The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Founder's Edition Review: Bigger Pascal for Better Performance
by Ryan Smith on March 9, 2017 9:00 AM ESTSynthetics
As always we’ll also take a quick look at synthetic performance. As a pretty straightforward and wider implementation of Pascal, GTX 1080 Ti shouldn't offer too many surprises here.
With TessMark, we find that the that the GTX 1080 Ti offers 26% better tessellation performance than the GTX 1080, and 63% better performance than the GTX 980 Ti. NVIDIA has always built their architectures geometry-heavy, and GTX 1080 Ti further adds to that lead.
Finally, for looking at texel and pixel fillrate, we have the Beyond3D Test Suite. This test offers a slew of additional tests – many of which use behind the scenes or in our earlier architectural analysis – but for now we’ll stick to simple pixel and texel fillrates.
As it turns out, the pixel fillrate results for the GTX 1080 Ti are a bit surprising. The GTX 1080 Ti doesn’t dominate by as much as I would have expected given the massive memory bandwidth advantage and additional ROP throughput. Not that a 25% increase over the GTX 1080 is anything to sneeze at, but I wonder if we’re looking at one of the consequences of the unusual way NVIDIA has cut-down GP102 for GTX 1080 Ti. We haven’t seen NVIDIA disable a single ROP/memory channel at the high-end before in this manner.
As for texel fillrate, the GTX 1080 Ti excels. In fact it does a bit better than I’d otherwise expect based on the specifications. This could be a sign that GTX 1080 is a bit bandwidth limited at times when it comes to texel throughput, as that’s the facet of performance the GTX 1080 Ti has improved upon the most.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
161 Comments
View All Comments
mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Some 780 Ti owners may have oc'd their cards that high, but not many I suspect. I've been searching for 780 Ti cards for a while, for CUDA, most tend to be around 980MHz at best.mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Also recall one model which was 1002MHz.Chaser - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
Glad to see I have no need for a card that powerful and expensive. I run a single 27" 2K IPS monitor and my Gigabyte Extreme gaming 1080 is more than enough to keep me on the high end for years to come. 4K is 90% bragging rights in terms of visible difference and also game developer support.sharath.naik - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
I think you may need to consider multi monitor gaming. Then this card makes sense if you want to use this in a small case that allows only one GPU.mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Depends on the game and what kind of detail one likes. Site reviews and forum commentaries also don't take into account game mods which often significantly increase the GPU load (check out the OCN Best Skyrim Pics thread, have a look at the builds people are using).I like to play games with all details/settings at maxed out. Thus, such a card is very relevant. Sure, plenty of players don't mind if the fps drops to 30 or 40, but some like it smooth at a minimum. I've currently no interest in high frequency monitors (which ironically can sensitise one's vision anyway), but I do seek 60Hz minimum sync'd, something I can't get atm with a single 980 at 1920x1200. I plan on moving up to 4K soon; with a 1080 Ti, and likely being able to get away with turning of some of the AA options because of the higher pixel density (which regains performance), minimum 60Hz looks very possible.
It depends on one's needs; everyone has different thresholds of what they're happy with.
Chaser - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
Very well written, balanced review. Nicely done Ryan.BrokenCrayons - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
+1!nismotigerwvu - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
Quality work as always Ryan! I spotted a minor typo on the conclusions page "Because the GeForce GTX 1080 Tii Founder’s Edition isn’t NVIDIA’s first GP102-based product". Did a little midnight coffee spill and make that i key sticky? :)BrokenCrayons - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
Typo/Error also on Page 4 of the review in the line that reads:"For our review of the GTX 1060, we’re using NVIDIA’s 378.78 driver."
Probably should be "GTX 1080 Ti"
The table directly below that line is also missing the GTX 1080 Ti in the video cards section.
Ryan Smith - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
Thanks!