Is this the best generation of GPUs ever?

[Arkaign]

I know that sounds like an idiotic question, but I don't mean "7xxx is faster than 6xxx", I mean in relation to improvements for the top end on both sides at the same time.

I'm thinking no, personally, but at the higher end I think it's about as solid as it's ever been.

Pros for 7800+/670+

+No major scandals (bumpgate, etc)
+Big boost over the cards they directly replace
+Very close to the rival company performance

---------

Cons for 7800+/670+

-EXPENSIVE
-Some models slow to trickle out
-2560x1440/1600 still quite expensive to run at reasonable speed
-High prices haven't had very much of an impact on last-gen GPUs at all (eg; 6950 2GB is about as expensive as when I first bought mine waaaaaaaaaaaay back when)

As opposed to major discrepancies in many past generations :

-6900 series no significant improvement at all over 5800 series
-GTX480 super late, super hot
-Solder issues on some gens (think it was the 8xxx/9xxx that people were baking a lot?)
-HD2900 was late / underwhelming next to 8800
-Geforce FX overall debacle
-3dfx Voodoo3 disappointing
-9xxx Nvidia mostly rehash of 8xxx (and of course GTS250 another one?)
-HD3xxx not enough to get AMD competitive that gen
-etc
-etc

I'm not saying that the current gen is necessarily the best ever (prices my main complaint), but for the most part one can buy any of the 7800/670 and higher models from either company and come away with a very very nice product.

 

[Maximilian]

Boring imo heh. Its always more interesting if there's a clear choice

 

[Smoblikat]

Id say in my lifetime the HD5XXX and GTX4XX series was the best improvment ive seen, though the HD3XXX and 7XXX series to their next versions were great too.

 

[Grooveriding]

Probably one of the worst really.

GTX 680 = GTX 580 + 30%

Radeon 7970 = Radeon 6970 + 40%





GTX 480 = GTX 285 + 70%

Radeon 5870 = Radeon 4890 + 80%

 

[AnandThenMan]

Every new generation is the best GPU ever. But if we are talking about history, the 9700 Pro IMO is the best video card ever made.

 

[RussianSensation]

I know that sounds like an idiotic question, but I don't mean "7xxx is faster than 6xxx", I mean in relation to improvements for the top end on both sides at the same time.

In terms of performance increase from one generation to the next, not even close. All the cards prior to HD2900XT on the AMD side netted way more performance increase, even HD5870 vs. HD4870 was a huge performance increase from the factory. On the NV side, performance increases were massive in the past, especially GeForce 6 vs. GeForce 5 in DX9 and GeForce 8800GTX vs. 7900GTX.

In terms of bang-for-the buck, GeForce 4 Ti 4200, unlockable 9500Pro, unlockable X800GTO2, unlockable 6800 Non-Ultra, unlockable HD6950, etc.

Overclocking and bang-for-the buck cards such as X800XL, 8800GT, GTX460 1GB, HD5850 also brought a ton of performance per dollar.

I am sure there are other examples.

On the NV side, next generation mid-range GPU tended to outperform previous generation high-end card with ease:

GeForce 2 Ultra < GeForce 3 Ti200 (mid-range)
GeForce 3 Ti 500 < GeForce 4 Ti 4200 (mid-range)
GeForce 4 Ti 4600/4800 < GeForce 5700U (mid-range)
GeForce 5900/5950U < 6600GT (mid-range)
GeForce 6800U < 7800GT (mid-range)
GeForce 7800GTX 256mb < 7950GT (mid-range)
GeForce 7900GTX < 8800GT (mid-range)
GeForce 8800GTX/U < GTS250 (mid-range)
GeForce GTX280/285 < GeForce 460 1GB (mid-range)
GeForce GTX480/580 < GTX660Ti (??? need benchmarks).

This generation the 680 is just 30-35% or so faster than a stock 580. That's not great. AMD raised prices from $370 (5870/697) to $550 on launch.

So no I don't think this generation is great. Honestly $550 for reference HD7970 with just 40% faster performance with early drivers over the 6970 was a kick in the teeth. Only with price drops, 5 months of driver updates and 20%+ overclocking did 7970 become good imo.

Every new generation is the best GPU ever. But if we are talking about history, the 9700 Pro IMO is the best video card ever made.

It's a tie for me between 9700Pro and 8800GTX.

While 9700Pro was super fast vs. 5800U with AA/DX9, it became obsolete very quickly back in those days of crazy graphical progress and GPU speed increases. 8800GTX brought us to the era of unified shaders and the card could still play some games 3-4 years later at lower settings, something the 9700Pro couldn't do at all (when Doom 3 and Far Cry 1 launched, it was done iirc). Also, the 8800GTX managed to smash both the 2900XT and 3870! 2 year lead for NV uncontested I am sure.

 

[Siberian]

I would say that the 8800GTX was the best ever. It is impressive that the 680 is such a small chip and still performs at the top. I guess it was really meant as a midrange chip, so that can also be considered impressive.

 

[pandemonium]

Best? Probably not.

Most expected by anticipated performance placement? Probably yes.

I feel both companies had fairly smooth generational releases once TSMC's yields were maintained, and that may be where you're getting "best" from. /shrug

 

[Arkaign]

Best? Probably not.

Most expected by anticipated performance placement? Probably yes.

I feel both companies had fairly smooth generational releases once TSMC's yields were maintained, and that may be where you're getting "best" from. /shrug

Yeah that's basically the argument I made in the OP.

(1)- I don't think the current gen is the best ever. The largest negative IMO is the very high pricing.

(2)- On the flip side, there's no major failure this gen in the major releases so far (above low end stuff). In almost every previous gen there was something seriously wrong with one of the entries, such as the ones I listed in the OP, along with :

6770 rehash of 5770, bleh
HD5800 series WAY better than HD6800 series, naming fail (I hope only a few idiots replaced 5870 with 6870, hah)
Some card that fried itself due to driver failure
GTX 3xx series stillborn, lost generation there aside from bogus notebook GPUs
Overall many terrible choices were usually available in many gens due to one side being massively better. I'm sure some people bought HD2900 at launch pricing, but it really took it on the nose in $/performance back then. Ditto when 9700 Pro came out and made Nvidia's entire high end obsolete.

Currently if you go buy a common 670, 7950, etc, you're pretty sure to get a great card for a fairly high price. I suppose the wimpy reference 670 PCB (for overclockers at least) is somewhat notable, but as they work fine at stock speeds it's not the biggest deal.

 

[moonbogg]

Its not the best, Geforce 256 was. Voodoo 3 was badass. Radeon 9700 was fucking great and came out before 5800 Ultra. 8800GT was loaded with value. Still love my 670's of course (for now).

 

[Arkaign]

I'm not so much talking about a single card like the 9700 Pro, or original Geforce, but rather an entire gen from the major companies involved.

When the 9700 Pro was out, why would anyone buy anything else? Ditto Geforce DDR. Ditto 8800. Etc. Those were all blowouts where the competition fell right on their face.

 

[blackened23]

Interesting question but i'd have to say, no. When I look back on the best GPUs ever, I think of stuff like the 8800, 9700 pro, voodoo2, the original geforce - true game changers which were miles ahead of everything else.

We haven't had anything like that in a while.

 

[hokies83]

Worst ever was the 400 series to the 500 series.. 5=15% performance over there counter parts why i skipped that generation.

 

[Arkaign]

Interesting question but i'd have to say, no. When I look back on the best GPUs ever, I think of stuff like the 8800, 9700 pro, voodoo2, the original geforce - true game changers which were miles ahead of everything else.

We haven't had anything like that in a while.

I agree in terms of major GPU landmarks, but all of those were standouts, not the whole generation of GPUs from all major companies.

I think this question has been massively misunderstood, generation =! gpu.

In most generations, an uneducated consumer could go out and buy a card from their favorite brand, and fairly often they'd get something incredibly stupid (eg; FX5800 when the 9800 Pro was out, or HD2900 when the 8800 was out, etc).

Outside of some utterly idiotic super weird cards like the 690 2GB, for the most part if one goes out and buys a 670, 680, 7850, 7950, (and probably the 660?), etc, they're gonna have a great card.

The big downside I see is we're a long long way from fantastic $150ish cards. And the old cards really haven't budged in price enough to make any difference.

 

[Arkaign]

I think the last time the cards were this good and close between the two companies might be the 7800/X1800/etc range. That was a pretty good back and forth, IIRC ATI finally outgunned NV there after releasing what seemed like a billion SKUs, but for the most part any of those cards were great for the time.

 

[pandemonium]

I'm not so much talking about a single card like the 9700 Pro, or original Geforce, but rather an entire gen from the major companies involved.

When the 9700 Pro was out, why would anyone buy anything else? Ditto Geforce DDR. Ditto 8800. Etc. Those were all blowouts where the competition fell right on their face.

Apparently no one else in this thread is recognizing the forest for the trees. >.<

 

[toyota]

Worst ever was the 400 series to the 500 series.. 5=15% performance over there counter parts why i skipped that generation.

um wrong. the 5 series were faster than that over the 4 series and improved upon everything. for example the gtx570 was 25% faster than the gtx470 and matched or beat the gtx480 all while using much less power, running cooler and being quieter. its the pos 4 series that should have been skipped.

 

[BD231]

This gen sucks. Hot power hungery flagship card from ATI and an overpriced offering from nVidia that barely gets you any performance over their last gen.

Total propaganda title, this gen is literally sh t and the only good thing to come of it is gated transistors which should have come age's ago.

 

[MrMuppet]

I bought my PowerColor Radeon HD 4870 PCS+ 1GB back in 2008 and paid ~2150 SEK before VAT (no rebates). It was the top ATI card at the time with a great aftermarket cooler and twice the memory of the reference version.

Even today the cheapest 7970 3GB is at sale for ~2850 SEK before VAT. 6GB would cost you ~4800 SEK, but is on the other hand unnecessary.

I say the 4870 was the best for that reason.

 

[Cogman]

In terms of performance increase from one generation to the next, not even close. All the cards prior to HD2900XT on the AMD side netted way more performance increase, even HD5870 vs. HD4870 was a huge performance increase from the factory. On the NV side, performance increases were massive in the past, especially GeForce 6 vs. GeForce 5 in DX9 and GeForce 8800GTX vs. 7900GTX.

In terms of bang-for-the buck, GeForce 4 Ti 4200, unlockable 9500Pro, unlockable X800GTO2, unlockable 6800 Non-Ultra, unlockable HD6950, etc.

Overclocking and bang-for-the buck cards such as X800XL, 8800GT, GTX460 1GB, HD5850 also brought a ton of performance per dollar.

I am sure there are other examples.

On the NV side, next generation mid-range GPU tended to outperform previous generation high-end card with ease:

GeForce 2 Ultra < GeForce 3 Ti200 (mid-range)
GeForce 3 Ti 500 < GeForce 4 Ti 4200 (mid-range)
GeForce 4 Ti 4600/4800 < GeForce 5700U (mid-range)
GeForce 5900/5950U < 6600GT (mid-range)
GeForce 6800U < 7800GT (mid-range)
GeForce 7800GTX 256mb < 7950GT (mid-range)
GeForce 7900GTX < 8800GT (mid-range)
GeForce 8800GTX/U < GTS250 (mid-range)
GeForce GTX280/285 < GeForce 460 1GB (mid-range)
GeForce GTX480/580 < GTX660Ti (??? need benchmarks).

This generation the 680 is just 30-35% or so faster than a stock 580. That's not great. AMD raised prices from $370 (5870/697) to $550 on launch.

So no I don't think this generation is great. Honestly $550 for reference HD7970 with just 40% faster performance with early drivers over the 6970 was a kick in the teeth. Only with price drops, 5 months of driver updates and 20%+ overclocking did 7970 become good imo.



It's a tie for me between 9700Pro and 8800GTX.

While 9700Pro was super fast vs. 5800U with AA/DX9, it became obsolete very quickly back in those days of crazy graphical progress and GPU speed increases. 8800GTX brought us to the era of unified shaders and the card could still play some games 3-4 years later at lower settings, something the 9700Pro couldn't do at all (when Doom 3 and Far Cry 1 launched, it was done iirc). Also, the 8800GTX managed to smash both the 2900XT and 3870! 2 year lead for NV uncontested I am sure.

This is about how I remember things. If anything, the performance increase / generation has been going down pretty fast in both the GPUs and the CPUs.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'm not so much talking about a single card like the 9700 Pro, or original Geforce, but rather an entire gen from the major companies involved.

I still think this generation is one of the worst. For people still using GTX570 and unlocked HD6950s, there hasn't been any card worth upgrading to at a reasonable price (Maybe HD7950 with its recent price drops to $310). Sure HD7850 overclocks but that's still not THAT much faster overall than an overclocked 570/6950. The main draw is the power consumption. It would be a waste of $ for someone with a GTX570/6950 OCed to go out and spend $220+ on an HD7850/7870. The crazy part is HD6950 launched in December of 2010. So by the time NV responds with GTX650Ti/660, it'll be almost 2 years since HD6950.

Look at the sub-$150 market and it's looking awful. Sure, HD7750/7770 may be good vs. what's available, but compared to an almost 3-year-old HD5770, they are an utter joke. Performance has increased maybe 25-30% from HD5770. An HD6870 beats HD7770 and at launch HD7770 cost $159.....more than the market rate for the 30% faster HD6870.

If you remove GTX670/680/HD7950/7970, this generation of GPUs so far is one of the worst in the history of GPU increases. Outside of people who only get the top GPUs, this generation is a complete pass for anyone with something like a GTX470/560/560Ti/570/6950. The only exception could be GTX480 users who sold that card and got a more efficient HD7850 OC to get rid of all that heat and noise on their secondary rigs for example.

Also if we look at HD5870 vs. HD7970. It's been now almost 3 years since HD5870 launched and performance has increased only about 1.8x (let's say 2x with a 1.2ghz overclock on the 7970) from that card. Probably a very large factory here is lack of tessellation performance and 1GB of VRAM bottleneck in newer games. If you take slightly older games, HD7970 is nowhere near 80% faster than an HD5870.

In terms of how close the performance is, it's also not that unusual. 6800 Ultra vs. X800XT & X850XT / PE were very close, trading blows depending on the game (although later 6800U fell apart in newer DX9 shader based games and only held on to its average performance due to winning a couple key OpenGL titles and flight sims).

Worst ever was the 400 series to the 500 series.. 5=15% performance over there counter parts why i skipped that generation.

Ok but that's not really a new generation using a more traditional definition. GTX480 --> GTX580 is a refresh generation and normally NV would have called that a GTX485 or something. It uses the same Fermi architecture and all NV did was improve FP16 performance, Z-culling and unlocked full 512 SPs. The real generation is GTX480/580 --> GTX680. That took about 2 years and GTX680 is at best 50% faster than a GTX480, less if you overclock the 480 to 580 speeds.

Hot power hungery flagship card from ATI and an overpriced offering from nVidia that barely gets you any performance over their last gen.

If HD7970 is hot and power hungry, what does that make a stock GTX480? At stock speeds the 480 uses up 80W+ more power than an HD7970 and even at 1080mhz, after-market 7970s draw 70W less than a stock 480. Only reference 7970s run hot btw. Your overclocked 480 is probably drawing 100W more power than a 1.2ghz HD7970. If you look at the difference in power consumption between the 7970 and 680, it's very small. The difference in power usage between GTX480 and 7970 is huge!

 

[KCfromNC]

Yeah that's basically the argument I made in the OP.

(1)- I don't think the current gen is the best ever. The largest negative IMO is the very high pricing.

Combined with a relatively small performance jump compared to previous generations. And a lack of a need for that extra performance they do provide in the vast majority of games.

(2)- On the flip side, there's no major failure this gen in the major releases so far (above low end stuff). In almost every previous gen there was something seriously wrong with one of the entries, such as the ones I listed in the OP, along with :

Shouldn't you wait for both major competitors to release their current generation cards before jumping to this conclusion? We're still waiting for most of nV's lineup.

 

[Silverforce11]

This is the generation where ppl who OC gets the best and ppl who don't, they just pay heaps extra for a small perf increase.

Thats how I see it, and its pretty damn obvious when you have cards with 40-50% OC (combined with near perfect scaling) capability on their air coolers. You don't see this often in the history of GPUs, period.

Example: The 7970 may only be 40% faster than a 6970, once you OC both to their max, the gap looks closer to 70-80% (and prolly more in games that stress dx11).

 

[Fanatical Meat]

9500 pro best value/performance ever

 

[RussianSensation]

Example: The 7970 may only be 40% faster than a 6970, once you OC both to their max, the gap looks closer to 70-80% (and prolly more in games that stress dx11).

Ya, exactly! :thumbsup: With overclocking, it's a good generation, esp. for AMD. Without it, meh.

At 2560x1600, HD7970 GE and factory pre-overclocked GTX680 are as fast as HD6990/GTX590:

With overclocking, they beat last generation dual-GPU cards:

But everything below HD7950 is meh for those with a decent last generation card.