ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1070 Ti GAMING Advanced Edition @ [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
56,456
Last edited:
Pretty bad ass card! I think I will recommend that my nephew look into getting one of these when he builds his next system. Thanks for the review!
 
That is one helluva solid OC. Damn.

I could see this card actually cannibalizing 1080 sales with that kind of headroom.
 
I think this is the first time I've seen a lower temp on an overclocked chip. Yeah the fan speed increased, but to run quietly and beat stock temps is damned impressive.
 
While I think that binned chips really don't make much of a difference (specially now that the manufacturing process is more mature). This one is a hell of a deal. Its faster, cooler, more silent and much more power efficient than the Ti FE, and Vega56/64. Well worth the extra $30~50 bucks.
 
Last edited:
With the release of the GeForce 1070Ti the defeat of the VEGA line of GPUs is utter and complete.
We have a GPU which, not only performs just like AMD's flagship, VEGA64, but it is also much more power efficient and also cheaper as well !!
(*i remember during VEGA's release that the argument was that.... "it doesn't matter if it can't compete with NV's flagship if it is priced properly" !!,..... well, there goes this one last AMD's argument as well !! :blackeye: )
 
You know though.. the more I think about this the less impressed I am.

The 1080 launched May 27, 2016. A year and a half ago.

At this point the time between proper generations is creeping closer to the 2 year mark and I'm not cool with that part.

The 1070Ti is impressive for the price and very impressive in terms of OC potential, but is that enough for December 2017? Or should we just collectively be disappointed that it isn't a 20-series card that's launching?
 
Sith'ari said:
With the release of the GeForce 1070Ti the defeat of the VEGA line of GPUs is utter and complete.
We have a GPU which, not only performs just like AMD's flagship, VEGA64, but it is also much more power efficient and also cheaper as well !!
(*i remember during VEGA's release that the argument was that.... "it doesn't matter if it can't compete with NV's flagship if it is priced properly" !!,..... well, there goes this one last AMD's argument as well !! :blackeye: )
Click to expand...
Le Sigh. Apparently you don't do well with reading comprehension or logistical analysis. This review compared stock ASUS card and OC ASUS card against only stock Vega 64 and NV 1080. In the DX11 games, yes the 1070TI does well, but is destroyed by Vega 64 in Vulkan, and beaten in DX12. It is only when overclocked that this card keeps up with the Vega 64, and still in DX12 and Vulkan, loses out. Would you want to wager how competitive the 1070TI would be with an OC'd Vega or NV1080?

But of course, there's that pesky retail price. Vega64 is such an utter failure, that people are buying them in such huge quantities, that if you can find one, it is well over MSRP. Such a huge failure for AMD. /s
 
jardows said:
Le Sigh. Apparently you don't do well with reading comprehension or logistical analysis. This review compared stock ASUS card and OC ASUS card against only stock Vega 64 and NV 1080. In the DX11 games, yes the 1070TI does well, but is destroyed by Vega 64 in Vulkan, and beaten in DX12. It is only when overclocked that this card keeps up with the Vega 64, and still in DX12 and Vulkan, loses out. Would you want to wager how competitive the 1070TI would be with an OC'd Vega or NV1080?

But of course, there's that pesky retail price. Vega64 is such an utter failure, that people are buying them in such huge quantities, that if you can find one, it is well over MSRP. Such a huge failure for AMD. /s
Click to expand...

How was that you said?
"Le Sigh"
Apparently you should check the numbers here 1st before jumping to your own personal conclusions . ( )
You'll notice that at stock the GTX1070Ti easily outperforms VEGA56, and while OC'ed in most games it matches even the VEGA64 LiquidCooled version , which costs tons more and consumes ....even more !!
 
jardows said:
Le Sigh. Apparently you don't do well with reading comprehension or logistical analysis. This review compared stock ASUS card and OC ASUS card against only stock Vega 64 and NV 1080. In the DX11 games, yes the 1070TI does well, but is destroyed by Vega 64 in Vulkan, and beaten in DX12. It is only when overclocked that this card keeps up with the Vega 64, and still in DX12 and Vulkan, loses out. Would you want to wager how competitive the 1070TI would be with an OC'd Vega or NV1080?

But of course, there's that pesky retail price. Vega64 is such an utter failure, that people are buying them in such huge quantities, that if you can find one, it is well over MSRP. Such a huge failure for AMD. /s
Click to expand...

Vega is not a huge failure for on the surface. People are buying every one they make. MINERS FUCKING ADORE IT!

But when you look at it critically, it IS a huge failure for AMD.

The added cost of HBM2 adds around $50-100 to the build cost compared to GDDR5 of the GTX 1070 ti. We've already discussed this in several threads.

The RX Vega has a 50% larger die size than the GTX 1070 Ti it's matched with. This means a higher cost-per-die, on the same process.

The yields on the interposer the GPU is assembled on is lower than a PCB with GDDR5 chips. This adds some additional cost to making Vega 64.

All these eat massively into AMD's profit margins. To the point where they're not making any money on Vega.

Further, the reason Vega keeps being sold-out is because AMD's yields are poor. And AMD will never have the cash to fix this, because they don't make any money on these high-end devices.

It takes massive amounts of research to get your GPU's power consumption down low enough that you can handle the high power consumption of 9Gbps GDDR5 ram. It also takes massive amounts of research to get the same performance as AMD's HBM2 with 33% less bandwidth. And more research in design optimization to get the most performance out of the least number of functional units.

But when you're selling tens of millions of cards like Nvidia, that research more than pays for itself. It means they can actually meet demand in the consumer marketplace with MAINSTREAM EMORY for all their cards, and sell tons of chips.

Until AMD gets a huge influx of cash, they'll be perpetually stuck in second.
 
Last edited:
upload_2017-12-5_15-27-8.png
 
Undervolt the Vega 64 in a review sometime, curious how that plays out; Undervolted V64 vs overclocked 1070ti
 
It clocks higher than my ASUS ROG-STRIX-GTX1080-O8G-11GBPS with the same cooler that supposedly has a binned chip. I can't get that thing stable anywhere near 2100.
 
shad0w4life said:
Undervolt the Vega 64 in a review sometime, curious how that plays out; Undervolted V64 vs overclocked 1070ti
Click to expand...

If all Vega 64s could be run at a lower voltage they'd have shipped 'em that way. For every person that can get their Vega 64 to overclock flawlessly on reduced voltage there's a Vega 64 that can't overclock worth a damn regardless of voltage.
 
any chance of a overclocked vs overclocked run? i think the numbers would have been much better on AMD's side , they are more or less the same price, why not offer a OC'ed V64 in the mix as well? a stock V64 gets equaled or marginally beat by the highest overclocked 1070ti ever.i dont think it could take a oc'ed V64, and dollar for dollar i want the best bang for the buck. I am not a fanboi, running Nvidia cards now. just dont think AMD got represented here properly. different price...then no problem with a cheaper card oc'ed vs a stock card. same price then it should have been a oc vs oc regardless of architecture.
 
B770 said:
any chance of a overclocked vs overclocked run? i think the numbers would have been much better on AMD's side , they are more or less the same price, why not offer a OC'ed V64 in the mix as well? a stock V64 gets equaled or marginally beat by the highest overclocked 1070ti ever.i dont think it could take a oc'ed V64, and dollar for dollar i want the best bang for the buck. I am not a fanboi, running Nvidia cards now. just dont think AMD got represented here properly. different price...then no problem with a cheaper card oc'ed vs a stock card. same price then it should have been a oc vs oc regardless of architecture.
Click to expand...
Bang per buck right now is clearly Nvidia due to that you can get Nvidia cards at MSRP (straight from Nvidia or retailer/online) while RTG - good luck finding anything even remotely at MSRP.
 
