Nvidia Pascal to launch in June

[teknoman2]

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

[Ganrich]

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.

[teknoman2]

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.

[Sarex]

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-review,1.html

[Bokishi]

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

[teknoman2]

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.

[Ganrich]

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.

[Bokishi]

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]

@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.

[Humanoid]

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.

 

 

 

 

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:

 

 

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

 

 

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

Edited May 27, 2016 by Humanoid

[Bokishi]

Yeah I'm totally skipping this card for sure. Instead I put my 980ti under water, made a modest 250mhz oc, and I'm getting 10-20 fps boosts in everything now. Staying under 55c at load, and no more throttling. All this for like 60 bucks. Stock reference coolers are junk, I didn't know throttling held this card back so much. 1080 FE is worse? No thanks

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00ZQ4PFX2/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1464549737&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40&keywords=980+ti+hybrid+kit&dpPl=1&dpID=417hMTSHiyL&ref=plSrch

Edited May 29, 2016 by Bokishi

[Keyrock]

My Titan X after flashing the ROM for a decent overclock (1215, 1430 turbo, 7400 memory clocks) and more aggressive fan profile should easily take the Pepsi challenge with the GTX 1080.  I don't intend to upgrade for at least 3 years anyway.  I'll let 3D memory mature then think about doing an upgrade.  With Vulkan, my ridiculously overpriced Maxwell card should be good to go at 1440p for the foreseeable future.  Ideally, in 4 or 5 years I build a whole new machine with 4K in mind and turn my current rig into a server.

[Humanoid]

GTX 1070 reviews are out, and consensus seems to be that at stock vs stock, it is indeed a few percent faster than the Titan X/980Ti as promised. However it has far less overclocking headroom, so even with very mild overclocking, it quickly falls behind, and at maximum typical clocks for both, the old cards end up in the region of 10-20% faster.

 

It's not surprising of course, that a cut-down small chip needs pushed to its limits to match a big chip. But with 980Ti prices now as low or lower than the 1070 FE, it's far from clear cut on which is the better buy. Of course, that will change once the custom 1070s come out (assuming they do around the $380 RRP) and also once the stock of the older cards runs dry, but I suppose whether you buy a custom 1070 or a discounted 980Ti, the shake-up is that we should have 980Ti performance for ~$400 shortly.

 

There's still nearly a month before the NDA on Polaris lifts, and by that point we surely will have at least a little news on the GP106 (i.e. GTX 1060/1050), so it'll be that long at least before we get a clear picture on the overall state of the market.

[Bartimaeus]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3077432/components-graphics/polaris-confirmed-amds-200-radeon-card-will-bring-high-end-graphics-to-the-masses.html

 

"In a livestream from Computex in Taipei, AMD announced that the Radeon RX 480 will be the first graphics card based on its forthcoming Polaris graphics processors. And get this: The Radeon RX 480 stands ready to deliver performance equivalent to what today’s $500 graphics cards offer, as first reported in the Wall Street Journal earlier today. That’s roughly in line with the Radeon R9 390X, GeForce GTX 980, or air-cooled Radeon Fury.

 

But here’s the real bombshell: The Radeon RX 480 will cost only $200 when it goes on sale on June 29."

 

Hmm...I'm liking AMD's (purported) end of this much better so far...

Edited June 1, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[Humanoid]

The absence of the 480X from the announcement has people wondering whether Apple snaffled them all up for the iMac refresh. Shame, would have been interesting to see how close Polaris could get to the 1070 if they released a fully-enabled version at say, $300, but we might be waiting a little longer for it.

[teknoman2]

on base clock speeds

RX480 - 6,720,454,656 flops

gtx 1070 - 5,551,718,400 flops 

[WDeranged]

It's looking more and more like I'll have to snap up another 980 when the price finally crashes