NVIDIA Readying GM200-based GeForce GTX 980 Ti

[Haytch]

Let's just hope the specifications turn out to be what Nvidia state they will be. We don't want another repeat of the 970 memory issue

 

[HumanSmoke]

Somewhere in one of these GM200 threads a member here listed the value of 12 GB VRAM for various uses other than gaming even without DP. I don't keep up with using a video card for work so I don't know but maybe the Titan X with 12 GB will still be relevant to those customers even after the 980 Ti drops.

Anything that uses large data sets could benefit the larger vRAM capacity of the Titan X, just as the previous large framebuffer cards (Quadro K6000 for example) have found homes in compute based workloads. CG rendering isn't double precision based for the most part, and 4K (and higher) rendering definitely benefits from the larger memory capacity, and anyone involved in the industry of training neural networks would certainly consider the card rather than a K6000/M6000 if the data handling required it.
Obviously, the usage scenarios are for a mere fraction of the graphics card buying market, but I don't think Titan X was ever intended for mass market appeal.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

but for general gamers who plays games at Maxed out settings (without texture mods), I think it wouldn't be a beneficial thing of having too much VRAM coz according to TPU, the most for COD:AW is ~7.3GB VRAM used, in which an 8GB variant of any high end card would do. 12GB is too much for me anyways & usually I would only buy & use a card to play games that don't require crazy stuff. Maybe there is a small reason why some would willing to buy the Titan X, but for what reason I don't know. Well, by the time the 980Ti comes out, I wonder what will current 970, 980 & Titan X owners will say about it. Just my opinion.

 

[64K]

but for general gamers who plays games at Maxed out settings (without texture mods), I think it wouldn't be a beneficial thing of having too much VRAM coz according to TPU, the most for COD:AW is ~7.3GB VRAM used, in which an 8GB variant of any high end card would do. 12GB is too much for me anyways & usually I would only buy & use a card to play games that don't require crazy stuff. Maybe there is a small reason why some would willing to buy the Titan X, but for what reason I don't know. Well, by the time the 980Ti comes out, I wonder what will current 970, 980 & Titan X owners will say about it. Just my opinion.

I think the 980 Ti with 6 GB VRAM will be plenty for almost everyone for gaming for a couple of years. Even people on 4K with two of these if DX12 works the way they are saying it will with Split Frame Rendering. 6 GB + 6 GB will no longer equal 6 GB as it does now with Alternate Frame Rendering.

 

[mroofie]

I think the 980 Ti with 6 GB VRAM will be plenty for almost everyone for gaming for a couple of years. Even people on 4K with two of these if DX12 works the way they are saying it will with Split Frame Rendering. 6 GB + 6 GB will no longer equal 6 GB as it does now with Alternate Frame Rendering.

Forgot about that dx 12 feature

No TitanX needed

 

[xenocide]

but for general gamers who plays games at Maxed out settings (without texture mods), I think it wouldn't be a beneficial thing of having too much VRAM coz according to TPU, the most for COD:AW is ~7.3GB VRAM used, in which an 8GB variant of any high end card would do. 12GB is too much for me anyways & usually I would only buy & use a card to play games that don't require crazy stuff. Maybe there is a small reason why some would willing to buy the Titan X, but for what reason I don't know. Well, by the time the 980Ti comes out, I wonder what will current 970, 980 & Titan X owners will say about it. Just my opinion.

The CoD:AW stats were an outlier. It ran just as well with a 4GB limit, it's a wasteful game. Realistically like 4-5GB is the most any game uses.

 

[arbiter]

The CoD:AW stats were an outlier. It ran just as well with a 4GB limit, it's a wasteful game. Realistically like 4-5GB is the most any game uses.

Yea if its that wasteful, but if you give game dev's more vram to use they will use it. Least you can hope they will.

 

[Prima.Vera]

The CoD:AW stats were an outlier. It ran just as well with a 4GB limit, it's a wasteful game. Realistically like 4-5GB is the most any game uses.

In 4K with 4xMSAA you have to specify that.

 

[onmybikedrunk]

This is why I love Microcenter. Pay $60 ahead of time for a trade value equal to what I paid for my cards. 980's on loan for $60 for 8 months then returned for full credit to go to the 980 Ti's. Rinse, repeat.

 

[N3M3515]

More a case of AMD sell cheaper because they are not in a dominant position. Selling cheaper then impacts ASP's and ultimately revenue, which leads to less resources available for R&D, which translate to longer product cycles - and old product is a tough sell when you don't have top of the mind branding. The latest R&D figures reflect those companies leading their respective markets, and carrying little or no debt burden to drain funds away from their product cadence. AMD are caught in a brutal economic cause and effect situation.

AMD paid $5.4bn for ATI, which was twice what it was actually worth. AMD sustained a couple of hefty write-downs - a $1.68bn impairment charge in Q4 2007, and a further $880m in Q2 2008 - basically half ATI's sale price. Covering that loss has meant AMD carrying debt (currently at $2.04bn) to the current day and for some years to come.
AMD would undoubtedly be a vastly different company had Ruiz paid closer to ATI's actual worth, or worked out a deal to licence ATI's graphics IP.

The first order of business is to be competitive performance wise. AMD will incur higher costs - an AIO, HBM + large interposer aren't cheap in comparison to GDDR5's commodity pricing and the now-standard Nvidia blower shroud. Estimates seem to put HBM alone at twice the relative cost per bit of LPDDR3/LPDDR4 (which is fairly pricy in itself)

...but at this point, AMD has little option if they want to make a run at maintaining a viable halo product and its trickle down marketing effect on the rest of the product stack.

As for the GTX 980 Ti - It is nothing less than expected. Hopefully the 390X lives up to its billing and both cards allow the enthusiast to actually be enthusiastic for a change.

In conclusion, the cause is bad management.