Let's do some maths and see how much extra longevity you actually get when you only purchase x80 Ti parts vs x80 parts.
Here's launch dates for the last few generations of NVIDIA GPUs:
780 (May 23, 2013)
780 Ti (November 7, 2013)
980 (September 18, 2014)
980 Ti (June 1, 2015)
1080 (May 27, 2016)
1080 Ti (March 5, 2017)
So let's work out the relative lifespans of these GPUs (i.e. the number of days until they were directly replaced with a next generation part).
700 series
-> 780: 484 days until replaced by direct sucessor, the 980
-> 780 Ti: 572 days until replaced by direct sucessor, the 980 Ti
-> Difference in 'lifespan' between 780 and 780 Ti: 88 days
-> 780 had 85% of the 'lifespan' that the 780 Ti did
900 series
-> 980: 618 days until replaced by direct sucessor, the 1080
-> 980 Ti: 644 days until replaced by direct sucessor, the 1080 Ti
-> Difference in 'lifespan' between 980 and 980 Ti: 26 days
-> 980 had 96% of the 'lifespan' that the 980 Ti did
SUMMARY: the 780 had 85% of the lifespan that the 780 Ti did. Fair enough, the 780 wasn't as long-lived as the 780 Ti was. However, that gap closed significantly with the 980 which had 96% of the lifespan the 980 Ti did. So yeah, there was more of a case that you got a longer lifespan out of the 780 Ti than the 780, but the relative lifespans of the 980 Ti and 980 were almost the same with only a slight advantage to the 980 Ti. So assuming this pattern continues, is getting a 1080 at launch really that stupid compared to getting a 1080 Ti at launch?
Yes, exactly my point! Early adopters of the 1080 shouldn't have to feel ashamed of their purchase.
Already liked but quoted because this is the stuff I like. Going to reread later and try to decide whether I will just suck it up or not.
If I get one directly at launch where do you guys resell them? EBay or Craigslist?
May just buy at launch and decide for a day whether I want the gpu or a free $100.
I don't have any faith in the midrange chip masquerading as a high end in the x80.
Its either a full chip or the cut down of the full chip for me of the high end gpu. I want nothing less and actually that's what I have been using anyway.
Very likely. Quadro P6000 was shown to deliver 17% better performance than Titan X (Pascal), and that's with rather modest clocks. Imagine what a gaming focused 'full' GP102 with 24GB GDDR5X at 250-300W TDP will be capable of. That's a high bar not only for AMD but also NVIDIA with Volta (GV104).
I have to question the numbers in that Hothardware Hitman review. Time Spy only shows 6.4% uplift, which seems reasonable. Given the P6000 only has 7.1% more shaders, the same boost clock, and lower memory clocks/bandwidth, I'd like to see someone else verify a 17% improvement.
Regardless though, Titan XP is essentially dead in the water now. It would make sense to sell P6000 with the Geforce driver stack as a Titan XP Black to keep a halo product at the $1200 price point for people who need or just want those last few percent.
Okay? You can make as many illogical guesses as you want. It has no bearing on reality and that reality is that Nvidia are crushing RTG while what we've seen of Vega pegs it at GP104 level or very slightly above at best. Sorry if using my eyes somehow offends you and forces you to make up irrelevant guesses of what I've said. And for the record, no, I never predicted that about AMD. Look at my username. Ghost of Cyrix. I've been into this market for a very long time. I'm not sure why you would guess that I don't believe AMD can challenge Intel other than your own bias grasping at straws in the absence of a relevant argument. They have many times in the past few decades. Come up with an actual argument next time instead of flinging insulting insinuations at people who actually use their objective senses.
So with this fabled price cut, I actually might be in the market for a 1080 to go with my new 1800x (was going to wait for Vega). But newegg still has 1080s for >$600. Wasn't it supposed to happen today?
So with this fabled price cut, I actually might be in the market for a 1080 to go with my new 1800x (was going to wait for Vega). But newegg still has 1080s for >$600. Wasn't it supposed to happen today?
So with this fabled price cut, I actually might be in the market for a 1080 to go with my new 1800x (was going to wait for Vega). But newegg still has 1080s for >$600. Wasn't it supposed to happen today?
1080 seems to be in a weird place in my opinion. With the FE pricing it's $400 for a 1070, $550 for a 1080, and $700 for a 1080Ti. The 1080 doesn't seem like enough of a step above the 1070 to be worth $150 more and the 1080 Ti is definitely likely worth the extra $150 over a 1080 if you're going to be gaming at the highest end.
If you've got a 1080p monitor, even the 1070 is overkill for most games, but the 1080 isn't going to get you any meaningful improvement. It's a marked step up at 1440p, but the 1070 is still going to pull above 60 FPS in almost anything but there's enough of a gap for the 1080 to shine. However, the Ti is going to be an even bigger leap and more future proof than a 1080 if you plan on keeping the same GPU for a while. If you're gaming at 4k, you're going to need the Ti as the 1080 can't always get acceptable framerates.
Your comment may yet prove to be very insightful. They have done it to cut costs by removing 1 memory chip and probably also to differentiate it from the 12G Titian.
Good post cakefish. I guess the only difference is the prices this time around. In all cases the x80 user also payed a little less than for the Ti card. 780 launch was $50 less than 780 Ti, and 980 was $100 less than 980 Ti. The prices are equal this time for FE users who bit at launch, and even the first wave of aftermarket was usually $650+.
But, in general, Nvidia has a fairly consistent cycle and being on either the x80 or Ti cycle gets you the fastest card in the world for a while, followed by months of being dethroned as king. In most cases x80 is cheaper, and in all cases it has lower power consumption. I'd argue the x80 cycle may actually be better from this perspective.
480 15.6fps
580 18fps (+15.4%), $499 - cost same as (+0%) 480 at launch
680 25.6fps (+42.2%), $499 - cost same as (+0%) 580 at launch
780 35fps (+36.7%), $649 - cost $150 more (+30%) than 680 at launch
780 Ti 39.8fps (+13.7%), $699 - cost $50 more (+7.7%) than 780 at launch
980 46.4fps (+16.6%), $549 - cost $150 less (-21.5%) than 780 Ti at launch
980 Ti 58.6fps (+26.3%), $649 - cost $100 more (+18.2%) than 980 at launch
1080 77.6fps (+32.4%), $699 - cost $50 more (+7.7%) than 980 Ti at launch
1080 Ti ??? (+35-40%???), $699 - cost same as (+0%) 1080 at launch
OK so this is only 5 games, so it's obviously by no means a scientific conclusion. The other games in article follow similar patterns though. The 1080 was the greatest increase in performance over the preceding flagship GPU since the 780. It came at a $50 premium (+7.7%) vs the 980 Ti (looking only at Founder's Edition pricing). It has to be said that the 1080 Ti is even superior value at potentially 35-40% faster (assuming NVIDIA's promotional figures are accurate) than the 1080 at the same price point. However, it does not mean that the 1080 was a bad deal at the time. If you look at the 980 Ti, it cost $100 more (+18.2%) than the 980 at launch and yet offered a similar, if not slightly smaller performance bump than the 1080 vs 980 Ti. The 780 Ti also offered a relatively small performance boost, whilst being $50 more (+7.7%) expensive than the 780. Even the 780 itself with that big performance boost was asking $150 extra (+30%) for that privilege.
So, it looks like the 1080 Ti is indeed by far the best deal since the 680. But the 1080 and 980 also offered fairly compelling value propositions vs the preceding flagship GPU. The 980 Ti, 780 Ti and 780 weren't quite as compelling when taking both price increases/decreases and relative performance boosts into perspective.
So yeah... 1080 is being outdone by 1080 Ti for sure, but it also beat every other recent flagship NVIDIA GPU in recent years, with the possible exception of the 980. I guess it's debatable whether the significant price drop, paired with the modest performance boost of the 980 represents a better deal (relative to the 780 Ti) than the much larger performance boost, but small price rise of the 1080 (relative to the 980 Ti).
All very good points. While I think that 1080 Ti offers a better deal than 1080 did at launch, I don't think that the 1080 was a bad deal.
. . .
The 1080 was the greatest increase in performance over the preceding flagship GPU since the 780. It came at a $50 premium (+7.7%) vs the 980 Ti (looking only at Founder's Edition pricing).
It doesn't really matter what the 1080 was relative to the 980 Ti or how it stacked up historically, it's that compared to the 1070 it wasn't a good buy. The performance difference at 1080p was meaningless since both are monsters, at 1440p the 1070 still does well enough that it's hard to justify the extra cost (which was utterly massive relative to performance gain) and at 4k the 1080 isn't good enough as a single card solution.
Right now there's a big hole in the market at $300 that the 970 used to live in and where it made a killing. I think Nvidia originally wanted the 1060 to fill in that spot, but AMD was pretty aggressive with price cuts (and really needed to be given that Polaris was their only chip) which meant you couldn't sell a 1060 at $300, or at least not for very long. I think the 1070 price will come down once it gets some competition, but who knows how long that will take.
However, I don't think the 1080 was every a good buy, and even now at $500-$550 you're better off spending less and getting a 1070 or spending around the same amount more to get a 1080 Ti that will be able to get 60 FPS at 4k with no or fewer compromises.
1080 seems to be in a weird place in my opinion. With the FE pricing it's $400 for a 1070, $550 for a 1080, and $700 for a 1080Ti. The 1080 doesn't seem like enough of a step above the 1070 to be worth $150 more and the 1080 Ti is definitely likely worth the extra $150 over a 1080 if you're going to be gaming at the highest end.
