[VC]NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980, GTX 980 SLI, GTX 970, 3DMark performance

[Attic]

If a review discusses power under the value aspect I'd be fine with it but it definitely shouldn't be given the same review space as performance, with the exception of perhaps a "silent" or "green" focused site.

From the value, price/performance context:

US average price per kWh = $0.1297
Hours per week played by "core gamers" = 22
Annual cost per 100W of power of "core gamers" PC = 22 hours/week * 52 weeks/yr * 0.1297 $/kWh = ~150 $/yr * .1 (100W) = 15 $/yr
Total cost 100W of power usage of "core gamer" video card if used for 3 years = $45

So for example if the Nvidia 970 saves an amazing 100W over the 780 and this rumor is correct about their performance being relatively equal, that's $45 in inherent value to be considered when comparing pricing.

After crunching the math I'm just going to remember 50 cents per watt when value comparing.

Out of curiosity I looked up Techpowerup's power chart from their latest review: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_285_Dual-X_OC/23.html
Their Radeon 290 uses 64W more than the Geforce 780 so that's a negative value of $32.00 using that $0.50 close enough number. Excluding rebates the cheapest cluster of 290s are ~$380 cheapest cluster of 780s are $470, so from a brand feature neutral perspective the 290 is offering $58 in value atm. If the theoretical GeForce 970 using 100W less than the 780 was dropped into the market at $450 it would be close to value parity, $7 better value, with the Radeon 290 at $380.

So how close to 75W of card power does everyone think the GeForce 970 will get?

Sources:

"core gamers" 22 hours a week - http://bgr.com/2014/05/14/time-spent-playing-video-games/

US Average price per kWh - http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/end_use.cfm#tabs_prices-3

Nice post. I expect real power draw while maintaining boost clocks to be 160-190w for the 970 after it has heated up to 68c or higher.

 

[tviceman]

$50 cut from AMD for the 290 is all it would take. If the 290 goes to 299 (much cheaper) then a $399 gtx970 is going to have trouble selling.

Exaggerating? There are not any r290 cards going for $350. There is one for $370, 3 more under $400, and 10 $400+. The ASP is right around $400, not $350.

 

[Vesku]

I disagree. 290 is considered old to the masses, and too many of them used on ebay and the like for very cheap. 970 will be new and being NV it will still sell well. The masses determine sales and prices.........NV has a winner here.

I don't see the "masses" considering the Radeon 290 old and if a potential customer is already shopping ebay it's unlikely they'll buy either AMD or Nvidia brand new retail. If Nvidia drops the GeForce 970 in at $450 then AMD dropping official MSRP to $350 keeps them very competitive assuming the shopper has not already decided they must have Nvidia specific features. If they drop it in at $400 then in addition to AMD setting MSRP at $350 I'd expect the actual AIB partners to have several 290s hovering in the $320-330 range, much as there are several around $380 at the current MSRP of $400.

 

[DooKey]

I don't see the "masses" considering the Radeon 290 old and if a potential customer is already shopping ebay it's unlikely they'll buy either AMD or Nvidia brand new retail. If Nvidia drops the GeForce 970 in at $450 then AMD dropping official MSRP to $350 keeps them very competitive assuming the shopper has not already decided they must have Nvidia specific features.

The problem for AMD is that about 60%+ of customers (current customer base) has decided they are going to buy NV. A new model for NV just consolidates that position.

 

[Vesku]

The problem for AMD is that about 60%+ of customers (current customer base) has decided they are going to buy NV. A new model for NV just consolidates that position.

I wouldn't put 100% of current Nvidia card owners as being completely brand captured. Even with AMD having some serious work to do to sell consumers on their features.

Note AMD weathered the Q1'14 -> Q2'14 dedicated GPU sales drop better than Nvidia on a percentage basis: -10.7% vs -21%

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8446/the-state-of-pc-graphics-sales-q2-2014

 

[reputationZed]

It seems that a good number of you are less than enthusiastic about the anticipated performance of the GTX980 in comparison to the GTX780/780ti. But how significant of an improvement will it be for some one currently running an AMD 7870 (pre GHz edition). I'm still thinking I'm better off getting a 980 than a 780 unless the prices on the current gen cards drop significantly. The only reason I question this, and I may just be reading this wrong, is that many of you don't seem to think the 980 will do as well at higher resolutions. I'm running a single 2560 x 1600 monitor for gaming. I understand we will have a more definitive answer shortly but I'm in the mod to speculate. What would be the best gaming option for a 2560x1600 monitor in the near term?

 

[Vesku]

It seems that a good number of you are less than enthusiastic about the anticipated performance of the GTX980 in comparison to the GTX780/780ti. But how significant of an improvement will it be for some one currently running an AMD 7870 (pre GHz edition). I'm still thinking I'm better off getting a 980 than a 780 unless the prices on the current gen cards drop significantly. The only reason I question this, and I may just be reading this wrong, is that many of you don't seem to think the 980 will do as well at higher resolutions. I'm running a single 2560 x 1600 monitor for gaming. I understand we will have a more definitive answer shortly but I'm in the mod to speculate. What would be the best gaming option for a 2560x1600 monitor in the near term?

I think the Radeon 290 is the best value atm for 2560x1440 and your 2560x1600 resolutions. I'd think the GeForce 970 is much more likely to be a good fit for you as an alternative to the Radeon 290 than the GeForce 980 will be. That or keep an eye open for vendors clearing 780 and 780Ti stock after the Maxwell replacements arrive.

 

[alcoholbob]

CPU bottleneck approaching, temperature throttling due to bad case ventilation? It makes no sense that the GPU scales well in SLI in mobile but not on desktop cards.
Videocardz has no clue as usual about the reasons why this could happen. Especially in these theoretical tests, scaling usually is excellent.

If the card uses 160-170W as suggested by chiphell, that is 80W less than the 780 Ti at roughly the same performance. That is 50% better perf/W, an excellent result for a GK104 successor.
Or compared to the GTX 680 it would be about the same power for 75% higher GPU score, again excellent. How this translates into gaming remains to be seen but I expect a massive perf/W increase with GM204 across the board.
If (and I stress if) that characteristic is the same with GM200, it could be up to 50% faster than the GTX 780 Ti although I expect 30-40% just to be conservative.

290X Crossfire in Uber mode is also faster than the 295X2. So that means for high resolutions 780Ti SLI and 290X CF are both faster than the GTX 980 SLI.

GTX 980 is turning into the "fastest 1080p card". We'll have to wait until Titan II to have an upgrade for those of us running high resolutions.

 

[Grooveriding]

I'm sure nvidia can sell these things much cheaper. Small die = massive margins. They can dip way down the price ladder if AMD responds. No need to do that on launch though.

This is my guess as well. Smaller die with the near the same performance as 780ti and the ability to be more price flexible and bigger margins due to a lower cost of production.

Thinking on it I believe if these benches are accurate it may drive up the resale value of GK110 based cards if they go EOL and are replaced by these 256bit gm204 parts. If they become unavailable at retail many gamers wanting to run high resolutions may find the GK110 parts more desirable. But I believe they will keep Titan Black available if 780 and 780ti do get phased out to woo those customers.

 

[jpiniero]

They will definitely keep Titan Black on the market, if only for it's DP compute.

 

[reputationZed]

I think the Radeon 290 is the best value atm for 2560x1440 and your 2560x1600 resolutions. I'd think the GeForce 970 is much more likely to be a good fit for you as an alternative to the Radeon 290 than the GeForce 980 will be. That or keep an eye open for vendors clearing 780 and 780Ti stock after the Maxwell replacements arrive.

Is your recommendation of a 290/GTX970 over the GTX 980 based solely on performance per dollar or does the performance advantage of a 780/980 compared to a 770/970 drop off severely at 2560 x 1600. I only upgrade every 3 years or so.

 

[amenx]

GTX 980 is turning into the "fastest 1080p card". We'll have to wait until Titan II to have an upgrade for those of us running high resolutions.

I dont think the 256 bit bus is anything to worry about with these cards. At 1600p should do very well if we go by how well the 680 managed at that res when released. A couple years later and with expected improved bandwidth efficiency, should be easy for what is now almost a mainstream res (1440p). Not sure how it will do at 4k though.

 

[sao123]

It seems that a good number of you are less than enthusiastic about the anticipated performance of the GTX980 in comparison to the GTX780/780ti. But how significant of an improvement will it be for some one currently running an AMD 7870 (pre GHz edition). I'm still thinking I'm better off getting a 980 than a 780 unless the prices on the current gen cards drop significantly. The only reason I question this, and I may just be reading this wrong, is that many of you don't seem to think the 980 will do as well at higher resolutions. I'm running a single 2560 x 1600 monitor for gaming. I understand we will have a more definitive answer shortly but I'm in the mod to speculate. What would be the best gaming option for a 2560x1600 monitor in the near term?

Its not the anticipated performance... its the performance per price.

If what was being marketed as the GTX 980, was being marketed as the GTX 970 at the 399 price point, I think most people would have no issue with it.

The fact is, no GxX04 chip should ever be marketed or sold as part of a GTX x80 flagship model video card at flagship pricing. That level should exclusively be reserved for the X00/X10 chips

 

[Vesku]

Is your recommendation of a 290/GTX970 over the GTX 980 based solely on performance per dollar or does the performance advantage of a 780/980 compared to a 770/970 drop off severely at 2560 x 1600. I only upgrade every 3 years or so.

I suppose it depends on your desired game settings in the last year of that 3 years versus money spent. I think the 290/780/970 will be much like my 7950 you should be able to play at 1440/1600 on high in that 3rd year excluding a possible Crisis like "we'll obliterate current gen hardware" style of game. Now if you think you may transition to 4K/5K gaming during the cards lifespan that brings the very top end GPUs into consideration. It's also excluding the idea that you just want the fastest card available in which case all other factors go away and the choice will be clear from just looking at the top results in reviews.

I don't think this proposition changes much even if you plan to game at 120Hz+, just becomes a matter of needing two of whatever GPU you settle on. Although it would add a bit to the AMD performance aspect given their PCIe based Crossfire delivers better than SLI atm.

 

[Attic]

Exaggerating? There are not any r290 cards going for $350. There is one for $370, 3 more under $400, and 10 $400+. The ASP is right around $400, not $350.

No.

$348 from newegg

And it's one of the better non reference 290's available. I have fairly consistently seen new non reference 290's go for around $350, not always the PCS+ version, sometimes XFX or the lower tier powercolor TurboDuo model.


Interested as anyone to see how the 970 stacks against the 290. A $399 970 at launch is interesting, more than that, not so much if the performance holds true. Heat and power debate will only get overdone if the 970 can't compete toe to toe at price/performance with the non reference 290's.

Tip for spotting the review sites playing into the nVidia review guide (many do) will be to look for the 290's being benched at 947mhz on the core rather than the 1000+mhz core that the non reference 290's at or below $400 are running at. The PCS+ 290 for $348 runs 1040core and 1350 mem and matches/exceeds reference 290x cards.

I hope I don't see the 970 banging out against 947/1250 290's when the market for the 290's is 1000+/1250+ speeds available ~$400.

 

[3DVagabond]

You know that this happens when the competition doesn't show up?
Like Titan, for example.

...and 5870's? Now what was your point? That given the chance nVidia will screw us half to death? That's not AMD's responsibility. It's the nVidia faithful who continually show a willingness to over pay.

 

[3DVagabond]

The titan is not a rip off, it wasn't meant to be a gaming card.

With 4k monitor becoming affordable this is very disappointing.

Titan is an absolute rip off. It runs Geforce drivers, therefore it's a gaming card. They offer no professional support which is the only thing that makes pro cards cost more.

 

[MathMan]

The fact is, no GxX04 chip should ever be marketed or sold as part of a GTX x80 flagship model video card at flagship pricing. That level should exclusively be reserved for the X00/X10 chips

I agree: Nvidia should rename the gm204 die to gm200 and the gm200 to gm210. That would immediately shut up those people who whine about internal engineering names as if they matter.

 

[Attic]

I still love the Titan, as much for the name as anything, but when it came out it was not about price, it was about all that performance.

Overpriced yes, but hard to say someone can overpay. They know what's available.

 

[MathMan]

Titan is an absolute rip off. It runs Geforce drivers, therefore it's a gaming card. They offer no professional support which is the only thing that makes pro cards cost more.

The professional support is as follows:
- Quadro: special features related to CAD software. HW clipping planes, HW-accelerated AA line drawing.
- Tesla: special features related to multi-GPU management, ECC etc.
The Titan doesn't have those special features, but it DOES have the full speed DP. For a lot of people (think universities who want to build research workstations, not farm installations), that's a very big deal. The CUDA compiler is identical between Tesla and Titan.

You're more than welcome to think that Titan is worthless for a gamer, but if you think they're a bad deal for a professional, you're just being ignorant.

 

[3DVagabond]

A $399 GTX970 and a $499 GTX980 with around the same performance of the 290(x) will immediately kill AMD's Haiwaii sales and will result in the typical post nvidia launch price cut.

I guess in less than two months we will AMD's graphics card will be much cheaper than today.

You mean like the 770 with the 285 launch. Or the 780 after the 290X launch. It happens all of the time to both sides. Don't worry, AMD will release something to drive pricing down, and with the minimal performance increase we've seen so far it's not like anyone should be in a hurry to drop their 780 to get a 980.

 

[3DVagabond]

Exaggerating? There are not any r290 cards going for $350. There is one for $370, 3 more under $400, and 10 $400+. The ASP is right around $400, not $350.

HERE's 4 @ $350 or less.

 

[96Firebird]

Tip for spotting the review sites playing into the nVidia review guide (many do) will be to look for the 290's being benched at 947mhz on the core rather than the 1000+mhz core that the non reference 290's at or below $400 are running at. The PCS+ 290 for $348 runs 1040core and 1350 mem and matches/exceeds reference 290x cards.

I hope I don't see the 970 banging out against 947/1250 290's when the market for the 290's is 1000+/1250+ speeds available ~$400.

LOL.

Don't bench stock vs stock, bench overclocked vs stock! Didn't we get a whole lot of complaining when that happened with the 6870 launch vs the GTX 460 FTW? So which is it? Is it ok to do that, or is it not?

 

[3DVagabond]

The professional support is as follows:
- Quadro: special features related to CAD software. HW clipping planes, HW-accelerated AA line drawing.
- Tesla: special features related to multi-GPU management, ECC etc.
- Geforce: Gaming
The Titan doesn't have those special features, but it DOES have the full speed DP. For a lot of people (think universities who want to build research workstations, not farm installations), that's a very big deal. The CUDA compiler is identical between Tesla and Titan.

You're more than welcome to think that Titan is worthless for a gamer, but if you think they're a bad deal for a professional, you're just being ignorant.

You left off Geforce, which is what Titan is.

Universities pay the Clintons $700K for a speaking engagement. What Uni's are running research stations (pretty generic) made up of Titans? Unless you can name a few thousand, they aren't supporting the Titan market. It's gamers who don't mind over spending who are the largest Titan customers.

 

[Johnmcl7]

I've preferred AMD cards for a while but I'm seriously considering Nvidia this time around for their better coolers (assuming the new cards have decent blower units) and better 4K support. I currently have a pair of 6950's and one appears to be failing (or failed), the 290's don't appeal as the reference blower cooler doesn't appear to be very good and I prefer the blower type in case I decide to run a second later on. I have a GTX 760 for a TV gaming PC and surprised to find it works flawlessly with 4K over displayport while the AMD 290x's were troublesome (testing for a friend).

Hopefully there will be some concrete information on the new Nvidia cards some time soon.

John