Single 7970 OC VS Single 680 OC VS 6950 CF VS 580 SLI

[aaksheytalwar]

No idea about tdp

But I researched that onwards of GeForce 4 ti to GeForce 680, nvidia always releases a refresh after about the first 6 months. The only exception was 6800 ultra.

Usually such a refresh has been 15-20% faster with nearly no exceptions

As a general rule more often than not nvidia does about 2x the performance every 2 years so you should expect the big Kepler to be in the range of twice the fps of a stock gtx 480 or so

Something like 15-25% faster than gtx 680, tops 30% I guess across most usable settings, but more realisitically take or give 20%

However it will probably be priced over $600-650 for that performance

 

[BallaTheFeared]

My guess is if it's 20% faster than the 680 it will need an additional 25~~ish% more TDP, putting it right around 240w TDP.

I think it will be stronger than 20% faster at higher resolutions, and with higher levels of AA. As it should carry a few more ROPs, which do AA for Nvidia cards and is one of the major problems (and it's OC potential with the gross TDP limit) with the 680 currently.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I am talking about settings where a 680 gets about 45 fps it will probably get 55-60 fps tops in most situations

It will basically get twice the fps of a gtx 480 or 570,

In situations like eyefinity or an insane amount of aa it may be 30-40% faster but chances are both would be unplayable anyway or there would be very few such situations and merely reducing 8x aa to 4x aa would correct it, possibly

Think of
Gtx 480 to 580
Or
Gtx 280 to 285
Or
8800gtx to 8800ultra
Or
7800gtx to 7900gtx
Or
Fx5800 ultra to fx5900ultra
Or
GeForce 4ti 4600 to 4800

Practically none of these cards was exactly even a full 20% faster

IMO 20-25% is optimistic-realistic, 15% is sorta assure, 30% is dreaming but possible

 

[BallaTheFeared]

The difference between those and this (if it's truly bigK) is that they're all big node -> big node progressions.

If bigk is really coming, we're looking at 2k SP vs 1.5k SP, a large increase in ROPs, and a larger bus. Unlike say 480 -> 580 which was simply a refined GF100 chip, this would be more akin to Nvidia releasing a high TDP 460 first, then coming out with a refined GF100 given more time to perfect the process and decrease leakage, resulting in higher clocks and better perf/watt than what GF100 actually came out as.

It should be interesting none the less :thumbsup:

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Maybe ur right but then it would need to be the first in history. Besides, are those specs speculation or officially announced?

 

[Silverforce11]

BigK on specs should be ~25% faster, obviously depends on how high they will clock it, prolly not as high as gk104 to restraint TDP below 300W. Have to consider its a HPC architecture first and foremost.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Maybe ur right but then it would need to be the first in history. Besides, are those specs speculation or officially announced?

Speculation based off what happened with GF114 (GTX 560ti) -> GK104 (GTX 680).

 

[aaksheytalwar]

If it is speculation then I am pretty sure that anything more than 20-25% gain is unlikely. And if that is the case then amd might wait till 2013 to release Tenerife but may release something which is faster than big k

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Hopefully someone makes something happen, right now we have next gen mid range performance parts in the $500+ slot with no actual offerings worth noting below it.

 

[Lepton87]

I am talking about settings where a 680 gets about 45 fps it will probably get 55-60 fps tops in most situations

It will basically get twice the fps of a gtx 480 or 570,

In situations like eyefinity or an insane amount of aa it may be 30-40% faster but chances are both would be unplayable anyway or there would be very few such situations and merely reducing 8x aa to 4x aa would correct it, possibly

Think of
Gtx 480 to 580
Or
Gtx 280 to 285
Or
8800gtx to 8800ultra
Or
7800gtx to 7900gtx
Or
Fx5800 ultra to fx5900ultra
Or
GeForce 4ti 4600 to 4800

Practically none of these cards was exactly even a full 20% faster

IMO 20-25% is optimistic-realistic, 15% is sorta assure, 30% is dreaming but possible

7800GTX 256MB to 7900GTX yielded definitely more improvement than 20%. 7800GTX 512MB was a phantom card almost like 6800ULTRA EXTREME

 

[aaksheytalwar]

You can't compare 256mb to 512mb. In games where 256mb is enou the difference won't be there. You need to compare 7800gtx 512mb to 7900gtx 512mb

 

[Lepton87]

You can't compare 256mb to 512mb. In games where 256mb is enou the difference won't be there. You need to compare 7800gtx 512mb to 7900gtx 512mb

7800GTX 512 was clocked massively faster than 7800GTX 256.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Yes, going from a 7800GTX 256 to 7900GTX 512 was at least a 40-50%+ performance increase. But I really doubt that will happen in this case. It is possible. But the chance of it not happening is greater considering that nVidia hasn't announced official specs and we are just speculating.

Recently I even read somewhere that GK110 wasn't big kepler, big kepler would be a bigger die than GK104 but not GK110 and faster but just a fair bit compared to GTX 680.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

A Detailed Analysis of 7970 OC ~ 1150 approx VS 680 OC @ 1215 6110.

In the games tested (at 1920x1080 8x AA, anything lower is anyway irrelevant with these cards), they practically tie, but the 7970 is 4.6% faster with average FPS and 6.6% faster with minimum FPS.

Clock to clock 7970 is faster, at stock to stock 680 is a bit faster, once both are overclocked, 7970 is a bit faster. OVERALL TIE

http://akshaytalwar.blogspot.in/2012/04/7970-oc-vs-680-oc-7970-wins.html

The analysis is above.

 

[Dark Shroud]

Even with the overclocking I think AMD needs to drop the price to $450 and I agree 7970 oc for $500 would be a nice deal but it would have to alteast come with a 1Ghz Core if not 1.125 or 1200. That an slap on an Artic cooler on it and I would jump on it.

However since this is a new arch for AMD i'm curious so see how driver tuning will go in the next few months.

There is no reason for at $100 price drop on the 7970. It's a niche product where almost everyone who buys one will OC it.

Dropping the price down to $500 or possibly $480 is more than fair. Especially considering Nvidia has almost no product to sell.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

In India, 7970 and 680 sell at the same price, so that isn't an issue here.

And honestly, ideally it should be priced at $500 or so. But the thing is isn't it often that nvidia has priced its stuff 15-25% higher than amd despite similar performance, in the past years, like 570 and 6970, 6970 was a bit faster at stock but once overclocked 570 was a bit faster, but there were pretty much equal like the case here.

So a price drop is optional as when you are spending $500+ on a GPU, $50 isn't something that matters much. But yea, sub $500 would be ideal, and $450 isn't required until AMD wants to woo customers and provide greater value/$

And a 7970 @ 1200 beats the hell out of any overclocked 680 OC when you really move to 1600p or 1440p or use 8x AA with 1080p, because lower settings with that usually don't require these cards in most games anyway

 

[3DVagabond]

In NZ the 680 is ~$100 (~$80USD) more expensive than the 7970 (last time I checked). nVidia always demands a premium over AMD here, though. For what it's worth, both cards are in stock.

 

[biostud]

the 680 and 7970 is the same price in Denmark as well...... ~$690 :\

 

[Don Karnage]

Overclock3d? Is this a joke?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Overclock3d? Is this a joke?

Nope, but you are becoming one

 

[aaksheytalwar]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2238096

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Waiting for more replies

 

[plsboy]

Thx Great Post
i was lookin for something like this for days it doesnt matter whats the average fps, u want to know how much low the frames will get.
any chance u can get the result for crysis 2 & batman arkham?
well i need to know wich way should i go, 6950 cf or 7970?
in other games-except metro&BF3- u get the smooth gameplay but in these 4 games simply u cant...