• 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 **

Orangey said:
Seems Charlie is trying to cover his tracks on the bumpgate 2.0 story:

http://semiaccurate.com/2016/06/08/nvidia-p100-gpu-update-no-bumps-yet/
Click to expand...

Based on what? He said there was a bump issue, he didn't say it was another bumpgate. WIthout being able to read the story there is absolutely no basis at all to say he's trying to cover his tracks.

From the extreme little that can be gathered from the intro he's suggesting no one is seeing the chip despite it's supposed availability, he mentions a stepping step up, so maybe the initial chips aren't going to ever be released and a new stepping with some design changes to help with bump issues is happening.

How's it going on how 14/16nm are completely unsuitable processes for even 300mm^2 sized chips btw? Because they are 'low power' processes and thus you can't make bigger than arm/mobile chips on them?
 
Born_2_Kill_83 said:
Yup pritty much, O/C the 1080 and your looking at 40%, though it doesn't O/C as well as a TX, O/C the TX and the gap closes quite a lot. But as you never O/C you don't have to worry about this.

Either way, no TX/TI of the 1080 on the horizon and nothing from AMD I can see them comming out next year TX first. A lot of big games I want to max out this year so why not jump to the 1080.
Click to expand...

Thats what I usually go by TBH. I can't hang on for a few month to wait when there are games out I want to play now
 
drunkenmaster said:
How's it going on how 14/16nm are completely unsuitable processes for even 300mm^2 sized chips btw? Because they are 'low power' processes and thus you can't make bigger than arm/mobile chips on them?
Click to expand...

14/16nm are nodes. The 14LPP process is the unsuitable one, evidenced by the fact we haven't seen anything bigger than ~230mm2 at underwhelming clocks. Despite the fact they had a year head start.

I'm waiting for the announcement that Vega will be made at TSMC then my victory will be complete.
 
layte said:
Is anyone here crazy enough to pay for Chaz's ramblings and care to post his latest.
Click to expand...

I hope not. He is bitter because NVidia didn't send him this and that and pander to his tantrums, so they got on the blacklist and now he just goes out of his way to carry on his temper tantrums at anything NVidia. Pretty sad in truth and charging $1000 to read his rantings is comical.
 
I wouldnt neccesarily buy the inno over the strix based purely off of that video - the strix is running at 2000rpm and the inno 1470, then they run the inno at "max" and it tops out at just over 1500... depending on the temps the strix at least gives you the option of running the fans higher or lower where you dont really have that option on the inno
 
andybird123 said:
I wouldnt neccesarily buy the inno over the strix based purely off of that video - the strix is running at 2000rpm and the inno 1470, then they run the inno at "max" and it tops out at just over 1500... depending on the temps the strix at least gives you the option of running the fans higher or lower where you dont really have that option on the inno
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly. What they do is miss information in fact. What they should have done is compare apples to apples as at full load Strix is 42.5db but 72C while Inno is 38db but 82db. What they should have done is lower RPM of Strix to match 82C at load of Inno and then compare the noise... while now their comparison is not worth much am afraid.

I have just asked about same on their forum - maybe the reviewers will read it and replay. Probably no but it is worth trying as silence is most important for me (currently have Strix on pre-order).

Any thoughts on the above guys? I read plenty of complains recently from 980Ti users that strix cards are loud and that many of them would not buy again anything with strix in naming :) which makes me wonder :(

I am considering switching to Inno, but it will be hard without first seeing direct sound levels comparisons at same load temperatures.

Cheers
 
If anything it will drop with time. Unless GBP falls in value if you decided to leave EU (which probably would happen even if temporarily, the value fall)... which would mean the prices would also rise. Not to mention some possible extra tax arrangements, if out of EU, acting against current prices.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure we will be leaving the EU based on the info etc

I'm talking straight away when there's stock available to buy. I definitely want this card and don't want to wait too long.

How long is it normally before we see the prices drop? Months or weeks? Cheers.
 
Orangey said:
14/16nm are nodes. The 14LPP process is the unsuitable one, evidenced by the fact we haven't seen anything bigger than ~230mm2 at underwhelming clocks. Despite the fact they had a year head start.

I'm waiting for the announcement that Vega will be made at TSMC then my victory will be complete.
Click to expand...

Really, what makes 14nm lpp less suitable for bigger higher power chips than 16nm ff+? Because you could never explain that before when asked. Also a 90-150W chip that Polaris 10 is, you said the process was unsuitable for higher power chips and only designed for low power mobile chips, so how does that work out. Are you saying Polaris 10 is similar to a sub 10W mobile chip?

I've asked you multiple times, what difference does die size make, the design of a process is about size and power, not die size. What would make defect density of any process worse for bigger chips than smaller chips, they are the same wafers. I'm fairly sure, though it's hard to search for, that you claimed both companies couldn't make gpus on either process because they were unsuitable. If you double the die size and make a 460mm^2 chip that uses 200-300W, what make that impossible if they can make a up to 150W 232mm^2 chip?
 
I currently have 2 x R9 280x's in crossfire, Would a single gtx1080 be a decent soloution to replace them and not loose any performance. I've had a google for some comparisons but it seems no-one has done any that i can find.
TIA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom