Friday, May 6th 2016
NVIDIA Also Announces $379 "Faster than TITAN X" GTX 1070
Hot on the heels of the GeForce GTX 1080, the company also announced its second fastest GPU, the GeForce GTX 1070. Based on the same 16 nm GP104 silicon as the GTX 1080, the GTX 1070 features 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, and has 3 quarters the single precision performance (6.5 TFLOP/s vs. 9 TFLOP/s) of the GTX 1080. NVIDIA claims that just as the GTX 1080 is faster than the GTX 980 SLI, the GTX 1070 is faster than the GTX TITAN X, making it the second fastest GPU in existence. Available on June 10, the GTX 1070 will be priced at US $379, with a "founder's edition" (reference-design) card going for $449.
141 Comments on NVIDIA Also Announces $379 "Faster than TITAN X" GTX 1070
and "GTX 1080 is (/may be) faster than GTX 980 SLI (in select benchmarks)" (remember SLI scaling is really bad in some cases)
Both Nvidia and AMD is always stretching the truth in these claims. Do you remember the cherry-picked benchmarks of Fury X which portrayed it as faster than GTX 980 Ti? (I remember some people canceling their orders for GTX 980 Ti)
Even though we have an idea of how these cards will perform, we'll only know precisely after extensive benchmarking.
www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/radeon-fury-x-outperforms-geforce-gtx-titan-x-fury-to-gtx-980-ti-3dmark-bench.213528/
The Polaris 10 is afaik the 490, because it has some shaders of its 2560 shader engine disabled (about 2300 usable). The 490X will have all shaders enabled, 2560. And i expect very high clocks, 1700 minimum and a maximum of 2000, maybe even more. With those speeds, it's easy to surpass Fury X and even 980 Ti performance. Hawaii with its 2816 cores and 1050-1100 MHz is just 20% slower than Fury X (maximum), now imagine a Hawaii with clocks of over 1700 MHz - yeah, now you know what I mean.
Also I think the 480(X) are the Polaris 11 GPUs. But maybe I'm wrong. But naming isn't overly important I'd say. ;)
On the other hand, Pascal is a compute based engine, unlike Maxwell, so thats why Pascal is only a tad faster than 980 Ti, just by its big advantage 16nm resulting in clearly higher clocks. Give GM200 these clocks and it wins easily against 1080. GTX 1080 is no wonder GPU, all it's advantage is the better manufacturing process. Now imagine Maxwell with 6144 (double Titan X) or 5632 shaders (double 980 Ti), this would be nice (16nm 600mm² GPU). I think if Nvidia does a pure gaming architecture again, it will be like that - and a lot faster than Pascal. Just imagine, Maxwell on 16nm and with even higher performance per shader and more ROPs etc.
faster than Titan X in VR when using simultaneous multiprojection
PS
I'll pray for 490/490x to be faster than 1070. AMD absolutely needs it.
..and the fact that nVidia comparing 1070 to Titan X instead 980 Ti is becouse Titan X is indeed the fastest card.
(no cherry picks, no extra clocks, no nothings)
Nobody will be buying a 1070 for $379, maybe in 2017 you might, or unless AMD have something competitive.
What leads me to believe it's greed and not financial crisis, is because of the 'founders' concept. They want to sell the top dog premium product while price fixing what their partners are able to do(bottom floor price/price range). I can see this leading to the third party being limited on what they can offer because what happens when they create a better product? Are they forced to charge more than Nvidia as to not undercut them? Or are they forced to sell less as to not make their product look more premium than the Nvidia 'founder' model, but all the while losing money by selling at a loss.