Gtx 1080

[Deleted]

Im buying it

JELOUS KIDS ?? YOU MAD

[Lathais]

AMD fans so rude


yes genius and the boost clock of stock/reference 1080 is 1733 as STATED by BOTH the official site AND the leaked GPU-Z screen

have a nice day

and yet the non OCed card was running at higher than that. Weird. That's actually pretty cool tech that they have there, adaptive boosting that will boost your GPU beyond stock automatically if your card can take it. Very awesome stuff there, that could put nVidia ahead again, but we won't really know for sure until we see what AMD is releasing.

- - - Updated - - -

Im buying it

JELOUS KIDS ?? YOU MAD

Why would anyone be jealous? Because you are making an uninformed purchasing decision? Actually I'm laughing at you because AMDs stuff is right around the corner as well and on the chance it is much better than nVidia, who will be the jealous one then? I mean seriously, by the time you can actually buy the good third-party boards from ASUS, Gigabyte and the like, which will definitely be worth the wait over the founders, we'll have real data from AMD hopefully and you'll be able to make a better informed decision. There is no reason to be jealous of someone who is not making sure they inform themselves fully before a purchase.

[Life-Binder]

even if you dont believe the leak ...


a very OCed 980Ti can easily do ~25% more performance then a pure stock 980Ti

so - there is no reason why a 1080 cannot do the exact same thing or even better since its 16nm


you should be expecting that, not doubting it

[Artorius]

Guys... Please.

Increasing the clocks when the card needs higher clocks is anything but unusual. It doesn't matter what they call stock clocks or not, if the card can go as high as X that's the highest clock it can go stock. They advertise lower numbers to make it look like you're getting more than what you're paying for, but the thing was engineered to do it by default.

This isn't new or gamechanging, all graphic's cards do the exact same thing. They don't run at their maximum clock all the time, that's waste of power.

[Lathais]

even if you dont believe the leak ...


a very OCed 980Ti can easily do ~25% more performance then a pure stock 980Ti

so - there is no reason why a 1080 cannot do the exact same thing or even better since its 16nm


you should be expecting that, not doubting it

and a stock 390x can outperform a stock 980, there is no reason to believe that a stock 490x will not beat a stock 1080. In addition, since AMD is now a new architecture and die shrink, unlike previously just recycled 7970s, there is reason to believe it will be a better OCer than the 390x's were.

so - there is no reason why a 490x will not do the exact same thing the 390x did(outperform the x80) or even better since it's 14nm

you should be expecting that, not doubting it.

- - - Updated - - -

Guys... Please.

Increasing the clocks when the card needs higher clocks is anything but unusual. It doesn't matter what they call stock clocks or not, if the card can go as high as X that's the highest clock it can go stock. They advertise lower numbers to make it look like you're getting more than what you're paying for, but the thing was engineered to do it by default.

This isn't new or gamechanging, all graphic's cards do the exact same thing. They don't run at their maximum clock all the time, that's waste of power.

I mean, I knew they did not run at max clocks all the time, but I did not realize they would go above their advertised boost speeds. TBH, I don't pay that much attention, I don't OC them myself or really pay attention to the clocks they are running. I want a card that I can put in my system and install drivers for and that's it. Don't want to be messing around with stuff like that when I could be playing games.

[AztechZero]

Saw a podcast last night and the hosts seemed to think that Nvidia is taking a similar approach with Pascal that AMD did with Bulldozer. As in, "IPC", for lack of a better term for comparison, is lower on Pascal than Maxwell but they're making up for it by tuning up the clock speeds.

That being said, if Nvidia's offerings do turn out to crush Polaris in the $300ish price range I'll be jumping ship back to team green.

Link to the podcast in question for those who may be interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O92z1dGQoAk

[Daffan]

$449 and $699 atm.

No aftermarket have been priced at $379 or $599

[Artorius]

Saw a podcast last night and the hosts seemed to think that Nvidia is taking a similar approach with Pascal that AMD did with Bulldozer. As in, "IPC", for lack of a better term for comparison, is lower on Pascal than Maxwell but they're making up for it by tuning up the clock speeds.

That being said, if Nvidia's offerings do turn out to crush Polaris in the $300ish price range I'll be jumping ship back to team green.

Link to the podcast in question for those who may be interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O92z1dGQoAk

Yes. Pascal has worse IPC than Maxwell but can clock way higher. The Bulldozer approach works well for GPUs because everything is ridiculously parallel anyway.

[Deleted]

AMD fans so rude


yes genius and the boost clock of stock/reference 1080 is 1733 as STATED by BOTH the official site AND the leaked GPU-Z screen

have a nice day



finally you said something correct

Wow... You are completely missing the point...

Nvidia cards go beyond their stated boost clocks...

[Life-Binder]

and a stock 390x can outperform a stock 980, there is no reason to believe that a stock 490x will not beat a stock 1080. In addition, since AMD is now a new architecture and die shrink, unlike previously just recycled 7970s, there is reason to believe it will be a better OCer than the 390x's were.

so - there is no reason why a 490x will not do the exact same thing the 390x did(outperform the x80) or even better since it's 14nm

you should be expecting that, not doubting it.

wat

l2read, I was comparing the exact same card in OC vs stock .. that a heavy OC beats stock of the same card by 25% (happened in 980Ti, happening in 1080)

not entirely different cards Jesus Christ ...



also the bolded is hilarious, 390X loses to 980 in most games and it also OCes worse since its already an OCed rebranded 290X ...

[Lathais]

Wow... You are completely missing the point...

Nvidia cards go beyond their stated boost clocks...

ikr, we are actually saying something POSITIVE about nVidia and he is still railing against us.

[Life-Binder]

ikr, we are actually saying something POSITIVE about nVidia and he is still railing against us.

oh yeah you guys are the bastion of positivity

[Lathais]

wat

l2read, I was comparing the exact same card in OC vs stock .. that a heavy OC beats stock of the same card by 25% (happened in 980Ti, happening in 1080)

not entirely different cards Jesus Christ ...



also the bolded is hilarious, 390X loses to 980 in most games and it also OCes worse since its already an OCed rebranded 290X ...

You are comparing what a 980ti does to what you are guessing a 1080 will do, those are entirely different cards, <insert religious saying here>. You are once again taking rumor at face value and claiming it is true. We do not know for sure if the 1080 will really OC that well, it's all speculation, and you are basing your speculation off the 980ti which is an entirely different card.

In most games? Really? Do I need to post this AGAIN?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/G...Gaming/23.html

I tallied it up and out of the 15 games tested, at 4k, the 390x came out ahead in 10, the 980 in 3 and there were 2 ties. Yeah, sounds like the 980 wins at stock in most cases to me......

Also, I clearly stated that the 390x did not OC well because they are recycled 7970s, but that the 490x's will be better OCers. So that's my point. If the 390x outperforms the 980 in most games why would the 490x not outperform the 1080? Especially considering that with the new architecture and die shrink, the 490xs have potential to be some great OCers. Sure the 1080s do too, but that was really the only thing that put nVidia ahead in the 390x vs 980s, was that the 980s could OC better. Well, now the 490xs will be able to OC well.

[Life-Binder]

from your own link 980 beats 390X in both 1080p and 1440p

[Bigvizz]

Wait for it......../feels a DX 12 argument coming

[Lathais]

from your own link 980 beats 390X in both 1080p and 1440p

I was looking at 4k TBH and at 1440p, it's a 1% difference, that's statistically insignificant and basically a tie. Also, as BigVizz pointed out, what about DX12? Over the next 2-4 years, the life of these cards, that's going to be a much bigger deal.

[Noctifer616]

Wait for it......../feels a DX 12 argument coming

Well the DX12 argument can't really be ignored since it's where the playing field is equal. AMD has had 3 generations of GPU's with ACE's that where not exposed in old graphics API's. Then you get DX12 games and suddenly AMD gets a big boost due to ACE's actually doing work.

[Bigvizz]

Well the DX12 argument can't really be ignored since it's where the playing field is equal. AMD has had 3 generations of GPU's with ACE's that where not exposed in old graphics API's. Then you get DX12 games and suddenly AMD gets a big boost due to ACE's actually doing work.

Not ignoring simply stating. Maxwell + DX 12 = shit. We all know this simple truth.

[Lathais]

Well the DX12 argument can't really be ignored since it's where the playing field is equal. AMD has had 3 generations of GPU's with ACE's that where not exposed in old graphics API's. Then you get DX12 games and suddenly AMD gets a big boost due to ACE's actually doing work.

Well it can be ignored, and often is by many people, usually people in the green camp.

[Lathais]

Sorry, I define a products life cycle by how long it takes for their producuing company to replace them.

Not by how long it is used for? That's kinda silly.