There is a rumor that GP100 will not be released for the consumer market (PC and gamers).
The other thing is that GP100 just wouldn't be very competitive as a gaming card in the the time frame it could potentially launch in. Right now GP100 would be roughly 35% faster than an aftermarket 980Ti.
You are severely underestimating +IPC and the new 2x Warp 64 layout that means Pascal is better suited for the era of GCN-optimized console port.
Hence why I say amd should ditch reference cards and instead designate an oem card as reference. Far more incentive to have oems compete to deliver the best design which oem will then ship out to reviewers as the "reference".If they were smarter they wouldn't release the reference model to the press, but only custom models with huge OC.
That's the nice thing about NV's boost, it's just so easy. No tweaks required, move the slider to the right, viola!
Secondly I never said GP100 wasn't a good gaming GPU, and it will probably beat an aftermarket 980 Ti by roughly 35%, which is about the same as what Titan beat 680 by.
That doesn't make any sense. Titan and 680 are the same family, same gen and node. GK104 and GK110.
We're talking about GP100, you have to compare it to Titan beating the 580.
People here are really underestimating GP100. 30-40% higher clocks, ~17% more units, improved IPC. That alone gives you at least 50-60%. Not to mention that some of these people compare stock GP100 to very highly overclocked GM200...
People here are really underestimating GP100. 30-40% higher clocks, ~17% more units, improved IPC. That alone gives you at least 50-60%. Not to mention that some of these people compare stock GP100 to very highly overclocked GM200...
GP100 will be no slouch for gaming. NV has never made a big chip that was weak at gaming, period.
I don't get why people keep saying it has no ROPs. There's absolutely no evidence of that. They showed some block diagrams of the part being used as a compute chip, and the omission of a render block there doesn't mean it doesn't exist on the silicon.
While the module is P100 and doesn't have video outputs, nVidia specifically refers to the chip as GP100. Unless someone can point to a credible source at nVidia saying that the chip can't do graphics, saying there's no ROPs is wildly premature.
I don't think it's the lack of ROPs that are the issue, more the lack of specs. Given the relative immaturity of the node we can only really expect to see a GP100 Titan with 2 disabled SMX and a voltage bump.
How close will that be to a normal gaming focused 384-bit GDDR5 GP102? The extra cost of the HBM2 and interposer will be too much to make it worth it.
Then how fast is that likely to be compared to big Vega? What if AMD goes with a 600mm2 Vega as well, except a pure gaming GPU (their last "big" GPU)? A cut-down GP100 will get annihilated.
The specs for P100 do not list a ROP count either. That's not to say they don't exist, but they aren't being revealed as a spec.
https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/inside-pascal/
The specs for P100 do not list a ROP count either. That's not to say they don't exist, but they aren't being revealed as a spec.
https://devblogs.nvidia.com/parallelforall/inside-pascal/
Secondly I never said GP100 wasn't a good gaming GPU, and it will probably beat an aftermarket 980 Ti by roughly 35%, which is about the same as what Titan beat 680 by.
People here are really underestimating GP100. 30-40% higher clocks, ~17% more units, improved IPC. That alone gives you at least 50-60%. Not to mention that some of these people compare stock GP100 to very highly overclocked GM200...
I don't get why people keep saying it has no ROPs. There's absolutely no evidence of that.