I'd also imagine they'd like to stay far enough ahead of AMD to not have to release another card on short notice or cut the prices on these cards dramatically. The 970 was good to Nvidia and I'd imagine they'd like to replicate it's success.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GTX 970/980 replaced by Pascal with GDDR5X at Computex
- Thread starter yamo
- Start date
I'd also imagine they'd like to stay far enough ahead of AMD to not have to release another card on short notice or cut the prices on these cards dramatically. The 970 was good to Nvidia and I'd imagine they'd like to replicate it's success.
innervision961
Member
I have a GTX780 currently, I also have a Vive coming in the post hopefully by the end of April. Steam VR Perfomance Tool says I'm capable (just shy of green). My question is, do you guys think I should go for a 970/980 right now and hope that I can do the 90 day trade in/difference with EVGA or just wait for Pascal and make due with the 780 and the Vive until then?
Make the decision when your Vive has actually shipped. A 980/980Ti -> Step Up is fine.
dgrdsv
Member
Depends on what you compare to what. +25% for GP104 when compared to GM204 will be very low in my opinion. +25% for GP104 when compared to GM200 would be very good on the other hand. I feel that we may end up somewhere in between those two figures.
NecroGiggles
Member
Once the new cards hit the market what do you think you could sell a 980 ti for I wonder ? I want a 1080 and I could use some help with the price tag.
maybe under $400
Crimsonsky
Member
Seems quite the opposite like you should buy it since these are just rebrands with similar performance. Doesn't look like anything will top the 980ti this year.
Around 40-50% depreciation when newer cards come out is usually the norm, unfortunately.
| Praxis |
Banned
I'm getting one a month old. Still pretty expensive. Selling my Xbox One and a pair of headphones to cover it though.
Please dont give advice if you have no idea what you are talking about?
SneakyStephan
Banned
I mean +50 percent across the board
gp100 = gm200 + 50 percent, gp104 = gm204 +50 percent , ditto for gp107 whenever it comes out.
You'd assume that's what he meant by a x percent improvement, comparing apples to apples.
ofcourse it would be very good if gp104 was 25 percent faster than gm200 (and then the jump from gm200 to gp100 would be huge)
dgrdsv
Member
Well, 50% increase on average may be too high but in heavy modes and in modern loads it can be even bigger than that. Then again this is a long overdue process change so it may be better than we expect as we've essentially skipped 20nm.
It's also worth to remember that while GM200 was a pure gaming behemoth GP100 is likely to be target at HPC and gaming like GK110 was which means that pure gaming increases for GP100 are likely to be lower than you'd expect.
So a 50% increase for GP104 going off GM204 is very possible in my opinion. A 50% gaming increase for GP100 going off GM200 is less likely imo. But who knows?
SneakyStephan
Banned
You think more cuda cores again in gp100?
I hope not, gimme pure gaming performance (also more cuda cores would mean them pushing more physx and flex stuff again, which always had shitty meaningless implementations in games like the clutter in borderlands 2)
And yeah who knows indeed
Right before a new gpu architecture comes out is always the most fun (speculation)
dgrdsv
Member
You think more cuda cores again in gp100?
I hope not, gimme pure gaming performance (also more cuda cores would mean them pushing more physx and flex stuff again, which always had shitty meaningless implementations in games like the clutter in borderlands 2)
And yeah who knows indeed
Right before a new gpu architecture comes out is always the most fun (speculation)
CUDA core is just NV's brand naming for a base processing unit in a SIMD cluster aka shader processor (SP). Thus more CUDA cores = more SPs = more performance overall. And of course there will be more SPs. That's the main benefit of a new production process - you can pack more than twice more units in the same chip size on it.
There is a decent chance this will be the biggest jump in a few years, since the lack die shrink. It could be big for AMD and nvidia.
I don't think Nvidia is the generous type to offer 980ti power at 970 level just because they can. They will if AMD is putting that sort of power at that sort of price, but that's about it.
You'll probably see it shy of 10~15% under 980ti, and the X80 will be 20% more powerful than the 980ti. Juuuust enough performance for people to be as happy as they can be about a $400 card and the X80 is juuuuust powerful enough for people eager for the newness to ditch their 980ti and upgrade (and then ditch the X80 once the X80ti comes out.)
edit: I could also see Nvidia being absolute dicks and making the jump from 970 to X70 still be roughly in 30% improvement range with the argument being "Yeah but now the card is smaller and uses less electricity!"
You'll probably see it shy of 10~15% under 980ti, and the X80 will be 20% more powerful than the 980ti. Juuuust enough performance for people to be as happy as they can be about a $400 card and the X80 is juuuuust powerful enough for people eager for the newness to ditch their 980ti and upgrade (and then ditch the X80 once the X80ti comes out.)
edit: I could also see Nvidia being absolute dicks and making the jump from 970 to X70 still be roughly in 30% improvement range with the argument being "Yeah but now the card is smaller and uses less electricity!"
That's exactly what I would have said (and in fact did say) before the 970 was released.
Perhaps they figure that they make more money by getting people to upgrade more readily at that price point. Or perhaps it was just a one-off experiment. Both seem at least somewhat possible at this point.
I guess but isn't the 970 only a bit more powerful than the 780? And the 770 was a bit more powerful than the 680 and so on...
I thought the love for the 970 was 1.) the $330 price and 2.) the "next-gen" bump from the consoles being so muted that the 970 ran everything new at high or ultra at 1080p/60fps.
I just looked back at the Computerbase benchmarks at the 970 launch, and in those it was only 3% behind the 780ti in average performance. If anything, I'd assume it to be even closer if you include modern games.
Its price/performance ratio certainly exceeded what I would have ever expected them to offer. Though as I said above, that certainly doesn't mean that this will happen again.
Beerman462
Member
I feel like the GPU market has been frozen for a year+. I am really confused my the 970/390 market. The 390 was cheaper than the 970 for awhile and now it's more expensive.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Pascal equivalent of 970 ends up very close to the 980 TI. My thinking is, both GPU manufactures will want to make a big splash with these releases since it's a node shrink, which typically has brought huge performance gains.
And, it's a great time to incentivize people to upgrade because of all the hype surrounding VR.
And, it's a great time to incentivize people to upgrade because of all the hype surrounding VR.
Megaton?
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-ultra-low-level-gameworks-api/
"What Nvidia has created is probably the first fully concurrent low level API. From what we can gather, the API will be able to operate on an ultra low level concurrently (and under) DirectX12"
"True SLI: This particular feature is the first true multi-GPU solution in the world. When enabled, the resources of the GPU will be merged using the SLI bridge and the PCI-E interface. Drivers will effectively see only one GPU with pooled hardware specifications. (Two 4GB cards in SLI will show up as one GPU with 8 GB of vRAM)."
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-ultra-low-level-gameworks-api/
"What Nvidia has created is probably the first fully concurrent low level API. From what we can gather, the API will be able to operate on an ultra low level concurrently (and under) DirectX12"
"True SLI: This particular feature is the first true multi-GPU solution in the world. When enabled, the resources of the GPU will be merged using the SLI bridge and the PCI-E interface. Drivers will effectively see only one GPU with pooled hardware specifications. (Two 4GB cards in SLI will show up as one GPU with 8 GB of vRAM)."
Look at the date.
icecold1983
Member
id say 50% is the top range of what to expect when looking at replacements in each gpus respective tier. id be shocked if nvidia offers more than that, for business reasons alone if nothing else. rumors also say yields are awful for nvidia and amd.
dgrdsv
Member
780Ti was faster than the original Titan even though the difference between 780 and 780Ti was smaller than between 980 and 980Ti.
nguyen704
Member
Also the quote from the author of the article:
"Happy April Fools! Please do remember to recommend and share if you enjoyed reading it.
"Lol!
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Also the quote from the author of the article:
"Happy April Fools! Please do remember to recommend and share if you enjoyed reading it.
Lol!
Lol Daante
Theonik
Member
There is two things we know of that might bring this to doubt. First of all, Maxwell managed the boost it did by downgrading double precision float performance for the sake of more game oriented single precision float performance. We already know that Pascal is again increasing DP float performance so it should be a regression in that respect. They should still be able to compensate due to the shrink by adding more computational units.
Moreover, it is hard to do both a shrink and major optimisations and going from 28nm to 16nm might be really costly which means nVidia will try to maximize their financial gain first.
Like it was mentioned before, Cuda cores are nothing more than a way to express the computing performance of the card. More Cuda cores means more performance including more gaming performance.You think more cuda cores again in gp100?
I hope not, gimme pure gaming performance (also more cuda cores would mean them pushing more physx and flex stuff again, which always had shitty meaningless implementations in games like the clutter in borderlands 2)
And yeah who knows indeed
Right before a new gpu architecture comes out is always the most fun (speculation)
Damn, you guys switch cards fast.
Theonik
Member
I think I'll keep my 980Ti till the 1080Ti. Don't expect the 1080 to be fast enough to justify the upgrade, then again resell value might be better if I go 980Ti -> 1080 ->1080Ti. I'm more interested in new features and connectivity as I want to move to high framerate and HDR by 2017.
ALLseeingEYE
Member
Fixed.
At least, that's what I'm expecting. I'm hearing Pascal will be a nice upgrade though, would be awesome to see the 1070 be more powerful than a 980ti. It would basically make 4K gaming much cheaper, and very viable.
If you can sell your 980ti, or trade it straight up for a 1080, I'd personally go for it. A 20-30% power increase isn't insignificant. It could basically be the difference between running modern games at max settings at either 30-40fps on your 980ti and running them at a solid 60fps on the 1080. Hopefully they release the 1080 ti around the same time though. Can't wait to check out these cards.
Theonik
Member
It's not like I won't be tempted. It all depends on timing and what the 1080 enables me to do that I can't do with my 980Ti. A 1080Ti or a pascal Titan will probably not be out till late this year but probably early next year. I don't expect the 1080 is going to really matter to me till then. By the time my 980Ti feels old and I feel like I need the performance the replacement I want will be out, and what I want in terms of features will not be available in terms of monitors till around when the card I want is.
So really I don't see 10-20% pushing me over the edge right now.
There is no evidence either way. I would imagine nVidia wouldn't want this clusterfuck again. Moreover there is something else to determine first.
What will the prices be and how gimped would the 1070 be. The problem with the 970 was that it was too much value and would canibalise the 980. nVidia decided to do this to differentiate the two.
The x70 and x80 tiers are usually more strongly separated, the 970 is an outlier, unless the 1070 is another value beast nVidia won't bother doing that.
neurosisxeno
Member
Since Kepler they have been really close. I bought a 670 because a factory OCed 670 at launch was on par with a 680, but was $200 cheaper. The 970 was a smaller gap true, but it's not like the difference between the 2 Kepler series' was massive by comparison, just slightly wider. The difference between the 570 and 580 was pretty large though.
Theonik
Member
Ultimately this is exactly what nVidia wants to avoid. They don't want to straight out do that though As in, they can make money if lots of people buy the x70 part but they lose money when people buy the 970 over the 980 because they are too close. So nVidia wants to control performance and pricing across tiers. Where they place the balance is entirely on them.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Nvidia is happy to offer huge increases if they believe that bigger increases are around the corner. Even in the absense of competition, if it is "easy" for them to make significantly better processors, they will be happy to offer those increases since it incentivises upgrade. The new normal of holding back the "Big" chip until 8-12 months after the "little" chip launches is based on the slowing of die shrinks and the increased difficulties in performance increases, generally.
neurosisxeno
Member
Basically this. 20nm (or was it 22/24nm?) not panning out resulted in an extra cycle and a half where we got more 28nm chips while they readied 16/14nm to be the next process shrink. This forced Nvidia to essentially section up their offerings. Maxwell was slated to be the first 16nm GPU Nvidia offered, but because of delays from TSMC and Samsung they were forced to refashion it as a 28nm GPU (that's what the 750Ti was). If Nvidia could offer 50% improvements with each revision they absolutely would, because people would upgrade more frequently, but low yields and slowed implementation from their partners has forced them to slow their progress.
EscapeArtist
Banned
I legitimately put a 970 in my Amazon cart today because I need a GPU upgrade (I have a 760 4gb right now) but never actually checked out because I feel like I should wait to see what the next generation of GPUs offer. As much as I hate to I should probably just hold off until they announce release dates and pricing.
I was going to buy a 970 for a vive. I ended up selling my old card a few days ago so now I'm just running my PC from my processor. Anyway, I was thinking of waiting until my vive ships before I buy a card so I can potentially do that step up program from EVGA if something comes out within the 90 days. Are we thinking these will be out sometime in the summer?
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
Seems like a gamble that I wouldn't take.
dgrdsv
Member
Will depend on how the memory will be configured on these both in the chip and on the board. Considering that we're likely looking at 8GB cards with 8GBs comprised of 8 1GB chips I'd say this is kinda unlikely as they'll be able to cut down more cost if they'll simply remove one 1GB chip completely and leave only 7GBs of VRAM on the card. But it's even more probable that we'll get the full 8GBs on all GP104 boards after the 970 fiasco.
BlackClouds
Member
I think Nvidia is going to charge top dollar and those looking for bargains are going to be disappointed.