Wednesday, June 12th 2019

NVIDIA's SUPER Tease Rumored to Translate Into an Entire Lineup Shift Upwards for Turing

NVIDIA's SUPER teaser hasn't crystallized into something physical as of now, but we know it's coming - NVIDIA themselves saw to it that our (singularly) collective minds would be buzzing about what that teaser meant, looking to steal some thunder from AMD's E3 showing. Now, that teaser seems to be coalescing into something amongst the industry: an entire lineup upgrade for Turing products, with NVIDIA pulling their chips up one rung of the performance chair across their entire lineup.

Apparently, NVIDIA will be looking to increase performance across the board, by shuffling their chips in a downward manner whilst keeping the current pricing structure. This means that NVIDIA's TU106 chip, which powered their RTX 2070 graphics card, will now be powering the RTX 2060 SUPER (with a reported core count of 2176 CUDA cores). The TU104 chip, which power the current RTX 2080, will in the meantime be powering the SUPER version of the RTX 2070 (a reported 2560 CUDA cores are expected to be onboard), and the TU102 chip which powered their top-of-the-line RTX 2080 Ti will be brought down to the RTX 2080 SUPER (specs place this at 8 GB GDDR6 VRAM and 3072 CUDA cores). This carves the way for an even more powerful SKU in the RTX 2080 Ti SUPER, which should be launched at a later date. Salty waters say the RTX 2080 Ti SUPER will feature and unlocked chip which could be allowed to convert up to 300 W into graphics horsepower, so that's something to keep an eye - and a power meter on - for sure. Less defined talks suggest that NVIDIA will be introducing an RTX 2070 Ti SUPER equivalent with a new chip as well.
This means that NVIDIA will be increasing performance by an entire tier across their Turing lineup, thus bringing improved RTX performance to lower pricing brackets than could be achieved with their original 20-series lineup. Industry sources (independently verified) have put it forward that NVIDIA plans to announce - and perhaps introduce - some of its SUPER GPUs as soon as next week.

Should these new SKUs dethrone NVIDIA's current Turing series from their current pricing positions, and increase performance across the board, AMD's Navi may find themselves thrown into a chaotic market that they were never meant to be in - the RT 5700 XT for $449 features performance that's on par or slightly higher than NVIDIA's current RTX 2070 chip, but the SUPER version seems to pack in just enough more cores to offset that performance difference and then some, whilst also offering raytracing.
Granted, NVIDIA's TU104 chip powering the RTX 2080 does feature a grand 545 mm² area, whilst AMD's RT 5700 XT makes do with less than half that at 251 mm² - barring different wafer pricing for the newer 7 nm technology employed by AMD's Navi, this means that AMD's dies are cheaper to produce than NVIDIA's, and a price correction for AMD's lineup should be pretty straightforward whilst allowing AMD to keep healthy margins. Sources: WCCFTech, Videocardz
Add your own comment

126 Comments on NVIDIA's SUPER Tease Rumored to Translate Into an Entire Lineup Shift Upwards for Turing

#51
Xzibit
RH92, post: 4064051, member: 174545"
To my knowledge TPU article is based on wccftech ''rumors '' and that has been confirmed by Videocardz ( the existance of RTX Super not exact specs ) so yeah that makes those '' rumors '' pretty solid .
We wont know until Nvidia says anything.

Videocardz is also based on Wccftech and Vonguru which they are using each other as sources.
Posted on Reply
#52
RH92
Xzibit, post: 4064058, member: 105152"
Videocardz is also based on Wccftech and Vonguru which they are using each other as sources.
Nope , quote form Videocardz : '' Disclaimer: we have independently confirmed the SUPER series. '' .

When Videocardz publishes something it's no longer a rumor :laugh: but i agree we will probably know more when Nvidia is ready to talk .
Posted on Reply
#53
Valantar
Totally, post: 4063905, member: 90126"
Tl;dr

Price cuts without actually cutting prices.
Nvidia is effectively slashing the price of the 2080ti, 2080 and 2070 by $500, $200, and $150 respectively.

Man I hope this is true, this news has made my day. I'm going to run over nvidia forums with popcorn and watch as the entitled people slowly wizen up to what Nvidia has done and start crying. I imagine it's going to be Titan Pascal dumpster fire all over again, would have been awesome if they did this at the 6mo mark.
Uh ... no. You should re-read the rumored specs listed above.

RTX 2060: 1920 CUDA Cores (TU106)
RTX 2060 SUPER: 2176 CUDA cores (TU106), +13%
RTX 2070: 2304 CUDA cores (TU106), +6%
RTX 2070 SUPER: 2560 CUDA cores (TU104), +11%
RTX 2080: 2944 CUDA cores (TU104), +15%
RTX 2080 SUPER: 3072 CUDA cores (TU102), +4%
RTX 2080 TI: 4352 CUDA cores (TU102), +41%

From the looks of this, the 2060 SUPER will come close to matching 2070 performance (at least when OC'd), but the rest are nowhere near their higher-tier counterparts. If the reported 2080 SUPER specs are correct, there's still a 41% gap between it and the 2080 Ti. If this was a "$500 price cut" there would need to be equivalent performance between the 2080 SUPER and Ti. There definitely won't be, particularly if it still has a 256-bit RAM bus.

Totally, post: 4063932, member: 90126"
Doubt it would sting if the margins were overinflated to begin with. Feels like a correction if anything.
Partly, sure, but remember how gargantuan Turing dice are. The 2070 SUPER will move from a 445mm2 die to a 545mm2 die, and the 2080 SUPER from 545mm2 to 754mm2. Even if the 12nm process is relatively cheap, that's not an insignificant increase, and will force them to sell cut-down chips rather than fully enabled ones - which I can't believe is an actual problem given the maturity of the process. Sure, they probably have stockpiles of dud chips that they haven't been able to use for fully enabled SKUs up until now, but at some point this move is going to start costing them significantly. If they need to sell a TU104 off the line as a 2080 SUPER rather than a 2080 Ti, that's $300-400 less money per sale. Even subtracting a bit from the lower BOM for the card, this is significant. I doubt Nvidia cares, but it's a move that shows that they're feeling some pressure.
Posted on Reply
#55
Candor
Hmmmm. The plot thickens :)
Posted on Reply
#56
theoneandonlymrk
RH92, post: 4064051, member: 174545"
You suppose wrong , as i said buy whatever fits your needs and wallet as far as im aware nobody forces you to spend 1200 bucks on a GPU !

The stupid stand is to not buy from X or Y company for some ideological reason . The only thing companies care about is your wallet and that applies to all companies so why should you care about any company instead of the actual product you paying for that's the point im trying to make , but hey to each his own i guess !



To my knowledge TPU article is based on wccftech ''rumors '' and that has been confirmed by Videocardz ( the existance of RTX Super not exact specs ) so yeah that makes those '' rumors '' pretty solid .
My opinion of your opinion is just as lowly, self self self eh, I want and be damned the consequences.

I better not see you moan about price then eh.
Posted on Reply
#57
ArchStupid
trparky, post: 4063832, member: 170376"
@kings mentioned something about the expense of moving to 7nm, that's what I'm referring to. AMD seems to have been able to move to 7nm and do it quite well without having to raise prices. Why can't nVidia do the same?
Not all 7nm are the same. The only thing that really matters is transistor density.
Posted on Reply
#58
GinoLatino
trparky, post: 4063774, member: 170376"
So correct me if I'm wrong, does this mean that a 2080 will become a 2070 with the same price as the 2080 and a new 2080 will come out with an even higher price?
This information is not out yet, only speculations... AFAIK
Posted on Reply
#59
bug
trparky, post: 4063774, member: 170376"
So correct me if I'm wrong, does this mean that a 2080 will become a 2070 with the same price as the 2080 and a new 2080 will come out with an even higher price?
As far as I understand, the 2080 will become the 2070 Super, at the 2070 price point. And so on.
Posted on Reply
#60
jabbadap
Valantar, post: 4064072, member: 171585"
Uh ... no. You should re-read the rumored specs listed above.

RTX 2060: 1920 CUDA Cores (TU106)
RTX 2060 SUPER: 2176 CUDA cores (TU106), +13%
RTX 2070: 2304 CUDA cores (TU106), +6%
RTX 2070 SUPER: 2560 CUDA cores (TU104), +11%
RTX 2080: 2944 CUDA cores (TU104), +15%
RTX 2080 SUPER: 3072 CUDA cores (TU102), +4%
RTX 2080 TI: 4352 CUDA cores (TU102), +41%

From the looks of this, the 2060 SUPER will come close to matching 2070 performance (at least when OC'd), but the rest are nowhere near their higher-tier counterparts. If the reported 2080 SUPER specs are correct, there's still a 41% gap between it and the 2080 Ti. If this was a "$500 price cut" there would need to be equivalent performance between the 2080 SUPER and Ti. There definitely won't be, particularly if it still has a 256-bit RAM bus.


Partly, sure, but remember how gargantuan Turing dice are. The 2070 SUPER will move from a 445mm2 die to a 545mm2 die, and the 2080 SUPER from 545mm2 to 754mm2. Even if the 12nm process is relatively cheap, that's not an insignificant increase, and will force them to sell cut-down chips rather than fully enabled ones - which I can't believe is an actual problem given the maturity of the process. Sure, they probably have stockpiles of dud chips that they haven't been able to use for fully enabled SKUs up until now, but at some point this move is going to start costing them significantly. If they need to sell a TU104 off the line as a 2080 SUPER rather than a 2080 Ti, that's $300-400 less money per sale. Even subtracting a bit from the lower BOM for the card, this is significant. I doubt Nvidia cares, but it's a move that shows that they're feeling some pressure.
Well only real reason why RTX 2080 Super would use tu102 chip is to have more than 256bit memory bus thus bigger vram amount. 3072 cc with 256bit is full fat tu104, no reason what so ever to use overly big chip for such configured card.

Camm, post: 4063872, member: 110377"
This has got to be one of the most disgusting rebrands I've seen in a while.
And yet there's not even single sku that is rumored to be specced as just simple rebrand(You don't call RX 580 a RX 470 rebrand either, or do you. Or well there's that asian version, but let's not go there). Just new config skus with clusterf**k naming scheme. More the merrier I guess... But if Nvidia don't lower the prices of current offering, but just EOL them and replace these supderduper cards on current price slots. The 2019 year of gaming graphics cards will be expensive and pretty boring.
Posted on Reply
#61
64K
I would not expect the 2070 Super to be really close to the present 2080 FE. Right now the 2080 FE is about 20% faster than a 2070 FE overall according to benches here and the 2080 has 28% more cores than the 2070 with 7.5% faster clocks on the 2080 as well. They both have a 256 bit Memory Bus.

If the 2070 Super comes in at 2560 cores then that is still 15% less cores than the present 2080. Assuming it will have a higher clock speed that will help but anyone can OC a 2080 also. How much the 2070 Super can OC remains to be seen.

My guess when all is said and done a 2070 Super OC will still be at least around 10% slower than a 2080 FE OC.
Posted on Reply
#63
efikkan
Steevo, post: 4063908, member: 19251"
I would be SUPER pissed if I bought a new Nvidia card and their knee jerk reaction to Navi was to undercut the value of the card I just bought.

Marketing at its finest, any RTX owners SUPER happy about their now devalued card?
Why can't people behave rationally any more? (I'm talking to several in this thread and the usual opinionators on Youtube etc.)
Many claim to want competition, yet they bash Nvidia (or Intel) every time they refresh their lineup.
It used to be regarded as a good thing when a company refreshed their lineup, it's a natural thing as yields improve and production costs go down.
Did AMD screw their customers when they refreshed RX 480 with RX 580 or R9 290X with R9 390X?
Posted on Reply
#64
bug
efikkan, post: 4064298, member: 150226"
Why can't people behave rationally any more? (I'm talking to several in this thread and the usual opinionators on Youtube etc.)
Many claim to want competition, yet they bash Nvidia (or Intel) every time they refresh their lineup.
It used to be regarded as a good thing when a company refreshed their lineup, it's a natural thing as yields improve and production costs go down.
Did AMD screw their customers when they refreshed RX 480 with RX 580 or R9 290X with R9 390X?
Nvidia and Intel are only allowed to come up with a radically new design at every launch and offer their stuff at the same or lower prices. AMD is the underdog and they can be excused when not doing the same.

E.g: look at how everybody reacted to Turing pricing and then look at the reactions then Navi comes in the same performance ballpark at the same exact prices. One year later.
Posted on Reply
#65
Casecutter
The bins are full... let The Re-Branding start!

trparky, post: 4063832, member: 170376"
@kings mentioned something about the expense of moving to 7nm, that's what I'm referring to. AMD seems to have been able to move to 7nm and do it quite well without having to raise prices. Why can't nVidia do the same?
No no they can't that ship sailed for Jen-Hsun a while ago, and is why he throws-shade at TSMC. He didn't go with them... he' had made his deal with Samsung... so we'll see what he gets. Price might be good but price is only one matrix. He's made his bed and now he has to "promote" it will be "super" comfy-cozy.
Posted on Reply
#66
Xaled
bug, post: 4063829, member: 157434"
What do you mean no issues? They have a die half the size of Nvidia's, but their finished product costs just as much. That was the only implied issue.
Do you have a prove that "they costs just as much"?
Just dont eat anything Nvidia throws at you, like "our cards cost too much, that's why they are expensive" or the reason why they didn't move to 7nm. They are just dishonest and not only not telling the truth but they are obviously and intentionally lying. (Yes there is a huge difference between keeping silent and not saying anything and between lying) Nvidia didn't move to 7nm because there were no NEED for it (yet). That is the only and the only reason for that.
Posted on Reply
#67
kings
bug, post: 4064300, member: 157434"
Nvidia and Intel are only allowed to come up with a radically new design at every launch and offer their stuff at the same or lower prices. AMD is the underdog and they can be excused when not doing the same.

E.g: look at how everybody reacted to Turing pricing and then look at the reactions then Navi comes in the same performance ballpark at the same exact prices. One year later.
The hate towards Nvidia is reaching ridiculous levels. It feels like some people stop thinking rationally!

It's amazing how we got to the point of criticizing them for supposedly going to release better and faster cards!
Posted on Reply
#68
r9
I want to see dual RT 5700 XT with shared VRAM over infinity fabric.
Basically if they could deliver the concept as Ryzen chips.
Manufacturing smaller GPUs and stacking them together it always gonna be cheaper.
Posted on Reply
#69
biffzinker
r9, post: 4064368, member: 56898"
I want to see dual RT 5700 XT with shared VRAM over infinity fabric.
Multiply GPUs will only work if there invisible to the game engine either through the driver or the API (DirectX/Vulkan.)
Posted on Reply
#70
efikkan
r9, post: 4064368, member: 56898"
I want to see dual RT 5700 XT with shared VRAM over infinity fabric.
Basically if they could deliver the concept as Ryzen chips.
Manufacturing smaller GPUs and stacking them together it always gonna be cheaper.
A MCM GPU would need a common scheduler module organizing multiple modules of compute clusters, while operating similarly to a monolithic GPU (with some constraints of course). Designs like this might be coming in the future, but Navi is not designed for this.

Putting two Navi chips with an interconnect would be no different from connecting Nvidia GPUs with NVLink, and would have to be operated in the same way we do multi-GPU today.
Posted on Reply
#71
RH92
https://videocardz.com/81046/nvidia-geforce-rtx-20-super-series-to-launch-mid-july

Videocardz has finally released some specs and it turns out 2080 Super won't use TU102 chip just full TU104 and so on for the rest wich is a bit disapointing this is really the bare minimum Nvidia could do but it's not like they really need to do more anyways . Hopefully vanilla 20 series will get at least a good pricecut .

Nothing to see here for 1080Ti owners , next year is when the exciting stuff comes out .
Posted on Reply
#72
Vayra86
Steevo, post: 4063908, member: 19251"
I would be SUPER pissed if I bought a new Nvidia card and their knee jerk reaction to Navi was to undercut the value of the card I just bought.

Marketing at its finest, any RTX owners SUPER happy about their now devalued card?
Wait... isn't that what AMD was doing since every release post HD7970? Maxwell? "Here, have this rebrand" And isn't Navi the exact same thing?

GPUs are supposed to devalue fast, if they do not, it means progress is stalling. That is what we've been looking at post-Pascal to present... 1080ti performance still sells for about MSRP.

This SUPER feels a bit like a Kepler refresh to me. Not a bad thing IMO, more cards = lower prices.
Posted on Reply
#73
64K
Vayra86, post: 4064394, member: 152404"
This SUPER feels a bit like a Kepler refresh to me. Not a bad thing IMO, more cards = lower prices.
That's my take so far as well.
Posted on Reply
#74
Steevo
Mephis, post: 4064041, member: 186806"
How exactly is the card they just bought devalued? Does it all of a sudden get less fps in games, now that a new card is out?

Of course, you can always wait and get something newer and faster. But that will always be true. Should people not buy Zen 2 processors, because Zen 3 will be coming down the road, not to mention Zen 4 or 5?
Devalued by the same exact card now being a tier lower in pricing.

I bought a X1800XT and low, the X1900XT displaced it and devalued it so it lost a couple hundred bucks in value for resale.

Did it still work? Yes.
Was it worth the cost? No.

It's about consumer value, if I buy a premium product I would expect it to be valued as a premium product.

Just my opinion.
Posted on Reply
#75
Xaled
Vayra86, post: 4064394, member: 152404"
Wait... isn't that what AMD was doing since every release post HD7970? Maxwell? "Here, have this rebrand" And isn't Navi the exact same thing?

GPUs are supposed to devalue fast, if they do not, it means progress is stalling. That is what we've been looking at post-Pascal to present... 1080ti performance still sells for about MSRP.

This SUPER feels a bit like a Kepler refresh to me. Not a bad thing IMO, more cards = lower prices.
The only reason for this "not bad thing" is the release of Navi .
You may have had to wait 1-2 years to see a "real" refresh or 3 years for a new thing from Nvidia. While AMD were refreshing actually because they weren't able to make new cards because they had to focus on CPU segment and on console graphics AND this mining thing just saved AMDs ass in recent years or they'd had very tough period.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment