How will this change the world of mining?? GTX 1080 / 1070

[Genoil]

Genoil is it really only 24Mhash for 1080? Cant be 

It is 24mhs at 140w that is for 1080 - the big question is 1070 that will be better choice for mining anyway (or even other cheaper Pascal based GPUs)

well that's bad, because right now a 390 can do the same with the same wattage, now imagines what a 490 can do

so i think if the new gpu will not be optimized in some way they will be out of the cryptoscene altogether

It's not unthinkable that AMD is going the same way with their architecture. You already see that in their GCN1.2 line. Narrower buses, delta compression, all to save power. I wouldn't be surprised if 490 also sticks in the 20-25 range for ETH.

With 2MB page size support we may see performance up to full bandwidth utilization. But that's pure speculation.

[1714713601]

1714713601

[1714713601]

1714713601

[Hamliss]

Genoil is it really only 24Mhash for 1080? Cant be 

It is 24mhs at 140w that is for 1080 - the big question is 1070 that will be better choice for mining anyway (or even other cheaper Pascal based GPUs)

well that's bad, because right now a 390 can do the same with the same wattage, now imagines what a 490 can do

so i think if the new gpu will not be optimized in some way they will be out of the cryptoscene altogether

It's not unthinkable that AMD is going the same way with their architecture. You already see that in their GCN1.2 line. Narrower buses, delta compression, all to save power. I wouldn't be surprised if 490 also sticks in the 20-25 range for ETH.

With 2MB page size support we may see performance up to full bandwidth utilization. But that's pure speculation.

Do you have a chance to use the 1080/70 and optimise the Ethereum miner? I hope it will be faster.

[toptek]

should ask how will amd top it and they will then nvidia will, as for mining i hope we get more coins like eth so i have a excuse to make a 9 card miner . Video card mining  might just make a come back and stay, not with bitcoins but if we can do it with video cards again why not .I would very much welcome it .

[Genoil]

Genoil is it really only 24Mhash for 1080? Cant be  

It is 24mhs at 140w that is for 1080 - the big question is 1070 that will be better choice for mining anyway (or even other cheaper Pascal based GPUs)

well that's bad, because right now a 390 can do the same with the same wattage, now imagines what a 490 can do

so i think if the new gpu will not be optimized in some way they will be out of the cryptoscene altogether

It's not unthinkable that AMD is going the same way with their architecture. You already see that in their GCN1.2 line. Narrower buses, delta compression, all to save power. I wouldn't be surprised if 490 also sticks in the 20-25 range for ETH.

With 2MB page size support we may see performance up to full bandwidth utilization. But that's pure speculation.

Do you have a chance to use the 1080/70 and optimise the Ethereum miner? I hope it will be faster.

No I have to wait like everybody. Optimization-wise there isn't much to do, as 10x0 appears to actually be very similar to 9x0 on the inside. Just a few more SM's die-shrink and very high clocks.

[Amph]

Genoil is it really only 24Mhash for 1080? Cant be 

It is 24mhs at 140w that is for 1080 - the big question is 1070 that will be better choice for mining anyway (or even other cheaper Pascal based GPUs)

well that's bad, because right now a 390 can do the same with the same wattage, now imagines what a 490 can do

so i think if the new gpu will not be optimized in some way they will be out of the cryptoscene altogether

It's not unthinkable that AMD is going the same way with their architecture. You already see that in their GCN1.2 line. Narrower buses, delta compression, all to save power. I wouldn't be surprised if 490 also sticks in the 20-25 range for ETH.

With 2MB page size support we may see performance up to full bandwidth utilization. But that's pure speculation.

mmh that's even worse, or maybe not so much, we would avoid upgrading to new gpu if they do not offer anything, minus a slightly efficency of some insignificant less wattage

[restless]

It was expected.
AMD wins in dagger-hashimoto because they have cards with wide bus - more mem controllers so faster random memory access/latency. I don't see how bigger page supported will help for "random" access

Obviously scaling on AMD is very very low after 1000-1200 shaders (7850/7870 265-270)
Its all because of bus width...

270 can make ~ 20MH/s with core:mem ratio of 2:3 (exp atm)
290 has 2x wider bus, 2x shaders... but afaik never was close to 40MH/s
Fury can make 35MH/s due to ver wide HBM memory.
So my prediction:

1070 - 20-24MH/s (the maximum for 256-bit bus)
Polaris10 - same lvl

[Amph]

It was expected.
AMD wins in dagger-hashimoto because they have cards with wide bus - more mem controllers so faster random memory access/latency. I don't see how bigger page supported will help for "random" access

Obviously scaling on AMD is very very low after 1000-1200 shaders (7850/7870 265-270)
Its all because of bus width...

270 can make ~ 20MH/s with core:mem ratio of 2:3 (exp atm)
290 has 2x wider bus, 2x shaders... but afaik never was close to 40MH/s
Fury can make 35MH/s due to ver wide HBM memory.
So my prediction:

1070 - 20-24MH/s (the maximum for 256-bit bus)
Polaris10 - same lvl

so it might be worth to wait again the 470, which should be the best and cheapest along with the 490 or the possible future polaris nano

according to some speculation tdp target seems a bit lower on polaris

[mandica]

Wide bus is very important. For the R9 390, I can run 1100/1200MHz, the memory controller usage is just 98%.

[QuintLeo]

It was expected.
AMD wins in dagger-hashimoto because they have cards with wide bus - more mem controllers so faster random memory access/latency. I don't see how bigger page supported will help for "random" access

Obviously scaling on AMD is very very low after 1000-1200 shaders (7850/7870 265-270)
Its all because of bus width...

270 can make ~ 20MH/s with core:mem ratio of 2:3 (exp atm)
290 has 2x wider bus, 2x shaders... but afaik never was close to 40MH/s
Fury can make 35MH/s due to ver wide HBM memory.
So my prediction:

1070 - 20-24MH/s (the maximum for 256-bit bus)
Polaris10 - same lvl

 290 did get to 30MH though, so it was still scaling somewhat - just not 100% scaling vs. shader count.
 Limit is definitely somewhere in the memory system though - and it's NOT just bus width, Fury/Nano have a 4096 bit wide memory bus (due to the structure of HBM) yet they're as fast as the 290 or about the SAME hash.

 Genoil IIRC was speculating it was a limit in the TLB table hardware, but I dunno how far their research into that has gotten.

 I don't see anything close to 20 MH out of my 7870s - the 270 has the SAME shader count, but it does have somewhat faster memory and IIRC 2x the memory bus width, but while it's certainly a good bit faster than the 7870 it's nowhere near 2X as fast, much less 2x PLUS the memory speed ratio.


 TDP target on Polaris should be a LOT lower - the smaller node is a lot more efficient, even if you puch more transistors AND kick the clock rate up quite a bit.
 On the other hand, it won't be out in time to do much Eth mining with, unless AMD pushes the release dates up a good bit.

[Kasmonian]

It was expected.
AMD wins in dagger-hashimoto because they have cards with wide bus - more mem controllers so faster random memory access/latency. I don't see how bigger page supported will help for "random" access

Obviously scaling on AMD is very very low after 1000-1200 shaders (7850/7870 265-270)
Its all because of bus width...

270 can make ~ 20MH/s with core:mem ratio of 2:3 (exp atm)
290 has 2x wider bus, 2x shaders... but afaik never was close to 40MH/s
Fury can make 35MH/s due to ver wide HBM memory.
So my prediction:

1070 - 20-24MH/s (the maximum for 256-bit bus)
Polaris10 - same lvl

 290 did get to 30MH though, so it was still scaling somewhat - just not 100% scaling vs. shader count.
 Limit is definitely somewhere in the memory system though - and it's NOT just bus width, Fury/Nano have a 4096 bit wide memory bus (due to the structure of HBM) yet they're as fast as the 290 or about the SAME hash.

 Genoil IIRC was speculating it was a limit in the TLB table hardware, but I dunno how far their research into that has gotten.

 I don't see anything close to 20 MH out of my 7870s - the 270 has the SAME shader count, but it does have somewhat faster memory and IIRC 2x the memory bus width, but while it's certainly a good bit faster than the 7870 it's nowhere near 2X as fast, much less 2x PLUS the memory speed ratio.


 TDP target on Polaris should be a LOT lower - the smaller node is a lot more efficient, even if you puch more transistors AND kick the clock rate up quite a bit.
 On the other hand, it won't be out in time to do much Eth mining with, unless AMD pushes the release dates up a good bit.

I do hope AMD can release the Polaris earlier than November. Otherwise we will only have a few months to mine.

[Amph]

polaris is expecting to be released next month, so still in time, but first wave of gpu would be expensive as usual

i would look at the new 470 it should consume something like 40w and hash at 15MH at least

[Fasdata]

polaris is expecting to be released next month, so still in time, but first wave of gpu would be expensive as usual

i would look at the new 470 it should consume something like 40w and hash at 15MH at least

I would prefer the high end ones. You can have more hash per rig and that will reduce the cost of the system overheads.

[QuintLeo]

From what I've seen reported, Polaris will start out in the low-to-mid range (more or less replacing the current R7s and perhaps the bottom end R9) and won't move up-range for a bit.

 I've not seen ANY report of it showing up next month or even July - might get an "official announcement" in June, but actual "release for sale" date last I've seen was still estimated for mid-to-late 3Q 2016 at the earliest - with the TSMC damage from the big earthquake adding months to a LOT of estimates.

[fredeq]

From what I've seen reported, Polaris will start out in the low-to-mid range (more or less replacing the current R7s and perhaps the bottom end R9) and won't move up-range for a bit.

 I've not seen ANY report of it showing up next month or even July - might get an "official announcement" in June, but actual "release for sale" date last I've seen was still estimated for mid-to-late 3Q 2016 at the earliest - with the TSMC damage from the big earthquake adding months to a LOT of estimates.

Polaris for sure will be shown at Computex 1st of June. Rumour has it even sooner at 26th of May at some conference for journalists.
Should get more info then.

[QuintLeo]

Paper launch is NOT "available" - though NVidia paper-launching the GTX 1080 less than a month before actual availability (presuming they meed the announced May 27 "available for sale" date) was semi-impressive.

[fredeq]

Paper launch is NOT "available" - though NVidia paper-launching the GTX 1080 less than a month before actual availability (presuming they meed the announced May 27 "available for sale" date) was semi-impressive.

I agree, I only wanted to point out that we will know by 1st of June for sure
I have a feeling that top Polaris will still outperform 390x. Hoping for a nice 480x.

[vaulter]

Numbers for 1070 (maybe there will be some improvement but dont expect much with optimization)
all results are without overclocking

Quark 25000 at 140w
LiraReV2 14000 at 120W
Decred 1900 at 130W

Dont have ethereum yet - but expect 20-24mhs at 120W 

[Amph]

Numbers for 1070 (maybe there will be some improvement but dont expect much with optimization)
all results are without overclocking

Quark 25000 at 140w
LiraReV2 14000 at 120W
Decred 1900 at 130W

Dont have ethereum yet - but expect 20-24mhs at 120W  

mmh not really excited so far

970 right now is

quark 17MH 150w
lira 10MH at 150w
decred 1350 at 150w

ethereum 22MH at 150w or 20MH at 125w

so we have 50% on other algo, probably less with sp mod private, because i remember he pushed 1700 or something on decred for example

and for etheruem we have a very bad position...and to be honest i was expecting a much lower consumption...

[Next BillG]

Paper launch is NOT "available" - though NVidia paper-launching the GTX 1080 less than a month before actual availability (presuming they meed the announced May 27 "available for sale" date) was semi-impressive.

I agree, I only wanted to point out that we will know by 1st of June for sure
I have a feeling that top Polaris will still outperform 390x. Hoping for a nice 480x.

According to the following link, "480x" is just 5% faster than the 390x.

http://videocardz.com/60253/amd-radeon-r9-480-3dmark11-benchmarks

[vaulter]

Paper launch is NOT "available" - though NVidia paper-launching the GTX 1080 less than a month before actual availability (presuming they meed the announced May 27 "available for sale" date) was semi-impressive.

I agree, I only wanted to point out that we will know by 1st of June for sure
I have a feeling that top Polaris will still outperform 390x. Hoping for a nice 480x.

According to the following link, "480x" is just 5% faster than the 390x.

http://videocardz.com/60253/amd-radeon-r9-480-3dmark11-benchmarks

I think we might be a bit surprised that new amd polaris parts will look similar to 970 in terms of mining perf
390 and nano will look better in memory dependent but will they be good from price/watt/perf standpoint - 1070 looks definitely better from resale value - so overall might be a nice part
but yes - end of year parts from both vendors will definitely outperform current parts in pure perf but perf per value - that is the biggest question...