• 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 **

IvanDobskey said:
Seriously? You reckon £300? Just lol is all I can say.

Have you seen the price for the 1080? The tier down will be half the price you reckon?

We shall see ;)
Click to expand...

Well based on MSRP it should be £310 to £370.

Whether uk retailers add a "tax" to this we will wait and see.

If they do Ill wait a month and let them drop back down to £350.
 
IvanDobskey said:
Seriously? You reckon £300? Just lol is all I can say.

Have you seen the price for the 1080? The tier down will be half the price you reckon?

We shall see ;)
Click to expand...

you what mate, just lol?

they are $50 over the 900 series msrp so I would expect around £50 more after prices settle, ignoring founders rip off.


havnt got a clue where you are pulling you're prices from, can only imagine it hurts a bit.
 
I'll be VERY surprised if FE 1080 is less than £600 initially. Not quite sure why people think otherwise... new cards are always hiked on release. I fully expect the 1080 price to start with a '5' before much longer, but not until things settle down.

Similar story with the 1070... £400+ initially, maybe £379-399 if we're REALLY lucky, with AIB cards to come in less, as I do feel the 1070 NEEDS to be a competitive card, so we'll see better pricing on these. 1080 will be targeting the real enthusiasts though, those who will pay almost any price for top end new shiny... and Nvidia + retailers know this.
 
Ferrari100 said:
Reading? I have been interested in this topic for over two years now. I don't need to read assumed literature based on Nvidias lack of information and decision to only state 'Pascal has ASYNC' which it technically does not.

The article you show does not, as I already knew before reading it, prove in any way shape or form that Pascal ASync is real.

The only evidence so far, if you are able to read between the lines, is that benchmarks of AOTS and Hitman confirm there is no ASYNC compute for Pascal.

Don't tell me if Nvidia had fully working async hardware that they would have had OXIDE (or their drivers) flip the on switch for Pascal Async.
Nvidia would stand to retain far too many customers if they had 'proof' there had a strong ASYNC implementation as it is they are guaranteed to lose consumers who want the best DX12 hardware.

Remember as well, Pascal is a shrunk Maxwell which was Async'less too.
Come on, this is Nvidia, who do everything they can to stay on top but were unable to flip a switch on AOTS to turn ASYNC ON.
Yeah right, whatever.
The higher you build Pascal Async the further it will come crashing back down.


P.S
Don't be so rude replying to posts. It doesn't do your legitimacy any good.
Click to expand...

Baboonanza said:
He's right, when you look at the technical information detailing how AMD do it (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9124/amd-dives-deep-on-asynchronous-shading for instance, and there are some interesting tit-bits in here too that's about the PS4 implementation) what Nvidia appears to have done with Pascal is a useful improvement but no where near real asyncronous compute.
Click to expand...

You are quite correct Ferrari and I shouldn't be rude when replying (stress with waiting for my Oculus Rift to be delivered) but I am basing my posting on what Tom Peterson said in the PCPer interview. Now I am not an engineer and take that there are many ways to deal with asynchronous shading like Tom has implied and this is something I have also kept a close eye on and also had my reservations about how Pascal would cope.

https://youtu.be/xtely2GDxhU?t=2h12m55s

You will forgive me if I take what Tom said as literal but truth be told, it will all come out in the wash over time.

Edit:

And I am also doing what anyone who is buying new hardware does and not looking at possible negatives :)
 
Last edited:
IvanDobskey said:
1080 will be at least £600
1070 will be at least £400

I will be surprised if I am wrong. Hope I am, but I'll be surprised.
Click to expand...

Only for gouging. How you can list prices much higher than MSRP is beyond me.

But yeah, for the first week or so I expect a retailer tax on these cards.

Especially with the amount of 980ti sold on Ebay atm momemt for £350.
 
Its amazing how the U.S price is known, but for everywhere else its a guessing game that apparently is under some kind of nda until etailers can figure out how much they're going to tack onto the price. =/
 
Baboonanza said:
He's right, when you look at the technical information detailing how AMD do it (http://www.anandtech.com/show/9124/amd-dives-deep-on-asynchronous-shading for instance, and there are some interesting tit-bits in here too that's about the PS4 implementation) what Nvidia appears to have done with Pascal is a useful improvement but no where near real asyncronous compute.
Click to expand...
In the DX12 games that actually do use Async well (AoTS and Hitman), the FuryX is within 10% of the 1080. The 1080 leads due to its brute force clockspeed rather than AC since we now know that at least Oxide haven't enabled the AC path for Nvidia cards in AoTS.

Digital Foundary's review shows that the 1080 performance doesn't change much at all going from DX11 to DX12 which would indicate that either the drivers are not showing support for Async so the games are using alternative paths or that there is simply no improvement from Nvidia's Async implementation.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-review

Once they have a card in their possession they will test it with AC and we will know once and for all if Nvidia has the feature or it's the same old Maxwell situation.
 
MSRP + £50 early buyers tax on top of the £85 Nvidia early buyers founder tax.

That seems the norm in recent years.

SOme could argue that Nvidia has already "applied the early buyers premium for your convenience" so Gibbo doesn't have to ;)
 
Last edited:
Ferrari100 said:
Don't tell me if Nvidia had fully working async hardware that they would have had OXIDE (or their drivers) flip the on switch for Pascal Async.
Nvidia would stand to retain far too many customers if they had 'proof' there had a strong ASYNC implementation as it is they are guaranteed to lose consumers who want the best DX12 hardware.
Click to expand...

Utter tripe - the cards haven't even hit the shelves yet and things like game optimisations don't necessarily happen oveornight - even id only just got cards to test their Vulkan implementation and Oxide are unlikely to push out a public build without qualification testing. Features like this often can't just be turned on and off at driver level (with good results).

EDIT: And that assumes Oxide were willing to work with nVidia to any particular timetable.
 
Last edited:
fs123 said:
In the DX12 games that actually do use Async well (AoTS and Hitman), the FuryX is within 10% of the 1080. The 1080 leads due to its brute force clockspeed rather than AC since we now know that at least Oxide haven't enabled the AC path for Nvidia cards in AoTS.

Digital Foundary's review shows that the 1080 performance doesn't change much at all going from DX11 to DX12 which would indicate that either the drivers are not showing support for Async so the games are using alternative paths or that there is simply no improvement from Nvidia's Async implementation.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-review

Once they have a card in their possession they will test it with AC and we will know once and for all if Nvidia has the feature or it's the same old Maxwell situation.
Click to expand...

I suspect Nvidia has just gone brute force but the point is its still 10% faster than the furyx in these directx12 games and then you might gain another 20% from overclocking, does it matter that Nvidia has gone brute force? Faster is still faster no matter how you do it.

Its like somebody coming up with a new car engine totally different to the old one. It might be the better and neater design but if the old v8 with supercharger and twin turbos is still 20% faster it doesnt matter how good the new design is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom