Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [WCCF] Nvidia's Volta could launch as early as 2H 2017 ON 16nm node
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[WCCF] Nvidia's Volta could launch as early as 2H 2017 ON 16nm node - Page 20

post #191 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

No.

My point was a 980 Ti @ 1405/7200 shouldn't come anywhere near a 1080 running 1801/10000. So either they did something really wrong, or that particular benchmark is still CPU bottlenecked even at 1440p. That's all.

I watched AdoredTV Video comparing the 980Ti with the 1080, the 980Ti as everyone knew it's dramatically faster than a GTX 1080 clock for clock (just to clarify the graphs from AdoredTV already had the core difference offseted).

While the 1080 was running at 95 FPS the 980Ti was running at 107 FPS which is a 13% difference in clock for clock performance, now from 1400MHz to 1800MHz (which isn't 100% 1800MHz and could be averaged down if we had more data, probably to 1700MHz or so because Founders Throttlition) there's a 21% difference - 13% = 8%

The 980Ti at 1400MHz should be 8% behind a GTX 1080 at a FIXED 1700MHz.

In any way, these benchmarks seem a little bit off, I trust Computerbase the most because they always go the extra mile with their testing.
Edited by Dargonplay - 7/30/16 at 2:31pm
post #192 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

I watched AdoredTV Video comparing the 980Ti with the 1080, the 980Ti as everyone knew it's dramatically faster than a GTX 1080 clock for clock (just to clarify the graphs from AdoredTV already had the core difference offseted).
The 980ti has more CUDA cores. It's not surprising that 2 very similar architectures have similar performance per CUDA count. Nvidia clearly designed Pascal to be slightly better than Maxwell due to clock difference, but retaining die space for future products.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700k 4.5 GHz 1.3v Asus Z170i MSI 980Ti 1490/7760 MHz G.skill DDR4 8 GB x2 3733 MHz 15-15-15-35-1 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Crucial M4 256 GB NH-C14S Windows 10 Student 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
TBD Cooler Master Quick Fire TK Corsair SF600 Fractal Core 500 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Zowie EC2-A Zowie G TF-X Fiio E17 v1 Sennheiser HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700k 4.5 GHz 1.3v Asus Z170i MSI 980Ti 1490/7760 MHz G.skill DDR4 8 GB x2 3733 MHz 15-15-15-35-1 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Crucial M4 256 GB NH-C14S Windows 10 Student 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
TBD Cooler Master Quick Fire TK Corsair SF600 Fractal Core 500 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Zowie EC2-A Zowie G TF-X Fiio E17 v1 Sennheiser HD 598 
  hide details  
Reply
post #193 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syan48306 View Post

Tell me, what do you think "Volta" brings to the tables? Do you guys even remember what the original announcement for Volta was? Back in 2014, when Volta was announced, it was supposed to get "stacked DRAM". Basically, HBM. Then a year later, we got Pascal slotted in between maxwell and volta, with the features "unified memory" and "3d memory". So, what exactly does Volta bring new to the table?

My personal belief is that Volta effectively doesn't bring that much "new" to the table. What I mean by that is we already got HBM on Pascal, albeit only on GP100, it still counts. We got NV Link on professional boards and all of the other enhancements. The original volta concept has already come to market. So what's the new Volta? Just trickling down the features to consumers. Effectively, all of the R&D is done, and Volta probably doesn't bring much NEW to the table. That's why there's a potential thet Volta is already "DONE" because it effectively, it's already been proven.

Nvidia struggled with 16nm but the Volta features were independent of 16nm. They made pascal 16nm while volta was architectural improvements. Now that we're on 16nm. Volta's schedule is independent of Pascal. Just like how Intel fumbled Broadwell, Skylake still came on time/early even though they dragged out the launch window. I think enhancements for Volta is done, they're just waiting for a release window.


OLD ROADMAP


NEW ROADMAP

They may reuse Einstein. Originally, the successor to Maxwell was Einstein, then it was changed to Volta.
well HBM2 is a given

but we're mostly interested in arch changes for gaming
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
post #194 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post


Alright, let me clarify a few things.

The Fury X does gain that much performance when using Vulkan and Async with TSSAA X8, the reason why Doom Benchmarks have been going all over the place is because despite the Fury X technical prowess it sadly still got 4GB of VRAM, HBM or not Doom requires 6GB of VRAM to work properly with Nightmare settings.

Now with Ultra settings the Fury X should gain the most performance at 1440p and I'd venture to say that less than 5% of people using these cards use a 1080p monitor, most will be using a 1440p monitor, at 1440p the benchmark you showed will have the Fury X closer to the GTX 1080, at least it should be around 5% give or take from the GTX 1080.

Also, as others have pointed out a 1450MHz 980Ti is already at a GTX 1080 level of performance, and 1450MHz 980Tis are as common as 1250+MHz Fury Xs while the benchmark you linked have the Fuy X at stock settings, so there's something to think about.

There's no denying of the Fury X real potential that was all wasted thanks to dated APIs.



I don't mind about the Fury X being so much better than my GTX 1070 G1 when used properly, which is why I still have it installed on my main RIG. thumb.gif

Majority of AIB 980Tis go past 1400Mhz without much effort. Mine is game stable at 1490mhz. In SLI.
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
Reply
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #195 of 272
As I said, most likely, Votla's R&D continued even while They struggled with Pascal's 16nm. Even though they had to make a a stopgap maxwell 16nm = pascal. The different design division of volta probably never stopped work on that.
Hydra TH10A
(15 items)
 
Nova Vault
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5960x Rampage V Extreme 3-Way SLI GTX 980 Ti Hydro Copper 16 GB Dominator Platinum 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
480GB Intel 730 SSD Raid 0 x4 Custom Loop 4x 480 Alphacool Radiators Aquacomputer Aqualis 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer B326HK Razer Black Widow 2014 Corsair AX1500i  Case Labs TH10A 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer Naga 2014 Megasoma 2 Creative ZxR 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Xeon D-1541 Supermicro X10SDV-TLN4F 128GB Crucial DDR4 2133 ECC 10x WD Red 4TB  
Case
Caselabs Nova  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
2.9 Ghz Radeon Pro 560 4GB 16 GB 1TB SSD 
OSMonitor
OS 10.11 15 Inch Retina 2880x1800 
  hide details  
Reply
Hydra TH10A
(15 items)
 
Nova Vault
(5 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5960x Rampage V Extreme 3-Way SLI GTX 980 Ti Hydro Copper 16 GB Dominator Platinum 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
480GB Intel 730 SSD Raid 0 x4 Custom Loop 4x 480 Alphacool Radiators Aquacomputer Aqualis 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer B326HK Razer Black Widow 2014 Corsair AX1500i  Case Labs TH10A 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Razer Naga 2014 Megasoma 2 Creative ZxR 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Xeon D-1541 Supermicro X10SDV-TLN4F 128GB Crucial DDR4 2133 ECC 10x WD Red 4TB  
Case
Caselabs Nova  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
2.9 Ghz Radeon Pro 560 4GB 16 GB 1TB SSD 
OSMonitor
OS 10.11 15 Inch Retina 2880x1800 
  hide details  
Reply
post #196 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpjoslee View Post

Majority of AIB 980Tis go past 1400Mhz without much effort. Mine is game stable at 1490mhz. In SLI.

How does that change anything of what I said? Good Fury Xs can go to 1300MHz just like good 980Tis can go to 1550MHz.

But my point is that they used a 1400MHz 980Ti while using a stock Fury X while most Furies will hit 1150 with ease.
post #197 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

How does that change anything of what I said? Good Fury Xs can go to 1300MHz just like good 980Tis can go to 1550MHz.

But my point is that they used a 1400MHz 980Ti while using a stock Fury X while most Furies will hit 1150 with ease.

Because that is "stock" boost clock from Asus Strix 980ti lol. There is no extra overclocking done from there. Fury X only comes in one version. Btw, good Fury X can go to 1300mhz? what? When did that happen lol. Last time I checked it was near impossible to reach 1200mhz, let alone 1300.
Edited by Kpjoslee - 7/30/16 at 3:53pm
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
Reply
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #198 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargonplay View Post

How does that change anything of what I said? Good Fury Xs can go to 1300MHz just like good 980Tis can go to 1550MHz.

But my point is that they used a 1400MHz 980Ti while using a stock Fury X while most Furies will hit 1150 with ease.

No most Furies will not hit 1150 with ease. According to HWBot average OC for Fury even under water is 1117, while Fury X at 1135 still falls short of 1150.
post #199 of 272
Im getting the feeling Fury X is Dargons favorite card ever
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
post #200 of 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

No most Furies will not hit 1150 with ease. According to HWBot average OC for Fury even under water is 1117, while Fury X at 1135 still falls short of 1150.

I was strictly speaking of Fury X, shouldn't have wrote "Furies".

Also, who buys a Fury to slap a water block on them? That seems like, dumb because you know, Fury X is a thing.

Mine can do 1190MHz 24/7 stable with 80mV offset, there are several 1300MHz Fury Xs hanging around, just as many 1550MHz 980Tis I'd say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChevChelios View Post

Im getting the feeling Fury X is Dargons favorite card ever

That was the 980Ti, but as how things stand today with new games finally taking advantage of the Fury X hardware near its maximum potential and considering that Maxwell was just moved to Legacy then I'd say that anyone should take a Fury X over a 980Ti now if both are priced similarly.

Of course, if anyone wants to buy a new card Pascal it is, but if anyone have a fury X expect that card to beat the GTX 1070 across the board in no time, reducing the need for an upgrade, making it easier to wait for VEGA, just like I'm doing thumb.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [WCCF] Nvidia's Volta could launch as early as 2H 2017 ON 16nm node