Jump to content
Iron

Nvidia 1080 Leaked Benchmarks

Recommended Posts

Hmmm, so this and i7-6700k or wait and see how Zen + Polaris does... AMD has been doing some great things with DX12 and drivers, might just smack Nvidia if they decide to push out a high end GPU + CPU this year. Luckily I don't have any demanding titles to play, hopefully I can wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just upgraded to a 6700k system but am still using my old gtx750. I was waiting for Pascal and am surprised it's dropping this early. The 1080 releases May 27, that's my birthday! At least it made an easy gift choice for my wife. Not bad either at $599 usd... Even with the 750 my rig shreds up whatever I can throw at it, just not on epic.... this 1080 will change that.

 

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/05/nvidia-gtx-1080-1070-pascal-specs-pricing-revealed/  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, IWI-GALIL5.56FA said:

 

Gddr5x is just a stop gap until hmb2 is cheaper. I'd rather have an engine with 300bhp and use half the performance available knowing it has reserve for the extreme times than a 150bhp engine and be left wanting at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whoaaa.... those specs... it has much better texture and pixel fillrate... way better than titan x... insane... cant wait to see this in benchmarks!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_10_Series

 

really sick....... this could be same game changer as series 9600gt was or 8800gtx (after this cards amd and nvidia started to pump up sepcs, remember 260gtx/HD4850?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget how cherry picked those charts are, they never really said anything concrete about under what circumstances. Plus they compared to Titan X and SLI 980's that performace could easily be in DX12 only with all the new DX12 optimization, for comparisone the Fury X just straight up smacks both those cards in multi-GPU and in DX-12/Vulkan titles. So I'd bet my money on this being the year for AMD to make it's comeback simply due to the fact that they are going with the "more is more" unlike Nvidea and their "less is more" strategy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NotBrad said:

Don't forget how cherry picked those charts are, they never really said anything concrete about under what circumstances. Plus they compared to Titan X and SLI 980's that performace could easily be in DX12 only with all the new DX12 optimization, for comparisone the Fury X just straight up smacks both those cards in multi-GPU and in DX-12/Vulkan titles. So I'd bet my money on this being the year for AMD to make it's comeback simply due to the fact that they are going with the "more is more" unlike Nvidea and their "less is more" strategy. 

 

The problem is AMD said their next cards won't be high end, so Nvida might not have competition this year. The "Better than TitanX" etc. claims are for VR, just wait for proper benchmarks. I hope Zen and Polaris 12 makes good use of DX12 + game devs start utilizing multi threading finally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, banOkay said:

 

The problem is AMD said their next cards won't be high end, so Nvida might not have competition this year. The "Better than TitanX" etc. claims are for VR, just wait for proper benchmarks. I hope Zen and Polaris 12 makes good use of DX12 + game devs start utilizing multi threading finally.

True but if their next-gen Polaris architecture is really as efficient as they claim, which given the circumstances we don't have to worry about Nvidea-like cherry-picking, then their Polaris Fury-X equivalent will still be as or more powerful as the 1070 but at a similar or lower cost and with more features to boot. Plus they will still have the significant CPU-side power advantage over Intel as well due to their shift to SMT while having four times as many cores! There's no way they could lose! Or so I would like to believe, if Nvidea's cherry picked "benchmarks" versus previous gen are actually representative of their hardware and Polaris 10 isn't enough then us consumers are in for a serious anti-consumerist market. To all you mouth breathers on the forums who built an Intel system simply because AMD hardware "couldn't handle" Squad are a huge part of why performance increases are diminishing and competitive pricing is all but a thing of the past, every time you switch you are only driving the prices up and reducing the need for actual optimization.

/rant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, KulaGGin said:

And the price? I guess 250-500% bigger than 980ti's.

 

Not at all!

GTX 1080: $599 ($699 for Founders Edition)

GTX 1070: $379 ($449 for Founders Edition)

Edited by MVPiet13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2016 at 7:25 PM, NotBrad said:

True but if their next-gen Polaris architecture is really as efficient as they claim, which given the circumstances we don't have to worry about Nvidea-like cherry-picking, then their Polaris Fury-X equivalent will still be as or more powerful as the 1070 but at a similar or lower cost and with more features to boot. Plus they will still have the significant CPU-side power advantage over Intel as well due to their shift to SMT while having four times as many cores! There's no way they could lose! Or so I would like to believe, if Nvidea's cherry picked "benchmarks" versus previous gen are actually representative of their hardware and Polaris 10 isn't enough then us consumers are in for a serious anti-consumerist market. To all you mouth breathers on the forums who built an Intel system simply because AMD hardware "couldn't handle" Squad are a huge part of why performance increases are diminishing and competitive pricing is all but a thing of the past, every time you switch you are only driving the prices up and reducing the need for actual optimization.

/rant

 

Lol, so don't switch. It's obvious Nvidea and Intel trump's AMD at everything but price. It's been this way for years. You want cheap shit? Go with AMD.... and good luck. You want the best in performance and reliability? Go Nvidea and Intel. Yes I know that AMD is not cheap shit and can run everything (except Squad) just as good as their opponent. AMD is Nvidea and Intel's little brother, and will always be in their shadow's trying to play catch-up. Never in the 12 - 15 years I've been into PC's have I once had a problem with Nvidea or Intel. So am I fanboy of great, reliable, and better products? You bet I am. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one problem I have with these expensive high level cards being needed for epic or VR, is that I think it pushes mainly people to consoles, just consider the price of a VR ready PC, then look at the New VR for the PS.

 

I personally think the performance and price of the X50 model range is very important to the future  of PC gaming. 

 

The big saving grace for PC gaming that unfortunately most non PC gamers don't know about is price - angry birds star wars 3DS 30 US free for PC.   BF4 PS4 in my local shop is 90 US I just picked it up for 8....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking too buy a 1070 and it looks promising and all but in these situation it's always a good idea to give it a few weeks after release just to see how it works out for others before you buy.. I guarantee you there will be problems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×