• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

** The Official Nvidia GeForce 'Pascal' Thread - for general gossip and discussions **

Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2012
Posts
3,246
i think someone was on the sauce when making these.

5ad81b66c83cd316e207ddb608dab9d1.png

Yea looks like those slides are Bs lol. I highly doubt that there is a equal performance jump from 970 to 1070 and 980 to 1080. The x70 variant this round is more gimped compared to last gen.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,618
But the 970 was barely any slower than the 980...

Something like 12-15% slower IIRC.

The 1070 will not be 12-15% slower than the 1080.

I can 100% guarantee that it will be at least 20% slower than the 1080.

My guess is the 1070 will be about 15-20% slower. The 970 had disabled ROPS, cache, memory bus, TMU. The 1070 is almost all 100% identical to 1080 but 25% less CUs, but that never leads to a linear performance drop. Look at 980ti vs TX
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Jun 2012
Posts
3,732
Location
UK
My guess is the 1070 will be about 15-20% slower. The 970 had disabled ROPS, cache, memory bus, TMU. The 1070 is almost all 100% identical to 1080 but 25% less CUs, but that never leads to a linear performance drop. Look at 980ti vs TX

If its 15-20% slower then i will get a 1070 instead. But I don't think so. 980ti vs TX is basically the same card with almost zero difference. Same memory, same everything except a tiny amount less cores.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
32,618
No its more gimped than 970 vs 980.

No, its less gimped. Same ROPS, same cache, same geometry engine, same memory bus, same tessellation engine, no segregation of memory etc. It has 73% of the theoretical compute performance but due to real-world bottle necking the gaming performance delta will be much smaller. The core count difference between 970 and 980 was 20%
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
2 Jan 2012
Posts
11,932
Location
UK.
My guess is the 1070 will be about 15-20% slower. The 970 had disabled ROPS, cache, memory bus, TMU. The 1070 is almost all 100% identical to 1080 but 25% less CUs, but that never leads to a linear performance drop. Look at 980ti vs TX

Thinking the same, I do think the GTX 1070 will be a really good card, price performance (Nvidia) sweet spot. Looking forward to picking one of these up.

EVGA FTW + Backplate, yeah boi.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,188
No, its less gimped. Same ROPS, same cache, same geometry engine, same memory bus, same tessellation engine, no segregation of memory etc. It has 73% of the theoretical compute performance but due to real-world bottle necking the gaming performance delta will be much smaller. The core count difference between 970 and 980 was 20%

It may have the same memory bus(presuming no 970 memory bus split shenanigans) but it has gddr5 instead of 5x, meaning it's got 20-30% less bandwidth, it would be no different to having a 192bit gddr5x setup.

970 had 20% less texture units, about 10% less rops, 12% less bandwidth, 19% less shaders and a 3% lower boost clock.

The 1070 has 25% less TMUs, 25% less shaders, 20% less bandwidth and a 3% lower boost clock again.

Sorry but to say it's less gimped is completely ridiculous. It hasn't lost 10% of rops, but loses more shaders, more TMUs, and more bandwidth? In real world terms it's likely the gap between the 1080 and 1070 is noticeably bigger than the gap between the 980 and 970.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Jun 2012
Posts
3,732
Location
UK
No, its less gimped. Same ROPS, same cache, same geometry engine, same memory bus, same tessellation engine, no segregation of memory etc. It has 73% of the theoretical compute performance but due to real-world bottle necking the gaming performance delta will be much smaller. The core count difference between 970 and 980 was 20%

Yes as you just said... it has a 27% core difference vs a 20% difference. It also has GDDR5 on a 256bit bus vs GDDR5X.

If the 1070 is within 20% of the 1080 eg. faster than 980ti at 3440x1440, then I would probably get that instead of a 1080. I do not think it will be though. I want a 1080 as that is actually an upgrade to the 980ti, but depends... If they actually have 1080's at or near the $599 MSRP that are decent then fine, if they come in at the $699 or higher then its not worth it for me.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Posts
2,189
Location
South London
Where has this rumour of the 1080 being up for preorder today come from? I wouldn't expect any listings on OcUK and other major retailers until the official May 27th release date as per usual.
 
Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2012
Posts
3,246
No, its less gimped. Same ROPS, same cache, same geometry engine, same memory bus, same tessellation engine, no segregation of memory etc. It has 73% of the theoretical compute performance but due to real-world bottle necking the gaming performance delta will be much smaller. The core count difference between 970 and 980 was 20%

Hmmm maybe your right, we will only see when reviewers get them to test I guess.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2008
Posts
5,952
No its more gimped than 970 vs 980.

But it doesn't have the premium new memory type,hardly gimping just less spec to keep the price lower. So yeah considering the new memory the 1080 has the perf difference between them probably is bigger but ss will be the price
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Posts
1,227
Location
South Wales
No its more gimped than 970 vs 980.

No, its less gimped. Same ROPS, same cache, same geometry engine, same memory bus, same tessellation engine, no segregation of memory etc. It has 73% of the theoretical compute performance but due to real-world bottle necking the gaming performance delta will be much smaller. The core count difference between 970 and 980 was 20%

I'll go in the middle and just say it's gimped exactly the same, just for sake of balance. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom