NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition Review @ [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,598
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition Review - In our review of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition video card we will explore the price competitive performance and find out what kind of gameplay advantage the new GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition offers over the previous generation cards. We compare both the GTX 980 and Radeon R9 Fury GPUs to the new GTX 1070.
 
The review had no 4K numbers ... not even a mention?

I was planning on getting a 1080 anyway for my 4K Acer Predator but it would have been nice to know what the extra $200 was buying me ...
 
Brent found a use for apples that I approve of. Apples to Apples.... I like very much. I always get confused a little when I am looking at the FPS numbers and see that different options are enabled per the card. I understand you are trying to show how some features can be enabled for the same FPS that other cards can't pull off, but this makes it easier for my feeble mind to judge. Kudos for having both. Ironically, it helps better understand the options and first charts you show.

DirectX 12 leaves questions in my mind though. Hopefully after a couple of months, we can get a better view of how DX12 really works on NVidia's cards. And AMD's new cards ;)
 
pcgeekesq said:
The review had no 4K numbers ... not even a mention?

I was planning on getting a 1080 anyway for my 4K Acer Predator but it would have been nice to know what the extra $200 was buying me ...
Click to expand...
As we have mentioned over and over and over, even the 980 Ti and Titan X have shown to provide acceptable 4K gaming in our opinions. Sure you can game at 4K with a single card, but be prepared to lower quality settings greatly to have decent framerates at such a high resolution.

Overall, with the exception of DOOM, the GTX 1080 is only able to support acceptable gaming at 1440p in a single card configuration.

GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition Review
 
254W at full gaming load is insane, seriously!

I'll wait to see what AMD comes out with and make a decision from there, but I'll likely go with a custom cooled GTX 1070. The only thing I don't like about Nvidia's offering at this point is the price of GSync, and I need a new monitor. Anyone have a 144Hz monitor without GSync and really notice the difference? I seem to get mixed reviews on this depending on who I ask, but it's pretty frustrating for me as a consumer that I can get a monitor with FreeSync and a video card from AMD for the price of GSync, especially given that FreeSync can be supported by anyone who wants to. With an R9 280X though, I'm definitely overdue for an upgrade.
 
DrLobotomy said:
DirectX 12 leaves questions in my mind though. Hopefully after a couple of months, we can get a better view of how DX12 really works on NVidia's cards. And AMD's new cards ;)
Click to expand...
Yeah, this was one of the more interesting parts of the review. I expected the 1070 to outperform the 980 by the margin it did, and it seems like the same sort of margin prevailed in DX12, but there was the fury right at it. While I loathe the idea of moving to W10 for various reasons, DX12 would be the decider. I feel like I will probably replace my 290X at some point in the next year, and I might as well be as future proof as possible. I will probably wait till Vega and 1080 Ti to see how it all shakes out.

Brent/Kyle, would it be possible to do the DX12 benches with a 390/390x as well? I know the 980 is a stand in for it performance wise, but I wonder if that would be the same case under DX12, based on how the Fury closed that gap. Also possible you guys have explored this already in a different article. (y)
 
britjh22 said:
Brent/Kyle, would it be possible to do the DX12 benches with a 390/390x as well? I know the 980 is a stand in for it performance wise, but I wonder if that would be the same case under DX12, based on how the Fury closed that gap. Also possible you guys have explored this already in a different article.
Click to expand...
When we get some games to truly test in-game, we will likely do so.
 
HockeyJon said:
254W at full gaming load is insane, seriously!

I'll wait to see what AMD comes out with and make a decision from there, but I'll likely go with a custom cooled GTX 1070. The only thing I don't like about Nvidia's offering at this point is the price of GSync, and I need a new monitor. Anyone have a 144Hz monitor without GSync and really notice the difference? I seem to get mixed reviews on this depending on who I ask, but it's pretty frustrating for me as a consumer that I can get a monitor with FreeSync and a video card from AMD for the price of GSync, especially given that FreeSync can be supported by anyone who wants to. With an R9 280X though, I'm definitely overdue for an upgrade.
Click to expand...

