I think its based on rumor it taped out last month
Printable View
I think its based on rumor it taped out last month
Think ATI is gonna have HD8970 out before the end of the year ?
Nope.
HPC Kepler products was known to be released in Q2-Q3 2012 already. The only think we dont know yet is when Desktop GK100/110 will be released.
Attachment 124713
My Birthday is in September, that's obviously why such a thing would be launched then!
Please let these clock like buggery with a water block and extra juice .....
:D
For reference:
GeForce GTX 480 was launched on March 27, 2010.
Quadro 6000 (448 CUDA cores, closes thing to GTX 480) was launched on July 27, 2010. 4 months later. Could be the same this time around. Who knows about GK110, though...
that's more or less accurate, as far as I know most phone and tablet makers are going to ditch Tegra 3 (Kal-El) for cortex A-15's ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Aten-Ra
So reviews should be out in a few days, some people already have the cards and even put it on sale, this guys for example :D
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/syd/2911756479.html
His pictures are of the GTX 570 though...Quote:
Originally Posted by iTravis
That's his latest ad, he has a few on there as well:Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/syd/2910407246.html
Who the hell is this douchebag in San Diego with GTX 680s and how do I not know him?!?
Perhaps people aren't replying because there's really nothing to discuss.Quote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
On one hand we have the rumored specs of a product that appears to be launching this week. On the other we have conjecture about a chip we don't even know exists, or if it does, may not be ready for release.
It's a lot easier to discuss parts that are either released or at least we've seen all sorts of leaked info about.
NVIDIA hasn't stopped launching chips as your analogy suggests, although from all indications AMD is going to wish they did this week. The first 40nm chips were low end, personally I'm happy the first 28nm chips launched look to be the best GPUs available on the planet. I'm sure other Kepler chips will be launched over the next couple years, until they are, sign me up for two of these.
Link to source of this info?Quote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
I don't think his backside has internet access.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
What beans do you have to spill?Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanSmooth
Are you employed by AMD, their PR firm, one of their OEMs, or a software developer?
These are the only people with "beans to spill" about unreleased AMD parts and I somehow doubt AMD employees, software developers, or OEM employees are sporting three water cooled GTX480s. Just can't see a Sapphire or AMD employee with 480s, and software devs would have NVs latest, not 2 years old parts.
Are you associated with Edelman PR?
Mmm..no. That is just marketing.Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanSmooth
well I could go and link a few, but since you're so keen to talk about it I think you should do the research yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
at least all of the phones coming out this year that I have read about either use Cortex a-15 or OMAP5 (which is basically a product from TI enclosing 2x cortex a15 cores + 2 cortex m4 cores), which will be used by Sony and Samsung, not sure about htc. but OMAP5 is definitely more powerful than the current kal-el on the market.
I have read that Tegra 3 was doing some devs with the automotive industry, but besides the Transformer Prime I haven't read of many other devices using kal-el
**edit, I have made the conscious decision to no longer post on this thread.
Cheers for the good read.
eVGA GTX 680 SuperClock: http://us.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=69800
MSI GTX 680 OC: http://us.ncix.com/products/?sku=69802
:eek: $578.20
Friggin dammit, so it will be ~$550.
I hate waiting, but this will be one of the gen's where I wait it out till I see some prices worth paying for. Not like my 480 isn't doing well, but 900Mhz @ 1.1V = serious wattage and my room = tiny. Oh, also got the hardware itch.
yesQuote:
Originally Posted by Zloyd
Yeah, I'd say $550 for normal editions... :(.Quote:
Originally Posted by nascasho
I'm sure that 300$ GK104 will be available...in 2014. :ROTF:
Special thanks to AMD for pricing the Radeon 7970 so high at the outset.... :p: .Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantsu
Volume discount on HD7970 is $535 "For consumers" so a reduction in price for an OCed HD7970 would most likely be an easy thing for the partners.
