I think the current consensus is that Founders Editions will be available on launch regardless of the partner who is selling them for $699. Custom models should follow shortly afterwards, atleast Gigabyte has been teasing theirs for June. The pricing model of these is a mystery to me as well...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nvidia announces Geforce GTX 10 Series - GTX1080 - $599 - May 27th, GTX1070 = $379
- Thread starter wachie
- Start date
I don't think we'll be waiting that long. Nvidia don't want the market to themselves - that's partly why the refere...founders edition is expensive. They want space around the recommended price for their partners to release at.
Dreams-Visions
Member
people need to just wait for the non-founders editions. they're for suckers. don't be a sucker, GAF.
I thought the founders editions would be sold just through nvidia. I didn't think partners would sell them - only their own designs. I hope the founders editions isn't an excuse for everyone to price gouge. Although I now expect any OC models to be around that price or even a little higher. If a headline $599 suddenly becomes $699-749 for factory OC cards with good cooling then that is enough to price lots of people out.
How exactly?
StoneSarge89
Banned
What if they just keep all custom cooled models at $699 and save the $100 price drop for when the demand cools down a bit?
I'm pretty scared that might happen and I also live in Europe in a non-EUR EU country, so they will get me on both the USD-EUR price translation and on the EUR-local currency one.
roadrunn3r
Member
AstuteClass
Banned
So does this mean the 940m, 950m, etc, are all about to become way cheaper, if there's a 1080m around the corner?
ShogunDarius
Member
all this talk about the rather meh founders cards is starting to make me less hyped about the 1080 in general tbh
Not until the new M's are at least announced.
Great video
It looks like other vendors reference (or founder's, if you prefer) design cards will cost as much as Nvidia's, which makes sense. So a 100$ premium over the MSRP. Custom cooler models will arrive in the following months.
In the past, cards with a custom cooler design were traditionally associated with a price that either matched Nvidia's reference cooler price or was slightly / significantly higher. Which is understandable, since developing and fabricating a custom cooling solution costs money and in the end nets a better cooling performance for the user. You pay more, but you (usually) get lower temps and less noise for it.
So what some people seem to believe now is that EVGA, MSI, Asus, etc. will come up with custom (which, again, traditionally means better / pricier) cooling designs that will cost less than what they'll be selling reference cards for initially (699$). You can see how this might seem highly improbable to the people on the other side of the argument / issue, hence the doubts about Nvidia's pricing scheme.
We'll see in June, it looks like non-reference cards will show up then.
Cow Mengde
Banned
The easiest thing to do is wait for both cards to be released with real benchmarks to compare. Then decide on what to buy. No point in rushing when both are just around the corner.
May the best performance/price ratio win.
May the best performance/price ratio win.
I doubt there's much of a market for reference cards after the big players come out anyway. This is their way of squeezing some more money before the drop off.
But this is so short sighted not to mention Nvidia claimed Founders edition would be sold during the lifespan of the card. But who will buy those after custom cards are commonly available is my question.
The only plausible reason I can think of is that Nvidia won't allow their partners to use the reference design for OC models or after a certain period of time, so customers who want the design for SLI or for the looks have to buy from them. But idk, would be weird.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Excited to see benches in a week.
My VR performance coming from SLI 970s (so 1 970 really), should theoretically more than quadruple.
That said, I really hope the 1080 improves 4K performance. Since my 970's already best a Titan X.
If anything the 8gb should prevent me from hitting that particular bottleneck at 4K in certain games.
My VR performance coming from SLI 970s (so 1 970 really), should theoretically more than quadruple.
That said, I really hope the 1080 improves 4K performance. Since my 970's already best a Titan X.
If anything the 8gb should prevent me from hitting that particular bottleneck at 4K in certain games.
mario_O
Member
What are you talking about? there's always been a source in my post. And from where do you get that the 980Ti was "insanely" OC to 1500? You can check many results of the 980Ti in this benchmark, there are dozens on the web.
I'm still not sure how Nvidia 'lied' about their pricing?
They have a founder's card, that has great overclockability and possibly what JHH alluded to when he pointed out the 2.1Ghz air cooled chip on stage. This is available on May 27th as seen in the press release. Press release was also noticeably silent about availability of non-founders cards.
In short if you want the $599 non founders price with less overclockability, wait a bit? All the specs on Nvidia official site for the GTX 1080 would still hold true for the non founders version.
If EVGA/MSI/Asus and other vendors make custom cooling designs, won't there be founders and non founders versions, and priced accordingly?
It's come out recently where the chips are no different to the other chips. There's no extra OC or special binning, it's just the ones out earlier.
dr_rus
Member
The cooler should provide some additional OC headroom compared to the cheap AIB solutions. AIB cards with good coolers will likely be factory OC and will sell for something close to what FE will cost.
But yeah, the whole FE idea is just stupid imo especially if we're looking at a couple of weeks period from launch till AIB cards will hit the street. The cards aren't that much better than what we have now to not be able to sit out this couple of weeks.
SneakyStephan
Banned
The FE is stupid from a consumer perspective. From NV's perspective, given the situation at 970/980 launch, it's pretty smart.
I'm waiting for those and computerbase
Hardware? No difference at all from what I've seen.
Obviously service, warranty etc differ from vendor to vendor.
Last_colossi
Member
So, will the third party vendors (evga, Asus etc.) "Founders Editions" be cheaper than Nvidias "Founders Edition" or are they all $699?
They could release a cheaper version with let's say a cheaper to manufacter cooler and sell it for $650. I'm having my doubts we will see any "founders" card for less than that at launch.
EVGA already listed theirs for $699
http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=08G-P4-6180-KR
Ok I've just seen JayzTwoCents video and finally caught up.
So there's no difference between the founders cards and "non founders"/other manufacturers cards then!
EVGA is 699$, I don't think we know prices for the others yet but I guess nobody would pay more than the base price for the exact same model... so I assume all will be 699$.
BlueLiquid
Member
The EVGA Founders Edition linked above is $699. I would think the other vendors will follow suit.
Edit: beaten
What I got from that video is that Founder = reference. Nvidia just chose to name it that way.
The other manufacturers, as usual, will introduce upgrades in the form of OC, less noisy disipation system, etc..
They probably won't even let you do the step up thing when they get a better cardbecause it would be actually cheaper :lol.
There's no difference between Nvidias Founder card and EVGAs, Gigabyte etc Founder cards.
Digital Foundry isn't respectable?
i would always pick the i7 ( if you can afford it ) unless the only thing you care about is doing a top benchmark in some weird low resolution.
the extra math power in the i7 will benefit you in the long run.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
What CPUs are you comparing? Because if you have the money to spend you should pick an i7 over an i5, especially if it's a long term investment.
SneakyStephan
Banned
They just have that little fcat graph on screen but they don't do any frametime graphs, 99 percentile numbers etc. And they rarely offer any insight. Without detailed frametime measurements benchmarks are pointless.
Here's an example: gta 5 runs at about 60 fps average on the radeon pro duo at 1440p ultra. (a 2 gpu on one PCB graphics card), which is about 50 percent faster than it runs on a fury x.
Sounds good, right? And that's all the info most benchmark sites will ever give you, along with maybe minimum fps.
But if you check pcper's benchmarks you see this:
HOLY FUCKIN SHIT, it's the worst stuttering you have ever seen in any game on any gpu, ever. (the green line, no... green wall)
The pink line is how it runs on sli gtx 980 tis for comparison
This is why you need frametime graphs, because it shows that the 99 percentile frametime for this radeon pro duo is much lower than that of the fury x
http://www.pcper.com/files/review/2016-04-29/GTAV_2560x1440_PER.png
The fury x will give you an infinitely much better experience
If there is anything wrong with the 1080's drivers or frametime performance you'll have to go to pcper or techreport to find out. What if for some reason the frametimes suck compared to maxwell, and you currently had a 980, would you want a 1080 ? HELL no because who cares about higher average fps if the 99 percentile maximum frametime is worse.
Similarly maybe pascal will be able to offer more consistent frametimes than maxwell, or somehow have less cpu overhead or something , which would make it more attractive.
DF stumbled upon an i7 absolutely killing it frametime consistency wise compared to an i5 in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSU0UWFCa1Y and they didn't even notice, too busy talking about the i3.
brotkasten
Member
I'm waiting for those and computerbase
No love for PCGH?
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Speaking of; what is the best software for measuring framerate and frametimes? Similar to those graphs.
Guess outputting to a csv via presentmon or afterburner, then generating a graph from that in excel would be the most straightforward approach.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
They are not really experts on PC hardware or performance. They don't measure frametimes for one.
Digital Foundry isn't particularly insightful when it comes to PC hardware.
PCGH isn't bad, but I generally prefer the way computerbase presents information. E.g. their interactive scatter plots are great.
dr_rus
Member
Techreport's Scott Wasson is at AMD now and I don't think that there were any benchmarks made by the new guy there so it remains to be seen how good they are now.
What's "NVIDIA's FE"? NV doesn't make videocards, whatever they have are made by some OEM partner anyway - probably one of the AIBs who will sell 1070/1080 cards by itself as well.
When it comes to benchmarking PC h/w no, not even close to the likes of Anandtech, Techreport, TPU, Guru3d, PCPer, etc. They do provide some unique perspective of their own though.
NV's FCAT is the best overall solution, AB monitor logging is the most accessible one though.