54.4% Margins - Nvidia

[Grooveriding]

Plenty of 680s can do 7000 or close to it now. It does not make the difference you think, but it is better than a core OC. Looks like also another 75mhz on the core as well. So 770 is an overclocked 680 for $400. That is still a decent deal and will be a popular card. The 7970GE will find its self tying more than it wins now though.

Looking forward to seeing the 780 and whether it is $700 or $800. Lol....

 

[tviceman]

Plenty of 680s can do 7000 or close to it now. It does not make the difference you think, but it is better than a core OC. Looks like also another 75mhz on the core as well. So 770 is an overclocked 680 for $400. That is still a decent deal and will be a popular card. The 7970GE will find its self tying more than it wins now though.

Looking forward to seeing the 780 and whether it is $700 or $800. Lol....

If it overclocks better than a 680 then overall it's a better card than just getting a 680 and overclocking that. We'll soon see! I think Nvidia will be retarded if they price the gtx780 more than $200 more than the gtx770, and if the gtx770 comes in at $499 then Nvidia is retarded no matter what.

 

[wand3r3r]

Plenty of 680s can do 7000 or close to it now. It does not make the difference you think, but it is better than a core OC. Looks like also another 75mhz on the core as well. So 770 is an overclocked 680 for $400. That is still a decent deal and will be a popular card. The 7970GE will find its self tying more than it wins now though.

Looking forward to seeing the 780 and whether it is $700 or $800. Lol....

I disagree, it is supposedly only bumped up ~5%. It needs more than that to even tie the 7970GHz.

Granted that looks like a marketing slide so you need a bucketful of salt.

Edit. this is the wrong thread for this discussion anyway...

 

[f1sherman]

is that marketing slide for real?
comparing 7970GE to NV 3rd fastest, arguing future performance and making a point that 770 is 680 rebrand(!)

sure looks ridiculous enough to come from AMD

~5% higher perormance LMAO I'll bet my new guard dog that 770 is just as fast, and if you really want to split hair, proly an incy bit faster. We'll see...

Superior game bundle is a valid argument, but at this point in time Metro Last Light is probably more attractive

 

[wand3r3r]

is that marketing slide for real?
comparing 7970GE to NV 3rd fastest, arguing future performance and making a point that 770 is 680 rebrand(!)

sure looks ridiculous enough to come from AMD

~5% higher perormance LMAO I'll bet my new guard dog that 770 is just as fast, and if you really want to split hair, proly an incy bit faster. We'll see...

Superior game bundle is a valid argument, but at this point in time Metro Last Light is probably more attractive

Link to supposedly faster than 5%?

Speculate all you want, I just go off of numbers leaked or rumored.

The 780 is certainly going to be a reasonably amount slower than the titan. The titan is only ~<30% faster than the 7970 G. The 780 is rumored 20% more than the 680 so maybe 15-20% more than the GHz. It has to be faster than the 770, which is merely a 680 + 5%.

Of course these are based off of rumors, but it's still more evidence than you claiming numbers out of thin air.

Also, we'll see where the price settles. If the 780 is indeed say an outrageous $600+ than the 7970G will compete with the 770 which could possibly cost more and perform less if it's over $400 and 5% more than the 680.

 

[f1sherman]

Link to supposedly faster than 5%?

5'' above your response

Remember the past and you'll see that AMD's 5% is enough ground for my incy bit faster thesis.

 

[96Firebird]

~5% higher performance from a marketing slide is the same as a tie in real life.

 

[willomz]

As I said on the other thread, even the current 670 beats the 7970GE in Bioshock and Crysis 3 normally.

Now I'm sure AMD aren't actually lying, but it sounds like they have cherry picked benchmarks that put the 7970 in a good light. Certain levels in certain games, or a certain combination of settings.

 

[Leadbox]

As I said on the other thread, even the current 670 beats the 7970GE in Bioshock and Crysis 3 normally.

Now I'm sure AMD aren't actually lying, but it sounds like they have cherry picked benchmarks that put the 7970 in a good light. Certain levels in certain games, or a certain combination of settings.

No doubt there's a link or 2 you could provide to back this up?

 

[willomz]

No doubt:

Bioshock
http://www.techspot.com/review/655-bioshock-infinite-performance/page3.html

Crysis 3
http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page4.html

Now AMD specify 4xAA for Crysis 3, so let's have a look at that.

The 7970 does eek out a small lead at 4x (1.7%), although oddly it is behind at both 2x and 8x. However it's a bit of a moot point as neither card is really playable at 4x and above.

 

[wand3r3r]

As I said on the other thread, even the current 670 beats the 7970GE in Bioshock and Crysis 3 normally.

Now I'm sure AMD aren't actually lying, but it sounds like they have cherry picked benchmarks that put the 7970 in a good light. Certain levels in certain games, or a certain combination of settings.

The 7970 does eek out a small lead at 4x (1.7%), although oddly it is behind at both 2x and 8x. However it's a bit of a moot point as neither card is really playable at 4x and above.

In Crysis 3 a win is barely true, at 2560x1600 the 680, 670, 7970 GHz are all within a couple fps.
The 7970 G technically has 1 fps more than the 670 but it's essentially a tie.

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/642/bench/High_03.png

In Bioshock it's a slight win at 1600p.
670 41 vs. 39 7970g

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/655/bench/FPS_2560.png

Either way it's hardly beating anything. It's surprisingly close.

The AMD chart shows the bioshock as a tie between them.
Crysis 3 is shown to be considerably faster which doesn't jive with that single review shown.

Either way, your claim is embellishing the details, and not entirely so straightforward.

 

[Fx1]

In Crysis 3 a win is barely true, at 2560x1600 the 680, 670, 7970 GHz are all within a couple fps.
The 7970 G technically has 1 fps more than the 670 but it's essentially a tie.

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/642/bench/High_03.png

In Bioshock it's a slight win at 1600p.
670 41 vs. 39 7970g

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/655/bench/FPS_2560.png

Either way it's hardly beating anything. It's surprisingly close.

The AMD chart shows the bioshock as a tie between them.
Crysis 3 is shown to be considerably faster which doesn't jive with that single review shown.

Either way, your claim is embellishing the details, and not entirely so straightforward.

There are clearly issues with Crysis 3 engine also. 20-30FPS minimums even on 7970 CF and Titan just show that engine has problems. Not even 6 core CPU can fix it.

Id say that when its fixed or newer drivers deal with the problem another way then you will see the 7970 up with the 680 or faster and then 670 down below.

 

[willomz]

In Crysis 3 a win is barely true, at 2560x1600 the 680, 670, 7970 GHz are all within a couple fps.
..
In Bioshock it's a slight win at 1600p.
..
Either way, your claim is embellishing the details, and not entirely so straightforward.

The AMD chart is talking about 1080p where Nvidia tend to do better. Granted at 1600p the 7970 does do better due to the larger bus, etc. But AMD are talking about the mass market 1080p resolution.

 

[f1sherman]

No doubt there's a link or 2 you could provide to back this up?

here... 7950 keeps up nicely vs 650 Ti Boost :ninja:

 

[BallaTheFeared]

zug zug, what's the hash rate thou bro?

 

[f1sherman]

more than 50 Mhash/s??

 

[Leadbox]

here... 7950 keeps up nicely vs 650 Ti Boost :ninja:

.
Thx, one of the titles he listed is a loss though so I'm not sure it backs up his point quite so well

 

[Rvenger]

If AMD fixes some driver quirks they can win Bioshock and Crysis 3. The hardware is capable. June/July driver release can't come sooner.

 

[exar333]

Complete troll thread is that is fully off the rails.

Fact - Nvidia tries to make $$$.

Fact - Nvidia making money is GOOD for us gamers because that means they may still be around, unlike 3DFX, etc.

Fact - competition is good

Fact - NV and AMD are pretty close these days in performance

Fact - there is halo pricing (always has been) in graphics, CPUs, etc. get over it.

 

[5150Joker]

Many people can afford a Titan but who wants to really buy one?

$1k GPU will be near worthless soon as 20nm GPU's arrive. Its like throwing money down the toilet.

Super premium GPU's become obsolete within 12-18 months because of process shrinks. Titan should have been released with the 680 GTX and then it would have had a good life and maybe a better purchase. But 20nm isnt far off and that means the purchase cant be justified.

You must have insider information with TSMC/NVIDIA/AMD to know precisely when 20nm GPUs will be released, their cost and what performance they'll bring to make such a bold statement. Well either that or you're full of it.

Let's say 20nm GPU are released in the Jan-March 2014 time frame, that's plenty of time to have enjoyed a Titan and then sell it and upgrade again. There's no such thing as a GPU that doesn't depreciate quickly and if you want the best, you pay for it. Your constant whining about it won't change anything.

 

[Cerb]

When has there not been newer better hardware around the corner? You always pay more to have the best, than the added performance it brings over cheaper options, and within 1-2 HW generations, midrange parts will beat it. I can't think of a time when this was not true, going back as far as the socket 7 days, just by my own memory.

 

[RussianSensation]

And I think it is pathetic that instead of realizing AMDs failures in the market somebody would blame consumers and call them retarded.

$410 MSI TF 7970GE + Tomb Raider/Bioshock Infinite/Crysis 3/FC3 BD >>>>>>> MSI GTX680 = $479 with Metro Last Light

Faster at stock, faster overclocked + better game bundle + $60 cheaper + makes $ bitcoin mining. At high rez the 680 is consistently slower. People keep buying NV. Your explanation is what 30W power savings matters on high end gaming rigs? PhysX? CUDA? Or are people buying $480 videocards for WOW and SC2?

Oh and they will give you more free games. :awe:

Oh how awful this is for the consumers, more free awesome games, performance improving drivers, price drops. What a bad day for the graphics industry....Let's all cheer price stagnation of mid-range cards and the worst price increases in 1 generation from team NV. Never seen so many people in 1 generation diss free game bundles so much. I enjoyed mine with GTX470s. Thank you NV for providing me value during Fermi gen. :whiste:

here... 7950 keeps up nicely vs 650 Ti Boost :ninja:

Like GTX680 barely keeps up with HD7870 in Grid 2?
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/scree...04/Grid-2-Preview-Benchmarks-1080p-4xMSAA.png

or how HD7970GE is consistently faster than 680 in this review:
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...marked-4K-Resolutions/How-Current-Cards-Stack

HD7970GE is still faster than GTX680 and wins in a lot more games, which is why GTX770 at $399 with a 5-10% performance increase over GTX680 sounds reasonable.

As I said on the other thread, even the current 670 beats the 7970GE in Bioshock and Crysis 3 normally.

Nope.

Crysis 3, HD7970GE is faster than GTX680 TOP.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/graphics/nvidia-geforce-gtx-titan/17_crys3.png

Here is a May 8, 2013 review:

Crysis 3 - stock HD7970GE > GTX680 OC
http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Videocards/ares 2/test/c3 1920.jpg
http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Videocards/ares 2/test/c3 2560.jpg

Bioshock Infinite - GTX680 > HD7970GE but GTX680 OC is just 1 fps faster in minimums and ties in avg to HD7970 GE OC.
http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Videocards/ares 2/test/bi 1920.jpg
http://gamegpu.ru/images/stories/Test_GPU/Videocards/ares 2/test/bi 2560.jpg

You are looking at 1 fps difference. GTX670 would get beaten handily by HD7970GE in both of those games.

I'd like to see the 780 @ $500 and the 770 @ $350 forcing GHz to around $320 and the 7950 around $225, lolz.

2x GTX780s would trash a single Titan then. I don't think NV will want to egg face Titan's customers like that. On paper the GTX780 seems to be just 17-20% slower than Titan if it comes in with 384-bit bus and 2304 SPs. Also, knowing NV's GTX670/680 pricing for the last 12 months, why would they price GTX770 for $350 considering some of the cheapest after-market GTX680s are going for $470 (!) and people keep buying. NV realized this generation more than ever its customers will pay $70-100+ premium for the brand name. They have no incentive to drop the price to $349 for the 770.

 

[raghu78]

No doubt:

Bioshock
http://www.techspot.com/review/655-bioshock-infinite-performance/page3.html

Crysis 3
http://www.techspot.com/review/642-crysis-3-performance/page4.html

Now AMD specify 4xAA for Crysis 3, so let's have a look at that.

sites like techspot or guru3d are using the Bioshock in game benchmark which is not indicative of gameplay performance. check out techreport which does actual gameplay benchmarks. HD 7970 Ghz easily beats GTX 680.

http://techreport.com/review/24703/amd-radeon-hd-7990-graphics-card-reviewed/7

here is linus bioshock infinite gameplay benchmarks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6wUIThcpxM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMkhafTMPcc

HD 7950 OC edges ahead of GTX 670 OC. :whiste:

Crysis 3 performance is on par with GTX 680 and HD 7970 Ghz . depending on a particular review one of the cards can edge ahead. But they are mostly on par.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/amd-radeon-hd-7990-im-test/28/

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/03/12/crysis_3_video_card_performance_iq_review/3

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ils-Capture-based-Graphics-Performance-Test-5

 

[Keysplayr]

sites like techspot or guru3d are using the Bioshock in game benchmark which is not indicative of gameplay performance. check out techreport which does actual gameplay benchmarks. HD 7970 Ghz easily beats GTX 680.

http://techreport.com/review/24703/amd-radeon-hd-7990-graphics-card-reviewed/7

here is linus bioshock infinite gameplay benchmarks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6wUIThcpxM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMkhafTMPcc

HD 7950 OC edges ahead of GTX 670 OC. :whiste:

Crysis 3 performance is on par with GTX 680 and HD 7970 Ghz . depending on a particular review one of the cards can edge ahead. But they are mostly on par.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/amd-radeon-hd-7990-im-test/28/

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/03/12/crysis_3_video_card_performance_iq_review/3

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ils-Capture-based-Graphics-Performance-Test-5

Are you two going to be playing the cherry picking game much longer? LOL.

 

[Dribble]

$410 MSI TF 7970GE + Tomb Raider/Bioshock Infinite/Crysis 3/FC3 BD >>>>>>> MSI GTX680 = $479 with Metro Last Light

Faster at stock, faster overclocked + better game bundle + $60 cheaper + makes $ bitcoin mining. At high rez the 680 is consistently slower. People keep buying NV. Your explanation is what 30W power savings matters on high end gaming rigs? PhysX? CUDA? Or are people buying $480 videocards for WOW and SC2?

People buy what they know and what they trust. You really need something special to change that. Bundles and a little money not enough. Nvidia really is very reliable - they don't give many people a reason to switch. This is further backed up by all the little extras Nvidia have - not just physx, the new geforce experience for example is just brilliant - install game, open geforce experience, click optimize, job done - no fiddling with settings required.

Last time AMD had a card that was really worth switching for was the 5xxx, lots of people did switch but tbh they are less reliable - whatever the fanboys say AMD drivers are worse - so they haven't held on to those people as well.