Lol, that was the cumulative result of 4-6 review sites posted a few pages back. You want to argue with their testing methodology, take it up with them.
I'm okay with rabid fanboys. It's just when we are constantly spammed by marketers it really ruins the forums.
So... Answer your own question, I want to see if you fully understand.
7970 has never been faster, it took an overclocked sku "GHz" to beat the stock 680, that's never not been that case.
Nope, since it's a new sku based on an old chip that was overclocked GHz itself is not an overclocked gpu. It's just based on an overclocked previously released sku, there is nothing different it's just clocked higher.
No I just don't care about it, if that's how you want to end the discussion that's fine with me.
Personally I'll use more practical and representative results that would reflect my usage more similarly.
If I want to know how boost 2.0 performs when being hotboxed in summer with stock cpu's I'll know where to look now, thanks.
You'd have to consider the same thing for the 7970 though. Watercooling really let's them fly.
Of course you have to find the reviews that best represent your usage, but those reviews are far from impractical. Most users don't run watercooling or mess with bios flashes.
You'd have to consider the same thing for the 7970 though. Watercooling really let's them fly.
It would depend on the game tbh, as the performance could range from still being behind, to matching it, to even being faster.I can see a watercooled 7970 @ 1300-1350Mhz beating or meeting a stock GTX 780 in synthetic benchmarks. Don't think it would in games though :hmm:
TPU reviewed the EVGA ACX cooler. http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EVGA/GTX_780_SC_ACX_Cooler/
60% faster than the stock GHz at 1200p 4xAA in BF3 with an OC.
:thumbsup:
If only someone here had such a card to do 1350Mhz on water and post a 3Dmark11 so we could get a baseline over stock GHz and compare that to this new card... if only..
Thanks for this!
This sku is solid over the default sku. I like this sku!
So what did EVGA do to make their card so fastfaster than the much more expensive GTX Titan? First of all, they increased the GPU clocks by more than 100 MHz (130 MHz higher than Titan). Unfortunately, memory clock is unchanged, which would have been an easy extra boost. Our manual overclocking confirms that there would be plenty of headroom for that. Now, the secret sauce seem to be the operating temperatures. NVIDIA designed their Boost 2.0 algorithm with temperatures in mind: if the card goes beyond 80°C, Boost 2.0 will reduce clocks to ensure the card stays around that temperature target. EVGA realized that and designed a cooler that ensures the card will never reach 80°C to keep the additional throttling from taking effect. Just having a good cooler is not enough, you also need to find the right fan speed settings. It's easy to stay below 80°C with a fan that sounds like a leaf blower, and EVGA picked decent fan settings that are just as quiet as the reference cooler without falling into the 80°C performance hole.
EVGA's cooler is also one of the better-looking custom designs, but I do not think it cannot compete with NVIDIA's reference design cooler visually, which is without a doubt the best-looking one in the industry. EVGA was wise to choose matte colors and metal highlights to keep the cooler from looking plasticky. In terms of cooling performance, the ACX cooler is definitely a step forward: It improves temperatures while keeping noise levels in check. EVGA also highlights that it uses ball bearings while most other VGA card fans use sleeve bearings. On paper, ball bearings have a longer lifespan, but I seriously doubt there is a significant difference for a product that will only be used for a few years tops. Technically, ball bearings are noisier than sleeve bearings, but this doesn't seem to be an issue on EVGA's cooler. I do wish the card came with a backplate. Granted, unlike the GTX Titan, which has memory chips on the backside, the GTX 780 has nothing to cool, but a backplate would have certainly helped with the visual appearance of the card.
Not a 7970 but it's the best I could do with a 7950. I thinks it's 400 points off from a GTX 780.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6231384
MrK6 your turn You should be going over 12K on the Graphics Score
I can see a watercooled 7970 @ 1300-1350Mhz beating or meeting a stock GTX 780 in synthetic benchmarks. Don't think it would in games though :hmm:
I was curious why EVGA did get this kind of speed increase:
Thanks for this!
This sku is solid over the default sku. I like this sku!
I was curious why EVGA did get this kind of speed increase:
So probably around 12.5k for a 7970, that would be my guess!
Is there a gpu only score for the GTX 780? I can't pull up any with search :|
Here ya go
http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1002&page=4
GTX 780 = 12291 Graphics Score