NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition Review @ [H]

misterbobby said:
You really just dont get it. We are supposed to get more performance for about the SAME price. If prices went up every time we got a bump then cards would be 10,000 bucks by now. It was bad enough when the midrange die 680 came out and was priced at 500 bucks. Before that we would get 104/204 die cards for 200-250 bucks. Then of course Nvidia went one step further than the 680 pricing on the 980 bumping it up another 50 bucks. With the 1080 they have gone full retard by actually jumping to what was the ti price bracket. Hell its 50 bucks more than the big die 980 ti was at launch.
Click to expand...

Did you just skip the 780 cards which were notably more expensive on launch?
 
misterbobby said:
Maybe learn to read a little closer before you call anyone an idiot. I said it was a midrange die gpu which it is as there will be true high end die gpu coming later. If anything its your view on the situation that is idiotic by acting like 700 bucks is no big deal for what used to be aptly named and priced x60 and x60 ti cards.
Click to expand...

I only called someone who fits that description an idiot. This conundrum is something that people create in their own heads. To call a card that blows away the fastest $1000 dollar card to date "mid range" is idiotic. There's no other way to put it.
I understand what people saying the sht you are saying are getting at. I'm just calling it BS. I been buying these cards as long. I know what i payed, i have watched them all be released, i know the general performance gains that are almost ALWAYS in the same ballpark. If i buy a 1070 or 1080 in the next few months I won't feel ripped off because something better is coming later. I know that well in advance. I'd be a moron to cry about it. I'll probably buy a 1070. I guarantee you i will pay 350-380 for it, which is in the same ballpark maybe 20-30 bucks more than i payed for a gtx660, and it comes with 6 GB MORE RAM. Wow what a rip off.

The introduction of the Highest End "Titan" series does not change anything. It's a niche card for peeple with disposable income, or developers needing double duty performance / Vram. It's not main stream in any sense of the word. It's out of the equation of the general consumer Lo/Mid/High range card. Separate. Not in the same category.

You are saying that because this "chip" can do "better" that what is released today, that it is "midrange". It's BS. It's the fastest available ...not even yet.
And they have not really done anything different than they have done since Geforce 2 Ultra or Geforce 3 Ti series. Same basic exact thing for 16 years. I was there. I lived it and bought those cards, read all the reviews, know the general performance gains you can expect to see in every single generation. Seen this same stupid argument for as long in forums same exact sht over and over and over for 16 years. You don;t have to buy it. Shit is Bound to get more expensive with more tech, more v Ram, more transistors ect ect ect. Not far fetched at all. Wait for the Ti if it bothers you so much ( why it should i don't know) you always had that option. Of course then the Titan will be released and you can call the Ti Midrange too! And all the Quadro owners can call your sht Ti Midrange Too! And then Geforce 2080 comes and your 1080Ti sht is i guess worthless at that point. Oh my god. Then it starts again.

I'm just going to lay this here for future generations. In the year 2018 there will be a new Geforce x80. It will prbably be called the Gtx 2080. It will get at best 20-30 fps more than the Geforce 1080Ti if that. It will cost in the range of 600 dollars. It will be bitched about, called "mid range" or a rip off by people who have a Gtx1080Ti who are seemingly fortunate enough to own one, and no fking apparent reason to be bitching at all. And the circle Jerk will continue. I just told you the future. I guaranfkintee it.
 
This is for the last 2 transitions since the switch to the "mid" followed by "big" strategy -

GTX 680 -> GTX 780: 427 days
GTX 780 -> GTX 980: 483 days

56 day difference, or slightly less then 2 months more wait.

TPU (Techpowerup) 2560x1600 avg summarry:

780/680 = 26.6% (0.06% improvement per day)
980/780 = 29.9% (0.62% improvement per day)

GTX 980 -> 980ti: 257 days
980ti -> 1080: 360 days

103 day difference, or a slightly more then 3 months longer wait

TPU 4K avg results:

980ti/980 = 28.2% better (0.11% improvement per day waited)
1080/980ti = 37.0% better (0.10% improvement per day waited)

Given the last two sample points why exactly is waiting for the "big" die over the "mid" die really all that relevant? If anything looking at this I'd prefer to be on jumping in per new uarch since what isn't mentioned above is that those bring more feature improvements aside from performance as well as possibly better forward looking performance. Efficiency is better too.

Sure maybe big Pascal drops with 50%+ performance improvements in 4 months from now or something while Volta ends up being 2 years + out but that really wouldn't be based on any empirical data presently available.
 
I apologize if this has already been covered (new to this thread), but a lot of websites are saying that its not temp throttling that occurs under heavy over-clocked use, that its power limit throttling:

From NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 tested with aftermarket cooler | VideoCardz.com
"As you know reference model is only equipped with one 8pin power connector. In fact even overclocking tools are limited to 120% TDP, which basically means GPU won’t use more than 215W (8pin power connector and the PCI-Express interface can only deliver 225W of power).

Test performed by PCHG brought a simple conclusion; it is not temperature that is keeping GP104 from achieving higher clocks, but board power limit, which can’t be increased unless more power connectors are added. So I’m guessing we need to wait 10 more days to see what custom cards can deliver in this matter."

I was going to wait for non reference board cards with 2 x power plugs (8 x 6 or maybe even and 8 x 8) to make sure the cards will pull enough juice to maintain a decent overclock under custom water.

Side question:

Do you guys really think the "titan" and/or "Ti" high end card will be out this October??

Thx
 
Thing is. If Nvidia never told you what was coming next, or no one ever took a part a card and figured out all this sht, you wouldn't know jack sht to base your little conspiracy on. You own a card. One day it has payed for itself in usefulness. You go and buy a new card. It should be much better than the current card you have. EX: I own a gtx660. If i even buy LAST GENS "Mid rage" card, a gtx 970. The performance gain would be huge. Totally worth it. I would run that card until Volta Ti at least without issue. Not even giving a single FK about 1080's existence. Why? Because i already know it's not worth the upgrade ( to me ). No conspiracy. Always been that way.
 
KG-Prime90 said:
Thing is. If Nvidia never told you what was coming next, or no one ever took a part a card and figured out all this sht, you wouldn't know jack sht to base your little conspiracy on. You own a card. One day it has payed for itself in usefulness. You go and buy a new card. It should be much better than the current card you have. EX: I own a gtx660. If i even buy LAST GENS "Mid rage" card, a gtx 970. The performance gain would be huge. Totally worth it. I would run that card until Volta Ti at least without issue. Not even giving a single FK about 1080's existence. Why? Because i already know it's not worth the upgrade ( to me ). No conspiracy. Always been that way.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the anger here. For some gamers, its worth it to jump on 2 x 1080s, even coming from 2 x Titan X's (like I am now).

Depends on your monitor and what kind of games you play. Im using the Acer X34, its 3440 x 1440 with a 100 hz refresh rate. Its kind of a beast. 3440 x 1440 is approx 70% of the pixels of 4K, and its capable of 100 hz instead of the current 4K refresh rates of 60hz.

To get 100 FPS in AAA titles at 3440 x 1440, well, in some games even 2 x Titan X's under custom water wont do it. In quite a few titles, Im only able to pull 80 FPS or so, graphics settings depending of course. When 120 hz 4k monitors show up, it will be even more so.

I guess it just depends on what games your playing and at what resolution / refresh rate wether you think a 1080 or 2 is worth the price of admission.
 
skypine27 said:
I'm not sure the anger here. For some gamers, its worth it to jump on 2 x 1080s, even coming from 2 x Titan X's (like I am now).

Depends on your monitor and what kind of games you play. Im using the Acer X34, its 3440 x 1440 with a 100 hz refresh rate. Its kind of a beast. 3440 x 1440 is approx 70% of the pixels of 4K, and its capable of 100 hz instead of the current 4K refresh rates of 60hz.

To get 100 FPS in AAA titles at 3440 x 1440, well, in some games even 2 x Titan X's under custom water wont do it. In quite a few titles, Im only able to pull 80 FPS or so, graphics settings depending of course. When 120 hz 4k monitors show up, it will be even more so.

I guess it just depends on what games your playing and at what resolution / refresh rate wether you think a 1080 or 2 is worth the price of admission.
Click to expand...

True especially today.

For me though, even an ultra overclocked SLI Titan rig on water at 144 fps in any game on Ultra settings is still garbage if it's running through an lcd. It's still a blurry crappy lcd making the money i would spend on all that sht basically worthless for gaming.

Until the point that lcds perform as good as crts in motion ( which will likely never happen with current sample hold displays even with strobing backlight ) it's irrelevant to me. I basically give up on a lot of gaming without a crt. Won't even bother to play a shooters ect on an lcd.

But you do also point out the conundrum is that to even have half assed performance on an lcd you do need the OC Titans ect, but the fact is it's still half assed. X34 did not impress me at all. I though it was crap if i'm honest i laughed and sighed at the same time at how shitty it was. If they brought it up to 120Hz and added ULBM i would buy it, though i wouldn't say it was great. I would buy it for the 21:9 and the ULMB primarily for desktop use. I hate lcds. And therefore i find that any amount of money you spend on video cards and oc cpu on water ect ect is useless if you have to look at it through that crap.

I can say that the difference is I played Witcher 3 on a gtx660 and I5 3570k stock at higher than 1080p at mostly "High" settings tuned with sht that doesn't really need to be maxed like Foliage Hair and some post processing, still with full AA and still pretty much high settings that the difference is almost indescribable, and it played fine on an Fw900 42 fps and looked cleaner and ran smoother than any lcd made today. By far. The Bottle neck today is the display and there's nothing we can do about that.

Alas, that's another topic. I do have strong opinions on that matter that may not jibe in the Matrix.

It is true though that if you want even half assed performance at good refresh with as little blur ect that is possible on an lcd, then more than ever you need to spend the dough. I don't think it's worth it and a lot of the game made today aren't worth it either. I play maybe 2-3 newer titles a year and mostly they are a few years old already and my system is usually newer by that time to crush them. I've been at an offset like that for a decade. It's cheaper all around. The games are 10 bucks or whatever on Steam ect. Plenty of stuff to play in the meantime. I don't have to have it Now.

I'm dying to play Doom. But my fw900 died so i will wait until the next monitors release and see what comes. Hoping that the 21:9's get ULBM. Then i have to upgrade my video card and likely will be doing a full system upgrade. So i'll probably be playing Doom in the Winter if not next year. No big deal.
 
Fixall said:
Everyone doing extended testing is noticing that. Gamers Nexus had the same result as HardOCP with extended testing. Red line is an over locked FE 1080 and the blue line is an overclocked FE 1080 with a hybrid cooler from a 980 Ti slapped on it.

View attachment 3189
Click to expand...

Bear in mind they stayed with variable fan and that issue in the middle could also be tied to the fan dropping rpm.
That is also balanced by the results when they did not use offset/OC and disabled all chassis-case fans.
gtx-1080-throttle-test-1.png



I think context is also important, how much should one expect the reference design to OC.. Personally I would say for a reference design getting 10% above boost if OC with the parameters is pretty fair, as it is not really designed for more aggressive OC.
To achieve that 10% above boost, the question then becomes how easy (what profiles need to be modified and options set) is it to do, and impact on gaming enjoyment (not just the dynamic nature of Boost3) but also the fan noise and whether they need to be more aggressive/fixed/etc.
10% above 1733 boost gives a clock of 1906, then we can also apply memory with around 10% I think.

Note though I am talking 10% above the boost and not base clock.

I also think this has been clouded a bit due to Jen-Hsun saying it is an amazing card to OC, it probably is when one uses the EVGA Precision tool to set all the offsets/profiles perfectly combined with ignoring noise by running fans at extreme RPM - this is not what a customer buying the FE-reference would necessarily do though.
However it does look like the design is going to be a great OC, meaning the custom AIBs should have a great range of performance tiers, especially with the better power phase/regulation they include on boards.

Cheers
 
This whole mid-range debate to me is better summarized like this

1060 = low-end
1070 = mid-range
1080 = high-end
1080 ti (or higher) = enthusiast

To me, the Titans I would never have called high-end. Video cards over $1000 are clearly in a whole other elite category which the majority of gamers could not afford. The same will be true of the 1080ti and above which will likely be $799+.
 
zamardii12 said:
This whole mid-range debate to me is better summarized like this

1060 = low-end
1070 = mid-range
1080 = high-end
1080 ti (or higher) = enthusiast

To me, the Titans I would never have called high-end. Video cards over $1000 are clearly in a whole other elite category which the majority of gamers could not afford. The same will be true of the 1080ti and above which will likely be $799+.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with that with respect to CPUs as well.


Im running a 1000 USD 5960x. The next CPU Im going to buy is a rumored 1500 USD 6950x.

They aren't "high end". They are "niche" products. So are Titan's / Titan Blacks / Titan X's / Titan "Next's"

Good point
 
Raendor said:
I'm debating whether I should try to get any of 1080 for a resale lol.
Click to expand...

That never, ever pans out for end users in my many years of purchasing cards. Even if you sell for a 20% premium you'll just barely break even considering sales tax, shipping etc.
 
I plan on getting two 1080's in SLI but I've always had extreme bad luck with overclocking video cards (even on water, as were my 3 980TIs and my 4 Titans). I wonder if the founders edition cards will be okay if I plan on holding on to these as long as it takes for the 1080TIs to come out.

I may just end up getting one 1080 since this is a stop gap. Right now I'm running with nothing so I need to pick up something to keep gaming. I game now (down from 4k) at 1440p GSync.
 
Raendor said:
Should've sold it earlier if was not planning to stick with it from the start ;)
Click to expand...

True, but this launch actually took me a little bit by surprise. I haven't been keeping up with the news lately.

That, and I don't like selling and then not having anything in my system for a while, especially with the uncertainty of new launches.
 
NewEgg has a category listing for 1000-series now--they're all 1080's and they all say coming soon, but they are there and you can get notified.
 
Canadian sites have them listed now too but holy shit they are $910-999CAN!! $699=917 ugh...
 
Anyone found good 1080 SLI Test? Would like to know improvement compared to "old" SLI builds.
 
FE's go on-sale at 9 AM EST today, approx 1 hour from this post. Confirmed by Nvidia on Twitter yesterday.
Sorry for not posting sooner...
 
3:00 PM CET for the European people. Many stores here pushed the date back to May 31. Maybe waiting on shipments. I'm still on the fence whether or not to get 2. I'm in for new cards but I don't really know any games I want to play right now. Such a dilemma!

Does anyone know if stores will have that new SLI HB bridge today as well?
 
Hmmm do I want a 1080. My brain tells me no, my Titan X is fine. Some other body part tells me yes.
 
Hello, I think the values for the GTX 1080 are wrong = click (Let me check this out, thanks!! - Kyle)

 
FE sold out in 30 min?? Clicked the Newegg link from 30 minutes ago, got this.

upload_2016-5-27_8-41-38.png
 
I couldn't resist and ordered 2. Didn't have a SLI setup since my 2 580's in 2011, I hope it works well. Just no word on the new HB bridges yet, says coming soon.

Kyle planning on a SLI review old vs. new HB bridge performance?
 
Cov said:
Hello, I think the values for the GTX 1080 are wrong = click (Let me check this out, thanks!! - Kyle)
Click to expand...

You could be missing that they are not the same AA settings, he was doing highest playable settings I believe, the bottom screenshot you took is from the apples-to-apples comparison
 
Cov said:
Hello, I think the values for the GTX 1080 are wrong = click (Let me check this out, thanks!! - Kyle)
Click to expand...

The playable settings in the table is with 2X SSAA turned on, indicated in the top row along with the resolution and DX11. These settings are the highest playable settings we find on each video card.

The apples to apples graph indicates SMAA is being used for that apples to apples comparison.

2X SSAA is much more demanding than SMAA. I've checked the data I gathered, the numbers are correct.
 
Cov said:
Hello, I think the values for the GTX 1080 are wrong = click (Let me check this out, thanks!! - Kyle)
Click to expand...
OK,first of all you have cut and pasted data from two different graphs together. One shows the card using our highest playable settings criteria, and the other using Apples to Apples settings.
 
From the temps I'm forseeing a mid-gen refresh that gets another 15-25% performance, along with all the silly Ti and Titan versions.
 
So still if you want Ultra (best) quality and a solid 60fps you still need to be using a 1080p monitor even with a 1080GTX. Interesting, 1440p is still too much for a single card if you want all the visual "bells and whistles", and want to always be above 60fps. Looks like I'll get the 1080 but keep my 1080p monitor around for a bit longer... or maybe even get the Acer XB270H as an interm upgrade.
 
Last edited:
Skylinestar said:
Amazon review:
http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-...?ie=UTF8&ref_=cm_sw_r_other_apa_mZosxb939TJK1

Not sure if his cards throttle

Checking out the star rating in Amazon.. so much negativity.
Click to expand...
I laughed as EVGA are having to respond to nearly every 1 star post as majority it seems mention the price being a rip-off and not MSRP.
They point out that it is not Amazon but independent market sellers who use Amazon.
I bet EVGA is cursing Amazon with their independent sellers at the moment :)

Cheers
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top