• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

1070 vs 390/970

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Rydis

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Location
Bradenton, FL
how do you think the 1070 will stack up against the 390 and the 970? As a recent buyer of the 390, I been happy with it, but the 1080 looks amazing, but can't find much on the 1070.
 

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
The 1070 will be 7% worse of a upgrade than prier GTX 970 according to Anandtech, the hole launch is just a bunch of hype.

Looking just at rated TFLOPs, at 72% of the rated performance of the GTX 1080, the gap between the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 is a bit wider than it was for the GTX 900 series. There the GTX 970 was rated for 79% of the GTX 980’s performance.

NVIDIA’s own performance marketing slides put the average at around 65% faster than GTX 980 and 20-25% faster than GTX Titan X/980 Ti, which is relatively consistent for a new NVIDIA GPU http://www.anandtech.com/show/10304/nvidia-announces-the-geforce-gtx-1080-1070/2
 

Mindinversion

New Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Go get a comparison of GTX 970 vs GTX titan X. See how much better the Titan is. Now add 20-25% performance to the Titan X

That's the 1070.

Launch is not "hype" . These cards are monsters.

MONSTERS I say :D
 

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
The 1070 will be 7% worse of a upgrade than prier GTX 970 according to Anandtech, the hole launch is just a bunch of hype.

Go get a comparison of GTX 970 vs GTX titan X. See how much better the Titan is. Now add 20-25% performance to the Titan X

That's the 1070.

Launch is not "hype" . These cards are monsters.

MONSTERS I say :D

No Anandtech said that the GTX 1080 is only 20-25% faster than the Titan X or GTX 980Ti it is all just a bunch of Hype.

Looking just at rated TFLOPs, at 72% of the rated performance of the GTX 1080, the gap between the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 is a bit wider than it was for the GTX 900 series. There the GTX 970 was rated for 79% of the GTX 980’s performance.

NVIDIA’s own performance marketing slides put the average at around 65% faster than GTX 980 and 20-25% faster than GTX Titan X/980 Ti, which is relatively consistent for a new NVIDIA GPU http://www.anandtech.com/show/10304/nvidia-announces-the-geforce-gtx-1080-1070/2
 

mald

Registered
Joined
Dec 4, 2015
No Anandtech said that the GTX 1080 is only 20-25% faster than the Titan X or GTX 980Ti it is all just a bunch of Hype.

Doesn't that mean that the gtx 1070 would be around a gtx 980ti in terms of performance then?
 

Firey_chasm

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Location
Guildford, England
the materials I have read so far put the 1080 20-25% above the titan X, and the 1070 around the same as the titan X. (ignoring VR)

However until we see real benchmarks (May 17th) we really dont know. We have only seen vague bar charts without any system specs or game settings.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
the materials I have read so far put the 1080 20-25% above the titan X, and the 1070 around the same as the titan X. (ignoring VR)

However until we see real benchmarks (May 17th) we really dont know. We have only seen vague bar charts without any system specs or game settings.
This.

If its 980Ti level, it will spank the 390 and 970.

This quoted passage even alludes to that point:
NVIDIA’s own performance marketing slides put the average at around 65% faster than GTX 980 and 20-25% faster than GTX Titan X/980 Ti, which is relatively consistent for a new NVIDIA GPU http://www.anandtech.com/show/10304/...tx-1080-1070/2

Look at the difference between a 980 and a 970.... its a few percent. I would have to imagine that a 1070 will EASILY beat a 970 and 390.

Id bet the 1070 is between 980 and 980Ti performance (closer to 980Ti) if the 1080 is supposedly 20-25% faster than a 980Ti/TitanX....like that article said, there is a bit bigger of a gap between them this time (in TFlops anyway).
 
Last edited:

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
After watching the Doom video with the GTX 1080 on only a 1080p monitor only averaging 130FPS I'm vary disappointed and the game Graphics are horrible not much video rendering..

 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
After watching the Doom video with the GTX 1080 on only a 1080p monitor only averaging 130FPS I'm vary disappointed and the game Graphics are horrible not much video rendering..

quick to judge, don't you think? You have nothing to compare it to, so how can you judge? Who knows how hard that game is on a gpu too. The 980ti likely gets a bit over 100 fps if the 20-25% thing is true. Soooooo....

You do know you are watching a screen through a camera, right? Tough to judge how good looks like that IMO.

What do you mean by rendering video?
 
Last edited:

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
quick to judge, don't you think? You have nothing to compare it to, so how can you judge? Who knows how hard that game is on a gpu too. The 980ti likely gets a bit over 100 fps if the 20-25% thing is true. Soooooo....

You do know you are watching a screen through a camera, right? Tough to judge how good looks like that IMO.

What do you mean by rendering video?
I watched that video and compared it to Crysis 3 both at 1080p and Doom looks like it is going backwards to the old doom games,so it does not look like a lot of video rendering was done in my impression. I'm not judging just that he said GTX 1080 was playing Doom and it hit 200FPS and he said "you do want to play at 200FPS", then I watched the FPS all they way through it averaged 130FPS and was let down again just when I got my hopes up for GTX 1070 doing so well, like you said I will have to wait till NVidia allows the 1080-1070 Graphic cards to be tested on a game that is out now.

I just remember back at a time when hardware company's use to let review sites have a samples before sales now there all so shady they just want orders and preorders before results.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Again, its a picture of a screen. No way you can tell how good it looks from tbat. Perhaps gooe some doom screenshots and look before making another premature judelgement. ;)

I still have no idea what you mean by "video rendering"....

It's competition is why they hold back information... there are less leaks these days, but a lot have the cards in their hands already. I honestly don't recall seeing anything but rumors of performance pre-release for as long as I have been in this game (2003)
 
Last edited:

Firey_chasm

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Location
Guildford, England
I just remember back at a time when hardware company's use to let review sites have a samples before sales now there all so shady they just want orders and preorders before results.


Review sites have the cards in their hands now. The NDA lifts on the 17th May. The card isnt released till the 27th. So you should be able to see benchmarks and reviews at least 10 days before the earliest you could ever get your hands on a card. Patience :)
 

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Again, its a picture of a screen. No way you can tell how good it looks from tbat. Perhaps gooe some doom screenshots and look before making another premature judelgement. ;)

I still have no idea what you mean by "video rendering"....

It's competition is why they hold back information... there are less leaks these days, but a lot have the cards in their hands already. I honestly don't recall seeing anything but rumors of performance pre-release for as long as I have been in this game (2003)
Thanks for suggesting I look at the screen shots, it looks great however a scary game. My hopes are backup for great performance, I just don't under stand why the projection was so bad I have seen many projectors do vary well.

What Is Video Rendering? it is a old term before 2003;). Video cards have to draw every polygon or called triangle one at a time, the more Detail in a game the more polygon or triangles have to be done, so that takes more rendering power. Her is a link for video rendering have a read http://www.ehow.com/facts_4923368_what-video-rendering.html

Here is a link about polygons in Graphics cards. http://pc.net/helpcenter/answers/polygons_in_3d_graphics

Review sites have the cards in their hands now. The NDA lifts on the 17th May. The card isnt released till the 27th. So you should be able to see benchmarks and reviews at least 10 days before the earliest you could ever get your hands on a card. Patience :)
Thanks, I'm glad Nvidia is still allowing the bench test results before the card release with good time to decide, for some reason I thought they changed that policy.
 

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
Thanks for the link... wow is that not a common term today. I was with you until the "video" part, LOL!
 

wingman99

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
I'm so use to calling Graphics cards Video cards also video rendering from the old days, it is a hard habit to break. Most people don't know the basics of how the video rendering works or now called graphics card, it's a lost subject it was not easy to find links I went to howstuffworks and there descriptions on the basics of how a Graphic card works was awful they were talking about wire framing with strait lines and it is easer to understand the Graphics card draws polygon or tringle one at a time then rasterizes.

I think if I can recall when they became Graphics cards was about the time when Nvidia had the card also do transformation and lighting along with Polygons rasterizes they then called it Graphics processing unit, they were first to have coined the phase Graphics processing unit, they then went form Video accelerator cards to Graphics cards. Nvidia was the name changer it went from the term 3D chip, video accelerator card to GPU to Graphics cards. The TNT and voodoo2 were video accelerator cards. The confusing thing back then which causes a lot of arguments who coined GPU or Graphics card, back then Graphics was a separate issue, image quality look with the same game and a new 3D chip, they use to doo screen shots in 1998 of better graphics with a new 3D chip and the same game, that was just one part of the video accelerator card improvement. So once Nvidia went to GPU people called it a Graphics card because it did more functions than the CPU did not have to do anymore for Graphics.
 
Last edited:

EarthDog

Gulper Nozzle Co-Owner
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Location
Buckeyes!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit

The term GPU was popularized by Nvidia in 1999, who marketed the GeForce 256 as "the world's first GPU", or Graphics Processing Unit.[2] It was presented as a "single-chip processor with integrated transform, lighting, triangle setup/clipping, and rendering engines that are capable of processing a minimum of 10 million polygons per second".[3] Rival ATI Technologies coined the term visual processing unit or VPU with the release of the Radeon 9700 in 2002.[4]