- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 9,101
what im worried about if it's a cut down version. Will it have the same issue the 970 GTx has with memory?
Would be pretty shitty.....
Would be pretty shitty.....
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
980 Ti @ $599?
- Thread starter TaintedSquirrel
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 13,482
I doubt Nvidia will make that mistake again. Also both the 970 and 980 are on 4 GB so the situation isn't entirely the same.
But the titan X is only 20-30% faster than the 980.... So a 980ti being 10% slower would then be 10-20% faster than a 980.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan_X/29.html
... Which would be alright with me... IF the price is only a bit more than a 980 currently costs.
No it doesn't... Logically Nvidia will have a load of Titan X which do not have fully operational cores by now... So I think it would be more likely to see a 980ti which has less cores than the Titan X.
Then AMD is going to eat their lunch. I highly doubt they are going to come out with a card that is inferior to the 390x.
Depends how much it costs etc. But other than the 980ti... what is nvidia doing with all the TitanX cores that cannot run at full speed? Maybe that will be the "980 metal enhanced edition" I read about somewhere. But why would nvidia release a 980ti which makes the titan X obsolete for anything except triple SLI where 12Gb might at some point be useful. I think it might be similar to the 780ti eg. something like 2780 CUDA cores at 1150mhz, which would perform similar to a titan X and cost less, whereas an OC titan X vs an OC 980ti the titan X will still be the faster card.
AMD won't eat their lunch really because people are losing faith in them with nvidia being superior in pretty much every way recently, TDP, speed, drivers, features etc. Pretty much the only thing that AMD can win on is price / performance and people would probably still buy a 980ti even if it is 5% slower than a 390x AND 5% more expensive... Even I probably would TBH Because I like low TDP cards with all the nvidia features like Gsync, MFAA and DSR etc. I don't care about AMD or Nvidia or have loyalty to either brand BUT lets be honest... Nvidia cards recently have just been all around better.
Last edited:
Titan X has always been for the guys who need the best of the best. The people who wants it will have already bought it. After that, nobody will buy it anymore because it's a niche product. That's always been the case. For the price sensitive rest of the population, the Titan X has a useful life of about 2 months only.
According to Brent, the Titan X is on average 33% faster than the 980 at 1440p.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/04/14/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_x_video_card_review/14#.VVP3ePlVhBd
At 4K, the difference widens further...
Bingo!
Isn't this like common sense?
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 13,482
Some people are optimistic they will be able to buy full GM200's for $700ish in June.
Common sense be damned.
Common sense be damned.
Not sure if that includes OC or not? Anyway 25% better than a 980 at not much more money would make me likely to buy one! Then I would get approx the performance my OC 970 gets at 1080p but at 1440p so that would be good enough for another few years of PS4 ports at 1440p! I would probably even buy a 980ti if it was slightly worse performance than a 390x at a similar price, because my time with the 970 has shown me that the nvidia features like MFAA and DSR + lower TDP are not to be "sniffed at". MFAA effectively gives you about 5-10% more performance and lower TDP effectively lowers the price of the card over 1-3 years.
That doesn't include OC. Overclocked the TX can get to around 50-55% faster than a stock 980.
Nvidia is going to use gimped Titans X. However, people are assuming it's going into the 980Ti. 780Ti was a half frame buffer Titan Black but wasn't gimped otherwise. It's not like Nvidia hasn't set the precedence before. Why are people surprised that 980Ti is a half frame buffer Titan X?
980 is being cleared of inventory, guess what's going to replace it? Gimped Titan X.
980 is being cleared of inventory, guess what's going to replace it? Gimped Titan X.
Hm did not realise it was that good... there's another thing that makes me think the 980ti will be a Titan X with 2500-2900 cores and 6gb of vram... The GM200 has 20% overclocking room so adding a 10-15% overclock and dropping the cores by 10-15% would be similar to a stock titan X but the titan X would still be the better card with OC...
Maybe they will release a full titan x with 6gb and a gimped titan X with 6gb as well... Then they would have all areas covered.
My guess would be ~2500-2800 cores at 1100-1200mhz. Actually I want it to be less cores than the Titan X because that means it will cost less and still be good enough for 1440p games, the 980 is not quite good enough for 1440p (not worth upgrade from 970) and the Titan X is ideal for 1440p but too much money.
The 780ti was the same as titan with half the vram but wasn't the 780ti almost as expensive as a titan when it was released? The 980ti is supposed to be cheaper to compete with the 390 / 390x
No, it was not expensive as Titan. I remember it at roughly 650 euro ( I imported mine from Germany as it was about 50 euro cheaper than in here), while Titan was over 1000 euro. The vanilla 780ti that is, with Titans cooling, not one of those fancy AIB cards.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,592
The GTX Titan had a launch MSRP of $1000. The GTX 780 had a launch MSRP of $650, this was later cut to $500.
The GTX 780ti had a launch MSRP of $700. The GTX Titan Black had a MSRP of $1000.
The GTX 780ti had a launch MSRP of $700. The GTX Titan Black had a MSRP of $1000.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,592
Disabling SMM units (each with 128 cores) would not affect what you are referring to.
Disabling ROPs is what you are referring to strictly speaking is not as simple as saying it lowers usable VRAM. The actual situation is much more complex than that and also that there are some more effects than just differences in accessible memory, but this is another topic.
In terms of what you are referring to it would depend on how many ROPs are disabled. If they disable the same absolute amount of 8 ROPs (half a ROP partition) it would be 5.5gb with a similar scenario to the GTX 970. If they disable more than that it becomes more complicated and I don't believe enough information is available to know how that would be handled. Especially if they disable 12 ROPs, the same relative 1/8th amount, this would be a much more complex scenario due to the number of ROPs being disabled (I believe with what is known it would have to be disabled in clusters of 8, or half paritions. Kepler had to be full partitions).
Disabling ROPs is what you are referring to strictly speaking is not as simple as saying it lowers usable VRAM. The actual situation is much more complex than that and also that there are some more effects than just differences in accessible memory, but this is another topic.
In terms of what you are referring to it would depend on how many ROPs are disabled. If they disable the same absolute amount of 8 ROPs (half a ROP partition) it would be 5.5gb with a similar scenario to the GTX 970. If they disable more than that it becomes more complicated and I don't believe enough information is available to know how that would be handled. Especially if they disable 12 ROPs, the same relative 1/8th amount, this would be a much more complex scenario due to the number of ROPs being disabled (I believe with what is known it would have to be disabled in clusters of 8, or half paritions. Kepler had to be full partitions).
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,592
There wasn't anything inherently wrong technically speaking with how the GTX 970 was configured. The controversy was due to it not being made aware to the public, which may or may not have affected each individuals actual affinity for the GTX 970 had they known.
Strictly technically speaking the ability to disable half ROP partitions is more flexible from a design stand point than having to disable full ROP partitions.
Strictly technically speaking the ability to disable half ROP partitions is more flexible from a design stand point than having to disable full ROP partitions.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 9,101
Considering GTAV shows me having only 3.6gb of memory and not 4. IT really is an issue in some games.
If the 980ti is cut down, It worries me that it will be gimped like the 970 GTX.
Just my 0.02c. I really do think Nvidia wouldnt let it happen again, and I can guarantee you that people will test it again.
If the leaked specs are true, TI model at $600 aint gonna happen. $700 at least until AMD releases their cards.
Its nice to be optimistic, but its better to be realistic. Nvidia has no reason to make the TI so cheap knowing that AMD has nothing to counter it.
Its nice to be optimistic, but its better to be realistic. Nvidia has no reason to make the TI so cheap knowing that AMD has nothing to counter it.
Last edited:
So what is Nvidia gonna do then, if the 390X comes out say atleast 5% faster than the Titan X and at a reduced price, say $700-800. Remember pascal isn't coming out until supposedly september next year.
That could mean AMD reign surpreme for over a year. So Nvidia may have to release the 980 Ti faster than the Titan X at a lower price.
That could mean AMD reign surpreme for over a year. So Nvidia may have to release the 980 Ti faster than the Titan X at a lower price.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 13,482
If the 980 Ti is launched before the 390X, that means Nvidia already knows what the 390X is capable of.
If the 390X is as you described, then the 980 Ti will be an overclocked full Titan X.
If the 390X is somewhere between the 980/TX then the 980 Ti will be cutdown to compete.
Considering this GPU is entirely reactionary to Fiji, its final specs will be determined by Fiji itself... And Nvidia's determination to keep the flagship crown. If the 390X didn't exist, the 980 Ti wouldn't exist.
limitedaccess
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 7,592
You are arguing something different here which I mentioned in a previous post was a separate topic all together.
Nvidia used various cut down ROP/Memory configuration before there was never any controversy with those since all the information was made available. You knew what you were getting (or more accurately you were able to infer/judge based upon accurate information).
Some people would not have bought the GTX 970 (or at least viewed it more negatively/less postively) had they known about the situation, that is where the problem lies. It being cut down isn't an issue by itself if that is what you chose to buy and information was not hidden from you. It is a valid way to optimize costs and segment SKUs.
A September release for Pascal would be speculation at this point, could be earlier or later.
Also practically speaking a 5% difference is way too close to be a definitive lead (either way). In that type of situation their will be plenty of situation due to work load differences where the lead shifts which is generally the case with card's in roughly that close of the same segment. You saw this with GK104 vs Tahati and GK110 vs Hawaii, it would not be entirely accurate or precise to say one had the lead over the other.
There is also too much emphasis on the performance lead by enthuasists. If you look at Nvidia's relevant recent history they were doing worse financially during the Fermi generation where they had a clear lead at the highest end compared to the Kepler generation where things were much closer due to AMD leaving the "small die" strategy to compete at the highest end.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 13,482
290X Uber was like 1 or 2% above the original Titan and Nvidia still released the 780 Ti.
The titan x is strictly a gaming card, and it's much younger than the original titan was when the 290X launched, so the circumstances are a bit different this time around.
The titan x is strictly a gaming card, and it's much younger than the original titan was when the 290X launched, so the circumstances are a bit different this time around.
Not sure that is 100% correct because AFAIK when they make a GPU they will use the fully working cores in the "flagship" card and then use the partially disabled / not fully working cores in the next card down... eg. 290x > 290, 980 > 970 etc etc. So another Gm200 card would be inevitable. I do not work in the industry but that is how I think it works.
yes I was talking in general. If it were 5% more performance at a much lower price than the Titan X.
-5% is too close.
Between -10% and -15% seems much more realistic.
<-20% appears too conservative as it gets too close to GTX 980 territory.
I think that the performance of the 980 Ti depends more of the manufacturing process than AMD's offering. However, the price/performance ratio of the upcoming 390 will certainly have an impact on NVIDIA pricing structure.
We will know shortly I guess.
Between -10% and -15% seems much more realistic.
<-20% appears too conservative as it gets too close to GTX 980 territory.
I think that the performance of the 980 Ti depends more of the manufacturing process than AMD's offering. However, the price/performance ratio of the upcoming 390 will certainly have an impact on NVIDIA pricing structure.
We will know shortly I guess.
After a few months of selling Titan X's you wonder how wide the availability will be for the 980 Ti when they drop it. Nvidia has to have a boat load of lower binned GM200 cores kicking around that don't pass the Titan X muster, it's not like they can do anything else with them since the GM200 isn't a compute part in the slightest.
GTA 5 shows 4Gb for my 970, like any other game. Not sure why yours would show 3.5?
I never see VRAM usage above 3.5 however but then I never use MSAA or DSR or anything so that might be it.
GTA 5 goes over the memory limit of 970 with DSR and other settings turned up... But the FPS is bad at those settings anyway so it does not make much difference.
I hope the AMD 390x is not a complete turd of a card because at least a competitive 390x will make nvidia release a 980ti at a competitive price!
I hope the AMD 390x is not a complete turd of a card because at least a competitive 390x will make nvidia release a 980ti at a competitive price!
I run 970 SLI and the game shows 8 GB (that's just the way it reports multiple cards) so full memory. The game still wants to stick around 3.5-3.6 no matter what. It runs fine with 4xTXAA at 1440p for me.
'Witcher 3: Wild Hunt' and 'Batman: Arkham Knight' free bundle extented to GTX 980 Ti?
http://www.vcpost.com/articles/66855/20150514/gtx-980-ti-released-gm200-310-gpu-nvidia-gives-free.htm
http://www.vcpost.com/articles/66855/20150514/gtx-980-ti-released-gm200-310-gpu-nvidia-gives-free.htm
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2013
- Messages
- 13,482
Where did Nvidia confirm the 980 Ti?
They haven't, the article is just making shit up. Still it's a fairly sure bet that it exists and it will launch along side the 390x or as near to it as possible.