pechei just want 980 prices drop ... really want an 980

regards,

Get a G1 970 OC 'it and u got better bro

EOGGuys, wait a sec.

Nvidia already stated that the 1070 would be "faster than a Titan X".

Benchies for the GTX 1080 are already out and it's about ~22% faster than the Titan X, so there you have it, the GTX 1070 should be MAX ~22% slower than the GTX 1080.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Sounds like accurate speculation based on info we have. My guess: 1070 will be a bit faster than Titan X using metric a, b, c (as Nvidia claimed) and comparable with metric d, e, f, g, h and slower in x and y. On average it will be on par, with some areas it exceeds to give nvidia their marketing talking point. I bet if you use Titan X as a gauge you'll get the idea.

EOGGuys, wait a sec.

Nvidia already stated that the 1070 would be "faster than a Titan X".

Benchies for the GTX 1080 are already out and it's about ~22% faster than the Titan X, so there you have it, the GTX 1070 should be MAX ~22% slower than the GTX 1080.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Was that in relation to some VR thing though?

Specs aren't half bad, but the price is a figure of 100 too high.

So this is what going to happen from now one. For each new generation they are going to add at least 50$ more to the price. Does this mean than in 10 years an xx70 card will be 500$ more???

xorbeWas that in relation to some VR thing though?

Nope, the guy (Nvidia CEO) was talking overall performance as far as I know:

(skip to 3m40s)


The crazy talk was things like "GTX 1080 is faster than 980s SLI", that WAS about VR

I really doubt the 1070 will be more than 20% slower than the 1080, but we'll see. Looks like insta-buy for me.

EOGNope, the guy (Nvidia CEO) was talking overall performance as far as I know:

(skip to 3m40s)

The crazy talk was things like "GTX 1080 is faster than 980s SLI", that WAS about VR

I really doubt the 1070 will be more than 20% slower than the 1080, but we'll see. Looks like insta-buy for me.

It's kinda intriguing on how the 1070 would be at that level with a lot of the hardware got cut down, maybe if the clocks would be 1600-1800 base and 2000+ boost it would be a more believable scenario, but for now, i'll just wait for the benchmarks. Also looking at Polaris 10. Id get either one as both would be a massive boost from my GTX 660 anyway heh.

idxIn general Nvidia widened the gap between the GTX *80 and the GTX *70 .
They want to make sure that the GTX1070 will never get close from the 1080 (remember GTX970 oc and GTX980) specially when overclocked. this time they dont have to screw up the memory internally they just stayed with GDDR5.

The gap is wide enough for if EllesmereXT is somewhere between 1070 and 1080, they can do a 1070-2240 SP.

GTX 1075 with GDDR5X? GTX 1075Ti with GDDR5X and 2240 Cores?

ViperXTRGTX 1075 with GDDR5X? GTX 1075Ti with GDDR5X and 2240 Cores?

Probably save something like this for the Pascal refresh. Perhaps a 1920sp GP104 with GDDR5X and higher power limit? Or maybe retain GDDR5 and increase the SP count. Since the full GP104, aside from higher power limit and clocks, is already max specification, they wouldn't want to do too much to step on its toes if such a refresh appears.

idxGTX 1070 is nothing like the GTX 970 was, talking marketing wise. This time nvidia carefully limited (crippled) the GTX1070.
physically the 1070 is almost exactly the same as 1080 except for... :
- slower memory (GDDR5).
- full block fo SP is disabled ( 640 CUDA cores).
- power limit ( to prevent its clocks from going as high as the GTX 1080).

At least they didn't gimp the memory subsystem this time around (minus the lack of GDDR5X, of course). That'll keep a lot of folks happy.

idxGTX 1070 is nothing like the GTX 970 was, talking marketing wise. This time nvidia carefully limited (crippled) the GTX1070.
physically the 1070 is almost exactly the same as 1080 except for... :
- slower memory (GDDR5).
- full block fo SP is disabled ( 640 CUDA cores).
- power limit ( to prevent its clocks from going as high as the GTX 1080).

So any chance of re-enabling the cores and increasing power limits with a mod?

Prima.VeraSo this is what going to happen from now one. For each new generation they are going to add at least 50$ more to the price. Does this mean than in 10 years an xx70 card will be 500$ more???

$120 increase over the GTX 970

NaitoProbably save something like this for the Pascal refresh. Perhaps a 1920sp GP104 with GDDR5X and higher power limit? Or maybe retain GDDR5 and increase the SP count. Since the full GP104, aside from higher power limit and clocks, is already max specification, they wouldn't want to do too much to step on its toes if such a refresh appears.



At least they didn't gimp the memory subsystem this time around (minus the lack of GDDR5X, of course). That'll keep a lot of folks happy.

Maybe Pascal refresh would even use 14nm, same architecture but higher clocks, then GTX 1075/1070Ti with GDDR5X 1920SP and up to 2000Mhz boost, also looking at the architectural diagram, 1920 sp of the 1070 means a whole GPC was disabled, was this the same scenario with the GTX 970 or was individual SM removed which affected the ROPs and memory controller?

the54thvoidI read your post as neutral so I'd agree entirely with what you say. This is what chip makers do. They release a full chip (as such knowing the GP100 is out there too) and have that as the top part. You then make a more affordable version (normally with salvaged wafer parts that didn't quite make the cut) and make sure it's not as good as the top part.
It's called business. Fury X to Fury. Titan X to 980ti. Ironically in both cases the top part was limited to a singular design but the lower part (Fury/980ti) was allowed to be tweaked by AIB's. Nvidia pitch the top part as semi professional (oh look, Radeon Duo Pro) so it doesn't matter if the 'non-professional' 980ti exceeds it's performance.

Yeah, what the hell is thread on about anyway? Oh look, 1070 isn't as good as 1080 and it's cheaper....

Umm.. what?

That's what this thread needs...somebody thinking and not just fanboy-screaming. I don't care about Red/Green, I just want the best bloody GPU I can afford. I'll wait for the new AMD upper/mid range GPU's, and then I'll do some comparisons. (watching people fight over cards that haven't been released is like watching pro wrestling...it's entertaining, but you feel a little dumber for watching it)

ViperXTR...was this the same scenario with the GTX 970 or was individual SM removed which affected the ROPs and memory controller?

From memory, the GTX 970 has 3 SMs disabled, but was further gimped by cutting L2 cache down from the full GM204 chip. As such, anything tied to the L2 cache was also gimped - ROPs were disabled and the connected memory controller was linked to it's sibling. Sharing of resources now occurred.

Keep an eye out for the real ROPs and bandwidth.

If it's like the 970, they will have 2 partition. 224 + 32 memory controller. ie. 224GB/s from the first 7GB vram only.

RustyKatsKeep an eye out for the real ROPs and bandwidth.

If it's like the 970, they will have 2 partition. 224 + 32 memory controller. ie. 224GB/s from the first 7GB vram only.

Some folks would most likely test it during the review, and depending how the SM and GPC are disabled

EOGNope, the guy (Nvidia CEO) was talking overall performance as far as I know:

(skip to 3m40s)

The crazy talk was things like "GTX 1080 is faster than 980s SLI", that WAS about VR

I really doubt the 1070 will be more than 20% slower than the 1080, but we'll see. Looks like insta-buy for me.

I think it'll be real close to that.

You can take the 6.5TF (which insinuates at least close to 'real' 1700b), you can take 1080's real boost (~1860/1886/1898mhz) which insinuates somewhere slightly over 1700mhz boost, or literally one or two steps below 1080's rated boost clock (which 970 was similar compared to 980)...etc.

You could even take the ratio of units disabled from the TDPs (150w/180w), subtract the ~20w for ram....and all come to the same rough conclusion.

It'll probably be faster than 980ti (both 'stock' and overclocked) by literally just about the smallest margin possible. Like you said, ~80-83% of a 1080 sounds spot on imho.

For me though, this is actually insta-wait-for-gddr5x-P10. It's really a MASSIVE disappointment.

That said, so is 1080. The fact it seems to cut off it's clock scaling (limited by TDP) at 225w conveniently to short-shrift general 4k60 gaming performance is a gigantic nvidia-style middle finger to the gaming populace:

"You will buy this because it is the best available, and then you will buy the next thing that is overpriced to do the thing the last thing should have. Then later we will re-release the former thing doing what it should have in the first place"

Sure, sure...you can buy a $1000 2x8-pin card in 3 months (or whatever) when they eventually come out, but that kind of defeats the purpose of the card, doesn't it?

Both the reviews AND the 1070 specs lead me to wait for P10. I still have complete and no-proof hope P10 will have less PPC than 1080, only slightly higher than 1070, but perhaps clock similar to both while having similar compute to the former and general gaming perf to the latter.

Is that optimistic? Maybe...but one can hope. Xfire for the price of a 1080 (while actually getting the perf I want) would be A-OK.

Worst-case, there's always Vega and/or the eventual cheap iteration of GP100 (perhaps 52 units?) which will probably give me what I want for a similar price to 1080 before not too long.

i believe the new gtx 1070 could be 25-30% faster than gtx 970 and on par with the gtx 980ti for the most part which a bit faster than the titan x (in term of power efficiency at least). Again this is purely my speculation but based on what nvidia has revealed and rumours, this sounds about right :)))

alwaysstsIs that optimistic? Maybe...but one can hope. Xfire for the price of a 1080 (while actually getting the perf I want) would be A-OK.

Worst-case, there's always Vega and/or the eventual cheap iteration of GP100 (perhaps 52 units?) which will probably give me what I want for a similar price to 1080 before not too long.

Note that when CF works the 295x2 trades blows with the 1080 (until the power page where the AMD card uses close to 3x the power, two 290x/390x will use even more)

I agree with the guess that the 1070 will preform at 80 - 85 % of the 1080. The 25% reduction in cuda cores will not be that bad to performance, it (suposedly) has the same number of ROPs, but a 25% reduction in TMUs could be more of a problem at 1080p.

alwaysstsBoth the reviews AND the 1070 specs lead me to wait for P10.

Polaris 10 will be 470-480, i.e. 390-390x max.

That's a tier lower than 1070. (490/490x would compete with it).

My point is, you'd need to wait for at least October (first Vega from AMD might be released then) to see competition in, lol, any tier. So far we only have:

470 - ? 150-200$
480 - ? 200-299$
? - 1070 449$
? - 1080 699$ (789€, oh, fuck you, nZilla)
? - ?

medi01Polaris 10 will be 470-480, i.e. 390-390x max.

That's a tier lower than 1070. (490/490x would compete with it).

My point is, you'd need to wait for at least October (first Vega from AMD might be released then) to see competition in, lol, any tier. So far we only have:

470 - ? 150-200$
480 - ? 200-299$
? - 1070 449$
? - 1080 699$ (789€, oh, fuck you, nZilla)
? - ?

And in October you'd be skipping Vega and waiting for the 1080Ti. Isn't this game fun?

The real gain here is that 980ti actually keeps its value a lot better than predicted, and the main reason is the pricing of 1070/1080.

Nvidia is just trying really hard to hide that fact with some smoke and mirrors surrounding clocks, power and boost.

Vayra86The real gain here is that 980ti actually keeps its value a lot better than predicted, and the main reason is the pricing of 1070/1080.

Nvidia is just trying really hard to hide that fact with some smoke and mirrors surrounding clocks, power and boost.

What was predicted? Because it will be worth ~300 once 1070 hits market.

deemonWhat was predicted? Because it will be worth ~300 once 1070 hits market.

Exactly, 300 bucks for a 980ti that will perform almost similar to a 1070 that is +$150? Not happening. It happened in past gen but not this time. And if it does, let me know and I'm buying two.

This is also why I feel the 1070 is priced 100 bucks too high.