The 8% is a bit tongue-in-cheek on my part. Should be at least 20%. Still though, that's a bit underwhelming compared to the last few generational performance deltas. Also with a 754mm^2 die I would expect more CUDA cores, but I understand that this generation is all about shifting the focus towards ray tracing.
- Status
The 8% is a bit tongue-in-cheek on my part. Should be at least 20%. Still though, that's a bit underwhelming compared to the last few generational performance deltas. Also with a 754mm^2 die I would expect more CUDA cores, but I understand that this generation is all about shifting the focus towards ray tracing.
Ray tracing....... The day we see a complete game render in raytracing... wake me up... I deal with raytracing since 15 years ... At the moment 3D modeling softwares are moving from raytracing for real time productivity in real time work to other type of engine ( Evee ) ( this way we can models with the same quality we will then render the scene with raytracing ,.... ( 3Ds, Blender etc )... games move to real time raytracing ... yes ...
Real time viewport .....
Last edited:
And GTX 1070 had ~55% higher clocks, so it's theoretical performance (FP32, pixel and texture rate) are bit higher than 980 Ti's.
ImSpartacus
Regular
Nvidia strongly alluded to the 102-type GPU being 754mm2.
If the 104-type GPU is about 2/3 of it's bigger brother, then we're in the 500mm2 range .
DavidGraham
Veteran
I will only say this once, you are extremely on the low side on this.
Not that high in the end. They were almost the same, but with significantly lower bandwidth on the 1070.
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
Not sure this is the case. All articles I've read seem to indicate combined coherent memory access via NVLink is not limited to just compute workloads. Hopefully we should know more on Monday.
https://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1333598&_mc=RSS_EET_EDT
Good. I hope so. It's atypical for a new generation to only be marginally faster than the last one. I can see the stated clocks could be way off from reality, as is the case with every Pascal card on the market, but it seems like NV quotes clockspeed based on a set of parameters that I have never encountered in the real world, even before installing watercooling on every card, as I eventually do. When I owned a Titan X (Pascal) it boosted to ~1800MHz with a waterblock installed but no overclocking applied. Same goes for my 1070 (about 1900MHz "stock" boost under water). The thing is, installing waterblocks on Pascal cards had no effect on maximum (pre-overclocked) boost clock in my experience, only sustainability.
I've owned both 1070 and 980 Ti. I went from 980 Tri-SLI down to single card 980 Ti (because multi-GPU support has gotten worse and worse over the last few years), up to Titan X Pascal (significant upgrade), down to 1070 (made money on the deal and wasn't gaming as much). The 980 Ti and 1070 are indeed, roughly comparable in most workloads. However, my particular 980 Ti was a beast of an overclocker, hitting 1550MHz. My 1070 is only an average overclocker, reaching just over 2GHz. More recent releases tend to run slightly better on the 1070, with older titles being a bit faster on 980 Ti. Even ignoring my watercooling and overclocking I've run across others with similar experience with these cards. It is impressive what performance can be achieved by the 1070 with such low bandwidth, for sure. Pascal is very efficient in its bandwidth utilization.
I'll keep an eye on that, thanks. Might actually be worthwhile to pick up 2 cards again if their VRAM pools can be combined. Would be even better if the driver handles this automatically and game devs don't have to jump through hoops to make it work.
Ike Turner
Veteran
It will..
People shouldn't downplay the RT Cores IMO. But they also shouldn't expect anything more that shoddy Gameworks stuff on the gaming side. RTRT in games for useful features that don't require pixel peeping is still years away. But for everything non-gaming Nvidia just brought one hell of a product & I can't wait to grab one for myself for work either a 2080Ti or Quadro RTX 5000 depending on price and performance for what I need.
My desire for more VRAM is not contingent on a specific performance requirement. I simply need more VRAM in a single pool with a certain baseline of performance available. 16GB ought to get the job done.
It also needs to be seen just how much impact the evolved SM-TPC-associated graphics related pipeline and processes-stages has on improving performance (also has a revised cache) and additional gains from the RT cores for other functionality.
However using RT cores beyond their traditional function probably will take time to expose as it will require specific library/functions that do not exist yet; you could access them directly in a similar way to Tensor Cores (that also had limited libary function support to begin with but could use c++ directly) but that is usually more specialist related development-optimisation.
https://www.servethehome.com/nvidia-turing-introduced-with-the-quadro-rtx-line/
On the slide with the die spec, it’s says “100 GB/s”. Assuming that this is byte/s, and that this will be available for GeForce, then that’s nothing to sneeze at.
They are adding both directions for the 2 NVLink 2.0 ports together.
Also note that my original post already says gBps (gigabytes per second) as denoted by the capitalized B (if that was what was confusing you about my post).
50 or 100 GB/s: both of those are nothing to sneeze at. ;-) Especially compared to what was available in the past. It won’t allow one to treat memory on the other side as identical to local memory, but it’s 3x better than anything could reasonably have in the past.
My brain saw the lower case ‘g’ and used that to override the upper case ‘B’!
While great, it's still stuck in the canyon where you cannot simultaneously work on the same "frame" with both GPUs without latency/lag inducing queuing of multiple "frames" of input.
Probably need ~50% of local memory bandwidth as link bandwidth between dies before that can be a reality (at massive power cost at the very least, not to mention the die area cost).
Anything less than that and you are still left with AFR 2 with 2+ frames of input latency.
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
Assuming cards go pre-order on Monday, how long before we see the first reviews? I would imagine one of the things tested will be memory with the cards in NVLInk mode.
- Status
Similar threads
- Deleted member 2197
- Tools and Software
