ASRock Z590 Extreme review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 6700 XT Gaming OC review
Corsair K70 RGB TKL keyboard review
Corsair RM650x (2021) power supply review
be quiet! Silent Loop 2 280mm review
Corsair K55 RGB PRO XT keyboard review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - March 2021
Intel Core i9-11900K processor review
Intel Core i5-11600K processor review
ASUS ROG Maximus XIII HERO review
GALAX GeForce GTX 1070 Box Photo and Renders Surface
A new photo of the GALAX GeForce GTX 1070 Boxing surfaced on the web. That alongside some renders. The GP104 based graphics card doesn't reveal much on its boxing other then the product code.
You can also check out some renders of the GeForce GTX 1070 PCB from GALAX. This could very well be NVIDIA's reference PCB design of GTX 1070. It looks rather similar to GTX 1080 PCB and will be equipped with GDDR5 memory. The GeForce GTX 1070 goes on sale from June 10, 2016.
The GeForce GTX 1070 has the same GP104 GPU housed on it's PCB as the 1080, however it'll be cut-down GPU with stripped away segments, it has 1920 shader processors. This means it is has 15 out of the 20 SMs active (15 streaming multi-processors x 128 shader cores). The memory is clocked at 2000 MHz actual which is 8 GHz (GDDR5-effective) at a memory bandwidth of 256 GB/s. Single-precision floating point performance at 6.45 TFLOP/s. The card will start at 379 USD with the founders edition (reference card) costing 449 USD. Below an overview of the specifications:
| | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GeForce | GTX 1080 | GTX 1070 | GTX Titan X | GTX 980 Ti | GTX 980 |
| GPU | GP104-400-A1 | GP104-200-A1 | GM200 | GM200 | GM204 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal | Maxwell | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Transistor count | 7.2 Billion | 7.2 Billion | 8 Billion | 8 Billion | 5.2 Billion |
| Fabrication Node | TSMC 16 nm | TSMC 16 nm | TSMC 28 nm | TSMC 28 nm | TSMC 28 nm |
| CUDA Cores | 2,560 | 1,920 | 3,072 | 2,816 | 2,048 |
| SMMs / SMXs | 20 | 15 | 24 | 22 | 16 |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 | 96 | 96 | 64 |
| GPU Clock Core | 1,607 MHz | 1,506 MHz | 1,002 MHz | 1,002 MHz | 1,127 MHz |
| GPU Boost clock | 1,733 MHz | 1,683 MHz | 1,076 MHz | 1,076 MHz | 1,216 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 1,250 MHz | 2,000 MHz | 1,753 MHz | 1,753 MHz | 1,753 MHz |
| Memory Size | 8 GB | 8 GB | 12 GB | 6 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Bus | 256-bit | 256-bit | 384-bit | 384-bit | 256-bit |
| Memory Bandwidth | 320 GB/s | 256 GB/s | 337 GB/s | 337 GB/s | 224 GB/s |
| FP Performance | 9.0 TFLOPS | 6.45 TFLOPS | 7.0 TFLOPS | 6.4 TFLOPS | 4.61 TFLOPS |
| GPU Thermal Threshold | 94 Degrees C | 94 Degrees C | 91 Degrees C | 91 Degrees C | 95 Degrees C |
| TDP | 180 Watts | 150 Watts | 250 Watts | 250 Watts | 165 Watts |
| Launch MSRP ref | $599/$699 | $379/$449 | $999 | $699 | $549 |
GeForce GTX 1070
- 16 nm GP104 silicon "GP104-200-A1" GPU
- 1920 CUDA cores
- 15 out of 20 streaming multiprocessors enabled
- 120 TMUs
- 64 ROPs
- 256-bit GDDR5 memory, 8 GB standard memory amount
- Maximum GPU Boost frequency ~1600 MHz
- 6.45 TFLOP/s single-precision floating point performance
- 150W TDP, single 8-pin PCIe power connector
- 3x DisplayPort 1.4, 1x HDMI 2.0b
- 2-way SLI with SLI HB bridge support
A substantial difference with the 1080 is not the reduced GPU, this model will have your 'normal' GDDR5 memory and not GDDR5X. Check the leaked photos below:
GALAX GeForce GT 710 Graphics Card - 02/12/2016 09:47 AM
Cheaper than cheap with its 192 shader processor cores Galax releases a new GeForce GT 710 graphics card. Codenamed GF PGT710-LP/1GD3, this low-profile graphics card is packed with 192 CUDA Cores, a...
GALAX GeForce GTX 970 BLACK EXOC SNIPER EDITION Graphics Card Launches - 02/10/2016 09:44 AM
The GTX 970 is still a mighty popular graphics card. With the graphics industry at an alltime slow, AIB partners are still outting new SKUs based on this 2014 GPU. GALAX, for example recently relea...
Review: GALAX GeForce GTX 980 Hall Of Fame - 12/02/2014 07:50 PM
We review the GALAX GeForce GTX HOF edition. The card is beautiful in design with a snow white theme; it is also the fastest factory clocked product that we have tested to date. Get this, the card is ...
GALAX GeForce GTX 980 HOF Photos - 11/19/2014 02:49 PM
A week or so ago GALAX announced their Hall of Fame edition GeForce GTX 980 that boosts over 1400 Mhz at default. This is one of the more desirable GTX 980 card for many with that massive cooler and t...
Review: GALAX GeForce GTX 970 EXOC Black Edition - 11/06/2014 10:18 AM
We review the all new GALAX GeForce GTX 970 EXOC Black Edition graphics card. The product comes factory overclocked with a boost clock of 1317 MHz (!). The product has a custom and relatively small ...
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 13280
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 13280
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5277730 Posted on: 05/23/2016 01:29 PM
The 9800 Pro was a high end card. The 1070 isn't. Huge difference. That was most of the point of what I was saying. A 1070 at $500 is like paying that much for a Radeon 9600 in 2003. The price isn't the problem, what we're getting for the price is; their 4th card down the line with a deceptive name.
While we're playing the pricing game, I paid less than $400 CAD ($350?... don't remember) for a GTX 280 months before the GTX 285 was available. The 280 was the full blown chip, no cuts, not a lower architecture, nothing. The 285 was just a higher binned version in the future that managed higher stock clocks. There was no 280 Ti or Titan, the 280/285 were near identical and the highest end cards available; no naming agenda/scheme to try to pass a lower card as the high end.
It's not that easy for me to skip a generation considering my monitor res is 1440p. Though I'm going to do it anyway. If I have to drop to 30 fps and make my eyes bleed or play on a console then so be it.
*Shrug* Well enjoy paying higher prices every generation then. The fact that people are okay with nVidia gradually selling lesser and lesser cards as the "high end" for constantly increasing prices is why they can get away with it. If they saw even a 20% drop in sales do you think they'd continue?
9800XT was the high end, not the Pro.
There is also an entirely new gap now with 4K being available, yet not the overwhelming standard. There are going to be people looking for single card 60fps experiences there and in order to deliver that kind of performance the chips are going to have to be really big. Couple that with moore's law ceasing to scale properly and the complexity of the architecture/chip manufacturing increasing + inflation of the economy in general and it seems pretty reasonable that the prices have gone up.
I bought a 8800GTX in 2006 for $600, that's $712 now with inflation.
The 9800 Pro was a high end card. The 1070 isn't. Huge difference. That was most of the point of what I was saying. A 1070 at $500 is like paying that much for a Radeon 9600 in 2003. The price isn't the problem, what we're getting for the price is; their 4th card down the line with a deceptive name.
While we're playing the pricing game, I paid less than $400 CAD ($350?... don't remember) for a GTX 280 months before the GTX 285 was available. The 280 was the full blown chip, no cuts, not a lower architecture, nothing. The 285 was just a higher binned version in the future that managed higher stock clocks. There was no 280 Ti or Titan, the 280/285 were near identical and the highest end cards available; no naming agenda/scheme to try to pass a lower card as the high end.
It's not that easy for me to skip a generation considering my monitor res is 1440p. Though I'm going to do it anyway. If I have to drop to 30 fps and make my eyes bleed or play on a console then so be it.
*Shrug* Well enjoy paying higher prices every generation then. The fact that people are okay with nVidia gradually selling lesser and lesser cards as the "high end" for constantly increasing prices is why they can get away with it. If they saw even a 20% drop in sales do you think they'd continue?
9800XT was the high end, not the Pro.
There is also an entirely new gap now with 4K being available, yet not the overwhelming standard. There are going to be people looking for single card 60fps experiences there and in order to deliver that kind of performance the chips are going to have to be really big. Couple that with moore's law ceasing to scale properly and the complexity of the architecture/chip manufacturing increasing + inflation of the economy in general and it seems pretty reasonable that the prices have gone up.
I bought a 8800GTX in 2006 for $600, that's $712 now with inflation.
Vxheous
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 2003-07-12
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 2003-07-12
#5277739 Posted on: 05/23/2016 01:41 PM
Something tells me the GTX 1070 will cost between €500-600. Mark my words.
I seriously hope I'm wrong.
Yeah, it's going to be $490 CAD + tax. The current exchange rate is 1.3. the Founders 1080 is $699 USD, and stores in Canada have it pre-order at $909 CAD (exactly $699 x 1.3)
The 9800 Pro was a high end card. The 1070 isn't. Huge difference. That was most of the point of what I was saying. A 1070 at $500 is like paying that much for a Radeon 9600 in 2003. The price isn't the problem, what we're getting for the price is; their 4th card down the line with a deceptive name.
While we're playing the pricing game, I paid less than $400 CAD ($350?... don't remember) for a GTX 280 months before the GTX 285 was available. The 280 was the full blown chip, no cuts, not a lower architecture, nothing. The 285 was just a higher binned version in the future that managed higher stock clocks. There was no 280 Ti or Titan, the 280/285 were near identical and the highest end cards available; no naming agenda/scheme to try to pass a lower card as the high end.
It's not that easy for me to skip a generation considering my monitor res is 1440p. Though I'm going to do it anyway. If I have to drop to 30 fps and make my eyes bleed or play on a console then so be it.
*Shrug* Well enjoy paying higher prices every generation then. The fact that people are okay with nVidia gradually selling lesser and lesser cards as the "high end" for constantly increasing prices is why they can get away with it. If they saw even a 20% drop in sales do you think they'd continue?
The 2xx Series had the GTX 295 as the top card though, and it was $799 CAD when I bought it in 2009 (Yes the 280/285 was high end single GPU)
Something tells me the GTX 1070 will cost between €500-600. Mark my words.
I seriously hope I'm wrong.
Yeah, it's going to be $490 CAD + tax. The current exchange rate is 1.3. the Founders 1080 is $699 USD, and stores in Canada have it pre-order at $909 CAD (exactly $699 x 1.3)
The 9800 Pro was a high end card. The 1070 isn't. Huge difference. That was most of the point of what I was saying. A 1070 at $500 is like paying that much for a Radeon 9600 in 2003. The price isn't the problem, what we're getting for the price is; their 4th card down the line with a deceptive name.
While we're playing the pricing game, I paid less than $400 CAD ($350?... don't remember) for a GTX 280 months before the GTX 285 was available. The 280 was the full blown chip, no cuts, not a lower architecture, nothing. The 285 was just a higher binned version in the future that managed higher stock clocks. There was no 280 Ti or Titan, the 280/285 were near identical and the highest end cards available; no naming agenda/scheme to try to pass a lower card as the high end.
It's not that easy for me to skip a generation considering my monitor res is 1440p. Though I'm going to do it anyway. If I have to drop to 30 fps and make my eyes bleed or play on a console then so be it.
*Shrug* Well enjoy paying higher prices every generation then. The fact that people are okay with nVidia gradually selling lesser and lesser cards as the "high end" for constantly increasing prices is why they can get away with it. If they saw even a 20% drop in sales do you think they'd continue?
The 2xx Series had the GTX 295 as the top card though, and it was $799 CAD when I bought it in 2009 (Yes the 280/285 was high end single GPU)
Neo Cyrus
Senior Member
Posts: 9774
Joined: 2006-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 9774
Joined: 2006-02-14
#5277789 Posted on: 05/23/2016 03:02 PM
9800XT was the high end, not the Pro.
There is also an entirely new gap now with 4K being available, yet not the overwhelming standard. There are going to be people looking for single card 60fps experiences there and in order to deliver that kind of performance the chips are going to have to be really big. Couple that with moore's law ceasing to scale properly and the complexity of the architecture/chip manufacturing increasing + inflation of the economy in general and it seems pretty reasonable that the prices have gone up.
I bought a 8800GTX in 2006 for $600, that's $712 now with inflation.
The 9800 Pro was still a high end card with nothing cut, the 1070 is a joke compared to what the Titan will be. The 9800 XT was just 32MHz higher on the core and 25MHz on the memory - http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=36&card2=32#
The 8800GTX/Ultra was the top end single GPU card, that's the equivalent of the current Titans by every metric but price. At least back then when they sold the Ultra binned version at a stupid price it was barely any different in actual performance, it was just a few MHz faster (37MHz LOL) like the 9800 Pro Vs XT example from earlier, but even less of a difference % wise. Now you'll get an entirely different architecture that has shaders cut to boot.
The 2xx Series had the GTX 295 as the top card though, and it was $799 CAD when I bought it in 2009 (Yes the 280/285 was high end single GPU)
Yeah, I'm only talking about apples to apples, single GPU cards. I honestly don't even bother remember dual GPU cards, I've intentionally avoided multi GPU setups. Maybe DX12/Vulkan/whatever will change that with the change in processing style.
The bottom line is: Either nVidia/AMD's research/development is unsustainable in terms of the result in market prices at the rate they're going, or they're just abusing the niche market for every drop they can squeeze out. The truth is often somewhere in the middle, but I'm having an impossible time believing AMD/nVidia couldn't do much better if they really wanted.
9800XT was the high end, not the Pro.
There is also an entirely new gap now with 4K being available, yet not the overwhelming standard. There are going to be people looking for single card 60fps experiences there and in order to deliver that kind of performance the chips are going to have to be really big. Couple that with moore's law ceasing to scale properly and the complexity of the architecture/chip manufacturing increasing + inflation of the economy in general and it seems pretty reasonable that the prices have gone up.
I bought a 8800GTX in 2006 for $600, that's $712 now with inflation.
The 9800 Pro was still a high end card with nothing cut, the 1070 is a joke compared to what the Titan will be. The 9800 XT was just 32MHz higher on the core and 25MHz on the memory - http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=36&card2=32#
The 8800GTX/Ultra was the top end single GPU card, that's the equivalent of the current Titans by every metric but price. At least back then when they sold the Ultra binned version at a stupid price it was barely any different in actual performance, it was just a few MHz faster (37MHz LOL) like the 9800 Pro Vs XT example from earlier, but even less of a difference % wise. Now you'll get an entirely different architecture that has shaders cut to boot.
The 2xx Series had the GTX 295 as the top card though, and it was $799 CAD when I bought it in 2009 (Yes the 280/285 was high end single GPU)
Yeah, I'm only talking about apples to apples, single GPU cards. I honestly don't even bother remember dual GPU cards, I've intentionally avoided multi GPU setups. Maybe DX12/Vulkan/whatever will change that with the change in processing style.
The bottom line is: Either nVidia/AMD's research/development is unsustainable in terms of the result in market prices at the rate they're going, or they're just abusing the niche market for every drop they can squeeze out. The truth is often somewhere in the middle, but I'm having an impossible time believing AMD/nVidia couldn't do much better if they really wanted.
Monchis
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Joined: 2014-06-15
Senior Member
Posts: 1303
Joined: 2014-06-15
#5277851 Posted on: 05/23/2016 04:31 PM
Bang for buck relative to consoles has plummeted hard in the latest years, I remember I could easily play xbox games at twice console resolution (480i vs 768p) on my ati 8500 and friends with the fx5200 did it too, pff I was able to play call of duty 2 on dx7 40/60 @1024x768 smoothly. Then a couple of years after the xbox360 arrived one could get a $80 hd4670 (don´t remember the nvidia equivalent) and easily play console games at twice console resolution as well (1024p vs 540p). But today it seems that nvidia and amd have decided that you need to drop a small fortune to get the same amount of physical memory of the consoles and play at the same walmart tv 1080p resolution, oh and if you want smooth gameplay you better grab a new gsync/freesync monitor, because the card wont get you there by itself. IMO these two need to go under investigation again, because they are known to be naughty.
Bang for buck relative to consoles has plummeted hard in the latest years, I remember I could easily play xbox games at twice console resolution (480i vs 768p) on my ati 8500 and friends with the fx5200 did it too, pff I was able to play call of duty 2 on dx7 40/60 @1024x768 smoothly. Then a couple of years after the xbox360 arrived one could get a $80 hd4670 (don´t remember the nvidia equivalent) and easily play console games at twice console resolution as well (1024p vs 540p). But today it seems that nvidia and amd have decided that you need to drop a small fortune to get the same amount of physical memory of the consoles and play at the same walmart tv 1080p resolution, oh and if you want smooth gameplay you better grab a new gsync/freesync monitor, because the card wont get you there by itself. IMO these two need to go under investigation again, because they are known to be naughty.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 297
Joined: 2014-11-06
nvidia have cut the gtx 1070 down a little too much i think they should have give the gtx 1070 more cuda cores than the gtx 980, and the price u.k it probably gonna be £400 , the problem for me with pascal is we know nvidia is gonna release that 1080 TI in few months and it probably have 12 or 16gb vram and be much faster and good price point just like the gtx 980 ti was , im gonna stick with gtx 970 for now and wait for the gtx 1080 TI