cdawallI mean g92 was the best thing nvidia ever touched. It was in a lot more cards than that as well.

Its odd reading this comment, because my first bad sting with Nvidia came from the G92. I had them in a macbook pro and a workstation, both failed. Nvidia was very slow to admit there was an issue and refused to help. For all the shit Apple gets over its care, they sorted me out, while being out of warranty. I didnt pay a thing.

That seemed to mark a major turning point in Apple and Nvidias relationship.

swirl09I had them in a macbook pro and a workstation, both failed. Nvidia was very slow to admit there was an issue and refused to help. For all the shit Apple gets over its care, they sorted me out, while being out of warranty. I didnt pay a thing.

That was less NVidia's unwillingness to help and more the contract Apple had with them. In those situations it was on Apple to fix those issues.

So let me get this straight. This GPU is basically a failed 1080 GPU with tons of cores disabled to match the original 1060 GPU specs?
Is it possible to do a BIOS mod tuning of this GPU and re-enable some of the disabled cores?

Prima.VeraSo let me get this straight. This GPU is basically a failed 1080 GPU with tons of cores disabled to match the original 1060 GPU specs?

Very likely.

Prima.VeraIs it possible to do a BIOS mod tuning of this GPU and re-enable some of the disabled cores?

Unlikely. The GTX 1xxx bios' are all encrypted. So unless they get decrypted/unlocked..

Am I the only one who read this and immediately thought that must be a typo. I mean seems odd to ready a last generation card when the 2080/ti and 2070 are in the wild. Why not just push your 2060 and 2050 out instead faster if your worried (I mean must not be ready yet but still just a thought). Seems weird as that product stack I would think is going to be slowing down.

Nvidia aren't worried at all, it's a BS title with no substance. They haven't felt the need to lower prices on their Pascal lineup because large chunks of it still have f all competition.... even when apparently overstocked. As mentioned earlier, there is nothing to stop them from lowering the price of the 1070... hell even AMD don't think the name RX 680 is warranted, and the 580 was nothing more than a bump in clocks over the 480.

Meh

ValantarUgh. 2 years later, launching a barely refreshed product for noticeably more than MSRP of the original? I might be naive, but that seems too low even for 2018-era "Hey buy our new $1200 GPUs! They're a bit faster than our two-year-old $700 GPUs!" Nvidia.

Still, this whole thing sounds weird. Just the concept of Nvidia GP104 dice more than 50% disabled (rather than launch a rebrand and sell the same hardware for more money) is baffling to me. Wouldn't they ultimately make more money by launching a refresh/rebrand (or just cutting MSRPs), giving 1070 performance at 1060 prices, and so on? There can't possibly be that many GP104 dice with that many defects. Not at this point.

This is happening because we're supposed to be excited by Navi being yet another midrange, Polaris-type, design.

As long as Nvidia is allowed to monopolize the mid+, high, and higher ranges, it will be able to do things like this to the midrange.

Consumers have decided to allow monopolies and duopolies to dominate the tech world, from search, to consoles, to mobile... You name it and it's either a duopoly or a monopoly.

Anti-consumer practices are what you get when you don't have proper competition. Fact is that duopolies don't qualify. So, even if AMD were to suddenly start competing in the mid+, high, and higher range markets, we would still be in a situation where both companies are guilty of various anti-consumer practices like deceptive product naming. The only thing stopping companies from releasing cards that are clearly named (e.g. 1060, 1061, 1062 or 1060 A, 1060 B, 1060 C or 1060, 1065, 1070, 1075) is consumer pressure. Without choice consumers have very little leverage with which to exert that pressure.

For all the vaunted choice and competition capitalism is supposed to provide, there is very little of it in so many tech sectors. Smaller companies seem relegated to being absorbed instead of being able to actually compete and establish themselves.

RichFAs long as Nvidia is allowed to monopolize the mid+, high, and higher ranges, it will be able to do things like this to the midrange.

That wasn't the case back in 980/970/960 times.
They all outsold AMD's faster and cheaper cards.
It was particularly baffling in the case of 960.

medi01That wasn't the case back in 980/970/960 times.
They all outsold AMD's faster and cheaper cards.
It was particularly baffling in the case of 960.

Nvidia's mindshare advantage is well known for at least a decade, with them outselling ATI/AMD even when their products are clearly inferior. That's what happens when you have the premier name in PC gaming hardware. Consumers are swayed as much by their own preconceptions as they are by facts and reviews. Sad, but true.

At this point, someone should report both companies to various trade commissions for misleading marketing practices, given how fast and loose they're playing with model numbers recently.

medi01It was particularly baffling in the case of 960.

Exactly. That card was terrible for the price. The 670/760 cleaned it's clock, not to mention the offerings from AMD that gave it a thumping.

INSTG8RMuddying up the product stack again...

Adding more choice... what a horror ! The 1060 was perfectly placed so as to make AMD non competive in yet another price tier. Was slower out of the box but yet again, blew the doors off once both cards were overclocked. It's held that position thru the 480 and 580 ... makes perfec sense they'd respond to the 590 in likewise fashion. I dunno that the 2060 makes sense with all the talk about RTX If the cards performance iwould be impoacted by the RTX, then nVidia could very will wind up handing the performance crown in tier no. 4 back to AMD.

As for the 960, agree with lex, yeah that was a puzzle.... card never made sense... with the 970 just over $320, it basically wiped all but the top tier cards from serious consideration. While the 970 sold 2.5 more units than all AMD 2xx and 3xx series cards combined, it did also make the 950 - 960 unattractive choices when just for few more bucks. I was so shocked by the 970s pricing, I thought for sure they were going to get targeted for predatory pricing. Seemed ovious that they were seeking to cut AMDs through pricing it so close to their core mid to lower range market. In the end they probably made out as they sold so danged many of them that the R&D and soft costs gottan w=eaten up.

ValantarNvidia's mindshare advantage

That's an euphemism for "clueless buy green".

medi01That's an euphemism for "clueless buy green".

You probably have a point, as the vast majority of people buying gaming PCs and even gaming PC components are likely quite clueless overall. Informed consumers are a rare breed no matter the market, after all. Can't really expect anything else, as the vast majority of people have neither the time nor the energy to educate themselves properly about the stuff they buy. I'm painfully aware of just how much time I spend reading about PC hardware I'll never come into contact with, and I'd likely be just as happy (if not more) if I spent more of that time actually making use of the hardware :P Oh well. At least I find this stuff interesting.

It looks like the Data base is corrected now as I thought what I saw a couple of days ago indicated it was the GP106 receiving the GDDR5X.

It's funny how this still has any traction, other than working from (or confirming) the rumor that Nvidia has a "boat load" of GP104 to dump. Even castrating the GP104 that still means AIB's have to make new lower cost PCB to mount that die and permit GDDR5X (190 pins), all while Nvidia still selling current GP106 at like $280-300.

I suppose... but let's see how these get priced and work as I'm not sure gelding (shut-off) half of some huge die doesn't still inflict some hit on efficiency, while how much above the GTX 1060 6Gb, we'll wait for reviews.

They should have done "1060 ti" with the Quadro P4000 coreconfig (1792 Cores) and GD5X

king of swag187They should have done "1060 ti" with the Quadro P4000 coreconfig (1792 Cores) and GD5X

That would make a lot more sense, though there's the question of whether there's room for a whole new SKU in between the 1060 and 1070 in terms of pricing and retailers being willing to purchase more stock. While MSRPs are a rare breed these days, the 1060's is $249 ($199 for the 3GB) and the 1070's is $379 (with the Ti at $449). So the price steps from the 1060 3GB up to the 1070 Ti are $50 (25%), $130 (51%) and $70 (18%!). While there is some "room", squeezing in another SKU in-between the two in the middle is rather tight, splitting the difference would mean only a $65 difference. The 1070Ti is already oddly close to the 1070, but it serves as an up-sell where the next step up is significantly more expensive. Splitting the difference here might as well cannibalize 1070 sales as serve as an up-sell from the 1060. Of course, cutting the 1060 6GB to $200 and selling this at $300 or a bit less would solve the whole "problem", but Nvidia doesn't seem too keen on price decreases recently.

ValantarThat would make a lot more sense, though there's the question of whether there's room for a whole new SKU in between the 1060 and 1070 in terms of pricing and retailers being willing to purchase more stock. While MSRPs are a rare breed these days, the 1060's is $249 ($199 for the 3GB) and the 1070's is $379 (with the Ti at $449). So the price steps from the 1060 3GB up to the 1070 Ti are $50 (25%), $130 (51%) and $70 (18%!). While there is some "room", squeezing in another SKU in-between the two in the middle is rather tight, splitting the difference would mean only a $65 difference. The 1070Ti is already oddly close to the 1070, but it serves as an up-sell where the next step up is significantly more expensive. Splitting the difference here might as well cannibalize 1070 sales as serve as an up-sell from the 1060. Of course, cutting the 1060 6GB to $200 and selling this at $300 or a bit less would solve the whole "problem", but Nvidia doesn't seem too keen on price decreases recently.

I'd say something like a $329 for a 1792 core 1060 ti would be decent, but that's approaching used 1080 territory ($360)

Yeah the problem is the GP104 is more than a match for the mighty Vega 64, nice problem to have I guess.

FluffmeisterYeah the problem is the GP104 is more than a match for the mighty Vega 64, nice problem to have I guess.

Well, I doubt a GP104 cut down to 1280 Cuda cores and a 192-bit VRAM bus can match the Vega 64 ...

Or...

ValantarWell, I doubt a GP104 cut down to 1280 Cuda cores and a 192-bit VRAM bus

Can match a full GTX 1060.

T4C Fantasythe rumor is this is a 1060 6 GB with GP104 on a 1080 PCB

here is the entire stack of cards

wtf
there is a 10gb gtx 1080ti?
is that another card for the Chinese market only?

bajs11wtf
there is a 10gb gtx 1080ti?
is that another card for the Chinese market only?

thats a prototype 1080 ti, we have data on it and a bios to prove its real