GeForce Titan coming end of February

[SirPauly]

According to this:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/graphi..._Back_Market_Share_from_Intel_Nvidia_JPR.html

A while back is the last time ATI led by a meaningful margin...and that is when their high end cards cost MORE than $379. Around the time of G80, that changed.

It hasn't looked as good as before for AMD dGPU marketshare in a while:
http://www.techspot.com/news/47593-jpr-discrete-gpu-shipments-down-65-nvidia-gains-market-share.html

http://www.techspot.com/news/49946-discrete-gpu-shipments-down-in-q2-amd-regains-market-share.html

It's sat at about 40/60 AMD/Nvidia for a while it looks like.

Here is a link from AMD :

In fact, according to Mercury Research, AMD is now the market share leader for all discrete GPUs, and we intend to expand that lead.

http://blogs.amd.com/play/2010/08/06/amd-discrete-graphics-gpus-fusion-apu/

 

[thilanliyan]

Here is a link from AMD :

http://blogs.amd.com/play/2010/08/06/amd-discrete-graphics-gpus-fusion-apu/

According to this:
http://www.techspot.com/news/47593-jpr-discrete-gpu-shipments-down-65-nvidia-gains-market-share.html

At the end of 2010, it was 40/60 AMD/nV. Maybe what you are quoting includes mobile discrete? I'm talking desktop discrete.

 

[RussianSensation]

http://blogs.amd.com/play/2010/08/06/amd-discrete-graphics-gpus-fusion-apu/

The first thing they teach you at business school is this rule:

What matters is not just market share %, but market share $$$.

^ You can sell 3 million units of a product by undercutting your competitor and make $10 on each and have 90% market share. It's meaningless without taking into consideration profitability. A perfect example of this is Apple's iPhone. It doesn't have anywhere near the top market share %, but has class leading market share $$$ among any competitor for each market share % it has. The strategy behind HD4000-6000 didn't work in terms of market share $$$. AMD was giving up profits for market share. In other words that market share gain was artificial because it was unsustainable long-term due to rises of 28nm wafer prices that TSMC passed on to AMD/NV.

Despite this, if you look at current prices of HD7970 cards, you can pick up the 7970 for $350, not too dissimilar to HD5870/6970 prices. On top of that you get 2 free games that seem decent. This suggests that at the current time, HD7970 is delivering both class matching performance (leading with OCing), price/performance and extra perks like free game bundles. HD4870/5870/6970 did not deliver on these areas simultaneously. In terms of value, HD7950's proposition is nearly unheard of in recent years. It's a $280 GPU that can surpass $450 flagships. I don't remember this happening in a long-time (maybe X800GTO2 unlocked or GeForce 4 Ti 4200 Albatron P Turbo OCed to the moon). The $280 asking price for 7950 is actually even better than $259 HD5850 or $299 HD6950 offered because it can surpass $450 flagships and comes with free games.

http://www.legionhardware.com/image..._7950_IceQ_X2_Boost_Clock/Overclocking_01.png
http://www.legionhardware.com/image..._7950_IceQ_X2_Boost_Clock/Overclocking_02.png
http://www.legionhardware.com/image..._7950_IceQ_X2_Boost_Clock/Overclocking_03.png
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/images/perf_oc.gif

Maybe you recall what $280 GPU in the last 5 years could outperform $450 flagship cards with air OCing at reasonable voltages. I don't recall such a scenario. My 470 even at 760mhz couldn't beat a stock GTX480. 8800GT couldn't beat 8800GTX. HD4870 OC couldn't beat a stock 280. HD5850 OC matched a 5870 and even at 900mhz I don't think it could on avg beat the 480. I don't think many 5850s could consistently go above 900mhz either on air. Even if the 5850 OC did, it has less VRAM than 480. HD7950 has more VRAM than $440-450 680s!

The value of 7950 V2 is huge, esp. at 2560x1440 or above. It's akin to having an $280 4870/5850/HD6950 that delivers similar performance to a $440-450 NV flagship at stock speeds at 1440P/1600P. That's before 7950's OCing to 1100+mhz.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/graphics/his-iceq-x2-7970-7950-7850/zfulltable.png

You can actually get 2x after-market 7950s with 6 free games for almost the same price as some GTX680 4GB cards. That's a jaw dropping amount of value because a single OCed 7950 is faster than a 680/7970GE. I don't remember any HD4000-6000 card delivering that much value at this price level. Your expected performance with HD7950 OC CFX will be 90% within an overclocked 680/HD7970GE when CFX doesn't work and when CFX works, 60% faster than those cards. That's nuts!

To make matters worse, despite its huge tag, GTX680 4GB even loses in multi-monitor gaming to a stock HD7970GE. "That said, we have to wonder why anyone would bother with the GeForce GTX 680 4GB for extreme resolutions when the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition was constantly faster at both 5040x1050 and 7680x1600. In fact at 7680x1600 the 7970 GHz Edition was on average 20% faster than the GeForce GTX 680 4GB in the half dozen games that we tested with."

 

[OCGuy]

Weren't people foaming at the mouth when AT included an OC'd card in a review.....

I love seeing the arguments switch from offense to defense based on where each company is in its product cycle.

 

[RussianSensation]

Weren't people foaming at the mouth when AT included an OC'd card in a review.....

I wasn't. I welcomed GTX460 FTW since its price was comparable to HD6870. You can check my post history. I thought that was a great review since those 2 cards were primary competitors based on price at launch and GTX460 had formidable OCing headroom.

Also, even if you check performance at stock speeds for HD7950-7970-7970GE, every single of those cards delivers superior price/performance to NV's competitors. If you look at the last chart I posted, GTX680 can barely beat a stock 925mhz 7950 at 2560x1440 despite being priced $150-160 higher.

Same story at TPU. $440-450 GTX680 is only 5% faster than a 925mhz HD7950 at 1600P.

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/HIS/HD_7950_X2_Boost/images/perfrel_2560.gif

 

[notty22]

Who has this HIS IceQ x2 boost 7950 in stock and at how much? That is proposed above?

And also, most non reference 7970's are priced much higher than represented (350.00) in cherry picked sales.

These non- reference, desirable?, 7970's are 430-600 dollars.


edit: The higher priced 7970 appears to have some kind of card jack in the box. Which is to lift weight of the card sitting in the pci-e slot. And has 2- 8 pin pci-e power requirements, for O/C ?

 

[RussianSensation]

Who has this HIS IceQ x2 boost 7950 in stock and at how much? That is proposed above?

That's not what's proposed. What's being discussed are HD7950 V2 925mhz versions at stock speeds relative to GTX670s/680s, especially pointing out their performance at 1440/1600P and the value you get if you buy 2 and OC them.

Sapphire HD7950 925mhz = $290

Or buying a proven overclocker like MSI TF3 7950 for $290 (although the Sapphire 7950 dual-x also overclocks well).

And also, most non reference 7970's are priced much higher than represented (350.00) in cherry picked sales.

I never said "most HD7970s are $350". I said you can now find some (non-reference) HD7970s for as low as $350.

These non- reference, desirable?, 7970's are 430-600 dollars.

edit: The higher priced 7970 appears to have some kind of card jack in the box. Which is to lift weight of the card sitting in the pci-e slot. And has 2- 8 pin pci-e power requirements, for O/C ?

No. You do not need 8+8 pin connector to get a good overclocking 7970. That's non-sense.

You can find 925mhz-1Ghz HD7950s for $360-$390 with good coolers that will let you overclock to 1150-1200mhz.

925mhz powercolor dual fan for $360
1000mhz Gigabyte HD7970 for $380
1000mhz Sapphire DX for $390

You also do not need any jack to hold those cards. Again, made up assumptions on your part. My Dual-X is running without any issues and nothing is holding it. In fact, what you suggested is strange indeed considering Gigabyte Windforce 7970 and 670/680s are very similar in weight and size.

HD7970 Windforce 3x: http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/GPU/GIGABYTE-HD7970/LARGE/GIGABYTE-HD7970-1.jpg
GTX670 Windforce 3x: http://images.bit-tech.net/content_...geforce-gtx-670-2gb-review/gigabyte670-4b.jpg
GTX680 Windforce 3x: http://i.imgur.com/cnUM4.jpg

A 1Ghz HD7970 ~ GTX680 in performance. The cheapest after-market GTX680 is $440 on Newegg.

Pretty funny how an awesome after-market cooler is now a negative for you. That's what allows GPUs to overclock at reasonable temperatures and noise levels. The cooler on the 7970 Sapphire Dual-X is awesome: http://cdn3.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/4308654/vs05-11_10-28-31x_verge_super_wide.jpg

After-market coolers on the Dual-X and Windforce 3x can keep HD7970 1145-1165mhz at 67-71*C: http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/graphics/radeon-hd-7970-crossfirex/ztemps-xbt.png
The Windforce 3x would fit easily for CFX too: http://cdn.overclock.net/b/b2/b2050cc2_p1070318exjy0.jpeg
Even Tri-Fire would work without any "jacks": http://cdn.overclock.net/8/8b/8bb13e83_e4ysegy5.jpeg

Same for those $350 XFX 7970s I linked: http://cdn.overclock.net/e/eb/474x600px-LL-eb14884c_XFXCrossfired1.png

You can even fit a sound-card between them: http://cdn.overclock.net/a/a4/a4dcc306_DSC02994.jpeg
HD7970 DirectCUIIs triple slot in CF = no jacks: http://cdn.overclock.net/4/4f/4f023fb5_DSCF0871.jpeg

I know you are trying really hard bringing things like extra weight of after-market coolers vs. reference card coolers (as if this doesn't apply to after-market 670/680 cards ???), but GTX670/680 are both overpriced, that's not even accounting the 2 free games that come with a 7950/7970s.

 

[RussianSensation]

Sapphire Vapor-X 7970s in tight CF - no problem

http://limages.vr-zone.net/body/15149/sapphire_7970_6gb_1.jpg.jpeg

 

[blackened23]

Good grief screenshots. New Titan benchmarks:

Shy of the GTX 690 by a bit. Yes, OBR is a complete nvidia fanboy and not very objective, but this benchmark falls in line with previous rumors.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Is ORB saying he has one?

His Bulldozer leaks were spot on, even after JFAMD attacked him. But a lot of his other things have been Charlie like.

Maybe I'll get a Titan and use it with my i3-540, lulz...

Doing it wrong, this user later reported issues with CF I'm sure!

 

[Will Robinson]

So Titan is slower than the 690 but costs about the same?
Oh dear.:\

 

[boxleitnerb]

What did you expect? Both are Kepler. A 560 Ti SLI also was faster than a 580. Expect the impossible and then be disappointed...sounds about right

 

[blackened23]

What did you expect? Both are Kepler. A 560 Ti SLI also was faster than a 580. Expect the impossible and then be disappointed...sounds about right

To be fair, we don't know Titan's price yet. The benchmark does seem reasonable given the specifications and rumored pricetag, I guess.

 

[SirPauly]

According to this:
http://www.techspot.com/news/47593-jpr-discrete-gpu-shipments-down-65-nvidia-gains-market-share.html

At the end of 2010, it was 40/60 AMD/nV. Maybe what you are quoting includes mobile discrete? I'm talking desktop discrete.

Personally, offered over-all discrete, indeed! Now it is like around 60 40 -- over-all discrete share for nVidia.

 

[SirPauly]

The first thing they teach you at business school is this rule:

What matters is not just market share %, but market share $$$.

Offered many quarters to you in the past where they made more income with the sweet spot strategy.

 

[tviceman]

What did you expect? Both are Kepler. A 560 Ti SLI also was faster than a 580. Expect the impossible and then be disappointed...sounds about right

True that, but GK110 is going to compare more favorably to GK104 than GF110 did to GF114, especially if GK110 has some voltage adjustment headroom. If Nvidia allows it, I think a decent overclock with GK110 will pull it ahead of stock GTX680's in SLI. Pretty amazing performance jump if you ask me.

Just don't be $900. $800 would still give a fat profit margin for a consumer card while doing a much better job of disrupting the ultra high end vs. the slower "high end" cards.

 

[blackened23]

True that, but GK110 is going to compare more favorably to GK104 than GF110 did to GF114, especially if GK110 has some voltage adjustment headroom. If Nvidia allows it, I think a decent overclock with GK110 will pull it ahead of stock GTX680's in SLI. Pretty amazing performance jump if you ask me.

Just don't be $900. $800 would still give a fat profit margin for a consumer card while doing a much better job of disrupting the ultra high end vs. the slower "high end" cards.

Very much agreed, I can see how some might justify the price -- but from a consumer standpoint few are willing to shell that much out; Going from 900 to 800$ would widen the audience dramatically. I'm still confused as to why these cards are using 6GB VRAM, it is a complete waste with current games.

 

[wand3r3r]

Weren't people foaming at the mouth when AT included an OC'd card in a review.....

I love seeing the arguments switch from offense to defense based on where each company is in its product cycle.

I would/do certainly welcome it, provided they don't try to do it sneakily like some sites which tested a new card that came out against the competitors factory overclocked card and it appeared that it was stock vs stock (labels say model X vs model Y, not overclocked X vs model Y! ). If you don't read every word of the review and only look at the pretty charts they had better be clearly labeled. As long as they show stock and overclocked against whatever they are comparing along with no intent to mislead it would be a nice addition.

 

[wand3r3r]

Whoever added those huge images above it's really annoying to read this. You have to scrooooooll to far.

 

[scooterlibby]

Very much agreed, I can see how some might justify the price -- but from a consumer standpoint few are willing to shell that much out; Going from 900 to 800$ would widen the audience dramatically. I'm still confused as to why these cards are using 6GB VRAM, it is a complete waste with current games.

$800 would make this card much more tempting to me. It is very cool if they are able to cram close to 690 performance on a single GPU, but $900 still crosses a psychological threshold for this consumer.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Whoever added those huge images above it's really annoying to read this. You have to scrooooooll to far.

I'll give you one guess as to who created a huge image laden post!

 

[tviceman]

I'm still confused as to why these cards are using 6GB VRAM, it is a complete waste with current games.

So they can make an early premium off 6gb. A 3gb card will probably come later and cost $100 less.

 

[Black Octagon]

Only because of the retarded comment about 7970s needing 'jacks' to be supported in their PCIe slots. That deserved to be thrashed (and was)

 

[ehpexs]

I'm curious to see the pricing on these, depending on how they perform and how much they cost it's either one of these or three 7950s (two more) for my 7680x1440 set-up

 

[SirPauly]

Good grief screenshots. New Titan benchmarks:

Shy of the GTX 690 by a bit. Yes, OBR is a complete nvidia fanboy and not very objective, but this benchmark falls in line with previous rumors.

Thanks, this one may be on target!