Am I missing something with the 10XX series?

[OddballMV]

Not sure if I'm missing something but why is it for 3 generations the laptop graphics cards have barely gone up and now all of a sudden the 10XX series laptops are £400 more than the previous generation?

Is this just an Nvidia 'because they can' scenario?

 

[steaky360]

Is it not because the 10xx series laptop cards are actually full fat 'desktop grade' cards? I'm just surmising here, I'm not sure if you can still get the 10 series m cards.

 

[Scott]

I didn't notice much of a jump if I'm honest.

 

[Oussebon]

I too believe it's because the new laptop GPUs are much, much closer to their desktop counterparts than in previous generations.

There aren't any 10xxm GPUs, the 1000 series GPUs available for laptops (GTX 1060, GTX 1070, GTX 1080) are downclocked versions of the desktop cards and are the only ones available.

If it's any consolation, the ~25% increase in price equates to a ~60% increase in performance compared to a 970M (see: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/foru...ese-good-specs&p=372514&viewfull=1#post372514 )

 

[OddballMV]

I too believe it's because the new laptop GPUs are much, much closer to their desktop counterparts than in previous generations.

There aren't any 10xxm GPUs, the 1000 series GPUs available for laptops (GTX 1060, GTX 1070, GTX 1080) are downclocked versions of the desktop cards and are the only ones available.

If it's any consolation, the ~25% increase in price equates to a ~60% increase in performance compared to a 970M (see: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/foru...ese-good-specs&p=372514&viewfull=1#post372514 )

I do remember them making a big thing with the 9xx series about them being closer than they had ever been to the desktop variants though. Besides which, a desktop 1060 is £200 but a 1060 laptop is £400 (nearly 50%) more than a 960 laptop. Can there really be that much hard work in fitting it into a laptop?

My current laptop has a 765m, which was £850, the 860m ones were the same, the 960m ones were the same but the 1060 ones are £1,250.

 

[Scott]

Ahh that's perhaps where I don't see as much of a change. I was looking at the 980 desktop Octane II Pro. The difference in price between that and the Octane III with the 1080 is negligible. The jump from the 980m to the 1080 is incredible, similarly the jump from the 960m to the 1060 is huge.

I can understand your frustration with it, the only way I can put it across to you is like the price difference between the 980m and the 980 desktop equivalent. The price was much higher for the near desktop performance. I guess the jump in price is because there is no "m" class middle ground anymore.

 

[Oussebon]

Yeah, it's because they're not -M ones, there really is a huge performance jump for the number. One might argue that the 1060-laptop as a successor for the 970M rather than the 960M, like the GTX 1070 (desktop) was a successor for the GTX 980 rather than the GTX 970, and that the GTX 1060 (desktop) was a successor to the GTX 970 rather than the 960 (in terms of price v performance and the broad section of the market they're aimed at).

Look at the kind of jump from a 960M compared to a 1060-laptop, compared to the others you mentioned: http://tinyurl.com/juvhau2

(GTX 1060, GTX 960M, GTX 860, GTX 765M in descending order)

I do remember them making a big thing with the 9xx series about them being closer than they had ever been to the desktop variants though.

I can't quite be bothered to look up the relative performances, but it's possible that it was true and there was a much smaller gap. But this time it really is much smaller. See: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Nvidia...-1080-SLI-GTX-1070-and-GTX-1060.171566.0.html

So perhaps the GTX 1050 (and its laptop version) need to come out before we have true successors to things like the GTX 960(M)/965M.

I totally agree with you that it's disappointing not to have anything new in the mid-range yet and so basically if someone wants the new stuff, while they are getting a big performance boost, they also need to find a lot more cash first. I'm just speculating as to why there is / why Nvidia feel able to put the price where it is, and that a part of that is that -60 is really a replacement for -70 cards, plus the pascal notebook cards aren't -M cards, they're much fuller fat than their predecessors were.

 

[OddballMV]

Yeah, it's because they're not -M ones, there really is a huge performance jump for the number. One might argue that the 1060-laptop as a successor for the 970M rather than the 960M, like the GTX 1070 (desktop) was a successor for the GTX 980 rather than the GTX 970, and that the GTX 1060 (desktop) was a successor to the GTX 970 rather than the 960 (in terms of price v performance and the broad section of the market they're aimed at).

Look at the kind of jump from a 960M compared to a 1060-laptop, compared to the others you mentioned: http://tinyurl.com/juvhau2
View attachment 8758
(GTX 1060, GTX 960M, GTX 860, GTX 765M in descending order)

I can't quite be bothered to look up the relative performances, but it's possible that it was true and there was a much smaller gap. But this time it really is much smaller. See: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Nvidia...-1080-SLI-GTX-1070-and-GTX-1060.171566.0.html

So perhaps the GTX 1050 (and its laptop version) need to come out before we have true successors to things like the GTX 960(M)/965M.

I totally agree with you that it's disappointing not to have anything new in the mid-range yet and so basically if someone wants the new stuff, while they are getting a big performance boost, they also need to find a lot more cash first. I'm just speculating as to why there is / why Nvidia feel able to put the price where it is, and that a part of that is that -60 is really a replacement for -70 cards, plus the pascal notebook cards aren't -M cards, they're much fuller fat than their predecessors were.

I take your point. It just doesn't seem to have happened with the desktop cards, the 1060 is a massive improvement over the 960 by the looks of it, far bigger than the 960/760 difference was and yet they haven't gone up a penny. Maybe there is difficulty in getting the 'full fat' cards into laptops.

Here I am with £900 burning a hole in my pocket with essentially nothing to spend it on other than last years cards until maybe the 1050 comes out, which will likely seem a much smaller improvement over the 960m. All of this made worse of course because as usual AMD have absolutely nothing out.

 

[Oussebon]

I take your point. It just doesn't seem to have happened with the desktop cards, the 1060 is a massive improvement over the 960 by the looks of it, far bigger than the 960/760 difference was and yet they haven't gone up a penny.

That is actually my point, that it has also happened with the desktop cards - they've gone up by a lot more than a penny.

The GTX 960 was retailing for ~£160-200 for more than half a year before Pascal was announced. The 1060 is ~£240+, closer to the prices people were expecting of the 970 (~£250+). Even the official launch prices were different. Just like the 1070 is £380-£450, whereas even when it launched the 970 was ~£300 and very soon less than that.

The 1060's official RRP was 50-100$ more than the 960: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_900_Series

That's why I say the GTX 1060 6gb (desktop) is more of a GTX 970 (desktop) replacement. It's a good bit better (15-20%?) and a decent amount cheaper than the 970 was. While being in a totally different class and price bracket to the 960.

It's the cut-down GTX 1060 3gb (cut down cores as well as VRAM) that's closer in price to the 960. Tbh it should really have been called the 1050 ti, or the 6gb version should have been called the 1060 ti. Perhaps a version of it might make its way to laptops, or the GTX 1050 will make an appearance - once the higher end has been appropriate milked.

AMD's RX 460 for laptops may appear soon. But that's going to be aimed very much at the value end of things and at a rough guess would be around a GTX 965M.

 

[OddballMV]

That is actually my point, that it has also happened with the desktop cards - they've gone up by a lot more than a penny.

The GTX 960 was retailing for ~£160-200 for more than half a year before Pascal was announced. The 1060 is ~£240+, closer to the prices people were expecting of the 970 (~£250+). Even the official launch prices were different. Just like the 1070 is £380-£450, whereas even when it launched the 970 was ~£300 and very soon less than that.

The 1060's official RRP was 50-100$ more than the 960: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_900_Series

That's why I say the GTX 1060 6gb (desktop) is more of a GTX 970 (desktop) replacement. It's a good bit better (15-20%?) and a decent amount cheaper than the 970 was. While being in a totally different class and price bracket to the 960.

It's the cut-down GTX 1060 3gb (cut down cores as well as VRAM) that's closer in price to the 960. Tbh it should really have been called the 1050 ti, or the 6gb version should have been called the 1060 ti. Perhaps a version of it might make its way to laptops, or the GTX 1050 will make an appearance - once the higher end has been appropriate milked.

AMD's RX 460 for laptops may appear soon. But that's going to be aimed very much at the value end of things and at a rough guess would be around a GTX 965M.

Ah I was looking at the 3gb version of the 1060, hadn't noticed the spec difference as well as ram. Yeah I guess there is a bit more difference in the desktop cards than I thought. I guess some of this is down to the weak pound as well which would affect everything.

Will wait and see what the 1050 is like I guess or unless AMD surprise everyone with something a bit higher end.

 

[Oussebon]

Yeah, never a bad plan to wait and see if what you have atm will get you by still

I might be a little surprised if AMD released anything high end in the coming months for laptops. Polaris 11 (RX 460) was meant to be their mobile offering, and while there were reports that the mobile version will be pretty much as good as the desktop version (what with it being a ~75W card) it hasn't appeared yet and even when it does it's still going to be ~GTX 965M performance. (maybe somewhat better, RX460 gets ~7500-8000 in 3dmark, while the 965M gets ~7200+)

 

[NobleStone]

I'm in a similar boat to OP.

£900 to spend, very best I can get is 970m system, lot of dough for obsolete tech.

I think it's a terrible time to buy unless your willing to throw money at a 1060 or better.

Think i'll wait and see if 1050 or AMD rx 460 balance the market or 970m/980m drops in price.

Like I say, bad time to buy at the £900/£1000 price point.

 

[adryanos]

And I thought that I'm the only one with that budget. I really hope that in October we will see 1060 3GB and 1050 in laptops in this price range, maybe in Optimus VIII for 1000 GB with a 256 GB SSD (M.2) .