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

[Genx87]

There is competition. 7970 CF for £560, 7950 CF for £430, Even Nvidias products are better such as 670 GTX SLI £580

If people buy the other product, then they disagree with you.

 

[Fx1]

If it is overpriced people wont buy it. And who can get away with that? Whatever company can sell a product to people willing to purchase it. That is who.

There are always people who will buy it. Some people have 3 on there. Nvidia is testing the water. Now it knows it can get away with it prepare to pay $1000 for the 880 GTX.

 

[Genx87]

There are always people who will buy it. Some people have 3 on there. Nvidia is testing the water. Now it knows it can get away with it prepare to pay $1000 for the 880 GTX.

If I feel like paying for it. If I dont, there will be other models available to me for purchase from Nvidia or their competitor.

 

[Fx1]

If I feel like paying for it. If I dont, there will be other models available to me for purchase from Nvidia or their competitor.

Sure if you can no longer afford the 3.0L with the leather seats you can always give in and pay them for the hybrid with the tape player.

Way to stick it to em!

 

[Genx87]

Sure if you can no longer afford the 3.0L with the leather seats you can always give in and pay them for the hybrid with the tape player.

Way to stick it to em!

Welcome to the real world where not everybody gets to drive the BMW. And instead decides it is wiser to purchase a Chevy.

 

[badb0y]

Yep, no competition and the price will go higher. Now we have to see how AMD reacts to this, are they going to sell there 8970 at $999 when it comes out and beats the Titan?

 

[Black Octagon]

For those of you making 'clever' comparisons between performance GPUs and performance cars:

When you drive a car, there are SPEED LIMITS to respect*

The same is not true of graphics cards. It would be different if the mid range was already maintaining a solid 120+fps when maxing out the latest games at 1440p...then, people could buy their performance GPUs for other reasons like design, acoustics, thermals etc.

But since that's not the case, most all of us are spending what we can afford on GPUs because nearly no amount of performance is ever enough

*This being a forum infested with yanks, I'm going assume that 0-1% of you do NOT drive mainly or exclusively on the German highway

 

[tviceman]

Yep, no competition and the price will go higher. Now we have to see how AMD reacts to this, are they going to sell there 8970 at $999 when it comes out and beats the Titan?

You know what would be funny (not really funny, but amusing in an ironic sort of way)? If AMD's first 20nm flagship chip can't convincingly beat Titan. The original 7970 at launch was only about 20% faster than gtx580 when it initially launched. If AMD makes a similar leap with their first 20nm single GPU flagship video card, then they'll pretty much "only" match Titan.

Yeah I know it will be way, way cheaper blah blah blah but from a technological standpoint, it will be embarrassing for them.

 

[SirPauly]

There is competition. 7970 CF for £560, 7950 CF for £430, Even Nvidias products are better such as 670 GTX SLI £580

Then why are you going on-and-on?

For value minded enthusiasts there is more value offerings!

Maybe if it was priced lower, nVidia couldn't meet demand and cannibalize sales from their current and future Kepler derivatives -- to protect current and future margins.

nVidia doesn't care what Kepler product a gamer buys as long as it is Kepler based, imho!

If the GTX Titan was 749 -- who would buy GTX 670 SLi? Or potentially GTX 770 SLi?

 

[badb0y]

You know what would be funny (not really funny, but amusing in an ironic sort of way)? If AMD's first 20nm flagship chip can't convincingly beat Titan. The original 7970 at launch was only about 20% faster than gtx580 when it initially launched. If AMD makes a similar leap with their first 20nm single GPU flagship video card, then they'll pretty much "only" match Titan.

Yeah I know it will be way, way cheaper blah blah blah but from a technological standpoint, it will be embarrassing for them.

Titan is ~30% faster than the 7970 Ghz edition, On release the 7970 was something like 50% faster than the 6970 IIRC so that should put it about ~20% faster than the Titan if a similar pattern is followed.

If AMD is smart they won't go for a small die, they will try to make something like a Titan at 500mm^2 and then sell it for $999+. At least that's what I would do if I wanted to be an aggressor to nVidia.

EDIT: I just went back and checked the early reviews of 7970. Holy crap the drivers were crap back then.....

 

[SlickR12345]

Way too expensive, I hope no one buys the new graphics.

 

[96Firebird]

On release the 7970 was something like 50% faster than the 6970 IIRC

30%.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34981002&postcount=48

This is how I knew that off the top of my head...

 

[wand3r3r]

You know what would be funny (not really funny, but amusing in an ironic sort of way)? If AMD's first 20nm flagship chip can't convincingly beat Titan. The original 7970 at launch was only about 20% faster than gtx580 when it initially launched. If AMD makes a similar leap with their first 20nm single GPU flagship video card, then they'll pretty much "only" match Titan.

Yeah I know it will be way, way cheaper blah blah blah but from a technological standpoint, it will be embarrassing for them.

gtx 580 -> 7970 +20% performance (embarrassing)
7970 -> titan + <30% (not embarrassing at 250% the price?)
titan -> 8970 +20% (even if cheaper would be embarrassing?)

You're saying 20% more performance for less cost would be embarrassing from AMD, but are you saying less than 30% for 250% the cost isn't? Did I follow that correctly? In my opinion 20-30% faster is somewhat significant, if the cost is less. I'd prefer 100% gains though.

 

[badb0y]

30%.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=34981002&postcount=48

This is how I knew that off the top of my head...

Haha, Yea I went back to confirm and by then you had already posted.

 

[96Firebird]

Haha, Yea I went back to confirm and by then you had already posted.

To add to your point, the drivers have really changed the performance of the 7xxx series cards from launch. Was this because AMD had a totally new architecture? On the subject of VI, how similar is that architecture?

Edit - I guess this is getting very off-topic now...

 

[SirPauly]

Titan is ~30% faster than the 7970 Ghz edition, On release the 7970 was something like 50% faster than the 6970 IIRC so that should put it about ~20% faster than the Titan if a similar pattern is followed.

If AMD is smart they won't go for a small die, they will try to make something like a Titan at 500mm^2 and then sell it for $999+. At least that's what I would do if I wanted to be an aggressor to nVidia.

EDIT: I just went back and checked the early reviews of 7970. Holy crap the drivers were crap back then.....

I thought the small die strategy was working -- AMD was gaining share and bringing in monies -- nVidia was trying to combat this strategy with monolithic cores and had trouble executing these bigger dies. Working so well that AMD did over-take nVidia in over-all discrete leadership. Worked so well nVidia did an AMD on AMD!

 

[Face2Face]

OFF-Topic

Don't you think AMD sandbagged when they released the 7970 and 7950 on purpose?. Nvidia released their GTX 670 and GTX 680 to counter the original 7970 + 7950. Then AMD releases drivers with huge gains and GHz and boost editions to put them back on top...

 

[wand3r3r]

Here are AT's numbers for the 7970 at launch.

Crysis warhead
At 2560 the 7970 enjoys a 26% lead over the GTX 580
Even compared to the 6970 that trend holds, as a 32% lead

Metro 2033
At 2560 it’s ahead by 30% (of the 580)
33% at 2560 (6970)


Dirt 3
As a result the 7970 is still faster than the GTX 580, but not by as much as in other games. At 2560 this manifests itself as a 19% lead
compared to the 6970 the 7970 enjoys one of its bigger leads. Here the 7970 leads by about 45% at 2560

Total war shogun
which is 29% ahead of the GTX 580
and 48% ahead of the 6970.

Batman ac
7970 only taking an 18% lead over the GTX 580 at 2560.
As for the 6970, the 7970 has another very strong showing opposite AMD’s previous generation, beating the 6970 by 44%.

Portal 2
is 18% better than the GTX 580
7970 enjoys a smaller lead over the 6970, beating it by only around 30%

BF3
Battlefield 3 ends up being one of the worst games for the 7970 from a competitive standpoint. It always maintains a lead over the GTX 580, but the greatest lead is only 13% at 2560
2560 ... quite good at 30% (over 6970)

Starcraftii
it takes a 19% lead over the GTX 580
Against the 6970 it also looks quite good, with a lead of just under 40%.

Civ 5
the 7970 is winning by 12% in a game NVIDIA previous won by a massive margin.
to the 6970, where the 7970 enjoys a consistent 62%

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5261/amd-radeon-hd-7970-review/24

Interesting to review the performance differences at launch. These are without the massive increases late last year.

 

[badb0y]

I thought the small die strategy was working -- AMD was gaining share and bringing in monies -- nVidia was trying to combat this strategy with monolithic cores and had trouble executing these bigger dies. Working so well that AMD did over-take nVidia in over-all discrete leadership. Worked so well nVidia did an AMD on AMD!

Nah, it didn't work in the desktop discrete market share. For the past....7-8 years? The desktop market share has been pretty much split 40-60 between AMD and nVidia despite AMD's price/performance strategy most of nVidia's gains in market share came from notebooks. It would be prudent for AMD to follow the money instead of the mind-share.

 

[96Firebird]

It would be prudent for AMD to follow the money instead of the mind-share.

Which is why I think AMD went with the bigger die with better compute. They wanted to penetrate the professional market in a big way, but I fear it was too little too late. Nvidia already saturated the market and anyone who coded their programs in CUDA are not very likely to switch over to AMD.

 

[24601]

Agreed. I actually believed it for a second, as IMO that's the only way to get a real speed increase out of GK104.

._.

so..... we have nothing to talk about until December when we can complain about 20nm delays until march.

I blame ARM.

28nm and 20nm were/are expensive because of retardedly high competition for wafers from ARM manufacturers.

Hopefully the 780 comes out at least slightly lower than the current price curve would set it at to lower prices at least a little on the lower end parts.

Doubt it though.

It looks like Nvidia will just have a part (770) that will be on par with 7970 GHz edition @ $450 or will drop that segment to $400 at best.

 

[tviceman]

gtx 580 -> 7970 +20% performance (embarrassing)
7970 -> titan + <30% (not embarrassing at 250% the price?)
titan -> 8970 +20% (even if cheaper would be embarrassing?)

You're saying 20% more performance for less cost would be embarrassing from AMD, but are you saying less than 30% for 250% the cost isn't? Did I follow that correctly? In my opinion 20-30% faster is somewhat significant, if the cost is less. I'd prefer 100% gains though.

You apparently did not read what I said correctly. Let me requote myself.

from a technological standpoint, it will be embarrassing for them

Them, referring to AMD, and my statement as a whole, referring to a hypothetical situation of AMD's first single GPU flagship card not soundly beating Titan. I spoke nothing of price. I've already said time and again Titan is too expensive and if gtx780 comes in over $600 then it's too expensive too.

 

[tviceman]

OFF-Topic

Don't you think AMD sandbagged when they released the 7970 and 7950 on purpose?

If they did, it backfired big time in sales and bad perception of being beaten and slower when gtx680 came out. So I say no they did not purposefully sandbag. Not releasing the 7970GE from the get-go was stupid and I refuse to believe that yields weren't good enough.

 

[SirPauly]

Which is why I think AMD went with the bigger die with better compute.

The die was smaller than the HD 6970 though and to an extent, still a small die strategy.

 

[MrK6]

You apparently did not read what I said correctly. Let me requote myself.
Them, referring to AMD, and my statement as a whole, referring to a hypothetical situation of AMD's first single GPU flagship card not soundly beating Titan. I spoke nothing of price. I've already said time and again Titan is too expensive and if gtx780 comes in over $600 then it's too expensive too.

What a hypocrite. If AMD is faster, it's "not fast enough." If they charge $50 more, they're "gouging." If nvidia is faster, but charging $600 more, we're also "not appreciating the hardware from a technology standpoint."

gtx 580 -> 7970 +20% performance (embarrassing)
7970 -> titan + <30% (not embarrassing at 250% the price?)
titan -> 8970 +20% (even if cheaper would be embarrassing?)

You're saying 20% more performance for less cost would be embarrassing from AMD, but are you saying less than 30% for 250% the cost isn't? Did I follow that correctly? In my opinion 20-30% faster is somewhat significant, if the cost is less. I'd prefer 100% gains though.

Pretty much.

The die was smaller than the HD 6970 though and to an extent, still a small die strategy.

I wonder if AMD will change that this time around.