Nvidia GeForce GTX 1000 Series (Pascal) MegaThread: FAQ and Resources

[TehPenguin]

oh ok, now my mind is in the right place, it all makes sense now i did not connect those dots at the time but .... yah.... exactly....

but id does seem like we won't be seeing any major overclocking beyond the 2 ghz we have already seen. guess nvidia has limited things enough and already pushed the chip pretty far already. so in the end, picking a card will be mostly eye appeal and price. which so far for me is the vevga ones. just something sexy about that acx 3.0 cooler.

Maybe the 1080Ti will get it's big boost from very high clock rates, so they're limiting the 1080 to limit its performance relative to an upcoming, better card.

All leaks concerned the bigger gp102 chip has a slower clock and as some users on the forum have assured me: this is common for bigger chips. I don't think the Ti will be the 2.5 or 3GHz(good lord) card. Nor do I care. But if it can run 4k at or close to 100fps then I am dumping all that saved up money on it as soon as I can.

 

[17seconds]

There was a leak this past week that the Ti is equal to 2x 1080.
http://techfrag.com/2016/05/28/zotac-gtx-1080-ti-teased-firestorm-oc-performance-equivalent-gtx-1080-sli/

 

[turkey3_scratch]

There was a leak this past week that the Ti is equal to 2x 1080.
http://techfrag.com/2016/05/28/zotac-gtx-1080-ti-teased-firestorm-oc-performance-equivalent-gtx-1080-sli/

Overclocked, that is. Still impressive, though. Very. I'm still not buying the idea that they are passing up on a Titan. They will either have a Titan or they will price the 1080Ti like a Titan. I'd expect a solid $1000 at least if it really has that much performance.

 

[TehPenguin]

There was a leak this past week that the Ti is equal to 2x 1080.
http://techfrag.com/2016/05/28/zotac-gtx-1080-ti-teased-firestorm-oc-performance-equivalent-gtx-1080-sli/

Yeah, I posted this a few pages ago but no one seemed to notice ^^

 

[TehPenguin]

There was a leak this past week that the Ti is equal to 2x 1080.
http://techfrag.com/2016/05/28/zotac-gtx-1080-ti-teased-firestorm-oc-performance-equivalent-gtx-1080-sli/

Overclocked, that is. Still impressive, though. Very. I'm still not buying the idea that they are passing up on a Titan. They will either have a Titan or they will price the 1080Ti like a Titan. I'd expect a solid $1000 at least if it really has that much performance.

980ti had pretty much the performance of the Titan X. They just halved the vram. I don't think they'll pass up the titan and according to some leaks the Titan will have 24GB GDDR5X with the Ti having "only" 12GB.

I wouldn't be surprised personally, if it had that much horsepower. I really feel like the 1080 could've been so much more but nVidia just dialled it down because it didn't have to.

 

[mr91]

oh ok, now my mind is in the right place, it all makes sense now i did not connect those dots at the time but .... yah.... exactly....

but id does seem like we won't be seeing any major overclocking beyond the 2 ghz we have already seen. guess nvidia has limited things enough and already pushed the chip pretty far already. so in the end, picking a card will be mostly eye appeal and price. which so far for me is the vevga ones. just something sexy about that acx 3.0 cooler.

Maybe the 1080Ti will get it's big boost from very high clock rates, so they're limiting the 1080 to limit its performance relative to an upcoming, better card.

1080 ti should benefit from higher clocks more tham the 1080 because it will have more cuda cores...

When do you guys think the 1080 ti will come out?

 

[TehPenguin]

oh ok, now my mind is in the right place, it all makes sense now i did not connect those dots at the time but .... yah.... exactly....

but id does seem like we won't be seeing any major overclocking beyond the 2 ghz we have already seen. guess nvidia has limited things enough and already pushed the chip pretty far already. so in the end, picking a card will be mostly eye appeal and price. which so far for me is the vevga ones. just something sexy about that acx 3.0 cooler.

Maybe the 1080Ti will get it's big boost from very high clock rates, so they're limiting the 1080 to limit its performance relative to an upcoming, better card.

1080 ti should benefit from higher clocks more that the 1080 because it will have more cuda cores...

When do you guys think the 1080 ti will come out?

Titan X had 3k Cuda Cores vs 980's 2k Cuda Cores and the 980 had a base clock of 1.15GHz vs Titan's 1GHz
Looking back this seem to be the case more often than not.

Also the Zotac's presumably leaked 1080Ti was clocked at 1.4GHz

 

[opio]

oh ok, now my mind is in the right place, it all makes sense now i did not connect those dots at the time but .... yah.... exactly....

but id does seem like we won't be seeing any major overclocking beyond the 2 ghz we have already seen. guess nvidia has limited things enough and already pushed the chip pretty far already. so in the end, picking a card will be mostly eye appeal and price. which so far for me is the vevga ones. just something sexy about that acx 3.0 cooler.

Maybe the 1080Ti will get it's big boost from very high clock rates, so they're limiting the 1080 to limit its performance relative to an upcoming, better card.

1080 ti should benefit from higher clocks more tham the 1080 because it will have more cuda cores...

When do you guys think the 1080 ti will come out?

I bet it comes out Q1 2017 at the earliest, and I'd bet dollars to donuts it isn't gonna have HBM2, I'm just hoping it has a 512 bit interface. We won't see HBM2 until the 1180, but that's just my opinion. And I agree with whoever said that it feels like nvidia dialed down the 1080 a bit. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, who knows.

 

[mr91]

My guess is a HBM 2 Titan in Q1 or 2 of 2017 & maybe a GP102 as per rumors in fall or 1st quarter of next year.

My guess is they will just use GDDR 5x with a 384 bit bus for the 1080 ti and more cuda cores which will probably = 2x the power of Titan x and not only in VR lol...

I might just get GTX 1080 just to test the Architecture however I want a fully enabled BIG Pascal with HBM2 that should be enough unless I upgrade my monitor....

 

[TechyInAZ]

My guess is a HBM 2 Titan in Q1 or 2 of 2017 & maybe a GP102 as per rumors in fall or 1st quarter of next year.

My guess is they will just use GDDR 5x with a 384 bit bus for the 1080 ti and more cuda cores which will probably = 2x the power of Titan x and not only in VR lol...

I might just get GTX 1080 just to test the Architecture however I want a fully enabled BIG Pascal with HBM2 that should be enough unless I upgrade my monitor....

DSR will make sure you never have enough GPU power.

 

[mr91]

My guess is a HBM 2 Titan in Q1 or 2 of 2017 & maybe a GP102 as per rumors in fall or 1st quarter of next year.

My guess is they will just use GDDR 5x with a 384 bit bus for the 1080 ti and more cuda cores which will probably = 2x the power of Titan x and not only in VR lol...

I might just get GTX 1080 just to test the Architecture however I want a fully enabled BIG Pascal with HBM2 that should be enough unless I upgrade my monitor....

DSR will make sure you never have enough GPU power.

Good point lol

 

[Math Geek]

would make sense to limit the 1080 is it would get too close to a 1080ti/titan in performance. from their viewpoint it makes perfect sense if that is indeed what the idea is that or perhaps the voltage limits are basically the highest worth using. we see with cpu's all the time where adding more voltage does not yield more speed. they may have just pushed the chip as high as it could go and then dialed it back a touch like any overclocker would.

 

[opio]

would make sense to limit the 1080 is it would get too close to a 1080ti/titan in performance. from their viewpoint it makes perfect sense if that is indeed what the idea is that or perhaps the voltage limits are basically the highest worth using. we see with cpu's all the time where adding more voltage does not yield more speed. they may have just pushed the chip as high as it could go and then dialed it back a touch like any overclocker would.

I'm totally not saying this to sound like a douche, it is not a personal attack, it's kind of comical, and off topic, but your profile picture reminds me of a baby that was born with the Zika Virus lol.

 

[17seconds]

The GTX 1080 is the full GP104 chip, no gimping whatsoever. The GTX 1080 Ti, now that may end up being a cut down version of the full GP102 chip, leaving room for a full GP102 Titan. Different chips, so not really valid to compare as if they were the same.

 

[mr91]

I said fully enabled big pascal and was referring to the other chip not the gp104.

 

[U6b36ef]

since you quoted me it will still show my error 🙁 either way, still a review worth reading.

and not really sure why the lonely island song but it is a good tune to listen to while reading the review. got all their cd's cause they all funny 😀

It was a pleasure to assist, and not a snipe at you. Sorry I can't edit it all out as others quoted too. However it doesn't matter since, no offence was intended. Thank you again for posting the 1080 MSI card review ASAP, which is what was important to me anyway.

I was wondering about the conundrum of the low overclocking headroom. I wonder if it's the new transistor technology FinFET which is just less capable of overclocking.

Or maybe because the massively lower power usage it has over MOSFET, they upped the clock-speed already. With the lower power usage and smaller transistor gate size, the chip runs cooler. Maybe they already sped it up as much as possible. (Either that or FinFET just naturally clocks faster, which I think is the case.)

 

[Will14186]

I honestly can't wait for the 1070 SLI benchmark. I'm really hesitant to buy the 1080 with the 1070 right around the corner. I'm also worried about the possible performance issues with SLI. Let's just hope that new HB bridge brings it up

 

[opio]

Someone on tomshardware in another thread said that a GTX 1080 is overkill for 1440p. I think a GTX 1080 is perfect for a 21:9 1440p 144hz monitor. What y'all think? He said he plays skyrim with his 980ti at a steady 60fps in 4k

 

[RobCrezz]

Someone on tomshardware in another thread said that a GTX 1080 is overkill for 1440p. I think a GTX 1080 is perfect for a 21:9 1440p 144hz monitor. What y'all think? He said he plays skyrim with his 980ti at a steady 60fps in 4k

I would say its a great 1440p card if you like maxing games out and want some longevity.

Skyrim isnt a good title to compare with because its so easy to run. I used to run it maxed out in 1080p on a 560 ti. I doubt you need a 980 ti to get 60fps in 4k, lower cards could do it I bet.

 

[U6b36ef]

Someone on tomshardware in another thread said that a GTX 1080 is overkill for 1440p. I think a GTX 1080 is perfect for a 21:9 1440p 144hz monitor. What y'all think? He said he plays skyrim with his 980ti at a steady 60fps in 4k

No way is it overkill. There is no such thing as overkill ever.

I would buy a 1080 and use it on a 1080p monitor, using DSR 1440p sometimes. All it means is that it would be longer before I needed to upgrade again.

I know higher resolutions use more VRAM. However there are two games on the market now which request more than the 4GB my 980 has. Shadow of Mordor in 1440p maxed my 4GB out at something like 4072 of 4096MB. (I had a 970 then and got intermittent frame rate drops once the VRAM exceeded 3.5GB. It was always about 50% drop and lasted for about a minute or more.) Doom has a graphics setting that will only run with more than 4GB.

I think the 1080 is a classic card. I think the aspect to look out for is whether the 1070 is better bang for buck though. However with me being a 980 owner, an upgrade to 1070 is like an upgrade only to a Titan X. Something I would never have thought of. I think the 980 will keep me going for quite a while.

 

[U6b36ef]

Someone on tomshardware in another thread said that a GTX 1080 is overkill for 1440p. I think a GTX 1080 is perfect for a 21:9 1440p 144hz monitor. What y'all think? He said he plays skyrim with his 980ti at a steady 60fps in 4k

I would say its a great 1440p card if you like maxing games out and want some longevity.

Skyrim isnt a good title to compare with because its so easy to run. I used to run it maxed out in 1080p on a 560 ti. I doubt you need a 980 ti to get 60fps in 4k, lower cards could do it I bet.

Yes I think I was running Skyrim at 1440p DSR on a 1080p monitor on a GTX 650 Ti Boost, at a solid 60fps. If not it was 1080p solid 60fps. (Still in my drawer and used sometimes as a Phys X card.)

However even with my GTX 980 there is a place in Markarth that pushes the frame rate down to 40fps. I never did work out what that was. The CPU is minimal, and RAM usage was at about 25%.

(NB Always nice to see you again Rob.)

 

[ern88]

I think I might get a GTX 1070 AIB card for 1440p. I think it will be a great upgrade from my HD7950 boost card I have now. AMD's offering of the RX 480 doesn't interest me and VR is too expensive to jump into. $199 for a VR capable card and $800 CAD for a headset. Not cheap at all. I give this round to Nvidia.

 

[RobCrezz]

Someone on tomshardware in another thread said that a GTX 1080 is overkill for 1440p. I think a GTX 1080 is perfect for a 21:9 1440p 144hz monitor. What y'all think? He said he plays skyrim with his 980ti at a steady 60fps in 4k

I would say its a great 1440p card if you like maxing games out and want some longevity.

Skyrim isnt a good title to compare with because its so easy to run. I used to run it maxed out in 1080p on a 560 ti. I doubt you need a 980 ti to get 60fps in 4k, lower cards could do it I bet.

Yes I think I was running Skyrim at 1440p DSR on a 1080p monitor on a GTX 650 Ti Boost, at a solid 60fps. If not it was 1080p solid 60fps.(Still in my drawer and used sometimes as a Phys X card.)

However even with my GTX 980 there is a place in Markarth that pushes the frame rate down to 40fps. I never did work out what that was. The CPU is minimal, and RAM usage was at about 25%.

(NB Always nice to see you again Rob.)

Have we spoke before? sorry dont recognize your name.

 

[TehPenguin]

I'm on my phone so I can't link anything but if you go on the ultrawidematterrace subreddit you'll find some 21:9 1440p benchmarks. 1080 performs well but it's not enough for 144hz

That's why I'm waiting on a 1080ti

 

[Eximo]

2 part question: I have 2 980's in SLI running a 1440P monitor. That's obviously plenty of graphical horsepower to push that resolution on ultra everything with almost nothing going below 60fps.

It's not the raw graphical power that's getting me, it's the sometimes issues I run into with SLI. It's not much, but it's still there and I can notice it on some games. However, it's not enough for me to be willing to take a loss on a new card, unless it's a serious upgrade. So, since the reference 1080 gets in the neighborhood of 90-95% of 2 980's would it be better to go that route for a single card solution with one of the factory OC from MSI, etc., or wait for the ti?

OR with the new HB sli bridges would 2 1070's be the better cost/performance option with the premise of improved SLI scalability and smoother gameplay?

This reminds me, I'd also be interested in seeing the 1080s/1070s in comparison to the gtx 900s in SLI and the r9 300s in Xfire, just to get a comprehensive coverage of where these cards fall.

Also because SLI and Crossfire have so many issues, want to see recent and combined results showing some of their downsides.

I've seen several reviews of the 1080 paired up against various 980's (non ti) in SLI, since Nvidia's claim was that one 1080 would be the equivalent of 2 980's. On average, it's usually about 90-95% of an SLI setup, though depending on the game and resolution tested the delta could be bigger or smaller. Considering that I never go below 60fps at 1440p I think one 1080 would certainly do me just fine, but I dont want a side grade just for the sake of getting rid of SLI.

PC GAMER did a pretty good spread showing the average fps across different resolutions showing all of AMD and Nvidia's higher end units, but what I want to see is the SLI results using the new HB bridge. I have no doubt 2 1070's will easily out perform my 2 980's, but if the scaling is the same and the problems inherent with SLI aren't improved with the new HB bridge then I'd rather wait for a ti

I'm stuck in the same boat, except that I water cooled my 980s so I am looking at the reference cards. On several of the games I am playing recently SLI isn't even a future plan, so I'm leaning towards a 1080.

I've been trying to confirm the EVGA ACX 3.0 is reference board with a non-reference cooler. Seems to be the consensus, especially based on the model numbers, but there is no photo evidence. I'm tempted to attempt SLI with the 1080 and get whatever I can for the 980s. But I also have the itch to re-build my system to get a NVMe drive to replace my Vertex 4s.

I'd rather get the $200 or so I can get out of a 980 now then wait until the 1060 is available in that price bracket.