The 1080 Founder’s Edition was available May 27th, 2016. I had to wait a couple of extra weeks because I was dumb and ordered my EVGA card from Amazon but I got it on July 6th. About a month.
Edit: I’m very wrong, they were the same day, the EVGA card was just harder to get.
Edit edit: Does not apply to Europe, Asia, South America, Austraila, or the Arctic.
The 1080 is still not out in Antartica.
stusser
4754
I would look to get $500 for a RTX2080 non-super.
Just saw a video by Gamers Nexus where he says he’s gotten info from board partners where the 3000 series will be announced around Sept 9th.
Yeah, that’s the rumor in the last couple days. 3080/Ti announced on 9/9 (shipping 9/17?). 3070 in October. 3060 in November.
rei
4758
Apparently 3 years after my GTX 1080 ‘Tis equal to a $1000 CAD 2080 Super, WTF.
stusser
4760
What? The 2080S is substantially faster than the 1080 with driver updates. By 45% or so.
I think he meant to say GTX 1080 Ti’s , maybe?
stusser
4762
Ahh. The 'tis threw me off. 2080S is still a solid 20% faster. Even the 2080 non-super would be 15% faster. Driver updates helped Turing a lot since release when they were literally sidegrades.
I saw mentioned either on JayZ2cents or GamersNexus I forget what video I was watching, someone mentioned September 9th as the NVIDIA reveal day.
Yep. Lots of confirmation it should be sometime that week, at least. I’ve also been hearing amount of VRAM is still a little up in the air until they get a better idea of what AMD is doing with Navi, who in turn is keeping things close to the vest and doing the same.
You would think we’d be seeing 12 or 16GB of RAM for this new generation of cards, at least on the high end side.
Or apparently more?
Yeah, I was about to post that as well, lol. Still just rumors, of course.
stusser
4767
There aren’t any games that need >8GB at 4k with AA, but that may be a chicken and egg problem in that there are very few GPUs with >8GB so the games don’t use it. We don’t know one way or the other.
Also as GPUs get faster it may make sense to run older games at double resolution then scale down to get the best image quality. So you might want to run a game at 8k then scale to your 4k monitor.
Overall, I wouldn’t have any problem buying that 10GB variant and feel the 20GB will ultimately be seen as a waste of money for gaming. It may make sense if you use the GPU for machine learning though.
schurem
4768
And what about VR, especially high Res VR. That needs a TON of Bram too.
stusser
4769
The highest resolution VR headset announced is the HP reverb v2, and that’s only 12.5% more total pixels than 4k.
Soon enough we’ll want 4k per eye to reduce blurriness and screen-door effects, and that will certainly take a lot more video RAM. 16GB would easily handle that, but I don’t know that those headsets will come out in the next 2 years, which is the reasonable lifetime of the coming GPU generation, and they probably won’t be fast enough to do 4k*2 without compromising on quality anyway. Maybe if DLSS works with VR.
Ultimately you’ll need 11k per eye to completely eliminate screen-door and offer a “retina” experience in VR for people with 20/20 vision.
So in summary-- don’t buy the 20GB variants unless you do HPC stuff on it. Almost certainly not advantageous for gaming.
Yeah modern games like Control are up to 6.5GB at 4K, though AC: Odyssey is similarly hungry too. I wonder if Valhalla will push it a bit more?
Still can’t see it going much over 10 for the next little while.
stusser
4771
That is certainly possible, next-gen consoles have 16GB of shared VRAM and they expect to stream textures from NVME storage in realtime too. Perhaps PC games will have extra high definition texture packs if you’ve got 16GB of VRAM at some point.
But really, nah. Probably won’t benefit from >8GB at 4k for the next 2 years.
