Nvidia Says GeForce GTX 1060 Will Outperform GTX 980, Founders Edition Will Cost $299

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

17seconds

Champion
Moderator
Here is an interesting post from Kyle Bennett at HardOCP regarding dual GPU setups:

This is an interesting quote from AMD on mGPU in DX12, OGL, and Vulkan. We were talking to AMD about CrossFire support in DOOM and AMD made this statement.

I don’t believe there are plans to have mGPU enabled in OGL path for DOOM, and the Vulkan guys haven’t figured out what mGPU looks like yet.

Understand please that as games move to the newer APIs, the mGPU work has to be done by the developers, it’s not in the driver anymore…
https://hardforum.com/threads/official-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-announcement-h.1904330/page-3
 
Yeah. Not so concerned about availability, my guess is poor TSMC yields mean that lots of 1080 dies are binned as 1070, ot worse as 1060s. Plus, take it with a grain of salt. The RX 480 beats a R9 390X sometimes. If the GTX 1060 is as fast as the 980 under NVIDIA optimized conditions, we are looking at a midrange marker that's like the 960 and either the R9 380 or 280(X).
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Not sure I'd call a $250-300 GPU "mid-range" in terms of pricing nor mid-range in terms of performance when there is no sign of anything lower than the 1050 yet.
 


$250 is where mid range begins. So the GTX 1060 is definitely a mid range card, bordering it for sure, but definitely in that category. Then I believe $150 and under is where the low range begins.

Typically it has always been this:

x50 = Low Range
x50 Ti = Low Range/Mid Range
x60 = Mid Range
x60 Ti = High Range
x70 = High Range
x80 = High Range/Very High Range
x80 Ti = Very High Range
Titan = Absurd :p
 

Onus

Titan
Moderator
I agree that the low end is now being chewed-on by iGPUs. I've always thought of sub-$100 cards as low end, $100-$250 as mainstream, $250-$450 as high-end, and anything above that as extreme. When you find a card that's been in one range being priced in the next lower range, you might have a deal (e.g. a GTX750Ti model at <$100 or a GTX970 for $240).
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador


Yes because they are not updating them. I know iGPUs match the GT 730, but I'm not sure about the GT 740. I'm pretty sure the GT 740 still has an advantage over the iGPUs out there, and if they made a 940 now, that would indeed beat the iGPUs out.

It is a very large jump from an iGPU to a GTX 950. If they don't go below a 1050, I feel like there will be a whole budget sector left out, those who are unsatisfied with the iGPU performance yet can't afford a mid-end GPU.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

If they "made" a 940 now, it would compete directly against the Maxwell 750. In all likelihood, it would be nothing more than a 750 re-brand into the Maxwell lineup where it should have been in the first place.

Of course, Nvidia could introduce a low-end Pascal as the GTX940 but there is not much marketing point in doing so when the high-end of the 10xx lineup has already launched, so it would make more sense to introduce low-end Pascal as the 1030 and 1040 than get model generations mixed up for no reason.
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador


But they mixed it up before, so why wouldn't they do it again?
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

The first Maxwell GPU introduced was the 750. If Nvidia had launched it as the 940 or 950, it would have made the 760-780 seem obsolete before the 960-980 launched.

With Pascal, Nvidia launched from the 1080 working its way down, so there is no psychological obsolescence at play there. Launching a new Pascal as a 9xx model would cause completely unnecessary confusion. Keeping all the Pascal/16nm chips in the 10xx lineup makes marketing's and shoppers' jobs much simpler. Nvidia would be doing the market (and itself) a significant favor by keeping things this way.
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador


True, makes sense.
 

IInuyasha74

Splendid
Moderator
It would be nice to see AMD and Nvidia make a low-end GPU die again. Back in the 400-series, Nvidia made a 96-CUDA core GPU die for the GT 430. It ended up being used in various GPUs up at least into the 700-series. It is slower than some iGPUs nowadays, but back then it was fairly low power and offered decent performance.

If they did something similar, it would probably be something it would probably be something like a Pascal with either 256 or 384 CUDA core 16 nm chip, it would probably find a strong position as the desktop 1030 or a mobile chip. Of course it wouldn't be completely linear, but with roughly 25% of the GTX 1060's resources, it should be relatively inexpensive to produce. They could probably get power consumption tied down under 30 W.
 

whymeeeee97

Commendable
Mar 3, 2016
52
0
1,660
6
Whats up with all the rip AMD? amd devolopes cpu and gpu for all the consoles because amd creates good mid ranged low cost products unfornatuly the pc market generally wants the higher end stuff, which is bad for amd but even if the rx 480 fails, amd will not die, not with new consoles being devoleped for vr because amd is heavily focused on vr.
 
This week sold some of the XFX versions of the RX-480s today and a couple of the EVGA version of the GTX 1070 today too. So far I've sold more of the 1070s & 1080s then the RX-480 but not by much, and the RX-480 has been out the shortest amount of time. Hopefully the RX-480 will start moving better.
 

whymeeeee97

Commendable
Mar 3, 2016
52
0
1,660
6


very few people buy founders edition of cards mainly because they don't have a great rep, im thinkin about the saphire nitro rx480.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

That's pretty much where I would imagine things to land: 1050 made from the same die as the 1060 but with 1024 shaders (256 shaders / four cores disabled) and 128bits memory (one slice of 64bits disabled), a 1040 from a smaller die with 640 shaders and 128bits memory, and 1030 from the 1040 die but only 384 shaders enabled.
 

Samer1970

Admirable
BANNED
Oct 23, 2014
1,729
1
6,460
216


x60 GTX SLI is very popular in the second hand market , when they drop to $100 on Ebay , 2 in SLI are very attractive for cheap Gaming PCs
 

Samer1970

Admirable
BANNED
Oct 23, 2014
1,729
1
6,460
216


still , a 970 GTX in a Console , thats HUUUGE !!!

the PS4 neo is 2.5x faster than the PS4 , and the XBOX Scorpio is 5x faster than Xbox one !!! you do the math !!!

and keep in mind , when games are coded for consoles ? they use every bit of hardware available !!! full advantage of the hardware unlike the PC Games coding.



 


I think the reason why ultra low end graphics cards are not being updated is because we've forgotten what there supposed to be in the market for.

IGPUs and low end graphics cards actually don't really compete with each other. IGPUs are designed for a market which needs low end graphics for ordinary new computers. Meanwhile, low end graphics cards like the Nvidia GT series are designed for systems that DON'T HAVE integrated graphics. You aren't supposed to add a GT 710 to a Core i3-6100 build for example (except for more monitor support).
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador


AMD still feeds that low-end market, I hope we will see an RX 340 and RX350.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

There won't be R(X)-3xx chips. There was a table a while ago explaining the R(X)-4xx model numbering scheme where the 'X' stood for > 1.2TFLOPs and for the 400, that cuts off at the 460 or 450. The lower-end loses the 'X' and on the table I have seen, the 400 series ends at 440. When you consider that the 480 already starts at $200, there isn't all that much pricing space to squeeze so many extra products below it and the price point below $100 must not be worth much in terms of net revenue.

The 450 being at the 'X' cut-off point means that it should be about a quarter as fast as the RX-480 and that would put it under the $100 mark.
 

turkey3_scratch

Polypheme
Ambassador


That was actually just a typing error on my part :p I meant to say RX440 and RX450.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS