Gtx 780ti to be faster than Titan, will battle R9 290x

The boys at fudzilla have received some information regarding upcoming GTX 780ti. Amd's time in the sun may be cut very short, at the least they will have to share the space if Nvidia has anything to say about it.

Quote:

---

We have heard from multiple independent sources that the upcoming Geforce GTX 780 Ti will end up faster than the Titan, and obviously significantly faster than original Geforce GTX 780 card.

The Radeon R9 290X is giving Nvidia?s Titan a run for its money, at least in its noisy ?ber mode, but apparently 780 Ti can put some distance between these cards. Since the GTX 780 currently sells for $649 in most US etail stores and in Europe it costs just over ?500, we can only assume that GTX 780 TI performance will come at a high price, but with a Titan like cooler that we saw showcased at Nvidia?s Montreal The way it's meant to be played, the card could end up really quiet.

Let's not forget UK etail where GTX 780 sells for average ?499.99 with VAT.

We are not sure if GTX 780 Ti beats the Titan in all benchmarks, but it will definitely be faster in most of them. It remains to be seen what happens to the Titan, currently priced at $999, as the GTX 780 Ti launch will render this pricey card obsolete and uncompetitive.

One can only assume that there might be a Titan price drop happening after the 780 TI launch. The other possibility is that the Titan will be discontinued, if the Ti ends up significantly cheaper to produce.

In the US Titan cards sell for $999 and up, in the German market you can buy a Titan for ?800 and in the UK it?s ?779.99 on sale, or ?800+ on an average day. These cards make sense for people with 2560x1600 or higher resolution monitors and all settings cranked up to max.

---

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/32...ter-than-titan

should I not install these two Titans in my LAN rig then?

Lmao SLI Titans in a LAN rig....

Way to cannibalize Nvidia... Sounds like a great card, but why not just drop Titan Price to $650 and 780 to $500? Allow some factory overclocked Titans and you've accomplished the same thing without needing to kill a 8 month old product.

Im pretty sure nvidia doesnt want to sell fully enabled compute card for lower amount of $, it either stays or is EOL i think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

Way to cannibalize Nvidia... Sounds like a great card, but why not just drop Titan Price to $650 and 780 to $500? Allow some factory overclocked Titans and you've accomplished the same thing without needing to kill a 8 month old product.

---

you're wrong. releasing a full GK180 is not "the same thing" -- it's faster than titan and faster than 290x, and it's worth releasing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bamtan2

you're wrong. releasing a full GK180 is not "the same thing" -- it's faster than titan and faster than 290x, and it's worth releasing.

---

There is no reason to release a 780Ti besides for epenis effect. Sure the 290X is good but it is hotter and lounder than Titan, therefore the latter is still more competitive and going by Nvidia's perceived image, could still sell for $100 more than the 290X. To me this is a kneejerk reaction to add a few frames more than AMD and keep the "fastest card" in the market. It is also a clear sign that the mystical Maxwell is no where to be found any soon, and most likely will show up only on 20nm in late 2014....

Already have a thread for 780 Ti stuff? :confused:

-PB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

It is also a clear sign that the mystical Maxwell is no where to be found any soon, and most likely will show up only on 20nm in late 2014....

---

No it is not. There are other performance segments besides "enthusiast" ;)

Good, the more the merrier. Bing it on nVidia, if you really can, and may the best product win. :up:

There is no reason to release a 780Ti besides for epenis effect.

The 290x is significantly faster than the 780 and $100 cheaper. Even in quiet mode the 290x is faster. If they do nothing and keep their current price structure they *will* lose customers to AMD. Including me. I've never bought an AMD/ATI video card before, but I'll be damned if I'm going to buy a slower and more expensive card just because of AMDs crappy stock air cooler. So, yeah, I think there is a reason for them to do something. It's called remaining competitive. It's called not being a bunch of complete idiots and not treating their customers as if they are either.

They could just lower the price of the Titan to say $499 or something and discontinue the 780 altogether, but the 290x actually beats even the Titan in many cases. I don't think Nvidia likes to lose the prestige of having the fastest GPU for no good reason. It's one thing if AMD truly has them beaten in terms of technology, but if these rumours are true they don't. And most people aren't going to pay that much attention to the extra noise of the stock cooler. They'll just run it in quiet mode and/or plan on getting an aftermarket cooler for it later. For those of us with water cooling setups the cost of the water block is mostly paid for by the price difference and probably someone will start selling a more effective air cooler for the 290x.

As far as the extra power usage of the 290x that does bother me, but not as much as Nvidia trying to sell me a slower card for more money. If that's Nvidia's plan then I'll say thanks but no thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

No it is not. There are other performance segments besides "enthusiast" ;)

---

None that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gojirasan

None that matter.

---

Nonsense. Most revenue is generated in the $200 segment where GK104 resides. GK104 will be 2 years old in Q1/2014 and is bound to be replaced. A Maxwell GM104/106/108 can perfectly coexist with a GTX 780 Ti. That's the point of my argument that you probably didn't understand.

Nvidia are perfectly willing to sell at a loss, as long as it protects market share, this situation will balance out again Q2 2014 but until then lets enjoy the cheap cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

Way to cannibalize Nvidia... Sounds like a great card, but why not just drop Titan Price to $650 and 780 to $500? Allow some factory overclocked Titans and you've accomplished the same thing without needing to kill a 8 month old product.

---

Titan owners shouldn't care what NVidia does in the future. Whether they drop the price or introduce a faster card it doesn't change anything about the card they already own. If NVidia has enough good GK1x0 chips to release a faster version there's no reason they shouldn't do just that.

GeForce GTX 780 Ti stock performance within ~3-5 % of a heavily (read: maxed out) air OC'd Radeon R9 290X in 3DM11.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

Nonsense. Most revenue is generated in the $200 segment where GK104 resides. GK104 will be 2 years old in Q1/2014 and is bound to be replaced. A Maxwell GM104/106/108 can perfectly coexist with a GTX 780 Ti. That's the point of my argument that you probably didn't understand.

---

I don't own any Nvidia stock. Why should I care about what segment generates the most revenue? We are here to discuss news about real video cards (for instance). No one posting here is going to be buying a $200 video card any time soon. Do any of us really care what slow cards are being sold in that segment? It's just not important to any "enthusiast". So it makes a lot money. Whoopie. I could not care less. Those cards simply don't matter in any real sense. Not in terms of technology or progress. They certainly aren't news except maybe to Nvidia stockholders, which is something that I would *never* be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iconyu

Nvidia are perfectly willing to sell at a loss, as long as it protects market share, this situation will balance out again Q2 2014 but until then lets enjoy the cheap cards.

---

I've been hearing this "selling at a loss" bit here since GTX280. Yes, Nvidia has been selling all of their high end desktop graphics cards at a loss for the last five years. :rolleyes:

I can't understand how they could only turn a profit at only $550. :rolleyes:

$550? Pretty persuasive to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gojirasan

I don't own any Nvidia stock. Why should I care about what segment generates the most revenue? We are here to discuss news about real video cards (for instance). No one posting here is going to be buying a $200 video card any time soon. Do any of us really care what slow cards are being sold in that segment? It's just not important to any "enthusiast". So it makes a lot money. Whoopie. I could not care less. Those cards simply don't matter in any real sense. Not in terms of technology or progress. They certainly aren't news except maybe to Nvidia stockholders, which is something that I would *never* be.

---

That is your right not to care about anything but enthusiast cards. Yet your statement about Maxwell was wrong, that's all I illustrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101

GeForce GTX 780 Ti stock performance within ~3-5 % of a heavily (read: maxed out) air OC'd Radeon R9 290X in 3DM11.

---

This information is very difficult to classify:

• Performance or Extreme preset? Most reviews see the 290X match or exceed Titan in P-Preset but behind it in X-Preset.
• What clocks for both cards? In 3DM11 there is no difference between Quiet and Uber mode for the 290X but about a 6% difference between a stock Titan (warmed up) and a Titan@1 GHz (power and temp target raised but still warmed up). Question is if Nvidia raised the 80C temp target vs Titan or not and if/how that affects boost clocks.
• Within as in "below" or "above"?

Titan is being held up because of it's compute capacity. Remember that a tesla which is ~120% of a titan is ~400% of the titan's price. I'd love to see the price differential grow to 800% :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

That is your right not to care about anything but enthusiast cards. Yet your statement about Maxwell was wrong, that's all I illustrated.



This information is very difficult to classify:

• Performance or Extreme preset? Most reviews see the 290X match or exceed Titan in P-Preset but behind it in X-Preset.
• What clocks for both cards? In 3DM11 there is no difference between Quiet and Uber mode for the 290X but about a 6% difference between a stock Titan (warmed up) and a Titan@1 GHz (power and temp target raised but still warmed up). Question is if Nvidia raised the 80C temp target vs Titan or not and if/how that affects boost clocks.
• Within as in "below" or "above"?

---

Stock clock speed on the 780 Ti puts it between 3 and 5 % below a 290X running at around 1150 MHz on the Performance Preset.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101

Stock clock speed on the 780 Ti puts it between 3 and 5 % below a 290X running at around 1150 MHz on the Performance Preset.

---

So if the 290x was running stock clocks, they would be neck and neck.

A titan is no replacement for a workstation card. It is still lacking most of the rendering compute features. It only has a option to enable FP64. This only benefits crunchers really. No benefit to workstation users that would be using a quadro. Titan still performs well in generic rendering applications though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iconyu

Nvidia are perfectly willing to sell at a loss, as long as it protects market share, this situation will balance out again Q2 2014 but until then lets enjoy the cheap cards.

---

Who says anything about selling at a loss? The same silicon is used for multiple SKUs. TITAN being a card that sold for over $1000 (in many parts of the world its price hit as much as $1500) NVIDIA *could* charge that. Margins for NVIDIA on TITAN are stupidly high, while being quite low for the AIB partners. NVIDIA has a hell of a lot of headroom to play with the price, much more than people realise. TITAN could have launched at a price of several hundred dollars less and still turned a profit - but NVIDIA is in the business of making money, not saving other people money. They charge what the market dictates. When you consider how quickly the TITAN sold out time after time, I don't think even NVIDIA could have predicted how well it would do, and this shows that it wasn't "overpriced." Expensive or unaffordable to many, sure, but not overpriced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

This information is very difficult to classify:

• Performance or Extreme preset? Most reviews see the 290X match or exceed Titan in P-Preset but behind it in X-Preset.
• What clocks for both cards? In 3DM11 there is no difference between Quiet and Uber mode for the 290X but about a 6% difference between a stock Titan (warmed up) and a Titan@1 GHz (power and temp target raised but still warmed up). Question is if Nvidia raised the 80C temp target vs Titan or not and if/how that affects boost clocks.
• Within as in "below" or "above"?

---

Stock clock speed on the 780 Ti puts it between 3 and 5 % below a 290X running at around 1150 MHz on the Performance Preset.

By the way, I'm pretty sure the 780 Ti will use a new revision of GK110, not GK180. I don't see any need for validating ECC, etc on a consumer desktop card. GK110 can indeed have more CUDA cores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101

Stock clock speed on the 780 Ti puts it between 3 and 5 % below a 290X running at around 1150 MHz on the Performance Preset.

By the way, I'm pretty sure the 780 Ti will use a new revision of GK110, not GK180. I don't see any need for validating ECC, etc on a consumer desktop card. GK110 can indeed have more CUDA cores.

---

That would make the 780 Ti about 12% faster than Titan@stock if my math is correct. Nvidia could not achieve this by clocks alone, that would kill energy efficiency. Together with your comment on cores I think that points to 2880 cores :D

Thanks to Oj101 for bringing some newz on it ! :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaddMuppet

So if the 290x was running stock clocks, they would be neck and neck.

---

The 290X would be about 13 % slower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

That would make the 780 Ti about 12% faster than Titan@stock if my math is correct. Nvidia could not achieve this by clocks alone, that would kill energy efficiency. Together with your comment on cores I think that points to 2880 cores :D

---

Seeing as we know that a stock 290X comes within a few percentage points of the TITAN your assumption is good.

And damn those CUDA cores :D

http://abload.de/img/resultskcu4f.png

Oj101 - i dont know, where you get that numbers, but i am not sure it is correct. 10 percents above R9 290X on stock clocks? - We will see.

Look at these results, Ti sample here is 6GB card with more CUDAs than today GTX 780. But i don t know if it has final clocks and final SKU configuration.

PS. Reviews are closer then all expected :)
PS2. I have some another shots made with this secret card :)

Thx!

Quote:

---

I have some another shots made with this secret card

---

give me more shots :D

I wonder how much NVIDIA will sell this, knowing them they will most likely will sell this at a high price and won't try to sell it close to the R9 290X price because they are afraid of losing money. Though I wonder if the GTX 780 Ti will come with 6GB RAM or not if its meant to be faster than both the Titan and R9 290X.

i think price can be around $650 but who know now.

i'd say they drop the 780 to $550-600, introduce the 780ti at $650-700 and EOL the Titan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biohead

i'd say they drop the 780 to $550-600, introduce the 780ti at $650-700 and EOL the Titan.

---

I think they'd have to price the 780 at least at $500, if not lower to be honest. Yes power consumption and heat are factors, but in the end most people only care about performance. Most reviews I've seen show it being around 10% slower than the 290X in uber mode, so $500 would be a good point to undercut AMD.

Eitherway I'm just happy that we have real competition at the top end again. Better prices and performance for everyone!

Titan was EOLed long time ago

Umm... both the Gtx 780 and Titan in those benchmarks are running 3930k and quad channel memory..... the R9-290x is running a 3770k....
Find some benchmarks running on the same system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biohead

i'd say they drop the 780 to $550-600, introduce the 780ti at $650-700 and EOL the Titan.

---

This is reasonable, nVidia brand still carries more weight compared to AMD graphic, though i am more leaning that GTX 780 would be closer to the lower number (US$ 550) thus matching reference R9 290X price (yes it's a bit slower but it has its own good qualities), while GTX 780 Ti would go higher, the upper limit at US$ 700, factoring its top of the class performance and perhaps 6 GB high speed VRAM, not to mention higher CUDA count GK110 chips are more rare, so it needs to be priced accordingly to ensure good supply & optimum profitability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

I've been hearing this "selling at a loss" bit here since GTX280. Yes, Nvidia has been selling all of their high end desktop graphics cards at a loss for the last five years. :rolleyes:

I can't understand how they could only turn a profit at only $550. :rolleyes:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101

Who says anything about selling at a loss? The same silicon is used for multiple SKUs. TITAN being a card that sold for over $1000 (in many parts of the world its price hit as much as $1500) NVIDIA *could* charge that. Margins for NVIDIA on TITAN are stupidly high, while being quite low for the AIB partners. NVIDIA has a hell of a lot of headroom to play with the price, much more than people realise. TITAN could have launched at a price of several hundred dollars less and still turned a profit - but NVIDIA is in the business of making money, not saving other people money. They charge what the market dictates. When you consider how quickly the TITAN sold out time after time, I don't think even NVIDIA could have predicted how well it would do, and this shows that it wasn't "overpriced." Expensive or unaffordable to many, sure, but not overpriced.



Stock clock speed on the 780 Ti puts it between 3 and 5 % below a 290X running at around 1150 MHz on the Performance Preset.

By the way, I'm pretty sure the 780 Ti will use a new revision of GK110, not GK180. I don't see any need for validating ECC, etc on a consumer desktop card. GK110 can indeed have more CUDA cores.

---

I said they are willing to sell at a loss, sure there is a lot of head room now, but right now Nvidia have to protect their market share, it would be stupid to allow AMD to gain more share with a card supporting an API nvidia can't use. Every AMD sale with GCN in it is a point gain for developers to consider implementing Mantle.

If Nvidia isn't going to be able to join the Mantle party, and developers are resistant to them building a real rival API their only choice is to kill this API before it gets off the ground, they should consider GCN a virus. If Mantle gains are small then it's not an issue, but if Mantle gains are large every sale Nvidia make before December and the BF4 Mantle patch is very important. So yes, I think Nvidia are willing to sell at a loss to protect market share because, depending on Mantle's performance, they won't be able to bring it back if the lose it.

Lol you gotta be kidding me!!!

Quote:

---

A forum member on XtremeSystems posted an alleged 3DMark 11 score which he claims is the performance of the reference GeForce GTX 780 Ti graphic card. From the screenshots, it can be clearly seen that the GeForce GTX 780 Ti ends up as a faster solution than the GeForce GTX Titan and the Radeon R9 290X. The performance may be faster in synthetic benchmarks but gaming results are a whole different story so we have to wait to see the final performance results of the card when the card launches next month.Furthermore, the sample received by the user isn?t exactly a retail sample but an engineering board with 6 GB VRAM and an increased core count compared to the GeForce GTX 780 (2304 Cores). The user didn't pointed out the exact number but we will get to know them in the upcoming weeks. Usually, suchboard samples end up with lower clock speeds than the retail models so one can expect even better performance in the final models. You can see the performance results below

---

Read more:http://wccftech.com/alleged-nvidia-g...#ixzz2isZ4yuKn

It stinks a bit when NVidia know they are going to release a secret revision (780Ti) that makes all other cards they happily took a lot of money for worthless. Thanks.

:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

I wonder how much NVIDIA will sell this, knowing them they will most likely will sell this at a high price and won't try to sell it close to the R9 290X price because they are afraid of losing money. Though I wonder if the GTX 780 Ti will come with 6GB RAM or not if its meant to be faster than both the Titan and R9 290X.

---

This type of card never sell well anyway.. but you know Nvidia, if they can sold, AMD is not faster, they hope peoples will buy the cheaper cards thinking it is better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

Lol you gotta be kidding me!!!

Read more:http://wccftech.com/alleged-nvidia-g...#ixzz2isZ4yuKn

---

You was really think this site have any source ? They do like us.. they watch forums, discussion and they do their article based on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

Way to cannibalize Nvidia... Sounds like a great card, but why not just drop Titan Price to $650 and 780 to $500? Allow some factory overclocked Titans and you've accomplished the same thing without needing to kill a 8 month old product.

---

My guess is that NVidia doesn't want to permit access to the un-neutered compute abilities of Titan at that much lower price point. AMD, on the other hand, has not restricted the compute performance of its cards. The fact that AMD is giving their compute performance away for much less than NVidia is the thing that hurts NVidia the most by eroding market share in their most valuable categories...and increases the likelihood that CUDA will lose traction in the market.

Hawaii have restricted DP performance m8 ( by software it means only ) ... 1/8 vs 1/4 on the 7970.. ofc they are still a good number upper the Nvidia Gefore card ( with 1/24 this was not hard ).... Its not reduced at te same point, but they follow the same course. Well this can change really hard ( reviews are not clear on it, some say 1/4 other 1/8 )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lutjens

My guess is that NVidia doesn't want to permit access to the un-neutered compute abilities of Titan at that much lower price point. AMD, on the other hand, has not restricted the compute performance of its cards. The fact that AMD is giving their compute performance away for much less than NVidia is the thing that hurts NVidia the most by eroding market share in their most valuable categories...and increases the likelihood that CUDA will lose traction in the market.

---

They semi neutered the compute ability of this card or they changed the specs of the double precision unit.

I believe the double precision which was previously 1/4 with the 7970 is now 1/8 which is still better than how neutered the gtx 780 is at 1/24.

I wonder if they are going to even bother with a professional chip for this card. Usually pro chip come out quite a bit later and by them 20nm will be in talks.

Also, I wonder if it is possible to put this chip into the new Mac Pros. This is really where it can hurt AMD having a high TDP. The Mac Pros are a lot more limited for cooling capacity in general and having this chip thermally regulated might turns its performance into tahiti by lowering the clocks.

Plus having the heatsink shared by the CPU, and I have seen with some xenon e5 which are in the mac pro, have a max operating temperature of 81 degrees. Thus, having something that regularly wants to run at 95 degree's is going to increase the temperature of CPU beyond that capacity since its a shared heatsink, particularly if the singular heatsink is overwhelmed.

I doubt you'll see the 290 or 290x in a mac pro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

Umm... both the Gtx 780 and Titan in those benchmarks are running 3930k and quad channel memory..... the R9-290x is running a 3770k....
Find some benchmarks running on the same system.

---

because it is random result from some review on internet, we have no 290x here for testing, and yes - dp compute power on 780 ti will be disabled for ever. Titan will be still king for these usages. DP power of 290x is lower then 7970, it is disabled too.

If in doubt about the CPU, one can just look at the GPU subscore. That is unaffected by the processor.

thats not 100% true in my opinion

Then go ahead and test it with different CPU clocks. It won't change by more than 1-2%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

thats not 100% true in my opinion

---

IT shouldn't change much at all, particularly the extreme setting. Extreme setting basically ignore CPU power for the GPU part of the score. If this was performance setting I would agree it has an affect.

This is the newest 3dmark, but it basically shows this. BUt 3dmark extreme setting has always typically been good at getting rid of the CPU factor with earlier editions too.

http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smart...mid=948&page=4

Scores changed less than 1 percent from enabling 1 core to 4 cores on a 3770k.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

There is no reason to release a 780Ti besides for epenis effect. Sure the 290X is good but it is hotter and lounder than Titan, therefore the latter is still more competitive and going by Nvidia's perceived image, could still sell for $100 more than the 290X. To me this is a kneejerk reaction to add a few frames more than AMD and keep the "fastest card" in the market. It is also a clear sign that the mystical Maxwell is no where to be found any soon, and most likely will show up only on 20nm in late 2014....

---

This is why I only build new rigs once every 5 to 6 years. When that time comes around the new hardware is 5 to 10 times faster. Not in increments of small percentages for massive amounts of cash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

thats not 100% true in my opinion

---

score of 290x is not important here, important is difference between Titan and 780 Ti score on the same system.

Don't Worry ,Because R9 290 is around lower then 1% of the whole Products , so this won't hurt NV and Nv is not Worried for AMD R9 290x's Price.they have enough money to cover their loss.

the 3dmark11 scores for gtx 780 ti seem to be 5% more than gtx titan. the problem is the R9 290X (uber) is on avg anywhere from 3 - 12% faster than GTX Titan at 1440p / 1600p depending on game suite, settings etc

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-18.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X/27.html
http://techreport.com/review/25509/a...rd-reviewed/13
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphi...9-290x/?page=5
http://www.gamestar.de/hardware/graf...3029260,5.html
http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzne...ieznanej_firmy
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/910-...formances.html

most likely Nvidia will share the GPU crown for the first time even with their big die GPU.

But only because Titans temperature target is set at 80C. If you compare quiet vs stock mode (and properly preheat) or uber mode vs power/temperature targets@max, they perform equally:
https://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...90x-im-test/5/
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2013/amd_rad...ew/index46.php

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raghu78

most likely Nvidia will share the GPU crown for the first time even with their big die GPU.

---

you seem to forget the 9700pro. who beat the FX series until the refresh of it. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aussie-revhead

It stinks a bit when NVidia know they are going to release a secret revision (780Ti) that makes all other cards they happily took a lot of money for worthless. Thanks.

:(

---

When a new card gets released all the cards before it don't magically get slower. Of course, if the only reason you buy graphics cards is for the ego boost of "having the fastest!" then yeah it's worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

But only because Titans temperature target is set at 80C. If you compare quiet vs stock mode (and properly preheat) or uber mode vs power/temperature targets@max, they perform equally:
https://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...90x-im-test/5/
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2013/amd_rad...ew/index46.php

---

the way I see it GTX 780 Ti is going to trade blows with R9 290X . it comes down to what the partners are going to do with both these cards and how high the cards can go on custom cooler designs on air (toxic,lightning,matrix) and how high they clock on water (for watercooling enthusiasts). these are the only solutions which can be run 24/7.

VGA Card Naming is confuse me again

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

Umm... both the Gtx 780 and Titan in those benchmarks are running 3930k and quad channel memory..... the R9-290x is running a 3770k....
Find some benchmarks running on the same system.

---

6 core 12 threats with 119xx Physics score compared to 125xx physics score with a 3770K 4 core 8 threats?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raghu78

the way I see it GTX 780 Ti is going to trade blows with R9 290X . it comes down to what the partners are going to do with both these cards and how high the cards can go on custom cooler designs on air (toxic,lightning,matrix) and how high they clock on water (for watercooling enthusiasts). these are the only solutions which can be run 24/7.

---

As I said, the Titan and 290X already trade blows. The 780 Ti will be a tad faster, but possibly only equal clock for clock since it seems to be "just" a Titan with 2688 cores.

780 Ti will be faster then 290X in most of tests and games, 6GB VRAM will help in many HD+ resolutions. Be sure of this, Nvidia will compare 290X performance in many games and after that they will make final clock decision. But with lower power consumption, less noise, lower temps a with 10-15 percents OC headroom.

780 Ti will be winner in ALL aspects, except the price i think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

780 Ti will be faster then 290X in most of tests and games, 6GB VRAM will help in many HD+ resolutions. Be sure of this, Nvidia will compare 290X performance in many games and after that they will make final clock decision. But with lower power consumption, less noise, lower temps a with 10-15 percents OC headroom.

780 Ti will be winner in ALL aspects, except the price i think.

---

at 4K Ultra HD or multi monitor the gap is significant. that 512 bit memory bus and 64 ROPs really make a difference at ultra high resolutions. clock speeds alone cannot make up for architectural differences.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/...card_review/14
http://www.nordichardware.se/Grafikk...0.html#content
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ew,3650-9.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/t...290x-review/11

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raghu78

at 4K Ultra HD or multi monitor the gap is significant. that 512 bit memory bus and 64 ROPs really make a difference at ultra high resolutions. clock speeds alone cannot make up for architectural differences.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/...card_review/14
http://www.nordichardware.se/Grafikk...0.html#content
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ew,3650-9.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/t...290x-review/11

---

No it is not. You're still forgetting that the GeForce cards don't run with maximum clocks, but the Radeons do, often in quiet mode as well (as evidenced by the negligible difference between quiet and uber mode in many cases, showing insufficient pre-heating procedures). This is due to the 80C temp target, especially now when many sites have changed their testing procedure to warm up the cards. I have provided you with two reviews that do proper comparisons with Titans "uber mode" if you will. The difference in 4K on average is minimal.

It's funny how incompetent many reviewers are. First they benchmark Nvidia boost 2.0 cards without pre-heating, creating unrealistic testing conditions. Now that AMD has implemented a temperature-dependent boost, too, reviewers test AMDs quiet AND uber mode but only test Nvidias "quiet" (stock) mode, yet again creating an unfair comparison.

so if Amd released a slower R9-290x but more power efficient, quieter, and lower temps than a 780. people would still complain

The only complaint is about untrue statements. It's funny since raghu78 always wants so see clock for clock results, but when they disprove what he says, he ignores them :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

so if Amd released a faster R9-290x but more power efficient, quieter, and lower temps than a 780. people would still complain

---

Fixed it for you.
The people complaining don't care about the product, they care about their agenda.

FYI- Hawaii DP is 1/2... it is Radeon neutered by software.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

No it is not. You're still forgetting that the GeForce cards don't run with maximum clocks, but the Radeons do, often in quiet mode as well (as evidenced by the negligible difference between quiet and uber mode in many cases, showing insufficient pre-heating procedures). This is due to the 80C temp target, especially now when many sites have changed their testing procedure to warm up the cards. I have provided you with two reviews that do proper comparisons with Titans "uber mode" if you will. The difference in 4K on average is minimal.

---

what. the majority of reviews show performance difference on avg of 10 - 20% at 4k. so the difference is not minimal. btw there are reviews which found even uber mode throttling clocks in few games. so again you are wrong.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/...3#.Um1CU1P098E

Quote:

---

It's funny how incompetent many reviewers are. First they benchmark Nvidia boost 2.0 cards without pre-heating, creating unrealistic testing conditions. Now that AMD has implemented a temperature-dependent boost, too, reviewers test AMDs quiet AND uber mode but only test Nvidias "quiet" (stock) mode, yet again creating an unfair comparison.

---

btw nvidia does not provide a uber mode. you have to manually work the fan settings. so who determines what fan settings to run ? instead of accusing reviewers read the reviews properly. study their benchmarking procedures and then take the results from the ones you consider fair.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...-review-5.html

"Now, before every run, cards are left to heat up for 10 minutes under in-game load which will ensure more realistic benchmark numbers. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boxleitnerb

The only complaint is about untrue statements. It's funny since raghu78 always wants so see clock for clock results, but when they disprove what he says, he ignores them :D

---

yeah i am all for clock for clock comparisons which seem impossible unless both Nvidia and AMD allow you to disable boost completely and just work with clocks, voltages and fan speeds with a hard temp limit (throttle if exceeded) for safety reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

780 Ti will be faster then 290X in most of tests and games, 6GB VRAM will help in many HD+ resolutions. Be sure of this, Nvidia will compare 290X performance in many games and after that they will make final clock decision. But with lower power consumption, less noise, lower temps a with 10-15 percents OC headroom.

780 Ti will be winner in ALL aspects, except the price i think.

---

Unless if they give a 512 bit memory controller I'm not sure they can win out at the higher resolutions. After getting a 1440p monitor there's no way I'm ever going back to 1080p, and I think a lot of others feel the same now that they are becoming more affordable

only way i'd go back to 1080p is if it were 2560 pixels wide ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

only way i'd go back to 1080p is if it were 2560 pixels wide ;)

---

There are monitors like that ;-)

All this shows just how much some competition can get us, man it would be great if AMD could get their act straight on the cpu front.

780ti will with all possibility be faster on average than R290x, thats a given, they have the silicon, and they have the headroom.
But after 290x, they cant really go overboard with price, they either attack AMD at their price point, which will mean AMD will lower theirs, or go for the 780 price point, they cant really get higher.
Titan is obsolete, of course, they can do a titan ti ,and keep the price points.All this makes it pretty possible for me to buy hawaii LE in few months :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEC911

Fixed it for you.
The people complaining don't care about the product, they care about their agenda.

FYI- Hawaii DP is 1/2... it is Radeon neutered by software.

---

Really, that's just troll bait. Everyone would be happy if it was faster, cheaper, quieter and cooler. That would just be a flawless product.

Consuming more power and creating more heat in the process than a gtx 480(techpowerup and guru3d reviews, even in quiet mode) is not a good thing and likely makes a new record for a single GPU card. Every one, particularly AMD fans complained about the heat problems of the gtx 480.

So when a 290x, I would expect the same criticism. However, with the 290x, it doesn't even fully capture the performance crown like the gtx 480 but to its benefit, it is priced much better than its competition.

For a company that has championed efficiency for a while now, I would hope AMD could create a more efficient chip after having more than two years to work on this process(and during this course they made a whole line). With GF100, there was a good chance that such a monster die as their first product on 40nm was going to be a leaky processor. So AMD really has no excuse for the problems of Hawaii. Well Nvidia should have made such a big die as their first chip either so it is their fault too. But with AMD making quite a bit smaller product, and having that experience, they should have made something a bit more efficient.

Its seems like a problem with GCN in general and left them with two choices. Increase the utilization of the GCN cores and power goes up a lot or just make a monster die like Nvidia. They went with sort of both. But it doesn't have the max performance of a monster die but has the power usage of one. They got part of the performance but the entire cost of the power consumption.

Fermi was already breaking or at the limit of how much energy and how hot a processor can be. To go 10-15 percent beyond this isn't the direction AMD can continue with. Nvidia made huge improvements with keplar and likely changed their design scheme to not repeat past mistakes of Fermi. I.e making gx104 first then the big die and just generally making a more efficient architecture.

I find it really strange that people think the practical solution to this bad cooler(which is universally being called crap) debacle is to buy a waterblock and thus a water loop. The fact that the best solution is water cooling which is kind of extreme and atleast 200 dollars in water cooling(125 dollar block, radiators, tubes and all that stuff or a cheap water cooling kit + block) kind of shows how much people are willing to overlook AMD. The extra cost really kills the savings and the default cooler should be better even if it meant raising the cost by 20 bucks.

As a result of this bad cooling solution, CF crippled by air as open air cooling + high heat producing product makes water almost essential. If AMD had put a better blower fan on it, it would have atleast killed the noise issue and made crossfire more usable. As is, it seems like AMD is forcing people to make too many compromise unless they are willing to spend huge amounts on cooling.


Yet it's tough to recommend R9 290X CrossFire because it's anything but quiet. No matter whether you use the "Quiet" or "Uber" BIOS, they're both unbearably loud when properly loaded and not recommendable for setups in which you rely on speakers, no matter how punchy they are. Their noise output can even potentially affect your gameplay in online multi-player games where you can hear out your enemies. We'd strictly recommend a gaming headset with good noise isolation, preferably active noise cancellation.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...ssFire/23.html

The point where loud speakers are not enough and preferably noise canceling headphone is ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

only way i'd go back to 1080p is if it were 2560 pixels wide ;)

---

I dunno dude, I looked at some 21:9 monitors, and it's frankly an awkward experience. I think 1440p is really the way to go, especially with the QX2710 having an overclockable version of the same Samsung Matte PLS panel in many high end professional monitors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aussie-revhead

It stinks a bit when NVidia know they are going to release a secret revision (780Ti) that makes all other cards they happily took a lot of money for worthless. Thanks.

:(

---

Eh all brands do it all the time.

Rumours of the Titan Ultra had been around for months now as well, it's to be expected now days.

The only way to get over this is to fight that buyers remorse and be happy with what you have :)

-PB

Impossible to do as a bencher .... 290x look like fun, unless they get shuffled again soon after buying ....

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spursindonesia

This is reasonable, nVidia brand still carries more weight compared to AMD graphic, though i am more leaning that GTX 780 would be closer to the lower number (US$ 550) thus matching reference R9 290X price (yes it's a bit slower but it has its own good qualities), while GTX 780 Ti would go higher, the upper limit at US$ 700, factoring its top of the class performance and perhaps 6 GB high speed VRAM, not to mention higher CUDA count GK110 chips are more rare, so it needs to be priced accordingly to ensure good supply & optimum profitability.

---

looks like news has come early. prices have dropped some 100-120 euros here.