Passing the buck doesn't change the situation. Even the cHiL controllers have a hard cap, same as Kepler.
They do not... its the AIBs that modify the PCB and exclude the cHiL controllers to save $$$.
The data is the data Keys, there's less frametime latency variation on the radeon than the geforces in that TR review.
AMD locks their voltage too, lol. A cap isn't a lock.
There would almost certainly be more degradation as well. Not quite as desperate and out of place as the $200 sweet spot market discussing price/perf of $500 video cards. What's to defend? The GTX 780 stock is faster than 7970 OC.
What about them? If I can spend $650 on a video card and get 10-15% more performance than the next guy who also spent $650, why shouldn't I?
You're sounding like a desperate individual trying to use $200 sweet spot logic to justify $500 video cards. 7970 OC and 780 OC aren't comparable, stop trying to compare them. Even the $500 7970 Lightning gets trounced by a reference GTX 780.
He claims to have some AMD 7950'S.You don't need try to defend everything about nv, it just shows your extreme NV fanboyism.
My MSI 7950s voided warranty with removal of screws, I still took my cooler off to replace the stock TIM because it sucked.
ROFL... Post of the day... and it is only 4pm...Passing the buck doesn't change the situation. Even the cHiL controllers have a hard cap, same as Kepler.
Yes it spends less time beyond 16.7ms thats coz it's faster see but it has more frametime variance. You can see it in spikes in FCAT frame time graph and you see how it shoots upwards more in the latency percentile graph were ideally you'd want to see a more horizontal lineThat is incorrect. If you actually look at the TR review, GTX 780 has better 99th percentile FCAT frametime than 7970 GHz Ed in all games tested other than Sleeping Dogs, and has less time spent beyond 16.7 ms measured using FCAT in all games except Sleeping Dogs and Guild Wars 2.
Seriously?
Ok, NV didn't lock the voltage down? You are desperate to turn this into a positive for NV.
Why isn't the 680 unlocked if by your (fallacy) logic the 7970 G beats it? Who cares what the faster stock card is, that doesn't justify voltage locking.
Kepler cards need the voltage that is given, they have limited headroom on the limited voltage.
You know very well what I'm talking about but try to portray your beloved nV in the best light.
The 780 basically has 2 things against.
-Price
-Neutered beyond nv's stingent limits
The performance, cooler, etc. are all good. (not utterly amazing it's only a ~15% boost from the last king of the hill)
You don't need try to defend everything about nv, it just shows your extreme NV fanboyism.
wand3r3r said:They capped the limit artificially low.
GPU Boost 2.0 does allow the card to be overvolted to some degree up to the point where long-term reliability is not seriously compromised. It is insane to suggest or imply that it would be prudent for any manufacturer to not impose any limit.
That s why we try to convince people not to buy overpriced cards. I want need GPU too! But if people will be $1000 cards I'll have to wait 2 years until I can afford it!
Keysplayr, I know you think 780 is second best thing in the world (just after Titan). But your point of view is invalid. Consumers who have to pay for the products may have very different option to yours...
Compared to what? A slave on a chains is more free than a slave in a cage now? That's a good thing? Should we jump and clap our hands?
Doing that you increase the price of graphics cards for honest consumers that take responsibility for they actions (overclocking/volting and/or modding)
GPU Boost 2.0 does allow the card to be overvolted to some degree up to the point where long-term reliability is not seriously compromised and within power/temp/fan limits. It is insane to suggest or imply that it would be prudent for any manufacturer to not impose any limit.
Passing the buck doesn't change the situation. Even the cHiL controllers have a hard cap, same as Kepler.
every card is different. We all know that kepler is limited by the voltage locking.You also have a limit to where adding voltage doesn't do anything but add extra heat.
Caymen was limited to 1.3v but did nothing with it.
Fermi was limited to 1087mv but could be unlocked and use a bit more than that for higher clocks. Even still it was capped at 1.21v unlocked through a bios flash but even with chilled water 1.13v was about the end of the voltage scaling.
Kepler is basically a refined Fermi, it's unlikely it scales much past 1.2v.
We know it's limited by TDP capping, what you know is beyond our comprehension.
Well as a consumer I'm not really interested in what is best for a multi billion dollar corporation and any other consumer shouldn't be either. I want the best value for my dollar and I enjoy overvolting my card and overclocking the bejeesus out of it. I will continue to support whatever manufacturer allows me to continue to do that. Keep playing games and locking down cards and pricing cards as high as a complete system build and I'll buy a console and be done with the nonsense. I think Nvidia got a little taste of the enoughs enough attitude the enthusiast market has showed the last day or so. The 780 is sitting on the shelves like a moldy loaf of bread at the corner store.
You don't get it. GPU Boost does allow the cards to be overclocked and overvolted, just within power/temp/fan limits that the card can reliably operate with.
So you admit they built them way below industry standards therefore they had to cap the voltage and tdp low to keep them from blowing up
GPU Boost 2.0 allows the user to adjust power target, temperature, and fan speed up to a certain point. You do realize that GPU's cannot handle infinitely high power, temps, and fan speeds right?
The GTX 780 stock is faster than 7970 OC.
You're sounding like a desperate individual trying to use $200 sweet spot logic to justify $500 video cards. 7970 OC and 780 OC aren't comparable, stop trying to compare them.
That is incorrect. If you actually look at the TR review, GTX 780 has better 99th percentile FCAT frametime than 7970 GHz Ed in all games tested other than Sleeping Dogs, and has less time spent beyond 16.7 ms measured using FCAT in all games except Sleeping Dogs and Guild Wars 2.
You don't think the average Ghz card has 10-15% overclocking potential? The difference between the 480 and the 5870 was 15% and we still compared those cards. Same with the 580 and 6970. Now all of a sudden, 15% is too large a gap to compare two cards?