[GPU.RU]Playing the first half of 2013 against modern cards

[boxleitnerb]

You didn't understand my point. The midrange keplers with 256bus struggle at 1600p due to lack of bandwidth, its already starved at 1080p. Look at the GE vs 770/680, at 1080p, the 770 is actually faster than 7970 GE, but its opposite at 1600p. Tahiti just scales better at higher res, and this is amplified in the 7990 vs 690 scenario. This doesn't occur for GK110 based skus, because it has ample bandwidth to cope and it performs well at 1080p and 1600p.

CoH2 doesn't have CF/SLI support because they used massed dynamic terrain deformation using compute, they could not do GPU <-> GPU compute load transfers. Relic has stated as such and no CF/SLI gains are possible with their implementation. So unless there's some magic driver fix that bypass the way the developers designed their engine..

You also have to take into account shading performance which GK104 has much less of. Let's put it this way: Tahiti loses efficiency at lower resolutions (due to the frontend), but at higher ones it can play its GFLOPs card. Bandwidth certainly is a factor, too.

 

[Nomanor]

I am going to continue to wait for the next generation on a new process. That should offer at least 50% more performance

Where did you pull that information from? Your ass?

Please keep it a bit more civil in the technical forums. -Admin DrPizza

 

[Callsign_Vega]

I read nothing about them ensuring PCI-E 3.0 was enabled via the forceregedit for NVIDIA on X79. Could be a flaw in the test.

 

[SirPauly]

You didn't understand my point. The midrange keplers with 256bus struggle at 1600p due to lack of bandwidth, its already starved at 1080p. Look at the GE vs 770/680, at 1080p, the 770 is actually faster than 7970 GE, but its opposite at 1600p.

Based on GPU.ru specific testing but still very competitive -- but based on computerbase' findings -- the GTX 770 offers more performance at 1600p with x8 AA:

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2013/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-im-test/4/

Starved may be too strong of a word to me but more-so the GK-104 is very efficient compared to Tahiti.

 

[tviceman]

AMD needs to do nothing about the 780, there are very few people out there who will spend $650 on a video card. I'd almost bet the 780 does more for sales of the 7970 GHz or GTX 770 because it's such a poor buy in comparison.

It must absolutely blow your mind to think that there are people who spent $550 on a video card, like yourself, and would even consider the notion of putting down $650. THE IMPOSSIBLE. And by the extension of your horribly flawed logic, the gtx580 must have made the 6970 and gtx570 super hot sellers, because it was priced 40% higher, yet only had 15% better performance. CRAZY!

 

[cmdrdredd]

Not much of a bullet point, considering Titan is already vastly overpriced.

It looks like the 780 only gets you around 5-8 frames extra in some games for paying over $300 more. That kind of increase doesn't buy you much, maybe you'll be able to dial AA from 2x to 4x.

Overpriced according to you but there are many members here with multiple titans. There is a market for ultra high end cards. There are some people who buy the best because it's the best. They can afford it so more power to them.

I think people need to stop making generalizations based on their needs, or their budget. Yeah some people probably don't feel their money is well spend on a GTX 780 or a Titan but there are many people who buy the fastest cards they can because they can and sometimes to have the best you have to be willing to spend more than the other guy.

 

[bystander36]

CPU bottleneck

If it were a CPU bottleneck, there wouldn't be such varying performance as you go down the list of GPU's.

It is also interesting that I've noticed this trend in other benchmarks, where the Nvidia cards don't handle 1440/1600p well, yet do fine at 5760x1080p. That is the most surprising to me.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Overpriced according to you but there are many members here with multiple titans. There is a market for ultra high end cards. There are some people who buy the best because it's the best. They can afford it so more power to them.

I think people need to stop making generalizations based on their needs, or their budget. Yeah some people probably don't feel their money is well spend on a GTX 780 or a Titan but there are many people who buy the fastest cards they can because they can and sometimes to have the best you have to be willing to spend more than the other guy.

So instead we should make generalizations based on 10 guys on an enthusiast forum right? The thing is his generalization that most buyers don't go over the $350 mark is far more plausible.

Even if nvidia sold titans and 780's to 3 million people that is peanuts in the grand scheme of hardware purchases.

 

[MrK6]

Well if 780 was not selling well NV would have lowered the price.I would not be surprised if 780 is helping 770's sales, faster cards gives you a better brand recognition.So AMD needs to respond.

Without the sales figures of specific parts that's just all guesswork and hypothesis, isn't it? However, if you actually DO take a look at sales figures, you'll see that cards >$500 generally account for less than <1% of sales. And again, the GTX 780 isn't the fastest card, so what is nvidia going to brag about in advertising? That its second fastest single GPU is only 20% faster than the competitors (or its own GTX 770) but costs 60%+ more? That doesn't seem like a great tagline.

It must absolutely blow your mind to think that there are people who spent $550 on a video card, like yourself, and would even consider the notion of putting down $650. THE IMPOSSIBLE. And by the extension of your horribly flawed logic, the gtx580 must have made the 6970 and gtx570 super hot sellers, because it was priced 40% higher, yet only had 15% better performance. CRAZY!

They were, go look at the sales charts. I find the irony of your outburst hilarious though, I think you need to familiarize yourself with the phrase "flawed logic." However, what does it matter what I personally have done or bought? I'm more than happy to agree that I am part of a small echelon of users who are willing and able to spend more than $500 on a video card. I'm also an astute consumer and like to compare what I'm getting for my money no matter how much I'm spending. However none of that negates what I've said. Because you're personally upset that my logical argument disagrees with your personal bias doesn't mean you should go on the ad hominem. Grow up.

 

[cmdrdredd]

So instead we should make generalizations based on 10 guys on an enthusiast forum right? The thing is his generalization that most buyers don't go over the $350 mark is far more plausible.

Even if nvidia sold titans and 780's to 3 million people that is peanuts in the grand scheme of hardware purchases.

No, you should stop making generalizations period.

"It's overpriced" is simply a tactic used to bait someone into an argument. It's also only true from your point of view, as proven by the fact that there are many people buying them. They don't feel it's overpriced if they are buying it. Making a statement such as "I feel the 780 and especially the Titan are too expensive for what you are getting" is more than sufficient to make your argument. It is not necessary to generalize the statement in an attempt to apply your personal judgement to the whole community.

 

[f1sherman]

And again, the GTX 780 isn't the fastest card, so what is nvidia going to brag about in advertising?

That its second fastest single GPU is only 20% faster than the competitors (or its own GTX 770) but costs 60%+ more?

YES

GF1x4, 332mm2, $160-249 --> GK104, 294mm2, $250-500
GF1x0, 520(529)mm2, $279-499 --> GK110, 561mm2, $650-1000

So they considerably bumped MSRP/mm2 on their GPUs therefore achieving record margins and generating resources to babysit for Tegra, and are still managing to gain market share and make a decent living.

What's there not to brag about?
That they have only 2 GPUs out of competition reach, and are pricing them accordingly (read how ever they please)?

 

[3DVagabond]

Overpriced according to you but there are many members here with multiple titans. There is a market for ultra high end cards. There are some people who buy the best because it's the best. They can afford it so more power to them.

I think people need to stop making generalizations based on their needs, or their budget. Yeah some people probably don't feel their money is well spend on a GTX 780 or a Titan but there are many people who buy the fastest cards they can because they can and sometimes to have the best you have to be willing to spend more than the other guy.

You must have completely missed the meaning of the post you replied to. He was saying that the 780 offering better value than Titan doesn't mean that it's good value because Titan is the worst value on the market. Nothing to do with who can afford what. Nothing based on how desirable Titan is. Nothing about the enthusiasts, etc...

 

[cmdrdredd]

You must have completely missed the meaning of the post you replied to. He was saying that the 780 offering better value than Titan doesn't mean that it's good value because Titan is the worst value on the market. Nothing to do with who can afford what. Nothing based on how desirable Titan is. Nothing about the enthusiasts, etc...

No, it's still generalizing because Titan certainly has value to those who buy it and buy more than one.

 

[3DVagabond]

No, it's still generalizing because Titan certainly has value to those who buy it and buy more than one.

You are changing the meaning of value in the context is was being used in and applying a different metric to it in order to invalidate the original statement.

We all know that there are some people out there who "value" Titan. Those who apply enough "value" to Titan's attributes to justify it's price. And that some who can afford it, actually buy it. That does not justify in any general terms that offering better value than Titan (Focus, because that was what the post was in response to) makes a product good overall value.

 

[MrK6]

YES

GF1x4, 332mm2, $160-249 --> GK104, 294mm2, $250-500
GF1x0, 520(529)mm2, $279-499 --> GK110, 561mm2, $650-1000

So they considerably bumped MSRP/mm2 on their GPUs therefore achieving record margins and generating resources to babysit for Tegra, and are still managing to gain market share and make a decent living.

What's there not to brag about?
That they have only 2 GPUs out of competition reach, and are pricing them accordingly (read how ever they please)?

And how is that good for the average consumer? How would they market that they're delivering a poorer price/performance ratio than previously seen for quite some time in that minute segment? I think it's laughable how some of you don't even bother to reread your drivel before you hit "Post" to see if it makes a lick of sense.

You are changing the meaning of value in the context is was being used in and applying a different metric to it in order to invalidate the original statement.

We all know that there are some people out there who "value" Titan. Those who apply enough "value" to Titan's attributes to justify it's price. And that some who can afford it, actually buy it. That does not justify in any general terms that offering better value than Titan (Focus, because that was what the post was in response to) makes a product good overall value.

This. Also he's implying that because something is purchased it somehow has greater value, which isn't the case. Most Titans are not bought for gaming. Labs I work with could write for a $10,000 grant tomorrow and get it approved and buy 10 Titans. They aren't spending their money, so where's the implication (actually, they're probably spending YOUR money depending on the funding source, so think about that as well).

 

[SirPauly]

Imho,

There are products for the mainstream and average consumers that are very competitive to AMD products: GTX 650, GTX 650ti, GTX 650ti boost, GTX 660, GTX 670, GTX 760 and GTX 770.

GTX 780 and Titan are more-so premium priced products -- similar to the 8800GTX and 8800 Ultra -- both offering competitive advantages and bigger premiums for their window of opportunities.

Ask AMD To compete more and force nVidia to drop prices like nVidia did with their release of the GTX 680, GTX 670 and GTX 660ti -- forced AMD to drop prices!

 

[3DVagabond]

Imho,

There are products for the mainstream and average consumers that are very competitive to AMD products: GTX 650, GTX 650ti, GTX 650ti boost, GTX 660, GTX 670, GTX 760 and GTX 770.

GTX 780 and Titan are more-so premium priced products -- similar to the 8800GTX and 8800 Ultra -- both offering competitive advantages and bigger premiums for their window of opportunities.

Ask AMD To compete more and force nVidia to drop prices like nVidia did with their release of the GTX 680, GTX 670 and GTX 660ti -- forced AMD to drop prices!

Why they are doing it isn't in question. Why people, as consumers, are letting them get away with it, is the point of those voicing disapproval.

I think the people who are waiting for AMD to save the day with current pricing are dreaming. None of their recent moves have given any indication that's the direction they are going to go. What we've allowed is for the price doubling of enthusiast cards. We need to refuse to buy them.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Why they are doing it isn't in question. Why people, as consumers, are letting them get away with it, is the point of those voicing disapproval.

I think the people who are waiting for AMD to save the day with current pricing are dreaming. None of their recent moves have given any indication that's the direction they are going to go. What we've allowed is for the price doubling of enthusiast cards. We need to refuse to buy them.

Why do you care so much how people spend their money? People still buy $5,000 tube amplifiers when something lower would suffice.

Nvidia offers products across the price spectrum. Don't get mad because you cannot afford their best card(I sure don't), they have many that are competitive with AMD's offerings.

 

[cmdrdredd]

And how is that good for the average consumer? How would they market that they're delivering a poorer price/performance ratio than previously seen for quite some time in that minute segment? I think it's laughable how some of you don't even bother to reread your drivel before you hit "Post" to see if it makes a lick of sense.

This. Also he's implying that because something is purchased it somehow has greater value, which isn't the case. Most Titans are not bought for gaming. Labs I work with could write for a $10,000 grant tomorrow and get it approved and buy 10 Titans. They aren't spending their money, so where's the implication (actually, they're probably spending YOUR money depending on the funding source, so think about that as well).

I said nothing about greater value. I'm saying value is an individual thing. You can say "there's no value" when someone else buys it because they see the value of it. It's a little like luxury cars. There's an ass for every seat. Nvidia tested the waters and what do you know, people actually want to have the highest end products even at the current pricing. It's not much different than dual GPU cards being sold for $999 when you can buy two cards for $200 less.

 

[3DVagabond]

Why do you care so much how people spend their money? People still buy $5,000 tube amplifiers when something lower would suffice.

Nvidia offers products across the price spectrum. Don't get mad because you cannot afford their best card(I sure don't), they have many that are competitive with AMD's offerings.

I don't care how people spend their money. I care about escalating prices though. I care about people trying to justify higher prices with BS.

YES

GF1x4, 332mm2, $160-249 --> GK104, 294mm2, $250-500
GF1x0, 520(529)mm2, $279-499 --> GK110, 561mm2, $650-1000

So they considerably bumped MSRP/mm2 on their GPUs therefore achieving record margins and generating resources to babysit for Tegra, and are still managing to gain market share and make a decent living.

What's there not to brag about?
That they have only 2 GPUs out of competition reach, and are pricing them accordingly (read how ever they please)?

Did you miss this post? Pretty much sums up the situation.

 

[bystander36]

You are confusing FPS/$ with value. Though the average consumer may look at it that way, that is not the only thing that matters.

Heck, there have been some posts here for researchers who found the Titan to be the best bang for the buck, because time spend doing computations cost them money on wages.

Then you have the cutting edge enthusiasts, who find value in having the highest performance on the market. It may not be great for myself or others, but to them, there is value in getting that last 20% performance boost.

 

[3DVagabond]

You are confusing FPS/$ with value. Though the average consumer may look at it that way, that is not the only thing that matters.

Heck, there have been some posts here for researchers who found the Titan to be the best bang for the buck, because time spend doing computations cost them money on wages.

Then you have the cutting edge enthusiasts, who find value in having the highest performance on the market. It may not be great for myself or others, but to them, there is value in getting that last 20% performance boost.

I'm not confusing anything. fisherman's post sums it all up very nicely. They've doubled the price of GPU's this gen. I fully expect AMD continue this with their next cards. I doubt they'll be able to pull off a grand like nVidia did with Titan, but $650 is likely coming.

We're talking gaming. If we bring in other performance parameters we could also include the compute functionality that Tahiti destroys Kepler in. Besides, most researchers need the support that comes with Tesla cards that nVidia doesn't offer with Geforce. It's a very small number of people who can make use of Titan's DP and forgo manufacturer support.

 

[bystander36]

I'm not confusing anything. fisherman's post sums it all up very nicely. They've doubled the price of GPU's this gen. I fully expect AMD continue this with their next cards. I doubt they'll be able to pull off a grand like nVidia did with Titan, but $650 is likely coming.

We're talking gaming. If we bring in other performance parameters we could also include the compute functionality that Tahiti destroys Kepler in. Besides, most researchers need the support that comes with Tesla cards that nVidia doesn't offer with Geforce. It's a very small number of people who can make use of Titan's DP and forgo manufacturer support.

Again, you are failing to recognize that value does not have to equal FPS/$. That is what you consider value, but not the cutting edge enthusiast. Not to those who buy them.

I do not expect that to be the price of next gen cards. This was special, because they took a Tesla card, and sold it as a gaming card. That was their rational of the price. It is possible they may sell a similar card in the future, but for their standard 880 and below, I will not expect this kind of pricing.

 

[3DVagabond]

Again, you are failing to recognize that value does not have to equal FPS/$. That is what you consider value, but not the cutting edge enthusiast. Not to those who buy them.

I do not expect that to be the price of next gen cards. This was special, because they took a Tesla card, and sold it as a gaming card. That was their rational of the price. It is possible they may sell a similar card in the future, but for their standard 880 and below, I will not expect this kind of pricing.

It's not a Tesla card. Tesla cards offer professional support. That's what makes Tesla cost what it does. It's always been the same chip in the Geforce card as the pro cards. Enabling DP doesn't add any additional cost to the card and zero value of any kind to 99% of it's users.

Please, stop repeating yourself. I understand exactly what you are saying. Also, read the post that started this whole conversation. Titan was compared to say that the 780 was good value. This is about the value of the 780, a twice crippled salvaged part.

To me the real winner is 780, providing good performance at a competitive price compared to Titan.

^Here it is, in case you missed it coming in in the middle as you've done. Maybe you should be addressing Jaydip to convince him that the 780 doesn't offer better value than Titan because it doesn't have DP enabled and isn't good enough for the "cutting edge enthusiast". Even though there is no perceptible performance difference for any enthusiast who knows how to get the best out of their gear. As a matter of fact, there are 780's that are faster out of the box than Titan is.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Why they are doing it isn't in question. Why people, as consumers, are letting them get away with it, is the point of those voicing disapproval.

Where were those people when the 7970 and 7950 came out with abysmal performance gains over previous generations?

Where were they when mid-range GK104 came out at $500 and beat those two cards? Not only did this signal AMDs woeful performance gains, but it also make it clear you were paying $500 for mid-range 28nm performance.

Where were they when AMD released an overclocked 7970 and 7950 to retain their price brackets?

This entire generation has been disapproval worthy.