NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Specifications Released

[HumanSmoke]

Oh, I don't blame Nvidia for their business plan, it is very logical. I do think using a swanky term for their own cooler is 'manipulative' in a small way though.

I'd agree. As a consumer it just smacks of cynicism. From a business perspective it will probably work because the hyperbolic name infers some degree of an illusory exclusivity. The mitigating factor is that the retail packaging doesn't seem to carry the marketing guff, and AIB custom boards are due out in short order (June by all accounts for the major players).

However if reviews come out and it's brilliant, then fair enough. But still, 'Founders Edition' implies a shit tonne more than reference, even if reference is great.

I think I'm more interesting in seeing how mature the 16nmFF+ process is and if we'll see progressively higher clocked AIB models as the process ages. Like you, I'm more interested in a big die GPU card so it's more interesting to see how the process might translate to bigger silicon.

 

[Xzibit]

This is making its rounds

OC3D - GTX 1080 Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks

Benchmarking Data for Nvidia's GTX 1080 have been submitted online to the Ashes of the Singularity benchmark leaderboard, with single GPU performance that can best even AMD's R9 Fury X GPU.

In the games built in benchmark, the R9 Fury X is able to achieve a score of 4300 points with an average framerate of 44.4 FPS, with the Nvidia GTX 1080 achieving a higher score of 4900 and an average framerate of 49.6.

In Ashes of the Singularity, the Nvidia GTX 1080 has framerates that are around 10-12% higher than AMD's R9 Fury X. These scores were provided by the same gamer on the same system, so this comparison should be fairly accurate.

 

[HumanSmoke]

This is making its rounds

OC3D - GTX 1080 Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks

You very likely need to compare the same game version for an accurate comparison given AotS's many builds. I posted a filtered (like for like game revision) leaderboard a few hours ago. The database makes filtering fairly easy.

EDIT: It seems like someone has trawled though the db and found Polaris entries as well.

 

[Vayra86]

So not expecting 1080 to do 4k at max settings? Big let down, the marketing certainly fooled me

In all honesty anyone who was honestly thinking that was going to happen, doesn't know a thing about the GPU market. Marketing =/= reality.

It's not happening. And I seriously doubt a single 1080ti will do the magic of 4k@60 for every game out today and in 2017. Wait, hell no, I'm certain it will not. Because why would we then upgrade to anything else, ever?

4K is the new enthusiast benchmark, but it is far, far away from mainstream still. If anything, 1440p is slowly becoming the new mainstream. Especially because higher FPS is also getting into the picture and you don't just push 4k@120hz, but 1440p is reachable. High FPS is a growing niche, due to the new API's that drastically improve CPU efficiency it also becomes more and more attainable for a greater number of games. In addition, VR needs the high FPS as well - it becomes economically viable to build games and engines around a higher FPS target. If you're serious about your gaming, as in competitive in any way, 4K should be miles away for you, but 1440p@120-144hz is a very nice new sweet spot. 4K is also still plagued by a PPI issue which will move many users back to a 1080p or intermediate resolution. It either requires a very large panel, which forces you to sit further away and essentially lose the detail you paid for due to view distance, or it has scaling issues in games and with text, it being too small to read.

In addition, the 'other' new enthusiast benchmark is VR, which is, on average, 1080p x2 @ 90 fps. Most VR games run at lower resolutions internally to *hopefully* reach that magical 90 fps per eye. Nvidia uses technology (viewports), not raw power, to tackle the VR benchmark. 4K however, is where they have dropped the ball and this is not surprising, because the target market for 4K is fár smaller than the potential market for VR. Why would they cripple their release scheme of +30% per release on similar tier GPU, just to enable a small minority of the market (if it's 5-7%, I'd say that is optimistic)? They won't. Having the GPU do a little trick to enable VR, a far greater potential market share, is more than enough to create incentive.

The 980ti at stock clocks is probably going to end up within a +-10% margin of the actual in-game performance of the 1080 at stock clocks.

1080ti will probably be about 25-35% faster than the 1080. Do the math. You are definitely going to dip below 60 on multiple occasions at 4k. If you like to be optimistic, perhaps add another 10% from your 24/7 overclock, but I'd bank on 5-8% in-game performance from that.

 

[nickbaldwin86]

So DP1.4 .... ASUS please make a ROG Swift 34" 3440x1440 @ 144Hz.

Thanks

 

[medi01]

For what it's worth, launch pricing:

and more interesting:

PS
Man, that Polaris bench does look depressing.

 

[Casecutter]

"Founder Editions" it feels like paying the "tribute to the "Founder" for giving you the opportunity to receive it. Like something from North Korea... "The Supreme leaders Edition". A binned GPU that has GDDR5X and higher clocks for $100 more, the highly exalted offering over a peasants' Ti version.

We (basically know) the GP104 memory controller can also run standard GDDR5. Will the standard spec 1080's at $599 just have GDDR5? I mean is the memory spec described in such a way that the highest spec can be GDDR5X, though optionally it could be lowered the whole GDDR5/DDR3 kind of thing? Is there enough GDDR5X as it seemed the ramp up was "out of sync" with the needs of High-End Graphics production and volume to have all 1080's that AIB want to release ready for their production? While is it me or is there something amiss with either architecture arrangement or TSCM processes that has such wonky variance of clocks? Probably the latter and will get there as TSCM process improves.

Could it be as GDDR5X production moves up more AIB will offer that spec in OC'd cards, but till then...

 

[arbiter]

Impossible!
AMD showed working silicon first so clearly Nvidia are way behind, also GDDR5X is non-existent so those Hilbert pics are clearly fake!

Yea shows how little logic you have with that comment. Just cause Nvidia didn't demo off their card until know means they are far behind. Typical logic of people that know Nothing.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Yea shows how little logic you have with that comment. Just cause Nvidia didn't demo off their card until know means they are far behind. Typical logic of people that know Nothing.

You missed the sarcasm by at least one astronomical unit

 

[arbiter]

You missed the sarcasm by at least one astronomical unit

Sarcasm doesn't transmit over the internet, but stupidity does.

 

[Dru]

I'm just waiting to order a GTX 1080 when it is available for pre-order or on release date. I'll also wait to read an actual review when it comes out in the next week or so. I heard the GTX 1080 is faster than a Titan X and also the Founder's Edition features a heavier shroud that would sag the card so you have to make sure the next three slots down is free to allow it to sag.

 

[Vayra86]

"Founder Editions" it feels like paying the "tribute to the "Founder" for giving you the opportunity to receive it. Like something from North Korea... "The Supreme leaders Edition". A binned GPU that has GDDR5X and higher clocks for $100 more, the highly exalted offering over a peasants' Ti version.

We (basically know) the GP104 memory controller can also run standard GDDR5. Will the standard spec 1080's at $599 just have GDDR5? I mean is the memory spec described in such a way that the highest spec can be GDDR5X, though optionally it could be lowered the whole GDDR5/DDR3 kind of thing? Is there enough GDDR5X as it seemed the ramp up was "out of sync" with the needs of High-End Graphics production and volume to have all 1080's that AIB want to release ready for their production? While is it me or is there something amiss with either architecture arrangement or TSCM processes that has such wonky variance of clocks? Probably the latter and will get there as TSCM process improves.

Could it be as GDDR5X production moves up more AIB will offer that spec in OC'd cards, but till then...

It's just the shroud, nothing else. Don't buy the story about binning and clocks. They will all clock to a certain ceiling on air and have a bit of margin between them, big deal. AIB's will do the work for us.

It's Nvidia's market strategy - complete opposite of AMD"s. AMD released stock coolers that were cheap and utter junk not too long ago and had multiple big card releases go sour on that. They clearly aimed for the bottom of the spectrum. Nvidia aims for the top end, better brand image etc. etc. etc. so we pay top dollar - and there are tons of people on this forum that will buy into it. Every AMD marketing slide: a lump of red/black plastic. Nvidia marketing slides: shiny metals and bling. AMD had some half-decent attempts at that too recently with the Fury X wcooler and the Wraith. Half decent.

 

[Xzibit]

Some more info.

In fact, Nvidia explained that, as usual, we can expect to see factory overclocked cards and other variations that cost more than the Founders Edition, along with other cards that will cost less, and presumably at least some of these will be around at launch. Are those cards better, worse, or the same as the Founders Edition? The answer: yes.

I'm guessing for example EVGA ACX base cooler on reference board design or cheeper PCB design to cost less then FE and anything overclocked to cost more. That's what more and more articles are sounding like.

 

[HumanSmoke]

I'm guessing for example EVGA ACX base cooler on reference board design or cheeper PCB design to cost less then FE and anything overclocked to cost more. That's what more and more articles are sounding like.

I'll take that wager.

Many vendors ally reduced cooling BoM with higher clocks (MSI's OCV series for example), while other vendors have never shied away from adding OC'ing and a reasonable cooling solution without elevating prices above MSRP (Zotac's AMP series for example). The vendor competition is simply to congested and cutthroat to make the simplistic pronouncement that all OC'ed cards will cost more than $699.

 

[Dru]

 

[Caring1]

It's a bit pointless posting a video that doesn't work, without any comment too.

 

[HumanSmoke]

It's just the shroud, nothing else. Don't buy the story about binning and clocks.

A little more information. From VRWorld's sit down from Nvidia and its board partners:

Stock GTX 1080 is clocked at 1.66 GHz, with Turbo Boost lifting it to 1.73 GHz. Founders Edition includes overclocking-friendly BIOS to raise the clocks to at least 2 GHz, and the presentation showed the chip running at 2.1 GHz. The main limiting factor for the overclocking beyond 2.2 GHz is 225 Watts, which is how much the board can officially pull from the power circuitry....[ ]...partners such as ASUS, Colorful, EVGA, Galax, GigaByte, MSI are preparing custom boards with 2-3 8-pin connectors. According to our sources, reaching 2.5 GHz using a liquid cooling setup such as Corsair H115i or EK Waterblocks should not be too much of a hassle.

...and on the memory side of things

GeForce GTX 1080 has the memory clocked at 2.5 GHz but we do expect some of the samples clocking at 2.75-3.5 GHz (11-14 Gbps). That would raise the available bandwidth from 320GB/s to 352-448 GB/s and we do expect to see extreme overclockers pushing the memory even more. If Micron adopts 10nm process for GDDR5X, we’ll get to 4 GHz clock / 16 Gbps rather sooner than later.

Sounds like the custom boards will be the way to go.

 

[Xzibit]

Different people reporting different things.

Saying the FE edition has a OC friendly bios leads to questions about the non FEs (not the AOE or LCE those are a given to be better). We have several people reporting they are the same. Pretty much everyone that went to the event and has a YouTube channel is saying they were told they are the same.

• GeForce GTX 1080 8GB

• GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition

• GeForce GTX 1080 Air Overclocked Edition

• GeForce GTX 1080 Liquid Cooled Edition

They also report this.

For DirectX 12 and VR, the term Asynchronous Compute was thrown around, especially since AMD Radeon-based cards were beating Nvidia GeForce cards in DirectX 12 titles such as Ashes of The Singularity and Rise of the Tomb Raider. We were told that the Pascal architecture doesn’t have Asynchronous Compute, but that there are some aspects of this feature which qualified the card for ‘direct12_1’ feature set.

Nvidia needs a unified msg specially on the FEs

 

[buggalugs]

Global conspiracy confirmed! Who knew that a small tech company with less than 5% of the market cap of Microsoft held so much influence in the world?

On a conspiracy/FUD debunking note...

...the Founders Edition's apparently just the polygonal shroud treatment:

So, board vendor custom designs start at $599, and the stock clocked reference/Founders Edition is $699 for those wanting the blower/shroud. For the extra hundred, there should be a lot more people holding out for a MSI OC Gaming, Asus Strix, Giga Windforce, or EVGA ACX with higher clocks I would imagine.

Since when are non reference with decent cooler cheaper than reference?. For years, AIB cards like Asus DCUII, Gigabyte windforce, MSI Lightniing etc, have always sold for a premium over the reference model. Usually around $50 more, the lightning is usually $100 more. Reference cards are almost always cheaper than partner cards.

People are dreaming if they think they will be buying any 1080 for $599, for at least a few months after launch, and not before AMD has some competition. Then you might have one option like INNO3D at a cheaper price.

...and ffs are we still debating what the founders edition is? Theres still heaps of comments from people saying "wow $599 for 1080 and $379 for 1070 so cheap" and people still think the founders edition might be overclocked, might be this or that. The founders edition is the bog standard reference card.

Gotta give Nvidia credit for marketing, it has obviously worked.

 

[HumanSmoke]

Since when are non reference with decent cooler cheaper than reference?.

Learn to read son. I said:

For the extra hundred

That means the same price NOT cheaper.

For years, AIB cards like Asus DCUII, Gigabyte windforce, MSI Lightniing etc, have always sold for a premium over the reference model.

And for years some AIB's have had custom cards with overclocks applied for the same price as reference. This Zotac Amp! for example.

People are dreaming if they think they will be buying any 1080 for $599, for at least a few months after launch, and not before AMD has some competition. Then you might have one option like INNO3D at a cheaper price.

You want to take a wager on that?
Thought not.

 

[Prima.Vera]

I'm curious if 1 single card can push 100fps on 3440x1440 resolution on the latest AAA games....

 

[RealNeil]

Is it 5 more days to wait for reviews?

 

[EarthDog]

Yes.

I'm curious if 1 single card can push 100fps on 3440x1440 resolution on the latest AAA games....

Depends on the settings on those games.. particularly with the use of AA... but doubtful...look at what the 980Ti does and extrapolate. The 1080ti though................................

 

[medi01]

card, clock, score, power, score/W

1080, 2100mhz, 45609, 244W, 186.9
1080, 1733mhz, 37193, 180W, 206.6
980ti, 1076mhz, 28690, 235W, 122.1
980, 1250mhz, 22170, 165W, 134.4

Compared to the GTX 980:
stock 1080 vs stock 980: 53.7% improvement in efficiency
OC 1080 vs stock 980: 39.1% improvement in efficiency

stock 980ti vs stock 980: 10.1% decrease in efficiency

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-benchmarks/

 

[HumanSmoke]

card, clock, score, power, score/W

1080, 2100mhz, 45609, 244W, 186.9
1080, 1733mhz, 37193, 180W, 206.6
980ti, 1076mhz, 28690, 235W, 122.1
980, 1250mhz, 22170, 165W, 134.4

Compared to the GTX 980:
stock 1080 vs stock 980: 53.7% improvement in efficiency
OC 1080 vs stock 980: 39.1% improvement in efficiency

stock 980ti vs stock 980: 10.1% decrease in efficiency

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-3dmark-firestrike-benchmarks/

Classic. That's got to the dumbest analysis I've ever seen

To get those "scores" you not only have to add ALL the Firestrike scores together, you also have to accept that the lowest level of benchmarking (Firestrike Performance) accounts for almost 60% of the total.