Printable View
I think 45% is a little inflated and prolly cherry picked results over all 25-30% faster is expected and realistic I guess. With double the stream processors and arch improvements I think we can expect 170-180% performance of 580. 2gb mem is going to be less for 25xx rez ?
Except the gtx 480 was also a very flawed chip. I think they did that more so to stir interest for a product that they saw as a flop and a stop gap until the gtx 580. Note that they were completely silent about the 580 and we knew almost nothing official about the 8800gtx - their two best products in the past decade imoQuote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75
Finally, after many months of waiting, we have the next gen Nvidia specs.Quote:
Originally Posted by BHD
Kind of disappointed with only 2GB of RAM on the flagship card (GTX 680) as the 7970 and variants of the GTX 580 have 3GB. I'm planning on upgrading from 3x1 Surround to 5x1 Surround (hopefully Nvidia will allow this). Here's hoping for additional aftermarket RAM.
Wow grain of salt much?
People are eating this up that easily?
I might live in a bit of a shell when it comes to good websites breaking news but I have never seen lenzfire up there with the leaks, that and the specs they show off (and their "sources") all seem way to good to be true.
-PB
The specs core wise is right in line with what Nvidia has been doing, doubling core count with process shrink. However I'll believe the specs when its released but the quoted specs are well within reason based on previous hardware revisions.
At this point it's just as baseless to say the specs are wrong as it is to say they are correct, we don't know for sure either way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulbagz
Those specs are baised off a few diff things, all rumors though I think...
1. Shader count is doubled, seems biased of a rumor I read a while back.
For example, 384 x2 and 512 x2 equ to the amount shown in the above specs.
In reality you never know, nvidia could change this within a month of launch, say they screw up on yield and have to..., 992 instead of 1024 for example.
2. GPU clocks are likely from another piece of rumor news, I wouldn't know, never paid attention to the clocks (I don't honestly pay any attention to those anymore, at least not right now).
The mem clocks could be values someone picked out of there @rse
3. Mem controller crossbar width is listed like it was the last few generations of cards.
It looks to me like somoene pulled together a spec or 2 from rumors, then compiled a list of so called next gen cards baised off that info and info about the current gen of cards.
To someone like me all I'm interested in is the wattage, amount of mem, mem crossbar bit width, and the amount of shaders.
I won't know that info until after it's released, finding info on the wattage is usually not written in places easy to find...
Not really interested in replacing my furnace with an electric vga card of a heater for my house...
Eh whatever though I guess.
We should start seeing some real leaks soon from the chinese, just assuming.
Quote:
Lets analyze this boys
- Kepler does not have hotclocks - Chart has hotclocks for all kepler parts, when Kepler doesn't have hotclocks, check
- GTX 690 will be the flagship Kepler, on a single PCB with dual GPU - Chart has the GTX 690 using a 224 bit memory bus x 2 - check
- GTX 660 will have a (224 bit) memory bus. Not even possible - check
- Stream processors? Really? Cuda core counts - wrong - check
- GTX 680 has a 512 bit memory bus, while the dual GPU version the 690 (GTX 680x2) has a 224 bit memory bus - lolworthy
The kicker really is their GTX 690 specs. According to that chart it has a 224 bit memory bus with 1.75gb of memory times two. Hilarious.
Yep this sounds plausible.
Post from another forum.
45% is thanks to simulation. Real numbers will be lower.
LOL :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanSmooth
Has there ever been a launch where so many sets of different specs floated around? I still feel we don't know anything at all about Kepler.
Many times...Quote:
Originally Posted by boxleitnerb
G80 (no one had a clue what was going on)
RV770 (480 sp , 800sp 480sp, then finally launched at 800sp!)
Cayman (1920 shader rumors etc )
to name a recent few
Evergreen and Fermi were a bit more predictable, but the chopping off of SM was a last min surprise IIRC
lol how many aussies are in this thread clutching at hopes of a killer vid card on the horizon.
Cheers boys.
:up:
http://images.fanpop.com/images/imag...13_800_600.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by BHD
link is not more working....Quote:
Originally Posted by cold2010
Anyone know how Nvidia will price this card?
"NEVERMIND"
Ewww 650 and only 2GB? cmon for that price it should be 4GB....
Yup, whole page is down.Quote:
Originally Posted by p3gaz_001
-PB
What 45% ? You really believe those specs ?Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
Please look at this reviewQuote:
Originally Posted by UrbanSmooth
http://www.hardware.fr/focus/50/test...-surround.html
The difference between GTX 580 1.5GB and 3GB is negligible even at extreme high resolution with 4x/8x AA
In other words, 1.5GB of ram is more that enough and yet you are complaining about the 2GB ?!!
If GTX 680 is really 45% faster than HD7970, then the price is very attractive. Actually, even if it is 20% faster the price is still not bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBull78
2GB memory is more than enough. 4GB is going to make it more expensive to manufacture, and you will probably not see any performance gain.
Doesn't even make much sense if thge GTX 660 has 2GB and the GTX 670 only has 1.75GB, WTF? I call fake on these specs.
Remember that some GTS 250 has 1GB while GTX 260 has 896MBQuote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
GTS 450 has 1GB and some GTX 460 had 768MB
I've read more pissing into the wind speculation than I care to in this thread, so to try and plant peoples feet back on the ground lets reiterate and remind people of a few things;
1. Even the GTX560 Ti struggles to break 1GHz on the core even with increased voltage and good cooling, so "well above 1GHz as standard" on the core with the next gen? *chuckles* Lets be realistic, default reference clocks will likely hover around 850-875MHz for the new midrange cards.
2. 2GB midrange cards, very nice in principle but lets not forget the price premium between a 1GB and 2GB GTX 560 Ti at present, they are £140 for a 1GB MSI Twin "Frozr" II and £206 for a 2GB Gainward 560 Ti. Those are the cheapest prices I can find as well. That extra 1GB vRAM is not worth a £66 price premium. If the difference was £20-25 (like it should be) then yes. £66 though? LOL!
3. Next gen performance... come on people, after all the effort nvidia put into getting GF104/114 etc halfway decent do you think they are going to throw millions away on a completely new architecture so soon? Of course not. The architecture will get a heavy revamp I'd think but it won't be all whizz-bang entirely new "OMGZor look-at-this!" architecture.
Bottom line: I'll expect a 20-25% performance improvement with next gen midrange cards over the current GTX 560 Ti. Perspective people.
I wanted to address some things here. Not saying whether ANYTHING is accurate or not....just debunking some things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kristoferr
Debunking a rumor with another rumor....nice!Quote:
Kepler does not have hotclocks - Chart has hotclocks for all kepler parts, when Kepler doesn't have hotclocks, check
Why is a 224-bit bus not possible?Quote:
GTX 690 will be the flagship Kepler, on a single PCB with dual GPU - Chart has the GTX 690 using a 224 bit memory bus x 2 - check
GTX 660 will have a (224 bit) memory bus. Not even possible - check
The kicker really is their GTX 690 specs. According to that chart it has a 224 bit memory bus with 1.75gb of memory times two. Hilarious.
7x 32-bit memory controllers = 224 bit bus width.
If you couple each of those controllers with a single 256MB IC, you get ~1.8GB of memory.
I'm not saying it will happen. Rather, I am saying we should all refrain from making blanket statements about what is and isn't possible based upon the architectural limitations of previous generations.
What you never seen a low end card with 1gb or ram that was slower than a higher end model with less ram?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrono Detector
6600 1gb vs 6600GT 256/ 512 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by highoctane
This thread is for rumors about GTX780, please no more rumors about GTX6XX series, they're outdated. :D