Nvidia Pascal Consumer card announced during Computex

Published by

Click here to post a comment for Nvidia Pascal Consumer card announced during Computex on our message forum
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/164/164033.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/237/237957.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/115/115462.jpg
No wonder demand for GPUs has dropped, the prices are simply obscene. Very bad price performance ratio on most cards...
data/avatar/default/avatar02.webp
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)
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/115/115462.jpg
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:
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/259/259654.jpg
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.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
I don't see why Nvidia not showing stuff matters. It's not like they showed Maxwell or Kepler off months before it launched. The only reason why you'd show stuff off that far ahead is advertising essentially, at the expense of your current revenue, something Nvidia doesn't want or need.
data/avatar/default/avatar24.webp
"the graphics card players' third-quarter performance will mainly be driven by demand for their Nvidia products" ouch...
I don't see why Nvidia not showing stuff matters. It's not like they showed Maxwell or Kepler off months before it launched. The only reason why you'd show stuff off that far ahead is advertising essentially, at the expense of your current revenue, something Nvidia doesn't want or need.
Well yes... Showing off with your future product months ahead is not something that is usually done with consumer cards. Due to obvious reasons of shooting down your partners and their existing products. Reasons which I guess do not matter much if you hold only 20% of the market. What Nvidia is doing is how it has always been done: Announcement followed by wide availability within few weeks.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
The question now is, will announcement and availability be executed asynchronously ?
Nope. Still waiting for a driver update on that one. 2019 at the earliest.
data/avatar/default/avatar10.webp
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.
Yes and they've said they are 6 months ahead... or something along those lines. Didn't they? So obviously who ever made those predictions was terribly terribly wrong. Since Nvidia is already accepting DGX1 orders and shipping in June.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/34/34585.jpg
Of course weak demand in first quarter cause everyone is waiting for the new generation video cards for both AMD and nVidia. Especially nvidia due to their current weak DX12 performance atm.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/259/259654.jpg
Yes and they've said they are 6 months ahead... or something along those lines. Didn't they? So obviously who ever made those predictions was terribly terribly wrong. Since Nvidia is already accepting DGX1 orders and shipping in June.
That's the high end Tesla, right? It sells for something like $10,000. They can afford to make these even if they had to multiplex the chip pathways by hand. That means nothing about their mainstream production. There are big differences between "soft" and "hard" launches. Ask Hilbert, he'll tell you. Unless NVIDIA launches mainstream products with availability, it means nothing.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
The PX2 is shipping to select customers in June and has two, smaller, ~150w GPU's on them. So obviously they have more than just GP100 in volume production.
It sells for 5k I think, dgx1 is a rack with 8 of them it sells for 130k
I don't think they are selling GP100 individually until Q4. They are only selling the DGX to "Hyperscale Customers". Which I'm assuming is like Google and whatnot. Anyway, the mark up on each is obviously what allows them to sell 600mm2 units despite terrible yields. They'll have a GP104 that's geared towards gaming. Probably with significantly less DP units, which takes up a huge amount of die space.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/204/204717.jpg
No wonder demand for GPUs has dropped, the prices are simply obscene. Very bad price performance ratio on most cards...
^this. I probably would've bought another gtx 970 but I can't justify paying $330 for a card that was $330 when I bought it 2 years ago. If I bought anything else that was 2 years old, it'd be way cheaper.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
^this. I probably would've bought another gtx 970 but I can't justify paying $330 for a card that was $330 when I bought it 2 years ago. If I bought anything else that was 2 years old, it'd be way cheaper.
But how much is a used 970 going to go for after the 1070 or w/e its' going to be called comes out? I made a several posts here, back after the giant bitcoin 290x mining storm dropped, that people should buy used 290x's. They were going for like $270 each and they were basically brand new, because miners bought them to run in a farm for like a few months then ASIC hit and the 290x's because worthless for mining. I honestly wish I took my own advice, I should have bought two then. But yeah, while a new 970 might be selling for $330, a used 970 a few months for now will probably be much lower.
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/264/264923.jpg
time to sell those gpus... time to ride the wave:banana::banana: for those with the 970 and 980, its going to be a rude awakening when pascal comes out :deadhorse: