wow Nvidia are going hardcore on the hype, but why is there no real benchmarks? I've only seen one benchmark that shows the 1080 with 19,000 3D marks 11. The 980Ti scores higher than that.

Clever marketing though by Nvidia, although a little sneaky. If reviewers had the card and were telling people "its about the same as 980Ti" or "A little slower than 980Ti" the public perception of the card would be a little different.

Nvidia is slowly raising the price of the cards and everyone is buying it up. $700 is insane and it's not even the titan yet. I can't imagine what price they would release the 1080ti and titan10 at.

Hmm, about time for an upgrade. Seeing these clocked so high makes me want to grab a pair, get a pair of waterblocks, then get a G-Sync monitor to match them. I want to overclock beyond 2000mhz on the core!!!

However I will be waiting for the aftermarket variants if they are really charging that much extra for the reference (or FE as its named). Don't understand that logic even if it's pretty unless it cools so much better...

buggalugswow Nvidia are going hardcore on the hype, but why is there no real benchmarks? I've only seen one benchmark that shows the 1080 with 19,000 3D marks 11. The 980Ti scores higher than that.

Clever marketing though by Nvidia, although a little sneaky. If reviewers had the card and were telling people "its about the same as 980Ti" or "A little slower than 980Ti" the public perception of the card would be a little different.

they have some scores vs 980 on their site.

My only concern is about if it really has some hardware to benefit for DX12 like async compute. If it has then drivers will turn out crippling Maxwell really hard.

Otherwise... hype... the only real card will be coming next year. Why are everyone so cheerful about the card performing the same. 980Ti is not enough for 1440p nor 30% will help... it needs a double to take witcher 3 or Tomb Rider at decent FPS.

Good for those whose cards are kicking the bucket soon, but for those with Titans and 980Ti... not yet...

OC will be screwed by power limits, I see through that already.

Ferrum MasterMy only concern is about if it really has some hardware to benefit for DX12 like async compute. If it has then drivers will turn out crippling Maxwell really hard.

Otherwise... hype... the only real card will be coming next year. Why are everyone so cheerful about the card performing the same. 980Ti is not enough for 1440p nor 30% will help... it needs a double to take witcher 3 or Tomb Rider at decent FPS.

Good for those whose cards are kicking the bucket soon, but for those with Titans and 980Ti... not yet...

OC will be screwed by power limits, I see through that already.

Yep

Ferrum MasterMy only concern is about if it really has some hardware to benefit for DX12 like async compute. If it has then drivers will turn out crippling Maxwell really hard.

So its bad news....or...bad news

Ferrum MasterOtherwise... hype... the only real card will be coming next year.

...and more bad news...

Ferrum MasterOC will be screwed by power limits, I see through that already.

...and yet more bad news.

Ferrum MasterWhy are everyone so cheerful about the card performing the same. 980Ti is not enough for 1440p nor 30% will help...

Hey at least the AotS benchmarks that have started to pop up have it fairly highly ranked compared to some 980 Ti, Crossfire, and SLI scores. That must mean something right? I was told that AotS was the be-all-and-end-all of gaming even though it's about as interesting as Minesweeper.

Ferrum MasterGood for those whose cards are kicking the bucket soon, but for those with Titans and 980Ti... not yet...

When was the last time a small die GPU became a direct upgrade for a large die GPU? GP104 is around half the size of GM200, carries 17% less ALUs and texture address units, likely 33% less raster ops, and 5% less nominal bandwidth. Doesn't sound remotely like an upgrade to me.

The 1080 is starting at $699. Some more sneaky marketing from Nividia. The reference 1080 also known as the
"founders edition" is $699. The $599 price is for partners who build their own cards, and most wont use this price, many will be $699 or higher like $749.

HumanSmokeWhen was the last time a small die GPU became a direct upgrade for a large die GPU? GP104 is around half the size of GM200, carries 17% less ALUs and texture address units, likely 33% less raster ops, and 5% less nominal bandwidth. Doesn't sound remotely like an upgrade to me.

Pretty much every generation. 7970 and 680 were nearly double the performance 6970 and 580, Usually the Nvidia X80 or AMD XX70 is faster than last gens fastest card.

buggalugsThe 1080 is starting at $699. Some more sneaky marketing from Nividia. The reference 1080 also known as the
"founders edition" is $699. The $599 price is for partners who build their own cards, and most wont use this price, many will be $699 or higher like $749.

Bit late to that particular party, I'm pretty sure we have a couple of threads that have been discussing the reference/Founders Edition vagaries for a while.

It is also quite odd that neither the sources of both the stock clock/unbinned stories and the FE's being speed binned are substantiated by any official Nvidia source. Hopefully W1zz can enlighten everyone on the 17th.

HumanSmokeWhen was the last time a small die GPU became a direct upgrade for a large die GPU?

When GTX680 came? Well Thermi wasn't exactly an utter win for nvidia.

But yeah... I am just trying too keep calm and look at it as it is... the ashes benchmark shows really it is the same... at least using current drivers.

Ferrum MasterWhen GTX680 came? Well Thermi wasn't exactly an utter win for nvidia.

Thanks for a good laugh. :D

Ferrum MasterWhy are everyone so cheerful about the card performing the same. 980Ti is not enough for 1440p nor 30% will help... it needs a double to take witcher 3 or Tomb Rider at decent FPS.

Good, I'm not alone thinking that.
I've got dual-980Ti running OC'd above 1.5GHz in SLI and I'm glad to be able to play most titles with eye-candy maxed @1600p +60fps. No way anything similiar performing like those 980Ti in dual-SLI is ready for 4K like everyone is pretending, especially Nvidia or AMD.
4K is about twice the pixel count of 1600p, so in my book this sounds like quad-SLI is needed with 980Ti-like performance (if memory is not an issue).
And no, reducing eye-candy just to be able to render 4K sufficiently fast isn't going to look any better, especially on a computer monitor.

But at least there is hope: Jen-Hsun Huang repeatedly claimed at that launch event that the GTX 1080 is twice as fast as the Titan-X! So maybe we can get away with dual-SLI for 4K then. :rolleyes:

When is the NDA lift? May 17th? We need reviews...

Ferrum MasterMy only concern is about if it really has some hardware to benefit for DX12 like async compute. If it has then drivers will turn out crippling Maxwell really hard.

Otherwise... hype... the only real card will be coming next year. Why are everyone so cheerful about the card performing the same. 980Ti is not enough for 1440p nor 30% will help... it needs a double to take witcher 3 or Tomb Rider at decent FPS.

Good for those whose cards are kicking the bucket soon, but for those with Titans and 980Ti... not yet...

OC will be screwed by power limits, I see through that already.

Not sure what you're on about. I played W3 at 40-50fps on mostly ultra settings at 1440p. Thing is, game ran smooth. I've played 60plus fps in other titles, jittery as hell.
Depends on the code but don't write off a 980ti so quickly. They're faster than some people (and a lot of reviews) report.

the54thvoidDepends on the code but don't write off a 980ti so quickly.

Well that's the problem... well GTA5 killer grass(albeit it looks kick arse) and Witcher 3 gets choppy when a lot of action(like drowners) are around... Well my target FPS is democratic 75FPS as my panel does and my eyes are very pleased by that... and the card doesn't do it on max. I have to turn down settings... (I hate hairworks, off by default). Well like I have a choice... I just a want a smooth stutter less FPS after coming home from work and let some steam off.

And screw it... I actually want to run Witcher 3 DSR from 5K on my 1440p as it looks superb then... but... I cannot do it... and won't be able this year. 980Ti may be much stronger than many people have, but I and you and many others here are enthusiasts, so like we care about others, we just want reasonable gaming experience(justifying the money spent on the game), in the same time not going way too stupid.

So my point is... a single 980Ti is not really enough for a carefree experience and not feeling like a peasant on MAX like like a proper PC user for most AAA titles now. Exceptions are MGS5 and Mad Max... both utilize the fact that mostly around is a desert and pretty much nothing sophisticated.

If it really is the code fault? Or lack of power? It doesn't matter there is nothing to change in those both things... the half life crisis for this card is here and the divorce is a classic option, just because you are unhappy and want more power and SLI is not an option.

Ferrum MasterAnd screw it... I actually want to run Witcher 3 DSR from 5K on my 1440p as it looks superb then...

I think you're going to need a bigger boat..... But yeah, I see where you're coming from. You'd need 2 card in perfect scaling to get anywhere close to that. Wait for Vega, Big Pascal or Volta.....

the54thvoidYou'd need 2 card in perfect scaling to get anywhere close to that.

BTW I missed, did they fix DSR for SLI?

I couldn't get through it it's just gut-wrenching to have to watch/listen to such a sappy promotional piece, it's just all to weird having to look and listen to David.

Let's hope turn-about is fair...

wake me when the 1060 hits $200 or less, my OC GTX 760 is still doing the job

buggalugsThe 1080 is starting at $699. Some more sneaky marketing from Nividia. The reference 1080 also known as the
"founders edition" is $699. The $599 price is for partners who build their own cards, and most wont use this price, many will be $699 or higher like $749.

Gotta love how people are spinning this in way they want to make it look bad but have 0 proof what so ever to back their basis claim's.

I'll stick with the 970m sli in my laptop for another 1.5 years.

arbiterGotta love how people are spinning this in way they want to make it look bad but have 0 proof what so ever to back their basis claim's.

Are you talking about yourself in most of the AMD threads? You certainly don't have an issue jumping to conclusion or negative spin in those that's for sure.

Aside from marketing material which we all know they can be misleading at times.


There isn't any solid independent evidence until the NDA lifts on the 17th.

Spin in favor, Spin against.. but keep on spinning until the 17th I guess.

PCGamerIn fact, Nvidia explained that, as usual, we can expect to see factory overclocked cards and other variations that cost more than the Founders Edition, along with other cards that will cost less, and presumably at least some of these will be around at launch. Are those cards better, worse, or the same as the Founders Edition? The answer: yes.

HumanSmokeBit late to that particular party, I'm pretty sure we have a couple of threads that have been discussing the reference/Founders Edition vagaries for a while.

It is also quite odd that neither the sources of both the stock clock/unbinned stories and the FE's being speed binned are substantiated by any official Nvidia source. Hopefully W1zz can enlighten everyone on the 17th.

Well, theres still plenty of people that havent heard it. or read it. Even on the latest Nvidia news posts, people are still saying wow good price $379 for 1070 and $599 for 1080.

This is exactly my point about marketing. Most people are too lazy to look at detail, and just see the headlines and PR. People think they are getting said performance for $599 but the reality is $699 and most likely $749 when its released. Thats a big difference in perception about the card, the first initial perceptions of a GPU generally sticks, good or bad......just like the 970 was the bees knees when released, everyone said it was the card to get.......and we know how that turned out later, but by then they had sold a boatload of them.

Im just trying to remind people of the reality of pricing, and to wait for real benchmarks before getting carried away.

Funny how the costs for nVidia goes down, but the prices for us goes up... ;)

buggalugsWell, theres still plenty of people that havent heard it. or read it. Even on the latest Nvidia news posts, people are still saying wow good price $379 for 1070 and $599 for 1080.

This is exactly my point about marketing. Most people are too lazy to look at detail, and just see the headlines and PR. People think they are getting said performance for $599 but the reality is $699 and most likely $749 when its released. Thats a big difference in perception about the card, the first initial perceptions of a GPU generally sticks, good or bad......just like the 970 was the bees knees when released, everyone said it was the card to get.......and we know how that turned out later, but by then they had sold a boatload of them.

Im just trying to remind people of the reality of pricing, and to wait for real benchmarks before getting carried away.

If nvidia is to be believed then there will be 1080 versions with a cheap blower cooler made by board vendors for 599 USD. But we will know for sure only after the 1080 launchers I guess.

Legacy-ZAFunny how the costs for nVidia goes down, but the prices for us goes up... ;)

Yea 550 to 600$ is unwarranted even though new proc node vs mature node with high yield and older memory vs new memory.