Nvidia Geforce 1080 - 1070 announced!

I think BF:1 may force my hand on that 1070 GTX. Thing is, my 780 OC is doing me really well. I don't play all that many games admittedly, however the ones I do play, only one struggles slightly, and thats Crysis 2.

If the 1070 came down to about £350, I may bite.

 

I made the leap to Skylake (i7-6700k/z170) but I did not see a doubling in performance....more like 25% better using the same settings (triple screen rendering). It looks like you lowered your settings to get better scores. For me, there was in increase in performance that allowed me to run at 85hz refresh with v-sync with lots of eye candy:

AC VERSION: 1.7.3 (x64)
POINTS: 16465
FPS: AVG=112 MIN=67 MAX=138 VARIANCE=0 CPU=45%

LOADING TIME: 15s
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (5760x1080)
OS-Version: 6.2.9200 () 0x300-0x1
CPU CORES: 8
FULLSCREEN: ON
AA:4X AF:16X SHDW:4096 BLUR:0
WORLD DETAIL: 5 SMOKE:3
PP: QLT:5 HDR:1 FXAA:1 GLR:5 DOF:0 RAYS:1 HEAT:1

 

Apples to Apples here is my system with your settings (my previous benchmark was with triple screen rendering, FXAA, and high reflections):

AC VERSION: 1.7.4 (x64)
POINTS: 15468
FPS: AVG=105 MIN=88 MAX=139 VARIANCE=13 CPU=44%

LOADING TIME: 11s
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (5760x1080)
OS-Version: 6.2.9200 () 0x300-0x1
CPU CORES: 8
FULLSCREEN: ON
AA:4X AF:16X SHDW:4096 BLUR:0
WORLD DETAIL: 5 SMOKE:1
PP: QLT:5 HDR:1 FXAA:0 GLR:5 DOF:5 RAYS:1 HEAT:1

I upgraded my mobo, CPU and memory last week.

 

Do you hit solid 90fps when playing with a full grid with your setup? You may be the person I was looking for. I basically want proof of a setup that can deliver it with a 1080. Seems i7 6700 may be required

 

They're obviously not using VR so any comparison with your setup is completely worthless.

 

Thanks, wondering if anyone posted results on 4K already as we use completely different rendering, 4k vs triple 1080.

 

Found 1080 results with similar settings on 4K here
http://www.assettocorsa.net/forum/i...1080-1070-announced.32530/page-12#post-706324

 

He has a Vive listed in his signature. So obviously any comparison with that would not be worthless

 

What are you looking for? After the last update, I am able to run 90fps on my Vive with AC with fairly high settings (AA and PP are now working). Occasionally online or if I crank the settings too high, AC seems to bump the FPS to 45, but it is still playable. If I run with PP turned off and reflections on low with the Vive, the FPS stays at 90. I also tweak the steamvr.ini settings to get better anti-aliasing, but that limits what other settings I can crank up. I have noticed racing online that is seems to degrade down to 45fps with a large field (12+ cars). Something seems to click in the code and the fps drops, further into the race with less cars visible, it cranks back up to 90 fps. It seems like problem in the code.

I used to have 2 GTX 980s in SLI and a 4k TV. AC ran pretty smooth with 60hz v-sync and only a few settings turned down in 4k. Running the 4k TV on the GTX 1080 didn't seem much different. I moved the TV to another room after I switched back to triple and found a performance improvement with the new CPU and mobo. The GTX 1080 runs better triple monitor frame rates than the old SLI setup, and the CPU upgrade made about a 25% difference in FPS.

 

This is exactly what I was looking for. Nice info. I'm highly likely to end up getting a new CPU based on your feedback.

I think everyone is getting he same problem as you and me with the larger grids dropping to about 45 fps

 

With Skylake it's basically a CPU+cooler, DDR4 memory, and a new motherboard to support it all (new OS too!). I basically built another machine specifically for sim racing... and gave the old one to my son (with the 2 GTX 980s and the 4k TV).

 

So after installing my new GTX1070 i can say i am very happy with the results. I am only playing in 2560x1080 @60hz and can do this with ALL settings maxed out and no fps drop below 60 fps.

Ok, to be honest, it is not a huge step forward compared to my old GTX970.

But the overall look is much better now. I am not sure if it was woth 500 bucks, but i am confident now that the card will last for the next 3-4 years.

Aooner or later i will need a new CPU and more RAm but till now it´s ok

 

To be honest: If you've read some comparsions of the GTX 970 vs GTX1070 you should see the better step would be the GTX 1080. I think the step from the 970 to the 1070 is wasted money.
But just my 2 cents...

 

IMO, a CPU upgrade would have been more suitable for running at 1080 resolution (even on a 21:9 ratio screen). Check the CPU1 core utilization. It's probably getting crushed in AC--really need a 4790k or newer to take advantage of the 1000 series cards.


I upgraded from a 970 to 1070 since at higher resolutions (1440+) you get more of a benefit over the 970 (probably due to the 3.5 VRAM issue).

 

I had a Gainward GTX1080 Phoenix GLH on order, but delivery got postponed from this week to september.

I currently have a overclocked Gigabyte 980Ti Gaming G1 @ 1475 Mhz and according to this comparison on youtube, the expected performance increase is probably not worth the money right now



So i decided to cancel my order and wait for the 1080Ti

 

Curious to get thoughts on my machine and whether or not it makes sense to splurge for a 1070/1080.

I'm running a Dell T5600 workstation with these specs:

• Dual Xeon E5-2687 V1 (a total of 16 physical cores, 32 logical)
• 128GB RAM
• nVidia Quadro K5000
• 4X 900GB SAS drives in Raid 0

I'm currently achieving 75-85 FPS @ 2560 x 1080 with medium-high settings and would very much like to bump up resolution to the full 3440 x 1440 my ultra-wide supports. Perhaps even try out a CV1 in the future.

Seeing how this is a gaming machine, I'm interested to know if I can even put a GTX card in the box. I believe that I can but any information anyone has would be helpful. Also, will a 1070/1080 be hampered by my CPU? Even though there are 16 physical cores, I'm afraid that the per core performance may not be up to the task to support the CPU1 video processing load.

Pretty sure my RAM won't be a limitation.

 

Yes, you can run a GTX 1080 in that box. The Xeon should run comparable to my old I-7 3770k when it comes to Assetto Corsa performance. I could run 4k @60hz and 5760x1080@75hz with the 3770k and the GTX1080.... although I did see about a 25% increase in frame rate when I upgraded to a Skylake i7 6700k. I think it may have wider PCI bandwidth to accommodate the GTX 1080.

Also, run the SteamVR test on your current machine to see if you have the specs to run the Oculus or the Vive. The CPU might not be supported.

 

I'll try the SteamVR test tonight. I just looked up the processors and I may be in luck. I think my chips may have performance more comparable to the newer skylake. I just compared your old and new and my current and the bust speeds are similar, PCI is the same, and mem bandwidth is actually better. Of course, who knows until it's actually tested. Appreciate the feedback though. That is crazy that you saw a 25% increase in FPS through CPU alone.

http://ark.intel.com/compare/65523,64582,88195

 

Looks like the CPU passes the SteamVR test. Quadro K5000...not so much. 88% of frames below 90 fps. Shocker...

 

There you go. I thought about going ultra wide and g-sync, but I like the FOV of triples for side mirrors and seeing cars next to me. VR has a way to go. I can only play it for about 20-30 minutes at a time.