• 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.

2070 is a TU106

Thats a pretty big deal if true so part of me wants to dismiss it as a baseless rumour but given the size of the TU104 die i can actually see this being true.
 
This would be the first generation where each chip is released in a single corresponding consumer model.
I guess the defective chips will go GeForce, while the fully enabled chips Quadro.
 
The 1070 is a 7.2m transistor 314 mm² die
If is as rumored, the 2070 is a 10.6m transistor 445 mm² die.

That tells you far more than code names. 50% increase in transistors.
 
D.P. said:
The 1070 is a 7.2m transistor 314 mm² die
If is as rumored, the 2070 is a 10.6m transistor 445 mm² die.

That tells you far more than code names. 50% increase in transistors.
Click to expand...

But how much of that 50% increase is taken up by Tensor Cores and RTX Cores? Its gonna be faster then a 1070 but not by the amount that the increase in transistors will have you believe.
 
Every body has dismissed these card before we even know anything about performance, just like the Tom Peterson piece on the podcast, he talks for 30 mins about roughly a 40-50% improvement across the board, but the only part that anyone mentions is when he answers a question a 2080 might not always beat the 1080ti or something similar.
40-50% puts even the 2070 ahead of the 1080ti.
Now of course the glory of benchmarking and especially with cherry picking the results it only takes one that shows what you want it too for it to become fact. of course this works both ways. ;)


relative-perf.jpg


Taken from here.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2840/geforce-gtx-1070

So if the 2070 is in fact the TU106 chip, then NVidia are ahead of AMD with the top 3 chips which put them ahead by a huge margin.
 
With all due respect bru, that graph is for 1080p, a more cpu limited resolution.

The difference between a 1070 and a 1080ti at 1440p and 4k is a much larger gap than 41%.
 
bru said:
Every body has dismissed these card before we even know anything about performance, just like the Tom Peterson piece on the podcast, he talks for 30 mins about roughly a 40-50% improvement across the board, but the only part that anyone mentions is when he answers a question a 2080 might not always beat the 1080ti or something similar.
.
Click to expand...

If they are 40-50% faster across the board, then how can the 2080 possibly not beat the 1080ti in some cases? That very statement contradicts the 40-50% faster argument doesnt it?
 
Jeps said:
If they are 40-50% faster across the board, then how can the 2080 possibly not beat the 1080ti in some cases? That very statement contradicts the 40-50% faster argument doesnt it?
Click to expand...

Yes I agree it is very confusing, we have to take the across the board comment with certain leeway knowing that their will always be cases where it isn't true. But such is the joy of cherry picking, for example look at the bottom 9 benchmarks in this chart.

https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1941?vs=1939

Oh look the 1070 wins all of them, does that make the across the board statement not accurate, well we can all decide that for ourselves, as we all have our own opinions.
 
Problem here is they have no competition any more, so they can do exactly whatever they want. When you used to have some cards which were bargains, like the 970 or various other ones, this was not because Nvidia are being "nice" and want to give you a bargain, it is because AMD had competing cards. Now that AMD are almost completely non competitive, they can do what they want.
Funny because I predicted all of this about 4 months ago and was exactly right on all of it, I should be an industry forecaster or something.
 
bru said:
Every body has dismissed these card before we even know anything about performance, just like the Tom Peterson piece on the podcast, he talks for 30 mins about roughly a 40-50% improvement across the board, but the only part that anyone mentions is when he answers a question a 2080 might not always beat the 1080ti or something similar.
Click to expand...

His first reference to performance was this:

"We shared some data that shows a bunch of games, you'll see the perf somewhere between 35-45% better at roughly the same generation. In most cases, if you are on high resolution and not CPU limited, Turing is going to crush it!"

Which is completely at odds with his answer when asked about the presentation slides. Then he claims that the performance over the 1080 will be 50% in most cases.

But after answering that question the interviewer also asked him this direct question, is the 2080 faster than the 1080ti. His reply "I think so. I would expect some cases where 2080 would beat 1080 Ti but I don't have the data in front of me"

I guess people are quoting that last sentence because who really believes he doesn't know the exact performance? And they are so quick to big up any product they are launching. Remember Pascal, in interviews and the launch event, they made it clear that the 1070 was going to be faster than the Titan X. He didn't have missing data for that interview. Surely if it was faster than the 1080ti, they would be doing the same thing now? What's to be gained from hiding the performance?
 
melmac said:
His first reference to performance was this:

"We shared some data that shows a bunch of games, you'll see the perf somewhere between 35-45% better at roughly the same generation. In most cases, if you are on high resolution and not CPU limited, Turing is going to crush it!"

Which is completely at odds with his answer when asked about the presentation slides. Then he claims that the performance over the 1080 will be 50% in most cases.

But after answering that question the interviewer also asked him this direct question, is the 2080 faster than the 1080ti. His reply "I think so. I would expect some cases where 2080 would beat 1080 Ti but I don't have the data in front of me"

I guess people are quoting that last sentence because who really believes he doesn't know the exact performance? And they are so quick to big up any product they are launching. Remember Pascal, in interviews and the launch event, they made it clear that the 1070 was going to be faster than the Titan X. He didn't have missing data for that interview. Surely if it was faster than the 1080ti, they would be doing the same thing now? What's to be gained from hiding the performance?
Click to expand...

Basically it will be within about 10% either way, mark my words pal haha.
 
melmac said:
Surely if it was faster than the 1080ti, they would be doing the same thing now? What's to be gained from hiding the performance?
Click to expand...

And that's what I found a bit suspect. Not even a footnote or passing comment. Hell, could've even gone like this:

"Hi, I'm Uncle Jensen, and this is your new RTX generation. Of course it's going to be faster than the 10 series, so there's no point in talking about it. You're here for the really good stuff"

I get the RTX technologies should receive all the focus because it's game changing stuff, but to have absolutely zero mention of the normal bits? I dunno, maybe my sarcasm is actually correct, there's little point talking about obvious performance jumps when there's a lot to talk about with RTX.

Still doesn't sit right though...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom