lexluthermiesterActually they do watch and listen. And if enough of us object, they act. If you are to impotent to take a stand, ok. But suggesting that no one should because"who cares", is not only seriously sad, but also reveals something disturbing.
You can quit arguing with me and start voicing you objection to Nvidia.

Wait you're being serious? Thought you were just being a bit of a jerk..

You're missing the point, When the GTX970 nonsense broke, people stood up and put Nvidia in their place. And even after the air was cleared, the damage was done and Nvidia learn a lesson about what boundary not to cross. This is no different. It's an artificial limitation that will hamper maximum possible performance. It equally unacceptable.

Really? Is that what you see happening here? Think that one over for a minute.

And that's another part of the point, companies need to understand that it IS in THEIR best interest to have our best interests in mind.

Exactly right! And those laws were crated to PROTECT the comsumer from unscrupulous actions of companies who place their profits over the good of the public.

Another reason why laws and the courts exist.

That is an opinion not backed up by history and experiences many have had. If enough of us speak up, they will listen.

"You can quit arguing with me and start voicing you objection to Nvidia." - Who's arguing ? Personally I couldn't care less if nVidia is putting out a revision of 8800 GT locking it down to 1mhz and asks $4000 for it. Nvidia isn't forcing you at gun point to buy their stuff.

"Wait you're being serious? Thought you were just being a bit of a jerk.." - Call it whatever you like it, I'm not the one asking for nvidia's head on a platter just because they put out a product that i have no intention of buying.

"You're missing the point, When the GTX970 nonsense broke, people stood up and put Nvidia in their place. And even after the air was cleared, the damage was done and Nvidia learn a lesson about what boundary not to cross. This is no different. It's an artificial limitation that will hamper maximum possible performance. It equally unacceptable." - 1 word LAWSUIT. It happened they lost, it's over. False advertisement. This is a whole different story which won't lead to a lawsuit. The only point you're missing is that for it to be a boundary it needs to hold up in court that did .... this does not ... not even by a long shot.

"Really? Is that what you see happening here? Think that one over for a minute." - I clearly see that people tend to bitch and whine about anything when it's clearly a free market. Quit whining, go with the competition. The competition does not have what you're looking for? Then bend over and enjoy the ride or build it yourself.

"And that's another part of the point, companies need to understand that it IS in THEIR best interest to have our best interests in mind." - That's what they need you to believe, like someone mentioned earlier check out a bank's business model. Because clearly if you and me a couple of other tech savy Joes won't buy their stuff they will declare bankruptcy the next day ....

"Exactly right! And those laws were crated to PROTECT the comsumer from unscrupulous actions of companies who place their profits over the good of the public. " - How's sandboxing YOUR creation an unscrupulous action? In what dimension would this be a valid lawsuit? You are protected ... if thingie breaks down ... manufacturer has to replace/fix it. If manufacturer says on the box "carrots" and upon opening it you find apples then you have a lawsuit. And i'm sorry which company is so ethical that doesn't put profits in front of the "general public"?

"Another reason why laws and the courts exist." - For the last time they are not violating any laws by doing this.


"That is an opinion not backed up by history and experiences many have had. If enough of us speak up, they will listen" - Clearly .... until they got dragged into court over the 3,5GB fiasco ... and before the judge handed them a court order for the refunds to the people that got shafted, did you see anyone saying "hey look Nvidia gave me $50 cuz they lied about the VRAM". Again... laws were broken... they had to pay up... again it wasn't the voice of the people it was a judge and a court order and a basis for a case, this is not one.

I NoStuff you said..

Ah. So you're not understanding context. Ok. That's all you had to say..

lexluthermiesterAh. So you're not understanding context. Ok. That's all you had to say..

Yup, must be me then. Good luck with the pitchforks and torches thing.

I NoYup, must be me then. Good luck with the pitchforks and torches thing.

Alrighty then. You have a nice day.

lexluthermiesterActually they do watch and listen. And if enough of us object, they act. If you are too impotent to take a stand, ok. But suggesting that no one should because"who cares" is not only seriously sad, but also reveals something disturbing.
You can quit arguing with me and start voicing your objections to Nvidia.

Wait you're being serious? Thought you were just being a bit of a jerk..

You're missing the point. When the GTX970 memory nonsense broke, people stood up and put Nvidia in their place. And even after the air was cleared, the damage was done and Nvidia learn a lesson about what boundary not to cross. This is no different. It's an artificial limitation that will hamper maximum possible performance. It equally unacceptable.

Really? Is that what you see happening here? Think that one over for a minute.

And that's another part of the point, companies need to understand that it IS in THEIR best interest to have our best interests in mind.

Exactly right! And those laws were created to PROTECT the consumer from unscrupulous actions of companies who place their profits over the good of the public.

Another reason why laws and the courts exist.

That is an opinion not backed up by history and experiences many have had. If enough of us speak up, they will listen.

Just as a qualifier, I'm an Nvidia user. Was one of those who had a 970 and demanded a replacement. Got it and then some. I love Geforce and Quadro based products. However, I will NOT tolerate crap like that or this.

I'm not missing the point. People don't like DRM, guess what? It still exists. People throw fits over microtransactions and P2W, there are still microtransactions.

Lastly, how much of the market do you think actually knows the history of their cards? From the rebranding, binning and what have you, I bet you most people just see the numbers 260,280,560,580 1050,1060,1070,1080 etc...and wonder, "Gee, I wonder how or why these cards are made? Why do ti versions exist? How were they created?" I'm pretty sure they don't. I'm sure most consumers just know that higher number=higher performance.

ppnIt will be priced slightly above 1070 now 399$. Even cheaper in some places because 1070 is stuck to post mining craze prices. Mining is unprofitable at this point. Difficulty about to rise to double that of 4 months ago. There are plenty of 1060/70/80 on the market and the prices are normal.

At this point is only worth saving for Volta or the next big optical shrink to 10 or 7 nm because 12nm is not much of an improvement yet it could still bring 40% more cores in each class compared to Pascal at lower prices, for example GTX 2080 with 3584 cores and 256 bit memory running at 14 Gbps would perform much like 1080 Ti smaller die.

where i live 1070 cards are still priced between £400 and £500.. assuming you actually want to buy one as opposed to just look at all the pre-order or out of stock prices.. :)

having bought 10 of the f-cking things over the last six weeks i know what they cost..

trog


ps.. having said that availability at the lower prices has improved over the last week.. some of the pre orders are now available to buy..

trog100where i live 1070 cards are still priced between £400 and £500.. assuming you actually want to buy one as opposed to just look at all the pre-order or out of stock prices.. :)

400 seems normal VAT and shipping included. they wouldn't dare price it above 400, given that there are 1080's at 450.

ppn400 seems normal VAT and shipping included. they wouldn't dare price it above 400, given that there are 1080's at 450.

high end (brand brand names)1070 cards are near £500.. most 1080 cards are between 500 and and 600.. dollars or pounds take yer pick..

to be honest i cart see much point in a 1070 TI or a place for it to fit..

trog

The GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 are exactly the same GPUs. The 1070 is basically a failed 1080 with cores disabled low level. 1070Ti is exactly the same thing, but with fewer cores disabled than a standard 1070. That's all.
nVidia's business reason for releasing this new card is not only clear as crystal, but actually it makes perfect sense.

What I'm really interested in at this point is if past and current 1070s can be flashed with Ti bios to unlock shaders.

the failed parts theory isnt always true.. as yields improve there can be no failed parts but a place in the pricing structure still exists.. when this happens good parts are crippled just to fit a place in the pricing structure.. its been this way for a number of years..

where does this new 1070 TI at a $429 price fit in with current top end 1070 cards already priced at close to $500.. there is already too much price overlap i cant see room for anything else in the mix..

the TI bios flash does seem interesting.. it does come down to exactly how the 1080 cards are crippled to make them into 1070s

trog

1070 Ti can squeeze between. New**g GT X 1070/80 400/520$ or £305/396 for the Armor version. (VAT and TAX not included)

gdallskYou keep forgetting that the memory is also different, the difference is probably gonna be larger than just 2 fps.

Ahhh, 2 fps...


2 fps matters at 30 fps, not so much at 100...

Talk % people... :)

EarthDogAhhh, 2 fps...


2 fps matters at 30 fps, not so much at 100...

Talk % people... :)

no it doesn't matter. it doesn't make any more playable at 28 fps than 30, it is still a stutter slideshow.

True in that case... point still remains, however. ;)

Stating it as percent difference gives a context without knowing total fps. What if its 5? 5 at 100 doesnt matter... 5 added to 30 does. What if its 20 fps from 40 to 60? Big difference there vs 100/200...no?

ppnno it doesn't matter. it doesn't make any more playable at 28 fps than 30, it is still a stutter slideshow.

you mean 4K gaming.. :)

trog

I can still play 4K/60 on 1070 Ti, lower detail as much as possible without sacrificing the image too much overall. I have played many games on 1440p/60 on GTX 780. and this 1070 has 200% the clock speed 150% the architecture IPC, Should be perfectly fine on 4K for me. Give me more pixels and noAA/16AF and I'm good to go.

ppnI can still play 4K/60 on 1070 Ti, lower detail as much as possible without sacrificing the image too much overall.

Not even a full fledged 1080 can maintain 60fps at 4K in some games even with lowered setting . Not to mention games are also evolving , which means it will get even worse. 4K60 is still not quite here.

Don't think restricting the manual OC will be much of a problem for folks who prefers letting the card do it's job since GPU Boost 3.0 does all the job already. What I wanna see are folks who would flash the 1070Ti with custom VGA BIOS just to lift the restrictions, if that ever happens.

trog100the failed parts theory isnt always true.. as yields improve there can be no failed parts but a place in the pricing structure still exists.. when this happens good parts are crippled just to fit a place in the pricing structure.. its been this way for a number of years..

where does this new 1070 TI at a $429 price fit in with current top end 1070 cards already priced at close to $500.. there is already too much price overlap i cant see room for anything else in the mix..

the TI bios flash does seem interesting.. it does come down to exactly how the 1080 cards are crippled to make them into 1070s

trog

One, no one batch will ever have a perfect yield that is why 1070s or any lower tier sku exist in the first place to recapture the failed dies, so your initial statement is false. No one knows when Nvidia started harvesting chips for a 1070ti it's highly unlikely they have just started recently, and more plausible they've passively collecting dies well in advance for this SKU. Once initial demand for 1070s settled they only needed to use the worst useable dies to meet demand and then portion out and set aside the rest for other uses(e.g. super oc editions or other variants). Disabling dies is usually a last resort.

ppnno it doesn't matter. it doesn't make any more playable at 28 fps than 30, it is still a stutter slideshow.

If everyone thought such silliness we'd still be stuck playing games with such low FPS. "Guys, no need to make improvements on our hardware, 2 FPS doesn't matter."

Thank god people actually know better and know a little here and a little there adds up in the long run.

I'll use a car analogy :D When doing things such as weight reduction you don't just look for a single spot to shed 100 pounds, you look in several(or a hundred) spots to shed the weight.

Th3pwn3rIf everyone thought such silliness we'd still be stuck playing games with such low FPS. "Guys, no need to make improvements on our hardware, 2 FPS doesn't matter."

Thank god people actually know better and know a little here and a little there adds up in the long run.

I'll use a car analogy :D When doing things such as weight reduction you don't just look for a single spot to shed 100 pounds, you look in several(or a hundred) spots to shed the weight.

I don't get your analogy, it's too vague. shedding weight by mass reduction doesn't cost money therefore is extremely cost effective, weight reduction via material replacement depends heavily on the material cost. If you are talking about the latter ppn opinion is valid, benefit needs to outweight the cost.

TotallyI don't get your analogy, it's too vague. shedding weight by mass reduction doesn't cost money therefore is extremely cost effective, weight reduction via material replacement depends heavily on the material cost. If you are talking about the latter ppn opinion is valid, benefit needs to outweight the cost.

Yeah, you totally missed the point. It's about small improvements 'here' and 'there' that add up to a whole.

It's akin to the 'brick by brick' saying.

TotallyOne, no one batch will ever have a perfect yield that is why 1070s or any lower tier sku exist in the first place to recapture the failed dies, so your initial statement is false. No one knows when Nvidia started harvesting chips for a 1070ti it's highly unlikely they have just started recently, and more plausible they've passively collecting dies well in advance for this SKU. Once initial demand for 1070s settled they only needed to use the worst useable dies to meet demand and then portion out and set aside the rest for other uses(e.g. super oc editions or other variants). Disabling dies is usually a last resort.

Adding to that, as time goes by, yields are likely to improve. At this point there simply may be more better dies. Ones with flawed parts but not as many as current 1070.

TotallyOne, no one batch will ever have a perfect yield that is why 1070s or any lower tier sku exist in the first place to recapture the failed dies, so your initial statement is false. No one knows when Nvidia started harvesting chips for a 1070ti it's highly unlikely they have just started recently, and more plausible they've passively collecting dies well in advance for this SKU. Once initial demand for 1070s settled they only needed to use the worst useable dies to meet demand and then portion out and set aside the rest for other uses(e.g. super oc editions or other variants). Disabling dies is usually a last resort.

market demand is one thing.. yields are another.. yields improve.. market demands if the prices are about right stay the same.. crippling good chips to match demand is the norm.. it has been for a number of years.. binning is just the cover up story.. he he

trog