Pascal: What do we know? Discussion, Latest News & Updates: 1000M Series GPU's

: )
looks like in our lifetimes we will see photorealistic games and 1070 aint going to cut it in 2 years. crosses fingers with volta

SOURCE FOR BELOW INFO
http://www.pcgamesn.com/both-nvidia...an-eye-that-resolution-is-close-to-perfection



4K’s the current buzzword in pretty games. 3840 x 2160. More than 8 million pixels.Twice Four times the resolution of 1080p, it makes the old standard look like you’re playing games on an etch a sketch, not a computer. Right now, graphics card manufacturers are making cards that can pump out that many pixels, monitor makers are making screens them, and game developers are making games that demand them.

4K’s for wusses, I want to know about 8K.

I spoke to AMD and Nvidia to find out what they’re doing to make it happen.



I’m not asking simply to jump the gun on industry trends. Something amazing happens at 8K, as Richard Huddy, AMD’s chief gaming scientist tells me: “If we get to a display resolution of about 8k horizontally and about 6k vertically then, for a player with 20/20 vision, they will have something that is close to perfect for their visual system.”

Beyond that, the human eye wouldn’t be able to perceive any more detail on their screen. There’ll be no great race to 16K or 32K.

“That’s about 48 million pixels to fill the field of view,” Huddy explains. So it would take a card six times more powerful than a card capable of producing 4K graphics.

And, in truth, they’d need to be even more powerful than that. Due to the way graphics cards push information to the screen they typically need to produce twice as much data than the monitor requires, otherwise you end up with visual artifacts. So, an 8K monitor would actually be receiving 16K resolution data. “If you had 16K you’d offer a perfect experience, no one would see artifacts if they had 20/20 vision,” Huddy said. “An eagle might be frustrated that it was low resolution for them but for the human eye that resolution is close to perfection.”

“8K, or anything above 4K is going to require multiple GPUs,” Scott Herkelman, Nvidia’s head of GeForce GTX told me when I asked about what would be needed for 8K. “4K for most GPUs is pretty tough, the 980 handles it well but it’s still one of those things that the more GPUs you have the better it looks.”

The next challenge is having a monitor that can display all that data at a refresh rate that you can game on. Huddy thinks 8K will begin life as a multi-screen setup with three or five screens powered by a stack of cards running in Crossfire. Even now monitor companies are struggling to build a screen that can run 4K graphics at 144hz, top level gaming speeds.

The final challenge is our expectations. We won’t accept an increase in resolution if it means a step back elsewhere. “A lot of what we put up with in graphics we put up with because we’re used to it,” Huddy says. “We used to have low shadows and then people found they had enough graphics horsepower to put shadows on; we used to say ‘Work with one or two closest light sources, it’s a close approximation’ and we’d put up with it. As graphics cards got more potent they’re able to fill in more of those blanks and you don’t really want to ever go back.”

AMD could reach for 8K cards but if they weren’t also able to maintain the current standard of visuals in games we’d be disappointed. Plus, with companies like Crytek and DICE exploring graphical advancements besides simply more detailed models, the demands on a graphics card are always increasing.

It’s going to be a Herculean task for AMD and Nvidia to make those cards which can run games at the limits of what our eye can perceive. But they will get there.

 

So you want 8K?....

I mean, it's all about the distance from the screen and size of the screen, when you talk about number of pixels.

Human eye shoul be okay with a pixel density of 500PPI (pixel per inch).

If a display is large enough, even 8K might go seriously under this pixel density which is considered perfect, and after which there is no improvement.

While I'm one who's looking for future myself, we need wide gamut and other stuff before 8k. 8k is already too much of a master race, artists won't be able to draw content anymore after a point.

I can just tell this: to present an image at FHD, it is drawn in at least duouble or more. Usually, to present in FHD, the image is drawn at 7-8K already.

To present an image at 4K, it is drawn at 10-12K...

Now if you want 8k, artists would have to draw us an amazing 20K... which already needs more than just GPU. even space would be a problem. it's ~15mb per image per 8K resolution and ~150mb per work file...

Now, if we go so much up, we need to have 20-30 TB HDDs, at least 10 TB SSDs, internet connections of at least 300-500 MB/s, and we will need to be able to transfer and interpret that data. IT will happen eventually, but expect more waiting XD. I can't wait for full human vision color displays (which will come too eventually) XD .

 

Instead of ridiculously high resolutions, I'd rather advances in rendering technology itself. It's 2016, I think it's high time we used fewer rendering tricks like ambient occlusion, and more realistic (albeit expensive) rendering techniques like ray-tracing or photon mapping.

I look forward to the day when we can play games that look like this, in real-time, at 60 FPS:

 

yeah im super stoked how far its come since of genesis days of my youth.

we have the power to make this a reality...a UNION of gamers and consumers

 

I'm not quite happy with buying a BGA CPU (Still rockin' a socketed 2370m here), but since mobile PGA started vanishing with Haswell and died with Broadwell, any really portable device you adquire will be BGA.. Compromises, compromises

 

source
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/12/future-of-video-gaming-visuals-nvidia-rendering


a must read article on phtorealism in videogames and why we are not there yet.. what do you guys figure is the main reason cgi looks so much better...its lighting obviously but what technique needs to be used and will a 1070 or 1080 be able to use that technique

 

do you think we will see a 15in 1080 laptop this time around (980n ref)

 

Ummmm no.

I run 4K on my desktop and my laptop.

I've had 980M SLI, 980, Titan X (Maxwell), 980 (desktop) SLI and Fury X.

None of these configurations were able to max out all of my games at 4K @ 60fps.

Even now, a Titan X (Pascal) would be my minimum recommendation to play current available games at max settings.

For games that support SLI, 1070 SLI is minimum imo to have that 60fps max settings experience at 4K.[/QUOTE]

 

ssj92...oh ok i thought the 1070 gtx was close to running 4k max settings...are you talking in general or only few games?

 

In general. The thing is, most reviews turn off some things like nVidia's game works or PhysX when doing their comparison.

However if someone wants to be able to play their whole library of games at 4K and be able to max things out, they're looking at Titan X (Pascal) or 1070 SLI.

1070 performs around the same as my Fury X when overclocked and I still struggle on half my games to max out 4K at 60fps.

Most likely no and 1070 will probably be what we will see max in 15" form factors.

 

would you recommend i get a desktop with titan x or what card is the best bang for the buck setup wise two 1070 or one titan x. im asking because i am getting a 4k 55 in led tv and want to game on it in 4k with witcher 3 as i only played a few min and fell in infatuation i would love to play it all the way through in 4k on my new tv well planned tv in 3 months

 

I mean for anyone new to summarize:
3 new cards coming when MSI's countdown ends on like Mondayish (I don't remember when exactly lol)
1080 is replacing the 980 desktop in high end large laptops
1070 is replacing the 980m
1060 is replacing the 970m

All leaks so far for the 1070 and 1060 have actually been pointing to a price decrease where the 1070 is like 1650ish and the 1060 is like 1200ish. Those numbers are obviously not exact, but the Clevo P650RS-G has a price of 1570 with a 1070.

 

Okay, thread cleaned. Please try to stay on topic with Pascal info, I don't want to have to issue warnings.

 

I think you're being optimistic with the pricing there That 1570 is without Windows or an SSD, and I haven't seen anything to suggest a price lower than 1400 for 1060. I would love to be wrong though I'm waiting for 13"/14" 1060 myself (or 15" if light).

 

Oops. Your totally right about the operating system. I never buy windows through resellers like that so I forgot. I'm fairly certain about the 960m though shouldn't be starting barebones at more than like 1300.

Edit: I fixed the 1070 price though.

 

Fully configured p650rsg is around 1900.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk

 

What does that even mean? The 1650 dollar one is a 6700hq 1070 8GB of ram 1TB HDD and Windows 10.

 

I'm talking about 16g ram, 256ssd,1tb hdd and windows 10, which is comparable with Asus or msi.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk

 

I currently have a 40" curved samsung 4K tv. My plan is to upgrade to 55" curved later this year or next year.

I would recommend a single Titan X (Pascal) for gaming if money isn't an issue. This way you will get the most performance, specifically also for games that don't support SLI.

Otherwise if most of your games support SLI, 1070 SLI is a cheaper option and performance will be around the same. If you are looking at 1070 SLI, the upcoming Clevo P870DM2 might be of interest or some of the MSI laptops such as the GT73S or w/e it was called.

I would wait until mobile cards are officially announced and benchmarked.

 

I'd probably say wait. The 1080 Ti will be a better buy than the Titan X for the same performance, or go with 1080 sli once the price comes down to its msrp a bit more where it will be about the same price as a Titan X for way more performance.

 

If your only option is BGA that isn't really a compromise. But I know what you mean, and for travel and portability I do like it.

 

It is not all about pixel discernment! Information, whether you can break it down to pixel or not, is still able to have an effect on perception. Every jump up in pixel density, all I've heard is the human eye can't... Guess what? It can! Some see the difference in color gamut better than others. Some see the difference in frequencies. When these combine, they help to give depth to an image, nuances, seen as a while, that could not be seen otherwise. Too many want to say what they eye can perceive without realizing that it is the mind that determines. They eye is a receptor, a peripheral device like a camera. It is limited and we will reach that limit eventually. But so long as the added information continues to effect the perception, it is something to strive for!

With that said, I do agree getting there will be a long, hard slog. But we will...

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

Looks like the product pages are up for the new Clevo P870s:

http://www.clevo.com.tw/clevo_prodetail.asp?id=948&lang=en
http://www.clevo.com.tw/clevo_prodetail.asp?id=949&lang=en
http://www.clevo.com.tw/clevo_prodetail.asp?id=950&lang=en

Also for the new P775 variants

http://www.clevo.com.tw/clevo_prodetail.asp?id=943&lang=en

There are probably other pages for the smaller models linked on the left hand side as well - but I don't know them well enough to spot what's new.

No details on which models have which GPUs

 

Oh no P770DM2 maybe soon

 

Single 1080
Dual 1070
Dual 1080

Just a guess of course. Also since when G-SYNC is supported in SLi?

 

Some news on official MSI Vietnamese website
https://vn.msi.com/news/detail/gyNf...TvmFMHR4H3G-aZM-8F-SdjTrHfeOCYSOJPbJW3zAHlQ~~

 

Useful information there, nice find. No mention of the GS43VR though. Puzzling.

 

It is not only priced, but also slower performance especially against Clevos with desktop processors (obviously) Heck, the MSI Titan GT83 SLI 1080 costs $6000 in my country.

I'm waiting for the 200W 1080 along with a heatsink for my P870DM-G.

 

Which is a better same cost deal, a 1080 SLI or a single Titan X(P)??

I'd say the Titan X(P), which can be OC'd pretty far, especially if you swap in a water block. The Titan X(P) is the best model for OC so far.

The other Pascal models don' respond as well to OC beyond Boost 3.0 - they are already out of the box pretty close to max performance.

It's too bad the Titan X(P) isn't going to have any AIB versions, with potentially lower pricing and/or better builds with more power and better air cooling or water cooling.

Plus, you can get a 2nd Titan X(P) down the road to get that SLI goodness, and that's performance good enough for high FPS 4k, 5k, and maybe even - 8k

 

G-sync + SLI has been working for quite a while:

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/technology/g-sync/faq#q4
Q: How does NVIDIA G-SYNC work with SLI?
A: The NVIDA GPU connected to the display manages G-SYNC. SLI GPU setups work seamlessly with G-SYNC displays.

DSR was added, I think, in August 2015... not sure what version of driver, but this confirms 364.47 is working with SLI+Gsync+DSR, with comments saying it was working for them months earlier:

SLI+Gsync+DSR confirmed working with 364.47

 

So those earlier leaks are now officially confirmed:

Though in light of "same CUDA cores" quote I do wonder about 2,048 vs 1,920 cores of GTX 1070 notebook vs desktop.

Maybe just imprecise wording in marketing copy (e.g. how Clevo manuals omitted GDDR5X for GTX 1080)?

 

But even a maxed overclocked Titan XP is slaughtered by 1080 sli as long as scaling is there. Its not even close. In a game the Titan XP would get like 50fps in the 1080 sli should be getting ~85. If your planning on sli ing the Titans go for it, but that's just a ton more money than the 1080 Ti slis will cost.

 

New games aren't supporting SLI out of the gate, and some not even later, and the multigpu development tools aren't there yet, so there will be a gap of time where a faster single GPU will be better to have over 2 slower GPU's in SLI for new games.

I am completely onboard for SLI'ing of the highest performance GPU available, but that is the Titan X(P) right now.

The OC Titan X(P) 4k @ 60 hz gaming tests I have seen are looking pretty darned good, enough so for me to suggest a single GPU instead of SLI.

The 1080ti might effectively do as well for gaming for less $, and be open to AIB models as well - which would all be worth waiting for rather than getting either the Titan X(P) or 1080 SLI.

It's a fun time, but a bit frustrating given all the good stuff out right now, who wants to wait?

 

You are right about DX12 stuff multigpu is horrible for that right now. Rise of the Tomb Raider still doesn't have it while Doom at least does I believe.

Sorry @Ethrem, turning it back to mobile discussion now.

Why do you guys think Nvidia is dropping the price for their mobile stuff? The 1070 starting all the way in the 1500s with no OS is nuts, and lower than the 980m launch prices.

 

P775DM3-G from avadirect.

http://www.avadirect.com/Avant-P775-Gaming-Laptop/Configure/10736290

The price is really good.

 

I think alot of people expect Pascal to cost more due to the performance increase compared to Maxwell. This is a bit of a fallacy. It should be more or less in line with what Maxwell cost at release when that was shiny and new.

 

Exactly.

If the price should be increased based on the increment of the performance, we should sit on $100,000 GTX 1080 comparing to 1990s.

 

Nice find - that's the first link to a configuration page for the laptop that I'll almost certainly buy. Thanks!

I'm guessing that's the 1920x1080 version at that price?

Looks like I'll be spending around 3250EUR to get a 4k with top spec (and a modestly-sized SSD)

 

It decreased actually which amazes me. The 1070 is starting around 100 more than the 970m even though its replacing the 980m tier wise, and is an enooooormous power boost.

 

Yeah it's probably just rearranging the deck chairs more than anything. But it's good to finally get a conformation on what we're in for.

 

still a little confused will 1060 beat 980M in performance or Should I invest in 1070 for 1080P gaming ?

 

If your budget is around $2000, then go for the 1070.

 

The 1060 beats the freakin 980 desktop. The 1070 will beat the 980 Ti and the 1080 beats everything period but the new Titan XP.

 

Thx for the answers

 

We only have desktop Pascal benchmarks to go by today, and there are a lot of them on Youtube comparing lots of games and GPU/CPU combinations.

The 980m is similar in performance to a desktop 970, so keep that in mind when watching this performance comparison of the 1060, 970, 980,RX480.

The 1060 performs +- the 980 desktop, depends on the game if the 1060 is a little faster or a little slow than the desktop 980.

The 1060 outperforms the 970 => 980m in games

 

Damn, $1600 for a P750DM is really, really good.

I fully expect a base P640RS to not exceed $1200, because it would firstly be smaller; next, it'd use a BGA GTX 1060 and a BGA CPU. For $1200, we might get a 14" notebook that kills the flagship desktop GPU of the previous generation. Pascal is the second coming of Jesus, I swear. And I'm not even Christian.

 

The P750DM has always been a steal, price wise.

 

There are some models with the 1070 under $2000, like this one that's been seen for $1700, the same price as the previous VY 980m model:

ASUS GL502VS-DB71 ROG 15.6" Full-HD Gaming Laptop, Intel Core I76700Q, NVIDIA GTX 1070, 256GB SSD + 1TB HDD, Windows 10, Black
https://www.amazon.com/GL502VS-DB71-Full-HD-Gaming-I76700Q-Windows/dp/B01K1INYD0/

We won't know the real solid pricing till after the announcements.

 

People expected notebook Pascal to cost more because desktop Pascals did cost more than their Maxwell predecessors.

Apparently though notebook GPUs have already so high margins they could just absorb price increase.

-----------

BTW that AVADirect config page also gives idea about notebook GPU costs:

GTX 1060 - XXX USD
GTX 1070 - XXX + 216 USD
GTX 1080 - XXX + 616 USD

For comparison, desktop GPUs are:

GTX 1060 - 249 USD
GTX 1070 - 379 USD (249+130)
GTX 1080 - 599 USD (249+350)

 

They added more cores to clock it slower to allow less heat and same performance.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk