What is wrong with that question, i have the same point, they are just selling a modded Titan x at lower price, what is the point of Premium pricing for Titan x.
As with the last few generations where the X80 Ti ended up in the same performance class as the corresponding Titan, depending on your cynicism it's either paying for the privilege of having the speed half a year sooner, or separating a fool from his money.
OTOH I wouldn't be surprised to see a refreshed Titan show up with the higher clock speeds in the near future. On the gripping hand, I wouldn't be surprised if NVidia doesn't bother doing anything with it now in favor of doing a top to bottom 11xx or 20xx refresh over the summer.
Depends how much heat Vega brings. If the top Vega can outperform the 1080ti than they just may release a 1080ti version 2 with all 30 sm's enabled instead of 28 and full rops and memory controller with 12gbps gddr5x as it's available now too. Giving it 3840 cuda cores instead of 3584 and a memory bandwidth of 12 * 2 * 384 / 8 = 1152GB/sec memory bandwidth and gddr5x can even be quad pumped to a staggering 12 * 4 * 384 / 8 = 2304GB/s mem bandwidth! Which rivals HBM 2 albeit at a higher power draw than HBM2. Also giving 3840 * 2 * 1600 giving 12.3 TFLOPS of raw FP
nvidia has sold no full gp102 gpu's. They likely have a nice stockpile of fully capable chips if they make sure to use all truly defective ones first, if they go that route.
The answer to "why is this company selling this product at this price" is literally always "because that's what they think will make them the most money".
I feel like you might have a fundamental misunderstanding of GPU pricing. A large percentage of the cost of building GPUs is development costs, not cost of materials. Because of this the GPU maker is always trying to sell their top-end cards for as much money as the market will bear and costs of all cards are not particularly tied to their price.
A 1080 for example, doesn't cost 4x as much to build as a 1050 does. But in order to provide a variety of price points the GPU maker builds a variety of stripped-down designs to fit all the price points they think they can sell. This is how the GPU industry prices their products and also why the second competition shows up, the prices for the current cards all fall.
It's their prerogative to sell whatever they want to sell at whatever price they think they can sell it for. It's not a ludicrous proposition. They are a business and it's the job of the CEO and sales at the business to determine what the market will bear. It's kind of obvious that, by now, most people who were considering a TITAN X are already in possession of one or more. So, they move down the foodchain to sell at another price point to a different audience. There's nothing wrong with this tactic.
That titan tax is the price you pay if you do not want to wait months for the performance. Also Vegas performance may be influencing nvidia right now to pre-preemptively strike and get as many people over to green before vega even releases.
i'm more and more interested in making my next build all AMD. AMD CPU, GPU, and RAM. With the mobo asus matching the gpu board asus and the soundcard asus essence stx II
(side note: the Asus Essence STX II sounds freakishly amazing connected via its rca output to KRK expose E8B's each speaker with it's own dedicated bi amps with 240 watts rms of power for each speaker totaling 480 watts of power for the 2 speakers, 1 amp for the highs and 1 amp for the high midrange and lower midrange and midbass of the 8 inch kevlar driver on each speaker and a 2 way crossover system on each speaker fully adjustable, 8 inch kevlar cone midrange/midbass and 1 inch aluminum beryllium inverted dome tweeter extending it's range from 40hz to 30khz, both material choices equal super light weight, stiff responsive speaker cones with no harsh resonances, I mean each speaker weighs in at over 67 pounds totally impressive beasts. Pair that sound card and those awesome speakers to a KRK rokit 12sHO subwoofera 400 watt RMS beast with a strengthened version of the kevlar cone to increase rigidity under high SPL for tight accurate bass even when it's pushing all it's watts. It can play a range of 29-60hz, 29-160hz or 29-211hz depending on where your midbass begins to pick up is where you cut the sub off. the 8 inch cones go down to 120hz no problem even tho they say 40hz they sound best cut off at 120-140hz to let the sub do what it does best and free up a lot of the 8 inch woofers midrange capabilities that are sacrificed when the power is drained to play them all the way down to 40hz. Run the sub 29hz to 120hz-140hz not adding too high of frequencies in there so it can concentrate its power on the big booms. Plus what I like about KRK is they give you the real numbers real usable specs not hypothetical laboratory bests that cant be reproduced. People hate on the 12 inch sub for only producing down to 29hz, well it plays sound below 29hz no problem there is just roll off after 29hz so krk puts the more truer sound quality accurate number instead of padding their tech spec sheets with bs but it has no problem playing down to the limit of human hearing 20hz, 29hz is just the lowest it can go and still play at its highest sound level. Adding a high quality parabolic equalizer is akin to a color calibrating device for a monitor adding a parabolic eq will let you fine tune adjust till you have flat frequency response over the entire range of human hearing and a set of these speakers are capable of producing super warm bass junky machines for hip hop and electronic while also retaining the ability of complete neutrality.
o and for those waiting to hate on the supposed 400 watts is weak for a sub the 1 12 inch sub system weighs in at a whopping 110 pounds. It's moving serious amounts of air.
and before you say but 15 and 18s they are so much better. For sound quality applications no they arent. 12-13 inches is the best size for reproducing 25-150hz. The bigger subs can edge it out on 20-30hz or the 18s at 16-40hz but they muddy up the upper bass the sub takes cares of.
Not interesting at all. No one buys a $1200 graphics card for its price/performance ratio. They buy it because it's the fastest card money can buy. IT held that distinction for 7 months, not a bad record. Even now it will be about as fast as the 1080 Ti so it's likely to be close to the fastest single GPU card for at least another 6 months. When the Titan X came out everybody was well aware of the likelihood that a cheaper and similarly-performing 1080 Ti would be coming out eventually.
'so it's likely to be close to the fastest single GPU card for at least another 6 months' -- possibly, not likely. If AMD take the same approach with Vega as they have with Zen, things could get very interesting in as little as three months' time.
What approach? it's a matter of having or not the right architecture. CPU performance has not increased much the last few years so kind of "easy" to catch-up, the GPU performance on the other hand has doubled every 2 or so years. By the time Vega will be out and even if it's at the level of the GTX1080 Ti Volta will be just around the corner.
Tflops don't = performance but big Vega is supposed to have roughly 10% more "power" than the 1080ti, so Meteor is actually correct. If Vega is released in May or June, the 1080ti's reign will be short lived.
I wouldn't expect Vega to be much, if any more powerful than the 1080. It's twice the cores of the RX 480, on the same process, but coupled with HBM2 RAM. I expect it will be about as powerful as RX 480 Crossfire. Ram bandwidth doesn't seem to be a big issue for Nvidia so I don't think HBM2 will help Vega much.
Your comment makes the assumption that Vega is just Polaris X2 with HBM, but it's not, it's the biggest overhaul to the GCN architecture that we've seen in years. AMD demoed the difference using the HBCC in yesterday's presentation and it looked fairly significant. If AMD delivers a card that can utilize on-board SSD storage (not that I'm expecting that any time soon), I think AMD has the potential to leave Nvidia in the dust.
My point bringing up the SSD storage being, this is more than just 2X Polaris.
I'm not sure if you mistakenly went with a greater than or less than symbol there but they have released both I own a 250 watt card actually a few of them and I also own some low-end cards that are way less than 150 watts
Vega is due 1H this year, that means at most, 4 more months (if they release at the very end of June). I think more likely would be an early June launch at the latest, they were publicly demoing working silicon back in December.
I'm hoping it'll be a bit sooner than that even, but I can easily wait 3 more months to see what happens.
I disagree. There's almost no chance Vega is faster than the 1080 Ti in practical use cases, except possibly in a game or two that's been heavily optimized for AMD hardware. Firstly, I'm not sure why you think Ryzen has anything to do with Vega. They are two completely separate efforts from different teams that have different competition in very different markets. Secondly, there's not an "approach" AMD has taken to suddenly decide to make competitive products. For the last 20 years, at least, they've been trying to make high-performance, competitive products. They just haven't always executed very well.
BTW, we haven't seen where Ryzen fits in performance-wise. Just a couple more days to wait.
16nm yields have definitely improved by a big margin and hence Nvidia can sell it now after 7 months for 699$. Titan X is dead now. It might be stopped by Nvidia.
Yeah they stole their money from them right out of their pockets. Get over it. Sorry, your under 1070 with another name is so underwhelming and has been for so long. Keep cheering from your vague press releases.
I have been waiting on this for awhile. Currently running the 780 Ti (which was not, in retrospect, the best money spent). It should be a considerable increase in performance!
Should be a massive performance boost. I went from a 780Ti -> 1080 (and then SLI later) but it was night and day even with 1 card. The 1080Ti is anywhere between 30-50% faster than the 1080.
Yeah, I'm still with the 780TI GHz Edition from Gigabyte. My card's core clocks aren't stable at stock in som,e games such as GTA V. I know I'm an idiot for buying GIGAFAIL.
This TI card looks like the perfect replacement for the 780TI. Really worried though that nobody will buy my 780TI for around 200 Euros.
Well, I wouldn't buy it for 200€...but then I'm not representative of the whole market :) I think at this point I'd rather go for 970-980-480 around that price point new or used depending on the card. I think you'll find it easier to sell around 150€.
You admit the 780 Ti was not the best money spent, but you're willing to take the chances of making the same mistake, even without knowing what the competition has to offer yet?
The 'competition' offered nothing in the CPU space for a decade and now look at all those happy 7700k buyers who see the price drop right after the competition's product announcement.
When you're so close to a brand new architecture launch the smart thing to do is wait. It's common sense. What's the worst that can happen? They run out of 1080Tis?
It will save us all from people buying an overpriced card then whizzing on forums flipping tables in anger and all that fanboy or remorseful buyer stuff.
The problem is we really have no idea how close to launch this product is or what it will be. I was going to wait for AMD before I upgrade, but everything I read leads me to believe I will be waiting longer than anticipated. If I spend $100-$200 extra for the same performance but 6 months early, I am happy with that. That is just me though, wait for the card you think will be best if you have the patience.
1. 3GB of VRAM just wasn't enough at the time for a card like that. 2. The price was rather high for the performance level and VRAM.
This card has vastly more RAM, certainly enough to satisfy. And it is much more reasonably priced. Which means the 1080 Ti isn't repeating the same mistakes. At least from my perspective.
Well, it could still do with being edited. I don't know why but the writing on Anandtech is always more tortured and less concise than on any other site.
Looks like a far wiser response to forthcoming meaningful competition than Intel has managed. Well done Nvidia (this looks a very fine product) and well done AMD for forcing competition.
well not so good for amd imo. If big part of buyers will be impatient and jump on Ti ship and amd wont have much sales later with vega, next year you may have 2080 for 999$
I'm a bit disappointed about yesterday's capsaicin, Raja didn't even hint any specs of vega nor possible launch date, while they could reasonably suspect that NVidia is at least announcing Ti in the evening.... They should at least lift nda for ryzen and give it head start or something, when next week Ti reviews will pop up ryzen will get less attention. Though maybe some reviewers will use ryzen cpu in benchmarks instead of usual intel, but that's hardly a satisfaction imo :)
On the article, not sure I would chose "not-quite-fully-enabled " wording instead of "cut down" add slightly or a little bit if you like. Cause 1070 can be said also to be not-quite-fully-enabled (with not-so-big stretch) :) and one more thing, I would welcome some more summary/info regarding INT8, if it was always the norm for Ti to cripple it, and why NVidia didn't do it now. Could it be due to vega rumors? They wouldn't do it out of their hearts if they can milk more.
Well, I for one cannot buy AMD cards even if I wanted to b/c I own the ACER PREDATOR X34 GSYNC monitor, so pretty much tied with NVIDIA.
When it came to choosing between the Predator's GSYNC or FREESYNC I chose GSYNC not b/c I am a fanboi, but b/c I trust NVIDIA more to deliver cutting edge products in the future.
I just can't bring myself to trust AMD and Lisa Su based on their track record. Just can't, doesn't feel right.
Well by all means, make your purchasing decisions based on your "feelings", see how well that goes for you. @lordken, I disagree completely. Ryzen NDA lifts tomorrow, there is no point in talking about Vega when they want the attention squarely focused on Ryzen. In fact, it's brilliant on AMD's part, the 1080ti will get completely drowned out by Ryzen news. Once the hubbub over Ryzen dies down, THEN they can start with the Vega info and keep the tech world focused on AMD. Meanwhile the 1080ti will get lost in the shuffle with only the most hardcore Nvidia fans dropping their cash on the table.
How will the 1080Ti get downed out by Ryzen? If you're looking for a new graphics card and AMD doesn't release any information whatsoever on Vega, Ryzen CPU's aren't going to affect your decision. Unless, you're just willing to wait a long time to see if AMD's offering is even worth it.
Nvidia will get drowned out by all of the reviews about Ryzen, that's how. Today we are talking about the 1080ti, starting tomorrow and for at least a week or two, the only people who will even mention the 1080ti are the fanboys. So I think you are missing the point, it isn't about Ryzen vs 1080ti, it's about the culmination of a year+ of hype FINALLY getting to see daylight. Who in their right mind, in the tech world, are going to be talking about the 1080ti tomorrow? Fanboys and fanboys only.
Then I would assume no one will be talking about Ryzen yesterday. 1080Ti benchmarks are coming soon and launch is soon, those are note worthy events that will gather attention. Combine that with the Ryzen hype (that is deserved) and you have a powder-keg of excited consumers that are wanting to upgrade NOW. They aren't going to be hyped about Ryzen in a few months when Vega finally is released, but now we have 2 new products to get excited about that are available very soon. That is how market share is won, not by the people holding out.
Completely false. Many of us on the 6/8 core Intel chips have very little incentive to upgrade. While there may or may not be a speed increase over these Intel chips, it certainly isnt worth replacing a motherboard/cpu. While I'm happy AMD finally looks competitive it offers me nothing with my 4.6Ghz 5930k while the 1080Ti will give me 35% improved performance over my 1080 which is a much smarter use of my money.
Of course Ryzen offers *you* nothing, but if anyone wants to access the same level of performance as you have with your 5930, it's suddenly going to cost 1/3rd as much. That's pretty interesting.
I completely disagree, PC enthusiast are capable of paying attention to more than one piece of hardware at a time. I think Ryzen is awesome and will deliver some good gaming gains at a great price for sooo many people. But now everyone is wanting to upgrade to Ryzen and they will need a new GPU to go with it. Those that can wait maybe 6 months might be rewarded with a cheaper GPU at a similar performance or a little better. Those who grab a Ti early might not care about paying a little extra in that amount of time.
In general, I feel like AMD should want to ride the Ryzen hype train all the way to GPU station and really seal the deal. Everyone would have full AMD systems, this is the logical move. The fact that they haven't released much yet leads me to believe they are not sure their product can compete performance wise, so they will have to beat it on price. Nvidia assumed that as well, which is why they priced the Ti much lower than many expected.
For those buying Ryzen, will need to buy a video card and the timing of the 1080Ti was excellent. Lots of new builds due to Ryzen and the 1080Ti will benefit.
Well ryzen dropped and made a splat noise for gaming ;) On top of that motherboards aren't even done as shown in many reviews having tons of issues with multiple boards. AMD should have waited for this release until #1 BOARDS were actually READY, and #2, the CPU was FULLY WORKING. The fact that they released it half-baked makes me wonder if rev1 will ever get fixed, or if they'll just jump to a rev2 that finally works right in actual shipping games. It is not adequate to tell users "you ran at 1080p instead of 1440p+ where you are supposed to be and games aren't made yet that take advantage of our architecture properly"...LOL. Where the heck did they expect reviews to be running? If you're testing CPU PERFORMANCE you are NOT running at 4K tapping out the vid cards...ROFL. So what does that sound like? "Well if you'd just run your benchmarks where everything is GPU bottlenecked, we'd do a lot better"...LOL. Ok...Whatever dude.
When making a product, always make it for 95% of the market, not <5%.
Intel didn't and likely doesn't need any response. That's why there is effectively silence from them on that topic. ZEN simply won't do any shake up of CPU market and Intel knows it. (They are very well familiar with structure of ZEN as it is Sandy Bridge-lite with some small stuff from Haswell without full-speed AVX(2) support)
Reminder: Price already spoilered what performance one can expect...
The price didn't spoil anything. AMD always had to price lower to compete with Intel. Intel's brand is much stronger and given performance for the past decade, probably rightly so.
Good to see that DVI port finally consigned to history. Shame it's still lumbered with a HDMI port rather than a fourth DP++ port (which electrically operated as HDMI anyway), but maybe it still has the legacy of past chips and can only drive three DP streams.
It has a passive DP->HDMI adapter-trace on the PCB for the HDMI port. The equivalent Quadros run the 4xDP layout instead (with full 4DP output capability).. on the same PCB (when it's using the same GPU).
I understand that people still have DVI monitors, but how many of those people are the ones dropping $700 on a new video card? Logically, the people who aren't spending money to replace older monitors are probably looking for more affordable cards too. A Steam hardware-ish survey on this would be interesting, if only it could detect such things.
I have two DVI monitors and you can count me as one dropping $700 soon probably. Just waiting to see what vega has first and hopefully get that $700 down to $600 by xmas or maybe something faster by then (refresh coming). Waiting on a monitor until I pic a vid card obviously. But even then I'll still likely have one DVI running (dell 2407-wfp-hc still looks beautiful ~7yrs in and 1200p!). Also hoping I can stay 16:10. I hate WIDE crap and really wish 16:10 would come back in droves.
Both? They cut down the ROP's but probably for differentiation and harvesting dies. Possibly even slightly better thermals to allow a slight clock increase? Take it with a grain of salt, it's all speculation on my part.
Look at the memory bus width, 352 bits instead of 384. 11 32bit controllers, 11 memory chips, 11 GB. I imagine there are 2 GB chips out there, and certainly 512MB chips. But 22GB is probably unnecessarily expensive, and 6.5 is too small for such a high end card.
They will take your money !!! How do you think they make record profits quarter after quarter ? 30-50% faster than an 1080 ? For the same price ? Got to feel sorry for those who bought a 1080 around Christmas. As for Vega, the only edge they may have is in using HBM2. Otherwise, I can't see how they can beat this one.
This is a pretty smart move on nVidia's part--releasing early March that is. They are basically releasing right after Ryzen, offering a shiny new high-end card to the hordes of people who are building new 8/16 computers.
I really like the fact that the DVI port is gone. Looks much cleaner. Performance wise its probably going to be the same as last gen ... like 25% ish faster than the 1080
so as far as the memory clock did they just factory overclocked the gddr5x to 11gbs? My 1080 can easily do 11 gbps as well. Im curious to see if the memory on the TI version can overclock higher , but to me it sounds that they just overclocked the memory on the 1080 which one can do on his/her own anyway
As has been said, you'd be mad to buy one of these. Maybe Vega will blow this out of the water. Maybe it won't come close. But it's worth waiting a couple of months to find out before spending $700.
it is about the resolution you are gaming on ... and GTX 1080 is enough for 1440P
and most people will game on an 1440P monitors using GTX 1080.
to upgrade and game on a 4K monitor you need a 4K capable Card .. and it is not here yet . so it is a waste of money to get this card when you can do well enough using GTX 1080 on 1440P monitors.
"The Ti series of cards isn’t new for NVIDIA. The company has used the moniker for their higher-performance cards since the GTX 700 series back in 2013." There was the Geforce 2 Ti in 2001, the Geforce 3 Ti 200 and Ti 500 in 2001, the Geforce 4 Ti in 2002, and then the disastrous Geforce FX line which had no "Ti" model.
Its a interesting GPU, but pretty impractical from a power and cost perspective. I'd be much happier with Nvidia and AMD if they pushed Pascal and Polaris down to the 15-35W TDP range of the GeForce GT 710 to 730 that were really the last half-height, single slot GPUs released. True, you can those cards are still for sale with the GT 710 priced at under $30, but getting modern titles to run on such a card is a difficult prospect and iGPUs aren't getting much better with Intel stuck on 14nm.
I'm interested in what clocks it actually maintains in real life at 100% compared to the 1080 (and Titan X for that matter), but this looks really awesome. Unless something's really off, no question I'd spend the extra $200 and buy this if I were buying a new "main" desktop PC right now. *drools* Tons more hardware.
