|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Uhhh, I'm not sure what the point of comparing a LN2 cooled 980Ti to a reference cooled 1080 is? If the 1080 can boost to very high clock speeds out of the box then it is faster than the 980Ti overall, which is about what I would expect. On top of that unless Nvidia are true and complete idiots(which they aren't most of the time) the new chips will have a hardware scheduler and other features that should make their DX12/Vulkan performance much better than Maxwell based cards. A 980ti @ 1.8Ghz beats the stock 1080 I think is the point, while a more reasonable air cooled but OC'ed to 1.5-16Ghz should trade punches, considering the 2.0Ghz 1080 only beats the 980ti by 10-15% when the 980ti is also basically at stock clocks. Core difference isn't large enough to explain the difference IMO. But like I said, it really depends on Pascals headroom, if it can hit 2.4ghz while consuming less power than stock 980ti then yeah it's compellingly faster.
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
How long does it usually take for the third party cards to come out after the reference card is released? Also, which of the third parties have had the best cards lately?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 14:49
|
|
FaustianQ posted:A 980ti @ 1.8Ghz beats the stock 1080 I think is the point, while a more reasonable air cooled but OC'ed to 1.5-16Ghz should trade punches, considering the 2.0Ghz 1080 only beats the 980ti by 10-15% when the 980ti is also basically at stock clocks. Core difference isn't large enough to explain the difference IMO. But like I said, it really depends on Pascals headroom, if it can hit 2.4ghz while consuming less power than stock 980ti then yeah it's compellingly faster. I was not really expecting the 1080 to beat the 980Ti by more than 10-15%, that plus much better DX12/Vulkan support would be enough to push a lot of people to upgrade I would think. Hell, I'm on a 970 and I'm thinking about getting a 1070 even though I am only using a 1920x1200 monitor and the reason is DX12/Vulkan, if games built on those APIs run like poo poo on Maxwell based cards I don't see a choice other than upgrading to Pascal or Polaris. EDIT: fozzy fosbourne posted:How long does it usually take for the third party cards to come out after the reference card is released? Also, which of the third parties have had the best cards lately? A month or so, as for the better card manufacturers I would say MSI, EVGA, Asus and Gigabyte, Zotac is good too but their cards last gen were huge, really good coolers but over a foot long. AVeryLargeRadish fucked around with this message at 14:57 on May 5, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:How long does it usually take for the third party cards to come out after the reference card is released? Also, which of the third parties have had the best cards lately? About the same time, MSI and Asus are safe bets, EVGA and Sapphire for green/red specific.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
I'm really interested to see the clock speeds AMD gets. Hopefully if the clocks are low for mobile and PSU limited scenarios there'll be either 7000 series style OC headroom or a hot clocked version for desktop. I'm more interested in Vega though.teagone posted:I have a GTX 970 right now and game at 1080p. I'm planning on ditching nvidia and going back to AMD once Polaris drops since Freesync monitors are way cheaper than G-sync ones and I want to experience no-tearing, 144Hz buttery smooth goodness. This is a good idea, right? I don't know how credible this is, but Techpowerup claims that the R9 480 non-X version (priced at around $200) performs close to a 390X at half its power draw: https://www.techpowerup.com/222156/amd-radeon-r9-480-non-x-performs-close-to-r9-390x That can't be right, right? What resolution are you targeting? 1080 or 1440? At 1080 you'll likely be up in the framerates where low motion blur is a big deal (either from a gsync or the monitor maker, such as BenQ Blur Reduction like the XL2730Z has). At 1440p, in newer games you'll be balancing framerate against quality so you may find it well worthwhile to run *sync because it'll let you increase settings without losing perceived smoothness and you likely won't be in the land of diminishing returns like you would when targeting a lower resolution/framerate combo. I really hope the XL2730 gets an IPS cousin soon, it's everything else a gaming monitor should be.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:How long does it usually take for the third party cards to come out after the reference card is released? Also, which of the third parties have had the best cards lately? Last time it was the same day, I read here that manufacturers were already making next gen cards so I imagine there's a good chance its the same situation. As far as nvidia goes its actually difficult to buy a reference card in general, but that's pretty true with AMD too (just less so).
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:A month or so, as for the better card manufacturers I would say MSI, EVGA, Asus and Gigabyte, Zotac is good too but their cards last gen were huge, really good coolers but over a foot long. ZOTAC actually offered a really short gtx 970, only 8.5", which I have. Only one short enough for my case at the time. For the 980 and 980 ti though, yeah, they're massive. But really good offerings. For the 980 ti at least, the AMP, AMP OMEGA, and AMP extreme usually had the highest clocks for the price range compared to other cards. I used a ZOTAC AMP! GTX 760, and now a ZOTAC GTX 970, and both have been great and neither were loud. If I decide to go 980 ti over 1080, I'll probably get the ZOTAC again now that I have a bigger case that can accommodate any length card.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
These people are saying it's more like a 30% increase to stock if you compare graphic scores to graphic scores. https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/4hznfw/first_nvidia_geforce_gtx_1080_3dmark_benchmarks/d2tq8aw No idea how to interpret that
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:These people are saying it's more like a 30% increase to stock if you compare graphic scores to graphic scores. https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/4hznfw/first_nvidia_geforce_gtx_1080_3dmark_benchmarks/d2tq8aw Lol im not sure I believe that but ... one can hope Christ if true I should have sold this fuckin 980ti 3 days ago penus penus penus fucked around with this message at 15:30 on May 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
Factory OC'd 980Tis go into upper 8000, so unless pascal also has a pretty hefty OC headroom it's going to be barely faster after you move that slider in afterburner 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:30
|
|
Truga posted:Factory OC'd 980Tis go into upper 8000, so unless pascal also has a pretty hefty OC headroom it's going to be barely faster after you move that slider in afterburner If they OC by 40% over stock like Maxwell I'll just  , I just don't see it happening with their first chip on 14nm.
|
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
THE DOG HOUSE posted:Lol im not sure I believe that but ... one can hope Well, the videocardz graphics score for the 1080 is 10102 and in the linked benchmarks in that thread the stock 980ti scores 7459-7841 graphics score. How does a less significant "overall" score delta and a more significant "graphics score" delta translate to practical game performance, I have no idea
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:Well, the videocardz graphics score for the 1080 is 10102 and in the linked benchmarks in that thread the stock 980ti scores 7459-7841 graphics score. How does a less significant "overall" score delta and a more significant "graphics score" delta translate to practical game performance, I have no idea I mean, as far as have been able to tell it translates pretty drat well. But... as pointed out, and embarrassing since this is typically a sticking point to me, these are stock 980ti values so its not *really* 30% in reality unless Pascal can also overclock just as well.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Fingers crossed we get some solid info on pricing tomorrow, anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I'm really interested to see the clock speeds AMD gets. Hopefully if the clocks are low for mobile and PSU limited scenarios there'll be either 7000 series style OC headroom or a hot clocked version for desktop. I'm more interested in Vega though. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:How long does it usually take for the third party cards to come out after the reference card is released? Also, which of the third parties have had the best cards lately? Pretty quick. keep in mind the third parties arn't sitting on their thumbs till the ref comes out. They could have cards ready to go same day.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
FaustianQ posted:A 980ti @ 1.8Ghz beats the stock 1080 I think is the point, while a more reasonable air cooled but OC'ed to 1.5-16Ghz should trade punches, considering the 2.0Ghz 1080 only beats the 980ti by 10-15% when the 980ti is also basically at stock clocks. Core difference isn't large enough to explain the difference IMO. But like I said, it really depends on Pascals headroom, if it can hit 2.4ghz while consuming less power than stock 980ti then yeah it's compellingly faster. All pointless though because LN2 overclocking is such a niche thing and the majority of consumers aren't going to be doing extreme mods/cooling like that. Sure it's great seeing both at their respective air-cooled overclocks and also running stock, but makes no sense to go with "extreme" cooling for the sake of saying that an older gen card is faster, that's just stupid.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
Ozz81 posted:All pointless though because LN2 overclocking is such a niche thing and the majority of consumers aren't going to be doing extreme mods/cooling like that. Sure it's great seeing both at their respective air-cooled overclocks and also running stock, but makes no sense to go with "extreme" cooling for the sake of saying that an older gen card is faster, that's just stupid. Actually the point I was trying to make was more that clock for clock the 980ti is still faster, even if the 1080 is able to keep higher clocks on air, as a comparison between the actual cores themselves. Since it's 2880 vs 2560 (from what we know), it's quite possible per core performance hasn't received much of a jump and Pascal is faster purely due to higher attainable clocks. In the real world, this won't matter much and it's mostly academic I suppose, we'll see.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/status/728222996138168320
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Can nvidia stop focusing on this poor person poo poo and just give me a Titan XI or a 1080ti
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:Can nvidia stop focusing on this poor person poo poo and just give me a Titan XI or a 1080ti They've stopped focusing on that poor person poo poo and are giving companies the big chips.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Why sell a chip for $1000 when you can tack on an extra memory chip, a parity processor, and sell it for $10000 for as long as you could
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Anime Schoolgirl posted:Why sell a chip for $1000 when you can tack on an extra memory chip, a parity processor, and sell it for $10000 for as long as you could All you gotta do is flash a new bios. Boom quadro (yea yea and ecc memory)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:All you gotta do is flash a new bios. Boom quadro (yea yea and ecc memory) You gotta add video outputs, have fun with that.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Which adds what? $100 to the BOM to a card selling that will sell for five figures?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Boosted_C5 posted:For the love of God I need to know the price and performance of a GTX 1080 already. Buy now, leave in box, return on Monday if things move in the wrong direction?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:That was looked at up-thead, the thing is that they were using the on-screen numbers to claim that the 480 is equal with the 390X, the problem is that the tests were obviously done with vsync enabled, they also include off-screen results which don't have vsync getting in the way, in those results the 480 benches much more like you would expect, at about 75% of the speed of a 390X and with less than half the texturing performance. On top of that this is an OpenGL based benchmark meant for things like smartphones and tablets so basically what I am saying here is the results were badly misrepresented and to take said results with a giant block of salt on top of that. Ok, that makes way more sense. Thanks for the clarification. Well, I hope the 480 is at least comparable to the 970 because I sort of, kind of want to take advantage of FreeSync. If 480/Polaris turns out to be a bust when it drops, I guess I can hope for a 390 or 390X going on the cheap instead.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
teagone posted:Ok, that makes way more sense. Thanks for the clarification. Well, I hope the 480 is at least comparable to the 970 because I sort of, kind of want to take advantage of FreeSync. If 480/Polaris turns out to be a bust when it drops, I guess I can hope for a 390 or 390X going on the cheap instead. I'd assume a 480 should outperform a 970, I wouldn't worry too much about that. I'd worry about release date
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
snuff posted:About the same time, MSI and Asus are safe bets, EVGA and Sapphire for green/red specific.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
The new shroud leak was real image was posted by nvidia on the oc3d forums
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Will you be able to cut yourself on them
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Jfc I thought people were talking about a GTX480 vs a 390X and I was loving confused.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
My body. My body is ready. My body is ready for Pascal.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
I just want a new single slot low profile card 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
I just want to know the sick gains I can expect from Vega. That'll be a fun excuse for some uninformed speculation and wild guesses about scaling.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Sick gains? Do you even lift, bro? Go get some sups and stop bothering Mr Vega.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/02/directx-12-amd-and-nvidia-gpus-finally-work-together-but-amd-still-has-the-lead/ Woah how the hell did I only just hear about this multi gpu split frame rendering in DX12? I'm guessing there are some serious drawbacks that won't allow me to use a 1080, 670, and my iGPU in one big split frame rendering party?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/02/directx-12-amd-and-nvidia-gpus-finally-work-together-but-amd-still-has-the-lead/ The drawback is games have to support it.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Goon bro's, what time is the nVidia (hopeful) announcement going on? I need to know if I need to F5 the gently caress out of PCCG (Ausgoon).
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
fozzy fosbourne posted:http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/02/directx-12-amd-and-nvidia-gpus-finally-work-together-but-amd-still-has-the-lead/ The return of microstuttering.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 02:52
|
|