Slashdot Mirror


Nvidia Claims Its New Chip Is the 'World's Fastest GPU' for Game and VR Design (venturebeat.com)

An anonymous reader shares a VentureBeat report: Nvidia announced today the Quadro P6000 graphics card for workstations, using the "world's fastest GPU." The graphics card is targeted at designers who have to create complex simulations for everything from engineering models to virtual reality games. The Quadro P6000 is based on Nvidia's new Pascal graphics architecture, and it uses a GPU with 3,840 processing cores. It can reach 12 teraflops of computing performance, or twice as fast as the previous generation. Nvidia unveiled the new platform for artists, designers, and animators at the Siggraph graphics technology conference in Anaheim, Calif. AnandTech has more details on this. From their article:As NVIDIA's impending flagship Quadro card, this is based on the just-announced GP102 GPU. The direct successor to the GM200 used in the Quadro M6000, the GP102 mixes a larger number of SMs/CUDA cores and higher clockspeeds to significantly boost performance. Paired with P6000 is 24GB of GDDR5X memory, running at a conservative 9Gbps, for a total memory bandwidth of 432GB/sec. This is the same amount of memory as in the 24GB M6000 refresh launched this spring, so there's no capacity boost at the top of NVIDIA's lineup. But for customers who didn't jump on the 24GB -- which is likely a lot of them, including most 12GB M6000 owners -- then this is a doubling (or more) of memory capacity compared to past Quadro cards. At this time the largest capacity GDDR5X memory chips we know of (8Gb), so this is as large of a capacity that P6000 can be built with at this time. Meanwhile this is so far the first and only Pascal card with GDDR5X to support ECC, with NVIDIA implementing an optional soft-ECC method for the DRAM only, just as was the case on M6000.

35 comments

  1. My chip is even faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    but sorry cant leave contact info here, have to make a first post on slashdot.

  2. Crysis by iamwhoiamtoday · · Score: 0

    Yes, it can run Crysis. The game came out back in 2007. Shesh.

    That said, I certainly want a few of these in my work computer "for testing purposes."
    That's this week's excuse, anyways.

    1. Re:Crysis by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      You're right, but the irony is the Crysis's relatively poor optimisation means that it still doesn't really run at the levels you might expect even on new hardware. And Crysis 3, of course, is only just now starting to be edged out as a go-to game for benchmarking (the current favoured games for that role seem to be The Witcher 3, Ashes of the Singularity and Assassin's Creed: Unity/Syndicate).

  3. Totally unavailable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    And, like literally all new GPUs this year, it will be totally unbuyable.

    My brother's wanted a new GPU for months, so I told him I'd get him one. No Rx480 stock as it was sold out day one and has pretty much remained so since it launched. So I looked at the 1060, no stock available whatsoever there either. Same goes with Nvidia's 1080 and 1070, which have apparently had vastly limited quantities, even moreso than the smaller cheaper GPUs.

    And of course their less available, that's how chip manufacturing works. The larger the chip's die, the more transistors that can go wrong during manufacturing, the more likely the chip is to come out as a dud. Don't expect this "world's most powerful GPU for gaming!" to actually be buyable by most anyone. Probably have to wait till next year for anything beyond the smallest new GPUs to be available in any kind of decent quantity.

    1. Re: Totally unavailable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I managed to get an MSI gtx 1080 armor edition from newegg. Keep checking and you'll find it! Newegg usually has estimates on when new stock will arrive too.

    2. Re:Totally unavailable by acrobuddy · · Score: 2

      This card isn't a gaming card, far from it. The Quadro line of cards are workstation cards, not built or made for gaming in the first place. As you missed a few words as well in the title "...for Game and VR Design"

    3. Re:Totally unavailable by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      It's a $5000 workstation card. I don't think you will have too much trouble ordering it directly from nVidia.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    4. Re:Totally unavailable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      now in stock dot com

    5. Re:Totally unavailable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Shrug] I just checked the on-line store for the local computer shop I frequent. They have Nvidia GTX 1080 in stock, and GTX 1070 (3 different vendors - EVGA, Gigabyte, and Zotac). The 1060 are out of stock. So, your mileage may vary. I guess be persistent, because they are around.

    6. Re: Totally unavailable by loufoque · · Score: 1

      I got a 1070 24 hours after I ordered it from Nvidia.

    7. Re:Totally unavailable by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Don't buy new GPUs.

      Buy ones that a little behind the cutting edge, ones from a few months ago.

      80% of the performance at 30% of the price.

    8. Re:Totally unavailable by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Buy ones that a little behind the cutting edge, ones from a few months ago. 80% of the performance at 30% of the price.

      Are you trying to be funny? Even if you said years, almost two years ago I bought the GTX 970 for pretty close to MSRP of $329. If you think you can get 80% of that for 30% or <$100 today you're delusional. Don't get me wrong, today you can get roughly the same DX11 performance in a Radeon RX 480 4GB for $199 so it's lost quite a bit of value but it's not like last year's cards turn to shit anymore. A GTX 980 Ti will still kick a lot of ass simply because it's a 600mm^2 250W truck, sure there's a bigger and more badass truck but it'll still crush a compact car despite being a few generations old and the price reflects that. Sure, if you can get a deal from a gamer just trying to get rid of his card at any price really...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:Totally unavailable by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I haven't purchased a card for gaming since about 2010, so I may be a bit behind the times.

  4. Better-binned Titan X? by Misagon · · Score: 2

    According to Anandtech, the GPU is the GP102 which is the same as in the recently announced top-end consumer card "Titan X" (note: not "GTX Titan X".. confusing? yes)

    The Titan X has 3584 shader processors while the Quadro P6000 has 3840 and twice the memory. I assume that this means that the Titan X has a lower-binned chip.
    Previous generation of Nvidia GPUs ("Maxwell" architecture) has a GPU called GTX 980 Ti, which was a lower-binned GTX Titan X with half the memory. Now when the 10-series Titan X is already the lower-binned GPU, I suppose this means that there will not be any "GTX 1080 Ti".

    --
    "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    1. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      According to Anandtech, the GPU is the GP102 which is the same as in the recently announced top-end consumer card "Titan X" (note: not "GTX Titan X".. confusing? yes)

      The Titan X has 3584 shader processors while the Quadro P6000 has 3840 and twice the memory. I assume that this means that the Titan X has a lower-binned chip. Previous generation of Nvidia GPUs ("Maxwell" architecture) has a GPU called GTX 980 Ti, which was a lower-binned GTX Titan X with half the memory. Now when the 10-series Titan X is already the lower-binned GPU, I suppose this means that there will not be any "GTX 1080 Ti".

      If there is a 1080ti, it will probably use the same GP102 from the Titan X, but with only 8GB of vRAM. Heck they might even use the GP102 from the P6000. The first Titan came out during the 700 series and the 780ti had a higher-binned GK110 than the Titan, even though the Titan had more vRAM and FP64 support, and a much higher price tag.

      Honestly though, it's not all that necessary. The 1080 is a beast of a card. A 1080 ti might not be enough to justify the extra cost this generation. I'd rather they concentrate on getting more 1080's out so I can actually buy one.... at MSRP.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    2. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by RatBastard · · Score: 1

      Once the new version of CUDA is released and my rendering software will work with it. But none do right now.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    3. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Anandtech, the GPU is the GP102 which is the same as in the recently announced top-end consumer card "Titan X" (note: not "GTX Titan X".. confusing? yes)

      The Titan X has 3584 shader processors while the Quadro P6000 has 3840 and twice the memory. I assume that this means that the Titan X has a lower-binned chip.
      Previous generation of Nvidia GPUs ("Maxwell" architecture) has a GPU called GTX 980 Ti, which was a lower-binned GTX Titan X with half the memory. Now when the 10-series Titan X is already the lower-binned GPU, I suppose this means that there will not be any "GTX 1080 Ti".

      If there is a 1080ti, it will probably use the same GP102 from the Titan X, but with only 8GB of vRAM. Heck they might even use the GP102 from the P6000. The first Titan came out during the 700 series and the 780ti had a higher-binned GK110 than the Titan, even though the Titan had more vRAM and FP64 support, and a much higher price tag.

        Honestly though, it's not all that necessary. The 1080 is a beast of a card. A 1080 ti might not be enough to justify the extra cost this generation. I'd rather they concentrate on getting more 1080's out so I can actually buy one.... at MSRP.

      The 1080 maybe a beast of a GPU but it is only ok for 4K60hz gaming. It fails to maintain a 60 fps minimum in Doom and it is only a matter of time before games come out with higher requirements. A 1080ti maybe enough for good 4K60hz gaming. What has really screwed over everyone is that the 1080 was released at the "ti" price point and the 1070 released at the "x80" price point. If Nvidia releases a "ti" card then they will either have to drop the prices of the 1080 and 1070 (annoying those who bought them) or put the "ti" at a price point where Nvidia will get very few sales. Either way Nvidia loses...

    4. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We saved $5000 AUD buying a GTX980ti instead of a high end Quadro for CAD and it performs "equally" as good for our crane engineer as the other station with the ridiculously priced high end Quadro card...

    5. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by Aereus · · Score: 1

      I've heard people say all it comes down to is which driver it uses a lot of the time. Pretty expensive drivers to design I guess...

    6. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      My guess is that Anandtech got the conclusion for that one already written just substitute for this generation:

      With an average performance deficit of just 3%, GeForce GTX 980 Ti is for all intents and purposes GTX Titan X with a different name. (...) With a launch price of $649, the GTX 980 Ti may as well be an unofficial price cut to GTX Titan X, delivering flagship GeForce performance for 35% less.

      I expect that the GTX 1080 Ti will come in at $799/$899 (FE) in Q4 2016 or Q1 2017, this time with partner boards. And then there will be a new card with HBM2 to become the new Titan.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:Better-binned Titan X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the third-party validation tests for things like Softimage, Maya, 3DStudioMax. The visual output has to look exactly the same on every professional graphics card, so the studios know that no geometry will look bad after being sent to the renderfarm.

  5. And by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Claims' being the operative word.

  6. WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nvidia never planned to make Pascal chips- instead the original roadmap had a NEW architecture that matched rival AMD's GCN technology in its support of true independent multiple GPU tasks running at the same time. This architecture is named VOLTA.

    Volta is coming, and very soon, on the SAME process as Pascal. These Pascal chips are a money-grab, designed to exploit the naive brand loyalty of Nvidia fanboys. Nvidia fanboys tend to have a large disposable income, and a need to own the latest and most expensive Nvidia product. The new Titan X (which is the REAL name of the gamer card based on the largest Pascal die) will be a bad joke, depreciated by Nvidia drivers and support, when Volta arrives in the 2H of 2017. The first card called Titan was a rotten rip off too- and only suckers bought it. The 980TI is the ONLY decent large die part from Nvidia in this family so far.

    The new consoles (refresh of the Xbone and PS4, again using all AMD tech), and AMD's later GCN designs (including the new Polaris parts) are all future proof. Pascal is obsolete by design, so Nvidia customers can pay all over again a few months later. Pascal neither supports true native Vulkan nor DX12 coding- it only supports these APIs in COMPATIBILITY mode- which essentially means the emulation of older, slower APIs. DX11 under DX12. OpenGL under Vulkan. Currently true native Vulkan and DX12 methods only run on AMD.

    When Volta arrives, Nvidia will be the first to proclaim the uselessness of their older architectures. And again, this happens shortly into next year.

    1. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Billly+Gates · · Score: 0

      Dude the new AMD Polaris just hit 2014 era benchmarks as it caught up with 9xx Nvidia technology. It is dead . Even the new 1060 low end Pascal can easily outmatch a Polaris 480x

    2. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are the AMD fan bois really this stupid or is this a paid AMD shill?

      AMD are still 2.5-3 years behind nvidia, not just in pure performance terms but also price/performance ratio. That's just the GPUs, the CPUs are even further behind.

    3. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? Interesting because my 290x runs doom 2016 at 4k 60fps maxed out under vulkan. How old is the 290x? It outperforms some brand new nvidia GPUs in dx12 and vulkan without breaking stride.

      AMD may have been behind artificially because of bullshit like gameworks but those days ended quite a while ago. AMD driver updates would squash performance issues within a week or 2.

      You want top tier performance? AMD has dual GPU single cards that spanked everything from nvidia until the new titan came out. The 295x was a performance monster and it's going to be replaced soon by Polaris based cores.

      You can cheer for nvidia all you want but they dont innovate. They sit on their ass and overcharge people and cripple games synthetically just long enough that they always look like winners.

      Vega, up to 32 gigs of hbm2 14nm and a shit ton better at the 2 new APIs than anything from nvidia will be here soon enough but while we wait my 290x still hits 1080p 60 in every dx11 game I've thrown at it and if we are talking 12 and vulkan I can go well past those numbers without over clocking

      So take your fanboy and "shill" it up somewhere else. People should buy whatever suits their needs for the price they want to pay. AMD offers value and performance. Nvidia offers performance and tricks you into thinking it offers value with its titan line.

      Oh and the 1060 is shit. Is that $70 worth the extra 5 fps in dx11 games? I sure as hell noticed when I plugged one into my PC it couldn't come anywhere near the numbers of the 480 I borrowed from a friend to play with in Hitman, tomb raider or doom.

    4. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure if troll or retarded...

      The shiny new polaris AMD RX 480 is actually slower than the 3+ year old Nvidia GTX 780 by around 5%.

      On price vs performance the RX 480 is 30% slower than the Nvidia GTX 1060 AND IS also 50% more expensive. $359 vs $289.

      Why does anyone still buy AMD graphics cards? It doesn't make any sense.

    5. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the same reason people buy Apple products other than iPhones.

    6. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow the self delusion is strong with this one, mommy bought him AMD instead of decent gear...

      >>Really? Interesting because my 290x runs doom 2016 at 4k 60fps maxed out under vulkan. How old is the 290x? It outperforms some brand new nvidia GPUs in dx12 and vulkan without breaking stride.
      Firstly your R290X/R390X (same card, different name) is only 5% slower than an RX480. That shows you just how little AMD has progressed over the last few years. And it doesn't outperform ANY NVidia gaming card from the GTX 770 early 2013. Same goes for the RX480 which sits between the over 3 years old GTX770 and GTX 780. Even a NVidia GTX1060 card, which is $170 cheaper than the RX480 wipes the floor with the RX480 in performance terms in whatever API or benchmark you chose.

      >>AMD may have been behind artificially because of bullshit like gameworks but those days ended quite a while ago. AMD driver updates would squash performance issues within a week or 2.
      Absolute horseshit. AMD drivers have been a nightmare for years on both windows and linux. They have finally started to get a grip on the situation in the last 6 months. It really is this simple: AMD are behind NVidia in the benchmarks because they are slower. Is that really so difficult for you to admit to yourself? The RX480 currently sits behind 18 NVidia cards in the performance rankings.

      >>You want top tier performance? AMD has dual GPU single cards that spanked everything from nvidia until the new titan came out. The 295x was a performance monster and it's going to be replaced soon by Polaris based cores.
      Yes I do! The 295X was not a performance monster, it was a massive market failure. It was 25-35% slower than it should have been and slower than most top end single GPU cards because AMD's drivers were horrible and couldnt SLI the 2 cards in a useful way so normally only 1 card got used.

      >>You can cheer for nvidia all you want but they dont innovate. They sit on their ass and overcharge people and cripple games synthetically just long enough that they always look like winners.
      Im not cheering for NVidia, Im crying at the disgraceful mess the once great AMD is in. And laughing at the idiots trying to convince themselves AMD is still relevant.

      >>Vega, up to 32 gigs of hbm2 14nm and a shit ton better at the 2 new APIs than anything from nvidia will be here soon enough but while we wait my 290x still hits 1080p 60 in every dx11 game I've thrown at it and if we are talking 12 and vulkan I can go well past those numbers without over clocking
      And by the time VEGA is here NVidia will have released VOLTA. Again it will be behind. The performance deficit will stay at 2-3 years as it has for the last 6 years. We can all go past specs with over clocking, we can all hit 1080P@60hz on 3 year old NVidia cards. None of that matters, what matters is that AMD is still 3 years behind in performance terms and doesnt have a plan or the money to catch up.

      >>So take your fanboy and "shill" it up somewhere else. People should buy whatever suits their needs for the price they want to pay. AMD offers value and performance. Nvidia offers performance and tricks you into thinking it offers value with its titan line.
      Loool thankyou for being a fanboi, you make it so easy :D We know NVidia offers performance, thats why nobody who understands buys AMD anymore, we dont need you to tell us and nobody in their right mind (thats you excluded) thinks that the Titan line is the value line, thats the stupidest statement you made so far.

      >>Oh and the 1060 is shit. Is that $70 worth the extra 5 fps in dx11 games? I sure as hell noticed when I plugged one into my PC it couldn't come anywhere near the numbers of the 480 I borrowed from a friend to play with in Hitman, tomb raider or doom.
      Yeah yeah the GTX 1060 is shit, it is the entry level card for serious gamers after all, not like the top end AMD RX480 which costs $170 more and which is 30% slower. Yeah the GRX 1060 is so shit that its faster than ANY GPU AMD have ever made.... Your logic is amazing. Also what $70 for 5fps are you talking about? Like most of your post it doesnt have any bearing in reality.

    7. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not even go into power use of said cards.

    8. Re: WARNING- obsolete Pascal junk by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1

      Uh, the Radeon RX 480 is $220 or so, and besides the GTX 1060 is only about 15% faster.

  7. Best drivers by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Currently on linux, modern AMD cards have the "best-of-both-world" driver support.

    Nvidia currently only produce closed-source drivers.
    (Nouveau is exclusively the work of reverse engineering. Recieving nearly no support from Nvidia, except for the occasional patch to enable modesetting)

    AMD provides a hybrid stack:
    - they develop an kernel module (amdgpu) which is available up-stream. (i.e.: new versions of the kernel feature it out of the box).

    above this, you have two choices:

    - AMDGPU-Pro, the closed source drivers (which are the modern day equivalent of the user-space portion of Catalyst).
    Nowadays, they seem pretty stable, run games without bugs, and because they require a module which is already in mainstream kernel, they do work even with the latest kernel update. (unlike nvidia's driver which need the nvidia.ko some adaptation in case of variation of the kernel API).

    - RadeonSI, the opensource back-end to the Mesa driver.
    These are devloped by people of whom some are on AMD's payroll (i.e.: AMD doesn't only provide information, but even salaries for opensource development)
    With the Polaris, the driver was available at release day, and has a decent performance compared to the closed source one, and runs lots of games.

    That's quite some achievement compared with the early "fglrx" that was buggy as hell, and that's quite some engagement for the opensource community.

    As a Linux user, I actually like more the ADM driver situation.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  8. One Upped by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 1

    The Radeon Pro SSG just killed that off. Most likely, anyway. 8K video rendering at 90+fps is pretty impressive to me. The other machine barely hit 17fps.