NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 To Be Based on GK114 GPU

[Rvenger]

I think NVIDIA put a longer cooler on the 670 to make it look more like a high end card. I don't think it needs it when you look at the PCB. Looking at the launch reviews the 680 was the clear winner over the 7970, so you can't blame NVIDIA for taking advantage of the situation.

You and Balla should become besties. 7970 is the faster card since 12.7 driver release. Sorry, nice try though.


and how did AMD bashing get to this thead? Yeah, lets keep it out and stay on topic.

 

[chimaxi83]

You and Balla should become besties. 7970 is the faster card since 12.7 driver release. Sorry, nice try though.

Well no, he's partially right. The self overclocking, randomly boosting to 1100-1200 MHz GTX680 did have a slight lead, for a little while, over the stock 925MHz 7970.

All it really leads in now is power consumption. That's cool, I guess.

 

[soccerballtux]

"I really think we should work harder together on the marketing front. As you and I have talked about, even though we are competitors, we have the common goal of making our category a well positioned, respected playing field. $5 and $8 stocks are the result of no respect."

"We launch the GPU initiative at some industry show together. Perhaps something like Meltdown or IDF. We could even share a GPU initiative booth together to get tons of PR from the press."

"Both of us have spent the last three years trying to bring the perceived value of our products up to the level of Intel. The "GPU" category is clean and has served us well that way. We both have increased the price of our high end product several fold over the last 4 years while Intel’s high end prices have more than halved. Creating another category serves to work contradictory to that. How does one cleanly position it versus a GPU and a CPU?? It will tear down what we have both built."

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Nvidia-ATI-lawsuit-antitrust,6421.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-amd-ati-graphics,6311.html

price fixing different from both deciding there's no point in creating a graphics card now that nobody needs, which is so fast that it will take away from future sales.

 

[soccerballtux]

Well no, he's partially right. The self overclocking, randomly boosting to 1100-1200 MHz GTX680 did have a slight lead, for a little while, over the stock 925MHz 7970.

All it really leads in now is power consumption. That's cool, I guess.

if ( benchBF3.exe || 3dmark12.exe)
{
clocks = zomgBOOST!!!!!!;
}
else
{
clocks = slowwwww;
}

 

[Rubycon]

Hopefully it's a (true) successor to the GTX580 for compute performance.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I think NVIDIA put a longer cooler on the 670 to make it look more like a high end card. I don't think it needs it when you look at the PCB. Looking at the launch reviews the 680 was the clear winner over the 7970, so you can't blame NVIDIA for taking advantage of the situation.

Infrared thermal images of the GTX 670 shows it totally needs heatpipes or something much more robust than reference cooling.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Infrared thermal images of the GTX 670 shows it totally needs heatpipes or something much more robust than reference cooling.

Why are they overheating/throttling/downclocking under load?

Copper gets hot, that's why they put in on the gpu.


I don't see why this had to turn into a 680 vs 7970 thread, this thread was meant to discuss the possibility that nVidia might deliver another mid-range gpu for their flagship - not another which incremental increase over GF110 is more or less incremental.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Why are they overheating/throttling/downclocking under load?

Copper gets hot, that's why they put in on the gpu.


I don't see why this had to turn into a 680 vs 7970 thread, this thread was meant to discuss the possibility that nVidia might deliver another mid-range gpu for their flagship - not another which incremental increase over GF110 is more or less incremental.

I can't find the site that had the pictures but you could see the back of the PCB burning up (100c)

 

[BallaTheFeared]

What was the core at?

 

[cmdrdredd]

What was the core at?

Dunno because the pictures were of the PCB area compared to other models from ASUS and Gigabyte etc.

I think it was a French or German site.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Ahh IC, I wouldn't worry about the PCB, the core itself would shut down if it hit a critical temperature.

My pump went out when D3 first came out and I never noticed until it shut the PC down and I saw boiling water coming from the blocks.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Hopefully it's a (true) successor to the GTX580 for compute performance.

It will probably blow the doors off it

But then, this GK110-consumer version is intriguing. Does it perform faster than the rumoured GTX780 or slot itself as a GTX765 (using GPU cores from the unwanted scrap)? or is the GK114 actually the GTX760?

Two things are for certain. First is that the GK110 based cards will perform well depending on how cut down they are (even with the compute orientated design as seen by Fermi based video cards, tradeoff here would be increased power consumption) and secondly they will come in some sort of retail version since they have graphics specific hardware built into them. If it was purely for HPC and GPGPU, some of those could have been cut down but they have been left in (and beefed up for that matter).

 

[tviceman]

Meh Take it to pm bro, and/or report your trolling theory. Thanks :thumbsup:

Also, your hilarious hypocrisy shows in not calling out something like the following:



Which he does day in, day out. But at least its negativity about AMD, all good in your eyes

He has 100 posts, you have over 2,000. I would completely expect your conduct to be more conducive to productive banter, and not slithering troll / mockery / worthless posts which seems to be your M.O. 90% of the time.

And you seem to keep zeroing on on me being so pro nvidia. Obviously you do not look through my post history. I may prefer a particular brand, but I am not above criticism and am not blind to market realities.

 

[3DVagabond]

I think NVIDIA put a longer cooler on the 670 to make it look more like a high end card. I don't think it needs it when you look at the PCB. Looking at the launch reviews the 680 was the clear winner over the 7970, so you can't blame NVIDIA for taking advantage of the situation.

I think that anyone who "blames" a business for pricing their product as high as possible (sell as much as you can for as much as you can) is naive. AMD charged as much as they could, given their firdt to market position, and nVidia countered. They likely would have come in at the same price as AMD if they had adequate stocks to go head to head. I think they came in $50 cheaper to give people a reason to wait until their product ramped up. For $50 less with better performance (at the time) people were content to contend with limited availability.

 

[3DVagabond]

I can't find the site that had the pictures but you could see the back of the PCB burning up (100c)

Behardware (hardware.fr English site) has thermal imaging pics. On the bottom of THIS page there's imaging for the 680, 670, and 580, idle and load.

The 670's power stages do run quite a lot hotter than the other 2. Although the GPU itself is cooler.

 

[Siberian]

NVIDIA has had the fastest video card since March. Odds are the 780 will continue that trend. No worries.

 

[blastingcap]

NVIDIA has had the fastest video card since March. Odds are the 780 will continue that trend. No worries.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970_GHz_Edition/28.html

 

[Jaydip]

@BC 680 lightning with volt mod is the fastest out there.Check out [H] review.

 

[RussianSensation]

NVIDIA has had the fastest video card since March. Odds are the 780 will continue that trend. No worries.

:whiste: NV lost the single-GPU performance crown since June 2012 (and if you consider overclocked 7970 vs. overclocked 680, NV never really had it since January 9th).

1.05ghz HD7970 is still the fastest card despite countless driver releases from NV.
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-650-ti/6/

The difference is not a lot but when you look deeper at the games where GTX680 trails 7970 GE, it can lose by 20-30%, while when 680 leads, that lead is usually 5-15%. HD7970 GE is actually a safer buy especially for higher resolutions since it offers a more balanced performance in a wider variety of games. The lead GTX680 had in Dirt 3, Batman AC and Skyrim are all gone in favor of HD7970 GE now and the performance gap in BF3 and Crysis 2 is practically non-existent. Now look at the games where 680 trails 7970GE and NV hasn't closed those gaps since March 2012.

Back to topic of the thread, good to hear that NV will be releasing some GK110 SKU after all, along with GK114. If HD8970 will only be 15% faster than 7970GE and GK110 is actually in the cards from NV, then of course they'll regain the performance crown.

Now the hope is for Metro Last Light and Crysis 3 to shine and take full advantage of all that new hardware goodness. :biggrin:

@BC 680 lightning with volt mod is the fastest out there.Check out [H] review.

[H] only tests a few games. If you look at high resolution, GTX680 already trails HD7970 GE 1.05ghz by 10-12% at 1600P. If [H] did a test of a 1280-1300mhz HD7970 against a 1370mhz 680, the 680 could easily win if you pick 5 games. Secondly, if you are going to talk about overclocked vs. overclocked, let's look at water then and 680 again loses.

If you look at reviews that consider 15-18 games+, it's clear that a 1.05ghz 7970 is faster than a 680, meaning HD7970 has faster performance at much lower clocks than 680 does. So how could a 1350mhz 680 outperform a 1300mhz 7970? It can't, but since [H] has such a small selection of games, including MP3, BF3 allows NV to score wins but what about all the games where 680 gets smoked in? Include those in the review to expand it to 15-18 games. That's the point I keep making, look at more games and where 680 loses, it loses by much more than when it wins.

In multi-monitor gaming, HD7970 GE CF is nearly as fast as GTX690 SLI. That's insane since the GTX690 SLI setup costs $1100 more.

Again, we've been over this GTX680 vs. HD7970 / 7970 GE topic 100x. Plus, his statement is still misleading since GTX680 Lightning never came out in March 2012, while HD7970 was overclocking to 1200mhz+ starting January 9th.

Let's just talk about GTX780. What do you guys think? GK114 15% faster than GTX680 and NV prices this at $449 to compete against HD8970 while GTX780 will be based on GK110 flagship at $599? Or will NV deliver GTX680+15% with GK114 at below $400 and position GK100 at $649? Or could we see GK110 as some $700-800 card?

 

[Will Robinson]

NVIDIA has had the fastest video card since March. Odds are the 780 will continue that trend. No worries.

I note that this statement is carefully parsed.
He is refering to a dual GPU(on one PCB)690 as the "fastest card" while alluding to a follow up to the GTX680(single GPU)..aka GTX780 as being it's worthy successor.

 

[Jaydip]

@RS
That was my point.They are slower or faster according to games. There is not a single gpu which wins in all the benches.But enough of that.I think if 780 is GK110 it will be more than 499$ for sure.

 

[SPBHM]

good news for AMD I guess...
GK110 would probably be a lot faster,

 

[raghu78]

Nvidia seems to have finalized Tesla K20 specs.

http://www.cadnetwork.de/konfigurator/gpu_rackserver_proviz_g13/system=88

2496 cuda coress, core clock 705 MHz, 5 GB memory, 320-bit bus.

Single precision = 705 Mhz x 2496 x 2 = 3.52 TFLOPS.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5840/...gk104-based-tesla-k10-gk110-based-tesla-k20/2

"GK110 SMXes will contain 192 CUDA cores (just like GK104), but deviating from GK104 they will contain 64 CUDA FP64 cores (up from 8, which combined with the much larger SMX count is what will make K20 so much more powerful at double precision math than K10."

GK110 has a 3:1 ratio between SP and DP units per SMX = 192: 64

DP = 3.52 /3 = 1.17 TFLOPS

The 320 bit memory bus for the high end Tesla K20 SKU is a clear indication of yield problems. This kind of crippling is unheard of on the flagship Tesla SKU. This does not bode well at all for desktop GK110. Nvidia might clock their desktop GK110 at 775 - 800 Mhz but the extent of the chip being crippled is definitely going to affect perf and perf/watt.

Nvidia are lucky that the GK104 was able to compete with HD 7970 and they were able to charge very good prices. that helped the margins and masked their yield issues.

Compared to M2090 based on GF110 which had 666 GFLOPS , Tesla K20 has 1.75 times the DP performance. Though Nvidia will have better efficiency with Kepler and achieve more of its theoretical max DP performance it still is far from the expected 3x performance improvement Nvidia was promising with K20. The real maxed out fully enabled GK110 based Tesla can be expected in H2 2013 and same can be said for the fully enabled desktop GK110.

 

[brandon888]

Russian sensation ....

Let's just talk about GTX780. What do you guys think? GK114 15% faster than GTX680 and NV prices this at $449 to compete against HD8970 while GTX780 will be based on GK110 flagship at $599? Or will NV deliver GTX680+15% with GK114 at below $400 and position GK100 at $649? Or could we see GK110 as some $700-800 card?

here there will be same fermi 2.0 for sure ... no doubt now ... They will launch GK 114 with +15% over 680 and with 500$ prie tag ... 680 will be like 450$ for that time ....
(but it's already about 460-470$ .... whatever ) so people will rush and buy 780 with no problem .... problem is that they will be blamed and will sold 670/680 cheap to buy 780 lol ... but good for me i will run then with 670 and save $$$ .....

even 580 to was 35-40% difference at max and now 15% ? meh ....

 

[RussianSensation]

brandon888, I am still disappointed in these 15% faster only rumours, but I am not buying them yet. More than 12-15 months to squeeze just 15% more sounds like it's not even worth the effort and R&D, especially for NV since just adding more memory bandwidth and expanding the CUDA cores from 1536 to 2048 would already pass 15% easily.

Consumers can get faster than that this month in the Asus Matrix HD7970, as it hits 1300mhz on air (that's 24% faster than HD7970 GE, and real world should be around 20% as the GPU performance/clock speed scaling is fairly linear).

Source

I'd imagine NV and AMD will have faster cards than the Matrix 7970 but that card is already > 20% faster than HD7970 GE with 5 min of tweaking and it will cost less than $500 USD.

So why wait for a 15% faster GK114 or HD8970 when Asus gives you that today? HD8970 and GK114 have got to be much better than that at $500 for enthusiasts, unless they'll be next generation's $399 cards or NV and AMD will continue to focus on performance/watt or these rumors are not very accurate.

2496 cuda coress, core clock 705 MHz, 5 GB memory, 320-bit bus.
Single precision = 705 Mhz x 2496 x 2 = 3.52 TFLOPS.
DP = 3.52 /3 = 1.17 TFLOPS

Those specs are on the low end of the the 2880 CUDA cores, 240 TMU 15 SMX GK110 die that many expected in K20. The clock speeds of 705mhz is what I estimated them to be a while back based on 1.2Tflop DP estimation in the white-paper and it looks to have been correct as well. At the same time NV may be more conservative with clocks of its Tesla cards to increase yields and keep the power consumption in check in the professional/server environments. K10 is only clocked at 745mhz to stay at 225W TDP.

2496 CUDA cores @ 705mhz is just 8% faster than a 1058 mhz GTX680. Further evidence NV had no chance at all to launch a consumer GeForce GK100/110 in 2012 at reasonable clocks this year to make it worthwhile over the leaner 294mm^2 GK104 chip.

Of course 5-6 more months from today can make a lot of difference in the maturity of the 28nm node. If NV can get those clocks to 1Ghz at 2496 CUDA cores, this chip will be fast.

I wonder what the TDP is on that K20 2496 CUDA cores 705mhz chip?