Nvidia Pascal Coming Soon
#1
Posted 06 May 2016 - 09:38 PM
First - actual third-party performance numbers are not here yet. Those are still under NDA, and I don't think any reviewers have yet received their samples. That will likely happen next week, and of course NDA is probably held to midnight PST on launch day.
Second - when I roughed the math and said it was possible that these cards would literally double performance at the same price point, there were not many people that were willing to agree. I said 'sure, not extremely likely, but very possible.' Turns out, it happened. GTX 1080 is, according to Nvidia, roughly equivalent to GTX 980 SLI performance-wise. I believe the price will be $50 higher than GTX 980 on release day, but that beats buying two 980s in a lot of ways. No crappy SLI to mess with or require support of, lower power consumption, less heat in the case, etc.
Third - 8GB of VRAM on the 1070 and 1080 means nobody will be sad about CW taking up 3GB of VRAM at 1080 on 'very high' settings. I know there are a fair amount of people out there with 1GB and 2GB cards. If they're looking for an upgrade, the new cards are looking pretty 'near-future-proof' (meaning, future proof for the next couple years).
Fourth - Unfortunately, I foresee that keeping these cards fed with data may require a little more from the CPU, so the CPU hits MWO incurs could get slightly heavier. At this point, I would recommend any new systems people are planning on building be based on Skylake. Every IPC boost you can get is a good thing with this game, and if these cards will need a little more CPU as it is to keep from being bottlenecked, Skylake is the chip with the highest IPC.
Commence obligatory internet arguments.
#2
Posted 07 May 2016 - 05:44 AM
The GTX 1070 looks like the card for me. I will try to hold out until this Fall when the availability will be higher and hopefully there will be some sales. Perhaps I will grab a GTX 970 or an R9 390 if the prices drop a bit. I probably won't be able to wait and end up getting something this summer.
I am running a 4790K at stock speeds which should be sufficient I hope.
#3
Posted 07 May 2016 - 06:51 AM
Is it really worth $100 to be a few weeks early and be stuck with a reference cooler? I guess it won't matter to the real enthousiasts who put waterblocks on.
#4
Posted 07 May 2016 - 08:23 AM
http://arstechnica.c...icing-revealed/
http://www.anandtech...e-gtx-1080-1070
http://www.pcgamer.c...vidia-gtx-1080/
Edited by Lord Letto, 07 May 2016 - 08:30 AM.
#5
Posted 07 May 2016 - 09:32 AM
3dmark numbers leaked seem to indicate the 1080 is somewhere in the realm of the 980TI in games, perhaps modestly faster, at 599, which isn't too shabby if you consider the floating point performance and RAM hikes, featurewise.
http://hexus.net/tec...medium=facebook
My 980TI scored 25k GPU on the 3dmark11 test. I don't have a copy of 3dmark that can run the Firestrike Extreme test.
Edited by Catamount, 07 May 2016 - 09:35 AM.
#6
Posted 08 May 2016 - 08:39 AM
I think the GTX 1070 is about to become the "gold standard" for "mid-range" builds in here. I anticipate many "OP, if you can spend $50 more on the GPU, you can get something that will definitely max out this game" statements.
I really hope AMD's Polaris GPUs live up to their hype, too, so we can maybe even see some good early price cutting going on.
#7
Posted 08 May 2016 - 09:02 AM
Cheap 970's will make me very happy.
#10
Posted 08 May 2016 - 06:05 PM
Flapdrol, on 07 May 2016 - 06:51 AM, said:
Is it really worth $100 to be a few weeks early and be stuck with a reference cooler? I guess it won't matter to the real enthousiasts who put waterblocks on.
AMD? The 1080 is a coup de gras headshot to AMD for now. Maybe next year they can release something worth of substance.
#12
Posted 09 May 2016 - 10:04 PM
Oderint dum Metuant, on 08 May 2016 - 10:01 PM, said:
We are already seeing that -- GTX 980 Ti owners are offering their video cards at sub-$450 USD used prices here in the United States.
After all, with a stock GTX 1070 supposedly being slightly better than a stock GTX Titan X for the great price of $379 MSRP, it's going to be a great value upgrade season for those still holding onto a GTX 970 or less ...
#13
Posted 09 May 2016 - 11:54 PM
The 1070 has a 256bit bus and gddr5, I'd say that'll put some constraints on performance, even with massive overclocks on the gpu itself. I doubt it'll be faster than a 980Ti in regular games, though it will be in VR titles.
War 4H, on 08 May 2016 - 06:05 PM, said:
The rumors say polaris is a very small chip, aimed at a different level of performance. If it gets better price/performance than a 1070 I'd be interested, even if it's not as fast.
Edited by Flapdrol, 10 May 2016 - 12:10 AM.
#14
Posted 10 May 2016 - 06:31 AM
AMD's GPUs are supposedly built on the slightly smaller CPU node, though, so they may have a slight advantage compared to Nvidia. Or, conversely, maybe Nvidia made their chips a little bigger because of what they were expecting to compete against with this slight disadvantage.
I'm eyeing a 1080. The 980 is good, but I want to bump up the resolution from 1080p finally, and newer things at 2k/4k are starting to really stress this generation's top tier cards.
#15
Posted 10 May 2016 - 12:00 PM
#16
Posted 10 May 2016 - 11:21 PM
I have faith they'll launch a competitive product.
#17
Posted 17 May 2016 - 06:25 AM
It also uses less energy than the 980Ti. So far, only the founders edition 'reference' cards are out and being reviewed, so aftermarket improved cooling solutions will likely extend the lead a little bit more in the coming months.
Compared to AMD's Fury X card, its worst case is about 20% faster when it comes to asynchronous compute (Ashes of the Singularity) and its best case is about 60% (Battlefield 4). The average is something around 35%. Since AMD is going to be really late to the game with Vega, they need to hope that it's faster than the 1080 when it comes out and priced to compete.
#18
Posted 20 May 2016 - 09:55 AM
I saw some performance Overclocking tests where the 1080 gained ~5% fps by overclocking only the GDDR5X
Wonder how much a 1080ti with a wider bus (like 980ti) and Ram clocked at more mature ratings would fare
Also I'd kill for a skylake with a load of edram
sigh
Maybe with kaby lake again
#19
Posted 20 May 2016 - 10:24 AM
Peter2k, on 20 May 2016 - 09:55 AM, said:
I saw some performance Overclocking tests where the 1080 gained ~5% fps by overclocking only the GDDR5X
Wonder how much a 1080ti with a wider bus (like 980ti) and Ram clocked at more mature ratings would fare
Also I'd kill for a skylake with a load of edram
sigh
Maybe with kaby lake again
Well, it's assumed that the eventual 1080Ti would have HBM2 memory clocking in at about triple the bandwidth. However, seeing what little HBM did for Fury X, I don't think it'll make that much of a difference unless you're running brand new games at 4k.
I think I might end up going with an EVGA hybrid 1080 if they aren't too above and beyond the prices for other 1080s.
Broadwell-E may end up having the eDRAM as well, which is being announced in a couple of weeks. It either does a wonder, or it does nothing. There isn't much in-between, and it doesn't seem like it helps with most games.
#20
Posted 20 May 2016 - 12:09 PM
Nvidia has pulled some serious nonsense gains out of their rear ends with this generation, and I will admit to being taken completely by surprise there. I may root for AMD, but I think it's pretty obvious here that nothing short of a miracle will keep them competitive against Pascal. The 1080 is the new 8800GT.
Edited by Catamount, 20 May 2016 - 12:10 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users