GTX 980 goes mobile

[bradly1101]

This fall, NVIDIA is changing that [gimped mobile GPU's] with the introduction of the GeForce GTX 980 for gaming notebooks. Notice I did not put an 'M' at the end of that name; it's not an accident. NVIDIA has found a way, through binning and component design, to cram the entirety of a GM204-based Maxwell GTX 980 GPU inside portable gaming notebooks.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Worlds-Fastest-Mobile-GPU-Full-GM204-GTX-980-Notebooks

 

[LTC8K6]

That would indicate that a competitor to Nano is quite possible?

 

[alcoholbob]

Any nvidia partner could bin gm204s and put it into a mini itx PCB and match a Nano in performance and beat it in power consumption while they are at it. The issue is there is no point competing with the Nano because there's hardly a market for what the Nano does.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I know I keep asking this, but why isn't the Nano the world's best laptop GPU?

Seems like there is more margin milking the gaming laptop crowd than the Mini ITX crowd.

 

[sm625]

If they can fit it on a MXM module, they can fit it on a card the size of a Nano, or smaller. They wont though, because they know it is a pointless waste of resources.

 

[Pariah]

That would indicate that a competitor to Nano is quite possible?

No. The margins are significantly higher in the mobile market and don't need to be shared with AIB manufacturers. It's also a larger market than the market AMD is targetting with the Nano.

 

[AtenRa]

I know I keep asking this, but why isn't the Nano the world's best laptop GPU?

Seems like there is more margin milking the gaming laptop crowd than the Mini ITX crowd.

Low volumes I guess, they hardly have chips for the desktop and i suppose Laptop market would need even higher volumes.

 

[SPBHM]

No. The margins are significantly higher in the mobile market and don't need to be shared with AIB manufacturers. It's also a larger market than the market AMD is targetting with the Nano.

wouldn't the margins be quite good if they asked "Nano" prices?

it's like double the price of a 970 which also uses 4GB of GDDR5 and GM204 GPU.

 

[RussianSensation]

Very impressive.

Without doing crazy amount of research, a quick google search shows R9 M295X is 79% as fast as a 970M:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/nvidia-vs-amd-gtx-970m-vs-r9-m295x.775226/

Computerbase.de has GTX980 (~ 970M SLI) 66% faster than a 970M:
http://www.computerbase.de/2014-10/...ok-test/3/#abschnitt_benchmarks_in_1920__1080

That means a laptop with NV's GTX980 is going to be 166 / (100*0.79) = 2.10X (or 110% faster) than AMD's best mobile dGPU laptop. That's astounding. If NV improves perf/watt over Maxwell to achieve a performance increase of 1.6-1.9X with Pascal next generation, that would put the next generation 2016-2017 ultra high-end NV-powered laptop at 2.1x 1.6 = 3.36X faster and up to 2.1 x 1.9 = 3.99X faster than a laptop powered by the R9 M295X. AMD is screwed as they are going to be literally 2 full generations behind and will need to come up with 3.36-3.99X the performance jump over R9 M295X to just match a top-of-the-line mobile Pascal chip! I am surprised AMD's mobile dGPU market share is not close to 0% by this point.

Instead of focusing on mobile dGPU market segment they waste marketing $ and efforts on the $650 Nano. OMFGBBQ AMD you keep failing hard at this.

---

As a side note, I can't imagine what kind of laptops will be able to cool a 140-150W TDP binned 980. I presume this will be 8.5-11 lbs briefcases with a screen attached to them? While the performance is impressive for the TDP, I will never consider an 8.5+ lbs brick a laptop and especially since all gaming laptops are basically garbage for battery life. Linus put it best in this video -- gaming laptops are neither great gaming rigs, nor great laptops and you end up paying through the nose for them. I would MUCH prefer to just have a great light laptop with great battery life + a separate uber powerful desktop. To this date I cannot understand the point of $2000-2500 gaming laptops. I asked myself this question when I was in high school, then when I went to university and now that I am working. They still do not make sense to me, but I guess millions of people feel otherwise.

EDIT: Looks like the Aorus X7 with a 980 is very appealing with a thin form factor (much like their GTX970M SLI X7 Pro version).

Now if they could only figure out a way to get 8-10 hours of battery life on a gaming laptop, this would be a breakthrough.

But boy, those grotesque MSI, Alienware and Clevo 8.5-11 lbs gaming laptops are just ugly briefcases/bricks with a screen attached to them. The Aorus X7 / Pro can at least be dual-functional for work + gaming in the workplace, without childish colors and color accents. It can actually be brought to a boardroom meeting but these....ya:

Who the hell buys these ugly monstrosities!

Can't wait for Pascal/16nm GPUs though as it should bring a huge breakthrough due to smaller HBM2 form factor. For laptops, this should provide a big benefit in terms of freed up PCB space that can be utilized towards a bigger battery

 

[tviceman]

That would indicate that a competitor to Nano is quite possible?

The 980 going in laptops will likely have a 20-30 watt lower power usage than a stock reference desktop gtx980. Since the GTX 980 already draws about 25 watts less than the nano (with peak and max power draws being about the same), Nvidia should be able to put the 980 on a mini-ITX card as-is without having to resort to MXM shenanigans.

 

[Rakehellion]

Wow, this thread is nothing but Nano bashing?

What's the power consumption on that chip? I'm guessing they have a 990 around the corner.

 

[Techhog]

Any nvidia partner could bin gm204s and put it into a mini itx PCB and match a Nano in performance and beat it in power consumption while they are at it. The issue is there is no point competing with the Nano because there's hardly a market for what the Nano does.

I can't wait to see if this is what you think a year from now.

 

[Techhog]

Wow, this thread is nothing but Nano bashing?

What's the power consumption on that chip? I'm guessing they have a 990 around the corner.

What would this have to do with a 990?

 

[Pariah]

wouldn't the margins be quite good if they asked "Nano" prices?

it's like double the price of a 970 which also uses 4GB of GDDR5 and GM204 GPU.

Not as good as mobile which carries even higher margins than similarly priced enthusiast cards. Also, again there are no 3rd party AIB makers in the mobile market which further reduces profits. High end mobile is also a larger market than whatever market AMD was targeting with the Nano.

 

[RussianSensation]

The 980 going in laptops will likely have a 20-30 watt lower power usage than a stock reference desktop gtx980. Since the GTX 980 already draws about 25 watts less than the nano (with peak and max power draws being about the same), Nvidia should be able to put the 980 on a mini-ITX card as-is without having to resort to MXM shenanigans.

Ya, they can definitely do it but why would they when they can bin 140W 980s for laptops and sell them as +$500 add-on options in laptops where there is 0 competition from AMD? With 0 competition on the laptop side, it ensures that NV can basically charge what it wants within reason (PCPer reports 25% premiums on top of 980 laptops). I think what could make sense for NV is to use some of these highly binned 980 chips to produce a GTX690 successor that would go head-to-head against the rumored Fury X2. With this strategy, NV kills 2 birds with 1 stone.

980 performance in a laptop though has me uber excited about the progress in GPU performance in laptops with Pascal in 2016 and Volta in 2018. Soon it's going to be possible to have 980Ti level of GPU performance in a 4.5-5.5 lbs 15.6 inch laptop.

I just hope we can still buy 1080P 15.6" laptops with those powerful next gen GPUs as I have no interest in a 3K-4K 15.6" laptop.

 

[poofyhairguy]

To this date I cannot understand the point of $2000-2500 gaming laptops.

I learned the answer to this question selling PCs at Dell. The answer is that when you graduate high school your rich aunt is only willing to buy you one PC for college use. Hitting her up for a gaming desktop and a chromebook blows your cover, plus dorms are small. So you rack up her credit card on a heavy $2500 monster laptop before she thinks twice. In fact, you might do this even if you don't game in a hope of buying a computer that is relevant for four years.

I made a killing back at Dell during August, so many dads and Aunts buying overpriced laptops. That was before MacBook really took off though, I bet they kinda dominate the rich aunt non-gamer demographic now.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I learned the answer to this question selling PCs at Dell. The answer is that when you graduate high school your rich aunt is only willing to buy you one PC for college use. Hitting her up for a gaming desktop and a chromebook blows your cover, plus dorms are small. So you rack up her credit card on a heavy $2500 monster laptop before she thinks twice. In fact, you might do this even if you don't game in a hope of buying a computer that is relevant for four years.

I made a killing back at Dell during August, so many dads and Aunts buying overpriced laptops. That was before MacBook really took off though, I bet they kinda dominate the rich aunt non-gamer demographic now.

:biggrin:

 

[tviceman]

Ya, they can definitely do it but why would they when they can bin 140W 980s for laptops and sell them as +$500 add-on options in laptops

By $500 add-on options, you mean $500 more than the GTX 970m. HahHAHahahahAHAHHA

I think what could make sense for NV is to use some of these highly binned 980 chips to produce a GTX690 successor that would go head-to-head against the rumored Fury X2. With this strategy, NV kills 2 birds with 1 stone.

A dual 980 card would get whipped vs. a dual Fiji card, plus it would cannibalize 980 TI sales. As you've stated one way or another time and again, lately it seems like Nvidia is only competing with themselves when it comes to GPU sales. They would be best served to just ignore AMD's dual card like they did with their 700 series Kepler cards.

Anyways, until I can get 80-100% performance improvement at a similar perf/w for <= $500 over my GTX 980, I'm sitting tight. So basically, given that price hikes are likely, I'm not upgrading until AMD or Nvidia are fire selling their next gen mid-range before bringing out revisions or rebadges. My reason for wanting to stay below a 200w GPU is I am getting this case when it goes up for crowd funding: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1799326

 

[beginner99]

Instead of focusing on mobile dGPU market segment they waste marketing $ and efforts on the $650 Nano. OMFGBBQ AMD you keep failing hard at this.

As was already mentioned in this thread this probably has a slot to do with availability or lack thereof. If you only have a handful chips in the best bin, you can't go into the laptop market. To little volume to develop a laptop around it. So you either don't do anything with these golden chips or release something like the Nano.

But yeah with AMD's limited research budget I'm not sure wasting money on something like the Nano is a great idea. On the other hand I doubt it took that much time and resources. All you need is a smaller board and different cooler. Not really rocket science.

All in all Fiji Volume seems to be so low, they will never make any money from it. It's back to classic AMD. Hope. Hope that NV has huge trouble with the node jump + hbm2 and experience from Fiji helps AMD to be first to market with 16nm HBM2 for like half a year.

 

[crisium]

The Clevo Bezel.

 

[RussianSensation]

By $500 add-on options, you mean $500 more than the GTX 970m. HahHAHahahahAHAHHA

Right and it's FAR harder to up-sell a 130-140W TDP binned 980 @ premium pricing on the desktop where most gamers have solid PSUs, and larger cases. By the looks of it the Nano is hardly selling well but even if it were a $450 card, it would still sell nowhere near to what NV can get for a GTX980 on the laptop. That's because a $2000-2250 laptop looks like a good deal over a $1600 one with a 970M because the former has 80% more performance. That's why NV's graphics card business has been so successful too - their pure dominance in all the critical $200+ OEM mobile dGPU add-on segments. They are killing it in terms of volumes, profit margins and performance lead.

But you know what's exciting that if Pascal gives us 1.6-1.9X boost in perf/watt over Maxwell, the GP204 successor will blow the doors off a 980Ti in a laptop and then by 2018 with Volta, another 1.5-1.6X increase (at minimum) and we'll have > 980Ti SLI performance in a laptop!

A dual 980 card would get whipped vs. a dual Fiji card, plus it would cannibalize 980 TI sales.

Depends on how cut down/downclocked Fury X2 is. Also, I presume a GTX990 would cost $999 as it would beat 980Ti so I don't see how it would cannibalize sales of the 980Ti.

As you've stated one way or another time and again, lately it seems like Nvidia is only competing with themselves when it comes to GPU sales. They would be best served to just ignore AMD's dual card like they did with their 700 series Kepler cards.

Maybe you are right. I personally would have liked to see a fully unlocked 980Ti with another 100-150mhz+ increase in base clocks, priced at say $649, and a price drop on the regular 980Ti to $549 but I think NV sees no pressure on this front at all. A shame really as this will be the first NV generation I can recall where we might never get a fully unlocked consumer flagship chip at $700 or less.

Anyways, until I can get 80-100% performance improvement at a similar perf/w for <= $500 over my GTX 980, I'm sitting tight.

Well the other thing is a 980 OC to 1.5Ghz (I am sure your MSI Gaming can hit that?) is probably very fast for the vast majority of games (save GPU killers like Vanishing Ethan Carter Redux with 200% scaling on ) so it's not as if you are in a desperate need of an upgrade.

So basically, given that price hikes are likely, I'm not upgrading until AMD or Nvidia are fire selling their next gen mid-range before bringing out revisions or rebadges.

80-100% increase in performance under 200W real world power usage is a tall order. I don't think Pascal can do that because that's > 2X the perf/watt increase in 1 generation. I could see a 250W Pascal doing it but a below 200W desktop part? You might have to wait until 2018 with Volta or bump up your power usage headroom.

My reason for wanting to stay below a 200w GPU is I am getting this case when it goes up for crowd funding: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1799326

That case looks epic. If you do end up getting, please create a separate build thread of your new rig with high quality pics. :biggrin:

BTW, that case looks like it can easily accommodate a 980Ti (and subsequent 250W TDP Pascal/Volta successors). I am not sure why are you limiting your upgrade options to only 200W. Maybe sell your underpowered PSU and spring for the 700W Platinum small form factor from Silverstone.

Anyway, looking forward to your build once it goes through.

 

[raghu78]

I know I keep asking this, but why isn't the Nano the world's best laptop GPU?

Seems like there is more margin milking the gaming laptop crowd than the Mini ITX crowd.

AMD is definitely going to have a mobile Fiji in early 2016 , probably CES 2016. Right now AMD are working through the supply issues and ramping Fiji and HBM volumes. Fiji at 175w TDP is 6-8% faster than GTX 980 at 1440p and 10-12% faster at 4k. It runs at clocks of 850-900 Mhz depending on game.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/70246-amd-r9-nano-review-18.html

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-09/amd-radeon-r9-nano-test/3/

http://www.computerbase.de/2015-09/...t/4/#diagramm-rating-2560-1440-hohe-qualitaet

Given that Nano loses 15% performance at 4k and 12% performance at 1440p compared to Fury X by downclocking 150-200 Mhz and cutting TDP by 100w, I would say a 120W Fiji would run around 750 - 775 Mhz and be able to match a desktop GTX 980 at 4k while coming in a bit slower at 1440p. AMD will be able to make higher sales margins by selling Fiji into high end gaming notebooks where AMD has been absent for more than 2 years. AMD might also be waiting for HBM1 8 Hi chips to be available as that would allow them to bump VRAM to 8 GB which would be a key marketing point especially when putting mobile Fijis in CF for 4k notebook gaming.

 

[Pariah]

AMD is definitely going to have a mobile Fiji in early 2016 , probably CES 2016. Right now AMD are working through the supply issues and ramping Fiji and HBM volumes. Fiji at 175w TDP is 6-8% faster than GTX 980 at 1440p and 10-12% faster at 4k. It runs at clocks of 850-900 Mhz depending on game.

Which is meaningless for the mobile market. Who on earth wants a 17" 4k screen let alone a 15"? Unless you're a photographer, the screen would be useless for pretty much anything else except killing your battery even when just squinting at your desktop. 1080p is still a rather niche feature in the laptop market since humans' eyes haven't improved over the past 10 years, and neither has Windows when it comes to scaling. At 1080p, Nvidia is winning, so even when they are inferior to AMD, Nvidia seems make sure it's only in areas where it doesn't matter. If AMD was seriously thinking of bringing Fiji to the mobile market, they didn't plan it out very well.

 

[raghu78]

Which is meaningless for the mobile market. Who on earth wants a 17" 4k screen let alone a 15"? Unless you're a photographer, the screen would be useless for pretty much anything else except killing your battery even when just squinting at your desktop. 1080p is still a rather niche feature in the laptop market since humans' eyes haven't improved over the past 10 years, and neither has Windows when it comes to scaling. At 1080p, Nvidia is winning, so even when they are inferior to AMD, Nvidia seems make sure it's only in areas where it doesn't matter. If AMD was seriously thinking of bringing Fiji to the mobile market, they didn't plan it out very well.

sorry but there is a market for greater than 1080p resolution in gaming notebooks.

http://www.xoticpc.com/custom-gaming-laptops-notebooks-3k4klaptops-ct-95_51_479.html

http://4k.com/laptop/

 

[Techhog]

By $500 add-on options, you mean $500 more than the GTX 970m. HahHAHahahahAHAHHA

You mean 980M.

Still, these have a place. Obviously not to any of you people here since you can't see beyond your own needs, but they do.