• 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.

Geforce GTX 780, 770 coming in May

Gregster said:
I am looking at the 770 scores and seeing a 680 only under the hood. See what prices are and it could well save you money grabbing a pair of 670's or even 680's. I understand the shiny thing, as I am terrible but unless you are big into benchmarking, I would avoid unless the 770 is cheaper than a 680 or the 780 is around the same price as the current 680.
Click to expand...

Indeed, if the 700 series turns out to be horrendously expensive - then I shall be looking at 670's/680's instead. We'll see in a couple of days time I guess.

... But those Titan-like coolers do look nice :D
 
straxusii said:
So with those prices we got £360 for the 770 and £480 for the 780 including vat.

Sounds about right and back to normal for Nvidia, guess they have managed to make GK110 in vaguely affordable quantities now*


*alledgedly, pinch of salt until we see the confirmed prices
Click to expand...

That would make the GTX 770 £20 cheaper than the GTX 680 and the GTX 780 about £100 more.
 
If you have a 27" 1440p monitor can you play without AA?

I guess if you can get away with no AA then the performance would not be quite as bad compared to 1080p with AA. But 1440p + AA = probably very bad fps.

I bet the 780 will be over £500 because it is not far from a Titan.
 
NirK said:
If you have a 27" 1440p monitor can you play without AA?

I guess if you can get away with no AA then the performance would not be quite as bad compared to 1080p with AA. But 1440p + AA = probably very bad fps.

I bet the 780 will be over £500 because it is not far from a Titan.
Click to expand...


The thing is @ 1440P, even @ 1080P AA makes no difference in most games, unless you press your face up against an edge there are no jaggies in Crysis 3, BF3...... the only game of the more recent ones where i can see AA making a visible difference is Dirt Showdown.

I play Crysis 3 with everything on Very High @ 1080P on a Tahiti 7870 perfectly well with AA off or very low.

I play BF3 with AA and every other thing maxed out only because i can, can I see the difference with it off? nope :)
 
humbug said:
The thing is @ 1440P, even @ 1080P AA makes no difference in most games, unless you press your face up against an edge there are no jaggies in Crysis 3, BF3...... the only game of the more recent ones where i can see AA making a visible difference is Dirt Showdown.

I play Crysis 3 with everything on Very High @ 1080P on a Tahiti 7870 perfectly well with AA off or very low.

I play BF3 with AA and every other thing maxed out only because i can, can I see the difference with it off? nope :)
Click to expand...

AA makes a huge different to me at 1080. In pretty much all games I play.

Nirk is correct in saying that the cost/benefit scenario at 1440 doesn't really add up to using AA in most cases. The difference in AA and no AA is significantly reduced at that resolution.

I have both next to each other so easy enough to compare like for like :)
 
Rusty0611 said:
LOL :D

Man, those movie style textures in Bioshock Infinite weren't that impressive ;).
Click to expand...

I have enjoyed the game but the GFX wasn't quite what I was expecting. The weird thing was fps. I got the same fps at 5760x1080 as I did at 1024x768*. Goes to show that more pixels don't require any more GPU grunt :D



* I could be wrong.
 
780price.jpg


I make that £567 with VAT.
 
New releases are always exciting :).

Let's hope AMD pump something out Q3 this year to keep it interesting. Won't be getting rid of my 7950s. They're probably marginally quicker than 770s at 2560*1440 due to the memory bus (talking overclocked vs overclocked).

Obviously that's a guess as no performance figures have been released but it'll be interesting to see how much faster, if it all, the 770 is over the 7970 GE. IMO NVIDIA shouldn't be aiming for that with the 770 as it really doesn't bode well for generational upgrades if only the top spec card offers performance over what is currently available. And it makes it pretty boring too. AMD did it with the 7950. Making it marginally quicker than the old 580... great :D. Obviously with the driver improvements it's a different picture now but at release time both the 7970 and 7950 were unremarkable compared to the 580. Here's to hoping it's not the same with roles reversed this time round!
 
Boomstick777 said:
After seeing how woefully disappointing the 'next gen' Xbox is, I'm gonna save a ton of money not buying any new consoles lol.. I'm almost tempted to get another Titan (:
Click to expand...

Disappointing yes, looks like a damn VHS player.
But I know I'll still be getting it at launch. Not gonna kid myself otherwise. COD is probably the main reason as of now :)

E3 is only weeks away so we'll see games, pricing & release dates there.

I'm finding the GTX 700 series more disappointing to be honest. With the mysterious release schedule, ever increasing pricing and non existent benchmarks so close to release.
 
For me the only thing that can let this down is the price. I've currently got a GTX 570 and i'm overdue an upgrade.

If it's more than £500 then i'll just get myself a 7950, which will cover me until the next gen from AMD. I really hope Nvidia listen to their loyal customers, because i can see them pushing a lot of us away!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom