Originally Posted by moustang
You have to understand what you're looking at.
The top 980 Ti scores are all examples of extreme to the point of virtually unobtainable systems. The level of CPU, memory, and GPU overclocking those systems are using is NOT indicative of anything normal people could achieve. The #2 on the list has a 980 Ti overclocked to 1977mhz. You're never going to hit that with any normal cooling system. Unfortunately overclocked CPUs aren't accurately listed but I'll bet that his CPU is well in excess of 5GHZ as well.
And the CPU makes a HUGE difference in Firestrike/Extreme/Ultra. Simply moving from a 4790k to a 6700k at the same speed will increase your score by 1500 or so. Firestrike Extreme is NOT a GPU benchmark, it's a full system benchmark. Which is why you see the R9 Fury X at #26 beating out hundreds of 1080s and 980TIs.
I mean, I understand that the top scores are pushing the absolute upper limit of what the card can do and put them under extreme circumstances to do what they do, but regardless, the GTX 1080 should be a faster card when pushed to it's extreme vs. 980 Ti extreme, right?
It just doesn't make sense to me that the 1080 is supposedly faster than a Titan X/980 Ti when it's nowhere near the 980 Ti scores.
I'm still not able to properly wrap my head around that..