Congrats... you just made it onto my signature. First post to make it there in years!Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
I've had the itch, I don't even have to pay for the card myself, but realistically I am not supporting those prices from EITHER company for a card that doesn't obliterate the last generation by 50% MINIMUM (not best case, I'm talking worst case scenario of 50%).Quote:
Originally Posted by nascasho
To be fair, my true hope was for a midrange part at the $200 mark giving GTX 580 performance with gtx 460 heat levels. At that range, I can pick up a new cpu, ram, and mobo to go with it and still be around the same price range total. AMD missed that mark for me (seriously, if the 7870 launched at $200-$250 I'd buy it), so now I'm wanting to see what NVidia will put in that segment.
I'm still willing to wager that this year we'll see GK104 (or a chip that's essentially it with some minor adjustments ala GF104 to GF114) in a mid-range part this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantsu
This post echoes my thoughts pretty well, I couldn't picture buying two of these at this pricing even though they're fast. I'll go for one perhaps, but two just isn't worth it considering these will probably drop like stones later this year. Heck, I was on two reference GTX 570 in SLI (1280MB), almost wondering if I should just go grab a pair of nice non-reference 580's for a similar price as a single 680 will run me... probably be faster and about the same price once this shakes out at GTX 680 launch. EDIT: Of course, I'm going to see how the 680 turns out in reviews, and likely will go for it since it's a single card, but still... :).Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Put it this way: if AMD doesn't have a different (non dual GPU) high end product out by year's end, they'll be in bucketloads of trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zloyd
It is almost laughable that Nvidia is putting out a product that basically is about the same speed as a 7970.... Where is the Nvidia that came out with a card that beats AMD the last 3 rounds or so? Looks like a no-show this round. Now before everyone starts saying "but they are coming out with GK110/GK114" Well its not going to be here for awhile.....
Alot of let down Nvidia fans....
Errrr, no... the GTX 680, purportedly, is 15-20% faster than the Radeon 7970 from the leaks we've seen, possibly more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmy
They must have needed a lot of R&D to get it running on the TSMC 28nm process.
That's too bad, but ya know it happens to everyone eventually.
The reason being GK110? I think we can safely say that GK110 will be significantly larger than Tahiti and possibly even Tahitis refresh, so AMD always has the money card to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
On maybe 1 or 2 games, hand picked by nV of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Even if it is a little faster than AMD. Nvidia fans are STILL let down.....Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
And like that other poster it is probably in a FEW benchmarks....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
We'll see, regardless, it's priced the same, better drivers, and better overall performance... what's not to like then, fan or not? I love how people were raving how the Radeon 7970's 15%-20% lead over the GTX 580 made it revolutionary, yet a 40-50% lead or so over the 580 makes GTX 680 a "let down"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmy
I have yet to see a single review that prove the 40-50% you're claiming!! Until then it's all bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: rumors.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
twisting things?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
the 7970 led the 580 with 24% on average... that number includes a few titles which were completely cpu limited (starcraft) and were with the release drivers of the 7970 (which according to anand already imrpoved performance in some cases by 5 to 10%). So we are loking closer to 30% and not 15% as you try to falsly inform us.
even with the best numbers seen so far.. the 680 looks to be less than 10% faster on average. (and that is on 1080p or lower).
Personally i don't even expect it to be faster on average at all... but its looks to be an amazing chip for its die size and power consumption. (i just hope this chip isn't pushed to far on defaults that even a minimal oc will need additional voltage, thus busting out the power consumption values)
Errrrr, of course there aren't reviews: the card isn't out yet. The pics in this thread and others, however....Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBreezyBB
Really now? No need to try to claim someone's lying/trying to intentionally mislead here.Quote:
Originally Posted by flyck
Fine, pretend it's 24%... that's still a lot less than 40-50% over the 580. My point stands just fine without all the hyperbole. Why do you think the GTX 680 will suffer at 2560x1600 exactly? It has the same bandwidth as a GTX 580. Even at those #'s it's still 21% faster than a Radeon 7970 if the very-real-looking leaks pan out.
the Pics in this thread says it's equal or +/-5% improvement over the 7970 which means 20-35% at best over the 580!Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Not sure what pictures you're looking at... the ones I'm seeing with 300.99 drivers show what I'm saying here and in the OCN thread: http://www.overclock.net/t/1231113/ for the later tests by someone with 300.99 drivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBreezyBB
Heaven is tesselation test. Nothing more. It wont translate straight up to game performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Heaven benchmark is not everything! I saw these and it doesn't say anything!! Suddenly one heaven test with no proof makes the GTX680 40-50% faster!! :shrug:
3dmark11 also....Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
That too. Its lot better, but still it wont translate to pure game performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Wow just woow the Fanboism Force its very strong on this tread :rofl:
Edelman?Quote:
Originally Posted by chispy
All emotions aside, the card seems to be pretty much on par with 7970, from what i have seen so far. A bit faster perhaps. The big question is, does it OC like 7970 does. If its able to hit 1300th GPU, its going to be nice.
I think people are getting things mixed up here.
The HD 7970 was a revolution for AMD (being their first ground up DX11 architecture) but an EVOLUTION for the GPU market as a whole. It essentially brought AMD up to NVIDIA's technology level (and maybe a small step beyond) by leveraging the 28nm manufacturing process for a tangible performance benefit. Its impact upon the HPC market has so far been non-existent since AMD seems to be twiddling their fingers on that front.
Fermi on the other hand was a revolution on BOTH fronts since it was the market's first architecture that properly supported high levels of geometry processing throughput while also bringing a new dimension of performance to HPC spaces. It may have consumed a ton of power due to the elements added for the aforementioned tasks but that's the lesson AMD is currently learning with their GCN architecture.
As for Kepler, at the last GTC NVIDIA called it "Fermi refined" which should (supposedly) lead to higher performance per watt ratios. IF (and only if) NVIDIA can attain the perf per watt levels they first presented at last year's GTC, the AMD trolls will have to find something else to pick on since the OMGFERMIBBQ jokes would no longer hold any traction. Then again, we've already seen the first steps towards that with cries of "clock speed cheating!" and "cherry picked games!" coming from the usual corners....
While I can't say anything, this is one launch I am actually excited about because for the first time in a long time a GPU company is going to do a number of things that are totally unexpected.
1840 post still no info. Still everyone fighting over who they think has the best guess. Still people saying amd/ati is doomed. Amd/ati has been doomed for 15 years now along with nvida intel and amd.
And that's why this is my favorite thread :DQuote:
Originally Posted by osiris999
From a spectators point of view, all the trolling, confusion and overall overreacting is pretty amusing to read:p
http://www.tomshardware.com/gallery/...---jpg-36.html
On avarage 18% faster than 7970 at 1080p.
If you base it solely on Unigene,Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
in the 2.0 the 7970 is 41% faster than the 580. I don't know what the 3.0 does more or taxes more, just giving an indication that basing average on a single benchmark is extremely misleading.
And from what i gather heaven 3.0 seems to favor nvidia alot more as the difference between 580 and 7970 seems to be alot less.
Holllyyyyyy crudddddQuote:
Originally Posted by Backie
Good numbers for a small chip (perf/watt ratio is awesome). Tough times for AMD...Quote:
Originally Posted by Backie
Yeah, saving them all now, most of the way through... perf looks really nice.
EDIT: Looks like it gets somewhat bandwidth-constrained at 2560, I have a feeling OC'ing the memory is going to be very rewarding. Other question is, what driver set did they use? 300.99 or the earlier one, 300.65...? Thing's slick overall though, no question! $500 or $550 and it's going to smash...
wow, silly tomQuote:
Originally Posted by Backie
the numbers are all over the place, sometimes 8xaa demolishes the 7970, and some times it makes it almost as bad as a 7950. however in total this card is looking very nice. i wonder though if alot of the efficiency is coming from just 2gb of ram and 256bit bus, that might be a bad thing in the upcoming year or two. for 1920 gaming this card is a monster though.
o_0 so damn awesome! Nice one nvidia!Quote:
Originally Posted by Backie
Based on real tests by Tom's (18% better overall) and others, the immaturity of the nv drivers still, less power consumer and less heater, less vram, I really can't believe how AMD fan people still claims for the 7970 as on par with it. Come on! NV having gk104 and gk110 (supposed), and knowing gk104 could be better than thaiti (as it is), why should they release a gk110 based vga? to compete with themselves?
Looks to be a solid performer overall, Nvidia engineers definitely earned their pay this time around.
One thing you can be pretty sure of, there's bound to be some nice gains with driver optimizations considering the new uarch.
The raw performance is more or less in line what I expected really but the overall efficiency of the design is a big surprise, especially compared to previous Nvidia cards.
That's very impressive. :shocked:
I am so glad now that I didn't jump on the 7970. :D
Made an album backup: http://imgur.com/a/RCDqK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBreezyBB
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBreezyBB
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmy
What was that again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberration
they do seem to have went for gaming and less for gpgpu where its gets destroyed by the 580 and every AMD 7 serie.
Great performance though.. dominating at 1080 without AA. Difference seem to fall down alot with AA and higher resolutions, so they seem to be close to either a bandwidth limitation(which will be dificult to get past, seeing they are already running at high frequencies).
power consumption between the 7950 and the 7970, which is very good for the chips performance (not to say extremely good).
All in all a worthy opponent from Nvidia for gamers. And finally a 'clean' chip from nvidia. (absolutely no replacement part for tesla though)
I gotta say I'm happy the rumors of 680 beating 7970 were true, because other than price 7970 what I would considered a good card.
In other news.... MSI Afterburner 2.20 Beta 15 with Kepler support has been released:
http://downloads.guru3d.com/MSI-Afte...load-2884.html
EDIT: Here's my imgur backup of the review images: http://imgur.com/a/RCDqKQuote:
- Added NVIDIA Kepler graphics processors family support
- Added GPU power consumption monitoring for NVIDIA Kepler series graphics cards
- Added, core clock offset, memory clock offset and voltage offset support for dynamic overclocking on NVIDIA Kepler series graphic cards
- Fixed issue preventing applying new settings from control shared memory
- Fixed issue with video capture timer display, causing hours to be incremented erroneously after each 6 minutes of videorecording
- Skin format reference guide has been updated to v1.5 to document new indicator types support
- Added new "Force fan speed update on each period" option to the "Fan" tab. New option may improve compatibility of software automatic fan speed control mode with some bugged display drivers, overriding manually programmed fan speed under certain conditions
nice card better then expected graphics performance for me but what is with the gpgpu scores ??? i really expecting much good scores at it.
Nipping at the heels of the 6990 and 590 more than not... nice :) They definately made some sacrifices in the GGPU department which is quite interesting but at the end of the day the bulk of these cards end up in gaming machines so shouldn't be a big issue for most. Will be intersting to see what ends up as a Telsa part down the road however...
Now the question is when can we expect non reference designs and aftermarket coolers / waterblocks ?
Thanks to Olivon and GoldenTiger for quickly backing up the pics. :up:
Link is down already.
An old habit from Tom's Hardware. Important is to be quick :DQuote:
Originally Posted by snoid_zero
Big Thanks to Backie :up:
Aye, thanks Backie!
Air OC result please!!! :rolleyes: WTsee 1300mhz GPU.
/drool, Sounds... so... good....!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
Whoa what happened to compute!
At that rate it's almost as efficient as AMD's oops- old VLIW4 designs.
For gaming though it's extremely impressive, let's see some price cuts thar on Tahiti, and the 1.5GB versions too.
They probably cut it out, hence the small die sizeQuote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Look at the efficiency difference between Tahiti and Pictairn too, and you'll see a similar trend
The current state of the NV's OpenCL 1.1 driver is a bit of a mess... ever since the R280 branch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Nice scores.
Wake me up when 2560x1600 OC and max OC results vs 7970 OC start appearing, then we will see the real champion
If those scores from Tom's are based at all in reality then Nvidia has made a fantastic card...
Wow very nice, more than I expected. It is a good day to be an Nvidia fan...;)
Any words about when lower performance cards will arrive (I need something like 560 power for eGPU so 150-200$ segment)
Not really. Actual nVidia fans would have bought the real GTX680, instead of this bumped GTX660. You are now paying the price of the most high-end to get the mid-range.Quote:
Originally Posted by solofly
Anyone know if it will support bitstreaming audio?
If a midrange card is smacking around competitor's high-end, then that's all that matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipeax
As for pricing you can thank AMD for that underpowered card they released...
No thanks, I care more about what I gain for my money, than how it does compared to the competition. Surely you buy your VGA to look at benchmarks, as that HTML content surely requires a $500 card.Quote:
Originally Posted by solofly
So now you are saying that a GTX680 should have costed $800 and a dual GPU $1400. And then we can also just stack all future releases, meaning the GTX980 will cost $6000. Sounds reasonable!Quote:
Originally Posted by solofly
i pray this card comes out at 499$, then the whole line of current gpus will shift down about 20% in price.
if they launch at 600$ or more, then we better hope amd does a price drop for us.
I do not see that HUGE difference compared to 7970 a part in certain games. But the chip is really efficient!!
You pay for the avg performance, doesn't matter how big or small the die or bus width.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipeax
EDIT: Relative to the competition that is...
I guess if those scores carry over to other reviews, we can't blame Nvidia for pricing the card like they did. They are making the 7970 look last generation with power consumption and performance. But peoples performance expectations at this point have to be more than met. Most were expecting 7950 beating performance, not 7970 beating performance. If we did get 7950 beating performance, I could see the 400 dollar price tags coming true.
I for some reason think these scores are too good by about 10% though.... Just the scores of the gtx 580 seem a bit high verses the 7950.
If true,
CONGRATZ nVidia, finally a worthy card. I may even buy an nvidia card which I didn't since the 8800GTX...
Surely the HD4850 & HD4870 didn't follow up on that rule, heck even nVidia did better than that (8800GT for example, which this could have been). Anyway, let's take the HD5870 as an example, it could have costed 500 euros (I mean, the HD7870 apparently can). Then as a follow-up the GTX480 could have been 650 euros (it's better so why not)? Then the GTX580 and HD6970 could have been 775 and 900, putting the current cards above 1000.Quote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
Join date Oct 2005 and only one post? LoLQuote:
Originally Posted by Backie
Been sitting here waiting for the past 6 and half years for the right time to make a memorable post?
But really it isn't nothing special. Yes it is an improvement and more efficient than the last Nvidia architecture but alot of ppl were hoping for more and even more ppl were hoping for better pricing than this.
AMD is probably thinking that they would of thought Nvidia would be bringing something better than this to the table....
AMD needs to drop prices of the 7970 down to 499.99 though....
I asked this earlier in the thread and didn't get a reply. I hope it does, otherwise I'll be going with 7970s since I use my PC for my home theater as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by kam03
too much negativity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmy
this card is much more efficient then even current 28nm parts. who cares about its jump vs last generation, its jump vs current generation is more than amds jump vs last generation
should amd be scared? you bet. this gpu is much smaller than their 7970 and seems to be noticeably faster. they can undercut amd by 50$ and probably still earn more per unit sold. so in a price battle, nvidia will have the upper hand and probably be the one to test how low amd is capable of selling at.
(i am an amd fanboy and i might have to buy a 670 if priced around 300-350$)
The difference is power is very small in toms benches. Heck the 680 is in the middle between the 7950 and 7970 in power consumption. (Actually depending on how close kepler is set in terms of frequency and voltage, the 79xx serie might even consume less if AMD wasn't so conservative with the votlages.)Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
It delivers better performance than both in 1080p without AA, but with AA things are become very thight compared to the 7970. Heck as you mention yourself the 7950 and 7970 are barely above the 580 in those tests.. whereass other reviews put the 7950 where the 7970 is in toms review. (i'm not saying the 7970 will outperform the 680 in 1080p though, because kepler might do alot better than fermi in the test where AMD does well) but i expect only a minor overal difference in 1080p with MSAA and and an even smaller difference on 2560* (small difference can go either way). seeing how the 680 fades when msaa and resolutions are crancked up i expect the 7950 might become a close competitor in triple screen resolutions.
Both the 7950 and 7970 give much higher gpugpu capability. Actually the 580 gives a higher gpgpu capability. So nvidia did make a tradeof with kepler 104. (as in it seems not to be suited for tesla).
But from a desktop and laptop view Kepler 104 seems to be an amazing chip.. I previously thought it would be hard to best pitcairn, but i think they did it though... (although we might need to wait for overclocking to see how nvidia binned their chips..)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...5&postcount=61Quote:
All I can say it looks good, its quieter than 7970 which was quiet, it clocks to similar levels, and it cost less.
Hope it's true.
So nvidia took out all the cgpu stuff and left only gaming relevant pieces in kepler?
How could you think that. In the high end, and just lost the performance per watt and die size. This was supposed to be NV mid range and it makes some of and it makes amd cards look mid range, at least the 7950.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmy
Although it loses some of its advantage at higher resolution, this is the telling sign that this was supposed to be the gtx 560 ti replacement. This card is like the gtx 560 to coming out but beating the 6970. Amd cannot be thinking this is all NV brought to the table.If NV wants, it can put on a price war with the 79xx series which AMD cannot want/win.
Certainly the numbers in tom's article are not final as there is an obvious math mistake in average performance/watt graph. GTX680 is only ~40% better that GTX580 according to their own data. Calculations for 7970 and 7950 are correct.
Scores without Hawx 2 and WoW using AA Max :
Quote:
1080P AA | GTX680 | HD7970
Metro2033 AAA
64.33|72.33
Skyrim Ultra/FXAA
92.76|83
BF3 4XMSAA
77.51|68.46
Crysis2 Ultra/DX11
69.70|55.60
DirtIII
98.65|80.58
Total GTX680 : 402.95
Total HD7970 : 359.97
Ratio GTX680/HD7970 : 111.94%
-------------
1600P AA | GTX680 | HD7970
Metro2033 AAA
40.00|43.00
Skyrim Ultra/FXAA
63.32|59.96
BF3 4XMSAA
44.58|42.43
Crysis2 Ultra/DX11
38.40|32.70
DirtIII
64.73|54.73
Total GTX680 : 251.23
Total HD7970 : 232.82
Ratio GTX680/HD7970 : 107.9%
When the 4xxx series launched Nvidia had to price their big die and bus high end way down relative to AMD/ATI's offerings, so with the gtx280 & 285 we got high end gpu for midrange price. The gpu, die size, node, memory, bus, etc didn't alone decide the pricing but the performance relative to the competition and their pricing was the determining factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipeax
Performance and pricing is going to be relative to the competition, if AMD launched 7970 at $300 well then we would have ~$300 Nvidia cards of comparable level of performance.
We pay XXXX dollars for a product that will deliver XXXX performance.
In the case of the 680 we are paying for a high end level of performance based on what AMD has already released and set the bar for pricing at for this level of performance, doesn't matter what the 680 specs are.
if you simply add the numbers i think your weighting games with higher FPS as more.
instead find the percent over/under for each game then average the percentages