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

crinkleshoes · 5 Mar 2018 at 21:51

FoxEye said:
No "the bet" is totally different now And I don't even have so much as a single Dogecoin if you win

Bahhhh... pansy... it'd only be 0.05BTC from you to me if you won

FoxEye · 5 Mar 2018 at 22:01

crinkleshoes said:
Bahhhh... pansy... it'd only be 0.05BTC from you to me if you won

How many £thousands is a 0.05 BTC worth these days?

crinkleshoes · 5 Mar 2018 at 22:17

FoxEye said:
How many £thousands is a 0.05 BTC worth these days?

Half of 0.1BTC... that you'd get if you won

Gtiracer · 5 Mar 2018 at 23:18

I'm not fully up to date with what we're looking at for next gen but what are the reasons that Nvidia wouldn't put 2 X 1080ti chips on a single PCB like amd used too with the 7990 for example. Would make for an extremely (hot) fast card and flog that until proper next gen kicks in?

Or are they trying to abandon sli for good for gaming purposes eventually?

Kaapstad · 5 Mar 2018 at 23:43

Gtiracer said:
I'm not fully up to date with what we're looking at for next gen but what are the reasons that Nvidia wouldn't put 2 X 1080ti chips on a single PCB like amd used too with the 7990 for example. Would make for an extremely (hot) fast card and flog that until proper next gen kicks in?

Or are they trying to abandon sli for good for gaming purposes eventually?

NVidia need the game devs to do the SLI support in DX12, this is not happening because of the extra work/cost.

DX12 the biggest step back in GPU performance ever.

fowler002 · 6 Mar 2018 at 03:43

Any chance of the 4K gaming capable version coming out with the ryzen+ release?

KillBoY_UK · 6 Mar 2018 at 10:00

The whole nVidia selling "mid range as high end" thing is getting kinda dull now, even if it was true wouldn't it just show how laughable AMD's GPU's have been since the 2011/2012 if there parts are getting beaten (arguably in some cases) by parts which some people thing where a part of a product range/stack/level lower ?

Caracus2k · 6 Mar 2018 at 10:55

crinkleshoes said:
The 2070/2080 will easily be 20-30% faster than the 1080ti... quite possibly more.

Even if Nvidia overprice the 2080 at £600 a pop, they will easily sell every last one of them.

Based on what? The 1070 traded blows with the 980ti. There is no guarantee that Ampere or whatever they call their next gen will show such a dramatic uptick in performance. It may just be revision of pascal for all we know with rather middling performance improvement.

crinkleshoes · 6 Mar 2018 at 11:27

Caracus2k said:
Based on what? The 1070 traded blows with the 980ti. There is no guarantee that Ampere or whatever they call their next gen will show such a dramatic uptick in performance. It may just be revision of pascal for all we know with rather middling performance improvement.

Based on history lol... the 1080 is regularly 30-40% faster than the 980ti.

The 980 is regularly 10-20% faster than the 780ti.

The 680 is regularly 30-50% faster than the 580.

Since they started doing this pattern of releasing the mid-range part as the high end for a while before releasing the real high end... their mid-range parts (680, 980 & 1080) have all been a noticeable improvement over the previous "ti" card... so an estimate of 20-30% improvement is a safe bet.

Kaapstad · 6 Mar 2018 at 11:33

crinkleshoes said:
Based on history lol... the 1080 is regularly 30-40% faster than the 980ti.

The 980 is regularly 10-20% faster than the 780ti.

The 680 is regularly 30-50% faster than the 580.

Since they started doing this pattern of releasing the mid-range part as the high end for a while before releasing the real high end... their mid-range parts (680, 980 & 1080) have all been a noticeable improvement over the previous "ti" card... so an estimate of 20-30% improvement is a safe bet.

There is a big clue out there now.

Titan V is about 30% to 35% faster than a Titan Xp.

Or putting it another way a GTX 2080 is likely to have about the same advantage over a GTX 1080, 35% give or take a bit.

crinkleshoes · 6 Mar 2018 at 11:38

Kaapstad said:
There is a big clue out there now.

Titan V is about 30% to 35% faster than a Titan Xp.

Or putting it another way a GTX 2080 is likely to have about the same advantage over a GTX 1080, 35% give or take a bit.

Yup, there's that too

Caracus2k · 6 Mar 2018 at 12:57

crinkleshoes said:
Based on history lol... the 1080 is regularly 30-40% faster than the 980ti.

The 980 is regularly 10-20% faster than the 780ti.

The 680 is regularly 30-50% faster than the 580.

