Gtx 1080

[GoKs]

Really? I mean, the 1080 is only outperforming the Fury X by 20-30%. You really do not think that AMD going from 28nm to 14nm will have at least as big of an increase in performance as nVidia going from 28nm to 16nm?

Also, yeah, AMDs previous gen was not that great at OCing, because it was basically already OCed to high hell and back. This was due to them using the same GPUs for about 3 generations, with only minor improvements. So they got better performance out of them by basically increasing the stock clock to OC levels. However, Polaris 10 will not suffer from that. It's a new architecture on a new platform, so it should be able to be OCed well, the way the older AMD cards were.

I'll agree, it will be interesting, but I think AMD has a chance to stay even with nVidia this time around, again.

For me it is a bit silly to compare the fury X (HBM) with 980 (gddr5)... it is two totally different processes, but then again we are comparing the gddr5x of the 1080 to both HBM and gddr5, so point is not valid =/.

You are correct in your statement about the AMD overclocking, but that is just why they lag far behind, they are already pushed to almost their max when they release, leaving little room for overclocking, and they barely compete with stock 980/ti, that is just sad. Yes average Joe does not overclock, but the people going for the 1080 is normally the ones that does, average Joe will aim for 1070 or polaris. We have not yet seen what either of those can do, but we will in 2 weeks time.

As for Vega competing with the 1080... I have no doubt it will be close and maybe even better then the 1080, but that will be short lived (again my opinion, so not worth anything, but it keeps my hopes up) since nvidia will be ready with the Titan Y (or what ever they gonna call it), and after that we will see the 1080ti. For me at this stage nvidia just has a answer for all the questions that amd could ask, and even more.

[Lathais]

For me it is a bit silly to compare the fury X (HBM) with 980 (gddr5)... it is two totally different processes, but then again we are comparing the gddr5x of the 1080 to both HBM and gddr5, so point is not valid =/.

That's really just the speed of the RAM though, which I do not think with HBM the speed was really used all the way anyway. It's not like GDDR5X is not enough, so the increased bandwidth is exciting for the future, but not something we are currently going to be using all the speed of anyway.

You are correct in your statement about the AMD overclocking, but that is just why they lag far behind, they are already pushed to almost their max when they release, leaving little room for overclocking, and they barely compete with stock 980/ti, that is just sad. Yes average Joe does not overclock, but the people going for the 1080 is normally the ones that does, average Joe will aim for 1070 or polaris. We have not yet seen what either of those can do, but we will in 2 weeks time.

Barely compete? With the release of the Crimson drivers they beat the 980 with a 390x and beat the 980ti with a Fury X. Yeah, at stock speeds only, but at stock speeds it's more than "barely compete." Even before Crimson drivers, AMD was keeping up at resolutions above 4k, then with the release Crimson, they widened the gap at 1440p and 4k and got caught up at 1080p.

As for Vega competing with the 1080... I have no doubt it will be close and maybe even better then the 1080, but that will be short lived (again my opinion, so not worth anything, but it keeps my hopes up) since nvidia will be ready with the Titan Y (or what ever they gonna call it), and after that we will see the 1080ti. For me at this stage nvidia just has a answer for all the questions that amd could ask, and even more.

Maybe? Really? Vega is going to replace the Fury X. The 1080 only beats the Fury X by 25-30%, 10% at DX12. You do not think that the replacement for the Fury X will outperform the Fury X by 25-30%, 10% at DX12? Sure, the next Titan will come out, but the 1080ti will replace that. The Fury X already beats the 980ti, so it's reasonable to estimate that the top end Vega chip will compete with the 1080ti.

[Fascinate]

1070 specs leaked here:
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/nvi...s-surface.html

Not very impressive tbh the cuda core count is quite disappointing. The farther this goes along the more i am excited for polaris 10 announcement lol.

[GoKs]

That's really just the speed of the RAM though, which I do not think with HBM the speed was really used all the way anyway. It's not like GDDR5X is not enough, so the increased bandwidth is exciting for the future, but not something we are currently going to be using all the speed of anyway.



Barely compete? With the release of the Crimson drivers they beat the 980 with a 390x and beat the 980ti with a Fury X. Yeah, at stock speeds only, but at stock speeds it's more than "barely compete." Even before Crimson drivers, AMD was keeping up at resolutions above 4k, then with the release Crimson, they widened the gap at 1440p and 4k and got caught up at 1080p.



Maybe? Really? Vega is going to replace the Fury X. The 1080 only beats the Fury X by 25-30%, 10% at DX12. You do not think that the replacement for the Fury X will outperform the Fury X by 25-30%, 10% at DX12? Sure, the next Titan will come out, but the 1080ti will replace that. The Fury X already beats the 980ti, so it's reasonable to estimate that the top end Vega chip will compete with the 1080ti.

You obviously did not see the benchmarks of the 1080 currently, which has the fury x and 980/ti in them aswell.... I will post some for you...
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...by/index7.html (1080p)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...by/index8.html (1440p)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...by/index9.html (4K)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...y/index10.html (DX12)

The fury x beats the 980ti there.... 3 times? Yea DX 12 the fury is a beast, but way too little games support that to worry about that now, by the time that DX12 will be the norm, nvidia should have sorted their problem out. I dont think nvidia is too worried about DX12 currently, they are able to just brute force it, since too little games support it for them to worry, but come HBM2 the game will change. (WoW getting the impression I am a fanboy of nvidia =/ ). I do like nvidia, but that is because they have consistently beaten amd, if amd did the same to nvidia, I would go over to them.

I actually hope AMD could pull something ridiculously awesome off with Vega, so that Nvidia could put some effort into the next gen of GPU's, I dont think they event try too hard at this stage.

[Artorius]

For me it is a bit silly to compare the fury X (HBM) with 980 (gddr5)... it is two totally different processes

They're both 28nm.

[Lathais]

You obviously did not see the benchmarks of the 1080 currently, which has the fury x and 980/ti in them aswell.... I will post some for you...
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...by/index7.html (1080p)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...by/index8.html (1440p)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...by/index9.html (4K)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/770...y/index10.html (DX12)

The fury x beats the 980ti there.... 3 times? Yea DX 12 the fury is a beast, but way too little games support that to worry about that now, by the time that DX12 will be the norm, nvidia should have sorted their problem out. I dont think nvidia is too worried about DX12 currently, they are able to just brute force it, since too little games support it for them to worry, but come HBM2 the game will change. (WoW getting the impression I am a fanboy of nvidia =/ ). I do like nvidia, but that is because they have consistently beaten amd, if amd did the same to nvidia, I would go over to them.

I actually hope AMD could pull something ridiculously awesome off with Vega, so that Nvidia could put some effort into the next gen of GPU's, I dont think they event try too hard at this stage.

I suggest you check your own results. In many cases, when the 980ti beats the Fury X at MAX resolution, the Fury X wins out in MIN resolution, which is a much more important figure. Too few games support it currently, but these are brand new cardsa nd DX12 is the new standard, Seeing as these are brand new cards, if you bought one today, you likely want it to perform well for the next 4 years, the average time in which video cards get replaced. Sure, a year from now nVidia will have an answer, but what about all the people still running 1070/1080s 3 years after that?

Yeah, HBM2 will change things as well, but who has priority in getting HBM2? nVidia or the people who helped develop it? Who do you think will work better with it, nVidia or the people who were involved in creating it?

I know I've said this plenty of times before in this thread, I am an nVidia Fanboy myself. I almost always prefer nVidia products. Look at my sig and see what I use. I am considering getting 1070s come Jan/Feb when I have upgrades to my and my wife's PCs budgeted in. Depends on what AMD has available in price bracket though. Being an nVidia fanboy though, I am very hopeful that AMD will at least keep up with and somewhat challenge nVidia to do better, because without healthy competition, nVidia will stagnate.

[Life-Binder]

if Polaris 10 cant compete with 1070 then "RIP AMD" :P

Nvidia said 1070 = Titan X and since 1080 is performing exactly like they said (even a bit better) - no reason why 1070 isnt the same


so AMD better have that 980Ti @ $300 card ready somehow




also new drivers will introduce FastSync for all Nvidia cards - Vsync with greatly reduced latency

- - - Updated - - -

I know I've said this plenty of times before in this thread, I am an nVidia Fanboy myself.

noone will believe that xD

[GoKs]

I suggest you check your own results. In many cases, when the 980ti beats the Fury X at MAX resolution, the Fury X wins out in MIN resolution, which is a much more important figure. Too few games support it currently, but these are brand new cardsa nd DX12 is the new standard, Seeing as these are brand new cards, if you bought one today, you likely want it to perform well for the next 4 years, the average time in which video cards get replaced. Sure, a year from now nVidia will have an answer, but what about all the people still running 1070/1080s 3 years after that?

Yeah, HBM2 will change things as well, but who has priority in getting HBM2? nVidia or the people who helped develop it? Who do you think will work better with it, nVidia or the people who were involved in creating it?

I know I've said this plenty of times before in this thread, I am an nVidia Fanboy myself. I almost always prefer nVidia products. Look at my sig and see what I use. I am considering getting 1070s come Jan/Feb when I have upgrades to my and my wife's PCs budgeted in. Depends on what AMD has available in price bracket though. Being an nVidia fanboy though, I am very hopeful that AMD will at least keep up with and somewhat challenge nVidia to do better, because without healthy competition, nVidia will stagnate.

Buddy what are you on about? Did you get enough sleep? Check those links again, and read what you said again....

As for the new technology (DX 12 standard), same could be said for the cards released just before any major DX-upgrade (think the big leap to DX9c)..... again the average Joe would not care for DX12 till it becomes the norm (like what DX11 is now), which will be in 2-3 years, so this cards are still ideal for them. The ones that do care about the top end cards are the ones that will actually care about DX12, and they tend to not skip a GPU generation or 2 like the average Joe does.

I know I wont even bother with DX12 till way later, the only reason I bought my GTX760 (from a 570) was because my dad and I were playing arround while I cleaned my gpu, and I ended up stepping on it (RiP GTX 570), so for me Ill take the 1080, and by the time DX12 is a must, it would have served me well enough for its price.

[Lathais]

noone will believe that xD

Why, because I am a bit skeptical, about ALL things and because I have some hope that AMD will provide some competition so nVidia will be inspired to do better in the future?

- - - Updated - - -

Buddy what are you on about? Did you get enough sleep? Check those links again, and read what you said again....

As for the new technology (DX 12 standard), same could be said for the cards released just before any major DX-upgrade (think the big leap to DX9c)..... again the average Joe would not care for DX12 till it becomes the norm (like what DX11 is now), which will be in 2-3 years, so this cards are still ideal for them. The ones that do care about the top end cards are the ones that will actually care about DX12, and they tend to not skip a GPU generation or 2 like the average Joe does.

I know I wont even bother with DX12 till way later, the only reason I bought my GTX760 (from a 570) was because my dad and I were playing arround while I cleaned my gpu, and I ended up stepping on it (RiP GTX 570), so for me Ill take the 1080, and by the time DX12 is a must, it would have served me well enough for its price.

Well, in addition to only glancing at your benchmarks, I also look at my own, which shows a different picture. Here is the overall summary of all the games this site tested tallied up and put into a format where you can see the average results across all games:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...X_1080/26.html

I these benchmarks, at 1080p yeah, the 980ti beats the Fury X, but who buys either one of these cards for 1080p?
At 1440p, they are dead even and at 4k, the Fury X pulls ahead of the 980ti.

Different benchmarks, different results. In the end, the performance is very similar with the Fury X obviously having an advantage over the 980ti in DX12. So I call that a win for the Fury X. Compared to the 1080, the Fury X is only about 25% behind at 4k. I mean, the 1080 is one card lower than the "best" card which will be the 1080ti and it's only beating the competitions old best by 25%? and this is a great thing? No, beating last gens tech by 25% with your second best card is pretty much to be expected. Nothing earth shattering here. If AMDs new architecture and platform keeps up, the 2 vendors will be about dead even again, which is a great thing for everyone on both sides.

[Barnabas]

Why, because I am a bit skeptical, about ALL things and because I have some hope that AMD will provide some competition so nVidia will be inspired to do better in the future?

Why when they can get every developer to include the way the game is mean't to be played if they don't get the performance crown without it? It seems to be working so far. 295x2 is on par with 1080. That card is how many years old now?

[Bigvizz]

if Polaris 10 cant compete with 1070 then "RIP AMD" :P

Nvidia said 1070 = Titan X and since 1080 is performing exactly like they said (even a bit better) - no reason why 1070 isnt the same


so AMD better have that 980Ti @ $300 card ready somehow




also new drivers will introduce FastSync for all Nvidia cards - Vsync with greatly reduced latency

- - - Updated - - -

noone will believe that xD

1. "RIP AMD" no one wants that, so get outta here with that nonsense.

2. Who the hell are you quoting? Use poster names in your quotes for god sakes.

[Remilia]

Because of TressFX and Hairworks, obviously.

It's not Hairworks actually. It's just TressFX 3.0 named as PureHair which is actually a compute based hair effect by AMD. There's not a huge amount of performance penalty in PureHair actually for either vendor. Best of all, it doesn't tessellate the fucking hair at 64x.

DX12 however for Tomb Raider is a clusterfuck. The average framerate has gone down in DX12 across the board which is not supposed to be the case, though frametime is supposedly better. It's like early mantle games with memory leaks also. Just cause it uses DX12 doesn't mean it uses Asynchronous compute. There's also the chance that they used VXAO in testing which is Nvidia proprietary voxel based ambient occlusion and it's absurdly taxing for no visual gains but tanking performance for every card (30%+) or so on Nvidia cards and more on AMD cards last I remember. Wouldn't surprise me if Pascal improves on VXAO capabilities which really makes tomb raider a very bad benchmark use if VXAO is to be used.

[Lathais]

Why when they can get every developer to include the way the game is mean't to be played if they don't get the performance crown without it? It seems to be working so far. 295x2 is on par with 1080. That card is how many years old now?

Well, luckily for us, it seems more VR and DX12 developers will be signing up with AMD in the future.

Also, to be fair, the 295x2 is a dual GPU solution, so not really fair to compare the two. Comparing it to dual 970s would be a fair comparison and I doubt it will win there.

- - - Updated - - -

1. "RIP AMD" no one wants that, so get outta here with that nonsense.

2. Who the hell are you quoting? Use poster names in your quotes for god sakes.

He was quoting me, because he is quite obviously trying to upset me for some reason. Been going on for PAGES now.

[Barnabas]

Well, luckily for us, it seems more VR and DX12 developers will be signing up with AMD in the future.

Also, to be fair, the 295x2 is a dual GPU solution, so not really fair to compare the two. Comparing it to dual 970s would be a fair comparison and I doubt it will win there.

- - - Updated - - -



He was quoting me, because he is quite obviously trying to upset me for some reason. Been going on for PAGES now.

Dual 970's isn't even close. I mean in the way that if you made that investment when that card was at 500 usd you are still on par compared to the 1080. Unless you are a weirdo that can spend 500+ on a video card but complain about 20 more a month on your power bill.

[DeltrusDisc]

I'd really like to see some 3440x1440 benchmarks.. I'm kind of in between with 2560x1080 and 3440x1440.
Because I do want to run the next few years with latest games on high (and upwards) settings.
But I explicitly DO NOT want to SLI. I wonder how it would perform at those resolutions with 2.1GHz

Look at the 4k results.

That's more pixels, so the results will be even better for 3440x1440...

Also: don't waste your time on the 2560x1080, I tried one for all of a week. Noooooooope.

[Bigvizz]

Well, luckily for us, it seems more VR and DX12 developers will be signing up with AMD in the future.

*cite this or it doesn't exist.

[Lathais]

*cite this or it doesn't exist.

Oh god, it's pages back at this point, but it was in one of the articles I linked at one point. I'll try to find it again.

[Life-Binder]

He was quoting me, because he is quite obviously trying to upset me for some reason. Been going on for PAGES now.

u already upset after seeing 1080 benches

[Vash The Stampede]

Well 1080 lives up to the hype 25-30% faster than a titan x depending on the game, also dx12 seems to be no problem as well. I am still waiting to see polaris 10 before i buy anything tho.

TweakTown seems to have the best benchmarks, but so far the 1080 performs like I thought it would. AOTS from Tweaktown shows it barely outperforming the Titan with like 1-3 fps higher results. It does seem to be brute forcing it's way to the top. But most of these benchmarks suck, so I'll pass judgement until someone comes up with better benchmarks.

Polaris 10 doesn't matter cause the 1080 is not in that price range. The 1070 though...

I know I've said this plenty of times before in this thread, I am an nVidia Fanboy myself. I almost always prefer nVidia products. Look at my sig and see what I use. I am considering getting 1070s come Jan/Feb when I have upgrades to my and my wife's PCs budgeted in. Depends on what AMD has available in price bracket though. Being an nVidia fanboy though, I am very hopeful that AMD will at least keep up with and somewhat challenge nVidia to do better, because without healthy competition, nVidia will stagnate.

What Nvidia did with the 1080 will benefit everyone, so long as AMD isn't being a bitch about it. The 1080 is the new King, and the Fury X needs to be cheaper. Since AMD doesn't have anything equal to the 1080 for a long time, they should restructure their products and make sure their prices reflect their performance. It's not like the Fury cards were king at all to begin with, but they did at least justify their prices.

It's not like the 1080 is in your price range. You own a GTX 960, which is a fair bit cheaper than a 1080. Unless you plan to make a major upgrade? Otherwise GPU's in the 960 price range are going to be what AMD is aiming for with Polaris. Just so happens AMD will have a press release about Polaris soon. For now, the 1080 is the "GO TO" card for highest performance. No getting around that. Be excited about the 1070 instead.

[GoKs]

Why when they can get every developer to include the way the game is mean't to be played if they don't get the performance crown without it? It seems to be working so far. 295x2 is on par with 1080. That card is how many years old now?

Because comparing a dual chip gpu with a single chip gpu is the way to go.......

@Lathais: The 1080 is not the second best card nvidia has for this range, we dont know what they will bring out in the future, but if going by last gen, then you still have the Titan# and 1080ti to come, so it is at least (speculation) the 3rd best card. We will just have to wait and see what the next few months brings.

@Life-Binder: Dude no one will benifit from AMD closing its doors, we will all suffer if that happens, please stop with this trolling and deliver a constructive discussion?

@Bigvizz: Dude do you even read the posts in here or do you just nit pick which ones to read? It is literally the post right above his.......