• 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 **

Jono8 said:
Click to expand...

Well I could say the same thing of you.

You've already proclaimed that the 1070 will be faster than a TX for £300. I mostly don't understand why you're so confident in these extreme predictions. Press releases never exaggerate, right?

Personally, I'm waiting for reviews. We'll find out then if the 1070 is a "£300 TX killer". I doubt it.
 
KompuKare said:
Actually, while the frequencies are very impressive, what do you get when you calculate the per shader speeds:

First for TFLOPs:
9 TFLOPs / GTX1080 / 1607MHz (core) / 2560 shaders * 1125MHz (GTX980 core speed) * 2048 (GTX980 shaders)
= 5.04TFLOPs (i.e. the actual GTX 980 speed).

Now % of shaders and frequency:
2560 shaders / 2048 shaders = 125%
1607MHz / 1125MHz = 143%
125% * 143% = 178%.

Which is about where the claimed performance is. Impressive for sure, but only because of the frequency. Per shader performance doesn't seem to have changed; looks like all the gains are due to the node process.

Anyway, actual reviews will be far more interesting than canned PR statements. Not long now I guess.
Click to expand...

Thats what i thought.
I wan't to see if there is a real difference(apart from the clock speeds) in newer (and especially DX12) games where Maxwell was disappointing against AMD cards (far cry primal, hitman, quantum brake).
 
FoxEye said:
Seriously tho, who said a 1080 would be slower than a 980ti? Who? I remember there was one rumour that said it (wccf?) and we discussed it for a bit, but most of us before that were saying 980ti +20% or that kind of ballpark.

I personally said the 1070 would be between a 980 and 980ti, and I'm not convinced it'll be faster, but the 1080 was always going to be faster.
Click to expand...

Yep, for the 1080 'a tad' faster than a 980Ti for about the same money has been the general consensus around here, myself included. And it seems to be panning out.

It's basically the 780Ti to 980 story again. Pretty simple really.
 
FoxEye said:
Well I could say the same thing of you.

You've already proclaimed that the 1070 will be faster than a TX for £300. I mostly don't understand why you're so confident in these extreme predictions. Press releases never exaggerate, right?

Personally, I'm waiting for reviews. We'll find out then if the 1070 is a "£300 TX killer". I doubt it.
Click to expand...

Who said the 1070 is a "£300 TX killer". :confused:

I am only going by the information and specs we have.
 
wunkley said:
Yep, for the 1080 'a tad' faster than a 980Ti for about the same money has been the general consensus around here, myself inculded. And it seems to be panning out.

It's basically the 780Ti to 980 story again. Pretty simple really.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. The 980 is rated at around 5Tflops, around the same as the 780Ti was .

This time around we have the 1080 rated at 9Tflops....compared to the Titan X's 6.3Tflops

Now I know Flops don't always translate into gaming performance ( look at AMD!) but This is Nvidia vs Nvidia in what is probably fairly similar architecture ( or so I keep being told by all the experts on here...) so those numbers should translate to a nice increase.
 
Last edited:
There were two dates, one for the 1080(both editions I believe) and one for the 1070. Maybe some of you should watch the presentation instead of jumping to conclusions :P. But lets wait and see for the unasnwered questions
 
Jono8 said:
No it isn't. The 980 is rated at around 5Tflops, around the same as the 780Ti was .

This time around we have the 1080 rated at 9Tflops....compared to the Titan X's 6.3Tflops

Now I know Flops don't always translate into gaming performance ( look at AMD!) but This is Nvidia vs Nvidia in what is probably fairly similar architecture ( or so I keep being told by all the experts on here...) so those numbers should translate to a nice increase.
Click to expand...

Your over enthusiasm is making me 'floppy' ;)
 
Last edited:
Jono8 said:
Who said the 1070 is a "£300 TX killer". :confused:

I am only going by the information and specs we have.
Click to expand...
Hot on the heels of the GeForce GTX 1080, the company also announced its second fastest GPU, the GeForce GTX 1070. Based on the same 16 nm GP104 silicon as the GTX 1080, the GTX 1070 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, and has 3 quarters the single precision performance (6.5 TFLOP/s vs. 9 TFLOP/s) of the GTX 1080. NVIDIA claims that just as the GTX 1080 is faster than the GTX 980 SLI, the GTX 1070 is faster than the GTX TITAN X, making it the second fastest GPU in existence. Available on June 10, the GTX 1070 will be priced at US $379, with a "founder's edition" (reference-design) card going for $449.
Click to expand...
 
setter said:
Id say everyone knows theese are mid range. Higher end parts being the Ti and titan x replacement. Same as the 700 and 900 series.
Click to expand...

Yar it's just that the prices have increased so much, that the 1080 (mid-range) is now the same price as the Ti of last gen. Even the 1070 has had a price rise, and the first cards will be sold at 980 prices.

So whilst we all know they're mid-range, the pricing is definitely in enthusiast territory for now, and probably for a while until they start shipping in volume.

Milking is a fair comment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom