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
eddman - Friday, March 10, 2017 - link
Adjusted for inflation: http://i.imgur.com/ZZnTS5V.pngMeteor2 - Friday, March 10, 2017 - link
Great charts!mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Except they excude the Titans, Fury, etc.eddman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
I, personally, made these charts.No titans because they are very niche cards for those gamers who cannot wait and/or have more money than sense. The following Ti variants perform almost as good as the titan cards anyway.
No radeons because this is an nvidia-only chart. I should've titled it as such. I focused on nvidia because ATI/AMD usually don't price their cards so high.
mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Ok on the Radeon angled, shoulda realised it was NV only. :DHowever, your description of those who buy Titans cannot be anything than your own opinion, and what you don't realise is that for many store owners it's these very top-tier cards which bring in the majority of their important profit margins. They make far less on the mainstream cards. They enthusiast market is extremely important, whether or not one individually regards the products as being relevant for one's own needs. You need to be objective here.
mapesdhs - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Sorry for the typos... am on a train, wobbly kybd. :D Is this site ever gonna get modern and allow editing??...eddman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
I think I am being objective. Titan cards do not fit into the regular geforce range. They are like an early pass. Wait a few months and you can have a Ti that performs the same at a much lower price.If nvidia never released a similar performing Ti card, I would've included them.
eddman - Saturday, March 11, 2017 - link
Also I don't see how stores and their profits has anything to do with that.Mr Perfect - Tuesday, March 14, 2017 - link
Nice work on those charts.So there where a couple years where top tier cards where $400 or less. Inflation number normalize that price a fair bit though.
Ryan Smith - Thursday, March 9, 2017 - link
Those days are long-gone, and not just because of profit taking. 16/14nm FinFET GPUs are astonishingly expensive to design and fab. The masks are in the millions, and now everything has to be double-patterned.