They are just ""SLI"" machines bundled into a single chip. They make bigger dies, they are more expensive to make and they have lower yields, and therefore they have to charge more. They are very easy to make once you have a base of mid-end chips, simply because GPUs are by definition parallel machines and you can just stick more cores onto them, because they aren't CPUs that you actually have to make the cores themselves faster too.
Take a look at this for example: A regular ~1500 cores GPU will burn about 150W of energy. Those bigger chips of ~3000 cores will burn about 300W so the above notion is pretty blatantly true.
Good technology ~= overdesigned technology.
James Adams
>They are just ""SLI"" machines bundled into a single chip trolling is a bannable offense
Aaron Carter
Hence the quotations marks. They are technically not using SLI but technologically, even SLI is more complex. Those big chips do essentially nothing more than sticking more cores onto the existing chips technologically.
Josiah Morales
I'm still gonna buy it.
Looks like you're just looking for an excuse for being POOR
Jack Cruz
You can buy it, nobody will stop you. I'm referring to the notion that this is somehow something to "celebrate" in technology discussions. Anyone that can make a GPU can just stick more cores into it and make a faster GPU, hence the "Ti" of 1080 offers nothing to the table other than "moar cores" technologically.
..and a price of $700 that will be worth $100 in 5 years.
Ryder Sullivan
You're either trolling or retarded. Kys yourself, sage & hide.
Liam Wright
It's not like that's how all graphics chips are built today or anything. I mean that wasn't the idea when both AMD and Nvidia started using programmable shader blocks at all.
Cooper Cruz
I don't know why you deny that simple fact. Those CPUs are exactly the same technology with their small brothers. They practically have moar cores and practically spend almost double the energy.
Aaron Ward
GPUs*
Angel Russell
...
Joshua Johnson
Did you just discover how GPUs work? They were never serial machines. They always worked in parallel, they always got easy gains from moar cores, and they never needed serial performance the way CPUs do.
Aaron Thomas
Tone down the retard, nobody is talking about parallel vs serial processing here. Except you.
Wyatt Moore
>They are just ""SLI"" machines bundled into a single chip
Except, they're not, it's a single chip
Jonathan Ward
I don't even know what you're trying to say anymore.
David Cox
Expect I knew retards like you would reply and I put quotation marks, I guess I shouldn't double them to predict the extra retards, but triple them for the super extra retards like you.
Jonathan Campbell
A retarded statement in between quotation marks is still a retarded statement.
You're tech illiterate
Landon Edwards
You're literally saying that the fact that programmable shader blocks work as intended is no good. What the fuck is wrong with you?
Jackson Johnson
>same architecture GTX 980ti = 2816 cores GTX 1070 = only 1920 cores GTX 1070 is fater and draw less power
Fuck off OP
Charles Murphy
>coars is the only thing that matters You forgot the megahurtz :^)
Gavin Peterson
>Take a look at this for example: A regular ~1500 cores GPU will burn about 150W of energy. Those bigger chips of ~3000 cores will burn about 300W so the above notion is pretty blatantly true. I remember the GTX750Ti used to have only 5W higher TDP than the regular GTX750, so you are wrong.
Joseph Martin
> source: ass and manboobs
Joshua Edwards
>..and a price of $700 that will be worth $100 in 5 years.
implying that all tech doesn't go down in value over time.
hardware has always been a money dump
Xavier Carter
ITT: Bunch of triggered idiots that miss the point.
It's not that GPU cores never advance idiots.
It's that 9999 cores != better tech
Oliver Hall
There *IS* some power saving due to half VRAM needed mainly and some other minor circuitry but that's about it, for the most part those chips mainly bundle more cores into a single chip on the same generations, OP is right.