I'm amazed we've hit 12 BILLION transistors! Just astonishingly complex.
Its crazy what you can get for a $1K desktop PC now. This card + a $150 CPU, 16 GB RAM and an SSD and you've got a gaming powerhouse for 7 years easily.
Nah. You and I KNOW that things 'could' be moving faster than they are. It's not in their best interests to move things faster than the cash train allows.
"The Ti series of cards isn’t new for NVIDIA. the company has used the moniker for their higher-performance cards since the GTX 700 series back in 2013." Actually NVIDIA first used the Ti moniker back in 2001 for the launch of the GeForce 2 Ti and 3 Ti series.
I know he should have been more specific but I think he meant just the x80 ti model. I could be wrong but that's what i was thinking when I read the article
This and things have gotten pretty weird these days with everything being OC'd. As Ryzen demonstrates, vague claims of N GHz OC are vague. It really comes down to how hard is it to reach and remain at what frequency (and whether there is trickery per core, design unit, etc.. with that number).
I'm running my 1080s at 2088-2100 depending on temp (water cooled) - that's a ~30% speed-up over the base clock (1600). So, the TI has to be 35% faster AND running at 2088-2100 to give me something that that's 35% better (ignoring memory size for a moment).
Nvidia are greedy and I dont like how they fool their customers and sell them the same thing double the price then say oops here you can have it half the price when they steal enough money.
Thats why I allways support AMD and buy their cards ... evn if Nvidia wins in benchmarks.
No one is being fooled and nothing is being "stolen". Technology marches on and prices come down. That's progress. Why do people want to see that in a negative light? Do you still want to be paying $300 for a Radeon HD 4000 series card? The people who paid $1200 for the Titan X were the people who wanted to. Everyone should know that it is inevitable that in some amount of time better performance will be available for less money.
Judging by what you said, you are willing to make an inferior choice for yourself simply because NVIDIA has an architectural advantage that allows them to control the high end. All businesses are trying to make as much money as they can over the long term. AMD doesn't have the architecture at the moment to compete with the halo products of NVIDIA, so NVIDIA wins that ultra-enthusiast revenue. Trust me, AMD would love to be the one winning that revenue. If you don't want to pay ultra-enthusiast prices then don't buy ultra-enthusiast products. I can't fathom why you would rule out choices for yourself. Why? Because you are resentful of the people who are able to pay ridiculous prices for the cream of the crop? The one who is hurt by you limiting your own options is you.
Hi. this is a good blog about GTX 1080. But I have a lot of doubts and generally, i have confusion about Difference Between GTX 1080 'Founder's Edition,' Reference, & AIBs Can anybody solve my doubt? --https://edgylabs.com/2017/06/30/nvidia-geforce-now...
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
139 Comments
Back to Article
Chaitanya - Tuesday, February 28, 2017 - link
So not only did nvidia con users by selling a crippled Titan X(Pascal)) now they are selling the exact same chip at lower price. Interesting...HighTech4US - Tuesday, February 28, 2017 - link
Are you an idiot just today or everyday?hellbrokeloose - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
What is wrong with that question, i have the same point, they are just selling a modded Titan x at lower price, what is the point of Premium pricing for Titan x.DanNeely - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
As with the last few generations where the X80 Ti ended up in the same performance class as the corresponding Titan, depending on your cynicism it's either paying for the privilege of having the speed half a year sooner, or separating a fool from his money.OTOH I wouldn't be surprised to see a refreshed Titan show up with the higher clock speeds in the near future. On the gripping hand, I wouldn't be surprised if NVidia doesn't bother doing anything with it now in favor of doing a top to bottom 11xx or 20xx refresh over the summer.
Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Depends how much heat Vega brings. If the top Vega can outperform the 1080ti than they just may release a 1080ti version 2 with all 30 sm's enabled instead of 28 and full rops and memory controller with 12gbps gddr5x as it's available now too. Giving it 3840 cuda cores instead of 3584 and a memory bandwidth of 12 * 2 * 384 / 8 = 1152GB/sec memory bandwidth and gddr5x can even be quad pumped to a staggering 12 * 4 * 384 / 8 = 2304GB/s mem bandwidth! Which rivals HBM 2 albeit at a higher power draw than HBM2. Also giving 3840 * 2 * 1600 giving 12.3 TFLOPS of raw FPLaststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
nvidia has sold no full gp102 gpu's. They likely have a nice stockpile of fully capable chips if they make sure to use all truly defective ones first, if they go that route.CoD511 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The Quadro P6000 is a fully enabled GP102?extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Omg you are so bad at math, RIGHT IN THIS ARTICLE it says 484gb/secYour numbers are nvidiot imagination
ses1984 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The answer to "why is this company selling this product at this price" is literally always "because that's what they think will make them the most money".Gasaraki88 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
That wasn't a question. nVidia didn't con anyone, this always happens and if you are still "conned" then it's on you.Flunk - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I feel like you might have a fundamental misunderstanding of GPU pricing. A large percentage of the cost of building GPUs is development costs, not cost of materials. Because of this the GPU maker is always trying to sell their top-end cards for as much money as the market will bear and costs of all cards are not particularly tied to their price.A 1080 for example, doesn't cost 4x as much to build as a 1050 does. But in order to provide a variety of price points the GPU maker builds a variety of stripped-down designs to fit all the price points they think they can sell. This is how the GPU industry prices their products and also why the second competition shows up, the prices for the current cards all fall.
usernametaken76 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
It's their prerogative to sell whatever they want to sell at whatever price they think they can sell it for. It's not a ludicrous proposition. They are a business and it's the job of the CEO and sales at the business to determine what the market will bear. It's kind of obvious that, by now, most people who were considering a TITAN X are already in possession of one or more. So, they move down the foodchain to sell at another price point to a different audience. There's nothing wrong with this tactic.Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
That titan tax is the price you pay if you do not want to wait months for the performance. Also Vegas performance may be influencing nvidia right now to pre-preemptively strike and get as many people over to green before vega even releases.Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
i'm more and more interested in making my next build all AMD. AMD CPU, GPU, and RAM. With the mobo asus matching the gpu board asus and the soundcard asus essence stx II(side note: the Asus Essence STX II sounds freakishly amazing connected via its rca output to KRK expose E8B's each speaker with it's own dedicated bi amps with 240 watts rms of power for each speaker totaling 480 watts of power for the 2 speakers, 1 amp for the highs and 1 amp for the high midrange and lower midrange and midbass of the 8 inch kevlar driver on each speaker and a 2 way crossover system on each speaker fully adjustable, 8 inch kevlar cone midrange/midbass and 1 inch aluminum beryllium inverted dome tweeter extending it's range from 40hz to 30khz, both material choices equal super light weight, stiff responsive speaker cones with no harsh resonances, I mean each speaker weighs in at over 67 pounds totally impressive beasts. Pair that sound card and those awesome speakers to a KRK rokit 12sHO subwoofera 400 watt RMS beast with a strengthened version of the kevlar cone to increase rigidity under high SPL for tight accurate bass even when it's pushing all it's watts. It can play a range of 29-60hz, 29-160hz or 29-211hz depending on where your midbass begins to pick up is where you cut the sub off. the 8 inch cones go down to 120hz no problem even tho they say 40hz they sound best cut off at 120-140hz to let the sub do what it does best and free up a lot of the 8 inch woofers midrange capabilities that are sacrificed when the power is drained to play them all the way down to 40hz. Run the sub 29hz to 120hz-140hz not adding too high of frequencies in there so it can concentrate its power on the big booms. Plus what I like about KRK is they give you the real numbers real usable specs not hypothetical laboratory bests that cant be reproduced. People hate on the 12 inch sub for only producing down to 29hz, well it plays sound below 29hz no problem there is just roll off after 29hz so krk puts the more truer sound quality accurate number instead of padding their tech spec sheets with bs but it has no problem playing down to the limit of human hearing 20hz, 29hz is just the lowest it can go and still play at its highest sound level. Adding a high quality parabolic equalizer is akin to a color calibrating device for a monitor adding a parabolic eq will let you fine tune adjust till you have flat frequency response over the entire range of human hearing and a set of these speakers are capable of producing super warm bass junky machines for hip hop and electronic while also retaining the ability of complete neutrality.
Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
o and for those waiting to hate on the supposed 400 watts is weak for a sub the 1 12 inch sub system weighs in at a whopping 110 pounds. It's moving serious amounts of air.Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
and before you say but 15 and 18s they are so much better. For sound quality applications no they arent. 12-13 inches is the best size for reproducing 25-150hz. The bigger subs can edge it out on 20-30hz or the 18s at 16-40hz but they muddy up the upper bass the sub takes cares of.Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
sorry for the crazy tangent. I just built my hi rez 24 bit 192khz listening station and got to excited.Alex0826 - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Listening station? Zeta Reticuli, planet X or maybe seismic activity?extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
That's why the biggest W7 is 13.5"extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Lol, 480w rms, I could be wrong but I think you are dreamingYojimbo - Tuesday, February 28, 2017 - link
Not interesting at all. No one buys a $1200 graphics card for its price/performance ratio. They buy it because it's the fastest card money can buy. IT held that distinction for 7 months, not a bad record. Even now it will be about as fast as the 1080 Ti so it's likely to be close to the fastest single GPU card for at least another 6 months. When the Titan X came out everybody was well aware of the likelihood that a cheaper and similarly-performing 1080 Ti would be coming out eventually.Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
'so it's likely to be close to the fastest single GPU card for at least another 6 months' -- possibly, not likely. If AMD take the same approach with Vega as they have with Zen, things could get very interesting in as little as three months' time.Klimax - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
If same approach, then definitely not. Then Titan X Pascal and 1080 Ti will still reign supreme.Strunf - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
What approach? it's a matter of having or not the right architecture. CPU performance has not increased much the last few years so kind of "easy" to catch-up, the GPU performance on the other hand has doubled every 2 or so years. By the time Vega will be out and even if it's at the level of the GTX1080 Ti Volta will be just around the corner.fanofanand - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Tflops don't = performance but big Vega is supposed to have roughly 10% more "power" than the 1080ti, so Meteor is actually correct. If Vega is released in May or June, the 1080ti's reign will be short lived.Flunk - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I wouldn't expect Vega to be much, if any more powerful than the 1080. It's twice the cores of the RX 480, on the same process, but coupled with HBM2 RAM. I expect it will be about as powerful as RX 480 Crossfire. Ram bandwidth doesn't seem to be a big issue for Nvidia so I don't think HBM2 will help Vega much.rarson - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Your comment makes the assumption that Vega is just Polaris X2 with HBM, but it's not, it's the biggest overhaul to the GCN architecture that we've seen in years. AMD demoed the difference using the HBCC in yesterday's presentation and it looked fairly significant. If AMD delivers a card that can utilize on-board SSD storage (not that I'm expecting that any time soon), I think AMD has the potential to leave Nvidia in the dust.My point bringing up the SSD storage being, this is more than just 2X Polaris.
Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Indeed it's an entirely new architecture. Polaris caught up with Pascal; AMD never bothered doing a >150W card, probably as very few are sold.I expect Vega to go solidly beyond the performance of Polaris and thus Pascal.
extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
I'm not sure if you mistakenly went with a greater than or less than symbol there but they have released both I own a 250 watt card actually a few of them and I also own some low-end cards that are way less than 150 wattsrarson - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Vega is due 1H this year, that means at most, 4 more months (if they release at the very end of June). I think more likely would be an early June launch at the latest, they were publicly demoing working silicon back in December.I'm hoping it'll be a bit sooner than that even, but I can easily wait 3 more months to see what happens.
Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
'What approach?' -- going high-end first (Ryzen 7), rather than middle-first (RX480).Yojimbo - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I disagree. There's almost no chance Vega is faster than the 1080 Ti in practical use cases, except possibly in a game or two that's been heavily optimized for AMD hardware. Firstly, I'm not sure why you think Ryzen has anything to do with Vega. They are two completely separate efforts from different teams that have different competition in very different markets. Secondly, there's not an "approach" AMD has taken to suddenly decide to make competitive products. For the last 20 years, at least, they've been trying to make high-performance, competitive products. They just haven't always executed very well.BTW, we haven't seen where Ryzen fits in performance-wise. Just a couple more days to wait.
Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Sorry my comment was a bit obtuse; the approach I was referring to is going high-end first, rather than 'mainstream' or lower power/mobile-first.I expect AMD to release a high-end card when they launch Vega, rather than a RX480 replacement.
Yojimbo - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Oh Yes, they will definitely be launching a high end card. I just think NVIDIA still has a competitive advantage.lmcd - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
10 months is still an excellent record on the top of the heap.bin806 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
16nm yields have definitely improved by a big margin and hence Nvidia can sell it now after 7 months for 699$. Titan X is dead now. It might be stopped by Nvidia.Klimax - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
More likely just reduced production.Flunk - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
1080 TI still has intentionally neutered FP64 performance so the Titan X still makes sense for the market it was designed for (HPC)Laststop311 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
no this isnt like previous titans. They left pascal titan with the same fp64 as tiChaser - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Yeah they stole their money from them right out of their pockets. Get over it. Sorry, your under 1070 with another name is so underwhelming and has been for so long. Keep cheering from your vague press releases.waldoh - Tuesday, February 28, 2017 - link
take my moneyTotalMeltdown - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
GimmkeSpoony - Tuesday, February 28, 2017 - link
I have been waiting on this for awhile. Currently running the 780 Ti (which was not, in retrospect, the best money spent). It should be a considerable increase in performance!brasewel - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Should be a massive performance boost. I went from a 780Ti -> 1080 (and then SLI later) but it was night and day even with 1 card. The 1080Ti is anywhere between 30-50% faster than the 1080.Achaios - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Yeah, I'm still with the 780TI GHz Edition from Gigabyte. My card's core clocks aren't stable at stock in som,e games such as GTA V. I know I'm an idiot for buying GIGAFAIL.This TI card looks like the perfect replacement for the 780TI. Really worried though that nobody will buy my 780TI for around 200 Euros.
Lilietto - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Well, I wouldn't buy it for 200€...but then I'm not representative of the whole market :) I think at this point I'd rather go for 970-980-480 around that price point new or used depending on the card. I think you'll find it easier to sell around 150€.ToTTenTranz - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
You admit the 780 Ti was not the best money spent, but you're willing to take the chances of making the same mistake, even without knowing what the competition has to offer yet?Chaser - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
What has that competition offered over the years so far?close - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The 'competition' offered nothing in the CPU space for a decade and now look at all those happy 7700k buyers who see the price drop right after the competition's product announcement.When you're so close to a brand new architecture launch the smart thing to do is wait. It's common sense. What's the worst that can happen? They run out of 1080Tis?
It will save us all from people buying an overpriced card then whizzing on forums flipping tables in anger and all that fanboy or remorseful buyer stuff.
lilmoe - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
+1SquarePeg - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
+2Demibolt - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The problem is we really have no idea how close to launch this product is or what it will be. I was going to wait for AMD before I upgrade, but everything I read leads me to believe I will be waiting longer than anticipated. If I spend $100-$200 extra for the same performance but 6 months early, I am happy with that. That is just me though, wait for the card you think will be best if you have the patience.extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
What about the 4870 what about the original radon I mean are you old enough to remember the GeForce FX fuck up?Spoony - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The failures of the 780 Ti were:1. 3GB of VRAM just wasn't enough at the time for a card like that.
2. The price was rather high for the performance level and VRAM.
This card has vastly more RAM, certainly enough to satisfy. And it is much more reasonably priced. Which means the 1080 Ti isn't repeating the same mistakes. At least from my perspective.
Ranger1065 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Thanks for an interesting read. I only wish there were MANY more articles of this sort @ Anandtech.Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Well, it could still do with being edited. I don't know why but the writing on Anandtech is always more tortured and less concise than on any other site.MrSpadge - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
THan on any other site? Have you been out in the webs lately?Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Well yes, that's my point...lazarpandar - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Obviously the question was rhetorical. Acting like you didn't recognize a rhetorical question doesn't make a point, it makes a person look stupid.extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Give me an example of a site that is more conciseimaheadcase - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The price is actually a lot cheaper than i was expecting. Also the back of it looks fantastic change.Just now have to see what base clock speed is and how it actually translates to real performance.
Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Looks like a far wiser response to forthcoming meaningful competition than Intel has managed. Well done Nvidia (this looks a very fine product) and well done AMD for forcing competition.lordken - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
well not so good for amd imo. If big part of buyers will be impatient and jump on Ti ship and amd wont have much sales later with vega, next year you may have 2080 for 999$I'm a bit disappointed about yesterday's capsaicin, Raja didn't even hint any specs of vega nor possible launch date, while they could reasonably suspect that NVidia is at least announcing Ti in the evening....
They should at least lift nda for ryzen and give it head start or something, when next week Ti reviews will pop up ryzen will get less attention. Though maybe some reviewers will use ryzen cpu in benchmarks instead of usual intel, but that's hardly a satisfaction imo :)
On the article, not sure I would chose "not-quite-fully-enabled " wording instead of "cut down" add slightly or a little bit if you like. Cause 1070 can be said also to be not-quite-fully-enabled (with not-so-big stretch) :)
and one more thing, I would welcome some more summary/info regarding INT8, if it was always the norm for Ti to cripple it, and why NVidia didn't do it now. Could it be due to vega rumors? They wouldn't do it out of their hearts if they can milk more.
ToTTenTranz - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I agree. Yesterday's lack of details on the Vega line may have been off-putting for people who are eager to purchase a new high-end graphics card.Talking about dev relations can only go so far, since there's no one stopping e.g. Bethesda and Epic from doing the exact same deals with nvidia.
Achaios - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Well, I for one cannot buy AMD cards even if I wanted to b/c I own the ACER PREDATOR X34 GSYNC monitor, so pretty much tied with NVIDIA.When it came to choosing between the Predator's GSYNC or FREESYNC I chose GSYNC not b/c I am a fanboi, but b/c I trust NVIDIA more to deliver cutting edge products in the future.
I just can't bring myself to trust AMD and Lisa Su based on their track record. Just can't, doesn't feel right.
fanofanand - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Well by all means, make your purchasing decisions based on your "feelings", see how well that goes for you. @lordken, I disagree completely. Ryzen NDA lifts tomorrow, there is no point in talking about Vega when they want the attention squarely focused on Ryzen. In fact, it's brilliant on AMD's part, the 1080ti will get completely drowned out by Ryzen news. Once the hubbub over Ryzen dies down, THEN they can start with the Vega info and keep the tech world focused on AMD. Meanwhile the 1080ti will get lost in the shuffle with only the most hardcore Nvidia fans dropping their cash on the table.imronburgundy - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
How will the 1080Ti get downed out by Ryzen? If you're looking for a new graphics card and AMD doesn't release any information whatsoever on Vega, Ryzen CPU's aren't going to affect your decision. Unless, you're just willing to wait a long time to see if AMD's offering is even worth it.fanofanand - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Nvidia will get drowned out by all of the reviews about Ryzen, that's how. Today we are talking about the 1080ti, starting tomorrow and for at least a week or two, the only people who will even mention the 1080ti are the fanboys. So I think you are missing the point, it isn't about Ryzen vs 1080ti, it's about the culmination of a year+ of hype FINALLY getting to see daylight. Who in their right mind, in the tech world, are going to be talking about the 1080ti tomorrow? Fanboys and fanboys only.Demibolt - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Then I would assume no one will be talking about Ryzen yesterday. 1080Ti benchmarks are coming soon and launch is soon, those are note worthy events that will gather attention. Combine that with the Ryzen hype (that is deserved) and you have a powder-keg of excited consumers that are wanting to upgrade NOW. They aren't going to be hyped about Ryzen in a few months when Vega finally is released, but now we have 2 new products to get excited about that are available very soon. That is how market share is won, not by the people holding out.SpartanJet - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Completely false. Many of us on the 6/8 core Intel chips have very little incentive to upgrade. While there may or may not be a speed increase over these Intel chips, it certainly isnt worth replacing a motherboard/cpu. While I'm happy AMD finally looks competitive it offers me nothing with my 4.6Ghz 5930k while the 1080Ti will give me 35% improved performance over my 1080 which is a much smarter use of my money.Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Of course Ryzen offers *you* nothing, but if anyone wants to access the same level of performance as you have with your 5930, it's suddenly going to cost 1/3rd as much. That's pretty interesting.TotalMeltdown - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
2600k + gtx1070 here. The fuck do I need to upgrade for? ;)Demibolt - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I completely disagree, PC enthusiast are capable of paying attention to more than one piece of hardware at a time. I think Ryzen is awesome and will deliver some good gaming gains at a great price for sooo many people. But now everyone is wanting to upgrade to Ryzen and they will need a new GPU to go with it. Those that can wait maybe 6 months might be rewarded with a cheaper GPU at a similar performance or a little better. Those who grab a Ti early might not care about paying a little extra in that amount of time.In general, I feel like AMD should want to ride the Ryzen hype train all the way to GPU station and really seal the deal. Everyone would have full AMD systems, this is the logical move. The fact that they haven't released much yet leads me to believe they are not sure their product can compete performance wise, so they will have to beat it on price. Nvidia assumed that as well, which is why they priced the Ti much lower than many expected.
Capt Caveman - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
For those buying Ryzen, will need to buy a video card and the timing of the 1080Ti was excellent. Lots of new builds due to Ryzen and the 1080Ti will benefit.TheJian - Sunday, March 5, 2017 - link
Well ryzen dropped and made a splat noise for gaming ;) On top of that motherboards aren't even done as shown in many reviews having tons of issues with multiple boards. AMD should have waited for this release until #1 BOARDS were actually READY, and #2, the CPU was FULLY WORKING. The fact that they released it half-baked makes me wonder if rev1 will ever get fixed, or if they'll just jump to a rev2 that finally works right in actual shipping games. It is not adequate to tell users "you ran at 1080p instead of 1440p+ where you are supposed to be and games aren't made yet that take advantage of our architecture properly"...LOL. Where the heck did they expect reviews to be running? If you're testing CPU PERFORMANCE you are NOT running at 4K tapping out the vid cards...ROFL. So what does that sound like? "Well if you'd just run your benchmarks where everything is GPU bottlenecked, we'd do a lot better"...LOL. Ok...Whatever dude.When making a product, always make it for 95% of the market, not <5%.
extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Fanboy confirmedKlimax - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Intel didn't and likely doesn't need any response. That's why there is effectively silence from them on that topic. ZEN simply won't do any shake up of CPU market and Intel knows it. (They are very well familiar with structure of ZEN as it is Sandy Bridge-lite with some small stuff from Haswell without full-speed AVX(2) support)Reminder: Price already spoilered what performance one can expect...
Nagorak - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The price didn't spoil anything. AMD always had to price lower to compete with Intel. Intel's brand is much stronger and given performance for the past decade, probably rightly so.Michael Bay - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Except they didn`t when they actually had a competitive architecture like Athlon in P4 times.imaheadcase - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Umm this has nothing to do with competition, this card was planned for a long time. Its just nvidia natural progression.Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The launch price has everything to do with competition. Do you really think it would have been less than $999 without serious competition coming?edzieba - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Good to see that DVI port finally consigned to history. Shame it's still lumbered with a HDMI port rather than a fourth DP++ port (which electrically operated as HDMI anyway), but maybe it still has the legacy of past chips and can only drive three DP streams.ZeDestructor - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
It has a passive DP->HDMI adapter-trace on the PCB for the HDMI port. The equivalent Quadros run the 4xDP layout instead (with full 4DP output capability).. on the same PCB (when it's using the same GPU).prisonerX - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
That sucks, would it have killed them to put an adaptor in the box instead, on their $700 card?colonelclaw - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
All major VR headsets currently use HDMI.prisonerX - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Who cares?TotalMeltdown - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Hdmi is trashMr Perfect - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Yeah, I'm surprised it took this long.I understand that people still have DVI monitors, but how many of those people are the ones dropping $700 on a new video card? Logically, the people who aren't spending money to replace older monitors are probably looking for more affordable cards too. A Steam hardware-ish survey on this would be interesting, if only it could detect such things.
Capt Caveman - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I have a 27" Overlord 1440p IPS overclocked monitor that uses DVI, so I'll be hoping for non-reference 1080Ti's will have DVITheJian - Sunday, March 5, 2017 - link
I have two DVI monitors and you can count me as one dropping $700 soon probably. Just waiting to see what vega has first and hopefully get that $700 down to $600 by xmas or maybe something faster by then (refresh coming). Waiting on a monitor until I pic a vid card obviously. But even then I'll still likely have one DVI running (dell 2407-wfp-hc still looks beautiful ~7yrs in and 1200p!). Also hoping I can stay 16:10. I hate WIDE crap and really wish 16:10 would come back in droves.jamesnmandy - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Ahem, the "Ti moniker" goes all the way back to the GeForce 2 Ti circa 2001. ;)neo_1221 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Yeah, that bugged me too. The GeForce 2, 3, 4 and 500 & 600 series all had Ti variants.11GB seems like an odd choice for the memory configuration. Wonder if they did that for technical reasons, or just to differentiate it from Titan.
JackNSally - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Both? They cut down the ROP's but probably for differentiation and harvesting dies. Possibly even slightly better thermals to allow a slight clock increase? Take it with a grain of salt, it's all speculation on my part.hammer256 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Look at the memory bus width, 352 bits instead of 384. 11 32bit controllers, 11 memory chips, 11 GB. I imagine there are 2 GB chips out there, and certainly 512MB chips. But 22GB is probably unnecessarily expensive, and 6.5 is too small for such a high end card.vladx - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
NVidia take my money, I'm gonna buy two.cocochanel - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
They will take your money !!! How do you think they make record profits quarter after quarter ?30-50% faster than an 1080 ? For the same price ? Got to feel sorry for those who bought a 1080 around Christmas.
As for Vega, the only edge they may have is in using HBM2. Otherwise, I can't see how they can beat this one.
prisonerX - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
There's a sucker born every minute. In the case on Nvidia, no matter how many times they get taken, they keep coming back for more.Michael Bay - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
You really should sell your salt-producing services. You`ll be able to afford it then.seamonkey79 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
My poor Visiontek GeForce3 Ti 500 weeps in its poor, lowly grave ":'(TemjinGold - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
This is a pretty smart move on nVidia's part--releasing early March that is. They are basically releasing right after Ryzen, offering a shiny new high-end card to the hordes of people who are building new 8/16 computers.Hxx - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I really like the fact that the DVI port is gone. Looks much cleaner. Performance wise its probably going to be the same as last gen ... like 25% ish faster than the 1080Hxx - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
so as far as the memory clock did they just factory overclocked the gddr5x to 11gbs? My 1080 can easily do 11 gbps as well. Im curious to see if the memory on the TI version can overclock higher , but to me it sounds that they just overclocked the memory on the 1080 which one can do on his/her own anywayRyan Smith - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
No, this is a new series of chips from Micron. (more on that in the full review)Hxx - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Interesting thank you. Looking forward to find outLolimaster - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Is just a rebated Titan X pre Vega launch, not even worthy of news.Lolimaster - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
If a 1080 struggles at 4k 60fps this will too.imronburgundy - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
And? Are you trying to tell us that there's a better alternative?Meteor2 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
As has been said, you'd be mad to buy one of these. Maybe Vega will blow this out of the water. Maybe it won't come close. But it's worth waiting a couple of months to find out before spending $700.samer1970 - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
its not about an alternative...it is about the resolution you are gaming on ... and GTX 1080 is enough for 1440P
and most people will game on an 1440P monitors using GTX 1080.
