Review: Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founders edition graphics card

exactly. you included guru3d in your previous statement so where is your min framerate there???

i linked you two other reviews and you can find the main review that showed more examples of this posted like 2 pages back.

i just want to know where the bottleneck of the 1080 is in those cases.
as there are clearly cases where avg fps is higher than 980Ti but then again the min fps is lower in the same bench.
and it's not only in UHD

EDIT: another one http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-pascal,4572-7.html the 4K hitman bench... again the same phenomenon.
also here http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/7/7/7703_43_nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-review-hail-king-baby.png
it could be memory bus. i am curious what it really is.

 

I see 31 FPS on 1080 and 22 FPS on 980 TI on that bench for min FPS...???

As for the others, maybe there was a spike at some point during the benchmark that dropped it low for a split second. I'm not sure how every site does their benchmarking. Do they just run it once? 3 times and average it? Could just be the release drivers aren't that great.

 

yes in that one its the fury x on second place.
just compare it to the second placed card...
dont you see the pattern????
i mean you know what i am talking about. or do you play dumb on purpose?

 

Who promised this? Certainly not Nvidia on any of the marketing stuff i read.

Not sure what you mean by clear benchmark, comparing the 1080 to a 980 and 980ti and a FuryX would be clear and that is what most reviews done.

 

Do You saw oficial Nvidia Pascal presentation?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5EIzL8_gm4
I just talk about false Hype, nothing more.

 

Sorry, please point me to the bit you mean as i tend to watch these things in the background and from what i saw it's only VR that is faster than SLI GTX980.

 

Nah, he said it's faster then 980's in SLI even without VR and honestly if you average every game, it's true. Like obviously there are going to be games where SLI scales perfectly and it won't be faster -- but on average the 1080 is roughly 70% faster than a single 980. So any game that doesn't have above 70% scaling, the 1080 is going to be quicker.

Like if you look at PC Perspective's review, they show a couple losses vs 980's by about 5-10% in the first two games, but the next three or so the 980's don't scale well at all, the 1080 beats the SLi setup by 107% in 4K on Hitman.

 

I watched the presentation when it initially came out. Not once did Jen ever make comparisons about 1080 vs 980 sli. What he did make mention of was the 1080 being twice as fast as the titan x. Maybe there was another Pascal presentation that day. Idk. I'd like to watch that video of him hyping the 1080 vs 980 sli though.

 

I recall him mentioning that the 1080 is faster than 980SLI followed by "just amazing.. it really is amazing.. isnt this amazing? Aren't you all amazed? Wow.. amazinnnnng."

 

Or that may be caused by their new delta color compression method.
But cmon its look like small "sin" and mby even drivers will fix it soon.
Thats why always is good to wait some time, b4 buy brand new GPU.

oky i give You another link.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJgxsqKRJKo
(just on start above one)

 

I just finished watching Jay from jayztwocents' review of the 1080 and he has a 1080 that overclocked to over 1800mhz right out of the box man too bad that we wasn't able to overclock his 1080 further. Maybe he might have gotten closer to what Nvida did at the conference.

 

Benchmarks, ALU throughput, bandwidth, fillrates , geometry

Spoiler

 

I think that's due to GPU Boost 3.0. If you run a short benchmark on a cold card then you get max boost of say 1880Mhz, but after 5mins the boost drops about 6% to about say 1770Mhz with sometimes dips to the base clock of 1600Mhz('ish). Some review sites may not be warming up the cards, or perhaps different ambient temperatures or different individual cards are performing differently on a thermal basis which all influences max boosts seen & how long they can be held for.

EDIT: Which is why I think it's madness to buy these expensive Founders Edition cards, I think they will benefit greatly in performance with proper efficient cooling from the 3rd party cards, especially when it comes to overclocking too.

 

Pretty dang impressive performance from this card. It's literally twice as fast as my GTX 970. It will be a very nice upgrade to drive my 1440p G-Sync monitor.

 

The cards will only clock over 2100 if they add another 6 or 8 pin power connector. Well there was already a test for 1080 with a proper cooler never went over 60 celsius and started to show visual artifacts around 2100 on core. Shouldn't throttle as easily tho.

 

I would like to know if the performance between PCI-E 3.0 16x and 8x is still the same for the 1080.

Due to my motherboard in combination with my Soundcard i can only run at 8x.

 

That's a basically pcie 2.0 16x bandwidth. You wont have any problems running a 1080. Again like 1-2% difference.

 

Reading HH's review now and some other benchmarks etc., I have to admit I was more anxious about the card's release and numbers than the performance atm. Not really tempted to upgrade, maybe not even the 1080Ti. I'll wait for the 1080Ti, but I guess Volta's still where it's at for me personally.

 

This was literally a slide in the presentation.

http://cdn.wcc=ftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2016_NVIDIA_Pascal_FINAL_published-page-019.jpg

Can't link relevant things apparently, so take the = out of the domain.

 

Lol -- I totally read this in his voice.