NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 3DMark Firestrike Benchmark Results Leaked

[Energycore]

4 hours ago, Demonking said:

i'm buying it. Iv'e been waiting for 8Gb vram card for a while,& yes i know 390 but i want PhysX & shadowplay raptr is trash. 

Have you actually tried raptr's Game Video Recorder?

[Demonking]

2 hours ago, Energycore said:

Have you actually tried raptr's Game Video Recorder?

Yes. Iv'e had raptr before the AMD partnership, it's trash garbage. 

[WereCat]

Anyone outside of US will be disapointed imo. Why?

GTX 1080 - MSRP $699 -> EU price €789

GTX 1070 - MSRP $379 -> EU price €429 (€340+20% VAT +5% extra NVIDIA asks from EU customers)

 

This card will be not even close to what GTX 970 was. Cost effective with a really nice performance. I dont think it will be much popular outside of US because it will be hella expensive.

(Yes, I am talking about founders - reference card because that is what will be available at launch).

[Albatross]

If this is true there is no way they are going to sell it at the same price of a 970 or even around it.

[Big-G]

Inflation and process improvements... they cost...

[Carclis]

This is pretty much what was expected. With any luck the 8 pin power won't be as big a bottleneck for overclocking as it is on the 1080 although I don't see it keeping up with an overclocked 980ti with only a 256 bit bus and gddr5 memory.

[WereCat]

4 minutes ago, Carclis said:

This is pretty much what was expected. With any luck the 8 pin power won't be as big a bottleneck for overclocking as it is on the 1080 although I don't see it keeping up with an overclocked 980ti with only a 256 bit bus and gddr5 memory.

256bit bus is not an issue because of all the delta color compression improvements.

[Big-G]

The 1080's issue is way too restrictive BIOS limits on power targets... it never gets to the rated 225W and thus throttles accordingly.

[-BirdiE-]

8 hours ago, GreezyJeezy said:

Yes but if you can get the same performance of a 1080 and you don't have the money to buy a 1080 it gives you more reason to get the 1070. 

 

If this was pointless then over clocking in genrel would be pointless, some cards are bad overclockers.

Worst logic ever...

[Curufinwe_wins]

8 hours ago, Aytex said:

 

 

 

IT seems really nice, if this is true

compareing this leak of the 1080's 3dmark, and the actual 3dmark bench for the 1080 here

if your too lazy to look the 1080 on the REAL, not the leak got a score of 19370 and the leak with 21828, its either cherry picked or OC, or you know; Fake *gasp*

it isn't that far off so my speculation is its going to be on par with the titan x and 980 ti, most likely inbetween but if your like me with not alot of money and a tight budget

with the MSRP of around $375 USD. thats a hell of  a deal

 

 

source

You do know the leak's meagre 19370 was total score not graphics only right.... Reading is so hard... I even mentioned on this thread the ~21k graphics score from the original leak..

 

Seriously this is 100% exactly what we expect.

[Energycore]

2 hours ago, Demonking said:

Yes. Iv'e had raptr before the AMD partnership, it's trash garbage. 

So you never thought that by chance AMD improved it in all these years?

 

Perhaps it's time to give it another chance since it's both changed hands and had a long time elapsed.

[GreezyJeezy]

8 minutes ago, -BirdiE- said:

Worst logic ever...

if you have shit to say just PM it to me so you don't end up getting the thread locked by going off track with useless comments that contribute nothing, since it is directed at me and not the conversation it should be discussed over PM .

[Curufinwe_wins]

7 hours ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Damn the 1070 is so cut down vs the 1080 though, they should really call this card a 1060 Ti with a 24% delta in performance even at lowly 1080p. The difference between 970 and 980 was only about 13% and 670 vs 680 was about 8%. Even big die GK110 GTX 780 was only 15% more powerful than mid die GK104 GTX 770. I think these numbers are very disappointing myself, based on past 70 series vs 80 series.

We already knew GP104 1070 was a confirmed 75% of the fully activated 1080... And we already knew that while the 1080 was 15-25% better than the Titan X the 1070 was supposed to be just better than the Titan X.

 

All of this was already known...

 

Also the 780 was a cutdown... on full GK110 of about 15%.

 

The 970 was a 13/16 of the 980 die, and did about that much worse by scaling (other dies have done better from cut-downs but mainly from older architectures, aka less optimized)

 

You see, if a cutdown can get more than it's die proportion of performance it means the full card is less optimized at using all of its subunits than it otherwise should be (as both Hawaii and Fiji are notorious for).

 

AKA you expect an intel i7 to perform almost exactly 2x better than an i3 at the same clock at well multi-threaded processes.

 

Thus since efficiency is supposed to constantly improve over time, the die size relationship to performance should also become more rigid.

 

 

Also how the hell could this be disappointing when the 770 was the 680 (and the 970 was merely on par with the 780) while the 1070 is a good 25%+ faster than the 980?

 

People have such odd expectations...

 

 

 

[Carclis]

37 minutes ago, WereCat said:

256bit bus is not an issue because of all the delta color compression improvements.

That has not been tested yet. Nvidia on their slides mentioned that the compression will bring a 20% boost to bandwidth which puts the 1070 at 307Gb/s compared with the 336Gb/s of the 980ti. Mind you, both cards are using GDDR5 and the 1070 is operating near the limit of what it can whilst the 980ti can reach 374Gb/s with a memory clock of 7800Mhz. Only time will tell but the 980ti was quite far ahead of it's time and the 1070 had to make compromises due to the availability of GDDR5X so it sounds unlikely that it will top it just yet.

[Lethal Seraph]

However tempting to replace my 980ti, I'm holding up for bigger, badder Pascal. Hbm2.0 plox....kthxbai.

[SteveGrabowski0]

45 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Also how the hell could this be disappointing when the 770 was the 680 (and the 970 was merely on par with the 780) while the 1070 is a good 25%+ faster than the 980?

 

People have such odd expectations...

You make a good point there. While this is the biggest delta we have seen on 70 vs 80 performance, you're right, it's still a really big increase over 980.

[Arcmanov]

Great stuff...time to replace these 970s. 

[Kimmers]

The want for a 1070 is quite real. But I think I'll bide my time and wait for the 1170.

[Carclis]

1 hour ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Also how the hell could this be disappointing when the 770 was the 680 (and the 970 was merely on par with the 780) while the 1070 is a good 25%+ faster than the 980?

 

People have such odd expectations...

It's not that people are disappointed, more so that we already knew to expect and were not surprised at all. Many people on these forums are sitting on 980ti's which are very close in performance to the 1080 making Vega and big Pascal the cards to look out for. Then you have others who are looking to get this card but were let down by the price. I mean the 1070 is a good price by todays standards, but todays standards don't account for two generations of performance leaps.

 

I'm personally waiting on Vega to see how prices and performance turn out.

[Seireitou]

I'm looking to replace my GTX 960 for this and pretty much double or triple my performance for about $450 from MSI or EVGA. For me the performance is very much worth if it truly does get  Titan or 980TI performance for about 200 less and on STOCK. Pfft. For people with 980ti, I can see why they wouldn't even flinch at the 1080 or this card but for us lower people who's been waiting AND have money. This card is pretty damn good looking.

[M4st4M1nd]

24% performance drop from the 1080? No thankyou

[Megazero]

7 minutes ago, M4st4M1nd said:

24% performance drop from the 1080? No thankyou

About 24% drop in performance for a roughly 36% drop in price. Pretty fair IMO.

[Albatross]

19 minutes ago, Seireitou said:

I'm looking to replace my GTX 960 for this and pretty much double or triple my performance for about $450 from MSI or EVGA. For me the performance is very much worth if it truly does get  Titan or 980TI performance for about 200 less and on STOCK. Pfft. For people with 980ti, I can see why they wouldn't even flinch at the 1080 or this card but for us lower people who's been waiting AND have money. This card is pretty damn good looking.

Agreed.

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, Carclis said:

It's not that people are disappointed, more so that we already knew to expect and were not surprised at all. Many people on these forums are sitting on 980ti's which are very close in performance to the 1080 making Vega and big Pascal the cards to look out for. Then you have others who are looking to get this card but were let down by the price. I mean the 1070 is a good price by todays standards, but todays standards don't account for two generations of performance leaps.

 

I'm personally waiting on Vega to see how prices and performance turn out.

Lol two generations of performance leaps? Even were that applicable (which it isn't), this is pretty much two gen+ difference... GK110 (well 780 variant) was only ~10% better than GK104, GM204 was only about 15% better than GK110...

 

GP104 is almost 95% better than GM204!

 

There is a smaller difference in performance between the 580 to 780 (~90%) than there is between the 980 and 1080 (~95%)...

 

Sorry GM200 was just so god damn amazing that it made everyone's perceptions way out of wack... Both Fiji and GM200 were literally the largest 28nm gpu's that could be made with modern technology... 

 

Crap man, I'm sitting on two 980ti's now. 

[Carclis]

1 hour ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Lol two generations of performance leaps? Even were that applicable (which it isn't), this is pretty much two gen+ difference... GK110 (well 780 variant) was only ~10% better than GK104, GM204 was only about 15% better than GK110...

 

GP104 is almost 95% better than GM204!

 

There is a smaller difference in performance between the 580 to 780 (~90%) than there is between the 980 and 1080 (~95%)...

 

Sorry GM200 was just so god damn amazing that it made everyone's perceptions way out of wack... Both Fiji and GM200 were literally the largest 28nm gpu's that could be made with modern technology... 

 

Crap man, I'm sitting on two 980ti's now. 

I think we both know that Maxwell should have been 22nm but unfortunately all cards have been stuck on 28nm for pretty much 3 years which is what I mean when I say two generations. That's probably the reason such large chips such as Fiji and GM200 came out as the 28nm process became quite mature and refined. I completely agree that GM200 was so good as to take some of the fire away from the 1080 at launch, but I also think Nvidia playing it safe and going with a 300mm chip instead of instead of 400mm like the Maxwell counterpart has also diminished the possible growth over Maxwell again.

 

Here's hoping that GP100 and Vega are worth the wait.