Are new full fat Hawaii XT cards on the way ?

[Kaapstad]

Go back at look at the 750ti and its lack of ROP's and bandwidth compared to the 260x and 650ti, LOTS of efficiencies were made. So I'm not too worried about a 256bit 28nm/20nm new high to start off with.

If I had not seen the 750ti before, now I would be saying the same.I found from overclocking the 256bit bus 680 was bandwidth starved

Just been looking at a 750ti pushing a big overclock and graphically it is about 1/3 the power of a GTX 780ti or 290X. These new 8 series NVidia cards are going to need a lot more than a 256bit bus to take on the two cards above.

 

[Kaapstad]

+1

Until we see the retail parts we have no idea how they are going to perform.

On the subject of the 750Ti, we got an EVGA 750Ti SC for a build coming this week, might have to test that out, see what it's capable of

Here is one Stulid has just done on the Sky Diver bench @1425/1700

Single GPU Graphics Scores.

1. GPU 780ti @1370/1955, GFX Score 49028, Physics Score 18021, Combined Score 31564, CPU 4930k @4.87, Nickolp1974 - Link
2. GPU 290X @1250/1625, GFX Score 47454, Physics Score 18033, Combined Score 33058, CPU 4930k @4.8, Kaapstad - Link
3. GPU 290X @1215/1625, GFX Score 46670, Physics Score 12294, Combined Score 25546, CPU 4770k @4.6, uksoldierboy - Link
4. GPU 290X @1200/1625, GFX Score 46256, Physics Score 11658, Combined Score 23569, CPU 4770k @4.4, the1gooner - Link
5. GPU 290X @1200/1550, GFX Score 45108, Physics Score 8983, Combined Score 21040, CPU 2500k @5.0, ~Mike~ - Link
6. GPU 290P @1210/1500, GFX Score 44688, Physics Score 12266, Combined Score 25279, CPU 3770k @4.6, win8.1 - Link
7. GPU 780ti @1241/1750, GFX Score 43189, Physics Score 9642, Combined Score 21459, CPU 4670k @4.5, NeoStuey - Link
8. GPU 290P @1200/1400, GFX Score 42545, Physics Score 11454, Combined Score 23977, CPU 3770k @4.6, Litmoose - Link
9. GPU 290P @1200/1500, GFX Score 42177, Physics Score 9408, Combined Score 18744, CPU FX-8350 @4.6, humbug - Link
10. GPU 780ti @1100/1750, GFX Score 40906, Physics Score 8318, Combined Score 18322, CPU 3570k @4.4, TwsT - Link
11. GPU 290P @1185/1500, GFX Score 40513, Physics Score 8164, Combined Score 18882, CPU 2500k @4.6, SieB - Link
12. GPU 780 @1160/1750, GFX Score 39145, Physics Score 8467, Combined Score 19187, CPU 3570k @4.2, Ian Evey - Link
13. GPU 290P @975/1250, GFX Score 37854, Physics Score 11849, Combined Score 24511, CPU 4770k @4.4, Robzere31 - Link
14. GPU 290X @1000/1250, GFX Score 37482, Physics Score 10252, Combined Score 22345, CPU 3820k @4.4, breadturbo - Link
15. GPU 290P @1030/1400, GFX Score 37039, Physics Score 14511, Combined Score 27172, CPU 3930k @4.5, stulid - Link
16. GPU 780 @993/1502, GFX Score 36160, Physics Score 9993, Combined Score 20217, CPU 4770k @3.9, nashathedog - Link
17. GPU 290P @1000/1300, GFX Score 36063, Physics Score 7854, Combined Score 18185, CPU 2500k @4.4, varkanoid - Link
18. GPU 780 @1189/1652, GFX Score 36014, Physics Score 12825, Combined Score 26474, CPU 4770k @4.5, setter - Link
19. GPU nvTitan @1006/1576, GFX Score 35739, Physics Score 15592, Combined Score 30495, CPU 3930k @4.6, Geeman1979 - Link
20. GPU 290P @975/1250, GFX Score 34343, Physics Score 12466, Combined Score 26844, CPU 2700k @5.3, LtMatt - Link
21. GPU 7970 @1150/1700, GFX Score 30407, Physics Score 12587, Combined Score 25757, CPU 3770k @4.8, wazza300 - Link
22. GPU 7950 @1200/1650, GFX Score 29934, Physics Score 11483, Combined Score 24161, CPU 2700k @5.0, MyBrains - Link
23. GPU 280X @1075/1500, GFX Score 27581, Physics Score 6829, Combined Score 13796, CPU FX-6300 @4.2, P4Clock - Link
24. GPU 280X @1020/1500, GFX Score 26343, Physics Score 7183, Combined Score 15044, CPU FX-6300 @4.5, gazzaa - Link
25. GPU 7950 @1145/1495, GFX Score 26181, Physics Score 8210, Combined Score 17792, CPU 4670k @4.3, katinacooker - Link
26. GPU 760 @1333/2000, GFX Score 23945, Physics Score 14362, Combined Score 24907, CPU 3930k @4.5, stulid - Link
27. GPU 780M @980/1375, GFX Score 21101, Physics Score 8268, Combined Score 15896, CPU 2960XM @4.0, alex_123_fra - Link
28. GPU 670 @915/1502, GFX Score 20415, Physics Score 9456, Combined Score 19543, CPU L5639 @3.2, MeatLoaf - Link
29. GPU 7850 @1200/1500, GFX Score 20305, Physics Score 10913, Combined Score 22575, CPU 2600k @4.5, wazza300 - Link
30. GPU 7850 @1190/1500, GFX Score 20293, Physics Score 4973, Combined Score 10778, CPU Q6600 @3.6, MadMatty - Link
31. GPU 750ti @1425/1700, GFX Score 17138, Physics Score 14590, Combined Score 19004, CPU 3930k @4.5, stulid - Link
32. GPU 5850 @725/1000, GFX Score 8784, Physics Score 6155, Combined Score 9311, CPU E5640 @2.67, Lanz - Link
33. GPU 250 @1180/1400, GFX Score 7955, Physics Score 1782, Combined Score 3871, CPU OP180 @2.89, MadMatty - Link

 

[Kaapstad]

Yeah i saw Stulid post that 1425Mhz 750ti, it struggles to keep up with a 7850 even at that speed.

You see the same if you study a wide selection of reviews on it, in some games like Bio-Shock it does well, in more modern demanding games like Crysis 3 and BF4 it does not, it seems to get bogged down by a lack through put grunt.

+1

If you scale things up on that architecture you would need at least a 384bit bus to deliver the same as the top AMD and NVidia cards graphics scores. I know this is a very crude way of working things out but it gets the point across.

 

[Kaapstad]

I think you are underestimating how good Maxwell could be.

The 750Ti performs very similarly to the 650Ti boost, if not very slightly behind it however its has a much lower spec -

As I put in another post:

"The 650Ti boost has a 50% larger memory bus (192 vs 128), 20 % more cores (768 vs 640), 50%+ more texture units (64 vs 40), 50% more rops (24 vs 16), ~11% faster memory (6ghz vs 5.4ghz).

The only thing the 750Ti has that is better in spec is a 50mhz core bump."

Also, it is a bit cruel to compare it to a 7850. The 7850 is/was in competition with the 660 which has far better specs than the 750Ti (50% more stream processors, 50% more Rops and 100% more texture units)

If that translates all the way up the range and they put some seriously fast memory on the 880/870 I can see them easily beating the 780Ti.

I have high hopes for Maxwell but not on 28nm.

I really don't think NVidia are going to pull out all the stops on a 28nm mid range card though and their past history with the GTX 670/80 tends to back this up.

I am looking at the leaked specs for the GTX 880 and I would go as far as to say they are rubbish and look like something a NVidia zealot has made up if you use the 750ti as a reference.


750ti
880

Base clock
1020mhz
900mhz

Boost clock
1085mhz
950mhz

Memory clock
1350mhz
1850mhz

Stream processors
640
3200

Texture units
40
200

ROPs
16
32

Mem bus
128bit
256bit

Transistors
1.87
7.9

These err leaked specs for the GTX 880 are just rubbish as they don't scale within the architecture (5x as many SPs and Texture units and only twice the ROPs). Memory clocked @1850mhz stock (Not even a Kingpin is clocked that high)lol.

Nothing is right with these specs and also the one I have not posted above is this is supposed to be @20nm and we all know the GTX 880 is going to be 28nm.

I think we all need to step back from this speculation and wait for the real card and specs.

 

[Kaapstad]

You have been the one speculating . I was pointing out how well the 750Ti performs with such low specs (as an actual reference) showing that a full fat 28nm Maxwell, could quite easily beat a 780Ti.

Don't think so I am not the one pushing those dodgy specs for the err GTX 880, I am the one saying they are rubbish. You are the one trying to link the performance of the 750ti and GTX 880.

If ever the GTX 880 shows up with a 256bit bus it will mean it is a mid range card and lower mid range at that.

 

[Kaapstad]

But in fairness the 750Ti IS Maxwell architecture and on 28nm which should be a pretty good indicator of what is to come. So judging by the 750Ti, if Nvidia release a maxwell card with the same number of cores, TMUS, Rops etc as a 780Ti and perhaps clock it higher, it looks like it would be a good bit faster.

I too am taking the proposed specs of the 880 with a pinch of salt as they are most likely wrong.

A very crude way of doing it is to compare the total number of transistor in a GPU and the clockspeeds used. If both a Kepler and Maxwell card use the same number of transistors @28nm I would expect the Maxwell card to be about 5% or 10% faster due to being a newer more refined and optimised design.

The above method is very crude but works very well when comparing AMD and NVidia cards.

I suspect the real specs for a GTX 880 could be as simple as multiplying by the specs used for the 750ti by 3, this would give something like this.

750ti actual
880 My prediction

Base clock
1020mhz
900mhz

Boost clock
1085mhz
950mhz

Memory clock
1350mhz
1750mhz

Stream processors
640
1920

Texture units
40
120

ROPs
16
48

Mem bus
128bit
384bit

Transistors
1.87
5.61

This would produce a card that would be around the same performance as a GTX 780 but more efficient.