Geforce GTX 1080 Ti now official - Faster than Titan X ($699)

[alcoholbob]

So you aren't expecting more than 15% bump from Volta? 980 Ti -> 1080 was a good 20%+ bump. But either way, like I said you only have the top end card for a few months and are paying more per month than had you just bought Titan X to begin with. That means that this card is nothing more than a devalued Titan XP since it has released so late. Giving it a separate name allows them to sell both the devalued and full value one still and helps keep resale value high for those not paying attention to the technology. Its not any value for customers that are paying attention.

Once you account for the typical overclock -- a 1450MHz 980 Ti vs a 1950MHz 1080, it's more like 14-16% effective speed boost.

Remember, the x80 Volta is going to be a smaller chip than 1080Ti. A midsize die x80 Volta will have to achieve 40% to 50% higher IPC/architectural efficiency improvement just to beat 1080Ti by 15%.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Sounds like a soft launch to me almost. Hardly any availability on day 1 of preorder. How can they say its going to be released next week when they don't even have any? Damn I'm pissed right now. This is a huge tragedy. HUGE.

The chip has been in production for a long time, so I'm surprised at the availability issues. The board/card design is new though, could be production bottlenecks there.

 

[w3rd]

If you need a psychic to form an opinion on performance figures given freely by AMD, I'm a bit concerned.

AMD demoed Vega, they chose the game(s) most friendly to their hardware (Doom), they stated the settings (ultra), they left the FPS counter up (knowing full well that it gives performance away), and it's been been analyzed repeatedly and found to be about 1080 performance in that same area with the same settings in that cherrypicked example.

With Polaris, AMD demoed best-case scenarios. With Ryzen, same thing. What makes you think Vega will somehow be different and undersold? Their marketing team has shown that they're too smart to do that.

?
Why do you keep asking everyone all these outrageous rhetorical questions, that you keep answering..? I am having a hard time following this thread.

This 1080ti is a perfect buy for ANYONE who is building a rig today, (this week, month, etc), or anyone who currently has a g-sync monitor, or basically anyone who already owns a monitor. Nothing beats it. But ideally, One's video card always matches/equals their monitor's resolution (They are a pair). But unfortunately, most people are eyeing up 4k gaming.

So for anyone planning a build within the next few months..?
The 1080ti is only a stop-gap. That is why so many are holding on to their purse strings to see AMD come thru on 4k. (Understand, I am buying the first MSI 1080ti twin-frozr I can find, for my Acer x34)


After reading this thread, I personally don't think Nvidia will have anything to match AMD's Vega @ 4k in 2018 either. I don't even think Volta will slow VEGA sales down, because AMD technology and designs/process, looks uber efficient & scalable. And if Volta is a 2018 release and only +30% faster than 1080ti, then AMD will be in a good position for 4k supremacy. Well, kinda how I am envisioning this all playing out. I could be wrong.

Either way, I am all for a price war, because I like buying hardware so win/win for me.

But Ghost, you backdrop a post, that seem at odds or negligent with what is going on around you. AMD isn't going to be pushed aside, they have solid technology and have already demonstrated pieces of it. VEGA is kinda of a connect-the-dots.

I am eager to hear more about VEGA. And will it's secret substrate really allow for x1/x2/x3/x4 chips design on the same card..? (quad-vega?) So again, if we are fantasizing, how is a 1080ti going to compete with something like that, if people wanted to drop $1,499 on a RX VEGA x4 Card..?
Why not, right?

 

[railven]

You know you're on ATF when you click a GTX 1080 Ti thread and AMD vs NV is majority of the posts haha.

Anyone find any info on second batch? Yesterday at work started feeling the sting if missing out on first batch. Swung by MC before work and saw the price cut in effect. MC has a great bundle for Ryzen buyers. Because of the bundles, you could get the ASUS GTX 1080 Strix for $450! That's where the majority of sales are gonna come from, if you ask me. Good move by NV. Good time to be a new builder/upgrader.

WTB GTX 1080 Ti @ non-Ebay prices.

 

[ddogg]

You know you're on ATF when you click a GTX 1080 Ti thread and AMD vs NV is majority of the posts haha.

Anyone find any info on second batch? Yesterday at work started feeling the sting if missing out on first batch. Swung by MC before work and saw the price cut in effect. MC has a great bundle for Ryzen buyers. Because of the bundles, you could get the ASUS GTX 1080 Strix for $450! That's where the majority of sales are gonna come from, if you ask me. Good move by NV. Good time to be a new builder/upgrader.

WTB GTX 1080 Ti @ non-Ebay prices.

Pretty sure 10th is when custom aibs start selling. Although I'm sure those will sell out in minutes as well

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[railven]

Pretty sure 10th is when custom aibs start selling. Although I'm sure those will sell out in minutes as well

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

With the Nier: Automata PC version rumored to release 3/10 also, I got two things to look forward to! Granted, none of this info is 100% confirmed, a boy can dream

My Rig has been in dire need of a good deep cleaning. Also picking a new M.2 Drive while I'm at it (I'm very late to that party.)

 

[ddogg]

I'm taking this opportunity to do a deep cleaning as well (not that my PC is dirty). This means taking apart all my waterblocks, replace the tubing, clean the rads etc. Should be a day's worth of work

 

[badb0y]

You guys think I can get away with pairing this with my 2600k at 4.7 ghz or should I upgrade my platform first?

 

[AtenRa]

You guys think I can get away with pairing this with my 2600k at 4.7 ghz or should I upgrade my platform first?

For what resolution ??? for 1440p/4K not even bother to thing about a CPU upgrade.

 

[Capt Caveman]

EVGA 1080Ti FTW3

 

[Mopetar]

You guys think I can get away with pairing this with my 2600k at 4.7 ghz or should I upgrade my platform first?

At 1080p a newer CPU will give you a little bump, but at 1440p and beyond it doesn't matter. Here's an older review showing the difference between SB and Skylake when using a 980 and it basically doesn't matter.

 

[Carfax83]

I'm pretty sure I will get screwed over like I did the last time by lack of good availability at launch, and the price will be jacked up big time by retailers and resellers alike.

 

[badb0y]

At 1080p a newer CPU will give you a little bump, but at 1440p and beyond it doesn't matter. Here's an older review showing the difference between SB and Skylake when using a 980 and it basically doesn't matter.

For what resolution ??? for 1440p/4K not even bother to thing about a CPU upgrade.

I am gaming at 1440p/144 Hz. I guess I'm good then.

 

[ddogg]

I am gaming at 1440p/144 Hz. I guess I'm good then.

Yeah you should be good. I only upgraded from a 2500k to a 6700k because I wanted the newer technology and started doing some video encoding and other VM work related stuff where the extra threads and power mattered. Gaming wise, I probably barely see any difference at the resolution I play at

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[tential]

EVGA 1080Ti FTW3

I wonder how much EVGA will charge you for the upgrade to the working cooler....
MSI
Gigabyte
Zotac

EVGA is towards the bottom of the list to me for AIBs.

 

[railven]

EVGA 1080Ti FTW3

Interesting design. I wonder what the acoustics will be. While I'd rather got with a CLC, I wouldn't mind something like this either. The Accelero I had on my Ref 7970 was whisper quiet and kept temps in check. And the 3-fan design I had on my 780 Lightning was just as good.

EDIT:

I wonder how much EVGA will charge you for the upgrade to the working cooler....
MSI
Gigabyte
Zotac

EVGA is towards the bottom of the list to me for AIBs.

I know EVGA got a huge black eye with their recent screw ups. I had a faulty GTX 1080 Hybrid FTW which they promptly took care off with barely any down time to me. They also threw us a nice power adapter for $15 which looks pretty nice.

I'd still buy from EVGA for myself with confidence, but I definitely am not recommending them without a huge warning.

 

[Bacon1]

EVGA 1080Ti FTW3

2x8pin for power?

 

[Capt Caveman]

2x8pin for power?

Yes

 

[wanderica]

"Vega costs $599-649 and it's not as fast as the 1080Ti, almost no one will buy it." - RussianSensation

This was my thought as well. I personally don't care which company gets my money as long as I get the best card for that money. I think this was a brilliant move by Nvidia. AMD are the ones with something to prove, after all. If Vega isn't at least equal, then Nvidia will get my money again. It would be an entirely different story had the 1080 Ti been $799 as I expected it would be, though.​

 

[tential]

"Vega costs $599-649 and it's not as fast as the 1080Ti, almost no one will buy it." - RussianSensation

This was my thought as well. I personally don't care which company gets my money as long as I get the best card for that money. I think this was a brilliant move by Nvidia. AMD are the ones with something to prove, after all. If Vega isn't at least equal, then Nvidia will get my money again. It would be an entirely different story had the 1080 Ti been $799 as I expected it would be, though.​

Because of my monitor, I'm screwed into Vega. There is just no way that the 1080Ti could be good enough to overcome the deficit of the monitor.

It's a shame that Gsync is so limited in monitor selection because otherwise it would be a no brainer to get a 1080Ti. Or that the platform was open.

So that's where AMD can gain a number of sales at the highend. From people who wanted 4K freesync monitors and couldn't find good 4K gsync alternatives.

Otherwise, I wouldn't even wait for Vega. I would just get a 1080Ti.

The really sad thing is that the 4K 144hz monitors come out this year, and then it will be me being sad all over again as I'll wish I had one of those and 2 1080Tis, but I can't live without freesync now and who knows if those monitors will actually make it.

 

[Bacon1]

4K 144hz monitors come out this year, and then it will be me being sad all over again as I'll wish I had one of those and 2 1080Tis, but I can't live without freesync now and who knows if those monitors will actually make it.

The 1080 Ti won't be able to drive a 4k 144hz. It doesn't have displayport 1.5. Even DP 1.5 will only do 8 bit 4k 144hz but will do 10bit 4k 120hz.

 

[alcoholbob]

"Vega costs $599-649 and it's not as fast as the 1080Ti, almost no one will buy it." - RussianSensation

This was my thought as well. I personally don't care which company gets my money as long as I get the best card for that money. I think this was a brilliant move by Nvidia. AMD are the ones with something to prove, after all. If Vega isn't at least equal, then Nvidia will get my money again. It would be an entirely different story had the 1080 Ti been $799 as I expected it would be, though.​

No one will buy it, and simultaneously it will be perpetually out of stock as AMD's supply chain is several orders of magnitude smaller than Nvidia's.

 

[Sweepr]

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti features GP102-350 GPU

https://videocardz.com/66976/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-features-gp102-350-gpu

Reviews out March 10

 

[tviceman]

The only two big mysteries surrounding the 1080 TI is

1) How much improvement did Nvidia make on the cooler and
2) How well it will scale in performance with sustained overclocking. I know that clock-for-clock it will be very, very close to Titan XP, but it's still an unanswered question nevertheless.

All in all, I expect larger performance gains when overclocking vs. the rest of the Pascal lineup, just like GK110 experienced vs. the rest of Kepler.

 

[tajoh111]

If you need a psychic to form an opinion on performance figures given freely by AMD, I'm a bit concerned.

AMD demoed Vega, they chose the game(s) most friendly to their hardware (Doom), they stated the settings (ultra), they left the FPS counter up (knowing full well that it gives performance away), and it's been been analyzed repeatedly and found to be about 1080 performance in that same area with the same settings in that cherrypicked example.

With Polaris, AMD demoed best-case scenarios. With Ryzen, same thing. What makes you think Vega will somehow be different and undersold? Their marketing team has shown that they're too smart to do that.

+1

And this is the thing, AMD already demoed performance and gave some indication of Vega lies.

When it came to Polaris showing of performance, what we saw from AMD is basically what we got. Heck AMD might have exaggerated a tad on some information like it's performance per watt increase and how VR capable it is.

AMD hinted something like 390x/gtx 980 performance and we got more along the lines of r9 390 performance. But people like Bacon1 even after these performance figures were shown were indicating better than gtx 980 ti and even better informed people like Mahigan were saying better than gtx 980 ti performance.

Because of wild speculation that was entirely too optimistic, no one guessed the rx480 would performance at the bottom of the barrel for expectations. We had expectations from rx 480 performing 20% better than a 1080 to basically performing at the r9 390x level with most of the forum believing atleast gtx 980 ti performance. When the performance of 390 became a reality, it was those with optimistic expectations that reset their goal post.

Now they are making those same mistakes again. And worse yet being hypocrites. E.g Being as vocal as possible about downplaying Nvidia products and lying their way to get people to wait for Vega, shifting on the most optimistic rumors to get people to wait, e.g vega coming in October 2016, Vega, Vega is coming Q1 because AMD said 1st half. Is Bacon1 going to tell people to wait for Volta, when it should be about 8-9 months away from after the release of Vega? I doubt it.

One more thing to note is AMD has zero products in the product range where Bacon1 is indicating Vega will perform. i.e something like 10+% better than a gtx 1080 ti. Releasing information on a rx vega does nothing to Polaris sales because vega if it had that performance would perform 2.7-2.8x faster than a rx480. With an rx480 being found for 170-180 dollars, they would perform not remotely in the same pricing segment. This is basic marketing and business. Because Vega attacks an entirely different segment than Polaris, it does nothing but good to release information on Vega at this point. Every sold gtx 1080 and gtx 1080 ti is a lost Vega sale for the near future. People that want a vega, want nothing to do with an rx480.

Another mistake people are making is assuming AMD has more positive surprises after Ryzen because it did better than expectations. This is logic error. Simply put, Ryzen was the result of AMD allocating almost all it's resources to Ryzen which AMD has outright said. This focus came at the expense of the GPU division, hence why we have generally seen less products coming out of AMD GPU division and generally have been underwhelmed by AMD's performance. E.g r9 285, Fury X and Polaris. Hence Ryzen success means nothing towards a successful Vega. Until AMD Gets some real cash flow going, AMD is going to starve their GPU division because their CPU division is potentially so much more profitable and it will only be the way to save the company. AMD did the correct move by hurting their GPU side to save their CPU side. AMD graphics fans might not like it but it was the best move they could make to help their CPU division survive.

AMD fans would be best to help with AMD CPU sales than build another hype train for Vega. Vega means nearly nothing in comparison to Ryzen in terms of profits.