Yes, I applaud the fact that AMD has helped develop DX12/Mantle/Vulkan. However, there is no market value on consoles. There is no such thing as an AMDbox1, or a AMDstation. It's XBOX 1, or Playstation. The shares go out to Sony and Microsoft. AMD is probably making nickles and dimes off those consoles. The games that are made for the consoles...again, they don't score profit from it. This is why Nvidia bailed on it when they approached Nvidia for PS4 and XBOX1, they didn't make anything off of it from playstation 3. It was more of a waste of time for them. Not even sure if they made any recognition from it. I'll put any money on the table when it comes to the next consoles that AMD will take a second thought on the idea of supporting the console market. Just wait and watch. IBM helped develop xbox360.
 
MS and Sony will go to Intel on the next consoles - haha. Intel Graphics for the win

donta1979

stalinx20
Yes, I applaud the fact that AMD has helped develop DX12/Mantle/Vulkan. However, there is no market value on consoles. There is no such thing as an AMDbox1, or a AMDstation. It's XBOX 1, or Playstation. The shares go out to Sony and Microsoft. AMD is probably making nickles and dimes off those consoles. The games that are made for the consoles...again, they don't score profit from it. This is why Nvidia bailed on it when they approached Nvidia for PS4 and XBOX1, they didn't make anything off of it from playstation 3. It was more of a waste of time for them. Not even sure if they made any recognition from it. I'll put any money on the table when it comes to the next consoles that AMD will take a second thought on the idea of supporting the console market. Just wait and watch. IBM helped develop xbox360.
 
MS and Sony will go to Intel on the next consoles - haha. Intel Graphics for the win

You are right there is no market value on consoles but how are games developed, mid ranged console or now since not much  that goes on the Nintendo console due to major hardware limitations, they go with the lower of the two the xbox one and then ported to pc and ps4. They have their hardware in the consoles, they helped develop the three API's what do you think that will mean, then there is GPUOpen for the developers that will let them fully optimize the games on their side instead of having to wait for drivers. Really a simple to see where it is going. Inlet is actually trying to get out of the gaming market, if they don't buy Nvidia they wont be able to get their way in as the dominant hardware for all gaming platforms.

I'm assuming you meant Intel at the end there. It definitely would be something to consider Intel to do, get out of the gaming market. They're not aimed for that at all.

Sajin
It's easy to make a video using your phone. I'll pass on the screenshot since the text document can be modified. My pc sounds worse over the video, doesn't sound as bad in person.

phone took a bath while saving my dog no more camera, but watching https://www.twitch.tv/nvidia you might want to sell those Titan X's now. 
NVIDIA says GTX 1080 is 80% faster than the 980, faster than 980 SLI and 29% faster than TITAN X.
They don't have async shaders, so no free instanced 3d objects, no multiple lanes of traffic. Looks like they are going to muscle their way though it to buy more time.

donta1979

Sajin
It's easy to make a video using your phone. I'll pass on the screenshot since the text document can be modified. My pc sounds worse over the video, doesn't sound as bad in person.

phone took a bath while saving my dog no more camera, but watching https://www.twitch.tv/nvidia you might want to sell those Titan X's now. 
NVIDIA says GTX 1080 is 80% faster than the 980, faster than 980 SLI and 29% faster than TITAN X.
They don't have async shaders, so no free instanced 3d objects, no multiple lanes of traffic. Looks like they are going to muscle their way though it to buy more time.

Question.... On what resolution?
 I'm going to wait at the end of the year on the 1080s. Seems overwhelming but underwhelming at the same time.

Each new generation, everyone resets the datum of judgement.  It's all "ooh and ahh" when comparing new products to old flagships, until the new flagships show up, then no one cares for anything but those new flagships.  
 
The retarded aspect is how many people forget that certain resolutions or rated power levels used to work with older flagships, so why down-rate newer non-high-end for not being able to keep up when older flagships did just fine?  It is a pride issue: No one will admit the possibility that something slower can catch up to something older that they had a lot of respect for-- especially if it is too soon-- and do the same job.  Don't tell anyone how close Intel 9e IGP is to Fermi flagships, or midrange Kepler or mainstream Maxwell.  But at least nVidia keeps Intel in their place with Pascal...
 
So certain Polaris 10 dies may meet the performance of certain GM200 dies, in my mind, so what?  The 10-series equivalent of GTX980 Ti could be a GTX1060 at the same price that the Polaris flagship goes into, and then nVidia fanboys will slam AMD for not being better than GTX1080 (forgetting or ignoring that Vega is Fiji's successor next spring while the point for Polaris is to succeed all the mainstream and midrange refreshes).  
 

Sajin
Both GPU's selected were the cheapest ones listed on newegg. Looks like AMD is the one money grubbing. 

Actually, it is Newegg doing the 'grubbing' against the two, if you choose a different e-retailer or a brick&mortar store, you'll see a different price gap.
 
 
All retailers are reselling and bought from the manufacturer at bulk prices in large quantities, add in their costs to sell something and the recommended products' MSRP ends up independent from market fluctuations like demand.  As the demand drops after a while, the cost to acquire doesn't change, therefore the price to the customer goes up until continuing to offer the item doesn't add up with remaining few customers.  That's when it finally EOL's-- which BTW, it doesn't mean no one wants it anymore, it only means the cost to keep it available isn't being paid off by the few customers left.
 
My point is, don't pass judgement on the OEM when they can't control what retailers charge after their bulk purchases.  Maybe if the retailer isn't being a complete jerk, they will leave the listing at MSRP until the end, but really they can crank it as high as they want as long as the market will bear it.
 
I remember when Intel debuted the first consumer quad-core, their Core 2 Extreme QX6700; and while the MSRP was still $999 from Intel, Newegg would vary the price listing from $999 all the way to $1500 every week for the first month, like a rollercoaster.  Does this mean Intel is the money grubber?  No, it is Newegg that was wildly changing the price every week due to demand variations and competing with other retailers likely rollercoaster charging as well.

Sajin

donta1979

Sajin
It's easy to make a video using your phone. I'll pass on the screenshot since the text document can be modified. My pc sounds worse over the video, doesn't sound as bad in person.

you might want to sell those Titan X's now.

I need a 4k monitor to hit the market that does 120Hz before I do that.

I would sell them because since Huang didn't say it during the conference but here is the source 
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2016/05/06/geforce-gtx-1080/
 
Under Marvels of pascal pic
"Our Pascal-based GPUs feature enhanced asynchronous compute, and are the first to harness the power of 8GB of Micron’s new GDDR5X memory. The GTX 1080 is the first gaming GPUs designed for the 16nm FinFET process."
 
Since your GTX Titan X's do not have async shaders, or double precision to hold up their value sell them now before they are worth under 300 bucks a pop... The GTX Titan, Titan Black and Titan Z will hold their value unlike the Titan X. Since people will still have use for them that fall under my market segment. 
 
You need a 4k monitor with gsync 120hz, 1ms, hehehe