[Rumor] GTX 980 Ti Release Date Set For February 2015 Rumored As Specs Leaked Online!

[HermanT]

You were the only one trying to argue and I'm sorry if you can't understand the difference between the 9(900 series) being the series and the 80 part being the model of the particular part in the series.

whatever you say

[Opcode]

You must show me this wonderful time travel device you've acquired as neither of these cards exist in our universe! Seriously though let's all wait for them to be at least confirmed to exist before making judgement...

The R9 390x exists and is in testing phases right now set to launch Q1 2015.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Uhm, on this link here posted in the OP: http://www.game-debate.com/hardware/?gid=2490&graphics=GeForce%20GTX%20980%20Ti%208GB

 

They are claiming the 980 Ti will have 8GB of VRAM on a 384-bit bus. Which is impossible. 

 

And on this link here they claim the same thing (that it's on a 384-bit bus) except it will come in 6GB or 8GB variants which makes no sense: http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/52474/20141113/gtx-980-ti-release-date.htm

 

If it's on a 384-bit bus, it can only come in 3GB, 6GB, or 12GB variations.

 

So the people making these rumors really don't know very much about GPU technology.

[Deletive]

The R9 390x exists and is in testing phases right now set to launch Q1 2015.

I feel like thats a little early. I think Q2 would be good because they can release Carrizo in Q1 (january, february) then release 390x in late March/early april then may for other chips.

P.S can we stop calling it 980ti already and just call it Gm200/Gm210. It's not going to be called 980ti.  

[BrianPena]

No one cares what it's called, jesus. I don't understand why people have to talk about it so much. As long as there is a performance increase I could honestly not give a crap lol..

[Opcode]

I feel like thats a little early. I think Q2 would be good because they can release Carrizo in Q1 (january, february) then release 390x in late March/early april then may for other chips.

P.S can we stop calling it 980ti already and just call it Gm200/Gm210. It's not going to be called 980ti.  

I'm pretty sure GTX 980 is a full featured GM204 die so I doubt there will be a GTX 980 Ti as well. Unless they strive to make another TITAN based on two GM204 dies. In which case I doubt they will simply because it's going to be one hell of an expensive card to manufacture meanwhile the R9 390x will more than likely still crush it performance wise. My own personal speculation is that Nvidia is done until Pascal. They dropped GM204 out of no where on a scarce market and are soaking it up until AMD offerings come. Nvidia is making tons of money off GTX 970 and 980 sales also keep in mind Black Friday, Christmas, New Years sales are still to come providing big selling points for Nvidia to milk GM204. By the time the R9 390x launches, Nvidia wont care because they would of already made their money.

[Deletive]

I'm pretty sure GTX 980 is a full featured GM204 die so I doubt there will be a GTX 980 Ti as well. Unless they strive to make another TITAN based on two GM204 dies. In which case I doubt they will simply because it's going to be one hell of an expensive card to manufacture meanwhile the R9 390x will more than likely still crush it performance wise. My own personal speculation is that Nvidia is done until Pascal. They dropped GM204 out of no where on a scarce market and are soaking it up until AMD offerings come. Nvidia is making tons of money off GTX 970 and 980 sales also keep in mind Black Friday, Christmas, New Years sales are still to come providing big selling points for Nvidia to milk GM204. By the time the R9 390x launches, Nvidia wont care because they would of already made their money.

Yep. AMD really got to put out a card without a huge TDP also. So either way whether they release is Q1 or Q2 they'll really have to pull something new out of their pockets.

[Jerakl]

SPECULATION!

[Opcode]

Yep. AMD really got to put out a card without a huge TDP also. So either way whether they release is Q1 or Q2 they'll really have to pull something new out of their pockets.

It's going to be hard, the R9 390x is supposedly packing 4096 SPU's @ 1 GHz (essentially two R9 280x dies slapped together) which is going to generate quite a bit of heat. I foresee it having a liquid loop just like the R9 295x2. Tho the question is how well will it perform in comparison while being a single GPU (instead of relying on Crossfire/SLI drivers like dual GPU cards). I personally don't mind cards having a liquid loop out of the box as that's just a bonus both ascetically and performance wise (closed loops on GPU's are becoming more common these days among enthusiasts anyways). I'm just itching to see all of them SPU's working in conjunction with that huge memory bus. It's our first look at HBM technology on a GPU so its kind of exciting.

[deathjester]

 

Good news for those eagerly awaiting the GTX 980 Ti as not only has the specs leaked online but the GTX 980 Ti release date may have been revealed as well, if the reports and rumors are to be believed.

"Initial specs (of the GTX 980 Ti) put this monstrous Maxwell-powered graphics card at roughly 50% more powerful than the GTX Titan Black."John Sutton of GameDebate.com has reported about the GTX 980 Ti specs that leaked recently and he has claimed that the GTX 980 Ti would be at least 50% percent faster than one of the fastest single GPU cards in the market today.

 "That's some serious power under the hood, but where does it all come from? Firstly, the GM200 GPU will be on a 551mm2 die, with an estimated 20-22 Streaming Multiprocessors Maxwell (SMM) giving a total of between 2560 and 2816 CUDA cores. This will all be on a 384-bit memory bus, up from the 256-bit bus seen on the GeForce GTX 980 and the GeForce GTX 970."

 

            http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/52474/20141113/gtx-980-ti-release-date.htm

            http://www.game-debate.com/hardware/?gid=2490&graphics=GeForce%20GTX%20980%20Ti%208GB

 

___________________________

probably just a rumor, the 50% leap that they are claiming makes me call BS...

but we might see it revealed at the upcoming CES at the very least...

 

 

Just a heads up. Kdramastars posts false articles all the time to get hits or troll. To be honest I don't know what their deal is I trust that WCCFtech site more than them lol. 

 

Some funny examples.

 

http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/25980/20140623/nba-2k15-pc-next-gen.htm

http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/20071/20140421/mass-effect-4-pc-release-date.htm

[MuffinTopMike]

Hopefully the release of the 980 ti will make the 980 and 970 cheaper... 

[Fahrenheit]

I got a 290x i'm sitting on. Hope something new comes out before Witcher comes out on February 24. The 290x got some nasty coil whine with even vsync turned on. 

[xAcid9]

Uhm, on this link here posted in the OP: http://www.game-debate.com/hardware/?gid=2490&graphics=GeForce%20GTX%20980%20Ti%208GB

 

They are claiming the 980 Ti will have 8GB of VRAM on a 384-bit bus. Which is impossible. 

 

And on this link here they claim the same thing (that it's on a 384-bit bus) except it will come in 6GB or 8GB variants which makes no sense: http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/52474/20141113/gtx-980-ti-release-date.htm

 

If it's on a 384-bit bus, it can only come in 3GB, 6GB, or 12GB variations.

 

So the people making these rumors really don't know very much about GPU technology.

 

This, they can't even get that shit right.

[LukaP]

Uhm, on this link here posted in the OP: http://www.game-debate.com/hardware/?gid=2490&graphics=GeForce%20GTX%20980%20Ti%208GB

They are claiming the 980 Ti will have 8GB of VRAM on a 384-bit bus. Which is impossible.

And on this link here they claim the same thing (that it's on a 384-bit bus) except it will come in 6GB or 8GB variants which makes no sense: http://www.kdramastars.com/articles/52474/20141113/gtx-980-ti-release-date.htm

If it's on a 384-bit bus, it can only come in 3GB, 6GB, or 12GB variations.

So the people making these rumors really don't know very much about GPU technology.

Not entirely true. Yes this is correct if you are using 4/8Gb memory modules. But if they used higher capacity ones they could get that amount over 384bit bus. Remember, bus only affects the number of "channels" that memory is attached to. Not the size of that memory, and with 384 that is 3 channels of 128 bits, with 64bits for upstream and 64 for Downstream simultaneously. If you double the amount of chips, you lose simultaneous up/down transmission.

[harrybob141]

PLEASE

 

I would love to go from my 780ti to SLI 980tis... I would probably smile from ear to ear

And play AC: Unity in GLORIOUS 24 CINEMATIC Frames in every second!

[Astralify]

kdramastars? REALLY? This site must be purged from existence. ALL of their "articles" are totally made up crap based on hype.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Not entirely true. Yes this is correct if you are using 4/8Gb memory modules. But if they used higher capacity ones they could get that amount over 384bit bus. Remember, bus only affects the number of "channels" that memory is attached to. Not the size of that memory, and with 384 that is 3 channels of 128 bits, with 64bits for upstream and 64 for Downstream simultaneously. If you double the amount of chips, you lose simultaneous up/down transmission.

 

However, the bus width basically controls the amount of memory chips that can be used on the card. Each memory chip uses a 32-bit bus most often, meaning on a 128-bit card there would be four chips, on a 256-bit there would be eight chips, on a 384-bit there would be twelve chips and 512-bit there would be sixteen chips (this is usually the minimum amount or standard amount). The memory chips themselves can come in different sizes; to get 4GB of VRAM on a 256-bit bus you would need chips with 512MB on each of them. 

 

On a 384-bit bus to achieve 8GB wouldn't be plausible because of the sizes of the chips. Using 512MB chips x 12 = 6144 or 6GB. Some cards can have double the amount; so the extra chips on the front will share the bus with the chips on the back. So theoretically if you had double the amount of memory on a 384-bit bus there would be 24 chips using 512MB sizes you would end up with 12GB though. In order for there to be 8GB or 8192 it would mean that they would have to add four more chips to the back totaling 16 chips. Those four more chips would have 512MB on them each. Then you have 8GB of memory. But really that wouldn't make sense because many of these cards that come out are cut down versions of workstation cards. So it would seem like a lot of extra labor and cost to do something like that instead of simply offering 6GB or 12GB variations because it's more than probable that the workstation versions of these cards will come in 12GB variations automatically. 

[LukaP]

 

However, the bus width basically controls the amount of memory chips that can be used on the card. Each memory chip uses a 32-bit bus most often, meaning on a 128-bit card there would be four chips, on a 256-bit there would be eight chips, on a 384-bit there would be twelve chips and 512-bit there would be sixteen chips (this is usually the minimum amount or standard amount). The memory chips themselves can come in different sizes; to get 4GB of VRAM on a 256-bit bus you would need chips with 512MB on each of them. 

 

On a 384-bit bus to achieve 8GB wouldn't be plausible because of the sizes of the chips. Using 512MB chips x 12 = 6144 or 6GB. Some cards can have double the amount; so the extra chips on the front will share the bus with the chips on the back. So theoretically if you had double the amount of memory on a 384-bit bus there would be 24 chips using 512MB sizes you would end up with 12GB though. In order for there to be 8GB or 8192 it would mean that they would have to add four more chips to the back totaling 16 chips. Those four more chips would have 512MB on them each. Then you have 8GB of memory. But really that wouldn't make sense because many of these cards that come out are cut down versions of workstation cards. So it would seem like a lot of extra labor and cost to do something like that instead of simply offering 6GB or 12GB variations because it's more than probably that the workstation versions of these cards will come in 12GB variations automatically. 

no, youre not getting it. you can use chips that are (cba to calculate it) lets say 768MB in size, and use 6 of them to get 8GB

[BiG StroOnZ]

no, youre not getting it. you can use chips that are (cba to calculate it) lets say 768MB in size, and use 6 of them to get 8GB

 

You're not making any sense.

[LukaP]

You're not making any sense.

how? you take 6 chips that are 1.33GB in size (or 12 that are 0.665GB) and put them on the card. granted its not an elegant way, but its a way...

[BiG StroOnZ]

how? you take 6 chips that are 1.33GB in size (or 12 that are 0.665GB) and put them on the card. granted its not an elegant way, but its a way...

 

You just said take take 6 chips that are 768MB in size. Now you take 6 chips that are 1330MB in size? Or 12 that are 665MB? None of that adds up to 8192.

[<boss2939>]

^ This I really really doubt it'll be called a 980ti in fact seeing it still being called that when we know it's not a 980 core is starting to annoy me as it's plan stupid IMO I'd say there's more chance of it being called a 985(stealing from amds 285) then there is 980ti and I highly doubt that also.

actually there was a gtx 285 

[LukaP]

You just said take take 6 chips that are 768MB in size. Now you take 6 chips that are 1330MB in size? Or 12 that are 665MB? None of that adds up to 8192.

I said before that i wasnt calculating it. and now it does add up almost perfectly. its around that size (+- 1%)

[BiG StroOnZ]

I said before that i wasnt calculating it. and now it does add up almost perfectly. its around that size (+- 1%)

 

But a 384-bit bus uses 12 chips minimum since each memory chip has a 32-bit wide bus. You wouldn't be able to use 6 chips only. You would have to use 12 chips of 665MB which only equates to 7.98GB. Which means they cannot advertise the card as an 8GB card because it doesn't have 8GB but rather 7.98GB. Although it's a small percentage of difference compared to 8GB it's still not 8GB. They wouldn't say this card comes with 8GB of memory when it only comes in 7.98GB 

 

Back to the original argument, even doing such a thing, putting on 7.98GB of memory would be entirely inefficient if you were also going to have a 6GB model. Because these cards are almost always cut down workstation cards. As you stated yourself, it's not a very elegant way of doing things. But besides being not elegant it also doesn't make any sense. Which brings me back to what I was trying to say, this leak or rumor about this card should be taken with a grain of salt because there's a lot of claims that don't add up. 

[LukaP]

But a 384-bit bus uses 12 chips minimum since each memory chip has a 32-bit wide bus. You wouldn't be able to use 6 chips only. You would have to use 12 chips of 665MB which only equates to 7.98GB. Which means they cannot advertise the card as an 8GB card because it doesn't have 8GB but rather 7.98GB. Although it's a small percentage of difference compared to 8GB it's still not 8GB. They wouldn't say this card comes with 8GB of memory when it only comes in 7.98GB 

 

Back to the original argument, even doing such a thing, putting on 7.98GB of memory would be entirely inefficient if you were also going to have a 6GB model. Because these cards are almost always cut down workstation cards. As you stated yourself, it's not a very elegant way of doing things. But besides being not elegant it also doesn't make any sense. Which brings me back to what I was trying to say, this leak or rumor about this card should be taken with a grain of salt because there's a lot of claims that don't add up. 

are you stupid? I said its approximate numbers... 

 

who said you would have a 6GB model? also, im pretty sure it will have a 512b bus, but i was playing devils advocate that there is an option to do it... as i said, it would not be elegant, but possible