Nvidia`s schedule: Geforce 940MX, GTX 970MX and 980MX in Q2 2016

Ok so reading through the thread I wanted to ask a question. As a laptop gamer myself I am not very up to speed with the desktop offering but the gtx 970 seems to be getting crapped on here. Why is that? I realize that nvidia lied about the final .5gb of ram which will piss people off but in reality is it that big of a deal? I mean unless I am mis understanding it will only effect high resolution games mainly. Other than that the benchmark results for the price seem excellent. IMO if you wanted to use the 970 for resolutions higher than 1440p then you have chosen the wrong GPU in the first place. What am I missing here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The fact that we didn't get what we paid for.

Imagine buying 1 gallon of milk and then only being able to use 3/4 of it regularly, and the other 1/4 is rotten. Sure, you got a gallon, but you can't use all of it.

 

Its not the 4gb thats the issue, its the lower effective memory bus.

 

Haha nice analogy. While I completely agree with that as it was wrong of nvidia to lie about the ram the price/performance still seems great. By no means am I defending it since I don't own one but I was just curious since a lot of the others are speaking as if it is a terrible card bc of the "gimped" ram but the users benchmark results say it's one of the best price/performance ratio cards in a long time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I kinda think it would be fun to have a 1/4 Gallon of *Slow* Milk

 

in case you've not read this.

well, not an expert on the matter with the 970 myself but this is my take on it after reading what people said on the forum.

It's not only about the performance of the card itself, it's also about how nvidia decides to deal with the issue. If we decide to act as nothing wrong; the 970 still works but it just doesn't work very well out of its comfort zone; then that means we, the buyer/customer, have to compromise. We have to beg them to sell us their product? No, it's the other way around. They need us to buy their stuff. So they're the one who needs to make compromises, not us. We get what we pay for, no less (more is better).

Tbh, nvidia isn't exactly a "good" company itself. If they were, I think we can just overlook the matter, forget and forgive. But no, this is not communist utopia. We must fight for what is ours. If we take one step back, they will take ten steps forward.

 

Yeah, that's the entire point. But people keep not only saying it's ok, but DEFENDING IT when people say otherwise.

 

There we go that's what I was looking for haha. I knew I was missing something. Thank you @D2 Ultima incredible rant. And great points. I was one of the ones with the np9772 that was blocked from overclock so I knew exactly what you meant. And also big thanks to @kaze no tama for the link


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I don't understand the general disgust with the specs of the 970MX and 980MX. . . . They're not rebrands, both cards have significantly more SP than their older counterparts. They'll both probably overclock better too than their older counter parts as more complete dies tend to be more stable at higher clocks.

I have SLI GTX 970m's. If I were to upgrade to SLI GTX 980mx's I'd see a minimum of a 30% increase in performance + however much more those cards can be overclocked. The GTX 980m's can generally be pushed about 100mhz more than GTX 970m's so the GTX 980mx's should push that even higher. Wouldn't be surprised if that's a more than 35% increase - which is pretty typical of cross generational gains.

For once, the cards aren't being rebranded, thank god.

Furthermore, the Fastest mobile gpu is the GTX 980 (desktop) which is identical to the desktop GTX 980. The mobile card has double the vram, which means with all other things being equal, it's actually the better card. When the GTX 980MX releases, it will be identical to a GTX 970 desktop, but again probably even better due to double the memory. This really sticks it to desktop users, who can't say anymore that mobile cards are weak compared to desktop cards.

Maybe the GTX 980 (desktop) will even be replaced with a MXM GTX 980 TI.

 

Wait. I'm confused. Will there or will there not be a 970 and a 980 MX before Pascal?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I don't think they'll be a 970MX & 980MX released, I think we're gonna go straight to Pascal now. From what I've read I expect Pascal before the end of this year.

 

Read this, gents:

https://semiaccurate.com/2016/02/01/news-of-nvidias-pascal-tapeout-and-silicon-is-important/

 

That article made my head spin...

It sounds like a race to the moon haha....

From the sound of it, AMD might be in the lead here with a head start (time wise), most importantly with a working Polaris.

Interesting stuff....thanks for sharing.

 

I dont want to be 'that guy", but the author of this article, has a reputation (in some circles) of being biased towards AMD. So take this info with a grain of salt.

 

ATi already sold their radeon mobile division a while ago to qualcom. That's why we have qualcomm push decent graphics with their Adreno GPU(Adreno - radeon word play).

Samsung could very well just use the base MALI GPUs and improve them, but I don't think they see it fit nor beneficial.

The rebrands will be, at best, 10% faster. And nothing suggest they will overclock better at all. Current GTX 980 are around 20% faster than 980m on stock (comparing SLI vs SLI). The current best OC for 980 SLI is around 15% faster than my best OC (26.5k vs 23k GPU score). 980s excel at higher res too thanks to more memory bandwidth, something the 980mx won't have.

So, the new rebrands will most likely do nothing to current GPUs. They have the same memory bus and memory speed. If the desktop 980 is slightly better, what makes you think that an identical GPU with a bit more cores will do anything magical?

 

That maybe true. But so is the fact that nvidia ceo lied in front of a room full of journalists...

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

 

Charlie isn't biased towards AMD, he just hates nVidia more because of they did to him during the Fermi wood screws incident.

But in any case, I have a gigantic post on this so I won't bother repeating it here. But bottom line is given TSMC's historical track record and nVidia's troubles with Fermi, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Pascal has them stumped once again.

 

Let alone NVIDIA has a much higher standard to live up to...

 

If that's true a 35% increase seems significant. I don't think it's whining, I just think the current generation of Nvidia cards are so good it's hard for most people here to find a reason to upgrade especially for 1080p guys. Nvidia is just too dang good right now. If 4k gaming, and 4k screens become more mainstream, I can see the need for those upgrades.

Well a desktop user is paying considerably less for his setup, and should be able to overclock much better than the laptop. But that performance gap from desktop to laptop is decreasing significantly.

 

nvidia launching geforce 920, 930, 940mx : http://videocardz.com/58449/nvidia-quietly-launches-geforce-940mx-930mx-and-920mx