Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Nvidia Pascal to launch in June


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#41
Humanoid

Humanoid

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3840 posts

Regarding AMD vs Nvidia it's fair to remember that Nvidia is consistently better at performance per watt whereas AMD is consistently pushing their chips right to the edge resulting in very power hungry cards. 
 
Anyway it's best to have no brand loyalty and just judge each chip lineup on its own merits.


Wouldn't say consistently, it was only two generations ago we had nV's "Thermi" debacle. Polaris is reputedly a very small chip, dunno about Vega though.

#42
Bokishi

Bokishi

    Graphics Lord

  • Members
  • 6451 posts
  • Location:Hutt Space

 

There's regular GTX 1080, and Founder's 1080 for $100 more. Hmmmm

 

Wth is a founder's edition?

 

edit: ah nvm...it's just a "fancy" cooler...

 

 

Maybe it has bat wings =]


Edited by Bokishi, 07 May 2016 - 12:34 PM.


#43
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

the reveal was done

they said that the 1080 will have twice the power of the 980 at 3 times lower watts at 600$. they also had a demo of the new doom running in vulcan on the 1080: 1080p, max settings 150fps. release date may 27 for the 1080 and mid june for the 1070 (about 50% faster than the 980 at 400$)

which i don't find all that awesome considering the AMD prototype of their 200$ card in GDC was running hitman at 1440p, max settings and 60fps (vsync on).

we have to wait and see



#44
Humanoid

Humanoid

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3840 posts

Think you misread that, the 980 has a TDP of 165W, the 1080 is listed at 180W. Real life power consumption will be slightly higher because of the way nV calculate the number (typical instead of maximum). It has twice the speed of the 980 *only* in VR applications, the gain in regular titles seems more along the order of 60%.

 

Since the 980Ti is about 30% faster than the 980, maybe a little more, we can extrapolate from this that the 1080 is only about 20% faster than the 980Ti for the same price (actually with the latest round of price cuts, the 980Ti is slightly cheaper). That's distinctly unimpressive, but then the x80 series cards have been a trap for the past two generations. As per those series, buy either the x70 or x80Ti cards when they become available.



#45
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

i worded it wrong... i meant 3 times the power efficiency but i wasn't paying attention while typing.



#46
Humanoid

Humanoid

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3840 posts

Realistically though, 60% more performance at 5-10% more power consumption would suggest more like 50% gain in efficiency.

 

Obviously there's no hard data on performance, but I'm mostly taking nVidia's own very basic (and no doubt heavily "massaged") slide here:

 

1d0bze.jpg

 

 

 

The other thing to bear in mind is that the 980Ti has a lot of room for overclocking, and I reckon a heavily overclocked one could probably match a stock 1080 given the estimated difference of 20%. Much of the 1080's value then will be in how much it overclocks in turn.

 

 

EDIT: Another of their own slides here might be more instructive. Eyeballing that shows an approximate rating of 2.6 for the 980, 3.6 for the 980Ti and 4.4 for the 1080. Normalising the figures to 100%, we get 1.38 for the 980Ti and 1.69 for the 1080. Normalising the 1080 vs the 980Ti we get 1.22 which is pretty close to my earlier estimate.

 

980Ti is down to $550USD now, and the 1080 will roll out later for $600. It barely moves the price/performance stakes at all. The "Founder's Edition" (early access reference design) card for $700 is particularly laughable in this context, it's for suckers only.

 

More speculatively, if we take the same 3.6 value to be the 1070's performance, that's 1.71 relative to the 970 at 2.1. A slightly bigger increase in relative performance to the card it's replacing, but at half the price increase (or two-thirds in relative terms). I reckon that's fair enough, it's around what I'd have guessed prior to the reveal.


Edited by Humanoid, 10 May 2016 - 12:48 AM.


#47
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

i was watching a video of the reveal on youtube and i was not really convinced by the guy on stage (though the fanboys in the audience were drooling). he was emphasizing way too much the 2x fps at 3 times power efficiency, like there was nothing else he knew or could say about the card.

still, the marketing trick nvidia uses i old but effective: they make a monster card that very few people can buy and then they use it to create hype for the mainstream cards like the x50 and x60 by saying "we made that beast, all our cards are better and that is why they are more expensive". so people fall in the trap that makes them think that the 960 that is a bit more expensive than the 380 is better than the 380 and nvidia sells more


  • Ganrich likes this

#48
Bartimaeus

Bartimaeus

    (11) Wizard

  • Members
  • 1764 posts
  • Steam:Ask!

snip

 

Things will be much more interesting, I imagine, when AMD releases info on Polaris (which, to my understanding, is supposed to happen late May-early June, but I could be wrong).



#49
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

they didn't really release any solid info, they just dumped some numbers and overhyped the performance. we have to wait until the card is actually on the market to get any reliable info



#50
falchen

falchen

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 260 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

Right now these just seem like too much overkill for anyone who already has a 9xx card, I got a 970 and that can run Witcher 3 at max, and I'm not eyeing any upcoming games that should require an update just yet. If some is building new or upgrading anyway though then sure grab one of these, no reason not to though.



#51
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

i read a nice one

of the entire 900 series' sales, the 980 (both normal and ti) sold about 5%, the 970 about 13%, the titan 3% and the rest was split between 950 and 960



#52
Ganrich

Ganrich

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1463 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Gold Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

i read a nice one
of the entire 900 series' sales, the 980 (both normal and ti) sold about 5%, the 970 about 13%, the titan 3% and the rest was split between 950 and 960


It's pretty typical for the entry level cards to outsell the mid to high level cards. The 980, 980ti, 970, and Titans are mostly marketing. They want their cards on top of benchmarks (when games are released) as it gives the impression their cards are faster than AMDs across the board.

I can't remember where I read it, but AMD made the same point in an interview I read. They said that is why Polaris is trying to make VR capable cards for entry level prices. They want something of equal power to a 970 (maybe a 980 if we are lucky) to be in the 950 to 960 price bracket. We will see what happens.

#53
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

i saw a video about benchmarking the 1080. first thing that i noticed about it is how the charts had conveniently chosen stats, but despite their best efforts i rolled a 20 for perception and noticed something they failed to mention about the card: it had lower fps in DX12 compared to DX11 by about the same % as the 900 series.



#54
Sarex

Sarex

    (12) Mage

  • Members
  • 1914 posts

http://www.guru3d.co...0-review,1.html



#55
Bokishi

Bokishi

    Graphics Lord

  • Members
  • 6451 posts
  • Location:Hutt Space
I may wait for big Pascal 1080ti with dx12 kinks worked out (hopefully)

#56
teknoman2

teknoman2

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1368 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

there was a giveaway last night sponsored by blizzard/nvidia where 5 people could get a 1080. i hope im one of the 5 (results will be revealed tonight). a free vga (and an expensive one at that) would really save me the trouble of waiting (and paying) for a more reasonably priced card.



#57
Ganrich

Ganrich

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1463 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Gold Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I may wait for big Pascal 1080ti with dx12 kinks worked out (hopefully)


I hate being the bearer of bad news, but much of Nvidia's DX12 woes are hardware related. It isn't something they can do with software on any real level. If they haven't made room for Async Compute in their architecture then they won't ever excel with the feature in DX12. Async Compute being one of the major things that has put AMD in front in the Ashes of the Singularity benches. However, I am unsure what features the 10xx cards have. So I could be wrong, but my understanding (which is limited to be sure) was it could take a few years for Nvidia to change their architecture to accommodate it.

#58
Bokishi

Bokishi

    Graphics Lord

  • Members
  • 6451 posts
  • Location:Hutt Space
Yeah this wasn't the pascal I was looking for, the stock FE 1080 has like 10 fps gain over the stock 980ti, which can get similar results by simply overclocking. I may wait for a heavy factory OC'd version, the ti version, or maybe dare go red?
  • Ganrich likes this

#59
Ganrich

Ganrich

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1463 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Gold Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!
@Bokishi

AMDs polaris is supposed to be bringing cards equal to the 380 and 390 to the $200-$400 price point. That's in American dollars from my understanding. Don't expect gains in performance over their current cards, but a cheaper option. Vega (the cards slated for next year) will boost performance.

Just throwing that info out there. Good luck in your purchase.
  • Bokishi likes this

#60
Humanoid

Humanoid

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3840 posts

Worse, the stock FE 1080 actually throttles at out of the box settings. After about 20 minutes under load, it hits the thermal limit and drops clocks dramatically. Forget the 2000MHz+ clocks they were demoing at the presentation, it struggles to maintain any sort of boost clock at all. This behaviour would likely escape notice under testing conditions because few reviewers would run their benchmarks for that length of time, and often they run the cards on an open bench rather than in a case. When those factors are accounted for, the 1080's advantage over the 980Ti quickly diminishes, and possibly even disappears completely.

 

With this FE cooler, nV have done an AMD, but arguably even worse. The R9 290 reference cooler was a shocker, but it was cooling a 250W+ card. This 1080 FE cooler is struggling to cool a sub-200W card. $100 extra for a "premium" cooler that can't even handle factory settings? This thing is a shocker. FE? Fool's Edition.

 

TL;DR: The 1080 may be a decent chip, but the FE is anything but a good card.

 

 

 

clock_analysis.jpg

 

After 20 minutes the fan is at full tilt just maintaining that 82C threshold at diminished clock speeds. And in the next graph we see why:

 

clock_analysis2.jpg

 

It's about to fall off a cliff...

 

original.jpg

 

And it actually does tip off the edge for quite a number of games.


Edited by Humanoid, 26 May 2016 - 05:32 PM.

  • kirottu, Bokishi, teknoman2 and 2 others like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users