NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti official gaming performance

[Cloudfire777]

According to our newest data, NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 780 Ti is much faster than Radeon R9 290X.

Note that Techpowerup found out with their review that 290X in uber mode give 8% better performance in 1600P than in quiet mode.

That said, GTX 780 Ti is still way ahead.

Pretty sick performance

http://videocardz.com/47587/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti-official-gaming-performance
​

You thread title in not in compliance to the agreed upon rule of posting 3rd party information.

Read the rules:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=225737

Thread-Title Citation Expectations:
Per community voting, thread titles containing information based on 3rd party sources must include a citation of the source in the thread-title.

For example, if a member wishes to start a new thread based on information from an article published on Semi-Accurate, the VC&G community expects the thread-starter to incorporate some manner of reference to Semi-Accurate in their thread's title.

"S/A: 580GTX's are not manufacturable"
or
"580GTX's are not manufacturable, per Semi-Accurate"

The thread-citation guideline was approved for permanent adoption by VC&G community vote effective Sunday Mar 27, 2011.






This thread is locked.


esquared
Anandtech Forum Director
[/b]

 

[5150Joker]

Note that Techpowerup found out with their review that 290X in uber mode give 8% better performance in 1600P than in quiet mode.

That said, GTX 780 Ti is still way ahead.

Pretty sick performance

http://videocardz.com/47587/nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-ti-official-gaming-performance
​

Yeah that's a sound beating. Well at least AMD was ahead for about a week.

 

[bystander36]

Well, I don't consider benchmarks coming from AMD or Nvidia to be official. They are known to skew results, that said, they certainly didn't pick games just to favor Nvidia. Several of those are AMD favoring games.

 

[chimaxi83]

This just in, official results from a rumor site. Oh nevermind, OP is at it again. Carry on.

 

[caswow]

So this is a stock 780ti 30% faster than a 290x quite? You guys really believe this?

 

[chimaxi83]

So this is a stock 780ti 30% faster than a 290x quite? You guys really believe this?

You must be new here.

 

[3DVagabond]

I can't wait until we get "official gaming performance" instead of nVidia marketing slides.

 

[Cloudfire777]

So this is a stock 780ti 30% faster than a 290x quite? You guys really believe this?

So this is a stock 780ti 30% faster than a 290x quite? You guys really believe this?

This is the new GK110 B-stepping which is said to overclock better than GTX Titan. Which it clearly does if you look at the other thread http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2351420

If GPU Boost on 780 Ti goes higher than Titan because of this, considering that Titan beats 290X by 5% in quiet mode, http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/R9_290X/images/perfrel.gif, its not really far fetched to see additional 20%

But yeah, will be interesting to see results from other than Nvidia. Chiphell posted results yesterday. GTX 780 Ti beat 290X by a good margin there too.

 

[el etro]

Not really smashing 290X. The same can't be said about 780Ghz...

 

[Xcobra]

Will wait...

 

[Elfear]

Results seem too good to be true. According to 3DCenter, which bases its results on review sites who warmed the cards up first, in Quiet mode the 290X is on par with Titan.

These benchmarks are claiming the 780Ti will be 30% faster than the Titan on average from 7% more cores and 6% higher Boost clocks?

 

[hjalti8]

so if its 30% faster than a quiet 290X, that would make it ~45% faster than a stock gtx 780 @1440p :

As much as I would love for that to happen it just does not sound realistic

 

[el etro]

Results seem too good to be true. According to 3DCenter, which bases its results on review sites who warmed the cards up first, in Quiet mode the 290X is on par with Titan.

These benchmarks are claiming the 780Ti will be 30% faster than the Titan on average from 7% more cores and 6% higher Boost clocks?

These tests are wrong.