GTX 1080 Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks

[WYP]

Benchmarking Data for Nvidia's GTX 1080 have been submitted online for Ashes of the Singularity. How well does Nvidia's new flagship compare to AMD's Fury X in DirectX 12?

Read more on the GTX 1080's performance in Ashes of the Singularity.

 

[steverebo]

The hype train suddenly comes off the rails, I'm still getting one though

 

[Daiyus]

The hype train suddenly comes off the rails, I'm still getting one though

Haha. Very true on the hype train part. This is why I've been waiting for real world benchmarks before getting too excited.

Don't get me wrong, I'm as excited as everyone else; watching the VLogs, gawping at the specs, etc. There's no way I could I actually want to buy one before knowing true relative performance though.

I'm kind of glad that I'll have to wait until next year to get a new GPU/screen combo as I simply don't have the money right now. Hopefully that'll mean I'll have the GTX 1080 Ti and AMD's Vega cards to choose from too.

 

[Bagpuss]

Hmm, that's quite concerning actually.

Shows that problems with Nvidia & DX12 are very real and look to have been carried over to a new gen architecture.

Would definitely wait to see more DX12 benchmark results before jumping on the Pascal hype train.

 

[Kushiro]

meh, the 1080 is supposedly only marginally more powerful than a titan X in the first place. Bring on the Tis

 

[Agati]

When I read “New asynchronous compute advances improve efficiency and gaming performance.” I thought to myself, going from non existing to something is something the marketing department is going to hype up as being a huge increase.
Guess I wasn't wrong.

 

[tolagarf]

Seems someone broke a NDA hehe.

 

[phillipstuerzl]

Comparing an unreleased GPU with no proper drivers, to an established GPU with long driver support makes no sense. A month or two from release will tell the true story.

 

[AverageNinja]

This isn't that bad, right? Don't forget that the R9 Fury X beat the GTX 980 Ti by just north of 20% on Crazy settings at 1440p in Mark's performance review. Ashes of the Singularity really seems to favor AMD cards.

 

[DarthDudo]

Comparing an unreleased GPU with no proper drivers, to an established GPU with long driver support makes no sense. A month or two from release will tell the true story.

This is definitely true but everyone seems to underwhelmed by what they are seeing I cant really understand why given all the info out there? This never even on paper looked like a uber powerful new card?

Yea drivers, watch in a few months as the drivers come there will no doubt be an improvement and we can all watch as the 1060 beats out the 'ol 980's

 

[MrBridger]

Comparing an unreleased GPU with no proper drivers, to an established GPU with long driver support makes no sense. A month or two from release will tell the true story.

Nvidia started adding support for Pascal in drivers last November

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-pascal-volta-gpus-supported-geforce-drivers-adds-support-vulkan-api/

 

[semitope]

This isn't that bad, right? Don't forget that the R9 Fury X beat the GTX 980 Ti by just north of 20% on Crazy settings at 1440p in Mark's performance review. Ashes of the Singularity really seems to favor AMD cards.

A lot of these newer updated engine games seem to. tomb raider was the odd one out for me, tho a 390 was faster than a 970, it was a mess for many.

Comparing an unreleased GPU with no proper drivers, to an established GPU with long driver support makes no sense. A month or two from release will tell the true story.

The current drivers ill be used for reviews, so they better be ready.

 

[sixdean]

gtx 1080 Ashes performance in dx12

I'm a little surprised its only just better than the Fury X, could e an issue with Nvidia's DX12 opt, still I will see what the reviewers say and then make my upgrading descisions Screen included. If these cards can't do 60FPS at 4K I'll just get a 1440 screen and maybe 4K next year.

 

[kylemcl]

uhm

Hmm, that's quite concerning actually.

Shows that problems with Nvidia & DX12 are very real and look to have been carried over to a new gen architecture.

Would definitely wait to see more DX12 benchmark results before jumping on the Pascal hype train.

I'd like to remind everyone that any drivers currently available for the 1080 are in literal beta... most of us should know that drivers make up about 20-30% of a cards ability. so what I see from this is that the 1080 wile be roughly 30-40% better than a fury 390x in 1440p.

 

[FMinus]

I'd like to remind everyone that any drivers currently available for the 1080 are in literal beta... most of us should know that drivers make up about 20-30% of a cards ability. so what I see from this is that the 1080 wile be roughly 30-40% better than a fury 390x in 1440p.

Even if we believe that the drivers are so broken for a card that is supposed to be in reviewers hands right now (which nobody believes & drivers are pretty much fine), "proper" optimized drivers will mean 8-12FPS at best at stock speeds over a Fury X, which is nothing to write home about, for a top-tier card of a new generation.

But that's one game, I don't doubt it will perform much better in DX11 and other games, if it doesn't, well then it's a big disappointment.

 

[NeverBackDown]

This is definitely true but everyone seems to underwhelmed by what they are seeing I cant really understand why given all the info out there? This never even on paper looked like a uber powerful new card?

Yea drivers, watch in a few months as the drivers come there will no doubt be an improvement and we can all watch as the 1060 beats out the 'ol 980's

On paper? There hasn't been any! Just the quote "Faster than 980 SLI". That's not exactly indicative of much, more of a baseline.

I'd like to remind everyone that any drivers currently available for the 1080 are in literal beta... most of us should know that drivers make up about 20-30% of a cards ability. so what I see from this is that the 1080 wile be roughly 30-40% better than a fury 390x in 1440p.

This is your 4th post and every single one has been about 1080 and drivers.. we got it dude. You're hardcore for the 1080 and want to keep the hype train rolling. But sorry to stop it, this card isn't that much faster in DX12 than a Fury X if these benches are true. They already have proper drivers for it, saying they don't simply because consumers don't have them isn't saying much. Reviewers are getting proper drivers, if for any reason to show the best results possible. Only difference between there's and release drivers are the fact that they will probably end up turning on all there special features they talked about at the Press Event in the drivers. Nothing against Nvidia here but the hype was so high beforehand you can only expect disappointment because of it

 

[Zuler]

On paper? There hasn't been any! Just the quote "Faster than 980 SLI". That's not exactly indicative of much, more of a baseline.

There is right on the geforce site XD check for yourself. Just click view full specs.
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1080
GPU Engine Specs:
2560 NVIDIA CUDA® Cores
1607 Base Clock (MHz)
1733 Boost Clock (MHz)
Memory Specs:
10 Gbps Memory Speed
8 GB GDDR5X Standard Memory Config
256-bit Memory Interface Width
320 Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)

 

[ImprovizoR]

Smart move is to wait for AMD and then official AMD vs Nvidia benchmarks. You don't want to potentially regret your purchase just because you couldn't wait a month to see if the competition has something better. This could be driver related but it could also be indicative of 1080 not really being that much faster than 980Ti.

 

[Kushiro]

Meh. Just like the 980, the 1080 was bound to disappoint in regards to performance. The efficiency and OC headroom is fun though. Even if it was a binned chip.

Bring on the Tis

 

[NeverBackDown]

There is right on the geforce site XD check for yourself. Just click view full specs.
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1080
GPU Engine Specs:
2560 NVIDIA CUDA® Cores
1607 Base Clock (MHz)
1733 Boost Clock (MHz)
Memory Specs:
10 Gbps Memory Speed
8 GB GDDR5X Standard Memory Config
256-bit Memory Interface Width
320 Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)

Ok so they did a soft launch, my bad. But still on paper it doesn't really tell us much about performance. The graph they show has no numbers either with no PC specs. Just gonna have to wait.