NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 vs. 970 Performance Comparison

NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1070 is set to launch next month, but is it worth upgrading from an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970?

[FPSFox]

Was expecting more of a jump. I'll be getting the next Titan when it launches later on.

[freshslicepizza]

At 1440p, across the ten games we tested with, it was on average 22% faster than the Titan X and 28% faster than the GTX 980 Ti, which is significant. It was also 60% faster than the GTX 980, which is an important comparison to make considering how many 980 owners will likely be looking at the GTX 1080 for their next GPU upgrade. The 1080 was also 34% faster than the Fury X.
http://www.techspot.com/rev...

"Moving to 4K, the GTX 1080 was only 19% faster than the Titan X and 26% faster than the 980 Ti. Interestingly, it remained 60% faster than the GTX 980. Against AMD's top card, the GTX 1080 was 28% faster than the Fury X which is surprising -- we expected the 4GB AMD card to slip further behind at this extreme resolution but it did hold well."

the titan is also much more expensive so i would say this card is quite impressive for being $600

[FPSFox]

Wow, my mind read this title and replaced 1070 with 1080 and 970 with 980. Sorry! I don't like the leap the 1080 has over the 980TI overclocked. Those are the number I wasn't impressed with. Sorry again for the comment above lol

[OoglyBoogly]

Anyone have info on what magic Nvidia has to make VR so much better? If the GPU itself isn't 2.3x more powerful then how is the VR performance 2.3x faster? Doesn't make any sense.

Also, what can the 1070 and 1080 do in VR that can't be done on the 9xx series?

[cluclap]

Im not a tech wiz but from what Ive gathered a big deal id the way the transistors are placed on the gpu. The 9 series uses 24nm(?) on its die while the 10 series uses 16nm process. This somehow allows for faster data transfer rate im assuming the electrons dont have to travel as far. Nm stands for nanometers which is a measure of microscopic length to the degree of a billionth of a meter. Talking crazy small. Couple that with the gtx 1080's use of GDDR5X memory which is supposed to be significantly more effecient than the standard GDDR5 and you have a card that may not seem so good on paper, but offers a truly enormous leap in performance.

[OoglyBoogly]

Nah, it's number of transistors and architecture that really makes a difference. I know the 1070 is also just using GDDR5 and not GDDR5X. Also, again, VR performance being much faster than that of the other games listed doesn't make sense. VR is just producing the same image twice (once per eye) so I fail to see how that could be so much faster but actual game performance is only like 1.4-1.6x faster.

[cluclap]

Right I missed your point. Google "Nvidia Simultaneous Multi Projection". I believe your answer lies there.

[Kleptic]

Any VR performance increases, other than what comes with simply being more powerful, is only marketing...They're claiming they have some driver updates that will make VR performance 'unparalled' to competition...but there aren't any real tricks to it, you just need a lot of gpu horsepower.

cluclap...die size and manufacturing processes, on their own, do not determine performance...They're more related to energy efficiency and power consumption...both of which translate to heat...and heat is the problem in relation to performance...So shrinking die size and increasing transistor density allows for less power usage, more efficient cooling, and therefor a higher amount of transistors to be utilized...which leads to increased performance...

[cluclap]

Sorry for that ridiculously long paragraph lol

[DJ]

Instead of drawing all the geometry and shading the 3D scene separately for each "eye" in your VR goggles, that data is processed for both at the same time. So the GTX 1080 isn't really twice as fast as the 980. It's more like a 50% gain in performance for normal games.

[KTF26]

this video have the answer
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
but take it with a grain of salt as well as the 2.3x performance gain because it's marketing
you need perfect conditions to reach near 2.0x

[sweendog]

They have locked software to the new cards that allow for things like the gpu only processing what the lenses see and not the whole picture. This could be achieved on all capable cards but nvidea being nvidea are locking it down on the new cards

[OoglyBoogly]

That's a shocker...not.

[WeedyOne]

Its the same reason as to why AMD ran VR better than nvidia for a while. AMD had something called asynchronous compute built in at a hardware level with their CGN architecture. This feature allows graphics processes and compute processes to run simultaneously.

I believe the answer to much better VR performance of the 1000 series is due to the recent inclusion of async compute at a hardware level in nvidias 1000 series cards. The 900 series did not have async compute built in at hardware level which meant it had to rely on driver software for async compute which caused dips in performance on 900 series nvidia cards when in VR.

[OoglyBoogly]

AMD still runs VR better. It's still the only GPU that has Async computing.

[DJ]

Call me when the new Titan is announced. That's worth upgrading for.

[FlyingFoxy]

Waiting for the Ti myself, 1080 isn't really worth it if you already own a 980Ti Oced/Pre-oced, difference is only like 10-20% at most.

Plus when AMD bring Vega there will be better prices, not like the 1080 that's priced what a Ti would be right now. Nv are really trying to milk this time, and I'll likely never get the Titan cards at the ridiculous prices they charge when you can get a Ti for a fair bit cheaper and is usually just as fast or faster than a Titan.

[GrontB]

Exact same boat as you. The 1080ti will be great I think. I was hoping the 980ti would get the Simultaneous Multi Projection as an update for a little VR boost but probably not. The 1070 is a good card though still and the price won't be ridiculous once it gets down to the MSRP price.

[Dabigsiebowski]

I doubt there will be a 1080ti. The 980ti was an unlocked 980 to its full potential. The 1080 already has the full chip running at capacity with no gimps. Just wait 2 more generations at least if you want things to get interesting. Plus AMD has Vega moved up and will probably see some mentions of it soon. My bets with them.

[FlameBaitGod]

You'll be able to get two 1080's for the price of one titan lol, and two 1080's will outperform a titan.

[Nero2142]

Yeah that relative performace comparisions are usualy bullshit , it looks like they are saying 1070 is faster around 70% in w3 than 970 but in benchmarks 1080 it's ''only '' faster 40 % in w3 than 980

[sadsatan]

was considering a 1080 build but decided to hold off for the Ti release

[nowitzki2004]

And then it never gets released...... MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[sadsatan]

hopefully in time for xmas *fingers crossed*

[nowitzki2004]

Yeah I hope so. Im thinking about the 1070 or 1080 but I thought about the 980 and 980ti before as well. Am still happy with my 970 so ill wait a bit longer. Time flies.

[sadsatan]

970 is a great card. just overclock it :)

[Takwin]

I'm getting the 1080ti or the AMD Vega in summer of 2017. My 290x and 1600p play everything maxed now, but next summer will be a perfect time for an upgrade. The 1080 looks amazing, but is overpriced initially.

[Nibbs]

Am I missing something? All I'm seeing is a bar graph that over extends "2x"

[Yetter]

Looks like I'll just be grabbing another 980ti before upgrading to the 10 series. I'm sure the price is gonna be reasonable in no time