Read more.The first enthusiast Maxwell GPU enters the fray.
Read more.The first enthusiast Maxwell GPU enters the fray.
Well done nV I Have now XFX DD 7970GHz ED and waiting for ATI R390X 20nm
ZEN 3700X, HeroVI | 32GB 3800MHz CL16 | RTX 3080 OC/UV | XFX 760 PSU | 10Bit 27" IIyama 1440p FS | 1TB NVMe Sammie, 2xSamie 850 512GB | SB-AE7+Audio-Technica ATH-AD1000X | DeathStalker, Roccat Nyth
I had been wondering what would be the better option, a GTX 780 Ti or a GTX 980 and preliminary numbers do put the GTX 980 in a favorable light. While it does have lower DP performance due to ratio drop, overall it is quite impressive in pretty much all metrics. So, bring on the multitude of aftermarket cards
The power consumption chart is unbelievable, getting that much performance (that too better than the 780ti) with the power consumption like this is what a gaming PC definitely needs. Nvidia definitely takes the No.1 spot by this innovation.
That's a juicy snippet of infoOriginally Posted by hexus
I've used Nvidia for over 10 years and power isn't a concern over framerates and how the game looks. Looks like i'll be flipping to 390x as it will crush anything Nvidia have to offer.
On another point - I remember having 2 machines side by side years back and watching Morrowind on Nvidia and an AMD card.... the water looked awesome on the AMD and ****ty on the Nvidia... would be interesting to do side by side again!
So, am I reading this right and if you were in the market for a 900 series graphics card then you'd be better to wait 'n' see until the more efficient chips are available, (980Ti anyone?)
By the way, folks keep mentioning an R390 as AMD's reply - is this wishful thinking or something genuinely "coming soon"?
That said, I'm pretty impressed by the 980's power/performance. While I like my current OC'd 7970, the s.o.b. is pretty vocal when you start to push it - not something that I've seen from my previous exclusively-NVidia cards. Unfortunately, I suspect that anything from AMD will not be able to match that efficiency (or quiet even).
I think you're remembering wrong. Pixel shaded (1.3) water for Morrowind was only available on the nVidia geforce 3 ti cards. AMD and other nVidia cards had to make do with normal textured water on Morrowind. The code was actually developed by nVidia and given to Bethesda.
The 980 and 970 are pretty efficient by all accounts. The 20nm process is likely to be used more for squeezing more performance into an economically viable die size than power efficiency. But if performance is what you're after I'd definitely wait for the 980ti or whatever they call it.
Genuinely coming soon, but I'm not expecting huge fireworks.By the way, folks keep mentioning an R390 as AMD's reply - is this wishful thinking or something genuinely "coming soon"?
Looks a good gaming GPU indeed.
However,people do need to release that both the GK110 and Hawaii have a massive DP advantage over the GM204 and together with the higher bandwidth both the former GPUs are used for commercial and supercomputer usage too,and it means added power consumption,added heat and larger chips. This is one of the reasons the GM204 can be better with regards to die size and power consumption,and means it can boost higher too before throttling and that is on top of any uarch improvements. Yet,review sites are comparing the GM204 and GK110 and Hawaii chips and uarchs (not performance or power consumption) without realising the earlier two are somewhat handicapped due to their dual nature. Adding those DP transistors has a side effect. A massive one.
This is why a GK110 is double the size intransistors of a GK104,and is nearly 90% bigger in area for only a 50% improvement in performance:
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeF...rfrel_2560.gif
Its why the GK110 tended to have worse performance/watt and performance/mm2 than the GK104 and the same will follow with the GM200 against the GM200.
PS:
The R9 39X GPU will be designed for significant DP performance,so even if AMD caught up in GCN efficiency in general,its still going to have worse performance/watt.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 19-09-2014 at 10:19 AM.
cptwhite_uk (19-09-2014)
So 980 or Titan if buying in the next month?
On the AMD thing. Been burned by their poor drivers too many times in the past to risk this sort of cash again.. NV just works and always does is my experience
I think the drivers are fine for both companies under Windows(Linux is not so great for performance drivers with AMD though) - I know like a dozen mates who have AMD and Nvidia cards from the last three years who are fine.
But moving on,the GTX980 if you are a gamer. Titan Black has better DP performance,so unless you really need it,its pointless. If you do there should be a GM200 out in a few months I suspect.
I had a quick looksy at the 4K gaming benchmarks and the GTX980 does not appear slower(or there is not much in it). OTH,the Titan Blacks are probably clocked much lower,so could push ahead when overclocked??
The thing is we still have not seen a GM200 yet,and if say that comes out in three months,you might regret any purchase now especially since you want to stay with Nvidia.
Well, GM104 brings HDMI 2.0 and from glancing at the reviews a guarantee of 3xDP plus being able to drive tiled 4K displays with one port. So for 3x4K, you don't want GK110. Now the thing is, none of these choices (even in SLI) can really drive 11520 x 2160 at any decent framerate.
very interesting review and that power saving, seems that it cvould run in systems running <500 wt quality psu's!
would it be worth getting a gtx 970 to replace a R9 280X 3 gig card from ATI which i have now?? can't afford to spend £500 on a GPU. i won't be 4k gaming either. yet.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)