1080m?

the 780m came out in summer 2013, then the 880m came out in spring of 2014, then fall of 2014 the 980m came out. It's springtime now and still no leaks or rumors of the next mobile king? typically a new GPU is released every year. The Maxwell 980m rumors started months and months early thanks to Cloudfire who was pretty much spot on. The 980m has been out for half a year now, so shouldn't then 1080m be coming out this summer or fall? How much of an improvement from the 980m will it be and is it worth waiting for?

Cloudfire, do you know anything?

anyone else have some guesses?

 

I hope it rolls out soon or at least rumors come up .... Not that I care about it though, cuz I know it will be as expensive as hell ... I want it to drop the prices on the 980m so I could get one of those

 

I'm guessing nVidia will come out with another naming scheme like they did after the GeForce 9000-series cards. They'll probably site not wanting to cause confusion between GPU lines as their reason. Probably similar to why AMD went with the R-series after The Radeon HD 7xxx and 8xxx.

 

There won't be a new performance jump until a new fab process comes, and/or a new architecture fully launches. If 1080m comes too soon, it will just be a rebrand, or perhaps slightly higher spec'd 980m.

 

I have a feeling that there will be one rebrand series before Pascal, likely late this summer. It will be like 800m Kepler series was to 600/700m series, but hopefully not as pathetic.

 

Yea not overly interested myself, will keep using my Titan X for a good long while I think.

 

My guess is, it will have one additional SMM (so 1664 shaders like desktop 970) and won't be called 1080M. Then it will be on to Pascal.

Also Cloudfire doesn't frequent this forum much anymore since he moved to a desktop. "R.I.P. mobile gaming" and whatnot. Funny to say, I will miss those leaks of his.

 

My guess is that the "1000m" series will merely be a rebrand of the current 900m. Its why Nvidia tried so hard to block overclocking on Maxwell cards, so they could just sell us an overclocked version themselves.

> : (

 

Profit wise it's a smart move.

 

Pissing of customers is not. We're not dumb sheeple.

 

Majority of people still will buy though...

 

What I don't understand is why do they keep releasing a bump in series when there's little to no difference, basically same GPU. Just wait until their next gen is actually ready than giving 5-10% bump. Doesn't make sense.

 

What's there not to understand - to sell more stuff. Simple as that.

 

GTX 680: 1536 cores - 195W TDP
GTX 680M: 1344 cores - Released June 2012
GTX 780M: 1536 cores - Released May 2013
GTX 780M leak posted in early March 2013

GTX 980: 2048 cores - 165W TDP
GTX 980M: 1536 cores - Released October 2014

You see pretty quick that if they can make a full GK104 chip in mobile where the GK104 has a 195W TDP. They should have absolutely no problems releasing a full GM204 chip for mobile since its only at 165W TDP.

We are now at April 2014 and I havent seen any leaks from an upcoming mobile GPU yet. I`d assume we see some new mobile cards. GM206 (1024 cores) for example havent found its way to mobile yet. Nvidia may plan to release new mobile cards based on that along with a new top dog.
Whats certain is that they have zero competition right now and can do whatever they want when they want which kinda sucks.

GTX 980MX or whatever it would be called should be like 20-30% faster than GTX 980M if it was a full GM204. Thats actually how much Nvidia have been holding back

 

I agree with HT. There will likely be a 980MX or something with more Maxwell cores.

If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably "full-core" GM200 with like 2048 CUDA cores or something. Pascal is still far away, and the 980Ti was delayed, so it's safe to assume mobile was also delayed. We'll know more at Computex in June. The 780M has more cores than the 680M, and were pretty close otherwise. The 880M is literally a re-brand with more VRAM and issues.

Hopefully it's not just a boring re-brand with a higher clock speed. That would be lame.

 

Isn't GTX965M based on GM206? It has 1024 Maxwell cores.

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/notebook-gpus/geforce-gtx-965m/specifications

 

Nope, it's GM204. Desktop 960 is GM206.

 

You're not. I'm not. Some active people on this forum are not. 99% of people who are looking for gaming notebooks are. Go on ANY non-NBR website. Everything is "lenovo Y50" or "ASUS G751JL" (because OMFG IPS 75Hz HNGG) or Razer Blade.

No matter how much anyone explains the shortcomings, everyone wants it. I'd say yes, yes "we" are dumb sheeple. I STILL have people fighting me down telling me that haswell is a great processor architecture because their 4790K doesn't get hot in their AIO watercooling system.

 

There's no way we will get GM200 on mobile. The die size is way too big. We will most likely get full GM204 with low voltage memory, a slight bump in clocks, and a further neutered electrical system so that the core doesn't go over 1275-1300 to force people to upgrade to Pascal rather than overclock and keep their card for another generation or two. That or it will ship with an overclock disable bit that drivers will ignore until Pascal comes out.

I don't trust nVidia. With AMD basically dead in mobile until 2016, nVidia can do what it wants because there is no other option.

 

Well if 970's vram deception and drivers blocking laptop overclocking is any indication, I'd say nVidia doesn't exactly care about pissing off its customers.

 

It's like they change the model numbers just because they want to.

In a way I get it, like with 800 series. 840m, 850m, 860m came out with Maxwell, they wanted to keep the naming consistent, and weren't ready for Maxwell with 870m or 880m yet and having 840m, 850m, 860m, with 770m and 780m being faster just doesn't compute for most people. But at least do *something* to differentiate it and don't make it throttle at its rated stock speeds.

 

Like octiceps explains, its a GM204. A waste of silicon unless Nvidia have trouble with GM204 manufacturing and there are many damaged GM204 chips they need to use on stuff.

Id assume Nvidia eventually release a smaller GM206 Mobile GPU with 1024 cores and a new GPU to fill in the performance difference between GM107 (640 cores - 860M/960M) and GTX 965M (1024 cores).

Computex launch is a great time like J.Dre explains, but then again 980M nor 780M was launched at Computex ao who knows.

Funny enough, TDP and power wise Nvidia could actually release a cut down GM200 with say 2500 cores and it would be at 780M TDP level. Just imagine that, 2500 Maxwell cores and 384bit....Call it a Mobile Titan. It would completely crush the GTX 980M in performance.
One can always dream heh. But it shure would be awesome.

 

I'm betting on a slight change either way. At least 680M to 780M changes to satisfy the market until Pascal hits. More cores were added to the 780M. The 880M is just the retarded brother of the 780M.

 

And they'll charge $2000 for such a card knowing NVIDIA... Gee I rather have something like a 970M version 2.. Cheap and does the job excellently!

 

Maybe that much but it will sure cost close up to $800-$999 somewhere.
If Nvidia cared and actually carried out with the mobile GTX Titan Mini with 2432 cores and 384bit, it would actually be worth it in my opinion. Just imagine what performance we would get over a 1536 core/256bit 980M. That would be a true gamer card.

Right now we have these cards:
640 cores
1024 cores
1280 cores
1536 cores
2048 cores (desktop)

You can see where the holes in performance are. Nvidia will most likely fill in between 640 and 1024 cores.
And 1536 and 2048 cores.

GTX 965MX with 896 cores perhaps
GTX 980MX with 2048 cores.

The problem with a 970M V2 is that it can`t beat GTX 980M. 970M have 1280, 980M have 1536. Not much room there.

 

how much would the 980m go down in price when the next card comes out? i just dont want to buy the 980m halfway through it's life cycle then a new upgrade come out 2 months later. i got burned already buy putting myself into debt with the 880m right when it was released

 

It won't I wouldn't think.

 

Well 970M = 10 SMM while 980M = 12 SMM, so 970M V2 could theoretically fit right in the middle with 11 SMM = 1408 cores and it would still leave 980M's crown intact.

In fact isn't that basically what we saw with 870M vs 780M? 870M was about 5% behind IIRC, but for all intents and purposes it was basically a 192-bit 780M.

 

Yes, although still based on Kepler architecture, the GTX 870M made a decent leap. There is headroom for OC too. Maybe they will make something like that.

 

Absolutely a possible scenario, as well as rebranding 970M and calling it 970MX. Either way it will be a boring card don`t you think, with only 1 SMM more?

It will surely take quite a while to come down in price I think. GTX 880M stayed high in price after 970M and 980M was launched, and it wasnt after used 880Ms started hitting the marketplace the respected resellers like upgrademonkey started going down in price.
You should wait until Computex is here before making your move anyway. Best to see if Nvidia got some goods in store. Its in June, maybe leaks will creep up on us before that as well.

GTX 880M cost the same as 970M from upgrademonkey. "Hmmm, I wonder what I should buy?..."

 

Oh absolutely it will be a boring card, but when there's a lack of competition, I think nVidia actually adding SMMs and not just doing pure speed bumps is the best we could hope for.

 

any chance there could be a memory bandwidth increase for higher resolution in a mobile card? isnt the 980m like 256 bit or something like that while some desktops are in the 300s?

 

What is the performance gap between GTX 880M and GTX 970M exactly? Is it worth to upgrade? I am really curious about this, sorry if it is out of the subject.

Look that image from Notebookcheck:


To them, It is about %6 performance gap between them. Notebookcheck also writes this:

"The distance to the contenders is not as gigantic in the gaming field as it was in the synthetic benchmarks. Based on our ultra-setting (1920x1080 pixels, maximum details, anti-aliasing), the GTX 980M has an edge of approximately 30% on the GTX 880M and 55-65% on the GTX 870M and R9 M290X. Passionate gamers will not go wrong with the GeForce GTX 970M either. The high-end chip only lags behind the GTX 980M by not quite 16%."

(BTW, why Notebookcheck says that GTX 980M is ahead of GTX 870M by %55. Didn't they state that is ahead by %36 in their own image lol)

 

No reason to upgrade other than 970m runs cooler and less power.

970 and 980 desktop are 256-bit now too. Previously they were 384-bit.

 

Just get rid of the 880M! No wrong decision can be made if that is your first step, unless you buy another 880M.

I'd be surprised if the 1080M even supports the socket type. Just grab a 980M. It's a beast.

 

980 Ti will be 384-bit. Kepler threw a wrench in the previoius nomenclature (Titan was supposed to be 680 and 680 was supposed to be 660/660 Ti), but the mid-sized die (GXxx4) is always 256-bit and the big die (GXxx0) is always 384-bit.

But to answer Phase's question, 256-bit mem interface for GDDR5 is a space limitation of MXM until we get HBM on mobile.

 

I dont think Notebookcheck got full control of what they are writing about. They test so much hardware they lose foresight sometimes.

When GTX 970M and 980M launched they did their comparisons. Tested games along with synthetic benchmarks (where CPU plays a role too) and got an average out of all of it.
Back when I cared about mobile I compared all their games and ditched the synthetics, an d found out that GTX 970M was 18% faster (or 880M is 15% slower). And that GTX 980M was 40% faster but cant find the comparison I made.

Notebookcheck is correct that GTX 980M is 55% ahead of 870M but 870M is only 36% slower.
Try 155/100 and 100/155

We need bigger MXM modules. New revision

 

This is because percentages are different depending on which way you are going. If going from A to B is a certain percent increase, the percent decrease going from B to A will be different.

In this case, the 870M is 36% behind the 980M. In other words, the 870M has (1-0.36)/1 = 0.64 = 64% of the 980M performance. But if you look at it the other way, i.e., how much faster the 980M is compared to the 870M, you have to take 1/0.64 = 1.56 = 156% of the 870M performance, which means it is 56% faster.

That is why it is always important to be clear and consistent when dealing with percentages.

 

Thanks for the clarifications, now all make sense. I hope Notebookcheck will use something like that in the future in order to eliminate the confusion:

 

We're a long way from 16nm. Next Nvidia card will be like a 985M with an additional shader cluster enabled.

 

What if they pull an AMD and release the next card with just a 50MHz turbo bump?

 

I believe Nvidia was first the master the art of 'overclock rebrand'.

The only reason I see the card not being a rebrand, is because there are still so many shaders to unlock between the 980M (1536), desktop 970 (1664), and desktop 980 (2048) . Heck Nvidia has probably already realized that they can stretch that for 2 or even 3 more mobile flagships.

 

Yeah the fact that they can do that makes me nervous that we won't see Pascal for awhile or they will sell Maxwell rebrand and the highest end GPU will be Pascal but at a much higher cost. With AMD teetering on the verge of death, nVidia can do pretty much whatever it wants.

 

If AMD goes bust I will game on Intel's Iris Pro instead.

 

You da real MVP

 

36%/(100-36%)

 

I sure as hell hope they change the name.

Can't imagine telling people I have a 1080M in my laptop.

 

I would say the X80M or the X1M

 

I do not understand. What's the problem with 1080m?

 

Me neither. It's just a number.
It don't sound any more wierd to say 1080m than it does 980m. Actually 1080m has a little bit better ring to it than 980m to me anyway.