Nvidia GPUs with nearly 8,000 CUDA cores spotted in benchmark database (updated)

mongeese

Posts: 643   +123
Staff
Through the looking glass: A trio of next-gen Nvidia graphics cards have been discovered in the Geekbench database. One has 124 compute units and the other two have 118 and 108. Given compute units generally contain 64 cores, the cards are implied to have 7,936, 7,552 and 6,912 CUDA cores, respectively... with a catch. Geekbench counts compute units, but the structure of compute units and the cores they contain can vary from generation to generation.

Correction (Mar 3, 2020): An earlier version of this article published on February 29 detailed only two of the three GPUs. The largest, with 7,936 cores, was uncovered only recently.

When transitioning from Pascal to Turing, Nvidia halved the number of CUDA cores from 128 to 64 per Streaming Multiprocessor (colloquially, the compute unit). However, while Pascal uses FP32 ALUs as the backbone of a CUDA core, Turing pairs an FP32 ALU with an INT32 ALU in every CUDA core, increasing the performance of each core by about one-third.

You can read more about this in our Navi vs. Turing architecture comparison.

Nvidia could boost the per-core performance again with the next generation, or, as rumors suggest, go the other way and increase the ratio of FP32 ALUs to INT32 ALUs in an attempt to increase efficiency. The bottom line is, until Nvidia tells us how they're configuring their next-gen architecture, nothing is guaranteed. What Geekbench registers as a compute unit may be a device we're unfamiliar with, and contain CUDA cores that perform better or worse than what we're used to.

Model Mystery GPU 0 Mystery GPU 1 Mystery GPU 2 Quadro RTX 8000
CUs/SMs 124 118 108 72
CUDA Cores 7936 7552 6912 4608
Clock Speed 1110 MHz 1110 MHz 1010 MHz 1770 MHz
Memory 32 GB 24 GB 48 GB 48 GB

But let's not spoil all the fun. These GPUs are, without a doubt, next-gen hardware that offer unprecedented levels of performance.

Contained within the Geekbench entries are the GPUs' OpenCL benchmark scores. The largest card achieves 222,377 points. Two entries exist for the middle card with scores of 184,096 and 169,368, and the little one (isn't that an oxymoron) gets 141,654. For comparison, the RTX 2080 Ti gets roughly 130,000.

It's also a pretty safe bet that this set are underperforming members of their species. The largest pair have maximum clocks of 1.1 GHz, as recorded by Geekbench. The little one ran at 1.01 GHz. By the time the silicon graduates from engineering sample status they'll probably reach full-blooded clocks of well over 1.5 GHz, and their performance will improve accordingly.

At a guess, I'd say that this trio are prototypes of next generation Quadro flagships. Their respective memory capacities of 48 GB, 32 GB, and 24 GB exclude them from being gaming cards. But Nvidia uses almost identical silicon for its flagship Quadro and GeForce cards, so you could estimate the sequel to the RTX 2080 Ti to have about 7,000 cores - whatever those cores are made of.

Permalink to story.

 
Pretty good numbers, "Super RTX Mega" on the way. I hope they ship to EVGA first.

Oh god I hope not. Adding another moniker to the name indicates another price increase. Even with the performance increase, many people would look at a "budget" 3060 at $500 and say nope to PC gaming. That's only a moderate price increase as well, the RTX series increased prices more then that...
 
Oh god I hope not. Adding another moniker to the name indicates another price increase. Even with the performance increase, many people would look at a "budget" 3060 at $500 and say nope to PC gaming. That's only a moderate price increase as well, the RTX series increased prices more then that...

Comeon, I want to see how far away, EVGA can mount 8, 8-pin connectors to spin the 24 chrome plated titanium propellers this thing is going to have. EVGA are good people, I bet they'll come over hear herE to explain why we need a $3900 graphics card!!
 
I have a 2080Ti so I think I'll skip the 3080Ti and get the 4080Ti.

It's gonna be a while before any game is made to challenge the 2080Ti at 1440p so I don't see myself needing an upgrade till Tax Return 2025
 
Better than RTX2080Ti performance at 1GHz- for the smaller die. Wowsers.

It's obviously some sort of Quadro/professional card but nothing about that is bad news for gamers waiting on Nvidia's next gen consumer cards. Apart from the price perhaps.

At this level of core performance you could clean halve the number of compute units from the smaller part, run them at a perfectly realistic 1700MHz and it'll still be faster than an RTX2080 Super.

Just the small one is some monster GPU.
 
Last edited:
This align perfectly with the previous rumor where Ampere is 50% faster at 50% lower power than Turing. I reckon at full speed/power Ampere would be ~75% faster than Turing, quite a big leap in performance that I wouldn't want to miss. 3960X + 3080Ti here I come :).
 
I'll stick with my 1080ti myself until I see some REAL data and release dates... THEN I will wait 8-10 months to see how the longer term reviews and performance are looking before I spend the ridiculous amount of money that will (undoubtedly) be needed to buy a top tier card.
 
Sounds like the typical upcoming product leak to get everyone all excited that then fizzles in real-world tests.

But, with AMD lurking in the wings, maybe this will awaken nVidia from their we are THE graphics card Gods complacency.
 
I hate when we see words like “Obliterates” to express a 30-40% increase....

There has to be a better descriptive word
I mean, when talk about some like the 2080Ti, an already rediculous card, I think obliterates is appropriate. I'd guess that that 3070ti version of this will likely be ~5-10% slower.
 
Back