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

[ICDP]

One review, massive amounts of empirical evidence there, I have already read most of the reviews on videocardz review list so I think I have a reasonable idea, How can anything mean anything, without something to refer to? Your point makes no sense, compared to a fury X its a great overclocker, compared to a 980ti or 980, it is average so far on the reference card.

Is a giraffe tall?

No, not compared to the empire state building.

Yes, compared to an ant.

I actually referenced 3x reviews (provided links for 2) and showed the OC results as reported by them.

HardOCP
Guru3D
Hardwarecanucks

Good to see you can't even count all the way to 3, well done.

My question is a simple yes or no, does the fact you claim a 980Ti reference requires 80% fan to maintain 1200 somehow negate the fact the 1080 Founders Edition is a poor overclocker?

You keep bringing up other GPUs (and Giraffes) to deflect from the question but none of that matters. Let me ask an even simpler question.

Do you think the Founders Edition 1080 is a good overclocker given the 5%-15% actual performance gains in most reviews?

 

[NirK]

I actually referenced 3x reviews (provided links for 2) and showed the OC results as reported by them.

HardOCP
Guru3D
Hardwarecanucks

Good to see you can't even count all the way to 3, well done.

My question is a simple yes or no, does the fact you claim a 980Ti reference requires 80% fan to maintain 1200 somehow negate the fact the 1080 Founders Edition is a poor overclocker?

You keep bringing up other GPUs (and Giraffes) to deflect from the question but none of that matters. Let me ask an even simpler question.

Do you think the Founders Edition 1080 is a good overclocker given the 5%-15% actual performance gains in most reviews?

Cannot be bothered to argue with you. Yes you are right whatever you win etc.

 

[ICDP]

Cannot be bothered to argue with you. Yes you are right whatever you win etc.

I feel so good about myself right now. I managed to teach someone basic counting skills, and then how to understand a straight forward question and give a straightforward answer.

Thanks

 

[NirK]

First GTX 1070 3DMark Firestrike benchmark

http://videocardz.com/60265/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-3dmark-firestrike-benchmarks

I thought GTX 1070 would be about 15% slower but surprised it is 24% slower than 1080 which is a huge gap. Overclocked GTX 1070 will push to get closer to 1080 with around 10% gap but would not able to beat stock 1080 if overclocked maxed out probably due to 1080's GDDR5X advantage.

I was saying that, some people said will be similar to 970 vs 980, I said it will be 25% slower. So looks like nvidia copy/pasting their 1080 slide for 1070 was a bit off.

 

[D.P.]

First GTX 1070 3DMark Firestrike benchmark

http://videocardz.com/60265/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-3dmark-firestrike-benchmarks

I thought GTX 1070 would be about 15% slower but surprised it is 24% slower than 1080 which is a huge gap. Overclocked GTX 1070 will push to get closer to 1080 with around 10% gap but would not able to beat stock 1080 if overclocked maxed out probably due to 1080's GDDR5X advantage.

Its not 24% slower, its 19.4% slower:

100/124 = 80.6%.
100-80.6 = 19.4%

 

[D.P.]

I was saying that, some people said will be similar to 970 vs 980, I said it will be 25% slower.

It is similar, less than 20% as I said.

 

[NirK]

It is similar, less than 20% as I said.

Well I said 20-30% I think I cannot remember, but not 10-15% like 970 vs 980.

 

[Minstadave]

Looks like 1070 will do me nicely.

 

[NirK]

It can be 20 or 25% slower depending how you work it out. Graph says 24%.

However you want to look at it, there is a significantly bigger gap than 980 vs 970.

 

[ICDP]

As expected the 1070 to 1080 is a wider gap (24%) than tge gap between 970 and 980. Not surprising really considering it has a lower mem bandwidth.

 

[DarrenM343]

So, the 1070 will be about the same as a 980 Ti then which I think most people predicted, as that was the case when the 970 launched vs the 780 Ti

 

[NirK]

I actually referenced 3x reviews (provided links for 2) and showed the OC results as reported by them.

HardOCP
Guru3D
Hardwarecanucks

Good to see you can't even count all the way to 3, well done.

My question is a simple yes or no, does the fact you claim a 980Ti reference requires 80% fan to maintain 1200 somehow negate the fact the 1080 Founders Edition is a poor overclocker?

You keep bringing up other GPUs (and Giraffes) to deflect from the question but none of that matters. Let me ask an even simpler question.

Do you think the Founders Edition 1080 is a good overclocker given the 5%-15% actual performance gains in most reviews?

I don't know, but the overclockersclub review, where they said it gets a constant 2050-2080mhz, averages out about 23% faster than a 980ti at 1455/7900, so according to that it is not bad. Other reviews they do not tell you important things like fan speed and they just show you the peak clockspeed, it could go from 2100 down to 1900 but they don't tell you. Annoyingly only about 1 in 15 review tell you everything that you need to know.

 

[D.P.]

It can be 20 or 25% slower depending how you work it out. Graph says 24%.

However you want to look at it, there is a significantly bigger gap than 980 vs 970.

No, the graphs do not show it is 24% slower. They show the 1080 is 24% faster, the 1070 is 19.4% slower.

I amazes me that people don't know primary school maths.

 

[D.P.]

As expected the 1070 to 1080 is a wider gap (24%) than tge gap between 970 and 980. Not surprising really considering it has a lower mem bandwidth.

Only if you fail at basic maths. The 1070 is 19.4% slower, exactly in line with the 20% I suggested.

 

[Seanspeed]

Its not 24% slower, its 19.4% slower:

100/124 = 80.6%.
100-80.6 = 19.4%

People get hopelessly confused with percentages when it comes to benchmarks.

You are entirely correct here.

But it's also correct to say that the 1080 is 24% faster than a 1070.

Either way, people trying to claim a smug 'I told you so' over a 5% difference are simply way too eager to satisfy their ego.

It's a rough 20-25%. Whether nearer or farther to 20%, it's really negligible in real-world terms.

 

[NirK]

Surely if the 1080 is 24% faster, that means you will get 24% faster FPS in games. I admit maths is not my strong point.

 

[ICDP]

I don't know, but the overclockersclub review, where they said it gets a constant 2050mhz, averages out about 23% faster than a 980ti at 1455/8000, so according to that it is not bad for a reference card. Other reviews they do not tell you important things like fan speed and they just show you the peak clockspeed, it could go from 2100 down to 1900 but they don't tell you.

The reviews I showed did list the actual clock speeds attained and the fan speed % during their overclocking.

Guru3D 60% fan speed core clocks sat around 1950-2050MHz (up from 1733 normal boost clocks). ~15.4% Overclock (not actual performance boost).

HardOCP 100% fan speed gave max OC clock speed of 2062MHz versus 1770MHz average clock speed at default operation". 16.5% overclock (not actual performance boost).

I do believe the custom AIB version with better power delivery and cooling will OC better but that doesn't change the fact the FE 1080 is a bad overclocker.

 

[Gerard]

Surely if the 1080 is 24% faster, that means you will get 24% faster FPS in games. Which is the only relevant number.

Some games you might get more, other games you might get less, its not going to be a consistent number across numerous games and benchmarks. If anything something like 3d mark would probably show bigger gains than actual games.

 

[NirK]

Some games you might get more, other games you might get less, its not going to be a consistent number across numerous games and benchmarks. If anything something like 3d mark would probably show bigger gains than actual games.

But I mean the 24% would be the relevant number for game performance?

 

[AthlonXP1800]

Its not 24% slower, its 19.4% slower:

100/124 = 80.6%.
100-80.6 = 19.4%

Wow hmmm I think you should email WhyCry at the link below to tell him that he calculated it wrong and then he would revised to corrected it.

http://videocardz.com/contact