GTX 1080 benchmarks leak: not much faster than a 980 Ti

[captain cactus]

2 minutes ago, asim1999 said:

It should have more. The GP100 chip comes with 16GB VRAM default. so chances are that is what the 1080 Ti will have and the Pascal Titan could have as much as 32GB 

But what's the point in that? Games like GTA5 and Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor sure eat VRAM for breakfast, lunch and dinner at 1440p+ but it's not even enough to fill 8GB on a 290x or 290 series, let alone a current Titan X with 12GB. It's great if you want to do computational stuff but for games alone it's pretty much useless. 

[SteveGrabowski0]

Though actually, I'd probably wait until Vega even if these cards look good on release. Because I don't care what they can do with old and current games, my 970 handles them fine. But I would like to see how these cards look for the games releasing for this Christmas season, to see how they compare on games with compute heavy effects like Quantum Break that murder Maxwell if that's the direction new games are going to take.

[Sauron]

By now we should be used to nvidia holding back on the most powerful cards to milk those who upgrade early.

[asim1999]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

By now we should be used to nvidia holding back on the most powerful cards to milk those who upgrade early.

True, i felt so bad when i didnt get a 980 Ti as it only cost £100 more.

TBF i had a 5450 in my rig so it was pretty useless before i got the 980

 

[Citadelen]

If the 380X ends up being as fast as a 1080 then it will really surprise me, as the die size for Polaris 10 is 232mm², while GP104 will be 332mm².

AMD would be able to both undercut Nvidia and make more money per chip than them.

 

[SteveGrabowski0]

15 minutes ago, Sauron said:

By now we should be used to nvidia holding back on the most powerful cards to milk those who upgrade early.

You realize AMD is doing the exact same thing, right?

[Citadelen]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

You realize AMD is doing the exact same thing, right?

They have no choice, HBM2 is still very expensive, and yields on 14/16nm aren't that good yet, so they'd be stupendously expensive for what you'd get.

[Notional]

38 minutes ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

But what's the point in that? Games like GTA5 and Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor sure eat VRAM for breakfast, lunch and dinner at 1440p+ but it's not even enough to fill 8GB on a 290x or 290 series, let alone a current Titan X with 12GB. It's great if you want to do computational stuff but for games alone it's pretty much useless. 

2 years ago everyone said the 290's would never need that extra GB of VRAM compared to the 780's. Several games now use more than 3GB and even more than 4. So hat will we see the next year or two? 8GB should be minimum for mid and high end.

[potoooooooo]

2 hours ago, -BirdiE- said:

So, the 1080 is likely going to be cheaper than the 980ti, draw less power than the 980ti, and it would take a LN2 cooled 980ti to beat it at stock?

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

Sounds like every single generational increase as of late

[-BirdiE-]

2 minutes ago, potoooooooo said:

Sounds like every single generational increase as of late

Similar, but a slightly larger performance bump than last time around. A standard overclocked 780 ti would beat a stock 980. And there definitely wasn't the same power savings between Kepler and Maxwell.

[DevilishBooster]

38 minutes ago, Sauron said:

By now we should be used to nvidia holding back on the most powerful cards to milk those who upgrade early.

Yeah, that's why I decided to just go with a couple 980Ti's for my VR build that I'm working on instead of waiting for the 1080. Guaranteed performance that will last for a couple years and then I can drop in a couple 1080Ti's.

[Citadelen]

3 minutes ago, DevilishBooster said:

Yeah, that's why I decided to just go with a couple 980Ti's for my VR build that I'm working on instead of waiting for the 1080. Guaranteed performance that will last for a couple years and then I can drop in a couple 1080Ti's.

Doesn't Nvidia have problems with latency for VR at the moment?

[DevilishBooster]

6 minutes ago, Citadelen said:

Doesn't Nvidia have problems with latency for VR at the moment?

Nothing serious that I have read about, but then again I am by no means an expert on VR and I'm still reading up on how everything work with the VR kits. I haven't bought the cards yet, so I can always switch to a different card if needs be.

[226477_1454181668]

2 hours ago, alexyy said:

Kinda make sense if the 1080 is priced like a the 980 was then it's a very good jump if you ask me.

Not really as the 970 > 780ti. If the 1080 is only a bit better than the 980ti , that might be somewhat concerning.

[alexyy]

2 hours ago, larsi239 said:

Especially since it beats it on stock settings. Speaking of which, look at that core clock 1860MHz!! Looking forward to 2GHz oc's

Also with a stock ivy bridge i7, not sure how much the cpu would effect the score with firestrike,  we could see even more gains.

 

970 to 780ti was a larger jump than normal, the 770 wasn't beating the 680, 

[Citadelen]

1 minute ago, DevilishBooster said:

Nothing serious that I have read about, but then again I am by no means an expert on VR and I'm still reading up on how everything work with the VR kits. I haven't bought the cards yet, so I can always switch to a different card if needs be.

It's just that Async improves FPS and latency. Whil Nvidia's context switching improves FPS (not as good as AMD though), but increases latency as well. AMD aslo have LiquidVR. This might all change with Pascal, but for the moment I'd only recommend AMD for VR.

[DevilishBooster]

Just now, Citadelen said:

It's just that Async improves FPS and latency. Whil Nvidia's context switching improves FPS (not as good as AMD though), but increases latency as well. AMD aslo have LiquidVR. This might all change with Pascal, but for the moment I'd only recommend AMD for VR.

So look at going with dual R9 390X's? Or dual Fury X's?

I don't recall anyone making waterblocks for the 390X's, so I might just have to go with the Fury X.

[Citadelen]

Just now, DevilishBooster said:

So look at going with dual R9 390X's? Or dual Fury X's?

I don't recall anyone making waterblocks for the 390X's, so I might just have to go with the Fury X.

I'd say Fury Xs, but I'd also say wait for GP100 and Vega if you can.

[GoodBytes]

15 minutes ago, Citadelen said:

Doesn't Nvidia have problems with latency for VR at the moment?

I am working with Oculus Rift Dev Kit 2 at work (I mean I develop our software for it), and I see no latency with our software, at least at the moment.

My computer is has only 1x GeForce 980 in it. V-Sync off (but Oculus Rift adds its own cap to not have tearing). Dev Kit 2 run at 75Hz, the official one which we are waiting for, supports up to 90Hz.

[Yoinkerman]

I'm using 760s I'm down with an upgrade soon

[Citadelen]

1 minute ago, GoodBytes said:

I am working with Oculus Rift Dev Kit 2 at work (I mean I develop our software for it), and I see no latency with our software, at least at the moment.

My computer is has only 1x GeForce 980 in it. V-Sync off (but Oculus Rift adds its own cap to not have tearing)

Others notice it more, it would also depend on whether you're used to it. It does exist, at one of Nvidia's own events they had someone use a VR headset (can't remember which one) and he got quite dizzy.

[GoodBytes]

9 minutes ago, Citadelen said:

Others notice it more, it would also depend on whether you're used to it. It does exist, at one of Nvidia's own events they had someone use a VR headset (can't remember which one) and he got quite dizzy.

I don't know, I never got dizzy. But someone else in the office, does, but until we have the official Oculus Rift we can't say for sure, but we believe that it is because the eye point distance between the 2 eyes aren't matching for that person, as you can't adjust that in the Dev Kit 2. Another possibility is that person never plays games, and so anything fast moving is disorienting.

 

What we are doing is currently running at 75Hz solid (in fact it can pass 90Hz solid)

[SteveGrabowski0]

14 minutes ago, alexyy said:

970 to 780ti was a larger jump than normal, the 770 wasn't beating the 680, 

Nah man, the 770 was just a rebranded and overclocked 680.

 

[DevilishBooster]

4 minutes ago, Citadelen said:

I'd say Fury Xs, but I'd also say wait for GP100 and Vega if you can.

I'm working on the case mod right now, and I had planned on buying the components this year, so IDK that I want to wait for an undetermined release sometime in 2017.

2 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

I am working with Oculus Rift Dev Kit 2 at work (I mean I develop our software for it), and I see no latency with our software, at least at the moment.

My computer is has only 1x GeForce 980 in it. V-Sync off (but Oculus Rift adds its own cap to not have tearing). Dev Kit 2 run at 75Hz, the official one which we are waiting for, supports up to 90Hz.

I just decided to go with 980Ti's because it seem(es/ed) to be the general consensus among people adopting VR early.

1 minute ago, Citadelen said:

Others notice it more, it would also depend on whether you're used to it. It does exist, at one of Nvidia's own events they had someone use a VR headset (can't remember which one) and he got quite dizzy.

That could just be a result of his eyes not working well with the display so close. I don't really get motion-sickness (I love roller coasters and whatnot) but if I try to read in a moving vehicle I get a really bad headache and (usually) nauseous because of the micro-focusing movements that my eyes have to make. I don't know that I would just automatically chalk that up to latency.  

[Citadelen]

1 minute ago, GoodBytes said:

I don't know, I never got dizzy. But someone else in the office, does, but until we have the official Oculus Rift we can say for sure, but we believe that it is because the eye point distance between the 2 eyes aren't matching for that person, as you can't adjust that in the Dev Kit 2. Another possibility is that person never plays games, and so anything fast moving is disorienting.

This is all true. It's be best to wait for the final releases to make a final judgment I think.

 

1 minute ago, DevilishBooster said:

-snip- 

Most people see the 980 Ti at the top and then get that, without knowing that it has inferior hardware and software support for VR.