How fast do you think GeForce GTX 1070 will be?

[Kris194]

And when you stop getting priority for driver optimizations, you will change your mind very quickly.

There's a reason why 970/980/980 Ti prices on the secondary market are tanking right now. If you want top performance from nVidia you need their latest generation of cards.

Do you want to tell me that GTX 980 Ti which have been released a year ago and is something what GTX x70 series used to be in the past (slightly cut full chip) will stop to perform well after a year? 😵 Let me tell you something, currently I have GTX 770 which is nothing more than a slightly overclocked GTX 680 which have been released back in 2012 (4 years ago) and it still performs great in many games at 1080p. And you have to remember that higher stock clock means less overclocking headroom. It's really better to have 2048SP ~1,586 GHz GPU than 1920SP ~1,692 GHz GPU if we are talking about the same architecture. For me it's not about peformance only but also about not paying for heavily overpriced GPU. I really miss times before Kepler. Look at the GTX 260, look at the GTX 470 that did cost 349$ at launch 😀

 

[boozzer]

to be honest, if pascal can brute force it in dx12, compute would not matter at all.

so now it is all about benchmarks.

alot of 980 ti owners are now flooding the used market. it was/is pretty crazy when I scanned through some of the places I visit. there are even stickied threads telling every one to wait for 1070 before buying any used 980 ti 🙂 this feels like 780 ti all over again.

 

[tential]

The 970 is better than the 780Ti and it was cheaper.

What makes you think the 1070 won't be better than the 980Ti and be cheaper? Do you know something we don't? Please share if you do Kris194.

 

[PPB]

Do you want to tell me that GTX 980 Ti which have been released a year ago and is something what GTX x70 series used to be in the past (slightly cut full chip) will stop to perform well after a year? 😵 Let me tell you something, currently I have GTX 770 which is nothing more than a slightly overclocked GTX 680 which have been released back in 2012 (4 years ago) and it still performs great in many games at 1080p. And you have to remember that higher stock clock means less overclocking headroom. It's really better to have 2048SP ~1,586 GHz GPU than 1920SP ~1,692 GHz GPU if we are talking about the same architecture. For me it's not about peformance only but also about not paying for heavily overpriced GPU. I really miss times before Kepler. Look at the GTX 260, look at the GTX 470 that did cost 349$ at launch 😀

Just tell them you will ditch your 980ti and get dual 1080s and they will stop insisting you. That is my policy when salesmen get annoying trying ti shove a product down my throat, a little white lie to pass by.

Sent from my XT1040 using Tapatalk


Threadcrapping and trolling are not allowed
Markfw900

 

[Kris194]

I didn't say it. I said that GTX 1070 stock will not beat GTX 980 Ti 1,4 GHz boost. GTX 980 Ti 1,4 GHz boost will be much faster than GTX 1070 stock. So like I said, I will buy used GTX 980 Ti or I will buy Polaris card or I will stick to my GTX 770 for another year.

 

[PPB]

I didn't say it. I said that GTX 1070 stock will not beat GTX 980 Ti 1,4 GHz boost. GTX 980 Ti 1,4 GHz boost will be much faster than GTX 1070 stock. So like I said, I will buy used GTX 980 Ti or I will buy Polaris card or I will stick to my GTX 770 for another year.

Reread my post, just to show how a single letter typo can change the meaning of a paragraph so much.

Sent from my XT1040 using Tapatalk

 

[Lepton87]

1070 RRP is $379. $450 is the founders edition - unless you really want the reference cooler I don't know why you'd pay that.

I see only one reason and that is availability. I am convinced aftermarket models will be superior to the finder's edition but they won't be available at the same time just as the name implies. Just another way to milk their customers, I really hope that not many people will fall for that, people need to draw NV the line, NVidia's action got out of hand already at least by my account. How much more will people take? NV isn't just going to stop itself and they get more greedy with each new release. First it was a 1000$ flagship that wasn't even fully enabled so they could release another card with a more sane price-point that was fully enabled so some people would pay twice for the same performance and in the end both cards fell victim to another neat trick. Planned obsolescence. Both cards are not suited to new games with cutting-edge graphics so if people wanted to play those they released a new card which is all fine and dandy but they did the titan all over again but this time the immediate follow-up was both cheaper and with the after-market models faster, sometimes significantly. Right off the but up to 19% faster clocked (Gigabyte 980Ti G1) which later became even 29% faster clocked (ASUS ROG MATRIX in gaming mode). Now they continue to nickel-and-dime their customers any way they can. Changing the SLI fingers so they can sell the bridges in the process making them solid bridges so people need to buy specifically for their motherboard's slot arrangement. I don't buy the bandwidth argument and it is still pitiful compared to what PCI-E offers while costing nothing. Not to mention only supporting proprietary variable refresh rate technology and making sure only to support their own scalers for which they have to charge a pretty steep price because G-SYNC monitor are significantly more expensive then their free-sync equivalents. There are some laptop that lack G-SYNC module so it's painfully obvious that charging so much for their G-SYNC module and not letting manufacturers to support it without paying for something that is not technically necessary. Well, then we have their GAME-WORKS which bribes the developers to make the games in many cases worse just because it cripples the competitor's cards more. That's probably the tip of the iceberg.

Do you want to tell me that GTX 980 Ti which have been released a year ago and is something what GTX x70 series used to be in the past (slightly cut full chip) will stop to perform well after a year? 😵 Let me tell you something, currently I have GTX 770 which is nothing more than a slightly overclocked GTX 680 which have been released back in 2012 (4 years ago) and it still performs great in many games at 1080p. And you have to remember that higher stock clock means less overclocking headroom. It's really better to have 2048SP ~1,586 GHz GPU than 1920SP ~1,692 GHz GPU if we are talking about the same architecture. For me it's not about peformance only but also about not paying for heavily overpriced GPU. I really miss times before Kepler. Look at the GTX 260, look at the GTX 470 that did cost 349$ at launch 😀

You just made the argument for him. Compare your card to the competing cards at launch and do that now. See how much relative performance have changed?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Just tell them you will ditch your 980ti and get dual 1080s and they will stop insisting you. That is my policy when salesmen get annoying trying ti shove a product down my throat, a little white lie to pass by.

Sent from my XT1040 using Tapatalk

He doesn't have a 980 Ti already, which is why people are trying to convince him that a 1070 would be a better bet than a used 980 Ti. Please actually read the discussion before accusing others of trying to "sell" anybody on anything.

 

[Sweepr]

He doesn't have a 980 Ti already, which is why people are trying to convince him that a 1070 would be a better bet than a used 980 Ti. Please actually read the discussion before accusing others of trying to "sell" anybody on anything.

Throwing personal attacks is easier I guess. Next time a salesman tries to convince us that mainstream desktop cards will do miracles at lower prices/TDP than the competition, I'll remmember this policy.

 

[Kris194]

Afterall one thing doesn't suit in this rumour. Nvidia clearly said that yields are great so what would be the reason to gimp GTX 1070 so hard? It gives them literally nothing. Do you remember leaks where GTX 1070 was meant to cost about ~500$? When Nvidia announced that it will cost 379$ everyone was like how, impossible etc. Maybe this time they want to make the same effect but with the specification of the card. If most GP104 chips would be faulty by 25% it would be opposite to great yields.

edit

If GTX 1070 would really have only 1920SP there would be no reason to keep everything on GTX 1070 under wraps for such a long time. Last time I remember something like this it was with GTX 670 and we all know how great it was 🙂

 

[tential]

I didn't say it. I said that GTX 1070 stock will not beat GTX 980 Ti 1,4 GHz boost. GTX 980 Ti 1,4 GHz boost will be much faster than GTX 1070 stock. So like I said, I will buy used GTX 980 Ti or I will buy Polaris card or I will stick to my GTX 770 for another year.

I don't think that's a bad plan, but I think you should probably consider the 1070 as well if you're considering a 980Ti used as they'd be around the same price and the 1070 will last longer.

IMO,
1070
Polaris
Or stick with GTX 770.

Older Nvidia tech just doesn't hold up well, especially in the newer games.

This isn't about people trying to sell you on Nvidia tech as some may have you believe, but there is a large consensus here that staying on the latest Nvidia tech is definitely preferable.

Afterall one thing doesn't suit in this rumour. Nvidia clearly said that yields are great so what would be the reason to gimp GTX 1070 so hard? It gives them literally nothing. Do you remember leaks where GTX 1070 was meant to cost about ~500$? When Nvidia announced that it will cost 379$ everyone was like how, impossible etc. Maybe this time they want to make the same effect but with the specification of the card. If most GP104 chips would be faulty by 25% it would be opposite to great yields.

It's just marketing speak. Without exact numbers, no one knows the yields are great or not. Great to who? Great to Nvidia's expectations? Great to a random goat they asked? You really don't know. Don't read too much into the press statements from either camp right now.

 

[Lepton87]

Afterall one thing doesn't suit in this rumour. Nvidia clearly said that yields are great so what would be the reason to gimp GTX 1070 so hard? It gives them literally nothing. Do you remember leaks where GTX 1070 was meant to cost about ~500$? When Nvidia announced that it will cost 379$ everyone was like how, impossible etc. Maybe this time they want to make the same effect but with the specification of the card. If most GP104 chips would be faulty by 25% it would be opposite to great yields.

Nothing? They want more people to buy the more expensive model - the 1080 and if the yields are great than they would have to sell fully functional dice as 1070s if they made it way more appealing then the senior model. If the yields are great then they don't have that many not fully functional dice. So of course they prefer to earn more money as long as they don't have to worry about competition then relatively weak junior model makes sense and when the competition arrives with an actually very competitive card that is a better buy then 1070 they may counter it with a 1070Ti.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Afterall one thing doesn't suit in this rumour. Nvidia clearly said that yields are great so what would be the reason to gimp GTX 1070 so hard?

They want to be able to sell you the GTX 1080. If the 1080 doesn't offer much more performance over the 1070, then why would anybody go for the more expensive 1080? Product segmentation basics 🙂

It gives them literally nothing. Do you remember leaks where GTX 1070 was meant to cost about ~500$? When Nvidia announced that it will cost 379$ everyone was like how, impossible etc. Maybe this time they want to make the same effect but with the specification of the card. If most GP104 chips would be faulty by 25% it would be opposite to great yields.

I don't remember those leaks, no. I remember all of us sitting around speculating about various price points, but none of us actually "knew" anything.

edit

If GTX 1070 would really have only 1920SP there would be no reason to keep everything on GTX 1070 under wraps for such a long time. Last time I remember something like this it was with GTX 670 and we all know how great it was 🙂

IIRC, GTX 670 took a lot of the GTX 680's thunder.

 

[Kris194]

It's just marketing speak. Without exact numbers, no one knows the yields are great or not. Great to who? Great to Nvidia's expectations? Great to a random goat they asked? You really don't know. Don't read too much into the press statements from either camp right now.

Marketing is one thing but lying your shareholders is not the best thing you can do.

IIRC, GTX 670 took a lot of the GTX 680's thunder.

You do and you should know that they were keeping everything in secret for about 2 months. GTX 670 specification leaked not even 14 days before its release. Right now, we're almost one month before GTX 1070 release. I really doubt that anyone except Nvidia and their partners have GTX 1070.

I don't remember those leaks, no. I remember all of us sitting around speculating about various price points, but none of us actually "knew" anything.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1598114/chiphell-possible-gtx-1070-and-gtx-1080-price-revealed

 

[Lepton87]

They want to be able to sell you the GTX 1080. If the 1080 doesn't offer much more performance over the 1070, then why would anybody go for the more expensive 1080? Product segmentation basics 🙂


IIRC, GTX 670 took a lot of the GTX 680's thunder.

We seem to agree on the first point but about your second point. It was different for NV because they were launching second and they knew what they were up against. They had to make 670 competitive with the 7950 and with any counter that AMD might do. NV must have realized that 7950 was clocked very conservatively and that releasing a faster clocked variant would be child's play. Really, 800MHz was a very low clock for Tahiti it routinely overclocked over 1GHz and quite often reached 1.2GHz which was an incredible OC of 50%.
They soon released the boost-version which boosted to 925MHz which is an increase of 15% which is nothing to sneeze at. NV may well release a 15% faster 1070 to counter Polaris if it is indeed deemed to be a competitor. 6.5TFlops+15% would be a much more respectable 7.5TFlops which would make the difference in compute performance of the top card and second tier card seem quite normal and in-line with previous generations of cards. The difference between the flagship and the second-tier card seems too big.

 

[Arachnotronic]

We seem to agree on the first point but about your second point. It was different for NV because they were launching second and they knew what they were up against. They had to make 670 competitive with the 7950 and with any counter that AMD might do. NV must have realized that 7950 was clocked very conservatively and that releasing a faster clocked variant would be child's play. Really, 800MHz was a very low clock for Tahiti it routinely overclocked over 1GHz and quite often reached 1.2GHz which was an incredible OC of 50%.
They soon released the boost-version which boosted to 925MHz which is an increase of 15% which is nothing to sneeze at. NV may well release a 15% faster 1070 to counter Polaris if it is indeed deemed to be a competitor. 6.5TFlops+15% would be a much more respectable 7.5TFlops which would make the difference in compute performance of the top card and second tier card seem quite normal and in-line with previous generations of cards. The difference between the flagship and the second-tier card seems too big.

To be candid, I think NVIDIA's competitive intelligence probably knows all about AMD's plans, which is why they launched first and picked the price points that they did. I find it very unlikely that Polaris will be able to "surprise" them.

Anyway, in this day and age, the AIB partners overclock stuff like crazy out of the box, so I don't expect NVIDIA to "speed bump" the 1070. The AIB partners will do that for them and probably on launch day in order to make more $.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Marketing is one thing but lying your shareholders is not the best thing you can do.

It's not, it's in fact illegal. Also, you can tell from NVIDIA's gross margin guidance for FQ2 2017 that margins on Pascal are not anything out of the ordinary, suggesting yields are in good shape.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1598114/chiphell-possible-gtx-1070-and-gtx-1080-price-revealed

Interesting, thanks.

 

[Lepton87]

To be candid, I think NVIDIA's competitive intelligence probably knows all about AMD's plans, which is why they launched first and picked the price points that they did. I find it very unlikely that Polaris will be able to "surprise" them.

Anyway, in this day and age, the AIB partners overclock stuff like crazy out of the box, so I don't expect NVIDIA to "speed bump" the 1070. The AIB partners will do that for them and probably on launch day in order to make more $.

Well I'm also inclined to think that but then I remember when NV was caught with their pants down when 4850 and 4870 were launched. It was made painfully obvious by their 100$ retroactive price cut a move I would never suspect NV of today to make.

 

[Head1985]

If true it is the pefect reason for me to don't buy any Pascal cards and very unfunny joke. 1920SP (half of GP100) for 379$? What a garbage...

I am with you..1920Sp is just wrong and bad.
X70 card was always slightly cutdown SKU from x80 card with far better price.Also offer 15-20% performance boost over old Flagship card(new node)

What they are doing now is that they cut 1070 to the point its not 1070 anymore.Its just not x70 card by parameters only by marketing name.
Its not at the same performance level as 1080
33% SP cut its just crazy insane.

Do you guys remembter x70 cards from the past?
GTX470 16% faster than GTX285 for 350USD(GTX285 is todays TITANX BTW)

GTX670 18% faster than GTX580(Again GTX580 is TODAYS TITANX)

 

[Kris194]

Anyway, in this day and age, the AIB partners overclock stuff like crazy out of the box, so I don't expect NVIDIA to "speed bump" the 1070. The AIB partners will do that for them and probably on launch day in order to make more $.

This is another thing, AIB partners wouldn't be very happy with very high boost clocks of GTX 1070 (only 30 - 40 MHz lower than GTX 1080) what's about 2% lower than GTX 1080 clocks and you can clearly see that Nvidia doesn't want to play with them. High clocks of GTX 1070 means less possibilities for AIB partners and finally, less money for them.

Do you guys remembter x70 cards from the past?

I do, I had GTX 470 back in the past, amazing card.

I had three in Tri-SLI. I was so glad to be rid of them in favor of one GTX 580.

SLI was always...problematic and 3-way SLI was even more.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I do, I had GTX 470 back in the past, amazing card.

I had three in Tri-SLI. I was so glad to be rid of them in favor of one GTX 580.

 

[Head1985]

I had three in Tri-SLI. I was so glad to be rid of them in favor of one GTX 580.

Still unless 1070 is 20% faster than TITANX then GTX470 was way way better than 1070 will be.
Same with GTX670 btw

When i look to the past then if 1070 will not be even 15% faster than TITANX then it will be worst cutdown(from "flagship") card EVER on new node.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Still unless 1070 is 20% faster than TITANX then GTX470 was way way better than 1070 will be.
Same with GTX670 btw

When i look to the past then if 1070 will not be even 15% faster than TITANX then it will be worst cutdown(from "flagship") card EVER on new node.

Then don't buy it. It will be a good product for some people, a not-so-good product for others. Plain and simple.

 

[Riek]

1080 brings 9TFlops to the table
1070 brings 6.5 to the table

Given they use the same architecture you already know it will at least be 25% slower.
But there is more, it has a huge bandwidth bottleneck compared to the 1080 or the 980ti.

I believe it will be 5-10% slower than the 980ti and the difference will not be closed with overclocking. It think you will need GDDR5x or hbm to surpass the capabilities of the 980ti.

 

[ShintaiDK]

1080 brings 9TFlops to the table
1070 brings 6.5 to the table

Given they use the same architecture you already know it will at least be 25% slower.
But there is more, it has a huge bandwidth bottleneck compared to the 1080 or the 980ti.

I believe it will be 5-10% slower than the 980ti and the difference will not be closed with overclocking. It think you will need GDDR5x or hbm to surpass the capabilities of the 980ti.

GTX980TI got faster memory bandwidth than GTX1080.

GTX1070 uses 8Ghz GDDR5. So bandwidth to processing power the GTX1070 is better on than the GTX1080. In other words, bandwidth is the least of the GTX1070 worries.