Hilbert (guru3d) posted some pics of the 1080 sli at the conference.

 

 

Thanks for the links - single 8 pin - interesting also read a Titan X recommended power 250watt - 1080 is 350watt so hence the reason I buy powerful power supply's - especially if your going to run sli 

nVidia's benchmarks look more like 30 to 50% faster than a whitebread GTX 980. I'm guessing that the real improvement averages closer to your 20%.

 

Yes Jay thats a good point - so I guess I may not be to far off - not a dumb as I look  :wink:

- not a dumb as I look

 

Maybe you should use your left side profile in your photo.

Maybe you should use your left side profile in your photo.

 

Good one Jay   :wink:

no matter how money you're prepared to spend, you will hit the CPU clock with P3D.

 

No.  You will hit the CPU clock with Flight Simulation.   Most games have nowhere near the scope of computations to do as a simulator has.  Because they can, in fact, pick and choose what parts of reality to render, exploiting the next shiny thing that comes along for the story line.  In flight simulation, especially with us whiny types, it's demanded to be as real as it gets as far as the eye can see, and as far as the plane can pretend to feel the wind on it's wings.   Even in the sense of multi-player, each AI a/c is the same as another player functionally, the computational demands are not the same as gaming ai, where a script controls the timing.  They're structurally more like pvp demands than pipelined ai of other games.  Comparing apples to oranges.  Remember, LM's pvp is not for gaming.   P3D, like FSX is not a game, them's fightin' werds. 

The actual improvement with Pascal is not raw performance gains but performance per watt gains.

 

There's the idea floating around that Pascals are going to blow the 9xx series cards out of the water which is really not the case.

 

The real leap is in the power-to-performance gains over the 9 series and Titan Xs.

 

That being said, it will definitely leave more headroom for overclocking and I wouldn't be surprised to see a 25%-30% real overall gain over the last generation of cards. Which is pretty decent, for something almost half the price of a Titan X.

 

Also, the ideology that every generation of cards is about 20% faster may not be very accurate here, considering how long Nvidia held out before releasing the next gen of cards. The typical cycle is about 1 year, and this time it is a lot longer so don't be surprised if we do see higher gains.

 

 

That being said, it will definitely leave more headroom for overclocking and I wouldn't be surprised to see a 25%-30% real overall gain over the last generation of cards. Which is pretty decent, for something almost half the price of a Titan X.

 

 

 

Hopefully the gaming versions are around the same price - that would be nice - bet the AMD folks are having some serious business meetings next week :wink:

 

either i misunderstood or you did, these are the ONLY gaming cards/pcbs/chips/dies you and i are going to have access to as far as gtx 1080 and gtx 1070 are concerned...

think of these cards as product replacement by Nvidia for 980 and 970

the ones you are reffering to are the GP100 chip ones which are for scientific computation and THOSE will be out in 2017 (early) .....

Again .. these two are the ONLY GAMING cards with the PASCAL architecture that we soon have access to

 

 

kind regards,

 

jafff

 

This round of NVidia's GPUs aren't worth it as replacement for 980, 980ti or Titan X. Anyone who want's to upgrade those cards should wait for the big die at the end of the year. Also, for anyone really interested for VR, don't you know that AMD solutions are much superior than NVidia's? If you want VR now, Radeon 390X or Fury is the way to go, but truly superior solution should came also at the end of the year with Vega.

Hahaha...

Go for it guys...

 

Some people just need to update with every new card version...

P3D is still at least 70% cpu dependent..

 

Well if you're running multiple monitors with an effective resolution beyond 4K and you also want to enable all the shader-based eye candy and the best anti-aliasing available, then you're going to be GPU dependent even in Prepar3D. For single-monitor users at 1440p and below, a mid-range to high-end card in the 900-series is going to be enough for a while. However those users are unlikely to be considering the GeForce 1080 (ironic naming, BTW).

 

I think the new cards provide a healthy boost and it's nice to see some progress in the Era of Stagnation (we were stuck at 28nm for 4.5 years). Nvidia deserve to enjoy the price premium until AMD bring out some competition later this year or early next year.

Imho some people cannot resist and have to upgrade as soon as a new processor or graphics card comes out .

I am not into that hype.

 

Surely if you need an upgrade performance wise why not ...

 

4K is to sharp for me .

Look outside in an aircraft and you will not see such sharp contour lines from objects in the distance.

With weather programs we are creatiing a haze which makes the distance look less sharp...

Kind of funny how all the Titan X owners are supporting themselves in the believe that the new nVidia GPUs will not reach Titan X performance. Seriously, you don't need to feel bad just because you bought a Titan X a couple of month ago at an insane price tag and now nVidia will deliver the same performance at half the price. This is just how it has always been with IT when you want to have the best of the best. You buy something at an insane price and a couple of month later you get the same performance at a fraction of that price... Just get over it...

I'll wait to see if there are any actual performance gains with the 1070. 

 

Will be looking to run 2-3 screen /projector setups.  Otherwise I will stick with my 970 for a few more years

No.  You will hit the CPU clock with Flight Simulation. 

 

That's pretty wrong, you are confusing the CPU clock with the CPU computing speed.

 

By some years already the clock race is finished (because there's a physic limit you know..), so the modern CPU's takes advantage of the multiple cores (and so, multiple threads).

P3D/FSX because of it's very hold engine has a very primitive parallelization, LM did some good work with P3D but it's nowhere near where it should be, in fact as of today you still have a better performance with OC'ed quad core, than a lowered clocked 8 cores.

 

Saying that the simulators hits the CPU clock because they need more computational power is wrong, it's more: bad coded products (no matter what they do.. they can be a flight simulator or a encoding video utility) will hit the CPU clock, because they doesn't take advantage of all the cores (and threads) available. And P3D *is* bad coded (naturally that's not because of LM.. but because the core of the engine comes from many years ago, where the multi-core technology wasn't up to today).

 

Being realistic, we can't hope that LM will code the engine from the scratch to finally take advantage of the modern CPU's... but this doesn't negate the fact that this situation is a flawn in the current code, again not for LM mistakes, but still a BIG limitation.

This round of NVidia's GPUs aren't worth it as replacement for 980, 980ti or Titan X. Anyone who want's to upgrade those cards should wait for the big die at the end of the year. Also, for anyone really interested for VR, don't you know that AMD solutions are much superior than NVidia's? If you want VR now, Radeon 390X or Fury is the way to go, but truly superior solution should came also at the end of the year with Vega.

 

Sorry, this is completely wrong. The 1080 is more powerful than a 980ti, and it is currently double as fast than a 980 ... so the 1070 and 1080 replaces the 970 and 980 and the gap is even more evident than the previous "rounds"!

 

The only reason to not buy them is if you're waiting the "Ti" and you don't wanna change your card again in January (that is what I'm doing..), but it's a decision based upon the money you have invested.. otherwise the 1080, even non "ti" still better than anything else.

 

You're also wrong about the VR, in fact where this new cards shines more it's about the VR aspect. Due to the new VRworks they have a single pass stereo rendering, in fact they are capable of rendering a stereoscopi scene (used in VR) twice faster than any other card... so to resume a 1080 is actually 4 times faster than a 980 and 2 times faster than a Titan X under the "VR" appliances (assuming that the developers will get advantage of the new API).

 

The 1070/1080 *IS* the card to buy today if you're interested to the VR.. the 390X is ages behind them (and AMD will have no powerful solutions, by their admission.. neither by the end of the year, when we will have the 1080Ti anyway).

Hopefully the gaming versions are around the same price - that would be nice - bet the AMD folks are having some serious business meetings next week  :wink:

Those are Nvidia's Gaming cards they aren't releasing another set of cards those are the ones.

Those are Nvidia's Gaming cards they aren't releasing another set of cards those are the ones.

 

Thanks well see ho it all turns out still a bit early 

 

Sorry, this is completely wrong. The 1080 is more powerful than a 980ti, and it is currently double as fast than a 980 ... so the 1070 and 1080 replaces the 970 and 980 and the gap is even more evident than the previous "rounds"!

 

The only reason to not buy them is if you're waiting the "Ti" and you don't wanna change your card again in January (that is what I'm doing..), but it's a decision based upon the money you have invested.. otherwise the 1080, even non "ti" still better than anything else.

 

You're also wrong about the VR, in fact where this new cards shines more it's about the VR aspect. Due to the new VRworks they have a single pass stereo rendering, in fact they are capable of rendering a stereoscopi scene (used in VR) twice faster than any other card... so to resume a 1080 is actually 4 times faster than a 980 and 2 times faster than a Titan X under the "VR" appliances (assuming that the developers will get advantage of the new API).

 

The 1070/1080 *IS* the card to buy today if you're interested to the VR.. the 390X is ages behind them (and AMD will have no powerful solutions, by their admission.. neither by the end of the year, when we will have the 1080Ti anyway).

True Pascal performance isn't actually known yet, especially in P3D. Few folks here are money no object buyers who usually have SLI Titan X, and for them cashing $700 (they'll likely get founder edition) for 20% performance at best is sound strategy. For people with limited sources, like myself, who wants to maximize their purchase value, this round isn't feasible because it's way overpriced. And for the Vidia's VR, their past performance was horrendous. Pascal experience has yet to be seen, for now we only have marketing slideshow.

What could  have greater impact on P3D experience is Lockheed Martin to introduce Dx12 and some kind of async compute (along with much awaiting x64), but it's no small task and likely not in near future.