[Semiaccurate] GK104/Kepler/GTX680 Next Week?

[BoFox]

Now just for the OVERCLOCKABILITY... 10% is whoopty doopty, but if it's already maxed out on the clocks then the 30% OC will make the 7970 a better choice. If it's not maxed out it'll be a toss up and can be considered for other features (eyefinity/3dvision etc.)

IN before the lock.

195W TDP beating HD 7970 with 250W max TDP by 10% is already indicative of something..

That NV is planning on doing GTX 680 Ti that has the same 244W TDP as GTX 580, after stuffing as much voltage into its mouth as possible, for some serious surprise!

Perhaps the 195W TDP number is for the base clock only, not for the boosted clock.

IN before the lock too!

 

[Keysplayr]

Looking at those benches which we can safely knock 5-10% off for nvidia pr exaggeration, the 680 is really lackluster using your logic. Less of an improvement over the 580 than the 7970 was over the 6970. And $550 as well? Go premiums!

::FACEPALM:: he is actually using the graph. ::/FACEPALM::

 

[sontin]

I wonder if anyone would acknowledge that because of the gk104
name, that people thought this would be a mid range card with a mid range price?
Im pretty sure you all k.ow that is where the lower pricetag comes into play. And the lackluster performance of 7970 gave some the idea, or the hope that a lower priced mid ranged nvidia card could best it.
Alas, it all gets twisted in the end doesn't it.

I think that people can't believe that nVidia will not only have a smaller core but also the better performance than AMD with their "go premium" High-End card.

But after i saw that the mobile version of GK107 is nearly as fast as the gts450 (which have a 29% higher core clock) i think that GK104 with 1006MHz will be much faster than 2x over the GTX560TI and so much faster than the GTX580 and 7970.

GTS450 3DMark11 Performance:

GK107 aka GT640m 3DMark11 Performance

/edit: Tomshardware has gpu score of a GDDR5 GTS450:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/af6850-1024d5s1-ngt440-1gqi-f1-n450gts-m2d1gd5,2949-11.html

Even with nearly 2x the bandwidth the GTS450 is only a few % faster than the GT640m.

 

[AtenRa]

Be clever people, I dont expect anyone here would believe that any PR department would use a benchmark showing its own product being inferior to the competition, would you ??

Do you honestly believe NV PR department would put Civ 5 in the slide if GTX680 wasn't at least 10% faster in that game and not slower than the competition ?? :sneaky:

 

[Grooveriding]

Benchmarks? All I see is a fake slide that was on chiphell months ago. At least the fakes are try hards now. I love how the scale starts at .8. LOL.

Compare that chart to a proven fake chart that appeared on chiphell in January :

good stuff! Definitely looks legit bro. I still love how it starts at .8. The marketer that came up with that idea should be promoted! Props to nvidia.

Should of known that, especially with it coming from an nvidia shill site like ABT.

 

[SolMiester]

So, the whole "28nm node @ TSMC is shutdown" looked/read like an interesting article. Troubling if true.

For everyone. Too bad FABS cost $$$billions$$$ to make and operate.

I am really surprised that China hasn't pushed into the high tech manufacturing (FABS) in a huge way. It seems like a natural progression. Their government has the cash, and that seems to be the important thing. (actually curious, Taiwan seems to be doing seems to be the hotbed for this technology, I am curious why other regions/countries are not pursuing it)

China cannot be trusted with intellectual property, just ask some car manufacturers like BMW or a few Businessman who do frequent trip across Chinese Borders..

 

[blackened23]

Be clever people, I dont expect anyone here would believe that any PR department would use a benchmark showing its own product being inferior to the competition, would you ??

Do you honestly believe NV PR department would put Civ 5 in the slide if GTX680 wasn't at least 10% faster in that game and not slower than the competition ?? :sneaky:

They're both fan made IMO, they were both on chiphell a long time ago.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Grooveriding : 'using your logic' :\

Dude after all your posting on 7970 pricing, if you are going to about face on the 680, wow.

Read about 10 posts up. I'm not impressed with this card if $550 and 10% faster. For $550 I expect a massive die gpu that makes power supplies tremble and makes last gen cards like the gtx 580 look like a low end card. That's what it takes to pry $550 for a gpu. This gen is a no-go for me.

 

[Keysplayr]

I demand you find this. I haven't seen a post by the Skywalker in some time, of course I probably just missed it

Demand fulfilled.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2229924&highlight=sentence&page=4

Post #77.

 

[blckgrffn]

Demand fulfilled.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2229924&highlight=sentence&page=4

Post #77.

:awe:

LOL.

Thank you!

 

[BoFox]

Blackened23, thanks for pointing that out - whoops, excuse my memory/oversight!

Should of known that, especially with it coming from an nvidia shill site like ABT.

It doesn't mean that ABT is a shill site. What is it about ABT that is shill? Every forum has fanboys on both sides, but ABT seems to be pretty balanced and objective overall. Just look at my Voodoopower ratings and see how I put HD 6990 above GTX 590 - ultimately proving that I'm not NV-biased.. many many people out there would love to position GTX 590 above HD 6990 for millions of different reasons. Just because Keysplayr posts over at ABT doesn't mean it's shill - he posts here too!

You... are you on AMD's side? I'm just guessing..

I'm actually glad that the chart was fake, hoping that NV is indeed going to make it 30% faster than HD 7970.

For starters, 1536 CUDA cores seem to be too much for 320mm^2 silicion.

So I'm thinking it's 768 hyperthreaded physical cores, for 1536 total CUDA threads.

768 by itself is already 50% more than GTX 580's 512 cores.

180 Voodoopower for GTX 580 times 50% = 270 Voodoopower!!!!!!!!

Plus a conservative 15% efficiency with "hyperthreading" means 270*1.15 = 310 Voodoopower!

That's a bit insane, I know. The 256-bit bandwidth will be bottlenecking it so, so, so badly.

So, it'd probably be bottlenecked back to only 30% faster than HD 7970 (220VP * 1.3 = 286 VP)

It's a speculation thread, until facts come out anyways.

 

[Keysplayr]

Should of known that, especially with it coming from an nvidia shill site like ABT.

So because ABT is dead set against AMD's use of stealth viral marketing, and AMD not caring about it's employees doing this, you label ABT an Nvidia shill site. OK then Groove. :thumbsup:

 

[SolMiester]

Should of known that, especially with it coming from an nvidia shill site like ABT.

WTF..

 

[Grooveriding]

So because ABT is dead set against AMD's use of stealth viral marketing, and AMD not caring about it's employees doing this, you label ABT an Nvidia shill site. OK then Groove. :thumbsup:

You mean unsubstantiated fantasies that panned out to nothing? And a wingnut editor that makes up unfounded accusations against the members of another forum? Does not take much to convince you of anyting I guess

:thumbsdown:

ABT imo is an nvidia shill site and the forum there is a clear reflection of that.

 

[Keysplayr]

You mean unsubstantiated fantasies that panned out to nothing? And a wingnut editor that makes up unfounded accusations against the members of another forum? Does not take much to convince you of anyting I guess

:thumbsdown:

ABT imo is an nvidia shill site and the forum there is a clear reflection of that.

So in other words, if they were blatantly pro AMD, you'd have no problem with them and would most likely defend an attack upon them from an Nvidia zealot like myself. ?

@ SolMiester:

"WTF.."

::shrugs::

 

[BoFox]

You mean unsubstantiated fantasies that panned out to nothing? And a wingnut editor that makes up unfounded accusations against the members of another forum? Does not take much to convince you of anyting I guess

:thumbsdown:

ABT imo is an nvidia shill site and the forum there is a clear reflection of that.

Uh-oh. :rollseyes: You're getting in trouble here with the trolling. Keys is gonna spank you in private.

Why can't you answer my question yourself? I'm pretty much in accord with ABT's overall perspective. Am I biased?

You should LOVE me for positioning HD 6990 above GTX 590!!!

The speculations seem to make a bit sense with the rumored specs (in my above post), right?

 

[Grooveriding]

So in other words, if they were blatantly pro AMD, you'd have no problem with them and would most likely defend an attack upon them from an Nvidia zealot like myself. ?

What are you trying to say here? Not sure how you made this conclusion, but okay. :thumbsdown:

 

[blackened23]

Just because a number of their users are biased towards nvidia doesn't make them a shill site. Heck, I don't pretend to be unbiased and don't apologize about it. Isn't everyone biased in some fashion. LOL. But i'll buy either brand if the performance advantage is there, always have. (most recently with 580s)

 

[BoFox]

So in other words, if they were blatantly pro AMD, you'd have no problem with them and would most likely defend an attack upon them from an Nvidia zealot like myself. ?

@ SolMiester:

"WTF.."

::shrugs::

Could it be that Solmeister was saying this "WTF" to GrooveRiding?

 

[Nintendesert]

I don't think ABT is a shill site, Apoppin's head just assploded when he didn't get a free card to review and hasn't been the same since. I don't know if that's a reflection of the entire site and don't really feel it is.

 

[Lonyo]

Blackened23, thanks for pointing that out - whoops, excuse my memory/oversight!


It doesn't mean that ABT is a shill site. What is it about ABT that is shill? Every forum has fanboys on both sides, but ABT seems to be pretty balanced and objective overall. Just look at my Voodoopower ratings and see how I put HD 6990 above GTX 590 - ultimately proving that I'm not NV-biased.. many many people out there would love to position GTX 590 above HD 6990 for millions of different reasons. Just because Keysplayr posts over at ABT doesn't mean it's shill - he posts here too!

You... are you on AMD's side? I'm just guessing..

I'm actually glad that the chart was fake, hoping that NV is indeed going to make it 30% faster than HD 7970.

For starters, 1536 CUDA cores seem to be too much for 320mm^2 silicion.

So I'm thinking it's 768 hyperthreaded physical cores, for 1536 total CUDA threads.

768 by itself is already 50% more than GTX 580's 512 cores.

180 Voodoopower for GTX 580 times 50% = 270 Voodoopower!!!!!!!!

Plus a conservative 15% efficiency with "hyperthreading" means 270*1.15 = 310 Voodoopower!

That's a bit insane, I know. The 256-bit bandwidth will be bottlenecking it so, so, so badly.

So, it'd probably be bottlenecked back to only 30% faster than HD 7970 (220VP * 1.3 = 286 VP)

It's a speculation thread, until facts come out anyways.

256-bit isn't bandwidth.
Bus width * RAM clock gives you bandwidth.

I'd take a 256-bit bus at 6GHz over a 384-bit bus at 3GHz any day.
256 x 6GHz vs 384 x 4GHz is a wash, same bandwidth. Not necessarily a bottleneck at all.
One of the main reasons NV had to go 384-bit in the last gen was because they couldn't make a memory controller which could manage higher, so while AMD were sitting at 5+GHz and could settle for 256-bit, NV needed 384-bit.

 

[Grooveriding]

Certainly was a worth while site in the past, but as late, it has entered bizarro land and is worthless.

So, about that MIA 680? ...

 

[BoFox]

256-bit isn't bandwidth.
Bus width * RAM clock gives you bandwidth.

I'd take a 256-bit bus at 6GHz over a 384-bit bus at 3GHz any day.
256 x 6GHz vs 384 x 4GHz is a wash, same bandwidth. Not necessarily a bottleneck at all.
One of the main reasons NV had to go 384-bit in the last gen was because they couldn't make a memory controller which could manage higher, so while AMD were sitting at 5+GHz and could settle for 256-bit, NV needed 384-bit.

Ouch, you just one-upped me! I meant bus, not bandwidth. It was just a loose statement.

Like the one done written by Benchmarkreviews:

NVIDIA's GF114 GPU inside the GeForce GTX 560 Ti utilizes all four available 64-bit GDDR5 memory controllers to facilitate 256-bit bandwidth access to the frame buffer.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=680&Itemid=72
Just a loose statement..

GTX 580's memory clock was not 3GHz - it was 4GHz. The bandwidth would be identical, then.

Trust me, it's gonna "moderately" bottleneck Kepler, as GTX 580 was already "mildly-moderately" bottlenecked by it.

 

[tviceman]

So, about that MIA 680? ...

I think you complain more than my wife, mother, and everyone here on this forum. You must have a really, really crappy life to whine so much.

Do you know who has a really crappy life? The guys that end up getting banned for attacking other members. Don't let that be you!
-ViRGE

 

[MrK6]

Certainly was a worth while site in the past, but as late, it has entered bizarro land and is worthless.

So, about that MIA 680? ...

BFG jumped that sinking ship and that says enough for me. But indeed, about that 680...

I think you complain more than my wife, mother, and everyone here on this forum. You must have a really, really crappy life to whine so much.

And the thread's sunk to a new low.