1080 ti review thread

Why is there no Titan X(P) on the compute benchmarks?

I wonder how Titan owners feel right now.

>>59317017
Same as last time..

oooh nooo time to sell my gtx 1080 on ebay like everyone else

File: luxmark_complex.png (13KB, 701x352px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 701x352px

>>59316970
https://3dnews.ru/948821/page-3.html
This site has it . Ars also has some compute benches but numbers are all over the place

File: 1080ti.001-980x735.png (83KB, 980x735px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 980x735px

>>59316996
>>59317314
>ars

File: 198325698761253.png (181KB, 400x230px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 400x230px

>>59317017
Probably dgaf. 8 months/$500, $62.50 per month for the bleeding edge premium. Nvidia knows their Titan X target consumer, the whales who spend $10,000-$20,000 on a hobby yearly because of expendable income/trust funds.

PC hardware is pretty much a drop in the bucket financially compared to things like cars/boats, or even high end audio.

>>59317346
Why is the Ti slower?

>>59317528
1080 is the fastest so who knows what ars did? better ignore

>>59317562
I like how in Nvidia favored benchmarks they leave out AMD's high-end to make them look bad.

File: Doom_Vulkan_Average_FPS.png (5KB, 513x228px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 513x228px

AYYMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT

AYYMDPOORFAGS CONFIRMED ON SUICIDE WATCH

>>59317528

It has less ROPs and a 352-bit bus despite the fact it is equipped with faster GDDR5X chips.

I don't get it. Vega's still a couple months away at least, they can afford large margins like with the titan, why release a sizable performance bump at this low price? Imean, I'm all up for cheaper cards, but this is so...un-nvidiaish, if that can be a word.

File: compubenchcl_ocean.png (13KB, 700x352px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 700x352px

>>59317625
GP100 is the nvidia's main cruncher. Vega will likely chew them in OpenCL

>>59317625
?

Fury X gets fucked in the ass.

http://techreport.com/review/31562/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-graphics-card-reviewed/4

>>59317810

I think Nvidia is trying to avoid a RX 480 price disruption and they are preemptively dedicating the price ranges on marketplace. They cut prices on 1070 and 1080 (Nvidia is assuming that RX Vega will compete against them) and throw the 1080Ti onto the $699 crown. They also will probably snag some impatient potential RX Vega buyers who have been itching for almost a year now.

Glad I managed to sell my overclocked 980 Ti for $400 6 days ago.

>>59317824
I meant in that specific benchmark, of course they include it in a benchmark that it's not going to win.

>>59317886
Damn you found a sucker

>>59317865

>I think Nvidia is trying to avoid a RX 480 price disruption and they are preemptively dedicating the price ranges on marketplace

That's what is mostly on my head now, does Nvidia know something about Vega we don't, and is preparing its lineup for it? Then again, going by history, that is also unlikely as we've seen on Polaris and Ryzen: AMD tends to show their best cards right prerelease.

60FPS 4K gaming is now realistic and sort of affordable if you save for a little.

144Hz 4K gaming too if you buy 2 of these things, or more if you can get SLI to work past 2, which is possible. There's a guy on YouTube who streams gaming with 4 Titan XPs in SLI with remarkable scaling.

>>59317691
kek is that in 8K ?
because there is no other way they could have performance that low in doom

>>59316970
Linus is up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L34ZkAF9q9w

He even ran it on the 1800x and the 7700k

I don't know why I want this, I don't even have a monitor that would benefit from it.

File: 1488408198311.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>>59318015
>AMD time

>>59317379
>Monthly payment financial plan
>Hood Rich

>>59318036
It just proves what everyone knew all along once they saw past the double-sided circlejerk.

7700k for single to quad threaded performance
1800x for heavily multi-threaded applications

It's a hard concept for /g/ to grasp

>>59318079
You know, many from /g/ including me just want a CPU which can dominate in both things. One won't simply buy both two CPUs because it's just money burning and not necessary. And both are just so neck-and-neck that it's immensely difficult for us to choose.

nvidia always shits on amd launches, reviews and previews without fail.

I wish they start to get back at that with some new Vega stuffs today.

>700 dollars

they keept touting how the 1080 was 499 when you couldn't find it for less than 800 for a good semester after its launch. To this day it's still 600+ while everybody on youtube keeps saying that it's now cheaper, because nvidia said so... but the retailers didn't seem to pick that hint yet. Althought the promise is the super cheap price of only 700 burgers, I doubt we'll see that coming to fruition. This msrp will only start to be become truthful when Volta is about to launch or if Vega roflstomps Pascal w/o room for debate -- which is impossible, since the fanboys from opposite camps are incapable of agreement.

>>59318378
You should be able to get it from Nvidia for 699 right on launch

After that though it will be a shitshow because retailers can charge whatever they want

>>59316970
how long do evga usually take to add new cars to the step up program? I bought a 1080 a month ago so have about 60 days left to step up.

>>59318171
>a CPU which can dominate in both things
it's called a 4GHz+ Ryzen

either 1700 or 1500x

>>59318546
that's a fair point, that I actually forgot.
but (forcing the argument) we could totally expect it be sold out instantly on Nvidia's site only to find them back at ebay for a pretty hefty mark up.