Meanwhile, AMD has prepared Polaris-based GPUs to compete against Nvidia's Pascal; however, the GPUs will be released later than Nvidia's Pascal and therefore the graphics card players' third-quarter performance will mainly be driven by demand for their Nvidia products.

Idk about this part. Everything points towards AMD launching their stuff first. I think that both will come around mid-July personally with both announcing at Computex in June. Nvidia may be late, but it's only going to be a few weeks.

Ofc will be paper release.No Hbm ,no Gddr5x 'till then or till july.

Ofc will be paper release.No Hbm ,no Gddr5x 'till then or till july.

Or they can just release a card without either? Seems like AMD is going the same way with Polaris 10/11.

So, when exactly will NVIDIA/AMD start clearing old stock and how much of a price drop could one expect? Unless the new generation cards give amazing value/performance ratio, I'll grab an old generation card for much cheaper.

So, when exactly will NVIDIA/AMD start clearing old stock and how much of a price drop could one expect? Unless the new generation cards give amazing value/performance ratio, I'll grab an old generation card for much cheaper.

This is what I'm interested in as well; I don't think we'll see the 970 vs 780ti repeated again, and I don't expect prices to collapse. We'll see obviously, but I'm really on the fence about selling my Ti

Idk about this part. Everything points towards AMD launching their stuff first. I think that both will come around mid-July personally with both announcing at Computex in June. Nvidia may be late, but it's only going to be a few weeks.

Exactly, AMD demonstrated tech which is much better than current generation. And waiting for nV to release their updated stuff makes no sense. It's time to cash-in on what they have. Those small Polaris 11/10 must come from manufacturing lines in high volumes with low defect rate. Yes, at their demonstration it was stated that they are not final. But even if they released those, it would be commercial success. We'll see very interesting shift in notebook graphical performance per watt. Question is, When?

Or they can just release a card without either? Seems like AMD is going the same way with Polaris 10/11.

Considering gddr5 is plenty still why not. I am really looking forward to the big cards end of 2016 or beginning of 2017.

if 1070 with good oc will be at the same level as 980ti, then upgrade from 970 will be well worth it, and we cant forget that newer series will have higher priority for optimizing drivers

GTX 1080? Does that mean it's only capable of 1080P resolution? If it isn't that's a horrible designation for that new card.

I've been waiting for pascal to release to upgrade my aging SLI GTX 680's, I hope the GTX 1080 delivers the performance that I'm looking for.

I do wonder, what will happen when everyone understand how ****ty VR is? I mean - if many upgrades, then, when the realization comes, will they keep upgrading? Or will we see a hugh slump in GPU sales? And please, VR fanboys, don't try convincing me VR is so cool, I do not believe it.

I do wonder, what will happen when everyone understand how ****ty VR is? I mean - if many upgrades, then, when the realization comes, will they keep upgrading? Or will we see a hugh slump in GPU sales? And please, VR fanboys, don't try convincing me VR is so cool, I do not believe it.

How do you expect anyone to answer your question when the premise of it is so flawed?

Considering gddr5 is plenty still why not. I am really looking forward to the big cards end of 2016 or beginning of 2017.

Yeah I don't see why they wouldn't. That's my point. He makes it sound like HBM/GDDR5x is a requirement of these cards launching. It's not. The leaked stuff of both (Polaris 10/GP104) sound barely faster then what's out there currently.

Yeah I don't see why they wouldn't. That's my point. He makes it sound like HBM/GDDR5x is a requirement of these cards launching. It's not. The leaked stuff of both (Polaris 10/GP104) sound barely faster then what's out there currently.

Meh. Wouldn't make sense to release the Fury X2 if two Polaris 10 gpus in CF outperform it three months later. I'll be very very pleasantly surprised if the X80/X70 can outperform an overclocked 980ti with a 384bit bus, same re: Polaris 10 and Fiji XT

No wonder demand for GPUs has dropped, the prices are simply obscene. Very bad price performance ratio on most cards...

I've been waiting for pascal to release to upgrade my aging SLI GTX 680's, I hope the GTX 1080 delivers the performance that I'm looking for.

depends on your expectations, upgrading from a GTX 470 to a GTX 980 left me kind of dissapointed with the 980 (thankfully i timed it right to use the evga step up to get a 980 TI which did meet my expectations). my expectations were 60 fps solid on max quality at 1080p with perhaps enough headroom for a future upgrade to 1440p but the 980 failed to do that (also tend to run mods/ enb's which hit the 4gb vram cap in no time at all even in 1080)

No wonder demand for GPUs has dropped, the prices are simply obscene. Very bad price performance ratio on most cards...

Arguable. I don't know about Romania, but in the US prices are cheaper then they have ever been. You can run nearly every game released recently, maxed @ 1080p @ 60fps with a 390x that costs $429. By comparison, in 2007, you needed a 8800GTX which was $600 ($686.14 today) to hit the same performance targets in those games. There has obviously been a growing demand for higher resolutions and those cards (The Fury X's and 980Ti's) are priced slightly higher. But the vast majority of gamers are still running 1080p. I think the bigger decline in graphics shipments come from the decline of OEM sales of PC's in general and the increase in performance from iGPU units. Most people, if they are even buying a PC and not a tablet, don't need anything more then what's built into a modern Intel/AMD processor.

depends on your expectations, upgrading from a GTX 470 to a GTX 980 left me kind of dissapointed with the 980 (thankfully i timed it right to use the evga step up to get a 980 TI which did meet my expectations). my expectations were 60 fps solid on max quality at 1080p with perhaps enough headroom for a future upgrade to 1440p but the 980 failed to do that (also tend to run mods/ enb's which hit the 4gb vram cap in no time at all even in 1080)

I actually think this is a marketing problem that AMD/Nvidia need to solve. They need distinct price ranges/classes for cards based on resolution. Something like: $650 - Enthusiast (Fury X/980 Ti) (4K/30Fps @ Ultra)/(QHD/60Fps @ Ultra) $500 - Performance (Fury/390x/980) (1080p/60fps @ Ultra) $350 - Upper Mainstream (390/970) (1080p/45fps @ Ultra) $250 - Mainstream (380x/960) (1080p/30fps @ Ultra) Or whatever (I just put random stuff, don't fuss). They need to give resolution labels with general quality settings for each, so people can know what to expect out of the cards.

Arguable. I don't know about Romania, but in the US prices are cheaper then they have ever been. You can run nearly every game released recently, maxed @ 1080p @ 60fps with a 390x that costs $429. By comparison, in 2007, you needed a 8800GTX which was $600 ($686.14 today) to hit the same performance targets in those games. There has obviously been a growing demand for higher resolutions and those cards (The Fury X's and 980Ti's) are priced slightly higher. But the vast majority of gamers are still running 1080p. I think the bigger decline in graphics shipments come from the decline of OEM sales of PC's in general and the increase in performance from iGPU units. Most people, if they are even buying a PC and not a tablet, don't need anything more then what's built into a modern Intel/AMD processor.

It sucks here, especially because of the exchange rates, a $429 card would be at least 500 euros here and both dollar and euro (and pound) have gone up over the years versus our own currency (leu). For example he cheapest 980Ti is more than 2 times more expensive than the cheapest 970, which makes it very poor value for the price. To SLI 2x980Ti costs something like $1700-2000 (depending on how fancy a model it is) and the average wage is like $500... :wanker:

It sucks here, especially because of the exchange rates, a $429 card would be at least 500 euros here and both dollar and euro (and pound) have gone up over the years versus our own currency (leu). For example he cheapest 980Ti is more than 2 times more expensive than the cheapest 970, which makes it very poor value for the price. To SLI 2x980Ti costs something like $1700-2000 (depending on how fancy a model it is) and the average wage is like $500... :wanker:

Obviously I can't account for wage differences because I have no idea, but here in Italy we have highest taxation on consumer electronics in the EU, and the cheapest 970 I can find is ~ 280 euros Cheapest 980Ti is ~ 600 euros This lines up with MSRP for both cards, it's more expensive than in the US for sure though

AMD has prepared Polaris-based GPUs to compete against Nvidia's Pascal; however, the GPUs could be released later than Nvidia's Pascal and therefore the graphics card players' third-quarter performance will mainly be driven by demand for their Nvidia products.

This makes no sense. NVIDIA hasn't even shown a proper consumer-level PCB yet, and AMD has been doing live press demos on Polaris for two months now.

This makes no sense. NVIDIA hasn't even shown a proper consumer-level PCB yet, and AMD has been doing live press demos on Polaris for two months now.

Meh. AMD hasn't even specified which Polaris part that was. I agree it seems counter-intuitive, but it's totally possible