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

[seklas]

This looks impressive for a Mid-range card in my opinion and it may well overclock further.

It is impressive, however I feel that it won't be overlooked, therefore 1070 will cost at least £349, 1080 - £499 or £549. Then in 2017 GTX1080 Ti will cost - £749, and the new Titan - £1299, hence HBM 2.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

It is impressive, however I feel that it won't be overlooked, therefore 1070 will cost at least £349, 1080 - £499 or £549. Then in 2017 GTX1080 Ti will cost - £749, and the new Titan - £1299, hence to HBM 2.

I'll eat my hat if a full fat big pascal Geforce or Titian is that much

 

[ltron]

It is impressive, however I feel that it won't be overlooked, therefore 1070 will cost at least £349, 1080 - £499 or £549. Then in 2017 GTX1080 Ti will cost - £749, and the new Titan - £1299, hence to HBM 2.

That would be a pity if Nvidia adopt those same high-end prices which is why we need AMD to be very competitive in the bang-for-buck stakes and then they will have to lower them.

 

[sam77]

Just goes to show that the experts on this site saying there won't be much improvement at all, buy buy buy old tech months before release are full of %&$!

 

[Simon Belmont]

Just goes to show that the experts on this site saying there won't be much improvement at all, buy buy buy old tech months before release are full of %&$!

This^

lol Yep! Their sure are mate

 

[TheRealDeal]

Just goes to show that the experts on this site saying there won't be much improvement at all, buy buy buy old tech months before release are full of %&$!

Who says there is a big improvement. The rumored core clock is massively high. To get a 10% OC on this thing you are talking 1980 core clock. Even at that you are only talking around 15% faster than a Oced 980ti. We also are also assuming that this run was done on a stock card. I am surprised at the 1800 core boost which seems massive from the usual circa 1200 boost of a usual stock card.

There's to many unanswered questions for me atm, i was expecting the 1080 to be faster than the 980ti but not needing 1800 core to do so.

 

[glenimp617]

It is impressive, however I feel that it won't be overlooked, therefore 1070 will cost at least £349, 1080 - £499 or £549. Then in 2017 GTX1080 Ti will cost - £749, and the new Titan - £1299, hence HBM 2.

Yep, and you know what.....people will pay it. This is why graphics cards are so expensive these days. They can price a titan at £1,500 and it will sell

 

[GFX-Kid]

Yep, and you know what.....people will pay it. This is why graphics cards are so expensive these days. They can price a titan at £1,500 and it will sell

I know right. Crazy.

Lets hope AMD will price their cards well, if they do I know which gpu I will buy next until vega comes out

 

[karik666]

i wouldnt be suprised if the 1070 was over £400,and the 1080 £600.

 

[Ayahuasca]

I would be, incredibly.

 

[Seanspeed]

i wouldnt be suprised if the 1070 was over £400,and the 1080 £600.

I really think people are just losing the plot thinking the prices are going to skyrocket this generation.

People said the same thing about Maxwell.

It is actually in Nvidia's best interest to NOT price these ridiculously high. Will some people still pay it? Of course. But many, many people will not. Somebody who owns a GTX970 is hardly going to be impressed having to spend £400 just to get a meaningful upgrade. £300, though? A LOT more attractive an upgrade option.

 

[Gregster]

Huh? But you just said "why should it". Quite a few explained why it should. Would be better for us all no? Maybe not nvidia's bottom line in terms of selling gsync modules, but I did not know you worked for nvidia, thought you was a consumer like us and would prefer more options. My bad

You didn't read my response to you previously or did you just miss it? Sure choice is good but I would rather they optimise G-Sync (which they do) and they know what each panel is tuned to for their GPUs. More doesn't always mean better. My ROG Swift allows G-Sync to work all the way down to 1fps (not that I would want to game at that framerate) and not sure there are any Adaptive Sync panels that can do this? Some of the Freesync monitors ranges are quite poor as well and with a tiny tiny window in which to allow Freesync to operate. Frames need to be capped as well via external software to keep you within the freesync range. It just starts adding so many variables, I would rather they concentrate and dictate to what panels get G-Sync modules so the consumer gets the best possible experience.

 

[seklas]

There's to many unanswered questions for me atm, i was expecting the 1080 to be faster than the 980ti but not needing 1800 core to do so.

I don't think that's the case. Usually, yes - 1200 stock speed is very typical, however nvidia is already loosing the battle in DirectX12 games against AMD. In fact, more of them will come out in the future. i think in 10-12 months time, DirectX 11 will be used only by smaller game developers and indie. We all know that nvidia has started working on asynchronous shading too late and it won't be fully functional in these two pascal cards. Therefore imagine how it would affect their sales, if 1080 and 1070, would perform just as bad as all Maxwell cards did? It would literary destroy them and their strong position of the market-share. So I think they've put the clock speed this high on purpose, just so that their new cards would perform about the same or better than AMDs in the same price range. Knowing that on DirectX12 nvidia has performed about 20%+ worse than any AMD card in the same price range, it shouldn't be a surprise to see these numbers, as the clock speed must be higher to get the same performance in game.

It probably won't be so high with the Ti and Titan cards in 2017, as HBM 2 and a proper async shading support will should fix that problem.

 

[fs123]

Who says there is a big improvement. The rumored core clock is massively high. To get a 10% OC on this thing you are talking 1980 core clock. Even at that you are only talking around 15% faster than a Oced 980ti. We also areto assuming that this run was done on a stock card. I am surprised at the 1800 core boost which seems massive from the usual circa 1200 boost of a usual stock card.

There's to many unanswered questions for me atm, i was expecting the 1080 to be faster than the 980ti but not needing 1800 core to do so.

If that 1800MHz clock speed is correct then the architecture is essentially just Maxwell on a new process allowing higher clocks. A 1080 at 980ti clocks is therefore the same speed as a 980ti? That's underwhelming to say the least.

At such high clocks the headroom may well be limited.

 

[Gregster]

I do hope those bench results are correct and there is some overclocking headroom. It would be sweet to see 2Ghz clocks on air

 

[RavenXXX2]

If that 1800MHz clock speed is correct then the architecture is essentially just Maxwell on a new process allowing higher clocks. A 1080 at 980ti clocks is therefore the same speed as a 980ti? That's underwhelming to say the least.

At such high clocks the headroom may well be limited.

True, Nvidia overclocking mid range cards to beat out maxwell and charging premium pricing. Wait for the full fat chips.

 

[RavenXXX2]

I do hope those bench results are correct and there is some overclocking headroom. It would be sweet to see 2Ghz clocks on air

And still only slightly faster than a clocked 980 ti, yawn.

 

[TheRealDeal]

I do hope those bench results are correct and there is some overclocking headroom. It would be sweet to see 2Ghz clocks on air

Yea that would be cool to see. It would only be an 11% overclock though. For it to have the same kind of headroom as a 980ti it would have to OC to around 2.2-2.3 ghz. That would look wrong compared to what we are used to but seeing that 1800mhz core clock it could become a reality. LN2 clocks are going to be off the charts.

 

[Gregster]

And still only slightly faster than a clocked 980 ti, yawn.

Yer, not the big chip I was hoping for but new shiny is always interesting.

Yea that would be cool to see. It would only be an 11% overclock though. For it to have the same kind of headroom as a 980ti it would have to OC to around 2.2-2.3 ghz. That would look wrong compared to what we are used to but seeing that 1800mhz core clock it could become a reality. LN2 clocks are going to be off the charts.

I am a bit mashed with doing so many early shifts at work lately but was it Videocardz who said that overclocking both didn't return so well for the 1080 compared to the 980Ti? Maybe I read it wrong but sure it was that.

 

[TheRealDeal]

I am a bit mashed with doing so many early shifts at work lately but was it Videocardz who said that overclocking both didn't return so well for the 1080 compared to the 980Ti? Maybe I read it wrong but sure it was that.

I think what was said was a 980ti at the same 1800 core clock would be faster or they actually compared some Ln2 results of gtx980ti's at this clock and they were faster.