Page 132 of 143 FirstFirst ... 3282122129130131132133134135142 ... LastLast
Results 3,276 to 3,300 of 3567

Thread: Kepler Nvidia GeForce GTX 780

  1. #3276
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    338
    for this performance level is 3GB pretty enough

  2. #3277
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    Quote Originally Posted by paulbagz View Post
    3GB might be a bit of a downer.

    Here's hoping non-ref cards have 6GB etc.

    -PB
    Really? You need more? What for?
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  3. #3278
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by PedantOne View Post
    for this performance level is 3GB pretty enough


    We'll see what is going to happen with next gen console ports. They will use a lot more memory for graphics than now. And if you have a high end PC you'll want to get higher levels of AA etc on top of that, which means even more memory.
    Asus Z87 Deluxe, 4770K,Noctua NH-D14, Crucial 16 GB DDR3-1600, Geforce Titan, ASUS DRW-24B3ST, Crucial M500 960GB, Crucial M4 256GB, 3 X Seagate 4TB, Lamptron FC5 V2 Fancontroller, Noctua Casefans, Antec P183 Black, Asus Essence STX, Corsair AX860i, Corsair SP2500 speakers, Logitech Illuminated Keyboard, Win7 Home Pro 64 bit + Win 8.1 Home 64 bit Dual boot, ASUS VG278H

  4. #3279
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,972
    one year and half, for get 4Tflops and got a card with the same spec of the 7970 .. damn. This card look like a copy cat on paper of the 7970 ...

    - 384bits / 3gb
    - Same SP performance
    - nearly the same core speed of the 7970 ( 900 vs 925mhz))

    12.5% more SP ... 17-20% more performance.
    Last edited by Lanek; 05-18-2013 at 09:55 AM.
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  5. #3280
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North Queensland Australia
    Posts
    1,445
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    Really? You need more? What for?
    Well seeing as I've never gone past 1080p@120hz and I'm pushing for 1440p@120hz will 3GB be enough?

    -PB
    -Project Sakura-
    Intel i7 860 @ 4.0Ghz, Asus Maximus III Formula, 8GB G-Skill Ripjaws X F3 (@ 1600Mhz), 2x GTX 295 Quad SLI
    2x 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 RAID 0, OCZ ZX 1000W, NZXT Phantom (Pink), Dell SX2210T Touch Screen, Windows 8.1 Pro

    Koolance RP-401X2 1.1 (w/ Swiftech MCP35X), XSPC EX420, XSPC X-Flow 240, DT Sniper, EK-FC 295s (w/ RAM Blocks), Enzotech M3F Mosfet+NB/SB

  6. #3281
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    421
    Quote Originally Posted by paulbagz View Post
    Well seeing as I've never gone past 1080p@120hz and I'm pushing for 1440p@120hz will 3GB be enough?

    -PB
    for console ports obviously and basically any other current unmodded games yes it will be heaps since as far as i know there is still no games that make good use of a 64bit engine
    games still use ~1-3g system ram just as they did several ago with small levels or on the fly loading of low quality textures
    farcry 1 used more ram than farcry 3 although farcry 3 does use more gpu mem

    but as mentioned above hopefully new consoles will force things to change for the better
    TJ08-EW 6700k@4.7 1.375v - Z170-GENE - 2x8g 3866 16-16-16 - 1070@ 2088\9500MHz -Samsung 830 64G, Sandisk Ultra II 960G, WD Green 3tb - Seasonic XP1050 - Dell U2713 - Pioneer Todoroki 5.1 Apogee Drive II - EK VGA-HF Supreme - Phobia 200mm Rad - Silverstone AP181 Project Darkling
    3770k vs 6700k RAM Scaling, HT vs RAM, Arma III CPU vs RAM, Thief CPU vs RAM

  7. #3282
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    872
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanek View Post
    one year and half, for get 4Tflops and got a card with the same spec of the 7970 .. damn. This card look like a copy cat on paper of the 7970 ...

    - 384bits / 3gb
    - Same SP performance
    - nearly the same core speed of the 7970 ( 900 vs 925mhz))

    12.5% more SP ... 17-20% more performance.
    Some day NVIDIA will catch up to AMD's superior tech Lanek, maybe in our life times. Intel has almost caught up to the Bulldozer, if NVIDIA works really hard and hires some of AMD's cast off engineers, they too may triumph. (by "triumph" I mean "almost catch up"- they could never be expected to equal AMD!)

    Until then we'll all keep buying our 7970s and Bulldozers, and thinking about the world that might have been if AMD had any competition.
    Intel 990x/Corsair H80 /Asus Rampage III
    Coolermaster HAF932 case
    Patriot 3 X 2GB
    EVGA GTX Titan SC
    Dell 3008

  8. #3283
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    Some day NVIDIA will catch up to AMD's superior tech Lanek, maybe in our life times. Intel has almost caught up to the Bulldozer, if NVIDIA works really hard and hires some of AMD's cast off engineers, they too may triumph. (by "triumph" I mean "almost catch up"- they could never be expected to equal AMD!)

    Until then we'll all keep buying our 7970s and Bulldozers, and thinking about the world that might have been if AMD had any competition.
    Are you drunk ? or should i say " do you was drunk when you have write this ?
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  9. #3284
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    872
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanek View Post
    Are you drunk ? or should i say " do you was drunk when you have write this ?
    Nope, don't drink much.

    My point was the 780 will not be a "copy cat of the 7970".

    The 7970 was AMDs flagship part in 2012. The 780 will be NVIDIA's 2nd, and possibly 3rd, tier part in 2013.

    My guess is the 780 will be quieter, cooler, and have a far superior stock HSF.

    The 780 will launch with CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision, forced ambient occlusion, FXAA/TXAA, adaptive vsynch, and superior multi GPU drivers.

    So, while I have a GHz 7970 in one of my rigs and like it a lot, and think it was the best deal I've ever gotten on a high end card, the 780 doesn't look to be a "copy cat" of it a year and a half later as you said.

    If both cards were priced the same, there wouldn't be many 7970s sold. And that is the problem. AMD needs to take my advice and start selling a closed loop water cooled 7970 if 7970s are what they plan on selling the rest of the year.

    Because if they throw old school 7970s and 7990s up against Titans, 780s, 690s,and 770s, my hunch is it's going to be a blood bath this summer for AMD. If they don't have 8970s to sell they better come up with something.
    Intel 990x/Corsair H80 /Asus Rampage III
    Coolermaster HAF932 case
    Patriot 3 X 2GB
    EVGA GTX Titan SC
    Dell 3008

  10. #3285
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanek View Post
    one year and half, for get 4Tflops and got a card with the same spec of the 7970 .. damn. This card look like a copy cat on paper of the 7970 ...

    - 384bits / 3gb
    - Same SP performance
    - nearly the same core speed of the 7970 ( 900 vs 925mhz))

    12.5% more SP ... 17-20% more performance.
    You have to admit your words are at the same time, trying to slam on Nvidia and put AMD in a better light.

    Lets do the same thing with AMD 7970.

    Sure this card cut down to hell is "only" 25 percent faster than a standard 7970, but fully enabled(2880 shaders) this chip is somewhere around 40 percent faster that a 7970 ghz edition(I think the reviews complilation got an average of 33% with one cluster disabled) or 50 percent faster than 7970.

    Guess what the bigger the chip gets, the harder it is to get good yields and get everything enabled
    Core i7 920@ 4.66ghz(H2O)
    6gb OCZ platinum
    4870x2 + 4890 in Trifire
    2*640 WD Blacks
    750GB Seagate.

  11. #3286
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    Quote Originally Posted by paulbagz View Post
    Well seeing as I've never gone past 1080p@120hz and I'm pushing for 1440p@120hz will 3GB be enough?
    Absolutely. Even with tons of mods.

    And while we can complain about so-called console ports, most games released for PC use their own set of larger textures.
    Not to mention that no companies out there are going to shoot themselves in the foot by releasing a game that requires more VRAM than high-end cards can offer.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  12. #3287
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    France - Bx
    Posts
    2,601

  13. #3288
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North Queensland Australia
    Posts
    1,445
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    Absolutely. Even with tons of mods.

    And while we can complain about so-called console ports, most games released for PC use their own set of larger textures.
    Not to mention that no companies out there are going to shoot themselves in the foot by releasing a game that requires more VRAM than high-end cards can offer.
    Thanks for the info, see I didn't know as I'm coming from Core2 + 480s on a 1080p monitor and now heading towards bigger and brighter things.

    I haven't had the money nor the tech to play with things that a lot of people have been using for the better part of the last 3 years.

    -PB
    -Project Sakura-
    Intel i7 860 @ 4.0Ghz, Asus Maximus III Formula, 8GB G-Skill Ripjaws X F3 (@ 1600Mhz), 2x GTX 295 Quad SLI
    2x 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 RAID 0, OCZ ZX 1000W, NZXT Phantom (Pink), Dell SX2210T Touch Screen, Windows 8.1 Pro

    Koolance RP-401X2 1.1 (w/ Swiftech MCP35X), XSPC EX420, XSPC X-Flow 240, DT Sniper, EK-FC 295s (w/ RAM Blocks), Enzotech M3F Mosfet+NB/SB

  14. #3289
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by zalbard View Post
    Absolutely. Even with tons of mods.

    And while we can complain about so-called console ports, most games released for PC use their own set of larger textures.
    Not to mention that no companies out there are going to shoot themselves in the foot by releasing a game that requires more VRAM than high-end cards can offer.
    Quoted for truth, taking up over 3GB in actual usage (not allocation) is tough and requires more horsepower than most people buy. I've had 2560x1600 for 4 years and a few months, just moved to 120hz 2560x1440 now (though I'll probably run it at 96hz), and VRAM has never been an issue, performance on the other hand ...

  15. #3290
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post
    You have to admit your words are at the same time, trying to slam on Nvidia and put AMD in a better light.

    Lets do the same thing with AMD 7970.

    Sure this card cut down to hell is "only" 25 percent faster than a standard 7970, but fully enabled(2880 shaders) this chip is somewhere around 40 percent faster that a 7970 ghz edition(I think the reviews complilation got an average of 33% with one cluster disabled) or 50 percent faster than 7970.

    Guess what the bigger the chip gets, the harder it is to get good yields and get everything enabled
    Speaking of shaders, I find that the GCN uarch is not very optimized at high shader count. Compare 7870 and 7970 for example. The performance increase isn't much relative to the amount of shader power added. I'm not sure about current drivers though, it has been a while since I compared the 7870 and 7970. Sorry for the OT.
    Last edited by blindbox; 05-19-2013 at 04:03 AM. Reason: Removed the hyperbole

  16. #3291
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Spain, EU
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by blindbox View Post
    Speaking of shaders, I find that the GCN uarch is not very optimized at high shader count. Compare 7870 and 7970 for example. The performance increase isn't much relative to the amount of shader power added. I'm not sure about current drivers though, it has been a while since I compared the 7870 and 7970. Sorry for the OT.
    I compared them some weeks ago, 7970 is a good ~50% faster than 7870 for a 60% increase in shader count. The problem is that the increase in power consumption is huge, specially when overclocked and/or overvolted. 7970 is a lot less efficient than 7870.
    Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)


    Quote Originally Posted by PerryR, on John Fruehe (JF-AMD) View Post
    Pretty much. Plus, he's here voluntarily.

  17. #3292
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by nossy23 View Post
    We'll see what is going to happen with next gen console ports. They will use a lot more memory for graphics than now. And if you have a high end PC you'll want to get higher levels of AA etc on top of that, which means even more memory.
    No, it won't.

    Once DX11 gets instituted into consoles, you will see a lowering of memory requirements as more developers will begin taking advantage of the API's native memory addressing space and other tools which are specifically designed to lower memory requirements.

    The reason why we see ballooning memory requirements these days is due to the inherent inefficiencies of porting DX9-centric console games with their outdated memory management models over into the PC space.

    As for 1440P @ 120Hz, don't expect any widespread availability of quality screens like that at moderately accessible price (ie; under the $1000 mark) for the next 14 months or so, long after Maxwell arrives. And plus, the refresh rate doesn't really matter in terms of memory usage unless you run 3D Vision or whatever AMD calls their stereo 3D these days.
    Last edited by SKYMTL; 05-19-2013 at 07:56 AM.

  18. #3293

  19. #3294
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,972
    Lol they contradict themselves totally between the article and this shot ...

    The GTX 780 would be the flagship product of the 700 series and would be based on a cut down version of the GK110 core codenamed “GK110-300-A2″. This core would have 2304 cores and a 3 GB GDDR5 memory which would operate along a 320/384-bit memory interface. The core is maintained at 863 MHz with Turbo boost of 902 MHz while the memory operates at the reference 1502 MHz or 6 GHz effective clock speed.

    he pricing is suggested around the 500-600, some are pointing out to a $799 mark for GeForce GTX 780
    CPU: - I7 4930K (EK Supremacy )
    GPU: - 2x AMD HD7970 flashed GHZ bios ( EK Acetal Nickel Waterblock H2o)
    Motherboard: Asus x79 Deluxe
    RAM: G-skill Ares C9 2133mhz 16GB
    Main Storage: Samsung 840EVO 500GB / 2x Crucial RealSSD C300 Raid0

  20. #3295
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    588
    600$ I hope so
    WOOOOOF

  21. #3296
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,970


    For reference their Titan is listed at $1055 for the superclock. Hopefully it is just a preorder high price.

  22. #3297
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Olivon View Post
    Interesting, the bandwidths between the two GPU-Z screenshots differ by 0.1 GB/s. Maybe the memory on the first one is clocked at 1753 MHz.
    Quote Originally Posted by defect9 View Post
    Will the 9000 series will be named Pen Island?
    Quote Originally Posted by eXa View Post
    GTX 650 Ti Ghz edition?

  23. #3298
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,970
    From the past... 680 pre-order @ $560 from same vendor. So, maybe there's a chance of 599 MSRP yet for 780...


  24. #3299
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,264
    Had my fingers crossed for a $499-549 USD MSRP but with the lack of other competitive options in that bracket I doubt this will happen... Until Maxwell I guess!
    Feedanator 7.0
    CASE:R5|PSU:850G2|CPU:i7 6850K|MB:x99 Ultra|RAM:8x4 2666|GPU:980TI|SSD:BPX256/Evo500|SOUND:2i4/HS8
    LCD:XB271HU|OS:Win10|INPUT:G900/K70 |HS/F:H115i

  25. #3300
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,554
    Quote Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
    As for 1440P @ 120Hz, don't expect any widespread availability of quality screens like that at moderately accessible price (ie; under the $1000 mark) for the next 14 months or so, long after Maxwell arrives.
    You can buy a QNIX QX2710 for $300 now.

Page 132 of 143 FirstFirst ... 3282122129130131132133134135142 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •