schmidtbag:

I already explained why it's stupid - there's no demographic it caters to. Unless it outperforms the 1080 (which would just be confusing), it will sit between 2 GPUs that are a better value at what they're best at; a 1070 will play games 2K@60FPS just as well at the Ti while costing less. The 1080 will probably play VR games better than the 1070Ti, while also probably costing roughly the same. So what's the point of the 1070Ti? Those are fair points. Keep in mind, I have nothing against products being faster than a 1080Ti. If Nvidia released a 1090, I would be excited and say "this is great!" but instead they released something that does nothing more than clutter the product line, and confuse consumers.

There's a 20% performance gap between 1080 and 1070. There's some room in the middle without cluttering the lineup. Secondly, you're making blanket statements saying 1070 is fine for 2k60fps. What about the people with cheap 144hz monitors but can't afford a 1080/ti. 10% more performance is going to help. What about those games where a 1070 can't hold 2k60fps(or even close to) on new games? Ark survival is an example, a 1070 cant do 60fps at 1080p on high settings; granted I know this could be due to poor optimizations or unnecessary draw distances but this is going to be a common occurrence with newer games down the line. Hence the 'never' enough performance. Of course if this Ti release is more expensive with only faster memory or something like that, of course it will be a stupid release. Nobody knows though.

schmidtbag:

Whether or not Nvidia is milking anything, the 1070Ti is still a stupid product, whose sole purpose is just to make sure they have something faster than the Vega56 at a similar price point. This has nothing to do with whether or not Vega is a good product, good value, etc. I am sure without even seeing benchmarks that a 1070Ti will be the better product. Still doesn't change the fact it's a dumb product that doesn't need to exist. Who is the target demographic? A regular 1070 is perfectly fine for 2K@60Hz, but not much more. A 1080 is sufficient for 2K@90Hz (so, VR for example). What's a 1070Ti going to do other than give Nvidia the opportunity bragging rights over having the faster product in that performance tier?

I don't think it's stupid, I think it shows the 1070 could have been the 1070Ti if they wanted too. My issue is: they don't release the best, they sandbag and wait for AMD to release theirs so they can release again. I'd be pissed to drop +500€ on a card that only 6 months after coming, they release another with the full GPU. No thank you. (I know the card is from last year, talking about this year releases)

Agent-A01:

GPUs are never fast enough, I wish there was something much faster than 1080Ti.

We agree on something. What monitor do you have? I'm going to guess the 1070Ti will either be at 1080 performance or just have faster useless GDDR.

I believe the GTX 1070 Ti could actually have the rumored specs of 2304 cuda cores vs 1920 cores of the regular GTX 1070.Possibly with an increase of 9 Gbps GDDR5 or GDDR5X memory as well. The biggest bottleneck of the GTX 1070 is the 256-bit memory Interface, it is starved of memory bandwidth which helps quite a bit with a few game engines at 1080p but mostly at resolutions above 1080p. It is not the first time Nvidia has done this with previous generations of Gpu's. I don't see anything wrong with Nvidia releasing a lets call it a GTX 1070 refresh with better specs, more options for users wanting to buy a gpu at different price points and performance levels. But for me personally i think i am being screwed again as an early adopter of Nvidia cards, from way back in 2006 when i got into gaming again. My first GPU was the 8800 gts 640mb with 96 cuda cores (released fall 2006), in 2007 they introduced the 8800 gt with an increase to 112 cuda cores. Second card was the GTX 260 896mb with 192 cuda cores (released june 2008), in late 2008 it was EOL they replaced it with the GTX 260 Core 216 as the name says an increase to 216 cuda cores. Third card i decided to buy the highest end gpu the GTX 480 1536 MB with 480 cuda cores (released March 2010) was cut down fermi chip as everyone then was expecting a fully enabled one with 512 cuda cores. This has been the hottest gpu i ever bought 90+ c was insane and hard to keep cool in summer but thanks to Msi Afterburner's fan speed control it helped a lot to cool this beast down. Eight months later November 2010 the GTX 580 1536 MB with 512 cuda cores was released (refreshed Fermi card) with a fully enabled chip and much better thermals. For my fourth card i was aiming at getting the GTX 780 but a sudden breakdown of my GTX 480 and my funds available at the time i could only afford the GTX 770 2048mb. The GTX 770 released in summer 2013 was a refreshed kepler card of the GTX 680 released in march 2012 with GPU boost.They had the same amount of 1536 cuda cores and only an increase in memory speed from 6.0 Gbps to 7.0 Gbps and with GPU Boost 2.0 which allowed the temperature target to be controlled to stop thermal throttling issues from the 600 series. My next upgrade was going to be a maxwell GTX 970 4gb with 1664 cuda cores (released September 2014), but thankfully due to lack of funds i had to wait a while and just before i pulled the trigger the 3.5gb with 512mb of very slow ram fiasco pulled by Nvidia was found which was the cause of stuttering in games using above 3.5gb of vram. Glad-fully i skipped a whole generation and upgraded from a GTX 770 2gb to the GXT 1070 8gb bought on release day and i was totally shocked by the performance upgrade and now i am very happy owner with my card (samsung memory) and it's performance...but this 1070 ti card has upset me a bit as i could use i little bit of more gpu power and at the same time afraid as this card might completely replace the existing GTX 1070.. Sorry for the long post but my main point is that the rumored specs of the 1070 ti card could very well be true, as Nvidia has been doing this for years..

Agent-A01:

There's a 20% performance gap between 1080 and 1070. There's some room in the middle without cluttering the lineup.

I can't stress this enough: who needs the performance in the middle? There is a 33% difference between 60 and 90 FPS. If anything, the performance gap between the 1070 and 1080 could arguably be insufficient; there was no demand for something in-between. I have yet to encounter someone who got a 1070 and said "if only this was just a little bit faster..."

Secondly, you're making blanket statements saying 1070 is fine for 2k60fps. What about the people with cheap 144hz monitors but can't afford a 1080/ti. 10% more performance is going to help.

What difference does it make? If you have a 144Hz monitor and can't afford a 1080 or better, you're going to have to make sacrifices to reach that framerate. A 1070Ti isn't going to make you a whole lot happier (if at all) than a 1070 in such a situation, but you will pay more. You'll still be constantly reminded that your brand new hardware is already insufficient.

What about those games where a 1070 can't hold 2k60fps(or even close to) on new games? Ark survival is an example, a 1070 cant do 60fps at 1080p on high settings; granted I know this could be due to poor optimizations or unnecessary draw distances but this is going to be a common occurrence with newer games down the line.

Yes, but keep in mind I'm excluding poorly optimized games, because they're always a caveat no matter how good your hardware is. And like I said before, whatever boost you get in the Ti probably isn't going to be enough to make up for whatever is hurting performance so much. Games tend to revolve around console tech, and the 1070 has a healthy performance lead over current consoles. For moments where you're just a few FPS too low, just lower AA a notch. If the potential demands for future games is your defense, the 1070Ti isn't going to be much more future-proof. You'll probably get another few months out of it vs the 1070. Assuming the Ti is between $50-$100 more expensive, I'm not sure that price:performance difference is worth it for that. I'd rather use that money toward more games, or, my next upgrade. If I'm not on a tight budget, I'd rather just spend a little extra on the 1080. None of these are cheap parts, so might as well splurge a little.

Silva:

AdoredTV was right: Nvidia, milking you since 8800GTX.

Yeah, more like AdoredTV is very AMD biased, borderline fanboy i'd say.

Skip Pascal and wait for Volta, buying any 10xx now is madness. I bet the 1160 or whatever it's going to be called will smash a 1080. 🙂

Reddoguk:

Skip Pascal and wait for Volta, buying any 10xx now is madness. I bet the 1160 or whatever it's going to be called will smash a 1080. 🙂

Unlikely, but never say never.

Reddoguk:

Skip Pascal and wait for Volta, buying any 10xx now is madness. I bet the 1160 or whatever it's going to be called will smash a 1080. 🙂

Well yeah that's a no brainer. Pascal is now 2 almost 2 years old. Volta is likely 6 months away.

Loophole35:

Well yeah that's a no brainer. Pascal is now 2 almost 2 years old. Volta is likely 6 months away.

It's almost a year and a half, let alone 2 years, that would be may 2018, which is 8ish months away. So yeah, not really a nobrainer, and 1080Ti will still be an excellent card even when Volta launches, just like 980Ti.

oxidized:

Yeah, more like AdoredTV is very AMD biased, borderline fanboy i'd say.

If you watched any of his videos you'd know he bought various Nvidia and Intel products. He buys based on price/performance and not on who has the biggest wallet.

Silva:

If you watched any of his videos you'd know he bought various Nvidia and Intel products. He buys based on price/performance and not on who has the biggest wallet.

Doesn't matter what he buys, i've looked at many videos of his, and he criticized nvidia even in the title, the videos themselves are just pure gold. He shouldn't be taken so seriously, he's not neutral, he just likes AMD and that's it.

Silva:

What monitor do you have?

Acer xb270hu, 144hz 1440P gsync.

Loophole35:

Well yeah that's a no brainer. Pascal is now 2 almost 2 years old. Volta is likely 6 months away.

6months sure is an eternity though. Pascal is still today's best buy.

Silva:

I don't think it's stupid, I think it shows the 1070 could have been the 1070Ti if they wanted too. My issue is: they don't release the best, they sandbag and wait for AMD to release theirs so they can release again. I'd be pissed to drop +500€ on a card that only 6 months after coming, they release another with the full GPU. No thank you. (I know the card is from last year, talking about this year releases)

This notion is a bit nonsense. If overclocking of CPUs and GPUs says anything, they can ALWAYS provide something "better" then what they provide. Not to mention the fact that considering there's gaps between graphics cards (aka, there's not a 1% gap, it's more like 15%+) then there's always going to be something they could do to fill that gap. But that would be bad business practice. You don't make graphics cards that are so close to eachother that there is no reason to get one of them over the other.

oxidized:

Doesn't matter what he buys, i've looked at many videos of his, and he criticized nvidia even in the title, the videos themselves are just pure gold. He shouldn't be taken so seriously, he's not neutral, he just likes AMD and that's it.

What do you consider neutral? I plan to upgrade CPU next year and I'd like to get an updated R5 1600 or R7 1700. If Intel comes up with a new CPU that beats AMD in price/performance (not holding my breath for it), I will go Intel again. AdoredTV is about making informed purchases and not just buying a brand just because you saw an add or your buddy recommended it to you.

Agent-A01:

Acer xb270hu, 144hz 1440P gsync. 6months sure is an eternity though. Pascal is still today's best buy.

Makes sense, hitting those 144Hz@1440p must be hard even for a 1080Ti on certain games. Nothing like dropping a setting or too in quality but doubt you'd want to do that. 6 months is an eternity, if you want a GPU just buy the best you can afford and be done with it.

Silva:

What do you consider neutral? I plan to upgrade CPU next year and I'd like to get an updated R5 1600 or R7 1700. If Intel comes up with a new CPU that beats AMD in price/performance (not holding my breath for it), I will go Intel again. AdoredTV is about making informed purchases and not just buying a brand just because you saw an add or your buddy recommended it to you.

Informed purchases by his point of view, which is honestly not neutral. Something neutral is someone who doesn't bash a brand 90% of the time, and tries to belittle another brand's mistakes. But whatever I want to wait for the refresh too honestly, something that improves the already very good level of ryzen, basically i want to wait for something with a higher frequency, not even by much.

Specs are out, RIP Vega 56, and the 64.

Rich_Guy:

Specs are out, RIP Vega 56, and the 64.

If those specs are true. Bandwidth starved would be an understatement. However it will be faster than the 56 and come close or trade blows (depending on game) with the 64. And a rumored $429 MSRP. I'll go grab my salt.

Needs 9gbps ICs if those core counts are true. On that note, EVGA release some ICX elite 1080Ti with 12gbps memory instead of 11

oxidized:

I want to wait for the refresh too honestly, something that improves the already very good level of ryzen, basically i want to wait for something with a higher frequency, not even by much.

I'm not waiting for the refresh because I want a bump in frequency, but because I want to let the market stabilize. Intel is going batmad right now releasing stupid products and until it releases a true new gen CPU, we don't know what price fluctuations we might have in the future. Zen may come down in price, who knows? Also 12/10/7nm, I want to skip 14nm if possible. I don't know why Nvidia bothered, it's such a small jump from the 1070...

I already have a 1070 and I think this is great. More choices is always good. I don't understand why folks seem to be taking issue with this. It's priced in between the other two cards right where it should be. Someone building or upgrading may find it hits their sweet spot. Do folks want less choices? I don't get it.