Are you driven batshit crazy by the occasional torn frame? If so, then you need Free/Gsync.

If not, then you'll be fine with whatever. The response time of gaming with vsync off is exactly the same as Free/Gsync.
 
Damn this is a nice card. It fits well within my wattage range. I don't need this....but I want it so bad.
 
Bringing that level of performance down to a more affordable price for everyone allows more people to jump on the high-performance bandwagon.
Click to expand...

No, 379 (450) is not an affordable price for everyone. I'm sure NVidia would love everyone to accept that as affordable. If there is one GPU that I hope will do that it would be 1060 with better/similar performance than 970/980 for less than 200/250.
 
He said more affordable, which is correct. Obviously depending on your income, you might be eating kraft mac & cheese for dinner.
 
martinmsj said:
No, 379 (450) is not an affordable price for everyone. I'm sure NVidia would love everyone to accept that as affordable. If there is one GPU that I hope will do that it would be 1060 with better/similar performance than 970/980 for less than 200/250.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I haven't ever paid more than $300 for a card (8800 GT > 6870 > 7950 > 290x), and I'm happy to wait until AMD launches competition to push down prices.
 
I'm hoping the 1060 in SLI is faster than the 1080 like the GTX 660 SLI was faster than a 680 for cheaper cash.
 
Cheaper and Faster, what's not to like?
Another great review, thanks [H]ard.
 
On page 3, under the Apples top Apples, it says it is 33% faster than the 980Ti instead of 980.
 
Nice review guys. I'm sold on a 1070, however, I'm not interested in paying a premium/early adopter tax for a FE card. I plan to wait for the AIB partners and see just how far my money can go. Either way, a 1070 will be a very nice upgrade over my 760 and an easy way to get VR when generation 2 of the Vive or OR hit the markets in the future.

Edit.. if possible.. I'd like to see a shoot out between 1080/1070 FE cards vs AIB cards. That'll really be an interesting one.
 
britjh22 said:
Agreed, I haven't ever paid more than $300 for a card (8800 GT > 6870 > 7950 > 290x), and I'm happy to wait until AMD launches competition to push down prices.
Click to expand...

That's also been my historical budget. But damned I'm tempted to get one.
 
I'm really tempted to offload my 970 G1 SLI setup for one 1070, even if it costs me some money to do so. Considering SLI scaling, it seems like I would actually see a performance upgrade.

Might have to take my chances getting murdered on Craigslist to sell 'em quick!
 
My big question is will the 1070 support a VR/HMD experience as well as a 1080 or is it worth the extra $$$ to future proof the VR experience?
 
jolli said:
I'm really tempted to offload my 970 G1 SLI setup for one 1070, even if it costs me some money to do so. Considering SLI scaling, it seems like I would actually see a performance upgrade.

Might have to take my chances getting murdered on Craigslist to sell 'em quick!
Click to expand...

Tempted here too...I just wonder if it's worth it to go for a 1080 versus a 1070. Would have been nice to see some 1080 vs. 1070 graphs (would just be compiling data already taken from multiple reviews) to see if it's worthwhile at different resolutions.

EDIT: Seems to be a difference of around 10-15 FPS in favor of the 1080 in many games.
 
So, a 1070 for $449 or 2x Polaris 10's for $398 to $448 which are on par with the 1080? How is this a [H]ard choice?
 
pcgeekesq said:
The review had no 4K numbers ... not even a mention?

I was planning on getting a 1080 anyway for my 4K Acer Predator but it would have been nice to know what the extra $200 was buying me ...
Click to expand...

We will have a 1080 4K article.
 
martinmsj said:
No, 379 (450) is not an affordable price for everyone. I'm sure NVidia would love everyone to accept that as affordable. If there is one GPU that I hope will do that it would be 1060 with better/similar performance than 970/980 for less than 200/250.
Click to expand...

more affordable , which is true
 
kdh said:
Nice review guys. I'm sold on a 1070, however, I'm not interested in paying a premium/early adopter tax for a FE card. I plan to wait for the AIB partners and see just how far my money can go. Either way, a 1070 will be a very nice upgrade over my 760 and an easy way to get VR when generation 2 of the Vive or OR hit the markets in the future.

Edit.. if possible.. I'd like to see a shoot out between 1080/1070 FE cards vs AIB cards. That'll really be an interesting one.
Click to expand...

That will likely happen, we will test FE's sustainable consistent clock speed over time vs. a custom card clocked down to the same base clock (clock v clock) comparison.
 
The GTX 1080 benchies impressed me. The price, not so much.
The GTX 1070 benchies impressed me even more. The price impressed me as well. [not the lame FE prices though]

If I can someone here locally to sell my GTX 970 to I might seriously eyeball the GTX 1070. Either that or just get a GTX 1070 and relegate the GTX 970 to the 2nd box that is currently running a Radeon HD7870. :D
 
britjh22 said:
Agreed, I haven't ever paid more than $300 for a card (8800 GT > 6870 > 7950 > 290x), and I'm happy to wait until AMD launches competition to push down prices.
Click to expand...

Thats nice, but the 7950 and 290X launched at way, way more than $300. The only reason you got them that cheap is because Nvidia forced AMD to price them that low by offering better products. AMD didn't slash prices on those cards out of the goodness of their hearts! The 7950 launched at $450 and was about 10% better than nvidia's 580 at the time. Compared to what nvidia is selling at $380 this time (30-40% improvement over the 980?) that price was a joke. The 7970 was $550 too! Only $50 less than a non-FE 1080 is supposed to cost... and that was 4 years ago. Its like theres like this weird distortion field that prevents people from remembering that AMD is just as guilty of pricing high when they can as Nvidia, they just haven't been able to command those prices in a while.
 
Last edited:
risking kyle and/or brent's backlash, re 970 comparison, I think people are wanting to know if that "70% improvement over 970" claim is true. that's why they are pressing the issue. I know i'd like to see if it's true or not. is a 980 35% faster than a 970? if it is and the 1070 is 35% faster than a 980 then it would be the 70%(35+35) improvement they claim.
 
Taldren said:
So, a 1070 for $449 or 2x Polaris 10's for $398 to $448 which are on par with the 1080? How is this a [H]ard choice?
Click to expand...

It's an easy one. The 1070. Why would you run two cards with poor multi-card support when you could run one and call it good? I also like how you included the full possible price range for the AMD card, but left out the AIB price of $379 for the NV.

I mean, if you don't mind running two cards for the performance of one, then cool. I actually think the 480 cards might be great for several applications, and may pick one or two up for secondary machines in my house. I definitely won't be running two in the same system though. (and will be picking up a 1070 for my main desktop)
 
Taldren said:
So, a 1070 for $449 or 2x Polaris 10's for $398 to $448 which are on par with the 1080? How is this a [H]ard choice?
Click to expand...

I would venture to say we don't really know yet how RX 480 will perform. You also have to assume that perhaps in a 100% CrossFire scaling situation, what you state, may be true. However, we all know gaming does not scale at 100% in SLI or CrossFire. We also know SLI and CrossFire support is very game specific, and when CrossFire and SLI aren't working, you are back to one GPUs worth of performance. Perfect scaling is not guaranteed between two GPUs.
 
J3RK said:
It's an easy one. The 1070. Why would you run two cards with poor multi-card support when you could run one and call it good? I also like how you included the full possible price range for the AMD card, but left out the AIB price of $379 for the NV.

I mean, if you don't mind running two cards for the performance of one, then cool. I actually think the 480 cards might be great for several applications, and may pick one or two up for secondary machines in my house. I definitely won't be running two in the same system though. (and will be picking up a 1070 for my main desktop)
Click to expand...
Running two cards for superior performance to THIS one, you mean? ... for the same price range? I play mostly AAA games these days and have not had an issue with my 295x2 or my 780 SLI setups, so unsure what you mean by poor multi-card support. As for the price, I used the suggested retail provided by both AMD and nVidia as those are the only numbers I can compare atm.
 
Shame about the lack of GTX970 comparison, but anyway, many thanks for the review
 
2 of these is SLI will make for one pixel pumpin' mutherfucker. For less than the price of a Titan you can get some pretty amazing numbers. Hope Summertime Santa shows up soon.
 
Activate: AMD said:
Thats nice, but the 7950 and 290X launched at way, way more than $300. The only reason you got them that cheap is because Nvidia forced AMD to price them that low by offering better products. AMD didn't slash prices on those cards out of the goodness of their hearts! The 7950 launched at $450 and was about 10% better than nvidia's 580 at the time. Compared to what nvidia is selling at $380 this time (30-40% improvement over the 980?) that price was a joke. The 7970 was $550 too! Only $50 less than a non-FE 1080 is supposed to cost... and that was 4 years ago. Its like theres like this weird distortion field that prevents people from remembering that AMD is just as guilty of pricing high when they can as Nvidia, they just haven't been able to command those prices in a while.
Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't trying to say that either one are saints when they have an advantage and they can charge a premium. I don't care which company ends up being the one causing prices to balance, just saying I'm happy to wait till it happens. I probably have a slight AMD bias, because I don't want there to be just one vendor, but it hasn't made me part with money unwisely yet and it won't.
 
Taldren said:
Running two cards for superior performance to THIS one, you mean? ... for the same price range? I play mostly AAA games these days and have not had an issue with my 295x2 or my 780 SLI setups, so unsure what you mean by poor multi-card support. As for the price, I used the suggested retail provided by both AMD and nVidia as those are the only numbers I can compare atm.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that you don't have any issues with the games you play. I seem to read a lot of posts complaining about crossfire and SLI configs. Either issues, or just lack of support. Poor scaling is another thing that seems to come up often. I haven't had an SLI config for a few years (not since the GTX295) but when I did, it seemed to work decently well. Personally, I'd much rather have a single card. The $379 price point for the AIB 1070s seems to be pretty spot on for its performance. I also think $199 for a 480 based card is pretty nice, which is why I'm thinking about upgrading some of the other PCs in my house with them. I still prefer the whole idea of a faster single card though.
 
Taldren said:
Running two cards for superior performance to THIS one, you mean? ... for the same price range? I play mostly AAA games these days and have not had an issue with my 295x2 or my 780 SLI setups, so unsure what you mean by poor multi-card support. As for the price, I used the suggested retail provided by both AMD and nVidia as those are the only numbers I can compare atm.
Click to expand...

Sorry gotta call BS on this I've run both SLI and Crossfire over the years and NEITHER one of them is perfect, not every game "AAA" or otherwise has multi-card support out of the box and there are plenty that never do.
 
Taldren said:
So, a 1070 for $449 or 2x Polaris 10's for $398 to $448 which are on par with the 1080? How is this a [H]ard choice?
Click to expand...

Because you will need a big brick shithouse power supply to keep those cards fed ($10 says 2 of those will suck at down at least 500 - 600 watts of power alone) and you will have to install another A/C to keep up with the heat that will be pouring out of your case. If you already have a good case and a beefy power supply then ok, you might be on to something (well, excluding the PITA that CxFire / SLI can be for other reasons) but if you don't, you would be just better off buying a top end single card solution.
 
Good review, but the preview (which was AWESOME) was easily able to answer all of my questions and confirm that an AIB 1070 or 1070 hybrid card is the one for me. With a preview like that...who needs reviews!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top