Nvidia Titan XP has same FP64 and FP16 performance as GTX 1080

[Ratchetman42]

Just now, Valentyn said:

If you need DP, yes AMD cards are the ones to get, although even Fiji has had its DP compute cut to some extent. Hawaii has more DP compute than Fiji, although if you simply want a top "prosumer" card the Pro Duo is the one to get out of the two then.

No worries mate

[Remixt]

The price point makes sense to me. Its true for a lot of products that price will skyrocket after a certain performance point. It costs more to deliver smaller and smaller increases in performance. It's a logarithmic exponential price point. The Titan X is for people who want the absolute best, and are willing to pay for that slight increase in performance. Plenty of people buy Titans, so why wouldn't Nvidia make them?

[marldorthegreat]

1 hour ago, Remixt said:

The price point makes sense to me. Its true for a lot of products that price will skyrocket after a certain performance point. It costs more to deliver smaller and smaller increases in performance. It's a logarithmic exponential price point. The Titan X is for people who want the absolute best, and are willing to pay for that slight increase in performance. Plenty of people buy Titans, so why wouldn't Nvidia make them?

Because when you pay $1200 for a gpu, you would expect it to last for > 2 years. Which it won't. As soon as volta is out, they will drop major support for pascal. 

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, marldorthegreat said:

Because when you pay $1200 for a gpu, you would expect it to last for > 2 years. Which it won't. As soon as volta is out, they will drop major support for pascal. 

Except that's just blatant bullshit. 

 

My 780 is still able to handle games just fine at high to ultra settings @ 1080p and it's over three years old.

[MrDynamicMan]

On 26/07/2016 at 6:36 PM, marldorthegreat said:

IF that were true, nvidia would not release a $1200 gpu. 

Nvidia is off the rails. A 1060 Costs more than a launch 970, an x80 is selling for $700+. It's pretty hilarious. 

[79wjd]

46 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

Nvidia is off the rails. A 1060 Costs more than a launch 970, an x80 is selling for $700+. It's pretty hilarious. 

It's not nVidia's fault that the demand is extremely high and that retailers are price gouging. 

 

The 1060's msrp (i.e. what nvidia sells them for) is $250 ($300 for FE). The 1070 is $380 ($450 FE), and the 1080 is $600 ($700 FE). 

The 960 was $200, the 970 was $340, and the the 980 was $550. The 900 series was also the third generation on the 28nm node and as such the process had very high yields.

[Notional]

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

It's not nVidia's fault that the demand is extremely high and that retailers are price gouging. 

 

The 1060's msrp (i.e. what nvidia sells them for) is $250 ($300 for FE). The 1070 is $380 ($450 FE), and the 1080 is $600 ($700 FE). 

The 960 was $200, the 970 was $340, and the the 980 was $550. The 900 series was also the third generation on the 28nm node and as such the process had very high yields.

The only thing NVidia can dictate are their own prices, which is the founders editions. Of course they cannot dictate what third party vendors asks for their cards, like Asus. And of course no vendor has been dumb enough to sell their cards at the msrp that NVidia claimed you could get the cards for. That makes the 1060 50% more expensive than a 960, the 1070 is 110$ more and the 1080 is 150$ more. Price skimming ad nauseam.

Yields might be high on the 28nm node, but the chips were also a lot larger as a result.

[79wjd]

42 minutes ago, Notional said:

The only thing NVidia can dictate are their own prices, which is the founders editions. Of course they cannot dictate what third party vendors asks for their cards, like Asus. And of course no vendor has been dumb enough to sell their cards at the msrp that NVidia claimed you could get the cards for. That makes the 1060 50% more expensive than a 960, the 1070 is 110$ more and the 1080 is 150$ more. Price skimming ad nauseam.

Yields might be high on the 28nm node, but the chips were also a lot larger as a result.

The 1060 is 50% more than a 960 while being 100% faster. Nvidia doesn't need to keep the various tiers at the same price point as previous years if the improvement is much better. 980 performance for 40% less. 

 

 

 

960 = 230mm (2.9B, 12.6M/mm)

1060 = 200mm (4.4B, 22M/mm)

---> 15% smaller, 52% more transistors, 175% denser

 

970/980 = 398mm (5.2B, 13M/mm)

1070/1080 = 314mm (7.2B, 23M/mm)

---> 27% smaller, 40% more transistors, 180% denser

 

Titan X = 601mm (8B, 13M/mm)

Titan XP = 471mm (12B, 25M/mm)

---> 27% smaller, 50% more transistors, 190% denser

 

The chips are smaller, but also on a new node with worse yields and much higher densities. All of the above are contributing factors to pricing. How much each attribute affects pricing/yields, I have no idea. But it's not far fetched to think that Maxwell was cheaper to produce being that the 28nm node was as refined as it was.