I agree with the sentiment that if the slower card overall wins in 3D mk11, the benchmark is useless. It needs to reflect the real world, not be important unto itself.
RS is a straight shooter. I've been reading his posts for years, he certainly calls it like he sees it, and I've seen him praise Nvidia in the past too. I don't think any other poster here posts as many informative, information/benchmark backed posts than RS.
I would really like to go nvidia since one of the games I'm going to spend some time playing is borderlands 2, but the price/performance ratio just not as good as AMD's @ 1440p.
Danish prices ATM
GTX 670 ~$475
GTX 660 2Gb ~ $370
7950 ~$390
you actually think Borderlands 2 will use over 2gb of vram at 2560x1440? there is ZERO chance of that happening.Honestly, I don't see Borderlands 2 taxing GPU's on either side. Unless you want the Physx effects.
It may be a TWIMTBP title, but the difference is there is any at all will likely be something like 80fps for AMD vs. 90 fps for Nvidia. So, it won't matter at all in this title, and at 1440p the added VRAM on the 7950 may actually help it outperform nvidia in the game.
you actually think Borderlands 2 will use over 2gb of vram at 2560x1440? there is ZERO chance of that happening.
your post clearly refers to Borderlands 2 only though.Mainly referring to any other games the person might be playing.
lol, you cant be serious. have you been living in a cave?What kind of game is Borderlands 2? Is it an RPG or FPS?
Source?
Sea Islands taped out quite some time ago, we could see the first version as early as December.
VCE has already been tested and it works on desktop HD7000 series GPUs just as well as it does on GTX600 series for video transcoding - which is to say terrible, compared to native CPU for rendering quality or in regard to speed compared to QuickSync.
QuickSync = speed
CPU = quality
AMD/NV transcoding = very poor for speed and quality; in other words worthless in their current state.
Don't disagree with your speculation on GK-110 but where was it verbally confirmed to be a GeForce part?
GK110 is GK104 with a wider bus, more units and a few HPC-features. The difference between GF110 and GF114 was much bigger than this.
I'll see if I can find it later. It was at the end of the GK110 articles that came out when GK110 was announced. The comment went something like it will definiltey be a Geforce product, but Nvidia would evaluate the timing of release when full production begins, with professional markets likely getting the first batch of units.
Apoppin said:What about the GTX 780″?
There were a lot of questions left unanswered and this editor was able to get his question answered by a Nvidia official afterward. The question was naturally about the future GeForce GPU that would be based on the GK110 the video card using a 7.1 Billion transistor GPU. Of course, Nvidia doesnt discuss unreleased products, but it was made clear that there would be such a card after the demand for Tesla and Quadro were met.
You are way wrong on this. GK110 has way more HPC features than GF110 did. The difference between GK110 and GK104 is larger than GF110 and GF104 in almost every way possible. Features, abilities, die size, amount of shaders.
Honestly, I don't see Borderlands 2 taxing GPU's on either side. Unless you want the Physx effects.
Rumored specs on GK110 are nuts, with leaks from china suggesting its a massive die, nearly 600mm2. Its should be a VERY big jump in performance above gk104.
2013, looks like its going to be NV with the performance crown (at the expense of power use). Sea Islands so far does not look to be a massive increase above Tahiti, with ~25% more resources/die space only, so its unlikely going to be competing on raw performance.
Also we can understand why NV isn't promising anything for the consumer side until their HPC market demands are met.. i just doubt TSMC has the capability to produce on 28nm a gpu that massive with a decent yield*.
*Low yields are fine for HPC markets where NV can charge rediculous% markup prices.
wooo thx for the link, i have looking for this review for a long time.... :biggrin:
Rumored specs on GK110 are nuts, with leaks from china suggesting its a massive die, nearly 600mm2. Its should be a VERY big jump in performance above gk104.
2013, looks like its going to be NV with the performance crown (at the expense of power use). Sea Islands so far does not look to be a massive increase above Tahiti, with ~25% more resources/die space only, so its unlikely going to be competing on raw performance.
A couple thoughts of mine:
1) If the die is so massive, and NV is able to sell GTX680 for $500, why would they sell a GPU 2x larger for $500, if it has so much more performance? Unless 8970 gives them strong competition, NV has no incentive to price the 780 for $499. If it's 50%+ faster than a GK104 and has almost double the die size, and has the performance lead, NV can crank it to $649+. They did it before with GTX280 and even more for 8800GTX. The only reason NV dropped GK104 at $500 is because it's not really any faster than AMD's card. So they couldn't realistically charge much more. If NV has a substantially faster chip, they'll add the NV premium in no time -- they did in the past every single time they had a large lead. Now you may say well GTX480 and 580 stayed at $500 but remember AMD's cards were $370. If HD8970 is $550, GTX780 will be $650+.
2) 50% faster than GK104 and using 1080P as a yard stick starts to become questionable. At that level of performance, 1080P is no longer stressing the GPUs for most games (i.e., not every game will be like Crysis 3 or Metro Last Light).
At 2560x1600, HD7970 = GTX680 (TPU, Computerbase), HD7970 Ghz leads by 9% to 12%, depending on the source.
If 8970 has 2560 SPs, 48 ROPs and even higher clocks, 25-30% gain is possible. Suddenly, you are looking at 36% to 45% faster than a GTX680 at 1600P. GTX780 will probably win overall but at higher resolutions, it'll be close I bet.