Nvidia: No next gen graphics cards for a long time

[Arika]

15 minutes ago, TopHatProductions115 said:

Time for a 3rd company to breach the market - jumpscare nVIDIA and AMD for once (instead of AMD jumpscaring Intel)  

Intel is getting into the dGPU market.

[S w a t s o n]

Nvidia - "We'd like to release new cards, however we are currently too busy relocating our treasure hoard. Please have patience with us during this transition."

Jen-Hsun breaking ground at the treasure hoard.

[Okjoek]

4 hours ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

It's not the consumers fault for not wanting to buy a product that underperforms for what they want. That's like saying people should start buying Pontiacs to revive the firebird. Pontiacs cars were shit and they went out of business due to their lack of good product. If AMD wants to win over more people they first have to give them a reason to do so. That's what they did with their CPU's and that's what they need to do with their GPU's.

I'm not trying to suggest people to buy bad products, but rather not to keep complaining that nVIDIA is stagnating launches because of AMD. AMD Isn't supposed to "bring nVIDIA prices down" They're there to make a profit selling chips. It's not their fault entirely for nVIDIA not giving you their best. If they need competition to give you their best I think it speaks volumes to their greed and lack of passion.  Ofcourse AMD may be the same if in the same position and I wouldn't give AMD a free pass either in that case.

[JuicyPro]

I’m still hoping it will be released in August. It sounds like they are trying to sell as many gtx 1080 ti’s as they can. 

[maartendc]

14 hours ago, Drak3 said:

AMD has equivalents to the 1080, so yeah. That's an option that's on the table.

I was actually looking at the Vega 64 yesterday, which performs 5% slower than the 1080, but it is much more expensive. You can pretty easily find a GTX 1080 for $550 at the moment. Vega 64 cheapest you can find is $650 and average is closer to $699.

 

The Vega 56 isnt faring much better. True, it is 7% faster than the GTX 1070, but again much more expensive. It is slower than the 1070Ti, and also more expensive. Currently, the GTX 1070 can again be found for just under $400, the 1070Ti for $470, while the Vega 56 sits at $499. Not a good value proposition.

 

So the Vega lineup is not really making a strong case for itself is it..

- Slower

- Consumes more power

- More expensive

 

You'd have to be nuts to buy the Vega 64 over the 1080 or the Vega 56 over the 1070 Ti. I am all for competition, and I would buy an AMD card if they had a compelling offering in the $350-$400 range against the 1070, but they just don't.

[MadyTehWolfie]

9 hours ago, Okjoek said:

I'm not trying to suggest people to buy bad products, but rather not to keep complaining that nVIDIA is stagnating launches because of AMD. AMD Isn't supposed to "bring nVIDIA prices down" They're there to make a profit selling chips. It's not their fault entirely for nVIDIA not giving you their best. If they need competition to give you their best I think it speaks volumes to their greed and lack of passion.  Ofcourse AMD may be the same if in the same position and I wouldn't give AMD a free pass either in that case.

It is AMD's job to provide competition they are a business that is in direct competition with Nvidia. People shouldn't simply just buy a different product to make a company competitive when the company themselves don't make a competitive product. The stagnation in the market is due to lack of competition from one side of the competitors falling asleep behind that wheel and getting left behind in their market because they didn't bring anything to the table. Nvidia is a business and it makes 0 business sense to release a product when thedemand for your current products are still in high demand. AMD's lack of competition did this to the gpu market just like their lack of competition lead to the stagnation of the CPU market. Things never move forward without competition in the free market. So yes it's completely valid for people to blame AMD and it's completely not up to the consumer to by their piss poor gpu's that's aren't competitive. They need to start being competitive like they were during the 7th gen Nvidia gpu's. Their cards were performing as good if not better making a solid choice over Nvidia products. This is what lead me to buy a r9 295x2. Bottom line people shouldn't have to prop up a failing company and make artificial competition. Either make new products or go home. They did it for CPU's now they need to do it for gpu's

[MadyTehWolfie]

8 minutes ago, maartendc said:

I was actually looking at the Vega 64 yesterday, which performs 5% slower than the 1080, but it is much more expensive. You can pretty easily find a GTX 1080 for $550 at the moment. Vega 64 cheapest you can find is $650 and average is closer to $699.

 

The Vega 56 isnt faring much better. True, it is 7% faster than the GTX 1070, but again much more expensive. It is slower than the 1070Ti, and also more expensive. Currently, the GTX 1070 can again be found for just under $400, the 1070Ti for $470, while the Vega 56 sits at $499. Not a good value proposition.

 

So the Vega lineup is not really making a strong case for itself is it..

- Slower

- Consumes more power

- More expensive

 

You'd have to be nuts to buy the Vega 64 over the 1080 or the Vega 56 over the 1070 Ti. I am all for competition, and I would buy an AMD card if they had a compelling offering in the $350-$400 range against the 1070, but they just don't.

This is what I've been talking about exactly. No one's going to just "buy AMD" to make competition happen for the sack of competition. AMD needs to get their act together like they did with CPU's.

[Drak3]

10 minutes ago, maartendc said:

I was actually looking at the Vega 64 yesterday, which performs 5% slower than the 1080, but it is much more expensive. You can pretty easily find a GTX 1080 for $550 at the moment. Vega 64 cheapest you can find is $650 and average is closer to $699.

 

The Vega 56 isnt faring much better. True, it is 7% faster than the GTX 1070, but again much more expensive. It is slower than the 1070Ti, and also more expensive. Currently, the GTX 1070 can again be found for just under $400, the 1070Ti for $470, while the Vega 56 sits at $499. Not a good value proposition.

 

So the Vega lineup is not really making a strong case for itself is it..

- Slower

- Consumes more power

- More expensive

 

You'd have to be nuts to buy the Vega 64 over the 1080 or the Vega 56 over the 1070 Ti. I am all for competition, and I would buy an AMD card if they had a compelling offering in the $350-$400 range against the 1070, but they just don't.

Individual cards, ignoring optimization, only gaming, sort of. Except for a long time, the inverse was true.

 

However, if also pairing an ____sync monitor, the price difference drops considerably. For GPGPU, if something isn't CUDA accelerated, AMD cards also perform better.

[cluelessgenius]

[Drak3]

@maartendc That's also assuming onpy Windows.

 

Nvidia drivers for Linux are still craptastic, and OSX doesn't officially support Nvidia so eGPU and MXM is definitely no go.

[maartendc]

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

@maartendc That's also assuming onpy Windows.

 

Nvidia drivers for Linux are still craptastic, and OSX doesn't officially support Nvidia so eGPU and MXM is definitely no go.

My Macbook Pro has a Geforce 750M in it, so OSX definitely DOES support Nvidia. And until recently I was running a GTX 980 in a Thunderbolt 2 enclosure on my Mac. So yes, eGPU is definitely possible with Nvidia. (back then, the DIY eGPU solutions ONLY worked with Nvidia).

 

I know Apple has recently shifted to AMD graphics in their lineup, but until recently it was all Nvidia. Not sure about Apple "official" support for Nvidia eGPU's, but unoficially there are workarounds and it works.

 

Also: of course we are talking about gaming. This is what 90% of people uses these cards for. Professional market has different products: Quadro etc. And even for professional workloads you would be better off with a Nvidia card because it uses less power. Nobody wants a noisy power hungry hog in an office environment.

 

I have owned AMD graphics cards in the past, in fact, I have owned equal amounts of AMD and Nvidia cards. (3 each, 6 total). I would definitely buy AMD, but for me they are just not a compelling option right now.

 

(if I was shopping for a $250 card, perhaps I would get a RX580, but even then I think the 1060 is a better proposition, although the difference is less clear there).

[Wh0_Am_1]

5 hours ago, Drak3 said:

@maartendc That's also assuming onpy Windows.

 

Nvidia drivers for Linux are still craptastic, and OSX doesn't officially support Nvidia so eGPU and MXM is definitely no go.

Apple's MacOS (yes they changed the name) doesn't support Nvidia, but Nvidia supports MacOS and has released drivers for every Nvidia card since the 4 series, so yes you can use a 1080ti in an external enclosure on a Mac. There is a quite the long story behind that, if you guys want I can go into it or find a video about it.

[Drak3]

9 minutes ago, Wh0_Am_1 said:

has released drivers for every Nvidia card since the 4 series, so yes you can use a 1080ti in an external enclosure on a Mac.

No, they haven't. They resumed support with Pascal, but once Apple and Nvidia had their falling out, Nvidia basically stopped supporting new products on OSX.

[Wh0_Am_1]

Here are some quotes on the subject.

Quote

" NVIDIA has released alternate graphics drivers for macOS Sierra 10.12.3. These are separate from the drivers Apple ships as standard, and should be considered experimental. These drivers have been known to solve OpenCL issues with certain applications, as well as providing better native GPU power management for certain devices.

NOTE: These drivers are currently the only method to get full acceleration for NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, 750 Ti, 950, 960, 970, 980, 980 Ti, and TITAN X 'Maxwell' graphics cards. There are no current Macs with these cards, so support is absent natively in macOS." -source tonymacx86.com

 

Quote

"Nvidia has made good on its promise to release Pascal drivers for the Mac. This makes it possible to drive macOS with 10-series cards like the popular Geforce GTX 1080, or the newly released Titan Xp.

Up until now, users wishing to use modern Nvidia GPUs on a Mac were forced to use last-gen Maxwell-based hardware, such as the GTX 980 Ti and other 9-series cards. With the release of the Pascal drivers, more options have been opened up for eGPU users, legacy Mac Pro users, and Hackintosh users wishing to utilize the latest and greatest in GPU technology." -source 9TO5Mac

Also ever since the release of Sierra, OSX has been renamed MacOS.

[Overclock Gamer]

On 04/06/2018 at 1:15 PM, GoldenLag said:

@Princess Cadence i want a new Gen of GPUs that way the older gens will flow into the used market allwhile generally dropping im price. Im currently looking at R9 290x for a temporary upgrade. Would be nice if i could get a 980/ti or Fury instead. 

 

Im a cheapskate and i plan om keeping that way

Get 980ti 

[Andreas Lilja]

No upgrade for me then. Was probably a stupid idea to begin with. 

[Humbug]

On 6/5/2018 at 7:43 AM, TopHatProductions115 said:

Time for a 3rd company to breach the market - jumpscare nVIDIA and AMD for once (instead of AMD jumpscaring Intel)  

The fabrication plants of TSMC and Global Foundries cannot produce enough to keep up with the demand from AMD and Nvidia.

 

So if a 3rd player comes in hopefully it is somebody like Intel who brings their own fabs with them.

[yian88]

Seems like this year i wont be getting any new PC, no new intel 10nm , AMD 12nm is bust, nvidia gpu's nowhere near release and neither is AMD.

So next year Ryzen 7nm and new GPU's for me, hoefully DDR4 prices go down aswell cant wait.

[JediFragger]

8700k@5Ghz here + 1080Ti + Acer X34P, a dream combo tbh

[TechyBen]

On 05/06/2018 at 3:13 AM, TopHatProductions115 said:

Time for a 3rd company to breach the market - jumpscare nVIDIA and AMD for once (instead of AMD jumpscaring Intel)  

Rome was not built in a day... and would be very difficult to keep hidden. The fabs alone would be a massive giveaway. So no "jumpscares" possible from a third party... just a slow resounding "boom" as they approach.

 

The multiple 1050/1060/1070 variations shows the market is stagnant and NVidia will just spin out the existing boards with minor revisions.

[MadyTehWolfie]

7 hours ago, TechyBen said:

Rome was not built in a day... and would be very difficult to keep hidden. The fabs alone would be a massive giveaway. So no "jumpscares" possible from a third party... just a slow resounding "boom" as they approach.

 

The multiple 1050/1060/1070 variations shows the market is stagnant and NVidia will just spin out the existing boards with minor revisions.

Lol what about a 1080titi lol slightly faster then a 1080ti but not as fast as a Titan V

[Wh0_Am_1]

Rumors!!! From UFD Tech! According to this video we MAY see a new card or see new cards in August, but apparently since it is all closed door discussions, we can't know for sure... Also it apparently sounds like AMD probably has nothing for us this year besides the Vega 56 Nano that we saw in their press conference, but remember this is all rumors. 

 

[Steve F Fox]

Somehow 1170/1180 has appear in my local pc-shop with price, spec but still no stock available,

So, I assume that the release is really coming soon, 

[Wh0_Am_1]

43 minutes ago, Steve F Fox said:

Somehow 1170/1180 has appear in my local pc-shop with price, spec but still no stock available,

So, I assume that the release is really coming soon, 

I saw that post, I may be wrong, but due to the cooler cooler design, and the fact that it still has a DVI port, it looks like someone may have Photo-shopped a 1080 and a 1070 as an 1180 an 1170 respectively as a prank and/or scam.

[Wh0_Am_1]

4 minutes ago, rrubberr said:

VegaFE doesn't top 250 watts at stock voltages for me, would your PSU perhaps look something like this?

 

Lol that is what mine looks like though... and that is why I only have a 1050...