B770 said:
any chance of a overclocked vs overclocked run? i think the numbers would have been much better on AMD's side , they are more or less the same price, why not offer a OC'ed V64 in the mix as well? a stock V64 gets equaled or marginally beat by the highest overclocked 1070ti ever.i dont think it could take a oc'ed V64, and dollar for dollar i want the best bang for the buck. I am not a fanboi, running Nvidia cards now. just dont think AMD got represented here properly. different price...then no problem with a cheaper card oc'ed vs a stock card. same price then it should have been a oc vs oc regardless of architecture.
Click to expand...
OCing a Vega 64 is a waste of time. The liquid cooled version is already being pushed to the limit out of the box. You have very little head room with Vega 64.
 
Last edited:
Sith'ari said:
How was that you said?
"Le Sigh"
Apparently you should check the numbers here 1st before jumping to your own personal conclusions . ( )
You'll notice that at stock the GTX1070Ti easily outperforms VEGA56, and while OC'ed in most games it matches even the VEGA64 LiquidCooled version , which costs tons more and consumes ....even more !!
Click to expand...

no no no no no no no. I am going with Kyle's benches, not some random youtuber. Go comment on the youtube page - I'm sticking to the discussion of the article at hand. Kyle compared the ASUS ROG STRIX GeForce GTX 1070 Ti A8G GAMING Advanced Edition to the standard Vega64, not LC Vega. In which case, it does not cost "tons more." Power consumption is something to consider, but unless you are gaming 24x7, the practical difference is negligible, at least in the majority of the USA.

Based on Kyle's benchmarks, the ASUS ROG STRIX GeForce GTX 1070 Ti A8G GAMING Advanced Edition is a solid product, at a premium price. According to Kyle's benchmarks, unless overclocked, it falls short of the VEGA 64, at the same MSRP. According to Kyle's benches, when overclocked, it can keep up with the VEGA 64 in DX12 and Vulkan titles, but never shows clear superiority.

Did you even read Kyle's article, or did you just hop in here to stoke the "AMD is trash - Long live King NVIDIA" fires?
 
-1st of all, although i like [H]'s reviews, this doesn't mean that it's my only source of info.
-Secondly, just like vegeta535 said at previous post, the liquid cooled version of VEGA64 is the top of the top. It shows us the real limits of VEGA64, because there can be no aftermarket cooling solution that will beat the liquid cooling version.
Having that in mind, and seeing the GTX1070Ti reaching these levels when OC'ed, with ONLY 400$ ( https://www.newegg.com/global/gr/Pr...n=gtx 1070 ti&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36 ) , which is much cheaper than the entire VEGA series, is the reason for my previous comments!!
P.S. Lastly , the reason why i showed you the "Hardware Unboxed" video , was your comments about Vulcan & DX12 performance.... Yes , you are correct when saying that the VEGA cards have superior VULCAN performance, but the DX12 advantage is not accurate, since it's game-related.
Check, at the video i put, the performance among the DX12 games: The OC'ed -400$ COST- GTX1070Ti outperforms the VEGA64 Liquid version, at "Ashes of Singularity (*remember that this game was used by AMD as a landmark in order to advertise the DX12 capabilities of its GPUs)", "Hitman", "Rise of the Tomb Raider" and other DX12 games!!
P.S. Also , don't forget that the 1st pure DX12 game, "Gears of War 4 " has better performance with NVidia GPUs : https://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/11/23/gears_war_4_dx12_performance_review/1
 
Sith'ari said:
-1st of all, although i like [H]'s reviews, this doesn't mean that it's my only source of info.
-Secondly, just like vegeta535 said at previous post, the liquid cooled version of VEGA64 is the top of the top. It shows us the real limits of VEGA64, because there can be no aftermarket cooling solution that will beat the liquid cooling version.
Having that in mind, and seeing the GTX1070Ti reaching these levels when OC'ed, with ONLY 400$ ( https://www.newegg.com/global/gr/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=-1&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx 1070 ti&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36 ) , which is much cheaper than the entire VEGA series, is the reason for my previous comments!!
P.S. Lastly , the reason why i showed you the "Hardware Unboxed" video , was your comments about Vulcan & DX12 performance.... Yes , you are correct when saying that the VEGA cards have superior VULCAN performance, but the DX12 advantage is not accurate, since it's game-related.
Check, at the video i put, the performance among the DX12 games: The OC'ed -400$ COST- GTX1070Ti outperforms the VEGA64 Liquid version, at "Ashes of Singularity (*remember that this game was used by AMD as a landmark in order to advertise the DX12 capabilities of its GPUs)", "Hitman", "Rise of the Tomb Raider" and other DX12 games!!
P.S. Also , don't forget that the 1st pure DX12 game, "Gears of War 4 " has better performance with NVidia GPUs : https://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/11/23/gears_war_4_dx12_performance_review/1
Click to expand...

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709 601305993 Nope, global prices are not in dollars.

Edit: And this is the one you should be comparing it with: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487390
 
I just got a 4k screen. However, I don't "need" everything to be on ultra. Would this card be a good fit? I'll get the 1080TI if I "need" to...but putting $250 in my pocket for other upgrades is attractive.
 
Trepidati0n said:
I just got a 4k screen. However, I don't "need" everything to be on ultra. Would this card be a good fit? I'll get the 1080TI if I "need" to...but putting $250 in my pocket for other upgrades is attractive.
Click to expand...
Why did you get such a high res screen if you don't want excellent gaming IQ?
 
Geforcepat said:
So much this. why get a 4k screen and then only run on low/med ? just stick with 1080p or 1440 at most until you can do it right.
Good review BTW on this black sheep of the pascal fam.
Click to expand...
Is a real question. Just wondering if he had non-gaming reasons for going 4K. I got mine for "work" primarily, but gaming on it is a friggin kick in the pants at 48".
 
Vega still looks great if only it wasn't so incredibly expensive. Cheapest Vega 56 I can find right now is $650. For a Vega 56 lol. Ridiculous. Going by price vega 64 is competing with a 1080 ti.
 
Still looking for answer/opinion on how well this 1070ti will perform on 4k games... =/
 
Trepidati0n said:
Still looking for answer/opinion on how well this 1070ti will perform on 4k games... =/
Click to expand...

what? Even GTX1080Ti ,-(the most powerful GPU at the current market besides Titan Xp )- ,has to make some sacrifices at some games at 4K.
1440p is the perfect resolution for the GTX1070Ti if you want max quality at graphics, not the 4K one.
 
I went (zotac) gtx 1080 for $20 more, doesn't make a whole lot of sense at the price. I can't see setting the budget limit at $480 and not stepping up the extra $20 for a faster, higher featured card. It's too narrow of a price gap between 1070 and 1080 for the 1070ti to make any sense. Drop both the 1070 and 1070ti $50 and all of a sudden it makes a lot of sense. There's no more huge gap between the 1060 6gb and 1070, and there's a decent $100 between the 1070ti and 1080 for cards like this to slot into and start to make sense.
 
bobzdar said:
I went (zotac) gtx 1080 for $20 more, doesn't make a whole lot of sense at the price. I can't see setting the budget limit at $480 and not stepping up the extra $20 for a faster, higher featured card. It's too narrow of a price gap between 1070 and 1080 for the 1070ti to make any sense. Drop both the 1070 and 1070ti $50 and all of a sudden it makes a lot of sense. There's no more huge gap between the 1060 6gb and 1070, and there's a decent $100 between the 1070ti and 1080 for cards like this to slot into and start to make sense.
Click to expand...

Thank ETH mining for that. You can easily find 1070 that cost alsmost as much as a 1070Ti FE, and some non-refence 1070Ti close to GTX 1080 FE. BTW I think its odd that FE cards were more expensive than non-refence cards and now its the opposite.
 
jardows said:
no no no no no no no. I am going with Kyle's benches, not some random youtuber.
Click to expand...

Yeah especially that one. That's the guy that shit all over OC3D claiming they made up some news story about AMD doing a bait and switch on Vega launch prices based solely off a quote from one of their random forum members. Called them fake news and all kinds of nasty shit. Turns out the quote was from one of the bosses from the retailer Overclockers UK and turned out to be true. That unboxed guy didn't offer an apology or retraction, just took the video down like nothing had happened. So yeah, fuck that guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top