GeForce Deals & Offers

Of course it can be compared, are any ray tracing games, let only dlls enabled games available yet?. DLSS is just fake 4k using the deep learning cores. Similar to PS4 pro checkboard , Xbox X etc. Rtx 1070 (106) matches a gtx 1080 and some more with current games. Ray tracing needs a rtx 2080ti (104 ) to shine at 1080p @60fps and 4k @60fps possibly (if DLSS is enabled and works). I doubt ray tracing enabled games on rtx 2080/70 will hit 60fps at 4k, prob 2160p/1080p at 60fps respectively with DLSS enabled. Hope ray tracing/DLSS doesn't end up like hair works

Wait until 7nm in 2019 Both AMD and NVidia will release something in Q2. AMD has announced that they will, and NVidia always tries to spoil their party. AMD Vega 7nm (no, NAVI isn't here yet) will be announced that will be the best power-to-performance ratio in the mid-high end (but will overclock well), and either NVidia announces a GTX 2090/TI on 12nm that becomes the new performance king, or less likely 7nm. I called the 2000 series launch as a flop, since the 10 series was still going strong, AMD hadn't released anything competitive since Vega (and that wasn't that big a hit), and NVidia had a backlog of 300,000(reported returns from AIB partners)-1million (by some estimates) 10-series GPUs to sell. The pricing of the 20 series and the fact that NVidia is still actively selling the 10 series until at least January reflects that.

thank you for bringing this to peoples attention... no sli on this, another indication this is a x60 card ..

Why is the comparison only valid for 5 year old games? 1 year old games don't support raytracing or DLSS either. In fact neither do 1 month old games. Also since we're talking about a 2070 here, RT probably isn't going to be relevant since evidence suggests that even the 2080 TI is probably going to struggle with RT at a lowly 1080p, and the 2070 only has around 60% of the RT performance of that card.

Yes. Spend a lot of time on eBay.

I think if you have a 1070 already, there isn't a compelling reason to upgrade every generation for any GPU, the 2070 is approx 30% faster than the 1070, and as you say, the RTX stuff hasn't hit yet, so hold off for now. People with a 970 and below are the most likely buyers of this card. If you're on the 1070+ hold pat until we see more DLSS/RTX bits.

I voted hot!

Well that is a subjective opinion, rather then fact. Problem is that is nothing to do with what this site is about, price is Good so it ticks the box!

Not very good value for money is probably what was meant!

I think your term 'Useless' is a bit far fetched (ninja)

Well at this price someone is getting ....ed

The 20 series FE cards are NOT blowers. There are twin radial fans like many AIB cards. They are also factory overclocked.

You would not use the HDMI with that card though...

The FE (and any blower card) is not going to perform as well as a custom heatsink and more airflow

I was working on averages. It has also been on sale at £799. (y)

Thanks for clarification....

A year or two? Double that easy.

I presume RTX is proprietary and Nvidia won’t let AMD use it, just like hair works, in order to Gimp AMD.

been reading about nvidia releasing 7nm middle next year, amd begining of the year, so why are nvidia releasing rtx cards now :/

Personally, I think NVidia is keeping the RTX GPUs price high so the GTX 10XX series looks cheap in comparison, so they can shift these old stocks. For now, if you want high performance GPU for gaming, you only have NVidia. I have picked up a RX580 for a third of this price, less fps, but perfectly playable (60fps) on Forza 4 with ultra settings. If I really want more fps, I can easily get another for CrossFire and still save enough for a 3rd :).

Personal preference I guess. But you will have enjoyed “ultra” settings in games from 2-3 years ago which will be the equivalent of “very good” now. I’m arguing against improvement which I don’t want to do, but a good game from a few years ago with decent graphics is a good game now with relatively slightly lower graphics

I know right?? Oh well, guess I have to stick with 2

I think it makes a huge difference personally. If I had never seen ultra then yes but I have so everything else is ruined now. That's why console looks like poo to me.

I have a PC. I run on ultra, I just don’t think it’s that big a deal when playing games. Screenshots look great, the diff between very high and ultra isn’t usually that much. What I was saying is that if it wasn’t there you wouldn’t miss it.

Ultra gives you access to things like enhanced shadow textures, Water detail, increased field of view, increased draw distance, bloom lighting, hair works, Foliage realism etc etc. Whilst the graphics won't look "better" per se, the world will be more realistic overall. You'll be able to see further and clearer and you'll get a sheen on surfaces thanks to the enhanced lighting. It's things you would only miss if you games on Ultra and went to high. Honestly that's what it's like going from PC to console you take all these little things for granted and then you go play the same game on a console and it just all looks garbage.

DLSS at 4k makes plenty of sense

lol

(annoyed)

Ah, right, thanks for the detailed reply :-) Apologies for misinterpreting your comment, I was being wary because for a long time it seemed fashionable to bash Nvidia and perpetuate a myth that they deliberately gimped older cards at the driver level. I can't remember where the article is now, but there was a good analysis done on a reputable tech site that completely disproved it. They showed that over time, the performance of both Nvidia and AMDs older cards had been improved by later drivers. Take your point about there being no incentive to optimise newer games for older cards, that makes sense. However older cards can still get small optimisations from other improvements in the drivers. Obviously at some point this just doesn't happen any more, as support does eventually get dropped and clearly this is going to happen to the older cards first.

I didn't say Nvidia was directing gimping driver performance (existing performance), what I said was they just stop bothering optimising driver performance for old cards in NEW games. The simplest example is on latest driver a GTX780Ti will more than likely still beat a R9 290 in pretty much all games that were launch before the card became EOL; on new games that are released AFTER the 780Ti EOL though or games the 780ti get decimated by the 290 series cards- the newer the game, the worse the 780Ti will perform. It is not the case of Nvidia "putting poison" in the driver to cripple the performance of old cards, but more a case of "cutting off supplies" in providing what's needed to perform fully in new games to the level that they once did in the old games. https://www.techspot.com/review/1418-geforce-gtx-780-four-years-later/page9.html "Closing Thoughts It's hard to believe that the GeForce GTX 780 is four years old, although the card is certainly showing its age. In the 22 modern titles we tested, the 780 was just 23% faster than the 1050 Ti, despite the former GPU being four times larger, packing more than twice as many transistors and consuming well over twice as much power. Compared to the R9 390, the GTX 780 has slipped well behind. It's no secret that the Kepler architecture hasn't aged as well, which is either down to the architecture itself or Nvidia neglecting driver development -- or maybe a bit of both. Regardless, we've never seen an Nvidia architecture age as poorly as Kepler has. We don't expect the same to happen to Maxwell anytime soon, but of course we'll keep an eye on its performance."

I don’t disagree with you; I was just trying to drill down into why this deal has gone as cold as it has. You make a pertinent point about the Expedition models. My previous card with a 1050ti expedition and the performance, given its budget status, amazed me.

Only lower tier ones though, I paid £300 for my G1 card 2 years ago, it's still around the same price. They have identical clocks and both at the upper range of 1060s. I agree they should be a lot less now, but the fact is, none of them are. That makes this a good deal to me.

Applying very strict rules of logic then you could say that, however 1060 6gb cards have floated around this price for as long as I can remember, and as such it’s not a particularly striking deal and why, I think, it’s gone as cold as it has.

By that statement, a sub £250 1060 6gb is on a par with those deals. Each step is roughly £50. This is a good deal for this version. It were't long ago that the base models of the 6GB were this price. Everyone has a budget, and if it's sub £250, then this or the RX580 are the only options. The only way to get cheaper is by going with one of the lesser brands or non OC versions.

Seen in isolation, it’s probably an ok price for the 6gb version, but this week has seen a sub-£300 1070, £350-ish 1070ti’s and sub-£400 1080s so I think any 1060 deal would have to be a real doozy to gain any traction in the current climate.

Again, extremely early demos of RTX, if you are looking at the performance figures and not the real time ray tracing in early days, then you are looking at the demos with the wrong footing. Anyway, you appeared to be suggesting the 1080 or the 1080ti were better purchases, if that isn't the case, then fine.

There's been other demos of rtx and none of the performance figures wowed me. It may turn out amazing but this gen won't be worth enabling if the performance figures from the games so far are to be believed. I'm not recommending a 1080, 1080ti or any card at the moment as I think they are all poor value. Nvidia have kept prices high due to lack of competition and the need to clear the old backlog of Pascal due to the mining boom imploding. All Pascal cards should be far cheaper and the rtx cards would likely have been too had the things I mentioned not happened. I'd love to upgrade my 980ti I have the money ready but I refuse to be bent over by Nvidia.

If you are recommending a 1080 at 400 or a 1080ti at 580, then I would personally say your advice is poor. RTX may be amazing, it is a big if, but DLSS is already in progress and will certainly be a boon to higher resolution game play. But writing off RTX based on an alpha version of Tomb Raider is pretty knee jerk.

I never referred to the 1080ti I was referring to the 1080 which has been £400 and is less than 10% worse. The 1080ti has also been £580 and is 15% better than a 2070 so similar price to performance. No games support DLSS yet and rtx looks pointless on a 2080ti let alone a 2070. Like I said if your happy to pay similar money for similar performance over 2 years later then go ahead and get a 2070.

It matches in certain situations and may be far better at 4k with DLSS. Plus there is raytracing. You were the one suggesting they were 'same performance for the same price' and I was showing you that is a false statement. Plus you are ignoring all the new features, so, shrug? What's YOUR point?

Thanks Kwl!

Online reviews for the series. In general everything is sound as a pound but for the battery life. At £600 its very expensive punt to take and I think you can easily find something comparable either around this price tag or slightly more and you'd get a great experience.

Where did you see information of the battery life? Weight & Battery life are most important things for me. Thx.

Quality machine, with backlit keyboard and very light at 1.3kg. Shame not touchscreen though.

And shame that the battery life doesn't live up to expectations.

As mentioned by @bouttime2, the 1070TI has a better cooler.

For 10 quid more you can get the gigabyte 1080 OC or for the original price of this you can get a 2070, I would personally pay the 10 quid unless this is somehow better.

From ebuyer: As per our terms and conditions and in line with the Sale of Goods Act 1979, as this item is over 6 months old you will only qualify for a proportionate refund of the original purchase price. Therefore we are unable to issue a replacement as initially requested. If you send it back in 20 months time you won't get a full refund if faulty, unlike amazon.

Got it from Laptops Direct sadly.

£100 too much

Not sure what benchmarks you have been looking at, but there is a decent boost. Definitely not double and it's double the cost... but still a good boost. Unless you are only looking at 1080p reviews... but if you go 1440 or 4k then the 2080 ti gets much further ahead on most games.

Or you could pay double this for a 2080ti and barely get any discernable performance boost

Thank you for the details

I have the cards in seperate machines. Temps are anywhere from 60-73c depending on which game+graphics settings. 2560x1440 and 3440x1440

Thanks for the feedback. How is your airflow? Temps? Serious build it sounds. Crushing stuff at 4k >60hz or some other application?

Incredible price!

Because its not a £300 dell...

Good price, no idea why so cold. Heat from me.

That's actually a decent price for a 1070 laptop. I doubt you'll find an 8th gen i7 + 1070 for anywhere near that price

Have looked at this laptop. At this money would want latest Gen processor. Anyone know of anywhere with a GTX 1070 Graphics card with 8th Gen which does not have poor overheating reviews? Nearly bought a HP Omen similar spec with smaller but better screen and 8th Gen but lots reviews saying gets super hot within minutes.

how many more overclockers so called deals you going to post (lol)

Yep can't see these selling at this price. £330 sounds about right XD

this card is £390 at ebuyer MSI armor version is £385 at ebuyer and scan should the 1070ti be a little lower priced? for a bargain I mean

This needs to £50+ cheaper to be a deal

I appreciate it’s a mini but there have been 2 x 1080 deals posted in the past 24 hours under 400. It puts this in stark contrast.

Expired

Couldn’t agree more, need to change mine to blower for my node 202 build (y)

Amazon put it up to £525 because people were buying it at £399 (lol) (lol) . Are they stupid?

See what the 2070 comes in at price wise first, if it's near 500, the price for the current 1080s will continue shifting down rapidly.

my 1060 asus turbo was is 20C cooler than my 1070 asus dual with an extremely good airflow case Pascal is cool enough to go with blower and OC it to the max, cooler is for aesthetics imo

Intel have cut prices? R u sure, hun?

I just managed to bag an Asus ROG Strix GeForce STRIX-GTX1080-A8G-GAMING 8 GB from amazon for £350. Used Like New. is that a good version of the 1080? decent price?

Probably part of it, I'm sure plenty of people would be willing to save the money and as a trade off have the slightly noisier fan. I suspect a lot of it is due to the fact there have been a few deals close to the £400 mark, people won't be likely to vote hot on something that is still a distance north of that figure, that goes for me as well. As I said, wouldn't class this as terrible at all, just not hot.

Had a quick look through your previous comments. On Nvidia deals you always go on about the prices being too high, and on AMD (CPU and GPU) deals you talk about how great they are. Also noticed you own both AMD CPU and GPU. The obvious conclusion is that you are an AMD fan boy, so click on Nvidia deals just to talk crap about the prices. What a great life you lead :-) .

MSI's Armor card has had a number of reliability issues, hence the reason it's been discounted a few times in the past, and blower versions are great if you like the sound of an aircraft taking off in your room (or if you have a small case where the blower will help your case thermals). Actually, thinking about it people are probably voting this deal cold because of the £400 blower deal that's been posted.