to upgrade and game on a 4K monitor you need a 4K capable Card .. and it is not here yet . so it is a waste of money to get this card when you can do well enough using GTX 1080 on 1440P monitors.
deathBOB - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Does the Titan model offer any additional software support for non-gaming applications that would justify its price?Sivar - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
"The Ti series of cards isn’t new for NVIDIA. The company has used the moniker for their higher-performance cards since the GTX 700 series back in 2013."There was the Geforce 2 Ti in 2001, the Geforce 3 Ti 200 and Ti 500 in 2001, the Geforce 4 Ti in 2002, and then the disastrous Geforce FX line which had no "Ti" model.
zeeBomb - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
The feels when you just recently bought a 1080 too...Hasn't been a week so time to flip!LarsBars - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
GTX 1080Ti: You could have either had 35% more performance, or saved $200.Gunbuster - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
To summarize the past two days:Nvidia: New product, Details, Prices.
AMD: World most socially awkward game devs talk, Vega to be named Vega, Free T-Shirt.
Haawser - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
That would be becase AMD weren't launching Vega yesterday. They were talking about software to other geeks. Well noticed Sherlock.BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Its a interesting GPU, but pretty impractical from a power and cost perspective. I'd be much happier with Nvidia and AMD if they pushed Pascal and Polaris down to the 15-35W TDP range of the GeForce GT 710 to 730 that were really the last half-height, single slot GPUs released. True, you can those cards are still for sale with the GT 710 priced at under $30, but getting modern titles to run on such a card is a difficult prospect and iGPUs aren't getting much better with Intel stuck on 14nm.Michael Bay - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Why would you expect modern titles to run on any XX30 card in the first place?BrokenCrayons - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Usually because of system requirements specified by the developer of the game.Wolfpup - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I'm interested in what clocks it actually maintains in real life at 100% compared to the 1080 (and Titan X for that matter), but this looks really awesome. Unless something's really off, no question I'd spend the extra $200 and buy this if I were buying a new "main" desktop PC right now. *drools* Tons more hardware.I'm amazed we've hit 12 BILLION transistors! Just astonishingly complex.
webdoctors - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Its crazy what you can get for a $1K desktop PC now. This card + a $150 CPU, 16 GB RAM and an SSD and you've got a gaming powerhouse for 7 years easily.prisonerX - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
7 Years is a long time. You've been drip fed by Intel and Nvidia for too long.webdoctors - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Unless more companies magically jump up and start designing hardware and fabs step up with magic process nodes, this is all the tech leaps possible.damianrobertjones - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
Nah. You and I KNOW that things 'could' be moving faster than they are. It's not in their best interests to move things faster than the cash train allows.blzd - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
ROFL 7 years. Easily you say? GPU will be obsolete in 2-3.lazarpandar - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
700 for gpu150 for cpu
that leaves you $150 for...
case
psu
16gb ram
ssd
I don't think it can be done, 16gb ram is already like $75 and that's being liberal on the discount.
supakoopa85 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
"The Ti series of cards isn’t new for NVIDIA. the company has used the moniker for their higher-performance cards since the GTX 700 series back in 2013." Actually NVIDIA first used the Ti moniker back in 2001 for the launch of the GeForce 2 Ti and 3 Ti series.JackNSally - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
And much more recently the 660, 780, 980 and 1050 'Ti'sLe Geek - Saturday, March 4, 2017 - link
Don't forget the 550, 560 and 650 Tiswill54 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
I know he should have been more specific but I think he meant just the x80 ti model. I could be wrong but that's what i was thinking when I read the articlebeck2050 - Wednesday, March 1, 2017 - link
Should be phenomenal with custom cooling and pre overclockedGonemad - Thursday, March 2, 2017 - link
I wanna see a benchmark of this thing, how that clock bump and turning off a few parts compares to a Titan.cekim - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
This and things have gotten pretty weird these days with everything being OC'd. As Ryzen demonstrates, vague claims of N GHz OC are vague. It really comes down to how hard is it to reach and remain at what frequency (and whether there is trickery per core, design unit, etc.. with that number).I'm running my 1080s at 2088-2100 depending on temp (water cooled) - that's a ~30% speed-up over the base clock (1600). So, the TI has to be 35% faster AND running at 2088-2100 to give me something that that's 35% better (ignoring memory size for a moment).
zodiacfml - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Nvidia truly has the high-end for themselves.extide - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Actually, Ryan, the first "Ti" card was the 550ticatavalon21 - Saturday, March 4, 2017 - link
As others have noted, Nvidia has used the Ti suffix as far back as GeForce 2 days.http://www.nvidia.com/object/LO_20011001_1255.html
samer1970 - Friday, March 3, 2017 - link
Nvidia are greedy and I dont like how they fool their customers and sell them the same thing double the price then say oops here you can have it half the price when they steal enough money.Thats why I allways support AMD and buy their cards ... evn if Nvidia wins in benchmarks.
Yojimbo - Saturday, March 4, 2017 - link
No one is being fooled and nothing is being "stolen". Technology marches on and prices come down. That's progress. Why do people want to see that in a negative light? Do you still want to be paying $300 for a Radeon HD 4000 series card? The people who paid $1200 for the Titan X were the people who wanted to. Everyone should know that it is inevitable that in some amount of time better performance will be available for less money.Judging by what you said, you are willing to make an inferior choice for yourself simply because NVIDIA has an architectural advantage that allows them to control the high end. All businesses are trying to make as much money as they can over the long term. AMD doesn't have the architecture at the moment to compete with the halo products of NVIDIA, so NVIDIA wins that ultra-enthusiast revenue. Trust me, AMD would love to be the one winning that revenue. If you don't want to pay ultra-enthusiast prices then don't buy ultra-enthusiast products. I can't fathom why you would rule out choices for yourself. Why? Because you are resentful of the people who are able to pay ridiculous prices for the cream of the crop? The one who is hurt by you limiting your own options is you.
afiza - Thursday, July 6, 2017 - link
Hi. this is a good blog about GTX 1080. But I have a lot of doubts and generally, i have confusion about Difference Between GTX 1080 'Founder's Edition,' Reference, & AIBs Can anybody solve my doubt? --https://edgylabs.com/2017/06/30/nvidia-geforce-now...