Quote:NVIDIA is giving finishing touches to its next enthusiast-segment graphics card based on the "Pascal" architecture, the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti. Its specifications were allegedly screengrabbed by a keen-eyed enthusiast snooping around NVIDIA website, before being redacted. The specs-sheet reveals that the GTX 1080 Ti is based on the same GP102 silicon as the TITAN X Pascal, but is further cut-down from it. Given that the GTX 1080 is unflinching from its $599-$699 price-point, with some custom-design cards even being sold at over $800, the GTX 1080 Ti could either be positioned around the $850-mark, or be priced lower, disrupting currently overpriced custom GTX 1080 offerings. By pricing the TITAN X Pascal at $1200, NVIDIA appears to have given itself headroom to price the GTX 1080 Ti in a way that doesn't cannibalize premium GTX 1080 offerings.

The GTX 1080 Ti is carved out of the GP102 silicon by disabling 4 out of 30 streaming multiprocessors, resulting in 3,328 CUDA cores. The resulting TMU count is 208. The card could retain its ROP count of 96. The card will be endowed with 12 GB of GDDR5 memory across the chip's 384-bit wide memory interface, instead of GDDR5X on the TITAN X Pascal. This should yield 384 GB/s of memory bandwidth, significantly lesser than the 480 GB/s bandwidth the TITAN X Pascal enjoys, with its 10 Gbps memory chips. The GPU is clocked at 1503 MHz, with 1623 MHz GPU Boost. The card's TDP is rated at 250W, same as the TITAN X Pascal.

Quote:Whether the information accidentally trickled onto Nvidia's site or not, this is very likely not the final specs for GTX 1080 Ti. I haven't heard any launch date plans from Nvidia (I couldn't say that if I had!), but then the Titan X sort of came out of nowhere so they might call me next week for a surprise announcement. Barring that, there have been several other 'leaks' of GTX 1080 Ti specs, and it's not too difficult to guess that one of them will eventually prove accurate.

Using GP102 is a given, and disabling some of the SM clusters is expected as well. Nvidia followed this same pattern with the GTX 980 Ti where they disabled two SMs (256 CUDA cores) on GM200 compared to the fully enabled GTX Titan X. In theory that should have resulted in about nine percent lower performance, but in practice the difference between those two GPUs is often margin of error (1-2 percent). The question is how many SM clusters will Nvidia disable this round, and the answer to that likely depends as much on AMD as anything.

The new Titan X sports 3,584 cores, or 28 SM clusters, but even that isn't the full GP102 chip. Nvidia's upcoming Quadro P6000 uses GP102's full 30 SMs with 3,840 cores, for example. The Quadro P6000 also has 24GB of 9Gbps GDDR5X memory, so 12GB of 10Gbps GDDR5X seems far more likely for 1080 Ti. And don't tell me that Nvidia is worried about hurting sales of the Titan X, because that wasn't a problem when they launched the GTX 980 Ti at $649 and basically killed off any sane reason to buy the $999 GTX Titan X. So what's the AMD connection?

If we go back to the first GTX Titan GPU, launched in February 2013, Nvidia used their GK110 chip (first seen in the Quadro K6000—sound familiar?), only with one SMX disabled. At the time, Nvidia had the fastest and second fastest GPUs for gaming, and they weren't in any hurry to reduce prices. It wasn't until October of 2013 that AMD finally had a viable competitor to the GTX 780 and Titan.

When AMD launched their first Hawaii GPU, the R9 290X, they laid claim to the title of the fastest gaming GPU, beating out the GTX Titan in most games. Nvidia's response came one month later with the GTX 780 Ti, which had half the memory of the GTX Titan (and 'slow' FP64 support) but included the fully enabled GK110 chip, along with higher clocks, all at a lower price. Nvidia closed the performance gap, and even if they didn't outright win, they at least had a viable claim to the throne.

Back to the present, we know that AMD is prepping Vega 10 for release—it might make it out in 2016, but 'early' 2017 is more probable. Whether they end up calling it the RX 490, RX Fury, or something else isn't important; Vega will come out, and it could be a performance monster. Best indications are it will have 16GB of HBM2 and 4,096 cores, with higher clocks and significantly better performance than Fury X.

Nvidia spoiled the launch of the Fury X by releasing the GTX 980 Ti. They had more memory, overall better performance (even if there are a few cases where Fury X beat the 980 Ti), and the cost of manufacturing GM200 is significantly lower than Fiji. Looking at GP102 and Vega, assuming the rumors are anywhere close to accurate, Nvidia is going to try to do the same again with the 1080 Ti.

If Vega 10 proves to be significantly faster than the Titan X—and don't kid yourself, these companies know each other's plans better than we do—Nvidia could use a fully enabled GP102 with 3,840 cores, and they might do this even if it results in a card that's faster and cheaper than the current Titan X (see 780 Ti). On the other hand, if Vega ends up falling somewhere between the 1080 and the Titan X (which is my bet), we'll see something closer to the above 'leaked' specs with 3,328, 3,456, or perhaps 3,584 cores.

The decision on whether to use 8Gbps GDDR5 or 10 Gbps GDDR5X has already been made, and if Nvidia is actually using GDDR5, they might think they can beat AMD's best shot. Using GDDR5 and not GDDR5X is a bit odd, but considering Titan X is 12GB GDDR5X, Nvidia doesn't have too many options. 6GB GDDR5X would be less than the 1080's 8GB GDDR5X, so 12GB GDDR5 is a potential middle ground.

Assuming the above is correct (or close enough to it), we're looking at 30 percent more CUDA cores and 20 percent more bandwidth than the GTX 1080. The 1080 Ti would still be a beast, and most likely performance will be very close to the Titan X. The 250W TDP limit might also come into play, as it did with the 980 Ti and GTX Titan X.

(09-19-2016, 05:10 AM)ocre Wrote: How could Vega be a pascal titan competitor?

Let's be real.

Its not making sense to me. Polaris is more than half of the 4000sp vega.  If 2 polaris chips was as fast as the pascal titan, it would still be hard to imagine.  4000sp vega is significantly less..polaris x2 is 30% more cores.  

Architectural improvements that would be needed to close that gap alone would be an extremely large order.  Like, on the levels of unrealistic and unreasonable.  But even if by some special powers amd manages such heavenly and super strengths..out of the blue..its still not anywhere near enough.

2 polaris chips would not be a competitor for the titan polaris nor the 1080ti.  And the Vega has a tall order to match the power of 2 polaris with a huge deficit in sp cores. Vega, seems to me, a struggle and will compete with the 1080.

Amd is at a wall in mghz and power consumption.  A 4000sp vega makes sense based on the power consumption of polars.  The power saved by scratching the 256bit bus is probably half of what they gained when they dropped the 512 from hawaii.  It adds up for me, the 4000sp is the limit determined by power limits.  Vega will use upwards of 250watts, have 4000sp and clocks wont be much different than that of polaris.

(09-19-2016, 07:15 AM)SickBeast Wrote: AMD is going to hit a heat and perhaps a power wall when it comes to Vega.  Polaris already runs hot.  Cram in that many cores and it's a recipe for disaster.  If you thought Hawaii was hot and loud, I would suggest that Vega will take it to another level.  My prediction is that AMD is going to have to underclock the card quite a bit to keep the thermals in line, and by doing that the performance is going to really suffer.  My prediction is that it will offer performance in between a GTX 1070 and a GTX 1080, and no better than that.  And it won't overclock *at all*.

(09-19-2016, 09:11 AM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:

(09-19-2016, 07:15 AM)SickBeast Wrote: AMD is going to hit a heat and perhaps a power wall when it comes to Vega.  Polaris already runs hot.  Cram in that many cores and it's a recipe for disaster.  If you thought Hawaii was hot and loud, I would suggest that Vega will take it to another level.  My prediction is that AMD is going to have to underclock the card quite a bit to keep the thermals in line, and by doing that the performance is going to really suffer.  My prediction is that it will offer performance in between a GTX 1070 and a GTX 1080, and no better than that.  And it won't overclock *at all*.

It will be an overclockers dream SB, just like Fury X.

Eh, I'm hoping respins are going to bring 1080 level performance to Vega so we see some price breaks.

It's hard for me to want to spend $1000 on the Ti when:
A. The last one was $650
B. I don't really game anymore (at least lately)
C. My son's computer gaming is nowhere close to taxing the 980Ti Classified

(09-20-2016, 05:17 AM)SickBeast Wrote:

(09-19-2016, 09:11 AM)RolloTheGreat Wrote:

(09-19-2016, 07:15 AM)SickBeast Wrote: AMD is going to hit a heat and perhaps a power wall when it comes to Vega.  Polaris already runs hot.  Cram in that many cores and it's a recipe for disaster.  If you thought Hawaii was hot and loud, I would suggest that Vega will take it to another level.  My prediction is that AMD is going to have to underclock the card quite a bit to keep the thermals in line, and by doing that the performance is going to really suffer.  My prediction is that it will offer performance in between a GTX 1070 and a GTX 1080, and no better than that.  And it won't overclock *at all*.

It will be an overclockers dream SB, just like Fury X.

Eh, I'm hoping respins are going to bring 1080 level performance to Vega so we see some price breaks.

It's hard for me to want to spend $1000 on the Ti when:
A. The last one was $650
B. I don't really game anymore (at least lately)
C. My son's computer gaming is nowhere close to taxing the 980Ti Classified

Honestly you were too impatient with that GTX 980 Ti purchase.  The sales weren't that good.  They basically charged 90% of the price of a GTX 1070 for 90% of the performance.  But then you need to consider all the other advantages of the GTX 1070.  It has more VRAM.  It consumes *way* less power.  It runs cool and quiet.  It has a newer architecture that will be supported longer and will get better support in the drivers for new games.

Actually from the sound of it you probably would have done great with the GTX 1060 that I bought.  I have become more of a casual gamer as I really just don't have the time as much any more.  My son loves the card and it runs all his games flawlessly.

If Vega can match a GTX 1080 I will be shocked.  Absolutely shocked.  The only way it will do it is if they water cool it like they did with the Fury X.

(09-20-2016, 11:14 AM)24601 Wrote: <snip>

(09-30-2016, 03:47 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote: GTX 1080 Ti reportedly launching at CES 2017: https://www.techpowerup.com/226290/nvidia-preparing-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-for-2017-ces-launch

(09-30-2016, 03:47 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote: GTX 1080 Ti reportedly launching at CES 2017: https://www.techpowerup.com/226290/nvidia-preparing-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-for-2017-ces-launch

Quote:I have no problems with a discussion relating to the top offerings from NVidia and AMD even though it's purely rumour and speculation because it does directly relate to the topic, I draw lines around 680's and 7970's, architecture, performance and trends are changing and have changed and the point here is simply 3 or 4 people take over the place and talk about this nonsense completely taking over to the point where others struggle to actually talk about the actual news topic, it pushes people away because it becomes tiresome........ as I said, if 2 people want to argue over performance comparisons of 3 gen old cards fine, just not here, that's what the general forums and private messaging are for.

Posted on Sep 30th 2016, 14:28

(10-01-2016, 09:27 AM)ocre Wrote:

(09-30-2016, 03:47 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote: GTX 1080 Ti reportedly launching at CES 2017: https://www.techpowerup.com/226290/nvidia-preparing-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-for-2017-ces-launch

Wow. TPU seems to be waking up. From the comments in this article  

Quote:I have no problems with a discussion relating to the top offerings from NVidia and AMD even though it's purely rumour and speculation because it does directly relate to the topic, I draw lines around 680's and 7970's, architecture, performance and trends are changing and have changed and the point here is simply 3 or 4 people take over the place and talk about this nonsense completely taking over to the point where others struggle to actually talk about the actual news topic, it pushes people away because it becomes tiresome........ as I said, if 2 people want to argue over performance comparisons of 3 gen old cards fine, just not here, that's what the general forums and private messaging are for.

Posted on Sep 30th 2016, 14:28

These amd troopers have been running people away for yrs now

Quote:Air-cargo shipping manifest descriptions point to the possibility that NVIDIA's upcoming high-end graphics card based on the GP102 silicon, the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, could feature 10 GB of memory, and not the previously thought of 12 GB, which would be the same amount as the TITAN X Pascal. NVIDIA apparently is getting 10 GB to work over a 384-bit wide memory interface, likely using chips of different densities. The GTX 1080 Ti is also rumored to feature 3,328 CUDA cores, 208 TMUs, and 96 ROPs.

Quote:In a LinkedIn job post for Senior Marketing Manager, NVIDIA has seemingly confirmed the launch of a Ti version of their GTX 1080 graphics card. The relevant line is a simple one: "980 Ti users get first spot in line for 1080 Ti pre-orders, or Step Up offer".
...
However, a move such as this also has the potential to open the proverbial can of worms: what about current owners of GTX 1070 or GTX 1080 graphics cards? Should they have the same right to participate in such an upgrade program? Or maybe even more, since this is a program designed to reward loyalty, and they've already acquired the company's latest and greatest (at the time)? Only time will tell, but I wager rivers of digital ink will run under this particular bridge, it NVIDIA does indeed decide to build upon it.

Yet another point of contention may be the fact that NVIDIA's add-in board partners, such as EVGA, ASUS or MSI, just to name a few, will see this upgrade program as a way for NVIDIA to keep sales of their products in-house (admitting that this offer will only be available towards an eventual acquisition of their Founder's Edition 1080 Ti graphics cards). This is definitely not a slight issue either, since any unbalancing acts towards the status quo are sure to have repercussions in the AIBs' relations with the company.

Quote:After disappointing scores of potential buyers by skipping a GTX 1080 Ti announcement at CES - which could have been a last-moment decision on the company's part when AMD failed to make any relevant VEGA announcement - it looks like NVIDIA has chosen the grand stage of PAX East, which begins at March 10th, as the place to carry the previously-confirmed addition to their Pascal line of GPUs.

This information (which should be taken with a maybe unhealthy grain of salt) came to light by way of an MSI (NVIDIA's AIB partner) representative, which also mentioned that the 1080 Ti would be available from board partners (including, naturally, MSI itself) at time of launch.

Quote:What I'm saying, then, is that in my view there's a very good chance the GTX 1080 Ti isn't coming out in the next month or two, and more likely it's four to five months out. This is what happens when there's no serious competition at the high-end of the graphics card market. For now, AMD's fastest GPU remains the Fury X, which sits slightly below the performance level of the GTX 1070 and 980 Ti in average performance across a large suite of games. The GTX 1080 is comfortably ahead by 30 percent, and the GTX Titan XP is another 25 percent above that.

AMD's Vega sounds promising, though I'm still more than a little concerned about power and efficiency (Vega 10 appears to be a ~275W part based on what we know of the Radeon Instinct MI25). Estimating by the 25 TFLOPS number, Vega should land relatively close to the Titan XP in performance—potentially faster if AMD's architectural changes have a significant impact, but more likely close to parity. Considering the GTX 780 Ti was faster than the original Titan and cost less, and the 980 Ti was within two percent of the Titan X and cost less, there's a very good chance the 1080 Ti will be very close to Titan XP and cost around $700-$800.

So if you're waiting for the GTX 1080 Ti, or AMD's Vega, best guess right now is a near concurrent launch of both GPUs sometime around May/June. And if you want to know how they'll perform, best guess is a few percent slower than the Titan XP—maybe a few percent faster from AMD if things pan out. That might not be the most exciting news in the world, but a 25 percent improvement over GTX 1080 performance one year after launch is a lot better than the 5-10 percent increase in performance we get on the CPU side. Or you could just drop your settings to 1080p medium and game happily on significantly less expensive and/or older hardware.

Here's to hoping AMD and/or Nvidia prove me wrong on the timing, but I'm not holding my breath.

Quote:If you've been holding out hope for a Pascal-powered version of the GeForce GTX 980 Ti, you might want to skip your afternoon coffee. Nvidia sent out invitations today to a "GeForce GTX Gaming Celebration" event in San Francisco on February 28 during the Game Developers Conference. The invitation to the event talks about "amazing surprises," and ends with a seemingly-portentous "you won't want to miss this" declaration. To be clear, there's nothing explicitly mentioned in the invitation other than "an evening of awesome PC gaming, hardware, tournaments, and of course free food." That doesn't stop us from imagining what will happen, though, and the office betting pool is running good odds on an unveiling of the rumored GTX 1080 Ti.

Nvidia has a history of launching new graphics cards at relatively innocuous events, and it's been a while since the GeForce GTX 1080 first saw the light of day. Ever since the Kepler architecture, Nvidia has released the high-end cards first, and let loose the range-topping enthusiast-class card much later. The timing is also suspiciously close to the rumored launch date of AMD's new Ryzen CPUs. AMD and Nvidia are bitter rivals, and it wouldn't be the first time that one of these companies tried to steal the other's thunder. Suffice to say, the time is ripe for such an announcement.

Quote:A pretty big change to GeForce.com today practically confirms that an offical announcement of the hotly-anticipated GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is coming in less than a week. A countdown clock with a curious emphasis on TIME welcomes visitors, and a quick dig through the page's source code reveals the background image file names that tip off the entire game:

• gdc-2017/GTX1080Ti_Countdown__Hero_1920x1080_h264_2mbps.mp4
  
• gdc-2017/GTX1080Ti_Countdown_WebM_2kbps_variable_vp8.webm

Quote:Look at GStan- he's been bargaining with SB on APJ over which one has enough room on their credit card to buy a 1060.

(02-23-2017, 01:01 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote:

Quote:Look at GStan- he's been bargaining with SB on APJ over which one has enough room on their credit card to buy a 1060.

APJ?

(02-23-2017, 01:01 AM)SteelCrysis Wrote:

Quote:Look at GStan- he's been bargaining with SB on APJ over which one has enough room on their credit card to buy a 1060.

APJ?

(02-23-2017, 05:16 AM)SickBeast Wrote: I can't even be bothered responding to Rollo.  Rollo you no longer exist to me.  Have a great life.  Maybe you can talk to yourself in an empty void.

(02-23-2017, 04:55 AM)gstanford Wrote: SickBeast lives in Canada, I don't.  That is why I asked if you must know.  Amazon Australia is pretty much a book-store only.

I have the credit (and more, much more) to pay for the card, that part isn't an issue at all.

Don't worry though Trollo I wouldn't expect you to understand.  Just like you can't understand my VW engine analogy.  I never said that you drive one, but your moral and ethical behaviour is a close match.

(02-23-2017, 12:23 AM)RolloTheGreat Wrote: Price will be interesting this time.

$699 and a price shift downward on the stack and they sell all they can make of anything 1060-1080Ti.

$799 and I think they'll see a shorter sales run, and more wait and see for Vega.

If they do what I "think" they will do ($899-$999) the fifteen guys on the forums who always buy such cards will and the rest of the world will not.

It doesn't matter that the performance justifies it, the market is just small for $1000 video cards.

Look at GStan- he's been bargaining with SB on APJ over which one has enough room on their credit card to buy a 1060.

I learned my lesson on the $1000 parts with my Titan and 990X, no way jose'. (and I could buy one with cash any week of the year)

(03-01-2017, 11:57 PM)SteelCrysis Wrote: Nvidia's 980 Ti to 1080 Ti step up program is missing: https://www.techpowerup.com/231140/whatever-happened-to-the-gtx-980-ti-to-gtx-1080-ti-step-up-programme

Quote:An NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti reference-design graphics card was overclocked to 2062 MHz core, and 11404 MHz (GDDR5X-effective) memory, and put through the 3DMark suite. The card was able to sustain its overclock without breaking a sweat, with its core temperature hovering around 63°C. Apparently, the card's power-limit was manually set to 122%, to sustain the overclock.
...
Overall, the card falls within 30-40% performance of an overclocked GTX 1080.

(03-06-2017, 10:55 PM)SteelCrysis Wrote: https://www.techpowerup.com/231279/geforce-gtx-1080-ti-overclocked-beyond-2-ghz-put-through-3dmark

Quote:An NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti reference-design graphics card was overclocked to 2062 MHz core, and 11404 MHz (GDDR5X-effective) memory, and put through the 3DMark suite. The card was able to sustain its overclock without breaking a sweat, with its core temperature hovering around 63°C. Apparently, the card's power-limit was manually set to 122%, to sustain the overclock.
...
Overall, the card falls within 30-40% performance of an overclocked GTX 1080.