NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8 GB

[Champ]

Kinda regard limiting myself with a freesync monitor now. It'll be another two gens before AMD touches this. They'll always be very behind

 

[erocker]

Seriously I dont understand their train of thought on it.



Time will tell. All I know is my next card will be an MSI Gaming variant.

No, through what they've said about it, the "Founders Edition" is the reference card. They release it first at a price premium, then after, they let their partners battle it out amongst themselves. So, they've taken the normally "cheaper" card and made it the more expensive card.

I think I too am going to get one of MSI's 1080's.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I don't understand why you would say that before seeing what AMD have to offer.

You took the words out of my mouth. I'd prefer to await as many findings as possible first.

Really, this is an exciting card, but I will need to see game requirements vastly increase before I move on from my 980, which is quite a capable card in these recent tests, still. So an upgrade is not currently in the cards.

 

[GreiverBlade]

Then compare it to R9 380.
After all, it also ends with 80.
Makes as much sense.

clever ... but a R9 380 i will compare it to a R9 480 if they ever come up ...and if i did effectively own one ...

make sense ... yep

 

[medi01]

. but a R9 380 i will compare it to a R9 480 if they ever come up ...and if i did effectively own one ...

That will make sense, provided, it's priced accordingly. (which it very likely will be)

It'll be another two gens before AMD touches this

Lolwhat?
Jeez, and you post on a tech review site, what a shame... =(

 

[xorbe]

as someone who sees a 50W jump in power just because a webpage has a video ad, that 7W power use for bluray is incredible.

Also VirtualBox sessions keep my Titan X spun up. The 960 (used one for a while, it's in the htpc now) was nice in that it hurt a lot less this way (heating up my room upstairs). Reduced power would be a nice reason to swap out for a 1080. I don't really need a new card though ...

 

[gasolina]

some of the local msi staff in Vietnam claim that their FE 1080 is "pinned" and charge around 870$ could be overclock to 2800mhz under watercooling i just don't know if it is fraud or not since here you can make it to 2060. I cam barely think non ref design pcb and after market cooler/ waterblock will be around 2200mhz Oc base clock will be maximum i guess. Is there any source claiming thay they could reach to 2500mhz for some custom design ?

 

[droopyRO]

Would it be compatible with an ArcticCooling Xtreme III or IV ?

 

[GC_PaNzerFIN]

mmhhh? #rip.... ? childish hashtag to say "you virtually murdered me"? ...

i see 30 to 40% increase all over a stock 980 ... (talking 1080p and 4k respectively ...) its still not a good enough card to warrant a 980 replacement )

oh wait ... 4k ... the 1080 is 41% above 980 ... my bad ... 1080P it's 36% ... my bad again ...

GTX 980 is 36% slower than GTX1080 at Full HD res. That means GTX 1080 is 56% faster than 980.

 

[m&m's]

i see 30 to 40% increase all over a stock 980 ... (talking 1080p and 4k respectively ...) its still not a good enough card to warrant a 980 replacement )

oh wait ... 4k ... the 1080 is 41% above 980 ... my bad ... 1080P it's 36% ... my bad again ...
View attachment 74688 View attachment 74689

That's mathematically incorrect. You can't do 100-64=36. What you're saying is the 1080 is 36% faster than the 64% of the 980. Which doesn't make sense. You have to do a rule of three.
100*100/64=156.25% so 56.25% faster at 1080P compared to the 980.
100*100/59=169.49% so 69.49% faster at 4K.

 

[GC_PaNzerFIN]

Would it be compatible with an ArcticCooling Xtreme III or IV ?

Yes, although I would recommend installing some heatsinks directly on the VRM chips too. Not just the silly backplate thing.

http://videocardz.com/60151/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-tested-with-aftermarket-cooler

 

[the54thvoid]

Aren't most 980Ti-s overclocked? (and don't they OC much better than what we see 1080 do?)

Yes and No. Most 980ti's come overclocked but the overclock of 450Mhz on this amounts to a 28% overclock, versus a 26% like for like on the 'stock' 980ti (TPU review with W!zzard's base 980ti and 1080). Moreover, the ceiling for non exotic cooling (LN2) is about 1550Mhz on 980ti. The rumours suggest, once power unlocked and water cooled, these will reach up to 2.5Ghz. That will be the factory overclocked versions with additional OC (again if rumours are correct).

Partner cards with unlocked power and cooled with a great air solution or water will clock far higher than a founder edition (again, if rumours are to be believed and tbh, given this review and others hitting 2100+Mhz, I'd be believing them rumours).

 

[the54thvoid]

Yes, although I would recommend installing some heatsinks directly on the VRM chips too. Not just the silly backplate thing.

http://videocardz.com/60151/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-tested-with-aftermarket-cooler

Needs more powah.

 

[W1zzard]

That Simultaneous Multi-projection is a big deal ... the point is doing the geometry pipeline only once and have up to 16 projection in a single pass. Possible only on new pascal arch, there is a smp block in a new updated polymorph engine in each SM

Just to burst any theory bubbles: SMP can only work from the same viewpoint, so imagine in a 3d shooter being able to use the mouse to look anywhere you want, but you can not walk somewhere else

 

[Nihilus]

That's mathematically incorrect. You can't do 100-64=36. What you're saying is the 1080 is 36% faster than the 64% of the 980. Which doesn't make sense. You have to do a rule of three.
100*100/64=156.25% so 56.25% faster at 1080P compared to the 980.
100*100/59=169.49% so 69.49% faster at 4K.

GTX 980 is 36% slower than GTX1080 at Full HD res. That means GTX 1080 is 56% faster than 980.

Thank you. Griever's math was making my head hurt. A 56% improvement at 1080p and a 69% improvement at 4k while getting the same power consumption is NOTHING to sneeze at.
Price is high now, but it will go down once Vega launches.

 

[nem..]

13% what a bargain. min 23:24

 

[GreiverBlade]

Thank you. Griever's math was making my head hurt. A 56% improvement at 1080p and a 69% improvement at 4k while getting the same power consumption is NOTHING to sneeze at.
Price is high now, but it will go down once Vega launches.

i answer in reverse ... Vega will make nothing in price change (unless Vega is a huge leap in performance over the actual line) ... when the Fury got out ... no 980/980Ti price lowered ... a contrario they did go up ... (might be situational depending the region and country ... ok)


ok so the number in the chart means nothing if not taken with another calculation in between, i see ... my bad
not everyone are aware of that kind of additional step needed to have the effective numbers ...

my bad to apply a logic to something that require more steps ... and thanks @m&m's to have effectively explained the issue there (albeit in a manner that does not suits me totally ) but at last someone explained it instead of considering me like an idiotic ignorant for not applying any math in that case ... pfeh.

rule of three ... well it's not really something that you would take in account automatically ... cross multiplication i see... sorry i am an idiot ... thanks to make me realize it

still not making that card worth it tho ... since AIB and retailers will overprice it, thanks nvidia.

13% what a bargain. min 23:24

not worth it over a 980Ti indeed .... for a 980 it might be ... though still no games bring a 980 on her knees (ok ok 4k ... the new "standard" ... yep that case make it worth it and maybe 144hz
screen)

That will make sense, provided, it's priced accordingly. (which it very likely will be)

well in that case my 980 to 1080 make sense ... unless you didn't read about the price were i live ... : a 980 is already at the same price of a 1080 "fooled" edition (albeit the fact that i forgot the "rule of three" )

 

[Nihilus]

^^^ 1080 fps vs 980ti fps

Bench 1: 51.7 vs 45 (8:18)
Bench 2: 98.3 vs 86.3 (8:47)
Bench 3: 129 vs 129 (9:12) CPU LIMITED!!!!
Bench 4: 49.0 vs 50.3 (dx11) ; 58.5 vs 74.8 (dx12)
Bench 5: 39.0 vs 56.9.3 (dx11) ; 41.9 vs 56.1 (dx12)
Bench 6: 42.3 vs 56.0 (12:10)
Bench 7: 107 vs 125 (12:23) cpu limited????
Bench 8: 202 vs 157 (13:04) um the 980 gets 134 here making the 980ti only 17% faster than the 980. GARBAGE benchmarks.
Bench 9: 51.7 vs 68 (13:42)

Where did you guys dig up this burnout? Ignoring the dx11 Ashes of Singularity and CPU bottlenecks in bench 3, 7 and 8, it is much bigger than 13%

Also, is the 980 that much better than a 780ti?? In most older games, they are very close. Why would you expect a 1080 to blow away a 980ti? COMPARE a 1080 to a 980. What is so hard about that?!

 

[Kanan]

Without reading previous comments (no time):

980 Ti custom is barely slower, maybe 3-5% estimated. GTX 1080 custom could be 15% faster, tops, compared to custom GTX 980 Ti, but costs a lot more - not worth it. It's just Maxwell on speed, this GPU is a pretty big disappointment. Enthusiast gamers, keep your fingers crossed for Vega10 with HBM2 + 4096 shaders in October, it will easily crush this GPU.

 

[xorbe]

No cpu speeds seem to be disclosed in the video review or the linked article, so I guess stock settings and not pegged at 4.3 -4.7 GHz like the typical die hard enthusiast. That would explain the one bench that was cpu limited.

 

[kithylin]

WHY DO YOU NOT SHOW US THE MINIMUMS! WE NEED MINIMUM NUMBERS!

YOUR ENTIRE REVIEW IS USELESS AND A WASTE OF TIME!

 

[rtwjunkie]

WHY DO YOU NOT SHOW US THE MINIMUMS! WE NEED MINIMUM NUMBERS!

YOUR ENTIRE REVIEW IS USELESS AND A WASTE OF TIME!

Damn....I guess he should change his respected reviews just for your prima dona ass, huh?

Not gonna happen.

 

[xorbe]

WHY DO YOU NOT SHOW US THE MINIMUMS! WE NEED MINIMUM NUMBERS!

YOUR ENTIRE REVIEW IS USELESS AND A WASTE OF TIME!

A single number is useless. Other reviews have provided some proper frame percentile charts.

 

[Kanan]

WHY DO YOU NOT SHOW US THE MINIMUMS! WE NEED MINIMUM NUMBERS!

YOUR ENTIRE REVIEW IS USELESS AND A WASTE OF TIME!

MORE NUMBERS! Here you go:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,4572.html

 

[Absolution]

I don't understand why you would say that before seeing what AMD have to offer.

Exactly, I had plans to go GTX 1080 (from the Nano) but given the prices (in AU) and given the not so great improvement at AMD titles, I think Im going to wait a bit. The same seems to apply when AMD hardware runs slower on nvidia backed games. Really wish there was a better way to measure performance.

Basically the whole nvidia vs AMD thing is going to pan out over which vendor is backing the most number of titles, heh...