>2x performance they said
>9 Tflops they said and its already been shrunken down to 8.2 Tflops according to leaks and reviews now
>runs hotter than the surface of the sun
Fermi 2.0?
http://www.overclock-and-game.com/news/pc-gaming/46-gtx-1080-what-s-not-being-discussed
>>338027385
Is this real?
I'm going to need to see some actual heat testing of the cards by a reputable testing site that isn't pro-nvidia biased
if it is real, then that's housefire-tier memes all over again
>104 °C
>water boils at 100 °C
So it's also good at turning your room into a makeshift sauna? That's pretty good value tbqh.
>>338027590
For furmark yeah. it's actual temps are very standard 80-85C in games.
Huan lied on stage about 65C and 180w though.
>>338027590
If it is real, then the Russians disabled Nvidia's throttling system which usually throttles the card way down when running Furmark.
All other review sites have the card running at a constant 83°C, i.e. the default temperature limit. (not the 60°C Nvidia claimed)
>>338027385
I'd trust anandtech over some noname butthurt site I've never heard about
>>338027698
Nah, let's count it.
Gas and stones +liter of water let's say $50 USD
1080+electrical bill= about $800
legit as fuck m8
>>338027784
83c is still terrible temperature for ref cooler @ 185w
my 780 when i referance cooled it hit max 67c
i watercool it now and it hits max 40c, idles at 26c
>>338027385
>104C
Fucking hell, how is that not a safty risk?
>>338027385
>2x performance they said
No one said that. It's about 70% faster than a single 980, which makes it faster than 980 SLI
>9 Tflops they said and its already been shrunken down to 8.2 Tflops according to eaks and reviews now
Source?
>runs hotter than the surface of the sun
Not according to literally every review on the internet
>>338027816
>>338027874
Don't you guy know the trick with furmark?
What you do, run card under load at 80C then switch it to ultra furmark it skyrockets before card reacts and throtles down.
>>338027957
>>338027874
>>338027816
read the article before you post.
>>338027957
>70% faster than a single 980
didn't /g/ math class btfo you already?
>>338027885
1080 is more difficult to cool than a 980 or 780 because it has less die area. It's pushing the same amount of heat through a smaller surface area.
That's why Nvidia had to put a better cooler on it.
Looks like my gtx980 SLI rigs is still relevant for another year or so
it's a fucking reference card
TWICE THE PERFORMANCE OF A TITAN X
>Benches show it being 13% better than Ti
>>338028194
B-But VR!
>inb4 hur durr magic drivers
>>338028018
I read it. They do literally nothing to refute raw framerate numbers posted in other reviews. They can complain against pricing model and using brute force to acheive performance, but it doesn't really change the final result. As for nVidia jewing, blame AMD for not delivering a competitor to 10xx series if you must blame someone.
>>338028194
>VR
The whole point of this slide was about optimisations for rendering the different viewpoints of the same scene on two VR screens, not a single monitor
>>338028019
>/g/ anything
>>338028543
>6fps more on minimum fps
>$699usd
ILL TAKE TWO
wait
>>338027385
>Have to pay $100 more at launch to get a shitty reference cooler or wait a month to get better cooling and a cheaper price
Why?
>>338028636
>against a $1200 Titan X
>>338028818
It will be more than a month before prices drop.
At launch the non-reference models will be sold for moon prices.
>>338028818
Maximum jewery.
Also the cards are just a paper launch. you'd be lucky to get one before august due to 16 nm chips being in short supply.
>>338028543
Comparing minimum lol. What's the point, it could have one drop in one area, it won't affect you're experience at all. It's a retarded metric to judge performance by.
Are there any decent reviews with frame time analysis?
>>338028939
were there even any non-reference models announced yet? all I've seen so far are Jew Edition cards even from 3rd party manufacturers like ASUS, MSI and Zotac
Jewed again by nvidia...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQYsl360v1A
>>338028959
Bullshit. First people like you complained it was impossible for the 1080 to have anything but plain old GDDR5 and now it is a supposedly a paper launch. Not enough crow yet?
>>338029217
it's using GDDR5X, which has only just entered mass production and will be in limited supply
AMD Vega wen?
>>338029872
Vega is next year.
>GPU dies 2 months ago
>still waiting
>don't want a shitty Nvidia reference card
WHAT DO I DO!?
>>338029923
Early next year probably, by the way.
>>338029872
mid range Polaris will be early summer, Vega is rumored to be coming around october.
>>338030023
get a cheap 900 series card second hand cheap from any nvidiots upgrading to this housefire card
>>338029872
>>338029923
>>338030053
Nice memes
>>338030053
They've said that Polaris isn't enthusiast tier, which only means it's not Fury tiered. It'll probably be 390 tiered.
And AMD's roadmap showed Vega to be right on 2017, which probably means that it'll release in early 2017, realistically looking. It could be earlier, but if that's the case they would've probably put the Vega square a bit before 2017.
>>338030210
>And AMD's roadmap showed Vega to be right on 2017, which probably means that it'll release in early 2017, realistically looking. It could be earlier, but if that's the case they would've probably put the Vega square a bit before 2017.
Not anymore.
http://www.techpowerup.com/222403/amd-pulls-radeon-vega-launch-to-october
>>338030210
The position of the squares doesn't mean all that much AMD employees have said that people read way too much into those and yeah there's no way the marketing person that made them did the kind of pixel perfect positioning of them that some people want to read in.
Also the Q4 2016 rumors are based on more recent information than those charts and patches have already gone into the Linux kernel to support Vega which implies its not that far off.
>>338030370
First I've heard of the Vega10/11 distinction. It's possible that the original "Vega" is still slated for 2017.
I had not heard this news though.
>>338030053
>>338030210
"Mid range" just means the price is below $400. Probably close to $300.
Performance wise it will be close to Fiji. Where exactly it fits in depends on the actual clock rates.
>>338029487
Isn't it the same memory type used in PS4 and XBone?
>>338030492
Vega 10 is late 2016 or early 2017
Vega 11 (probably the big fat "Fury X" chip) will be much later. Mid 2017 maybe.
>>338030562
I mainly tier GPUs on their price and performance based on other GPUs in the same generation. It's stupid to say that the Polaris is a higher tier than the 390, just because it performs better, when it basically the same shit but actually updated.
>>338030667
The fuck are you basing that on? The article linked says that Vega11 is early 2017.
>>338030667
Could just as easily be the other way around, remember that Polaris 10 is the higher end version with the 11 being the low end part.
Also I hadn't heard that there were multiple Vega parts like there are with Polaris. Sure we'll probably still see Rage, Rage X, and a new R9 Nano but they'll all just be 'vega'.
>>338030851
Seems like which Vega releases when is speculation.
>>338027385
>buying reference designs
>ever
nigger what are you doing?
at least put some fucking effort into your shitpost.
>>338031310
I wish i still had my fermi folder
I just hope the 1070 will be ok for 1440p/60fps
>>338031310
>>338031493
Even now, years after the release, the second Google suggestion for "nvidia fermi" is "fire"
>>338027385
>2x performance they said
2x bandwidth they said, which isn't a synonym for performance.
Needing to twist words to suit your narrative, huh AMDrone?
>>338028930
>One overpriced card is cheaper than one other slightly overpowered card
Oh wow
Ill wait for the 1170 OC next year for $300
>>338030137
Keep trying to revive your fermi memes as a last dying throe, AMDrone. Your market share will be single digits soon.
>>338031958
>>338031795
Same nvidiot
>Nvidia being lying sneaky cunts
Wow, what a surprise. Stop the fucking presses.
>>338027874
>>338027816
>radeon cards hotter by nvidia, not by a fraction but by 10 degrees
>mfw atifags made up nvidia housefire meme >to distract people from their own cars
>mfw amd vs nvidia dragrace comic actually ends with nvidia winning and amd car without driver and on fire
>I buy AMD because I'm a smart consumer that gets what I pay for
AMD - liberals/"moderates"
NVidia - conservatives
>>338032667
Looks like they were caught with their pants down
I really think they thought async compute wasn't going to matter to consumers and refreshed maxwell again
>>338030137
except amd cards run hotter than nvidia AND have massive compability issues with most games and programs.
>>338033053
>Thinking the retarded 295x is representative of AMD
Nobody buys that shit. You're better of with a Fury or something.
>>338033114
>liberals/"moderates"
you are using word, you dont understand.
>>338033193
wow nice argument.
shame nobody buys 970, everyone buys 980ti, so you literally have NOTHING on nvidia right now.
>>338033239
would alt-right satisfy you more?
>>338033280
>shame nobody buys 970
Are you for fucking real? 970 is incredibly popular. People are more likely to buy 2 390s than the dual GPU horror that is the 295x.
>>338028194
>2x Performance!
> Graph plots it at a little over 1.5x
The fuck?
Do they not know how to read graphs at Nvidia?
>>338027957
50% faster is double the performance you idiot.
>>338028194
>TWICE THE PERFORMANCE OF A TITAN X
Well done. You've come to the realisation that companies will find the single aspect in which a product outperforms the previous model by the largest margin , usually a single benchmark and then proudly use that to proclaim "x% faster!".
>Nvidia face when
>>338033630
