Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #1

    Nvidia not releasing Volta "any time soon"

    Before I start, not sure which subforum this should be in...Mods, feel free to move it to the correct one if need be.

    Consider this shots fired. Nvidia has decided not to push their next-gen Volta cards due to the lack of competition. Not exactly their words, but they basically said that.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-next-...ffer_pcgamerfb

    My overall thought is it's perfectly fine. Vega was touted to be the 1080ti killer...and is barely at the same level of a regular 1080. There's no reason to waste resources to push out a product when you're already better. Shame on AMD for barely competing with Nvidia a year late..If you're mad at Nvidia over this, you should switch your anger towards AMD. But, looks like I'll use the upgrade program to get my 1080 to a 1080ti now since it will be a powerhouse for another year.

    What's everyone's thoughts?

  2. #2
    Probably means that we're going to see a Pascal refresh, possibly with GDDR6. I dont know how true those claims about the costs of Volta are, but we definitely dont need Nvidia to push expensive cards right now.
    R5 5600X | Thermalright Silver Arrow IB-E Extreme | MSI MAG B550 Tomahawk | 16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3600/CL16 | MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X | Corsair RM650x | Cooler Master HAF X | Logitech G400s | DREVO Excalibur 84 | Kingston HyperX Cloud II | BenQ XL2411T + LG 24MK430H-B

  3. #3
    From a business stand point it makes sense. They still have the best cards out, why would they eat into their own profits when 1080/1080 Ti is still selling due to still being the best GPU out there? As a consumer, I wish AMD would have beat out NVIDIA's 1080 Ti, because then it would push NVIDIA to release better stuff, which again is better for us in the long run.

    Hopefully because it's on-par with the 1080, AMD can make some money from it for more R&D to also make better cards in the future though.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Soisoisoi View Post
    From a business stand point it makes sense. They still have the best cards out, why would they eat into their own profits when 1080/1080 Ti is still selling due to still being the best GPU out there? As a consumer, I wish AMD would have beat out NVIDIA's 1080 Ti, because then it would push NVIDIA to release better stuff, which again is better for us in the long run.

    Hopefully because it's on-par with the 1080, AMD can make some money from it for more R&D to also make better cards in the future though.
    I can swear i just read recently or maybe i read it wrong that after these line of GPUS AMD doesnt want to make high performance power cards again.

    I may be wrong tho

  5. #5
    Bloodsail Admiral select20's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chase City, VA
    Posts
    1,031
    I'm kind of okay with that. I bought a 970 GTX back in Feb. of 2015. Its' still good enough for me since I'm still gaming on a 1080p monitor. I know though once the new GPU's drop, I'm going with the 1080ti equivalent and a new 4k gaming monitor. I've always used the 970 equivalents in years past, but I'm a big boy now and I want the big gpu lol.

    I was hoping it would be this year, but I can wait another year.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ali725 View Post
    I can swear i just read recently or maybe i read it wrong that after these line of GPUS AMD doesnt want to make high performance power cards again.

    I may be wrong tho
    Dude I hear yah. I hadn't thought about it till you just said that, but I'm in agreement with you although I can't back it up. I read it somewhere it seems like and I can't remember where. They didn't want to compete at the highest level anymore. Just against the midgrade GPU's like the 1070's.
    my SWTOR referal link:
    http://www.swtor.com/r/CVCyHD

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Soisoisoi View Post
    From a business stand point it makes sense. They still have the best cards out, why would they eat into their own profits when 1080/1080 Ti is still selling due to still being the best GPU out there? As a consumer, I wish AMD would have beat out NVIDIA's 1080 Ti, because then it would push NVIDIA to release better stuff, which again is better for us in the long run.

    Hopefully because it's on-par with the 1080, AMD can make some money from it for more R&D to also make better cards in the future though.
    I personally don't see them making money on Vega. They require more power to function at the same level as a 1080. That alone is worth going with the Nvidia cards.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ali725 View Post
    I can swear i just read recently or maybe i read it wrong that after these line of GPUS AMD doesnt want to make high performance power cards again.

    I may be wrong tho
    I have heard this, but I've never been able to find anything directly linked to that. AMD needs to not be okay with just catching up. I know they don't have the money that Nvidia has, but if Nintendo can still sell a console successfully with their competition being MS and Sony, then imo there's no reason AMD is constantly playing catch up.

  7. #7
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    AMD will be playing an eternal game of catchup if they try to keep on trading blows with high-end Nvidia cards. They simply don't have a proper and comparable answer to X80s or anything beyond that game-wise.

    They can absolutely compete and overtake in the mid to low end range though, and of course there's the efficiency for mining that's going to eternally sell cards.
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by select20 View Post
    I'm kind of okay with that. I bought a 970 GTX back in Feb. of 2015. Its' still good enough for me since I'm still gaming on a 1080p monitor. I know though once the new GPU's drop, I'm going with the 1080ti equivalent and a new 4k gaming monitor. I've always used the 970 equivalents in years past, but I'm a big boy now and I want the big gpu lol.

    I was hoping it would be this year, but I can wait another year.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Dude I hear yah. I hadn't thought about it till you just said that, but I'm in agreement with you although I can't back it up. I read it somewhere it seems like and I can't remember where. They didn't want to compete at the highest level anymore. Just against the midgrade GPU's like the 1070's.
    It's smart for them to stop focusing on the high end for now, since most people usually go for the xx60/xx70 cards. However, imo, they need to do one of two things if not both to start gaining serious market share back. The first is stop just barely catching up a year later for the same price. So they should start aiming to make their cards, even a year late, slightly more powerful than Nvidias card they're catching up to. Or, the second thing would be...do what they're doing but price their cards at a reasonable price cheaper where they can still turn in some profit. If it's $50 so be it, if it's $100 awesome...But costing the same, being about equivalent but a year behind your competitor is just bad business and explains why they have a 20% market share.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by MonsieuRoberts View Post
    AMD will be playing an eternal game of catchup if they try to keep on trading blows with high-end Nvidia cards. They simply don't have a proper and comparable answer to X80s or anything beyond that game-wise.

    They can absolutely compete and overtake in the mid to low end range though, and of course there's the efficiency for mining that's going to eternally sell cards.
    I think right now, it's definitely not a great idea to compete with an xx80/xx80 ti. They need to regain market share in the mid-range. But they need to give people a reason to buy their product. Pushing out something equivalent a year late for the same price is one of the dumbest marketing strategies I've seen in my time.

  9. #9
    Immortal Schattenlied's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    7,475
    Quote Originally Posted by RuneDK View Post
    Vega was touted to be the 1080ti killer
    By no one but self-overhyped fans. AMD said no such thing.

    and is barely at the same level of a regular 1080
    The one in the same pricerange as the 1070 handily beats the 1070, and overclocks within a few% of the performance of an overclocked 1080 in many titles, sometimes even outperforms the 1080 for over $100 less... The one priced to compete with the 1080 beats it handily.

    There's no reason to waste resources to push out a product when you're already better.Shame on AMD for barely competing with Nvidia a year late
    Literally the only thing Nvidia is doing better right now is the 1080ti (the least purchased card), AMD is beating or handily competing with them at every other pricepoint (the most purchased cards).

    What's everyone's thoughts?
    AMD is doing fine, Nvidia is doing fine, competition is good, and we have competition everywhere except the "uber-high-end", which is the least important area.
    Last edited by Schattenlied; 2017-08-15 at 02:21 AM.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.

  10. #10
    Legendary! MonsieuRoberts's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Weeping Squares, Vilendra, Solus
    Posts
    6,621
    Quote Originally Posted by RuneDK View Post
    I think right now, it's definitely not a great idea to compete with an xx80/xx80 ti. They need to regain market share in the mid-range. But they need to give people a reason to buy their product.
    Yup I agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by RuneDK View Post
    Pushing out something equivalent a year late for the same price is one of the dumbest marketing strategies I've seen in my time.
    Indeed. Same price, younger drivers, lacking in features such as PhysX, Shadowplay, big power draw, limited availability outside of buying half of a new PC through their bundles...Unless I was already in AMD's wheelhouse and were also looking to build an entire system, I'm not interested.
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ "In short, people are idiots who don't really understand anything." ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥
    [/url]
    ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ ⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Schattenlied View Post
    By no one but self-overhyped fans. AMD said no such thing.


    The one in the same pricerange as the 1070 handily beats the 1070, and overclocks within a few% of the performance of an overclocked 1080.


    Literally the only thing Nvidia is doing better right now is the 1080ti (the least purchased card), AMD is beating or handily competing with them at every other pricepoint (the most purchased cards).



    AMD is doing fine, Nvidia is doing fine, competition is good, and we have competition everywhere except the "uber-high-end", which is the least important area.
    Please provide sources for these claims.

  12. #12
    Immortal Schattenlied's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    7,475
    Quote Originally Posted by RuneDK View Post
    Please provide sources for these claims.
    Have you read no reviews? Hell, the page YOU linked itself says as much, the 1080ti is the only thing they aren't competing with.
    Last edited by Schattenlied; 2017-08-15 at 02:28 AM.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Schattenlied View Post
    Have you read no reviews? Hell, the page YOU linked itself says as much, the 1080ti is the only thing they aren't competing with.
    "The Vega 64 ends up just a hair faster than the GTX 1080, and at worst it can be about 30 percent slower (GTAV), but on average the GTX 1080 leads by just a bit less than 10 percent. And what about power use? At idle it's a wash, but while gaming the Vega 64 used 478W at the outlet on the test system compared to 370W on the GTX 1080—only the much faster 1080 Ti matches the Vega 64 by using 475W!," our own Jarred Walton noted.

    Um...it says at times it's a hair faster....but it can be 30% slower....I would say the 1080 is the superior card.

  14. #14
    Competition is great, go buy an AMD.

  15. #15
    Immortal Schattenlied's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    7,475
    Quote Originally Posted by RuneDK View Post
    "The Vega 64 ends up just a hair faster than the GTX 1080, and at worst it can be about 30 percent slower (GTAV), but on average the GTX 1080 leads by just a bit less than 10 percent. And what about power use? At idle it's a wash, but while gaming the Vega 64 used 478W at the outlet on the test system compared to 370W on the GTX 1080—only the much faster 1080 Ti matches the Vega 64 by using 475W!," our own Jarred Walton noted.

    Um...it says at times it's a hair faster....but it can be 30% slower....I would say the 1080 is the superior card.
    http://imgur.com/a/AGxwC
    That looks like pretty decent competition to me, winning in some games, losing in others, and they are priced lower than Nvidia's offerings to boot.
    Last edited by Schattenlied; 2017-08-15 at 03:10 AM.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don’t have one, you’ll probably never need one again.

  16. #16
    Warchief Tucci's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    2,205
    Nice. Makes me feel a bit better about buying a 1080 Ti hot off the presses when I'm still rocking a 2500k, lol. I've barely been able to unleash like 30% of this beast in most games I play, it's insane. I fully plan on upgrading the rest of my PC it's just that I got caught in the middle of AMD and Intel's CPU war so I've just been waiting and waiting.
    Ryzen 9 5900X/Trident Z Neo 32GB 3600 CL16/AORUS 1080 Ti Xtreme/Crosshair VIII Hero Wi-Fi/Arctic Liquid Freezer II 240/Optane 900p 3D XPoint/EVGA SuperNOVA 1200 P2/Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL/Steelcase Leap/BenQ XL2411Z/Philips Fidelio X2HR/Noppoo Choc Mini (RIP Reckful)/Razer Viper Ultimate/QcK Heavy

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Schattenlied View Post
    Have you read no reviews? Hell, the page YOU linked itself says as much, the 1080ti is the only thing they aren't competing with.
    I watched 6 different benchmarking videos today, from Linus to Paul to Bitwit and GamersNexus.

    The 56 performs better than the 1070, but does not "crush it" and even heavily overclocked (by Paul) doesnt come near the 1080.

    The 64, meanwhile, is about ~10% slower overall than then 1080, and beats it in a very few games. For the same MSRP. And uses gobs more power.

    And the moment you OC the 1080, the 64 has no hope of catching up, and has no OC headroom to speak of.

    The 56 is a -viable- competitor to the 1070, particularly when OCed (which it seems to have headroom for that the 64 does not), but the 64 is a DOA product. It has no place in the market. Its beaten by its closest competitor, and is almost beaten by its little brother when OCed (the 56 OCed comes with like 5% of the 64).

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucci View Post
    Nice. Makes me feel a bit better about buying a 1080 Ti hot off the presses when I'm still rocking a 2500k, lol. I've barely been able to unleash like 30% of this beast in most games I play, it's insane. I fully plan on upgrading the rest of my PC it's just that I got caught in the middle of AMD and Intel's CPU war so I've just been waiting and waiting.
    Sandy Bridge is legit...still rocking a 2500k too....probably going to upgrade to the Ti via the upgrade program.

  19. #19
    And this is exactly what we've been saying pretty much since we saw the 1080 ti and knew VEGA would match it at best(which it doesn't).

    Also the rumor of it going with GDDR6 doesn't help, as it's still quite a ways from mass production. Assuming they go with Micron, it's very late 2017 the earliest that GDDR6 is on the market.

  20. #20
    Dreadlord Enfilade's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    953
    No need. There's STILL no competition.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •