Kepler Nvidia GeForce GTX 780

[cold2010]

fudzilla

We must note that these tests are a bit unfair due to Nvidia's GPU Boost feature. You can't actually claim that the card is clocked at 1006MHz due to the boost, so we are hoping that reviewers will include overclocked Radeon HD 7970 cards in their official reviews. This should level the playing field.

LOL

[DarthShader]

That is NOT "cherry picking", that's more like "we have limited time, lets put up the numbers that matter to the largest portion of the community as possible".

Limited time?? It's a WHOLE WEEK till NDA lifts and you say not enough time?

Also judging by the "official" nVidia graph, I can't picture they'd claim 40%+ faster in BF3 when it's not even remotely like that in actuality.

That graph is just a graphical representation of the number posted by pcinlife or some other chinese site late January/early February. Obvious fake is obvious.

fudzilla

Haha, Fuad is adorable when he tries to play the concerned reviewer.

It has to be said though, that the preview mentions this boost producing inconsistent results with a 5% spread.

[STEvil]

Limited time?? It's a WHOLE WEEK till NDA lifts and you say not enough time?


That graph is just a graphical representation of the number posted by pcinlife or some other chinese site late January/early February. Obvious fake is obvious.


Haha, Fuad is adorable when he tries to play the concerned reviewer.

It has to be said though, that the preview mentions this boost producing inconsistent results with a 5% spread.

Not everyone has a week, let alone has the card until release day. Could be a loaner card, could be a "oh, a pc on the side of a road" test... who knows what.


Anyways, only fanboys flail around at numbers before release day so its not like it really matters.

[Lanek]

Limited time?? It's a WHOLE WEEK till NDA lifts and you say not enough time?


That graph is just a graphical representation of the number posted by pcinlife or some other chinese site late January/early February. Obvious fake is obvious.


Haha, Fuad is adorable when he tries to play the concerned reviewer.

It has to be said though, that the preview mentions this boost producing inconsistent results with a 5% spread.

I agree or not, but if Fuad is not jumping around saying: " Nvidia is a killer, Nvidia kill all, Nvidia make me a child " .... this dont look good lol .

[Vardant]

Haha, Fuad is adorable when he tries to play the concerned reviewer.

It wasn't written by him.

[SKYMTL]

It has to be said though, that the preview mentions this boost producing inconsistent results with a 5% spread.

What would you want:

A) A technology that throttles clocks (ie: AMD's PowerTune) to ensure a given TDP is met.

B) A technology that has been given enough headroom so it increases clocks to ensure an ASIC or CPU always stays at or near a given TDP. A la Intel Turbo Boost.

I know which one I would choose if the rumors are correct.

[Lanek]

What would you want:

A) A technology that throttles clocks (ie: AMD's PowerTune) to ensure a given TDP is met.

B) A technology that has been given enough headroom so it increases clocks to ensure an ASIC always stays at or near a given TDP.

I know which one I would choose if the rumors are correct.

AMD dont throttle anything down with Powertune, even on 6990 .... Powertune and the turbo boost are absolutely not the same and not aimed at the same thing .... In one case it is here for limit the TDP if needed, the other one is here for overclocking the card when it think it is possible or needed.

On the other hand, it will be needed to see how this boost work in details for gaming, instead of just benchmark: If the card is able to OC to 1100mhz under a 2 min phase bench, is it the same when you are playing ? or do just play at 1006mhz ? Will you see the same fps or is it just boosting benchmark score ? what happend when your card is going high in temps after 1hour of gaming ?

The reported graph for TDP show a strange thing, each 3Dmark GT test start high.. ( max...) and go down as the test is going, if you compare with framerate and the load given on the test ( each test start at a low level of charge increasing as it goes to the end, easy to check with fps, as you start high, and end with low fps ), here the tdp decrease from 50W from the start of the bench and the end ( during the test )... does the bench start with 1100mhz? and go back to 1006 then ?... is the difference is really of 50W? if you compare with the 7970 curve, the curve increae in each test, the nvidia decrease in each test.


IF the Turbo boost was based on TDP you should see it going to his max limit and trying to stay there, not decreasing it. ( it will not be a flatline, but it will not look like this )


Indeed this is a nice feature, but im not sure the impact is yet exactly what we want it is. Same goes for suround ? can we compare 3 monitors running at full speed ? and 2 at half speed and the main at full speed ?
( what this? we are not able to use 3 monitors on one card at full speed, so we use 2 at half and 1 ? )

( You are testing the card, so you can try a little test: increase the vcore and let stock clock, then run 3Dmark 11, read the increase in TDP and check the difference.. )

[SKYMTL]

AMD dont throttle anything down with Powertune, even on 6990 .... Powertune and the turbo boost are absolutely not the same and not aimed at the same thing .... In one case it is here for limit the TDP if needed, the other one is here for overclocking the card when it think it is possible or needed.

PowerTune absolutely can throttle some results. Its entire point is to downlock the ASIC if TDP is surpassed. You are right though: PowerTune is the exact opposite of Turbo Boost. Turbo is meant to INCREASE performance while PowerTune is meant to DECREASE it if necessary.

[LordEC911]

PowerTune absolutely can throttle some results. Its entire point is to downlock the ASIC if TDP is surpassed. You are right though: PowerTune is the exact opposite of Turbo Boost. Turbo is meant to INCREASE performance while PowerTune is meant to DECREASE it if necessary.

Wow... really?

One allows the ASIC to be clocked as high as possible but makes certain it stays within TDP limits and gives consistent performance across the vast majority of situations.
The other keeps the base clock relatively low to make certain it stays within the TDP limits in the outlier situations and tries to dynamically change clocks when not in those situations.

[SKYMTL]

Wow... really?

One allows the ASIC to be clocked as high as possible but makes certain it stays within TDP limits and gives consistent performance across the vast majority of situations.
The other keeps the base clock relatively low to make certain it stays within the TDP limits in the outlier situations and tries to dynamically change clocks when not in those situations.

Glass half empty kinda guy, aren't ya?

[Lanek]

PowerTune absolutely can throttle some results. Its entire point is to downlock the ASIC if TDP is surpassed. You are right though: PowerTune is the exact opposite of Turbo Boost. Turbo is meant to INCREASE performance while PowerTune is meant to DECREASE it if necessary.

Please... outside Furmark ( hpefully ) this was constated only in Metro benchmark... ( in general you will end with more fps in the game instead of the bench, who is really hardcore ).. push the slider to +20% and problem is solved. But this was not the point.. anyway.