Supposedly leaked 1080ti specs show GDDR5 (non x)

[Morgan MLGman]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

Of course there is. Volta for Titan, New Pascal for ti down to xx70 then rebadge for anything else. 

Nvidia does not want to continue this flawed architecture. Volta is brand-new, should be ready for low-level APIs and feature HBM2, Maxwell and its improved version Pascal are not.

[manikyath]

6 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I call BS, releasing this card would undermine Titan XP's spot on the market and the 1080 already has no competition and a Ti version would also cut its sales short.

 

EDIT: MAYYYYYBE around Vega launch, but then again, Volta won't be far after Vega launches, so I don't really see the point imho.

add this to the BScalling: no GDDR5x? yeah.. that's gonna be a totally real thing.

 

if it is real, they better have a very good reason for it, or literally every nvidia enthousiast will facepalm so hard they buy 4 RX480's in crossfire because that's more sensible.

[Master Disaster]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

Nvidia does not want to continue this flawed architecture. Volta is brand-new, should be ready for low-level APIs and feature HBM2, Maxwell and its improved version Pascal are not.

Everyone also said Maxwell would also be a full refresh (and Fiji too for that matter). It's like I said back then, simply scrapping everything they currently have and refreshing everything from the ground up makes zero business sense. 

 

Do you think they care if the card is retarded in some way? As long as they can continue to sell it to users they really don't. 

[Misanthrope]

Just now, manikyath said:

add this to the BScalling: no GDDR5x? yeah.. that's gonna be a totally real thing.

 

if it is real, they better have a very good reason for it, or literally every nvidia enthousiast will facepalm so hard they buy 4 RX480's in crossfire because that's more sensible.

Err no.

 

But swap that 4x nonsense for 2X Big Vega (if they don't put them in a single PCB which they might) then yep, pretty much.

[manikyath]

5 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Nvidia does not want to continue this flawed architecture. Volta is brand-new, should be ready for low-level APIs and feature HBM2, Maxwell and its improved version Pascal are not.

to be honest, nvidia probably has so much extra performance and marketshare on their current cards compared to what AMD has to offer at this time that they could probably survive sitting on their ass for an entire generation.

 

that said, i very much hope they dont.

[manikyath]

Just now, Misanthrope said:

Err no.

 

But swap that 4x nonsense for 2X Big Vega (if they don't put them in a single PCB which they might) then yep, pretty much.

well, the thing is, if they can have gddr5x on their 1070, what reason in the world would there be for it not to be there on their 1080ti? except if maybe that 4GB extra gddr5x in the titan is the only reason it is leaps and bounds beyond the $1000 pricepoint.

[AresKrieger]

Just now, manikyath said:

to be honest, nvidia probably has so much extra performance and marketshare on their current cards compared to what AMD has to offer at this time that they could probably survive sitting on their ass for an entire generation.

 

that said, i very much hope they dont.

Well they kinda are sitting on their ass anyway, they already have the next 5 year's chips designed (supposedly according to them), so essentially they are just releasing and manufacturing what they need currently to stay slightly ahead

[Morgan MLGman]

9 minutes ago, manikyath said:

to be honest, nvidia probably has so much extra performance and marketshare on their current cards compared to what AMD has to offer at this time that they could probably survive sitting on their ass for an entire generation.

 

that said, i very much hope they dont.

GCN is a superior architecture to Maxwell/Pascal imho, that being said, a 1080 already has literally no competition on the market, what's the point of the 1080Ti... That would interfere with the sales of the Titan XP, like the 980Ti did with Titan X.

 

The only time when a 1080Ti could make sense, would be right before or around Vega launch, provided that Volta is far away, which I doubt, cause as you said, the architecture is most likely already designed.

[manikyath]

2 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

GCN is a superior architecture to Maxwell/Pascal imho, that being said, a 1080 already has literally no competition on the market, what's the point of the 1080Ti... That would interfere with the sales of the Titan XP, like the 980Ti did with Titan X.

 

The only time when a 1080Ti could make sense, would be right before or around Vega launch, provided that Volta is far away, which I doubt, cause as you said, the architecture is most likely already designed.

the problem is, your new engine technology may be as superior as you want it to be over conventional diesel engines, if you can only implement it in 5 horsepower engines as of yet, it's no competition to the old crusty diesels.

 

which is -in fact- why steam engines happened in the first place: we had much better technologies, but they were very hard to scale up, so we went with the less efficient steam engine.

[Sakkura]

6 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

Pffft, nVidia would shoot themselves in the foot if G5X wasn't available on a model marketed higher than the 1080. I call BS.

No they wouldn't. 384-bit GDDR5 is still better than 256-bit GDDR5X.

 

Honestly people are way too hung up on the memory type, GDDR5X and GDDR5 are so similar it doesn't really matter. Just look at the memory clocks and bus width, that's what matters.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

No they wouldn't. 384-bit GDDR5 is still better than 256-bit GDDR5X.

 

Honestly people are way too hung up on the memory type, GDDR5X and GDDR5 are so similar it doesn't really matter. Just look at the memory clocks and bus width, that's what matters.

It's not... I've got a 512-bit GDDR5 in my 290X and I can bet you that it's not faster than 256-bit GDDR5X in the 1080.

[Sakkura]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

It's not... I've got a 512-bit GDDR5 in my 290X and I can bet you that it's not faster than 256-bit GDDR5X in the 1080.

The R9 290X has exactly the same 320 GB/s of memory bandwidth as the GTX 1080.

 

Of course it does depend on the memory clocks too, if you go back and compare with like a GTX 580 then of course its 384-bit memory doesn't provide good bandwidth. But a 384-bit GDDR5 card this year would have higher memory clocks and thus not fall behind. The rumored specs, which are completely realistic with regard to memory, show that a 1080 Ti with GDDR5 would beat the 1080 with GDDR5X, due to the wider bus.

 

As for the 1080 being faster than the 290X, that's due to all kinds of factors, but NOT memory bandwidth. They are 100% equal on that particular point.

[Sakkura]

31 minutes ago, manikyath said:

well, the thing is, if they can have gddr5x on their 1070, what reason in the world would there be for it not to be there on their 1080ti? except if maybe that 4GB extra gddr5x in the titan is the only reason it is leaps and bounds beyond the $1000 pricepoint.

They don't have GDDR5X on their 1070...

 

The whole point here is they'll be scaling down the Titan XP. Cut some shaders, reduce memory bandwidth.

 

That's exactly what they did with the GTX 1070 compared to the 1080. Chop the GPU a bit, and then they swapped from GDDR5X to GDDR5. It makes perfect sense to do the same with the 1080 Ti.

 

That doesn't mean the rumor is necessarily true, but the memory type doesn't prove it any more fake than the 1070 is.

[Morgan MLGman]

5 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

The R9 290X has exactly the same 320 GB/s of memory bandwidth as the GTX 1080.

 

Of course it does depend on the memory clocks too, if you go back and compare with like a GTX 580 then of course its 384-bit memory doesn't provide good bandwidth. But a 384-bit GDDR5 card this year would have higher memory clocks and thus not fall behind. The rumored specs, which are completely realistic with regard to memory, show that a 1080 Ti with GDDR5 would beat the 1080 with GDDR5X, due to the wider bus.

 

As for the 1080 being faster than the 290X, that's due to all kinds of factors, but NOT memory bandwidth. They are 100% equal on that particular point.

Memory bandwidth is not always related to its speed in this way, Nvidia has a thing called memory compression, that's why even with smaller memory buses they manage to get similar performance to AMD. GDDR5X is simply better at that.

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

They don't have GDDR5X on their 1070...

 

The whole point here is they'll be scaling down the Titan XP. Cut some shaders, reduce memory bandwidth.

 

That's exactly what they did with the GTX 1070 compared to the 1080. Chop the GPU a bit, and then they swapped from GDDR5X to GDDR5. It makes perfect sense to do the same with the 1080 Ti.

 

That doesn't mean the rumor is necessarily true, but the memory type doesn't prove it any more fake than the 1070 is.

oh, wellp, noted down.

 

that said, there's no cards below the 1070 with GDDR5x tho, and with the ti there will be.

[Sakkura]

5 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Memory bandwidth is not always related to its speed in this way, Nvidia has a thing called memory compression, that's why even with smaller memory buses they manage to get similar performance to AMD. GDDR5X is simply better at that.

Compression doesn't change the memory bandwidth, it just uses it more efficiently. 320 GB/s is still 320 GB/s either way.

 

Graphics cards have had memory compression for ages and ages, what we've seen for the past couple of years is just a new generation of improved memory compression. Nvidia and AMD have both introduced those improvements, AMD just had older cards without the improvements hanging around longer.

 

And I'll reiterate, the GDDR5X has nothing to do with the memory compression.

 

As for Nvidia getting similar performance with narrower memory buses, that doesn't have anything to do with any of the above; it's to do with their choice to use high memory clocks and narrow buses, where AMD has picked low memory clocks and wide buses. Those are just two different ways to get to the same (or similar) overall memory bandwidth.

[dtaflorida]

24 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

what we've seen for the past couple of years is just a new generation of improved memory compression.

Sounds like cars getting more miles per gallon and fuel price drop, slowing the uptake of electric. DDR vs HBM.

[Mira Yurizaki]

Anyone who looks at paper specs and makes a decision based on that alone is a dumb buyer.

 

All the GPU cares about is it's being fed data. If GDDR5 can feed it the data it wants, then there's no harm in going that route instead of GDDR5X. Besides, wait for the benchmarks to come out.

[Misanthrope]

10 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Anyone who looks at paper specs and makes a decision based on that alone is a dumb buyer.

 

All the GPU cares about is it's being fed data. If GDDR5 can feed it the data it wants, then there's no harm in going that route instead of GDDR5X. Besides, wait for the benchmarks to come out.

I'd go even further and say that anyone who is already being critical on something I went out of my way to point as a really doubtful and unfounded rummor needs to rethink their stances.

 

I enjoy speculation threads and such but I never understand why people go as far as to seriously pass judgement this early.

[Mira Yurizaki]

6 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I enjoy speculation threads and such but I never understand why people go as far as to seriously pass judgement this early.

Because this is what the internet does best. They never cross check "facts" and think anything remotely believable is true.

 

I recall one time reading an article about some new SSD technology, then clicking on its source, which led to another source, which led to another source, which finally led to the original paper. The articles were basically playing telephone and what they were saying was the wrong conclusion of what the paper was saying.

[Jaggsta]

2 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

But then again, 2017 is Volta... No point in releasing a new Pascal card which is essentially Maxwell on steroids...

if 2017 is volta no point in buying pascal cards nvidia been running same chipset for 2 years for awhile now and saving fastest cards for the last year of production for that chipset.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 hour ago, Jaggsta said:

if 2017 is volta no point in buying pascal cards nvidia been running same chipset for 2 years for awhile now and saving fastest cards for the last year of production for that chipset.

Volta has already been confirmed for 2017. So 2017 is Volta.

[Space Reptile]

oh look , they didnt even notice that its gddr5 non x 

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, Space Reptile said:

oh look , they didnt even notice that its gddr5 non x 

I know they probably look at and even lifted it from this forums. So guys: get it right I put it right on the thread title ffs.

[Repost]

14 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I call BS, releasing this card would undermine Titan XP's spot on the market and the 1080 already has no competition and a Ti version would also cut its sales short.

 

EDIT: MAYYYYYBE around Vega launch, but then again, Volta won't be far after Vega launches, so I don't really see the point imho.

What would you rather have? 100 Titan Xp sales with $800 profit each or 10000 1080ti sales with $400 profit each? The goal of the Titan Xp isn't to make a lot of money because it isn't expected to sell well.