News - ASUS and Gigabyte GeForce GTX 900 series cards seen listed

Quote:

---

Also some interesting 3DMark performance predictions are made.

---

Read more.

Nvidia going to pull another GTX680 stunt, cheap cards released overpriced, then bring the big guns out five months later, won't sucker me in this time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raven1001

Nvidia going to pull another GTX680 stunt, cheap cards released overpriced, then bring the big guns out five months later, won't sucker me in this time.

---

My thoughts exactly. Looks like single card 4K gaming is another generation away... still. Had high hopes for the Maxwell GPUs.

It does seem that these are likley more of a 'reduced power consumption' version of the high end 7xx series than anything else based on this 3d mark table. Cuda performance could be slightly higher though.

I do like the increased ram to 4GB though, could mean we get an 8GB titan....or I might be able to get away with a cheaper 980 with 4GB... I'm more interested in gpu rendering so the more ram the better :)

I never understand the reasoning behind naming schemes. Wouldn't it appear better to release a new generation under a new noclamature? As it sits now then, the Maxwell revision will be the new naming scheme; although I guess that's their reasoning is most people will see a new name and immediately think "entirely new product".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robb213

I never understand the reasoning behind naming schemes. Wouldn't it appear better to release a new generation under a new noclamature? As it sits now then, the Maxwell revision will be the new naming scheme; although I guess that's their reasoning is most people will see a new name and immediately think "entirely new product".

---

But this is an entirely new product. :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kalniel

But this is an entirely new product. :/

---

almost new :p
Some of the lower end 7xx series are maxwell, the 750 for example.

Think I'll stick to 770 sli for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

almost new :p
Some of the lower end 7xx series are maxwell, the 750 for example.

---

The 750s are GM107 chips. These are GM104. Unless you'd also say that all the Intel Core x series are the same thing because they're based on the Core architecture going back over 5 years? :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robb213

I never understand the reasoning behind naming schemes.

---

That's because there isn't any reasoning! With process technology stuck at 28nm for more than two years, they just rename & rebrand existing products, so they can give the perception of having 'new' products...it's just marketing. Mind you, AMD are just as bad, their 280X was pretty much just a rebranded 7970 Ghz Edition card. At least the upcoming 900 cards from Nvidia is based on a different GPU architecture. So in that sense its 'new' :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kalniel

The 750s are GM107 chips. These are GM104. Unless you'd also say that all the Intel Core x series are the same thing because they're based on the Core architecture going back over 5 years? :p

---

they're still under the 'maxwell' branding because they are based off that architecture, it's more accurate for you to argue i3 versus i5 and i7 in the same core x series. Same underlying architecture, different features enabled/disabled to fit within price constraints. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

they're still under the 'maxwell' branding because they are based off that architecture, it's more accurate for you to argue i3 versus i5 and i7 in the same core x series. Same underlying architecture, different features enabled/disabled to fit within price constraints. :p

---

And I would - if you release a core i3, and then later release a core i7, it's clearly a new chip! You don't say 'well, it's based on the same arch as the core i3 so it should be called a core i3 as well'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kalniel

And I would - if you release a core i3, and then later release a core i7, it's clearly a new chip! You don't say 'well, it's based on the same arch as the core i3 so it should be called a core i3 as well'.

---

but we're not on about branding for marketing purposes, we're on about the architecture, the 750 is still termed as maxwell (there are keplar versions too mind iirc) and your own post proved it... note the GM part of the code, the keplar cards are GK. The '750' branding shows it's relative performance position in the same way as the i3 does against i5/i7. The i3/i5/i7 can all fall under the same architecture, haswell/sandybridge/ivybridge etc

I think I've lost track of what you're trying to say.

The base architecture of the 980 is called Maxwell. The chip is called GM104. This is a new product and new chip. This release cycle determines that it's a 900 series GPU, and the 80 denotes it's the near top end of the performance scale for this release cycle.

And I have to say that (from an ease of comparison perspective) renaming parts into the new schemes make sense. How is someone supposed to easily determine performance hierarchy between say a 7970, r9 290 and r10 290 if only new chips get new names? It's not like (very limited cases of fraud notwithstanding) nvidia are trying to hide the fact that it's the same architecture

Marketing, crowding the price points; someone pointed out the thinly veiled 'bait and switch' con retailers use. "Highball" technique common in sales, too. cheaper product introduced at inflated prices. All of these seem to apply,here. But the bottom line is always is what i wait for. Bang for buck. Will it deliver? Have to be able to put a leash on my desire to get the hottest new product as soon as possible. I have always fared better in terms of bang for buck by waiting. Sometimes, I just cant seem to , though, despite what common sense indicates.