880+880Ti to be cheaper than current gen ! :D

[Sgt_Pepper]

Or C: your system theme is green and white and you don't want a red and black card i there.

I used to love my 7970 but hated that it was black and red in a blue and white themed system

 

[humbug]

Sometimes you just have to pay a bit more for an overall superior product, something nvidia users do.

Any price drop is always welcomed though.

You keep believing in that marketing FUD while AMD users laugh while getting more for less.

 

[kazuya1337]

You keep believing in that marketing FUD while AMD users laugh while getting more for less.

What more heat for less performance?

 

[humbug]

What more heat for less performance?

Try more performance, its faster than a 780, it trades blows with a GTX Titan.

I have an AIB 290. runs at 75c max on a silent fan profile with a 20% overclock. i can hear my Case Fans over it.

Even with a 30% overclock i can barley hear it.

 

[kazuya1337]

Troll bait taken, Hook, Line and Sinker =p

 

[mmj_uk]

More performance than a 780.*






* providing the developer optimises because without source code AMD can't be bothered, in this situation you'll feel compelled to spend your game time crying on internet forums.

 

[Ian Evey]

You only need to look at the gaming benchmarks on here to see which users are getting more

 

[humbug]

Troll bait taken, Hook, Line and Sinker =p

 

[_Alatar_]

More performance than a 780.*






* providing the developer optimises because without source code AMD can't be bothered, in this situation you'll feel compelled to spend your game time crying on internet forums.

More performance than a 780, matches Titan*

* Assuming no one asks humbug to prove his point by showing his performance levels. Because at that point he'll just claim everyone using Nvidia cards is OCing too much and is a professional overclocker.



BTW humbug NVidia cards perform better on AMD CPUs due to the lowered CPU overhead in every DX11 title:

AVG perf in 15 titles:

So you might want to reconsider your choice in GPUs

 

[humbug]

More performance than a 780, matches Titan*

* Assuming no one asks humbug to prove his point by showing his performance levels. Because at that point he'll just claim everyone using Nvidia cards is OCing too much and is a professional overclocker.



BTW humbug NVidia cards perform better on AMD CPUs due to the lowered CPU overhead in every DX11 title:

AVG perf in 15 titles:

So you might want to reconsider your choice in GPUs

290X vs 780TI, so £120 for +6%.

Is that a bad joke?

 

[_Alatar_]

290X vs 780TI, so £120 for +6%.

Is that a bad joke?

I thought you were running an 8350? So for you it'd be 15%

Besides, as we know the subject was 780 which OCs much higher than the 290 or 290X.

I've never even claimed that a ref 780Ti is a good deal...

The point is, when a 780Ti is 15% faster than a 290X when using a 8350 the 780 is going to be faster than the 290. Especially when OCd.

 

[humbug]

I thought you were running an 8350? So for you it'd be 15%

Besides, as we know the subject was 780 which OCs much higher than the 290 or 290X.

I've never even claimed that a ref 780Ti is a good deal...

The point is, when a 780Ti is 15% faster than a 290X when using a 8350 the 780 is going to be faster than the 290. Especially when OCd.

The 8350 overclocks, i run Mantle anyway. something you can't do

And i don't run a 290X, i wouldn't buy one for the extra cost of 5%

The 780 needs to overclock by 40% just to keep up with my 290 with its 30% overclock as its much slower clock for clock.

Why would i pay extra for a slower GPU that i need to achieve massive overclocks just to keep up with the more cost effective 290?

I made the smart choice.

 

[Deceptor]

I made the smart my choice.

When people stop worrying about right/wrong the world will be a better place

 

[_Alatar_]

The 8350 overclocks and once you also OC the 290 you're left in the exact same situation as the one you started from. Both saw a similar percentage increase. Meaning that again, Nvidia hardware performs considerably better on AMD CPUs.

As for the rest of the post; so much denial. All OCing bench threads for games and canned benches on here, OCN, and everywhere else are dominated by GK110s.

The GK110 cards are able to beat the hawaii cards that match/beat them in reviews. Once OC'd a 780 is faster than a 290, once OC'd a Titan is faster than a 290X and once OC'd a 780Ti (the volt unlocked ones) just widen the gap compared to the 290X. And this is on intel hardware with no significant CPU bottlenecks.

Situation falls even more into Nvidias favor once you get into AMD CPUs for the reasons I provided above.

You can again claim that GK110s can't clock high enough to beat hawaiis 'til you're blue in the face but all the proof points to the opposite conclusion.

 

[humbug]

The 8350 overclocks and once you also OC the 290 you're left in the exact same situation as the one you started from. Both saw a similar percentage increase. Meaning that again, Nvidia hardware performs considerably better on AMD CPUs.

As for the rest of the post; so much denial. All OCing bench threads for games and canned benches on here, OCN, and everywhere else are dominated by GK110s.

The GK110 cards are able to beat the hawaii cards that match/beat them in reviews. Once OC'd a 780 is faster than a 290, once OC'd a Titan is faster than a 290X and once OC'd a 780Ti (the volt unlocked ones) just widen the gap compared to the 290X. And this is on intel hardware with no significant CPU bottlenecks.

Situation falls even more into Nvidias favor once you get into AMD CPUs for the reasons I provided above.

You can again claim that GK110s can't clock high enough to beat hawaiis 'til you're blue in the face but all the proof points to the opposite conclusion.

You have shown me one random slide to make a point, i'm happy to take it on-board but one random slide means nothing by its self, your trying to push such a generalised all inclusive point with one slide. IMO that would constitute an agenda.
So frankly what you say has even less value to me.

I also don't care much for overclock forum users with hacks, custom BIOS and who knows whatelse used to compete with others using hacks and custom settings.... it very much becomes all about who runs the best hacks / BIOS, nothing to do with the GPU in reality.
Again your trying to push what goes on in here as an all inclusive fact as if its completely normal for these GPU to run at 1400+ Mhz right out of the box as a matter of course. not a chance anyone other than laymen buy into any of that. the 780 also needs to run that much higher than the 290.

In the real world i achieve a 24/7 performance in games at least that of the 780, if not more, and i do it for £70 less, whats more AMD GPU's are increasingly not limited by the CPU, where as Nvidia still very much are.

 

[_Alatar_]

You have shown me one random slide to make a point, i'm happy to take it on board but one random slide means nothing by its self, your trying to push such a generalised all inclusive point with one slide. IMO that would constitute an agenda.
So frankly what you say has even less value to me.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1495236/amd-vs-nvidia-cpu-overhead

I also don't care much for overclock forum users with hacks, custom BIOS and who knows whatelse used to compete with others using hacks and custom settings.... it very much becomes all about who runs the best hacks / BIOS, nothing to do with the GPU in reality.
Again your trying to push what goes on in here as an all inclusive fact as if its completely normal for these GPU to run at 1400+ Mhz right out of the box as a matter of course. not a chance anyone other than laymen buy into any of that. the 780 also needs to run that much higher than the 290.

The thing is that I don't need to run über high overclocks just to beat 24/7 OC'd Hawaii cards.

I run my über overclocks to beat ~1360MHz (read = incredibly high über OC) hawaii cards. As do other GK110 owners.

Both GPUs are also capable of somewhat lower 24/7 clocks. And GK110's frequency doesn't drop off any more than hawaiis does.

In the real world i achieve a 24/7 performance in games at least that of the 780, if not more, and i do it for £70 less,

Only at stock and only if you were running an intel CPU.

With an AMD one the 780 is a better choice and the gap widens once OC'd.

whats more AMD GPU's are increasingly not limited by the CPU, where as Nvidia still very much are.

Completely incorrect. AMD has a couple of Mantle Titles out while Nvidia's DX11 CPU overhead improvements are in effect in all DX11 titles.

And NV's DX11 drivers are closer to mantle's performance than they are to AMD's DX11 drivers.

 

[humbug]

Nvidia use Deferred Context, which is a part of DX11 and available to AMD just as it is to Nvidia.

It improves CPU performance to a degree and only for a limited time in limited situations, its not consistent and nor does it last, which is why AMD don't use it, they have come up with Mantle which is a vastly better solution, and consistent and it lasts for as long as you play the game.

Deferred Context only shows improvement for about as long as a benching run lasts as it fills thread buffers which then become useless, so again in reality it makes no difference.

There is writing on it that i can dig up later on if you need to read up.

You keep saying the 780 is faster once overclocked, its not as fast clock for clock so it needs that extra, the deficit is about 7%, because Overclocking the core is not linear, (about 0.5 to 1) the 780 needs to overclock about 15% already just to keep up with the 290, add a 30% overclock on the 290 and your looking at a 45% overclock on the 780 just to keep up.

If your talking about Nvidia new drivers to combat Mantle, the performance difference is less than 10% vs upto 100% + in Mantle.

 

[triss]

Trying to compare difference vendors and architecture types clock for clock imo is silly.
Eg hypothetically AMD's new 390 has a core speed of 2000 but beats a gtx880 with a core speed of 1000 Do we say the 390 is worse overall due to its core clock for clock or say its a better card because it has better performance overall?

If your talking about Nvidia new drivers to combat Mantle, the performance difference is less than 10% vs upto 100% + in Mantle.

Umm can i have the link to the mantle drivers for a 290 for Watchdogs and most other games ? Or is this just a couple of games your saying the 290 is faster in?

 

[Dicehunter]

They are just electronic cards peeps, No need to argue over electronics, They are just cards that put pictures on your screen

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

There's nothing wrong with charging £500+ graphic card, but the problem is the amount of performance increase vs the gen before it is now pretty pitiful, comparing back to the 8800 days...when it was around 80-100% faster than the top card in the previous gen.

The process nodes are getting more and more drawn out,plus they are getting people to actually pay more and more for the large performance boosts too from both companies,so both companies can milk each node for maximum effect. Dual GPU cards are starting to hit higher and higher prices,and even single GPU cards now from both companies. If you want the big performance boosts,you hand out the money now,unless you are willing to wait years.

What it does mean is that under £200 which is probably the largest market(and one that makes the least noise unlike enthusiasts and their silly wrangling over high end cards),performance has not moved as quicker,and it is this part of the market together with consoles,many devs are targetting. The sub £100 market is even worse.

It would explain why we are seeing a slowdown in games pushing graphics first. Remember,when Crysis was released,we had the 8800GT at under £200 and the HD3850 under £100,which massively improved performance at their price points.

However,look at the next few Crysis games?? They pushed them onto consoles,and reduced the scope of the games,so they could run on relatively slower hardware.