First GTX 1080 Review is HERE!

[VagabondWraith]

1 minute ago, Valentyn said:

It's a 180W card, with a new improved Vapor Chamber cooler, and NVIDIA claimed they were able to hit 2GH at load running at 67 degrees at their launch event.

Now it turns out, the card caps at 82 degrees, then throttles the boost clock down. 

The 980 didn't even have a vapor chamber and didn't throttle. 

Hell my 980Ti EVGA Superclocked card with reference cooler doesn't throttle under fullload for hours of rendering or gaming.

So to sum it up, "improved" vapor chamber cooler, which can't even keep a reference 180w card under 80 degrees on a double node shrink. 

While the same/older cooler can manage it on a 250W card like the 980Ti.

My 980 Ti would run at 85 without a custom curve. The person running this benchmark used no such curve afaik. You gotta treat a reference differently and I never thought this card would be any different than any reference dating back to the 690.

[SteveGrabowski0]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Love how the AMD defense force is at work here, trying to make these results seem bad.

It is on average 30% faster than a Titan X. About 70% faster than a 980 for 4K (seems to be 50-60% for 1080p).

 

Very good overclocking headroom.

Nice temps.

Quiet cooler.

Lots of new, exciting features.

 

 

The cards with custom coolers will be more interesting though.

Yeah this looks like a hell of a card. I was hoping for 25% in games like last time they did a node shrink (680 vs 580) and they look like they outperformed that from the Digital Foundry 4k review.

[SSL]

I'm not surprised at all. This stank of heavy marketing from the start - the "2x performance (in VR)" nonsense especially.

[Humbug]

6 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

Oced 980 Ti is the same as the stock 1080

Probably yes. But once you overlock the 1080 it should again win by 20%+.

 

Anyway i'm pleased with the performance. There are faster cards still to come (Nvidia big Pascal and AMD Vega).

GTX 1080 looks like a good purchase for people who want to upgrade and are currently using R9 280x or GTX 780 or lower.

On the other hand if you want to upgrade but already have GTX 970 or R9 290 or higher then I would recommend waiting for a few months for the flagship parts to come out.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Yeah this looks like a hell of a card. I was hoping for 25% in games like last time they did a node shrink (680 vs 580).

680 was nearly 40% above a 580 AFAIK

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

680 was nearly 40% above a 580 AFAIK

BIG CHIP VS BIG CHIP
Keep in mind the GTX 1080 IS NOT THE REPLACEMENT FOR THE GTX 980ti...it should be compaired with the GTX 980 in which case the performance difference is A LOT more than +40%

[don_svetlio]

4 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Love how the AMD defense force is at work here, trying to make these results seem bad.

It is on average 30% faster than a Titan X. About 70% faster than a 980 for 4K (seems to be 50-60% for 1080p).

 

Very good overclocking headroom.

Nice temps.

Quiet cooler.

Lots of new, exciting features.

 

 

The cards with custom coolers will be more interesting though.

 

 

 

Just set a custom fan curve if you want that. That way you can prioritize temperatures or sound to whichever degree you want.

I seriously don't agree about the temps being good. We were promised 69*C at 2.1Ghz on a ref cooler. Not 82*C at 1700MHz...

[Valentyn]

1 minute ago, VagabondWraith said:

My 980 Ti would run at 85 without a custom curve. The person running this benchmark used no such curve afaik. You gotta treat a reference differently and I never thought this card would be any different than any reference dating back to the 690.

I don't use a custom curve either, and thing is NVIDIA presented it live on stage as not even needing it. Showing a card that ran at 67 degrees at load at 2Ghz.

That turns out to have been a nasty little trick with  a cherry picked card, or they were running it on water and not air like they claimed they were.

 

That's mostly why people are not happy now with the thermals. Especially with some folks showing throttling at stock boost clocks.

Personally, I'm also not happy with the reference/founder cards costing an extra $100 now. If you want a waterblock on them now, you have to pay that extra premium just to do that as well now.

Here's hoping AMD get some decent competition in "soonish".

[SteveGrabowski0]

1 minute ago, Humbug said:

Probably yes. But once you overlock the 1080 it should again win by 20%+.

 

Anyway i'm pleased with the performance. There are faster cards still to come (Nvidia big Pascal and AMD Vega).

1080 looks like a good purchase for people who want to upgrade and are currently using R9 280x or GTX 780 or lower. If you have anything faster than that I would recommend waiting for a few months for the flagship parts to come out.

The flagship doesn't come out for 7.5 months though, and it has only been announced as a Tesla card. I imagine we'll see it as a Titan in early spring for maybe $1200 ($100 Founders Edition tax plus $100 price bump for HMB2) before getting it as an 1180/1080Ti in the summer or fall of 2017.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

BIG CHIP VS BIG CHIP
Keep in mind the GTX 1080 IS NOT THE REPLACEMENT FOR THE GTX 980ti...it should be compaired with the GTX 980 in which case the performance difference is A LOT more than +40%

Titan was the big chip and original 680. The card we have as a 680 was actually the 670 Ti. Look it up.

[SteveGrabowski0]

2 minutes ago, don_svetlio said:

680 was nearly 40% above a 580 AFAIK

Not at launch, it was 25%.

[Starelementpoke]

4 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Love how the AMD defense force is at work here, trying to make these results seem bad.

It is on average 30% faster than a Titan X. About 70% faster than a 980 for 4K (seems to be 50-60% for 1080p).

 

Very good overclocking headroom.

Nice temps.

Quiet cooler.

Lots of new, exciting features.

 

 

The cards with custom coolers will be more interesting though.

 

 

 

Just set a custom fan curve if you want that. That way you can prioritize temperatures or sound to whichever degree you want.

Does that include me if I´m more,¨ It´s nice and a good jump, just didn´t really meet what I was hoping for and doesn´t really seem worth it to me personally. Kinda like how Age of Ultron was a good movie, just not as great as everyone expected.¨

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

680 was nearly 40% above a 580 AFAIK

680 to 580 was 24% for 1920x1200 and 30% for 2560x1600.

[VagabondWraith]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

Love how the AMD defense force is at work here, trying to make these results seem bad.

It is on average 30% faster than a Titan X. About 70% faster than a 980 for 4K (seems to be 50-60% for 1080p).

 

Very good overclocking headroom.

Nice temps.

Quiet cooler.

Lots of new, exciting features.

 

 

The cards with custom coolers will be more interesting though.

Of course.... AMD has nothing to compete with right now as their cards are getting their asses beat up, down, sideways and back. The only natural response is a blanket downplay of defeat.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, don_svetlio said:

Titan was the big chip and original 680. The card we have as a 680 was actually the 670 Ti. Look it up.

yeah you're right the big kepler die only came out for the titan/780 sorry about that lol

[SteveGrabowski0]

2 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

BIG CHIP VS BIG CHIP
Keep in mind the GTX 1080 IS NOT THE REPLACEMENT FOR THE GTX 980ti...it should be compaired with the GTX 980 in which case the performance difference is A LOT more than +40%

580 was the big chip in Fermi though. Nvidia just called the big chip Titan and doubled the price in Kepler.

[Valentyn]

5 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

BIG CHIP VS BIG CHIP
Keep in mind the GTX 1080 IS NOT THE REPLACEMENT FOR THE GTX 980ti...it should be compaired with the GTX 980 in which case the performance difference is A LOT more than +40%

Actually the 680 was a midrange chip.

It was GK104 vs GF110.

 

The 1080 vs Titan is very similar performance wise. I expected more though considering Pascal is a double node jump compared to Fermi vs Keplar single node.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Not at launch, it was 25%.

It was. 7970 was 25% faster and 680 launched close to 20% above a 7970

[stconquest]

The numbers seem really good.  10%-35% improvement over their previous TOTL cards (980Ti/TitanX) is impressive.  Just because it is the norm to see an improvement from gen to gen, does not mean it is easy to do.

 

C'mon you guys, don't let a sense of entitlement get you.  The 1080 is impressive by any standard, relative to all Maxwell offerings.

 

Great work Nvidia!

[SteveGrabowski0]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

680 to 580 was 24% for 1920x1200 and 30% for 2560x1600.

@don_svetlio is probably looking at numbers after the drivers matured and new games came out a few months later, where the 680 increased that lead substantially to around 40-45%. I expect the same to happen with 1080 vs 980 Ti because of DX12 and the heavier use of compute effects in game.

[Starelementpoke]

2 minutes ago, VagabondWraith said:

Of course.... AMD has nothing to compete with right now as their cards are getting their asses beat up, down, sideways and back. The only natural response is a blanket downplay of defeat.

I don´t think the competition technically starts until the cards go onto sale.

[don_svetlio]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

@don_svetlio is probably looking at numbers after the drivers matured and new games came out a few months later, where the 680 increased that lead substantially to around 40-45%. I expect the same to happen with 1080 vs 980 Ti because of DX12 and the heavier use of compute effects in game.

Keep in mind. Fermi got driver-abandoned afterwards.

[SteveGrabowski0]

2 minutes ago, stconquest said:

The numbers seem really good.  10%-35% improvement over their previous TOTL cards (980Ti/TitanX) is impressive.  Just because it is the norm to see an improvement from gen to gen, does not mean it is easy to do.

 

C'mon you guys, don't let a sense of entitlement get you.  The 1080 is impressive by any standard, relative to all Maxwell offerings.

 

Great work Nvidia!

Absolutely. I'm still going to wait to see what Vega 10 brings to the table, but this is definitely an impressive card.

[VagabondWraith]

3 minutes ago, Starelementpoke said:

I don´t think the competition technically starts until the cards go onto sale.

So, 10 days.

[Starelementpoke]

Just now, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Absolutely. I'm still going to wait to see what Vega 10 brings to the table, but this is definitely an impressive card.

To say the least. Never thought I´d see a 2GHZ clock on a GPU.