• 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.

Nvidia Ampere might launch as GeForce GTX 2070 and 2080 on April 12th

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Plus,I think you forget the $250 8800GT matched performance of the $650 8800GTX for most intents and purposes in the game. That would be the equivalent of a GTX1060 or RX480 matching a GTX980TI at launch. Emm,yeah that never happened.
Click to expand...

You are forgetting a lot of details. The 8800 GTX was built on the G80 chip which was 90nm. The 8800 GT was built on a die shrink of the same chip. It was 65nm and that came with a performance increase as well as been cheaper to produce. And it wasn't released until almost a year after the 8800 GTX. You are also forgetting that the 8800 GTX wasn't $650 when the 8800 GT launched.

So what most accurately describes the chip you are looking for is a die shrinked version of the 980Ti at a $300-$350 price point.

The 8800 GT was an amazing chip. But, don't forget that it is 65nm vs 90nm. And because it was just a die shrink, there was no new process, it was very cheap for Nvidia to produce, hence the price.

As I said already, the 1060 would be the equivalent of a 8600 GTS back then.

But, it's looking back at the past through rose coloured glasses and seeing what you want to see.
 
muon said:
Before or after cryptocurrency inflation?

As mentioned GTX 1060 3GB and RX 480 4GB were star 1080p performers for anything but the most intensive games. Destiny 2, Overwatch etc. all 60+ fps.

10 years ago I believe the £ was at an all time high against the $ which was unsustainable. 10 years of inflation at a low 2% also adds up to 22% total inflation. Most people's income should have kept up.

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=USD&view=10Y
Click to expand...

I had an RX470 4GB,and the best model of it,which overclocked really well and a GTX1080. The RX470 still struggled at 1080p in more intensive games.

The 8800GT came in at $249 and essentially matched the $650 8800GTX for the most common resolutions of the day. It cost 39% of the RRP and was almost as fast.

This is why it was such a legendary card.

That would mean the RX480 8GB and GTX1060 6GB should have been slightly behind a Titan Xp or GTX980TI then,but they didn't.The GTX970 RRP had dropped to $265 by then.

Its not surprising since the GTX1060 launched at between $250 to $300. The GTX760/GTX960 all were around $200 at launch,and the GTX960 4GB was around $170 when the GTX1060/RX480 launched. Remember the RX480 launch pricing was $240 but was for the 4GB model and OcUK said it was a limited production modela and need companies to support them.

The RX470 4GB/8GB were priced so near to it,since essentially AMD really only wanted to sell the RX480 8GB.



decto said:
Nvidia are slowing increasing the gap between card performance by lowering the number of cores in mid range cards vs the 'full' version.
I'm ignoring the new tier of ultra cards e.g.1070/80 TI

Back in the GTX5XX generation
GTX560 - 66%
GTX560TI - 75%
GTX570 - 94%
GTX580 -100%

Now:
GTX1060 - 50%
GTX1070 - 75%
GTX1080 - 100%

Add to that the mid range cards aren't getting any cheaper, even before the memory and mining hikes I expect anything other than the 2080 will remain under specified unless AMD get their act together and launch a well priced volume card.
Click to expand...

This,and the GTX580 was the closest equivalent to the GTX1080TI,etc of its day. Both had huge 500MM2 class GPUs.

Also,agreed AMD kind of failing with Vega,etc has put zero pressure on Nvidia,so they can do what they want TBF!
 
Last edited:
An 8800GT did not essentially match an 8800GTX. The 8800GT also came out a year after the 8800GTX on a lower node (so comparing release prices is silly).
 
decto said:
Nvidia are slowing increasing the gap between card performance by lowering the number of cores in mid range cards vs the 'full' version.
I'm ignoring the new tier of ultra cards e.g.1070/80 TI

Back in the GTX5XX generation
GTX560 - 66%
GTX560TI - 75%
GTX570 - 94%
GTX580 -100%

Now:
GTX1060 - 50%
GTX1070 - 75%
GTX1080 - 100%

Add to that the mid range cards aren't getting any cheaper, even before the memory and mining hikes I expect anything other than the 2080 will remain under specified unless AMD get their act together and launch a well priced volume card.
Click to expand...

For Pascal you should be comparing the 1080 to the Titan Xp and you will find the difference is the same as the 560/580.

Back in the days of Fermi GTX 580 = Titan Xp as the top card.
 
Kaapstad said:
For Pascal you should be comparing the 1080 to the Titan Xp and you will find the difference is the same as the 560/580.

Back in the days of Fermi GTX 580 = Titan Xp as the top card.
Click to expand...

If a GTX 680 is compared to the Titan Black for Kepler the difference in core count was actually bigger back then.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I had an RX470 4GB,and the best model of it,which overclocked really well and a GTX1080. The RX470 still struggled at 1080p in more intensive games.

The 8800GT came in at $249 and essentially matched the $650 8800GTX for the most common resolutions of the day. It cost 39% of the RRP and was almost as fast.

That would mean the RX480 8GB and GTX1060 6GB should have been slightly behind a Titan Xp or GTX980TI then,but they didn't.
Click to expand...

They don't because they (both AMD and Nvidia) no longer directly shrink the bigger dies. Imagine a cheap, shrunk version of GTX 1080 Ti, that is the future GTX 2060.
They no longer do it, instead incremental updates and in the best case we have seen something like Radeon HD 5870 faster than Radeon HD 6870, or GTX 960 still slower than GTX 770, or RX 480 and RX 580 being actually one and the same thing, etc, etc.
 
muon said:
An 8800GT did not essentially match an 8800GTX. The 8800GT also came out a year after the 8800GTX on a lower node (so comparing release prices is silly).
Click to expand...

Unless you think TPU just make up reviews.

0tMKf2W.gif


z5VBXtH.gif


The 8800GT was $250,the 8800GTS 512MB was $300 and the 8800GTX was $650.

The 8800GTX was reviewed by TPU on November 30th 2006,and the 8800GT LESS than a year later on 29th October 2007. The 8800GT and 8800GTS 512MB also overclocked better:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTX_OC/14.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTS_512_MB/22.html

So compare that to the GTX1060 and RX480 then.

They moved from 28NM to 14NM FINFET,bypassing 20NM entirely.

Yet,was the $240 to $300 RX480 or GTX1060 really as close to the $440 to $500 GTX980TI or $1150 Titan Xm?? Nope they were at least 20% faster and the GTX980TI was massively underclocked at stock clockspeeds.

Dude,I mostly buy midrange cards and so do plenty of my mates,and the performance jumps are noticeably worse now. You need to spend more and more.

4K8KW10 said:
They don't because they (both AMD and Nvidia) no longer directly shrink the bigger dies. Imagine a cheap, shrunk version of GTX 1080 Ti, that is the future GTX 2060.
They no longer do it, instead incremental updates and in the best case we have seen something like Radeon HD 5870 faster than Radeon HD 6870, or GTX 960 still slower than GTX 770, or RX 480 and RX 580 being actually one and the same thing, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed,the HD6970 was an example of how ATI/AMD plonked another tier above,and the GTX960 bein a massive example of that too. The GTX960 was barely faster than a GTX760.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
I had an RX470 4GB,and the best model of it,which overclocked really well and a GTX1080. The RX470 still struggled at 1080p in more intensive games.

The 8800GT came in at $249 and essentially matched the $650 8800GTX for the most common resolutions of the day. It cost 39% of the RRP and was almost as fast.

This is why it was such a legendary card.

That would mean the RX480 8GB and GTX1060 6GB should have been slightly behind a Titan Xp or GTX980TI then,but they didn't.The GTX970 RRP had dropped to $265 by then.
Click to expand...

Again I direct you to my previous post

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/31593899/

You are missing a lot of information and twisting the facts to suit your agenda.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Unless you think TPU just make up reviews.

The 8800GT was $250,the 8800GTS 512MB was $300 and the 8800GTX was $650.

The 8800GTX was reviewed by TPU on November 30th 2006,and the 8800GT LESS than a year later on 29th October 2007. The 8800GT and 8800GTS 512MB also overclocked better:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTX_OC/14.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTS_512_MB/22.html

So compare that to the GTX1060 and RX480 then.

They moved from 28NM to 14NM FINFET,bypassing 20NM entirely.

Yet,was the $240 to $300 RX480 or GTX1060 really as close to the $440 to $500 GTX980TI or $1150 Titan Xm?? Nope they were at least 20% faster and the GTX980TI was massively underclocked at stock clockspeeds.
Click to expand...

So the 8800GT was 10% worse and came out 11 months later. Which bit of my post is innacurate?

The 8800GTX was not selling for $650 when the 8800GT came out.

The 7600GT matching the 6800GT/Ultra is a better example if you really want one since that is actually across generations and did indeed match it.
 
muon said:
An 8800GT did not essentially match an 8800GTX. The 8800GT also came out a year after the 8800GTX on a lower node (so comparing release prices is silly).
Click to expand...

The performance was pretty close. The 8800 GTX was still faster. But, like you said, the 8800 GT is on 65nm not 90nm. And there was no new process, just a die shrink, saved Nvidia a fortune.

muon said:
The 8800GTX was not selling for $650 when the 8800GT came out.
Click to expand...

True, said that in my previous post as well. ​
 
muon said:
So the 8800GT was 10% worse and came out 11 months later. Which bit of my post is innacurate?
Click to expand...

Clutching at straws I see. Let me get this into your head so its easier to compute for you.

If the GTX2060 at $250 had performance 10% below a $700 GTX1080TI,it would destroy all sales records.

So you are telling like the RX480/GTX1060 you probably never owned are barely slower than a GTX980TI??

BAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!

I want to know what you have been smoking.

Unfortunately for you I owned the best RX470 4GB,a mate had a higher end RX480 8GB,another mate had a GTX980TI and I now have a GTX1080.

Only in your fantasy land do you think a RX480/GTX1060 is comparable to the previous generation high end card like a GTX980TI,let alone if you overclocked them. The GTX980TI was massively underclocked at stock and they could not even match a stock one.

Also,LMAO 10% - you obviously have forgotten everything. The 8800GTX was a poor overclocker. I had the 8800GTS 320MB and the 8800GTS 512MB and even the HD3870. Look at the TPU reviews,the 8800GTS 512MB and 8800GT overclocked much better than the 8800GTX samples they had and for good reason(they kept the good ones aside).

8800GT SLI for less than the price of a single 8800GTX was a better choice in many games.

Maybe you might need to ask Gibbo,etc on how well the 8800GT/8800GTS 512MB sold.

Oh,goodness AMD and Nvidia don't need marketing departments. They just need the forum lot to do it,just like all those people justifying microtransactions and EA telling its investors it really wasn't needed. This is like some weird cult of whales.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Clutching at straws I see. Let me get this into your head so its easier to compute for you.

If the GTX2060 at $250 had performance 10% below a $700 GTX1080TI,it would destroy all sales records.

So you are telling like the RX480/GTX1060 you probably never owned being barely slower than a GTX980TI?? I want to know what you have been smoking,but that is the issue with whales.

Unfortunately for you I owned the best RX470 4GB,a mate had a higher end RX480,another mate had a GTX980TI and I now have a GTX1080.

Only in your fantasy land do you think a RX480/GTX1060 is comparable to the previous generation high end card.

Also,LMAO 10% - you obviously have forgotten everything. The 8800GTX was a poor overclocker. I had the 8800GTS 320MB and the 8800GTS 512MB. Look at the TPU reviews,the 8800GTS 512MB and 8800GT overclocked much better than the 8800GTX.

Maybe you might need to ask Gibbo,etc on how well the 8800GT/8800GTS 512MB sold.
Click to expand...

LOL Are you for real? you completely ignore his points.

Nobody is saying that the 8800 GT didn't sell well, what are you on? It's a die shrinked 8800 GTX with 256Mb ram? can't you get that through your head? It came out a year later and was so cheap because Nvidia didn't have to come out with a new process, just die shrinked the cards they had.

Don't you remember all the complaints that time because the 9 series and some of the 2xx cards were basically just rebrands of the 8800 cards.
 
I guess Cat the fifth, has me on ignore, can't argue against what I am saying, puts me on ignore instead.

Can someone explain to him, that the 8800 GT is a die shrink based on the same chip as the 8800 GTX. The top chip available to Nvidia at the time.

This comparison he has with a 1060 and a 980ti is just daft. You are dropping down two tiers in performance. The 980Ti was made from the GM200 chip. The 1060 is made from the GP106. And he is completely ignoring the cost of implementing a new process and the ever increasing complexity of die shrinks in his cost performance analysis.

Can even compare die sizes and transistor counts.

8800 GTX - Die size 484mm2, Transistors - 681 million
8800 GT - Die size 324mm2, Transistors - 754 million

Now lets compare that to the 980ti and the 1060

980Ti - Die Size 601mm2, Transistors - 8000 million
1060 - Die size 200mm2, Transistors - 4400 miliion

Hope this makes things perfectly clear.
 
Last edited:
Kaapstad said:
For Pascal you should be comparing the 1080 to the Titan Xp and you will find the difference is the same as the 560/580.

Back in the days of Fermi GTX 580 = Titan Xp as the top card.
Click to expand...

However 1080 isn't even close to a £300 card, effectively what was once a mid range card, the (x)x60 now has just 33% if the cuda cores for the flagship Titan XP. Never mind the fuss about mining driving prices, the new 'mid range card costs £500 at 'coupon' pricing, up from 150- 250 back a few years.

Hardly going to get better in the next generation.

AD
 
Given how hard it is to get a card these days at a reasonable price If I see a 2080 in stock at close to RRP I feel compelled to get it even if its not much of a upgrade over a 1080ti. Mainly due to by the time I want/need a upgrade it be harder to get and more pricey unless things change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom