videocardzFirst NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 3DMark Benchmarks

[xpea]

I already said, I think the TDP will be around 200W.

It will be a terrible marketing mistake to increase TDP with the biggest node jump since 2012 ! Nvidia won't do that for sure.

That is a low perf/w jump, considering AMD is claiming up to a 2.5 perf/w performance increase. Nvidia making their architecture more GCN-like has increased power usage.

AMD claims now 2x not 2.5
Moreover, I'm 99% sure that officially 1080 won't be 200W, not even 180w. In fact, it won't be more than GTX980 (165W). my guess is around 155W for reference 1080.

 

[tviceman]

25% is spot on for expectations. TDP levels will probably be at GK104 levels - about 5-10% higher than GM204.

 

[JDG1980]

It will be a terrible marketing mistake to increase TDP with the biggest node jump since 2012 ! Nvidia won't do that for sure.

Why not? They did on Tesla P100, which has a rated TDP of 300W, up from 235W for K40 and 250W for M40.

AMD claims now 2x not 2.5

Nope. It's still 2.5x in the latest roadmap.

Moreover, I'm 99% sure that officially 1080 won't be 200W, not even 180w. In fact, it won't be more than GTX980 (165W). my guess is around 155W for reference 1080.

First of all, the real TDP of a stock GTX 980 is 190W, not 165W. And the truth is that there really isn't much difference between 155W and 200W for the average user. It's possible that the low-end SKU ('60 Ti) may slide in under 150W so it can fit on a single 6-pin connector. But if you're above 150W and below 225W, you're looking at one 8-pin or two 6-pins. Thus, for desktop gaming cards, there is little advantage in trying to shave a few watts here and there if it doesn't cross those thresholds. (Obviously laptops, servers, AIOs, etc are different, and power efficiency is more important there.)

For the full GP104, Nvidia can't afford to hold back on clock speeds if the rumors of relatively low shader counts are true. It would be really embarrassing if they held back, and then got beaten by the smaller Polaris 10 chip. The same thing happened to AMD in 2012, when they left quite a bit of headroom on the table with the 7970 and lost to Nvidia's GTX 680.

 

[Raising]

Time to sell my two 980tis I guess.. any idea how long will it take for aftermarket 1080's start appearing after the vanilla 1080 ? Is it even worth getting an aftermarket card since the tdp is so low ?

 

[xpea]

Why not? They did on Tesla P100, which has a rated TDP of 300W, up from 235W for K40 and 250W for M40.

Tesla is a different world. In HPC, Nvidia is under much higher pressure with Knight Landings. They must deliver the higher performance or they will loose big. I won't use this case to compare with laptop/desktop market

Nope. It's still 2.5x in the latest roadmap.

Lisa Su said 2X during last investor conf call (after Capsaicin). I trust her more than another "overclockers dream" engineer's dream...

First of all, the real TDP of a stock GTX 980 is 190W, not 165W.

Damien from hardware.fr:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/928-7/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html
151W and 155W under BF4 max and Anno 2070 ultra
Anyway, no need to argue about silicon lotery, but 165W is not far from the truth and as you said, 165~200w doesn't make any significant difference. we agree :sneaky:

 

[Glo.]

Tesla is a different world. In HPC, Nvidia is under much higher pressure with Knight Landings. They must deliver the higher performance or they will loose big. I won't use this case to compare with laptop/desktop market


Lisa Su said 2X during last investor conf call (after Capsaicin). I trust her more than another "overclockers dream" engineer's dream...


Damien from hardware.fr:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/928-7/consommation-efficacite-energetique.html
151W and 155W under BF4 max and Anno 2070 ultra
Anyway, no need to argue about silicon lotery, but 165W is not far from the truth and as you said, 165~200w doesn't make any significant difference. we agree :sneaky:

It will be a terrible marketing mistake to increase TDP with the biggest node jump since 2012 ! Nvidia won't do that for sure.


AMD claims now 2x not 2.5
Moreover, I'm 99% sure that officially 1080 won't be 200W, not even 180w. In fact, it won't be more than GTX980 (165W). my guess is around 155W for reference 1080.

Really? Clocks, GDDR5X memory, even on new node, add to power consumption. That is why I think GP104 will be 200W GPU. You know what it also indicates? 8 pin connector. Power of GP104 will be between 185 and 200W.

 

[Arachnotronic]

GTX 1080 that can match a good after market 980 Ti at much lower power would be a win, especially since these chips are almost certainly destined for high perf gaming notebooks too.

BTW, no matter how hard I tried I couldn't get my 980 Tis to hit >1400mhz and stay there during extended gaming sessions, and those suckers were loud at full blast. If 1080 can give me just as good if not better performance out of the box, and have reasonable over clocking headroom thanks to a much lower TDP, it will be a win.

 

[LTC8K6]

GTX 1080 is actually much slower clock to clock

Wonder why that would be?

 

[FatherMurphy]

Really? Clocks, GDDR5X memory, even on new node, add to power consumption. That is why I think GP104 will be 200W GPU. You know what it also indicates? 8 pin connector. Power of GP104 will be between 185 and 200W.

I'm pretty sure that GDDR5X runs at lower voltages and saves power over GDDR5. Also, if the leak that 1080 is using 10Ghz GDDR5x, then it isn't even running near max speed.

 

[AtenRa]

New architecture, early drivers, no DX-12.

At that performance TDP should be close to half vs GTX980Ti.

 

[sontin]

Wonder why that would be?

Not every transistor is spent to do the same. With 8 billion transistors there is not enough room for new improvements (for example DX12 Features like CR Tier 3, new display controler, new video engine etc.) and providing the same core count.

 

[Kenmitch]

Wonder why that would be?

Wait for the real in depth reviews to get the real picture of performance and architecture. Not really sure what to think so far. Might be more brute force than enhancements? Guess maybe we'll get more info tomorrow during the event....Sucks it starts so late.

Seems silly some are sticking to lower tdp or failure. Most enthusiasts prefer raw performance over perf/watt. Burning an extra 20-50 watts isn't a big deal if performance is there.

Need something really compelling in the $400 price point for my son.

 

[rainy]

At that performance TDP should be close to half vs GTX980Ti.

Are you really expecting that TDP would be on circa 125W level?
IMHO it could be rather on 175-185W.

 

[AtenRa]

Are you really expecting that TDP would be on circa 125W level?
IMHO it could be rather on 175-185W.

Well, I believe it could be close to 145W TDP (+- 10W).

 

[moonbogg]

I love those clocks. Oh man this has me excited for the big dies. For now I think I'll avoid tossing my cards in the trash. I'll at least play Doom with them, then I might toss them in the trash, take them back out, STOMP on them, then toss them back in. I have a feeling 2017 is going to be a great year for me.

 

[railven]

I love those clocks. Oh man this has me excited for the big dies. For now I think I'll avoid tossing my cards in the trash. I'll at least play Doom with them, then I might toss them in the trash, take them back out, STOMP on them, then toss them back in. I have a feeling 2017 is going to be a great year for me.

Why are you tossing them in the trash?

I'm almost there!!!

EDIT: And once the right size interposer comes along, think of that performance!!!

 

[mikesnav]

Wonder why that would be?

Because of different core count and frequency.

1080 ~2400 CUDA @ ~1800MHz >>> 980Ti 2816 CUDA @ 1100MHz

but....

980Ti 2816 CUDA @ 1800MHz >>> 1080 ~2400 CUDA @ ~1800MHz

 

[digitaldurandal]

Time to sell my two 980tis I guess.. any idea how long will it take for aftermarket 1080's start appearing after the vanilla 1080 ? Is it even worth getting an aftermarket card since the tdp is so low ?

Do you have reference non overclocked 980tis? Otherwise this might be an expensive sidegrade.

Why not wait 6 months for a real upgrade?

 

[digitaldurandal]

Wait for the real in depth reviews to get the real picture of performance and architecture. Not really sure what to think so far. Might be more brute force than enhancements? Guess maybe we'll get more info tomorrow during the event....Sucks it starts so late.

Seems silly some are sticking to lower tdp or failure. Most enthusiasts prefer raw performance over perf/watt. Burning an extra 20-50 watts isn't a big deal if performance is there.

Need something really compelling in the $400 price point for my son.

I agree give me 350 TDP with the performance 2x980ti please.

 

[n0x1ous]

Why are you tossing them in the trash?

I'm almost there!!!

EDIT: And once the right size interposer comes along, think of that performance!!!

Thats the coolest desk ive ever seen.

 

[Beer4Me]

Thats the coolest desk ive ever seen.

I bet that desk is shockingly heavier than it looks.

 

[Actaeon]

Looking forward to official benchmarks with official clocks. However assuming the 1.8ghz core & 10ghz GDDR5X are official clocks then the core is clocking much higher than expected while the memory is lower than expected. At 10ghz it is only 320~GB/s with the 256bit bus, about the same as a stock GM200 @ 7ghz.

20% performance above a stock clocked GM200 was pretty much what was expected. But that puts it about the same as an aftermarket GM200. This is an impressive chip for being small Pascal and looks like a solid upgrade for anyone running Keplar or GM204s. For GM200 owners GP204 is looking like a side grade. We will need to wait for Volta or big Pascal to get any sort of meaningful upgrade.

I guess the next big question is what the price will be... $600 is my guess.

 

[AtenRa]

Looking forward to official benchmarks with official clocks. However assuming the 1.8ghz core & 10ghz GDDR5X are official clocks then the core is clocking much higher than expected while the memory is lower than expected. At 10ghz it is only 320~GB/s with the 256bit bus, about the same as a stock GM200 @ 7ghz.

20% performance above a stock clocked GM200 was pretty much what was expected. But that puts it about the same as an aftermarket GM200. This is an impressive chip for being small Pascal and looks like a solid upgrade for anyone running Keplar or GM204s. For GM200 owners GP204 is looking like a side grade. We will need to wait for Volta or big Pascal to get any sort of meaningful upgrade.

I guess the next big question is what the price will be... $600 is my guess.

It may not be if DX-12 performance is higher than 20-25%.

 

[thesmokingman]

Isn't that worst, clock for clock? Or am I looking at this wrong?

"However if we compare it GTX 980 Ti running at almost the same frequency (1.8GHz with LN2 cooling), GTX 1080 is actually much slower clock to clock"


Yea it is. They most definitely have different IPC. Is it just me or is this reminiscent of Intel Netburst from a decade ago minus the fail?

 

[linkgoron]

"However if we compare it GTX 980 Ti running at almost the same frequency (1.8GHz with LN2 cooling), GTX 1080 is actually much slower clock to clock"


Yea it is. They most definitely have different IPC. Is it just me or is this reminiscent of Intel Netburst from a decade ago minus the fail?

Not necessarily, it depends on the amount of cores, not just frequency.