If you've got a 1080p monitor, even the 1070 is overkill for most games, but the 1080 isn't going to get you any meaningful improvement. It's a marked step up at 1440p, but the 1070 is still going to pull above 60 FPS in almost anything but there's enough of a gap for the 1080 to shine. However, the Ti is going to be an even bigger leap and more future proof than a 1080 if you plan on keeping the same GPU for a while. If you're gaming at 4k, you're going to need the Ti as the 1080 can't always get acceptable framerates.
When do custom manufacturers typically start selling non-reference versions of cards? Is it within a few weeks or many months later? Trying to decide about waiting or going with a reference design.
Annoying that there are basically two exact threads, one here and one is NV forums.
Anyways, I will likely get this soon. Will be a pretty decent upgrade from my 1070 and 3440x1440 can be a killer in some games with eye candy on. Obviously wait for reviews, but 35% up from a 1080 which is a good amount up from my 1070 already would be nice.
When do custom manufacturers typically start selling non-reference versions of cards? Is it within a few weeks or many months later? Trying to decide about waiting or going with a reference design.
Its typically not up to them. They typically have X number of reference orders that they have to fill. Once those are filled, then they can come out with custom cooled version. Like with the RX480, it took over a month just to fill the large amount of orders for the reference versions.
Annoying that there are basically two exact threads, one here and one is NV forums.
Anyways, I will likely get this soon. Will be a pretty decent upgrade from my 1070 and 3440x1440 can be a killer in some games with eye candy on. Obviously wait for reviews, but 35% up from a 1080 which is a good amount up from my 1070 already would be nice.
Its typically not up to them. They typically have X number of reference orders that they have to fill. Once those are filled, then they can come out with custom cooled version. Like with the RX480, it took over a month just to fill the large amount of orders for the reference versions.
This close to Volta? I've heard that Volta is coming in a few months, right after Vega releases. Since Volta will offer better performance for less power and be cheaper I don't see how this is such a good deal this far into the lifecycle of Pascal. Its not like some new features or something, its just a slightly cut down Titan chip they've had released for 9 months for cheaper.
8800 90): Nov 2006
8800 (65): Nov 2007 (1 year)
9800 (65): Apr 2008 (8 months)
9800 (55): July 2008 (3 months)
285 (55): Jan 2009 (6 months)
480 (40): Mar 2010 (1 year 2 months)
580 (40): Nov 2010 (8 months)
680 (28): Mar 2012 (1 year 4 months)
780 (28): May 2013 (1 year 2 months)
980 (28): Sept 2014 (1 year 4 months)
1080 (16): May 2016 (1 year 8 months)
So assuming at worse case it takes a year and 8 months (980 -> 1080 which was the longest time) that gives you until Jan next year, or 10 months for $700, or $70/month. Titan XP would have been out for 17 months, so also $70/month. So you are basically getting the same worth that people who bought the original Titan XP are, they've just had it for an extra 7 months already.
If it only takes 1 year 4 months (so 1 yr 3 month for TXP) the TXP was top for $92/month and 1080 Ti was top for 6 months @ $116/month.
It's a bigger chip than GP102, it has more raw computing power (~12.5 TFlops for Vega vs ~11 TFlops for Titan X Pascal), and should have roughly the same memory bandwidth. Architecturally, now that AMD has implemented tiled rendering and fixed the front-end bottlenecks of old GCN, Vega should be fairly close to Pascal as well. IMO, if it falls short of Titan X Pascal / GTX 1080 Ti, that's indicative of either immature drivers, or hardware glitches that require a respin.
This close to Volta? I've heard that Volta is coming in a few months, right after Vega releases. Since Volta will offer better performance for less power and be cheaper I don't see how this is such a good deal this far into the lifecycle of Pascal. Its not like some new features or something, its just a slightly cut down Titan chip they've had released for 9 months for cheaper.
8800 90): Nov 2006
8800 (65): Nov 2007 (1 year)
9800 (65): Apr 2008 (8 months)
9800 (55): July 2008 (3 months)
285 (55): Jan 2009 (6 months)
480 (40): Mar 2010 (1 year 2 months)
580 (40): Nov 2010 (8 months)
680 (28): Mar 2012 (1 year 4 months)
780 (28): May 2013 (1 year 2 months)
980 (28): Sept 2014 (1 year 4 months)
1080 (16): May 2016 (1 year 8 months)
So assuming at worse case it takes a year and 8 months (980 -> 1080 which was the longest time) that gives you until Jan next year, or 10 months for $700, or $70/month. Titan XP would have been out for 17 months, so also $70/month. So you are basically getting the same worth that people who bought the original Titan XP are, they've just had it for an extra 7 months already.
If it only takes 1 year 4 months (so 1 yr 3 month for TXP) the TXP was top for $92/month and 1080 Ti was top for 6 months @ $116/month.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Facebook
Twitter