GTX700 series reviews thread

[omeds]

What people? Things aren't exactly flying off the shelves.

They seem to be selling ok

 

[wand3r3r]

Here are the performance differences from those tests:

Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - ALL BENCHMARKS: +30.1% / +28.8%

Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - SYNTHETIC BENCHMARKS: +30.4% / +30.8%

Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - DX9/DX10 GAMING BENCHMARKS: +30.2% / +28.5%

Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - DX11 GAMING BENCHMARKS: +30.1% / +28.5%

Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - 25X16 GAMING BENCHMARKS: +32.3% / +26.3%

Avg. % improvement for GTX 780 vs. GTX 680 / 7970 GHz Ed - 19X10 GAMING BENCHMARKS: +27.9% / +30.7%

Wow, bt got nearly 30% improvements. Many of the other reputable sites are saying ~15-20%? Hmm...

If anyone is curious, 3Dcenter.org did a round up of a number of review and calculated the average performance difference against 7970GE (and 680 and Titan):

http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/lau...launch-analyse-nvidia-geforce-gtx-780-seite-2

For 1920x1080 4xAA, across 6 reviews (HT4U, PCGH, ComputerBase, Anandtech, TPU and Techspot), the 780 is 14.7% faster than a 7970GE

For 2560x1600 4xAA, across 8 reviews (HT4U, ComputerBase, THG, Hardware Canucks, Anandtech, TPU, Tech Report and Techspot), the 780 is 14.5% faster than a 7970GE

For 5760x1080 4xAA, across 3 reviews (ComputerBase, Anandtech and TPU), the 780 is 18.3% faster than a 7970GE

~15-18%

TPU's review puts the 780 in the best light. Most other reviews have it 15-22% faster than 7970GE.

"On average we found the GeForce GTX 780 to be 24% faster than the GTX 680 and 16% faster than the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition when measuring frame rate performance. The frame time performance was a bit different as the GeForce GTX 780 was just 12% faster than the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition" ~ TechSpot

NV is asking $250 more for that. Even with overclocking on the 780, the price is about $100-150 too high. To me a 7970 card is not worth $400 anymore since I picked them up at $450 1 year ago. To me a 7970 today is worth $300-320 because it's now a 1.5 year old GPU. Based on that I think 780 needs to be $499 or maybe $549 tops. Instead NV threw the $499 pricing out and went to GTX280's launch price of $649.

See the way I look at it, why buy $650 28nm card 1.5 years into 28nm generation? Sure we do not know if VI will be 100% 20nm or what its pricing will be, etc., or when Maxwell will launch in 2014. However, with no next gen PC games even on the map until later this year, there is little reason to upgrade over the summer when a lot of us play summer sports, go travelling/vacation, etc. A lot of people have already beaten Tomb Raider, C3, etc. Why upgrade, just to replay those games again? I like to upgrade for fun too but after selling a 7970, it'll cost me $350 for what 20-25% more performance, maybe 40% once OC? That's decent but not great. For GTX580 owners, that's another story. For them this card is very enticing.

What 28nm generation taught me is moving forward, there is little reason to wait after NV and AMD drop their first set of cards. Once they arrive, you pay a small early adopter price premium but then your card is good to go for 2 years until the next node which brings major performance increases. Now buying the 780 entails a stop-gap solution. Maxwell 20nm $650 card may easily end up 40-50% faster than the 780. 2014 should start to see a lot more demanding games due to developers targeting PS4/Xbox One. If Maxwell is 40-50% faster than the 780, that'll be almost double the performance of my card. That's an upgrade I am looking forward to!

Good points.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

That really is the point for me. You're raping yourself buying a $650 card when you will likely be getting a +30-50% faster card in 7 months time for $550 (this price is a joke, probably $700 is the new norm.)

Even though only AMD has announced 20nm cards in 2013, Nvidia won't be far behind. Is the high price worth +20% performance for 7 more months of stagnant console ports? There are no games on the horizon worth upgrading for.

 

[hawtdawg]

Sadly, doesn't look like it (MSI lightning 780) is going to happen - from what I've read at some other forums, all GK110 aftermarket boards are limited to +37 more voltage higher than reference. Although they *can* specify different parameters for GPU boost which can result in longer boosts, which is why the WF3 GTX 780 is outperforming the stock Titan. So with this being the case, and the Lightning series always revolving around a substantially better than reference PCB - I don't think it will happen with the 780.

However, The rumor is that the GTX 770 will have more flexibility in terms of voltage, though - apparently the GTX 680 lightning is being rebadged as the 770 lightning. So it seems that over voltage 770s will be a thing.

The cards actually allow up to +50mv, but not unless you specify it in the vbios. I can't imagine a situation where a Titan or 780 would need anything close to that with the stock TDP limit. I would think MSI could do something like release a Lightning edition with the full 1.212v and 300w TDP unlocked.

You've seen the Heaven thread, there's a lot of potential in these cards with a couple of changes to the vbios.

 

[5150Joker]

That really is the point for me. You're raping yourself buying a $650 card when you will likely be getting a +30-50% faster card in 7 months time for $550 (this price is a joke, probably $700 is the new norm.)

Even though only AMD has announced 20nm cards in 2013, Nvidia won't be far behind. Is the high price worth +20% performance for 7 more months of stagnant console ports? There are no games on the horizon worth upgrading for.

Playing Last Light and Tomb Raider on max settings was worth it for me. Others will enjoy Crysis 3 and surround + whatever other backlog of games they got. There's always games that can use extra GPU power that people play. I play BF3 at 1440p with max settings and the two Titans comfortably keep the FPS above 60 so that it never dips below what I consider critical for smooth gameplay.

 

[3DVagabond]

This was sent to all of the Titan owners after the release of the GTX 780..

What a dweeb. Classic small man syndrome Shows he's got money, but no class. There are far better vehicles for less than 1/2 the price. It's not even a good looking Ferrari.

 

[hawtdawg]

What a dweeb. Classic small man syndrome Shows he's got money, but no class. There are far better vehicles for less than 1/2 the price. It's not even a good looking Ferrari.

not sure if serious.

 

[5150Joker]

What a dweeb. Classic small man syndrome Shows he's got money, but no class. There are far better vehicles for less than 1/2 the price. It's not even a good looking Ferrari.

Jealous much?

 

[Silverforce11]

What a dweeb. Classic small man syndrome Shows he's got money, but no class. There are far better vehicles for less than 1/2 the price. It's not even a good looking Ferrari.

I'll be happy with a Nissan GTR. Godzilla!

 

[3DVagabond]

not sure if serious.

Serious

Jealous much?

Nope.

 

[ams23]

Wow, bt got nearly 30% improvements. Many of the other reputable sites are saying ~15-20%?

At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters too much, as the % difference in performance is highly game dependent. The important thing is that the GTX 780 will allow for higher playable settings in the vast majority of gaming titles compared to 7970 GHz Ed. And GTX 680. And for people who want NVIDIA but want better perf/$ than GTX 780, then the upcoming GTX 770 is a fine choice.

 

[wand3r3r]

At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters too much, as the % difference in performance is highly game dependent. The important thing is that the GTX 780 will allow for higher playable settings in the vast majority of gaming titles compared to 7970 GHz Ed. And GTX 680. And for people who want NVIDIA but want better perf/$ than GTX 780, then the upcoming GTX 770 is a fine choice.

15% isn't going to allow for any higher settings in most cases. If the cards get 45 fps, then 52 fps isn't going to allow you to e.g. touch the AA. It's barely a noticeable difference.

In some rare case it'll just be barely better.

I'd take a 15% fps increase any day, that's not the question, but to try up-sell it is ridiculous (for nearly a $200-250 price difference).

 

[ams23]

That really is the point for me. You're raping yourself buying a $650 card when you will likely be getting a +30-50% faster card in 7 months time for $550 (this price is a joke, probably $700 is the new norm.)

Even though only AMD has announced 20nm cards in 2013, Nvidia won't be far behind. Is the high price worth +20% performance for 7 more months of stagnant console ports? There are no games on the horizon worth upgrading for.

I would imagine that most people upgrade high end GPU's on a two year cycle. So anyone getting GTX 780 now will probably get a Maxwell GPU in two years. The benefit of this approach vs. early adopters on new fabrication process tech is more stable drivers, better perf/watt, and higher overclocking headroom.

 

[brandon888]

i don't get why buy card for 650$ when after 1 year 860 will outperform 780 by few % for 200-250$ ...... i think best strategy is buy midrange card every 2 years and don't bother ....

like 460 =>660 => 860

 

[ams23]

15% isn't going to allow for any higher settings in most cases.

Sure it will, especially with graphically intensive titles at high IQ settings. Go read the [H]OCP review. GTX Titan has higher playable settings in a couple games vs. GTX 780, even though raw perf. differences are on avg. less than 10%. GTX780 has higher playable settings across their entire test suite vs 7970 GHz Ed and GTX 680.

 

[Silverforce11]

Please don't refer to [H]'s highly subjective "playable" settings.. they pass games in the past as playable with 35 fps. Who buys ridiculously expensive GPUs to run at that slow??

That site is great for several reasons, but highest playable setting is not one of them.

 

[ams23]

i don't get why buy card for 650$ when after 1 year 860 will outperform 780 by few % for 200-250$ ...... i think best strategy is buy midrange card every 2 years and don't bother ....

like 460 =>660 => 860

Some people simply want the best performance that money can buy at the time when they are ready to buy (rather than waiting one or two years for comparable performance at a lower price and lower power consumption).

 

[ams23]

Please don't refer to [H]'s highly subjective "playable" settings.. they pass games in the past as playable with 35 fps. Who buys ridiculously expensive GPUs to run at that slow??

That site is great for several reasons, but highest playable setting is not one of them.

You do realize that [H] reviewers actually play the games to make sure that they are smooth (which cannot be said about most reviewers nowadays).

 

[amenx]

That really is the point for me. You're raping yourself buying a $650 card when you will likely be getting a +30-50% faster card in 7 months time for $550 (this price is a joke, probably $700 is the new norm.)

Even though only AMD has announced 20nm cards in 2013, Nvidia won't be far behind. Is the high price worth +20% performance for 7 more months of stagnant console ports? There are no games on the horizon worth upgrading for.

7 months is an eternity for GPUs. Enthusiasts who can afford it (and there are many) may not care about value and some may even laugh at bringing it up. Whats silly are the envious folk who think everyone else should adhere to their model of value consciousness no matter if they can afford it or not. Not even sure if they believe that but just use it as a cover for their seething envy that Nvidia have the top performing single card which confers upon the brand a greater 'must have' appeal and shrinks the competitions epeen status down a bit. I honestly believe thats the case in many of the responses here.

 

[ams23]

7 months is an eternity for GPUs. Enthusiasts who can afford it (and there are many) may not care about value and some may even laugh at bringing it up. Whats silly are the envious folk who think everyone else should adhere to their model of value consciousness no matter if they can afford it or not. Not even sure if they believe that but just use it as a cover for their seething envy that Nvidia have the top performing single card which confers upon the brand a greater 'must have' appeal and shrinks the competitions epeen status down a bit. I honestly believe thats the case in many of the responses here.

The reality is that AMD's focus on upcoming game consoles has [directly or indirectly] resulted in them missing their yearly refresh cycle for high end GPU's (among other things), so NVIDIA benefits from having less intense competition for high end single GPU's for many months to come.

 

[NIGELG]

Yawn.

Nvidia's overpriced over hyped over rated 780 is not worth an upgrade over my 7970 to me.

 

[5150Joker]

Yawn.

Nvidia's overpriced over hyped over rated 780 is not worth an upgrade over my 7970 to me.

Cool story bro.

 

[NIGELG]

Cool story bro.

Your post/response/Nvidia cheer leading is even more Yawn worthyD:.

It's my own view.


Why should I upgrade from an overclocked 7970 to this overpriced thing??

 

[MrK6]

Playing Last Light and Tomb Raider on max settings was worth it for me. Others will enjoy Crysis 3 and surround + whatever other backlog of games they got. There's always games that can use extra GPU power that people play. I play BF3 at 1440p with max settings and the two Titans comfortably keep the FPS above 60 so that it never dips below what I consider critical for smooth gameplay.

I play it at Ultra settings at 1600p without AA and it never drop below 60FPS. Not really a good argument there.

15% isn't going to allow for any higher settings in most cases. If the cards get 45 fps, then 52 fps isn't going to allow you to e.g. touch the AA. It's barely a noticeable difference.

In some rare case it'll just be barely better.

I'd take a 15% fps increase any day, that's not the question, but to try up-sell it is ridiculous (for nearly a $200-250 price difference).

This.

 

[hawtdawg]

Serious

So, you're shitting on a 599, a car that you've never driven, due to how much better some other cars you've never driven are?