FluffmeisterThat $1500 Radeon Duo is gonna be a tough sell now.

It wasn't already?

MustSeeMelonsHow much did the 970 MSRP at launch? I had to pay 350 euros for my ~2 months after its release, don't want to spend 400+ on a 1070. AMD, show us what you've got!

Gonna be verry verry hard this time around for amd. Hbm is more expensive and in shorter supply so profit is gonna be much harder for them. If amd cards arent significantly faster than nvidia....then whats the point of hbm and its price premium? Vr? Not a house hold thing yet.....even amoung enthusiasts. Honestly the majority of the market i.e. the majority of sales and profit is from 1080p-ers

newtekie1It wasn't already?

Good point. :laugh:

Actually it's "faster than Titan X" in VR when using simultaneous multiprojection, not in general.
In normal gaming it's around stock 980 Ti performance or so, maybe even slightly under (since GTX 1080 is around 20 % faster than Titan X in general gaming, and around 58 % more expensive than 1070)

jigar2speedWell played Nvidia, you brought price war game to AMD with best in class performance offering. AMD is now in tough position. Nvidia was right in anticipating a price war this round and they have played the exact same move AMD was about to make. This complicates a lot of things for AMD. Hope Vega brings something good cause Nvidia has watered the parade of Polaris 10.

I don't think AMD will have a problem if they got the details right. Polaris 10 is lower tier. I expect performance in the 970 and 980 range for $200-$250. Even the 1060 Ti will likely be above it. Polaris 10 will only compete with old designs in that segment until 1060 comes out.

KaotikActually it's "faster than Titan X" in VR when using simultaneous multiprojection, not in general.
In normal gaming it's around stock 980 Ti performance or so, maybe even slightly under (since GTX 1080 is around 20 % faster than Titan X in general gaming, and around 58 % more expensive than 1070)

An 8GB GTX 980 Ti that probably floats around 165 watts or even less and is great for VR????

Sounds good to me.

FluffmeisterAn 8GB GTX 980 Ti that probably floats around 165 watts or even less and is great for VR????

Sounds good to me.

Not saying it wouldn't be a great card, just that people shouldn't expect it beating Titan X in normal games

Damn... that price must have made someone over at AMD lose some sleep. Didn't think nVidia would launch a price war so early but then they are the ones in the position to try that.

Still rocking my 7970 though. I guess I can hold out a little bit more.

Not sure why people are surprised by the price. The *70 cards have always been around this price point, and always been extremely good values for the money.

Yeah but with this performance level you'd think nVidia would charge a little extra at least at first while AMD has nothing to fight back.

TRWOVYeah but with this performance level you'd think nVidia would charge a little extra at least at first while AMD has nothing to fight back.

That isn't really their MO. They do that with the *80 cards, while the *70 cards are the values.

They are already charging +50$ over last year ;)

TRWOVYeah but with this performance level you'd think nVidia would charge a little extra at least at first while AMD has nothing to fight back.

Sure about that? Slowest Polaris 10 is around GTX 970 / R9 290 -level for VR. The highest is rumoured to be around Fury X / 980 Ti -level (in 3DMark anyway). They've confirmed to target under $349 markets

TRWOVYeah but with this performance level you'd think nVidia would charge a little extra at least at first while AMD has nothing to fight back.

Polaris will be at the price range below or up to $300, and with a performance 10-20% below 1070 me thinks, so not any competition between AMD and nVidia until late 2016-early 2017 imho. We might have a new 470-480 vs 4850-70 case in front of us. Not any thermal or TDP problems for the green camp now though. Just lower FPS/$ for Pascal vs Polaris I dare to predict. FPS/W could be very similar on the other side. Only thing that can judge this fight is how high will the clocks go for each camp and how much oc will the chips have?

GTX 1080 after some thought isn't faster than 980 SLI, it's just faster in VR than SLI 980, maybe. These are only marketing numbers from Nvidia, to take with a grain of salt, I don't think they are accurate. I expect custom 1080 to be 10-20% faster than 980 Ti custom and 1070 clearly slower. I expect the 1070 to be 10-20% faster than 980 (non Ti).

Polaris on the other hand not only has the arguably better tech (14nm) but smaller chips too, they have no problems starting a price war with Nvidia. I expect R9 490 to be about ~ GTX 1070 level with a smaller chip and better production tech. The days of AMD, starting with the biggest chip and 384 bit, are over I guess. Wasn't exactly a smart move anyway (talking HD 7970, vs. the smaller, but more efficient GTX 680 back then). Now they are doing the opposite again, reminds me of HD 6970/6950 days vs GTX 560 Ti/570/580. Better be small and efficient than too big to fail. Price cuts/wars are no problem that way.

Edit: corrected 980 Ti SLI to 980 SLI.

KananGTX 1080 after some thought isn't faster than 980 Ti SLI, it's just faster in VR than SLI 980 Ti, maybe. These are only marketing numbers from Nvidia, to take with a grain of salt, I don't think they are accurate. I expect custom 1080 to be 10-20% faster than 980 Ti custom and 1070 clearly slower. I expect the 1070 to be 10-20% faster than 980 (non Ti).

Polaris on the other hand not only has the arguably better tech (14nm) but smaller chips too, they have no problems starting a price war with Nvidia. I expect R9 490 to be about ~ GTX 1070 level with a smaller chip and better production tech. The days of AMD, starting with the biggest chip and 384 bit, are over I guess. Wasn't exactly a smart move anyway (talking HD 7970, vs. the smaller, but more efficient GTX 680 back then). Now they are doing the opposite again, reminds me of HD 6970/6950 days vs GTX 560 Ti/570/580. Better be small and efficient than too big to fail. Price cuts/wars are no problem that way.

Actually the claim was 980 SLI, not 980 Ti SLI. And yes, it's in regular gaming according to marketing slide (which does exaggarate differences a bit, even for already released cards)
1080 = ~2x 970, ~1.7-1.75x 980, ~1,2x Titan X

KaotikActually the claim was 980 SLI, not 980 Ti SLI. And yes, it's in regular gaming according to marketing slide (which does exaggarate differences a bit, even for already released cards)
1080 = ~2x 970, ~1.7-1.75x 980, ~1,2x Titan X

That's right, but doesn't change my opinion. Still expecting the 1080 custom to be "only" 10-20% faster than 980 Ti custom.

rtwjunkieTechnically, if it is only faster than the Titan-X, which is not faster than a 980Ti, then that makes the 1070 the THIRD-fastest in existence, not the second.

Except that you can overclock the 1070 + 1080 above 2k GHz on stock cooler, they even showed the 1080 overclocked in there testing of VR. In my eyes, that makes it the SECOND fastest card in existence.

KananThat's right, but doesn't change my opinion. Still expecting the 1080 custom to be "only" 10-20% faster than 980 Ti custom.

Halt right there! Overclocking the polaris will be a piece of cake on even stock cooling, though. If you read my above message you will get some of the info. Imagine a non reference cooler, how much more performance that will be. So better make that "10-20%" to be about "30%+"

TheNumberTrentExcept that you can overclock the 1070 + 1080 above 2k GHz on stock cooler, they even showed the 1080 overclocked in there testing of VR. In my eyes, that makes it the SECOND fastest card in existence.

On specially binned another 30-50$/€ extra..

970 was 330$
1070 is 370$
1070 binned is 430$


Normal won't OC as much..

Btw that 2.1Ghz was a golden ASIC 1080GTX, IMO normal will go up to 2Ghz, only those special up to 2.1GHz.


Like others said in reality (non VR) a 1080GTX will be up to 10-20% faster when both OC'ed to the "max", e.g. 980Ti @ 1450mhz, 1080gtx @ 2.1Ghz.

TheNumberTrentHalt right there! Overclocking the polaris will be a piece of cake on even stock cooling, though. If you read my above message you will get some of the info. Imagine a non reference cooler, how much more performance that will be. So better make that "10-20%" to be about "30%+"

Please don't doublepost (use edit). Also I talked about GTX 1080 not Polaris. Still expecting Polaris to be in GTX 1070 range, not speculating on more, that would be wishful thinking I guess.

PS. I think that prices are simply based on performance compared to the Maxwell GPUs. Expecting ~600$ for a GTX 980 Ti perf GPU isn't bad. Expecting 350-400$ for a ~GTX 980 perf GPU isn't too bad either. I think the prices are "okay" for now.

TheNumberTrentHalt right there! Overclocking the polaris will be a piece of cake on even stock cooling, though. If you read my above message you will get some of the info. Imagine a non reference cooler, how much more performance that will be. So better make that "10-20%" to be about "30%+"

Havent seen any possible pics of polaris if its aio cooled like furry x wouldnt expect too much

Nvidia's own slides on their site contradict what Huang said, he said the 1080 was twice the performance of a titan x(and he did not say VR until later) but on their slides it does not say that, it says 60% or 70% on the games they tested vs a GTX 980(not even a TI). The 1070 does look a little interesting though definitely moreso than the 1080 with that price.



Gonna wait for what AMD has to say about their card and some benchmarks.

Sold my 980 Ti. Let's face it. A driver gimp is coming and you all know it. Sell yours while you can for a decent price. Everyone is hungry in craigslist.

If a 1070 only beats a Titan X barely, nvidia will make damn sure it'll beat it soundly within a few months.

KananGTX 1080 after some thought isn't faster than 980 SLI, it's just faster in VR than SLI 980, maybe. These are only marketing numbers from Nvidia, to take with a grain of salt, I don't think they are accurate. I expect custom 1080 to be 10-20% faster than 980 Ti custom and 1070 clearly slower. I expect the 1070 to be 10-20% faster than 980 (non Ti)..

That is most likely the case, going by the Fire Strike numbers of the ~1800MHz GTX1080 from a couple of day ago.

KananPolaris on the other hand not only has the arguably better tech (14nm) but smaller chips too, they have no problems starting a price war with Nvidia. I expect R9 490 to be about ~ GTX 1070 level with a smaller chip and better production tech. The days of AMD, starting with the biggest chip and 384 bit, are over I guess. Wasn't exactly a smart move anyway (talking HD 7970, vs. the smaller, but more efficient GTX 680 back then). Now they are doing the opposite again, reminds me of HD 6970/6950 days vs GTX 560 Ti/570/580. Better be small and efficient than too big to fail. Price cuts/wars are no problem that way.

Edit: corrected 980 Ti SLI to 980 SLI.

Well... a couple of things to remember: First, if AMD doesn't clock Polaris high enough and focuses on power consumption, then even the Polaris10 XT won't beat the 1070. I do think that the Polaris 10 chip is highly capable of competing with the Fiji chip if clocked aggressively, which is the primary reason why the GP104 based cards are able to do so well against the GTX980 TI.
The second point to be made is Samsung's 14nm vs TSMC's 16nm finfet processes. I'm not sure which one is better, but the fact that AMD was able to cram 2560 SPs into a ~230mm^2 chips is impressive. Remember this is the same number of SPs that the full GP104 chip has.