GTX 980, no longer GTX 880 discussion thread - Page 6
Tags:
- Gtx
- Maxwell
-
Graphics
-
Graphics Cards
- Nvidia
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
ferwindjacks
October 8, 2014 6:19:56 AM
Yeah I knew performance gains on 20nm were going to be small, but why invest the money if you're not gonna use it? I'm sure Nvidia will launch 20nm to milk it, if they get production issues solved. Also, there are no reports that TSMC has 16nm capable nodes so we might not see it for another 2 years or so.
But who's to say they haven't already invested in 16nm process, hmm?
But who's to say they haven't already invested in 16nm process, hmm?
-
Reply to ferwindjacks
So correct me if I'm wrong: we won't see massive performance increases without finFETs, but TSMC isn't adopting finFETs because their non-finFET SoC's are selling like hot cakes?
That would be quite bad for us enthusiasts, we're already getting ever smaller performance increases. Hopefully some manufacturer somewhere decides to get Nvidia and AMD proper new chips because I'm starting to doubt TSMC is up for the job...
That would be quite bad for us enthusiasts, we're already getting ever smaller performance increases. Hopefully some manufacturer somewhere decides to get Nvidia and AMD proper new chips because I'm starting to doubt TSMC is up for the job...
-
Reply to Vexillarius
ferwindjacks
October 8, 2014 7:07:57 AM
TSMC certainly has their hands full but I do believe that companies can order finFETs in whatever they are manufacturing. I do not know however the affect finFETs have on GPUs and whether this would net more performance. Considering I haven't heard of it on GPUs I would say it can't be done/has no gains.
Which is why 16nm might be the next big jump. Like I said before however, I'm expecting two cycles of 20nm before 16/14 from Nvidia. AMD is another story.
Which is why 16nm might be the next big jump. Like I said before however, I'm expecting two cycles of 20nm before 16/14 from Nvidia. AMD is another story.
-
Reply to ferwindjacks
Related resources
- should i sell my gtx 780 and get a 880/980? HELP!!!!!!!!!! - Tech Support
- waitng for gtx 790 or waiting for gtx 880/980 or waiting for next something amd gpu??? - Tech Support
- i7-4710MQ with GTX 880M or i7-4910MQ with R9 M290X - Tech Support
- EVGA GTX980 Superclocked more stock - Tech Support
- GTX 980 vs. EVGA Super clocked GTX 980 - Tech Support
ferwindjacks said:
Yeah I knew performance gains on 20nm were going to be small, but why invest the money if you're not gonna use it? I'm sure Nvidia will launch 20nm to milk it, if they get production issues solved. Also, there are no reports that TSMC has 16nm capable nodes so we might not see it for another 2 years or so. But who's to say they haven't already invested in 16nm process, hmm?
because of tegra. 20nmSOC might not bring much improvement to gpu but that is not the case with soc. but the story about nvidia skipping 20nm process for gpu is still a rumor at best right now. one of the reason nvidia choosing to use 28nm over 20nm for GM204 is cost (nvidia mention this themselves). so i believe once the yield is good enough and it become much cheaper cost wise nvidia will starts using 20nm for their GPU. if you follow news about GPU closely surely you already heard rumor about nvidia plan on bringing GM204 design to 20nm node and then re-release them as a new series midrange.
-
Reply to renz496
Quote:
So correct me if I'm wrong: we won't see massive performance increases without finFETs, but TSMC isn't adopting finFETs because their non-finFET SoC's are selling like hot cakes?i haven't heard about TSMC will not adopting or cancelling to use FinFet. all i know TSMC will keep using planar design for 20nm node (same for GF) and will only start with FinFet design once they go with 16nm and lower.
Quote:
That would be quite bad for us enthusiasts, we're already getting ever smaller performance increases. Hopefully some manufacturer somewhere decides to get Nvidia and AMD proper new chips because I'm starting to doubt TSMC is up for the job...honestly if TSMC can't do it i don't know who can. samsung only dealing with SoC type process. GF has always been late and behind TSMC. intel? honestly i don't know if they have suitable process to be used with GPU because they never make one.
-
Reply to renz496
renz496 said:
ferwindjacks said:
Yeah I knew performance gains on 20nm were going to be small, but why invest the money if you're not gonna use it? I'm sure Nvidia will launch 20nm to milk it, if they get production issues solved. Also, there are no reports that TSMC has 16nm capable nodes so we might not see it for another 2 years or so. But who's to say they haven't already invested in 16nm process, hmm?
because of tegra. 20nmSOC might not bring much improvement to gpu but that is not the case with soc. but the story about nvidia skipping 20nm process for gpu is still a rumor at best right now. one of the reason nvidia choosing to use 28nm over 20nm for GM204 is cost (nvidia mention this themselves). so i believe once the yield is good enough and it become much cheaper cost wise nvidia will starts using 20nm for their GPU. if you follow news about GPU closely surely you already heard rumor about nvidia plan on bringing GM204 design to 20nm node and then re-release them as a new series midrange.
That's what I've been seeing and as the old 660Ti's are still alive, folding and able to handle Crysis 3 on max visuals I can wait.
-
Reply to Mousemonkey
Caught this item regarding the GTX 960:
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Allegedly Postponed To Q1 2015 Due To Strong GeForce GTX 980 and GTX 970 Sales
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-allegedly-po...
I don't really believe it since the holiday buying season is exactly the time that manufacturers target for their big product releases. To skip that in favor of the slow Q1 season doesn't make much sense.
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Allegedly Postponed To Q1 2015 Due To Strong GeForce GTX 980 and GTX 970 Sales
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-allegedly-po...
I don't really believe it since the holiday buying season is exactly the time that manufacturers target for their big product releases. To skip that in favor of the slow Q1 season doesn't make much sense.
-
Reply to 17seconds
ferwindjacks
October 8, 2014 8:07:14 PM
One of the best overclocking articles I have ever read here:
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Overclocking Video Card Review
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/10/08/nvidia_geforc...
Interesting editorial in the conclusion:
Represent
There is another aspect about the GeForce GTX 980 and GeForce GTX 970 that needs to be discussed. We have noticed a lot of excitement and discussion about the GeForce GTX 980 and 970 from our readers on our forums. There is a lot of excitement that is positive about these video cards creating demand and people wanting to buy these video cards simply based on the overclocking potential. This is exciting for us to see you guys so excited, but it makes us think about the differences in the AMD Radeon R9 290X launch and the GeForce GTX 980 launch that need to be discussed. AMD, listen up.
The overall buzz and reputation that GPUs garner at initial launch affect sales. This is where NVIDIA has got it right with the GeForce GTX 970 and GeForce GTX 980 and AMD got it wrong with the AMD Radeon R9 290X. AMD could perhaps take a page from NVIDIA here and learn a few things that will help it sell more GPUs. This reputation primarily revolves around how AMD's PowerTune (PDF) technology works in comparison to NVIDIA's GPU Boost 2.0. It relates directly to clock speed, and perceived performance of the GPU from the get-go.
If you recall back to the AMD Radeon R9 290X launch the immediate initial concern that sprung up in a flurry of articles was how the AMD Radeon R9 290X did not maintain its clock speed but instead clock throttled its clock speed as much as 200MHz or more while gaming for longer than 15 minutes. When the AMD Radeon R9 290X was marketed to the consumer AMD said its clock speed was "up to" 1GHz. Everyone expected that the video card would run at 1GHz, as all video cards before it had always run at what these were specified to run at. However, we quickly found out this wasn't the case in games. The frequency could indeed "go up to" 1GHz, but often times it was throttling down much less than 1GHz. This means one would perceive the performance of the video card to be less than what is advertised.
AMD quickly re-enforced their stance stating that the clock speed was always an "up to" 1GHz potential, if the thermals allowed Power Tune to run at 1GHz. We found that surely enough, with custom video cards using custom coolers 1GHz could be maintained. However, the damage was already done. AMD garnered a first impression out of the gate of the AMD Radeon R9 290X throttling performance. It has a perceived performance impression that felt like you were getting less performance than advertised, because you possibly were! This created a bad reputation for the AMD Radeon R9 290X from the start.
This is where NVIDIA got it right. The GeForce GTX 970 and 980 use GPU Boost, which doesn't downclock the frequency, instead, it actually up-clocks the frequency in practice. Now, technically this power controlling feature can downclock the frequency if needed, it has that capability, but since GPU Boost has been a part of our GPU lives it never has done so in practice.
Instead, NVIDIA specifies a clock speed, a GPU Base Clock and a Boost Clock. As long as the GPU frequency never drops below the specified base clock no one would complain, and no one has. The GPU Boost frequency is what it can go up to, but again in practice it is actually usually better than that. The real-time frequency we see in games is always above the Boost Clock by some degree.
This creates a perceived performance that is better than what you expect out of the video card. You know the base clock, but if the real-time frequency is always faster than that, and even exceeds the specified boost clock, you are going to think "wow, this card performs better than I ever thought."
Then, add on to the equation that now the GeForce GTX 970 and 980 are overclocking to frequencies never seen before on reference designs. With frequencies exceeding 1.4, 1.5 and up to 1.6GHz on GTX 970 cards we are talking about frequencies at a high level never before talked about on stock parts.
With this extreme overclocking potential it re-enforces this perceived performance. It makes the consumer feel good about their purchase, it is very positive. Therefore, the reputation created for the GeForce GTX 970 and 980 are very positive, and you better believe this makes a difference in sales.
One should never underestimate the power of reputation. NVIDIA got it right in terms of the perceived performance and feelings associated with the GTX 970 and 980. People are excited about these GPUs just based on the fact they overclock so well. AMD can learn from this, and we hope it does.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/10/08/nvidia_geforc...
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Overclocking Video Card Review
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/10/08/nvidia_geforc...
Interesting editorial in the conclusion:
Represent
There is another aspect about the GeForce GTX 980 and GeForce GTX 970 that needs to be discussed. We have noticed a lot of excitement and discussion about the GeForce GTX 980 and 970 from our readers on our forums. There is a lot of excitement that is positive about these video cards creating demand and people wanting to buy these video cards simply based on the overclocking potential. This is exciting for us to see you guys so excited, but it makes us think about the differences in the AMD Radeon R9 290X launch and the GeForce GTX 980 launch that need to be discussed. AMD, listen up.
The overall buzz and reputation that GPUs garner at initial launch affect sales. This is where NVIDIA has got it right with the GeForce GTX 970 and GeForce GTX 980 and AMD got it wrong with the AMD Radeon R9 290X. AMD could perhaps take a page from NVIDIA here and learn a few things that will help it sell more GPUs. This reputation primarily revolves around how AMD's PowerTune (PDF) technology works in comparison to NVIDIA's GPU Boost 2.0. It relates directly to clock speed, and perceived performance of the GPU from the get-go.
If you recall back to the AMD Radeon R9 290X launch the immediate initial concern that sprung up in a flurry of articles was how the AMD Radeon R9 290X did not maintain its clock speed but instead clock throttled its clock speed as much as 200MHz or more while gaming for longer than 15 minutes. When the AMD Radeon R9 290X was marketed to the consumer AMD said its clock speed was "up to" 1GHz. Everyone expected that the video card would run at 1GHz, as all video cards before it had always run at what these were specified to run at. However, we quickly found out this wasn't the case in games. The frequency could indeed "go up to" 1GHz, but often times it was throttling down much less than 1GHz. This means one would perceive the performance of the video card to be less than what is advertised.
AMD quickly re-enforced their stance stating that the clock speed was always an "up to" 1GHz potential, if the thermals allowed Power Tune to run at 1GHz. We found that surely enough, with custom video cards using custom coolers 1GHz could be maintained. However, the damage was already done. AMD garnered a first impression out of the gate of the AMD Radeon R9 290X throttling performance. It has a perceived performance impression that felt like you were getting less performance than advertised, because you possibly were! This created a bad reputation for the AMD Radeon R9 290X from the start.
This is where NVIDIA got it right. The GeForce GTX 970 and 980 use GPU Boost, which doesn't downclock the frequency, instead, it actually up-clocks the frequency in practice. Now, technically this power controlling feature can downclock the frequency if needed, it has that capability, but since GPU Boost has been a part of our GPU lives it never has done so in practice.
Instead, NVIDIA specifies a clock speed, a GPU Base Clock and a Boost Clock. As long as the GPU frequency never drops below the specified base clock no one would complain, and no one has. The GPU Boost frequency is what it can go up to, but again in practice it is actually usually better than that. The real-time frequency we see in games is always above the Boost Clock by some degree.
This creates a perceived performance that is better than what you expect out of the video card. You know the base clock, but if the real-time frequency is always faster than that, and even exceeds the specified boost clock, you are going to think "wow, this card performs better than I ever thought."
Then, add on to the equation that now the GeForce GTX 970 and 980 are overclocking to frequencies never seen before on reference designs. With frequencies exceeding 1.4, 1.5 and up to 1.6GHz on GTX 970 cards we are talking about frequencies at a high level never before talked about on stock parts.
With this extreme overclocking potential it re-enforces this perceived performance. It makes the consumer feel good about their purchase, it is very positive. Therefore, the reputation created for the GeForce GTX 970 and 980 are very positive, and you better believe this makes a difference in sales.
One should never underestimate the power of reputation. NVIDIA got it right in terms of the perceived performance and feelings associated with the GTX 970 and 980. People are excited about these GPUs just based on the fact they overclock so well. AMD can learn from this, and we hope it does.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/10/08/nvidia_geforc...
-
Reply to 17seconds
4ktv
October 8, 2014 8:33:07 PM
I guess that maybe the GTX 970 is doing so well that maybe they feel the GTX 960 would cut into profit's?
Maybe they don't want to price it to low because I bet they didn't plan on AMD not reacting much. Maybe they want to wait for AMD to reply before making the rest of GPU line up known?
I think that possibly they don't want to show there full hand and the GTX 970/980 was there plan to force AMD to spill there own hand.
But I think this card will come out on 11/3/2014. (I just came up with this so likely wrong, but it's fun to pin a date just because.)
Maybe they don't want to price it to low because I bet they didn't plan on AMD not reacting much. Maybe they want to wait for AMD to reply before making the rest of GPU line up known?
I think that possibly they don't want to show there full hand and the GTX 970/980 was there plan to force AMD to spill there own hand.
But I think this card will come out on 11/3/2014. (I just came up with this so likely wrong, but it's fun to pin a date just because.)
-
Reply to 4ktv
clueless77
October 8, 2014 10:59:01 PM
When I overclocked my 290x's cores, they would always downclock to sometimes as much as 150 mhz or more depending on the amount of power being used in more demanding scenarios, which is less than ideal for those scenarios as it negatively impacts performance. Even with the issue supposedly having been fixed through Catalyst or whatever, I still experienced this until I increased the power limit in both Afterburner and CCC. Nvidia on the other hand, I don't get "throttling" but I can't fix my boost clocks, and even Precision doesn't fully maintain the boost clocks, so I'm waiting on a custom bios so I can disable boost and increase the core voltage a little. There's times that I need that full boost clock in less demanding games at higher resolutions for smooth transitions, and the GPU isn't correctly scaling the clock proportionate to demand. I don't trust dynamic frequencies to do what I can just manually adjust myself and be done with it.
So I guess that's a slight +1 to AMD even if the above fix is totally incidental, as I really dislike all of this boost/powertune garbage.
So I guess that's a slight +1 to AMD even if the above fix is totally incidental, as I really dislike all of this boost/powertune garbage.
-
Reply to clueless77
B-man33
October 8, 2014 11:44:00 PM
Sorry this is a bit off topic (I always seem to go off topic) but it seems there will be no GTX800 series for laptops, Nvidia went with a GTX980M and GTX970M for laptops/notebooks.
I am not a huge fan of gaming notebooks/laptops but it is good to see there is an option for gaming on the go. Asus and MSI have already build these awesome laptops/notebooks and they look amazing!!
Especially the Asus, nice slick design, the MSI a bit more plane Jane type but it still looks good (personal opinion) here is a link:
http://www.geforce.com/geforce-gtx-gaming-laptops
Sorry if this was already mentioned, trying to keep up with this thread but sometimes work interrupts rudely....
I am not a huge fan of gaming notebooks/laptops but it is good to see there is an option for gaming on the go. Asus and MSI have already build these awesome laptops/notebooks and they look amazing!!
Especially the Asus, nice slick design, the MSI a bit more plane Jane type but it still looks good (personal opinion) here is a link:
http://www.geforce.com/geforce-gtx-gaming-laptops
Sorry if this was already mentioned, trying to keep up with this thread but sometimes work interrupts rudely....
-
Reply to B-man33
ferwindjacks
October 9, 2014 4:42:48 AM
ferwindjacks said:
But there are 800M series GPUs in laptops... Just overclocked my 770 for the first time last night to keep myself happy with my current card.
Here's a question, does the 980 have the same overclocking potential? And if so, imagine the limits the Ti could bring when you OC...
From what I'm reading, the GTX 980 is pretty much the best overclocking GPU of all time. If you check out that HardOCP overclocking article, just like the GTX 780 Ti, they mention that the 980 has the ability to balance its power load between sources to prevent overload on any one of them. The GTX 970 does not have that same capability. Boost clocks of ~1500 MHz are regularly possible on the reference cooler, and even more on the custom models now being released.
-
Reply to 17seconds
clueless77
October 9, 2014 10:23:08 PM
I'll probably be getting the ti's and skipping at least one generation, spitefully, but only for the increased vram that got locked out of the 970 and even more so with the 980. Everything that's been happening lately made me second guess my purchase with the 980, which I something I don't like to do. The overclocked frequencies and everything else on the 970/980's, even if only a slight improvement over previous generation cards, are good enough for now. So long as I can max out current games at 1080p and "higher" resolutions in SLI, I'm good.
And yeah, it overclocks well, I just wish the clocks were consistent for non-variable peak performance. It's kinda like how almost everyone hated Metro (I actually like 8.1) yet Microsoft insisted on not integrating an option for a 7 like UI so it was up to users to create a solution to it, and most people who overclock hate arbitrary boost scaling or something like Powertune.
And yeah, it overclocks well, I just wish the clocks were consistent for non-variable peak performance. It's kinda like how almost everyone hated Metro (I actually like 8.1) yet Microsoft insisted on not integrating an option for a 7 like UI so it was up to users to create a solution to it, and most people who overclock hate arbitrary boost scaling or something like Powertune.
-
Reply to clueless77
ferwindjacks
October 10, 2014 4:37:13 AM
-
Reply to ferwindjacks
The GM204 chip in the GTX 980 is fully unlocked, just like the fully unlocked GK104 chip in the GTX 680/770. These are merely "high-end" chips. The "enthusiast" level GM200, like the GK110 chip will be released at a later date in response to market conditions. Right now, there is nothing but complete market dominance for Nvidia, so tossing in an even higher performing card makes no sense. Basically look for the GM200 right around the time the 390X is released.
-
Reply to 17seconds
clueless77
October 10, 2014 10:28:30 AM
Yeah, I've read all the speculation about either the TI, dual GPU variant, Titan is dead, what node the next 9xx is going to be on and what type of specs to expect, but if it's just a dual GPU then nah, I'm totally good on that. Like 17 said, it make more sense for Nvidia to release a Ti around the time of 390x to attempt to blunt their product offering as the competition, but if AMD actually had some cool features coded into CCC and offered a significant price performance/ratio compared to Nvidia by then I'd maybe consider going back, lol.
I almost wish I would have went with dual 970's, I could probably still return this but screw it. I'd say if you got one or two 970's, there'd really be nothing to regret about it. I wanted to get settled in with dual 980's for a gen, looks like that might just get totally disrupted according to my own preferences within the next 6 months or so.
I almost wish I would have went with dual 970's, I could probably still return this but screw it. I'd say if you got one or two 970's, there'd really be nothing to regret about it. I wanted to get settled in with dual 980's for a gen, looks like that might just get totally disrupted according to my own preferences within the next 6 months or so.
-
Reply to clueless77
ferwindjacks
October 10, 2014 5:15:51 PM
True, I just hate waiting for new items like this. I don't believe Titan is dead, I would personally get one of it had 70-100% performance increase, but that won't happen so alas I'm waiting for the 990 or Ti to upgrade from my 770. Kind of meh on the 980, if next year's cards don't live up to 20/16nm hype (surprised if they wouldnt) then you should be glad and SLI the 980. If 1k series is awesome then it's up to you on what to do. I'd say if you have a 1440p+ monitor and planned to upgrade, go for 970. If it's 1080p then be happy.
-
Reply to ferwindjacks
17seconds said:
The GM204 chip in the GTX 980 is fully unlocked, just like the fully unlocked GK104 chip in the GTX 680/770. These are merely "high-end" chips. The "enthusiast" level GM200, like the GK110 chip will be released at a later date in response to market conditions. Then it could happen that the GM200 is released with or later than the GTX 960(most probably later) or as a separate 1080/1070 card lineup. I was kinda curious to know when the 750/750Ti had released whether the 250W maxwell cards would crack the 7500 GFlops mark. Looks like I'll have to wait another half a year to see what happens
-
Reply to cst1992
-
Reply to Mousemonkey
I love these reviews from X-Bit Labs. They really go in-depth.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/msi-g...
![]()
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/msi-g...

-
Reply to 17seconds
I started a new thread for this.
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2344781/nvidia-d...
New Nvidia driver brings Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) support to Fermi and Kepler GPUs:
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/78873...
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2344781/nvidia-d...
New Nvidia driver brings Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) support to Fermi and Kepler GPUs:
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/78873...
-
Reply to 17seconds
- First
- Previous
- 6 / 6
- … More pages
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6 / 6
Related resources
- SolvedNeed help configuring the EVGA GTX 980 SC ACX 2.0 - Do I need one or two of these? solution
- SolvedGTX 980; should I go for it? solution
- SolvedGtx 980 or wait for 980 ti solution
- SolvedGigabyte GTX 980 or Sapphiretech Radeon HD 7990 solution
- SolvedGTX 980 or 970 SLI? solution
- SolvedI have recently bought a GTX 980, low performance. solution
- Solvedcan a gtx 980 run bf4 at 4k? solution
- SolvedGood mostly black Mobo for a I5 4690k and GTX 980 solution
- SolvedIs gtx 980 compatible with i7 2600k and p8p67 motherboard solution
- SolvedCan my current setup handle a GTX 980? solution
- SolvedUpgrade to 980 gtx monitor displays no video solution
- SolvedWhat is the best gtx 980? solution
- Solvedgtx 980 vs titan black? solution
- SolvedGTX 980ti/980/970 vs R9 390x/380x solution
- SolvedNew High-End Graphic Card - NVidia GTX 980 solution
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!
... preferably someone with a gtx 970.