Any notion of how long until we'll see a 6 GB version of the GTX 780? How long after launch before the GTX 680 got the 4 GB version?
How fast is Tahiti in CUDA?
You know, the language that dominates the HPC market?
OpenCL is a non factor, it's only used because it's the only way to compare and even then it's a worthless comparison.
Not sure what your infatuation with team red is? Idc it's only useful to compare and show how absurd the pricing is. I don't stick with a company when they start gouging, and I'll choose the higher price/performance when I'm buying. It just happens NV is gouging at epic levels and their fanboys & shills are desperate to portray it as nothing unusual.
What did people EXPECT nvidia to do?
$1000 ~ Titan
$650 ~ GTX 780
$400-450 ~ GTX 770 (GTX 680 rebranded right?)
$350 ~ GTX 760 (GTX 670 rebranded? not sure if this has been confirmed)
I really don't see any other way Nvidia could have priced their cards other than how they did.
I would say that given this is a consumer card CUDA is not important and openCL is more so. CUDA is Nvidia's own so its going to be better.
This is why people can bitcoin mine with AMD and not Nvidia. Consumers will mine.
I think people forget that Pro card features are useless for consumers. Who wants to pay for CUDA when they want to game/mine
Firestrike isn't a good bench for Nvidia for some reason, maybe it's because the new 3DMark isn't very popular because it sucks unless you buy it.
I was hoping Nvidia wouldn't gouge prices, at $650 it's just ridiculous.
I still haven't kept a card I bought for over $300 (sold my 7970 and 680).
That being said, everyone keeps going on about price/perf here. However, if you go elsewhere, it's about perf and features. When you play competitively, price/perf doesn't matter if you don't have the perf.
I'm beginning to understand why AMD isn't as favorable as Nvidia for competitive gamers. One, it doesn't have lightboost. Secondly, less microstutter when running SLI (which is needed for 144 Hz gaming). Therein lies the reason why AMD can't gain foothold. The top gamers do need the extra advantages. And most everyone else just follow the top gamers because they want to play as well too.
The rest of us here at ATVC&G just can't justify spending $3000 on a system.
What did people EXPECT nvidia to do?
$1000 ~ Titan
$650 ~ GTX 780
$400-450 ~ GTX 770 (GTX 680 rebranded right?)
$350 ~ GTX 760 (GTX 670 rebranded? not sure if this has been confirmed)
I really don't see any other way Nvidia could have priced their cards other than how they did.
I was hoping Nvidia wouldn't gouge prices, at $650 it's just ridiculous.
I still haven't kept a card I bought for over $300 (sold my 7970 and 680).
That being said, everyone keeps going on about price/perf here. However, if you go elsewhere, it's about perf and features. When you play competitively, price/perf doesn't matter if you don't have the perf.
I'm beginning to understand why AMD isn't as favorable as Nvidia for competitive gamers. One, it doesn't have lightboost. Secondly, less microstutter when running SLI (which is needed for 144 Hz gaming). Therein lies the reason why AMD can't gain foothold. The top gamers do need the extra advantages. And most everyone else just follow the top gamers because they want to play as well too.
The rest of us here at ATVC&G just can't justify spending $3000 on a system.
Well you'd be wrong, just like you were wrong about Titan which is selling incredibly well for a 1K card.
AMD can't even run CUDA so of course it's going to be "better"
You can mine with Nvidia, it's just not as fast because of how the code was written which is SP anyways.
I think people who can use CUDA would laugh at mining, $2.50 a day is what you get mining per card, what do you think people who code in CUDA can make a day buddy?
However the additional software stuff - nvidia experience and the auto video recording, that is great as it doesn't need a 780GTX.
Pro gaming isnt a market. Wannabe Pro maybe. I cant think of any pro games that you cant max out 250fps on a single 7970 GPU.
The competition for AMD products are GK-104 based to me -- GK-110 are in a class of their own.
Yet again. You have no idea the Titan sales figures. Just Nvidia hyperbole.
Also what pro wants a consumer card to code for CUDA? If you make serious money you use serious tools. Not gaming cards. These people are going to be a smaller number than the "enthusiasts" dropping $1000 for a Titan.
reviewers have been measured in their accolades for GTX 780. quite a few have mentioned HD 7970 Ghz's value proposition in the GTX 780 review conclusions. That in itself is a indication that reviewers see the current pricing as unhealthy for the market, though its extremely good for Nvidia's margins.
The last time AMD were badly behind in performance was the Geforce 8800 GTX /HD 2900XT gen. The generation after that brought the most cut-throat competition and price wars ever seen between these 2 fierce competitors. Hopefully AMD can bring that kind of competition back. That would benefit all consumers in general, irrespective of which brand they prefer.
They should have priced the Titan at $750 or something. The Titan is ridiculously overpriced.
I said competitive, not pro. Pros get sponsored. OTOH, plenty of people still want to play competitively. And you can't max out BF3 on a single card, for one, without sacrificing a lot of detail.
You're also still missing lightboost on a 7970.