The GTX 780, 770, 760 ti Thread *First review leaked $700+?*

[ICDP]

It's worse than that. $450-500 GTX680s, $360-380 GTX670s

GTX680 and GTX670 have dropped in price by a small margin but it is par for the course with Nvidia as they rarely drop prices on their high end cards, at least not significantly. They do have better brand recognition which helps keep prices at a premium. Though in my experience their build quality and drivers (single GPU) are no better or worse than ATI/AMD so I usually end up with AMD because they have almost always offered better price/performance.

$290 HD7950s and $410 HD7970GEs 1 year after their launches, with almost no price drops.

Not true in AMDs case though. Reference HD 7970 (non GE) released at $550 and can now be purchased for ~$380 for a custom cooled version. Reference HD 7950 was released at $450 and can now be purchased for ~$280 for custom cooled versions. So both cards now available with much better custom coolers and with excellent games bundled, for ~$170 less.

 

[Cookie Monster]

We used to see bigger jumps in price/perf because there were quicker cost recoveries from going down in process size and a mad dash to stuff more and smaller transistors in the same amount of silicon real estate. But as it becomes more and more costly to transition down in size, price/perf increases also slow down. (Improving architecture usually doesn't net a whole lot, with some exceptions like NVidia's 8800 series.)

Add in increased demand for TSMC wafers from the likes of Apple and you may see even slower price declines AND slower increases in performance if GPU makers elect to stay on one process size for longer. This is not the fault of AMD or NV per se. We're just running into quantum limits soon, and having mobile chipmakers bidding up wafer prices isn't helping. Moore's Law has had a good run but it looks like that run is soon over and we'll have to come up with something new other than more lithography shenanigans. Some people think 3D is the next phase. I don't know. I do know that ultimately this is a process problem. The architecture folks at Intel, AMD, NV, etc. can do only so much by themselves.

Well said.

 

[iMacmatician]

Will Titan still be faster than GTX 780?

Very likely but by how much is anyone's guess (especially with the evidence pointing to a 384-bit bus on the 780).

 

[RussianSensation]

Not true in AMDs case though. Reference HD 7970 (non GE) released at $550 and can now be purchased for ~$380 for a custom cooled version. Reference HD 7950 was released at $450 and can now be purchased for ~$280 for custom cooled versions. So both cards now available with much better custom coolers and with excellent games bundled, for ~$170 less.

HD7970 launched 1.5 years ago. When I referenced price stagnation, I mentioned relative to prices 1 year ago, not 1.5 years ago. HD7970 Ghz launched at $499 but in retail it was going for $469 or so. HD7950s dropped to low $300s around that time. Compared to the first 3.5 months when HD7970 launched, its prices were high but that was before April 2012. Once GTX680 launched in March 2012, in about 1 month the HD7970 fell $70-80 in 1 shot and many were going for $450-470. Overall if you look at AMD and NV prices for the last 11-12 months, they have barely dropped. That is to say the opportunity cost of waiting 11-12 months for another $20-60 from May 2012 to May 2013 was not worth it. At this point if someone didn't buy 28nm tech last year, they should probably skip this round entirely or wait until 28nm clearance prices once 20nm tech launches. I do not understand why anyone would pay 2012 prices in 2013 for 1 year old 28nm tech. The game bundles are hiding how overpriced 28nm cards are now. Even last year there were deals on GTX670s for $320-330 and HD7970 for $300-330.

if there is no competition (titan and 780) - there is absolutely no reason for price to drop. until (1) amd can come up with some competition or (2) until every enthausaist who can afford a titan/780 buys out. price will stay high. titan and 780 is a premium luxury exclusive product. you want to play - you have to pay.

Titan and GTX780 do not compete with HD7870/7950/7970/7970GE/GTX670/680. I am not even sure why you bring that up since those cards can be priced 2-2.5x more for a 35% increase since they target top 1% of PC gamers who do not care about value it appears.

Why are the majority of $500 and below cards cards still priced near their 11-12 months levels more or less? People keep talking about lack of competition from AMD but that has nothing to do with cards in the sub-$500 range since 28nm tech in general should start to get cheaper as we get closer to 20nm and 28nm tech is no longer the hot new thing. Tech should fall in price over time from both AMD and NV. Why would someone pay $360 for a reference GTX670 and $390 for a reference HD7970 in May 2013? In May/June 2012, those cards were going for very similar prices. Some possible explanations are that AMD/NV can price the cards at these levels since the majority of PC gamers either do not follow GPU cycles / node technology curve or they do not know how to time GPU purchases/upgrades properly or they do not look at historical pricing of GPUs as a reference.

For example, even before HD4890 launched, NV refreshed GTX280 $499 with GTX285 at $349. There was no HD4890 even close on the horizon at that point. NV passed on the manufacturing node savings to us It seems with this generation AMD and NV figured out that PC gamers are OK to pay 1 year old prices for 1 year old tech. Even without a half node shrink, 28nm tech is cheaper to manufacture now than 12 months ago. We should be getting price drops on everything below $500 level. GTX670 level needs to be at $299 at most and GTX680 at $399.

I'll just quote myself below.

I agree with a lot of your points. Don't you think though that 28nm manufacturing is cheaper now? Yields surely have improved and 28nm wafer prices are likely lower than 12 months ago. It should cost a lot less to manufacture a 294-365mm2 28nm chip today than around May 2012. Where are those cost savings? AMD and NV are just propping up their gross margins instead of passing those savings to us. They are now doing what Intel is doing with CPU chips by keeping prices nearly steady for almost the entire 2-year generation until the next major architecture arrives. This is not at all how the GPU industry has worked in the last 15 years. I saw this scenario play out with GTX570/580 prices before HD7970 launched and took a mental note. Now both AMD and NV are doing the same thing and keeping prices steady.

HD6950 unlocked was $230-250 around February 2010 and now GTX660Ti is going for $205 when you catch a great sale. That means in nearly 3.25 years, the performance increase is barely 25-30% at a similar price level for mid-range cards. If you want a real upgrade from HD6950 @ 6970 speeds, you would need to get an HD7950 and clock that to 1100mhz+. That card costs $290. That is horrendous since it's been 3.25 years since HD6950 was going for $230. On top of this it seems AMD and NV are both eager to raise prices and create new $700-1000 GPU levels for flagships. The current state of the GPU industry is the worst I have ever seen.

 

[UaVaj]

Titan and GTX780 do not compete with HD7870/7950/7970/7970GE/GTX670/680. I am not even sure why you bring that up since those cards can be priced 2-2.5x more for a 35% increase since they target top 1% of PC gamers who do not care about value it appears.

Why are the majority of $500 and below cards cards still priced near their 11-12 months levels more or less? People keep talking about lack of competition from AMD but that has nothing to do with cards in the sub-$500 range since 28nm tech in general should start to get cheaper as we get closer to 20nm and 28nm tech is no longer the hot new thing. Tech should fall in price over time from both AMD and NV. Why would someone pay $360 for a reference GTX670 and $390 for a reference HD7970 in May 2013? In May/June 2012, those cards were going for very similar prices. Some possible explanations are that AMD/NV can price the cards at these levels since the majority of PC gamers either do not follow GPU cycles / node technology curve or they do not know how to time GPU purchases/upgrades properly or they do not look at historical pricing of GPUs as a reference.

here a few things you miss.

history has ZERO indication of the future. regardless of what happened in history. that does NOT predict the future. so that idea is moot and dead.

20nm is NOT here and who knows WHEN 20nm will be avaialble. so that idea is moot and dead.

7950/7970/7970GE/GTX670/680 prices has NOT drop because for the last 11-12 month, there is simple NO replacement for them.

780/titan obviously have NO competition. so nvidia can charge WHATEVER nvidia want. folks WHO can afford it will buy becuase they simple want the BEST.

not rocket science.

 

[toyota]

I have been thinking for a few days that the 780 and 770 will both be GK110. the fact that 770 pics show apparently the same cooler and card length plus it has 6 and 8 pin connectors making me think its even more likely. it just makes no sense to give GK104 all those expensive things. that means the 760ti will probably just use full GK104 seen in the 680 and the plain 760 will simply be basically the 670 or 660ti core.

 

[RussianSensation]

here a few things you miss.

7950/7970/7970GE/GTX670/680 prices has NOT drop because for the last 11-12 month, there is simple NO replacement for them.

No history does matter because in the past existing tech would drop in price before a new node because consumers would stop buying. Rational consumers would recognize that manufacturing node gets cheaper over time as yields mature and would demand price drops. NV and AMD delivered. In the past we didn't know when 90nm would be replaced by 65nm, when 55nm would be replaced by 40nm and when 40nm would be replaced by 28nm. Therefore, the same factors that are in play today have been in play in the past. What is different is in the past PC gamers would stop buying old tech at 12 months old prices because they recognized that's not how the GPU industry has worked for 15 years+. What you are saying is now people said screw history and let's pay high prices for old tech because we don't know when 20nm tech is coming? That's not logical since we were all in the same spot during 90nm, 80nm, 65nm, 55nm, 40nm transition periods too not knowing exactly when the next node arrives. The arrival of the next node is never a certainty but we have a rough idea that every 24 months new tech arrives. In May 2013, paying $410 for HD7970GE that's based on essentially a January 2012 HD7970 and $360 for a 12-months old GTX670 is crazy talk. That's just as bad as buying GTX580 12 months after launch for $450.

780/titan obviously have NO competition. so nvidia can charge WHATEVER nvidia want. folks WHO can afford it will buy becuase they simple want the BEST. not rocket science.

I am not even discussing those cards. I am not sure why you constantly keep bringing them up. But since you did bring them up, why is it GTX690 costs $1,000 when GTX670 SLI can be had for $720? Regardless of GTX670 SLI vs. 690, why is GTX690 still $1,000 1 year later? There is no way it costs NV and AMD the same money to fab 294-365mm2 chips 12 months later. Why is HD7990 still $1,000 when it's 1 year late and when 2x HD7970 GEs are $820?

In the past people would never have paid $200-300 more for HD5970/GTX590 when HD5870/GTX570 were going for $330-350. HD5970 was $599. Fact is consumers if consumers are buying at these prices in 2013, they have to be to blame since they are willing to get bent over unless you believe that for the last 15+ years NV and AMD have been underpricing videocards and that flagship cards like X1950XTX, 8800GTX, GTX280, GTX480/580 should have been $1,000? In other words, you now believe that videogaming as a hobby was 'cheap' in the past and now AMD/NV are pricing their gaming cards at levels that they should have been starting with say GeForce 2 Ultra? One or the other has to be true. You cannot just ignore history and assume that this year is the norm now. What's next, $1,500 flagships and $750 mid-range GPUs, and on 14nm $2,000 GTX890? It is totally different to get ripped off on 8800GTX or HD7970 as an early adopter since you kind of know that when you are buying right away. But when these prices persist for 12 months, what kind of a trend is that?

By the time HD4890 came out at $259, HD4870/GTX260 216 were already selling for $175-185, far down from their $299 MSRPs. No 40nm GPUs were on the horizon even. What's happening this generation is a very unusual development wrt GPU prices.

What can I say, looks like NV and AMD finally figured out that PC gamers are willing to pay 2x the price for gaming cards. Ironically, GPU prices are now at the highest level they've ever been despite almost no next gen games on the PC in the last 2-3 years.

HD3870X2 = $449 (Jan 2008) - "AMD expects the Radeon HD 3870 X2 to be priced at $449, which is actually cheaper than a pair of 3870s - making it sort of a bargain high end product."

HD4870X2 = $549 (August 2008) - "At $549 the X2 isn't exactly a bargain, it's slightly cheaper than two Radeon HD 4870s"

HD5870 = $599 (November 2009) - "In our benchmarks the 5970 is practically tied with the 5850CF, and a pair of such cards would sell for $600 at this time." <<Why is GTX690 $1000 when GTX670 SLI is $720?>> Rip off.

HD6990 = $699 (March 2011)

HD7990 = $999 (August 2013) <<Why is HD7990 is $1,000 when HD7970GE CF is $820?>> Rip off.

What incentive do AMD/NV have now to price HD8990/GTX790 below $1,000?

As I said before, people are so concerned about AMD vs. NV that they missed what just happened to the GPU industry in the last 5 years. What if Intel raised the price of 4670K from $225 to $450 and for 4770K from $325 to $650?

 

[UaVaj]

looks like you did not even comprehend a word that was typed.

CNFS or perhap it is rocket science.

carry on.

 

[Fx1]

No history does matter because in the past existing tech would drop in price before a new node because consumers would stop buying. Rational consumers would recognize that manufacturing node gets cheaper over time as yields mature and would demand price drops. NV and AMD delivered. In the past we didn't know when 90nm would be replaced by 65nm, when 55nm would be replaced by 40nm and when 40nm would be replaced by 28nm. Therefore, the same factors that are in play today have been in play in the past. What is different is in the past PC gamers would stop buying old tech at 12 months old prices because they recognized that's not how the GPU industry has worked for 15 years+. What you are saying is now people said screw history and let's pay high prices for old tech because we don't know when 20nm tech is coming? That's not logical since we were all in the same spot during 90nm, 80nm, 65nm, 55nm, 40nm transition periods too not knowing exactly when the next node arrives. The arrival of the next node is never a certainty but we have a rough idea that every 24 months new tech arrives. In May 2013, paying $410 for HD7970GE that's based on essentially a January 2012 HD7970 and $360 for a 12-months old GTX670 is crazy talk. That's just as bad as buying GTX580 12 months after launch for $450.



I am not even discussing those cards. I am not sure why you constantly keep bringing them up. But since you did bring them up, why is it GTX690 costs $1,000 when GTX670 SLI can be had for $720? Regardless of GTX670 SLI vs. 690, why is GTX690 still $1,000 1 year later? There is no way it costs NV and AMD the same money to fab 294-365mm2 chips 12 months later. Why is HD7990 still $1,000 when it's 1 year late and when 2x HD7970 GEs are $820?

In the past people would never have paid $200-300 more for HD5970/GTX590 when HD5870/GTX570 were going for $330-350. HD5970 was $599. Fact is consumers if consumers are buying at these prices in 2013, they have to be to blame since they are willing to get bent over unless you believe that for the last 15+ years NV and AMD have been underpricing videocards and that flagship cards like X1950XTX, 8800GTX, GTX280, GTX480/580 should have been $1,000? In other words, you now believe that videogaming as a hobby was 'cheap' in the past and now AMD/NV are pricing their gaming cards at levels that they should have been starting with say GeForce 2 Ultra? One or the other has to be true. You cannot just ignore history and assume that this year is the norm now. What's next, $1,500 flagships and $750 mid-range GPUs, and on 14nm $2,000 GTX890? It is totally different to get ripped off on 8800GTX or HD7970 as an early adopter since you kind of know that when you are buying right away. But when these prices persist for 12 months, what kind of a trend is that?

By the time HD4890 came out at $259, HD4870/GTX260 216 were already selling for $175-185, far down from their $299 MSRPs. No 40nm GPUs were on the horizon even. What's happening this generation is a very unusual development wrt GPU prices.

What can I say, looks like NV and AMD finally figured out that PC gamers are willing to pay 2x the price for gaming cards. Ironically, GPU prices are now at the highest level they've ever been despite almost no next gen games on the PC in the last 2-3 years.

HD3870X2 = $449 (Jan 2008) - "AMD expects the Radeon HD 3870 X2 to be priced at $449, which is actually cheaper than a pair of 3870s - making it sort of a bargain high end product."

HD4870X2 = $549 (August 2008) - "At $549 the X2 isn't exactly a bargain, it's slightly cheaper than two Radeon HD 4870s"

HD5870 = $599 (November 2009) - "In our benchmarks the 5970 is practically tied with the 5850CF, and a pair of such cards would sell for $600 at this time." <<Why is GTX690 $1000 when GTX670 SLI is $720?>> Rip off.

HD6990 = $699 (March 2011)

HD7990 = $999 (August 2013) <<Why is HD7990 is $1,000 when HD7970GE CF is $820?>> Rip off.

What incentive do AMD/NV have now to price HD8990/GTX790 below $1,000?

As I said before, people are so concerned about AMD vs. NV that they missed what just happened to the GPU industry in the last 5 years. What if Intel raised the price of 4670K from $225 to $450 and for 4770K from $325 to $650?

We are being screwed.

It used to be that 2 cards in SLI were more expensive than 1 Dual GPU card. Now that card is hundreds of $/£ more.

Look at all the screaming Nvidia fans who are telling Nvidia to "Charge Us MORE!"

AMD has followed suit with its 7990 because Nvidia lead the way. This Duopoloy will keep screwing us out of more and more money and the people on this forum who defend these companies are part of the problem.

People are so keen on here that they just get taken advantage of. Its embarrassing really. Fools and their money are easily parted.

AMD buying ATI has really hurt us also. ATI used to be willing to go cheaper on GPU's because they didnt have a debt mountain

 

[hawtdawg]

People need to realize that it will likely be a year or more before we see anything on a 20nm process. TSMC is targeting the first half of 2014 for the 20nm process that AMD would use for a GPU. We're going to be stuck with overpriced, underperforming GPU's until then. Plus, by that point, we'll be so used to it that people will forget that 500 dollars used to be hella expensive.

 

[Roadrunners]

No history does matter because in the past existing tech would drop in price before a new node because consumers would stop buying. Rational consumers would recognize that manufacturing node gets cheaper over time as yields mature and would demand price drops. NV and AMD delivered. In the past we didn't know when 90nm would be replaced by 65nm, when 55nm would be replaced by 40nm and when 40nm would be replaced by 28nm. Therefore, the same factors that are in play today have been in play in the past. What is different is in the past PC gamers would stop buying old tech at 12 months old prices because they recognized that's not how the GPU industry has worked for 15 years+. What you are saying is now people said screw history and let's pay high prices for old tech because we don't know when 20nm tech is coming? That's not logical since we were all in the same spot during 90nm, 80nm, 65nm, 55nm, 40nm transition periods too not knowing exactly when the next node arrives. The arrival of the next node is never a certainty but we have a rough idea that every 24 months new tech arrives. In May 2013, paying $410 for HD7970GE that's based on essentially a January 2012 HD7970 and $360 for a 12-months old GTX670 is crazy talk. That's just as bad as buying GTX580 12 months after launch for $450.



I am not even discussing those cards. I am not sure why you constantly keep bringing them up. But since you did bring them up, why is it GTX690 costs $1,000 when GTX670 SLI can be had for $720? Regardless of GTX670 SLI vs. 690, why is GTX690 still $1,000 1 year later? There is no way it costs NV and AMD the same money to fab 294-365mm2 chips 12 months later. Why is HD7990 still $1,000 when it's 1 year late and when 2x HD7970 GEs are $820?

In the past people would never have paid $200-300 more for HD5970/GTX590 when HD5870/GTX570 were going for $330-350. HD5970 was $599. Fact is consumers if consumers are buying at these prices in 2013, they have to be to blame since they are willing to get bent over unless you believe that for the last 15+ years NV and AMD have been underpricing videocards and that flagship cards like X1950XTX, 8800GTX, GTX280, GTX480/580 should have been $1,000? In other words, you now believe that videogaming as a hobby was 'cheap' in the past and now AMD/NV are pricing their gaming cards at levels that they should have been starting with say GeForce 2 Ultra? One or the other has to be true. You cannot just ignore history and assume that this year is the norm now. What's next, $1,500 flagships and $750 mid-range GPUs, and on 14nm $2,000 GTX890? It is totally different to get ripped off on 8800GTX or HD7970 as an early adopter since you kind of know that when you are buying right away. But when these prices persist for 12 months, what kind of a trend is that?

By the time HD4890 came out at $259, HD4870/GTX260 216 were already selling for $175-185, far down from their $299 MSRPs. No 40nm GPUs were on the horizon even. What's happening this generation is a very unusual development wrt GPU prices.

What can I say, looks like NV and AMD finally figured out that PC gamers are willing to pay 2x the price for gaming cards. Ironically, GPU prices are now at the highest level they've ever been despite almost no next gen games on the PC in the last 2-3 years.

HD3870X2 = $449 (Jan 2008) - "AMD expects the Radeon HD 3870 X2 to be priced at $449, which is actually cheaper than a pair of 3870s - making it sort of a bargain high end product."

HD4870X2 = $549 (August 2008) - "At $549 the X2 isn't exactly a bargain, it's slightly cheaper than two Radeon HD 4870s"

HD5870 = $599 (November 2009) - "In our benchmarks the 5970 is practically tied with the 5850CF, and a pair of such cards would sell for $600 at this time." <<Why is GTX690 $1000 when GTX670 SLI is $720?>> Rip off.

HD6990 = $699 (March 2011)

HD7990 = $999 (August 2013) <<Why is HD7990 is $1,000 when HD7970GE CF is $820?>> Rip off.

What incentive do AMD/NV have now to price HD8990/GTX790 below $1,000?

As I said before, people are so concerned about AMD vs. NV that they missed what just happened to the GPU industry in the last 5 years. What if Intel raised the price of 4670K from $225 to $450 and for 4770K from $325 to $650?

I totally agree with all of this. In all the years of buying top end gpus going back to the voodoo gpus I have never seen the market like this. People willing to spend silly money on gpus is not helping the market one bit. When I look at what I paid for my 4870X2 compared to dual gpu cards of today the difference is staggering. The GTX Titans price is also a joke for what would normally just be considered another normal top end gpu release. Some people seem to think that just because it has a fancy name it justifies spending double what a normal top end gpu should be sold for.

IMO enthusiasts need to stand their ground and not buy into this type of tactics which are being used by Nvidia and AMD. Vote with your wallet and these companies will soon see that they can get away with sort of pricing, until then they will continue to up the profit margins.

 

[ICDP]

HD7970 launched 1.5 years ago. When I referenced price stagnation, I mentioned relative to prices 1 year ago, not 1.5 years ago.

Irrelevant, you don't get to decide an arbitrary date that means nothing. You may as well argue that the prices haven't dropped in the past 24 hours. It still means nothing because the only valid timescale that matters is the actual release date until now. No 7970 GE and 7950 boost don't count, they are just higher clocked versions of the same cards that were released in Jan 2012.

Reference 7970, Jan 2012 = $550+, price today $380. That is a $170 (30%) drop in price. Here in the UK the reference 7970 launched at £420, custom cooled 7970s are now selling for £305 (27% saving).

So your "prices have stagnated" argument, at least for HD 79x0 cards is wrong. Though I agree that the new crop of top end cards are ridiculously overpriced and have said so since the release of GTX690.

 

[wand3r3r]

Irrelevant, you don't get to decide an arbitrary date that means nothing. You may as well argue that the prices haven't dropped in the past 24 hours. It still means nothing because the only valid timescale that matters is the actual release date until now. No 7970 GE and 7950 boost don't count, they are just higher clocked versions of the same cards that were released in Jan 2012.

Reference 7970, Jan 2012 = $550+, price today $380. That is a $170 drop in price so your "prices have stagnated" argument is wrong, PERIOD.

The Boost is a different SKU (different prices/speeds off the bat), therefore I think it's relevant.

Also, the prices haven't dropped *much* since ~the end of summer imo?

 

[Smartazz]

Is there much of a gain liquid cooling cards like the 780 and Titan? If I end up hating Crossfire, I think a liquid cooled, highly overclocked 780 would be the way to go.

 

[blackened23]

Is there much of a gain liquid cooling cards like the 780 and Titan? If I end up hating Crossfire, I think a liquid cooled, highly overclocked 780 would be the way to go.

The general consensus is, no. Liquid is more versatile with GPUs that provide robust voltage control options, which sadly isn't the case with the Titan. I don't know if the 780 will be different in this respect. The Titan attempts to do everything for you in terms of voltage control, downclocking, etc which works well for the average user, but for the power user that wants to crank the voltage really high on water, you don't have that flexibility. Since liquid cooled systems are the exception and not the norm, nvidia is trying to create the best performance out of the box for someone who doesn't know what they're doing.

You'll be able to make slight gains by putting the Titan on water, but it's a far cry from what prior cards were able to do - a GTX 580 for example, was able to get astronomical overclocks on water due to the flexibility of software-based voltage control. Of course you had to crank the voltage really high, but as long as the card was adequately cooled it was a non-issue.

 

[Smartazz]

The general consensus is, no. Liquid is more versatile with GPUs that provide robust voltage control options, which sadly isn't the case with the Titan. I don't know if the 780 will be different in this respect. The Titan attempts to do everything for you in terms of voltage control, downclocking, etc which works well for the average user, but for the power user that wants to crank the voltage really high on water, you don't have that flexibility. Since liquid cooled systems are the exception and not the norm, nvidia is trying to create the best performance out of the box for someone who doesn't know what they're doing.

You'll be able to make slight gains by putting the Titan on water, but it's a far cry from what prior cards were able to do - a GTX 580 for example, was able to get astronomical overclocks on water due to the flexibility of software-based voltage control. Of course you had to crank the voltage really high, but as long as the card was adequately cooled it was a non-issue.

I assume that liquid is still much quieter than the stock cooler on Titan though right? The major driving factor that I want to WC my GPUs is less noise and I'm hoping they clock a little higher.

 

[blackened23]

I assume that liquid is still much quieter than the stock cooler on Titan though right? The major driving factor that I want to WC my GPUs is less noise and I'm hoping they clock a little higher.

Quieter? Sure. It's a major case of diminishing returns, though, because the stock cooler is not noisy. Personally I don't feel the cost of water cooling the Titan is worth it - you're looking at least 100 for blocks and then the hassle of setting up the loop, I don't think it's a worthwhile endeavor.

It is worth water cooling most CPUs, because you have a lot of flexibility with changing load vcore. The load voltage on the titan is capped at 1.175 or 1.2, depending. So you get a slightly quieter system with overclocking that is no better than the stock cooler, so i'd stick with the stock cooler.

 

[SirPauly]

The key is why can nVidia command and sustain their asking price?

 

[Fx1]

The key is why can nVidia command and sustain their asking price?

duopoly and ATI has been crippled by AMD.

 

[DooKey]

The key is why can nVidia command and sustain their asking price?

Because there is too much history of crappy drivers and crappy product under the ATI/AMD video brand in the eyes of the average consumer. NV is just a better managed company and it shows.

 

[f1sherman]

duopoly and ATI has been crippled by AMD.

That's like saying Qualcomm crippled AMD,
after buying it lets say for $10B, going head-to-head against Intel/NV and getting manhandled.
So if anything it's other way - $6B investment in losing business is what has crippled AMD.

There had been zillion better ways to spend that money.
For example: Piling it all together in $10 notes and setting it alight for savings in office heating and illumination

 

[Fx1]

That's like saying Qualcomm crippled AMD,
after buying it lets say for $10B, going head-to-head against Intel/NV and getting manhandled.
So if anything it's other way - $6B investment in losing business is what has crippled AMD.

There had been zillion better ways to spend that money.
For example: Piling it all together in $10 notes and setting it alight for savings in office heating and illumination

ATI was fine without AMD

 

[wand3r3r]

The key is why can nVidia command and sustain their asking price?

Relying on people not keeping up to date on the current market. Brand loyalty etc.

Those things will only go so far though. Eventually the shine will wear off and people will notice they can get better deals etc.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Gaming Evolved and their recent drivers are doing a lot to change the perception of the average consumer. Many people who are brand loyal to the competition see it as desperation and losing money for AMD, but those bundles are the exact same thing as TWIMTBP. The difference these days is that AMD is getting all the major titles and Nvidia is giving people things for free to play titles.

 

[willomz]

At the moment both companies bundle 2 decent games, AMD also gives away Blood Dragon, but that''s hardly the biggest incentive.

Which recent drivers?