Geforce GTX 780, 770 coming in May

1kiwi · 7 May 2013 at 15:29

Rossi~ said:
All I'm hoping the 650Ti will come down easily below £100 so i can warrant getting one for PhysX.

Does that actually make a huge difference in physx enabled games?

I have to agree with the posts above, the 7 series feels like giant a con. That is assuming that the GTX780 is priced around £550-£600 mark.

Is there any news regarding the 770 in regard to voltage modding?

whyscotty · 7 May 2013 at 15:34

1kiwi said:
Is there any news regarding the 770 in regard to voltage modding?

If its a re badged 680, highley unlikely

Marine-RX179 · 7 May 2013 at 15:36

1kiwi said:
I have to agree with the posts above, the 7 series feels like giant a con.

Yea...they could have at least increase the Stream Processors count a bit...like the GTX260 from 192 to 216, but they are just lazy (or stingy) and doing a straight re-badge plus increasing clock speed only.

Yaayuh! · 7 May 2013 at 15:36

1kiwi said:
Does that actually make a huge difference in physx enabled games?

PhysX games seem to run a lot smoother and with higher fps with a 650/650Ti as dedicated, especially in Borderlands 2.

EL_NEO · 7 May 2013 at 21:11

Suarez7 said:
Liking the TITAN looking coolers.

+1

EL_NEO · 7 May 2013 at 21:16

Marine-RX179 said:
But seriously though...even if the GTX760Ti is GTX670 under the hood, it is still only 256-bit and 2GB of vram, so I still don't see how they are tempting if comparing to the 7950 with 384-bit and 3GB vram, plus free games. $299 for the GTX760Ti is too high IMO...it should really be at $250-$270 at most.

Who knows maybe they will have free game too this time

ubersonic · 7 May 2013 at 21:21

Rossi~ said:
PhysX games seem to run a lot smoother and with higher fps with a 650/650Ti as dedicated, especially in Borderlands 2.

In borderlands 2 my solo GTX670 FTW runs the game while handling physics with everything maxed out, I would have thought that anyone with the cash to buy a 650/650Ti for dedicated Physx would already have a main card or cards capable of handling it :S

imginy · 7 May 2013 at 22:49

Them new cards look great

WuMyster · 7 May 2013 at 22:50

Would going for the 7xx's be wise from a 7950? Can't find any blocks I want so I'm itching to sell this and get it out the way before demand for it drops.

Diagro · 7 May 2013 at 23:19

WuMyster said:
Would going for the 7xx's be wise from a 7950? Can't find any blocks I want so I'm itching to sell this and get it out the way before demand for it drops.

no

Wucked · 7 May 2013 at 23:39

I might just write 770 in tippex on my 680 and then overclock it a bit.

alex_123_fra · 7 May 2013 at 23:45

I think I'll skip this series of Nvidia GPUs. I highly doubt they are going to provide much improvement over current gen. I'd be very surprised if any 760ti or 770 performs as well as my overclocked 670s.

Boomstick777 · 7 May 2013 at 23:49

Thinking these look like could be ideal replacements for my 660's. Tempted to grab a pair of 770's for SLI..

The GTX 770 is basically an overclocked GTX 680 with a Titan cooler and possibly more vram for less money. Not bad at all tbh.

You think the launch of these will spur AMD to launch faster? Maybe they are just to preoccupied to launch new GPU's?

Buckster · 8 May 2013 at 07:38

agreed - if the 770 is faster than a 680, has a whisper quiet Titan cooler, and more VRAM - for similar price

count me in

glad I didn't buy a 7970 or 680 last month

in fact a 670 equivalent with a Titan cooler would be good too - my dad bought a new pc recently and I used it the other weekend - it has a reference 670 - and whilst great performance, the fan noise is very annoying

rare · 8 May 2013 at 07:43

This has to be one of the most underwhelming launches from memory. No new tech at all, same cards with a very nice cooler. Bah. Next!

RavenXXX2 · 8 May 2013 at 07:59

Was looking to get back in to gaming with the 7** cards, think I'll give it a miss and see what AMD bring to the table, I'm not exactly swamped by amazing quality games at the moment either.

The 770 AKA 680 with an OC will be priced the same as the 680 so yeah pointless release for anyone except those that like fancy plastic shrouds on their GPU's, the 780 might be decent if they keep it at around £500.

Yaayuh! · 8 May 2013 at 08:03

ubersonic said:
In borderlands 2 my solo GTX670 FTW runs the game while handling physics with everything maxed out, I would have thought that anyone with the cash to buy a 650/650Ti for dedicated Physx would already have a main card or cards capable of handling it :S

I use a GTX690 and play BL2 @ max with high PhysX and when using elemental weapons in a high PhysX environment the frames drop considerably, it may be that it's only really noticeable because i use a 120Hz monitor?

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1768879&mpage=1&print=true

ubersonic · 8 May 2013 at 08:30

Rossi~ said:
I use a GTX690 and play BL2 @ max with high PhysX and when using elemental weapons in a high PhysX environment the frames drop considerably, it may be that it's only really noticeable because i use a 120Hz monitor?

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1768879&mpage=1&print=true

It will be the 120Hz, at regular refresh rate I never have an issue and I spend most of my time gunzerking with a ****g OH and a teammate spraying corrosive everywhere.

ShakeNBake · 8 May 2013 at 08:31

Marine-RX179 said:
Except that the increasing in pricing is gonna push even the ever declining PC gamers toward console at an accelerating rate, rush killing the graphic card market even faster.

12 months ago, I wouldn't even consider the prospect of game consoles, but now...

I think the foundamental problem is not really the price, but more about the performance increase per gen no longer worth people's money (as much as they use to). There's no problem for graphic card to be priced at £400-£500, but the performance of what's expected of card in that price bracket simply ain't there...

So they should either keep the pricing at reasonable level, or at least give the performance increase that the consumer expect; increasing pricing AND minimal performance increase is simply a equation that stopping peoples' cash parting from their wallet for upgrading...

Spending £300 on a graphics card right now will get you something which absolutely destroys a PS4, and you could buy it over 6 months ago (670).

Anything above a 660 (best price : performance nvidia gaming card), you are paying a huge premium to get something which is only like 10-20% better.

For a single 60Hz monitor at 1080p (comparable to next gen consoles), a 660 will max most PC games that are out there. For £160-180, that ain't bad.

£500 cards are for ultra HD monitors, multi monitor setups, 120Hz monitors or 3-D setups. Consoles can't even compare with that tech, this gen or next.

I really don't see how PC gaming is "dead".

And yeah, spending £500 on a graphics card is massive overkill, don't expect to get value for money, expect to get some of the fastest tech available right now (besides £1k Titans etc.)

99.9% of PC gamers won't need more than a 660 to enjoy their fav. games on high-max settings on a single 60Hz, 1080p monitor imo.

We have no idea how much it costs nvidia to produce this kind of technology, but I bet it isn't cheap, and they need to make a profit at the end of the day. If you really don't like their pricing, there is always AMD

Marine-RX179 · 8 May 2013 at 10:11

ShakeNBake said:
Spending £300 on a graphics card right now will get you something which absolutely destroys a PS4, and you could buy it over 6 months ago (670).

Anything above a 660 (best price : performance nvidia gaming card), you are paying a huge premium to get something which is only like 10-20% better.

For a single 60Hz monitor at 1080p (comparable to next gen consoles), a 660 will max most PC games that are out there. For £160-180, that ain't bad.

£500 cards are for ultra HD monitors, multi monitor setups, 120Hz monitors or 3-D setups. Consoles can't even compare with that tech, this gen or next.

I really don't see how PC gaming is "dead".

And yeah, spending £500 on a graphics card is massive overkill, don't expect to get value for money, expect to get some of the fastest tech available right now (besides £1k Titans etc.)

99.9% of PC gamers won't need more than a 660 to enjoy their fav. games on high-max settings on a single 60Hz, 1080p monitor imo.

We have no idea how much it costs nvidia to produce this kind of technology, but I bet it isn't cheap, and they need to make a profit at the end of the day. If you really don't like their pricing, there is always AMD

I don't know where you get the idea that I was talking about Nvidia specifically, when I was referring to both camps' £400-£500 cards ain't up to scratch and falling behind time, with lots of people already moved on to 2560 res or 120Hz monitor...and graphic card performance advancement is simply too slow and far from catching up with it.

And you are forgetting something...graphic card alone doesn't play games...people need to spend money for the rest of the system as well.

Also a £300 graphic card such as GTX670 would not doubt be quite a bit faster than the 7870 level graphic in the console, but it certainly does not "absolutely destroy it"...that's the problem.