# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8 GB



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1070 is nearly twice as fast as the GTX 970, easily beating the $1000 Titan X and GTX 970 SLI at only $379/$449. It is built on the same platform as the GeForce 1080, using the same GPU and cooler, but with GDDR5 memory instead of GDDR5X. As expected, power efficiency is amazing, and overclocking works well too.

*Show full review*


----------



## Polycore (Jun 10, 2016)

Thanks for the review W1zzard 

Any idea when the reviews for the AIB 1080/1070 will be out ?  I'm especially interested to see which card is the most silent (since they seem to have about the same performance once overclocked)


----------



## bug (Jun 10, 2016)

This card looks like a steal. Well, not the FE, but the regular 1070. Let's hope availability won't be an issue.


----------



## Dimi (Jun 10, 2016)

I "need" this card and preferably before summer hits, its already getting bloody hot. My top card in sli is melting almost lol. Should be a huge jump going from GTX 760's SLI to a single GTX 1070.


----------



## 1c3d0g (Jun 10, 2016)

Thanks for the review. Found my next bang-for-the-buck GPU. Now I'll just have to wait for what the other third-party manufacturers come up with in terms of fans/coolers (I'm looking at you, Gigabyte, Asus, EVGA, Zotac and others). Excellent job, NVIDIA!


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

Polycore said:


> Any idea when the reviews for the AIB 1080/1070 will be out ?


I will have reviews starting from early next week


----------



## proxuser (Jun 10, 2016)

Nice review as always. 

I would say It's a 980TI custom with 100w less watt usage. Can easily cool it with Aftermarket cooler.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jun 10, 2016)

Thank you for the review W1zzard, very detailed as always. ^_^

I actually wonder how many people see these tables you create, can people really not see how they are being done in? :







In any case; it's a fantastic GPU and I think I will definitely get myself a GTX1070. (Just to add this, because I have to, not because I want to)


----------



## N3M3515 (Jun 10, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> It makes no diff, bc numerous reviews are showing that the 1070 is NOT faster than Titan X, proving Nvidia's claim is nothing but PR hot air.



Right?


----------



## puma99dk| (Jun 10, 2016)

looks like we will have a new king to take over from the GTX 970


----------



## EvOlViOlEnCe (Jun 10, 2016)

I thought the 1070 FE would not have a vapor chamber like the 1080?


----------



## TheLostSwede (Jun 10, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> I will have reviews starting from early next week



How many did you stuff in your suitcase when you left Computex?


----------



## Caring1 (Jun 10, 2016)

Nice card, pity the price will be twice the American value when it hits our shores.


----------



## ThomasS31 (Jun 10, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> I will have reviews starting from early next week



Great. Good to hear... looking forward to those.

Thanks!


----------



## Air (Jun 10, 2016)

EvOlViOlEnCe said:


> I thought the 1070 FE would not have a vapor chamber like the 1080?


Yeah, i think thats the case. Nvidia oficial site does not mention vapor chamber for the 1070, but does so for the 1080. 

I dont think it makes much diference anyway, all radial fan coolers seem inadequate. Higher temperatures; higher noise. Only use case is if there is no other way to remove the exausting air of the case. Which seems to be almost never, since even itx cases manage to do so easily.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 10, 2016)

Huh, well that's significantly better than I was expecting even on the overclock front.  Kinda surprising card overall with decent performance to boot backing it up.  Its definitely a step down compared to the 1080 but its performance compared to the GTX Titan X is pretty surprising considering it bests it for much less.  This is a good generation with a good performance jump.  Wonder how custom PCB versions will react on the overclocking front?


----------



## deemon (Jun 10, 2016)

bug said:


> This card looks like a steal. Well, not the FE, but the regular 1070. Let's hope availability won't be an issue.



I would hardly call 379$ GPU "a steal". Moreover it's a +50$ compared to previous generation x70 GPU, so I would call it a ripoff.


----------



## Solaris17 (Jun 10, 2016)

> NVIDIA Pascal is introducing a new voltage controller by uPI, the uP 9511P. It's the first time *I* see this model, so I don't know what features it provides.



Page 4 a closer look


----------



## Absolution (Jun 10, 2016)

Glad is has the same cooling solution, now here's to hoping of blower style reviews of non-FE editions (i really need a blower style for my case).


----------



## bug (Jun 10, 2016)

deemon said:


> I would hardly call 379$ GPU "a steal". Moreover it's a +50$ compared to previous generation x70 GPU, so I would call it a ripoff.



Well, you are getting performance previously available for ~$600 for under $400. The $50 markup on the previous generation makes it a rip-off?
I mean, I'm not comfortable spending $400 on a video card (I usually spend half of that), but come on...


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jun 10, 2016)

bug said:


> Well, you are getting performance previously available for ~$600 for under $400. The $50 markup on the previous generation makes it a rip-off?
> I mean, I'm not comfortable spending $400 on a video card (I usually spend half of that), but come on...



It can only be called progress when it was done at the previous generations price points. The move from 28nm to 16nm also reduced manufacturing costs for nVidia. A lot of people like to blame R&D for the new prices, but what do they think the previous generations GFX R&D cost? Gummybears and pink sweeties? The real fact is; in the past R&D would have cost even more...

Translation: Rippoff


----------



## bug (Jun 10, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> It can only be called progress when it was done at the previous generations price points.



That makes as much sense as rejecting a new Corolla having the performance of last year's Ferrari, because it costs $1,000 more than last year's Corolla.



Legacy-ZA said:


> The move from 28nm to 16nm also reduced manufacturing costs for nVidia. A lot of people like to blame R&D for the new prices, but what do they think the previous generations GFX R&D cost? Gummybears and pink sweeties? The real fact is; in the past R&D would have cost even more...
> 
> Translation: Rippoff


By definition, rip-off means grossly overpriced. If these were (grossly) overpriced, no one would buy them. Because they're not essential goods.
But hey, telling people what to sell their goods for is a popular ideology today...


----------



## xorbe (Jun 10, 2016)

Why is the 1070 beating the GTX 1080 here and also at 1920x1080?


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jun 10, 2016)

xorbe said:


> Why is the 1070 beating the GTX 1080 here and also at 1920x1080?



Not sure why exactly but you're essentially comparing drag race cars 0-10mph speed. Car was designed to go 300, but hey we just want to focus on why one is getting off the line faster than the other. I sure there's a valid use for that when you're doing it professionally but we're gamers. We buy 600$ cards to play 4k (or at least 1440p). Not 1600x900.


----------



## redeye (Jun 10, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> It can only be called progress when it was done at the previous generations price points. _The move from 28nm to 16nm also reduced manufacturing costs for nVidia. _A lot of people like to blame R&D for the new prices, but what do they think the previous generations GFX R&D cost? Gummybears and pink sweeties? The real fact is; in the past R&D would have cost even more...
> 
> Translation: Rippoff



TMSC has to  amortize, the cost of the fabs. Thus, higher prices for Nvidia. (Unless Apple paid the full tab for them, so it gets first choice of fabs line output...)
(Assuming TMSC makes the GPU)


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 10, 2016)

redeye said:


> TMSC has to  amortize, the cost of the fabs. Thus, higher prices for Nvidia. (Unless Apple paid the full tab for them, so it gets first choice of fabs line output...)
> (Assuming TMSC makes the GPU)



Bullshit. Look, they dragged out 28nm for over two years longer than _planned_. We're still paying the bill for being on an outdated process for two additional years, but never saw a price cut because 28nm was dragged out longer. Odd huh?

This isn't about expensive fabs, this is about maximizing profit. Let's not fool ourselves with silly arguments about cost - these are cut down chips as well, not fully working ones. In the same vein, Nvidia is content selling us an underperforming blower to cool that cut down chip, at ANOTHER price premium.

Yeah, this totally isn't a ripoff at its current MSRP. Because it's faster than past gen's 970 from two years ago. Logic is strong here.

FYI I don't care what they ask for it personally, but let's call things for what they really are please. LegacyZa is absolutely right in saying a 50 dollar markup is a ripoff, because really, it is. 10-20 bucks? Sure. 50? Can't explain that. It's nearly 20% up.

If they keep this up, soon they'll be marketing GP206 as 'high end' because it has a 450 dollar price tag.


----------



## bug (Jun 10, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> LegacyZa is absolutely right in saying a 50 dollar markup is a ripoff, because really, it is. 10-20 bucks? Sure. 50? Can't explain that. It's nearly 20% up.



Well, 10 bucks would probably only cover the inflation since last year...
Also, why is it so hard to understand that the price of goods is not based on BoM? It's based on supply and demand. It's so simple, I don't know how to explain this further.

Edit: Also, people tend to forget that while the GTX 970 launched at $330, the GTX 770 before it launched at $400. And so did the GTX 670.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 10, 2016)

bug said:


> Well, 10 bucks would probably only cover the inflation since last year...
> Also, why is it so hard to understand that the price of goods is not based on BoM? It's based on supply and demand. It's so simple, I don't know how to explain this further.
> 
> Edit: Also, people tend to forget that while the GTX 970 launched at $330, the GTX 770 before it launched at $400. And so did the GTX 670.



The value of goods is based on supply and demand, but when there is a near-monopoly at a certain performance level, the whole basis for healthy competition is blown away - enter ripoff pricing.

The more you know about a market, the easier it is to spot these things. You and I both know how this market works, but you are actually denying it in a sense. If AMD had a competitive product at this time, the world would look different. Also, the GTX 770 came down in price extremely quickly, like days after launch, and even under the MSRP of the 970. (And all because AMD could put something up against it)


----------



## thebluebumblebee (Jun 10, 2016)

> During gaming, the card goes above 82°C, which results in lower clocks


I think Nvidia dropped a letter from the model number.  I think it should be GTX 1070(or 1080) FE'M
Also, for the extra $100 for the FE cooler, I can only think of one thing:


----------



## qubit (Jun 10, 2016)

This card is gonna fly off the shelves.


----------



## cokker (Jun 10, 2016)

Here in the UK the 970 launched at £250~, depending where you shop the 1070 is £370 to £400.

£250 is my comfortable amount.


----------



## Casecutter (Jun 10, 2016)

Finally some fairly usable 1440p Fps for below $500, though not really worthy in 4K.

If I could purchase a 27" 1440p panel w/Adaptive Sync, and a card that gets in this realm of FpS for <$500 we'd see a huge migration from 1080p.


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

xorbe said:


> Why is the 1070 beating the GTX 1080 here and also at 1920x1080?



Fallout 4 results fixed


----------



## Danielino (Jun 10, 2016)

"Without the right tool, these are incredibly difficult to remove."
Which is the right tool?


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Jun 10, 2016)

still slower than gtx 970 sli, but less power consumption, more vram. I don't know why AMD fanboy dream about the RX480 will be better than this 1070 with a lower price.


----------



## Casecutter (Jun 10, 2016)

mrthanhnguyen said:


> the RX480 will be better than this 1070 with a lower price


Not sure who's believing it will be _*better*_, though if in this realm... of 1440p for $200 it will make a statement.


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

Danielino said:


> "Without the right tool, these are incredibly difficult to remove."
> Which is the right tool?


https://www.wiha.com/en/produkte/screwdrivers/picofinish-hex-nut-driver.html
Wiha PicoFinish  265P, size 4 Hex


----------



## birdie (Jun 10, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> It can only be called progress when it was done at the previous generations price points. The move from 28nm to 16nm also reduced manufacturing costs for nVidia. A lot of people like to blame R&D for the new prices, but what do they think the previous generations GFX R&D cost? Gummybears and pink sweeties? The real fact is; in the past R&D would have cost even more...
> 
> Translation: Rippoff



What makes you think 16nm wafers from TSMC cost significantly less than 28nm wafers? Don't you think for a second that maybe TSMC has to pay for their R&D which I heard was crazily expensive? Don't you think that maybe NVIDIA didn't just use their Maxwell blueprints and re-released it using a smaller node?

Wow, three likes for such a BS comment.


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 10, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> https://www.wiha.com/en/produkte/screwdrivers/picofinish-hex-nut-driver.html
> Wiha PicoFinish  265P, size 4 Hex


Every type of PC screw/nut, any board :







(Mastercraft 66 piece Precision Electronics Screwdriver Set (#57-3624-4))


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

cadaveca said:


> Every type of PC screw/nut, any board :








Mine's bigger than yours, but still not enough. None of these will fit the NVIDIA screws.

Even if one of your bottom row center ones would fit, their wall would be pretty thick, getting very close to components around the screws


----------



## Casecutter (Jun 10, 2016)

The article W1zzard said, "For the GPU, a vapo-chamber baseplate is used to soak up the heat quickly".



Air said:


> Yeah, i think thats the case. Nvidia official site *does not* mention vapor chamber for the 1070, but does so for the 1080.



Is there a clarification on this actually being the same "Vapor-Chamber" cooler used on the 1080?  The W1zzarrd pic of the 1080 is different.


----------



## Danielino (Jun 10, 2016)

Thanks


----------



## mroofie (Jun 10, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> Bullshit. Look, they dragged out 28nm for over two years longer than _planned_. We're still paying the bill for being on an outdated process for two additional years, but never saw a price cut because 28nm was dragged out longer. Odd huh?
> 
> This isn't about expensive fabs, this is about maximizing profit. Let's not fool ourselves with silly arguments about cost - these are cut down chips as well, not fully working ones. In the same vein, Nvidia is content selling us an underperforming blower to cool that cut down chip, at ANOTHER price premium.
> 
> ...





Its almost double the performance of the gtx 970

double the memory

28 to 16nm

Keep hating


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

Casecutter said:


> Is there a clarification on this actually being the same "Vapor-Chamber" cooler used on the 1080?


I'm looking into this right now, also Fallout at lower res


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 10, 2016)

not bad ... tho it will be overpriced as usual ... 699$1080FE translate in 849chf (881.73$) for me and 599$ custom (    ) tranlate into 899chf baseprice (933.66$)

can't wait to see the upcomming Polaris and Vega ... my 980 still hold it high enough (or my GTX860m also )

postrscriptum ... 1070 price for me : FE= 559chf (580.55$) and unannounced customs model prices, for now...

thanks but no thanks...  bleh


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 10, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> Even if one of your bottom row center ones would fit, their wall would be pretty thick, getting very close to components around the screws



Good point. NVidia has a bad habit of using "non-standard" screws on VGAs, damn Torx screws and motherboard M.2s had me buy my kit.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 10, 2016)

cadaveca said:


> Good point. NVidia has a bad habit of using "non-standard" screws on VGAs, damn Torx screws and motherboard M.2s had me buy my kit.


me it's working on some MacBook Pro ... that made me buy a kit ... i perfectly understand you ...


----------



## Frick (Jun 10, 2016)

If it lands on the same price as the GTX970, this is definitely a win.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 10, 2016)

Frick said:


> If it lands on the same price as the GTX970, this is definitely a win.


nice dreaming ... seriously ... you see the actual prices in different etailer? in Switzerland 1080 and 1070 are total ripoff, probably later when price will settle down (or up ... at some of my etailer/retailer, some component prices did go up instead of down with the time passing ... )


dunno where did nvidia got their MSRP of 599/699$ ... even with a 1:1 usd:chf conversion they are far from it ... 

(i know it's a MSRP but still, if it was a +/-10% variation, that would be understandable but that .... nope)

last but not least, in the case of a 1080 i would not buy a card that beat a Titan X and is under the upcomming TitanP for the price of a Titan X (altho the 980Ti was already at the price of a Titan X's MSRP where i am ... ) even a 295x2 is more tempting now (personal opinion ofc )


----------



## Frick (Jun 10, 2016)

GreiverBlade said:


> nice dreaming ... seriously ... you see the actual prices in different etailer? in Switzerland 1080 and 1070 are total ripoff, probably later when price will settle down (or up ... at some of my etailer/retailer, some component prices did go up instead of down with the time passing ... )
> 
> 
> dunno where did nvidia got their MSRP of 599/699$ ... even with a 1:1 usd:chf conversion they are far from it ...



Yeeeaaah they're listed now, for the same launch price as the 980, >€500. ;_; I can't really see a €200 price drop in the future, to match the 970.

EDIT: Right, forgot about thw FE thing. So far the 1080 non-FEs are not thag much cheaper than FE TBH. We'll see what happens with this, but I will assume they will not be cheap enough.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 10, 2016)

Frick said:


> Yeeeaaah they're listed now, for the same launch price as the 980, >€500. ;_; I can't really see a €200 price drop in the future, to match the 970.


well 980 for me (my Poseidon Platinum) was 626chf (650.14$/576.94€ ) so the 1070FE is a little under, but it's a good custom and i didn't pay for it ... so even 1$ for a 1070FE is a ripoff for me  (joke)


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

EvOlViOlEnCe said:


> I thought the 1070 FE would not have a vapor chamber like the 1080?


Ok,I took another look, the GTX 1070 does indeed use three heatpipes, while the 1080 uses vapo-chamber. There is just so little difference in terms of cooling performance that I assumed they were identical. The review has been updated. Nice catch!


----------



## enya64 (Jun 10, 2016)

*Awaiting the 1070 sli benchmarks*


----------



## jchambers2586 (Jun 10, 2016)

Should I buy another 970 for SLI when the cards become cheaper on ebay. I already have a 970.


----------



## Frick (Jun 10, 2016)

jchambers2586 said:


> Should I buy another 970 for SLI when the cards become cheaper on ebay. I already have a 970.



If on 1080p, that is what I would do.


----------



## alexsubri (Jun 10, 2016)

hmmmm really tempted to sell my gtx 970 sli...it performs nearly identically with the exception of some games in the chart provided by W1zz


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

Fixed Fallout 4 results

Also reworded that analog VGA part, apparently a lot of people thought I'm complaining about lack of a VGA D-Sub connector, whereas I meant analog pins within the DVI connector


----------



## ppn (Jun 10, 2016)

Well the DVi should be cleared for good to create some more heat exhaust openings and nice modern look. 4K, using DP here. If 1080Ti has any DVI not buying it.


----------



## mroofie (Jun 10, 2016)

ppn said:


> Well the DVi should be cleared for good to create some more heat exhaust openings and nice modern look. 4K, using DP here. If 1080Ti has any DVI not buying it.


Most consumer friendly monitors don't come with hdmi let alone a display port...


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

ppn said:


> Well the DVi should be cleared for good to create some more heat exhaust openings and nice modern look. 4K, using DP here. If 1080Ti has any DVI not buying it.


AMD RX480 has no more DVI, you should buy that, who wants 1080 Ti..


----------



## Frick (Jun 10, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> AMD RX480 has no more DVI, you should buy that, who wants 1080 Ti..



And that sucks. As mroofie says, a lot of monitors only have DVI and VGA, so you have to use adapters. I hate adapters.


----------



## mroofie (Jun 10, 2016)

Frick said:


> And that sucks. As mroofie says, a lot of monitors only have DVI and VGA, so you have to use adapters. *I hate adapters*.


Who doesn't


----------



## mroofie (Jun 10, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> AMD RX480 has no more DVI, you should buy that, *who wants 1080 Ti.*.



Hmm... know something we dont ?


----------



## nem.. (Jun 10, 2016)

Sapphire rx480

http://videocardz.com/60992/sapphire-radeon-rx-480-nitro-pictured






16nm tsmc first gen on Pascal

14nm finfet Samsung 2nd gen on Polaris

CF rx480 > 1080 > 1070


----------



## ppn (Jun 10, 2016)

Well I'll sacrifice my ego on the altar of legacy connectors this time, the presence of DVI that is. Hoping Gigabyte releases MiniITX 1070 version if that makes economic sense. 

As for 970 SLI bad idea simply because 1070 could go for as low as 330$ in few months by the RX490 release.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 10, 2016)

ppn said:


> As for 970 SLI bad idea simply because 1070 could go for as low as 330$ in few months by the RX490 release.


sweet dream ... 330$ ... when it's already 580.55$ (for me and FE ... not custom)  ... and RX490 ... let the promised 480 come and bench to go along (TPU one obviously ) before saying nv prices will drop ... for that price : you get a 2nd hand 1060 prolly 

looking at the past history : no chance, the 980 and 980Ti and 970 didn't drop in price with the 390/390X, a contrario they did go up for me... if i didn't got lucky on the 980 i actually have i would either kept my 290 or gone the 390X route instead ...


----------



## jabbadap (Jun 10, 2016)

Great review as always W1zzard . Card would be excellent if one could buy that with that $379 mrsp.



Spoiler: off topic






nem.. said:


> Sapphire rx480
> 
> http://videocardz.com/60992/sapphire-radeon-rx-480-nitro-pictured
> 
> ...



Pascal is actually from TSMC's 2 gen 16nm process called ff+, while polaris will be first gen global foundries 14nm lpp. The transistor density advantage is slightly on amd's side. But if the clocks are really that low (1266MHz), I'm afraid amd might have chosen wrong process...

And read the review, CF rx480 will scale much like r9-295x2. If CF scaling is good it will be close or over the gtx1080 performance. But if it is bad performance will be close to single rx 480.



EDIT: That power consumption was most surprising 151W peak on gaming. If I may suggest: W1zzard should change that bluray something that could potentially be more taxing on today's graphic cards vpus, i.e. some 10bit 4k60Hz high bitrate hevc movie clip(or 4k netflix could do it).


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 10, 2016)

jabbadap said:


> bluray something that could potentially be more taxing on today's graphic cards vpus, i.e. some 10bit 4k60Hz high bitrate hevc movie clip(or 4k netflix could do it).


Gotta wait a while longer for that to be well supported on all cards


----------



## N3M3515 (Jun 10, 2016)

It seems that this newgen cards (1080 & 1070), have less o/c potential than last gen (980Ti, 980, 970), from what i've seen on benchmarks.


----------



## jchambers2586 (Jun 10, 2016)

its heat related


----------



## techies888 (Jun 11, 2016)

It's beating Titan X in every single review i've seen and its much much cheaper, so what the hell are everybody crying about..... ffs


----------



## geon2k2 (Jun 11, 2016)

Can you please add game settings for each game please. 
The highest quality setting unless indicated otherwise doesn't say much to me. 
Its good to compare cards between themselves, but it is not good to make an educated purchase decision. 

For example I game in 1080p with AA off, in general on high, not ultra, so for me it would be a complete waste of money to go into 1070/1080 territory.
Sure you cannot cover all the possible settings, but it would be useful to show that even a 970 can get 60 FPS in all games, in full HD, if AA is not enabled for example. It will save many of us a lot of cash


----------



## bug (Jun 11, 2016)

mroofie said:


> Most consumer friendly monitors don't come with hdmi let alone a display port...



There's this thing called HDMI-to-DVI cable, you know. They could even include an adapter with the card.
Everything legacy should become an option asap, imho.


----------



## xorbe (Jun 11, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> Fallout 4 results fixed



Did you have to re-compute the summary charts? (Perf, perf/watt, perf/$)


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 11, 2016)

xorbe said:


> Did you have to re-compute the summary charts? (Perf, perf/watt, perf/$)


Of course, the changes are probably smaller than 1%


----------



## Frick (Jun 11, 2016)

bug said:


> There's this thing called HDMI-to-DVI cable, you know. They could even include an adapter with the card.
> Everything legacy should become an option asap, imho.



VGA even I consider to be legacy, but not DVI. For one thing, the connectors are a lot more stable than HDMI and DP, and you can secure them properly. And at least where I live DVI-HDMI cables are at least twice as much as the usual cables. And adapters are always terrible.


----------



## Grings (Jun 11, 2016)

Nice cards, but its a 980, not a 970 replacement (as the 1080 is a 980ti replacement) pricewise

still, i'm going by pre-order prices of £365 cheapest on ocuk, £400 for FE

If i see them drop closer to 300 i might pick one up (then a 4k monitor and 2nd card at a later date)


----------



## bug (Jun 11, 2016)

Frick said:


> VGA even I consider to be legacy, but not DVI. For one thing, the connectors are a lot more stable than HDMI and DP, and you can secure them properly. And at least where I live DVI-HDMI cables are at least twice as much as the usual cables. And adapters are always terrible.


Not gonna disagree with you there. For every advancement, something good gets left behind. It's they way of the world.
However DVI is (becoming) legacy because it can't do anything more than 2560x1600@60Hz. In a world of 120Hz+ monitors, that's not good enough. It's still useful, that why I thought including a (certified/tested) adapter would be nice for a generation of video cards or two. Just some thoughts, it's not like AMD and Nvidia are following my posts to decide what they should do next.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 11, 2016)

Grings said:


> Nice cards, but its a 980, not a 970 replacement (as the 1080 is a 980ti replacement) pricewise



No they are not.  Price has nothing to do with a card's placement in a product stack and what it replaces.  The 1070 is the direct replacement for 970, whether you like it or not.  What determines replacement is the actual GPU used in the card.

The GP104 chip of the 1080 may outperform the 980Ti, but it is mid-tier chip for Pascal, so it does not replace 980Ti.  

I can direct you to the 970 and 980 production having been discontinued.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jun 11, 2016)

techies888 said:


> It's beating Titan X in every single review i've seen and its much much cheaper, so what the hell are everybody crying about..... ffs


aherm ... 580$ is the point i could care less about Titan X prices (probably since the 980Ti are already at a Titan X MSRP price for me ...) much much cheaper ... still too expensive for the segment occupied ... 10XX are ripoff that's all



ppn said:


> simply because 1070 could go for as low as 330$ in few months by the RX490 release.





jabbadap said:


> Card would be excellent if one could buy that with that $379 mrsp.


if the price was like that (aka a la 970 launch/1month later) it would be fine, but no: AIB and etailer want to sell it to you for 200$ more, vaseline not include ...

300-380$ are just dreams ... (just like 980 at a "non 980Ti price" ... for me a 980 is still, even now, above 600$ )

for me if AMD play it right and price it adequatly i think i will go Polaris then Vega road ... my 980 is nice but unlike my 290, it only brought me "drivers issues" and not "real" improvement for a price 4 time higher (i paid my 290 150chf the 980 value is 626chf but i could also say that my 290 did cost me 150chf more since i got the 980 in a giveaway, which is the only reason that make it worth something.)



geon2k2 said:


> 199$/E. That is half the price of a 1070 anyway.


if it was 299$/€ that would be half the price ... at 199 it's a third


----------



## bug (Jun 11, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> No they are not.  Price has nothing to do with a card's placement in a product stack and what it replaces.  The 1070 is the direct replacement for 970, whether you like it or not.  What determines replacement is the actual GPU used in the card.
> 
> The GP104 chip of the 1080 may outperform the 980Ti, but it is mid-tier chip for Pascal, so it does not replace 980Ti.
> 
> I can direct you to the 970 and 980 production having been discontinued and 980Ti production still active.


Not sure why you think it has to be that way. Frankly, I don't think it _is_ that way, because neither Nvidia nor AMD has said "this card replaces that card". It's all in some people's head.
Personally, I couldn't care less about what replaces what. To me it's about the level of performance you can get. Then it's about price. And then about power consumption.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 11, 2016)

bug said:


> Not sure why you think it has to be that way. Frankly, I don't think it _is_ that way, because neither Nvidia nor AMD has said "this card replaces that card".



LOL.


----------



## jabbadap (Jun 11, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> Gotta wait a while longer for that to be well supported on all cards



Well, that's true. Some older gens cards does not even support  h264 4k 60fps clips. And of course there is the thing that if other card has full hw decoder and the other card has only partial, measuring only card power usage is apples to oranges test.


----------



## Frick (Jun 11, 2016)

bug said:


> However DVI is (becoming) legacy because it can't do anything more than 2560x1600@60Hz. In a world of 120Hz+ monitors, that's not good enough. It's still useful, that why I thought including a (certified/tested) adapter would be nice for a generation of video cards or two. Just some thoughts, it's not like AMD and Nvidia are following my posts to decide what they should do next.



Well that's a fair point. I didn't even know that limitation (I knew it didn't do 4k tho). For high end cards I can understand the sentiment then. Still kinda sucky, I really like the DVI connectors. So stable.


----------



## ppn (Jun 11, 2016)

980 to 1070 40%, 980Ti to 1080 40%, again improvement. I'm pretty convinced that one replaces the other with a discount of 50$. Lets face it 1070 will be obsoleted by 10% slower card at 250$ in the next 3 to 12 months. 
To complete the product line, unknown card should be 40% faster than 970.  and another +40% than 960. Now there is not such thing as what "should". There is just what "is". The "should" exists in somebody's head.


----------



## nem.. (Jun 11, 2016)

really worth it the 1070 taking on count it have 25% less cuda cores and right now are sell it on such high prices as 500E ? this have such high irresponsible performace?. no joke i hope this dont delete for i cant learn to make proper post, it be an legit argue.


----------



## Dethroy (Jun 12, 2016)

Such a butchered card with such a nice performance...
at a rather disappointing price.


----------



## raghu78 (Jun 12, 2016)

This card is found at prices from USD 419-449 at newegg. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709 601202919

To post perf/$ at USD 379 is downright disingenuous and intentionally misleading the consumer. The tech press seems to be an extension of Nvidia's PR nowadays. The price gouging at retailers makes this card even more pathetic. 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01GKD93IU/?tag=tec06d-20 
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01GEYE6YQ/?tag=tec06d-20

"AMD's upcoming Polaris cards will be nowhere near the GTX 1070 in terms of performance. Rather, expect RX 480 to perform about 20-30% slower. But AMD's $199 pricing for the 480 could stir things up, so if you don't need a new card immediately, maybe wait a few weeks and see how things pan out, which would also allow you to see how the custom GTX 1070 designs by board partners turn out."

The worst part is wizzard commenting on Polaris products which are yet to launch and claiming they won't compete with GTX 1070. Does he know the full specs of various Polaris 10 SKUs with price and perf. Rx 480 is the only announced Polaris product. But its one among a family of products to be launched. There are likely to be higher GPUs above Rx 480 and until those are launched/reviewed we won't know anything. Its downright unprofessional to comment on cards you don't know about yet. Anyway I think Polaris 10 is going to surprise one and all. I think we are likely to see intense competition like those during HD 4870/HD 4850 days. The 29th of June could not come sooner.


----------



## Dethroy (Jun 12, 2016)

raghu78 said:


> "AMD's upcoming Polaris cards will be nowhere near the GTX 1070 in terms of performance. Rather, expect RX 480 to perform about 20-30% slower. But AMD's $199 pricing for the 480 could stir things up, so if you don't need a new card immediately, maybe wait a few weeks and see how things pan out, which would also allow you to see how the custom GTX 1070 designs by board partners turn out."
> 
> The worst part is wizzard commenting on Polaris products which are yet to launch and claiming they won't compete with GTX 1070. Does he know the full specs of various Polaris 10 SKUs with price and perf. Rx 480 is the only announced Polaris product. But its one among a family of products to be launched. There are likely to be higher GPUs above Rx 480 and until those are launched/reviewed we won't know anything. Its downright unprofessional to comment on cards you don't know about yet. Anyway I think Polaris 10 is going to surprise one and all. I think we are likely to see intense competition like those during HD 4870/HD 4850 days. The 29th of June could not come sooner.



Pretty sure Wizzard already reviewed the RX 480 but is not allowed to publish the review until the nda gets lifted by AMD.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jun 12, 2016)

raghu78 said:


> This card is found at prices from USD 419-449 at newegg.
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709 601202919
> 
> ...



GTX1070's start @ $600 here and will remain there, as these ass clowns in SA never re-adjust the price points. So much for $380 MSRP right? GTX1080's for $1000, so much for $600 MSRP right?


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 12, 2016)

With these cards flying off the shelves, nVidia must be racking it in.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jun 12, 2016)

Dethroy said:


> Pretty sure Wizzard already reviewed the RX 480 but is not allowed to publish the review until the nda gets lifted by AMD.



Mmmm yeah, W1zzard did kinda hint at something special in an earlier post...

Perhaps I should wait for the AMD cards to release first before deciding on purchasing the GTX1070, if it's near the 1070 performance level @ $200... Not more needs to be said, but I will get an AMD card then, would be nice to give nVidia the middle finger as they so clearly love to do to us.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 12, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> Mmmm yeah, W1zzard did kinda hint at something special in an earlier post...
> 
> Perhaps I should wait for the AMD cards to release first before deciding on purchasing the GTX1070, if it's near the 1070 performance level @ $200... Not more needs to be said, but I will get an AMD card then, would be nice to give nVidia the middle finger as they so clearly love to do to us.



It's a free market my man, I'm really not sure why you're getting offended by the price of something no one is forcing you to buy.

No doubt AMD will undercut their currently overpriced products though.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 12, 2016)

ppn said:


> 980 to 1070 40%, 980Ti to 1080 40%, again improvement. I'm pretty convinced that one replaces the other with a discount of 50$



Then you don't understand about the way Nvidia's product lineup is named.  The 1070 can outperform any Maxwell, but that doesn't change where it sits in the new lineup.  In product placement it is the direct replacement for the 970.

Its always been that new models outperform previous year models from one to more levels higher.  

Think of it this way. BMW has a 3 series sedan and a 3 series M class.  One year, they put an engine in the regular 3 series that is more powerful than the previous year M-class.  That doesn't make it an M-class replacement.  It just makes it faster.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jun 12, 2016)

Man...So much red and green comments...Is it Christmas?



ppn said:


> 980 to 1070 40%, 980Ti to 1080 40%, again improvement. I'm pretty convinced that one replaces the other with a discount of 50$. Lets face it 1070 will be obsoleted by 10% slower card at 250$ in the next 3 to 12 months.
> To complete the product line, unknown card should be 40% faster than 970.  and another +40% than 960. Now there is not such thing as what "should". There is just what "is". The "should" exists in somebody's head.


Your not getting what hes saying...Its the chip being used and what replaces said chip in the lineup.  There will be a GTX 1080ti (And Titan) that have a higher different chip than what is currently available in the GTX 1080 and 1070.  The GTX 1080/1070 chip corresponds to the GTA 980/970 and is the direct replacement which is why (Like @rtwjunkie said) they have only stopped producing the GTX 980 and 970.  The others are in lower supply but still being made/available for the time being even though the 1080 and 1070 are besting them at better price points.  Nvidia has done this for two generations now and that's how they are going to continue it for the forseeable future until they feel the need to change the lineup.  Its the way they do things...  Nothing in this has to do with the logic of whats more powerful or a better buy, just how the chip maker does things.


----------



## geon2k2 (Jun 12, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> GTX1070's start @ $600 here and will remain there, as these ass clowns in SA never re-adjust the price points. So much for $380 MSRP right? GTX1080's for $1000, so much for $600 MSRP right?



You just made me curious. In my country(EU Est) the 1070 founders edition sells for 530 EUR in one of the major online retailers.


----------



## Aquinus (Jun 12, 2016)

Still wondering what changed to make 8GB not useless, @W1zzard... You can even go back to the last few 980 Ti reviews and 6GB isn't regarded as useless but, the latest 390 or 390X review will tell you, "8GB provides to tangible benefits," which is dumb because when ever did adding more system memory improve performance when you hadn't already run out? Also how does 6GB help over 4GB but 8GB doesn't? Is the 1070 and 1080 utilizing that 8GB whereas AMD cards aren't? The benefit of 6 or 8GB is not performance, it's running out when you've hit 4GB, that's not a performance improvement, that's longevity. So it's only a con when nVidia puts 12GB on a card but, it's a con when AMD puts 8GB on a card? 6GB is fine but 8GB was too much? Lack of explanation makes me think that there is a little bit of bias when it comes to the conclusions for each review.

Aside from the pro/con for 8GB, great review. I just think that every bullet point in the conclusion should be explained. If something is significant for a summary, there should be enough to be said to explain why it's listed in the first place, otherwise it just feels like marketing because, listing the benefits or downsides that aren't addressed in a review is typically a bad idea. It's harms credibility.


----------



## jaggerwild (Jun 12, 2016)

GhostRyder said:


> Man...So much red and green comments...Is it Christmas?
> 
> 
> Your not getting what hes saying...Its the chip being used and what replaces said chip in the lineup.  There will be a GTX 1080ti (And Titan) that have a higher different chip than what is currently available in the GTX 1080 and 1070.  The GTX 1080/1070 chip corresponds to the GTA 980/970 and is the direct replacement which is why (Like @rtwjunkie said) they have only stopped producing the GTX 980 and 970.  The others are in lower supply but still being made/available for the time being even though the 1080 and 1070 are besting them at better price points.  Nvidia has done this for two generations now and that's how they are going to continue it for the forseeable future until they feel the need to change the lineup.  Its the way they do things...  Nothing in this has to do with the logic of whats more powerful or a better buy, just how the chip maker does things.



Thank you!
A few people understand what is going on, while I see Great Spec's on the new 1070/80 they are at best mid tier GPU'S(the graph shows it as such), within a month the whole landscape will change Nvidia has not shown it's best chips yet(great for consumers)as soon the red team will release there card then Green, blah blah. 1070/80 are high, but soon as the next chip by Nvidia drop 1070/80 will be a gem of a price.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 12, 2016)

Fluffmeister said:


> With these cards flying off the shelves, nVidia must be racking it in.



if there was any amount available to fly off the shelves your comment might have some point.. being as there aint its a bit erroneous.. 

i am pretty sure that amd are now in the past tense as regards top end cards now.. they will have to compete with mid range and below with extra good prices..

to assume they will be able to do anything else is just wishful thinking.. i recon high prices at the top end are here to stay..

trog

ps.. plus if nvidia are now so far in front they dont have any reason to come up with a TI consumer version they may not bother.. why should they..


----------



## nem.. (Jun 12, 2016)

why if the 1070 FE its almost 100$ more expensive than customs designs this wont include vapor chamber?

heatsink 1070 FE .
http://www.itocp.com/htmls/40/n-6840-2.html







Vapor chamber 1080 FE .
http://www.itocp.com/htmls/50/n-6750-5.html


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 13, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> This isn't about expensive fabs, this is about maximizing profit. Let's not fool ourselves with silly arguments about cost - these are cut down chips as well, not fully working ones. In the same vein, Nvidia is content selling us an underperforming blower to cool that cut down chip, at ANOTHER price premium.
> 
> Yeah, this totally isn't a ripoff at its current MSRP. Because it's faster than past gen's 970 from two years ago. Logic is strong here.
> 
> FYI I don't care what they ask for it personally, but let's call things for what they really are please. LegacyZa is absolutely right in saying a 50 dollar markup is a ripoff, because really, it is. 10-20 bucks? Sure. 50? Can't explain that. It's nearly 20% up.



It's what the market is willing to pay.  AMD actaully needs to take a page out of their playbook if they want to survive, to be frank.

You can always buy previous gen if you REALLY need to save a buck and feel it's honestly better price to performance.  Heck, I did that and picked up a Titan X for $450.00.  I doubt you really honestly will find that a better deal though...


----------



## mroofie (Jun 13, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> Mmmm yeah, W1zzard did kinda hint at something special in an earlier post...
> 
> Perhaps I should wait for the AMD cards to release first before deciding on purchasing the GTX1070*, if it's near the 1070 performance level* @ $200... Not more needs to be said, but I will get an AMD card then, would be nice to give nVidia the middle finger as they so clearly love to do to us.



Did you miss the reveal ? 

its 970 - 980 performance 

As for your other post

The pricing is for America  and blaming nvidia for what happens to electronics regarding  price in our country is quite douchy and misleading


----------



## Kissamies (Jun 13, 2016)

"DVI output no longer includes analog VGA signals"

This should have been a positive thing since 290/290X, since who uses VGA monitors with high-end hardware?


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jun 13, 2016)

mroofie said:


> Did you miss the reveal ?
> its 970 - 980 performance



How convenient for you to exclude the price/performance per GPU. Now go back to the charts and see where 2x of those cards will be performing more or less and at a much lower price point. 



mroofie said:


> As for your other post
> 
> The pricing is for America  and blaming nvidia for what happens to electronics regarding  price in our country is quite douchy and misleading



Actually, nVidia does have more of a say than you realize, it's just after the import tax, shipping, markups that things become murky and misleading. The problem for me is; that they market it at those MSRP price points to us as a whole as if it will be like that for every country in the world, when it obviously isn't for various reasons. 

Go get a dictionary or Google, I don't care which and lookup Retail and MSRP, it's the price you pay as the end consumer regardless of all the in between transactions.


----------



## nickbaldwin86 (Jun 13, 2016)

Someday we will have a card... single 1 that can play Crysis 3 @ 4k and well over 60FPS


----------



## mroofie (Jun 14, 2016)

nickbaldwin86 said:


> Someday we will have a card... single 1 that can play Crysis 3 @ 4k and well over 60FPS


Lol


----------



## Air (Jun 15, 2016)

Looks like the dvi port blocks a lot of airflow. I wonder if the cooling performance would be better without it.


----------



## Frick (Jun 15, 2016)

Air said:


> Looks like the dvi por blocks a lot of airflow. I wonder if the cooling performance woulbe be better withou it.



It's not like it needs better cooling anyway.


----------



## Air (Jun 15, 2016)

Frick said:


> It's not like it needs better cooling anyway.



Review implies it does:


> During gaming, the card goes above 82°C, which results in lower clocks due to Boost 3.0.



And in the cons:


> High price for the Founders Edition
> *Cooler runs into temperature limit*
> Fans don't turn off in idle
> Overclocking more complicated than before
> ...


----------



## bug (Jun 15, 2016)

Air said:


> Looks like the dvi port blocks a lot of airflow. I wonder if the cooling performance would be better without it.



The cooler is not a blower type, so it doesn't block as much airflow as you'd think.
That said, I'd rather have a DP/HDMI instead. Or maybe two miniDP.


----------



## Air (Jun 15, 2016)

bug said:


> The cooler is not a blower type, so it doesn't block as much airflow as you'd think.
> That said, I'd rather have a DP/HDMI instead. Or maybe two miniDP.



What do you mean? It is a blower type, all air is exausted through the I/O bracket. Thats why its so perforated:






But the DVI conector blocks a LOT:





Compare it to the AMDs design:




The top row is enterely open to improve airflow.


----------



## bug (Jun 15, 2016)

Air said:


> What do you mean? It is a blower type, all air is exausted through the I/O bracket. Thats why its so perforated:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oops, my bad. I thought I was replying to the MSI 1080 Gaming thread.


----------



## Travis (Jun 26, 2016)

The GTX 1070 is blazing! It would be great for 4K with no AA turned on, and of course, it needs to be overclocked to death.

Once it is overclocked to death though, it performs just a little slower than a GTX 1080 at stock speeds! Which seems to average great playable fps at 4K .

I'm glad to see 4K is a standard just about now, for just $379.99 too!

I am excited to see how the partner cards look with more power to the PCB, and more overclocking potential!

I don't care what anyone says, (2) of these cards for $750 bucks is eye melting 4K performance once both overclocked especially!

$379 was how much the 4GB gtx 960 cards costed for a good one anyways like a FTW model.

And one of these GTX 1070's has 8GB of memory, and it is 5% faster then (2) GTX970's in SLI!!!! All for less money then a measly beefed up 4GB gtx 960... 


Yes it is a value!


----------



## SpAwNtoHell (Jun 27, 2016)

@W1zzard Are any partners cards with custom cooling like msi asus gigabyte evga reviews expected with techpowerup? If yes when we would see those?


----------



## Air (Jun 27, 2016)

Travis said:


> The GTX 1070 is blazing! It would be great for 4K with no AA turned on, and of course, it needs to be overclocked to death.
> 
> Once it is overclocked to death though, it performs just a little slower than a GTX 1080 at stock speeds! Which seems to average great playable fps at 4K .
> 
> ...



wat


----------



## SpAwNtoHell (Jun 27, 2016)

Travis said:


> The GTX 1070 is blazing! It would be great for 4K with no AA turned on, and of course, it needs to be overclocked to death.
> 
> Once it is overclocked to death though, it performs just a little slower than a GTX 1080 at stock speeds! Which seems to average great playable fps at 4K .
> 
> ...


 Not sure what your point should be really as i can assure you gtx 1070 is not that wow even in fhd in latest titles if your target is 60fps minimum with all eye candy on maxed out and i can give you a example rise of tomb rider, but indeed is smooth as my minimum on msi gtx 1070 gaming x as it comes from the box is 45 fps in steam counter with high of 90+ on fhd monitor at 144hz gsync of... 8x msaa...but is ok for leaving room i5 6600k movie and ocasional games.

If you do not see what aa is doing to a game...not know what to say really...

Ps my 4k monitor is still used as secondary as i cannot grab a 1080 at this time and FE is not worth for my main pc and can get any yet as is nothing in stock that i want.


----------



## nem.. (Jul 5, 2016)

For those who want to believe PR, let me test your logic..

NVIDIA says the 1070 has 64 ROPs. Is this the complete truth?

Look at the diagram and look at the actual test result of Rasterizer performance.






^ If you know anything about NV's architecture layout, you would have quickly realized Rasterizers are within a GPC cluster, if it's cut, bye bye ROPs.

Look at it's fillrate performance:






Ohh look at that! Nowhere near the 1080 with full 64 ROPs. It looks to be missing quite a few, like it's only got 48 ROPS usable.

What a coincidence, each GPC has 16 ROPs, four for the full GP104 equates to 64, 3 for the 1070 equates to 48 ROPs.

Do you trust AMD or NV PR?

Need I remind you, 970 fiasco?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=38336263&postcount=46


----------



## bug (Jul 6, 2016)

You made that picture up. There's no fully disabled GPC in 1070, this is how it's done: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/
I'm not sure where the ROPs are, but since the GPC is partially disabled to begin with, the ROPs may very well be left alone.

So there, you've tested my logic.



nem.. said:


> For those who want to believe PR, let me test your logic..
> 
> NVIDIA says the 1070 has 64 ROPs. Is this the complete truth?
> 
> ...


----------



## headik (Jul 21, 2016)

bug said:


> You made that picture up. There's no fully disabled GPC in 1070, this is how it's done: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/
> I'm not sure where the ROPs are, but since the GPC is partially disabled to begin with, the ROPs may very well be left alone.
> 
> So there, you've tested my logic.


Nope GTX1070 have one GPC disabled.Techpowerup is wrong
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10325/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-and-1070-founders-edition-review
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ews/72689-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-review.html


----------



## SpAwNtoHell (Jul 21, 2016)

What is the point here gpc disabled or not as frankly at the end of the day it matter how the card bhaves perform. Debating about internal chip itself will not make it better or worse. And all of this internal stuff is a general view of the chip for comparision with other pascal chips or older... Is good nvidia is not releasing internal tranzistor count schematic as i would lough my head out having debates like this as i doubt many using a card like this never used or implemented a circuit having not bilions or milions of tranzistors but 100....

Bottom line is: it is what it is and not going to be better or worse.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 21, 2016)

I don't understand the hang-up on the precise internal architecture.  As long as it performs without surprises and all vram is full speed ... nobody cares otherwise.


----------

