For 1080p in those games they tested it was usually 10%-50% faster than the Fury X.
(project cars seem really badly optimised for amd)

Which sounds like alot (not in the cases where its closer to 10%) but the reality was at 1080p, usually the Fury X was above 60 fps.

A 1080 GTX is overkill unless you plan to game at higher resoultions.

You probably wouldnt "feel" a difference between the fury X and the 1080 GTX, while playing at only 1080p.

The dx12 benchmarks are the meh part for me. Hopefully future drivers will improve it but so far... Skip for me

From the reviews and benches, this sounds like it's worth me going for next year to go with a new build. I don't know if what AMD brings later on in the year will do much to change my mind, especially with their main focus being on the low/mid end with very little focus on the higher end market. Also I'm hoping for some Vulkan related benches in the future, that API needs some attention at some point rather than being ignored at nearly every turn. 

I won't be making a new build till next year anyway but my thoughts on AMD bringing big heavy guns at say a cheaper price aren't exactly at an all time high. They have been playing the long game for, well a long time and it's a very slow one compared to Nvidia's game where they bring out bursts of power that do cost a a pretty penny. I just wish AMD brought out one just like the 1080 that either does more or does the same but is cheaper to boot, having a new card out much later that does less isn't exactly my target GPU.

Really I just want AMD to employ Nvidia's game style and just bring out the big guns rather than sticking with low/mid end all the time. THey could very well bring it later on this year but will they keep bringing it every year or so the same way Nvidia tries to go for?, their plans don't really tell us that much.

All meh. Good upgrade for people who only buy small chips. 980ti and Titan owners are still waiting for real Pascal.

DX 11 vs DX 12 video is telling.

The Nvidia GTX 1080 isnt really much faster than the Fury X, in Direct X 12 games, going by that video.

The GTX 1080 looks good in directx 11 games, when compaired to the competition.
However in Directx 12, things dont look nearly as positive.

So much for all the self proclaimed experts who thought it was only a minor upgrade over the 980Ti. "bbuuut It's only gonna be 10% faster" "bbuuut HBM2, Big Pascal next year!" all excuses to make them feel good about their outdated cards.

Next year we'll start hearing rumours about Volta, and those people will look silly. "Wait for Volta, the next big thing". Might as well never buy a gpu.

GTX 1080 Ti & Titan G.

It is a minor upgrade over a 980Ti Oc'd (of which no one runs vanilla).

Gaining single digit performance in most cases  at 4K is hardly worth all the hoopla and hype. 

Waiting for 1080Ti myself. That should stack an additional 30-40% on top of the 1080's 20%. That should make it the definitive single GPU card for 4K.

Turkish said: So much for all the self proclaimed experts who thought it was only a minor upgrade over the 980Ti. "bbuuut It's only gonna be 10% faster" "bbuuut HBM2, Big Pascal next year!" all excuses to make them feel good about their outdated cards. Next year we'll start hearing rumours about Volta, and those people will look silly. "Wait for Volta, the next big thing". Might as well never buy a gpu.

It kinda stayed true though. The 1080 is not a big enough improvement over the 980ti to upgrade. Volta will not release before 2018 and Big Volta may as well be not available before the end of 2018 or even 2019.

Upgrading now to a 1080 would be silly when there is a 1080ti on the Horizon which is significantly more powerful and the only thing able to tide us over to Big Volta.