Subject: Graphics Cards | July 20, 2016 - 12:19 PM | Sebastian Peak
Tagged: VideoCardz, rumor, report, nvidia, GTX 1070M, GTX 1060M, GeForce GTX 1070, GeForce GTX 1060, 2048 CUDA Cores
Specifications for the upcoming mobile version of NVIDIA's GTX 1070 GPU may have leaked, and according to the report at VideoCardz.com this GTX 1070M will have 2048 CUDA cores; 128 more than the desktop version's 1920 cores.
The report comes via BenchLife, with the screenshot of GPU-Z showing the higher CUDA core count (though VideoCardz mentions the TMU count should be 128). The memory interface remains at 256-bit for the mobile version, with 8GB of GDDR5.
VideoCardz reported another GPU-Z screenshot (via PurePC) of the mobile GTX 1060, which appears to offer the same specs of the desktop version, at a slightly lower clock speed.
Finally, this chart was provided for reference:
Image credit: VideoCardz
Note the absence of information about a mobile variant of the GTX 1080, details of which are still unknown (for now).
Yes, We're Writing About a Forum Post
Update - July 19th @ 7:15pm EDT: Well that was fast. Futuremark published their statement today. I haven't read it through yet, but there's no reason to wait to link it until I do.
Update 2 - July 20th @ 6:50pm EDT: We interviewed Jani Joki, Futuremark's Director of Engineering, on our YouTube page. The interview is embed just below this update.
Original post below
The comments of a previous post notified us of an Overclock.net thread, whose author claims that 3DMark's implementation of asynchronous compute is designed to show NVIDIA in the best possible light. At the end of the linked post, they note that asynchronous compute is a general blanket, and that we should better understand what is actually going on.
So, before we address the controversy, let's actually explain what asynchronous compute is. The main problem is that it actually is a broad term. Asynchronous compute could describe any optimization that allows tasks to execute when it is most convenient, rather than just blindly doing them in a row.
This is asynchronous computing.
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 19, 2016 - 01:54 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: pascal, nvidia, gtx 1060, gp106, geforce, founders edition
The GTX 1060 Founders Edition has arrived and also happens to be our first look at the 16nm FinFET GP106 silicon, the GTX 1080 and 1070 used GP104. This card features 10 SMs, 1280 CUDA cores, 48 ROPs and 80 texture units, in many ways it is a half of a GTX 1080. The GPU is clocked at a base of 1506MHz with a boost of 1708MHz, the 6GB of VRAM at 8GHz. [H]ard|OCP took this card through its paces, contrasting it with the RX480 and the GTX 980 at resolutions of 1440p as well as the more common 1080p. As they do not use the frame rating tools which are the basis of our graphics testing of all cards, including the GTX 1060 of course, they included the new DOOM in their test suite. Read on to see how they felt the card compared to the competition ... just don't expect to see a follow up article on SLI performance.
"NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1060 video card is launched today in the $249 and $299 price point for the Founders Edition. We will find out how it performs in comparison to AMD Radeon RX 480 in DOOM with the Vulkan API as well as DX12 and DX11 games. We'll also see how a GeForce GTX 980 compares in real world gaming."
Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:
- The NVIDIA GTX 1060 6GB Review @ Hardware Canucks
- A quick look at Nvidia's GeForce GTX 1060 @ The Tech Report
- VIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Founders Edition Review @ OCC
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Founder’s Edition @ Tech ARP
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Graphics Card Review @ Techgage
- GeForce GTX 1060 @ Hardwareheaven
- Nvidia GTX 1060 6GB Founders Edition @ Kitguru
- MSI GeForce GTX 1060 Gaming X 6 GB @ techPowerUp
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB @ techPowerUp
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Review - Enthusiast Gaming at a Mainstream Price @ HiTech Legion
- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Offers Great Performance On Linux @ Phoronix
Twelve days ago, NVIDIA announced its competitor to the AMD Radeon RX 480, the GeForce GTX 1060, based on a new Pascal GPU; GP 106. Though that story was just a brief preview of the product, and a pictorial of the GTX 1060 Founders Edition card we were initially sent, it set the community ablaze with discussion around which mainstream enthusiast platform was going to be the best for gamers this summer.
Today we are allowed to show you our full review: benchmarks of the new GeForce GTX 1060 against the likes of the Radeon RX 480, the GTX 970 and GTX 980, and more. Starting at $250, the GTX 1060 has the potential to be the best bargain in the market today, though much of that will be decided based on product availability and our results on the following pages.
Does NVIDIA’s third consumer product based on Pascal make enough of an impact to dissuade gamers from buying into AMD Polaris?
All signs point to a bloody battle this July and August and the retail cards based on the GTX 1060 are making their way to our offices sooner than even those based around the RX 480. It is those cards, and not the reference/Founders Edition option, that will be the real competition that AMD has to go up against.
First, however, it’s important to find our baseline: where does the GeForce GTX 1060 find itself in the wide range of GPUs?
