How long will the gtx 1080 last for 1080p Ultra gaming

[slapslop]

I want to pair a 1600 with an evga ftw 1080, I dont want to upgrade of the next 5 years. how long will it last for 1080p60/ 900p60 @ ultra settings?

 

[chickenballs]

short answer no

You just have to look at the benchmarks of the gtx 1080s predecessors released around 6-7 years ago
which is gtx 580 (released in 2011 which is only 5 years prior to the gtx 1080) and gtx 480 (released 2010, 6 years before the GTX 1080)

the gtx 580 only gives you 21 fps running Far Cry 5 at 1080p normal quality
https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/page3.html

expect around 20% less with the gtx 480

 

[Ztdutxjgxgtu]

I have a gtx970, expecting high to mid for another 3 years. Beforre un barible fps
So 1070 for 6 yrs? 1080 for 7 yrs?

 

[chickenballs]

I have a gtx970, expecting high to mid for another 3 years. Beforre un barible fps
So 1070 for 6 yrs? 1080 for 7 yrs?

the reason i upgraded from gtx 970 to gtx 1080 over a year ago was because I was getting crap fps (40-50 fps) when playing Rise of the tomb raider at 1080p ultra settings

 

[Rogue Leader]

short answer no

You just have to look at the benchmarks of the gtx 1080s predecessors released around 6-7 years ago
which is gtx 580 (released in 2011 which is only 5 years prior to the gtx 1080) and gtx 480 (released 2010, 6 years before the GTX 1080)

the gtx 580 only gives you 21 fps running Far Cry 5 at 1080p normal quality
https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/page3.html

expect around 20% less with the gtx 480

Highly disagree with this take. There is only so much detail that can be displayed at 1080p. Comparing cards that came out that long ago in development at this resolution is not an accurate measure. There is no game out there that the GTX 1080 can't crush at 1080p. Sure some wacky feature like hairworks may come out to mess that up but turning off nonessential things like that would allow the GTX 1080 to have no issues at 1080p for a good long time, 5 years is likely reasonable.

 

[chickenballs]

short answer no

You just have to look at the benchmarks of the gtx 1080s predecessors released around 6-7 years ago
which is gtx 580 (released in 2011 which is only 5 years prior to the gtx 1080) and gtx 480 (released 2010, 6 years before the GTX 1080)

the gtx 580 only gives you 21 fps running Far Cry 5 at 1080p normal quality
https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/page3.html

expect around 20% less with the gtx 480

Highly disagree with this take. There is only so much detail that can be displayed at 1080p. Comparing cards that came out that long ago in development at this resolution is not an accurate measure. There is no game out there that the GTX 1080 can't crush at 1080p. Sure some wacky feature like hairworks may come out to mess that up but turning off nonessential things like that would allow the GTX 1080 to have no issues at 1080p for a good long time, 5 years is likely reasonable.

yes the gtx 1080 performs better in modern games than the gtx 580 running the most demanding games released in 2010-2011
but do you know what games that will be released during the next year not to mention in 5 years.

GD is already predicting that Shadow of the tomb raider may will require the gtx 1070
https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=24281&game=Shadow%20of%20the%20Tomb%20Raider

It's not just demanding features like hair physics a lot has also to do with how optimized the games are.
The Gtx 980 is only able to squeeze out 50-60fps when running Nier Automata at ultra 1080p
and my Gtx 1080 is struggling in my ultra modded Fallout 4 at 1080p...

 

[Rogue Leader]

short answer no

You just have to look at the benchmarks of the gtx 1080s predecessors released around 6-7 years ago
which is gtx 580 (released in 2011 which is only 5 years prior to the gtx 1080) and gtx 480 (released 2010, 6 years before the GTX 1080)

the gtx 580 only gives you 21 fps running Far Cry 5 at 1080p normal quality
https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/page3.html

expect around 20% less with the gtx 480

Highly disagree with this take. There is only so much detail that can be displayed at 1080p. Comparing cards that came out that long ago in development at this resolution is not an accurate measure. There is no game out there that the GTX 1080 can't crush at 1080p. Sure some wacky feature like hairworks may come out to mess that up but turning off nonessential things like that would allow the GTX 1080 to have no issues at 1080p for a good long time, 5 years is likely reasonable.

yes the gtx 1080 performs better in modern games than the gtx 580 running the most demanding games released in 2010-2011
but do you know what games that will be released during the next year not to mention in 5 years.

GD is already predicting that Shadow of the tomb raider may will require the gtx 1070
https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=24281&game=Shadow%20of%20the%20Tomb%20Raider

Game debate is garbage but thats besides the point.

Again I'm not comparing a GTX 1080 to a GTX 580, I'm comparing the amount of detail that can be displayed at 1080p. There is only so sharp a texture can be, there is only so much VRAM that can be used (another limitation of a GTX 580 at 1080p with a modern game), because at that resolution unless the game is very poorly optimized there are only so many textures that are needed.

To illustrate this lets take a previous standard resolution, 1024x768. The GTX 580 I guarantee you barring CPU bottlenecking, can play ANY game at an absurd framerate that supports that resolution.

Will there be outliers? Sure, as I said, certain features will be GPU crushing like hairworks. ANd some games are optimized like crap (PUBG I'm looking at you!) But you don't know whats coming out in 5 years either, and if we are using history as a gauge, there is a very good chance of a GTX 1080 to be able to keep up even in 5 years at what has become a standard but low resolution. If we were taking 1440p or 4k we would be having a different discussion.

 

[chickenballs]

short answer no

You just have to look at the benchmarks of the gtx 1080s predecessors released around 6-7 years ago
which is gtx 580 (released in 2011 which is only 5 years prior to the gtx 1080) and gtx 480 (released 2010, 6 years before the GTX 1080)

the gtx 580 only gives you 21 fps running Far Cry 5 at 1080p normal quality
https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/page3.html

expect around 20% less with the gtx 480

Highly disagree with this take. There is only so much detail that can be displayed at 1080p. Comparing cards that came out that long ago in development at this resolution is not an accurate measure. There is no game out there that the GTX 1080 can't crush at 1080p. Sure some wacky feature like hairworks may come out to mess that up but turning off nonessential things like that would allow the GTX 1080 to have no issues at 1080p for a good long time, 5 years is likely reasonable.

yes the gtx 1080 performs better in modern games than the gtx 580 running the most demanding games released in 2010-2011
but do you know what games that will be released during the next year not to mention in 5 years.

GD is already predicting that Shadow of the tomb raider may will require the gtx 1070
https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=24281&game=Shadow%20of%20the%20Tomb%20Raider

Game debate is garbage but thats besides the point.

Again I'm not comparing a GTX 1080 to a GTX 580, I'm comparing the amount of detail that can be displayed at 1080p. There is only so sharp a texture can be, there is only so much VRAM that can be used (another limitation of a GTX 580 at 1080p with a modern game), because at that resolution unless the game is very poorly optimized there are only so many textures that are needed.

To illustrate this lets take a previous standard resolution, 1024x768. The GTX 580 I guarantee you barring CPU bottlenecking, can play ANY game at an absurd framerate that supports that resolution.

Will there be outliers? Sure, as I said, certain features will be GPU crushing like hairworks. ANd some games are optimized like crap (PUBG I'm looking at you!) But you don't know whats coming out in 5 years either, and if we are using history as a gauge, there is a very good chance of a GTX 1080 to be able to keep up even in 5 years at what has become a standard but low resolution. If we were taking 1440p or 4k we would be having a different discussion.

You do know that Bethesda has released a 4K high res texture dlc for Fallout 4 and it requires a GTX 1080 to run at 1080p.

Also some modern games allow you to use SSAA instead of FXAA and SMAA
It's basically running the games at 2x or 4x resolution and gives far better results than the other AA techniques

http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/rise-of-the-tomb-raider/alt/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-anti-aliasing-interactive-comparison-001-ssaa-4x-vs-fxaa-alt.html

 

[Rogue Leader]

short answer no

You just have to look at the benchmarks of the gtx 1080s predecessors released around 6-7 years ago
which is gtx 580 (released in 2011 which is only 5 years prior to the gtx 1080) and gtx 480 (released 2010, 6 years before the GTX 1080)

the gtx 580 only gives you 21 fps running Far Cry 5 at 1080p normal quality
https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/page3.html

expect around 20% less with the gtx 480

Highly disagree with this take. There is only so much detail that can be displayed at 1080p. Comparing cards that came out that long ago in development at this resolution is not an accurate measure. There is no game out there that the GTX 1080 can't crush at 1080p. Sure some wacky feature like hairworks may come out to mess that up but turning off nonessential things like that would allow the GTX 1080 to have no issues at 1080p for a good long time, 5 years is likely reasonable.

yes the gtx 1080 performs better in modern games than the gtx 580 running the most demanding games released in 2010-2011
but do you know what games that will be released during the next year not to mention in 5 years.

GD is already predicting that Shadow of the tomb raider may will require the gtx 1070
https://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=24281&game=Shadow%20of%20the%20Tomb%20Raider

Game debate is garbage but thats besides the point.

Again I'm not comparing a GTX 1080 to a GTX 580, I'm comparing the amount of detail that can be displayed at 1080p. There is only so sharp a texture can be, there is only so much VRAM that can be used (another limitation of a GTX 580 at 1080p with a modern game), because at that resolution unless the game is very poorly optimized there are only so many textures that are needed.

To illustrate this lets take a previous standard resolution, 1024x768. The GTX 580 I guarantee you barring CPU bottlenecking, can play ANY game at an absurd framerate that supports that resolution.

Will there be outliers? Sure, as I said, certain features will be GPU crushing like hairworks. ANd some games are optimized like crap (PUBG I'm looking at you!) But you don't know whats coming out in 5 years either, and if we are using history as a gauge, there is a very good chance of a GTX 1080 to be able to keep up even in 5 years at what has become a standard but low resolution. If we were taking 1440p or 4k we would be having a different discussion.

You do know that Bethesda has released a 4K high res texture dlc for Fallout 4 and it requires a GTX 1080 to run at 1080p.

Also some modern games allow you to use SSAA instead of FXAA and SMAA
It's basically running the games at 2x or 4x resolution and gives far better results than the other AA techniques

http://images.nvidia.com/geforce-com/international/comparisons/rise-of-the-tomb-raider/alt/rise-of-the-tomb-raider-anti-aliasing-interactive-comparison-001-ssaa-4x-vs-fxaa-alt.html

It requires a GTX 1080 because it needs 8gb of VRAM to hold the textures and keep up a playable framerate. And better AA techniques may allow current cards to perform better going forward. The point is you can't say "no it won't do it" with complete certainty as you did in your post. Gaming today is VERY different than it was in 2010, and 2005, and so on, a lot has changed, techniques have gotten better, programming has changed. I will say again that certain things may not be able to be run, so I will concede that ultra being everything cranked to the moon, it may not do it. But as I said there is no way to judge that for sure. There are AMD cards that were released nearly 5 years ago (R9 290x) that will still run 1080p/60 ultra on most games.

So for the OPs question he asked both about upgrading in 5 years and how long it would last at ultra. He certainly wouldn't need an upgrade in 5 years, at 1080p. Maybe it wouldn't run "ultra" but It would run a very high level. In terms of ultra, a bit less. 3-4 years from this point may be a safe guess.

 

[chickenballs]

my point is if we look at what has happened since 2010 we can't not be certain that the gtx 1080 will be able to play triple A titles released in the next 5-6 years at 1080p ultra.

Don't forget the OP was talking about 5 years from now by then the gtx 1080 will be over 7 years old while the R9 290x was less than two and a half years old when the Pascal cards released

I really wish you are right because that will definitely save me a lot of money but at the same time I will also be disappointed because that means the games released in 2023 will have the same graphics as the games we have now.

 

[Rogue Leader]

my point is if we look at what has happened since 2010 we can't not be certain that the gtx 1080 will be able to play triple A titles released in the next 5-6 years at 1080p ultra.

Don't forget the OP was talking about 5 years from now by then the gtx 1080 will be over 7 years old while the R9 290x was less than two and a half years old when the Pascal cards released

I really wish you are right because that will definitely save me a lot of money but at the same time I will also be disappointed because that means the games released in 2023 will have the same graphics as the games we have now.

Correct we can't be certain, nobody can predict the future. But we can't say no either. But lets be honest aside from crazy stuff like hairworks graphics are nearly photo realistic in some games right now. I mean I'm sure improvements will be made, there always can be (and even the most realistic computer characters have a "deadness" to them, right now). So we could say even in 2023 games running at lower details will still look pretty damn good.

 

[chickenballs]

my point is if we look at what has happened since 2010 we can't not be certain that the gtx 1080 will be able to play triple A titles released in the next 5-6 years at 1080p ultra.

Don't forget the OP was talking about 5 years from now by then the gtx 1080 will be over 7 years old while the R9 290x was less than two and a half years old when the Pascal cards released

I really wish you are right because that will definitely save me a lot of money but at the same time I will also be disappointed because that means the games released in 2023 will have the same graphics as the games we have now.

Correct we can't be certain, nobody can predict the future. But we can't say no either. But lets be honest aside from crazy stuff like hairworks graphics are nearly photo realistic in some games right now. I mean I'm sure improvements will be made, there always can be (and even the most realistic computer characters have a "deadness" to them, right now). So we could say even in 2023 games running at lower details will still look pretty damn good.

but the OP seems to want to play new games in 2023 at ultra settings
also personally I think there is no point in playing new games and not be able to enjoy all the improved graphics some of them offer.
That was the reason why I upgraded from the gtx 970 to the gtx 1080 in the first place because I simply couldn't get 60fps when playing Rise of the tomb raider at ultra settings and I still believe it was the best upgrade ive ever made.