Since they started doing this pattern of releasing the mid-range part as the high end for a while before releasing the real high end... their mid-range parts (680, 980 & 1080) have all been a noticeable improvement over the previous "ti" card... so an estimate of 20-30% improvement is a safe bet.

You quoted the 1070 in your post which definitely isn't 30-40% faster than a 980ti... And it would be accurate to say that in some use cases a 1080gtx might be circa 30-40% faster then a 980ti but it's definetly not true to claim this as an indicative figure for generalised performance uplift! (reviews at release suggested a more like 15 - 25‰ uplift)

I have had a 1070, 1080,1080ti and a slew of Maxwell and Kepler cards running relatively high resolution displays for a number of years.

And if the xx80 cards have all shown 'noticeable improvements' over xx80ti cards what are people whinning about? What with calling the xx70\80 cards 'mid range' and other nonsense

fowler002 · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:04

Caracus2k said:
What with calling the xx70\80 cards 'mid range' and other nonsense

They think the ti and titan/xp are the high end?

Rroff · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:06

Caracus2k said:
And if the xx80 cards have all shown 'noticeable improvements' over xx80ti cards what are people whinning about? What with calling the xx70\80 cards 'mid range' and other nonsense

Technology moves on - you don't keep calling something high end when the cap has lifted.

Caracus2k · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:06

Kaapstad said:
There is a big clue out there now.

Titan V is about 30% to 35% faster than a Titan Xp.

Or putting it another way a GTX 2080 is likely to have about the same advantage over a GTX 1080, 35% give or take a bit.

So we're throwing in the performance of a previously unprecedented $3000 dollar nvida gpu (that can be used for gaming) as indicative of what the next gen of xx80 cards will bring?

Well I suppose if this were true it would make the titan z look like an even more ludicrous proposition.

Caracus2k · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:08

fowler002 said:
They think the ti and titan/xp are the high end?

On release they are... Much like the xx80 gpu's with their 'considerable' performance uplifts from last gen xx80ti are on their release

Caracus2k · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:09

Rroff said:
Technology moves on - you don't keep calling something high end when the cap has lifted.

When did I say otherwise I would only call an GTX8800 ultra 'high end' with a qualifier like 'on release'

crinkleshoes · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:12

Caracus2k said:
You quoted the 1070 in your post which definitely isn't 30-40% faster than a 980ti... And it would be accurate to say that in some use cases a 1080gtx might be circa 30-40% faster then a 980ti but it's definetly not true to claim this as an indicative figure for generalised performance uplift! (reviews at release suggested a more like 15 - 25‰ uplift)

I have had a 1070, 1080,1080ti and a slew of Maxwell and Kepler cards running relatively high resolution displays for a number of years.

And if the xx80 cards have all shown 'noticeable improvements' over xx80ti cards what are people whinning about? What with calling the xx70\80 cards 'mid range' and other nonsense

The 680, 980 and 1080 were all mid-range parts... not sure what you're getting at there.

Anandtech shows 30-40% improvement.

The problem is that, because of a lack of any competition from AMD, Nvidia have been milking the market by releasing their mid-range / mobile GPU as the new high-end for ~6 months and have been withholding the full fat chip the maximise profits, stifling the market and delaying development because they no longer need to work as hard to be the best.

It's good that their new mid-range outperforms the old high-end... but the practise of milking the market and re-branding the mid-range gpus to x70/x80 to mislead people like you into believing they are actually the high end chip is unethical.

Both companies (well ATi, not AMD) used to push the boundaries of what was possible and keep doing it... now AMD are either unable to unwilling to compete and Nvidia have fallen back to doing barely enough to stay ahead.

Competition is good for us consumers.

Rroff · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:14

Caracus2k said:
When did I say otherwise I would only call an GTX8800 ultra 'high end' with a qualifier like 'on release'

When the 1080 was released the GP100 was already in the wind showing that much bigger performance uplifts were possible - thinking of the 1080 as "high end" in that context because it could match or beat the previous generation high end is just fooling yourself - regardless of what nVidia might or might not sell it at or how long until the inevitable faster cards of that generation come along.

crinkleshoes · 6 Mar 2018 at 13:16

Caracus2k said:
So we're throwing in the performance of a previously unprecedented $3000 dollar nvida gpu (that can be used for gaming) as indicative of what the next gen of xx80 cards will bring?

Well I suppose if this were true it would make the titan z look like an even more ludicrous proposition.

Your logic is weird.

The Titan V is the latest full fat (or near enough) chip... it's the latest 8800 ultra / 480 / 580 / Titan / Titan M / Titan P that, back when ATi/AMD were in the game, would have been branded Ultra, xx80 or Titanium and cost £600.