GTX 960 pictured !!!

[Kaapstad]

That graph doesnt impress me. What is the 960 clocked at? 9xx core? What is it boosting too? 10xx core? What happens when we clock it to 1500+ core?

I would take that graph with a pinch of salt anyway.

 

[bru]

One thing to think about with the exchange rate going up, it should effect all new buys that gibbo makes not just the 970, including the 960's unless he has already ordered them.

 

[Rangerjr1]

That graph doesnt impress me. What is the 960 clocked at? 9xx core? What is it boosting too? 10xx core? What happens when we clock it to 1500+ core?

Think the very same thing when reviewers run them stock or clock the AMD cards to a measly 1040 from 1000 and the Nvidias boost by them selves lol.

What happens when we clock it to ****+ core?

This is why i dont trust reviewers, they're lame.

 

[bru]

Is CES over?

No Nvidia announcement about the 960's?

I'm rather disappointed.

 

[BRIGGBOY81]

I would take that graph with a pinch of salt anyway.

personally i wouldnt get the salt out of the cupboard and waste it on that graph.

 

[IceShock]

GTX 960 pictured !!!

China is selling scrap metal? I thought they only bought it to sell us counterfeit goods.

 

[ubersonic]

Something nobody seems to have mentioned yet, if the 960 possesses the same HW memory compression that the 970/980 do then it will be able to stuff up to 2.7GB into it's 2GB (best case scenario).

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

That graph doesnt impress me. What is the 960 clocked at? 9xx core? What is it boosting too? 10xx core? What happens when we clock it to 1500+ core?

What happens if you don't get a 1.5GHZ GTX960 then?? Just like the guaranteed 5GHZ Pentium G3258 or 1.2GHZ HD7850,5GHZ Core i7 4960K or FX8350 and so on. Are you going to refund people yourself then??

You do realise when Nvidia split the 60 series SKU last time,ie, with the GTX660 and GTX660TI they artificially gimped the GTX660 with such low power limits it effectively gimped the effect of any overclock?? This was even with cards which had enhanced PCBs and coolers and that includes the one I have and my mates one too. The GTX660TI was not limited in this way. They did it to protect the GTX660TI as an overclocked GTX660 would have got close. The only realistic way round it was with Kepler Golden Bios or something similar.

There is both a GTX960TI and GTX965TI right above it.

Edit!!

Even HardOCP noticed it:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013...rectcu_ii_oc_video_card_review/3#.VLOR03uQG70

A reference NVIDIA GTX 660 has a base clock of 980MHz with the GPU boost clock of 1033MHz with a memory frequency of 6GHz. The ASUS GTX 660 DirectCU II OC is factory overclocked with a base clock of 1020MHz and a GPU boost clock of 1085MHz. Keep in mind that the effective clock speed will vary based on the card’s operating temperature, power limit and other factors and will often exceed the rated boost clock. In the case of the ASUS GTX 660 DirectCU II, throughout our stock clock testing, we observed a GPU clock of 1150MHz.

For our overclocking efforts, we set the power limit to +10% (the maximum allowed) and noticed that the observed clock speed dropped from 1150MHz down to 1019MHz. We then tried raising the base clock and changing other settings, but nothing would get the observed GPU clock to go above 1019MHz. We tried varying the power limit between 1% and 10% and got the same results. We also attempted this with MSI Afterburner to see if there was an issue with GPU Tweak, and received the same results. Leaving the power limit at +0% and increasing voltage also resulted in slower observed GPU clock speeds.

Since the card did not appreciate us trying to give it more juice, we set the power limit to +0% and voltage to stock and begun increasing the clock speeds. It took a significant amount of trial and error to find the maximum observed GPU boost clock because the card was already performing close to its power limit at stock. Ultimately, we were able to set the base clock at 1098MHz which resulted in an observed boost clock of 1228MHz, a 78MHz increase over the stock observed GPU clock. We were also able to increase the memory from the stock effective 6.008GHz to 6.608GHz effective. If we clocked the memory higher, it would still perform but the GPU speed would decrease to compensate for the higher memory power use.

Given the lower power limit and voltage requirements that NVIDIA imposes on the GTX 660 class GPUs, both the stock observed clocks and the overclock achieved in this power envelope are very impressive. We think that these chips have a lot more potential in them if NVIDIA would allow their card vendors to set power levels and voltages more freely, however, that would likely cause this level card become a valid substitute for GTX 660Ti and GTX 670 class cards.

 

[ubersonic]

What happens if you don't get a 1.5GHZ GTX960 then?? Just like the guaranteed 5GHZ Pentium G3258 or 1.2GHZ HD7850,5GHZ Core i7 4960K or FX8350 and so on. Are you going to refund people yourself then??

I don't think there's a single person on earth with a 5GHz 4960K ;P

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I don't think there's a single person on earth with a 5GHz 4960K ;P

I meant 4690K!

But my main concern is more the fact we appear to have a GTX960 and GTX960TI - if Nvidia does allow full overclocking and decent power limits with the GTX960,then hats off to them.

However,I think the GTX960TI might be more likely to have that.

Maybe I should just save up some more and get a GTX965TI or GTX970 and then I won't need to worry at this rate LOL!

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Something nobody seems to have mentioned yet, if the 960 possesses the same HW memory compression that the 970/980 do then it will be able to stuff up to 2.7GB into it's 2GB (best case scenario).

I wonder how many ROPs the GM206 will have though?? The GM204 based cards had more ROPs than the cards they superseded and AFAIK this is a positive influence on AA performance.

 

[RanxZy]

If its only 10% faster than a 760 then it needs to be £150 to £160 max.

Any higher pricing would be a lackluster launch.

I think you'll find the 960 is really a successor to the 660 as the 760 was a rebaged 670 with less vram. Things can get blurred when so many cards are rebadged.

 

[JustCallMeVlad]

What happens if you don't get a 1.5GHZ GTX960 then?? Just like the guaranteed 5GHZ Pentium G3258 or 1.2GHZ HD7850,5GHZ Core i7 4960K or FX8350 and so on. Are you going to refund people yourself then??

You do realise when Nvidia split the 60 series SKU last time,ie, with the GTX660 and GTX660TI they artificially gimped the GTX660 with such low power limits it effectively gimped the effect of any overclock?? This was even with cards which had enhanced PCBs and coolers and that includes the one I have and my mates one too. The GTX660TI was not limited in this way. They did it to protect the GTX660TI as an overclocked GTX660 would have got close. The only realistic way round it was with Kepler Golden Bios or something similar.

There is both a GTX960TI and GTX965TI right above it.

Edit!!

Even HardOCP noticed it:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013...rectcu_ii_oc_video_card_review/3#.VLOR03uQG70

I actually have a 5ghz 3258 and had a 1350 core 7870 Hawk. Thinking the 960 won't hit 1.5ghz is just foolish. I have no doubt it will easily match it's brothers overclocking abilities.

I'll be ordering a 960 Gaming or Hawk so I'll definitely let you know if she'll do 1.5ghz

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I actually have a 5ghz 3258 and had a 1350 core 7870 Hawk. Thinking the 960 won't hit 1.5ghz is just foolish. I have no doubt it will easily match it's brothers overclocking abilities.

I'll be ordering a 960 Gaming or Hawk so I'll definitely let you know if she'll do 1.5ghz

So you will personally guarentee every gtx960 will do 1.5ghz+ on this forum and offer a refund if they won't?

What is even funnier that people on this forum have had poor clocking HD7850 cards which won't hit 1.2ghz due to poor silicon or PCB revisions and plenty of people have not hit any where near 5GHZ on their G3258 unless you consider them liers.

Its the same lot of people who always go on on about gusrenteed overclocks but funnily enough not a sight or sound is seen of them in threads when these guarenteed overclocks don't materislise.

We saw the same nonsense sprouted for people with guaranteed 4ghz e5000 CPUs and 3.6ghz q6600s and 1ghz hd5850s and 1ghz gtx560ti cards even in the past. Maybe we can add that to the guarenteed 5ghz fx8350s,core i7 4790k and core i5 4960k cpus people like you were saying were guarenteed. Yeah that worked out well didn't it!

 

[Boomstick777]

From MyDrivers.com.

 

[Jamielicious]

Overclocking will always be a matter of luck, my 7870 struggles much past 1150MHz but that's still a 15% overclock. While the 960 probably needs to be a good overclocker to avoid becoming another 285, it is quite likely Nvidia will try and limit overclocking. After all isn't the 970 held back for power in order to protect the 980?

Also a 1060 card can then be sold a year later as an overclocked version of the 960 (560 = overclocked 460 springs to mind).

 

[Boomstick777]

With regard to vram, if you compare Nvidia's latest VS AMD's it looks right.

290X 4GB * GTX 980 4GB
290 4GB * GTX 970 4GB
280/280X 3GB * GTX 960 Ti 3GB (Rumored)
270X 2GB * GTX 960 2GB
260X 2GB * GTX 950 Ti 2GB

Looks like a fairly comparable stack, obviously with Nvidia having better performance VS AMD's counterparts. This is just to compare vram.

 

[loftie]

With regard to vram, if you compare Nvidia's latest VS AMD's it looks right.

290X 4GB * GTX 980 4GB
290 4GB * GTX 970 4GB
280/280X 3GB * GTX 960 Ti 3GB (Rumored)
270X 2GB * GTX 960 2GB
260X 2GB * GTX 950 Ti 2GB

Looks like a fairly comparable stack, obviously with Nvidia having better performance VS AMD's counterparts. This is just to compare vram.

While that's currently true, the 2** series are the current cards not the replacement for them. I'd expect the new cards, in this case the 9** series, to be better. Though at the same time I'm not actually expecting the 3** to change the VRAM amounts but maybe I'm just being pessimistic!

And at the end of the day, if the 960 works well at it's target resolution, more than likely 1080p, with just 2GB then it's job done regardless.

 

[JustCallMeVlad]

So you will personally guarentee every gtx960 will do 1.5ghz+ on this forum and offer a refund if they won't?

What is even funnier that people on this forum have had poor clocking HD7850 cards which won't hit 1.2ghz due to poor silicon or PCB revisions and plenty of people have not hit any where near 5GHZ on their G3258 unless you consider them liers.

Its the same lot of people who always go on on about gusrenteed overclocks but funnily enough not a sight or sound is seen of them in threads when these guarenteed overclocks don't materislise.

We saw the same nonsense sprouted for people with guaranteed 4ghz e5000 CPUs and 3.6ghz q6600s and 1ghz hd5850s and 1ghz gtx560ti cards even in the past. Maybe we can add that to the guarenteed 5ghz fx8350s,core i7 4790k and core i5 4960k cpus people like you were saying were guarenteed. Yeah that worked out well didn't it!

How hard is it to overclock a 970? Max out target power, +200 core, +500 mem. Done.. Why do you believe it would be any different with the 960?

Edit - Almost 1500 BC

 

[Darujhistan]

With regard to vram, if you compare Nvidia's latest VS AMD's it looks right.

290X 4GB * GTX 980 4GB
290 4GB * GTX 970 4GB
280/280X 3GB * GTX 960 Ti 3GB (Rumored)
270X 2GB * GTX 960 2GB
260X 2GB * GTX 950 Ti 2GB

Looks like a fairly comparable stack, obviously with Nvidia having better performance VS AMD's counterparts. This is just to compare vram.

That's the way it should be. No complaints if the 960ti's match the 280/x's of AMD (in terms of VRAM to adhere to your theme) , which is exactly what they ought to be doing. VFM, good performance, and plenty of VRAM for future proofing and in some instances where it's required right now.