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 19, 2016 - 01:07 AM | Scott Michaud
Honestly, when I first received this news, I thought it was a mistaken re-announcement of the contest from a few months ago. The original Order of 10 challenge was made up of a series of puzzles, and the first handful of people to solve it, received a GTX 10-Series graphics card. Turns out, NVIDIA is doing it again.
For four weeks, starting on July 21st, NVIDIA will add four new challenges and, more importantly, 100 new “chances to win”. They did not announce what those prizes will be or whether all of them will be distributed to the first 25 complete entries of each challenge, though. Some high-profile YouTube personalities, such as some of the members of Rooster Teeth, were streaming their attempts the last time around, so there might be some of that again this time, too.
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 16, 2016 - 06:37 PM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: Volta, pascal, nvidia, maxwell, 16nm
For the past few generations, NVIDIA has been roughly trying to release a new architecture with a new process node, and release a refresh the following year. This ran into a hitch as Maxwell was delayed a year, apart from the GTX 750 Ti, and then pushed back to the same 28nm process that Kepler utilized. Pascal caught up with 16nm, although we know that some hard, physical limitations are right around the corner. The lattice spacing for silicon at room temperature is around ~0.5nm, so we're talking about features the size of ~the low 30s of atoms in width.
This rumor claims that NVIDIA is not trying to go with 10nm for Volta. Instead, it will take place on the same, 16nm node that Pascal is currently occupying. This is quite interesting, because GPUs scale quite well with complexity changes, as they have many features with a relatively low clock rate, so the only real ways to increase performance are to make the existing architecture more efficient, or make a larger chip.
That said, GP100 leaves a lot of room on the table for an FP32-optimized, ~600mm2 part to crush its performance at the high end, similar to how GM200 replaced GK110. The rumored GP102, expected in the ~450mm2 range for Titan or GTX 1080 Ti-style parts, has some room to grow. Like GM200, however, it would also be unappealing to GPU compute users who need FP64. If this is what is going on, and we're totally just speculating at the moment, it would signal that enterprise customers should expect a new GPGPU card every second gaming generation.
That is, of course, unless NVIDIA recognized ways to make the Maxwell-based architecture significantly more die-space efficient in Volta. Clocks could get higher, or the circuits themselves could get simpler. You would think that, especially in the latter case, they would have integrated those ideas into Maxwell and Pascal, though; but, like HBM2 memory, there might have been a reason why they couldn't.
We'll need to wait and see. The entire rumor could be crap, who knows?
Subject: General Tech | July 14, 2016 - 06:06 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: nvidia, vr funhouse, ansel, vrworks
A while back Scott wrote about NVIDIA's Ansel, a screenshot application on performance enhancing drugs. Today it arrives, paired with their new driver and adds support for Mirror's Edge Catalyst to the list of supported games such as The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Unreal Tournament, Tom Clancy’s The Division, and No Man’s Sky just to name a few. The tool allows you to take 360 degree screen captures, allowing you to completely rotate around the image on a 2D screen or with VR headsets like the Vive or Rift. Just trigger the recording while you are in game, the game will pause and you can roll, zoom, and position your focus to get the screenshot you want. From there hit the Super Resolution button and your screenshot will be of significantly greater quality than the game ever could be. The thumbnail below is available in its original 46080x25920 resolution by visting NVIDIA's Ansel page, it is a mere 1.7GB in size.
NVIDIA also released their first game today, a VR Funhouse available on Steam for no charge ... apart from the HTC Vive and minimum hardware requirements of an GTX 1060 and i7 4790 or the recommended GTX 1080 and i7 5930, which are enough of an investment as it is. There are seven games to play, expect skeet shooting, whack a mole and other standard carny games. At the same time it is a showcase of NVIDIA's VR technology, not just the *Works which we are familiar with but also VR SLI support for those with multiple GPUs and VRWorks Multi-res Shading which reduces processing load by only rendering full detail to objects within your field of view. If you have the hardware you should check out the game, it is certanly worth the admission price.
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 13, 2016 - 09:20 PM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: vulkan, R9 Fury X, nvidia, Mantle, gtx 1070, fury x, doom, amd
We haven't yet benchmarked DOOM on Vulkan Update (immediately after posting): Ryan has just informed me that, apparently, we did benchmark Vulkan on our YouTube page (embed below). I knew we were working on it, I just didn't realize we published content yet. Original post continues below.
As far as I know, we're trying to get our testing software for frame time analysis running on the new API, but other sites have posted framerate-based results. The results show that AMD's cards benefit greatly from the new, Mantle-derived interface (versus the OpenGL one). On the other hand, while NVIDIA never really sees a decrease, more than 1% at least, it doesn't really get much of a boost, either.
Image Credit: ComputerBase.de
I tweeted out to ID's lead renderer programmer, Tiago Sousa, to ask whether they take advantage of NVIDIA-specific extensions on the OpenGL path (like command submission queues). I haven't got a response yet, so it's difficult to tell whether this speaks more toward NVIDIA's OpenGL performance, or AMD's Vulkan performance. In the end, it doesn't really matter, though. AMD's Fury X (which can be found for as low as $399 with a mail-in rebate) is beating the GTX 1070 (which is in stock for the low $400s) by a fair margin. The Fury X also beats its own OpenGL performance by up to 66% (at 1080p) with the new API.
The API should also make it easier for games to pace their frames, too, which should allow smoother animation at these higher rates. That said, we don't know for sure because we can't test that from just seeing FPS numbers. The gains are impressive from AMD, though.
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 7, 2016 - 10:13 PM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: nvidia, GTX 1080, ea, dice, battlefield, battlefield 1
Battlefield 1 looks pretty good. To compare how it scales between its settings, DigitalFoundry took a short amount of video at 4K across all four, omnibus graphics settings: Low, Medium, High, and Ultra. These are, as should be expected for a high-end PC game, broken down into more specific categories, like lighting quality and texture filtering, but I can't blame them for not adding that many permutations to a single video. It would just be a mess.
The rendering itself doesn't change too much between settings to my eye. Higher quality settings draw more distant objects than lower ones, and increases range that level of detail falls off, too. About a third of the way into the video, they show a house from a moderate distance. The lowest quality version was almost completely devoid of shadowing and its windows would not even draw. The lighting then scaled up from there as the settings were moved progressively toward Ultra.
Image Credit: DigitalFoundry
While it's still Alpha-level code, a single GTX 1080 was getting between 50 and 60 FPS at 4K. This is a good range to be in for a G-Sync monitor, as the single-card machine doesn't need to deal with multi-GPU issues, like pacing and driver support.
It’s probably not going to come as a surprise to anyone that reads the internet, but NVIDIA is officially taking the covers off its latest GeForce card in the Pascal family today, the GeForce GTX 1060. As the number scheme would suggest, this is a more budget-friendly version of NVIDIA’s latest architecture, lowering performance in line with expectations. The GP106-based GPU will still offer impressive specifications and capabilities and will probably push AMD’s new Radeon RX 480 to its limits.
Let’s take a quick look at the card’s details.
|GTX 1060||RX 480||R9 390||R9 380||GTX 980||GTX 970||GTX 960||R9 Nano||GTX 1070|
|GPU||GP106||Polaris 10||Grenada||Tonga||GM204||GM204||GM206||Fiji XT||GP104|
|Rated Clock||1506 MHz||1120 MHz||1000 MHz||970 MHz||1126 MHz||1050 MHz||1126 MHz||up to 1000 MHz||1506 MHz|
|Texture Units||80 (?)||144||160||112||128||104||64||256||120|
|ROP Units||48 (?)||32||64||32||64||56||32||64||64|
|Memory Clock||8000 MHz||7000 MHz
|6000 MHz||5700 MHz||7000 MHz||7000 MHz||7000 MHz||500 MHz||8000 MHz|
|Memory Interface||192-bit||256-bit||512-bit||256-bit||256-bit||256-bit||128-bit||4096-bit (HBM)||256-bit|
|Memory Bandwidth||192 GB/s||224 GB/s
|384 GB/s||182.4 GB/s||224 GB/s||196 GB/s||112 GB/s||512 GB/s||256 GB/s|
|TDP||120 watts||150 watts||275 watts||190 watts||165 watts||145 watts||120 watts||275 watts||150 watts|
|Peak Compute||3.85 TFLOPS||5.1 TFLOPS||5.1 TFLOPS||3.48 TFLOPS||4.61 TFLOPS||3.4 TFLOPS||2.3 TFLOPS||8.19 TFLOPS||5.7 TFLOPS|
The GeForce GTX 1060 will sport 1280 CUDA cores with a GPU Boost clock speed rated at 1.7 GHz. Though the card will be available in only 6GB varieties, the reference / Founders Edition will ship with 6GB of GDDR5 memory running at 8.0 GHz / 8 Gbps. With 1280 CUDA cores, the GP106 GPU is essentially one half of a GP104 in terms of compute capability. NVIDIA decided not to cut the memory interface in half though, instead going with a 192-bit design compared to the GP104 and its 256-bit option.
The rated GPU clock speeds paint an interesting picture for peak performance of the new card. At the rated boost clock speed, the GeForce GTX 1070 produces 6.46 TFLOPS of performance. The GTX 1060 by comparison will hit 4.35 TFLOPS, a 48% difference. The GTX 1080 offers nearly the same delta of performance above the GTX 1070; clearly NVIDIA has set the scale Pascal and product deviation.
NVIDIA wants us to compare the new GeForce GTX 1060 to the GeForce GTX 980 in gaming performance, but the peak theoretical performance results don’t really match up. The GeForce GTX 980 is rated at 4.61 TFLOPS at BASE clock speed, while the GTX 1060 doesn’t hit that number at its Boost clock. Obviously Pascal improves on performance with memory compression advancements, but the 192-bit memory bus is only able to run at 192 GB/s, compared to the 224 GB/s of the GTX 980. Obviously we’ll have to wait for performance result from our own testing to be sure, but it seems possible that NVIDIA’s performance claims might depend on technology like Simultaneous Multi-Projection and VR gaming to be validated.