• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NVIDIA Pascal Thread

Page 149 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
96Firebird said:
Ahh, I remember the old days of fear mongering that the Titan X was going to be $1200+...

And people lapped it up.

It seems we've come full circle, now the next Titan will be $1200+...
Click to expand...

Do you remember the days of many (especially Nvidia supporter) posters on this very forum saying that there's no way the 6950X will cost more than USD 999 or this would break Intel's practice of flagship HEDT pricing? And now just wait for the confirmation of the massive bump in price for the flagship. And I predicted it would happen on this very forum. And WCCFTECH has been saying that there'd be a bump in the price for ages too - not everything they write is mere clickbait.

If the MSRP of the 1080 is 599, what will the MSRP of the 1080 TI be? It doesn't need to be too high if it's released far after the 1080 itself, but I'd guess around 799 USD MSRP or a bit more, with the Titan at least USD 999.

I don't know where the 'fear mongering' comes from - it seems pretty clear to me that Nvidia wants to start charging more money, which is good for the company if their products still sell so well. People (like me) may be unhappy at first, but eventually they'll choose between spending so much money on PC gaming, or just buy an OLED TV and a next gen console and be done with it (shrug).
 
I'm one that is willing to reduce gfx settings to satisfy my 144 Hz screen (well 90+ is nice, I can't really tell 120 vs 144).

Gonna sit tight with my Titan X and gsync 2560x1440. Maybe post-Pascal will bring a compelling upgrade in 2018, plus an oled 4K screen or something, heh.
 
Aristotelian said:
Do you remember the days of many (especially Nvidia supporter) posters on this very forum saying that there's no way the 6950X will cost more than USD 999 or this would break Intel's practice of flagship HEDT pricing? And now just wait for the confirmation of the massive bump in price for the flagship. And I predicted it would happen on this very forum. And WCCFTECH has been saying that there'd be a bump in the price for ages too - not everything they write is mere clickbait.

If the MSRP of the 1080 is 599, what will the MSRP of the 1080 TI be? It doesn't need to be too high if it's released far after the 1080 itself, but I'd guess around 799 USD MSRP or a bit more, with the Titan at least USD 999.

I don't know where the 'fear mongering' comes from - it seems pretty clear to me that Nvidia wants to start charging more money, which is good for the company if their products still sell so well. People (like me) may be unhappy at first, but eventually they'll choose between spending so much money on PC gaming, or just buy an OLED TV and a next gen console and be done with it (shrug).
Click to expand...

You'll sort of be in the same boat if you buy a mid-tier card as a console.

I'm not sure if you've played console games lately.
1080p @ 30
or
Between 720p and 1080p @ 60
The ones that do 1080 @ 60, PC hardware has no issues hitting that also (if a decent port job).

And that's for the stronger PS4, on the Xbone side it's worse. Like I tell people who try to compare PC to consoles. You don't need a >$400 card to get the same performance as consoles. Often a mid-tier card will get you the same performance.

Even the amazingly broken Quantum Break gets similar console performance on a ~$200-300 R9 290/290X/390.
 
xorbe said:
I'm one that is willing to reduce gfx settings to satisfy my 144 Hz screen (well 90+ is nice, I can't really tell 120 vs 144).

Gonna sit tight with my Titan X and gsync 2560x1440. Maybe post-Pascal will bring a compelling upgrade in 2018, plus an oled 4K screen or something, heh.
Click to expand...

A Titan X is awesome, it's not like upgrading to a 1080 is going to have a huge impact, esp. if you got one that can overclock.

Just hang tight to the Titan X until something that's much faster comes along.
 
Arachnotronic said:
GTX 1070 is $379 for cheap aftermarket and $449 for Founders Edition. $449 for 980 Ti performance is a price reduction of around 30% for the same performance.

Seems to me that the "value" is going up for the cards people are most likely to buy. And, if you want the best, yes, it's going to cost $. Such is everything in life.
Click to expand...

dude you seem to have forgotten what a process node + improved architecture is capable of. look back at GTX 460 vs GTX 285. The price of GTX 460 was roughly half that of GTX 285. But the key there was competitive pressure from AMD.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/nvidias-geforce-gtx-460-the-200-king/6

The increase in prices of Nvidia GPUs is partially due to increase in design and manufacturing costs. But the big reason imo is lack of competition from AMD. If Polaris and Vega apply competitive pressure on Nvidia you will see prices drop just as when the R9 290X/R9 290 launched. I think we will see some serious competition from AMD with Polaris/Vega.
 
raghu78 said:
The increase in prices of Nvidia GPUs is partially due to increase in design and manufacturing costs. But the big reason imo is lack of competition from AMD. If Polaris and Vega apply competitive pressure on Nvidia you will see prices drop just as when the R9 290X/R9 290 launched. I think we will see some serious competition from AMD with Polaris/Vega.
Click to expand...

AMD has been competing with NVIDIA for years, and they have put out some good architectures. Hawaii was good, Fiji was very close to 980 Ti in performance, etc.

I don't get this whole idea that AMD isn't "competing."

What's happening is that AMD is competing but NVIDIA is winning.

AMD shouldn't even be discussed here, this is OFF TOPIC.

-Rvenger
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Arachnotronic said:
AMD has been competing with NVIDIA for years, and they have put out some good architectures. Hawaii was good, Fiji was very close to 980 Ti in performance, etc.

I don't get this whole idea that AMD isn't "competing."

What's happening is that AMD is competing but NVIDIA is winning.
Click to expand...

Hawaii was good and forced price cuts on GTX 780 and Nvidia brought out the 780 Ti to fill the top of the stack. Still AMD continued to gain share till Maxwell launched and the rest is history. AMD had no answer. Fiji was a huge flop against the 980 Ti in perf, perf/$ and availability. 980 Ti dominated the high end market with its amazing perf/$ (in fact even better than 980), outstanding OC and wide range of AIB custom cards which let the 980 Ti really shine to its full potential.

AMD needs a range of cards which will make Nvidia sweat and cut prices to remain competitive. I think we might see something like that with Polaris.

AMD shouldn't even be mentioned in this forum. This is OFF TOPIC.

-Rvenger
 
Last edited by a moderator:
raghu78 said:
Hawaii was good and forced price cuts on GTX 780 and Nvidia brought out the 780 Ti to fill the top of the stack. Still AMD continued to gain share till Maxwell launched and the rest is history. AMD had no answer. Fiji was a huge flop against the 980 Ti in perf, perf/$ and availability. 980 Ti dominated the high end market with its amazing perf/$ (in fact even better than 980), outstanding OC and wide range of AIB custom cards which let the 980 Ti really shine to its full potential.
Click to expand...

How was Fiji a "huge flop." It was slightly slower, slightly less efficient, and the same price. It wasn't a bad card, but in any competition there is a winner and NVIDIA had the better product. And obviously NVIDIA has a stronger brand, better marketing efforts, etc. so it vastly outsold Fiji.

If AMD hadn't used expensive exotic tech like HBM, they would have at least been able to cut price like they did on the Hawaii cards.


AMD needs a range of cards which will make Nvidia sweat and cut prices to remain competitive. I think we might see something like that with Polaris.
Click to expand...

Right, so what you're saying is that you want AMD to win. But don't confuse this with AMD not being competitive.
 
chiphellpascal.png


http://techreport.com/news/30174/rumor-a-gp102-geforce-titan-and-gtx-1080-ti-are-in-the-works
 
Pure nonsense guesswork. It has the 1060 labelled at GP104, rofl. Yes, they are gonna cut the 2560SP part to 1280SP.... never.
 
I guess all of you seem to of forgotten the first GTX Titan under 700 series line that was $999 at launch and everyone gobbled it up and they were sold out for weeks.

Then Titan Black came out.. $999 again, sold out again for a while.. Same story with Titan X.. $999, sold out for a good while.

The problem is people keep buying em up as soon as they come out. And as long as the demand is there, nvidia is going to keep releasing titans at the $999 mark.

It's standard supply-vs-demand market economics.
 
kithylin said:
I guess all of you seem to of forgotten the first GTX Titan under 700 series line that was $999 at launch and everyone gobbled it up and they were sold out for weeks.

Then Titan Black came out.. $999 again, sold out again for a while.. Same story with Titan X.. $999, sold out for a good while.

The problem is people keep buying em up as soon as they come out. And as long as the demand is there, nvidia is going to keep releasing titans at the $999 mark.

It's standard supply-vs-demand market economics.
Click to expand...
Maybe they only had a vary vary low stock so they would not have overstock to contend with.
 
Last edited:
In 2004 Nvdia launched the 6600gt for $200 and then in 2010 the Gtx460 for $200.
So in 6 years see saw approx 10X performance increase at same price.
So it would have been really nice that the gtx1060 would also be 10X faster than Gtx460 but that's not going to happen. 1060 will only be 4X faster at most. I am guessing that in another 6 years in 2022 the next card in the same price bracket of $200 would only be 2X faster than 1060. So much diminishing returns. Why doesn't the rate of gpu performance increase stay constant?
 
mohit9206 said:
In 2004 Nvdia launched the 6600gt for $200 and then in 2010 the Gtx460 for $200.
So in 6 years see saw approx 10X performance increase at same price.
So it would have been really nice that the gtx1060 would also be 10X faster than Gtx460 but that's not going to happen. 1060 will only be 4X faster at most. I am guessing that in another 6 years in 2022 the next card in the same price bracket of $200 would only be 2X faster than 1060. So much diminishing returns. Why doesn't the rate of gpu performance increase stay constant?
Click to expand...

From 6600GT to 460 we saw, 3 nodes?

Woof quick look, more like 6?
6600 GT was 110nm, 460 was 40nm.

From 460 to 1060 we only saw 2, 40nm to 16nm.

Who knows what we'll see in 2022. I read some where 14/16nm is going to be on the table for 3-4 years too.
 
railven said:
Who knows what we'll see in 2022. I read some where 14/16nm is going to be on the table for 3-4 years too.
Click to expand...

For GPUs - probably. Other, higher volume (ARM) products will probably move along faster. Now that Nvidia seems to have bifurcated it's professional and consumer GPUs, the compute specific GPUs could move on faster if there is a bigger threat from Intel (Xeon Phi) - but otherwise Nvidia will milk this node to make the most profits before moving on.
 
The 10nm node mentioned in the Artemis article on the front page of the main site definitely doesn't sound especially tempting for GPUs. Twice as dense, but only 30% power drop for the same frequencies.

You'd really get people moaning about how much the chips cost/area if they used that!

Think you can also see where NV are going to get their annual ~35% pick up for the next three years, even if they stay on 16nm for Volta. Bigger chips as its more mature, HBM2 probably much more usable in mass production by then and they've had a long time to redesign the architecture a bit so you'd presume some gains there etc.

Guess one more die shrink in 2020ish then goodness knows.
 
railven said:
From 6600GT to 460 we saw, 3 nodes?

Woof quick look, more like 6?
6600 GT was 110nm, 460 was 40nm.

From 460 to 1060 we only saw 2, 40nm to 16nm.

Who knows what we'll see in 2022. I read some where 14/16nm is going to be on the table for 3-4 years too.
Click to expand...
If you count both main and half-nodes, it's 6 node jumps between 110nm and 40nm, and it's 5 node jumps between 40nm and 16nm.
 
96Firebird said:
Ahh, I remember the old days of fear mongering that the Titan X was going to be $1200+...

And people lapped it up.

It seems we've come full circle, now the next Titan will be $1200+...
Click to expand...

Up for a cat food challenge? If Nvidia pushes the price of the new Titan Core Next over the already ridiculously unheard of $1,000.00 price point, then you eat a handful of catfood (I choose the brand, wet or dry). If Nvidia is feeling charitable and decides to do us a solid and holds to the already eye popping price of $1,000.00, I will eat a handful of catfood (you choose the brand, wet or dry).

Screw it. Make it a whole can of wet, or a full measuring cup of dry. Legit. I ain't messin'. I'll do it.
 
Last edited:
railven said:
You'll sort of be in the same boat if you buy a mid-tier card as a console.

I'm not sure if you've played console games lately.
1080p @ 30
or
Between 720p and 1080p @ 60
The ones that do 1080 @ 60, PC hardware has no issues hitting that also (if a decent port job).

And that's for the stronger PS4, on the Xbone side it's worse. Like I tell people who try to compare PC to consoles. You don't need a >$400 card to get the same performance as consoles. Often a mid-tier card will get you the same performance.
Click to expand...

Indeed, Digital Foundry finds that a GTX 750 Ti often replicates PS4 settings and performance and when it cannot, then a GTX 950 will do. Easily found $100-$150 cards. Probably a 750 non-Ti would work for many Xbone settings, I would guess.

We are being milked because it's a hobby and people are passionate about their hobbies and fine with many hundreds of dollars when $100-$150 will get you what the console masses are perfectly happy with. I complain that flagship and even now "mid-tier" GPUs are so super expensive, but it's not like their expense is a barrier to you playing any game. Just a barrier for better settings and framerates.
 
moonbogg said:
Up for a cat food challenge? If Nvidia pushes the price of the new Titan Core Next over the already ridiculously unheard of $1,000.00 price point, then you eat a handful of catfood (I choose the brand, wet or dry). If Nvidia is feeling charitable and decides to do us a solid and holds to the already eye popping price of $1,000.00, I will eat a handful of catfood (you choose the brand, wet or dry).

Screw it. Make it a whole can of wet, or a full measuring cup of dry. Legit. I ain't messin'. I'll do it.
Click to expand...

No thanks. 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top