AMD VP did definitely say that, speaking in his name would be too much even for wccft.
Promises look quite optimistic (I was worried they kept it mum for a while). With "we'll close the gap" and "we never been so close".
(although I can remember times when they were ahead, it was more than 10 years ago so probably doesn't count)
Anyhow, if AMD delivers, you can get your beloved Intel/nVidia chips for less, why not cross finger for AMD for that alone?
I, for one, will likely buy 480(x) (to replace 380) and later on likely Zen, (to replace i5 750).
The gains of the 1080 will hit much harder once consumers have a chance and companies have a chance to adjust drivers, software and such to fit the card.
Well, on a driver front, especially when talking about anomalies that, for instance, 290x keeps becoming faster vs 780Ti for the third consecutive year, people normally accounted that for AMD needing more time to develop good drivers. So theory goes that nVidia drivers are good and fast right away.
GTX 1080 vs Titan X not even 1.3 stronger, so don't keep your hopes that high.
That graph was 1080 vs cheaper previous gen card with model number that ended with 80, not vs Tx.
Curious part of it is, graphs for 1080 vs 980 are exactly the same as for 1070 vs 970... =)))
We are seeing reference cards hit 2100Mhz and generally being temperature limited.
Isn't it nearly always the case with overclocking?
There is certain threshold when upping this and that reasonably increases power consumption, but at some point power consumption grows too quickly.
Now, 980Ti was a brilliant OC-er and hands down best card high end tier of the last gen. (yep, I said that. Actually, I have no problems saying that, it's just some nZilla fanboi go defensive for no reason when reading my comments). It could easily get +40% of the stock, and even 50% wasn't that rare.
With 12% OC 1080 simply doesn't cut it. It might in the future, but not that there isn't much time left if Vega is coming in Oct, as rumored.
Oh, that if GloFo / Samsung 14nm doesn't fruck up, which, from what I've heard, namely:
a) Apple's TSMC 16nm chips are superior to the same chip on Samsungs 14nm (I, frankly, don't get how it could be "the same chip" given the differences in the process, but, oh well)
b) Nobody really forced nVidia to go with TSMC. They would NOT risk their high end dominance to simply get cheaper chips, so at the very least, there is no clear superiority in what Samsung's 14nm is doing
c) Some vague badmouthing about GloFo underperforming and underperforming
it could well do.
They already compete in that end of the market with APU's
There is no Dell XPS with AMD APU/CPU.
Also no high end Lenovo either.
HP might have some, as they (Compaq) tend to favor AMD.
