NVIDIA Pascal Thread

[dark zero]

Oh boy. Seems that Founders edition is a farce.... Waiting for extreme OC edition. It definitely is worthy. And finally.. A X80 which is potentially decent and is not a failure (I am looking at you 980).

 

[antihelten]

Looks like my prediction was right. GP104 is indeed 128 CUDA cores per SM just like Maxwell, and not 64 like GP100:

In fact it would appear that the only notable difference from the GM204 diagram is the inclusion of an extra SM per GPC (so a total of 5 instead of 4):

Of course this doesn't say anything about deeper lying architectural changes.

 

[CakeMonster]

So, there should be plenty of room for architectural improvements better fitting 16nm. In addition power usage and power limit has some room. Not sure about memory b/w headroom, but mem OC results can give us a hint about that too. I wouldn't be too worried that NV can't raise the performance on the next flagship, and then again, and probably again, before 10nm.

 

[lukart]

Looks like great card! but in europe at 789€? Let's see if there's many crazy gamers who want to spend that much.
Personally waiting to see 1070. Hope its not like this one, that you probably wont see any standar 1080's anywhere just Rip off 699.

 

[wingman04]

Really is true this time though I think - there's very little reason indeed to get these for 1080p gaming. The 1050/60 (& AMD equivalents) will cover that very nicely, or the last gen stuff for that matter.

No you're wrong. You will need 1070/1080 to play games at 60fps ultra settings at 1080p.
1050/1060 will not allow maxed settings at 1080p 60fps.
Even 980ti struggles to maintain stable 60 at 1080p in last year's AAA titles like Witcher 3 and AC Syndicate.
So even 1070/1080 will struggle to maintain 60fps at 1080p in future AAA titles.

This^. I have a GTX 970 with 1080p and I can't average 60FPS in Crysis 3.

 

[Innokentij]

I don't think the Founder's Edition is for anyone who is serious about OC'ing.

My personal opinion.

That's true but u can just set the fan to 100% to push it to the max for the benches, seems most review sites is around 2.1GHz so that's why i asked for that number. :thumbsup: I myself wont be getting it after seeing the price of it in Norway. 903.76 US Dollar

Edit: Found what i was looking for

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=38230235&postcount=3545

 

[kithylin]

Well... so far, all of this is -WILDLY- inconsistent. Not sure why.

So let's take one title for example, Fallout 4.. @ 1080p.

One site says "we picked ultra", another site doesn't even tell us what settings they used, one site says they used ultra but switched it to 2x AA, another site says they disabled AA "No one uses AA at 1080p".

And then.. one site reports 105 FPS minimum on "ultra", another site reports 70 FPS minimum. Another site reports 150 FPS minimum, and yet another site reports 100 FPS minimum.

And despite all of this, no site can get a solid 60 FPS minimum @ 4k in any title at high ultra settings. 50's maybe, most of em 40's.. so this still yet isn't the "ultimate 4K single card" magic weapon.

So we're still relying on SLI for 4K gaming, apparently.. even with the new 1080's.

And despite all of this I've read about 10 reviews and I'm still looking for a site that doesn't just "select ultra preset and click go" but actually manually sets every single last possible setting to the maximum/highest setting, including all AA settings and then runs it.

That's what I want from games: ALL THE BELLS AND WHISTLES.

That and, even with the 900 series.. actual "Enthusiast" people, like most "overclockers" on overclock.net forums and other sites don't give a rat's ass about boost or power limits or any of that nonsense. Most of us use a custom bios, set power limit to 400%, and raise thermal limits to somewhere around 105c and then we overclock with a fixed voltage and fixed clocks. So there's no clock fluctuation and we get a steady fixed speed at all games at all load %'s, and let the cards pull as much power as they need to achieve maximum clocks and just run it up to 80c or 85c in games and clock it high.

That's how I've always done it, my 15 or so friends all do it, and a lot of other folks on the forums over there do it. If it needs 80% - 100% fans.. we give it to em, flat out performance is all that matters.

So this stupid "power curve" we can set in to cards.... I guess that's for people that don't know how to get the most out of their hardware. Hard-Core overclockers won't use it.

I want to see someone that can get 2300 mhz out of these 1080's even if they have to run 80c - 85c to do it.

So far I've found 5 different reviews that do overclock the 1080's, but all they use is these built in tools and stop at 2000 - 2020 mhz and don't try to push em further.

Also, I'm still trying to find any review that compares the 1080 to SLI setups for 980/970/etc.

Back to google.. trying to hunt down more reviews again.. it's like a needle in a haystack on review days.

Also no one has posted hwbot.org results for 1080 yet, and no one has submitted any official 3dmark firestrike results to the 3dmark website either to the public domain. So any results in any of the review sites are all subjective and may not even be true.

EDIT: Found a good review!

http://hothardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal-gpu-review?page=1

Okay here's a good one. This one they manually turn all the settings and bells and whistles on when doing benchmarks. And when they do the overclocking tests, they throw it to 120% power target, 100% max fan and overclock it as far as it will go and not crash both core and ram.

Also with everything on and maxed, even the new GTX 1080 gets dragged down below 60 FPS minimum for 1080p in Shadow of Mordor.

Maximum clocks they could get stable were 2113 Core, max memory @ 5329 Mhz, and max temps (with 100% fan) were 65c.

And a quote from the overclocked page "While overclocked the GeForce GTX 1080 outran a Titan X by roughly 32 - 35 percent."


EDIT #..5, 6?

Here's another review that "pushes all the bells and whistles on" and this one has a GTX 980 SLI in the mix to compare to the 1080.

http://www.pcgamer.com/gtx-1080-review/

Which shows us also that at maximum settings, even with the GTX 1080, quite a few titles fall below 60 FPS for 1080p. A few "barely" hold at or above 60, at about 65'ish.

So yes.. 1080p is a viable reason to buy this card. And any review sites that don't show 1080p results.. in my opinion are useless.

 

[kithylin]

The final founders edition / reference PCB naked with cooler removed. I know some of you have been wanting this:

 

[BlueWeasel]

Looking for 1500MHz 980TI vs 2100MHz 1080 benches, if anybody seen any please share! Incause u wondering why is cause i always run my hardware to the max 24/7 they will be stable at and is only result that is of any interest to me personaly.

Edit: Found it! Pretty much a 1500MHz 980TI is a 1080 stock card minus the cool new features and better dx12 performance. http://www.computerbase.de/2016-05/...tt_geforce_gtx_980_ti_mit_15_ghz_gegen_pascal

I was looking for the same thing. Thanks for the link! :thumbsup:

 

[Ajay]

Man, it takes allot of GPU power to drive a 3,840 × 2,160 display

 

[x3sphere]

https://youtu.be/xtely2GDxhU?t=7610

Tom Petersen from Nvidia discussed the Founder's Edition a bit in this video (around 2:09:00), he says they intended it to be in the middle of the product stack price/quality wise.

That suggests to me some AIB options will be higher priced.

 

[antihelten]

https://youtu.be/xtely2GDxhU?t=7610

Tom Petersen from Nvidia discussed the Founder's Edition a bit in this video (around 2:09:00), he says they intended it to be in the middle of the product stack price/quality wise.

That suggests to me some AIB options will be higher priced.

And inversely it also suggest that the custom cards that actually manage to hit the $600 MSRP will be kinda crappy.

 

[kithylin]

And inversely it also suggest that the custom cards that actually manage to hit the $600 MSRP will be kinda crappy.

Probably what ever company is creating these fake chinese GTX 660 Ti and "GTX 770 3GB" cards that are flooding on ebay in the past week will make the $600 line of GTX-1080's.

 

[Freddy1765]

And inversely it also suggest that the custom cards that actually manage to hit the $600 MSRP will be kinda crappy.

Yeah, no.

The most reasonable conclusion is we'll have Gigabyte G1/MSI Gaming tier cards at ~600 and Classified/Lightning at 700+.

 

[Fire&Blood]

This German reviewer used the Accelero Xtreme IV with the 1080TI, 2.1GHz @50C:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlSeHCPd75s

 

[antihelten]

Yeah, no.

The most reasonable conclusion is we'll have Gigabyte G1/MSI Gaming tier cards at ~600 and Classified/Lightning at 700+.

No, the most reasonable assumption is that Tom Petersen, Nvidia's director of technical marketing, wasn't lying when he said that the founders edition would fall in the middle price/quality wise, and as such that 1080 cards cheaper than the 1080 (i.e. less than $700) will be lower quality and 1080 cards more expensive than it will be higher quality. Those are basically his exact words.

Combine this with the fact that the founders edition isn't overly impressive on the card quality side (as far as cooler and power delivery goes, the GPU itself is of course plenty impressive), and the conclusion is that the 1080 cards priced less than $700 (which obviously includes the $600 ones), would have to be mediocre at best.

Either that or Tom Petersen was lying.

 

[moonbogg]

Any 1080 that costs more than $700 is absolutely ridiculous. Beyond crazy.

 

[FatherMurphy]

NVIDIA GTX 1080 Founders Edition Early Adopter Tax Goes Away
This is an interesting change of events. Many of our readers have been a bit upset with how the "new" Founders Edition GTX 1080 cards were to be rolled out. Many readers saw this FE simply as a reference card with a new name that was being charged $100 extra for while AIB partner cards were making their way to market. It has been referred to as an "early adopters" tax more than once. That seems that it might not be the case now. I expected Founders Edition cards to be for sale within 48 hours of today's GTX 1080 launch, but that is not the case. NVIDIA has just informed me that Founders Edition cards will be available at the same time as AIB partner cards. The MSRP + $100 pricing still stands, it just seems now you will not have the option of getting the FE a week or two before AIB cards.

Yes, availability for 1080 for FE and partner cards is slated for May 27th.

EDIT: http://www.hardocp.com/news/2016/05...tion_early_adopter_tax_goes_away#.VzyMqPkrKCg

I find this to be a vague, poorly written post by Kyle. I cannot tell if he (mistakenly) thought the FE cards were going to be released within 48 hours of reviews, and, upon learning that the cards were actually coming out May 27, thinks something has changed. Or, if AIB cards have been pushed up to May 27.

Maybe I'm confused and the one who is missing something.

 

[biostud]

Lots of overclocked benchmarks here:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforcegtx_1080_overclocking/

 

[antihelten]

EDIT: http://www.hardocp.com/news/2016/05...tion_early_adopter_tax_goes_away#.VzyMqPkrKCg

I find this to be a vague, poorly written post by Kyle. I cannot tell if he (mistakenly) thought the FE cards were going to be released within 48 hours of reviews, and, upon learning that the cards were actually coming out May 27, thinks something has changed. Or, if AIB cards have been pushed up to May 27.

Maybe I'm confused and the one who is missing something.

You are right, it is horrendously worded, but given his later posts, what has basically happened is that the AIB cards have been moved forward to launch alongside the founders edition on the 27th.

In other words, we should hopefully see the entire price range on the 27th, from $600 all the way up to $800 or more (depending upon how high OEMs want to go)

Lots of overclocked benchmarks here:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforcegtx_1080_overclocking/

Average performance improvement of only 12.5%, but then again at this stage I think it's clear that the founders edition is not a particularly good overclocker (being held back by its cooler and power delivery), so hopefully we will see better results from custom versions.

 

[Freddy1765]

Lots of overclocked benchmarks here:
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforcegtx_1080_overclocking/

Great read. The 980 Ti does close the gap (somewhat) when both cards are overclocked; I wonder how much higher GP104 can be pushed with custom cooling and power delivery.

 

[kithylin]

Any 1080 that costs more than $700 is absolutely ridiculous. Beyond crazy.

Except of course it's as powerful as two GTX 980's in SLI, and even if you factor in used prices, two of those are about $650 now. So it's not totally insane at all, actually more on-target.

 

[Freddy1765]

Except of course it's as powerful as two GTX 980's in SLI, and even if you factor in used prices, two of those are about $650 now. So it's not totally insane at all, actually more on-target.

Your logic is flawed.
If nVidia had begun pricing their cards according to the performance delta 15 years ago, we'd be paying thousands of dollars for the high-end.

 

[kithylin]

Your logic is flawed.
If nVidia had begun pricing their cards according to the performance delta 15 years ago, we'd be paying thousands of dollars for the high-end.

For one.. it's 2 years ago for the 980, not 15 years ago... it only costs +$150 more at launch, than the GTX-980 did at it's launch, yet it's -TWICE- as fast, just 2 year later...

Why are people complaining? Be happy they didn't decide to charge twice what the 980 debut'd for. We could easily be looking at a $1000 card for the 1080 based on it's performance.

 

[Freddy1765]

snip

You're suggesting that a very high launch price is reasonable given the performance delta. This suggests a pricing scheme based on said delta.
Obviously you need to carry this to its logical conclusion, i.e. if nVidia had always done this, prices would be sky-high.

It makes no sense to say that because the performance is higher the price should be as well, especially when we're on a brand new architecture/node.