• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Nvidia Kepler vs 500 series specs released - **HOLY CRAP**

DamoTourettes

DamoTourettes

DamoTourettes

Associate
Joined
14 Dec 2010
Posts
495
As ever to be taken with a pinch of salt, but if these numbers are to be believed, these cards are going to be absolutely killer. :eek: :eek: :eek:

f4e7b310530039068f131c4f1a9ae835.jpg


Anyone for 85 FPS in BF3 @ 2560x1600 on a single chip card?

Full story here.
 
Pinch of salt, people...

But if it's true I WILL have a GTX 780. More than twice the performance of a 580 is pretty outstanding, although I may be tempted by that GTR 785!
 
DamoTourettes said:
As ever to be taken with a pinch of salt, but if these numbers are to be believed, these cards are going to be absolutely killer. :eek: :eek: :eek:
Click to expand...

I don't play Battlefield 3, but even I know it doesn't have PhysX. Yet the benchmark states that GPU PhysX is enabled. Seem fake to me, but I would love them not to be.
 
Last edited:
The benchmark is the exact spec I want to run my 30" monitor at, and considering BF3 is the only game I play, it makes it even sweeter. If true, these are the specs I was hoping for from the 7970 - and quite simply reinforces the fact that I'm holding off until Kepler is released to upgrade from my GTX 580 1.5GB

Belter.
 
Hasn't this same chart been floating around for a couple of weeks now? It didn't purport to be for battlefield 3, and it used the old "1.x improvement factor" scaling instead of real framerates, but still...

I haven't seen anything to suggest that this is actually from an Nvidia source, and much as I'd love to believe the results, I just don't think that kind of performance improvement is realistic. More than three times the performance going from GTX580 to the GTR785 (the equivalent high-end GK110 part)? I highly doubt it.


reflux said:
What happened to the 6xx series? Or am I being dim?
Click to expand...

Most rumours suggest they will be called the 7xx, to bring them in line with AMDs naming scheme (so they appear to be of the same generation as the AMD cards).
 
Last edited:
TaKeN said:
More awesome made up graphs! Great.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
It is not too hard to make up a graph in MS Excel then spend a few minutes in photoshop to make it look like the real deal.
Going off the speed increases of new generation graphics cards over the last few years, the performance increases in the graphs are too good to be true (assuming the y axis is FPS of course),
 
DamoTourettes said:
It could be feasible - the legit Nvidia roadmap charts showed the "performance per watt" of the Keplers at over 2 x Fermi, didn't they? Or have I got it wrong?
Click to expand...

Back when Fermi was released, Nvidia claimed that there would be a 2.5 - 3x improvement in double-precision floating point performance per-Watt. I don't honestly think that Nvidia will achieve that goal... and if they do, I can't see it carrying over into single-precision FP performance.

BUT, even if they do achieve their best estimate (3x improvement), then assuming that the in-game framerates scales perfectly with the theoretical FP-performance (another highly optimistic assumption), the GTR785 would still need to have a higher power-draw than the GTX580 to match that graph.

In short, to arrive at anywhere near those figures you have to make a string of very optimistic assumptions. A decade or so of following these releases has taught me that such things rarely ever happen!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom