New GTX1080 benchmarks destroy EVERYTHING * even at DirectX12

Many people here actually believed that AMD cards could approach GTX1080 performance at DirectX12 and other recent games basically using only the Ashes of Singularity benchmark, a game that was basically co developed with AMD.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present you non-refence version of GTX1080

ASUS ROG STRIX GeForce GTX 1080

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/asus-rog-strix-geforce-gtx-1080-review,1.html

This card is a f*cking beast - greater performance than the stock version of GTX1080, silent and reaches only 67C of temperature under load

Let's take the most powerful AMD cart, R9 Fury X, and compare it.

DirectX12 performance:

MOTHER OF GOD. Almost twice performance in RoTR than R9 FuryX

In Hitman, we have 20FPS boost over R9FuryX

Surprisingly even in Ashes of Singularity, ASUS GTX1080 still beats Radeon FuryX by some 17FPS

BUT not all future games will use DirectX12. Sony's version of games don't t even use DirectX at all, but OpenGL. And honestly more and more game will be using OpenGL for Linux and Mac compatibility.

OpenGL performance:

And here, BOOM, again almost twice performance compared to R9Fury

And finally let's not forget that a gazillion of games will still be using DirectX11

DirectX11 performance:

Boom, Asus GTX1080 has 80% performance boost over Fury X

Conclusion:

No 200USD RX480 will even remotely reach GTX1080 level of performance. Also I am trying to see if AMD Vega will reach GTX1080 performance...because if we assume that the next AMD flagman ship will have some 50-60% performance boost over R9 FuryX, which is quite reasonable expectation, I am concerned with AMD's low performance in latest OpenGL, where GTX1080 beats FuryX by some 80% already. So probably I should not even wait for mythical Vega, and go with a more safe choice of Asus GTX1080, which is already here.

I mean, it's expensive as shit, so i'd expect some beefy performance. Still dope.

The 1070 is the sweet spot for me @ 1080p.

Ummm everywhere I've read forum and article is hoping the 480 is going to come close to the 1070(10-15% slower) not 1080...

You are correct: a $200 card will not match a $600 card.

Great thread.

LMAO take that AMD. Your $200 mid range card can't compete with $600+ high end card. ROFLMAO. AMD has been OWNED.

See how stupid that reads?

The 480 is a budget GPU. AMD's high performance cards won't be released until October...

@Pedro: @organic_machine:

Chill out, guys lol Did you forget console gamers threads that RX480 will be some 70-80% of a GTX1080 performance ?

EDIT: I updated my conclusion to avoid derailing of the thread lol.

I picked up my 1080 Strix yesterday. It's simply ridiculous

I want the 1080Ti when it releases, but for now, I'm gonna grab a 1070. This is upgrading from a 750Ti, so it's still gonna be a HUGE improvement.

Awesome.

Gonna put together a rig with the 1080 in it.

The new Xbox will obliterate 90% of pc's so it doesn't matter.

Welll...we all know that. Honestly, I am not sure that AMD's Vega is even worth waiting for it. I have noticed that GTX 1080 beats FuryX in latest OpenGl games by some 80% already. DirectX12 on the other hand is so unpredictable though lol

Grats on winning the Stupid Thread of the Day award.

This.

New Xbox comes next year. GTX1080 is already here.

@jhonMalcovich said:

Perfect gif.

Well some of those tests have nVidia effects on it (like HBAO+, hair tesselation).

But even so, the Fury is their 28nm chip. And while AMD has done a really good job polishing that turd, they still can't compete with the engineering prowess of nVidia's recent offerings.

That said, we will see how their 14nm chips are.

Omg Nvidia is on a roll

@jhonMalcovich:

GTX 1080 is not going solve install base problem.

Scorpio's GPU is faster than PC's RX-480 with 1266Mhz clock speed. The fastest known RX-480 is 1607 Mhz.

1080 at 4K = 59.2 fps

Fury X at 4K = 48.6 fps

There's something wrong with Guru3D's Fury X scores at 1440p i.e. 88.8 fps from PC Gamer.

1080 at 4K = 50.1 fps

Fury X at 4K = 35.3 fps

1080 at 4K = 44.8 fps

Fury X at 4K = 31.4 fps

GTX 1080 is an expensive non-4K 60 fps solution.

My next GPU purchase must have sustained 4K 60 fps i.e. it must have substantial upgrade over my 980 Ti OC.

From dev's POV, 1080 owner is no different from a console owner i.e. both paid for their game license.

Yeah, but 2 RX480s are better and cheaper at the same time.

$400 is better than a $600 card.

Do you guys actually think Scorpio will have anything close to a 1080 or even a 1070? Serious question.

Sli/Xfire still have issues in many games also more heat, power consumption, etc. One good graphics card is always better

Yet there isn't even a game on that overpriced mammoth that matches the gift from the Naughty Gods, Uncharted 4.

So maybe you should...

Why the hell would you compare a $500+ GPU to one that costs $199.99?

Scorpio is one of the solutions that addresses the install base problem for VR.

Lol 480....it's a fucking 199 dollars card and you're comparing it to a 600 one wtf.

Are you going to upgrade or no?

There's nothing else to compare with lol But yeh I decided not to wait for Vega and will order an Asus GTX1080 this weekend.

lmao. Just look at the 390x (AKA 290x, a fucking 2013 card) compared to the 980/980ti. Dem sexy legz.

Spanking newer and more expensive cards in at least half of these benches. Bububut OpenGL hurrrr. Steammachines are dead, and Sony isn't a relevant PC developer, they dropped SOE last year.

You see, that tells us the real story of what we can expect ~2 years down the road . The 1080 is a repeat of the 780, except it costs $50 less up front. I'll be laughing my ass off when the RX480 comes within spitting distance 2-3 years down the road. The old 7970 is already spanking those old Gimpler flagships, so it's a pretty safe assumption at this point.

No. I think it will be close to Fury X performance, which means stable 2k and 60fps gaming and optimized for VR.

1070's calling me. Ain't getting 4k for a while now, so this'll suite me fine.

I actually compared it with Fury X, which the fastest 650USD AMD card duh

@ronvalencia: By the time Scorpio is released, Nvidia may come up with an even more powerful mid range GPU than RX480, and I pretty sure they will. In 9 month more upgraded GPUs will come. So I wouldn't bet all my chips on Scorpio. I am not an Nvidia fanboy, but I am pretty sure Nvidia won't let as big slice of a pie as mid range gpus slip away from them. Scorpio will probably priced at 500 bucks, so Nvidia will releasea 200USD GPU but more powerful than RX480, so many people may chose to go with a budget PC build, especially since all xbox exclusives are coming to PC now.

@jhonMalcovich: Yeah that's seems right if they want it priced around 400-500....I want to upgrade my 970 and it would make me sick to my stomach to have a console be more powerful than my PC.

While I'm super glad the performance leap is substantial, the industry really does benefit from strong competition, but it's pretty dumb to compare a 200 card to a 600 card and claiming ownage don't you think? I'm sure Vega Fury would open a new can of whoop ass on the 1080.

Not to mention the fact that even the conservative 10% of PCs is exponentially higher than the number of Scorpions that will sell months or even a year after release. There will likely always be more high end PCs than Scorpions sold.

@gamecubepad said:

Yet there isn't even a game on that overpriced mammoth that matches the gift from the Naughty Gods, Uncharted 4.

So maybe you should...

A bunch of multiplats on Ultra (PC) looks better than the face simulator UC4. I expect some Scorpion designed (W10 shared) games on PC to look better as well.

Folks wait for the 1080 ti the first single card to do 4k 60 FPS

that will be the card to own imo

My posts addressed your starting argument.

To address your pro-NVIDIA arguments

1. Build a PC that matches $299 Xbox One S with 4K ultra-blu-ray drive, 500 GB hard disk and a copy of Windows that can run MS Store games.

$299 Xbox One S is cost competitive and cheaper than ARM based SoC 4K ultra-blu-ray drive e.g. from Philips and Samsung. Intel usually avoids "race to the bottom" ARM competition i.e. Intel Atom cores are large at a given process tech.

NVIDIA Shield TV's cost $199 without 4K ultra-blu-ray drive and 500 GB HDD. It's 20 nm fab'ed GPU equivalent to Geforce GT 920MX. TSMC's 20 nm geometry and 16 nm FinFET geometry are similar (i welcome for you to start an argument on this matter since I'm ready ;-) ).

NVIDIA Shield TV with 500 GB HDD cost $299. Xbox One beats the NVIDIA Shield TV and it's Geforce GT 620MX GPU.

Against Intel i.e. the CPU factor.

Intel SIlvermont's chip area size is 8 mm^2 at 22 nm process tech. At 14 nm FinFET, Intel "Airmont" Atom has 2.88 mm^2 area size.

AMD Jaguar at 28 nm has 3.1 mm^2, 14 nm FinFET version 1.55 mm^2 area size. Intel wasn't cost competitive in XBO and PS4 game console contracts and it looks like Intel wouldn't be cost competitive in 14 nm FinFET.

28 nm AMD Jaguar's chip size is similar to 28 nm ARM Cortex A15 with comparable performance to ARM Cortex A57.

Some parts from Xbox One S will be common with Xbox One Scorpio.

2. WIth similar price segment, NVidia Geforce 960 was inferior to 380/380X. With NVIDIA GPUs, gimping SM units has direct relationship with gimping the memory controllers.

3. Has TSMC based 28 nm 250 mm^2 chip product cheaper than Global Foundry's AMD APU ~$50 at retail? Have you realized Global Foundry/Samsung's 14 nm LPP FinFET is smaller than TSMC's 16 nm FinFET+?

4. CPU factor. 6 TFLOPS GPU needs CPU increase i.e. fleets of Core i3 and lesser CPUs will need to be upgraded. VR minimum Intel Core i5- 4590 equivalent or greater. Another factor for PCs are the motherboard cost.

NEO has 8 core ZEN Lite LP at 2.1Ghz. Intel wouldn't be crazy enough to bring their 8 core Xeon with 2Ghz into "race to the bottom" embedded markets.

5. XBox One's SoC has mass manufacturing advantage i.e. no human involvement for inserting the GPU, hence less time and less human resource cost (no Chinese wage cost at this production stage i.e. they completely remove this factor). XBO also removes human resource cost for inserting the memory modules. Industrial designers for Xbox One minimizes Chinese wage cost.

I'm looking forward for year 2017 budget PC build when AMD drops ZEN+Polaris combo SoC on the PC market.

you also forgetting the fact that the 1080 is like 4x the price of a 480

just saying......

I have a 1070 coming when ever Amazon get them in stock, already pre-ordered. I'm pretty stocked from what I seen of that, especially when I'm not gaming in 4k and only 1080p. I'll be able to get some good fps, especially matched with a new I5 and 16mb DDR3 ram.

Microsoft is moving to branded game PCs under an Xbox moniker--giving it an established brand. I'd even say they merge with Nvidia.

Could grab a 1440p monitor, the 1070 is quite good card for that spot!

MS wouldn't merge with NVIDIA since they don't have X86 CPU and NVIDIA's CEO factor.

NVIDIA's Jen-Hsun Huang requirement to be the CEO in the new AMD+NVIDIA merged entity killed the deal.

Microsoft didn't contract Intel and NVIDIA for Project Scorpio.

Wow a $700 card on a brand new process beats a $200 card and a card on a 4 year old process. Absolutely stunning.

@jhonMalcovich: You realize that the RX 480 is not their high end card right?

Were you expecting enthusiast-level performance for $199? No, this is a mass-market card.

@jhonMalcovich: This card is out when? I am hoping to go with it in the fall.

1. Why do I need 300-USD 4K ultra-blu-ray drive when I can buy one for 120USD ? Why do I need a 4K ultra-blu-ray in first place if everybody is using Netflix ? I am not gonna shell out 20 buck for physical blue-ray movie I want to watch.

From I what I know Amd's Zen 14 nm FinFet will have more performance than AMD Jaguar at 28 nm, which is logical. But nobody knows for certain how bigger the performance will be. Anyway no apu CPUs will have performance of a Desktop CPU just because desktop PCs can afford to generate more heat and small factored PCs like consoles don't . This is why all consoles cpus come downclocked and with more cores - because of reducing heat output. So whatever AMD comed up with, 14nm Fin Fet won't be able to beat my 22nm I7 because of raw power of my I7. Probably they won't be able to beat a regular I5.

More clock speed wins over more threads. It has been proved many times by benchmarks.

2. NVidia Geforce 960 is 170USD and AMD 380X is 240USD. I don't see the same price segment -_-

3. So ?

4. One can build a decent PC with a Intel Core i5- 4590 for some 700bucks and 200USD mid range GPU. Yes, it's more expensive than 500USD Scorpio, but you have traditional advantages of PC - reduced gaming pricing, mods, free online, modularity, bigger lifespan of components.

5. But still you are stuck with fixed not-upgradable hardware. It's just 200 bucks more and you have a gaming PC, it's not that much of a difference. PC components will have more quality in them. For a good reason apus didn't prosper on pc desktop market.

Also you are omitting the fact that consoled apus lack desktop CPU versatility. Apus are orented in processing graphics but they will choke on simple mathematical algorithms a desktop cpu processes with ease. This is why console can't run pc simulators or strategy games lol. And this is a reason why I will never buy a Scorpio. Even Ms promised mouse and keyboard support, the problem with consoles is they are designed to be GPU oriented. They will never be able to run Total War or Europa Univresalis games. They will even choke on Star Craft 2 lol. And this is a deal breaker for me as I love too much strategy games.

You'd want it to perform after you had to mortgage your house for it...

I already ordered a Gigabyte GTX 1080 Xtreme, so obviously I like the 1080... but WTF is the point of this thread? A RX480 is more comparable to a 980. Why is it even being mentioned in the same breath as the 1080? Totally different cards with a huge price difference and targeted at different gamers. Also, there is no reason to shit on the RX480. It is an excellent card for the price.

1. Does your $120 USD cost include ultra 4K blu-ray play video back software? Why 4K blu -ray play video over Netflix? Bit-rate H.265 difference between physical vs online streaming.

As for the ZEN CPU.

http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-cpu-performance-double-fx-8350/

Compared to AMD’s “Orochi” quad module, eight core die powering the FX 8350, the Zen based desktop Summit Ridge eight core CPU delivers double the performance in Cinebench R15. This means that a single Zen core is in effect equivalent to two Piledriver cores in performance, which is incredibly impressive. This dramatic performance difference comes from the significant architectural performance per clock improvements in addition to Zen’s simultaneous multithreading capability.

it’s important to remember that AMD’s latest Orochi dies feature Piledriver cores rather than Excavator. Excavator cores are roughly 15% faster per clock than Piledriver This in turn puts Zen at a lead in excess of 60% vs Piledriver in terms of performance per clock. Doubling the performance of the FX 8350 puts Zen in direct competition with Intel’s eight core i7 5960X.

NEO's ZEN Lite LP is clocked at 2.1 Ghz not Summit Ridge's 3 to 4 Ghz clock speeds i.e. halve Summit's bar height.

2. http://pcpartpicker.com/products/video-card/#c=208,355&sort=a8&page=1

Current price

960 = $169.89

380X = $197.00

Timeline for 960

Timeline for 380X

The prices are roughly similar until May 9 2016 for 960

'960 was inferior to both 380 and 380X

3. Smaller ship size equals more chips to be sold per wafer, hence the cost for the wafer spread to more units.

4.

From http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/cpus/

Dual core CPU dominates Steam's CPU survey with 47.59 percent share. Outside of Steam, the dominate Intel CPUs are the fleet friendly Core i3/Pentium/Celeron.

For example, from http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Desktop-Computers/zgbs/electronics/565098

Best selling desktop PC has Intel Core i3 and second best selling desktop PC has AMD FX-4300. AMD ZEN quad core replaces Piledriver based FX-4300 with similar clock speed.

Your $500 price for Scorpio claim is not supported i.e. the chip size for Scorpio is smaller than the PS4's 348 mm^2

PS4 already has 256 bit GDDR5-6000 (down clocked to 5500) parts for $349 USD. http://www.gamestop.com/ps4/consoles/playstation-4-uncharted-the-nathan-drake-collection-500gb-bundle/125370

The price difference between RX-480 4G GDDR5-8000 and $229 RX-480 8GB GDDR5-8000 is $30 retail. Scorpio has lesser price GDDR5-7000 module.

PS4 reached $299. Sony is not taking a lost for PS4 hardware.

Xbox Scorpio's cooling solution

PS4's cooling solution

With 500 GB HDD, Scorpio is effectively another PS4 with updated FinFET parts + extra 4 GDDR5 memory modules. Looking at $399 to $449 price range.

5. Fluff statement on better quality parts. Both Intel and NVIDIA avoids razor thin profit margins.