbers for launch reviews...


Neither am I. I agree that we simply don't know. I mean, they did show an overclocked (presumably Founder's Edition) 1080 boosting to~2100 MHz in a game, but we don't know if that's the 1080's rough max capabilities and we don't know what it's actual in-game stock boost clock is. Nvidia's website cites 1733 MHz boost for the 1080 but just as the claimed 1076 MHz boost for the Titan X is about 80 MHz lower than the actual boost clock, I'll assume the 1080 will actually boost to around 1800 MHz at stock.

If that's the case and the chart from the event showing the stock 1080 to be faster than the stock Titan X by 20-25% is true and we assume that ~2100 MHz is roughly the 1080's 24/7 max OC (without crazy voltage), then the 1080 OC would be about 16.7% higher than stock whereas a Titan X with custom cooling can reach about 1450-1500 MHz (~25-30% higher than stock). That would diminish the 1080's lead down to about ~12% over the Titan X (and about 20% over the OC 980 Tis). That's a lot of assumptions of course, but I'm just demonstrating how little we conclusively know to tell. Point is, the bigger chips (Gxxx0) from Nvidia these past couple of generations have left a significant amount more clocking headroom on the table than the smaller chips at stock/reference. It's likely that the gap between GM200 and GP104 will diminish at least a little with both at max clocks.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> If anything this performance reveal makes it even more likely that the rumors of a $300 Polaris 10 with the performance around that of a 980 TI is true. That's almost what AMD is going to have to release now if they want the card to have any chance at all.


Polaris 10 has to be on at least 1.5GHz clock speeds to be on the same ballpark.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> If anything this performance reveal makes it even more likely that the rumors of a $300 Polaris 10 with the performance around that of a 980 TI is true. That's almost what AMD is going to have to release now if they want the card to have any chance at all.


Yeah

if the 379$ GTX 1070 is around 980 Ti / Titan X levels then the 300$ AMD card is probably slightly below that like 10%~


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Neither am I. I agree that we simply don't know. I mean, they did show an overclocked (presumably Founder's Edition) 1080 boosting to~2100 MHz in a game, but we don't know if that's the 1080's rough max capabilities and we don't know what it's actual in-game stock boost clock is. Nvidia's website cites 1733 MHz boost for the 1080 but just as the claimed 1076 MHz boost for the Titan X is about 80 MHz lower than the actual boost clock, I'll assume the 1080 will actually boost to around 1800 MHz at stock.
> 
> If that's the case and the chart from the event showing the stock 1080 to be faster than the stock Titan X by 20-25% is true and we assume that ~2100 MHz is roughly the 1080's 24/7 max OC (without crazy voltage), then the 1080 OC would be about 16.7% higher than stock whereas a Titan X with custom cooling can reach about 1450-1500 MHz (~25-30% higher than stock). That would diminish the 1080's lead down to about ~12% over the Titan X (and about 20% over the OC 980 Tis). That's a lot of assumptions of course, but I'm just demonstrating how little we conclusively know to tell. Point is, the bigger chips (Gxxx0) from Nvidia these past couple of generations have left a significant amount more clocking headroom on the table than the smaller chips at stock/reference. It's likely that the gap between GM200 and GP104 will diminish at least a little with both at max clocks.


Suddenly when you have a 980 Ti now Math become so very important. Got to apply some calculus there at the same time to decrease that % difference. Personally I would feel bad if I had a 980 Ti. Did not last more than 1 year.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Neither am I. I agree that we simply don't know. I mean, they did show an overclocked (presumably Founder's Edition) 1080 boosting to~2100 MHz in a game, but we don't know if that's the 1080's rough max capabilities and we don't know what it's actual in-game stock boost clock is. Nvidia's website cites 1733 MHz boost for the 1080 but just as the claimed 1076 MHz boost for the Titan X is about 80 MHz lower than the actual boost clock, I'll assume the 1080 will actually boost to around 1800 MHz at stock.
> 
> If that's the case and the chart from the event showing the stock 1080 to be faster than the stock Titan X by 20-25% is true and we assume that ~2100 MHz is roughly the 1080's 24/7 max OC (without crazy voltage), then the 1080 OC would be about 16.7% higher than stock whereas a Titan X with custom cooling can reach about 1450-1500 MHz (~25-30% higher than stock). That would diminish the 1080's lead down to about ~12% over the Titan X (and about 20% over the OC 980 Tis). That's a lot of assumptions of course, but I'm just demonstrating how little we conclusively know to tell. Point is, the bigger chips (Gxxx0) from Nvidia these past couple of generations have left a significant amount more clocking headroom on the table than the smaller chips at stock/reference. It's likely that the gap between GM200 and GP104 will diminish at least a little with both at max clocks.


The chart are to be taken with a pinch of salt at best.

At First the chart shows around 1.25X performance, in the later chat it actually shows 70% leap (1080 was above the 6 line while TX is below the 4 line).

Running on such high clock with 2560 is going to be pretty powerful no matter how you look at it. 25% is definitely an understatement.

2.1GHz is almost 2x the base clock of a Titan X and that is on a chip with 83% core count.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Neither am I. I agree that we simply don't know. I mean, they did show an overclocked (presumably Founder's Edition) 1080 boosting to~2100 MHz in a game, but we don't know if that's the 1080's rough max capabilities and we don't know what it's actual in-game stock boost clock is. Nvidia's website cites 1733 MHz boost for the 1080 but just as the claimed 1076 MHz boost for the Titan X is about 80 MHz lower than the actual boost clock, I'll assume the 1080 will actually boost to around 1800 MHz at stock.
> 
> If that's the case and the chart from the event showing the stock 1080 to be faster than the stock Titan X by 20-25% is true and we assume that ~2100 MHz is roughly the 1080's 24/7 max OC (without crazy voltage), then the 1080 OC would be about 16.7% higher than stock whereas a Titan X with custom cooling can reach about 1450-1500 MHz (~25-30% higher than stock). That would diminish the 1080's lead down to about ~12% over the Titan X (and about 20% over the OC 980 Tis). That's a lot of assumptions of course, but I'm just demonstrating how little we conclusively know to tell. Point is, the bigger chips (Gxxx0) from Nvidia these past couple of generations have left a significant amount more clocking headroom on the table than the smaller chips at stock/reference. It's likely that the gap between GM200 and GP104 will diminish at least a little with both at max clocks.


Totally agree with you there. I simply don't understand all the people still talking about 40 and 50% faster than 980 TI given what Nvidia has publicly stated. That is certainly marketing speak and I would assume that the "25 to 30% faster than a Titan X" comment would be the very highest number that we will see from the 1080.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Totally agree with you there. I simply don't understand all the people still talking about 40 and 50% faster than 980 TI given what Nvidia has publicly stated. That is certainly marketing speak and I would assume that the "25 to 30% faster than a Titan X" comment would be the very highest number that we will see from the 1080.


Keep in mind the power of optimization. I mean once Nvidia stops optimizing Maxwell. Fury X will stomp 980 Ti in 1 year. Mark my words.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Totally agree with you there. I simply don't understand all the people still talking about 40 and 50% faster than 980 TI given what Nvidia has publicly stated. That is certainly marketing speak and I would assume that the "25 to 30% faster than a Titan X" comment would be the very highest number that we will see from the 1080.


There is a chart at later presentation slide that show a >50% leap from Titan X. I saw it.


----------



## KarathKasun

%50 leap in what regard? Anything other than market speak?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> %50 leap in what regard? Anything other than market speak?


I didnt have chance to take a detail look. it was gone in seconds. But it was the same chart showing the curve of the 900 series, starting with 960 all the way to Titan X, den u see 1080 high above them at the middle section. This time round the height difference was very very distinctive (way higher than Titan X)

Which make me confused. But either way we need benchmark! And of cos with official drivers


----------



## Kriant

Well, my 980ti Xtreme pushes 9 852 graphics score and 9296 overall score.


----------



## carlhil2

What's up with all of the debbie downers, Lol, force a smile or something, you will feel better/live longer....


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> What's up with all of the debbie downers, Lol, force a smile or something, you will feel better/live longer....


Ahahaha. It's all because we want full pascal chip


----------



## Pantsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> What's up with all of the debbie downers, Lol, force a smile or something, you will live longer....


Yeah, just eat up those Nvidia marketing slides like a good boy!







When companies can launch their products like this, and fully control the message without any pesky unbiased reviews, everybody will be happy!


----------



## guttheslayer

TBH I am surprised at DP1.4.

It clearly mentioned HDR 120Hz at 4K, that is very very surprising feature.






1.3 obviously cannot support [email protected] with HDR


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pantsu*
> 
> Yeah, just eat up those Nvidia marketing slides like a good boy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When companies can launch their products like this, and fully control the message without any pesky unbiased reviews, everybody will be happy!


No, I am much more intelligent than that. benches will surface, then, in June, when I am ready to purchase, I would have soaked up all of the info that I need. then, once I buy said card, and, it doesn't live up to expectations, I will return it. but, I doubt that it will be the case. my way has helped me so far..I DEFINITELY won't be listening to the opinions of random dudes on random sites with agendas, telling me otherwise ...


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Suddenly when you have a 980 Ti now Math become so very important. Got to apply some calculus there at the same time to decrease that % difference. Personally I would feel bad if I had a 980 Ti. Did not last more than 1 year.


Wut. Mate, I always use math a lot (very important for processors), it's got absolutely nothing to do with my 980 Ti. My entire 2+ year presence on these forums, I've always done math comparing different things (TFLOPs at different speed, comparisons between shader/TMU/ROPs/bandwidth/etc. quantities across different GPUs of the same uarch, aftermarket clock speeds relative to reference stock ones, IPC on CPUs with normalized clock speeds, etc.) and I'm doing math now with the explicit qualifiers of "if" and "speculation".

Not sure what my 980 Ti has to do with anything other than flinging a random insult towards openly speculative math just trying to demonstrate how little we conclusively know and what _could_ be true. Please don't presume random nonsense about me because of what video card I currently own (that's just lame).

And for the record, a 20-30% faster card coming out a full year later doesn't in any way make a previous card last only a year. I mean, it's been a year and the card is still a 1440p beast. I haven't even beat The Witcher 3 yet (which I largely bought the card for a full year ago). This is kind of how video cards work. It's not a 7800GTX to 8800GTX moment or anything drastic. It's not like I didn't see this coming (seriously, I'm always in speculation threads, often doing math). It's not like I'm not even considering buying a 1080 knowing full well what big Pascal will do to it next year, and Volta to that the year or two after that.

I own a lot of video cards and I will own many more which I knew that the moment I bought my 980 Ti and all previous video cards.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The chart are to be taken with a pinch of salt at best.
> 
> Firs the chart shows around 1.25X performance, in the later chat it actually shows 70% leap (1080 was above the 6 line while TX is below the 4 line)


Which chart are you referring to? I don't remember that. There was one in comparison to the 980 with a ~70% leap in Tomb Raider and TW3 though.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pantsu*
> 
> Yeah, just eat up those Nvidia marketing slides like a good boy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When companies can launch their products like this, and fully control the message without any pesky unbiased reviews, everybody will be happy!


Damn, evil nVidia isn't going to allow third party reviews of their cards now? They'll stop at nothing!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Wut. Mate, I always use math a lot (very important for processors), it's got absolutely nothing to do with my 980 Ti. My entire 2+ year presence on these forums, I've always done math comparing different things (TFLOPs at different speed, comparisons between shader/TMU/ROPs/bandwidth/etc. quantities across different GPUs of the same uarch, aftermarket clock speeds relative to reference stock ones, IPC on CPUs with normalized clock speeds, etc.) and I'm doing math now with the explicit qualifiers of "if" and "speculation".
> 
> Not sure what my 980 Ti has to do with anything other than flinging a random insult towards openly speculative math just trying to demonstrate how little we conclusively know and what _could_ be true. Please don't presume random nonsense about me because of what video card I currently own (that's just lame).
> 
> And for the record, a 20-30% faster card coming out a full year later doesn't in any way make a previous card last only a year. I mean, it's been a year and the card is still a 1440p beast. I haven't even beat The Witcher 3 yet (which I largely bought the card for a full year ago). This is kind of how video cards work. It's not a 7800GTX to 8800GTX moment or anything drastic. It's not like I didn't see this coming (seriously, I'm always in speculation threads, often doing math). It's not like I'm not even considering buying a 1080 knowing full well what big Pascal will do to it next year, and Volta to that the year or two after that.
> 
> I own a lot of video cards and I will own many more which I knew that the moment I bought my 980 Ti and all previous video cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which chart are you referring to? I don't remember that. There was one in comparison to the 980 with a ~70% leap in Tomb Raider and TW3 though.


It was a joke lol. I do the same thing. If I want to buy something I do not do Math. If I do not want to buy something my Math is on the next level.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It was a joke lol. I do the same thing. If I want to buy something I do not do Math. If I do not want to buy something my Math is on the next level.


Sorry mate, my sarcasm/joke meter's broken and I just embarassed myself. This event kept me up too late.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I own a lot of video cards and I will own many more which I knew that the moment I bought my 980 Ti and all previous video cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which chart are you referring to? I don't remember that. There was one in comparison to the 980 with a ~70% leap in Tomb Raider and TW3 though.


The chart came at the later part showing a very clear distinct difference between TX and 1080. It was put on for a few seconds before its gone. I only rmb at the point in time JH was saying: Twice as fast as TX and the graph appears.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The chart came at the later part showing a very clear distinct difference between TX and 1080. It was put on for a few seconds before its gone. I only rmb at the point in time JH was saying: Twice as fast as TX and the graph appears.


Was it a VR chart? That's the only part I remember showing that large of a gain (much larger than normal gaming), but I was staring at the forums at the time so maybe I'm not remembering right.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Damn, evil nVidia isn't going to allow third party reviews of their cards now? They'll stop at nothing!


To be fair, it doesn't seem like Nvidia needs much defending. They put out some nice performance gains and folks are rushing out into the streets, Titans in hand, looking for the first buyer they can find.







I'm keen on getting some third-party OC results though, that will be interesting indeed.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Anybody who wants to dump their Titan X's for $400 go ahead and PM me!


----------



## SuperZan

I will be absolutely glued to the secondhand market over the next month or so. Mama needs a new TX farm.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Was it a VR chart? That's the only part I remember showing that large of a gain (much larger than normal gaming), but I was staring at the forums at the time so maybe I'm not remembering right.


There was one with "2X Performance, 3X Efficiency" and I think that was the VR one. The earlier slide had a power consumption vs relative performance graph with the Titan X at the top right end of the curve (highest 9XX performance/highest power draw) with a single dot representing the 1080 well above all the 9XX cards on the curve, and power at about 970 range IIRC.


----------



## Serandur

Serious question for those of you interested (just want some perspective), how much you think is a fair/reasonably sell-able price for say a G1 980 Ti now or in the next couple of weeks (can't be go a whole month without a strong video card ya know), whether on here or ebay or wherever? I mean, it'll realistically be about as fast as $380 to $400 1070s releasing a full month from now, but obviously it's used (though stellar condition), has less VRAM, and is more power hungry, so... $325-ish? Maybe much higher for ebay if acted on quickly?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> There was one with "2X Performance, 3X Efficiency" and I think that was the VR one. The earlier slide had a power consumption vs relative performance graph with the Titan X at the top right end of the curve (highest 9XX performance/highest power draw) with a single dot representing the 1080 well above all the 9XX cards on the curve, and power at about 970 range IIRC.


So, this one for VR:



And this one for general gaming:



And those are the only two, right?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Yes, that's the way I think it was, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it. I see my recollection on where the power draw fell was off by 970 vs 980 on the bottom (general gaming IIRC) chart.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Serious question for those of you interested (just want some perspective), how much you think is a fair/reasonably sell-able price for say a G1 980 Ti now or in the next couple of weeks (can't be go a whole month without a strong video card ya know), whether on here or ebay or wherever? I mean, it'll realistically be about as fast as $380 to $400 1070s releasing a full month from now, but obviously it's used (though stellar condition), has less VRAM, and is more power hungry, so... $325-ish? Maybe much higher for ebay if acted on quickly?


I think an ebay auction could still net $500+, selling in an enthusiast forum like this and $325-ish becomes more realistic.


----------



## Klocek001

I'm impressed with 1080 (kind of), that clock speed is crazy, oc'd maxwell vs oc'd pascall will come to about ~600MHz difference. Now drop a chip with HBM2







Hope it'll be next summer or earlier.


----------



## carlhil2





 in case some missed it, or, something, because there is a lot of misinformation being told....


----------



## Scrimstar

What if the 1070 is faster than TX only in VR, but not games

seems to me 1080 is only 15-20% faster in games, and the 1070 CANT be trailing the 1080 that close


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> What if the 1070 is faster than TX only in VR, but not games
> 
> seems to me 1080 is only 15-20% faster in games, and the 1070 CANT be trailing the 1080 that close


its a perfect example of gtx 970 vs titan black


----------



## Asus11

just sold the 980 ti


----------



## KeepWalkinG

970 and 980 was 145W and 165W and now in the graphs that jen hsun shows they are 160+ and 180+ W


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> 970 and 980 was 145W and 165W and now in the graphs that jen hsun shows they are 160+ and 180+ W


more powerful than a 250w cards though

so yeah! if you think about it its 2x the performance of gtx 970 and 980 while only using 15-25w more


----------



## xTesla1856

I'm sure happy I sold my Titan X's for a profit last month...


----------



## GoLDii3

Anyone has specs on the 1070? Also i read that 1080 FED will be aviable 27/05 but when will custom GTX 1070's be aviable?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Suddenly when you have a 980 Ti now Math become so very important. Got to apply some calculus there at the same time to decrease that % difference. Personally I would feel bad if I had a 980 Ti. *Did not last more than 1 year*.


lol -sooo, like a 290x.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol -sooo, like a 290x.


290x was always good from the last 4 years. Hawaii now is 50% faster from the beginning.
Say this for Gtx 780 ti he is = 380x now


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> 290x was always good from the last 4 years. Hawaii now is 50% faster from the beginning.
> Say this for Gtx 780 ti he is = 380x now


google translate seems to be having issues?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> 290x was always good from the last 4 years. Hawaii now is 50% faster from the beginning.
> Say this for Gtx 780 ti he is = 380x now


HD7970 is 4.5 years old now, and the 290X came in almost 2 year later. I am not sure where you get the last 4 years from, unless u are referring to GCN as a whole.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> 970 and 980 was 145W and 165W and now in the graphs that jen hsun shows they are 160+ and 180+ W


It still better than the 670 and 680 which is 175W and 195W respectively


----------



## sblantipodi

GTX1080 shows no wow performance.
It's slightly faster than a non overclocked GTX980 Ti. Ok. So why the nvidia ceo said that the GTX1080 is faster than a GTX980 SLI?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> GTX1080 shows no wow performance.
> It's slightly faster than a non overclocked GTX980 Ti. Ok. So why the nvidia ceo said that the GTX1080 is faster than a GTX980 SLI?


It is faster than most overclocked GTX 980 Ti even, except for the best OCed and those under LN2.

GTX980 has 70-80% performance leap over 980, which is around the same performance uplift for SLI.


----------



## bloot

Not really much impressed, good cards for sure but nothing outstanding.


----------



## Sheyster

Still confused about the "Founder's Edition" so I did some searches.

It sounds to me like the nVidia reference design 1080 IS the "Founder's Edition" and will sell for $699 on Launch Day. The $599 cards will be partner cards which start at $599 and up. There is no nVidia reference card for $599 at launch. The $699 reference card will feature the new shroud, cooler and a backplate. Nothing about better binning is mentioned that I could find.

Anyone with different info, please speak up!


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Still confused about the "Founder's Edition" so I did some searches.
> 
> It sounds to me like the nVidia reference design 1080 IS the "Founder's Edition" and will sell for $699 on Launch Day. The $599 cards will be partner cards which start at $599 and up. There is no nVidia reference card for $599 at launch. The $699 reference card will feature the new shroud, cooler and a backplate. Nothing about better binning is mentioned that I could find.
> 
> Anyone with different info, please speak up!


Yes that is what we are all thinking so far. Also it could be that the Founders Edition overclocks better.

Still much confusion. I hope that clears up soon


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Still confused about the "Founder's Edition" so I did some searches.
> 
> It sounds to me like the nVidia reference design 1080 IS the "Founder's Edition" and will sell for $699 on Launch Day. The $599 cards will be partner cards which start at $599 and up. There is no nVidia reference card for $599 at launch. The $699 reference card will feature the new shroud, cooler and a backplate. Nothing about better binning is mentioned that I could find.
> 
> Anyone with different info, please speak up!


Well, the Zotac has a reference cooler, so, it COULD be some type of asic binning maybe, and, smell like leather?







http://videocardz.com/59674/zotac-releases-its-geforce-gtx-1080


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Also it could be that the Founders Edition overclocks better.


That would constitute better binning.


----------



## Ghoxt

Laughing at all the tizzy people are spouting. Sell now lol, many of you sound like Stock Brokers. The money is not the focus for Titan owners nor the baby Pascal performance which we all will no doubt applaud coming from the *same company*. This is just the first reveal of Pascal. Slow your Roll... This is exactly what should have occurred if we were paying attention all along.

We knew looong ago we were potentially getting GDDR5X, new Architecture, and die shrink... Hell, Maxwell with new memory and a die shrink might get ballpark similar performance... Actually Maxwell was suppossed to have had the die shrink before TSMC advised they could not produce it in the time frame originally projected.

So many however kept looking in the past for the new GPU projections which did not match situation wise what we knew was coming. I'm thinking of the long haul. I'm waiting for Big Pascal. I can easily see some buying every card between now and the big Pascal eventually spending well over $1000 in that time frame. (Just like the last 2 times.)

OT:

One can only hope AMD's die shrink, & new architecture, and HBM2 as well keeps them in the ballpark, especially now that Nvidia has revealed first. It's in no ones best interest for them to lose more market share. I'm not optimistic however...


----------



## Ghoxt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> It is faster than most overclocked GTX 980 Ti even, except for the best OCed and those under LN2.
> 
> GTX980 GTX1080 has 70-80% performance leap over 980, which is around the same performance uplift for SLI.


FTFY - At least I think that's what you meant to type


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Still confused about the "Founder's Edition" so I did some searches.
> 
> It sounds to me like the nVidia reference design 1080 IS the "Founder's Edition" and will sell for $699 on Launch Day. The $599 cards will be partner cards which start at $599 and up. There is no nVidia reference card for $599 at launch. The $699 reference card will feature the new shroud, cooler and a backplate. Nothing about better binning is mentioned that I could find.
> 
> Anyone with different info, please speak up!


At the event, they said the founders edition would be available May 27th. They didn't say every card would be available then, so maybe you are paying for early availability.
Quote:


> NVIDIA's press release was also very careful to only attach the May 27th launch date to the Founders Edition cards.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> At the event, they said the founders edition would be available May 27th. They didn't say every card would be available then, so maybe you are paying for early availability.


TBH I only care for the backplate.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> At the event, they said the founders edition would be available May 27th. They didn't say every card would be available then, so maybe you are paying for early availability.


Yeah, since the reference card shown on Zotac's web site looks identical to the card shown at the event, you may be on to something there. Founder's Edition may be just a $100 launch week premium they're going to charge.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Yeah, since the reference card shown on Zotac's web site looks identical to the card shown at the event, you may be on to something there. Founder's Edition may be just a $100 launch week premium they're going to charge.


FE will be Nvidia reference.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> FE will be Nvidia reference *at a $100 launch premium.*


Fixed.


----------



## sebkow

Now we wait for the 1080 ti or 1080 p


----------



## Terreos

I'm curious to see if their claim that the 1070 is faster than a Titan X / 980 Ti has any truth behind it. If it is then I'd be curious to see what the price drop would be on the used Titan X / 980 Ti would be.


----------



## carlhil2

I seriously don't understand why someone, who is PLANNING to upgrade to new cards, would hold on to their old cards til the new cards are announced to sell. you should have your ear to the pavement and move your old cards accordingly, like at least a Month before the new cards are announced. this is OCN, you should know better. if I had a Titan X, I would just ride it til big pascal drops, use it as a backup for future use between cards....


----------



## kaosstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I seriously don't understand why someone, who is PLANNING to upgrade to new cards, would hold on to their old cards til the new cards are announced to sell. you should have your ear to the pavement and move your old cards accordingly, like at least a Month before the new cards are announced. this is OCN, you should know better. if I had a Titan X, I would just ride it til big pascal drops, use it as a backup for future use between cards....


As far as I'm concerned, if you have a Titan X you really don't care much about money anyway.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kaosstar*
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, if you have a Titan X you really don't care much about money anyway.


That doesn't make sense, come on man...


----------



## Dry Bonez

Is it worth it to sell my 980ti for the 1080?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> Is it worth it to sell my 980ti for the 1080?


Put it on Amazon for $450.00 and see who bites...


----------



## headd

Here is confirmation about 1080 performance in games not VR.25% faster than 980TI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnmZwChW_s&feature=youtu.be&t=304
1070 problably will be 10% slower than 980TI.
For 700 and 450USD MSRP its not that good deal.

Kepler 680/670 launch was better.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Here is confirmation about 1080 performance in games not VR.25% faster than 980TI
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnmZwChW_s&feature=youtu.be&t=304
> 1070 problably will be 10% slower than 980TI.
> For 700 and 450USD MSRP its not that good deal.
> 
> Kepler 680/670 launch was better.


yawn

I'll bet the average 980 Ti (aftermarket) ultimately has more relative overclocking headroom too. Should shrink that gap a bit... until newer game drives/features open it up again. Waiting for big Pascal.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Here is confirmation about 1080 performance in games not VR.25% faster than 980TI
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnmZwChW_s&feature=youtu.be&t=304
> 1070 problably will be 10% slower than 980TI.
> For 700 and 450USD MSRP its not that good deal.
> 
> Kepler 680/670 launch was better.


I am curious, what are you pushing?


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> yawn
> 
> I'll bet the average 980 Ti (aftermarket) ultimately has more relative overclocking headroom too. Should shrink that gap a bit... until newer game drives/features open it up again. Waiting for big Pascal.


lol.

Notice how he post signature price of both cards and not MSRP which is $100 below.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> lol.
> 
> Notice how he post signature price of both cards and not MSRP which is $100 below.


Yeah...







Honestly, 1070 SLI (2 x $379) will be amazing bang-for-the-buck considering the cards are 8GB VRAM.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> yawn
> 
> I'll bet the average 980 Ti (aftermarket) ultimately has more relative overclocking headroom too. Should shrink that gap a bit... until newer game drives/features open it up again. Waiting for big Pascal.


remains to be seen.

There is one thing people shouldn't forget :

When the GTX 1080 comes out people are going to compare the 1x8 Pin reference design GTX 1080 to the super 980 Ti like Classified, Lightning, HoF etc., which are all known for great overclocking.

I think we should consider to compare reference GTX 1080 with reference GTX 980 Ti and once the equivalent custom designs from the GTX 1080 come out then compare them to the 980 Ti counterparts.

I personally could see the GTX 1080 being "bottlenecked" by the single 8 pin power connector in terms of overclocking potential.

I am just shooting in the dark here speculating, but I could imagine a GTX 1080 Classified or Lightning to get like 2500 MHZ core clock maybe or even more?


----------



## jincuteguy

So where are the review?


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Notice how he post signature price of both cards and not MSRP which is $100 below.


Reference=founder edition
Unless aftermarket cards are 100USD cheaper i believe in reference card MSRP.
So it is indeed 700USD for 1080 and 450USD for 1070.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Here is confirmation about 1080 performance in games not VR.25% faster than 980TI
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnmZwChW_s&feature=youtu.be&t=304
> 1070 problably will be 10% slower than 980TI.
> For 700 and 450USD MSRP its not that good deal.
> 
> Kepler 680/670 launch was better.


A massive 30 acre ranch









Kinda makes me question the guy's perception.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Reference=founder edition
> Unless aftermarket cards are 100USD cheaper i believe in reference card MSRP.
> So it is indeed 700USD for 1080 and 450USD for 1070.


That is launch pricing. Many will wait for the lower priced cards that follow. It's just nVidia milking early adopters. There is no need for blanket pricing statements like this. You make it sound like there will never be a $599 1080 or $379 1070.


----------



## headd

Well GTX970 cost here where i live same as 2years ago at launch


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Reference=founder edition
> Unless aftermarket cards are 100USD cheaper i believe in reference card MSRP.
> So it is indeed 700USD for 1080 and 450USD for 1070.


No you silly rabbit.

Nvidia`s own crumbled paper design will cost $700/$450.
All other designs from AIBs will have MSRP starting at $600/$379

If Nvidia think I and many other will pay more for that card when MSI and many other AIBs got way better cooling, they better think again


----------



## headd

Its Ngreedia...
Quote:


> The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 "Founders Edition" will be available on *May 27 for $699*. It will be available from ASUS, Colorful, EVGA, Gainward, Galaxy, Gigabyte, Innovision 3D, MSI, NVIDIA. Palit, PNY and Zotac. Custom boards from partners *will vary by region* and pricing is *expected* to *start* at $599.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> No you silly rabbit.
> 
> Nvidia`s own crumbled paper design will cost $700/$450.
> All other designs from AIBs will have MSRP starting at $600/$379
> 
> If Nvidia think I and many other will pay more for that card when MSI and many other AIBs got way better cooling, they better think again


Not like any of the good AIB models will actually launch at those prices. My G1 980 Ti I bought at launch was $50 over MSRP. My G1 970s at launch were $40 over MSRP. Couple that with launch hype, demand, and that Nvidia themselves leave so much room for interpretation (by the AIBs) with that $70 - $100 premium just for reference and yeah...


----------



## Sheyster

FWIW, PNY offers lifetime warranty once the card is registered. They are offering the "Founder's Edition" in addition to the others listed. Might make sense to buy from them and get the free lifetime warranty if you're an early adopter.


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Not like any of the good AIB models will actually launch at those prices. My G1 980 Ti I bought at launch was $50 over MSRP. My G1 970s at launch were $40 over MSRP. Couple that with launch hype, demand, and that Nvidia themselves leave so much room for interpretation (by the AIBs) with that $70 - $100 premium just for reference and yeah...


Agreed. Those MSRP prices wont stay stagnant for long once the cards are launched. Retailers are guaranteed to raise prices concerning how hot this card is. They will add $50-100 over the MSRP. Every single cycle this happens. Unless you're first in line, you may have to wait for the price to go down.


----------



## iLeakStuff

MSRP is $379. Something will cost $379. AIBs typically cost $20+ than MSRP.
I can afford an extra 20 bucks


----------



## Menta

I wonder if Msi will keep the twin frozer design.

why the delay on 1070 card June 10, i think its possible to see after market designs from day one.what do you guys think?


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> I wonder if Msi will keep the twin frozer design.
> 
> why the delay on 1070 card June 10, i think its possible to see after market designs from day one.what do you guys think?


I think that it is possible yes, but I think June 10th will only be Founders Edition and 2-3 weeks later for custom designs


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> I wonder if Msi will keep the twin frozer design.
> 
> why the delay on 1070 card June 10, i think its possible to see after market designs from day one.what do you guys think?


The trend seems to be triple fan coolers (ala Gigabyte and Asus 980 Ti), so maybe we'll see something new from them.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> The release date of the GeForce GTX 1070 is set for 10th June 2016 and will include the launch of non-reference solutions which is great to hear. The GeForce GTX 1080 will launch a slight bit earlier on 27th May 2016. *NVIDIA partners will be delivering custom solutions for both cards at their launch*.


----------



## iLeakStuff




----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> No you silly rabbit.
> 
> Nvidia`s own crumbled paper design will cost $700/$450.
> All other designs from AIBs will have MSRP starting at $600/$379
> 
> If Nvidia think I and many other will pay more for that card when MSI and many other AIBs got way better cooling, they better think again


But I want reference design. What about SLI? Reference is way better. What about WC? How will I know a custom board will get a WB. What about availability? If you compare last gen Nvidia cards then yes the price is 700/450 vs 550/330. With 600/380 is a way for Nvidia to let partner make "cheaper" cards. If AMD or Nvidia say the cards has to cost $500 then no matter what they have to sell for $500.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> No you silly rabbit.
> 
> Nvidia`s own crumbled paper design will cost $700/$450.
> All other designs from AIBs will have MSRP starting at $600/$379
> 
> If Nvidia think I and many other will pay more for that card when MSI and many other AIBs got way better cooling, they better think again
> 
> 
> 
> But I want reference design. What about SLI? Reference is way better. What about WC? How will I know a custom board will get a WB. What about availability? If you compare last gen Nvidia cards then yes the price is 700/450 vs 550/330. With 600/380 is a way for Nvidia to let partner make "cheaper" cards. If AMD or Nvidia say the cards has to cost $500 then no matter what they have to sell for $500.
Click to expand...

Having a custom cooler doesn't mean it can't be a reference design.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Having a custom cooler doesn't mean it can't be a reference design.


Think its different this time.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Zotac
https://www.zotac.com/no/product/graphics_card/geforce-gtx-1080


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Zotac
> https://www.zotac.com/no/product/graphics_card/geforce-gtx-1080


So much for the "only founders cards get the new cooler" idea.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*


Nice.....i sold my 970 two weaks ago.....no loss so i am getting impaciente


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> So much for the "only founders cards get the new cooler" idea.


Every year zotac/asus/msi/gigabyte/evga make reference board + custom board.
So founders cards can be from them again?


----------



## Terreos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> So where are the review?


Can't review something that isn't released. It was announced. That's all.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> So much for the "only founders cards get the new cooler" idea.


From my twitter feed some people(hardware canucks iirc) said that only the founders cards will have the premium cooler with the backplate. The normal 1080 should have the same cooler in design but with lower quality materials.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> So much for the "only founders cards get the new cooler" idea.


What does that even mean?
Does that card say its $599?
FE will be sold by all partners.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> From my twitter feed some people(hardware canucks iirc) said that only the founders cards will have the premium cooler with the backplate. The normal 1080 should have the same cooler in design but with lower quality materials.


In principal GTX980 Reference has same Quality/Cooler as FE GTX1080 but $150 price difference.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> So much for the "only founders cards get the new cooler" idea.
> 
> 
> 
> From my twitter feed some people(hardware canucks iirc) said that only the founders cards will have the premium cooler with the backplate. The normal 1080 should have the same cooler in design but with lower quality materials.
Click to expand...

Same design as in it's made out of plastic instead of metal?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> What does that even mean?
> Does that card say its $599?
> FE will be sold by all partners.
> In principal GTX980 Reference has same Quality/Cooler as FE GTX1080 but $150 price difference.


It means that yesterday many people thought only founders cards would get the new cooler. That doesn't appear to be the case.

No where on the Zotac page does it say founder, so who knows what it is.


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Same design as in it's made out of plastic instead of metal?


Yes. With wood screws.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Same design as in it's made out of plastic instead of metal?


The founders' one is getting machined aluminum shroud.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> Yes. With wood screws.


lol ,good one


----------



## bfedorov11

It doesn't make sense that the reference card will be more money. Why would a card with a better cooling cost less? IMO, 599 will be the reference/non founder card. It will be limited with low OC by power or binning. Seems like they're leaving money on the table by not binning these things by now.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> The founders' one is getting machined aluminum shroud.
> 
> 
> lol ,good one


Anandtech mentioned a vapor chamber, wonder if that is also for the founders card only?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfedorov11*
> 
> It doesn't make sense that the reference card will be more money. Why would a card with a better cooling cost less? IMO, 599 will be the reference/non founder card. It will be limited with low OC by power or binning.


This time Custom cards will have to cost more then $700 to be better then FE. $599 price is for junk 1080s. Nvidia just could not price Reference model $599. They are leaving to their partners to find ways to cheap out.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

I can live with plastic. Too bad I'm stuck with this Freesync monitor.

Maybe I'll get 1070 and then get Vega lol


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bfedorov11*
> 
> It doesn't make sense that the reference card will be more money. Why would a card with a better cooling cost less? IMO, 599 will be the reference/non founder card. It will be limited with low OC by power or binning.
> 
> 
> 
> This time Custom cards will have to cost more then $700 to be better then FE. $599 price is for junk 1080s. Nvidia just could not price Reference model $599. They are leaving to their partners to find ways to cheap out.
Click to expand...

Or maybe its because CNC milled aluminum is expensive to make?


----------



## iLeakStuff

$379 MSI 8G GTX 1070 or Asus Strix 1070 8GB for me.
x2

Couldnt care less about that aluminium build from Nvidia.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> $379 MSI 8G GTX 1070 or Asus Strix 1070 8GB for me.
> x2
> 
> Couldnt care less about that aluminium build from Nvidia.


I personally would go with 1x GTX 1080 over 2x 1070 even if the 2x 1070 perform much better, but that is just a personal thing, because I also calculate the following into my budget and decision :

- CF/SLI mainboard extra cost
- Bigger PSU extra cost
- Games lacking SLI support
- Games lacking good SLI scaling
- multi GPU not possible with small itx builds

I will never be a multi GPU guy I guess. Mostly because of how upset I'd be if I had two GPUs and then some new fancy game I really want to play comes out and it doesn't support it.

People are different and make different decisions though. I think a 599$ GTX 1080 is a better buy than 2x GTX 1070 for 379$ each. If the GTX 1080 comes in at 699$ then it's a different story.
From a purely theoritical optimal case scenario the 2x GTX 1070 are definitively going to outperform the GTX 1080.


----------



## bfedorov11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Or maybe its because CNC milled aluminum is expensive to make?


No way anyone is paying an extra $100 for aluminum. There has to be more.

I bet the one shown last night is the founders edition. IMO it will have ~1950mhz stock clock and boosts up to ~2100. They're starting to cut out the middle men.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> $379 MSI 8G GTX 1070 or Asus Strix 1070 8GB for me.
> x2
> 
> Couldnt care less about that aluminium build from Nvidia.


Sli is dead. I am about to ditch a card because I have it disabled 85% of the time. I'm done with multiple cards until vrsli/liquidvr is mainstream.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I personally would go with 1x GTX 1080 over 2x 1070 even if the 2x 1070 perform much better, but that is just a personal thing, because I also calculate the following into my budget and decision :
> 
> - CF/SLI mainboard extra cost
> - Bigger PSU extra cost
> - Games lacking SLI support
> - Games lacking good SLI scaling
> - multi GPU not possible with small itx builds
> 
> I will never be a multi GPU guy I guess. Mostly because of how upset I'd be if I had two GPUs and then some new fancy game I really want to play comes out and it doesn't support it.
> 
> People are different and make different decisions though. I think a 599$ GTX 1080 is a better buy than 2x GTX 1070 for 379$ each. If the GTX 1080 comes in at 699$ then it's a different story.
> From a purely theoritical optimal case scenario the 2x GTX 1070 are definitively going to outperform the GTX 1080.


Thanks.
Now that DSR displays will arrive and I will either get 4K 120Hz or 1440p HDR 144Hz, I need more power than a single GTX 1080. Ive had SLI before and I have no issues fiddling around with profiles to get it to work sometimes or wait an extra week for SLI profile from Nvidia.

I will build a new computer anyway, with new motherboard with room for 2 GPUs and that extra $100 for bigger PSU doesnt bother me.
Not going small build either but if I did you have a point that single 1080 would be better


----------



## Scrimstar

If they both perform better than TX, why is there a $200 gap?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfedorov11*
> 
> No way anyone is paying an extra $100 for aluminum.


I wouldn't be so sure. How much extra do people pay for collector's edition games? 100% more?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> If they both perform better than TX, why is there a $200 gap?


Because one is 1% better, and one is 20% better.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Thanks.
> Now that DSR displays will arrive and I will either get 4K 120Hz or 1440p HDR 144Hz, I need more power than a single GTX 1080. Ive had SLI before and I have no issues fiddling around with profiles to get it to work sometimes or wait an extra week for SLI profile from Nvidia.
> 
> I will build a new computer anyway, with new motherboard with room for 2 GPUs and that extra $100 for bigger PSU doesnt bother me.
> Not going small build either but if I did you have a point that single 1080 would be better


That is understandable.

I don't know how you are budgeting your rig, but there are also options to go with a single 1080 first then add another later.

I bet the GDDR5X would come in handy over the standard GDDR5 of the 1070.

2x GTX 1080 would be around 1200$ and 2x GTX 1070 760$~. That's a noticeable difference of 440$. Maybe there is way to shift your budget so you can get that missing 440$ from taking a slightly cheaper PSU, CPU cooler, RAM, Mainboard or case.

(I know it sounds like I am trying to convince you to get 1080, but I swear I have no hidden agenda. I just feel like this time around the GTX 1080 is seriously better than the GTX 1070. It's not like with 670 compared to 680 or 970 compared to 980. But we have to wait for benchmarks. I am looking forward to see OC'd GTX 1070 vs OC'd GTX 1080 in 4K benchmarks)


----------



## Asus11

i might go founders if temps are legit..

but I dont believe the temps I reckon thats in an open air bench probs running max fan speed

in a normal rig probs hit 85c easy..


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> If they both perform better than TX, why is there a $200 gap?


Both a Ferrari and a Bicycle are faster than running. One is 250000$ and the other is 100$. Why is there a 249900 gap?


----------



## MerkageTurk

Meh, no worth the upgrade, plus a bit risky to invest in a short term produc


----------



## variant

I think a necessary question is why they brushed over the 1070. They could have easily put it on the performance chart with the 1080 and Titan X.


----------



## Bogga

Which manufacturers give you guarantee if you remove the cooler and add water cooling to it? I'm going for two and blocks to that. I know EVGA does it, but what about the others?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I personally would go with 1x GTX 1080 over 2x 1070 even if the 2x 1070 perform much better, but that is just a personal thing, because I also calculate the following into my budget and decision :
> 
> - CF/SLI mainboard extra cost
> - Bigger PSU extra cost
> - Games lacking SLI support
> - Games lacking good SLI scaling
> - multi GPU not possible with small itx builds
> 
> I will never be a multi GPU guy I guess. Mostly because of how upset I'd be if I had two GPUs and then some new fancy game I really want to play comes out and it doesn't support it.
> 
> People are different and make different decisions though. I think a 599$ GTX 1080 is a better buy than 2x GTX 1070 for 379$ each. If the GTX 1080 comes in at 699$ then it's a different story.
> From a purely theoritical optimal case scenario the 2x GTX 1070 are definitively going to outperform the GTX 1080.


If I had to buy if GTX1070 come close to 980 Ti then I would get that and play with it until the Big GPUs.


----------



## HAL900

Availability and Pricing
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 "Founders Edition" will be available on May 27 for $699. It will be available from ASUS, Colorful, EVGA, Gainward, Galaxy, Gigabyte, Innovision 3D, MSI, NVIDIA. Palit, PNY and Zotac. Custom boards from partners will vary by region and pricing is expected to start at $599 - See more at: http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/a-quantum-leap-in-gaming:-nvidia-introduces-geforce-gtx-1080#sthash.lypdN5Qc.7KxTlWIy.dpuf


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Availability and Pricing
> The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 "Founders Edition" will be available on May 27 for $699. It will be available from ASUS, Colorful, EVGA, Gainward, Galaxy, Gigabyte, Innovision 3D, MSI, NVIDIA. Palit, PNY and Zotac. Custom boards from partners will vary by region and pricing is expected to start at $599 - See more at: http://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/a-quantum-leap-in-gaming:-nvidia-introduces-geforce-gtx-1080#sthash.lypdN5Qc.7KxTlWIy.dpuf


Didn't non reference cards always cost more then MSRP. Now you cant even get Reference because MSRP is $100 more. Personally I want the FE.


----------



## HAL900

700 US dollars or euros for a 300 mm gpu. Nvidia is a real thief

And $ 700 they will cost you only a moment shelves amd their grips the throat


----------



## KarathKasun

I love how people prior to this panned the reference designs and praised custom ones. Now people will pay *$100 extra* for a reference card.


----------



## HAL900

People will not pay $ 100 more.
Here, rather, the point is that in the beginning they will starty only reference in 1080 and before amd give something in the range of 1080 and no reference card nvidia will be held high price


----------



## KarathKasun

The FE cards are the reference cards. The $599 figure was for AIB custom cards AFAIK.

Reference cards are always the first released for a launch like this. The $100 premium is the early adopter fee, they are just calling it what it is now.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The FE cards are the reference cards. *The $599 figure was for AIB custom cards AFAIK.*
> 
> Reference cards are always the first released for a launch like this. The $100 premium is the early adopter fee, they are just calling it what it is now.


It's been brought up before but I am curious as to how many AIB cards will actually go with the lowest-allowed price. I still think $625 will be the average price for AIB models. A lot will depend on the sales of the FE; if that moves in droves then I could see most of the big dogs (ASUS, Gigabyte, EVGA) keeping things above that $599 price-point.


----------



## HAL900

For now, 1080 is priced at $ 700 and as someone wants to buy it so much needs to give


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The FE cards are the reference cards. The $599 figure was for AIB custom cards AFAIK.
> 
> Reference cards are always the first released for a launch like this. The $100 premium is the early adopter fee, they are just calling it what it is now.


That would be pretty lame if true.


----------



## maltamonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> That would be pretty lame if true.


Nvidia could say it was 100 dollars for the heck of it and some people would still pay it. Why not? If you have an irrational segment of your customer base that's willing to pay anything.....why not?


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Nvidia could say it was 100 dollars for the heck of it and some people would still pay it. Why not? If you have an irrational segment of your customer base that's willing to pay anything.....why not?


$699 isn't "anything". We're not all kids here. Some of us actually work hard and can afford that and more for a video card.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> $699 isn't "anything". We're not all kids here. Some of us actually work hard and can afford that and more for a video card.


No, you will blindly pay more than the value of the product for it. There is a difference.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> No, you will blindly pay more than the value of the product for it. There is a difference.


... and it starts ...


----------



## maltamonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> $699 isn't "anything". We're not all kids here. Some of us actually work hard and can afford that and more for a video card.


By no means did I mean everyone that is interested in the card, but there is a portion of people that would. As long as there's enough of them to warrant doing so, why not? For the ones that wouldn't there's the other options.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> $699 isn't "anything". We're not all kids here. Some of us actually work hard and can afford that and more for a video card.


I'm living comfortably and I'm still not going to pay £600 (thereabouts after VAT) for a product when I know that its big brothers aren't far off.

$599 is already a big up from the 980 but we can forgive that as times and technology move forward. $699 early-adopter fee is a leap forward, not a step.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> ... and it starts ...


If its ~20% over T-X, you can get the same performance out of a 980 Ti pretty easily.

If you need that performance at the 180w power point, sure. But from a performance standpoint its not a good deal considering what is already on the market for less money.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm living comfortably and I'm still not going to pay £600 (thereabouts after VAT) for a product when I know that its big brothers aren't far off.


Get your wallet ready. If T-XL drops below $1099 I'll be shocked.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> Get your wallet ready. If T-XL drops below $1099 I'll be shocked.


So would I, but with what I have I'm more than fine waiting on Vega / Big Pascal to see an upgrade for which I'm willing to pay through the nose. I'm not stingy or skint, I just know where I personally aim for price and performance. To each their own.


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> To each their own.


Exactly this. If someone wants to spend $10K on a PC, don't judge them.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> ... and it starts ...


And it starts what, the voice of reasoning? People will mindlessly buy this card even if it cost them 800$, they are undeniable getting milked, anyone who says they're not getting milked is suffering of "Mad Hatter" syndrome after trying to patch their wallet back together, a 300mm2 card for basically 700$ is opening the doors for 1299$+ Flagship GPUs, and I'm not talking about the Titan lineup.


----------



## KarathKasun

When big pascal/vega drop The premium price would be worth it as nothing currently on the market will be even close. Just cant justify $700 for performance that I can get at ~$550.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> When big pascal/vega drop The premium price would be worth it as nothing currently on the market will be even close. Just cant justify $700 for performance that I can get at ~$550.


Where can you get 1080 performance at $550? Especially considering we don't even know what actual 1080 performance is.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Where can you get 1080 performance at $550?


980 Ti with a healthy OC will get close enough that the 1080 is not relevant unless current VR products can take advantage of the new methodology that comes with the 1080 and you use VR.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> No, you will blindly pay more than the value of the product for it. There is a difference.


Value is not objective.
Most purchases are not done as a result of calculation of value this and value that.
Product launches are almost never linear from year to year which makes discussion about value objectively like fishing for a golden chest in the water.

And last, people do whatever they damn want with their money. Expensive for you, or worse value for you, may be ok value for for other people

I dont understand why some people need to enforce their damn rules and thought process on other people`s lives


----------



## KarathKasun

Performance and price are numbers, therefore you can make objective claims about value.

As for people spending their money how they want, that is their right. Though if it takes off at $700, expect the starting price point for an x80 to move up by $150 each generation. This trend will continue until people stop paying the inflated prices or competition pushes it down.


----------



## zealord

or one could say the market is over saturated with people having money and under saturated with High End Graphic Cards Manufacturers to choose from


----------



## KarathKasun

The latter is probably more accurate.









Still waiting for both sides to launch before deciding on something from this gen.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The latter is probably more accurate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Still waiting for both sides to launch before deciding on something from this gen.*


Yeah though to be completely honest I have absolutely no faith in AMD for 2016. Like 0%.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Yeah though to be completely honest I have absolutely no faith in AMD for 2016. Like 0%.


My problem with AMD for Single GPU since Maxwell is overclocking. Not sue how AMD with Polaris will keep up with 2GHz monsters even if architectures are not the same.


----------



## KarathKasun

Yeah, its looking that way. Hoping they get close enough that prices come down by at least 10%.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Yeah though to be completely honest I have absolutely no faith in AMD for 2016. Like 0%.


Me too after the bomb that Polaris 10 is just able to match 390X.
I was honestly thinking about supporting them but I dont want a damn GTX 980/390X performance card


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Me too after the bomb that Polaris 10 is just able to match 390X.
> I was honestly thinking about supporting them but I dont want a damn GTX 980/390X performance card


I just don't understand.

AMD was talking about the goal of 16K Displays with 240hz and HDR ...

how are they ever going to achieve that if they continue to not make any progress on the performance side of things ?

What performance do you even need for that? It's like 500 times more demanding than 1080p/60 isn't it?


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> 980 Ti with a healthy OC will get close enough that the 1080 is not relevant unless current VR products can take advantage of the new methodology that comes with the 1080 and you use VR.


An 1800 1080 nearly matches (in FSE) a 1500 980 Ti (with unknown drivers) and we know that at least some 1080s will get to 2100. So now you are back to a 15% advantage for the 1080.

Pascal overclocks too.


----------



## KarathKasun

All based on rumor. Waiting for actual numbers. What was shown in the presentation makes me believe it will have no benefit over 980 Ti, since there was ZERO mention of 980 Ti.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I just don't understand.
> 
> AMD was talking about the goal of 16K Displays with 240hz and HDR ...
> 
> how are they ever going to achieve that if they continue to not make any progress on the performance side of things ?
> 
> What performance do you even need for that? It's like 500 times more demanding than 1080p/60 isn't it?


Must be some very very distant future because Nvidia is the one running the show unfortunately.
I thought Maxwell was a one time accident for AMD and not being able to keep up. But it looks like Pascal will be the exact same minus a few things.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> All based on rumor. Waiting for actual numbers. What was shown in the presentation makes me believe it will have no benefit over 980 Ti, since there was ZERO mention of 980 Ti.


There were several mentions of Titan X though, did you miss those?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> There were several mentions of Titan X though, did you miss those?


T-X stock performance is behind the factory OC'd 980 Ti's. Sometimes by as much as 15% before additional overclocking which extends that lead to 20-25%.


----------



## 19DELTASNAFU

nVidia is not going to kick their 980ti too hard, the shelves and warehouses are still full of them. The 2.1 ghz OC is impressive as hell with one 8 pin power. My 1575mhz Xtreme 980ti is sweating bullets in 4k to get playable frame rates. I can't believe that not even two months ago I bought two of them and one EK waterblock. Could have almost bought 3 1080s. 2.1ghz with one 8 pin................................ WOW. Team red must have an ace up the sleeve for nVidia to drop that bomb. At $500 bucks too. Again, I'm floored. I guess my $1500 bucks of Xtreme 980ti beasts are worth maybe............maybe half what they were worth yesterday. 1999 all over again.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *19DELTASNAFU*
> 
> nVidia is not going to kick their 980ti too hard, the shelves and warehouses are still full of them. The 2.1 ghz OC is impressive as hell with one 8 pin power. My 1575mhz Xtreme 980ti is sweating bullets in 4k to get playable frame rates. *I can't believe that not even two months ago I bought two of them and one EK waterblock*. Could have almost bought 3 1080s. 2.1ghz with one 8 pin................................ WOW. Team red must have an ace up the sleeve for nVidia to drop that bomb. At $500 bucks too. Again, I'm floored. I guess my $1500 bucks of Xtreme 980ti beasts are worth maybe............maybe half what they were worth yesterday. 1999 all over again.


Dont you read speculations? Pascal launch was imminent









Other than that, it must suck


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *19DELTASNAFU*
> 
> nVidia is not going to kick their 980ti too hard, the shelves and warehouses are still full of them. The 2.1 ghz OC is impressive as hell with one 8 pin power. My 1575mhz Xtreme 980ti is sweating bullets in 4k to get playable frame rates. I can't believe that not even two months ago I bought two of them and one EK waterblock. Could have almost bought 3 1080s. 2.1ghz with one 8 pin................................ WOW. Team red must have an ace up the sleeve for nVidia to drop that bomb. *At $500 bucks too*. Again, I'm floored. I guess my $1500 bucks of Xtreme 980ti beasts are worth maybe............maybe half what they were worth yesterday. 1999 all over again.


Pricing STARTS at $600 on the 1080.


----------



## 19DELTASNAFU

$599 it is. I would like to see a crysis 3 benchmark between the gigabyte xtreme 980ti and the 1080.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *19DELTASNAFU*
> 
> That is for the legacy card, 499 for others. But I'm sure the "introductory" price will last a month and prices will climb. $499 and $599 was what I saw last night. Anybody else see the same?


No, the Founders card is $700, vanilla is $600.

1070 is $379 vanilla and $449 FE.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> 980 Ti with a healthy OC will get close enough that the 1080 is not relevant unless current VR products can take advantage of the new methodology that comes with the 1080 and you use VR.


1080 can OC, no?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 1080 can OC, no?


To what? Was the 2100mhz card a FE card or vanilla?

14FF and 16FF have a much smaller clock window from Samsung/TSMC fab numbers.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 1080 can OC, no?


I had the same discussion with someone I know yesterday.
"Why should I upgrade from my 980Ti? I can overclock it and come close to GTX 1080."
"Yeah but you can overclock the GTX 1080 too, and get the same result: GTX 1080 is still better"


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> To what? Was the 2100mhz card a FE card or vanilla?
> 
> 14FF and 16FF have a much smaller clock window from Samsung/TSMC fab numbers.


If you can OC most maxwells to 1500 from stock boost, I am sure that pascal can get a similar OC. either nVidia is selling fairy tales, the 1080 can all hit 2G.....


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> If you can OC most maxwells to 1500 from stock boost, I am sure that pascal can get a similar OC. either nVidia is selling fairy tales, the 1080 can all hit 2G.....


Ill eat my shoe if they all hit much over 2ghz.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Ill eat my shoe if they all hit much over 2ghz.


You have absolutely nothing to base that on.
And they dont have to go "much" over 2GHz to have the edge over 980Ti OC either. Just to reach 1080 stock you need a hefty overclock on the 980Ti


----------



## TheGovernment

Meh, i will wait for the big boy before i will do anything.


----------



## carlhil2

I also noticed that reference maxwell was good enough to pit against new cards during reviews, I guess to not make the other gpu's look too bad.now, it's "against aftermarket OCed 980Ti..". Lol, dudes moving the goal post.....


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I also noticed that reference maxwell was good enough to pit against new cards during reviews, I guess to not make the other gpu's look too bad.now, it's "against aftermarket OCed 980Ti..". Lol, dudes moving the goal post.....


He is an AMD fan so he probably have nothing better to do than try to make Nvidia GPUs look bad anyway.
Wouldnt put too much energy in to what he says


----------



## ssiperko

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Value is not objective.
> Most purchases are not done as a result of calculation of value this and value that.
> Product launches are almost never linear from year to year which makes discussion about value objectively like fishing for a golden chest in the water.
> 
> And last, people do whatever they damn want with their money. Expensive for you, or worse value for you, may be ok value for for other people
> 
> I dont understand why some people need to enforce their damn rules and thought process on other people`s lives


Atta BOY!






























My $ my rules and vs versa!

We are ALL responsible for our own actions and the consequences that happens because of those actions.









SS


----------



## mav451

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> You have absolutely nothing to base that on.
> And they dont have to go "much" over 2GHz to have the edge over 980Ti OC either. Just to reach 1080 stock you need a hefty overclock on the 980Ti


Very curious how much the binning will affect the headroom of the non-founder cards.
I'm not at all interested in a $100 premium for something that doesn't affect 24/7 performance.

Other than that, my secondary concern is how close the 1070 is to matching the 980Ti.
If it fits right between 980/980Ti, then I think nVidia did right here. Moreover, the downward price pressure on used 980Tis will be tremendous if that's the case.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mav451*
> 
> *Very curious how much the binning will affect the headroom of the non-founder cards.*
> I'm not at all interested in a $100 premium for something that doesn't affect 24/7 performance.
> 
> Other than that, my secondary concern is how close the 1070 is to matching the 980Ti.
> If it fits right between 980/980Ti, then I think nVidia did right here. Moreover, the downward price pressure on used 980Tis will be tremendous if that's the case.


I will be extremely surprised if AIB $599 models have nearly the headroom of the FE and AIB "premium" editions. Mind that I'm not saying the 1080 isn't impressive or that I think nobody should buy one or anything of that sort. But if Nvidia feels that a reference early-adopter FE is worth $699 I think it's fair to say that well-binned "hyper extreme turbo OC edition" 1080's are going to come in closer to $650 than $600.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I also noticed that reference maxwell was good enough to pit against new cards during reviews, I guess to not make the other gpu's look too bad.now, it's "against aftermarket OCed 980Ti..". Lol, dudes moving the goal post.....


Quote where I ever said stock 980 Ti. Pretty much every 980 Ti is factory OC'd at this point.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> No, the Founders card is $700, vanilla is $600.
> 
> 1070 is $379 vanilla and $449 FE.


FE is Vanilla Reference Design. The cheaper models will be Custom cards.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> FE is Vanilla Reference Design. The cheaper models will be Custom cards.


Not quite, FE is supposed to have a machined aluminum shroud and other benefits over "vanilla" cards.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> FE is Vanilla Reference Design. The cheaper models will be Custom cards.


We'll see about that. I'm guessing that traditional AIB Windforce, Twin Frozr, etc. cards are going to be more than $599. I think any AIB $599 card will be reference with cheaper shrouding.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> We'll see about that. I'm guessing that traditional AIB Windforce, Twin Frozr, etc. cards are going to be more than $599. I think any AIB $599 card will be reference with cheaper shrouding.


Basically we will not see those eVGA cards using their cooler and reference PCB. Think of it as Titan X where Reference can not be changed. You can make custom cards though. This would be $599 price tag will only be for cards that are worse competences then even Reference. Most cards will go for $650-700. Keep in mind if you spending $600 then extra $50 to get the card you want for most people is not a problem. Is a good start from Nvidia. Just like they did with their Boost Clocks







. GTX1080 should be 599-699 price cards







. It does not have a fixed price.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kyle_Bennett*
> Things are changing a bit with how NVIDIA is handling "reference" cards. Those ref cards are now being called Founders Edition card and are being looked at to be a continued product line throughout the lifespan of the chipset. The cooler is very expensive and the components down on the PCB are supposed to be top quality.. I just asked if NVIDIA would give us a list of components and they said they would get that info back to us.


https://hardforum.com/threads/gtx-1080-founders-edition.1898941/#post-1042280214


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Basically we will not see those eVGA cards using their cooler and reference PCB. Think of it as Titan X where Reference can not be changed. You can make custom cards though. This would be $599 price tag will only be for cards that are worse competences then even Reference. Most cards will go for $650-700. Keep in mind if you spending $600 then extra $50 to get the card you want for most people is not a problem. Is a good start from Nvidia. Just like they did with their Boost Clocks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . GTX1080 should be 599-699 price cards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . It does not have a fixed price.


Good points, and I should have worded my post a little better. "Reference clocks" with worse shrouding, and I'm assuming the $599 cards will have the lowest binning. All just IMO, but what I would do as an AIB if I were given this kind of pricing setup from NV.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/gtx-1080-founders-edition.1898941/#post-1042280214


Thanks.
I still wouldnt want reference. AIBs always had better chokes, heatsinks, pipes, VRMs and cooling. If Nvidia want to catch up, cool, but I doubt their card will be any better than the cheaper AIBs. Unless silicon is binned of course


----------



## bfedorov11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/gtx-1080-founders-edition.1898941/#post-1042280214


So they upgraded the stock heatsink and placed it on a custom pcb. So now will the $599 card clock the same? Will third party custom pcb cards also be $699? I would imagine so, else nobody would buy it.


----------



## Alwrath

Man what a joke. $700 for a midrange card, rofl. Unless the other non-early adopter fee versions are available at launch, this is gonna go down as the biggest rip off in graphics card history. Anyone who buys this is just not knowledgeable about graphics cards or they MUST have this performance now. Either way I wont judge, people and fanboys all over the world are gonna eat this up.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfedorov11*
> 
> So they upgraded the stock heatsink and placed it on a custom pcb. So now will the $599 card clock the same? Will third party custom pcb cards also be $699? I would imagine so, else nobody would buy it.


My guess is these are higher binned and could potentially allow more overclocking. However, that overclocking is going to generate a lot of heat, so they needed a more expensive fan. It's probably a result of them having a very limited release, maybe due to a limited supply of GDDR5X, so they decided to sell high binned chips early.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Good points, and I should have worded my post a little better. "Reference clocks" with worse shrouding, and I'm assuming the $599 cards will have the lowest binning. All just IMO, but what I would do as an AIB if I were given this kind of pricing setup from NV.


I doubt there is much binning going on. Maybe for Lightning and Classified, but I really doubt Gigabyte is binning their WF3 cards versus their ref cards.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I doubt there is much binning going on. Maybe for Lightning and Classified, but I really doubt Gigabyte is binning their WF3 cards versus their ref cards.


I do not think even this FE has better chips. The $100 is probably the cooler and most likely no cheap PCB.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I do not think even this FE has better chips. The $100 is probably the cooler and most likely no cheap PCB.


That's what I think too.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alwrath*
> 
> Man what a joke. $700 for a midrange card, rofl. Unless the other non-early adopter fee versions are available at launch, this is gonna go down as the biggest rip off in graphics card history. Anyone who buys this is just not knowledgeable about graphics cards or they MUST have this performance now.


Quote:


> Either way I wont judge, people and fanboys all over the world are gonna eat this up.


Glad to hear you aren't going to judge, I was worried there for a minute.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That's what I think too.


You could both be right, but the whole FE thing is a paradigm shift to begin with so I'm not expecting 100% business as usual.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I doubt there is much binning going on. Maybe for Lightning and Classified, but I really doubt Gigabyte is binning their WF3 cards versus their ref cards.


I don't think WF necessarily would be a binned chip, but in the process of sorting out the best from the worst for things like the Lightning and the Classified I'd put the worst chips in $599 basic-shroud cooling. Anything that wasn't going into an Extreme Turbo OC Super Gamer edition card or a bargain card would end up in your WF-type card. It wouldn't take any extraordinary effort beyond what they do already and with the FE and the MSRP Nvidia has given AIB's tremendous latitude. I won't be surprised if they use it.


----------



## Smokey the Bear

This has me really excited for the 1180ti or 1280ti in a few years. That's when I'll ditch my 980ti's.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote where I ever said stock 980 Ti. Pretty much every 980 Ti is factory OC'd at this point.


I wasn't referring to you...


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/gtx-1080-founders-edition.1898941/#post-1042280214


I just want the pcb, forget the shroud. I will take the cheapest one, that will be all nVidia, because, I won't have these too long......


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> T-X stock performance is behind the factory OC'd 980 Ti's. Sometimes by as much as 15% before additional overclocking which extends that lead to 20-25%.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> You have absolutely nothing to base that on.
> And they dont have to go "much" over 2GHz to have the edge over 980Ti OC either. Just to reach 1080 stock you need a hefty overclock on the 980Ti


If the cores are the same as maxwell, you only need 1.1 x 1.5ghz ( 1.65ghz ) to match 980TI at 1.5ghz
The one they had up could hit 2.1ghz on air? That'd be 1.909ghz on 980TI


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> If the cores are the same as maxwell, you only need 1.1 x 1.5ghz ( 1.65ghz ) to match 980TI at 1.5ghz
> The one they had up could hit 2.1ghz on air? That'd be 1.909ghz on 980TI


There is decrease performance scaling as clock speed increases due to diminishing return. It doesn't scale perfectly linear. So u probably need something like 1.7 or 1.8 GHz to match a 980 Ti at 1.5. Which is in line with what we are seeing so far.


----------



## 316320

I am waiting for the 1080ti


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gregg1494*
> 
> I am waiting for the 1080ti


Core count performance scale more linearly as compared to clock speed increase.

Hence its always better to go for more cores, or in this case, GP100.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

As I have stated many times, the 1080 is not for current 980 TI and Titan X owners. If you have a couple of 980 TI's you're much better off hanging onto them and waiting for big Pascal or even Volta. The 1080 is much the same side grade for those cards as the 980 was for 780 TI and original Titan owners.

It seems pretty clear to me that a really good OC 980 TI is going to be pretty darn close to an overclocked 1080. At least that's my opinion.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> As I have stated many times, the 1080 is not for current 980 TI and Titan X owners. If you have a couple of 980 TI's you're much better off hanging onto them and waiting for big Pascal or even Volta. The 1080 is much the same side grade for those cards as the 980 was for 780 TI and original Titan owners.
> 
> It seems pretty clear to me that a really good OC 980 TI is going to be pretty darn close to an overclocked 1080. At least that's my opinion.


I dont think so, tbh we haven seen the capability of how much it can go up to.

If it comes 2.5GHz under watercooling. Its going to be pretty crazy.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I dont think so, tbh we haven seen the capability of how much it can go up to.
> 
> If it comes 2.5GHz under watercooling. Its going to be pretty crazy.


I highly doubt we're going to see clock speeds anything like that to be honest. Even underwater. Just look at Maxwell for instance. It's scales horribly with extra voltage and there's no reason to believe that pascal will do any better. My guess is the Nvidia is going to be using most of the overclocking headroom with their boost clocks to get good reviews on release. But again we still don't know much of anything about performance yet.


----------



## dagget3450

These 1080 threads are entertaining. 2.5ghz under water, i think 3ghz or 4ghz is more likely.









On a more serious note, is it just me or did the SLI bridges look like 2 way only?


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> These 1080 threads are entertaining. 2.5ghz under water, i think 3ghz or 4ghz is more likely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a more serious note, is it just me or did the SLI bridges look like 2 way only?


Why stop there? Go 8ghz or go home.


----------



## Oj010

Founders Edition is NVIDIA competing with their customers.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> These 1080 threads are entertaining. 2.5ghz under water, i think 3ghz or 4ghz is more likely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a more serious note, is it just me or did the SLI bridges look like 2 way only?


Those speeds and and will happen under LN2, not a chance for water though.

SLI is 2-way on these cards but it doesnt matter as two of them are destroying 980 Ti 4-way setups.


----------



## bmgjet

Ill be waiting for 1080ti to replacement 980ti.


----------



## carlhil2

My money is on pascal having similar OC headroom as maxwell, I mean, why not? just look at the base boost and the 2100 OC......


----------



## 19DELTASNAFU

The cooler on the FE card is not just your average air cooler either. It's that cooler that has liquid in the heatpipes that evaporates and then cools back to a liquid. The 1080 is a very interesting card. It uses only one 8 pin power but will turbo to 2.1 ghz holding at under 70 degrees. Either the cooler is an engineering marvel, hence the price for the FE, or does that card just run that cool. I'm leaning towards an awesome heatsink....... or both.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *19DELTASNAFU*
> 
> The cooler on the FE card is not just your average air cooler either. It's that cooler that has liquid in the heatpipes that evaporates and then cools back to a liquid. The 1080 is a very interesting card. It uses only one 8 pin power but will turbo to 2.1 ghz holding at under 70 degrees. Either the cooler is an engineering marvel, hence the price for the FE, or does that card just run that cool. I'm leaning towards an awesome heatsink....... or both.


Isnt that the same cooler than Nvidia has been using it for the past 3 years.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> My money is on pascal having similar OC headroom as maxwell, I mean, why not? just look at the base boost and the 2100 OC......


My money is on that its *better* than Maxwell.
When was the last time Nvidia promised everyone this sick overclock on a card?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> My money is on that its *better* than Maxwell.
> When was the last time Nvidia promised everyone this sick overclock on a card?


Most of the 980 Ti were able to go above 1.5GHz when given decent amount of cooling and proper power. That is at least 50% over its base clock

To achieve this pascal must attain at least 2.4GHz or more.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> My money is on that its *better* than Maxwell.
> When was the last time Nvidia promised everyone this sick overclock on a card?


what sick overclock , how much % it can overclock ? kepler is still the best overclocker. don't go over that 2ghz mumbo jumbo, 2000/1700 is just 18% more, and in reality it will be less because gpu will run around 1800mhz at stock, so even 2.2 ghz is just a 23% oc.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> what sick overclock , how much % it can overclock ? kepler is still the best overclocker. don't go over that 2ghz mumbo jumbo, 2000/1700 is just 18% more, and in reality it will be less because gpu will run around 1800mhz at stock, so even 2.2 ghz is just a 23% oc.


Try to READ what I`m writing.
When was the last time Nvidia *promised* that overclock on a card? Thats the guaranteed overclock.

We all know it will go higher than that once people starting to play around with the cards


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Try to READ what I`m writing.
> When was the last time Nvidia *promised* that overclock on a card? Thats the guaranteed overclock.
> 
> We all know it will go higher than that once people starting to play around with the cards


Who the hell cares what they promise. if it doesn't OC more % wise then it doesn't mean anything. lol
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> My money is on that its better than Maxwell.


That's what i'm saying, it won't oc better than maxwell.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Who the hell cares what they promise. if it doesn't OC more % wise then it doesn't mean anything. lol


I do and so should you if you understand how a business works.
A company can never guarantee anything specific unless they have tested thousands of samples and know all cards will *atleast* match that overclock.

Think of it as a minimum


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I do and so should you if you understand how a business works.
> A company can never guarantee anything specific unless they have tested thousands of samples and know all cards will *atleast* match that overclock.
> 
> Think of it as a minimum


Since when Guaranteeing a minimum 11% is some kind of achievement ? lol even Furyx which nightmare for oc does that. nobody cares about 11% that is just too low.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Since when Guaranteeing a minimum 11% is some kind of achievement ? lol even Furyx which nightmare for oc does that. nobody cares about 11% that is just too low.


When will you stop with the nonsense?
Boost clock of GTX 1080 is 1733 MHz. Overclock was 2114MHz and it ran just on 67C.
Thats 22% overclock. Not 11%.

And I ask you again:
When was the last time Nvidia demo a pre launch cards and bragged about how high it can overclock with real time results on the screen?
Stop avoiding my questions. Answer them instead or admit you are wrong.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I just want the pcb, forget the shroud. I will take the cheapest one, that will be all nVidia, because, I won't have these too long......


so the founders PCB is diff?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> When will you stop with the nonsense?
> Boost clock of GTX 1080 is 1733 MHz. Overclock was 2114MHz and it ran just on 67C.
> Thats 22% overclock. Not 11%.
> .


you haven't used any kepler/maxwell, cards have you ?

all of them run 7-8% above their rated boost clocks, ALL OF THEM , ALWAYS. so 1080 will run at least 1800mhz , oc to 2ghz and you get 11%.

and they did showed maxwell's oc potential with gtx970 when it launched. and nothing is guaranteed.

i'm not avoiding anything, just saying even those huge clocks they brag about are nothing %wise. you on the other hand said 85% more efficiency without even backing your claims


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *19DELTASNAFU*
> 
> The cooler on the FE card is not just your average air cooler either. It's that cooler that has liquid in the heatpipes that evaporates and then cools back to a liquid. The 1080 is a very interesting card. It uses only one 8 pin power but will turbo to 2.1 ghz holding at under 70 degrees. Either the cooler is an engineering marvel, hence the price for the FE, or does that card just run that cool. I'm leaning towards an awesome heatsink....... or both.


The 16nm FF+ from TSMC plays an important role in it too.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> you haven't used any kepler/maxwell, cards have you ?
> 
> all of them run 7-8% above their rated boost clocks, ALL OF THEM , ALWAYS. so 1080 will run at least 1800mhz , oc to 2ghz and you get 11%.
> 
> and they did showed maxwell's oc potential with gtx970 when it launched. and nothing is guaranteed.
> 
> i'm not avoiding anything, just saying even those huge clocks they brag about are nothing %wise. you on the other hand said 85% more efficiency without even backing your claims


We know nothing about GPU Boost 3.0 and how that will work. Previous cards have 2.0.
And we dont know anything what the additional boost will be if there is any.

That you fail to see that promising over 2.1GHz overclock isnt something they do if the cards doesnt overclock well, well that is your problem.
But why should I care, you dont either with that GT210 GPU.

I actually explained to you why the efficiency was what it was, and you would see it to, if you used a calculator. And no, I didnt explain it to you more because I have better things to do than argue here and waste my time.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> We know nothing about GPU Boost 3.0 and how that will work. Previous cards have 2.0.
> And we dont know anything what the additional boost will be if there is any.
> 
> That you fail to see that promising over 2.1GHz overclock isnt something they do if the cards doesnt overclock well, well that is your problem.
> But why should I care, you dont either with that GT210 GPU.


I owned 670 for 2 years, 2x 970s for 9 months( one borrowed), and a borrowed 980ti for a week. so i know about those gpus. atm i don't want to game for reasons and this crap gpu stops me from doing that.
Quote:


> I actually explained to you why the efficiency was what it was, and you would see it to, if you used a calculator. And no, I didnt explain it to you more because I have better things to do than argue here and waste my time.


You didn't explained a single thing but i did everything. nice try avoiding again. lol


----------



## iLeakStuff

In the list you go


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> In the list you go


classic


----------



## iLeakStuff

Benchmarks will be posted in about 2 days. Both SLI and single card I guess


----------



## DunePilot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Benchmarks will be posted in about 2 days. Both SLI and single card I guess


How do you already have these? Lol.... can you do standard Firestrike? We know most 980Ti do 16-18k firestrike.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Benchmarks will be posted in about 2 days. Both SLI and single card I guess


Sexy. Hope they know how to oc it well.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DunePilot*
> 
> How do you already have these? Lol.... can you do standard Firestrike? We know most 980Ti do 16-18k firestrike.


If you read the picture its from chiphell.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> If you read the picture its from chiphell.


Maybe he thinks that is Chip...jk


----------



## DunePilot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> If you read the picture its from chiphell.


I saw that, I thought the way he said it he was implying he was the one doing it. I need coffee.


----------



## iLeakStuff

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1581384-1-1.html


----------



## Cakewalk_S

When do the review sites launch their reviews of these 2 new cards? I'm kinda surprised there aren't any reviews up yet. I guess this really is a paper (leather jacket) launch..


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> When do the review sites launch their reviews of these 2 new cards? I'm kinda surprised there aren't any reviews up yet. I guess this really is a paper (leather jacket) launch..


Rumor point to May 17th


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Rumor point to May 17th


National day for Norway. Perfect


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Rumor point to May 17th


only 1080


----------



## Perfect_Chaos

Even though there aren't any game benchmarks yet, will it be worth the bother to sell up a MSI Gaming 980 Ti for a 1080? Cost wise at least.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Perfect_Chaos*
> 
> Even though there aren't any game benchmarks yet, will it be worth the bother to sell up a MSI Gaming 980 Ti for a 1080? Cost wise at least.


Hell yes, I'd not pay more than 350$ for a GTX 980Ti now given that the 1070 will most likely have just the same performance if not a little better with huge Tessellation, Geometrical and efficiency improvements, sell it now while you can still get a good price selling it to people who haven't been following tech news lately


----------



## VSG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> If you read the picture its from chiphell.


Don't assume that. Chiphell puts on their logo on any picture they find online and publish on their website. They have done this to many of my product photos as well.


----------



## Oj010

Interesting developments on the aftermarket front


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> As expected, under 10% performance deltas between new "top tier" midgrade chip and previous generation top tier chip.
> 
> Anyone expecting GTX 980 prices for this card is delusional.


Look at that... Nvidia even set themselves up to have the next generation mid grade chip to be released at ~$700 with minimal pushback... just force reference design at a premium price until release of large chip...

And all the fanboys are clamoring like they just won the lottery... Monopoly power and a cult like following... every company's dream...


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> And all the fanboys are clamoring like they just won the lottery... Monopoly power and a cult like following... every company's dream...


LOL.







I'm still waiting for AMD to give me a good reason to buy their products, ANY of them. Take your BS elsewhere son.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

I feel like it's going to be a heck of a deal to sell a Gtx970 for like $250 and then turn around and buy a gtx1070 for like $130 more...


----------



## bfedorov11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> I feel like it's going to be a heck of a deal to sell a Gtx970 for like $250 and then turn around and buy a gtx1070 for like $130 more...


They have been $250 for a couple months on /r/hardwareswap. More likely going to be $200 now.


----------



## Rob27shred

Hmm, what to do. I am definitely keeping my 980ti regardless but the 1080 is looking much more tempting than I had anticipated. Maybe a 1080 will find it's way into my sig rig & my 980ti can go on my test bench whenever I get that all put together...? Still leaves me with a spare 390 that does not have a home ATM but having an extra GPU laying around is not something I would really consider a problem!


----------



## jdstock76

I'll wait for actual "real word" benchmarks before jumping to conclusions.


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jdstock76*
> 
> I'll wait for actual "real word" benchmarks before jumping to conclusions.


Oh absolutely, I'm definitely gonna wait till I see some real world benchmarks before I drop $700 to $600 on GPU for the 2nd time in under a year. I just honestly expected less out of the 1st wave of Pascal chips. Although one has to wonder how much extra performance the 1080 is getting out of having GDDR5X memory. I'm personal thinking a GM200 matched with GDDR5X or a 1080 with just GDDR5 would close the gap pretty signifagantly. I think the GP204 by itself is not a huge leap above the GM200.


----------



## Yungbenny911

I'm getting x2 1070's for sure, glad I kept my 970's, they've served me well.

Anyone that wants x2 G1 970's with full waterblocks pm me. 1658Mhz max bench stable clocks hehe


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rob27shred*
> 
> Oh absolutely, I'm definitely gonna wait till I see some real world benchmarks before I drop $700 to $600 on GPU for the 2nd time in under a year. I just honestly expected less out of the 1st wave of Pascal chips. Although one has to wonder how much extra performance the 1080 is getting out of having GDDR5X memory. I'm personal thinking a GM200 matched with GDDR5X or a 1080 with just GDDR5 would close the gap pretty signifagantly. I think the GP204 by itself is not a huge leap above the GM200.


What do you mean expected less?

There was not really any room for less.

Less than GTX 1080 would be 980 Ti. We already have the 980 Ti.

Delivering less than expected is AMDs strategy


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Founders Edition is NVIDIA competing with their customers.
> Those speeds and and will happen under LN2, not a chance for water though.
> 
> SLI is 2-way on these cards but it doesnt matter as two of them are destroying 980 Ti 4-way setups.


It matters to me as i like crazy multi gpu setups. It caught my eye because its got me thinking back to when certain models support only 2 way and premium was 2 or more.
The other reason i was looking was if they are going to 2 way only for all gaming gpus. It also seems like it implies SLI scaling is held back by sli bridge and they have a new one now?

I have a feeling 2way sli is a limit set by VR now. Same as AMD since they have liquid VR. If i was guessing based on whats happening recently its 1 gpu for pc gaming and 2 for VR.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> It matters to me as i like crazy multi gpu setups. It caught my eye because its got me thinking back to when certain models support only 2 way and premium was 2 or more.
> The other reason i was looking was if they are going to 2 way only for all gaming gpus. It also seems like it implies SLI scaling is held back by sli bridge and they have a new one now?
> 
> I have a feeling 2way sli is a limit set by VR now. Same as AMD since they have liquid VR. If i was guessing based on whats happening recently its 1 gpu for pc gaming and 2 for VR.


3-way and 4-way SLI has never had good scaling, 2-way on these new cards is INSANE.


----------



## Catscratch

So considering dx12 or even vulkan is not optimal for multi-gpu because it's about developers now. Is it still wise to go multi-gpu ? I mean dx11 is perfectly fine for sli and crossfire but what about in 2017 ?


----------



## Rob27shred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> What do you mean expected less?
> 
> There was not really any room for less.
> 
> Less than GTX 1080 would be 980 Ti. We already have the 980 Ti.
> 
> Delivering less than expected is AMDs strategy


LOL, very true. TBPH, I was expecting the 1080 to pretty much match the 980ti/TitanX. I guess I wasn't that far off though, like I said in my last post I wonder what the difference would be with both chips running on the same VRAM?


----------



## variant

My guess is that they plan to have $600 "GTX 1080 Lite" cards that run slower than the $700 reference "Founder's Edition" card. The GTX 1080 performance we've been told? All Founder's Edition.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> My guess is that they plan to have $600 "GTX 1080 Lite" cards that run slower than the $700 reference "Founder's Edition" card. The GTX 1080 performance we've been told? All Founder's Edition.


Something along those lines I think. FE price gives AIB's the latitude to price their usual aftermarket coolers at $625-650 which will seem like a comparative bargain.


----------



## zealord

- Send all reviewers 699$ GTX 1080 Founders Edition
- Card runs great.
- Overclocks great
- Low temperature
- Low power draw
- Great materials
- Runs quiet
- Reviewers say GTX 1080 starts at 599$
- People are happy and buy GTX 1080


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> - Send all reviewers 699$ GTX 1080 Founders Edition
> - Card runs great.
> - Overclocks great
> - Low temperature
> - Low power draw
> - Great materials
> - Runs quiet
> - Reviewers say GTX 1080 starts at 599$
> - People are happy and buy GTX 1080


Doubt the Founders Edition card will be better than Classified/G1/Gaming/Strix/etc. Can see it if the GPU is binned though.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 3-way and 4-way SLI has never had good scaling, 2-way on these new cards is INSANE.


Some games scale very well with 3-way









That is why I have 3-way just in case


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Doubt the Founders Edition card will be better than Classified/G1/Gaming/Strix/etc. Can see it if the GPU is binned though.


You have to differentiate between custom designs that have the reference PCB and custom designs that don't.

One thing is for sure. Cards with non-reference design PCBs like the Classified, Lightning, Hall of Fame etc. *won't* be 599$.


----------



## i7monkey

So let me get this straight.

The reference design uses blower style coolers, is called the Founder's Edition, and costs $699?

Non-reference designs will use radial style coolers like they always have and will cost $599?

Will there be a reference design using a blow style cooler that is not a Founder's Edition card and costs $599 using cheaper materials, etc?


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> So let me get this straight.
> 
> The reference design uses blower style coolers, is called the Founder's Edition, and costs $699?
> 
> Non-reference designs will use radial style coolers like they always have and will cost $599?
> 
> Will there be a reference design using a blow style cooler that is not a Founder's Edition card and costs $599 using cheaper materials, etc?


Yes it is very likely to see a 599$ reference design with cheaper materials. There was a tweet about it from some reliable tech site that the FE has better materials.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Yes it is very likely to see a 599$ reference design with cheaper materials. There was a tweet about it from some reliable tech site that the FE has better materials.


Will it have better cooling or is it just better materials?


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Will it have better cooling or is it just better materials?


My guess is that everything will be slightly better. Like less noise and less heat. Little bit more overclocking headroom and so on.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> My guess is that everything will be slightly better. Like less noise and less heat. Little bit more overclocking headroom and so on.


IMO the better cooling and materials should be part of the Pascal experience and it should be $499 like they used to be.

If prices go up every time something better comes along we'll be paying $10 000 for a GPU in the next decade.

This is really getting ridiculous.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Remember during the presentation he said 1080 has better VRM and less ripple? 1080 FE VRM is upto 90% efficient, 980 reference is upto 80%. That and the aluminum shroud makes the $100 difference.


----------



## carlhil2

Two Classifieds please, and, cost $650.00. thanks eVGA......now, if I could dig up enough scratch for that 10-core....


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Remember during the presentation he said 1080 has better VRM and less ripple? 1080 FE VRM is upto 90% efficient, 980 reference is upto 80%. That and the aluminum shroud makes the $100 difference.


How does that equal $100 when other manufacturers do it for less than half that? Unless I'm missing something...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Remember during the presentation he said 1080 has better VRM and less ripple? 1080 FE VRM is upto 90% efficient, 980 reference is upto 80%. That and the aluminum shroud makes the $100 difference.
> 
> 
> 
> How does that equal $100 when other manufacturers do it for less than half that? Unless I'm missing something...
Click to expand...

nVidia is not a charity, unlike AMD.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Let's hope you are right. I doubt it though.
> 
> I don't expect to see a GTX 1080 classified for 649$.
> 
> I think all manufacturers are going to add a flat 30$ extra or something for Pascal.
> 
> E.g. Strix for 650$, Gaming for 660$, Classified for maybe 699$ or something like that


People thought the same thing about the 980Ti Classified, cost $50.00 over reference...


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> People thought the same thing about the 980Ti Classified, cost $50.00 over reference...


which card was it that is super expensive?

980 Ti Kingpin maybe? Or 980 Ti Lightning?

I remember some cards are super expensive. I thought it was the classified.


----------



## solarcycle24

Someone help me understand this, when the 980 was released, the reference models with backplates were a $100 more than the custom boards from the likes of evga, msi, etc. I bought my evga SC edition 980 with the ACX 2.0 for 549, while the same evga SC edition with nvidia's reference shroud was 640. Is this maybe the same situation or will the FE 1080 really be that much better than vanilla 1080?


----------



## KuuFA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> which card was it that is super expensive?
> 
> 980 Ti Kingpin maybe? Or 980 Ti Lightning?
> 
> I remember some cards are super expensive. I thought it was the classified.


Kingpin. But it had multiple tiers based on ASIC quality.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Wasn't the Classified $150 over reference?


----------



## zealord

How high are the chances of getting a GTX 1080 Lightning for 599€ within the next 2 months?

0% ?


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> How high are the chances of getting a GTX 1080 Lightning for 599€ within the next 2 months?
> 
> 0% ?


Assuming 1:1 pricing, 0% chance is a gross overstatement.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Assuming 1:1 pricing, 0% chance is a gross overstatement.


currently it is roughly 1:1 for 970, 980 and 980 Ti.

I think I've seen them even cheaper over here.

GTX 970 for 233€ and 980 Ti for like 575€

but still unlikely to happen ^^


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wasn't the Classified $150 over reference?


nope.

the vanilla classy was ~$30 $50* more but the k|ngp|n started at $200 over reference

*my bad, carlhil2 is right.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wasn't the Classified $150 over reference?


980Ti was $700.00, you might be thinking of the 980 Classy...


----------



## Scrimstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> If they both perform better than TX, why is there a $200 gap?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Both a Ferrari and a Bicycle are faster than running. One is 250000$ and the other is 100$. Why is there a 249900 gap?


what are you saying. i am suggesting 1070 is only faster than TX in VR

wouldnt understand why there would be a $200 difference for 10-15%


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Some games scale very well with 3-way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is why I have 3-way just in case


Most people don't use Mgpu, and they are usually the ones who say scaling sucks. They have somehow combined both scaling and mgpu not working into one. I am also inclined to believe the odds are the repeaters also game at 1080/1440. So they also lump scaling of all resolutions based on 1080/1440 a res they use. While Mgpu isn't perfect when it works its a thing of beauty. It's not for everyone obviously, many want to play games first day of release, and have 0 trouble doing so. They really should just be using a console, but instead love to take shots at all things that make pc gaming potentially special.

Also, the "2 way on these card are insane" comment is based on what benchmarks? Particularly 4k benchmarks in my case, i'd love to see. Not saying it won't be good but just curious how people already know.


----------



## carlhil2

1070 is as fast, the 1080 is much faster...


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scrimstar*
> 
> what are you saying. i am suggesting 1070 is only faster than TX in VR
> 
> wouldnt understand why there would be a $200 difference for 10-15%


Jen Hsun said so and he wasn't talking about VR.

I am sure that the GTX 1070 is roughly around the same speed as TX. maybe slightly slightly faster. Like 1-5%


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> Most people don't use Mgpu, and they are usually the ones who say scaling sucks. They have somehow combined both scaling and mgpu not working into one. I am also inclined to believe the odds are the repeaters also game at 1080/1440. So they also lump scaling of all resolutions based on 1080/1440 a res they use. While Mgpu isn't perfect when it works its a thing of beauty. It's not for everyone obviously, many want to play games first day of release, and have 0 trouble doing so. They really should just be using a console, but instead love to take shots at all things that make pc gaming potentially special.
> 
> Also, the "2 way on these card are insane" comment is based on what benchmarks? Particularly 4k benchmarks in my case, i'd love to see. Not saying it won't be good but just curious how people already know.


Weren't you recently experiencing this same lack of MGPU scaling? I thought I saw posts from you not only mentioning the lack of scaling, but also the impending end of MGPU support altogether.

Aplogies if I'm remembering incorrectly.


----------



## velocityx

I can't wait to replace my 290 CF for that 1080, this should keep me covered until big die pascal comes out


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> How high are the chances of getting a GTX 1080 Lightning for 599€ within the next 2 months?
> 
> 0% ?


Are you joking here? Assuming if there even will be one for 1080, Lightning is always 100-200€ on top of default reference card price.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Are you joking here? Assuming if there even will be one for 1080, Lightning is always 100-200€ on top of default reference card price.


yeah I was somewhat joking.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Weren't you recently experiencing this same lack of MGPU scaling? I thought I saw posts from you not only mentioning the lack of scaling, but also the impending end of MGPU support altogether.
> 
> Aplogies if I'm remembering incorrectly.


You are correct, but i was referring to Windows 10/Dx12 and last few new games(AAA titles). To be fair i haven't bought any new games in i think 6 months? However i got Hitman recently with a gpu purchase.
When it works properly its nice esp for 4k or surround/eyefinity. I guess i get salty when people use blanket statements. While it may have some truth to it, its not 100% correct either?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I think the irony with DX12 is that it was supposed to be amazing with MGPU setups, but at the same time placed all MGPU utilization duties on the developers (if I understand it correctly). And so far, they seem to be willing to let MGPU support slide.

Anyway, it's still a new tech - I guess we'll see how it shakes out in the next few years.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I think the irony with DX12 is that it was supposed to be amazing with MGPU setups, but at the same time placed all MGPU utilization duties on the developers (if I understand it correctly). And so far, they seem to be willing to let MGPU support slide.
> 
> Anyway, it's still a new tech - I guess we'll see how it shakes out in the next few years.


if and im gonna stretch the IF the new consoles are actually dual gpu we might see it a lot sooner


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *velocityx*
> 
> I can't wait to replace my 290 CF for that 1080, this should keep me covered until big die pascal comes out


Just get a 1070 if you are going to upgrade to Big Pascal. GTX1080 price is pretty bad if you only plan to keep for less then 1 year.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Just get a 1070 if you are going to upgrade to Big Pascal. GTX1080 price is pretty bad if you only plan to keep for less then 1 year.


I can see the GTX 1080 having a better resell value than the GTX 1070 (from a percentive standpoint). Mostly because of GDDR5X


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I can see the GTX 1080 having a better resell value than the GTX 1070 (from a percentive standpoint). Mostly because of GDDR5X


Not really. GTX1080 Ti will take all the sales of 1080 while 1070 will continue to sell at same price point. Looks at GTX970 vs 980. Nobody bought 980 after 980 Ti but 970 still remained relevant.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Except they actually spent more on the machined aluminum shroud and used better power delivery to improve efficiency by 10% and cut voltage ripple by 50%.


----------



## Yungbenny911

GTX 1070 will keep it's value longer than the 1080. It's just the way it's been, most of you really don't know how this things work lol. the "ti" version always brings down the price of GPUX80 or GPUX60


----------



## ebduncan

All these people wanting to buy 1080's are going to hate having to find stock of them. They will likely be very limited stock at first as micron is ramping up GDDR5X production this summer.


----------



## jdstock76

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlhawn*
> 
> why must you be so rude? this was an enjoyable and informative thread until you joined in.


He's not wrong.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smokey the Bear*


Don't get to comfy it will get cleaned up shortly.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

You'd think this thread was about something important, not something as trivial as a graphics card for a computer.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> All these people wanting to buy 1080's are going to hate having to find stock of them. They will likely be very limited stock at first as micron is ramping up GDDR5X production this summer.


Im sure they'll keep a healthy stock of the Founder's cards for that extra $100.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Last time AMD moved to 28nm we go 7970. I hope Vega is as good as 7970.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Im sure they'll keep a healthy stock of the Founder's cards for that extra $100.


i was just referring to at first, month or two after release. Production will be ramped up enough by late summer to keep up with demand.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Last time AMD moved to 28nm we go 7970. I hope Vega is as good as 7970.


not sure what you mean by this. Vega's performance will be faster than the 7970, that is a no brainer. I think you mean in comparison to the previous generation?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Last time AMD moved to 28nm we go 7970. I hope Vega is as good as 7970.


IMO if Polaris is truly a bargain-oriented part then Vega should be very competitive. I think they've learned their lesson about rushing things out just to have a SKU for every price segment. Whilst we would all love that as consumers, we may ultimately benefit more from them putting the work into a really compelling product. HBM2 won't hurt either. If you need to upgrade ASAP, Nvidia may be your best play. If you're happy with what you have, Big Pascal and Vega should both be very exciting.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> IMO if Polaris is truly a bargain-oriented part then Vega should be very competitive. I think they've learned their lesson about rushing things out just to have a SKU for every price segment. Whilst we would all love that as consumers, we may ultimately benefit more from them putting the work into a really compelling product. HBM2 won't hurt either. If you need to upgrade ASAP, Nvidia may be your best play. If you're happy with what you have, Big Pascal and Vega should both be very exciting.


If I was not into GPUs I would be way more exited about Polaris then GTX1070/1080. 1070/1080 hit a much smaller market then Polaris will. GTX950/960 class of GPUs is the market share leaders.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *geggeg*
> 
> Don't assume that. Chiphell puts on their logo on any picture they find online and publish on their website. They have done this to many of my product photos as well.


Doesnt matter cos i am just answering that the cards does not belong to ileak


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If I was not into GPUs I would be way more exited about Polaris then GTX1070/1080. 1070/1080 hit a much smaller market then Polaris will. GTX950/960 class of GPUs is the market share leaders.


Yeah it's true, that's the defensible thing about Polaris 10/11, is that they're aiming for the largest part of the market now and aiming for high-end mindshare with Vega. That's my take on it anyway.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> We know nothing about GPU Boost 3.0 and how that will work. Previous cards have 2.0.
> And we dont know anything what the additional boost will be if there is any.
> 
> That you fail to see that promising over 2.1GHz overclock isnt something they do if the cards doesnt overclock well, well that is your problem.
> But why should I care, you dont either with that GT210 GPU.
> 
> I actually explained to you why the efficiency was what it was, and you would see it to, if you used a calculator. And no, I didnt explain it to you more because I have better things to do than argue here and waste my time.


So you admit that we know absolutely nothing about clock speeds this generation or the new algorithms of boost clock yet you are 100% convinced that the card will do more than 2.2 GHz? I can see Nvidia's hype machine has done it's job on you perfectly.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> So you admit that we know absolutely nothing about clock speeds this generation or the new algorithms of boost clock yet you are 100% convinced that the card will do more than 2.2 GHz? I can see Nvidia's hype machine has done it's job on you perfectly.


But i am sure that polaris 10 will be slower than a 390x


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> But i am sure that polaris 10 will be slower than a 390x


Oh indubitably! You know, because Roy said!


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Oh indubitably! You know, because Roy said!


Also from the leaks and the speculation i expected the 1080 to be a lot slower than the titan-x.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> But i am sure that polaris 10 will be slower than a 390x wink.gif


Yep, if that CL benchmark is legit than it will be 30-40% slower than 390x.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> So you admit that we know absolutely nothing about clock speeds this generation or the new algorithms of boost clock yet you are 100% convinced that the card will do more than 2.2 GHz? I can see Nvidia's hype machine has done it's job on you perfectly.


well from what micron said the modules have an effective of 11/12gb/s that roughly means 2.3/2.4ghz tops but good luck finding a really good memory module to reach that


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> But i am sure that polaris 10 will be slower than a 390x wink.gif
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, if that CL benchmark is legit than it will be 30-40% slower than 390x.
Click to expand...

That GPU was at 800Mhz. It would suck if Polaris actually runs at 800Mhz for desktop.

Maybe when AMD said Polaris is almost as fast as 980 Ti meant AoTS?


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> That GPU was at 800Mhz. It would suck if Polaris actually runs at 800Mhz for desktop.
> 
> Maybe when AMD said Polaris is almost as fast as 980 Ti meant AoTS?


There is Polaris 10 bench in AotS database. It's half as fast as 980 Ti.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> There is Polaris 10 bench in AotS database. It's half as fast as 980 Ti.


you mean this one?
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60/match-details/868ae2c4-98ae-4eb5-9c14-1bf767dfe410

i dont know seems very low tho given that this card on other benches is showing some weird results id take a guess they are just "playing" to keep the hype

the guy has more of polaris too..
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60?ladderId=x

with that
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60/match-details/4fb42502-d01d-4192-8cfd-78dee670030c
being only 4 fps on average behind a 980ti


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> There is Polaris 10 bench in AotS database. It's half as fast as 980 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> you mean this one?
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60/match-details/868ae2c4-98ae-4eb5-9c14-1bf767dfe410
> 
> i dont know seems very low tho given that this card on other benches is showing some weird results id take a guess they are just "playing" to keep the hype
> 
> the guy has more of polaris too..
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60?ladderId=x
> 
> with that
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60/match-details/4fb42502-d01d-4192-8cfd-78dee670030c
> being only 4 fps on average behind a 980ti
Click to expand...

Nice find. Looks like Polaris 10 will get close to 980 Ti when the game favors AMD. Great. If it's over $250 I might as well get a used R9 290 for CF.


----------



## lahvie

edit - I'm happy with what they released. Unfortunately, as much as I want one in my tower, I don't see any games forcing me to have one until vega or a bigger chip comes out so, my little ti can glow his heart out in my window.

I think they set the bar pretty well, hopefully AMD brings some competition soon to spice things up.
Looking at it now though, I'm actually excited to see Polaris, despite the lacking higher end, which is mainly where my noise is pointed. Maybe since I think this release is not for me, i'll be more into checking out the improvements and advances they make in the mainstream


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> you mean this one?
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60/match-details/868ae2c4-98ae-4eb5-9c14-1bf767dfe410
> 
> i dont know seems very low tho given that this card on other benches is showing some weird results id take a guess they are just "playing" to keep the hype
> 
> the guy has more of polaris too..
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60?ladderId=x
> 
> with that
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/c1672994-9b51-42ce-981d-0b01d7e73a60/match-details/4fb42502-d01d-4192-8cfd-78dee670030c
> being only 4 fps on average behind a 980ti


You talk about dropped settings bench? Come on.

http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/357669a8-5a00-4408-b051-0bae6a8a7f3c/match-details/53ad30ab-8511-4439-99e9-77e1a2afa14b

It's like 20 fps behind 980 ti on comparable settings. In AMD favored game.


----------



## lahvie

has anyone played aots? is it even fun?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> You talk about dropped settings bench? Come on.
> 
> http://www.ashesofthesingularity.com/metaverse#/personas/357669a8-5a00-4408-b051-0bae6a8a7f3c/match-details/53ad30ab-8511-4439-99e9-77e1a2afa14b
> 
> It's like 20 fps behind 980 ti on comparable settings. In AMD favored game.


With 1/2 the MSAA. You are still not providing like for like there.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> With 1/2 the MSAA. You are still not providing like for like there.


But twice the shading samples, hence the "comparable".

It's kinda hard to provide exact comparison point for custom settings, namsaying.

EDIT: There's also the 390/390x run at 4k with same MSAA and better shadow settings at 5 less FPS by same guy, so 67DF does not look good still.


----------



## maltamonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> But twice the shading samples, hence the "comparable".
> 
> It's kinda hard to provide exact comparison point for custom settings, namsaying.
> 
> EDIT: There's also the 390/390x run at 4k with same MSAA and better shadow settings at 5 less FPS by same guy, so 67DF does not look good still.


Well it all comes down to price then doesn't it? For one price it may not look good but at another price it may look fantastic.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Well it all comes down to price then doesn't it? For one price it may not look good but at another price it may look fantastic.


I mean, if it was $200 for 480x, i would not shy away from getting it if i had spare money.

But we're on overclock.net, nahmean.


----------



## maltamonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> I mean, if it was $200 for 480x, i would not shy away from getting it if i had spare money.
> 
> But we're on overclock.net, nahmean.


I understand we are more high end centric, but that doesn't mean we have to be irrational when it comes to the lower markets.


----------



## wolfej

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> ...namsaying.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> ...nahmean.


What in the... Please don't let this become a thing around here.


----------



## lombardsoup

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wolfej*
> 
> What in the... Please don't let this become a thing around here.


gnomesaiyan


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wolfej*
> 
> What in the... Please don't let this become a thing around here.


His slang is lolfail.


----------



## sinholueiro

800Mhz and should come with about 1.5Ghz. My bet is 2560 cores like the 2816 and ramping up the frequency form the 1.1Ghz in the 390X to ~1.5Ghz. That's 36% more, something less than the 40% expected. At reference clocks, the 980Ti is 29% better than the 390X in 1080p. I expect to match a stock 980Ti. The main question is if AMD have a GDDR5X version to help in higher res scenarios. My 1440p monitor would like some GDDR5X love.


----------



## sblantipodi

Upgrade my GTX980 Ti SLI or wait big pascal. This is the problem.


----------



## Ghoxt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> 8GB GDDR5X running at 2500MHz memory clock.
> Cores is running at 1860MHz+
> 
> As always look at graphics score
> 
> *3DMark11 Performance*
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59558/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-benchmarks


Once the NDA drops are you planning on updating your 1st post with the official reviewer website Bench's & Links? If so I'll know where to look. Cause the Title of this implies "Benchmarks", and while it's a great graphics score only tells such a small part of the cards factual delivery of performance.

If not, once official benchmarks are delivered could you change the Title to 3DMark Pre Launch Bench? I know it's alot to ask something like this...but will save others confusion. You know what I mean.


----------



## s1rrah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> Upgrade my GTX980 Ti SLI or wait big pascal. This is the problem.


Totally wait, man.

I'm sitting on dual ref 980's and would feel silly upgrading to low end 1080 ... the high end cards are going to stomp.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s1rrah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> Upgrade my GTX980 Ti SLI or wait big pascal. This is the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Totally wait, man.
> 
> I'm sitting on dual ref 980's and would feel silly upgrading to low end 1080 ... the high end cards are going to stomp.
Click to expand...

So, what made you go low end 980 instead of waiting for big Maxwell?


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> So, what made you go low end 980 instead of waiting for big Maxwell?


Oh snap.


----------



## Cyclonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> So, what made you go low end 980 instead of waiting for big Maxwell?


Someone just got rekt


----------



## Nizzen

Owned


----------



## Oj010

Polaris 10 just got pushed back to October.


----------



## SpeedyVT

Told everyone on Reddit it was a rehash, it's a rehash of the 980ti with some minor improvements. Not only that but Nvidia has been incrementally slowing the 980ti by like %1 every other driver update. This is not the card everyone is waiting for, it's the 1080ti that others should consider.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Polaris 10 just got pushed back to October.












I thought it releases later this month / early June


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it releases later this month / early June


I cannot tell you the reason right now as it is highly confidential, but nope.

Edit - What I can tell you, and this is only part of the reason, is that they need the time to get their GPU up to speed. It's failing validation above about 850 MHz.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I cannot tell you the reason right now as it is highly confidential, but nope.


Vega in October


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it releases later this month / early June


Yep I'm more than certain you're right. However VEGA is October.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Vega in October


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyVT*
> 
> Yep I'm more than certain you're right. However VEGA is October.


The news that *Polaris 10* gets pushed back to October has just come in ten minutes ago.

I may have actually spoken out of turn here, I don't know who all has been told about the delay. If it's been made public then expect news sites to have a story up in the next few hours, if not... Oh damn, I opened my mouth too soon. The post has already been seen, read and quoted so no point in me removing it. Oops


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> The news that *Polaris 10* gets pushed back to October has just come in ten minutes ago.
> 
> I may have actually spoken out of turn here, I don't know who all has been told about the delay. If it's been made public then expect news sites to have a story up in the next few hours, if not... Oh damn, I opened my mouth too soon. The post has already been seen, read and quoted so no point in me removing it. Oops


Seriously? Doesn't seem legit given the rumors that Vega is getting pushed up to Oct.


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> The news that *Polaris 10* gets pushed back to October has just come in ten minutes ago.
> 
> I may have actually spoken out of turn here, I don't know who all has been told about the delay. If it's been made public then expect news sites to have a story up in the next few hours, if not... Oh damn, I opened my mouth too soon. The post has already been seen, read and quoted so no point in me removing it. Oops


https://www.google.com/search?q=polaris+amd+news&source=univ&tbm=nws&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwinhq2IidLMAhXIOyYKHUumA0IQsQQIIw&biw=1858&bih=1011

Where?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Seriously? Doesn't seem legit given the rumors that Vega is getting pushed up to Oct.


It doesn't, but it's straight from AMD.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyVT*
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=polaris+amd+news&source=univ&tbm=nws&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwinhq2IidLMAhXIOyYKHUumA0IQsQQIIw&biw=1858&bih=1011
> 
> Where?


No news site has an article up 10 minutes after an announcement, and I'm not even sure it's supposed to be public. Wait and see?


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> The news that *Polaris 10* gets pushed back to October has just come in ten minutes ago.
> 
> I may have actually spoken out of turn here, I don't know who all has been told about the delay. If it's been made public then expect news sites to have a story up in the next few hours, if not... Oh damn, I opened my mouth too soon. The post has already been seen, read and quoted so no point in me removing it. Oops


We will protect you mate !


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It doesn't, but it's straight from AMD.
> No news site has an article up 10 minutes after an announcement, and I'm not even sure it's supposed to be public. Wait and see?


No news since your news, I'm starting to think your source is full of butt butter.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It doesn't, but it's straight from AMD.
> No news site has an article up 10 minutes after an announcement, and I'm not even sure it's supposed to be public. Wait and see?


Ahh excellent. This gives Nvidia a chance to release the cut-down 1070 (1060 Ti?) for <$300 in July/August to counter AMD before they've even put a 14nm card on the shelf.


----------



## y2kcamaross

Ugh, should I grab 2 980tis for around $800....or just wait and grab a single 1080, or should I just splurge and get two 1080s...no clue what to do, hopefully may 17th sheds some light on the matter


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyVT*
> 
> No news since your news, I'm starting to think your source is full of butt butter.


Let's ignore all the info I've released ahead of time over the years and go with that, shall we?







I'm not just saying that to be facetious, I think I've genuinely spoken out of turn this time.


----------



## maltamonk

With things like twitter news definitely gets posted within 10mins.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Let's ignore all the info I've released ahead of time over the years and go with that, shall we?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not just saying that to be facetious, I think I've genuinely spoken out of turn this time.


Over the years? Join date is last year......Doesn't make sense on the surface.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> We will protect you mate !


Between this, the Matrix reference in another thread, and the other thread with all the science-y stuff... lol.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *y2kcamaross*
> 
> Ugh, should I grab 2 980tis for around $800....or just wait and grab a single 1080, or should I just splurge and get two 1080s...no clue what to do, hopefully may 17th sheds some light on the matter


Why would you pay $400 for a 980 Ti?? A GTX 1070 will be faster than Titan with MSRP of $379, New in box, with a warranty, and 8GB VRAM. Why would you pay $400 for an old, used, slower card that doesn't have a warranty??? The 1070 will be available soon enough.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> Why would you pay $400 for a 980 Ti?? A GTX 1070 will be faster than Titan with MSRP of $379, New in box, with a warranty, and 8GB VRAM. Why would you pay $400 for an old, used, slower card that doesn't have a warranty??? The 1070 will be available soon enough.


If you already have one. Who knows, they might sell for like $350 used lol.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

there are
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> Why would you pay $400 for a 980 Ti?? A GTX 1070 will be faster than Titan with MSRP of $379, New in box, with a warranty, and 8GB VRAM. Why would you pay $400 for an old, used, slower card that doesn't have a warranty??? The 1070 will be available soon enough.


if you compare it with the original titan then yes but they wont surpass it at all unless they gimp it or just showcase gameworks titles


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> With things like twitter news definitely gets posted within 10mins.
> Over the years? Join date is last year......Doesn't make sense on the surface.


I wasn't born last year though...









The oldest and quickest I can show is I was the first to give ACCURATE GeForce GTX Titan performance and pricing, my site (flyingsuicide.net) no longer exists but it was referenced by Nordic Hardware and VideoCardz (the unwatermarked graph is mine).


----------



## criminal

Still no news about Polaris being delayed.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Still no news about Polaris being delayed.


In the "No cards at Computex" thread, there was no reason given why no cards. But hopefully it won't be pushed back until October, I don't think the internet can bear 4 more months.


----------



## supergamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> VideoCardz


The Inverted version of PCNLife image is my doing.
Sorry OCN. Just wanted to help ppl see that fake was fake.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Still no news about Polaris being delayed.


As I said, it might not be public anytime soon and I may have spoken out of turn.


----------



## Dragon 32

Is it possible that Polaris being pushed back could have started the October Vega rumour?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> Is it possible that Polaris being pushed back could have started the October Vega rumour?


I doubt it, my source is less than five hours old unless someone has a faster source that messed up the information? If that's the case, entirely plausible.


----------



## maltamonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> Is it possible that Polaris being pushed back could have started the October Vega rumour?


I think the opposite is the more likely scenario. Someone probably saw vega getting moved to Oct and assume polaris being pushed back to Oct.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> I think the opposite is the more likely scenario. Someone probably saw vega getting moved to Oct and assume polaris being pushed back to Oct.


If that's the case, my source at AMD doesn't have a freaking clue what's going on


----------



## Dragon 32

Well I'd like to think the Vega rumour was true, and that's why they're choosing October. From a selfish personal perspective I'm not bothered much about Polaris 10 but I'd love early Vega.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If that's the case, my source at AMD doesn't have a freaking clue what's going on


Actually I retract that, specifically because of the reason said to me I can say that there won't be any new GPUs until October.


----------



## Dragon 32

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Actually I retract that, specifically because of the reason said to me I can say that there won't be any new GPUs until October.


RIP AMD


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> RIP AMD


Since last 4 years .....


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Since last 4 years .....


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> RIP AMD


Quite on the contrary.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Quite on the contrary.


If they aren't releasing anything new until October, it better be freaking amazing and cheap for it not hurt them.


----------



## hawker-gb

So October.
What's big deal?

Nvidia will milk boyz till then.

Xperia Z5 via Tapatalk


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> If they aren't releasing anything new until October, it better be freaking amazing and cheap for it not hurt them.


Removed, I'm saying too much.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Removed, I'm saying too much.


Yeah, yeah , yeah... the gpu division still matters though. Otherwise they would have gotten out of it already.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Yeah, yeah , yeah... the gpu division still matters though. Otherwise they would have gotten out of it already.


That's like saying Amazon would stop selling toys if it wasn't the division that matters. The more pies you have your fingers in, the better (normally and within reason).


----------



## AngEviL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Removed, I'm saying too much.


Haha. i'll tell you how its going to be. Polaris 10 will at best be close to a stock 980 ti, but at the same time its clocks will be pushed to the max, so if you count max oc vs max oc, it will end 20% slower than a gtx 980 ti. Its power efficiency will be at best same as pascal, so nothing to brag about there. Its same as fury r9 and 390x vs 980ti, amd overclocks like a pile of steamy you know what, while the 980 ti OCs like a champs.

I'm going to pick now too a gtx 1080 and OC it to the moon, and leave to you the scraps, maybe you will get a 5% overclock out of your beloved polaris and barely manage to beat a 2.5 year old 290x.

As for AMD vega, haha, going to match a gtx 1080 probably, and when nvidia will launch its big die pascal, its going to be a blood bath. You might as well jump ship now, but it's your choice. I aint sticking till q1 2017 (yeah, i am sure vega will come late) only to find that the damn card would just match a 1080, when i could have enjoyed a faster card since june this year.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Just got off the phone with my super secret source and they said we will be seeing AMD relaunching the 6970 as their only new GPU of 2016 (Sssshhhh, don't tell anybody, I'm not supposed to know about this!!!). They also said that AMD has decided through internal testing that their own designs are simply too terrible to ever challenge Nvidia again and that you should all go ahead and buy 1080's. I know this really sucks for poor AMD fanboys but hey, I've never been wrong before, you can trust me!

Btw, pay no attention to the Nvidia cards in my signature...


----------



## lahvie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AngEviL*
> 
> Haha. i'll tell you how its going to be. Polaris 10 will at best be close to a stock 980 ti, but at the same time its clocks will be pushed to the max, so if you count max oc vs max oc, it will end 20% slower than a gtx 980 ti. Its power efficiency will be at best same as pascal, so nothing to brag about there. Its same as fury r9 and 390x vs 980ti, amd overclocks like a pile of steamy you know what, while the 980 ti OCs like a champs.
> 
> I'm going to pick now too a gtx 1080 and OC it to the moon, and leave to you the scraps, maybe you will get a 5% overclock out of your beloved polaris and barely manage to beat a 2.5 year old 290x.
> 
> As for AMD vega, haha, going to match a gtx 1080 probably, and when nvidia will launch its big die pascal, its going to be a blood bath. You might as well jump ship now, but it's your choice. I aint sticking till q1 2017 (yeah, i am sure vega will come late) only to find that the damn card would just match a 1080, when i could have enjoyed a faster card since june this year.


Well I don't think anyone is disputing this, except that... Your speculating on too many things. And not taking all things into consideration

Faster Memory, new node, bigger dies from AMD
Polaris not going to threaten pascal (speculation, with a few hints from AMD)

Vega > big ? faster memory, new node, bigger die... We have no reason to know this won't be faster than Pascal big die and if its not, they may throw us the money bone, which isn't a problem for you, but may be for others, like me, who is still cleaning the house like a dog for my wife to make up for my recent upgrade









edit - we don't know enough about Polaris, let alone vega. : / lol


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Just got off the phone with my super secret source and they said we will be seeing AMD relaunching the 6970 as their only new GPU of 2016 (Sssshhhh, don't tell anybody, I'm not supposed to know about this!!!). They also said that AMD has decided through internal testing that their own designs are simply too terrible to ever challenge Nvidia again and that you should all go ahead and buy 1080's. I know this really sucks for poor AMD fanboys but hey, I've never been wrong before, you can trust me!
> 
> Btw, pay no attention to the Nvidia cards in my signature...


Hmm i think it's time to say --

RIP AMD


----------



## sugarhell

From now on just spam RIP AMD. This is a new leak from my sources. I call it now 7970 > polaris 10


----------



## ValSidalv21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Polaris 10 just got pushed back to October.







Jimmy... is that you?


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ValSidalv21*
> 
> Jimmy... is that you?












Sad there isn't a Rep+ x 10..


----------



## Ghoxt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ValSidalv21*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jimmy... is that you?


Nice find, My stomach hurt from that video, especially when he flips off AMD lol.


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> With things like twitter news definitely gets posted within 10mins.
> Over the years? Join date is last year......Doesn't make sense on the surface.


Before going to OC.net I was a XS member just as Oj010 and looking back he was one of the best source on this forum with real insider information, ahaed of launch.
He's really trustworthy guy for sure.


----------



## variant

I wonder if people on forums would fabricate rumors if the consequence is that they are banned if they are wrong.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Before going to OC.net I was a XS member just as Oj010 and looking back he was one of the best source on this forum with real insider information, ahaed of launch.
> He's really trustworthy guy for sure.


I am shocked, actually stunned, that you would say that! I mean man, never saw that coming...


----------



## lahvie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> I wonder if people on forums would fabricate rumors if the consequence is that they are banned if they are wrong.


that's pretty vague

Me saying Polaris will absolutely have hbm2 and come before q4, and being wrong... or

starting a thread claiming X and Y based on Z... or

commenting about insider source or...


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> that's pretty vague
> 
> Me saying Polaris will absolutely have hbm2 and come before q4, and being wrong... or
> 
> starting a thread claiming X and Y based on Z... or
> 
> commenting about insider source or...


Claiming an inside source and that inside source says "x". Not just speculation or over confidence about something, but actually purposely creating a rumor at it's foundation.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Claiming an inside source and that inside source says "x". Not just speculation or over confidence about something, but actually purposely creating a rumor at it's foundation.


It's a good point and would likely put a stop to most of these ridiculous rumor-generating posts we find around here (that inevitably get circled back around into becoming the source for news posts on WCCF). Definitely something for the mod-team to consider.


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Claiming an inside source and that inside source says "x". Not just speculation or over confidence about something, but actually purposely creating a rumor at it's foundation.


It's quite the same regarding Vega 10 Oct 16 rumour from a random 3DCenter member.
Except here, it's coming from a guy who revealed a lot of stuffs in the the past and was proved to be right.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It's a good point and would likely put a stop to most of these ridiculous rumor-generating posts we find around here (that inevitably get circled back around into becoming the source for news posts on WCCF). Definitely something for the mod-team to consider.


People who support the rumor monger's so-called legitimacy could be added as well.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> It's quite the same regarding Vega 10 Oct 16 rumour from a random 3DCenter member.
> Except here, it's coming from a guy who revealed a lot of stuffs in the the past and was proved to be right.


Personally I don't believe any of these rumors. This is the silly season of GPU news and everybody is all hyped up and looking to make a name for themselves. We will know actual, verifiable info soon enough on both fronts and then we can continue discussing actual facts rather than getting all frothy at the mouth over a bunch of BS rumors...


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> It's quite the same regarding Vega 10 Oct 16 rumour from a random 3DCenter member.
> Except here, it's coming from a guy who revealed a lot of stuffs in the the past and was proved to be right.


The forum moderators here can't ban people at 3DCenter.

If he is such a great source and is inevitably right, he has no fear of being banned. Unless you lack confidence in him...


----------



## Oj010

By all means, I'm not holding a gun to your head and forcing you to believe me. I'm just saying that information has been passed on to me that I'm choosing to share with all. I make the information available, that's it.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Yep, I'm just passing along what I've heard from my top secret source too!!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Just got off the phone with my super secret source and they said we will be seeing AMD relaunching the 6970 as their only new GPU of 2016 (Sssshhhh, don't tell anybody, I'm not supposed to know about this!!!). They also said that AMD has decided through internal testing that their own designs are simply too terrible to ever challenge Nvidia again and that you should all go ahead and buy 1080's. I know this really sucks for poor AMD fanboys but hey, I've never been wrong before, you can trust me!
> 
> Btw, pay no attention to the Nvidia cards in my signature...


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> By all means, I'm not holding a gun to your head and forcing you to believe me. I'm just saying that information has been passed on to me that I'm choosing to share with all. I make the information available, that's it.


Rumor mongers always use the "inside source" as an out when they are inevitably wrong. If you are confident enough to start a rumor, you should be confident enough to stand behind it.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Rumor mongers always use the "inside source" as an out when they are inevitably wrong. If you are confident enough to start a rumor, you should be confident enough to stand behind it.


Did I back out? I can't force Majin SSJ Eric to believe anything. If he wants to resort to passive aggressive sarcasm it's his prerogative. I've provided plenty of references for my credibility. I stand by AMD releasing Polaris in October.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Did I back out? I can't force Majin SSJ Eric to believe anything. I've provided plenty of references for my credibility. I stand by AMD releasing Polaris in October.


Would you be willing to be banned if you are wrong?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> Would you be willing to be banned if you are wrong?


If you ban everybody that posts something incorrect in the Rumors forum, the crickets chirping would be all that's left.

Somebody could post that nVidia sacrifices kittens by the trainload to boil down for PCBs and guys would be all "I knew it!, No surprise there!".


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I cannot tell you the reason right now as it is highly confidential, but nope.
> 
> Edit - What I can tell you, and this is only part of the reason, is that they need the time to get their GPU up to speed. *It's failing validation above about 850 MHz.*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pro3ootector*
> 
> _The new 14nm FinFET APU consists out of eight x86 LP cores at 2.1 GHz (they're not Zen nor Jaguar) and a Polaris GPU, operating on 15-20% faster clock than the original PS4.
> 
> According to sources in the know, the Polaris for *PlayStation Neo is clocked at 911 MHz, up from 800 MHz on the PS4. The number of units should increase from the current 1152. Apparently, we might see a number higher than 1500, and lower than 2560 cores which are physically packed inside the Polaris 10 GPU i.e. Radeon R9 400 Series.* Still, the number of units is larger than Polaris 11 (Radeon R7 400 Series), and the memory controller is 256-bit wide, with GDDR5 memory running higher than the current 1.38 GHz QDR. Given the recent developments with 20nm GDDR5 modules, we should see a 1.75 GHz QDR, 7 Gbps clock - resulting in 224 GB/s, almost a 20% boost.
> 
> Internally known as PlayStation Neo, the console should make its debut at the Tokyo Game Show, with availability coming as soon as Holiday Season 2016 - in time for the PlayStation VR headset._
> 
> http://vrworld.com/2016/05/11/amd-confirms-sony-playstation-neo-based-zen-polaris/


Well one of you is wrong.


----------



## lolfail9001

I mean, the guy did call power consumption on GP104 rather well, so i'll give him a chance and believe.

What is really interesting is that we now know why all these Polaris 10 ESs were running so slow: they could not clock up at all, if this is true.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Did I back out? I can't force Majin SSJ Eric to believe anything. I've provided plenty of references for my credibility. I stand by AMD releasing Polaris in October.


That's ABSOLUTELY BOLLOCKS!.

It's impossible for AMD to commit suicide in this bussiness, seeing that statement from a bussiness point of view that's insane, impossible, you're saying that AMD will have absolutely nothing, for the Low, Medium and Mainstream end while Nvidia is already feasting on the high end, AMD not releasing Polaris now would give Nvidia a chance to also release the low, Medium and Mainstream cards later negating any possibility for AMD to even stay afloat, their marketshare would be reduced to 5% or less but lets tackle this from a different angle.

AMD had Polaris samples working even before 2016 and they showcased their first Polaris samples just starting this year, it's downright impossible to think that it would take them over a year to launch an architecture that they already had finished, 1 year is enough to make that architecture obsolete before it has even launched.

Then you get AMD Slides that show that Polaris is launching on mid 2016, ending this month or starting the next, business can't just come and say "Hey, I feel like doing this tomorrow instead of now" bussiness have deadines, everything goes like clockwork.

I don't know where such rumor would have originated from, but I am 99.99% sure that's pure BS, AMD Stocks would plumb extremely hard if there was any sign of it being remotely valid but AMD Stocks are raising instead, it's more likely we even get VEGA on September if AMD feel the need to put some pressure in the market and see the risks worth taking, launching Polaris so late would not be a risk it'd be suicide.

Also you got the new consoles which already exist, they have samples, we know they are real, they use Polaris APUs, Sony and Microsoft would have never choose AMD for the newest consoles if they knew AMD would be so late and unreliable.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> I mean, the guy did call power consumption on GP104 rather well, so i'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> *What is really interesting is that we now know why all these Polaris 10 ESs were running so slow: they could not clock up at all.*


We need a revision on the chip quick! Didn't AMD have a similar issue with the first Phenom cpu's?


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well one of you is wrong.


Why would either of me be? Predicting precise clocks would be pretty naive considering Polaris 10 did not even release at the time we knew of deal.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> I mean, the guy did call power consumption on GP104 rather well, so i'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> *What is really interesting is that we now know why all these Polaris 10 ESs were running so slow: they could not clock up at all.[*/quote]
> 
> We need a revision on the chip quick! Didn't AMD have a similar issue with the first Phenom cpu's?
Click to expand...

You messed up your quotes, but yeah, AMD better release Polaris II straight away









EDIT: Also, funnily enough, was not Phenom core called "Stars"? AMD better stay away from these from now on.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well one of you is wrong.


He's not wrong, the fabrication process just needs a little maturing. Polaris 10 is supposed to run at close to double the speed that it currently is. This combined with another reason equals a delay.

As for taking a van if I'm wrong, so far I've been correct on GTX Titan performance, GTX Titan pricing, Fury X frequencies on stock voltage, lack of Fury X scaling with voltage, BIOS updates to block BCLK overclocking on non-K series processors, Pascal TDP, GTX 1080 memory frequency, GTX 1080 GPU frequency (OK I have been vague on that but I did say you'd see CPU-like frequencies on LN2), GTX 1080 2-way SLI performance vs GTX 980 TI 4-way SLI performance (watch HWBOT the day the embargo lifts), as well as many other things which were on my now defunct website such as Bulldozer performance not being the INTEL destroyer the world believed it would be, etc. You tell me.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> If you ban everybody that posts something incorrect in the Rumors forum, the crickets chirping would be all that's left.
> 
> *Somebody could post that nVidia sacrifices kittens by the trainload to boil down for PCBs and guys would be all "I knew it!, No surprise there!".*


But that one's believable.







Agreed though. There's a thin line between rumours and lies and I wouldn't wish the over-analysis on the mods.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Stuff


Maybe, just maybe, you have given a reason for the Polaris 10 GPU delay that I'm not allowed to. Who knows? I say no more on the matter cause I'm now walking an extremely fine line between what I can and can't say


----------



## sugarhell

Let's compare our virtual "something" thread.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> If you ban everybody that posts something incorrect in the Rumors forum, the crickets chirping would be all that's left.
> 
> Somebody could post that nVidia sacrifices kittens by the trainload to boil down for PCBs and guys would be all "I knew it!, No surprise there!".


No, this is not about simply a discussion of rumors, but actually claiming to have a source and creating their own rumor. This stuff does nothing but gives fodder for websites like WCCF. If every forum would ban people when they do this and get it wrong, there would be a whole lot less false rumors going around.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> But that one's _believable._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed though. There's a thin line between rumours and lies and I wouldn't wish the over-analysis on the mods.


Yeah the key to rumors is to not over-analyze. For me I read the rumors, go "ok cool" and that's it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> No, this is not about simply discussion of rumors, but actually claiming to have a source and creating their own rumor. This stuff does nothing but gives fodder for websites like WCCF. If every forum would ban people when they do this and get it wrong, there would be a whole lot less false rumors going around.


Chiphell actually does this believe it or not. (or at least, they have a sticky stating something to that effect)


----------



## Bugzzz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, you have given a reason for the Polaris 10 GPU delay that I'm not allowed to. Who knows? I say no more on the matter cause I'm now walking an extremely fine line between what I can and can't say


Is it possible somewhere along the chain of the possible source of said delay, the source meant to say Vega 10 and not Polaris 10? Because if true, that is really a biter pill to swallow, not for me, but AMD.


----------



## Dragon 32

Maybe this year Santa's sack will be full of Zen and Vega, and AMD shares will perk up even more.


----------



## Vowels

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Stuff
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, you have given a reason for the Polaris 10 GPU delay that I'm not allowed to. Who knows? I say no more on the matter cause I'm now walking an extremely fine line between what I can and can't say
Click to expand...

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that *if* what you say is true about P10 being delayed to October then AMD also decided to push forward the release of Vega (recently rumoured) because otherwise it'd be a huge slap to P10 buyers in October to have Vega release a few months later. So instead of 2 releases, AMD will do a single Polaris + Vega launch. This would be disastrous for the GPU market.

Again, only speculating on a possible scenario based on an unverifiable rumour.


----------



## Cyclonic

We have been talking about Polaris for a couple of pages but this is a thread about 1080 benchmarks









I belive that the card will be september/oktober tho


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> We have been talking about Polaris for a couple of pages but this is a thread about 1080 benchmarks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I belive that the card will be september/oktober tho


Well there's nothing more to say about the GTX 1080 at the moment


----------



## Cyclonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Well there's nothing more to say about the GTX 1080 at the moment


No inside information about release of non founder cards, like maybe a MSI Lightning 1080 ?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> No inside information about release of non founder cards, like maybe a MSI Lightning 1080 ?


You're really trying to put me in a tough spot, eh?







I can't hint at much right now, I can say the Xtreme Gaming is going to be a pretty nice card for Joe Average


----------



## Cyclonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You're really trying to put me in a tough spot, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't hint at much right now, I can say the Xtreme Gaming is going to be a pretty nice card for Joe Average


hehe


----------



## semitope

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You're really trying to put me in a tough spot, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't hint at much right now, I can say the Xtreme Gaming is going to be a pretty nice card for Joe Average


Joe average is not buying a $600 card, they are looking for polaris 10.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> No inside information about release of non founder cards, like maybe a MSI Lightning 1080 ?


MSI hasn't done a Lightning of a mid-range chip since 680.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *semitope*
> 
> Joe average is not buying a $600 card, they are looking for polaris 10.


More like Joe Average will buy 1060 because he assumes it'll be better than AMD's equivalent because 1080 has the performance crown. Remember Joe Average isn't called Joe *Average* for no reason.


----------



## semitope

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> More like Joe Average will buy 1060 because he assumes it'll be better than AMD's equivalent because 1080 has the performance crown. Remember Joe Average isn't called Joe *Average* for no reason.


not sure thats even possible. 1070 is already cutting it close, a 1060 won't beat a 390x. We'll see


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:
Originally Posted by *magnek* 

MSI hasn't done a Lightning of a mid-range chip since 680.


> More like Joe Average will buy 1060 because he assumes it'll be better than AMD's equivalent because 1080 has the performance crown. Remember Joe Average isn't called Joe *Average* for no reason.


I'm like a broken record with that, it's just so annoying to me for no reason. People's purchases are their own and I won't judge but I have to ask 'why' every time someone looks at some of the Nvidia mid-range options. YOU DON'T GET A FREE 980 TI WITH EVERY 960 PURCHASE M80'S. No reason to think it will be different now. The average consumer, -IF- they look beyond "Nvidia has best card", will only glance at the top of a performance graph, see the *80 Ti and Titan atop it, and assume that all Nvidia products = better. I was poor when I was at college, I remember the searching I did to carefully select my X800 XL even though the high-end 7800 GTX was the tits and everybody knew it. But as you say, most Joe Average types just don't look that hard.


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> More like Joe Average will buy 1060 because he assumes it'll be better than AMD's equivalent because 1080 has the performance crown. Remember Joe Average isn't called Joe *Average* for no reason.


I agree, and that will most likely happen. However, some new features like Ansel for instance might be appealing to many. I know that I would love taking screenshots 32x my resolution.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *semitope*
> 
> Joe average is not buying a $600 card, they are looking for polaris 10.


I'm talking about the Joe Average of GTX 1080 buyers, i.e. not the person to be using LN2.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I've provided plenty of references for my credibility. I stand by AMD releasing Polaris in October.


Do you live in a country where tech releases are delayed 3-6 months?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> RIP AMD


At every GPU release and event









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> So, what made you go low end 980 instead of waiting for big Maxwell?


My guess would be a large enough performance jump from what he was using and it was time to upgrade...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Do you live in a country where tech releases are delayed 3-6 months?
> At every GPU release and event
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My guess would be a large enough performance jump from what he was using and it was time to upgrade...


Considering we've already sold out of GTX 1080 preorders I'm going to go with no.


----------



## Ghoxt

Nvidia GTX1080 Discussion - Jay2Cents, Luke - Linus Tech Tips, Anthony - TweakTown, Pauls Hardware)






Interesting coming from those that attended the conference.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Yeah the key to rumors is to not over-analyze. For me I read the rumors, go "ok cool" and that's it.
> Chiphell actually does this believe it or not. (or at least, they have a sticky stating something to that effect)


Like I said earlier, how much you wanna bet we see a story in WCCF tomorrow that claims leaks surfacing that Polaris has been delayed til October and when you check their source it ends up being this thread?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> Nvidia GTX1080 Discussion - Jay2Cents, Luke - Linus Tech Tips, Anthony - TweakTown, Pauls Hardware)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting coming from those that attended the conference.


Jay2Cents: "I thought the price was going to be $650"


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







There is absolutely zero push back on price increases from media outlets... In fact, most of the media coverage makes the GTX 1080 sound like a bargain... "Titan X performance at $379"


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Jay2Cents: "I thought the price was going to be $650"
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely zero push back on price increases from media outlets... In fact, most of the media coverage makes the GTX 1080 sound like a bargain... "Titan X performance at $379"


It disgusting and disturbing. Have these people never seen GPU progress before. This is what happens when you get the GPUs for free or better said 3 of them. How does opinion even hold any value.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Like I said earlier, how much you wanna bet we see a story in WCCF tomorrow that claims leaks surfacing that Polaris has been delayed til October and when you check their source it ends up being this thread?


"A source at the reputable enthusiast community Overclock.net..."

We'll all get a gold sticker!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It disgusting and disturbing. Have these people never seen GPU progress before. This is what happens when you get the GPUs for free or better said 3 of them. How does opinion even hold any value.


It is amazing to me that you have all four of them sitting there in that video literally gushing over this new card when it is basically exactly a repeat of the 980 in almost every way. If I recall correctly, the 980 was just about the same performance increase over the 680 as the 1080 will be over the 980, at least from expectations. The only difference is it now costs $50-$150 more than the 980 did. Clock for clock Pascal is actually slower then maxwell on a much smaller node. And yet nobody mentioned any of this amongst the YouTube Tech wizards.

None of this is to suggest that the 1080 is a disappointing card to me at all. The clock speed is pretty incredible I will admit. But overall the performance is in line pretty much exactly with what I expected the card to be, I just didn't expect it to need such high clock speeds to reach that performance. And it should have released for the same price the 980 did.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Jay2Cents: "I thought the price was going to be $650"
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely zero push back on price increases from media outlets... In fact, most of the media coverage makes the GTX 1080 sound like a bargain... "Titan X performance at $379"


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It disgusting and disturbing. Have these people never seen GPU progress before. This is what happens when you get the GPUs for free or better said 3 of them. How does opinion even hold any value.


I'll get called a shill for this, but who cares. I love the hypocrisy in that video of one in particular claiming they wouldn't mind a power hog or a hot card, and yet have spent the last two years implying AMD hardware will catch your house on fire and trip your breakers..









I have nothing against any of them personally, we all got to pay the bills and eat, and i don't expect them to say anything good about the red team if they don't earn it. But at this point it's plainly obvious most of them are Nvidia biased.. To the point where they don't look out for the consumers at all, they are literally advertisers these days. They get payed by the company they are gushing over and we expect them to be impartial?

Little things like to this day still pretending a 970 has 4GB of Vram/never bringing up any of Nvidias false claims, and yet constantly bringing up the "overclockers dream" (which is deserved, just saying it should go both ways.) Videos that seem to offer nothing except a hidden advertisement. Never once bringing up Asynchronous shading, and never talking about AMD's recent trend in DX12 titles, always showing benches in Nvidia sponsored games to lessen a red cards perceived advantage, etc. I may be looking to much into it but it sure seems that way.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> I'll get called a shill for this, but who cares. I love the hypocrisy in that video of one in particular claiming they wouldn't mind a power hog or a hot card, and yet have spent the last two years implying AMD hardware will catch your house on fire and trip your breakers..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have nothing against any of them personally, we all got to pay the bills and eat, and i don't expect them to say anything good about the red team if they don't earn it. But at this point it's plainly obvious most of them are Nvidia biased.. To the point where they don't look out for the consumers at all, they are literally advertisers these days. They get payed by the company they are gushing over and we expect them to be impartial?
> 
> Little things like to this day still pretending a 970 has 4GB of Vram/never bringing up any of Nvidias false claims, and yet constantly bringing up the "overclockers dream" (which is deserved, just saying it should go both ways.) Videos that seem to offer nothing except a hidden advertisement. Never once bringing up Asynchronous shading, and never talking about AMD's recent trend in DX12 titles, always showing benches in Nvidia sponsored games to lessen a red cards perceived advantage, etc. I may be looking to much into it but it sure seems that way.


Eh, that video was actually pretty fair in its conclusions in my opinion. Completely restricting the airflow was stretching to make the 970 look better but Luke did admit they had to force that scenario and that the nano easily beats the 970 in normal conditions, albeit at a significantly higher price. Could've at least brought up the memory restrictions of the 970 however.


----------



## Kriant

I watched that 30 min youtube video and....why the hell are they ok with prices going $150 up compared to previous mid-range chip release? Just because you get a leap in performance by virtue of improved architecture and die shrink doesn't mean it's ok to raise the prices yet again. End users should really start voting with their wallets.

Also, I feel like the guys were waaaaaaay over excited after watching the presentation and the theoretical TFLOPS performance.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Eh, that video was actually pretty fair in its conclusions in my opinion. Completely restricting the airflow was stretching to make the 970 look better but Luke did admit they had to force that scenario and that the nano easily beats the 970 in normal conditions, albeit at a significantly higher price. Could've at least brought up the memory restrictions of the 970 however.


That vid sort of shows what i meant though, they'll never do a straight fight, it's always some extreme that any of us with common sense could know the answer too without watching it.. I'm subbed to them because i generally like their content, but i tend to avoid their GPU stuff. As i said, could just be me being overly cynical, although there is definitely blatant nvidia preference in lots of others, this was just the most recent one in my sub box.

So instead of the conclusion being the 970 is weaker but cheaper, it has to be more than that. It has to be that "although the nano performs better, it's also worse because it feels worse".. So "if your case doesn't have good airflow go with the mini". I also don't recall them using performance-per-dollar in their other videos.. But in this case the Nano is more expensive (like Nvidia cards usually are) so this time they'll use the perf-per-$ card.. Or maybe they always use that metric, i dunno.









Not to mention using a single title for performance metrics, which happens to be TW3, an Nvidia title. A single title for power draw, Crysis 3, and a single title for perf-per-$, TR.. And the data they're using is supposedly from when the Nano just launched, 9 months ago.. So they obviously wouldn't be using the efficiency setting in Crimson like the 970 has, which would of alleviated the throttling. I just find all these tech channels of late to be lazy advertisements.. Like seriously, what was the point of that video? "Lets tape up the vents on the case and pit the nano against the 970".. Yeah, that's great, lol.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> That vid sort of shows what i meant though, they'll never do a straight fight, it's always some extreme that any of us with common sense could know the answer too without watching it.. I'm subbed to them because i generally like their content, but i tend to avoid their GPU stuff. As i said, could just be me being overly cynical, although there is definitely blatant nvidia preference in lots of others, this was just the most recent one in my sub box.
> 
> So instead of the conclusion being the 970 is weaker but cheaper, it has to be more than that. It has to be that "although the nano performs better, it's also worse because it feels worse".. So "if your case doesn't have good airflow go with the mini". I also don't recall them using performance-per-dollar in their other videos.. But in this case the Nano is more expensive (like Nvidia cards usually are) so this time they'll use the perf-per-$ card.. Or maybe they always use that metric, i dunno.


I definitely don't remember them using the performance per dollar metric when they reviewed the Titan X.


----------



## magnek

Meh I'm sure the Youtube "reviewers" get a nice big check (cheque for SuperZan







) from nVidia every month for doing their infomercials.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Meh I'm sure the Youtube "reviewers" get a nice big check (cheque for SuperZan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) from nVidia every month for doing their infomercials.


Hard to blame them really. I mean I would absolutely do the same thing on my channel if Nvidia decided to send me free hardware and checks in the mail.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Meh I'm sure the Youtube "reviewers" get a nice big check (cheque for SuperZan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) from nVidia every month for doing their infomercials.


Thank you kindly!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Hard to blame them really. I mean I would absolutely do the same thing on my channel if Nvidia decided to send me free hardware and checks in the mail.


Yes it would have quite the effect on one's perceptions.. quad-fire Titans in every room!


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Just scrubbed through some of their GPU reviews, and yup, no perf-per-$ when it comes to the 390/X, 980, etc. Except for when the 950 was cheaper, or in this case the 970 vs the Nano.. Strange.

Funny thing going back to that Pascal discussion video, they are super hyped over the 1080 having temps in the 60's running @ 2.1Ghz "On stock cooling!", but they didn't seem to notice that Nvidia had a Vsync cap at 60fps.. Even my 390X sits in the 60's - low 70's with Vsync on, and I've heard they can catch your case on fire.









Also surprised that they are treating these cards like a bargain.. The damn 980Ti was cheaper.


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Just scrubbed through some of their GPU reviews, and yup, no perf-per-$ when it comes to the 390/X, 980, etc. Except for when the 950 was cheaper, or in this case the 970 vs the Nano.. Strange.
> 
> Funny thing going back to that Pascal discussion video, they are super hyped over the 1080 having temps in the 60's running @ 2.1Ghz "On stock cooling!", but they didn't seem to notice that Nvidia had a *Vsync cap at 60fps*.. Even my 390X sits in the 60's - low 70's with Vsync on, and I've heard they can catch your case on fire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also surprised that they are treating these cards like a bargain.. The damn 980Ti was cheaper.


Are you referring to the Doom video? If so, they uncapped the frame rate at 1:47.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueRjbYdcXbs


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> Are you referring to the Doom video? If so, they uncapped the frame rate at 1:47.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueRjbYdcXbs


Owned


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> In fact, most of the media coverage makes the GTX 1080 sound like a bargain... "Titan X performance at $379"


uh, because it is ? (I assume you mean 1070 here)

1070 is going to sell like hotcakes, just like 970 and 770 did in their time and for a reason


----------



## BlitzWulf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> Are you referring to the Doom video? If so, they uncapped the frame rate at 1:47.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueRjbYdcXbs


I'm guessing since he mentioned clocks and temps, neither of which is in that video you showed that no he is in fact referring to the launch event that was livestreamed


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> uh, because it is ? (I assume you mean 1070 here)
> 
> 1070 is going to sell like hotcakes, just like 970 and 770 did in their time and for a reason


Are you sure the 770 sold like hotcakes ? (it was a rebranded 680 btw )


----------



## ChevChelios

i know and yes im sure


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Jay2Cents: "I thought the price was going to be $650"
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely zero push back on price increases from media outlets... In fact, most of the media coverage makes the GTX 1080 sound like a bargain... "Titan X performance at $379"


NV shills
Most likely NV just Bribe them..You know Nvidia pay them for trip there...They eating for Nv money, drinking for Nv money,They ride on horses for Nv money..
Just look at this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnmZwChW_s


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> NV shills
> Most likely NV just Bribe them..You know Nvidia pay them for trip there...They eating for Nv money, drinking for Nv money,They ride on horses for Nv money..
> Just look at this
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnmZwChW_s


Well said. If this tiny chip is priced $600, I can't imagine how the flagship chip will be priced.


----------



## ChevChelios

- a Titan X level card with new features and better VR for $380-450

that Nvidia - literally worse than Hitler


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> - a Titan X level card with new features and better VR for $380-450
> 
> that Nvidia - literally worse than Hitler


GTX 560 beat the GTX 285 but was less than $250. Nvidia is increasing the prices of each segment by $50-100 each generation.
Don't be fooled by the GTX 1080 name. this is the mid-range GPU of the Pascal series priced as a high-end card,.


----------



## carlhil2

I look at it like this, I paid $700.00 for 2x980s Classifieds, $700.00 for 2x980Ti Classifieds, this time, I will only have to pay no more than $700.00 for 1x1080 Classified=I am not even mad...


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I look at it like this, I paid $700.00 for 2x980s Classifieds, $700.00 for 2x980Ti Classifieds, this time, I will only have to pay no more than $700.00 for 1x1080 Classified=I am not even mad...


And in 2018 you can pay 700$ for GTX 1280 with a 210mm² die


















I am not even mad


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> And in 2018 you can pay 700$ for GTX 1280 with a 210mm² die
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not even mad


I knew you would chime in,.....







but, yeah, you do, at times, sound mad...


----------



## HeadlessKnight

The truth hurts...


----------



## carlhil2

What would that be?


----------



## HeadlessKnight

GTX 560 Ti (GF104) was the mid-range gpu of the Fermi family priced $280 -> GTX 680 (GK104) the mid-range gpu of the Kepler family priced at $500 -> GTX 980 (GM204) the mid-range gpu of the Maxwell family priced at $550 -> GTX 1080 (GP104) the mid-range gpu of the Pascal family will have an MSRP of $600 and the first time in existence the reference card will cost more.
Don't you see a pattern with the last three generations?


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I look at it like this, I paid $700.00 for 2x980s Classifieds, $700.00 for 2x980Ti Classifieds, this time, I will only have to pay no more than $700.00 for 1x1080 Classified=I am not even mad...


You're not mad that just a few years ago you could get two high end chips in a video card for the same price as a single midrange gpu (gtx 590)?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeadlessKnight*
> 
> GTX 560 Ti (GF104) was the mid-range gpu of the Fermi family priced $280 -> GTX 680 (GK104) the mid-range gpu of the Kepler family priced at $500 -> GTX 980 (GM204) the mid-range gpu of the Maxwell family priced at $550 -> GTX 1080 (GP104) the mid-range gpu of the Pascal family will have an MSRP of $600 and the first time in existence the reference card will cost more.
> Don't you see a pattern with the last three generations?


Not really, like I said, I have paid $700 per card over the last two releases, hopefully, this Classified version costs no more than that price, so, again, for me, the price would not change...if nVidia priced the 1080 at $550.00, if the Classified came out at $700, that's what I would have paid...


----------



## skline00

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Thank you kindly!
> 
> Yes it would have quite the effect on one's perceptions.. quad-fire Titans in every room!


Well one thing for sure, no quad GTX1080s. Nvidia has "limited" them to 2. THAT is big news.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> You're not mad that just a few years ago you could get two high end chips in a video card for the same price as a single midrange gpu (gtx 590)?


Lol, no, I went from sli-580 to OG Titans, 590, that ram though...skipped the 680 too....


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlitzWulf*
> 
> I'm guessing since he mentioned clocks and temps, neither of which is in that video you showed that no he is in fact referring to the launch event that was livestreamed


Yeah, that seems to be the case. I got caught up on the G/V-Sync cap. However, when they showed the frame rate and clocks it was a still image, so I'm pretty darn sure it'd show higher frames than that had they uncapped the fps.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeadlessKnight*
> 
> GTX 560 beat the GTX 285 but was less than $250.


and the 1060 or its price isnt announced yet

and Im sure 1160 or 1260 will also beat Titan X









Quote:


> Don't be fooled by the GTX 1080 name. this is the mid-range GPU


Im not fooled

I know 1080 is no mid-range card


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> and the 1060 or its price isnt announced yet
> 
> and Im sure 1160 or 1260 will also beat Titan X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im not fooled
> 
> I know 1080 is no mid-range card


1060 is the GTX 550 Ti successor, so it is a low end card in disguise. And 1080 is a mid-range card in disguise, anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge on Nvidia GPUs know this fact.
Titan X and 980 Ti will be sad low end cards anyway when 1160 or 1260 match them. Just like GTX 580 today, so a 1160 or 1260 matching Titan X from now is nothing impressive, because that level of performance will be subpar in that time.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeadlessKnight*
> 
> Well said. If this tiny chip is priced $600, I can't imagine how the flagship chip will be priced.


Probably $1000 just like the past two flagship cards...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Hard to blame them really. I mean I would absolutely do the same thing on my channel if Nvidia decided to send me free hardware and checks in the mail.


They are not free. They are for advertisement. It does not matter really. He would have probably still gotten 1080s even if he did not get them for free. They are after all the best cards. I would get 1080s too if my job was similar to his but at the same time I would at least tried to have a similar AMD setup. This guy does not even game anymore. What difference is 3 x Fury X vs 3 x Titan X?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im not fooled
> 
> I know 1080 is no mid-range card





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I look at it like this, I paid $700.00 for 2x980s Classifieds, $700.00 for 2x980Ti Classifieds, this time, I will only have to pay no more than $700.00 for 1x1080 Classified=I am not even mad...


What is it that you do that warrants the need to upgrade for 10-15% performance gains each "generation"?


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Probably $1000 just like the past two flagship cards...


HBM2 will probably raise the value of the card up. I expect $1100+ honestly for the Titan P and $800+ for the Ti.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeadlessKnight*
> 
> 1060 is the GTX 550 Ti successor, so it is a low end card in disguise. And 1080 is a mid-range card in disguise, anyone with a tiny bit of knowledge on Nvidia GPUs know this fact.
> Titan X and 980 Ti will be sad low end cards anyway when 1160 or 1260 match them. Just like GTX 580 today, so a 1160 or 1260 matching Titan X from now is nothing impressive, because that level of performance will be subpar in that time.


Finally a bit of reason, the GTX 1080 is certainly NOT the spiritual successor to the GTX 560.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeadlessKnight*
> 
> HBM2 will probably raise the value of the card up. I expect $1100+ honestly for the Titan P and $800+ for the Ti.


Either that or the Titan will come in weaker compute that do not clash with their Quadro / Tesla series.

Something like 4:1 DP enabled rather than 2:1. Very likely given it give help to shell some extra wattage off. something like this can still help to bring down the cost to $999.

No one is going to be happy with a 300W TDP Titan just like the Tesla P100.


----------



## ChronoBodi

So, a GTX 1080 stock is roughly on par with an decently OCed 980Ti, not reference, like Gigabyte G1, Asus Strix, and so on.

everybody keeps comparing the 1080 to the stock 980 ti, but for me personally i want to see where the 1080 lands next to the OCed versions, the ones that boost to 1400 mhz or more.


----------



## carlhil2

I want to see max stable OC vs max stable OC....see if the 1080 loses or gain ground.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

At least we have ~30% performance gain over the 1070 for 58% more $$$. Better than the 980's 15% performance gain over the 970 for 67% more $$$. Starting to think if it's worth even buying the more expensive cards these days and giving Nvidia more incentive to price them higher and higher.


----------



## ValSidalv21

Oh boy, looks like Guru3D were reading this thread and now the rumor will spread like plague









Rumor: Polaris validation Failed Might Launch in October Now
Quote:


> Here's the story, some reports say Polaris 10 can't hit 850 MHz reliably and that availability will be pushed back to October.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Finally a bit of reason, the GTX 1080 is certainly NOT the spiritual successor to the GTX 560.


Yes it is. The midrange chips went 560 --> 680 --> 980 --> 1080

The high end big chips went 580 --> Titan/780 --> Titan X/980Ti --> Paschal Titan / 1080 Ti

All you have to do is look at the die sizes. And Nvidia doubled prices across the board.

Changing the sticker & price tag on a midrange GPU does not magically make it high end.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ValSidalv21*
> 
> Oh boy, looks like Guru3D were reading this thread and now the rumor will spread like plague
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rumor: Polaris validation Failed Might Launch in October Now


Hilarious. Hilbert banned me from his forums for calling BS on his review of the Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1.Gaming (which he then quietly edited with new results).


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It disgusting and disturbing. Have these people never seen GPU progress before. This is what happens when you get the GPUs for free or better said 3 of them. *How does opinion even hold any value.*


It does not hold any value to me; ZERO value. There are 2-3 guys that I actually trust to review properly and none of them are on youtube.


----------



## chuy409

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Yes it is. The midrange chips went 560 --> 680 --> 980 --> 1080
> 
> The high end big chips went 580 --> Titan/780 --> Titan X/980Ti --> Paschal Titan / 1080 Ti
> 
> All you have to do is look at the die sizes. And Nvidia doubled prices across the board.
> 
> Changing the sticker & price tag on a midrange GPU does not magically make it high end.


Exactly how i went up. From 460 to 770 (680), then to 980.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ValSidalv21*
> 
> Rumor: Polaris validation Failed Might Launch in October Now


such conflicted feelings on this one if true


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s1rrah*
> 
> Totally wait, man.
> 
> I'm sitting on dual ref 980's and would feel silly upgrading to low end 1080 ... the high end cards are going to stomp.


low end 1080? 
why low end?


----------



## VSG

lol Guru3D never fails to keep my feelings about them/Hilbert in check.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ValSidalv21*
> 
> Oh boy, looks like Guru3D were reading this thread and now the rumor will spread like plague


And yet, if you read the article, he lists his source as someplace different than this thread.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It disgusting and disturbing. Have these people never seen GPU progress before. This is what happens when you get the GPUs for free or better said 3 of them. How does opinion even hold any value.


Funny story, my buddy called me last night and asked what I thought about Nvidia's new graphics card (1080). I said it look pretty good, but I wasn't happy about the price. His response, "Really? It is as fast as 980 SLI and cheaper than the Titan X." I just laughed... I mean how do you even counter that thinking?


----------



## Dragon 32

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> And yet, if you read the article, he lists his source as someplace different than this thread.


Must be true then. Nobody lies on the internet.

It's also possible the other site got it from here.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ValSidalv21*
> 
> Oh boy, looks like Guru3D were reading this thread and now the rumor will spread like plague
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rumor: Polaris validation Failed Might Launch in October Now


That rumor originated on these forums... In fact, it was in this very thread...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Polaris 10 just got pushed back to October.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Funny story, my buddy called me last night and asked what I thought about Nvidia's new graphics card (1080). I said it look pretty good, but I wasn't happy about the price. His response, "Really? It is as fast as 980 SLI and cheaper than the Titan X." I just laughed... I mean how do you even counter that thinking?


"1070 is just as fast for $380." But I mean, it's true. That's why I bought a 980 at first. It was slightly faster than a 780 Ti AND cheaper (comparing it to prices a few weeks prior when I thought about getting one). This is also "cheaper" than a 980 Ti (depending on how good of a deal you get on a 980 Ti) and faster.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I look at it like this, I paid $700.00 for 2x980s Classifieds, $700.00 for 2x980Ti Classifieds, this time, I will only have to pay no more than $700.00 for 1x1080 Classified=I am not even mad...


I know I am not mad. I just get sick of the people that continue being fooled by the marketing and justifying the price or people like you that want cards to cost as much as possible because you feel elite by owning them...lol

Or at least that's how your posts come off to me.

I bought the first Titan because I can afford $1k card if I want one. I still felt stupid because of the silliness of what I was basically doing. I don't mind there being a gap between segments of graphics cards. But like some that gets smug as the price goes up, I am not. Especially when i know how Nvidia changed the position of the goal posts and now we get so much less for our money.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I know I am not mad. I just get sick of the people that continue being fooled by the marketing and justifying the price or people like you that want cards to cost as much as possible because you feel elite by owning them...lol
> 
> Or at least that's how your posts come off to me.
> 
> I bought the first Titan because I can afford $1k card if I want one. I still felt stupid because of the silliness of what I was basically doing. I don't mind there being a gap between segments of graphics cards. But like some that gets smug as the price goes up, I am not. Especially when i know how Nvidia changed the position of the goal posts and now we get so much less for our money.


But you're still getting the performance for the most part. It's not like it's $50 more than the 980 and only 20-30% faster. Then it would just be a 980 Ti and a huge ripoff. At that perf, they'd have to price it like $500.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> "1070 is just as fast for $380." But I mean, it's true. That's why I bought a 980 at first. It was slightly faster than a 780 Ti AND cheaper (comparing it to prices a few weeks prior when I thought about getting one). This is also "cheaper" than a 980 Ti (depending on how good of a deal you get on a 980 Ti) and faster.


I guess I know what the chip is, used to cost and why price doesn't need to go up for that performance. I think you know it to, but justify it because you want to upgrade. I want to upgrade to 1080, I just can't justify the price to myself. I will be getting Polaris or Vega just because we need to level the playing field a bit. I need an upgrade fix, but I just can't support Nvidia's tactics this round. They really are turning into Apple (which isn't a bad thing for profit), but I don't buy Apple products either.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> And yet, if you read the article, he lists his source as someplace different than this thread.


Notably the guy who 'leaked' this here also named Nordic Hardware as a site he has also provided with 'inside info'.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Notably the guy who 'leaked' this here also named Nordic Hardware as a site he has also provided with 'inside info'.


Indeed, but Guru3D didn't name OCN as the source for the rumor.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Indeed, but Guru3D didn't name OCN as the source for the rumor.


Fair enough. For veracity's sake I do wonder if it was the same person on both sites, though.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I know I am not mad. I just get sick of the people that continue being fooled by the marketing and justifying the price or people like you that want cards to cost as much as possible because you feel elite by owning them...lol
> 
> Or at least that's how your posts come off to me.
> 
> I bought the first Titan because I can afford $1k card if I want one. I still felt stupid because of the silliness of what I was basically doing. I don't mind there being a gap between segments of graphics cards. But like some that gets smug as the price goes up, I am not. Especially when i know how Nvidia changed the position of the goal posts and now we get so much less for our money.


Lol, ok, first, if I wanted a high-priced gpu in order to feel elite, I would have kept my Titan Xs, which, I got rid of because I thought that the 980Tis were the better deal. second, I am rocking a $1000 cpu, why would I cheap out on ANYTHING else in my build?


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I guess I know what the chip is, used to cost and why price doesn't need to go up for that performance. I think you know it to, but justify it because you want to upgrade. I want to upgrade to 1080, I just can't justify the price to myself. I will be getting Polaris or Vega just because we need to level the playing field a bit. I need an upgrade fix, but I just can't support Nvidia's tactics this round. They really are turning into Apple (which isn't a bad thing for profit), but I don't buy Apple products either.


Oh it doesn't need to go up that much at all unless you're the CEO of Nvidia or a major stockholder









Regarding the upgrade, I'm honestly thinking of just going with two cheap 1070s. Would be a sidegrade going 980 Ti -> 1070 (assuming same perf after OC) but I'm starting to feel the same way of not wanting to get my titties milked by Nvidia.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Lol, ok, first, if I wanted a high-priced gpu in order to feel elite, I would have kept my Titan Xs, which, I got rid of because I thought that the 980Tis were the better deal. second, I am rocking a $1000 cpu, why would I cheap out on ANYTHING else in my build?


I am just telling you how you come off. You don't have to prove anything to me.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I am just telling you how you come off. You don't have to prove anything to me.


What, because I don't throw a tantrum on the www because I don't like the price of a particular product? to be honest, the guys that do that sound like spoiled, privileged children., just being honest...







reading it in every thread about gpu/cpus give me an ice cream type headache...like poking ice picks through my eyes..you guys should have a sticky thread dedicated to complaints...







lastly, I don't care how I may come off, it's the internet, as long as I am not disrespecting anyone.....


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Notably the guy who 'leaked' this here also named Nordic Hardware as a site he has also provided with 'inside info'.


I have never communicated any information to Nordic Hardware - they sourced the info from my (defunct) website of their own accord.

In fact, I have not communicated information to any news sites - places like Nordic Hardware were competition to me, why would I supply them with info?


----------



## ValSidalv21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> That rumor originated on these forums... In fact, it was in this very thread...


I know, that's why I posted it here and said... "looks like Guru3D were reading this thread"


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I have never communicated any information to Nordic Hardware - they sourced the info from my (defunct) website of their own accord.
> 
> In fact, I have not communicated information to any news sites - places like Nordic Hardware were competition to me, why would I supply them with info?


Tomato, tomato.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> What, because I don't throw a tantrum on the www because I don't like the price of a particular product? to be honest, the guys that do that sound like spoiled, privileged children., just being honest...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reading it in every thread about gpu/cpus give me an ice cream type headache...like poking ice picks through my eyes..you guys should have a sticky thread dedicated to complaints...


That's a fair criticism. But my stance is more on the consumer side and your is that of a....







Since I don't worship Nvidia I am sure that annoys you as well? But anyway, I don't care what you buy, just quit acting like I don't have a right to criticize this product you happen to have so much interest in getting.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Tomato, tomato.


My point is I do not know where Nordic Hardware got their info. Is it this thread? Maybe. Is it one of their own sources? Maybe. Normally when info is sourced from another site, the original site is listed as a source at the bottom of the article. If an article doesn't list a source, it is one of their own private sources. I can't say more than that as I know as much as the rest of you where they got the info.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> That's a fair criticism. But my stance is more on the consumer side and your is that of a....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since I don't worship Nvidia I am sure that annoys you as well? But anyway, I don't care what you buy, just quit acting like I don't have a right to criticize this product you happen to have so much interest in getting.


I feel like GPU prices should be judged by those that do not have a job lol. Once you make a living $1000 for a GPU is nothing if its a hobby.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I feel like GPU prices should be judged by those that do not have a job lol. Once you make a living $1000 for a GPU is nothing if its a hobby.


LOL.. okay. But if they don't have a job the last thing they should be worried about is a gpu!


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> That's a fair criticism. But my stance is more on the consumer side and your is that of a....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since I don't worship Nvidia I am sure that annoys you as well? But anyway, I don't care what you buy, just quit acting like I don't have a right to criticize this product you happen to have so much interest in getting.


Get your criticism on champ, more power to you, get it off of your chest....oh, and, keep your head up, it'll get better....


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> LOL.. okay. But if they don't have a job the last thing they should be worried about is a gpu!


Yes but I had most fun buying GPU saving money when I was a student lol. Yes buying HD 4850 for $189 was amazing. What I mean buy a Job is once you are a family man. Part time still not enough for you to blow 1K in GPUs.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I have never communicated any information to Nordic Hardware - they sourced the info from my (defunct) website of their own accord.
> 
> In fact, I have not communicated information to any news sites - places like Nordic Hardware were competition to me, why would I supply them with info?


How exactly does one obtain new and relevant information from a defunct website?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> How exactly does one obtain new and relevant information from a defunct website?


You don't. These days I post exclusively on various forums. As FlyingSuicide.net was my baby I still consider other news sites to be competition.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I have never communicated any information to Nordic Hardware - they sourced the info from my (defunct) website of their own accord.
> 
> In fact, I have not communicated information to any news sites - places like Nordic Hardware were competition to me, why would I supply them with info?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How exactly does one obtain new and relevant information from a defunct website?
Click to expand...

It certainly give you an idea on the reliability of the "leaks"


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> It certainly give you an idea on the reliability of the "leaks"


Lol...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Funny story, my buddy called me last night and asked what I thought about Nvidia's new graphics card (1080). I said it look pretty good, but I wasn't happy about the price. His response, "Really? It is as fast as 980 SLI and cheaper than the Titan X." I just laughed... I mean how do you even counter that thinking?


Since he's your buddy, just tell him about the 1070. But if it was me, I'd ask if he was cool paying $200K for a Corolla in 2016.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Tomato, tomato.


Potato potato.


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> How exactly does one obtain new and relevant information from a *defunct* website?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You don't. These days I post exclusively on various forums. As Flying*Suicide*.net was my baby I still consider other news sites to be competition.


----------



## NABBO

Batman Arkahm Knight 2560x1440



980ti = 84fps AVG = +42% 1080 119fps
980ti = 87fps AVG = +35% 1080 117fps


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Funny story, my buddy called me last night and asked what I thought about Nvidia's new graphics card (1080). I said it look pretty good, but I wasn't happy about the price. His response, "Really? It is as fast as 980 SLI and cheaper than the Titan X." I just laughed... I mean how do you even counter that thinking?


It is the lack of "thinking" that needs to be countered








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NABBO*
> 
> 980ti = 84fps AVG = +42% 1080 119fps
> 980ti = 87fps AVG = +35% 1080 117fps


Impressive if true but the minimum frames are discouraging...


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> It is the lack of "thinking" that needs to be countered
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Impressive if true but the minimum frames are discouraging...


----------



## Dr Mad

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NABBO*
> 
> Batman Arkahm Knight 2560x1440
> 
> 
> 
> 980ti = 84fps AVG = +42% 1080 119fps
> 980ti = 87fps AVG = +35% 1080 117fps


I get 81fps AVG with one 980ti at 1290/1750, everything maxxed. If this is true and the 1080 running at ~1730 (normal boost), then it could be interesting.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> It is the lack of "thinking" that needs to be countered


Education reform


----------



## chuy409

Dont know if i should jump to the 1080. It will be a good 60-70% faster than my 980. But if i jump, i will get the ti treatment again. I should probably hold out till big daddy pascal.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chuy409*
> 
> Dont know if i should jump to the 1080. It will be a good 60-70% faster than my 980. But if i jump, i will get the ti treatment again. I should probably hold out till big daddy pascal.


You're in the wrong thread, this one has nothing to do with the 1080 or Pascal any more.


----------



## dieanotherday

2 980's, didn't we already achieve that performance by OCing a 980 ti?


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*
> 
> 2 980's, didn't we already achieve that performance by OCing a 980 ti?


980ti is more like 2x 970's in games and a little slower than 2x 970's in benchmarks. I'm not sure how much that changes when overclocking but the 970 and 980 over clock pretty darn well so any difference would be offset.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Polaris 10 just got pushed back to October.


I'm wondering why you decided to post your supersecret bombshell leak about Polaris 10 getting delayed in the 1080 benchmarks thread? Why not, oh I don't know, in the Polaris thread?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I'm wondering why you decided to post your supersecret bombshell leak about Polaris 10 getting delayed in the 1080 benchmarks thread? Why not, oh I don't know, in the Polaris thread?


Probably confused since at least half the posts in this thread are about AMD in one form or another.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NABBO*
> 
> Batman Arkahm Knight 2560x1440
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 980ti = 84fps AVG = +42% 1080 119fps
> 980ti = 87fps AVG = +35% 1080 117fps






Came from this I suppose... thought you all had seen it

The low fps might just be like the ones you get when trying heaven benchmark?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Probably confused since at least half the posts in this thread are about AMD in one form or another.


It was a rhetorical question. I know exactly why he posted that particular information in an Nvidia thread.


----------



## BlitzWulf

From a reddit poster an hour ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4j16sc/rumour_polaris_validation_failed_might_launch_in/d32uwx7

Quote:


> I just finished listening/watching the quarterly stock market investors presentation from AMD. Basically, Lisa addresses her shareholder's with some information on how business is doing. During the presentation she stated that Polaris is still on track for it's original release date. I'd imagine this is the most current and up to date information, available only within the last 10 minutes.


Quote:


> Pretty vague on most topics really. To clarify a little, she actually said, "Polaris is still on track to be in the market this summer." I personally was hoping for spring, but still, kinda vague in her wording. She didn't delve too deeply into any one topic, as she was discussing semi custom, CPU's, and joint ventures as well.


seems it was an investors only stream


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlitzWulf*
> 
> From a reddit poster an hour ago
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4j16sc/rumour_polaris_validation_failed_might_launch_in/d32uwx7
> 
> seems it was an investors only stream


Well, if true, the most important thing here is that October is not a summer month in the northern hemisphere so Polaris doesn't appear to be delayed. Unless... AMD is using southern hemisphere trickery to distort the truth and mislead us as they always do! For shame Lisa!

Disclaimer: that last bit was definitely sarcastic in case /s detector is broken.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Came from this I suppose... thought you all had seen it
> 
> The low fps might just be like the ones you get when trying heaven benchmark?


how many times that video will get debunked ? its a fake we all know it


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> Are you referring to the Doom video? If so, they uncapped the frame rate at 1:47.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueRjbYdcXbs


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Owned


Why would i of been referring to that? Owned? Come on... keep up.

This is what I'm referring to, they were gushing over the temps on stock cooling @ 2.1Ghz, but failed to notice NV conveniently had Vsync on, which makes the results useless. As i said, even my 390X OC can sit in the 60's with a 60fps cap.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Extremely disappointed that there are no new 3DMark benchies found, overclock or stock, or even GPU-Z screenshots


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I'm wondering why you decided to post your supersecret bombshell leak about Polaris 10 getting delayed in the 1080 benchmarks thread? Why not, oh I don't know, in the Polaris thread?


Polaris somehow became the subject here, probably because there's nothing more to discuss about Pascal at this moment in time. I was already active in this thread, as you can clearly see I'm not very active on OCN. Seeing Polaris as part of the topic here I put the info here, thats all there is to it. Stop trying to look for things that aren't there.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Extremely disappointed that there are no new 3DMark benchies found, overclock or stock, or even GPU-Z screenshots


Theres an embargo. I can't say anything more than that 2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Why would i of been referring to that? Owned? Come on... keep up.
> 
> This is what I'm referring to, they were gushing over the temps on stock cooling @ 2.1Ghz, but failed to notice NV conveniently had Vsync on, which makes the results useless. As i said, even my 390X OC can sit in the 60's with a 60fps cap.


The fact that it already runs 67C with VSync on doesn't instill confidence at all.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Why would i of been referring to that? Owned? Come on... keep up.
> 
> This is what I'm referring to, they were gushing over the temps on stock cooling @ 2.1Ghz, but failed to notice NV conveniently had Vsync on, which makes the results useless. As i said, even my 390X OC can sit in the 60's with a 60fps cap.


If the card wasn't being stressed the clocks would have dropped, right? I thought they were running a rendering demo so FPS was irrelevant.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> The low fps might just be like the ones you get when trying heaven benchmark?


Or a fake benchmark running SLI...


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Theres an embargo. I can't say anything more than that 2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records.


I was more talking about users that doesnt give a damn about NDA. Or users that gotten hold of a card from a retailer.

2-SLI beating 4-SLI in games or benchmarks?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> If the card wasn't being stressed the clocks would have dropped, right? I thought they were running a rendering demo so FPS was irrelevant.


Depends on whether they killed boost. I can bios mod my card to run full 3D clocks as soon as any load is put on it.


----------



## iLeakStuff

GTX 1080 have GPU Boost 3.0
We dont know the details of it yet


----------



## iLeakStuff

Interesting overclock on the GDDR5X btw. 5650MHz








Also looks like a 2GHz cap although that will be overcome with vbios mod


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Theres an embargo. I can't say anything more than that 2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records.


Yeah, sure..









A 1080 that's 10-20% faster than a 980 Ti is somehow curb stomping 4 of them, just in SLI? Lol, credibility = 0.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> If the card wasn't being stressed the clocks would have dropped, right? I thought they were running a rendering demo so FPS was irrelevant.


Not necessarily no, but i haven't owned any of the recent NV cards so i don't know. My point was that none of them bothered to question it, which is why i said they've become nothing more than advertisers.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Yeah, sure..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A 1080 that's 10-20% faster than a 980 Ti is somehow curb stomping 4 of them, just in SLI? Lol, credibility = 0.
> Not necessarily no, but i haven't owned any of the recent NV cards so i don't know. My point was that none of them bothered to question it, which is why i said they've become nothing more than advertisers.


GTX 1080 can reach overclocks that Maxwell couldn't even dream of. The frequencies are going to make you laugh.


----------



## SuperZan

Doesn't the architecture require those clockspeeds though? From the details I've seen Pascal SM's are designed differently from Maxwell's, so clock to clock is not equivalent. Depending on how much faster the stock 1080 is over an overclocked 980 Ti it would take some astronomical clockspeeds for 1080 SLI to beat out 4x OC'd 980 Ti, wouldn't it?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> GTX 1080 can reach overclocks that Maxwell couldn't even dream of. The frequencies are going to make you laugh.


i dont know what record can this be? we still have big problems with 2 way cards let alone 3 or 4 99% of the time nothing really works well so braking a record of something irrelevant really doesnt matter especially if the record has anything with gameworks on it


----------



## SuperZan

I'm just curious as to the raw maths of it. If the diagrams we've seen are correct then Pascal already relies heavily on very high clocks for performance. To beat 4x OC'd 980 Ti's in a benchmark like Fire Strike you'd need significant headroom and very good scaling.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Interesting overclock on the GDDR5X btw. 5650MHz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also looks like a 2GHz cap although that will be overcome with vbios mod


According to Jayz2cents Nvidia didn't put any effort in to the overclock they showed, the 1080 is so impressive that they overclocked it just 10 minutes before the show. If that's true then how did they exceed the 2Ghz cap? Lol, i'm reserving all hype until we see this thing for ourselves..


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> According to Jayz2cents Nvidia didn't put any effort in to the overclock they showed, the 1080 is so impressive that they overclocked it just 10 minutes before the show. If that's true then how did they exceed the 2Ghz cap? Lol, i'm reserving all hype until we see this thing for ourselves..


How would Jayz2cents know whether they cherry picked the GPU or not? He's just a mouth piece of Nvidia.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> According to Jayz2cents Nvidia didn't put any effort in to the overclock they showed, the 1080 is so impressive that they overclocked it just 10 minutes before the show. If that's true then how did they exceed the 2Ghz cap? Lol, i'm reserving all hype until we see this thing for ourselves..


I'm sure the company that makes the damn card has zero issues exceeding their imposed frequency cap. Since you know, they made it and they put the cap in place.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Depends on whether they killed boost. I can bios mod my card to run full 3D clocks as soon as any load is put on it.


If that's the mental approach we should take when looking at this data then maybe we should be questioning if it was even a GTX 1080 they were demoing. Do we even know if it was a video card? How do we know it wasn't just a prerendered scene with a fake overlay. Since I wasn't there, how can I even be sure that it really happened. Any press members who were there are on Nvidias payroll so we have no way of knowing if it really happened or if it was another moon landing....


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I'm sure the company that makes the damn card has zero issues exceeding their imposed frequency cap. Since you know, they made it and they put the cap in place.


Obviously.. Lol. I was being sarcastic, it was implied that the 1080 will far exceed 2.1Ghz because this only took them 5 minutes to do and they "did nothing special to achieve it", and they "just picked a random card, nothing special".. But exceeding the cap implies that they actually did put effort/thought into it. Capping the framerate to also keep temps down.

I'm not even talking about Nvidia here, I'm annoyed with the media for just repeating/selling whatever AMD/NV tell them to, there's very few that are taking an objective view/ putting consumers before their advertising revenue. I have no issue with companies wanting to put their best foot forward, i take issue with the sad state of journalism these days..


----------



## Forceman

You're assuming there is actually some kind of cap, and that the screenshot of whatever tool that is wasn't just an older version that doesn't go above 2000. They used Precision X in the demo, maybe it goes over 2000.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> GTX 1080 can reach overclocks that Maxwell couldn't even dream of. The frequencies are going to make you laugh.


Well 1080's stock boost of 1.73 GHz is already beyond the air/water realm of Maxwell, so the statement really doesn't mean all that much tbh.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> If that's the mental approach we should take when looking at this data then maybe we should be questioning if it was even a GTX 1080 they were demoing. Do we even know if it was a video card? How do we know it wasn't just a prerendered scene with a fake overlay. Since I wasn't there, how can I even be sure that it really happened. Any press members who were there are on Nvidias payroll so we have no way of knowing if it really happened or if it was another moon landing....


Jeez take a chill pill man, I was simply answering your question and pointing out if that was a game demo, then 67C with VSync on is nothing to be proud of.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Actually I retract that, specifically because of the reason said to me I can say that there won't be any new GPUs until October.


I know apple are waiting for new GPUs for the 2016 new macs. I wonder the implications of that.


----------



## DeathMade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Yeah, sure..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A 1080 that's 10-20% faster than a 980 Ti is somehow curb stomping 4 of them, just in SLI? Lol, credibility = 0.
> Not necessarily no, but i haven't owned any of the recent NV cards so i don't know. My point was that none of them bothered to question it, which is why i said they've become nothing more than advertisers.


Exactly my thought. You would need to have the 1080s to be 60% faster than 4x980TI stock.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You're assuming there is actually some kind of cap, and that the screenshot of whatever tool that is wasn't just an older version that doesn't go above 2000. They used Precision X in the demo, maybe it goes over 2000.


It looks pretty obvious that there's a cap. Obviously all assumptions.

I've become extremely cynical after all the garbage that has been peddled, all the false advertising these companies put on their packaging and never get called out for it except by us on forums. I'll stop being a wet blanket now..







I just can't watch content without feeling like they're always over-hyping/selling me on what company x told them to say, while never taking a step back. The fact that the media is literally dependent on having a good relationship with these companies to get sent products, or they will lose out to the others that conform speaks volumes. Without Youtubers/media outlets separating their advertising from their reviews creates a massive conflict of interest, and also means the company with the most money will always come out on top..

Calling $700 GPU's a bargain is ridiculous, but i digress..


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well 1080's stock boost of 1.73 GHz is already beyond the air/water realm of Maxwell, so the statement really doesn't mean all that much tbh.


I have to bite my tongue so hard right now because I'm not allowed to say much, but 1.73 GHz is NOTHING.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathMade*
> 
> Exactly my thought. You would need to have the 1080s to be 60% faster than 4x980TI stock.


Not so. The GTX 1080 has overclocking headroom like we hardly ever see (whether you look at it in frequency or percentage over stock).


----------



## GosuPl

Hi everyone







I have a question, about what do You think.
I have already 2x TITAN X SLI setup, oced to 1400/7600 and can have 3rd TX for , just cheap money (about 360$)









I play all games on 1440p/144hz with G-Sync and sometimes with 4k DSR (since NV drivers allow DSR + G-SYNC + SLI).

Performance are great and on 4k, vram usage can jump even for 9+ gb (sick!). So i thinking about GTX 1080.

I think, max performance boost is 20/25% faster than TX (stock vs stock). But, only 2 WAY SLI support, and only 8gb vram is not good deal for me.

Anyway, go for SLI 1080 and wait for new TITAN? Or just screw it, but 3rd TX for funny price and then, when prices stabilzed (now ppls are mad and sell GPUs for very low prices) just sell them for better money, than i can do that today.

I dont think, GTX 980T and TX prcies is go damnnn low after GTX 1080 relase and tests in games. Tx have still 4gb vram more and can connect with 3/4 WAY SLI.

Thanks for reply, and sorry for my not perfect english, but i think, you understand


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm just curious as to the raw maths of it. If the diagrams we've seen are correct then Pascal already relies heavily on very high clocks for performance. To beat 4x OC'd 980 Ti's in a benchmark like Fire Strike you'd need significant headroom and very good scaling.


Here's the Fire Strike world record for 4 GPUs, 1955MHz core clocks, 46,021 score, LN2

http://hwbot.org/submission/3183384_kingpin_3dmark___fire_strike_4x_geforce_gtx_980_ti_46021_marks


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> It looks pretty obvious that there's a cap. Obviously all assumptions.


Maybe we are talking about different things. They demoed a card running above 2.0, so there doesn't seem to be a hard cap at 2.0. The Firestorm screenshot showing a 2.0 limit is not evidence of a card cap, it could merely be a limit of that version of that program.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I have to bite my tongue so hard right now because I'm not allowed to say much, but 1.73 GHz is NOTHING.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Not so. The GTX 1080 has overclocking headroom like we hardly ever see (whether you look at it in frequency or percentage over stock).


I'll believe a 50% OC when I see it. Until then there's just no way you're convincing me sorry.









edit: Talking about air/water of course. If you're talking about LN2 clocks well don't even go there.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Maybe we are talking about different things. They demoed a card running above 2.0, so there doesn't seem to be a hard cap at 2.0. The Firestorm screenshot showing a 2.0 limit is not evidence of a card cap, it could merely be a limit of that version of that program.


and how do you know its not capped for marketing reasons?


----------



## y2kcamaross

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> and how do you know its not capped for marketing reasons?


Why would firestorm post a screenshot of a 2.0 max cap for marketing reason? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. That version of firestorm has been available since 2015...obviously no card could hit above 2ghz at that time, and that's probably why the artificial cap is there, if it even is a cap, it might just be the most that will report on their program at the time.


----------



## Asus11

I think 2.4ghz on these 1080s will be the 1500 on 980 ti

imo..

could be less but thats what ive calculated compared to the percent 980ti overclocks from standard clocks

so hitting 2.4ghz would be like rare like hitting 1,5ghz

most wont be able to reach it and probs will have to settle for 2.3ghz

who knows..

just guessing


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Not so. The GTX 1080 has overclocking headroom like we hardly ever see (whether you look at it in frequency or percentage over stock).


It better because, clock for clock, GM200 would smoke it....


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I'll believe a 50% OC when I see it. Until then there's just no way you're convincing me sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: Talking about air/water of course. If you're talking about LN2 clocks well don't even go there.


I thought we all benched like this.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *y2kcamaross*
> 
> Why woulld firestorm post a screenshot of a 2.0 max cap for marketing reason? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever


its simple micron stated effective 11/12gb/s that rougly means 2.3/2.4 ghz if they had lets say a 2.1/2.2 on them what "room" the aib's will have to play with with?


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Not so. The GTX 1080 has overclocking headroom like we hardly ever see (whether you look at it in frequency or percentage over stock).


If we're looking at percentage over stock then it has around the same headroom as Maxwell does, unless Nvidia (like was implied by the Youtubers I'm talking about) held back the overclock they showed us. Which i highly doubt.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Maybe we are talking about different things. They demoed a card running above 2.0, so there doesn't seem to be a hard cap at 2.0. The Firestorm screenshot showing a 2.0 limit is not evidence of a card cap, it could merely be a limit of that version of that program.


The cap I'm talking about is the fps, not the frequency.

The frequency bit was a bad attempt at sarcasm from me.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I'll believe a 50% OC when I see it. Until then there's just no way you're convincing me sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: Talking about air/water of course. If you're talking about LN2 clocks well don't even go there.


I believe he is. I heard mention (it may have been him) that Pascal can(should) reach close to 3GHz on LN2.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I'll believe a 50% OC when I see it. Until then there's just no way you're convincing me sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: Talking about air/water of course. If you're talking about LN2 clocks well don't even go there.


I am talking about LN2 as I said... Jeez, this thread has progressed fast, probably 100 pages ago? Considering I'm talking about records and records aren't often set on anything other than LN2...

Whether you want me to go there or not, we haven't had a case where two cards from one generation take the record from four cards from the previous generation.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I thought we all benched like this.


Well if I was still in CA the country I probably could do that during winter months.


----------



## dieanotherday

not expert but should true limit for these transistors be around 4-5ghs like normal cpus


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dieanotherday*
> 
> not expert but should true limit for these transistors be around 4-5ghs like normal cpus


That's a bit optimistic


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> The cap I'm talking about is the fps, not the frequency.
> 
> The frequency bit was a bad attempt at sarcasm from me.


It is entirely possible that whatever software they were running that unreal engine demo on has it's own output limit, might even be based on whatever screen it is hooked up to. I have no idea what software they were using but it is equally if not more plausible that the software was the limiter, not some type of vsync or frame cap from nvidia.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> I think 2.4ghz on these 1080s will be the 1500 on 980 ti
> 
> imo..
> 
> could be less but thats what ive calculated compared to the percent 980ti overclocks from standard clocks
> 
> so hitting 2.4ghz would be like rare like hitting 1,5ghz
> 
> most wont be able to reach it and probs will have to settle for 2.3ghz
> 
> who knows..
> 
> just guessing


1.5 on a 980Ti would be like stock for a 1080, from what I heard....


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well if I was still in CA the country I probably could do that during winter months.


I definitely wasn't wearing a similar outfit with all of the windows open this past winter for Novice Nimble 8. That would be crazy!









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I believe he is. I heard mention (it may have been him) that Pascal can(should) reach close to 3GHz on LN2.


If so we may indeed see some watercooled 1080's at 2.5GHz. If nothing else it's going to look funny on bench rankings.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I am talking about LN2 as I said... Jeez, this thread has progressed fast, probably 100 pages ago? Considering I'm talking about records and records aren't often set on anything other than LN2...
> 
> Whether you want me to go there or not, we haven't had a case where two cards from one generation take the record from four cards from the previous generation.


So you were talking about LN2 clocks. Yes I saw your "records" post, but since you responded to Gorilla's post I thought you were talking about non-LN2 clocks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I definitely wasn't wearing a similar outfit with all of the windows open this past winter for Novice Nimble 8. That would be crazy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If so we may indeed see some watercooled 1080's at 2.5GHz. If nothing else it's going to look funny on bench rankings.


Well Maxwell is hampered by the fact it doesn't voltage scale at all on air/water, so if Pascal does voltage scale without extreme cooling, that's already a huge leg up it has on Maxwell.


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 1.5 on a 980Ti would be like stock for a 1080, from what I heard....


Try it for yourself first, i think the guy above is almost right this card is little more the 980 ti (maybe), nothing else..
Don't be fooled by numbers of clocks... this doesn't mean anything, just numbers.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Theres an embargo. I can't say anything more than that 2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I'll believe a 50% OC when I see it. Until then there's just no way you're convincing me sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: Talking about air/water of course. If you're talking about LN2 clocks well don't even go there.


He said 980Ti records, and it's a pretty fair bet that the record isn't going to be air or water.

I posted the 980Ti record for Fire Strike, since it had been previously mentioned and is a common benchmark
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Here's the Fire Strike world record for 4 GPUs, 1955MHz core clocks, 46,021 score, LN2
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3183384_kingpin_3dmark___fire_strike_4x_geforce_gtx_980_ti_46021_marks


Seems to me that somebody posting a Fire Strike score higher than 46,021 on two 1080s would seal the deal. I'm not real good at searching the HWBOT site, I don't see an outright GPU speed listed, there is one for outright CPU speed. Searching the record scores for each benchmark generally yields 4X GPU results, I would think a single GPU might OC better.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> Try it for yourself first, i think the guy above is almost right this card is little more the 980 ti (maybe), nothing else..
> Don't be fooled by numbers of clocks... this doesn't mean anything, just numbers.


Huh? and, what I should have said was a 1.55G 980Ti would be close to a stock 1080, in Firestrike anyways...but, 1080 OCs like a beast, should hit 2.3+ on water..what's the average stable OC on the 980Ti, about 1.5G? wonder how many 8-pins the AIB cards will use?


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I am talking about LN2 as I said... Jeez, this thread has progressed fast, probably 100 pages ago? Considering I'm talking about records and records aren't often set on anything other than LN2...
> 
> Whether you want me to go there or not, we haven't had a case where two cards from one generation take the record from four cards from the previous generation.


So you have secret sources with regards to Polaris being delayed, and you somehow know that 2 1080's can somehow crush 4-way 980 Ti record holders? Impressive, you seem to be very well connected. Well tell us what clocks they were running at, we can use some simple math to use the theoretical limits of both Maxwell GM200 and Pascal GP104 to see if your clock speeds line up with reality.

But i have a feeling 2 1080's wouldn't get anywhere close to 4 980 Ti's running at nearly 2Ghz..


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Huh? and, what I should have said was a 1.55G 980Ti would be close to a stock 1080, in Firestrike anyways...but, 1080 OCs like a beast, should hit 2.3+ on water..what's the average stable OC on the 980Ti, about 1.5G?


Pretty much every 980 Ti can hit 1500 on water. So yeah going by pure percentages, that means 1080 would reach around 2350 on water.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Seems to me that somebody posting a Fire Strike score higher than 46,021 on two 1080s would seal the deal. I'm not real good at searching the HWBOT site, I don't see an outright GPU speed listed, there is one for outright CPU speed. Searching the record scores for each benchmark generally yields 4X GPU results, I would think a single GPU might OC better.


IMO the number to beat there is 84,336, the graphics score. Granted they'd probably use a 5960x for the comparison bench but best to leave that out of the equation I think.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> If we're looking at percentage over stock then it has around the same headroom as Maxwell does, unless Nvidia (like was implied by the Youtubers I'm talking about) held back the overclock they showed us. Which i highly doubt.
> The cap I'm talking about is the fps, not the frequency.
> 
> The frequency bit was a bad attempt at sarcasm from me.


Okay, I figured we were talking past each other.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Pretty much every 980 Ti can hit 1500 on water. So yeah going by pure percentages, that means 1080 would reach around 2350 on water.


Sounds about right...I was thinking maybe an 30% OC on air...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I believe he is. I heard mention (it may have been him) that Pascal can(should) reach close to 3GHz on LN2.


Criminal from XS? How're you doing man? I hinted at a speed but I can't say more, maybe you're on the money, maybe not


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> But i have a feeling 2 1080's wouldn't get anywhere close to 4 980 Ti's running at nearly 2Ghz..


ALREADY beaten


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> ALREADY beaten


on 3dmark you mean?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> on 3dmark you mean?


Yes.


----------



## 364901

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Yes.


I am very much excite to find out who has those scores.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 1.5 on a 980Ti would be like stock for a 1080, from what I heard....


was not comparing actual speed but how far each would oc

as in 1500 on a 980 ti is a clock everyone shoots for

for example 2.4hz on pascal would be like getting 1500 on the 980 ti

if it makes sense


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I am very much excite to find out who has those scores.


I don't for a second believe you don't know who, what cards, what frequencies and what scores


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> was not comparing actual speed but how far each would oc
> 
> as in 1500 on a 980 ti is a clock everyone shoots for
> 
> for example 2.4hz on pascal would be like getting 1500 on the 980 ti
> 
> if it makes sense


OK, gotcha now...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> IMO the number to beat there is 84,336, the graphics score. Granted they'd probably use a 5960x for the comparison bench but best to leave that out of the equation I think.


Yeah, wasn't sure how HWBOT ranked it - the gross score was the way it was ranked under GPU Benchmarks, but I agree the graphics score would be a better way to judge it vs the 1080.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> ALREADY beaten


As a guy who neither runs a site or is connected to any Nvidia partners, what is stopping you from posting scores? Nvidia wont find out who just out of a screenshot


----------



## 364901

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> As a guy who neither runs a site or is connected to any Nvidia partners, what is stopping you from posting scores? Nvidia wont find out who just out of a screenshot


They're likely have been run with the computer taken offline so it doesn't link to the database or make an entry with the licensee's name.

I mean, NDA and all. PR people have this magical way of finding out if you've broken it really, really quickly.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> They're likely have been run with the computer taken offline so it doesn't link to the database or make an entry with the licensee's name.
> 
> I mean, NDA and all. PR people have this magical way of finding out if you've broken it really, really quickly.


Example:
You have a GTX 1080 and are under NDA.

You scored 30 000 in 3DMark11 and run offline. You cut and paste the total score, graphic score etc, but leave out the rest (CPU, motherboard, RAM etc). How are Nvidia able to trace that to a specific user when its not in 3DMarks database?

Even GPU-Z screenshot of live clocks (like overclock) are impossible to trace anywhere.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Example:
> You have a GTX 1080 and are under NDA.
> 
> You scored 30 000 in 3DMark11 and run offline. You cut and paste the total score, graphic score etc, but leave out the rest (CPU, motherboard, RAM etc). How are Nvidia able to trace that to a specific user when its not in 3DMarks database?
> 
> Even GPU-Z screenshot of live clocks are impossible to trace anywhere.


As NVIDIA you know who has had access to cards. From that small number you know who has the ability to do the run. You'll be down to a VERY small handful of people.


----------



## VSG

I'll take Vince Lucido for $100, Alex.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> ALREADY beaten


Using VERY basic/not very accurate math (already pushing myself), and the fact that Pascal is extremely similar to Maxwell, so we don't have to worry to much about all the other stuff that goes into it, we should be able to get a rough ballpark of the performance by doing something as simple as - cores * 2 * clockspeed.

That means for two 1080's to beat 4 980 Ti's @ 2Ghz, the 1080's would need to be running at close to/ have to exceed 4Ghz.. Yeah, not buying this in the least.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Using VERY basic/not very accurate math (already pushing myself), and the fact that Pascal is extremely similar to Maxwell, so we don't have to worry to much about all the other stuff that goes into it, we should be able to get a rough ballpark of the performance by doing something as simple as - cores * 2 * clockspeed.
> 
> That means for two 1080's to beat 4 980 Ti's @ 2Ghz, the 1080's would need to be running at close to/exceed 4Ghz.. Yeah, not buying this in the least.


Don't forget that 3 and 4 way scaling isn't great, certainly not linear. And supposedly the 1080 has improved scaling, so that would close the gap some also.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> As NVIDIA you know who has had access to cards. From that small number you know who has the ability to do the run. You'll be down to a VERY small handful of people.


Pretty certain there are a lot of reviewers that have their cards now. Ive seen everything to famous tech sites to mexican and colombian reviewers with previews holding the cards etc.
Are they gonna call everyone around the world and ask who leaked?


----------



## fnZx

Polaris pushed back that far? After Lisa says today it's on track for the summer? Something doesn't add up.

Perhaps AMD suspects your source, and fed him this story to flush him out, a la The Departed


----------



## fnZx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> As NVIDIA you know who has had access to cards. From that small number you know who has the ability to do the run. You'll be down to a VERY small handful of people.


You've already given Nvidia that information by posting it here. The proof won't change that.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Don't forget that 3 and 4 way scaling isn't great, certainly not linear. And supposedly the 1080 has improved scaling, so that would close the gap some also.


Very true...but still, lol. No chance. Using the same logic of SLI scalling, would mean that a single 1080 should be able to get close to two 980 Ti's @ nearly 2Ghz.. If that were true I'm sure NV would of had a full LN2 booth set up.









He won't give us clock speeds or any proof at all.. What's he got to lose?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Pretty certain there are a lot of reviewers that have their cards now. Ive seen everything to famous tech sites to mexican and colombian reviewers with previews holding the cards etc.
> Are they gonna call everyone around the world and ask who leaked?


If you send out cars to several magazines to review and one of them posts and overall world record on the Nurburgring you're going to figure out who it is as there aren't many drivers capable of doing so.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fnZx*
> 
> Polaris pushed back that far? After Lisa says today it's on track for the summer? Something doesn't add up.
> 
> Perhaps AMD suspects your source, and fed him this story to flush him out, a la The Departed


Hahahaha very possible. I have one source that I hold very close and will protect, the info from that person will not make it to any of these threads. The rest don't care as the info can't be traced to them specifically.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Very true...but still, lol. No chance. Using the same logic of SLI scalling, would mean that a single 1080 should be able to get close to two 980 Ti's.. If that were true I'm sure NV would of had a full LN2 booth set up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He won't give us clock speeds or any proof at all.. What's he got to lose?


You are still assuming that 4 way SLI is the same as 4 x 980 Ti score. If instead, 4-way SLI gives you the same score as 3 x 980 Ti (because scaling isn't perfect), each 1080 would only have to be 1.5x the 980 Ti. Which would be feasible, at least.

Edit: Quad 980 Ti scores 30-35K on FSE, and a single 980 Ti scores 13-14K. So 4 way is barely faster than 2.5x a 980 Ti. If 1080 SLI scaling is 90% at 2-way, it wouldn't be hard to beat a quad score.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If you send out cars to several magazines to review and one of them posts and overall world record on the Nurburgring you're going to figure out who it is as there aren't many drivers capable of doing so.
> Hahahaha very possible. I have one source that I hold very close and will protect, the info from that person will not make it to any of these threads. The rest don't care as the info can't be traced to them specifically.


How can Nvidia find out who mod the driver or changed the vbios?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Very true...but still, lol. No chance. Using the same logic of SLI scalling, would mean that a single 1080 should be able to get close to two 980 Ti's @ nearly 2Ghz.. If that were true I'm sure NV would of had a full LN2 booth set up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He won't give us clock speeds or any proof at all.. What's he got to lose?


Just following along, best 2x 980 Ti graphics score is 55,495 whilst 4x is 84,336. That should help with the scaling bit of the maths.

http://hwbot.org/submission/3183384_kingpin_3dmark___fire_strike_4x_geforce_gtx_980_ti_46021_marks

http://hwbot.org/submission/3125153_steponz_3dmark___fire_strike_2x_geforce_gtx_980_ti_37562_marks


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Very true...but still, lol. No chance. Using the same logic of SLI scalling, would mean that a single 1080 should be able to get close to two 980 Ti's @ nearly 2Ghz.. If that were true I'm sure NV would of had a full LN2 booth set up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He won't give us clock speeds or any proof at all.. What's he got to lose?


Two card scaling is pretty good, three card scaling not so good, four card scaling pretty average. One GTX 1080 won't beat two GTX 980 TIs, two GTX 1080s will beat four GTX 980 TIs. SLI has also been damn near perfected with Pascal, scaling is better than it was previously.

As for what I have to lose, I will not post info that can cost people their jobs which proof most certainly can.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> How can Nvidia find out who mod the driver or changed the vbios?


If five magazines have drivers that are world famous for their lap times it won't take long to narrow it down to one.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You are still assuming that 4 way SLI is the same as 4 x 980 Ti score. If instead, 4-way SLI gives you the same score as 3 x 980 Ti (because scaling isn't perfect), each 1080 would only have to be 1.5x the 980 Ti. Which would be feasible, at least.
> 
> Edit: Quad 980 Ti scores 30-35K on FSE, and a single 980 Ti scores 13-14K. So 4 way is barely faster than 2.5x a 980 Ti. If 1080 SLI scaling is 90% at 2-way, it wouldn't be hard to beat a quad score.


Yeah I think you are on to something.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If five magazines have drivers that are world famous for their lap times it won't take long to narrow it down to one.


So can you say percentage wise how much faster the 1080 is than the 980Ti? Does it equal like 1.5x 980Ti's?


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You are still assuming that 4 way SLI is the same as 4 x 980 Ti score. If instead, 4-way SLI gives you the same score as 3 x 980 Ti (because scaling isn't perfect), each 1080 would only have to be 1.5x the 980 Ti. Which would be feasible, at least.
> 
> Edit: Quad 980 Ti scores 30-35K on FSE, and a single 980 Ti scores 13-14K. So 4 way is barely faster than 2.5x a 980 Ti. If 1080 SLI scaling is 90% at 2-way, it wouldn't be hard to beat a quad score.


To be fair, i did assume the same thing for the 1080's.

Let's ditch the 4th card completely then and drop the 980 Ti's speed from the record holder and.. We still have 1080's that would need to exceed 3.2Ghz in order to match them, not even break their record..

Lets also not forget that it's very likely Pascal is the same as Maxwell when it comes to overclocking, meaning it will get most of it's headroom on air (Nvidia showed us that Pascal has nearly identical headroom over it's boost as Maxwell does.). Water/LN2 doesn't give much in comparison. I mean come on, we're talking about 3Ghz here.. Wouldn't Nvidia have made a massive deal about that? This is busted as far as i'm concerned, no chance. Would be awesome if I'm wrong though, might make that $700 price less of an insult.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Just following along, best 2x 980 Ti graphics score is 55,495 whilst 4x is 84,336. That should help with the scaling bit of the maths.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3183384_kingpin_3dmark___fire_strike_4x_geforce_gtx_980_ti_46021_marks
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3125153_steponz_3dmark___fire_strike_2x_geforce_gtx_980_ti_37562_marks


Thanks. I wan't trying to be very scientific and i don't feel like wasting more time on this, it's completely implausible. But hey, would be great to see.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> To be fair, i did assume the same thing for the 1080's.
> 
> Let's ditch the 4th card completely then and drop the 980 Ti's speed from the record holder and.. We still have 1080's that would need to exceed 3.2Ghz in order to match them, not even break their record..
> 
> Lets also not forget that it's very likely Pascal is the same as Maxwell when it comes to overclocking, meaning it will get most of it's headroom on air (Nvidia showed us that Pascal has nearly identical headroom over it's boost as Maxwell does.). Water/LN2 doesn't give much in comparison. I mean come on, we're talking about 3Ghz here.. Wouldn't Nvidia have made a massive deal about that? This is busted as far as i'm concerned, no chance. Would be awesome if I'm wrong though, might make that $700 price less of an insult.
> Thanks. I wan't trying to be very scientific and i don't feel like wasting more time on this, it's completely implausible. But hey, would be great to see.


Please keep track of this post, I'll refer you back to it in about two weeks. Not to show I'm right, for a different reason altogether.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Please keep track of this post, I'll refer you back to it in about two weeks. Not to show I'm right, for a different reason altogether.


By all means, if (big fat if still as far as i'm concerned) this is true then i'll look at baby Pascal with different eyes. And seriously think AMD have no chance of competing with Nvidia for a very long time, if they even survive.


----------



## GosuPl

I repeat my post, cause he died on this very fast going ahead topic ;-)

"Hi everyone smile.gif I have a question, about what do You think.
I have already 2x TITAN X SLI setup, oced to 1400/7600 and can have 3rd TX for , just cheap money (about 360$)









I play all games on 1440p/144hz with G-Sync and sometimes with 4k DSR (since NV drivers allow DSR + G-SYNC + SLI).

Performance are great and on 4k, vram usage can jump even for 9+ gb (sick!). So i thinking about GTX 1080.

I think, max performance boost is 20/25% faster than TX (stock vs stock). But, only 2 WAY SLI support, and only 8gb vram is not good deal for me.

Anyway, go for SLI 1080 and wait for new TITAN? Or just screw it, but 3rd TX for funny price and then, when prices stabilzed (now ppls are mad and sell GPUs for very low prices) just sell them for better money, than i can do that today.

I dont think, GTX 980T and TX prices is go damnnn low after GTX 1080 relase and tests in games. Tx have still 4gb vram more and can connect with 3/4 WAY SLI.

Thanks for reply, and sorry for my not perfect english, but i think, you understand "


----------



## criminal

1080 is faster than 980 SLI correct?

One of the top 980 SLI scores:

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3424081

If 1080 has 90% scaling in SLI, we should see performance within 10% or less from a 980Ti 4 way.

That's pretty freaking amazing.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> how many times that video will get debunked ? its a fake we all know it


Was just referring to the screenshots the other dudes posted...


----------



## h2spartan

I'm interested in a matchup between an oc'ed Titan X vs a oc'ed 1080 in games. The benchmark performance doesn't necessarily translate to game performance in the same way. If a 1080 only gains maybe around 6fps extra then getting it is relatively pointless.

I have a titan X and not sure i should sell it to pick up 1080 when it releases. Maybe i should just wait for the next Titan or Volta.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Polaris somehow became the subject here, probably because there's nothing more to discuss about Pascal at this moment in time. I was already active in this thread, as you can clearly see I'm not very active on OCN. Seeing Polaris as part of the topic here I put the info here, thats all there is to it. Stop trying to look for things that aren't there.


Nice try but you also made the same claims in yet another Nvidia thread just before coming in this one to do so. It seems you expected quite the hero's welcome here in friendly territory, as it were...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GosuPl*
> 
> I repeat my post, cause he died on this very fast going ahead topic ;-)
> 
> "Hi everyone smile.gif I have a question, about what do You think.
> I have already 2x TITAN X SLI setup, oced to 1400/7600 and can have 3rd TX for , just cheap money (about 360$)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I play all games on 1440p/144hz with G-Sync and sometimes with 4k DSR (since NV drivers allow DSR + G-SYNC + SLI).
> 
> Performance are great and on 4k, vram usage can jump even for 9+ gb (sick!). So i thinking about GTX 1080.
> 
> I think, max performance boost is 20/25% faster than TX (stock vs stock). But, only 2 WAY SLI support, and only 8gb vram is not good deal for me.
> 
> Anyway, go for SLI 1080 and wait for new TITAN? Or just screw it, but 3rd TX for funny price and then, when prices stabilzed (now ppls are mad and sell GPUs for very low prices) just sell them for better money, than i can do that today.
> 
> I dont think, GTX 980T and TX prices is go damnnn low after GTX 1080 relase and tests in games. Tx have still 4gb vram more and can connect with 3/4 WAY SLI.
> 
> Thanks for reply, and sorry for my not perfect english, but i think, you understand "


I'd just use the Titan X's until big Pascal / Vega type GPU's show up. Those will likely ship on cards with tons of HBM2, making them the real upgrade for your use-case. I'm currently following my own advice with my Furries.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> 1080 is faster than 980 SLI correct?
> 
> One of the top 980 SLI scores:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3424081
> 
> If 1080 has 90% scaling in SLI, we should see performance within 10% or less from a 980Ti 4 way.
> 
> That's pretty freaking amazing.


Faster "in VR, when looking at a rendered cat at this angle while doing x,y and z.".. We'll have to wait and see if it's faster under real-world conditions.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GosuPl*
> 
> I repeat my post, cause he died on this very fast going ahead topic ;-)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> "Hi everyone smile.gif I have a question, about what do You think.
> I have already 2x TITAN X SLI setup, oced to 1400/7600 and can have 3rd TX for , just cheap money (about 360$)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I play all games on 1440p/144hz with G-Sync and sometimes with 4k DSR (since NV drivers allow DSR + G-SYNC + SLI).
> 
> Performance are great and on 4k, vram usage can jump even for 9+ gb (sick!). So i thinking about GTX 1080.
> 
> I think, max performance boost is 20/25% faster than TX (stock vs stock). But, only 2 WAY SLI support, and only 8gb vram is not good deal for me.
> 
> Anyway, go for SLI 1080 and wait for new TITAN? Or just screw it, but 3rd TX for funny price and then, when prices stabilzed (now ppls are mad and sell GPUs for very low prices) just sell them for better money, than i can do that today.
> 
> I dont think, GTX 980T and TX prices is go damnnn low after GTX 1080 relase and tests in games. Tx have still 4gb vram more and can connect with 3/4 WAY SLI.
> 
> Thanks for reply, and sorry for my not perfect english, but i think, you understand "


Right now you're on the big die cycle (meaning 780Ti, 980Ti,TX), I'd stay there if i were you, the real upgrade for your setup will be Big Pascal/Vega.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2spartan*
> 
> I'm interested in a matchup between an oc'ed Titan X vs a oc'ed 1080 in games. The benchmark performance doesn't necessarily translate to game performance in the same way. If a 1080 only gains maybe around 6fps extra then getting it is relatively pointless.
> 
> I have a titan X and not sure i should sell it to pick up 1080 when it releases. Maybe i should just wait for the next Titan or Volta.


8+ months wait or get 1080 on June.
$750+ or $600


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Not so. The GTX 1080 has overclocking headroom like we hardly ever see (whether you look at it in frequency or percentage over stock).


So the current FSE record has the 980 Ti running at 1955 MHz, which is an 81.9% OC based on the official boost of 1075 MHz that nVidia specifies.

Which means 1080 will have to *clock to at least 3152 MHz on LN2* to even surpass what GM200 had in terms of XOC percentage wise. (based on the official boost of 1733 MHz). Well I'll keep my eyes peeled I suppose.


----------



## s1rrah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> low end 1080?
> why low end?


I simply meant the vanilla 1080 cards; the 1080ti (or whatever they release in the future) will be a much better upgrade from a 980ti...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Interesting that somebody who was supposedly in the tech media and has all these top secret sources in the industry is so obviously biased towards Nvidia. Then again, after watching Jay, Luke and Paul yuck it up in Austin at the Dude Ranch on Nvidia's dime, I'd guess that would make OJ010 just par for the course in terms of bought and paid for Nvidia "journalists"...


----------



## GosuPl

http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance

Not bad, but not great


----------



## 364901

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So the current FSE record has the 980 Ti running at 1955 MHz, which is an 81.9% OC based on the official boost of 1075 MHz that nVidia specifies.
> 
> Which means 1080 will have to *clock to at least 3152 MHz on LN2* to even surpass what GM200 had in terms of XOC percentage wise. (based on the official boost of 1733 MHz). Well I'll keep my eyes peeled I suppose.


Keep in mind that according to NVIDIA's own graphs the GTX 1080 at stock is about 30% ahead of a GTX Titan X, and official boost clocks are 1733MHz-ish. I think it's possible that dual, heavily overclocked GTX 1080 will match or slightly beat 4x GTX 980 Ti, but only thanks to raw SLI efficiency and overclocking capability. There must be a reason why NVIDIA is comfortable with only two-way SLI on the cards.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GosuPl*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance
> 
> Not bad, but not great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm surprised at that Ultra score. Pretty neat for stock clocks. I wonder how aggressively the colour compression tech has been tuned to this time around.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> 8+ months wait or get 1080 on June.
> $750+ or $600


Well Vega is rumored for October, so unless he doesn't like AMD it's potentially only a 4 - 8 month wait. Not to mention the guy has two TX's.. I don't see any titles that will bring that to it's knees in the next 1/2 year.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So the current FSE record has the 980 Ti running at 1955 MHz, which is an 81.9% OC based on the official boost of 1075 MHz that nVidia specifies.
> 
> Which means 1080 will have to *clock to at least 3152 MHz on LN2* to even surpass what GM200 had in terms of XOC percentage wise. (based on the official boost of 1733 MHz). Well I'll keep my eyes peeled I suppose.


Which means that either he's inadvertently contradicting himself, or the 1080 needs to clock that high in order to beat 4 980 Ti's at 2Ghz, meaning my basic conjecture earlier checks out.

Either way, don't peel your eyes back to far.


----------



## s1rrah

Because I had GTX 670 cards and thought the ref 980 was a good enough upgrade to go ahead and buy. No regrets ... I had been waiting for a new card for so long that I just couldn't wait.



This time around, the ref 1080's just aren't a big enough increase for me to move on ... I'll def go for whatever higher end 1080's are released later this year, though ...


----------



## jprovido

benchmarks just leaked. at stock that's really impressive. 21% faster than titan x wow


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GosuPl*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance
> 
> Not bad, but not great


That's also at nearly 1900.. By the time boost 4.0 comes out there will be no headroom left to overclock.. This record breaking rumor is getting more and more unlikely.

Besides synthetics, we're probably looking at around 25% max over 980 Ti OC to OC in games (assuming the Nvidia demo is an accurate demonstration of Pascal on air). VR edge cases aside.









Oj010's credibility also more and more unlikely..
Quote:


> Since the reveal of NVIDIA's latest enthusiast graphics range, there have been numerous negative articles surrounding AMD which stems from unverified sources. We've reported on some of these in a similar vein to other media outlets but it's always important to adopt a sceptical approach whenever information is leaked. As a result, the coverage we previously posted was incorrect and we've received clarification from AMD's Northern Europe PR and Community Manager, Joe Cowell about a number of recent criticisms. Firstly, AMD will be attending Computex and this was never in doubt. It's important to remember that AMD always lists their attendance for trade shows in a clear and transparent manner. *Secondly, there are no production issues whatsoever with Polaris and it's on schedule.* This means our report suggesting AIB partners were unhappy with AMD is completely false and based on incorrect sources. Therefore, we were wrong in disclosing this information and wish to clarify the real truth after receiving an official word from AMD.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> benchmarks just leaked. at stock that's really impressive. 21% faster than titan x wow


So about 30-35% faster than 980 Ti in Fire Strike. So basically what the 680 was to the 580. So about what we expected and nothing too exciting.


----------



## NikolayNeykov

What are those stupid scores, where are the 4k ones?? or this card cannot perform well there? i see lowering of the advantages on higher resolutions with this 1080 card...
I will surely wait for Vega Ti, don't want any stupid *****s cards middle end.


----------



## Cyro999

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> You're assuming there is actually some kind of cap, and that the screenshot of whatever tool that is wasn't just an older version that doesn't go above 2000. They used Precision X in the demo, maybe it goes over 2000.


I think they even used a beta version


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> What are those stupid scores, where are the 4k ones?? or this card cannot perform well there? i see lowering of the advantages on higher resolutions with this 1080 card...
> I will surely wait for Vega Ti, don't want any stupid *****s cards middle end.


Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel.


----------



## HAL900

5% better by 980ti


----------



## iARDAs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> benchmarks just leaked. at stock that's really impressive. 21% faster than titan x wow


my OCed 980ti probably is on par with stock 1080.

Not a major reason for me to upgrade. I will probably wait for 1080ti or 1090.


----------



## magnek

So as expected, a 980 Ti running 1500/8000 = stock 1080 basically.

Now let's see if 1080 lives up to the overclocking rumors...


----------



## Serandur

Meh. Here's a 980 Ti at 1480 MHz. Graphics score of 9941 in FS Extreme vs the stock 1080's 10367. Yes, the stock/reference 1080's still slightly faster (probably not more so than a similarly overclocked Titan X though), yes it will still overclock and get aftermarket models itself obviously, but still meh especially for the price increase a year later. That 1080 better be a really strong overclocker to maintain a strong lead.

It's really the price increase I find offensive. Would have been a lot more respectable for ~$550.


----------



## HAL900

1866 mhz is not stock


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 1866 mhz is not stock


It sure is. They both said so in the article and all Nvidia cards with GPU boost go a healthy amount above their actually stated max clocks. Stock reference 980 Tis say 1076 MHz on their spec lists, but push up to 1200 MHz. Same thing with the 1080 and stating 1733 MHz but going up to 1860ish.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Meh. Here's a 980 Ti at 1480 MHz. Graphics score of 9941 in FS Extreme vs the stock 1080's 10367. Yes, the stock/reference 1080's still slightly faster (probably not more so than a similarly overclocked Titan X though), yes it will still overclock and get aftermarket models itself obviously, but still meh especially for the price increase a year later. That 1080 better be a really strong overclocker to maintain a strong lead.


Especially when you factor in boost 3.0.. I doubt Nvidia didn't give their demo version a hefty overclock, because as we've seen, there's a frquency cap here. Who knows, that 2.1GHz might be pushing things.



Boost 3.0 might actually be taking most of the headroom out of it..


----------



## NikolayNeykov

I get 4899 on ultra with my 980 ti so this 1080 can suck a lemon, not counting on overclocking abilities, it's not a upgrade this way. Need 50 % upgrade to be worthy upgrade, well that's my opinion.


----------



## HAL900

stok is 1607
and if I do not change it 3dmark reads 3d clock and no boost

Besides, it may as well be Fejk .where is the link?


----------



## y2kcamaross

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Especially when you factor in boost 3.0.. I doubt Nvidia didn't give their demo version a hefty overclock, because as we've seen, there's a frquency cap here. Who knows, that 2.1GHz might be pushing things.
> 
> 
> 
> Boost 3.0 might actually be taking most of the headroom out of it..


it's not a frequency cap, that version of the program is over 9 months old, obviously no card 9 months ago could come close to 2hgz


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

At stock the 1080 is about equal to a 1500MHz 980Ti (slower than a 1500MHz TX). Unless it can hit at least 2500MHz I just don't see the 1080 being any more than 20-30% faster than the top OC 980Ti's on air. Then again Nvidia's own cheerleader here on OCN has top secret sources that claim its an overclocker's dream so there you go...


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *y2kcamaross*
> 
> it's not a frequency cap, that version of the program is over 9 months old, obviously no card 9 months ago could come close to 2hgz


I assumed iLeakSuff was using up to date info.. My mistake for not double checking.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Also looks like a 2GHz cap although that will be overcome with vbios mod


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Especially when you factor in boost 3.0.. I doubt Nvidia didn't give their demo version a hefty overclock, because as we've seen, there's a frquency cap here. Who knows.
> 
> 
> 
> Boost 3.0 might actually be taking most of the headroom out of it..


I won't be shocked if it does, but will be very interested to see if the typical 1080 can boost up to ~2200 MHz (to theoretically stay 25% ahead of the 1500 MHz 980 Ti) and actually scale well enough to do so with memory overclocks taken into account too. Talking about GPUs potentially going to 2.2 GHz now, lol. I remember when 1 GHz was a big deal... a few years ago.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> stok is 1607
> and if I do not change it 3dmark reads 3d clock and no boost
> 
> Besides, it may as well be Fejk .where is the link?


Stock base clock on the reference 980 Ti is 1000 MHz. It doesn't actually run anywhere near that low though either. Kepler, Maxwell, Pascal... they all do the same stuff with GPU boost.

Here's the link.

Also, can't speak for anyone else but Firestrike reads my actual boost clock just fine without any changes (at least, I don't remember making any).


----------



## tpi2007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ghoxt*
> 
> Nvidia GTX1080 Discussion - Jay2Cents, Luke - Linus Tech Tips, Anthony - TweakTown, Pauls Hardware)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting coming from those that attended the conference.
> 
> 
> 
> Jay2Cents: "I thought the price was going to be $650"
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is absolutely zero push back on price increases from media outlets... In fact, most of the media coverage makes the GTX 1080 sound like a bargain... "Titan X performance at $379"
Click to expand...

JayzTwoCents even says at 3:48 and I quote:

"This might be the biggest generational jump they've done yet."

People nowadays let themselves be engulfed in money and PR, such as the Titan brand of cards being something that you have to revere when comparing other cards to, when they completely forget that the 8800 GTX was faster than 7900 GTX SLI.

It's ok to be excited about the 1080, it seems like a solid card with good overclocking potential, but they shouldn't let reality hidden in a box just because they might be afraid to lose some viewers or some sponsorship because of that. The truth is that the GPU makers are turning to fine tuning architectures over the span of longer time periods and milking manufacturing processes for longer periods because they take longer to develop, which ends up with us getting what was usually considered a mid-range chip first and then pay a bit more for the big chip a year later, if not later.

And at 11:04, again, JayzTwoCents, saying he expected the card to be $649 "because that has been the debut price for a long time" in order for them to then move the goal posts and add artificial excitement to this release? Where? When has that happened? That is the price of the big chip cards! The 680 launched for $499 and the 980 launched for 549$.

The fact that things are slowing down shouldn't preclude from excitement when it's warranted, but over blowing it with lies is another thing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> 1080 is faster than 980 SLI correct?
> 
> One of the top 980 SLI scores:
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3424081
> 
> If 1080 has 90% scaling in SLI, we should see performance within 10% or less from a 980Ti 4 way.
> 
> That's pretty freaking amazing.


According to the graph "a new King" that they presented, the 1080 should be around 31% faster than the Titan X and 110% faster than the 980.

Edit: sorry, misread that the graph starts at "1" instead of "0". The correct figures should be 22% faster than Titan X and 69% faster than the 980.

Edited last sentence because I misread 980 for 980 Ti in the first sentence because you say 980 Ti in the last one.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Meh. Here's a 980 Ti at 1480 MHz. Graphics score of 9941 in FS Extreme vs the stock 1080's 10367. Yes, the stock/reference 1080's still slightly faster (probably not more so than a similarly overclocked Titan X though), yes it will still overclock and get aftermarket models itself obviously, but still meh especially for the price increase a year later. That 1080 better be a really strong overclocker to maintain a strong lead.
> 
> It's really the price increase I find offensive. Would have been a lot more respectable for ~$550.


Absolutely. It's a good card, it brings the expected performance increase, and it's looking good at 4K for a mid-range card which is needed to advance that res. It's only the halo-product pricing games that are making it hard to recommend. Forget about the FE nonsense, price this card at $550 reference, and I might have bought one just for fun.


----------



## NikolayNeykov

The thing is that you can't count on overclock with new tech, it need real performance increase and then any overclock would be plus.
I wish happy purchasing to all, please donate to nvidia so i can purchase later on vega some awesome card that really have improvement over my 980 ti and it would be worthy upgrade, night-night!


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Also, can't speak for anyone else but Firestrike reads my actual boost clock just fine without any changes (at least, I don't remember making any).


I check it because for me was reading 3d clock and no boost
Only when modding bios can be locked boost and shows how the clock is


----------



## sugarhell

@Tpi Shame i cant rep you

Also i cringe everytime with this JayzTwoCents guy.

For me 980 is a "better" gpu than 1080(if the performance increase is 15-25% like the speculations).

980 did the same as 1080 but on the same node as the previous flagship while using standard gddr5.

1080 is a medium range gpu with high-end price. It is a solid card but i know in my head this gpu is a 1060ti and i cant buy it for 699.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> @Tpi Shame i cant rep you
> 
> Also i cringe everytime with this JayzTwoCents guy.
> 
> For me 980 is a "better" gpu than 1080(if the performance increase is 15-25% like the speculations).
> 
> 980 did the same as 1080 but on the same node as the previous flagship while using standard gddr5.
> 
> 1080 is a medium range gpu with high-end price. It is a solid card but *i know in my head this gpu is a 1060ti and i cant buy it for 699.*


Exactly. I can afford it but I just can't get past the cognitive dissonance and therein lies the problem if you're at all oriented towards price/performance.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> @Tpi Shame i cant rep you
> 
> Also i cringe everytime with this JayzTwoCents guy.
> 
> For me 980 is a "better" gpu than 1080(if the performance increase is 15-25% like the speculations).
> 
> 980 did the same as 1080 but on the same node as the previous flagship while using standard gddr5.
> 
> 1080 is a medium range gpu with high-end price. It is a solid card but i know in my head this gpu is a 1060ti and i cant buy it for 699.


Not really GTX980 was faster then GTX780 Ti but only by 5%. It did have a lower price though.


----------



## magnek

JayzTwoCents is more like JayzNoSense


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GosuPl*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance


just like Nvidia promised in their slides







(~25%+)

I want them 1070 results doe


----------



## Alwrath

$700 what a joke lol. Good job Nvidia, well played. Nvidia will be laughing at all the gtx founders edition 1080 owners all the way to the bank.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> @Tpi Shame i cant rep you
> 
> Also i cringe everytime with this JayzTwoCents guy.
> 
> For me 980 is a "better" gpu than 1080(if the performance increase is 15-25% like the speculations).
> 
> *980 did the same as 1080 but on the same node as the previous flagship while using standard gddr5.
> *
> 1080 is a medium range gpu with high-end price. It is a solid card but i know in my head this gpu is a 1060ti and i cant buy it for 699.


Nobody on Youtube or in the tech media has brought that up that I know of. The fact that these guys are supposed to be the smart guys with all the info and they don't even realize that the 980 was a much more impressive feat than what this 1080 appears to be offering is incredible...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> JayzTwoCents is more like JayzNoSense


You know when I stop listening about these you-tubes? Once they stop playing games. There is no reason for me to take advice from a non gamer when it comes to GPUs.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> JayzTwoCents is more like JayzNoSense


Somewhere out there he just turned to a friend and asked "does it feel warm in here?".


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I'm actually surprised at how brazen they are all being nowadays, happily showing off all the stuff Nvidia is doing for them just a week or so ahead of their supposedly "unbiased" reviews coming out!







Even the YT commenters are hitting them hard for that dude ranch silliness they posted up...


----------



## magnek

I think it's kind of an open secret that the social media is pretty much bought out by nVidia.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> benchmarks just leaked. at stock that's really impressive. 21% faster than titan x wow


hmmmm . . can't remember the last time i "played" fire strike.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Nobody on Youtube or in the tech media has brought that up that I know of. The fact that these guys are supposed to be the smart guys with all the info and they don't even realize that the 980 was a much more impressive feat than what this 1080 appears to be offering is incredible...


They will only focus performance vs titan-x. And the less power consumption.

But this gpu is replacing 980 not the titan-x.

Also did you see the 1080 pcb? It's again a joke of pcb. And they changed the name to Founder edition but it is just a reference gpu.

Do you expect any AIBs to sell at 599 when the reference gpu is 699?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> hmmmm . . can't remember the last time i "played" fire strike.


It's really good unless you play as the fire guy. He just can't catch a break.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> They will only focus performance vs titan-x. And the less power consumption.
> 
> But this gpu is replacing 980 not the titan-x.
> 
> Also did you see the 1080 pcb? It's again a joke of pcb. And they changed the name to Founder edition but it is just a reference gpu.
> 
> Do you expect any AIBs to sell at 599 when the reference gpu is 699?


I can't imagine why any of them would? I mean, sure they may make a few $599 cards here and there that nobody will ever be able to find just to say the card is a $599 card, but I bet all volume sales will be at far more than $599...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Nice try but you also made the same claims in yet another Nvidia thread just before coming in this one to do so. It seems you expected quite the hero's welcome here in friendly territory, as it were...


ONCE AGAIN, show me where I've spoken about any GPUs other than Polaris 10 and Vega? You seem to have a major comprehension issue.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Interesting that somebody who was supposedly in the tech media and has all these top secret sources in the industry is so obviously biased towards Nvidia. Then again, after watching Jay, Luke and Paul yuck it up in Austin at the Dude Ranch on Nvidia's dime, I'd guess that would make OJ010 just par for the course in terms of bought and paid for Nvidia "journalists"...


What, the truth hurts? I'm not biased towards NVIDIA, I report it as I get it. I was after all the person to say that the GTX Titan would perform 40 % slower than rumoured.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Which means that either he's inadvertently contradicting himself, or the 1080 needs to clock that high in order to beat 4 980 Ti's at 2Ghz, meaning my basic conjecture earlier checks out.


You said double the clock speed, I said less than double.


----------



## sugarhell

IIRC you said that you dont expect new gpus until October.


----------



## Serandur

What are the chances of any review site out there at least criticizing the price a little bit... and not ending on "but that's the cost to play with the best and we can't complain because it is a truly stellar product with the more budget-oriented 1070 reviews pending"? I would pay just to see some backlash.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Also did you see the 1080 pcb? It's again a joke of pcb. And they changed the name to Founder edition but it is just a reference gpu.


single 8-pin connector


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> What are the chances of any review site out there at least criticizing the price a little bit... and not ending on "but that's the cost to play with the best and we can't complain because it is a truly stellar product with the more budget-oriented 1070 reviews pending"? I would pay just to see some backlash.
> single 8-pin connector


single 8-pin, 5-1 weak vrm system.

But the shroud is awesome,totally worth the price of 699$.


----------



## SuperZan

I would love to see a little reviewer backlash. I'd love even more to see some consumer backlash. Every FE sold is telling AMD and Nvidia that if they can increase performance, even by an expected amount, they can up the prices a tier.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> IIRC you said that you dont expect new gpus until October.


Referring specifically to Polaris 10 and Vega.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> ONCE AGAIN, show me where I've spoken about any GPUs other than Polaris 10 and Vega? You seem to have a major comprehension issue.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> The news that *Polaris 10* gets pushed back to October has just come in ten minutes ago.I may have actually spoken out of turn here, I don't know who all has been told about the delay. If it's been made public then expect news sites to have a story up in the next few hours, if not... Oh damn, I opened my mouth too soon. The post has already been seen, read and quoted so no point in me removing it. Oops


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> *Actually I retract that*, specifically because of the reason said to me I can say that *there won't be any new GPUs until October.*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You said double the clock speed, I said less than double.


What are you talking about? You have to give me at least a bit of context.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> What are you talking about? You have to give me at least a bit of context.


You need to look at my previous posts for context, not just take one out of context. The conversation was SPECIFICALLY about Polaris 10 and Vega.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dragon 32*
> 
> Is it possible that *Polaris* being pushed back could have started the October *Vega* rumour?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I doubt it, my source is less than five hours old unless someone has a faster source that messed up the information? If that's the case, entirely plausible.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If that's the case, my source at AMD doesn't have a freaking clue what's going on


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Actually I retract that, specifically because of the reason said to me I can say that there won't be any new GPUs until October.


There's your context.


----------



## rubenlol2

1080 VRMs are literally missing over half the amount of mosfets they planned from looking at the empty soldermask, along with 1 phase missing.
Plenty of filter capacitors missing on the 12+ input, and they're using what looks like the cheaper type of mosfet package.
699 USD card with the VRMs of stuff I'd expect to find on budget 200 dollar cards, GJ Nvidia.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You need to look at my previous posts for context, not just take one out of context. The conversation was SPECIFICALLY about Polaris 10 and Vega.


Fair enough, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.. But the onus is on you to clear up what you said I'm afraid, your posts _in context_ implies what is being said.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Fair enough, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.. But the onus is on you to clear up what you said I'm afraid, your posts _in context_ implies what is being said.


Quoting one post (part of a conversation) removes all context. It's like saying;

"The world is going to end tomorrow."

Instead of:

"People are acting as if the world is going to end tomorrow."

By removing the context you change the meaning altogether.


----------



## Triggah

How hard is my i7 6700k gonna be bottlenecked with sli 1080's?


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> How so? Does it not have a single 8-pin connector. Pretty sure that's what I see... and haven't seen anything like it on a reference Nvidia flagship since 2005 (well, those were single 6-pins). Never mind the premium cost on a part I could definitely see some people trying to LN2 OC.
> 
> Yes, yes... it can deliver 150W versus two 6-pins at 75W each, but for a premium? Meh, should come with a pair of those 8-pins.


you answered your question.

one 8 pin = two 6 pins

pretty sure those that have OCD with cable management will appreciate one cable instead of two. (don't like daisy chains myself.)

however there would be a MAX limitation with how much power you could pump through one 8 pin over two 6 pins. but after just now taking a quick cruise through the 980 owners thread (where reference is two 6 pins) seems the most they mod a bios is 340 watts; _doable with a single 8 pin_.

and if nv did increase the vrm effiency i highly doubt there are weak(er) then previous reference cards:

vrm quality> vrm quantity


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Quoting one post (part of a conversation) removes all context. It's like saying;
> 
> "The world is going to end tomorrow."
> 
> Instead of:
> 
> "People are acting as if the world is going to end tomorrow."
> 
> By removing the context you change the meaning altogether.


You misunderstood what i meant.. I know what you're saying, that's why i said I'll take your word for it. But it's fairly obvious what you intended to say when you started the rumor didn't come across very well.

There's clearly more than one person who misunderstood your "there won't be any new GPU's until October" post. That was over 24hrs ago.. For some reason you didn't clarify what you meant in all that time to the dozens of people who misunderstood you.

"If you've ever felt like the whole world is crazy but you, maybe it's the other way around."


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> You misunderstood what i meant.. I know what you're saying, that's why i said I'll take your word for it. But it's fairly obvious what you intended to say when you started the rumor didn't come across very well.
> 
> There's clearly more than one person who misunderstood your "there won't be any new GPU's until October" post. That was over 24hrs ago.. For some reason you didn't clarify what you meant in all that time to the dozens of people who misunderstood you.
> 
> "If you've ever felt like the whole world is crazy but you, maybe it's the other way around."


I don't know, maybe people forget one post by the time they read the next?







Full context is there, spread over a total of four posts on the same page.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> you answered your question.
> 
> one 8 pin = two 6 pins
> 
> pretty sure those that have OCD with cable management will appreciate one cable instead of two. (don't like daisy chains myself.)
> 
> however there would be a MAX limitation with how much power you could pump through one 8 pin over two 6 pins. but after just now taking a quick cruise through the 980 owners thread (where reference is two 6 pins) seems the most they mod a bios is 340 watts; _doable with a single 8 pin_.
> 
> and if nv did increase the vrm effiency i highly doubt there are weak(er) then previous reference cards:
> 
> vrm quality> vrm quantity


I edited it a bit more to elaborate on what I meant. They're charging a premium for this now. It's not about "needs" when you're talking about such an expensive GPU, even relative to the supposed MSRP of the product. A premium on a card with a pair of 6-pins is equally as lame. Also, do you mean the highest they mod a BIOS on a reference card is 340 watts or aftermarket? Different scenarios, a simple 980 G1 comes with two 8-pins. A single 8-pin + mobo power is theoretically equal to 225w max. 340w on that seems... how?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I edited it a bit more to elaborate on what I meant. They're charging a premium for this now. It's not about "needs" when you're talking about such an expensive GPU, even relative to the supposed MSRP of the product. A premium on a card with a pair of 6-pins is equally as lame. Also, do you mean the highest they mod a BIOS on a reference card is 340 watts or aftermarket? Different scenarios, a simple 980 G1 comes with two 8-pins. A single 8-pin + mobo power is theoretically equal to 225w max. 340w on that seems... how?
> How presumptuous. My 980 Ti (aftermarket, of course) says hi.


Then, why are you responding to me?


----------



## GorillaSceptre

As far as the PCB goes.. I agree, it doesn't exactly scream $700 to me.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> I edited it a bit more to elaborate on what I meant. They're charging a premium for this now. It's not about "needs" when you're talking about such an expensive GPU, even relative to the supposed MSRP of the product. A premium on a card with a pair of 6-pins is equally as lame. Also, do you mean the highest they mod a BIOS on a reference card is 340 watts or aftermarket? Different scenarios, a simple 980 G1 comes with two 8-pins. A single 8-pin + mobo power is theoretically equal to 225w max. 340w on that seems... how?


do we forget those 970 MINIs that use one 8 pin and asus charges MORE for that "feature"? i know that is a much lower TDP card . .









there is no issue with any decent PSU providing 8 amps on each 12 volt pin so 8*12*3= 288 watts 75 watts (actually 66) from the pci-e slot = 363 watts.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Sorry but for the price this is not a quality pcb. They could easily use a better vrm system. And from the photos it seems that they use the same brand as 980.
> 
> It's not a bad pcb but for the price i expected something better.
> 
> Also they could easily use the same power connectors as the 980. 980 is 170 watt tdp vs 180 of 1080. This is not about the power consumption, it is mostly about not having any power limitation.


i haven't actually SEEN a FE pcb, have you?

as i just mentioned, if NV did increase the vrm efficiency (around 5% supposedly) then those are not the reference vrms that you are used to seeing.

*to both of you:*

have either of you seen any power benchmarks?!?

just as maxwell topped out at a lower power consumption that kepler (LN2/DICE aside) pascel could very well need/use even lower power than maxwell. unless you are going to bench the hell out of it - _if so then why in the hell would you get a reference board?!?_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> As far as the PCB goes.. I agree, it doesn't exactly scream $700 to me.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


that is NOT an FE board!


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> do we forget those 970 MINIs that use one 8 pin and asus charges MORE for that "feature"? i know that is a much lower TDP card . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there is no issue with any decent PSU providing 8 amps on each 12 volt pin so 8*12*3= 288 watts 75 watts (actually 66) from the pci-e slot = 363 watts.
> i haven't actually SEEN a FE pcb, have you?
> 
> as i just mentioned, if NV did increase the vrm efficiency (around 5% supposedly) then those are not the reference vrms that you are used to seeing.
> 
> *to both of you:*
> 
> have either of you seen any power benchmarks?!?
> 
> just as maxwell topped out at a lower power consumption that kepler (LN2/DICE aside) pascel could very well need/use even lower power than maxwell. unless you are going to bench the hell out of it - _if so then why in the hell would you get a reference board?!?_
> that is NOT a FE board!


My point is if you want to call it a Founders edition card and charge a premium for that at least give it a bit better pcb. It's not a "bad" pcb or really low quality but it's 700 bucks man.

I am sure that the pcb is sufficient for normal usage but I would prefer a bit better pcb quality.

Also if you look a bit up you can see the FE pcb.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> My point is if you want to call it a Founders edition card and charge a premium for that at least give it a bit better pcb. It's not a "bad" pcb or really low quality but it's 700 bucks man.
> 
> I am sure that the pcb is sufficient for normal usage but I would prefer a bit better pcb quality.
> 
> Also if you look a bit up you can see the FE pcb.


(i edited my last)

that is the GALAX non FE card.

so far there are NO FE naked pics posted - anywhere.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> (i edited my last)
> 
> that is the GALAX non FE card.
> 
> so far there are NO FE naked pics posted - anywhere.


http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pcb-gp104-gddr5x/

Can anyone spot the voltage controller?


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> that is NOT an FE board!


?

https://www.techpowerup.com/222408/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-reference-pcb-pictured

I give up with this damn card.. They call the FE reference, but then they don't, but it might be.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pcb-gp104-gddr5x/
> 
> Can anyone spot the voltage controller?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/222408/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-reference-pcb-pictured
> 
> I give up with this damn card.. They call the FE reference, but then they don't, but it might be.


oopppps my bad.









but my point still stand - those caps and mosfets are different.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> oopppps my bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but my point still stand - those caps and mosfets are different.


OK we will see about that









But can you spot the voltage controller at all?


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> OK we will see about that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But can you spot the voltage controller at all?


fair enough. and i think its way down by the right corner near that electrolyte - which little black box it is very hard to tell.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

This is only a 180W part. Does not need a crazy PCB. 8-Pin ~ 150W + 75W PCIE and you have 225W. 45W is more then enough to OC this card.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> do we forget those 970 MINIs that use one 8 pin and asus charges MORE for that "feature"? i know that is a much lower TDP card . .


I don't understand mini cards, tbh. Seems all backwards to me.









Quote:


> there is no issue with any decent PSU providing 8 amps on each 12 volt pin so 8*12*3= 288 watts 75 watts (actually 66) from the pci-e slot = 363 watts.


I did not know that. Thank you.









Quote:


> _if so then why in the hell would you get a reference board?!?_
> that is NOT an FE board!


Well see, that seems like a problem to me no matter what here. If the custom AIB models have extra power delivery potential (whether necessary or not), superior stock cooling, aren't generally larger enough to make a real compatibility difference (not like that reference cooler is compact), and the reference model costs more on top of that with no real build quality advantages, why would _anyone_ get a reference board? It's not like it will be cheaper to get just to put water blocks on either anymore according to what we've heard.

Additionally, we're talking about GP104 which is so efficient that it would take some truly terrible airflow to not be able to cool the custom models properly. A reference model like the one we've seen has lesser potential all-around (and I'm with GorillaSceptre here; thought we heard FE was synonymous with reference?), so what justifies the premium price? All it really does from my perspective is lower the bar AIBs have to beat to charge their own premium prices and it effectively solidifies $699 as the real pricing target.


----------



## fnZx

@Oj010

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-debunks-recent-negative-rumours/


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I don't know, maybe people forget one post by the time they read the next?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full context is there, spread over a total of four posts on the same page.


Since you're still posting here, care to shed some light on this thread?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599995/eteknix-amd-debunks-recent-negative-rumours/0_30


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Since you're still posting here, care to shed some light on this thread?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599995/eteknix-amd-debunks-recent-negative-rumours/0_30


Oh, I'm sure he saw it.. But then he read the posts and...


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> [SNIP]Well see, that seems like a problem to me no matter what here. If the custom AIB models have extra power delivery potential (whether necessary or not), superior stock cooling, aren't generally larger enough to make a real compatibility difference (not like that reference cooler is compact), and the reference model costs more on top of that with no real build quality advantages, why would _anyone_ get a reference board? It's not like it will be cheaper to get just to put water blocks on either anymore according to what we've heard.
> 
> Additionally, we're talking about GP104 which is so efficient that it would take some truly terrible airflow to not be able to cool the custom models properly. A reference model like the one we've seen has lesser potential all-around (and I'm with GorillaSceptre here; thought we heard FE was synonymous with reference?), so what justifies the premium price? All it really does from my perspective is lower the bar AIBs have to beat to charge their own premium prices and it effectively solidifies $699 as the real pricing target.


fwiw, i wasn't trying to justify the price of the FE, as a matter of fact i look at it as a money grab, i was trying to point out that an 8 pin is likely enough to provide the power and there are not the same "adequate" vrms as before.

sorry if i came off giving some feature/price/stuff debate - that wasn't my intention.

carry on.


----------



## tpi2007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I don't know, maybe people forget one post by the time they read the next?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full context is there, spread over a total of four posts on the same page.
> 
> 
> 
> Since you're still posting here, care to shed some light on this thread?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599995/eteknix-amd-debunks-recent-negative-rumours/0_30
Click to expand...

If he is where he says he is it's possible that he is sleeping at this time.


----------



## Vowels

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tpi2007*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I don't know, maybe people forget one post by the time they read the next?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full context is there, spread over a total of four posts on the same page.
> 
> 
> 
> Since you're still posting here, care to shed some light on this thread?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599995/eteknix-amd-debunks-recent-negative-rumours/0_30
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If he is where he says he is it's possible that he is sleeping at this time.
Click to expand...

~3:35AM right now where Ojo10 is located if anyone is wondering.


----------



## looniam

who sleeps around here?!?!?!?

thats just RUDE!










but i have a job . . .


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> who sleeps around here?!?!?!?
> 
> thats just RUDE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but i have a job . . .


Sleep on the job. Win win.


----------



## ebduncan

he saw the article and choked on so much crow, he died.

Sleeping I don't think so.


----------



## ondoy

who's selling their 980Ti's ? i'm offering 99.99 for each...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

It looks like they didn't spend any money on a better voltage controller. They probably filtered the voltage a bit better and fudged the efficiency numbers.


----------



## The Mac

since it only uses a single 8pin, it doesn't need as beefy regulators...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> since it only uses a single 8pin, it doesn't need as beefy regulators...


But they promised a better voltage controller than GTX 980


----------



## The Mac

i wonder why they picked some obscure site to talk to rather than one of the bigger ones...


----------



## The Mac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> But they promised a better voltage controller than GTX 980


was unaware of that.

did they promise better "regulation", or better "regulators"?

technicality, but could be the difference.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> But they promised a better voltage controller than GTX 980
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was unaware of that.
> 
> did they promise better "regulation", or better "regulators"?
> 
> technicality, but could be the difference.
Click to expand...

10% more efficient, 50% less voltage ripples


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> 10% more efficient, 50% less voltage ripples


I am sure the custom boards have much better voltage ripple.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Sorry but for the price this is not a quality pcb. They could easily use a better vrm system. And from the photos it seems that they use the same brand as 980.
> 
> It's not a bad pcb but for the price i expected something better.
> 
> Also they could easily use the same power connectors as the 980. 980 is 170 watt tdp vs 180 of 1080. This is not about the power consumption, it is mostly about not having any power limitation.


Agreed. This is what MSI gave us with a midrange flagship GPU for only $580 way back in 2012:



Now in 2016 we get a bare-bones PCB with middling hardware and power delivery for......$699! I know, I know, that's the Fanboy Edition but nothing indicates that that card will have any different power delivery or PCB than the $599 card (that will likely be a unicorn anyway)...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> This is only a 180W part. Does not need a crazy PCB. 8-Pin ~ 150W + 75W PCIE and you have 225W. 45W is more then enough to OC this card.


I see what you are saying but remember that the 680 was only a 195W card so the 1080 isn't that much more power efficient...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> If Hilbert hadn't picked up on this, nobody would've cared. So Hilbert is the one that should be pissing himself, not Oj010.


I would just like to point out that I absolutely called this last night!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Like I said earlier, how much you wanna bet we see a story in WCCF tomorrow that claims leaks surfacing that Polaris has been delayed til October and when you check their source it ends up being this thread?


----------



## SuperZan

^ True story.

<- Witness.

On the plus side for those that bought in hard, back-tracking is great for the quads and calves.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> ^ True story.
> 
> <- Witness.
> 
> On the plus side for those that bought in hard, *back-tracking is great for the quads and calves.*


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

The sad thing is I wonder just how many tech forums went crazy this morning after Hilbert posted this "leak" on his site? I only post on OCN but I can only imagine just how much misinformation was passed around out there. Naturally it was anti-AMD so it probably spread like wild-fire (this sort of rumor-mongering never seems to hit Nvidia for some reason *cough fanboys *cough*).


----------



## magnek

^SuperZan is still up at 6am, so clearly sleep is no excuse for not responding.









or may have just gotten out of bed in case I'm wrong


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> ^SuperZan is still up at 6am, so clearly sleep is no excuse for not responding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or may have just gotten out of bed in case I'm wrong


Late to bed, early to rise







. I work bizarre hours at times as well; you never know when I'll show up!


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Late to bed, early to rise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I work bizarre hours at times as well; you never know when I'll show up!


I just assumed you never sleep since you seem to be around all the time lol. But yeah same here as well, although it does take a heavy toll physically and mentally, which is especially bad when you're working in a lab all day.









(also inb4 darkreaper calls you a robot too







)


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I just assumed you never sleep since you seem to be around all the time lol
> 
> (also inb4 darkreaper calls you a robot too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Occasional insomnia is part of the kit, thanks to the bizarre hours. On the plus side my compensation is positively influenced by my T1000-ish constitution. \o/

Oops, I just gave it away!

<- is definitely not a robot/cyborg/metallic death machine from the future. Promise.


----------



## hokk

Works nights

Sub 1mbps connection


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Occasional insomnia is part of the kit, thanks to the bizarre hours. On the plus side my compensation is positively influenced by my T1000-ish constitution. \o/
> 
> Oops, I just gave it away!
> 
> <- is definitely not a robot/cyborg/metallic death machine from the future. Promise.


I wish I got paid for working like a robot err I mean OT


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Try working ER shift hours...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Try working ER shift hours...


That's part of why I get extra! We have to have a licensed biomed. scientist present for overnight as one of our depts. processes labs for the hospital. Somebody has to command the gaggle of technicians or they'll just play with the centrifuges and take Facebook quizzes.


----------



## magnek

How does one play with the centrifuges? Do they just throw random stuff in there and spin it for giggles?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Since you're still posting here, care to shed some light on this thread?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599995/eteknix-amd-debunks-recent-negative-rumours/0_30


Damage control? I see they don't single out Polaris 10, they just talk about Polaris in general.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> How does one play with the centrifuges? Do they just throw random stuff in there and spin it for giggles?


Pretty much, lol. Most of our techs are pretty young as they're usually uni students/interns or HND-holders (basically like a US Associates degree) working towards a complete four-year.


----------



## magnek

lol there must be stupid amounts of down time for them. All I remember back when I was working in a biochemistry lab was I spent more time waiting for the damn centrifuges to stop spinning than the actual centrifugation itself, which if memory serves varied between 15 minutes to an hour (or maybe 2 hours? can't remember this was literally 8 years ago)


----------



## chuy409

By the looks of it, a sli 980 seems to be faster than the 1080 according to that leak. Why would nvidia say its faster than 980 sli? Maybe worth grabbing another 980 if multi gpu support gets more support.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Damage control? I see they don't single out Polaris 10, they just talk about Polaris in general.


Well the statement seemed pretty... forceful: (emphasis mine)
Quote:


> Secondly, there are no production issues whatsoever with Polaris and it's on schedule.


So we'll see I guess.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well the statement seemed pretty... forceful: (emphasis mine)
> So we'll see I guess.


You see, as someone else pointed out there's another problem: Does anyone even know if schedule for Polaris exist? Because unless someone else saw it, it PR talk and Polaris could have it be released in end of summer, namely in end of September, from the beginning. Also, i am positively certain that Oj010 talked about validation issues and not production ones. In result, this statement is as vague as "Fury X is overclocker's dream" one, and you nicely demonstrated why it was vague.


----------



## DNMock

So yeah, late to the party, I know, but just ignore those clock speed numbers from firestrike. According to firestrike when I started using modded bios I was running nearly 1800mhz clocks on Titan-X cards on water (even though they were only running 1490 or so)


----------



## i7monkey

Is there anyone in the media that's called out Nvidia for their price increase? Every preview I've seen has been done by shills it seems.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Is there anyone in the media that's called out Nvidia for their price increase? Every preview I've seen has been done by shills it seems.


You mean increases from one generation to the next? You could put that down to inflation. According to http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/, $ 599 in 2006 (GeForce 8800 GTX launch date and price) is $ 707.54 now.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Is there anyone in the media that's called out Nvidia for their price increase? Every preview I've seen has been done by shills it seems.


I think not..Only NV shills so far.
GTX680 499
GTX980 549
GTX1080 699


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Is there anyone in the media that's called out Nvidia for their price increase? Every preview I've seen has been done by shills it seems.


maybe what you call a shill is just the normal response from the majority and you are the salty minority


----------



## GreedyMuffin

1080 is a tiny bit faster than my benchoced 980ti. That was running 1575/8200, still 1080 stock was faster.

Will show some 3Dmark scores when i get home, school atm.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> maybe what you call a shill is just the normal response from the majority and you are the salty minority


Damn.

Either way, i still don't see why some of you guys complain about price in market conditions. It's not like video cards are fresh water, you can live without a new one for a month until nV drops the price to milk even more people. Or don't buy it at all even.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> maybe what you call a shill is just the normal response from the majority and you are the salty minority


The facts aren't on your side









GF104 = $229

GK104 = $499

GM204 = $549

GP104 = $699

3x price increase for a midranged GPU. Inflation doesn't explain it and neither does better quality.

Nothing justifies the price except for a non-competitive market and price gouging.

But by all means, you seem okay with being gouged.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> I think not..Only NV shills so far.
> GTX680 499
> GTX980 549
> GTX1080 699


GTX 280 $649.99
GTX 260 $449.99

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/216/geforce-gtx-280
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/217/geforce-gtx-260

=

GTX 1080 $599.99
GTX 1070 $379.99


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> GTX 280 $649.99
> GTX 260 $449.99
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/216/geforce-gtx-280
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/217/geforce-gtx-260
> 
> =
> 
> GTX 1080 $599.99 699
> GTX 1070 $379.99 449


You forgot actual launch prices.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> You forgot actual launch prices.


That's not MSRP though, so there WILL be cards in that price range.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> GTX 280 $649.99
> GTX 260 $449.99
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/216/geforce-gtx-280
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/217/geforce-gtx-260
> 
> =
> 
> GTX 1080 $599.99
> GTX 1070 $379.99


Dual chip cards:

GTX 295 $499

GTX 590 $699

GTX 690 $999

GTX Titan Z $2999

Used to get two high end chips for $200 less than one midranged chip. Ya, nothing unusual going on here


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> 3x price increase for a midranged GPU. Inflation doesn't explain it and neither does better quality.
> 
> Nothing justifies the price except for a non-competitive market and price gouging.
> 
> But by all means, you seem okay with being gouged.


those are all good explanations actually

and the MSRP is $600


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> and the MSRP is $600


No Its not..and good luck founding 599USD GTX1080....


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> You forgot actual launch prices.


You forgot about inflation.

GTX 280 $ 649.99 = $ 718.91 today
GTX 260 $ 449.99 = $ 497.70 today

Inlfation prices calculated using http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You forgot about inflation.
> 
> GTX 280 $ 649.99 = $ 718.91 today
> GTX 260 $ 449.99 = $ 497.70 today
> 
> Inlfation prices calculated using http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


You forget mention GTX280 went down to 400USD month after launch.
BTW GTX280 was BIG DIE.It was Todays TITANX and GTX260 was todays 980TI


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Dual chip cards:
> 
> GTX 295 $499
> 
> GTX 590 $699
> 
> GTX 690 $999
> 
> GTX Titan Z $2999
> 
> Used to get two high end chips for $200 less than one midranged chip. Ya, nothing unusual going on here


I wouldn't use the GTX 295 as an example based on the fact that it was a GT200 chip, which under performed compared to Radeons at that time, the GTX 260 launched for $449.99 (280 @ 649.99) and the 4870 launched for $299.99:



https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/219/radeon-hd-4870

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4870,1964-9.html

So that's the only reason why NVIDIA dropped its prices later on (295 launched 6 months after the 280).

Wondering if anyone stopped to think whether or not Polaris would be another 4870...


----------



## headd

Btw GTX280 was way faster than 8800GTX.75% perf increase.Todays GTX1080 bring 25% over TITANX?


EDIT:even GTX260 brings 45% perf increase over 8800GTX (witch was todays TITANX) and still way more than 1080.


Its funny how Nv shills like pcper and jay2cent talks about groundbreaking performance loop on 1080 when its just worst performance gain at all time *on new node*.
They are NV shills nothing more.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> That's not MSRP though, so there WILL be cards in that price range.


According to these - , nope only FE will be available at launch which makes launch price 700/450.
Quote:


> There are not two GTX 1080 models made by nVidia. Only the "Founder's Edition" exists; there is not a cheaper card made by nVidia than the $700 Founder's Edition, *which ships first*


http://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/2427-difference-between-gtx-1080-founders-edition-and-reference#!/ccomment


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You forgot about inflation.
> 
> GTX 280 $ 649.99 = $ 718.91 today
> GTX 260 $ 449.99 = $ 497.70 today
> 
> Inlfation prices calculated using http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


And you forgot 460/560ti below 250$ which happened after GTX 280/260.


----------



## Glottis

http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance

very nice temps


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> According to these - , nope only FE will be available at launch which makes launch price 700/450.
> 
> http://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/2427-difference-between-gtx-1080-founders-edition-and-reference#!/ccomment


Why are you twisting the scenario here?

Even if this is true (that only FE cards will be at launch), if you wait for AIB cards that are non-FE cards you will be able to get cards for around MSRP.

Perfect example of a candidate for a $599 card:


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> very nice temps


and still using a refrence 980ti... i wonder why will do a properly bench with a nice oc 980ti just like they do with fury x


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Why are you twisting the scenario here?
> 
> Even if this is true (that only FE cards will be at launch), if you wait for AIB cards that are non-FE cards you will be able to get cards for around MSRP.
> 
> Perfect example of a candidate for a $599 card:


By that logic why did you quoted 260/280's huge launch prices even though they dropped ? to make your nonsense point ? launch price is the launch price just because nv said there will be cards for 100/80 less after some time doesn't change launch prices. what is the price on day 1 is the launch price, period.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> By that logic why did you quoted 260/280's huge launch prices even though they dropped ? to make your nonsense point ? launch price is the launch price just because nv said there will be cards for 100/80 less after some time doesn't change launch prices. what is the price on day 1 is the launch price, period.


I quoted the launch prices of those older video cards to show that there is no difference between today and back in 2008 (as proven by the example alone) but people like you still get your panties in a bunch when you can't impulse buy a video card because it is out of your reach financially; instead of just making a sigh of relief knowing that you can get one at $599 if you just wait.

You will be able to get a 1080 and 1070 at $599 and $379. NVIDA already got railed by people for lying about the 970 specifications and memory configuration, you really think NVIDIA can afford another backlash from the public for lying about launch prices? Your entire argument is nonsense plain and simple.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> very nice temps


how can 13% clock increase add 25% performance?
They say 1080 stock was runing on 1860-1883Mhz so 13% clock increase is 25% more performance or i am missing something?
http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Launched GeForce® GTX 1080 and GTX 1070, based on the new NVIDIA Pascal™ architecture, bringing the biggest performance gains over the previous generation of processors in a decade.


http://seekingalpha.com/pr/16487660-nvidia-announces-financial-results-first-quarter-fiscal-2017
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> very nice temps


Impressive scores if true !


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> and still using a refrence 980ti... i wonder why will do a properly bench with a nice oc 980ti just like they do with fury x


not sure what you mean? reference 980ti should be compared against reference 1080 and custom 980ti against custom 1080.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I quoted the launch prices of those older video cards to show that there is no difference between today and back in 2008 (as proven by the example alone) but people like you still get your panties in a bunch when you can't impulse buy a video card because it is out of your reach financially; instead of just making a sigh of relief knowing that you can get one at $599 if you just wait.
> 
> You will be able to get a 1080 and 1070 at $599 and $379. NVIDA already got railed by people for lying about the 970 specifications and memory configuration, you really think NVIDIA can afford another backlash from the public for lying about launch prices? Your entire argument is nonsense plain and simple.


lol, it's pretty simple what will be the price of 1080/1070 on day1 ? you know 699/449$ so that means that is the launch price. which according to nvidia will drop by 100/80 after some time. i know i'll be able to get those cards for 100/80 less, but that doesn't change the fact those aren't the *launch prices* .

I did exactly what you did, using the launch prices, and not the prices the card will cost after some time. hypocrisy is real here.

Try to insult when out of argument ? you have no idea what i'm financially capable of. and i'm not the only one seeing this overpriced card but other members too with tx's.


----------



## ChevChelios

very good OC and *very good* temps

+25% of OC 1080 vs stock 1080 !

although nothing less is ever expected from Nvidia caliber quality









and 2.1 is hardly the limit









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> They say 1080 stock was runing on 1860-1883Mhz


1860-1880 MHz is not stock 1080 - specs page on the official Nvidia 1080 page

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1080


----------



## Newbie2009

hmm, think I might wait for the big chip if I go green this round.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> not sure what you mean? reference 980ti should be compared against reference 1080 and custom 980ti against custom 1080.


not really refrence cards should get measured with refrence cards no matter what...if you brake that rule for one side and not for both then its safe to say you are bias

when they constantly where measuring custom 980ti against fury x or using 980ti vs 290 is not the same as picking a refrence 980ti vs a refrence 1080

(not that it would change anything im pretty sure they will pick the absolute favourable benches out there to measure it and it will leave out many of those that are neutral)


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> very good OC and *very good* temps
> 
> 1860-1880 MHz is not stock 1080 - specs page on the official Nvidia 1080 page
> 
> http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1080


from videocardz
http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance
Quote:


> All cards in this comparison are using stock settings. The variance for GTX 1080 clocks is between 1860 to 1886 MHz, probably caused by new GPU Boost 3.0 technology.


2114Mhz is 13% clock increase resulting to 25% performance increase...thats not possible.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> from videocarz
> http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance
> 2114Mhz is 13% clock increase resulting to 25% performance increase...thats not possible.


There can be miracles, if you believe.


----------



## ChevChelios

so basically

1080 @ max OC *>* 1080 @ 2.1 Ghz *>* 1080 stock *>=* 980Ti @ 1.5+ Ghz *>* 980Ti stock


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> from videocardz
> http://videocardz.com/59871/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-and-3dmark11-performance
> 2114Mhz is 13% clock increase resulting to 25% performance increase...thats not possible.


you are linking a different older bench lol

this one latest which has the 2100 MHz 1080 - http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance

quote:
Quote:


> This time we only have FireStrike scores. According to the leaker GTX 1080 was running at 2114 MHz clock, which is roughly 381 MHz more than stock *1733 MHz boost clock*. This is the first time new Pascal GP104-based graphics cards shows its true potential. We are observing a substantial boost in performance, GTX 1080 has 152/161/161% of GTX TITAN X stock performance in FireStrike Performance/Extreme and Ultra respectively.


----------



## tajoh111

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> and still using a refrence 980ti... i wonder why will do a properly bench with a nice oc 980ti just like they do with fury x


When comparing reference vs reference, they typically only compare it against the reference cards.

The only times it was benched against overclocked gtx 980 ti's was when reviewers were sent factory overclocked gtx 980 ti's after the initial Fury X review to do another review. Reviewers are not going to down clock the gtx 980 ti's to make the fury x look good. That would be too much and sabotage on behalf of AMD.

Fury X had every benefit of the doubt because pretty much all initial reviews benched it against the reference gtx 980 ti's. Considering the water cooling and the aggressive clocks on AMD part(and lack of headroom), this type of testing favored AMD big time considering most gtx 980 ti's were factory overclocked cards and they were the same price. Same with the review for the 390x(which every card was a factory overclocked model) which compared it against reference gtx 980's which didn't exist anymore. AMD was given extra leeway for their 2015 cards.

Plus all things considered, one of the only times where where a reference should have been compared to overclocked cards from the beginning was with the Fury X as you couldn't get a better fury X than the reference and the reference had all the advantages of a factory overclocked card and then some.

Also the results above are still pretty good for overclocked cards.

http://videocardz.com/58579/amd-unveils-radeon-pro-duo-3dmark-fire-strike-performance

These results are beating or matching a fury pro duo which is a 1500 dollar card that is water cooled. If overclocked cards come this fast, its going to easily justify it 700 dollar price tag thanks to AMD.


----------



## Kriant

If that OC is real, then that is pretty impressive. Stock though? Meh, my 980ti xtreme pushes similar scores (yes, it's OCed). I wonder what kind of performance can the Big Pascal deliver.









Also, where is the competition? I want a repeat of 4870/280 scenario.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you are linking a different older bench lol
> this one latest which has the 2100 MHz 1080 - http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance


Well nope..They have same results for 1080 stock in both tests.In first test they saying 1080 runs at 1833-1860Mhz.

Still even at if stock is 1733Mhz and 2114Mhz is 21% OC.1080 cant have 25% performance gain from 21%OC.
Most likely its 13% OC and 25% performance gain..Pure BS results.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Still even at if stock is 1733Mhz and 2114Mhz is 21% OC.1080 cant have 25% performance gain from 21%OC.
> Most likely its 13% OC and 25% performance gain..Pure BS results.


yep, headd hath spoken

RIP Nvidia









1080 is so good it can pull power out of thin air


----------



## headd

Where is am saying RIP Nvidia?








If you use your brain and use math those results make zero sense.

Either 1080 have Memory OC and its hard memory bandwidth bottleneck(at stock) so it have miracle performance gain(after memory oc) or results are false.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> lol, it's pretty simple what will be the price of 1080/1070 on day1 ? you know 699/449$ so that means that is the launch price. which according to nvidia will drop by 100/80 after some time. i know i'll be able to get those cards for 100/80 less, but that doesn't change the fact those aren't the *launch prices* .
> 
> I did exactly what you did, using the launch prices, and not the prices the card will cost after some time. hypocrisy is real here.
> 
> Try to insult when out of argument ? you have no idea what i'm financially capable of. and i'm not the only one seeing this overpriced card but other members too with tx's.


Nobody knows exactly what the price will be on Day 1 because it is not Day 1 (Day 1 is May 27th). So instead of freaking out over the price, why don't you just chill back to wait and see what happens. What if there is a base model ACX version from EVGA or base Windforce 3x version from Gigabyte for $609.99 or something like that on May 27th. Is that really something to freak out over? Also 1070 launches 13 days later, so less than two weeks later on Jun 10th. It would be a great assumption to make by at least then there will be 1080 AIB cards for around MSRP, and 1070 will launch with AIB cards from the get go just like the 970 did.

Also, lets consider this for a second, I used an example out of many of examples that weren't used (GTX 280, GTX 260) to prove that the argument is nullified completely. Hardly hypocrisy. Stating something is hypocritical doesn't make it so. Fact of the matter here, is trying to use old graphics card launches as an example for price hiking, leaving out the GTX 280 and GTX 260 to prove a point, which of course if included would not prove the point. Case in point.

Since you don't know the launch prices because it isn't launch yet, it is not actually a fact, and no insulting was done just stating that the entire argument is useless in its entirety as I already posted a GTX 280 and GTX 260 launching for similar prices as the 1080 and 1070. So as stated earlier, the only people freaking out at the prices who claim to be such veterans are obviously not going back far enough in time to consider their argument valid.

Oh I'm sorry if I offended you, but I just don't see people financially capable of impulse buying a $700 graphics card complaining about price knowing that it will also be available for $600 if not at launch, a few weeks later.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Nobody knows exactly what the price will be on Day 1 because it is not Day 1 (Day 1 is May 27th). So instead of freaking out over the price, why don't you just chill back to wait and see what happens. What if there is a base model ACX version from EVGA or base Windforce 3x version from Gigabyte for $609.99 or something like that on May 27th. Is that really something to freak out over? Also 1070 launches 13 days later, so less than two weeks later on Jun 10th. It would be a great assumption to make by at least then there will be 1080 AIB cards for around MSRP, and 1070 will launch with AIB cards from the get go just like the 970 did.
> 
> Also, lets consider this for a second, I used an example out of many of examples you didn't use (GTX 280, GTX 260) to prove that your argument is nullified completely. Hardly hypocrisy. Stating something is hypocritical doesn't make it so. Fact of the matter here is you are trying to use old graphics card launches as an example for price hiking, leaving out the GTX 280 and GTX 260 to prove your point, which of course if you included would not prove your point. Case in point.
> 
> Since you don't know the launch prices because it isn't launch yet, it is not actually a fact, and no insulting was done just stating that your entire argument is useless in its entirety as I already posted a GTX 280 and GTX 260 launching for similar prices as the 1080 and 1070. So as stated earlier, the only people freaking out at the prices who claim to be such veterans are obviously not going back far enough in time to consider their argument valid.
> 
> Oh I'm sorry if I offended you, but I just don't see people financially capable of impulse buying a $700 graphics card complaining about price knowing that it will also be available for $600 if not at launch, a few weeks later.


I'm saying launch price is 700/450 because according to 1-2 techsites FE cards will be only card available at launch and others will come later. i never said cards won't be available at lower prices than that, and i also didn't forget 460/560ti happened after 280/260 for lesser prices. even 600 is 50 over 980's price. if this continues we will be seeing 1200 for ti and 800 for 104 chips pretty soon. only problem i have is people who are quoting launch prices wrongly. it's a nice pr move by nvidia and obviously it's working. can't wait for may 17 when reviews are out based on 699$ card and they will say it costs 599$.


----------



## Menta

Everyone is screaming 1080 and the 1070 sits quietly


----------



## WhyCry

This ~1860 MHz clock is simply how 3DMark shows stock clocks. It never goes below 1835 MHz. It does not necessarily mean those benchmarks were run at 1.86 GHz.


----------



## ChevChelios

1080 is the flashy spectacle, while 1070 is the silent killer


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I'm saying launch price is 700/450 because according to 1-2 techsites FE cards will be only card available at launch and others will come later. i never said cards won't be available at lower prices than that, and i also didn't forget 460/560ti happened after 280/260 for lesser prices. even 600 is 50 over 980's price. if this continues we will be seeing 1200 for ti and 800 for 104 chips pretty soon. only problem i have is people who are quoting launch prices wrongly. it's a nice pr move by nvidia and obviously it's working. *can't wait for may 17 when reviews are out based on 699$ card and they will say it costs 599$*.


Here's the kicker, do you actually think an NVIDIA reference card is going to outperform an ACX or Windforce card? Try to look at this from a different marketing angle here. So say May 17th reviews are based on $699 card, showing certain performance levels. Then June 10th rolls along, and all the media is benching all the AIB cards like everybody does. What if the performance is higher than the FE card, but the price is lower?

What people don't seem to understand is there is a very niche NVIDIA crowd that prefers the reference card over AIB solutions. Here NVIDIA is not even trying to compete with the AIB partners. So say EVGA releases the GTX 1080 ACX SC+ w/ Backplate for $650. Card benches better than the FE, overclocks better than the FE, runs cooler than the FE, and costs $50 less than the FE.

So clearly even if the May 17th reviews are showing the FE card, reviews later are going to show non-FE cards performing even better for more than likely less (except of course Classified, K|NGP|N, Lightning, etc. will cost $700+). So it is not like NVIDIA is trying to pull the wool over somebody's eyes


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Everyone is screaming 1080 and the 1070 sits quietly


because we don't know much about 1070 at this point. 1070 release is few weeks after 1080 for a reason, so all focus now can be on 1080. very very smart of nvidia.


----------



## guttheslayer

What happen to those ppl that say 1080 OC badly and will be no big difference to 980 Ti OCed? Although I agree 14% OC is abit fishy.

Or the benchmark is done with 1.7GHz, not 1.86GHz


----------



## Crosshatch3D

Did I make a huge mistake buying a EVGA 980TI FTW last April?

I kind of feel crappy, especially since my return period ended MAY 11 and now I have no choice but to stick with the FTW.

Hmmm

-Jason


----------



## carlhil2

The best way to bench these cards is to lock it at 1800 vs 2100....


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Crosshatch3D*
> 
> Did I make a huge mistake buying a EVGA 980TI FTW last April?
> 
> I kind of feel crappy, especially since my return period ended MAY 11 and now I have no choice but to stick with the FTW.
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> -Jason


you bought a 980Ti full month before it was released, nice skills. but i don't see what this has to do with the topic at hand.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> you bought a 980Ti full month before it was released, nice skills. but i don't see what this has to do with the topic at hand.


Because, he bought it a month ago and he should have waited....


----------



## guttheslayer

Now imagine what a 1080 Ti can do.

even on 3200 SP, you are probably look at a 16K firemark extreme score.

And someone make a joke about 1080 finally scale perfectly with clock speed after OC. If that is true, its equal to a 5120 cores pascal running at a 1.05GHz mark.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Because, he bought it a month ago and he should have waited....


ok, my bad i thought he meant april 2015. now it makes more sense. but that's what happens when you buy GPU so late after it was released.


----------



## carlhil2

I want to OC that ram....


----------



## Crosshatch3D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Because, he bought it a month ago and he should have waited....


UGH yes, I thought the 1080 was going to come in at $1000+


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Crosshatch3D*
> 
> UGH yes, I thought the 1080 was going to come in at $1000+


Why would you think that? Only Titan's come in at that price. Generational performance increase should be expected for the same or less money.


----------



## Creator

Maybe this will turn out to be the Sandy Bridge of GPUs... in overclocking that is. And not still being relevant 5+ years down the line.


----------



## Crosshatch3D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Why would you think that? Only Titan's come in at that price. Generational performance increase should be expected for the same or less money.


I don't know, but I feel very disappointed that I just bought the EVGA 980TI FTW last month, only with this around the corner at roughly the same price...?

Looks like the 1080 is the better choice...even as a reference card.

-Jason


----------



## y2kcamaross

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Crosshatch3D*
> 
> I don't know, but I feel very disappointed that I just bought the EVGA 980TI FTW last month, only with this around the corner at roughly the same price...?
> 
> Looks like the 1080 is the better choice...even as a reference card.
> 
> -Jason


if you bought an EVGA...then you can just use the stepup program, so it shouldn't be a problem, just pay the difference


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Creator*
> 
> Maybe this will turn out to be the Sandy Bridge of GPUs... in overclocking that is. And not still being relevant 5+ years down the line.


That would be the 7970 for both cases.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

God I have been waiting to upgrade for 3 years now that this GPU is even showing in my dreams.


----------



## G woodlogger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> God I have been waiting to upgrade for 3 years now that this GPU is even showing in my dreams.


Can you expand on that


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> God I have been waiting to upgrade for 3 years now that this GPU is even showing in my dreams.


3 years? has it been that long


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> 3 years? has it been that long


Wait till u see my system dating back 2012.

GTX 670 ref
I7 - 3770K
Asrock Extreme 6 Z77
OCZ vertex 4
16GB ballistix tracer 1600MHz. lol.

I still didnt want to upgrade until 1080 Ti. But my GFX is dying and I am having a headache.


----------



## Ghoxt

I was looking at old posts from July of 2015 looking for something else and came across this How prophetic you are...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I'm with you though Raghu, I don't see big Pascal coming any earlier than mid 2017. We will almost certainly get another mid-range "flagship" out of Nvidia first a-la GP104/204 whatever, and then won't see big Pascal until they've milked all the money they can out of that first (never mind the yield issues they are certain to have with a new node)...
> 
> Either way, I'm all set with my 6GB Titans to last me until they do release big Pascal (or AMD comes up with something a lot more competitive than Fiji was)...
> 
> Yes you said this in July 2015.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Wait till u see my system dating back 2012.
> 
> GTX 670 ref
> I7 - 3770K
> Asrock Extreme 6 Z77
> OCZ vertex 4
> 16GB ballistix tracer 1600MHz. lol.
> 
> I still didnt want to upgrade until 1080 Ti. But my GFX is dying and I am having a headache.


Still a good build. I've no plans to upgrade my 3770k and rockin a OCZ vertex 2 until it dies


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You forgot about inflation.
> 
> GTX 280 $ 649.99 = $ 718.91 today
> GTX 260 $ 449.99 = $ 497.70 today
> 
> Inlfation prices calculated using http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


Both of them are GT200... The mid ranged GTS 250 was released at $199 which is $220.89 today...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Both of them are GT200... The mid ranged GTX 250 was released at $199 which is $220.89 today...


Did the prices from to 500/300 2 weeks after HD 4870/4850 crushed 260 for less money?


----------



## Cakewalk_S

It'll be a little more interesting to see the GTX1070. I think for the price point its going to be an extremely lucrative card. It sounds like its going to be ~+30% performance over the GTX970... so basically we're looking at a pretty hefty jump for GTX970 gamers. I'd imagine we'll be selling our GTX970's for $150-200 so basically another $150-200 price jump for 30% more performance isn't so bad...


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Both of them are GT200... The mid ranged GTX 250 was released at $199 which is $220.89 today...


There was no GTX 250, there was GTS 250 that was basically renamed 9800 GTX.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s1rrah*
> 
> I simply meant the vanilla 1080 cards; the 1080ti (or whatever they release in the future) will be a much better upgrade from a 980ti...


it all depends on the real performance of the GTX1080.
nvidia saied 2x the perf over a 980 but it seems impossible to me to be real.


----------



## michaelius

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> It'll be a little more interesting to see the GTX1070. I think for the price point its going to be an extremely lucrative card. It sounds like its going to be ~+30% performance over the GTX970... so basically we're looking at a pretty hefty jump for GTX970 gamers. I'd imagine we'll be selling our GTX970's for $150-200 so basically another $150-200 price jump for 30% more performance isn't so bad...


More like 60-70% increase.


----------



## Bogga

All this talk about the coming Ti... are there any rumours on that? From what I heard prior to the 10x0 was that those two would replace 970, 980 and 980Ti...


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> All this talk about the coming Ti... are there any rumours on that? From what I heard prior to the 10x0 was that those two would replace 970, 980 and 980Ti...


The 1080/1070 is the midrange Pascal chip, just like the 980/970/etc was the midrange Maxwell chip and the GTX 680/670 was the midrange Kepler chip. There will be a big Pascal chip coming in the not-too-distant future (probably next calendar year) which will be the high end Pascal chip just like the 780/780 Ti was the high end Kepler chip and the 980 Ti was the high end Maxwell chip.

So while the 1080 will be a faster chip than the 980 Ti, it is in fact the successor to the 980, not the 980 Ti.


----------



## DFroN

I'm probably going to get a 1080. It'll be the fastest card this year, my 780 isn't cutting it at 1440 and I don't want to wait until 2017 for the Ti. I'll have to wait for waterblocks though, hopefully EK are quick.


----------



## iLeakStuff

wccftech reports that air cooled version from Gigabyte reach 2.4GHz overclock.
There will be water cooled models from different companies able to reach 2.5GHz

Take it with some salt but I think 2.1GHz overclock is nothing compared to what we will see in the coming weeks. Especially when you see Nvidia`s presentation card only reaching 64C and the recent 2.1GHz overclock hit 59C max


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> wccftech reports that air cooled version from Gigabyte reach 2.4GHz overclock.
> There will be water cooled reference models from different companies able to reach 2.5GHz
> 
> Take it with some salt but I think 2.1GHz overclock is nothing compared to what we will see in the coming weeks. Especially when you see Nvidia`s presentation card only reaching 64C and the recent 2.1GHz overclock hit 59C max


But is like saying here GTX980 with 1300MHz OC.... Is that even a OC?


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> wccftech reports that air cooled version from Gigabyte reach 2.4GHz overclock.
> There will be water cooled models from different companies able to reach 2.5GHz
> 
> Take it with some salt but I think 2.1GHz overclock is nothing compared to what we will see in the coming weeks. Especially when you see Nvidia`s presentation card only reaching 64C and the recent 2.1GHz overclock hit 59C max


If it can reach overclocks beyond 2.5ghz on air then it might really be a great card that completely obliterates the 980 Ti.

Does the wccftech news air coocled gigabyte run on 1x8 pin ?


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> The 1080/1070 is the midrange Pascal chip, just like the 980/970/etc was the midrange Maxwell chip and the GTX 680/670 was the midrange Kepler chip. There will be a big Pascal chip coming in the not-too-distant future (probably next calendar year) which will be the high end Pascal chip just like the 780/780 Ti was the high end Kepler chip and the 980 Ti was the high end Maxwell chip.
> 
> So while the 1080 will be a faster chip than the 980 Ti, it is in fact the successor to the 980, not the 980 Ti.


I just heard from an inside source that a version of the big Pascal would be released this year, and another next year. Nvidia has to hit its quarterly numbers, advised my inside source.

Ps: what inside source, you may ask?the voices inside my head, of course... can't get any more inside than that... Lol. But, the above observation is more of, let's just say a hunch....


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> If it can reach overclocks beyond 2.5ghz on air then it might really be a great card that completely obliterates the 980 Ti.
> 
> Does the wccftech news air coocled gigabyte run on 1x8 pin ?


Remember that ugly GALAX 1080 card?
Thats the one that ran the 2114MHz clocks. He hit that limit because of bios according to him.
Should be easy to overcome by modding the bios though. Then we will see how much juice 1x8 can really deliver


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My plan is to buy a crappy plastic cooler card and the just slap a WB on it, flash it and have some fun! ^^

Don`t want to pay the FE premium as I`m getting a EK block.


----------



## Cyclonic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Crosshatch3D*
> 
> Did I make a huge mistake buying a EVGA 980TI FTW last April?
> 
> I kind of feel crappy, especially since my return period ended MAY 11 and now I have no choice but to stick with the FTW.
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> -Jason


Use the upgrade program and get the 1080


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> My plan is to buy a crappy plastic cooler card and the just slap a WB on it, flash it and have some fun! ^^
> 
> Don`t want to pay the FE premium as I`m getting a EK block.


That the best idea if you are going to water cool. Silly to throw that $100 cooler on the shelf!


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> wccftech reports that air cooled version from Gigabyte reach 2.4GHz overclock.
> There will be water cooled models from different companies able to reach 2.5GHz
> 
> Take it with some salt but I think 2.1GHz overclock is nothing compared to what we will see in the coming weeks. Especially when you see Nvidia`s presentation card only reaching 64C and the recent 2.1GHz overclock hit 59C max


Once again, 2.4GHz on 1080 is equivalent to 1500 on 980 Ti in terms of % overclock. Really that's the bare minimum it needs to overclock to be on par with Maxwell in terms of OC headroom.

As for temperature, Fire Strike benches are too short to be useful. My overclocked 980 Ti doesn't go over 65C running 1575/7800 or something like that.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Once again, 2.4GHz on 1080 is equivalent to 1500 on 980 Ti in terms of % overclock. Really that's the bare minimum it needs to overclock to be on par with Maxwell in terms of OC headroom.
> 
> As for temperature, Fire Strike benches are too short to be useful. My overclocked 980 Ti doesn't go over 65C running 1575/7800 or something like that.


Why the heck are you trying to downtalk it?
GTX 1080 at 2100MHz beats the living crap out of your 980Ti. That was an overclock from 1.7 to 2.1. Additional to 2.5GHz will bury your precious card

Think about that for a moment. Not only is it a chip with half the size of the 980Ti, but we are getting to 2500MHz clocks where its destroying the 980Ti with a lot less TDP and power.
Its simply amazing no matter how you look at it


----------



## SuperZan

Calm down there mate! The clockspeeds are very high, nobody's doubting that. The two caveats here are that Pascal requires high clocks as a feature to offer the performance increase that it does, and that 2.4GHz would be the number necessary to equal Maxwell OC headroom. Those points aren't down-talking, just fun facts.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Calm down there mate! The clockspeeds are very high, nobody's doubting that. The two caveats here are that Pascal _requires_ high clocks as a feature to offer the performance increase that it does, and that 2.4GHz would be the number necessary for equal Maxwell OC headroom. Those points aren't down-talking, just fun facts.


Caveat? What?

The card runs on high clocks but have low power. It can overclock much higher.
There is no caveat. Its how Pascal and Finfet is designed

Its the equivalent of lower clocks but higher power on 28nm.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Caveat? What?
> 
> The card runs on high clocks but have low power. It can overclock much higher.
> There is no caveat. Its how Pascal and Finfet is designed
> 
> Its the equivalent of lower clocks but higher power on 28nm.


In this case, the *condition* (for that is a key meaning of the word caveat) of Pascal's performance increase over Maxwell is that it must run high clocks. You keep seeing negative connotations to words that are only being used to describe performance, design, or putting the performance of the design into context.

Nobody is saying that Pascal sucks.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Why the heck are you trying to downtalk it?
> GTX 1080 at 2100MHz beats the living crap out of your 980Ti. That was an overclock from 1.7 to 2.1. Additional to 2.5GHz will bury your precious card
> 
> Think about that for a moment. Not only is it a chip with half the size of the 980Ti, but we are getting to 2500MHz clocks where its destroying the 980Ti with a lot less TDP and power.
> Its simply amazing no matter how you look at it


Pascal right now seems like all the performance comes from clock speeds. Kind of like Pentium 4 did.


----------



## looniam

pascal sucks.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> pascal sucks.


I saw that coming a mile away and yet I did nothing to stop it.


----------



## looniam




----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Why the heck are you trying to downtalk it?
> GTX 1080 at 2100MHz beats the living crap out of your 980Ti. That was an overclock from 1.7 to 2.1. Additional to 2.5GHz will bury your precious card
> 
> Think about that for a moment. Not only is it a chip with half the size of the 980Ti, but we are getting to 2500MHz clocks where its destroying the 980Ti with a lot less TDP and power.
> Its simply amazing no matter how you look at it


The only thing I'm downtalking is you trying to talk up that 2.4GHz, because as I pointed out earlier, 2.4GHz on 1080 is equivalent to reaching 1500 on 980 Ti. I challenge you to crunch the numbers yourself and prove me wrong on this.

Chip is half the size due to a node shrink LOL. And because of the node shrink (and transition to FinFET) comes with all the efficiency improvements. Seriously.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> The only thing I'm downtalking is you trying to talk up that 2.4GHz, because as I pointed out earlier, 2.4GHz on 1080 is equivalent to reaching 1500 on 980 Ti. I challenge you to crunch the numbers yourself and prove me wrong on this.
> 
> Chip is half the size due to a node shrink LOL. And because of the node shrink (and transition to FinFET) comes with all the efficiency improvements. Seriously.


He is sold. He will have a FE on day one!


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> The only thing I'm downtalking is you trying to talk up that 2.4GHz, because as I pointed out earlier, 2.4GHz on 1080 is equivalent to reaching 1500 on 980 Ti. I challenge you to crunch the numbers yourself and prove me wrong on this.
> 
> Chip is half the size due to a node shrink LOL. And because of the node shrink (and transition to FinFET) comes with all the efficiency improvements. Seriously.


When was the last time you saw a die with half the size beating the 2x as big chip with such performance? Oh yeah thats right, GTX 680 was bigger and overclocked much worse.

Its not "just a node shrink". Its a *huge* accomplishment when you look at everything


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> He is sold. He will have a FE on day one!


Beginning to think about these water cooled GTX 1080s that can reach 2.5GHz over the 1070 SLI I think


----------



## zealord

I think other people are just a little bit more conservative with their expectations since the overclocking capability and overclocking performance increases are only speculation/rumors so far.

we all hope it overclocks like a dream and the performance scales well with increased core clock, but people are not ready to commit to a final judgement before they have seen official reviews


----------



## looniam

anyone know the "make it work the way i want to" formula for excel?


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I think other people are just a little bit more conservative with their expectations since the overclocking capability and overclocking performance increases are only speculation/rumors so far.
> 
> we all hope it overclocks like a dream and the performance scales well with increased core clock, but people are not ready to commit to a final judgement before they have seen official reviews


The 2114MHz is already confirmed


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> anyone know the "make it work the way i want to" formula for excel?


A1 = expectations / reality + gingerbread wishes * candyland dreams


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> anyone know the "make it work the way i want to" formula for excel?
> 
> 
> 
> A1 = expectations / reality + gingerbread wishes * candyland dreams
Click to expand...











and here i was using unicorns²


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> When was the last time you saw a die with half the size beating the 2x as big chip with such performance? Oh yeah thats right, GTX 680 was bigger and overclocked much worse.
> 
> Its not "just a node shrink". Its a *huge* accomplishment when you look at everything


You're right, it's not just a node shrink, there's also FinFET involved.

In order to give merit to your 680 comparison, we'd have to redesign 680 on FinFET and then compare results.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> The 2114MHz is already confirmed


You know better than to use a screenshot from an nVidia presentation as "proof". We all know that card was under LN2 with a laboratory bios and custom drivers - and the screen was static. Probably a matte painting on the wall.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> The 2114MHz is already confirmed


Yeah and I am sure it overclocks higher than this.

What we DON'T know :

- how well does overclocking translate to performance. Your leak doesn't count. It's no official confirmation.

- how high does the card overclock

- how much will it be held back by bios or the 1x8 pin power connector

- how well are custom 1080s are going to overclock?

Maybe the Founders Edition overclocks to 2500mhz.
Maybe the Classified 1080 overclocks to 3200mhz.

We don't know yet


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> You know better than to use a screenshot from an nVidia presentation as "proof". We all know that card was under LN2 with a laboratory bios and custom drivers - and the screen was static. Probably a matte painting on the wall.


What are you talking about?








http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance

Thats the GALAX card running 2114MHz. No LN2, no special bios, no extra power phases etc. Ordinary 1080 you will get everywhere


----------



## Bogga

Haven't most rumours and leaks been quite spot on on the 10x0?

The potato pics of the cooler, the amount of memory and what they would use etc. etc.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> Thats the GALAX card running 2114MHz. No LN2, no special bios, no extra power phases etc. Ordinary 1080 you will get everywhere


get serious, seeing a few results with scores only and the the monitor of NVinspector would get laughed off HWbot.

no links to show run details with screen shot of desktop and gpu-z running and results - no proof.


----------



## Wepive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Its not "just a node shrink". Its a *huge* accomplishment when you look at everything


Wrong thread.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> Thats the GALAX card running 2114MHz. No LN2, no special bios, no extra power phases etc. Ordinary 1080 you will get everywhere


I love how 13% OC give 24% increase in performance lol.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> What are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> Thats the GALAX card running 2114MHz. No LN2, no special bios, no extra power phases etc. Ordinary 1080 you will get everywhere


Thing is, if you've ever used Afterburner (which is what the green on black graphs appear to be), the text isn't displayed like that. There is no gray bar along the bottom with all white text - at least not on any of the versions I run. The text is green, red, and white and the data is called out differently. Maybe that's not Afterburner but another monitoring program, still looks fake as heck to me. If it's something different, then I apologize. As it is, seems fishy.

ETA - Humble pie on a plate, I've never used the NV Inspector graph before. Sorry for calling that into question.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I love how 13% OC give 24% increase in performance lol.


yeah Ileakstuff will be pretty disappointed when he sees real reviews hit the street / or more likely people end up having them and the heavily overclocked GTX 1080 DOESN'T beat the heavily overclocked GTX 980 Ti by 40% like the leak would suggest


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Thing is, if you've ever used Afterburner (which is what the green on black graphs appear to be), the text isn't displayed like that. There is no gray bar along the bottom with all white text - at least not on any of the versions I run. The text is green, red, and white and the data is called out differently. Maybe that's not Afterburner but another monitoring program, still looks fake as heck to me. If it's something different, then I apologize. As it is, seems fishy.


ppsssst hey charlie:


but you are right . its still all fishy.


----------



## coelacanth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> 
> 
> benchmarks just leaked. at stock that's really impressive. 21% faster than titan x wow


The score is 29.8% higher than Titan X's in FireStrike Extreme.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> ppsssst hey charlie:
> 
> 
> but you are right . its still all fishy.


OK apologies offered. I've never used that before.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> The only thing I'm downtalking is you trying to talk up that 2.4GHz, because as I pointed out earlier, 2.4GHz on 1080 is equivalent to reaching 1500 on 980 Ti. I challenge you to crunch the numbers yourself and prove me wrong on this.
> 
> Chip is half the size due to a node shrink LOL. And because of the node shrink (and transition to FinFET) comes with all the efficiency improvements. Seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> He is sold. He will have a FE on day one!
Click to expand...

I'd be sold if I have more money to spare.

Trying to save up for a used Civic but nVidia just gotta release a 4k card. I mean 1080p.


----------



## magnek

I hate graph papers. Like you wouldn't even BEGIN to comprehend how much I've hated them since I had to start using them in school and my life got ruined by them. Yes I'm a papyrophobe and DAMN PROUD of it.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> But is like saying here GTX980 with 1300MHz OC.... Is that even a OC?


I am surprised you dont feel surprised

The fact that Ti are able to overclock till 1.5GHz and 1080 hitting 2.4GHz already show the 60% performance leap base on clock alone.

And that is still a healthy 28% lead (both OCed) over a 1.5GHz TX despite having 20% lesser cores. Anyway it will be fun quoting all the ppl here that claim: "*I will believe a 2.5GHz when I see one*"

And guys, you want to talk about OC %, compared it to *BASE CLOCK*

980 Ti has 50-55% OC over base clock
1080 has 50%-55% OC over base clock as well


----------



## BigMack70

Comparing anything to base clock is herpa derp derp levels of stupid. No Nvidia cards run at their base clock ever unless artificially constrained to do so. You determine an OC% by comparing OC clock to average actual boost clock


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Comparing anything to base clock is herpa derp derp levels of stupid. No Nvidia cards run at their base clock ever unless artificially constrained to do so. You determine an OC% by comparing OC clock to average actual boost clock


But its a fact the card can only run so much over its base clock.

And also the fact that GPU boost has improved over the years from 1.0 to 3.0. So much that it actually *part of the performance uplift.
*

Why you guys cant accept that? Comparing GPU boost of older to newer generation is same as apple to orange.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> Comparing anything to base clock is herpa derp derp levels of stupid. No Nvidia cards run at their base clock ever unless artificially constrained to do so. _You determine an OC% by comparing OC clock to average actual boost clock_


Which is nice in theory, but it's hard to say what the "average" actual boost clock is. There isn't a table or list somewhere you can use for comparison, so using the listed boost clock is the next best thing. At least it's an official published number.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Which is nice in theory, but it's hard to say what the "average" actual boost clock is. There isn't a table or list somewhere you can use for comparison, so using the listed boost clock is the next best thing. At least it's an official published number.


Don't know about pascal but for kepler/maxwell it's a frequency step of 13mhz, so 13/26/39... etc. and table is in the bios.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am surprised you dont feel surprised
> 
> The fact that Ti are able to overclock till 1.5GHz and 1080 hitting 2.4GHz already show the 60% performance leap base on clock alone.
> 
> And that is still a healthy 28% lead (both OCed) over a 1.5GHz TX despite having 20% lesser cores. Anyway it will be fun quoting all the ppl here that claim: "*I will believe a 2.5GHz when I see one*"
> 
> And guys, you want to talk about OC %, compared it to *BASE CLOCK*
> 
> 980 Ti has 50-55% OC over base clock
> 1080 has 50%-55% OC over base clock as well


I hope it does 2.4GHz. That would be amazing.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am surprised you dont feel surprised
> 
> The fact that Ti are able to overclock till 1.5GHz and 1080 hitting 2.4GHz already show the 60% performance leap base on clock alone.
> 
> And that is still a healthy 28% lead (both OCed) over a 1.5GHz TX despite having 20% lesser cores. Anyway it will be fun quoting all the ppl here that claim: "*I will believe a 2.5GHz when I see one*"
> 
> And guys, you want to talk about OC %, compared it to *BASE CLOCK*
> 
> *980 Ti has 50-55% OC over base clock*
> 1080 has 50%-55% OC over base clock as well










Ok, show me a single benchmark of 980ti which shows at least 50% performance boost across 3-4 games if you are going to use oc % that way. because that is misleading. saying it overclocks 50-55% but in reality it won't show anywhere close to that kind of performance boost because it's not a 50-55% oc. l2oc dude.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Which is nice in theory, but it's hard to say what the "average" actual boost clock is. There isn't a table or list somewhere you can use for comparison, so using the listed boost clock is the next best thing. At least it's an official published number.


It's not hard to determine average boost clock... Many review sites chart or record clock speed over time


----------



## magnek

Average for 980 Ti is 1167 with a range of 1101-1189 according to AnandTech.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Average for 980 Ti is 1167 with a range of 1101-1189 according to AnandTech.


Den wait till the same website published the same reading.

There is no point to compare what clock % it does, except to OC till max 24/7 and compared it in both card (980 Ti vs 1080). Its the only one that is fair and reasonable.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I hate graph papers. Like you wouldn't even BEGIN to comprehend how much I've hated them since I had to start using them in school and my life got ruined by them. Yes I'm a papyrophobe and DAMN PROUD of it.


Hey! I don't take kindly to papyrophobes who don't take kindly to graph papers.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigMack70*
> 
> It's not hard to determine average boost clock... Many review sites chart or record clock speed over time


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Average for 980 Ti is 1167 with a range of 1101-1189 according to AnandTech.


For each particular card it isn't hard to determine, but that doesn't tell you what 980 Ti generically does. The one 1080 we know of does 1080 (or whatever it is), but we don't know if all of them will do that, or if that is a good or bad example. I'd be willing to bet the average boost clock of a reference card is not the same as the average boost clock of a Strix, or G1 either.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Hey! I don't take kindly to papyrophobes who don't take kindly to graph papers.


Well I'm Peter Griffin, 'nuff said.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwHl3nSzz-s


----------



## carlhil2

Lol, this thread.....  The 1070 as fast as the Titan X, going by this chart anyways...


----------



## Jamaican Reaper

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/52117/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-arrive-liquid-cooled-version-2-5ghz/index.html


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> wccftech reports that air cooled version from Gigabyte reach 2.4GHz overclock.
> There will be water cooled models from different companies able to reach 2.5GHz
> 
> Take it with some salt but I think 2.1GHz overclock is nothing compared to what we will see in the coming weeks. Especially when you see Nvidia`s presentation card *only reaching 64C* and the recent 2.1GHz overclock hit 59C max


Was that the one that was FPS-locked to 60?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Caveat? What?
> 
> The card runs on high clocks but have low power. It can overclock much higher.
> There is no caveat. Its how Pascal and Finfet is designed
> 
> Its the equivalent of lower clocks but higher power on 28nm.


Dude is literally wetting himself over here!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> When was the last time you saw a die with half the size beating the 2x as big chip with such performance? Oh yeah thats right, GTX 680 was bigger and overclocked much worse.
> 
> Its not "just a node shrink". Its a *huge* accomplishment when you look at everything


Haha, your posts are simply a case-study in fanboyism. The 680 was EXACTLY the 1080 in that it beat the nearly twice as big GF110 by about 25% at much higher clocks and efficiency.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Beginning to think about these water cooled GTX 1080s that can reach 2.5GHz over the 1070 SLI I think


And you are basing that completely off of rumors. 100%. Not saying its wrong but you do not know this for a fact, yet you are already convinced 2500+ MHz is etched in stone. I hope we don't have to put you on suicide watch if 2500MHz doesn't materialize!


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And you are basing that completely off of rumors. 100%. Not saying its wrong but you do not know this for a fact, yet you are already convinced 2500+ MHz is etched in stone. I hope we don't have to put you on suicide watch if 2500MHz doesn't materialize!


2500 on 1080 would be akin to 1550 on 980 Ti. I'd say it's definitely possible BUT it may start sucking down power like crazy by that point and thermals may no longer look great.

(by sucking down power like crazy, I mean it'll probably turn into a 250W card, just like how GM200 turns into a 350W monster when pushed to 1550)


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jamaican Reaper*
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/news/52117/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-arrive-liquid-cooled-version-2-5ghz/index.html


Even for a rumor article, that one is light on information.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> 2500 on 1080 would be akin to 1550 on 980 Ti. I'd say it's definitely possible BUT it may start sucking down power like crazy by that point and thermals may no longer look great.
> 
> (by sucking down power like crazy, I mean it'll probably turn into a 250W card, just like how GM200 turns into a 350W monster when pushed to 1550)


I agree, 2500MHz is certainly in the realm of possibility considering the insane boost clocks quoted. That doesn't mean that its confirmed or anything though. And even if it does hit 2500MHz, there's no way to know exactly how that's going to scale in terms of actual FPS performance because we don't know anything about this architecture or node yet.


----------



## i7monkey

Who cares about megahertz when all that matters is absolute performance and absolute performance over it's predecessor.

Is $700 worth it for a 20-30% improvement over a 980Ti when the 680 showed a similar improvement for $499? Is a $499 midrange chip worth it when just a few years ago we got big die flagships for $499?

Short term memory syndrome?


----------



## Jamaican Reaper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Even for a rumor article, that one is light on information.


It is,i do hope there is some truth to it tho. Will be waiting for partnered 1080 (hopefully the Hydro) to replace my aging 780's.


----------



## Jamaican Reaper

Double posted


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Who cares about megahertz when all that matters is absolute performance and absolute performance over it's predecessor.
> 
> Is $700 worth it for a 20-30% improvement over a 980Ti when the 680 showed a similar improvement for $499? Is a $499 midrange chip worth it when just a few years ago we got big die flagships for $499?
> 
> Short term memory syndrome?


My Pentium 4 @ 4GHz will destroy your Core 2 Duo @ 1.86GHz.
Anyways a lot of people since Maxwell are loving these high clocks. Do not know the engineering behind Maxwell/Pascal but it seems Nvidia had chosen the "easier" way to get performance until they hit a wall like CPUs did.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

The 1080 clock speeds are mighty impressive I have to say. 2 GHz for video card is crazy! If we see the same kind of clock speeds on big pascal the performance is going to be unimaginable.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The 1080 clock speeds are mighty impressive I have to say. 2 GHz for video card is crazy! If we see the same kind of clock speeds on big pascal the performance is going to be unimaginable.


Now we know why those P100 clock speeds are so high.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I guess the only question is are there any architectural improvements with Pascal or are they simply relying on higher clock speeds for performance? Of course HBM2 is going to be a big factor I would imagine.


----------



## STEvil

these rumors of over 2.1ghz are tickling my bs button.

maybe, but not likely.


----------



## Vowels

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *STEvil*
> 
> these rumors of over 2.1ghz are tickling my bs button.
> 
> maybe, but not likely.


I'm not sure how you can say "not likely" when Nvidia showed 2.1GHz during their announcement event.


----------



## bmgjet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vowels*
> 
> I'm not sure how you can say "not likely" when Nvidia showed 2.1GHz during their announcement event.


Just like how they showed 1550mhz on the 980ti at one of there events yet most of them max out 1450-1500mhz unless you get lucky.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I guess the only question is are there any architectural improvements with Pascal or are they simply relying on higher clock speeds for performance? Of course HBM2 is going to be a big factor I would imagine.


Well 1080 @ 1733 (1860 actual boost?) with 2560 shaders is on par with a 980 Ti @ 1500 actual boost with 2816 shaders. That's 24% higher core clock to compensate for 9% less shaders.

Memory bandwidth the two are roughly on par (10 Gbps @ 256 bit = 320 GB/s; 7 Gbps @ 384 bit = 336 GB/s). I'd say clock for clock, Pascal might actually be slightly worse than Maxwell.


----------



## Forceman

Well, they cut the number of shader per SM again, like they did with Maxwell, so new drivers may improve the per clock performance. Some cache changes also, I think.


----------



## magnek

Also since everybody wants to play "be a clairvoyant", let me make the following predictions:

- Overclocking to 2.4GHz on air will be possible, but will run into heavy thermal and power limits on the reference Founder's Edition; AIB cards will fare better on the thermal front, and power can be overcome provided they provide at least a 6+8 configuration
- Max water overclock is around 2.55-2.6GHz, and the card will draw over 250W by that point


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Also since everybody wants to play "be a clairvoyant", let me make the following predictions:
> 
> - Overclocking to 2.4GHz on air will be possible, but will run into heavy thermal and power limits on the reference Founder's Edition; AIB cards will fare better on the thermal front, and power can be overcome provided they provide at least a 6+8 configuration
> - Max water overclock is around 2.55-2.6GHz, and the card will draw over 250W by that point


That would certainly make for some pretty impressive performance. However my guess is that Pascal will overclock just the same as Maxwell in that water won't really affect max over clocks all that much since Maxwell doesn't seem to scale very well with added voltage anyway. I could be wrong as I haven't followed the Titan X or 980 TI threads very much, but it seems to me like the maximum clocks are around 1500 to 1550 MHz either on air or water.


----------



## carlhil2

This is what someone is claiming on ChipHell "GTX 1080 3dmark Graphics division (water-cooled 2.5GHz winning [email protected] by 46% FS-31286 /FSE-15280 /FSU-7369.."


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> This is what someone is claiming on ChipHell "GTX 1080 3dmark Graphics division (water-cooled 2.5GHz winning [email protected] by 46% FS-31286 /*FSE-15280* /FSU-7369.."


Basically lines up with the math I just did.

They are claiming based on this:

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/52117/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-arrive-liquid-cooled-version-2-5ghz/index.html

2500MHz clockspeeds. Now if we take the most recent benchmarks after overclocked:



http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance

This was done with a 2114 MHz clock. If we say Pascal is actually boosting to 1800MHz stock (rough baseline estimate) this would be a 17% clockspeed improvement after overclocked. That netted a 25% increase in performance. So a 2500MHz clock is another 18% increase in clockspeed. Which would roughly translate to another 25% gain in performance based on what we can see (and assuming this is not linear scaling here we subtract 5%). Which would mean FireStrike scores @ 2500MHz would look like this:

GTX 1080 @ 2500MHz clock = 15,500 FireStrike Extreme Score
GTX 1080 @ 2114MHz clock = 12,921 FireStrike Extreme Score
GTX 980 Ti @ 2200MHz clock = 14,087 FireStrike Extreme Score

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6696190


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Basically lines up with the math I just did.
> 
> They are claiming based on this:
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/news/52117/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-arrive-liquid-cooled-version-2-5ghz/index.html
> 
> 2500MHz clockspeeds. Now if we take the most recent benchmarks after overclocked:
> 
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/59882/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-overclocking-performance
> 
> This was done with a 2114 MHz clock. If we say Pascal is actually boosting to 1800MHz stock (rough baseline estimate) this would be a 17% clockspeed improvement after overclocked. That netted a 25% increase in performance. So a 2500MHz clock is another 18% increase in clockspeed. Which would roughly translate to another 25% gain in performance based on what we can see (and assuming this is not linear scaling here we subtract 5%). Which would mean FireStrike scores @ 2500MHz would look like this:
> 
> GTX 1080 @ 2500MHz clock = 15,500 FireStrike Extreme Score
> GTX 1080 @ 2114 MHz clock = 12,921 FireStrike Extreme Score
> GTX 980 Ti @ 1886MHz clock = 14,087 FireStrike Extreme Score
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6696190


Good catch, but, weren't that Kingpin bench actually ran at 2.2G? EDIT: found the link http://hwbot.org/submission/3051525_kingpin_3dmark___fire_strike_extreme_geforce_gtx_980_ti_14432_marks


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Well, they cut the number of shader per SM again, like they did with Maxwell, so new drivers may improve the per clock performance. Some cache changes also, I think.


This I believe, over the time, it will be better than Maxwell IPC per core even compared at its best. (In case it get gimped)

Even at 5-10% IPC per core improvement, it will be means going from 25% to 37.5% lead over 980 Ti.


----------



## magnek

You don't gain 25% performance for a 17% overclock, it just doesn't work that way. Now if that GDDR5X was also heavily overclocked however then that could make it more plausible.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Good catch, but, weren't that Kingpin bench actually ran at 2.2G?


Yup appears so, he had a few runs that he did attempting 2.2GHz this was his final run:

14,432 Fire Strike Extreme

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6695719

Of course all on LN2 though. The 2500MHz 1080 is supposed to be under water.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You don't gain 25% performance for a 17% overclock, it just doesn't work that way. Now if that GDDR5X was also heavily overclocked however then that could make it more plausible.


In that case It will be better to wait for 1080 Ti for HBM2.

No way I will want to pay $600-700 for a memory bottlenecked mid-range. lol.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You don't gain 25% performance for a 17% overclock, it just doesn't work that way. Now if that GDDR5X was also heavily overclocked however then that could make it more plausible.


Maybe it will make sense when we find out the actual clocks that the reference card run at while benching/gaming at stock....


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> In that case It will be better to wait for 1080 Ti for HBM2.
> 
> No way I will want to pay $600-700 for a memory bottlenecked mid-range. lol.


Here's how I'm planning my purchase. I'm going to buy either the 1080 or the 1070 depending on how the 1070 performs whilst waiting for the 1080Ti. It shouldn't lose too much value over the time and I get to enjoy a new card in the meantime


----------



## hawker-gb

Who will buy midrange card for 600+ dollars?
Well,except boyz.









Xperia Z5 via Tapatalk


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> In that case It will be better to wait for 1080 Ti for HBM2.
> 
> No way I will want to pay $600-700 for a memory bottlenecked mid-range. lol.


What are you pushing now, a 980Ti?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I guess the only question is are there any architectural improvements with Pascal or are they simply relying on higher clock speeds for performance? Of course HBM2 is going to be a big factor I would imagine.


There should be but its minimal at best. I am pretty sure ipc will improve a bit as driver matures. But dont expect gp104 to perform at its best till gtx 1170 comes.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> What are you pushing now, a 980Ti?


1080 ti.

I know. Is going to be a gruelling wait.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> 1080 ti.
> 
> I know. Is going to be a gruelling wait.


Lol what gpu do you game with now?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> Here's how I'm planning my purchase. I'm going to buy either the 1080 or the 1070 depending on how the 1070 performs whilst waiting for the 1080Ti. It shouldn't lose too much value over the time and I get to enjoy a new card in the meantime


I am not sure how it turn out but i assume price will drop pretty quickly once amd show their hand. unlike the 980 ti where we reach the max limit of 28nm. We are only begining to see the potential of 14/16nm. Many more card coming out that is going to be more powerful in a pretty fast period.

Which is why i believe all gm200 owner are pretty blessed. They remain the top for over a year. No other flagship card allow them to enjoy for so long. Tbh.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Lol what gpu do you game with now?


670. But not the worst. The worst is that sucky plastic reference cooler. Yucks


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> 670. The worst is that sucky plastic reference cooler. Yucks


Yeah, time for an upgrade. hope that the Ti comes sooner than later, I don't want to hang on to the 1080 too long....here's hoping that AMD saves the Day....hopefully, AMD releases their big chip early to smack GP104 around, then, nVidia drops their chip to retaliate.....


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Yeah, time for an upgrade. hope that the Ti comes sooner than later, I don't want to hang on to the 1080 too long....here's hoping that AMD saves the Day....hopefully, AMD releases their big chip early to smack GP104 around, then, nVidia drops their chip to retaliate.....


Dont pin too much hope on amd. They have been failing to deliver. I am more interested on zen tbh. While amd always fails, jim keller doesnt! Haha!


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Dont pin tol much hope on amd. They have been failing to deliver. I am more interested on zen tbh. While amd always fails, kelly doesnt! Haha!


I don't know, I tend to think that AMD puts out competitive gpu's, it is just the rep, for whatever reason, and, bad marketing. I have faith that their big chip with HBM2 will put in work on the 1080.. can it compete with big pascal? that's the question....big pascal is going to be expensive, I can hear the controversy over the price now....


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Maybe it will make sense when we find out the actual clocks that the reference card run at while benching/gaming at stock....


Actual clocks don't matter. With perfect scaling you get 1% improvement for every 1% overclock. Here we're talking about 1.47% improvement for every 1% overclock, which is absurd. Literally the only possible explanation is the memory was also overclocked to make up for that 8% difference.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Actual clocks don't matter. With perfect scaling you get 1% improvement for every 1% overclock. Here we're talking about 1.47% improvement for every 1% overclock, which is absurd. Literally the only possible explanation is the memory was also overclocked to make up for that 8% difference.


Lol, I would HOPE that they OCed the ram, anyways, you are correct, but, we will find the answer to the riddle soon....I was talking to someone else about the OCed newer ram being a factor for higher scores in FS,......GDDR5X ftw,..lol going by that bench, a 980Ti at 2.1G scores just a little more than the 1080 at 2.1g in FSE....


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Food for thought.... 2.1Ghz GTX 1080 could be faster than Radeon Pro Duo.

nVidia the new king in price/performance confirmed.












$600-700 nVidia card beating a $1500 dual GPU AMD card???


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Food for thought.... 2.1Ghz GTX 1080 could be faster than Radeon Pro Duo.
> 
> nVidia the new king in price/performance confirmed.
> 
> $600-700 nVidia card beating a $1500 dual GPU AMD card???


There is no resolution for the firestrike on GTX 1080 benchie? Or I assume that is 1080p

This is the only I seen so far from PCPaper



It still abit slower. Maybe watercooled or high end air cooling 2.4GHz can beat it.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Food for thought.... 2.1Ghz GTX 1080 could be faster than Radeon Pro Duo.
> 
> nVidia the new king in price/performance confirmed.
> 
> $600-700 nVidia card beating a $1500 dual GPU AMD card???
> 
> 
> 
> There is no resolution for the firestrike on GTX 1080 benchie? Or I assume that is 1080p
Click to expand...

I believe performance is 1080p, and ultra is 2160p aka 4k


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I believe performance is 1080p, and ultra is 2160p aka 4k


13532 vs 12921. Firestrike extreme.

Pro Duo is still about 4% faster, which mean to safely beat it 2.2GHz for GTX 1080 is a must. At 2.5GHz it might match a OCed Pro Duo, Which I believe might struggle 10% OC.


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am not sure how it turn out but i assume price will drop pretty quickly once amd show their hand. unlike the 980 ti where we reach the max limit of 28nm. We are only begining to see the potential of 14/16nm. Many more card coming out that is going to be more powerful in a pretty fast period.
> 
> Which is why i believe all gm200 owner are pretty blessed. They remain the top for over a year. No other flagship card allow them to enjoy for so long. Tbh.


Well, bless your heart for this post!
did you really use the term, "Blessed", to describe a company's customers paying for the privilege to buy it's products? LMAO
I believe that it's the other way around- Nvidia is the one who should be feeling, what did you call it, oh yeah, "Blessed"... Lol


----------



## carlhil2

1070, 15-20% slower than the 1080, or, so they say..


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 1070, 15-20% slower than the 1080, or, so they say..


Half of that third fan isnt doing anything xD


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Half of that third fan isnt doing anything xD


Lol, ..


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Half of that third fan isnt doing anything xD


heatsink and heatpipes extends under 3rd fan. it's not doing nothing.


----------



## carlhil2

I am still not going for the whole 1070 being faster than a Titan X. a 980Ti, maybe, the TX just has so much brute force, at higher rez anyways...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Half of that third fan isnt doing anything xD
> 
> 
> 
> heatsink and heatpipes extends under 3rd fan. it's not doing nothing.
Click to expand...

I realized that as soon as I posted, but couldnt be bothered to edit.


----------



## Glottis

I'm wondering is this the new MSI flagship Frozr cooler design? or maybe it's their new lower tier coolers? in any case i'm glad they stopped with ugly red highlights that are so out of place in my neutral black build.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Average for 980 Ti is 1167 with a range of 1101-1189 according to AnandTech.


On the OC side of things:

According to HWBot...

Air: 1383/2297MHZ
Water: 1434/3485MHZ
LN2: 1849/2065MHZ


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 1070, 15-20% slower than the 1080, or, so they say..


Seems too close, considering the memory bandwidth limitations. I'd expect something closer to 25%.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Seems too close, considering the memory bandwidth limitations. I'd expect something closer to 25%.


I am guessing 980ti performance with some performance drop at 4K because of memory bandwidth.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> On the OC side of things:
> 
> According to HWBot...
> 
> Air: 1383/2297MHZ
> Water: 1434/3485MHZ
> LN2: 1849/2065MHZ


you are forgetting one thing, 980Ti is a 28nm 250W TDB monster that runs at 85C at stock clocks with reference cooler. 1080 overclocked runs below 60C with reference cooler. OC headroom on air will be through the roof. I'm absolutely positive there won't be any liquid cooled advantage over air cooling with 1080.


----------



## guttheslayer

I still find it hard to believe how a single mid range GPU can match a dual-flagship GPU from RTG, despite having need to OCed.

Worst the is pro duo is release just months ago, at twice the cost of 1080.

In any case, going to 2.4GHz, means the performance is getting really close with GTX 980 Ti SLI. And that is madness.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I still find it hard to believe how a single mid range GPU can match a dual-flagship GPU from RTG, despite having need to OCed.
> 
> Worst the is pro duo is release just months ago, at twice the cost of 1080.
> 
> In any case, going to 2.4GHz, means the performance is getting really close with GTX 980 Ti SLI. And that is madness.


I f these clocks are true, the 1080 will be 4k capable with one gpu, THAT'S crazy........


----------



## drewis

Same

Consider myself skeptical.

Single 4k card... I cant see it.... Not with any decent amount of eye candy on.. Even OC'd.


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I f these clocks are true, the 1080 will be 4k capable with one gpu, THAT'S crazy........


I don't think so, maybe 1080 Ti will be, but not 1080. You will see that i am right.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> I don't think so, maybe 1080 Ti will be, but not 1080. You will see that i am right.


I am talking if can actually hit 2.5G under water, that's almost SLI-980Ti....


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I am talking if can actually hit 2.5G under water, that's almost SLI-980Ti....


It is SLI


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> It is SLI


And, that's 4k material....


----------



## zGunBLADEz

4k material its irrevelant or to the expectation of the user. One single gpu @ 30 fps a 980ti can do ...

the way im looking at this it would be in the 40ish fps not yet 4k/60 material Not even close on new games


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> I don't think so, maybe 1080 Ti will be, but not 1080. You will see that i am right.


I agree, its not enough. To be really 4K capable on all AAA modern games its pretty much some distance away.

A 40% more core Pascal Titan that is heavily OCed can hit at capability. But by den [email protected] maybe out, and you probably need a pair.









Feel like pocket will never be deep enough to enjoy all this high end stuff.


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I am talking if can actually hit 2.5G under water, that's almost SLI-980Ti....


That really depends on what the typical boost clocks are, to give a sense of what % OC that is. If the card typically boosts to around 2 GHz at stock, then this is just a 25% overclock and not really anywhere close to SLI 980 Ti. If the card typically boosts to around 1.8 GHz at stock, then this would be a 39% OC and pretty much right on track with stock SLI 980 Ti (which is on average about 65% faster in games than a single card).


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Anybody wonder what SLI GTX 1080 will be like? They improved the bandwidth on SLI connectors...

Better SLI scaling incoming?


----------



## BigMack70

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Anybody wonder what SLI GTX 1080 will be like? They improved the bandwidth on SLI connectors...
> 
> Better SLI scaling incoming?


Hopefully back up to around the 1.8-1.85x mark average instead of the relatively pathetic 1.6-1.65x it's been at the last few years


----------



## carlhil2

I am talking about these numbers that someone claims that they got under water .. Geforce GTX 1080 @ 2.5 GHz - 3DMark Scores
Fire Strike: 31.286
Fire Strike Extreme: 15.280
Fire Strike Ultra 7.369 If true, should be as fast as sli-980Ti at stock...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I am talking about these numbers that someone claims that they got under water .. Geforce GTX 1080 @ 2.5 GHz - 3DMark Scores
> Fire Strike: 31.286
> Fire Strike Extreme: 15.280
> Fire Strike Ultra 7.369 If true, should be as fast as sli-980Ti at stock...


Which is faster than the Pro Duo









Looks like I have to shell out $1000 for the founder's edition, since USD to CAD is at 1.3 and I have to pay 13% tax.


----------



## caswow

iam so glad amd is not competing with nvidia so all of you guys have to pay big money for their cards


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caswow*
> 
> iam so glad amd is not competing with nvidia so all of you guys have to pay big money for their cards


Hey, you can always make more money, but you can only YOLO once.

#LivingInTheFastLane


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Hey, you can always make more money, but you can only YOLO once.
> 
> #LivingInTheFastLane


I absolutely agree with you,...YOLO once çause then you crash









Interesting results, if true. Wonder what the scaling is though... It may reach speeds but they may not materialize in performance.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> I absolutely agree with you,...YOLO once çause then you crash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting results, if true. Wonder what the scaling is though... It may reach speeds but they may not materialize in performance.


Yeah, like empty calories,..Lol


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> you are forgetting one thing, 980Ti is a 28nm 250W TDB monster that runs at 85C at stock clocks with reference cooler. 1080 overclocked runs below 60C with reference cooler. OC headroom on air will be through the roof. I'm absolutely positive there won't be any liquid cooled advantage over air cooling with 1080.





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> It may reach speeds but they may not materialize in performance.


how much did AMD pay for saying that ?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> how much did AMD pay for saying that ?


Because frequency increases always lead to linear performance gains...


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Because frequency increases always lead to linear performance gains...


Like seeing that 13% of overclock gaining you 24% on performance yeah right lol

The kool aid must be gold around here XD


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> how much did AMD pay for saying that ?


Ha, that was interesting... Don't get if it is sarcasm or a real question.
Nonetheless, we know that overclock doesn't scale linearly but if that points to me being paid... I can't tell the exact sum, but will by my new car tomorrow, if that is any indication









P.S. One has to carefully chose when registering a new account on forums. Avoid registering during:
Tech release dates
Strong rumors released
...actually, if you didn't register back in 2003, don't bother at all


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> Like seeing that 13% of overclock gaining you 24% on performance yeah right lol


Faith leave you blind to reason


----------



## NikolayNeykov

They will make games more demanding so it will be really hard untill truly supports 4k only one card


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> They will make games more demanding so it will be really hard untill truly supports 4k only one card


yeah with the PS4K coming out this year and a new Xbox One the GTX 1080 is going to end up being a 1080p card once again as soon as more demanding PS4K/Xbox One II games come out

When reviews come out the GTX 1080 will probably look like a good 4K/1440p card for nowadays games, but give it 1 year and it is no 4K/1440p card anymore.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> yeah with the PS4K coming out this year and a new Xbox One the GTX 1080 is going to end up being a 1080p card once again as soon as more demanding PS4K/Xbox One II games come out
> 
> When reviews come out the GTX 1080 will probably look like a good 4K/1440p card for nowadays games, but give it 1 year and it is no 4K/1440p card anymore.


1080 card is abit extreme. This card is still good for 1440p even for years to come.

Titan Pascal should do the trick. Hopefully.

I have a feeling this time round Titan might have gimped DP performance, probably at a 1:4 ratio instead. This will give more distinct difference between Quadro / Tesla and thus earn its true name of a "budget" professional card. It is probably done to prevent cannibalizing its Quadro series sales.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> They will make games more demanding so it will be really hard untill truly supports 4k only one card


oh i hope they do. i don't want to play simplistic looking games just so 0.01% of gamers with 4K monitors can have their 60fps with a single mid range GPU.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> They will make games more demanding so it will be really hard untill truly supports 4k only one card


lol, what?


----------



## Sheyster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hawker-gb*
> 
> Who will buy midrange card for 600+ dollars?
> Well,except boyz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xperia Z5 via Tapatalk


A lot of people, if it beats OC'd 980 Ti and has 2GB more RAM. We already know the striked out part. At this point I'm fairly certain the 1080 and 1070 will perform quite well for the price.

Don't hate son.


----------



## hawker-gb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sheyster*
> 
> A lot of people, if it beats OC'd 980 Ti and has 2GB more RAM. We already know the striked out part. At this point I'm fairly certain the 1080 and 1070 will perform quite well for the price.
> 
> Don't hate son.


Lot of boyz certainly.









Just like 980 when it was overpriced. Sometimes is better to wait.


----------



## HAL900

Newest 3dmark reads clock 3d or boost at the nvidia ??


----------



## chuy409

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hawker-gb*
> 
> Lot of boyz certainly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like 980 when it was overpriced. Sometimes is better to wait.


Yes. 2 months wait for me could of been soooooooooo worthwhile.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> yeah with the PS4K coming out this year and a new Xbox One the GTX 1080 is going to end up being a 1080p card once again as soon as more demanding PS4K/Xbox One II games come out
> 
> When reviews come out the GTX 1080 will probably look like a good 4K/1440p card for nowadays games, but give it 1 year and it is no 4K/1440p card anymore.


how many years before 290X matches 1080?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> how many years before 290X matches 1080?


where are the reviews?
oh wait..


----------



## y2kcamaross

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hawker-gb*
> 
> Lot of boyz certainly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like 980 when it was overpriced. Sometimes is better to wait.


yup....only "boyz"buy x80 series cards, real "men"buy the big dies


----------



## hawker-gb

Only boyz buy at launch with overinflated price.

Xperia Z5 via Tapatalk


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hawker-gb*
> 
> Only boyz buy at launch with overinflated price.


"boyz" are not the only ones demand instant gratification... Most of this community has no patience... I am all for the impatient funding technological advancements


----------



## ChevChelios

by boyz does he mean "enthusiast users" ?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> by boyz does he mean "enthusiast users" ?


I don't think so as enthusiasts do usually buy the big-die GPU's (some do the buy-every-new-thing as it comes out). I think he means youthful people but I can't be certain.


----------



## magnek

He means spoiled teeange brats with rich parents that will buy them anything they please.

And also people with more money than sense.


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> He means spoiled teeange brats with rich parents that will buy them anything they please.
> 
> And also people with more money than sense.


or an adult with a job.....


----------



## carlhil2

You are never supposed to let them see you sweat....crying in public is never a good look...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> or an adult with a job.....


Which is like 95% of the userbase here...


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Which is like 95% of the userbase here...


I never said otherwise, just explaining that one can afford these cards with an average salary too.


----------



## carlhil2

My main job is painting houses. on the side, I build/service computers, etc. also quit smoking recently. me and my girl share the bills. we have no dependents but our pets. life is good......


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> I never said otherwise, just explaining that one can afford these cards with an average salary too.


Well I was simply speculating what he meant by "boyz", so as far as that goes, I'd like to think I'm pretty on the mark.


----------



## Pragmatist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well I was simply speculating what he meant by "boyz", so as far as that goes, I'd like to think I'm pretty on the mark.


Fair enough, I guess.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> how many years before 290X matches 1080?


I'm sure that's what AMD wants. People holding onto their cards forever instead of upgrading and giving them more money. Soon enough we're going to see fathers passing along their 290X's to their children and then they'll be passed onto their children's children... Nvidia plays it so well with leaving older generations in the dust and, at least before the 980 Ti dropped, giving you less VRAM than AMD, thus reducing the lifespan of the card. Oh and let's not forget launching cards every 9-12 months vs every 18-24. /rant


----------



## SuperZan

*Slow clap*

I've got several random GPU's from Fermi/Barts on through Maxwell/Fiji and it never fails. The Nvidia cards don't get "gimped", you just stop seeing improvements from per-game drivers past a certain point. The drivers themselves still work, you're just not getting the benefits of architectural optimisation. That's to be expected of course, but Nvidia GPU's are designed around a fast-paced upgrade cadence. It is what it is, but it really should take some of the shine off the "rebrands suck" argument. New "innovations" are great, but when rebrands are competitive with new designs, that says something.


----------



## chuy409

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pragmatist*
> 
> or an adult with a half decent job.....


Fixed.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*


Didn't say they were gimped and by lifespan I mean how long they last before performance isn't there or vram is a hindrance. Its great for us but bad for AMD. Especially the long release cycles. Can't have planned obsolescence with cycles that long. Nvidia just does it right from a business perspective but from a consumer perspective it's sickening.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Didn't say they were gimped and by lifespan I mean how long they last before performance isn't there or vram is a hindrance. Its great for us but bad for AMD. Especially the long release cycles. Can't have planned obsolescence with cycles that long. Nvidia just does it right from a business perspective but from a consumer perspective it's sickening.


Oh I know you didn't say anything about gimping. Your post just reminded me of how some Nvidia fans react to any mention of driver optimisation fall-off and equate it to accusations of driver gimping.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Oh I know you didn't say anything about gimping. Your post just reminded me of how some Nvidia fans react to any mention of driver optimisation fall-off and equate it to accusations of driver gimping.


I'm just a grouch that hates both companies


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I'm just a grouch that hates both companies


That's healthy. I'm largely indifferent but seeing some of the insane things people say sets off my logic alarms. I'm the person that saw that "someone is wrong on the internet" meme and thought, "good on you mate, doing the lord's work".


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I'm just a grouch that hates both companies


I hope your name isn't Oscar.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I hope your name isn't Oscar.


It's whatever you want it to be.

I really gotta learn how to do the emoticons on mobile OCN.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You mean increases from one generation to the next? You could put that down to inflation. According to http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/, $ 599 in 2006 (GeForce 8800 GTX launch date and price) is $ 707.54 now.


Don't try to talk economics to anyone on OCN, from what I've gathered in my few attempts to explain how simple things like inflation works, it falls on either deaf or ignorant ears. I gave up a few weeks ago after my post about the economy of China was removed but another member was allowed to openly spout nationalist propaganda with no recourse. I threw my hands up after that.

I'll be buying a FE 1080 day 1 and anyone who doesn't like it can look at a single finger I am holding up.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Don't try to talk economics to anyone on OCN, from what I've gathered in my few attempts to explain how simple things like inflation works, it falls on either deaf or ignorant ears. I gave up a few weeks ago after my post about the economy of China was removed but another member was allowed to openly spout nationalist propaganda with no recourse. I threw my hands up after that.
> 
> I'll be buying a FE 1080 day 1 and anyone who doesn't like it can look at a single finger I am holding up.


Depending on the OCability of a RE card I might pick one up too.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> Depending on the OCability of a RE card I might pick one up too.


I'll just buy a superclocked card from EVGA like I did last time. I rarely mess with OCing my GPU. If my GPU cannot handle the game @60ps then it's time to buy a new one. This is why I'm ready to buy a new GPU The Division usually struggles to maintain 60fps at ultra settings. Time to buy a new card. Running 4 instances of EVE is smooth but my CPU is bottlenecking when trying to stream. Waiting on intel to get off their butts and release BW - E .. m ight be around the same time.. June is looking like a month in which I'll drop 2k on computer parts.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I dunno if i should get a FE PCB(Refrence PCB) card and put a waterblock on. I`m hoping for a 2500mhz OC, dunno how the single 8 pin will tolerate that tho.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I dunno if i should get a FE PCB(Refrence PCB) card and put a waterblock on. I`m hoping for a 2500mhz OC, dunno how the single 8 pin will tolerate that tho.


Well in 3 days we should get some benchmarks and hopefully someone tried to overclock it.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I dunno if i should get a FE PCB(Refrence PCB) card and put a waterblock on. I`m hoping for a 2500mhz OC, dunno how the single 8 pin will tolerate that tho.


FWIW, I'd keep an eye out for announcements of AIB partner cards with reference PCB's that use cheapo coolers. You can shuck those and put blocks on them and maybe end up paying closer to the $599 MSRP.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Don't try to talk economics to anyone on OCN, from what I've gathered in my few attempts to explain how simple things like inflation works, it falls on either deaf or ignorant ears. I gave up a few weeks ago after my post about the economy of China was removed but another member was allowed to openly spout nationalist propaganda with no recourse. I threw my hands up after that.
> 
> I'll be buying a FE 1080 day 1 and anyone who doesn't like it can look at a single finger I am holding up.


I think most people understand simple inflation just fine. We're not idiots, when we say "price hike" we mean _on top of what can be accounted for by inflation_. Also Oj010 gave a very bad example; why not try comparing what 560 Ti cost in 2011 and what 680 cost in 2012?


----------



## steveTA1983

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Don't try to talk economics to anyone on OCN, from what I've gathered in my few attempts to explain how simple things like inflation works, it falls on either deaf or ignorant ears. I gave up a few weeks ago after my post about the economy of China was removed but another member was allowed to openly spout nationalist propaganda with no recourse. I threw my hands up after that.
> 
> I'll be buying a FE 1080 day 1 and anyone who doesn't like it can look at a single finger I am holding up.


i like your response


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I think most people understand simple inflation just fine. We're not idiots, when we say "price hike" we mean _on top of what can be accounted for by inflation_. Also Oj010 gave a very bad example; why not try comparing what 560 Ti cost in 2011 and what 680 cost in 2012?


Good then we can compare the cost inhibited by Nvidia and AMD between the production of a 40nm and 28nm and then a 16nm die.... or is that unfair also?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Good then we can compare the cost inhibited by Nvidia and AMD between the production of a 40nm and 28nm and then a 16nm die.... or is that unfair also?


If you have the relevant data, by all means I'm all ears.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Good then we can compare the cost inhibited by Nvidia and AMD between the production of a 40nm and 28nm and then a 16nm die.... or is that unfair also?


No not unfair, but explain why Nvidia's margins are better than ever?


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> No not unfair, but explain why Nvidia's margins are better than ever?


Because the market is willing to bear the increased cost of Nvidia GPUs, thereby increasing the profit margins of Nvidia GPUs.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well I was simply speculating what he meant by "boyz", so as far as that goes, I'd like to think I'm pretty on the mark.


I'm thinking he was referring to fanboys actually...


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> If you have the relevant data, by all means I'm all ears.




source is semi conductor engineering

The number to the left is millions of dollars.. notice the fab of 16nm is going to cost about 320 million


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> 
> 
> source is semi conductor engineering
> 
> The number to the left is millions of dollars.. notice the fab of 16nm is going to cost about 320 million


If you are going to argue that we should always be paying more for processors every time there is a node shrink then we should have arrived at $2k cards by now. Look at Intel, they have been at 14nm for much longer than either of these companies yet their mainstream CPU pricing has been largely constant since the first i7's on 45nm...


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> If you are going to argue that we should always be paying more for processors every time there is a node shrink then we should have arrived at $2k cards by now. Look at Intel, they have been at 14nm for much longer than either of these companies yet their mainstream CPU pricing has been largely constant since the first i7's on 45nm...


Up until 28 nm the node shrinks weren't that relatively expensive compared to the previous generation. The last two generations have seen development costs skyrocket. Go back and look. 28 and 16nm have costs tons.. I would struggle to imagine what intel is paying to do 10nm


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> If you are going to argue that we should always be paying more for processors every time there is a node shrink then we should have arrived at $2k cards by now. Look at Intel, they have been at 14nm for much longer than either of these companies yet their mainstream CPU pricing has been largely constant since the first i7's on 45nm...


I think costs may have increase as a result of the increased cost of 14/16nm fabrication. I think a larger cause of the price increase is the willingness of people to pay more for video cards than in the past. Nvidia wants to maximize profit which is selling the largest number of products for the highest price it can, which is the equilibrium.

For example, and this is hypothetical, Nvidia could sell 10 video cards at $1000, 15 at $750 or 25 at $400.

The first and last yield the same sales, but the last requires 15 more cards to be produced with the last option.

The middle option is preferred over the others as it is at a point where Nvidia can sell the most units for the highest total amount resulting in the largest total sales.

I hope this helps. If anyone has done calculus, they'll understand the mathematical side of this.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> Up until 28 nm the node shrinks weren't that relatively expensive compared to the previous generation. The last two generations have seen development costs skyrocket. Go back and look. 28 and 16nm have costs tons.. I would struggle to imagine what intel is paying to do 10nm


So you are saying we should expect $1k midrange GPU's and $2k flagships by next node? Cuz costs of production won't matter, people are not going to pay such inflated prices. And even if the cost is getting much higher per node than they used to be, the per-chip margins still seem to be quite large...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> 
> 
> source is semi conductor engineering
> 
> The number to the left is millions of dollars.. notice the fab of 16nm is going to cost about 320 million


Isn't that chart just for SoC's and not ASICs like what GPUs are? A huge part of that increase comes from software, and wouldn't that just be driver development for GPUs? Hard to fathom the costs would jump so much between nodes.

Regardless, even from 65nm to 40nm the cost increased, but Fermi's pricing was anything but. Of course one could always argue Fermi was the exception rather than the norm.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Isn't that chart just for SoC's and not ASICs like what GPUs are? A huge part of that increase comes from software, and wouldn't that just be driver development for GPUs? Hard to fathom the costs would jump so much between nodes.
> 
> Regardless, even from 65nm to 40nm the cost increased, but Fermi's pricing was anything but. Of course one could always argue Fermi was the exception rather than the norm.


You are correct. The article discusses SOCs and never mentions ASICs. I don't see how software would be any different for a largely similar architecture, fabricated on a smaller node. It may be fair to look at the graph and ignore some of the software costs.


----------



## looniam

w/o concrete number for yields, that, at best (which is two years old btw), is only telling half the story.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> You are correct. The article discusses SOCs and never mentions ASICs. I don't see how software would be any different for a largely similar architecture, fabricated on a smaller node. It may be fair to look at the graph and ignore some of the software costs.


The principle is the same. It costs more to produce smaller. Nvidia even said earlier last year that 16nm was costing quite a bit more than 28


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkpriest667*
> 
> The principle is the same. It costs more to produce smaller. Nvidia even said earlier last year that 16nm was costing quite a bit more than 28


I'm not arguing that it isn't more expensive. It is more expensive. I have issue with the graph as it refers to SOCs and not ASICs, which is the basis of the argument.


----------



## Darkpriest667

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> I'm not arguing that it isn't more expensive. It is more expensive. I have issue with the graph as it refers to SOCs and not ASICs, which is the basis of the argument.


the graph was simply a visual representation to show them. The prices are pretty comparable.

how much do you THINK it costs Nvidia to develop an ASIC 16nm chip? Just guess.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> You are correct. The article discusses SOCs and never mentions ASICs. I don't see how software would be any different for a largely similar architecture, fabricated on a smaller node. It may be fair to look at the graph and ignore some of the software costs.


If you ignore the software cost the remain costs still about doubled (eyeballing it), which tracks what was said before the cards launched - that 14/16 is roughly double the wafer cost of 28nm.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> If you ignore the software cost the remain costs still about doubled (eyeballing it), which tracks what was said before the cards launched - that 14/16 is roughly double the wafer cost of 28nm.


That could be possible. I have no clue what the costs are.


----------



## magnek

I guess I was expecting something like the following when production costs were mentioned:





Source

But yes it's no secret that 20nm represents the inflection point for cost per transistor scaling, and in fact costs start going UP after 20nm.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> That could be possible. I have no clue what the costs are.


This is an old article, but seems fairly informative.
Quote:


> But perhaps the biggest issue is cost. The average IC design cost for a 28nm device is about $30 million, according to Gartner. In comparison, the IC design cost for a mid-range 14nm SoC is about $80 million. "Add an extra 60% (to that cost) if embedded software development and mask costs are included," Gartner's Wang said. "A high-end SoC can be double this amount, and a low-end SoC with re-used IP can be half of the amount."
> 
> On top of that, it takes 100 engineer-years to bring out a 28nm chip design. "Therefore, a team of 50 engineers will need two years to complete the chip design to tape-out. Then, add 9 to 12 months more for prototype manufacturing, testing and qualification before production starts. That is if the first silicon works," he said. "For a 14nm mid-range SoC, it takes 200 man-years. A team of 50 engineers will need four years of chip design time, plus add nine to 12 months for production."


http://semiengineering.com/finfet-rollout-slower-than-expected/

Edit: Just realized that's probably the same source as the previous post.


----------



## magnek

I hate SoC's, I really do.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I hate SoC's, I really do.


Me too. The only ones I like are thigh high and rainbow colored.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Me too. The only ones I like are thigh high and rainbow colored.


The ones with toes are the best.


----------



## magnek

^Google SoCs lol


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> ^Google SoCs lol


Ugly


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> The ones with toes are the best.


I didn't know you modeled socks in your spare time?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I think most people understand simple inflation just fine. We're not idiots, when we say "price hike" we mean _on top of what can be accounted for by inflation_. Also Oj010 gave a very bad example; why not try comparing what 560 Ti cost in 2011 and what 680 cost in 2012?


Except I didn't give examples?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I didn't know you modeled socks in your spare time?


Only the ones with the toesies! It's an under-served niche.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Except I didn't give examples?


You used 8800 GTX as an example:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You mean increases from one generation to the next? You could put that down to inflation. According to http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/, $ 599 in 2006 (GeForce 8800 GTX launch date and price) is $ 707.54 now.


Edit: Before this drags on any further, I said it was a bad example because it's not the kind of price increase we're talking about since Kepler, and there are better examples to exemplify that. I've beaten the horse enough as it is so I'm going to leave it at that.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You used 8800 GTX as an example:
> Edit: Before this drags on any further, I said it was a bad example because it's not the kind of price increase we're talking about since Kepler, and there are better examples to exemplify that. I've beaten the horse enough as it is so I'm going to leave it at that.


Oh sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that I compared the 560 price to the 680 price.


----------



## tajoh111

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> If you are going to argue that we should always be paying more for processors every time there is a node shrink then we should have arrived at $2k cards by now. Look at Intel, they have been at 14nm for much longer than either of these companies yet their mainstream CPU pricing has been largely constant since the first i7's on 45nm...


Intel is largely in charge of their own destiny because they control their own production and don't compete for wafers. Being in control of a state of the art FAB and having everything in house really has it's benefits because they can control production and continually increase yields. As a result, Intel has been able to keep their gross margins very steady. And if you look at intels chips, when they start on a new node, they make their chips small to reduce risk. Additionally, if yields are bad, they are willing to slow down production, let chips run out because AMD is not a threat until yields get better. This keeps costs under control. Intel being in their dominant position and being in charge of their own manufacturing means there is also very little writeoff of inventory. No excess production and needing to write off inventory because of the competition saves them money.

Also margins are very healthy to begin with on CPU's. Beside Core i7, 40 lane enthusiast chips, we are paying a huge amount for die that are well under 200mm2. The latest skylake chip is only 122mm2 and consists of only 2 billion transistors. The top bin is 350 dollars and almost all of this goes to Intel. The Revenue from a GPU sale has to be split so many more ways, plus the manufacturing cost of the rest of the videocard, that all things considered, we are getting more chip for our dollar compare to an Intel CPU.

Also because Intel is so ahead of the manufacturing game and because AMD has not put any pressure on them, they have been able to slow down an extend a node for often long periods of time. This in turn reduces the monthly depreciation expense compared to the other fabs.

TSMC and samsung have massive depreciation expenses because nodes are only good for 2 years and they are replaced with something more advanced. This pressure is caused by the telecom industry which demand higher performance annually. It has also allowed them to rapidly catch up to Intel which has slowed down their research This in turn has a big effect on semiconductor production companies because the biggest single cost is amoritization of technology and depreciation of a fab equipment/facilities. This is because each upgrade or new factory costs several billion dollars and writing this off every couple years is very expensive. And because their is a fierce competition between TSMC and Samsung, both fabs are willing to undergo this risk both have expensive upgrades. What affords them this risk is a combination of demand and the ability to raise wafer prices which in turn gets passed on to the consumer. Also the greater importance of telecoms to these fabricators means companies like Nvidia who used to for example have a contract where they could build as big a chip as they wanted and they would only pay for working chips when they were on 40nm can't get as favorable contracts.

Also one more thing you will notice is the desktop market is contracting and the number of discrete cards is shrinking, yet costs are rising. This means companies have to make up for it by charging more, whether it is AMD or Nvidia. If Nvidia still charged 500 dollars for flagships, 300(uncut) dollars for 204 parts they would lose money. Their net profits, particularly without the Intel settlement money aren't big enough to accept the blow from their overall revenue that those prices drops would cause. The only way a company could survive on these type of prices is if they are willing to run bone dry when it comes to R and D and production. Which AMD has sort of done.


----------



## HAL900

http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/16/05/15/v2t.png


----------



## Schmuckley

Futuremark anyhow


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> 
> http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/16/05/15/v2t.png


So Nvidias reference completely shuts off the fan when idle. Good

Also look at that idle voltage. Very low. Only 5W


----------



## looniam

yes i had to check!
TechPowerUp Releases GPU-Z 0.8.8
Quote:


> *Added support for NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080*, GTX 980 in laptop, GTX 965M, 940M, 910M, GT 755M, Quadro M6000 24 GB, M4000M, K3100M, M500M, Tesla M40, M60


Quote:


> Also look at that idle voltage. Very low. Only 5W


don't assume that until you look at a bios.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> yes i had to check!
> TechPowerUp Releases GPU-Z 0.8.8
> 
> don't assume that until you look at a bios.


Do the math yourself


----------



## mkclan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> The ones with toes are the best.


I like her legs.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Wow! 0.7v idle with the fans off and only 30c. Impressive.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 1080 is the flashy spectacle, while 1070 is the silent killer










Think you right


----------



## jincuteguy

So I heard EVGa been selling these 1080 Founder Edition early? is this true?


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mkclan*
> 
> I like her legs.


If you're into hot dog legs...


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Do the math yourself


yeah i can math but like i said don't ASSUME until you see it; *it's just wrong to believe all 1080 cards have the same TDP.*


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jincuteguy*
> 
> So I heard EVGa been selling these 1080 Founder Edition early? is this true?


Doubtful, there's normally a restriction on when they can go on sale.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> yeah i can math but like i said don't ASSUME until you see it; *it's just wrong to believe all 1080 cards have the same TDP.*


Yes all GTX1080s Reference have same TDP.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yes all GTX1080s Reference have same TDP.


No it depends the ASIC quality and the leakage.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> yeah i can math but like i said don't ASSUME until you see it; *it's just wrong to believe all 1080 cards have the same TDP.*
> 
> 
> 
> Yes all GTX1080s Reference have same TDP.
Click to expand...

did i say reference?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> No it depends the ASIC quality and the leakage.


Thats power consumption. TDP is only relevant to cooling and all that is taken into consideration.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Thats power consumption. TDP is only relevant to cooling and all that is taken into consideration.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

We're all Electrical Engineers on here.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> We're all Electrical Engineers on here.


which is surprising considering how little evidence is needed when accepting facts.

whoa! using software that reads other software reading firmware is accurate power readings. who knew?

not sites using expensive equipment for measurements. . . silly fools!


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> which is surprising considering how little evidence is needed when accepting facts.
> 
> whoa! using software that reads other software reading firmware is accurate power readings. who knew?
> 
> not sites using expensive equipment for measurements. . . silly fools!


Well you are nitpicking.
Wether the voltage increase by 0.01V from model to model during idle because of silicon quality, its still a lot less than 980Ti. That was sorta my point


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well you are nitpicking.
> Wether the voltage increase by 0.01V from model to model during idle because of silicon quality, its still a lot less than 980Ti. That was sorta my point


i didn't say anything about ASIC or voltage. i first talked about the bios and then software reading the driver.

anyone who has used a kill-o-watt (which just itself isn't 100% accurate given psu efficiency) will know the difference. hell even using the read points on a PCB will vary with readings on a DMM. pssst closer to the chip is more accurate.

but nice try.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> i didn't say anything about ASIC or voltage. i first talked about the bios and then software reading the driver.
> 
> anyone who has used a kill-o-watt (which just itself isn't 100% accurate given psu efficiency) will know the difference. hell even using the read points on a PCB will vary with readings on a DMM. pssst closer to the chip is more accurate.
> 
> but nice try.


How do you measure GPU draw using killo-watt? Plug the GPU directly in?








GPU-Z doesnt lie. If it say power consumption is 2.8% of TDP, you can easily calculate the power draw.
Yes its probably the chip. Who cares anyway. I didnt even say it was the gpu in total. You just assumed


----------



## magnek

You guys realize HAL9000 is the same guy who kept spamming those fake 1080 benches running Rise of the Tomb Raider right? I'd take anything he says or posts with a huge grain of salt.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You guys realize HAL9000 is the same guy who kept spamming those fake 1080 benches running Rise of the Tomb Raider right? I'd take anything he says or posts with a huge grain of salt.


It was in this article earlier. TPU messed up but deleted the 1080 and replaced it with 980Ti.
Its real

http://www.techpowerup.com/222453/techpowerup-releases-gpu-z-0-8-8


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> How do you measure GPU draw using killo-watt? Plug the GPU directly in?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GPU-Z doesnt lie. If it say power consumption is 2.8% of TDP, you can easily calculate the power draw.
> Yes its probably the chip. Who cares anyway. I didnt even say it was the gpu in total. You just assumed


lets see take kill-o-watt reading of a A) rig idling w/o card B) install card and take another reading. A-B= power consumption








you don't know this stuff do you? or do you wish to be snarky at the cost of looking . . .not so smart.

and gpu-z IS NOT accurate _nor is any other software_ (AB HWinfo, PX . or whatever). it reads what the driver reports. the driver reports what nvidia TELLS it to report.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> lets see take kill-o-watt reading of a A) rig idling w/o card B) install card and take another reading. A-B= power consumption
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you don't know this stuff do you? or do you wish to be snarky at the cost of looking . . .not so smart.
> 
> and gpu-z IS NOT accurate _nor is any other software_ (AB HWinfo, PX . or whatever).


Hey grumpy. Got off on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
Your method isnt perfect. Using the GPU may invoke more CPU utilization, RAM usage etc, suddenly you have CPU and RAM power consumption in that difference. Which counts a lot since idle consumption of a GPU is small in itself

Sorry, but only TomsHardware or TechPowerUp`s methods of hooking on directly to PCIe port are the only correct methods of measuring real power consumption of a card


----------



## sugarhell

Inc savage answer


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Hey grumpy. Got off on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
> Your method isnt perfect. Using the GPU may invoke more CPU utilization, RAM usage etc, suddenly you have CPU and RAM power consumption in that difference.
> 
> Sorry, but only TomsHardware or TechPowerUp`s methods of hooking on directly to PCIe port are the only correct methods


oh i'm the one being nitpicky.







and i already said a kill-o-watt isn't 100% accurate, no? but its better than relying on software.

i'm not the one who is posting or using small screen snippets and claiming anything here, nor did i reply with a snarky "do the math" reply. glad you mentioned tom's, remember how they found a LARGE variance between nvidia's specced TDP for maxwell and actual power consumption?









i pointed out a potential and likely flaw - if you don't like being corrected, i'm not sorry.


----------



## mkclan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> oh i'm the one being nitpicky.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and i already said a kill-o-watt isn't 100% accurate, no? but its better than relying on software.
> 
> i'm not the one who is posting or using small screen snippets and claiming anything here, nor did i reply with a snarky "do the math" reply. glad you mentioned tom's, remember how they found a LARGE variance between nvidia's specced TDP for maxwell and actual power consumption?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i pointed out a potential and likely flaw - if you don't like being corrected, i'm not sorry.


I think that the most important is the consumption of the wall,because that is what leads to additional costs.I am disturbed that spend their power, the chief of the GPU that after insertion it is used in addition power.
Sry my english


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> oh i'm the one being nitpicky.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and i already said a kill-o-watt isn't 100% accurate, no? but its better than relying on software.
> 
> i'm not the one who is posting or using small screen snippets and claiming anything here, nor did i reply with a snarky "do the math" reply. glad you mentioned tom's, remember how they found a LARGE variance between nvidia's specced TDP for maxwell and actual power consumption?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i pointed out a potential and likely flaw - if you don't like being corrected, i'm not sorry.


GPU-Z are actually one hundred % correct. It takes voltage and current and calculate what the chip draws, only display it as % of TDP.
Your method of using kill-a-watt isnt 99% accurate in comparison, not even 90%. It much more unreliable, and its sad to see all the sites that use that method because they have no other method. Some even use TDP of all components, a kill-a-watt, and deduct the TDP of each component from the kill-a-watt reading and is left with that they claim is the power consumption of the card lol

Thats why I always use TPU since they use correct equipment to read live draw


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> GPU-Z are actually one hundred % correct. It takes voltage and current and calculate what the chip draws, only display it as % of TDP.


so you're saying w1zard is wrong? you know the developer of gpu-z . . .








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Your method of using kill-a-watt isnt 99% accurate in comparison, not even 90%. It much more unreliable, and its sad to see all the sites that use that method because they have no other method. Some even use TDP of all components, a kill-a-watt, and deduct the TDP of each component from the kill-a-watt reading and is left with that they claim is the power consumption of the card lol


did i say it was "my method?" nope. you ask how and i answered.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Hey n00b, we are not getting anywhere.
Lets move on ok


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> so you're saying w1zard is wrong? you know the developer of gpu-z . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> did i say it was "my method?" nope. you ask how and i answered.


Yeah, I thought it was just the method..


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Hey n00b, we are not getting anywhere.
> Lets move on ok


what? no.

you're complete wrong about gpu-z and i won't accept people passing off crap as truth.

the voltage controller is monitored by the driver, been that way since kepler and continued with maxwell with buck controllers not having I²C support.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980_Ti/6.html
Quote:


> The controller has no support for I2C, so there is no advanced monitoring. *Its VID-based voltages can be monitored and controlled through NVIDIA's driver.*


it reads what the driver reports, for other AIB cards such as the classy, kingpin, lighting, HOF and whatnot that do not have a reference buck controller, you need other software (usually available) or modify AB to read it proper. _though for ALL those cards its HIGHLY advised to get a DMM and use the pcb's read points!_

TDP can change with a bios flash, reading 2.6% for 190 watts would be different than 170 watts. as i said originally, w/o seeing the bios - believing the TDP was 180 watts would be an _assumption_. nvidia said FE cards will have another bios then the $599 (el cheapo) cards for OCing. they either raised the base TDP or the allowed MAX TDP. niether is known until, again, one sees the bios.


----------



## sugarhell

Ileakstuff go ask any good overclocker if they trust gpu-z at all or any software app for the stats. I would like to hear your opinion after that









Even if the the voltage controller support i2c it's not completely accurate.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Today we have final specifications of GeForce GTX 1080.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Does the May17th review include the GTX 1070¿


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Does the May17th review include the GTX 1070¿


No. Only GTX 1080


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I think that the 1070 will have 20% less cuda cores compared to 1080. (16 active SM out of 20?). Therefor having 2048 cuda cores. It`ll perform a tiny bit better than TX and still be a good 20% under the 1080. Just my two cents.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Not as magnificent as the unicorn I have on one of my t shirts:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Unicorn-Castle-T-Shirt-Purple/dp/B0037TPEF2


You seriously walk around with that?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> No. Only GTX 1080


It sucks because 1070 is the true market decider/changer.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> You seriously walk around with that?


Yeah. Shirts legit.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Yeah. Shirts legit.


 8/8 m8.


----------



## magnek

I wonder if it was designed by Szeged


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

I love you guys









By show of hands, who is getting the FE, and who is getting the cheap-ass 1080?

I'm already going to pay nearly a grand thanks to exchange rates, might as well get the FE.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I love you guys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By show of hands, who is getting the FE, and who is getting the cheap-ass 1080?
> 
> I'm already going to pay nearly a grand thanks to exchange rates, might as well get the FE.


I am getting a cheap-ass GTX 1080 under the following circumstances :

- It actually is 599€ and in stock for a good custom design. (This is _very_ unlikely to happen)
- It overclocks really well. Like 2500mhz+
- Overclock performance is 30-40%+ better than 980 Ti heavily overclocked
- The smallest Broadwell-E is 350€~.
- E3 shows some PC games worth getting.

It doesn't look good for me getting the GTX 1080, but there is still a very small chance. If not then I'll buy VEGA or PS4K


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Not as magnificent as the unicorn I have on one of my t shirts:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Unicorn-Castle-T-Shirt-Purple/dp/B0037TPEF2
> 
> 
> 
> You seriously walk around with that?
Click to expand...

You wouldn't?


----------



## Bogga

Any good reviewers from Australia/NZ? If the 17th is the magic date, then NZ are the first ones to feel free to spread the news


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Have anybody bought nVidia branded cards straight from their website? Does nVidia care if you watercool your GPU?


----------



## carlhil2

I was only going to get one, because, it seems to be enough for what I do, BUT, benching 2 of these only seems right, RIGHT?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I am getting a cheap-ass GTX 1080 under the following circumstances :
> 
> - It actually is 599€ and in stock for a good custom design. (This is _very_ unlikely to happen)
> - It overclocks really well. Like 2500mhz+
> - Overclock performance is 30-40%+ better than 980 Ti heavily overclocked
> - The smallest Broadwell-E is 350€~.
> - E3 shows some PC games worth getting.
> 
> It doesn't look good for me getting the GTX 1080, but there is still a very small chance. If not then I'll buy VEGA or PS4K


I just cant Ignore HBM2. Nvidia has been stuck on ~ 300GB/s Mark since OG Titan. Going 720GB/s might show so crazy gains for their architecture.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I was only going to get one, because, it seems to be enough for what I do, BUT, benching 2 of these only seems right, RIGHT?


Buy a pair of Fanboy Edition GTX 1080 and start the club. I'll join you after I starve myself to pay for one.


----------



## y2kcamaross

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I was only going to get one, because, it seems to be enough for what I do, BUT, benching 2 of these only seems right, RIGHT?


see you on the 27th with a pair!


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *y2kcamaross*
> 
> see you on the 27th with a pair!


Lol, I will be late to the show then, I am holding out for the Classifieds, only because I have had good luck so far with that particular card with the 980 and 980Ti...meaning, they both did over 1500 stable in games in SLI...


----------



## zealord

and don't forget if you get two and somebody steals one from you then you have still one left









Also the new SLI bridge is ... well new!

Money is temporary. Benching fame with two GTX 1080 is eternal.


----------



## carlhil2

If I had children at home and a stay home wife, I would live differently, but, since I don't, it's on. when I leave this earth, I wish to leave nothing bihind. I am not working hard today so that someone else could enjoy the fruits of my labor once I am gone...


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> If I had children at home and a stay home wife, I would live differently, but, since I don't, it's on. when I leave this earth, I wish to leave nothing bihind...


Then nothing shall be left bihind


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Then nothing shall be left bihind


Unless someone wants a powerful computer..


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

I wouldnt mind inheriting some "lightly used, never overclocked" GTX cards...


----------



## Fiercy

I was meaning to ask if someone has an info on where would we able to buy one on 27? Is it Nvidia overpriced option only or will something be on newegg?


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fiercy*
> 
> I was meaning to ask if someone has an info on where would we able to buy one on 27? Is it Nvidia overpriced option only or will something be on newegg?


From the looks of it you have to wait till week of June.10th to get the cheap-ass versions. Only Fanboy edition available on May.27th.


----------



## Fiercy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> From the looks of it you have to wait till week of June.10th to get the cheap-ass versions. Only Fanboy edition available on May.27th.


Well I would have to wait on the waterblocks as well... here's hoping they will be released on the same day.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Any good reviewers from Australia/NZ? If the 17th is the magic date, then NZ are the first ones to feel free to spread the news


Not how it works. NDA will lift at a specific time, generally PST iirc...


----------



## chuy409

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I love you guys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By show of hands, who is getting the FE, and who is getting the cheap-ass 1080?
> 
> I'm already going to pay nearly a grand thanks to exchange rates, might as well get the FE.


Cheap ass 1080 for me. Already have a kraken g10+h55 for it on my 980. Why do I need some lousy blower cooler? Nothing founding about that, nvidia.


----------



## i7monkey

Two 1080's for $229 each is pretty good ($460 for both).

Either that or save up for a $499 GP100 flagship. You get more perf. out of the two 1080's for $60 less but you also deal with the headaches of SLI.

I'm waiting for the full GP100 and getting one. Single cards for me only.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Buying a cheap 1080 at launch if possible. Not going to bother with SLI since I'll sell the 1080 right before big Pascal is released. Don't need two cards for 1440p at the moment anyway.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> *Buying a cheap 1080 at launch if possible.* Not going to bother with SLI since I'll sell the 1080 right before big Pascal is released. Don't need two cards for 1440p at the moment anyway.


It's already pretty cheap at $229. You're acting like they're selling them for $700.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> It's already pretty cheap at $229. You're acting like they're selling them for $700.


Where can I buy a 1080 for $229?


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Where can I buy a 1080 for $229?


Didn't Jensen say $229? That's the going rate, right?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Didn't Jensen say $229? That's the going rate, right?


Don't we all wish....


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Don't we all wish....


What do you mean?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> What do you mean?


What do YOU mean? GTX 1080 will retail for $599 or higher, lol.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Didn't Jensen say $229? That's the going rate, right?


5 years ago


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> What do YOU mean?


I don't get it.

Quote:


> GTX 1080 will retail for $599 or higher, lol.


I can see a fully unlocked GP100 being $599 with an AIO cooler, but you gotta stop trolling.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> I don't get it.
> I can see a fully unlocked GP100 being $599 with an AIO cooler, but you gotta stop trolling.


You must be smoking the good stuff tonight my friend.


----------



## SuperZan

"back in my day 50p would get you sweets, a bus ride, carnival rides, a car, a mortgage, a space station, the moon and still have enough left for supper"


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> You must be smoking the good stuff tonight my friend.


Maybe you're right. $579 for AIO GP100? $599 for AIO Classified?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Maybe you're right. $579 for AIO GP100? $599 for AIO Classified?


I believe I was talking about the 1080 that's about to be released and retail for $599-$699.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> I believe I was talking about the 1080 that's about to be released and retail for $599-$699.


What kind of GP100 costs $699?

Has to have All-In-One cooler
Double the RAM
Classified
Platinum plated?
2x as fast as previous flagship in games

Right?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> What kind of GP100 costs $699?
> 
> Has to have All-In-One cooler
> Double the RAM
> Classified
> Platinum plated?
> 2x as fast as previous flagship in games
> 
> Right?


Hmmmm.....


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I am getting a cheap-ass GTX 1080 under the following circumstances :
> 
> - It actually is 599€ and in stock for a good custom design. (This is _very_ unlikely to happen)
> *- It overclocks really well. Like 2500mhz+
> - Overclock performance is 30-40%+ better than 980 Ti heavily overclocked*
> - The smallest Broadwell-E is 350€~.
> - E3 shows some PC games worth getting.
> 
> It doesn't look good for me getting the GTX 1080, but there is still a very small chance. If not then I'll buy VEGA or PS4K


You're not getting a GTX 1080 then, definitely not.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You're not getting a GTX 1080 then, definitely not.


Care to elaborate?

I better be misunderstanding what you mean by that..


----------



## GosuPl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You're not getting a GTX 1080 then, definitely not.


Same me, i dont want mid range chip with 64 ROPs...

When i play games i play on 1440p with max AA, and 4k + 2x MSAA/SMAA.

I think SLI 1080 cant deliver me level of performance like TX SLI.

64 ROPs/160TMU/2560 CUDA vs 96 ROPs/192 TMU/3072 CUDA.

And 8gb vram vs 12 gb vram...This is important too on this resolutions with AA.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Care to elaborate?
> 
> I better be misunderstanding what you mean by that..


I bolded two lines by accident. 2,500 MHz isn't going to happen on water without divine intervention. LN2 yes, and far beyond.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I bolded two lines by accident. 2,500 MHz isn't going to happen on water without divine intervention. LN2 yes, and far beyond.


What happen if finfet prove u wrong? Hahaha


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> What happen if finfet prove u wrong? Hahaha


It hasn't been done, maybe someone will get an incredible sample but right now air/water clocks are a fair way off from that.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It hasn't been done, maybe someone will get an incredible sample but right now air/water clocks are a fair way off from that.


I think it should surprise us to go beyond 2.5ghz imo.

And it definitely should for that crazy price


----------



## HAL900

You have not seen this card and already planning her oc. Do not be ridiculous


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I think it should surprise us to go beyond 2.5ghz imo.
> 
> And it definitely should for that crazy price


That's like saying the 5960X should surprise us and do 5.5 GHz on air because of its price - technology has its limits. Expect somewhere around 2,300 MHz on air or water.


----------



## carlhil2

Dudes automatically expecting 2.5G we just moved on from 1.5G being best that most could expect for a game stable OC. hmmm, me sense a whole lot of disappointments. all that we have heard about max OC is rumors...I can see it now, "what, can't hit 2.5G, fail.." "it's not 2x faster than Titan X? fail.." , isn't 3x faster than 980? fail..", etc., etc....Lol, misinformation is a dangerous thing...


----------



## NikolayNeykov

I think you should overclock it to *2.1* first to see if it's stable in games, don't trust what others said.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Dudes automatically expecting 2.5G we just moved on from 1.5G being best that most could expect for a game stable OC. hmmm, me sense a whole lot of disappointments. all that we have heard about max OC is rumors...I can see it now, "what, can't hit 2.5G, fail.." "it's not 2x faster than Titan X? fail.." , isn't 3x faster than 980? fail..", etc., etc....Lol, misinformation is a dangerous thing...


Now you are starting to catch on about how fail this 1080 actually is for the price.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Now you are starting to catch on about how fail this 1080 actually is for the price.


Speak for yourself..







I have no concerns about another individuals concerns over the cost of any item.. as long as I can afford to buy whatever, that's the only thing that concerns me. my financial issues aren't everyone's else issue, and vice versa..


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NikolayNeykov*
> 
> I think you should overclock it to *2.1* first to see if it's stable in games, don't trust what others said.


I haven't come across a sample that isn't. 2,500 MHz though? I haven't come across one either.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I haven't come across a sample that isn't. 2,500 MHz though? I haven't come across one either.


2.2-2.3 should be the norm under water, no? I am expecting close to the 2.5G number once the custom 2x8 pins hit...again, these are just my expectations, but, hey, I could live with a 1080 pushing 2.2G for about 6 months of use....


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 2.2-2.3 should be the norm under water, no? I am expecting close to the 2.5G number once the custom 2x8 pins hit...


Thereabouts. 2x8pin won't be the limit. However, it won't help on air or water as what the GPU needs is COLD.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

you can always move to mcmurdo and do your overclock magic


----------



## Crosshatch3D

If the 1080 Ref. PCB has one power connector slot, is it not possible to have an adapter PCB such that is has the ability for 2X 12 volts. Assuming the single connector/traces could handle the second 12 volt rail, this could be an easy way to add some more power on a stock set-up with one power connector.

Regards,

-Jason


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Speak for yourself..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no concerns about another individuals concerns over the cost of any item.. as long as I can afford to buy whatever, that's the only thing that concerns me. my financial issues aren't everyone's else issue, and vice versa..


My statement had nothing to do with your financial situation... Lol

It was a simple statement about the performance we should expect from a flagship price of $699. Chill dude.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> My statement had nothing to do with your financial situation... Lol
> 
> It was a simple statement about the performance we should expect from a flagship price of $699. Chill dude.


Being a fail for you at that price might not be so for everyone else. some keep equating chip size with price, I am willing to pay for the performance. if the 1080 put the smack down on my 980Ti, which, to me, is +25% and above, it's worth the $650-$700 for the Classy version. I am only basing this off of my previous purchases of the Classified models of the 980, 980Ti respectively...why would I have an issue paying $700 for this chip when I didn't have an issue paying $700 for an 980? Lol, a 980......







this supposedly is faster than SLI-980, if true, I will have zero complaints about the price.


----------



## provost

Given the enthusiasm, I personally think that Nvidia is undercharging for the given performance.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> My statement had nothing to do with your financial situation... Lol
> 
> It was a simple statement about the performance we should expect from a flagship price of $699. Chill dude.


Happens a lot these days.. I don't know why so many take opinions as a slight, or a statement directed at them.. I could look at your 980 and say "why would you buy that ripoff blah blah etc." But i don't know how much you bought it for, what your financial situation is, so you may not even give a damn about price and you just want the best available, or maybe you wanted to upgrade and like usual the red-team was slacking and taking their sweet time/couldn't compete with what you wanted.

People, looking at objective facts based on history and calling something overpriced isn't speaking for you, or implying those who buy it are suckers.. It's simply calling a spade a spade.


----------



## carlhil2

Lol...


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

I really hope the ACX models come in at $600 just so there's less complaining that no AIBs will have cards under $700.


----------



## carlhil2

someone seems a tad too excited...hope they are partial over there...don't need any fluff stuff...


----------



## jologskyblues

AMD must be keeping a very close eye on things right now. Their launch strategy for Polaris and Vega depends on it.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> someone seems a tad too excited...hope they are partial over there...don't need any fluff stuff...


SKYMTL from Hardware Canucks posted a similar reaction comment on Twitter yesterday also.

Wonder if reviews will go live at midnight, or some time tomorrow?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> SKYMTL from Hardware Canucks posted a similar reaction comment on Twitter yesterday also.


With all of the hype, hope that it's not a let down, I would feel as I were punk'd......


----------



## airfathaaaaa

who is betting that 99% of the games benched will be gameworks tittles?


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> SKYMTL from Hardware Canucks posted a similar reaction comment on Twitter yesterday also.
> 
> Wonder if reviews will go live at midnight, or some time tomorrow?


Sweclockers usually stay up and release their reviews 1 minute afterwards









But since we haven't seen any reviews yet (it's the 17th in NZ as we speak) I suppose Nvidia have set a specific timezone for the 17th


----------



## carlhil2

I hope that they show all DX12 titles with a max OC, ......


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> someone seems a tad too excited...hope they are partial over there...don't need any fluff stuff...


Nah man, [H]ardOCP is legit.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> who is betting that 99% of the games benched will be gameworks tittles?


wouldnt that be because a lot of popular games *are* gameworks titles ?









Nvidia having the majority of the discreet GPU market has always reflected onto game devs ...


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> SKYMTL from Hardware Canucks posted a similar reaction comment on Twitter yesterday also.
> 
> Wonder if reviews will go live at midnight, or some time tomorrow?


https://twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/731675819999936512

The gif made me laugh









NDA ends tomorrow at 15H00 UTC+2 :


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> wouldnt that be because a lot of popular games *are* gameworks titles ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nvidia having the majority of the discreet GPU market has always reflected onto game devs ...


given how most of the 2015 games were more neutral and gave amd quite a boost? yeah obviously







i can already tell some of the games that wont be on the list


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> SKYMTL from Hardware Canucks posted a similar reaction comment on Twitter yesterday also.
> 
> Wonder if reviews will go live at midnight, or some time tomorrow?
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/731675819999936512
> 
> The gif made me laugh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NDA ends tomorrow at 15H00 UTC+2 :
Click to expand...

Hey, Butters is supposed to be British, not French


----------



## zealord

they probably managed to overclock it big time. Higher than 2114mhz is very likely.

What I expect to see :

- Highest performance of any single GPU by far.
- Highest overclocking performance of any single GPU (air/water only)
- Best performance/watt of any single GPU
- It should perform really well at 4K I assume


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*


Am I missing something? A ~30-35% improvement isn't amazing. We saw that with the 680, and it was $200 less.

What is this extra $200 for?????? C'mon guys, I'm waiting for a justification. $200 for what exactly?


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Am I missing something? A ~30-35% improvement isn't amazing. We saw that with the 680, and it was $200 less.
> 
> What is this extra $200 for?????? C'mon guys, I'm waiting for a justification. $200 for what exactly?


You need to compare GTX 980 to GTX 1080.

You're not obliged to upgrade if you have a GTX 980 Ti.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Am I missing something? A ~30-35% improvement isn't amazing. We saw that with the 680, and it was $200 less.
> 
> What is this extra $200 for?????? C'mon guys, I'm waiting for a justification. $200 for what exactly?


Well the problem is that AMD has nothing ...

so Nvidia is competing with themselves ... and that is why we have 700$ mid-range die (320mm²) disguised as big card.

You know how it is. Cigarettes are pretty expensive in jail.


----------



## Bogga

So it is confirmed? (NDA at that specific time)


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Well the problem is that AMD has nothing ...
> 
> so Nvidia is competing with themselves ... and that is why we have 700$ mid-range die (320mm²) disguised as big card.
> 
> You know how it is. Cigarettes are pretty expensive in jail.


The day u see AMD start offering something that matches 1080 and you will see 1080 plummet down to $499 or less with FE dropping to $549 or even lesser.

And suddenly 1080 Ti appearing 3-6 months earlier than it should have been


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> So it is confirmed? (NDA at that specific time)


oh yeah the NDA stuff yeah in 21 hours 10 minutes yeah


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I bolded two lines by accident. 2,500 MHz isn't going to happen on water without divine intervention. LN2 yes, and far beyond.


Then we have rumors saying 2.5GHz will be buyable from AIB cards. But I assume you're speaking about the reference model.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Thereabouts. 2x8pin won't be the limit. However, it won't help on air or water as what the GPU needs is COLD.


So just like Maxwell, no voltage scaling until sub-zero?

Well we'll see if any of these (including the P10 delayed one) have substance after launch and users start benching them.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> oh yeah the NDA stuff yeah in 21 hours 10 minutes yeah


Confirmed where? Not questioning, but would be fun to read/hear it


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Confirmed where? Not questioning, but would be fun to read/hear it


I confirm it now.

If reviews are not live in 21 hours then you can call me an unreliable source


----------



## i7monkey

All the cores and Mhz in the world don't matter, it's all about absolute performance.

*#200forwhat?*


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The day u see AMD start offering something that matches 1080 and you will see 1080 plummet down to $499 or less with FE dropping to $549 or even lesser.
> 
> And suddenly 1080 Ti appearing 3-6 months earlier than it should have been


It's just because they are so much ahaid without competition, probably already maded that Ti... Same thing as Intel


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> All the cores and Mhz in the world don't matter, it's all about absolute performance.
> 
> *#200forwhat?*


Sorry, but this will lead to nowhere. just stop buying Nvidia and switch to Amd and be done with it.


----------



## mkmitch

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> All the cores and Mhz in the world don't matter, it's all about absolute performance.
> 
> *#200forwhat?*


I suppose you can look at it that way if you want. I need to update and I want the best card so I can pay $600 for 980ti or same for 1080. In my view 1080 seems like a bargain.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Given the enthusiasm, I personally think that Nvidia is undercharging for the given performance.


No kidding! I mean if the fanboys are willing to throw money at Nvidia for 25% more performance then why stop at $699? Why not charge $899? I bet they'd pay it!


----------



## i7monkey

#200forwhat


----------



## ciarlatano

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The day u see AMD start offering something that matches 1080 and you will see 1080 plummet down to $499 or less with FE dropping to $549 or even lesser.
> 
> And suddenly 1080 Ti appearing 3-6 months earlier than it should have been


This is exactly true. It has been playing out this way for a number of generations. nVidia is always holding an ace up their sleeve.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Sorry, but this will lead to nowhere. just stop buying Nvidia and switch to Amd and be done with it.


Good plan. Get way lower performance than GTX 1080


----------



## davidelite10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> All the cores and Mhz in the world don't matter, it's all about absolute performance.
> 
> *#200forwhat?*


Stop whining like a child, this is a upgrade from the 980, not a competitor to the 980ti however it's beats it greatly and we still don't know till tomorrow how far this thing can go.

this woe is me and the entitlement attitude that you are displaying belongs on WCCFTech, not here.
Go there if you want to cry/troll.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Good plan. Get way lower performance than GTX 1080


What happened to the list ? lol


----------



## kingduqc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidelite10*
> 
> Stop whining like a child, this is a upgrade from the 980, not a competitor to the 980ti however it's beats it greatly and we still don't know till tomorrow how far this thing can go.
> 
> this woe is me and the entitlement attitude that you are displaying belongs on WCCFTech, not here.
> Go there if you want to cry/troll.


It's a direct competition to the 980ti, it's replacing it at it's price point. Consumera don't buy a x80 card, they buy a 600$ card and the 1080 replace the high end GPU until next big Pascal is out.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> It's a direct competition to the 980ti, it's replacing it at it's price point. Consumera don't buy a x80 card, they buy a 600$ card and the 1080 replace the high end GPU until next big Pascal is out.


That is exactly how AMD/Nvidia would like you to think about GPU releases.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Good plan. Get way lower performance than GTX 1080


That's fine as long as AMD holds the reaming.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Am I missing something? A ~30-35% improvement isn't amazing. We saw that with the 680, and it was $200 less.
> 
> What is this extra $200 for?????? C'mon guys, I'm waiting for a justification. $200 for what exactly?


the things people will say/do to get attention on the www....


----------



## davidelite10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> the things people will say/do to get attention on the www....


Seriously it just screams 'look at me! Pay attention to me!'.

35% performance increase with even more headroom is awesome, absolutely awesome in my opinion.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidelite10*
> 
> Seriously it just screams 'look at me! Pay attention to me!'.
> 
> 35% performance increase with even more headroom is awesome, absolutely awesome in my opinion.


Those dudes need to pull their dress down, letting everyone see everything....


----------



## davidelite10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Those dudes need to pull their dress down, letting everyone see everything....


At least wear a kilt if you're going to 'accidentally' stand of exhaust vents.


----------



## magnek

lol how about let's just wait an extra day before slinging "mud" at each other

I mean this is getting unreal and out of hand


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> lol how about let's just wait an extra day before slinging "mud" at each other
> 
> I mean this is getting unreal and out of hand


No let's duel now







so funny


----------



## lahvie

NVidia explained the extra 100$ price tag
After a weekend of being stuck at the hospital and a nice fishing trip Sunday, I've thought about it for a while.

I see NVidia trying to go Apple. They are stepping toward maintaining a stronger presence now into the retail of their cards.

Fellows, this is step one in that direction. Step two could be, now they offer different type cooling on their "whatever" version of the card.

So now you have, what ? 1080, 1080 "Founders", which is literally the same thing.
This is just a naming and price step... into a stronger retail presence, and it is not just for a higher price tag on the reference for "fanboys" that are going to buy the card up at launch. This could lead into them moving aftermarket out of the way.
The general feeling here is aftermarket partners are getting hurt a little bit and this is a 100$ slap in the face due to their dominance right now.

My theory.


----------



## NikolayNeykov

What i think is since this cards doesn't need so much cooling and they run cool enough, the reference design is not bad at all, i kinda preffer it because no one else would have touched my card then the nvidia themselfs, as well look's solid enough. If i was buying this card, i would buy the reference, but maybe if it get's more cheaper.


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> My statement had nothing to do with your financial situation... Lol
> 
> It was a simple statement about the performance we should expect from a flagship price of $699. Chill dude.


I can foresee a two tier pricing policy; one based on MSRP, and another that appeals to higher calling inside Nvidia's customers, such as, supporting Nvidia if they want to support PC gaming. So, in the latter situation, customers will be free to pay as much as they would like with the minimum or floor being the MSRP. May be it will bring down the MSRP for customers not aspiring for the higher calling....

Ok, ok... J/k


----------



## zGunBLADEz

lol because nvidia said $599 msrb that doesnt mean they will release a card costing that... They already mess up the price scheme having a $699 card as a reference..


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lahvie*
> 
> NVidia explained the extra 100$ price tag
> After a weekend of being stuck at the hospital and a nice fishing trip Sunday, I've thought about it for a while.
> 
> *I see NVidia trying to go Apple.* They are stepping toward maintaining a stronger presence now into the retail of their cards.
> 
> Fellows, this is step one in that direction. Step two could be, now they offer different type cooling on their "whatever" version of the card.
> 
> So now you have, what ? 1080, 1080 "Founders", which is literally the same thing.
> This is just a naming and price step... into a stronger retail presence, and it is not just for a higher price tag on the reference for "fanboys" that are going to buy the card up at launch. This could lead into them moving aftermarket out of the way.
> The general feeling here is aftermarket partners are getting hurt a little bit and this is a 100$ slap in the face due to their dominance right now.
> 
> My theory.


Way ahead of ya








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> More like something that Apple would do and nVidia is copying them.


----------



## HAL900

This is not Fauners Edytions . THIS is THIEF EDYTIONS XD


----------



## carlhil2

FE Milking Edition...or, FEME


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> No kidding! I mean if the fanboys are willing to throw money at Nvidia for 25% more performance then why stop at $699? Why not charge $899? I bet they'd pay it!


I simply want to point out that Nvidia would, if the number sold didn't drop enough that they would make less money in the end. While (hopefully) taking into consideration longer term consequences this is how companies set prices. There isn't anything but market forces (individuals buying or not as they see fit) setting prices. Monopolies, near monopolies, oligarchies, etc. tend to mess with the available choices for the individuals but this is still how prices are set, raise them until the volume drops enough that you start to make less money total.

History is only important insofar as it influences the individual's choices. With enough users that do not care about the hardware specifics (non-geeks) hardware agnostic pricing becomes the norm. Welcome to 2013?

edit:
I suppose I agree with you, I think people should know more about their hardware, but I get sick of people pretending this is unique to Nvidia when it is how almost the entire economy works. Certainly the electronics industry doesn't, almost none of the customers have any clue what the hardware is like in their devices or how much it cost to produce or weather there is a better/worse method.

Watching high-end audio the long term trend might be even worse; pseudo-geeks who buy large die GPUs for really a lot of money, even if they are slower than the newer small-die GPUs because large die is better.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> FE Milking Edition...or, FEME


Founder's Extreme Killer Milking Edition


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Founder's Extreme Killer Milking Edition


MY NIPPLES ARE READY, Jen-Hsun Huang.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Founder's Extreme Killer Milking Edition


AKA 1080Ti....


----------



## Cyclonic

I really wonder what price MSI,Asus and EVGA are asking for there custom coolers, card like the Lightning are for sure above the 699 but what about the normal TwinFroser? Will those be below the 699 or are they going above the founder editions and will be arround 750? And what cards are really below 699? Stuff like that plastic Galax ?









I will be pretty pissed if I buy the FE on the 27th and a fecking Lightning will just cost 750.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> AKA 1080Ti....


... missed a T


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> MY NIPPLES ARE READY, Jen-Hsun Huang.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> AKA 1080Ti....


You guys ruined the joke


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

I find it hilarious how people complain so much about this $600 card with a medium sized die yet half of OCN upgraded from a 780 Ti to a 980 that was barely any faster.


----------



## HAL900

Simply they notice that EVGA selects ASIC chips KINGPIN and they want to leave your money in his pocket


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You guys ruined the joke


Sorry


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You guys ruined the joke


I didn't think "MY ANUS IS READY" would fly with the mods.


----------



## magnek

But you posted it anyway LOL

Well one of my fingers is ready


----------



## carlhil2

Well, I guess we all can agree that having your reference card as the so called premium priced card sounds as if they are trying to give their reference cards the "Titan" treatment, Lol...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Wasn't the OG Titan only 30% faster than 7970 GE?

$699 doesn't sound that bad all of a sudden.

Or am I a paid nVidia shill posting solely to sway public opinion?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Well, I guess we all can agree that having your reference card as the so called premium priced card sounds as if they are trying to give their reference cards the "Titan" treatment, Lol...


*cough*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I'm saying they might be trying to create a Titan SKU even within the mid-range.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wasn't the OG Titan only 30% faster than 7970 GE?
> 
> $699 doesn't sound that bad all of a sudden.
> 
> Or am I a paid nVidia shill posting solely to sway public opinion?


Had the OG Titan, dropped it like it was hot as soon as the 780Ti dropped.....well, one of them anyways..


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wasn't the OG Titan only 30% faster than 7970 GE?
> 
> $699 doesn't sound that bad all of a sudden.
> 
> Or am I a paid nVidia shill posting solely to sway public opinion?


OG Titan had DP and it was a big die. The 1k price was a bit high but you can't compare it with 1080.

Also it was at the same node (28nm) not 2 nodes down while using G5x memories.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wasn't the OG Titan only 30% faster than 7970 GE?
> 
> $699 doesn't sound that bad all of a sudden.
> 
> Or am I a paid nVidia shill posting solely to sway public opinion?


By now probably is only like 15% faster lol


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I find it hilarious how people complain so much about this $600 card with a medium sized die yet half of OCN upgraded from a 780 Ti to a 980 that was barely any faster.


It would be kind of dull around here if we agreed on everything. And to the people that "upgraded" from the 780 Ti to the 980, well I found that funny as well.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You guys ruined the joke


i7Monkey beat that joke into the ground 1001 posts ago.


----------



## carlhil2

You could still get $750.00 for a used OG Titan 2 years after it was released though, kept that resale value like a champ...


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> i7Monkey beat that joke into the ground 1001 posts ago.


Where is he anyway? I wonder which 1080 he plans on getting.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

You wish. Here in Norway TX with EK wb and backplate is selling for 7-800USD. That is a card that cost 1400-1500 new including blocks.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> i7Monkey beat that joke into the ground 1001 posts ago.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Where is he anyway? I wonder which 1080 he plans on getting.


He's getting the FEKME edition. There now I feel _slightly_ better.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> It would be kind of dull around here if we agreed on everything. And to the people that "upgraded" from the 780 Ti to the 980, well I found that funny as well.


I still have my old 780 Ti! It's a brilliant OC'er though, I'll keep that card until she gives out.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> You could still get $750.00 for a used OG Titan 2 years after it was released though, kept that resale value like a champ...
> 
> They still command ~ £300/$400+ second-hand, which is quite impressive given that we're knocking on the door of 16/14nm.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> You wish. Here in Norway TX with EK wb and backplate is selling for 7-800USD. That is a card that cost 1400-1500 new including blocks.


Boohooo... with all that oil money it's nothing but fair









But I guess we have the same prices as you? Or can we see you coming for beer, tobacco and graphics cards soon?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> He's getting the *FEKME* edition. There now I feel _slightly_ better.


The hell is that lol.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> The hell is that lol.


The cheaper version of the Founder's Edition King Ultra.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> The hell is that lol.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Founder's Extreme Killer Milking Edition


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> The cheaper version of the Founder's Edition King Ultra.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*


Damn , genius


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Damn , genius


That's why they pay him the big bucks.


----------



## Crosshatch3D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cyclonic*
> 
> I really wonder what price MSI,Asus and EVGA are asking for there custom coolers, card like the Lightning are for sure above the 699 but what about the normal TwinFroser? Will those be below the 699 or are they going above the founder editions and will be arround 750? And what cards are really below 699? Stuff like that plastic Galax ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will be pretty pissed if I buy the FE on the 27th and a fecking Lightning will just cost 750.


EVGA is releasing a Founders Edition style too, wonder what the price will be as well.

Regards,

-Jason


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Crosshatch3D*
> 
> EVGA is releasing a Founders Edition style too, wonder what the price will be as well.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Jason


$699... http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-6180-KR


----------



## lahvie

those cards should not cost the 699
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> $699... http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-6180-KR


next up: Buyers Edition


----------



## Crosshatch3D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> $699... http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-6180-KR


There ya go, thanks for the link.

Regards,

-Jason


----------



## zGunBLADEz

So this just pretty much confirm that if you want a 1080 for $599 you would have to deal with that ugly/cheap plastic cooler we saw. Thats if they dont price it @ $650...

SO we are looking at better pcbs with more phases and better coolers at $700+ or more

GG Nvidia GG


----------



## ZealotKi11er

GTX1080 still not 4K ready.

They say is 70% faster in Witcher 3 then GTX980. Needs to be a lot faster than that.


----------



## Bogga

I want to know the prices in EU. But the eu-site of EVGA still haven't updated their price


----------



## Fiercy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> So this just pretty much confirm that if you want a 1080 for $599 you would have to deal with that ugly/cheap plastic cooler we saw. Thats if they dont price it @ $650...
> 
> SO we are looking at better pcbs with more phases and better coolers at $700+ or more
> 
> GG Nvidia GG


who cares get 599 spend 100 for a waterblock and thats it!


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> *So this just pretty much confirm that if you want a 1080 for $599 you would have to deal with that ugly/cheap plastic cooler we saw*. Thats if they dont price it @ $650...
> 
> SO we are looking at better pcbs with more phases and better coolers at $700+ or more
> 
> GG Nvidia GG


How does it confirm anything other than the Founders Edition costs $699 (which we already knew since Nvidia announced the price)?


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> He's getting the FEKME edition. There now I feel _slightly_ better.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> So this just pretty much confirm that if you want a 1080 for $599 you would have to deal with that ugly/cheap plastic cooler we saw. Thats if they dont price it @ $650...
> 
> SO we are looking at better pcbs with more phases and better coolers at $700+ or more
> 
> GG Nvidia GG


Rather have MSI or Asus with plastic and superior fans than expensive aluminium that really does nothing for performance or my experience


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fiercy*
> 
> who cares get 599 spend 100 for a waterblock and thats it!


Sounds better but its not the idea
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> How does it confirm anything other than the Founders Edition costs $699 (which we already knew since Nvidia announced the price)?


Because usually the reference cooler versions are the cheapo versions? less expensive? Less desirable of the bunch?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Rather have MSI or Asus with plastic and superior fans than expensive aluminium that really does nothing for performance or my experience


Oh yeah and how you describe the cooling potential and such? Because they are cheapo materials you said right? Compare an evga acx cooler vs a reference cooler and the thing just scream CHEAPO!!!!!
And lets not talk about silent.. I guess you have never heard a reference fan running over 4800rpms XD


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> And lets not talk about silent.. I guess you have never heard a reference fan running over 4800rpms XD


Anyone remember the reference Radeon HD 2900XT cooler?







And at one stage I had four of them :/


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Rather have MSI or Asus with plastic and superior fans than expensive aluminium that really does nothing for performance or my experience


Concur, Alatar. Would rather get the AIB version with custom VRM's and slap in a full cover water block for about $130 and stick it into an existing loop. Top temps of 40c versus 67C too. The Founder's Edition is really for those who want to show off the new shroud in a windowed case and still pay NVidia to do extra advertisement for them.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Rather have MSI or Asus with plastic and superior fans than expensive aluminium that really does nothing for performance or my experience


Reference and EKblocks for me.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Anyone remember the reference Radeon HD 2900XT cooler?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And at one stage I had four of them :/


I don't think anything can beat the 290X's cooler in terms of terribad at this point.

But FX 5800 was definitely the original dustbuster.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Concur, Alatar. Would rather get the AIB version with custom VRM's and slap in a full cover water block for about $130 and stick it into an existing loop. Top temps of 40c versus 67C too. The Founder's Edition is really for those who want to show off the new shroud in a windowed case and still pay NVidia to do extra advertisement for them.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> Reference and EKblocks for me.


I`d do that as well if it wasnt for the fact that water cooling is expensive as hell. :/
I`m doing a build from scratch and was thinking about water cooling but figured it might not be worth the investment and extra work with tubing, replacing fluids every now and then etc. And have radiators on the outside instead of locking noise on the inside with air fans and a case with thick walls.


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zGunBLADEz*
> 
> Because _*usually*_ the reference cooler versions are the cheapo versions? less expensive? Less desirable of the bunch?


It should be obvious that "usually" and the current situation don't fit together. They are doing something different that no one can really seem to understand right now but maybe we will get a better understanding, in a month or so, of how all of this is going to work out.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> It should be obvious that "usually" and the current situation don't fit together. They are doing something different that no one can really seem to understand right now but maybe we will get a better understanding, in a month or so, of how all of this is going to work out.


Nvidia explained the deal about Founders Edition to The Verge today:
Quote:


> Relative to previous NVIDIA designs, we have upgraded the following areas: The power supply has been upgraded from 4-phases to a 5-phase dual-FET design and tuned for bandwidth, phase balancing and acoustics. We added extra capacitance to our filtering network, and optimised the power delivery network on the PCB for low impedance. As a result, power efficiency increased by roughly 6% compared to the GTX 980, and peak to peak voltage noise was reduced from 209mV to 120mV for improved overclocking.
> 
> "The GTX 1080 uses a vapour chamber cooling, a first for a sub-250W NVIDIA designed graphics card. Finally, we have a new industrial design with a faceted body and a new low profile backplate. The backplate features a removable section to allow better airflow between multiple graphics cards in adjacent SLI configuration."


http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/5/12/11662346/nvidia-founders-edition-geforce-gtx-explained


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I don't think anything can beat the 290X's cooler in terms of terribad at this point.
> 
> But FX 5800 was definitely the original dustbuster.


Its loud but its not bad. If you set it to 100% It will keep the card frosty.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Nvidia explained the deal about Founders Edition to The Verge today:
> http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/5/12/11662346/nvidia-founders-edition-geforce-gtx-explained


Does this mean that with custom PCBs and even higher phase counts, we can get even lower peak voltage noise of around 50mV and get even better overclocking? AIBs, please make it better.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Concur, Alatar. Would rather get the AIB version with custom VRM's and slap in a full cover water block for about $130 and stick it into an existing loop. Top temps of 40c versus 67C too. The Founder's Edition is really for those who want to show off the new shroud in a windowed case and still pay NVidia to do extra advertisement for them.


So you saying iLeak is Alatar? Or did I miss read what you were saying?


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Nvidia explained the deal about Founders Edition to The Verge today:
> http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/5/12/11662346/nvidia-founders-edition-geforce-gtx-explained


That's great but it only has to do with the reference card. We won't know what the AIB's are going to do until they start announcing their cards and pricing. I think custom cards and how they will be priced is what people are unsure about.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bigjdubb*
> 
> That's great but it only has to do with the reference card. We won't know what the AIB's are going to do until they start announcing their cards and pricing. I think custom cards and how they will be priced is what people are unsure about.


So GTX1080 is out of the question for me but if GTX1080 Ti follows the same FE nonsense what Non-Reference card is more likely to get a Water Block outside reference?


----------



## bigjdubb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> So GTX1080 is out of the question for me but if GTX1080 Ti follows the same FE nonsense what Non-Reference card is more likely to get a Water Block outside reference?


I guess that really depends on what the AIB's bring to the table. Non reference cards still get water blocks thrown on them, if they didn't there wouldn't be waterblocks available for non reference cards. If it turns out that the custom cards get a more substantial power delivery system they might be very popular among overclockers, which means popular among water cooling enthusiasts.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Man these days is so hard to justify getting a new GPU. If I have to get GTX1080 Ti I would have to spend ~ 1000 USD after TAX if I want to WaterCool. Convert that to CAD and its same money that got me R9 290X CFX 3 years ago. Its all good and all but just seems a little excessive to spend that much to maybe play 2-3 AAA games which cost less then $200.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Man these days is so hard to justify getting a new GPU. If I have to get GTX1080 Ti I would have to spend ~ 1000 USD after TAX if I want to WaterCool. Convert that to CAD and its same money that got me R9 290X CFX 3 years ago. Its all good and all but just seems a little excessive to spend that much to maybe play 2-3 AAA games which cost less then $200.


Hah, yes we're very near the point where a new mid-range die and a waterblock will carry VAT equal to the total cost of a 380 or some such.


----------



## guttheslayer

U expect aib to release decent custom cooling below $699 reference you can wait.

Like really wait lol. Next year maybe.

G1 gaming is already rumored at 720. Anything that perform better than reference, you are dreaming if u could get that below reference msrp


----------



## magnek

Pretty much lol.

I bet there will not be a single non-reference board that goes for less than $649.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Pretty much lol.
> 
> I bet there will not be a single non-reference board that goes for less than $649.


And lot of fanboy here argue the msrp is $599 when its just a decoy.

I support neither camp, cos disappointed with both.

The gpu and cpu market has only 2 competitor, and amd has to be in both.

Maybe that is pc hardware is not progressing much. As long as amd fails to deliver on both we will be stuck till graphene pc comes in


----------



## Bogga

So NDA is off in 3, 4 or 6 hours?


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> So NDA is off in 3, 4 or 6 hours?


11 hours 30 minutes


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> 11 hours 30 minutes


Which time zone is that? Can't really be any more beyond that?


----------



## SuperZan

Well Nvidia is a US west coast company so assume that the NDA will be lifted sometime in the afternoon on the European side of the Atlantic.


----------



## Bogga

LA goes 00:00 when we go 09:00 which is in 5 hours and 15 minutes. Working night and probably still be awake by then







So hopefully it's then it's lifted


----------



## flopticalcube

6:00 AM PST is the time. 9:00 AM EST


----------



## FlyingSolo

How much will the 1080 Ti cost when it comes out.


----------



## looniam




----------



## SuperZan

Nobody knows so I will guesstimate and say... $799 MSRP / $899 FE. See post above for galvanisation of feels.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> How much will the 1080 Ti cost when it comes out.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Nobody knows so I will guesstimate and say... $799 MSRP / $899 FE. See post above for galvanisation of feels.


SuperZan, I am disappoint. You're thinking like a consumer, not Jen-Hsun.

My guess: $999 FE, cheapest variant you can buy. And the GP100 Titan will come in at $1500.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopticalcube*
> 
> 6:00 AM PST is the time. 9:00 AM EST


Ahh ok, that's 15:00 over here. Guess I'll set the alarm for that then


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> SuperZan, I am disappoint. You're thinking like a consumer, not Jen-Hsun.
> 
> My guess: $999 FE, cheapest variant you can buy. And the GP100 Titan will come in at $1500.










That'll teach me to pontificate before putting my leather jacket on. I just wasn't in the Founder's Zone mindset without it.


----------



## xzamples

if you're canadian, you're going to have a bad time...

$1100 for founders edition

$1000 for regular edition

source: i asked a few canada computer stores and ncix


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> if you're canadian, you're going to have a bad time...
> 
> $1100 for founders edition
> 
> $1000 for regular edition
> 
> source: i asked a few canada computer stores and ncix


Wow, I was hoping they go by exchange rates. Was hoping to pay $1000 after tax for Fanboy Edition...

AMD pls...


----------



## keikei

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Nobody knows so I will guesstimate and say... $799 MSRP / $899 FE. See post above for galvanisation of feels.


My guess? Not before the Titan is released 3 months earlier for about a grand (probably higher this cycle). Nvidia needs to get those early adopters.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> SuperZan, I am disappoint. You're thinking like a consumer, not Jen-Hsun.
> 
> _My guess: $999 FE, cheapest variant you can buy. And the GP100 Titan will come in at $1500_.


Now we're talking. Absolutely no shame. People will buy it or not. Nvidia needs to see where that line is and adjust accordingly. Damn these guys are geniuses.


----------



## FlyingSolo

If its $1000 then i'll just get the 1080. Or wait and see what AMD has in store. Hopefully its around $700 or less.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keikei*
> 
> My guess? Not before the Titan is released 3 months earlier for about a grand (probably higher this cycle). Nvidia needs to get those early adopters.
> Now we're talking. Absolutely no shame. People will buy it or not. Nvidia needs to see where that line is and adjust accordingly. Damn these guys are geniuses.


I guarantee the 1080 Ti will still sell like hotcakes even at $999.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> if you're canadian, you're going to have a bad time...
> 
> $1100 for founders edition
> 
> $1000 for regular edition
> 
> source: i asked a few canada computer stores and ncix


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wow, I was hoping they go by exchange rates. Was hoping to pay $1000 after tax for Fanboy Edition...
> 
> AMD pls...


If you're in Ontario, tell your wussbag compatriots to start a revolution referendum to abolish the abomination known as HST, and also to make auto insurance public.

Or just move to BC.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Don't you still pay GST + PST in BC?

I'll probably have to order straight from EVGA and hope to not get screwed over too much by customs.


----------



## magnek

They do, but certain commodities are PST exempt whereas with HST the government gets to tax everything. But yeah I was mainly thinking about gas. And auto insurance, but that's got nothing to do with HST, and everything to do with how broken it is in Ontario.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I'll probably have to order straight from EVGA and hope to not get screwed over too much by customs.


If you get it from EVGA:

700 USD + $50 USD shipping + 10 brokerage fees (with expedited shipping you only pay $10 at customs) = $760 USD =979 Cad + tax = $1106


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

But that guy said its $1100 CAD at NCIX, which I assume is before tax.

Therefore EVGA save me $100 I hope?


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> if you're canadian, you're going to have a bad time...
> 
> $1100 for founders edition
> 
> $1000 for regular edition
> 
> source: i asked a few canada computer stores and ncix


CAD retailers are also doing a $200+ mark up









$599USD regular edition = should be $772 Cad not $1000

$699USD founders edition = $900 Cad not $1100


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> But that guy said its $1100 CAD at NCIX, which I assume is before tax.
> 
> Therefore EVGA save me $100 I hope?


Ya you'll save $140 if you go through EVGA. Crazy prices though. Our currency isn't helping, but NVidia's greed isn't either.


----------



## i7monkey

GTX 460 = $229









229 x 1.06 (exchange rate at the time) = $242 CAD + tax = $273 CAD after tax

$273 compared to $1106 these days for the same midrange chip. DAaaaamn.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> CAD retailers are also doing a $200+ mark up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $599USD regular edition = should be $772 Cad not $1000
> 
> $699USD founders edition = $900 Cad not $1100


Can expect $799 MSRP and $929 for FE. I mean this is bad but high GPU prices and strong USD we get 2 stick up the but lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> GTX 460 = $229
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 229 x 1.06 (exchange rate at the time) = $242 CAD + tax = $273 CAD after tax
> 
> $273 compared to $1106 these days for the same midrange chip. DAaaaamn.


Lets be fair. We still have GTX1070 but even then its $450 x 10.6 = 477 + Tax = $540. I remember people payed ~ $590 after tax for GTX580 here. I got mine for $460 from a guy which dropped Tri-Sli and got lucky.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> CAD retailers are also doing a $200+ mark up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $599USD regular edition = should be $772 Cad not $1000
> 
> $699USD founders edition = $900 Cad not $1100
> 
> 
> 
> Can expect $799 MSRP and $929 for FE. I mean this is bad but high GPU prices and strong USD we get 2 stick up the but lol.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting the prices from? If it's actually $929 I'll buy on day one. If not then I might get a used 980Ti instead.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Can expect $799 MSRP and $929 for FE. I mean this is bad but high GPU prices and strong USD we get 2 stick up the but lol.


Drive to Buffalo and shop, profit?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Where are you getting the prices from? If it's actually $929 I'll buy on day one. If not then I might get a used 980Ti instead.


$929 without TAX. How is that a good deal lol. Yeah I am thinking of getting a used 980 Ti but then GTX1070 is going to make it look like 780 Ti. I do not want to join the Maxwell Gimp club.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Drive to Buffalo and shop, profit?


The different after conversion is very minimal. We are talking 20-30 CAD. This has always been the case. We payed more even when CAD was a bit stronger.


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Can expect $799 MSRP and $929 for FE. I mean this is bad but high GPU prices and strong USD we get 2 stick up the but lol.
> Lets be fair. We still have GTX1070 but even then its $450 x 10.6 = 477 + Tax = $540. I remember people payed ~ $590 after tax for GTX580 here. I got mine for $460 from a guy which dropped Tri-Sli and got lucky.


$450USD x 1.28 (current exchange rate) = $576 + tax = $650 after taxes for 1070









I paid $535 after taxes for a 580, this is hilarous.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> $450USD x 1.28 (current exchange rate) = $576 + tax = $650 after taxes for 1070
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I paid $535 after taxes for a 580, this is hilarous.


$650 for a Cut down card, still not using G5X not HBM2. Man I can not do it. AMD save us all Please!


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> $650 for a Cut down card, still not using G5X not HBM2. Man I can not do it. AMD save us all Please!


It's nuttts.

How much for a 1080Ti if 1080 is $699? $899?

$899 US = $1155 Cad + tax = $1305 not counting shipping from EVGA or Canadian retailer markups.


----------



## i7monkey

Pascal Titan $1299?

$1671 Cad + tax = $1888 Canadian for Titan.

2 grand after retailer markups


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> Pascal Titan $1299?
> 
> $1671 Cad + tax = $1888 Canadian for Titan.
> 
> 2 grand after retailer markups


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The different after conversion is very minimal. We are talking 20-30 CAD. This has always been the case. We payed more even when CAD was a bit stronger.


$599 * 1.3 * 1.13 = $880 CAD AFTER tax

NCIX is selling the non-FE for $1000 BEFORE tax. After tax that's $1130. $1130 -$880 = $250. That's a huge difference.

Plus you also pay less tax in Buffalo vs the 13% in Ontario.


----------



## lahvie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> SuperZan, I am disappoint. You're thinking like a consumer, not Jen-Hsun.
> 
> My guess: $999 FE, cheapest variant you can buy. And the GP100 Titan will come in at $1500.


Perhaps this will bite them in the butt.

I bought my 980ti, and was happy about It. It was more than enough and with an extra $$ gave some extra life to my build without any future upgrades. but am kind of disgusted with this whole ordeal.
Seems like settling for a 300$ mid range in the future sounds like the best option, or fork out 1,000$ to play "next gen" (another founders edition decoy) current games with a PC experience just for the damn gpu!

4K gaming? See u in 2020

You know what? I see this making my Ti worth a little more on the resale : /
There's always a bright side!

- and I love the 1080 besides all this. Maybe that's why it's so much.
Jen was like where u gone go?


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> It's nuttts.
> 
> How much for a 1080Ti if 1080 is $699? $899?
> 
> $899 US = $1155 Cad + tax = $1305 not counting shipping from EVGA or Canadian retailer markups.


The whine force is strong with you.

Product is not even out but you spam the forum with always the same comments. Give us a break please.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Wasn't the OG Titan only 30% faster than 7970 GE?
> 
> $699 doesn't sound that bad all of a sudden.
> 
> Or am I a paid nVidia shill posting solely to sway public opinion?


The Titan OC'd a lot more than the 7970. Mine can both do 1325MHz with extra voltage which is 100MHz more than my 7970's would do when I had them. Nowadays AMD has made impressive gains with GCN so the 7970 compares better to GK110 but back when the Titans released they were substantially faster (especially at higher resolutions) than the 7970s. Here is a chart I made for my Titan / 7970 comparison I did over 3 years ago with the Titans OCd to 1150MHz and the 7970s clocked to 1225MHz:



Add 200MHz to those Titan scores and they would have been a lot faster (considering that extra voltage was limited at the time I did that testing)...


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> The whine force is strong with you.
> 
> Product is not even out but you spam the forum with always the same comments. Give us a break please.


----------



## kingduqc

Is there an article about how bad nvidia card age? I've seen it being mentioned a few times and saw benches with 7970 whopping some green butts same apply to newer models.. Any day 1 vs year 3 showdown?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingduqc*
> 
> Is there an article about how bad nvidia card age? I've seen it being mentioned a few times and saw benches with 7970 whopping some green butts same apply to newer models.. Any day 1 vs year 3 showdown?


I wish I still had my 7970's! I think it would be interesting to do the exact same 7970 vs Titan comparison that I did in my sig to see how the results differ today compared to in March 2013...


----------



## i7monkey

how many years til a 290x beats a 1080?


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> G1 gaming is already rumored at 720.


not that I would be surprised, but how are you getting this information?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

so i wonder how much a titan will cost? 1600+


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> so i wonder how much a titan will cost? 1600+


 ?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> 
> ?


close enough i guess


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> 
> ?


My soul is worth _so much more_ than a lousy Pascal Titan.

I mean we're talking about a DGX-1 _at least_.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> My soul is worth so much more than a lousy Pascal Titan.
> 
> I mean we're talking about a DGX-1 at least.


I dunnooo, for that kind of Nvidiaction you might need to buy a scythe and do a little grim reaping.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

i'll take the leather jacket for my soul, nothing less!


----------



## SuperZan

That's a good ask, it's the source of all of JHH's power!


----------



## Playboyer670

It is May 17 where are the goddamn official benchmarks????


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Playboyer670*
> 
> It is May 17 where are the goddamn official benchmarks????


asian ones are probably on the air already but good luck finding them


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Playboyer670*
> 
> It is May 17 where are the goddamn official benchmarks????


9:00 AM Eastern standard time.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That's a good ask, it's the source of all of JHH's power!


Nah the source of all his evil power is that tattoo.

His leather jacket is simply his shapeshifting device.


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> His leather jacket is simply his shapeshifting device.


Is that even his final form, though?


----------



## iLeakStuff

Reminder:
4 hours to go


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Reminder:
> 4 hours to go


Is it true these new cards work off of one 6 or 8 pin?


----------



## gasoau

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Reminder:
> 4 hours to go
> 
> 
> 
> Is it true these new cards work off of one 6 or 8 pin?
Click to expand...

Yes


----------



## iLeakStuff

First review is up








EDIT: Looks like HardwareCanucks is extremely impressed by overclocking performance
https://twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/732424263555293184

*Unigine Heaven Benchmark*
*GTX 1080*


*GTX 980Ti*




*Rise Of The Tomb Raider*
*GTX 1080*


*GTX 980 Ti*


----------



## NABBO




----------



## lolfail9001

Wait, what, is it really that good?

No, i don't believe it, no freaking way.

EDIT: Maybe it's max OC results? No way this is stock tbh.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> Wait, what, is it really that good?
> 
> No, i don't believe it, no freaking way.


Thats what I thought too. The settings I found in the benchmarks I used above all matched with his settings


----------



## NABBO

http://abload.de/image.php?img=...pvz1c.jpg

















overclock 2100mhz = 90°C ???


----------



## HAL900

Fejk
What are you putting. In heven not is impossible to get 155 frames because there is a limit cpu at 110 fps even if the card was a million times faster


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NABBO*
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=...pvz1c.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> overclock 2100mhz = 90°C ???


Maybe he ran overclock with his card?








Nvidia had way lower during their presentation. The cooler is suppose to be state of the art too


----------



## airfathaaaaa

any non gameworks titles yet?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Maybe he ran overclock with his card?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nvidia had way lower during their presentation. The cooler is suppose to be state of the art too


it was a vsync demo even 480 would have run on 67c im suprised you didnt know lol


----------



## iLeakStuff

Oh I like this











Videocardz uploaded all the slides:
http://videocardz.com/59999/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-full-presentation


----------



## iLeakStuff

Asus GTX 1080


----------



## Asus11

its the 17th reviewers should have uploaded 1 min last 12

imo


----------



## iLeakStuff

Gigabyte Extreme GTX 1080 Gaming Edition confirmed $700

https://xtremevr.pgtb.me/xRN4ZR


----------



## Serandur

Well, that's interesting. If this is true, then GP104 and GP100 have different SM structures. GP100 supposedly split the Maxwell SMM in half with 64 shaders per SM. GP104, on the other hand, retains the same 128 shader SM structure as Maxwell, according to this slide:


----------



## Noufel

Give us AOTS benchies plz








Ps : just kidding so plz disable nvidia defence system


----------



## guttheslayer

I think what ppl more interested in is the aib board that is offered fron $599 to $699, and not above.


----------



## carlhil2

https://twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/732424263555293184


----------



## airfathaaaaa

are those cards FE or regular? cause if its FE what is the % of the price that aib gets from it if they price it for 700?


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> are those cards FE or regular? cause if its FE what is the % of the price that aib gets from it if they price it for 700?


Same as Titan cards.


----------



## provost

Give me a holler when the "fastest card" can maintain 60 fps for all games on a 4K monitor with "all the bells and whistles turned up". Until then, I will be looking p/p to be able to play future games, not the games that were PC released for the last gen cards.... lol


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Give me a holler when the "fastest card" can maintain 60 fps for all games on a 4K monitor with "all the bells and whistles turned up". Until then, I will be looking p/p to be able to play future games, not the games that were PC released for the last gen cards.... lol


That will never happen, because games are only going to get more and more demanding. Or badly-written, if you will.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Give me a holler when the "fastest card" can maintain 60 fps for all games on a 4K monitor with "all the bells and whistles turned up". Until then, I will be looking p/p to be able to play future games, not the games that were PC released for the last gen cards.... lol


Sure, better be willing to pay $1200+ for big pascal, unless you are talking a couple of years from now, the 1180, for $650.00....lol


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Looks like it's going to be possible for +1ghz overclock maybe on Ln2 with these cards... Wow


----------



## rck1984

For people with Vessel, Techsource already uploaded some benchmarks:

https://www.vessel.com/videos/T82ea8k4v

Firestrike - 16794
Firestrike Extreme- 9317
Firestrike Ultra - 5032
Unigine heaven - 155.7 fps maxed at 1080, 36.6 fps maxed at 4k
Metro last light - 150.7 fps maxed at 1080p, 30.4 fps maxed at 4k
Gta V - 77 fps maxed 1080p, 25 fps maxed at 4k

83 degrees C at full load.


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> That will never happen, because games are only going to get more and more demanding. Or badly-written, if you will.


Well, ain't that something... "fastest card" that can only run last year's game with max settings at a 1080p - 1440p resolution... Wanna run this year's 2 games with max settings on 1080p -1440p? Buy the 1080ti FE for $1099.99...lol

May be gpu companies should start investing in their own game studios rather than spending "billions" on developing hardware that can only play "badly written games"... Lol nah... that will breakdown the finely tuned balance of the business model...

Lol... just playing around... carry on folks


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Max OC'ed 1080 vs reference 980 ti, nice try.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Well, ain't that something... "fastest card" that can only run last year's game with max settings at a 1080p - 1440p resolution... Wanna run this year's 2 games with max settings on 1080p -1440p? Buy the 1080ti FE for $1099.99...lol
> 
> May be gpu companies should start investing in their own game studios rather than spending "billions" on developing hardware that can only play "badly written games"... Lol nah... that will breakdown the finely tuned balance of the business model...
> 
> Lol... just playing around... carry on folks


Stuff move forward.

Can the 580,480,7970, 6970, which were top cards, run current games? They can most likely barely keep up with the mid and low range of updated cards on new games.

The demand of higher quality visuals is also a direct hit on performance on previous gen cards.

Considering the fact that for example a short few seconds scene in avatar took a couple of hours to render in full quality scale on a workstation high end card dedicated for rendering, and the fact that we today demand that to be rendered in real time in the game, shows how far things go forward.

Its like demanding an original iPhone to be able to give you the same quality in both compute and graphics quality and screen quality, as the next gen iPhone 7.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> For people with Vessel, Techsource already uploaded some benchmarks:
> 
> https://www.vessel.com/videos/T82ea8k4v
> 
> Firestrike - 16794
> Firestrike Extreme- 9317
> Firestrike Ultra - 5032
> Unigine heaven - 155.7 fps maxed at 1080, 36.6 fps maxed at 4k
> Metro last light - 150.7 fps maxed at 1080p, 30.4 fps maxed at 4k
> Gta V - 77 fps maxed 1080p, 25 fps maxed at 4k
> 
> 83 degrees C at full load.


this is fejk


----------



## ChevChelios

lol GTA 5 and Metro Last Light only 25-30 fps on 4K on a 1080 ?

wth are they broken at 4K or something ?

they're not THAT pretty and Last Light isnt even open world IIRC

Quote:


> Give me a holler when the "fastest card" can maintain 60 fps for all games on a 4K monitor with "all the bells and whistles turned up". Until then, I will be looking p/p to be able to play future games, not the games that were PC released for the last gen cards.... lol


several more years at minimum

probably not until 4K becomes the true mainstream standard as 1080p is now


----------



## rck1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> this is fejk


Ain't sure if you're trolling but those numbers are not fake, Techsource has 600k followers and i can tell you that he's reliable.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> Ain't sure if you're trolling but those numbers are not fake, Techsource has 600k followers and i can tell you that he's reliable.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/2190#post_25167603


----------



## iLeakStuff

I`m starting to think that a single GTX 1080 with an overclock to 2.2GHz or something running this 24/7 might be enough for my needs...


----------



## rck1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/2190#post_25167603


Noticed that post before.
That first one of Heaven 4.0 comes from Techsource, I figured I'd post the rest of the scores as well.


----------



## HAL900

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> Ain't sure if you're trolling but those numbers are not fake, Techsource has 600k followers and i can tell you that he's reliable.


this 155 fps is 2x better 980ti oc


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Well, ain't that something... "fastest card" that can only run last year's game with max settings at a 1080p - 1440p resolution... Wanna run this year's 2 games with max settings on 1080p -1440p? Buy the 1080ti FE for $1099.99...lol
> 
> May be gpu companies should start investing in their own game studios rather than spending "billions" on developing hardware that can only play "badly written games"... Lol nah... that will breakdown the finely tuned balance of the business model...
> 
> Lol... just playing around... carry on folks


I mean, ever tried running maxed Witcher 3 with gameworks on 780ti?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> this 155 fps is 2x better 980ti oc


Only 1.6 actually.


----------



## HAL900

Nope 2x .
64 rop 8x AA and score 2x better .Fejk


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> Nope 2x .
> 64 rop 8x AA and score 2x better .Fejk


Unigine heaven:
1080p: 80% faster (50% faster than OC)
4K: 65% faster (35% faster than OC)

Tomb Raider:
4K: 75% faster


----------



## HAL900

In my opinion as long as 3dmark latest was real, and further reads a clock 3d gtx 1080 will be 10% faster than the GTX 980ti


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Dota 2 on 4k ultra does not require latest gpu available ^^


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HAL900*
> 
> In my opinion as long as 3dmark latest was real, and further reads a clock 3d gtx 1080 will be 10% faster than the GTX 980ti


lol *you* are fejk


----------



## HAL900

An you are spam


----------



## Glottis

wth is vessel and techsource? doesn't matter actually, waiting for reviews on usual websites i frequent.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> Looks like it's going to be possible for +1ghz overclock maybe on Ln2 with these cards... Wow


More than that


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> More than that


So you would say running 400-500MHz overclock 24/7 is ok with GTX 1080?


----------



## rck1984

Some GTX1080 vs. GTX980Ti:








On 'low' resolutions the GTX1080 definitely is a nice upgrade compared to the GTX980Ti (stock), on 4k (and most likely on 1440p) it's still nice but not that great. I will be sitting on my GTX980Ti at 1585/8500Mhz until the GTX1080Ti comes out for sure, not big enough of a jump for me on high resolution to make the expensive jump.

Source: https://www.vessel.com/videos/EW46KxKRW (Techsource)


----------



## airfathaaaaa

so on anything higher than 1080p this card is ok but not that stellar as the daredevilLeatherjacket jhh said


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

GTX 1080 is a 1080p card afterall?


----------



## xzamples

i'm guessing this is the first official benchmark for the 1080, however it's a pretty bad one in my opinion...

https://www.vessel.com/videos/T82ea8k4v


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> So you would say running 400-500MHz overclock 24/7 is ok with GTX 1080?


On air I wouldn't expect more than 2.2-2.3 GHz.


----------



## Noufel

I think that the 1070 won't be faster than the 980ti afterall


----------



## rck1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> GTX 1080 is a 1080p card afterall?


Sure looks like it.

People gaming on a GTX980Ti basically have no reason to make the jump to the GTX1080, with an exception of 144hz screens perhaps. The 980Ti already runs games at 1080p, max settings on a solid 60+ FPS. Difference on higher resolutions are okay but nothing to be that excited for. Perhaps later on when drivers mature etc.. but right now, i don't think its worth the jump from a 980Ti...


----------



## carlhil2

Lol, those high rez scores, must be a joke....I expect at least a 25% gain at 4k....


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> On air I wouldn't expect more than 2.2-2.3 GHz.


I doubt temps will be the issue, power will be. Not much point in putting a block on these of only one 8pin connector.


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> Sure looks like it.
> 
> People gaming on a GTX980Ti basically have no reason to make the jump to the GTX1080, with an exception of 144hz screens perhaps. The 980Ti already runs games at 1080p, max settings on a solid 60+ FPS. Difference on higher resolutions are okay but nothing to be that excited for. Perhaps later on when drivers mature etc.. but right now, i don't think its worth the jump from a 980Ti...


same story every year, yet people DO jump on new GPUs and games DO become more and more demanding


----------



## carlhil2

I just realized his settings....doing 10 things at once today, lol


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Lol, those high rez scores, must be a joke....I expect at least a 25% gain at 4k....


The 980 Ti has 10% factory oc.

Its about 30% gain on 4k


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> The 980 Ti has 10% factory oc.
> 
> Its about 30% gain on 4k


Yeah, I just posted above you, just saw the settings...







scores look better then....


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> Some GTX1080 vs. GTX980Ti:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 'low' resolutions the GTX1080 definitely is a nice upgrade compared to the GTX980Ti (stock), on 4k (and most likely on 1440p) it's still nice but not that great. I will be sitting on my GTX980Ti at 1585/8500Mhz until the GTX1080Ti comes out for sure, not big enough of a jump for me on high resolution to make the expensive jump.
> 
> Source: https://www.vessel.com/videos/EW46KxKRW (Techsource)


So apparantly you didnt even look at my post after all or decided it was too good for your 980Ti?
That Tomb Raider score for 980Ti is wrong. GTX 980Ti gets 27.8FPS which I even posted earlier.
Very revealing dude








http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/2190#post_25167603


----------



## HAL900

This chip is so small. I do not know what you so excites the value of this card to join AMD and 1080 Ti fly down firmly. ; Yield to take the high clock. Of course these your 2.2 or 2.5 ghz is laugh xD
And those 80 frames 980ti in metro LL is a mistake because at 980ti is 130 -200
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> The 980 Ti has 10% factory oc.
> 
> Its about 30% gain on 4k


If this is not Fejk do not know asic the ref 1080 and may turn out that is much more than a 10% + mhz


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> I mean, ever tried running maxed Witcher 3 with gameworks on 780ti?
> Only 1.6 actually.


Well, since you brought it up, I gave up playing Witcher 3 gimpworks when my four Titans couldn't play the game worth a damn with a few settings turned up. Gave the boot to the Titans, and at the same time, and moved over to a single AMD Fury card, and couldn't be happier. Fury plays Witcher just fine, without the gimpworks.
Here are my four Titans collecting dust and to remind me that grass isn't always greener... Lol


----------



## tajoh111

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Lol, those high rez scores, must be a joke....I expect at least a 25% gain at 4k....


Although it doesn't improve the 4k situation much, the card he used and benched against was this card which is a solid 13.6% faster at 4k than a stock card.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_980_Ti_SC_Plus/30.html

Taking that into account, that's a solid 35% increase over a gtx 980 ti stock. This is alot better than I was expecting but we need to look at more results.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Well, since you brought it up, I gave up playing Witcher 3 gimpworks when my four Titans couldn't play the game worth a damn with a few settings turned up. Gave the boot to the Titans, and at the same time, and moved over to a single AMD Fury card, and couldn't be happier. Fury plays Witcher just fine, without the gimpworks.
> Here are my four Titans collecting dust and to remind me that grass isn't always greener... Lol


Better get rid of them before they become paper weights...


----------



## nyxagamemnon

If these numbers pan out, the 1080 is meh. Then again it's not the big boy.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> I doubt temps will be the issue, power will be. Not much point in putting a block on these of only one 8pin connector.


There will be cards capable of over 400w but they have the same approximate ceiling on air.


----------



## Leyaena

Wasn't the NDA supposed to lift today on the 1080?


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Well, since you brought it up, I gave up playing Witcher 3 gimpworks when my four Titans couldn't play the game worth a damn with a few settings turned up. Gave the boot to the Titans, and at the same time, and moved over to a single AMD Fury card, and couldn't be happier. Fury plays Witcher just fine, without the gimpworks.
> Here are my four Titans collecting dust and to remind me that grass isn't always greener... Lol


You might as well use 2 of those as paper weights. Atleast you save some electricty that way instead of wasting it on extremely poor scaling


----------



## carlhil2

These cards are going to smoke.....


----------



## xzamples

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Well, since you brought it up, I gave up playing Witcher 3 gimpworks when my four Titans couldn't play the game worth a damn with a few settings turned up. Gave the boot to the Titans, and at the same time, and moved over to a single AMD Fury card, and couldn't be happier. Fury plays Witcher just fine, without the gimpworks.
> Here are my four Titans collecting dust and to remind me that grass isn't always greener... Lol


I could put one to good use you know, maybe you wont feel as bad knowing someone else is using it


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Better get rid of them before they become paper weights...


What else do you think I am using them for...lol


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Well, that's interesting. If this is true, then GP104 and GP100 have different SM structures. GP100 supposedly split the Maxwell SMM in half with 64 shaders per SM. GP104, on the other hand, retains the same 128 shader SM structure as Maxwell, according to this slide:


1 sm now = 1 tpc?

The TPC on GP100 were same, not sure about SM?

Suppose to be 64x2 rather than 128x1?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> What else do you think I am using them for...lol


I have 2 reference 780Tis in the closet....


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> What else do you think I am using them for...lol


Since when Quad SLI is good for gaming?


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> I could put one to good use you know, maybe you wont feel as bad knowing someone else is using it


Well, they do serve a purpose as a reminder...lol but in all seriousness, these may get donate one way or another...


----------



## rck1984

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> So apparantly you didnt even look at my post after all or decided it was too good for your 980Ti?
> That Tomb Raider score for 980Ti is wrong. GTX 980Ti gets 27.8FPS which I even posted earlier.
> Very revealing dude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/2190#post_25167603


Only posting screenshots of the video Techsource uploaded on Vessel.
And too good? That average increase on high resolution isn't worth 700 euro's. I gladly sit on my current GPU until real Pascal releases.

You think of me and my 980Ti what you want, i don't give a rats ass really. I can only laugh at those sour comments of yours.


----------



## xzamples

Salting the Green Kool-Aid: A Skeptic's Take on the Pascal Launch

http://thestonedgamer.com/p-reviews/reviews/item/810-salting-the-green-kool-aid-a-skeptic-s-take-on-the-pascal-launch

this is the most honest article about pascal yet


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> Only posting screenshots of the video Techsource uploaded on Vessel.
> And too good? That average increase on high resolution isn't worth 700 euro's. I gladly sit on my current GPU until real Pascal releases.
> 
> You think of me and my 980Ti what you want, i don't give a rats ass really. I can only laugh at those sour comments of yours.


Now I know why GTX 1080 is called 1080, it work the best for 1080p.

And could be the possible reason?

Den I realised there is smth called memory bottlenecking.


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Since when Quad SLI is good for gaming?


Since Nvidia advertised it with the launch benchmarks of-course ... that's a game too you know...


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> Salting the Green Kool-Aid: A Skeptic's Take on the Pascal Launch
> 
> http://thestonedgamer.com/p-reviews/reviews/item/810-salting-the-green-kool-aid-a-skeptic-s-take-on-the-pascal-launch
> 
> this is the most honest article about pascal yet


Lol, why, because you like what it says?


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> Since Nvidia advertised it with the launch benchmarks of-course ... that's a game too you know...


You might have enjoyed it if it was just 2.

Time to donate the rest


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rck1984*
> 
> Only posting screenshots of the video Techsource uploaded on Vessel.
> And too good? That average increase on high resolution isn't worth 700 euro's. I gladly sit on my current GPU until real Pascal releases.
> 
> You think of me and my 980Ti what you want, i don't give a rats ass really. I can only laugh at those sour comments of yours.


My bad, There was another video


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Gigabyte Extreme GTX 1080 Gaming Edition confirmed $700
> 
> https://xtremevr.pgtb.me/xRN4ZR


It's not 700$ confirmed but 700$+


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Except he didnt post those graphs. You put GTX 980Ti in there...
> Nice try there


He did post 980Ti results, I think that it was a SC....


----------



## iLeakStuff

There is another video?
Oh then, sorry. Carry on


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> First review is up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Looks like HardwareCanucks is extremely impressed by overclocking performance
> https://twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/732424263555293184
> -Snip-


No... No way this is real. Something must be up with his settings or something...

Upwards of 60% faster? I would love for this to be true, but I don't believe it.

HardwareCanucks do seem really excited though.

If it's as good as it sounds then the GTX 1080 may just end up knocking my socks and the rest of my clothes off with it!

I'm still going for the GTX 1070 though!


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> No... No way this is real. Something must be up with his settings or something...
> 
> Upwards of 60% faster? I would love for this to be true, but I don't believe it.
> 
> HardwareCanucks do seem really excited though. If it's as good as it sounds then the GTX 1080 may just end up knocking my socks and the rest of my clothes off with it!


i agree, that is the most fake looking and unprofessional review i've seen in a long time. but what can you expect from someone who breaks NDA (assuming he was under one in the first place).


----------



## iLeakStuff

What a mess.

Oh well, less than 90 minutes to go before we get real results


----------



## carlhil2

I think some think that +30% means +30fps......


----------



## guttheslayer

https://www.vessel.com/videos/EW46KxKRW

I think at least this review is honest, and tell ppl to hold off for the price cut and 1070....

Those other fanboy review sure give 10/10 and say must buy!


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Glottis*
> 
> i agree, that is the most fake looking and unprofessional review i've seen in a long time. but what can you expect from someone who breaks NDA (assuming he was under one in the first place).


I don't think it's fake, I'm unfamiliar with their YouTube channel but seeing as they have over 600K subscribers they're probably fairly reputable.

Presuming they were under an NDA, it could be possible that they scheduled their video to upload on the 17th of May, however it went up before the the end of the NDA, possibly by accident.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> https://www.vessel.com/videos/EW46KxKRW
> 
> I think at least this review is honest, and tell ppl to hold off for the price cut and 1070....
> 
> Those other fanboy review sure give 10/10 and say must buy!


Anyone with a brain could get the card himself and test it out. if it doesn't match what nVIDIA claims, return it. that's if you don't trust any of the reviews....


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> 1 sm now = 1 tpc?
> 
> The TPC on GP100 were same, not sure about SM?
> 
> Suppose to be 64x2 rather than 128x1?


Yep, the SMs are supposed to have 64 each in GP100 (with 2 SMs per TPC):


----------



## xzamples

do you guys honestly trust the reviews from the guys who got a $3,000 free vacation to texas for the nvidia event? just curious to know


----------



## Glottis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> do you guys honestly trust the reviews from the guys who got a $3,000 free vacation to texas for the nvidia event? just curious to know


yes, professional reviews + user reviews here and on other places and I have pretty good opinion on the product. worked for me pretty good for years.


----------



## carlhil2

What do you advise, Old Great One? tell us what site that you use to get info on your AMD gear...let us know who it is that we should trust, do tell?


----------



## Crosshatch3D

When will it be that the PCB's of the GTX1080 get modified?

Nvidia launches the GTX1080 on May 27th, lets say EVGA and other companies release the "reference" model as well with perhaps their own housing/cooling. Will these early model PCB's remain the same, components in the same location for some time?

I understand that when the TI's I come out, that some PCB's are modified for better power delivery etc. I am curious about the early model layouts and how consistent they are.

Regards,

-Jason


----------



## toncij

That test at https://www.vessel.com/videos/T82ea8k4v seems strange: by what I have here, 1080 is significantly faster than 980Ti in 1080, but significantly slower in 4K. Could be an effect of 256-bit bus, but not sure. Looks fishy AF.


----------



## iLeakStuff

I find it extremely strange that he can just upload videos like that?
Maybe he isnt an partner and got the card elsewhere?


----------



## tajoh111

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> do you guys honestly trust the reviews from the guys who got a $3,000 free vacation to texas for the nvidia event? just curious to know


You know AMD has done the same thing before. They flew the press to Hawaii for Hawaii's tech day which was very much like Nvidia's launch on may 6. I would take a Hawaiian vacation over a Texas one.

If this guy was doing Nvidia favors, he should have tested the card against a stock gtx 980 ti, not a overclocked one.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> That test at https://www.vessel.com/videos/T82ea8k4v seems strange: by what I have here, 1080 is significantly faster than 980Ti in 1080, but significantly slower in 4K. Could be an effect of 256-bit bus, but not sure. Looks fishy AF.


The 980Ti that he used had a factory OC...


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> That test at https://www.vessel.com/videos/T82ea8k4v seems strange: by what I have here, 1080 is significantly faster than 980Ti in 1080, but significantly slower in 4K. Could be an effect of 256-bit bus, but not sure. Looks fishy AF.


Effective memory bandwidth is actually bigger on GTX 1080 than GTX 980Ti.
370GB/s vs 334GB/s

So if anything, it should be faster on 4K


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> Yep, the SMs are supposed to have 64 each in GP100 (with 2 SMs per TPC):


But the block diagram is the same for GP104, except no DP compute.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Effective memory bandwidth is actually bigger on GTX 1080 than GTX 980Ti.
> 370GB/s vs 334GB/s
> 
> So if anything, it should be faster on 4K


384 GB/s vs 336 is very small % boost.

In fact its not enough to feed the additional 25-40% boost from GPU especially under OCed senarios.

For me as usual. No HBM no talk.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> The 980Ti that he used had a factory OC...


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> But the block diagram is the same for GP104, except no DP compute.


What do you mean? The block diagram for GP104 shows 128 per each SM, just like Maxwell. GP100 shows 64 per SM.


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Effective memory bandwidth is actually bigger on GTX 1080 than GTX 980Ti.
> 370GB/s vs 334GB/s
> 
> So if anything, it should be faster on 4K


Your calculations are wrong. 1080 is 320.


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> But the block diagram is the same for GP104, except no DP compute.


GP100 has 6 GPCs or 3840 cores. GP104 has 4 GPCs or 2560 cores.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Your calculations are wrong. 1080 is 320.


I said *effective*.
GTX 1080 have 320GB/s bandwidth but Pascal have 20% improvement over Maxwell with compression.

So its 384GB/s


----------



## carlhil2

That Heaven score though, say bye to the leader board...in blowout fashion.....


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> What do you mean? The block diagram for GP104 shows 128 per each SM, just like Maxwell. GP100 shows 64 per SM.


I am looking at the amount of units in each TPC.

The only difference I saw was 1 TPC = 1SM, and 1TPC = 2SM for GP100.

For both chip, each TPC has 2 obvious clusters (top and btm), and the cluster that group them are the same effectively between the 2.


----------



## xzamples

https://www.instagram.com/p/BFgc72rJVrt/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tajoh111*
> 
> You know AMD has done the same thing before. They flew the press to Hawaii for Hawaii's tech day which was very much like Nvidia's launch on may 6. I would take a Hawaiian vacation over a Texas one.
> 
> If this guy was doing Nvidia favors, he should have tested the card against a stock gtx 980 ti, not a overclocked one.


of course AMD does the same thing, this isn't an amd vs nvidia thing nor is it questioning that specific reviewer...just a general question / statement

it's a myth that MOST (not all) of these tech reviewers are journalists, they care more about the hype and not burning bridges than being objective


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I said *effective*.
> GTX 1080 have 320GB/s bandwidth but Pascal have 20% improvement over Maxwell with compression.
> 
> So its 384GB/s


Its still not enough, 384 vs 336 is just 14% improvement from 980 Ti.

But the performance gain esp when overclocked is >25%. If you considered TFLOP alone its a whopping 35% more GPU horsepower.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

A better question will be why nVidia decided that 256bit bus is good enough for a 699 card.


----------



## axiumone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I find it extremely strange that he can just upload videos like that?
> Maybe he isnt an partner and got the card elsewhere?


It's not his numbers. I think he bought the content from paulshardware. Look at the b-roll footage, it's from pauls garage.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> A better question will be why nVidia decided that 256bit bus is good enough for a 699 card.


I think micron GDDR5X is only rated to run at 256 bits at best.

Regardless, all onboard chip are useless when compared to HBM.

We have to wait for GP100 gaming chip. But if AMD fails to delivers expect 1080 Ti to be $999.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> Its still not enough, 384 vs 336 is just 14% improvement from 980 Ti.
> 
> But the performance gain esp when overclocked is >25%. If you considered TFLOP alone its a whopping 35% more GPU horsepower.


1080 memory is qdr 980ti is ddr tho


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> I said *effective*.
> GTX 1080 have 320GB/s bandwidth but Pascal have 20% improvement over Maxwell with compression.
> 
> So its 384GB/s


Compression doesn't work that way. It is "up to 20% improvement over Maxwell". It's theory. The worst case is lower than 980Ti, the best case is higher than 980Ti.


----------



## Serandur

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> I am looking at the amount of units in each TPC.
> 
> The only difference I saw was 1 TPC = 1SM, and 1TPC = 2SM for GP100.
> 
> For both chip, each TPC has 2 obvious clusters (top and btm), and the cluster that group them are the same effectively between the 2.


You mean that the total number of shaders per TPC is the same, right? I see that, I'm just referring to the fact that each TPC and group of 128 shaders appear split into two separate SMs on GP100 and remain as one SM on GP104. Unless Nvidia's marketing just got confused and changed their idea of what constitutes an individual SM, I don't think that's a meaningless distinction. It could also signal a different amount of registers and shared memory per TPC than GP100.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> 1080 memory is qdr 980ti is ddr tho


QDR on a 256 bits is just barely a little more than DDR on a 384 bits. Somemore the DDR speed is rated at 7GHz while 256 bits in comparison is rated at 5GHz (10GHz effective due to QDR)

Use Maths and you realised it is even slower. lol.


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serandur*
> 
> You mean that the total number of shaders per TPC is the same, right? I see that, I'm just referring to the fact that each TPC and group of 128 shaders appear split into two separate SMs on GP100 and remain as one SM on GP104. Unless Nvidia's marketing just got confused and changed their idea of what constitutes an individual SM, I don't think that's a meaningless distinction. It could also signal a different amount of registers and shared memory per TPC than GP100.


TBH I got confused. need to see the full specs for GP104.

I think if SM = 128 den the registry cache size should be half as big only.


----------



## carlhil2

http://www.pcpop.com/view/2/2763/2763166_all.shtml?r=17180620#p2 BENCHES...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> http://www.pcpop.com/view/2/2763/2763166_all.shtml?r=17180620#p2


Thanks for the link. For a sec I thought it's pcper lol


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> http://www.pcpop.com/view/2/2763/2763166_all.shtml?r=17180620#p2 BENCHES...


Nice, repped!

Wish I sold my 980ti sooner and got more for it, was going to hold off but that is actualy a decent boost especially with me wanting to move to 1440p 165hz.


----------



## carlhil2

Looks impressive...


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> http://www.pcpop.com/view/2/2763/2763166_all.shtml?r=17180620#p2 BENCHES...


Pretty bad for 700USD GPU..It should cost 550USd just like GTX980.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Pretty bad for 700USD GPU..It should cost 550USd just like GTX980.


That's your opinion, and, you are welcome to it..and your agenda is obvious....


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Pretty bad for 700USD GPU..It should cost 550USd just like GTX980.


It will if AMD will release anything competitive in future.


----------



## NikolayNeykov

Im happy that i didn't sold my awesome 980 ti for this crap.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

can someone translate what is that dx12 thing? its aots or something else?


----------



## davidelite10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> That's your opinion, and, you are welcome to it..and your agenda is obvious....


What is up with these guys.
Anyways, can't wait for more reviews especially with Overclocks coming in 24 minutes!


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidelite10*
> 
> What is up with these guys.
> Anyways, can't wait for more reviews especially with Overclocks coming in 24 minutes!


Trolls be trolling...


----------



## gasoau

Hmm i wanna upgrade no point i have a 1080 monitor and a 980ti


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> can someone translate what is that dx12 thing? its aots or something else?


First is AotS, second is RotR.


----------



## moogleslam

Very impressive, but waiting for 1080 Ti to power my 3440x1440 @ 100Hz monitor.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Looks impressive...


Just like GTX680 vs GTX580- 20-30% faster.


----------



## carlhil2

"　　In 3DMark test mode Extreme 1080 GTX lead generation flagship GTX Titan X the rate reached 26.9%, ahead of the previous generation of the same positioning GTX 980 reached 68.5%. 4K Ultra performance in a test mode, this advantage reached 22.3% and 62.2%...." GTX 1080 GTX TitanX leading in both DX12 game margin of 20% to 30%. Effects at the highest resolution 4K two games have reached more than 40FPS, which can guarantee the normal game in this setting..." I thought that this is what was expected to an extent?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> A better question will be why nVidia decided that 256bit bus is good enough for a 699 card.


Only the misinformed get caught up with simply looking at the bus width.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Same price as 980 Ti SLI. Not sure if 980 Ti SLI is a better deal??


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> A better question will be why nVidia decided that 256bit bus is good enough for a 699 card.
> 
> 
> 
> Only the misinformed get caught up with simply looking at the bus width.
Click to expand...

idk man, I looked at bandwidth and it would be alot higher with 384 bit.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> First is AotS, second is RotR.


how can you tell its like reading necronomicon and waiting the god of biscuits to appear


----------



## flopper

800euro here, hehe


----------



## airfathaaaaa

so just like we knew already..

when they bench amd cards they will go with oc nvidia ones..
when they bench nvidia they will go with refrence only
kek


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> so just like we knew already..
> 
> when they bench amd cards they will go with oc nvidia ones..
> when they bench nvidia they will go with refrence only
> kek


I mean, amd is not looking to have something competitive with it until at least October.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> so just like we knew already..
> 
> when they bench amd cards they will go with oc nvidia ones..
> when they bench nvidia they will go with refrence only
> kek


Link?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> I mean, amd is not looking to have something competitive with it until at least October.


afaik they are launching on computex..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Link?


link to what?
look at the results.. 980ti is slower than titan x 8-9% to be precise..its a refrence one


----------



## Oj010

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-review,1.html

Even though he has little credibility in my eyes.


----------



## rck1984




----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> afaik they are launching on computex..


You base that off of almost certainly photoshopped screen?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> You base that off of almost certainly photoshopped screen?


nope i based that because we have been discussing it since 2 months now to the death...
also that screen was taken by the site which btw is that one
http://www.amdcomputex.com.tw/ i can understand why some sites just loves to news out of old news but ok


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> nope i based that because we have been discussing it since 2 months now to the death...
> also that screen was taken by the site which btw is that one
> http://www.amdcomputex.com.tw/ i can understand why some sites just loves to news out of old news but ok


I mean, i knew where contents of that email like 4 days before the thread here. I talk about photoshopped title, especially since it's unwarranted.

And even if they do factually launch it at computex, i am fairly certain they are at best in 1070's reach.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> afaik they are launching on computex..
> link to what?
> look at the results.. 980ti is slower than titan x 8-9% to be precise..its a refrence one


Link to the reviews that only put OC nVIDIA cards against the Fury X, as you claimed...


----------



## HAL900

GTX 1080 @ 1760 mhz has 21900 pkt graphfic and 980ti 1455 mhz has 20800 pkt > The difference is small but has a lot + fps of games. strange it

GTX 1080 @ 2000/11600mhz has 24160 graph score








This is good card but this price


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> I mean, i knew where contents of that email like 4 days before the thread here. I talk about photoshopped title, especially since it's unwarranted.
> 
> And even if they do factually launch it at computex, i am fairly certain they are at best in 1070's reach.


and your conclusion is based on what? the literally zero info we have on polaris?


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Link to the reviews that only put OC nVIDIA cards against the Fury X, as you claimed...


with the suprise exception of guru3d almost everyone else did..

on other news
http://www.computerbase.de/2016-05/geforce-gtx-1080-test/7/#diagramm-anno-2205-3840-2160


----------



## NABBO

Guru3d review

Rise of Tomb Raider 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 25% >> GTX TTX (4k + 22%)

Hitman 2016 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 36% >> GTX TTX (4K + 75%)

DOOM 4 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 22% >> GTX TTX (4K + 27%)

Far Cry Primal 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 +30% >> GTX TTX (4K + 27%)

Fallout 4 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 25% >> GTX TTX (4K + 44%)

The Division 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 24% >> GTX TTX (4K + 24%)

Thief 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 25% >> GTX TTX (4K + 25%)

Anno 2205 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 27% >> GTX TTX

GTAV 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 22% >> GTX TTX ( 4K + 22%)

The Witcher III 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 28% >> GTX TTX (4K + 20%)

Battlefield Hardline 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 +27% >> GTX TTX (4K + 25%)

Aliean Isolation 2560x1440 = GTX 1080 + 26% >> GTX TTX (4K + 37%)


----------



## HAL900

http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzne/test_geforce_gtx_1080_pascal_karta_graficzna_nowej_generacji?page=0,5

But in older games is poor. 980 ti 1164 mhz vs gtx 1080 @ 1800MHz and + 20% fps


----------



## mcg75

http://www.overclock.net/t/1600401/various-gtx-1080-reviews

Locked.


----------

