7990/Ares II Vs Ttian/690

LtMatt · 10 May 2013 at 12:13

Gregster said:
Stop posting inaccurate data and you wouldn't get this debate. These results are far worse than anything [H] has posted.

As said before, Its only on ocuk that these results are considered inaccurate by a few people. On every other hardware forum this is posted there are no such problems. You will never please everyone, especially if it shows their hardware to be slightly slower than another piece of hardware.

whyscotty said:
Always starts off well and then -

Always nice to see you never stoop down to this level though Scotty.

Rusty0611 · 10 May 2013 at 12:17

I don't see how the fact they've not been pointed out elsewhere is really relevant. If you've got trusted users on here saying that the results are under what they're getting then that does pose some questions...

LtMatt · 10 May 2013 at 12:19

Rusty0611 said:
I don't see how the fact they've not been pointed out elsewhere is really relevant. If you've got trusted users on here saying that the results are under what they're getting then that does pose some questions...

But i also know trusted users elsewhere that don't have issues with the results so its a bit of give and take required.

tommybhoy · 10 May 2013 at 12:21

@kap,

The GE could have been suffering from gpu spiking, possible explanation to lower scores.

LtMatt said:
Knew it wouldn't take long for the same suspects to start with the baiting.

Nothing surprising there, good scaling titles have been used where the dual GPU cards are naturally going to do well and pull ahead of the Titan.

There's not much moaning when single non Titan Nvidia cards pull ahead of Amd though.

Gregster · 10 May 2013 at 12:24

Rusty0611 said:
I don't see how the fact they've not been pointed out elsewhere is really relevant. If you've got trusted users on here saying that the results are under what they're getting then that does pose some questions...

What makes no sense is LtMatt even said they don't match his results by a few hundred points and yet calls them accurate. Titan results are wrong. An Ares 2 Is scaling more than 100% over a 7970 Ghz is very questionable and you only need to look at the 3D mark threads to know this wouldn't happen.

Only suck up posts allowed or you will be called a fanboy or thread crapper...

Rusty0611 · 10 May 2013 at 12:24

LtMatt said:
But i also know trusted users elsewhere that don't have issues with the results so its a bit of give and take required.

Have these people with 690s/Titans tried to match these results like Kaap, Andy and Greg have?

As I only really frequent this forum I'll believe those that I personally converse with as opposed to others on another forum of whom I'm not familiar with, I think based on the questionable (at the least) results provided based on the comments of Kaapstad and others I'll put GameGPU in the dustbin for review sites.

My own personal choice to do that

.

Darujhistan · 10 May 2013 at 12:25

Gregster said:
You do realise that the Ares II and the 7990 are dual chip cards or are you just acting this thick on purpose? 3 Titans against 3 7990's or Ares II will be a win for the Titans.

So what if they are?

The Titan isn't the fastest card, that's clear.

Rusty0611 · 10 May 2013 at 12:26

Darujhistan said:
So what if they are?

The Titan isn't the fastest card, that's clear.

Good luck with 2 7990s

.

LtMatt · 10 May 2013 at 12:26

Rusty0611 said:
Have these people with 690s/Titans tried to match these results like Kaap, Andy and Greg have?

As I only really frequent this forum I'll believe those that I personally converse with as opposed to others on another forum of whom I'm not familiar with, I think based on the questionable (at the least) results provided based on the comments of Kaapstad and others I'll put GameGPU in the dustbin for review sites.

My own personal choice to do that .

Yes as i say its only here that people disown this website as biased and or inaccurate. Elsewhere it is held in much higher regard. Most of the time their results are very accurate to what i see.

Its all about opinions of course but if people don't like it they don't have to comment and try and bait users in the thread. They can just ignore it like i do with threads that don't interest me.

Rusty0611 · 10 May 2013 at 12:28

Well I think Kaapstad's 690 results which he placed in this thread speaks volumes. Unless of course he forgot to turn his overclock off or something!

Darujhistan · 10 May 2013 at 12:33

Rusty0611 said:
Good luck with 2 7990s .

Why would I need luck with two 7990s?

The Titan is no longer the fastest card, that's the only point I am making.

andybird123 · 10 May 2013 at 12:41

Darujhistan said:
Why would I need luck with two 7990s?

The Titan is no longer the fastest card, that's the only point I am making.

Titan never was the fastest card, a 690 was always marginally faster, and a 7990 is marginally faster again

Titan is still the fastest Single GPU card, which is important for some people's uses (e.g. people that don't like SLI/Crossfire or who want to use more than 2 cards)

Darujhistan · 10 May 2013 at 12:48

andybird123 said:
Titan never was the fastest card, a 690 was always marginally faster, and a 7990 is marginally faster again

Titan is still the fastest Single GPU card, which is important for some people's uses (e.g. people that don't like SLI/Crossfire or who want to use more than 2 GPU's)

And both cheaper than a Titan!!!

Bit of a white elephant that Titan...

andybird123 · 10 May 2013 at 12:51

did you miss the bit about why people might buy a Titan instead of a dual GPU single card?

hell, 2 7970's are cheaper than a 7990, so surely the 7990 is a white elephant too using the same standards?

Rusty0611 · 10 May 2013 at 12:52

Darujhistan said:
Why would I need luck with two 7990s?

The Titan is no longer the fastest card, that's the only point I am making.

Comparing a dual GPU card to a single GPU card in that way doesn't really work though. It's comparable on cost only. Also the Titan was never the fastest "card"...

The point was more with a single 7990 you don't really have a viable upgrade option. Sure you can get another but you're at the mercy of the driver team as to whether quadfire works and the history here isn't great.

With a Titan, you've got the option to add another card or indeed another 2 and still get fairly decent scaling assuming you run a demanding resolution and/or settings.

Kaapstad · 10 May 2013 at 12:54

I have just run a Titan and GTX 690 on the above settings @stock and what I got was

1080p
Titan 56fps
GTX 690 70fps

1600p
Titan 33fps
GTX 690 41fps

The above is pretty close to what the review sight got, then I spotted their typo error.

The GTX 690 stock and OC results are the wrong way round.

LtMatt · 10 May 2013 at 12:56

So they actually got 1 more fps on TR than your titan. Yikes they really are bad i better stop using them. Don't want the titans looking any better than they do already.

Darujhistan · 10 May 2013 at 12:57

Rusty0611 said:
Comparing a dual GPU card to a single GPU card in that way doesn't really work though. It's comparable on cost only. Also the Titan was never the fastest "card"...

The point was more with a single 7990 you don't really have a viable upgrade option. Sure you can get another but you're at the mercy of the driver team as to whether quadfire works and the history here isn't great.

With a Titan, you've got the option to add another card or indeed another 2 and still get fairly decent scaling assuming you run a demanding resolution and/or settings.

Whether single GPU or dual GPU, whether Green or Red whether Titan or 7990, these cards are the very top end that play games at very high settings at very high res, right?

So why are people crying about a few FPS here or there on benchmarks?

What does it matter?

pgi947 · 10 May 2013 at 12:58

LtMatt said:
Pgi can run some comparisons if we ask him nicely id imagine using the 13.5 beta 2's. Over 100% xfire scaling is not surprising though ive seen it in other titles like bf3.

Strolled into this thread a little late

100%+ scaling doesn't often happen, on 13.5 with bf3 we are approaching it though, 150fps avg at 1010mhz ultra pre set, sits around 70-80 fps on a single card - 1080 testing.

3dmark11 scales at around 80-90%, looking around 9000 stock single and 16-1700 on gpu scores.

Can easy try some of the other benches later, though some of those single to dual scores do seem a little off. I really wish in bench comparisons they would list the stock boost clocks of cards, makes the whole thing pointless otherwise.

Rusty0611 · 10 May 2013 at 12:59

Darujhistan said:
Whether single GPU or dual GPU, whether Green or Red whether Titan or 7990, these cards are the very top end that play games at very high settings at very high res, right?

So why are people crying about a few FPS here or there on benchmarks?

What does it matter?

Why are you now talking about something completely different to what I've posted about?

People are "crying" because the results don't look accurate based on what they are getting themselves. I think you're possibly in the wrong forum if you don't want to see debates about a few FPS here or there. Especially this generation when everything is so close

.