Kepler Nvidia GeForce GTX 780

[MrEs]

IMO Problem is, you are a reviewer and often have got pre knowledge on new stuff. Saying yea right without explaining, people are going to have some questions marks. If you do know more, I don't think you should post that, unless you are going to explain what you know. If you don't know more, then, it's kind of trolling a bit. You obviously do know more, otherwise you wouldn't post that. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but that is the first thing that came to my mind.

If GK104 is mid range performance, and will launch first, it will be a first that a "4" chip is launched before the flagship product wouldn't it? Why would nVidia do that unless it was at least as fast as 7970? From the current rumours, it seems that will be the case, even from the Charlie articles.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Maybe he's just expressing his opinion... like everybody else on here...

[UNTAMED]

all you have to do is have a larger screen example 27" to have a need for either a faster card or dual cards with the current games. My GTX 580 cant run BF3 maxed out at 2560x1440.

-in bf3 @ 2560x1440 gtx580sli [1.5] I left all setting at max. by mistake , 30 minutes into the game it started to jerk around ,fps had dropped to 20 . vram was at 1538 , went to settings turned off msaa ,restarted the game [same server] vram was now below 1500mb and played the game for hours after that.
-not a big deal on one year old cards ,but to buy cards with 1.5gb of vram today ,no way , to buy 2 x high end 2gb cards to keep for 2 years not likely either.

[xVeinx]

IMO Problem is, you are a reviewer and often have got pre knowledge on new stuff. Saying yea right without explaining, people are going to have some questions marks. If you do know more, I don't think you should post that, unless you are going to explain what you know. If you don't know more, then, it's kind of trolling a bit. You obviously do know more, otherwise you wouldn't post that. I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but that is the first thing that came to my mind.

If GK104 is mid range performance, and will launch first, it will be a first that a "4" chip is launched before the flagship product wouldn't it? Why would nVidia do that unless it was at least as fast as 7970? From the current rumours, it seems that will be the case, even from the Charlie articles.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

...Half of which gets changed last minute or adjusted. Of anything, pricing is usually the very last to be released. I wouldn't expect anything that he says to be based on more than intuition, which is likely far more informed than mine .

EDIT: I imagine he's snickering at the thought of my intuition being even close to his on such things

[mutantmagnet]

Charlie says gk104 price is $299: http://semiaccurate.com/2012/01/23/e...k104-price-is/

If that is supposed to be the mid range card I'm not thrilled with the idea that Nvidia bumped up the MSRP about another $50 but it will be interesting if the bump matches the relative increase in performance that can be expected.

[HelixPC]

If that is supposed to be the mid range card I'm not thrilled with the idea that Nvidia bumped up the MSRP about another $50 but it will be interesting if the bump matches the relative increase in performance that can be expected.

If it performs better or on par with the 7970, the price is more than fair. And i will pick up 2.

[Zloyd]

Its getting crazier !!!!

But come on guys can anyone really believe that nv will sell us a card less than its market value ? 1 of the 2 has to be false , either its gonna be 300-350$ OR its gonna be close to 7970 or 7950 performance. Have to say with all the stuff flying around its hard to make a calculated not noob guesstimate.

[flyck]

Yeah the 299$ and performance > 7970 doesn't seem right.

that would make the whole >200$ lineup of nvidia complete obsolete. So how will they fill the space above and below?
570-580 would be worst buy ever, but they are to big to drop under the 250$
.

If it performs like the 7970 they will price it accordingly so they can still sell 560-570-580.

[boxleitnerb]

580 is EOL. The other cards of the old gen probably will be EOL once Kepler is available, so it IS obsolete. GK104 will be the new 8800GT. I guess at 300$ it will come quite close to the 7970 and GK110 will obliterate Tahiti for 400-600$. AMD will drop prices big time and introduce a XTX or what they call it to at least hope to compete with GK110.

Let's see if I'm right on this one.

[phantomferrari]

i wouldnt be shocked if nvidia released kelper at cebit

[Kristoferr]

580 is EOL. The other cards of the old gen probably will be EOL once Kepler is available, so it IS obsolete. GK104 will be the new 8800GT. I guess at 300$ it will come quite close to the 7970 and GK110 will obliterate Tahiti for 400-600$. AMD will drop prices big time and introduce a XTX or what they call it to at least hope to compete with GK110.

Let's see if I'm right on this one.

Thats one cool fairytaile you have here. Keep it up.

This 290$ card will be slower than HD7950 on stock clocks. If it indeed launches at 290$ price tag.

[paulbagz]

580s wouldn't be EOL until somethings ready to take its place.

-PB

[Pantsu]

Well if such a thing were to happen it would be a bigger surprise than the 4800 series. 300$ and 7970 performance makes no sense to anyone but a blind fanboy who wants a cheap card. Yet again people have even more bloated expectations than before 7970 launched. I think it was supposed to be at least twice as fast as previous gen, or at least 6990 performance at like 400$?

[RPGWiZaRD]

What do a GTX 580 get in 3DMark11, the HD7950 got like 61xx, just wanna know if it's even realistic to expect GK104 to perform about as good as GTX 580.

[Kristoferr]

Default HD7950 gets about 50points better GPU score than GTX580

[RPGWiZaRD]

Default HD7950 gets about 50points better GPU score than GTX580

OK ty well I suppose it's possible for GK104 to perform within margin of 10% of GTX 580 at least which is something I've waited for, GTX 580 performance at a more reasonable cost, hopefully it at least delivers that. Overclocking should also be a bit better probably.

[boxleitnerb]

They are not making GF110 anymore afaik, so that is EOL. You can still buy from the stock that is left, though.

AMD improved performance by around 40% (on average) compared to the 6970. This it not much for a new node. According to the latest info/speculations Nvidia focused heavily on perf/W this time around. So it is not unlikely that GK104 will improve quite more than 40% compared to its predecessor, the 560(Ti). I don't find it unreasonable that GK104 will land in between 7950 and 7970. That would make it only 60% faster than the 560Ti - an increase that is not uncommon for a new node.

Also, by the time GK104 launches, prices for the 7970 might have dropped a bit due to matured process and better availability. Considering that there is still GK110 for the segment above, why wouldn't GK104 be priced at 300$? If it were overpriced like the 7970, what would they want for GTX680? 800$? Who would buy that?

Think back of the 8800GT. It was priced in the 250$-300$ range and was also around 30% faster than the fastest previous offering of the last generation, the X1950XTX - just like the 7970 is around 30% faster than the GTX580. You see the parallel? It was a great deal and nobody cried "impossible". Tahiti and GK104 will have similar die sizes, so similar performance is to be expected, especially since GK104 probably is a chip trimmed for gaming while AMD had to make compromises due to HPC. The difference between Nvidia and AMD this round is, that AMD again stops at <400mm2 die while Nvidia will (as always in the last 6 years) have offerings above that. GK104 will be the new 8800GT in my opinion. And 8800GTX and Ultras followed suit.

And please stop calling people fanboy. That is childish and immature.

[Nikolasz]

As far i know back in wery 386 486... till now, and matrox mistique and voodoo2... till now, all new generations of gpu chips go like 20-30% "better" same as for cpu

[Cordell Cahill]

As far i know back in wery 386 486... till now, and matrox mistique and voodoo2... till now, all new generations of gpu chips go like 20-30% "better" same as for cpu

I wish Bulldozer were 20% faster...

[LordEC911]

Edit... I guess I shouldn't post that.

[-Boris-]

They are not making GF110 anymore afaik, so that is EOL. You can still buy from the stock that is left, though.

AMD improved performance by around 40% (on average) compared to the 6970. This it not much for a new node. According to the latest info/speculations Nvidia focused heavily on perf/W this time around. So it is not unlikely that GK104 will improve quite more than 40% compared to its predecessor, the 560(Ti). I don't find it unreasonable that GK104 will land in between 7950 and 7970. That would make it only 60% faster than the 560Ti - an increase that is not uncommon for a new node.

Also, by the time GK104 launches, prices for the 7970 might have dropped a bit due to matured process and better availability. Considering that there is still GK110 for the segment above, why wouldn't GK104 be priced at 300$? If it were overpriced like the 7970, what would they want for GTX680? 800$? Who would buy that?

Think back of the 8800GT. It was priced in the 250$-300$ range and was also around 30% faster than the fastest previous offering of the last generation, the X1950XTX - just like the 7970 is around 30% faster than the GTX580. You see the parallel? It was a great deal and nobody cried "impossible". Tahiti and GK104 will have similar die sizes, so similar performance is to be expected, especially since GK104 probably is a chip trimmed for gaming while AMD had to make compromises due to HPC. The difference between Nvidia and AMD this round is, that AMD again stops at <400mm2 die while Nvidia will (as always in the last 6 years) have offerings above that. GK104 will be the new 8800GT in my opinion. And 8800GTX and Ultras followed suit.

And please stop calling people fanboy. That is childish and immature.

When comparing differences you should compare at high settings to avoid bottlenecks. 7970 is more lite 60%+ faster than 6970.

As far i know back in wery 386 486... till now, and matrox mistique and voodoo2... till now, all new generations of gpu chips go like 20-30% "better" same as for cpu

No, when it's a new generation it's more often than not close to 100%, not counting half generations as the AMD 3000 or 6000 series or nVidia 9000 or 500 series.

[Iconyu]

They are not making GF110 anymore afaik, so that is EOL. You can still buy from the stock that is left, though.

AMD improved performance by around 40% (on average) compared to the 6970. This it not much for a new node. According to the latest info/speculations Nvidia focused heavily on perf/W this time around. So it is not unlikely that GK104 will improve quite more than 40% compared to its predecessor, the 560(Ti). I don't find it unreasonable that GK104 will land in between 7950 and 7970. That would make it only 60% faster than the 560Ti - an increase that is not uncommon for a new node.

Also, by the time GK104 launches, prices for the 7970 might have dropped a bit due to matured process and better availability. Considering that there is still GK110 for the segment above, why wouldn't GK104 be priced at 300$? If it were overpriced like the 7970, what would they want for GTX680? 800$? Who would buy that?

Think back of the 8800GT. It was priced in the 250$-300$ range and was also around 30% faster than the fastest previous offering of the last generation, the X1950XTX - just like the 7970 is around 30% faster than the GTX580. You see the parallel? It was a great deal and nobody cried "impossible". Tahiti and GK104 will have similar die sizes, so similar performance is to be expected, especially since GK104 probably is a chip trimmed for gaming while AMD had to make compromises due to HPC. The difference between Nvidia and AMD this round is, that AMD again stops at <400mm2 die while Nvidia will (as always in the last 6 years) have offerings above that. GK104 will be the new 8800GT in my opinion. And 8800GTX and Ultras followed suit.

And please stop calling people fanboy. That is childish and immature.

That's pretty much what I've been thinking, the 7970 isn't particularly fast for a node change. If you look back just one node change the GK104 being faster or on par with the GF110 is normal rather than exceptional. If the GK104 is faster than the 7970 it just means that AMD have missed the sweet spot (not that the 7970 can really be described as a sweet spot card) and they've not got the same performance per millimetre advantage they enjoyed in 40nm.

Nvidia's midrange offerings tend to use more transistors and more die space than AMD's have on any GPU since the 2900xt, Nvidia only really needed to close the gap on performance per mm2 to make this situation occur. The only light in the tunnel for AMD is that their card has very immature drivers, but as AMD drivers have not been the highlight of 2011 it's somewhat a mixed blessing.

[boxleitnerb]

• Computerbase: 30% at 2560x1600_8/16, 40% at 2560x1600_4/16 http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/g...stung_mit_aaaf
• TechPowerUp: 39% at 2560x1600 with AA/AF http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/28.html
• HT4U: 35% at 2560x1440_8/16: http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/amd_rad...st/index50.php

You can pick games where the the difference is larger, but on average 60% is not true.

Even with SGSSAA the maximum difference between the 6970 and the 7970 is around 45% (in Skyrim):
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/g...stung_mit_ssaa

[-Boris-]

• Computerbase: 30% at 2560x1600_8/16, 40% at 2560x1600_4/16 http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/g...stung_mit_aaaf
• TechPowerUp: 39% at 2560x1600 with AA/AF http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/28.html
• HT4U: 35% at 2560x1440_8/16: http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/amd_rad...st/index50.php

You can pick games where the the difference is larger, but on average 60% is not true.

Even with SGSSAA the maximum difference between the 6970 and the 7970 is around 45% (in Skyrim):
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/g...stung_mit_ssaa

Compound results with CPU-heavy benches included isn't a good basis when you want to tell the actual difference. With SC2 and Civ V you can effectively lower the advantage of any graphics card.
And any test where they don’t disclose their test systems is disqualified immediately in my eyes. A valid test should have at least an 2600K at 4.5GHz to avoid bottlenecks. Benching on an old unclocked Nehalem doesn’t cut it.

[boxleitnerb]

Computerbase tested with a 4,5 GHz 2600K. The influence of the CPU should diminish at these high settings, but it depends on the benchmark of course. I chose these reviews because they represent many games and have a performance rating for convenience. Can you point out at least 10 games where the 7970 is 60% ahead of the 6970?

[SubZero.it]

I just would say...why not stop dreaming about a mid-range card beating(or on par) an high end one?Techonology never gives miracles, even if it's new.