NVIDIA 780 Ti Announced (18/10/13)

whyscotty · 27 Oct 2013 at 01:11

Five.Stars said:
Fair enough, I stand corrected

No probs

Within days they did shoot up to around a grand though

chaparral · 27 Oct 2013 at 01:33

whyscotty said:
Within days they did shoot up to around a grand though

But that was the sellers putting there prices up due to low stock and high demand....

no_1_dave · 27 Oct 2013 at 01:26

humbug said:
Some might say that Nvidia users are sheep sucked in by Nvidia's "better quality" marketing. while AMD users are clever enough to see through it.

Or some may say AMD users are sheep chasing an extra 4fps they'll never notice, while Nvidia users are enjoying PhysX effects in Borderlands 2 :cool:

Rroff · 27 Oct 2013 at 01:35

no_1_dave said:
Or some may say AMD users are sheep chasing an extra 4fps they'll never notice, while Nvidia users are enjoying PhysX effects in Borderlands 2

Yeah! doesn't matter how fast you can render that fire effect (mantle) if it still looks like a billboard sprite

/me runs

bru · 27 Oct 2013 at 01:48

Rroff said:
Hah you mean take at face value whatever politicalized spin AMD pull next

yup like them assuring everyone that they will be vastly improving the heatsink and fans on the new cards, and we can all see how that seems to have turned out.

Gregster · 27 Oct 2013 at 05:51

Rroff said:
Hah you mean take at face value whatever politicalized spin AMD pull next

He does have a point. You just have to do this, this, this and maybe this and the games will play exactly the same as they do on an Nvidia card. RadeonPro FTW!!!

Silent_Scone · 27 Oct 2013 at 06:14

Value comes first

Are there any partially confirmed specs yet? I sold my Titans after Broomsticks advice.

Joke, obvs.

Kaapstad · 27 Oct 2013 at 06:17

Rroff said:
Yeah! doesn't matter how fast you can render that fire effect (mantle) if it still looks like a billboard sprite

/me runs

Mantle, the fastest route between two bottlenecks.

Orangey · 27 Oct 2013 at 07:11

Remember when we all thought Titan Ultra was gonna be £1200?

Marine-RX179 · 27 Oct 2013 at 07:20

MjFrosty said:
Value comes first

Indeed.

If the 290 launch at say...£350-£370, I would only consider buying the GTX780 if it price drop to £380-£400. IMO neither the 290x or the GTX780Ti warrant nearly extra £100 on top, for the little bit extra performance.

ALXAndy · 27 Oct 2013 at 07:58

Marine-RX179 said:
Indeed.

If the 290 launch at say...£350-£370, I would only consider buying the GTX780 if it price drop to £380-£400. IMO neither the 290x or the GTX780Ti warrant nearly extra £100 on top, for the little bit extra performance.

I'm still an Nvidia owner and user and I will remain so, even though I have a 7990. My fiancee is getting my 670s but they are remaining 'in the family' per se.

That does not stop me seeing what's going on though. Just look back at history, it says a lot.

I'm going to go back as far as the 5870... £300 at launch. That was 3.8 years ago when the economy was in a much better state than it is now. What I mean is, £300 seemed like far less to me then than it does now. Nvidia spunked a fortune on Fermi, then released the GTX 480 for £430, or something around that figure.

AMD respond with their 69xx cards and they were a bit pony. Not terrible, but not good enough to stand up to the revised Fermi cards (notably the 580). What do Nvidia do? start charging £450 for their high end card. AMD remained at their £300ish price (6970).

Moving on. Nvidia by now are charging £450 for a 3gb GTX 580 and have been for over a year, as AMD have nothing to respond with (bad times for GPU fans). AMD then come up with the 7970, and charge £439 for it at launch, which is what Nvidia are charging for their GTX 580 3gb.

AMD are the biggest robbers ever, and people are completely up in arms. The thing is, though, they are only using their competition for a pricing guide. When that competition wasn't there (Fermi delays, poor yields, too hot, too loud, guzzle power) AMD charge what they think they can get away with - £300. The problem with Nvidia as I see it is that they are prepared to charge whatever the heck they like, ignoring the competition and the economic climate.

Kepler mid range at launch, again extracting the urine.

After that? well Nvidia had something AMD could not compete with at any price, so they set the prices for GK110 at any price. £800+ for the top card, £600 or so for the 780.

Now at the present day. Nvidia are still charging £500 for the 780. Well, actually no they're not, they're charging £550, but some retailers are competing and selling it for around £500. AMD release the 290x and again, because they're AMD they're not allowed to charge that much. They charge £450 for a card that pretty much is on level peggings with the Titan, yet AMD are all sorts of bad words and a cheap ass terrible company for charging that much.

What will happen now? the Nvidia cards have been given a reality slap, and prices will drop accordingly. That would not happen if it were not for AMD forcing them to drop prices, yet people can't see that.

I dunno. It's almost as bad as the Intel lot wanting AMD CPUs out of the way so they can brag endlessly about how they have the best processor, failing to realise that the only thing keeping Intel in check with their pricing is AMD.

I still remember the 80s when Nintendo dominated with the NES. We were stuck with the same console for bloody years. It was so boring.

DarrenM343 · 27 Oct 2013 at 08:21

mmj_uk said:
NVidia charge more than AMD because there's an equally big user base willing to pay more for quality in other areas of the product.

LOL. I have to say I agree with this.
Just comparing the look of the R 290 X to a Gtx 690, Titan, 780, it just looks cheap in comparison. Of course looks can be deceiving of what's inside but is still part of the complete package, how it looks.
Before anyone jumps on me I had an Nvidia 670 and have to say for an NVidia part it looked and felt cheap, although performed very well.

Latest AMD top of the range will win on price but they have to, but IMO are behind the development curve. And it's always cheaper to manufacturer as time goes by - so building a card to just about beat the competition but x months later should mean lower cost to manufacture.
I always feel Nvidia want to get things right and have things optimised considering the shelf life of the product (in reality these cards are only good for about a year or two), where AMD might include things that at that time are not really required and by the time they are the overall performance of the card won't be good enough anyway. Like 2GB memory and 256bit bus Nvidia have only just moved away from really, where as the R290 mentions 512bit bus and 4K but will it actually perform at that resolution, even with a few of them?

All IMO of course. And as I always state in AMD and Nvidia type discussions, I've owned cards from both parties and very happy we all have more than one choice of manufacturer!.

ALXAndy · 27 Oct 2013 at 08:25

DarrenM343 said:
LOL. I have to say I agree with this.
Just comparing the look of the R 290 X to a Gtx 690, Titan, 780, it just looks cheap in comparison.

It IS cheap in comparison.

Silent_Scone · 27 Oct 2013 at 09:57

ALXAndy said:
I dunno. It's almost as bad as the Intel lot wanting AMD CPUs out of the way so they can brag endlessly about how they have the best processor, failing to realise that the only thing keeping Intel in check with their pricing is AMD.

I still remember the 80s when Nintendo dominated with the NES. We were stuck with the same console for bloody years. It was so boring.

Actually Intel have never payed attention to AMD pricing. High end Prescott chips were £800 even when AMD64 trumped them in performance.

Orangey · 27 Oct 2013 at 10:46

MjFrosty said:
Actually Intel have never payed attention to AMD pricing. High end Prescott chips were £800 even when AMD64 trumped them in performance.

If people think the bickering about Titan is bad they should take a time machine back to those days. I recall people being openly mocked for buying Intel and flamewars erupting even among more high-brow forums.

ALXAndy · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:06

Orangey said:
If people think the bickering about Titan is bad they should take a time machine back to those days. I recall people being openly mocked for buying Intel and flamewars erupting even among more high-brow forums.

Intel were very naughty in those days. Mind you, they still pull stunts but it's not as bad as it used to be.

flopper · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:24

DarrenM343 said:
LOL. I have to say I agree with this.
Just comparing the look of the R 290 X to a Gtx 690, Titan, 780, it just looks cheap in comparison. Of course looks can be deceiving of what's inside but is still part of the complete package, how it looks.
Before anyone jumps on me I had an Nvidia 670 and have to say for an NVidia part it looked and felt cheap, although performed very well.

Latest AMD top of the range will win on price but they have to, but IMO are behind the development curve. And it's always cheaper to manufacturer as time goes by - so building a card to just about beat the competition but x months later should mean lower cost to manufacture.
I always feel Nvidia want to get things right and have things optimised considering the shelf life of the product (in reality these cards are only good for about a year or two), where AMD might include things that at that time are not really required and by the time they are the overall performance of the card won't be good enough anyway. Like 2GB memory and 256bit bus Nvidia have only just moved away from really, where as the R290 mentions 512bit bus and 4K but will it actually perform at that resolution, even with a few of them?

All IMO of course. And as I always state in AMD and Nvidia type discussions, I've owned cards from both parties and very happy we all have more than one choice of manufacturer!.

AMD is changing the hardware landscape with mantle.
Not just with nvidia but with intel.
somewhow someone got smart there and thought out a plan, so with Mantle the IPC race with Intel is removed, the workload goes gpu.
the 290 have plenty of bandwidth which will help with higher resolutions and with mantle its really like to be a intersting playfield.
One that AMD played to win

the 780ti wont matter what its like and unless they put price at a level of the 290, its a doomed card.

pgi947 · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:42

flopper said:
AMD is changing the hardware landscape with mantle.
Not just with nvidia but with intel.
somewhow someone got smart there and thought out a plan, so with Mantle the IPC race with Intel is removed, the workload goes gpu.
the 290 have plenty of bandwidth which will help with higher resolutions and with mantle its really like to be a intersting playfield.
One that AMD played to win

the 780ti wont matter what its like and unless they put price at a level of the 290, its a doomed card.

Its a bit bold to say the IPC race is over due to mantle, don't forget, at the moment only ONE game has been confirmed to get the mantle treatment, granted other frostbite titles will no doubt follow but that still leaves us with a single confirmed developer behind the API. AMD did say more would follow but have yet to be named.

Mantles success also depends how easy it is to code. If a developer finds it easier to code to say OGL, then that is the path they will most likely take.

I agree Mantle is an interesting proposition, but it is far far too early to make any statements about it changing the shape of hardware as we know it.

bru · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:46

flopper said:
AMD is changing the hardware landscape with mantle.
Not just with nvidia but with intel.
somewhow someone got smart there and thought out a plan, so with Mantle the IPC race with Intel is removed, the workload goes gpu.
the 290 have plenty of bandwidth which will help with higher resolutions and with mantle its really like to be a intersting playfield.
One that AMD played to win

the 780ti wont matter what its like and unless they put price at a level of the 290, its a doomed card.

This is all well and good providing that AMD actually deliver on what they have been saying about mantle. If it turns out to be a bit of a letdown, then it will be typical of the AMD hype machine.

Think of the things they have said before.

Non proprietary 3D is they way forward. I didnt see much mentiond of tridef at the R9 290 launch event.
Non Physx physics. .....
Better coolers.....
True audio......

Now dont get me wrong Nvidia are just as bad hyping stuff up, but do they deliver more often?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 27 Oct 2013 at 11:46

ALXAndy said:
I'm still an Nvidia owner and user and I will remain so, even though I have a 7990. My fiancee is getting my 670s but they are remaining 'in the family' per se.

That does not stop me seeing what's going on though. Just look back at history, it says a lot.

I'm going to go back as far as the 5870... £300 at launch. That was 3.8 years ago when the economy was in a much better state than it is now. What I mean is, £300 seemed like far less to me then than it does now. Nvidia spunked a fortune on Fermi, then released the GTX 480 for £430, or something around that figure.

AMD respond with their 69xx cards and they were a bit pony. Not terrible, but not good enough to stand up to the revised Fermi cards (notably the 580). What do Nvidia do? start charging £450 for their high end card. AMD remained at their £300ish price (6970).

Moving on. Nvidia by now are charging £450 for a 3gb GTX 580 and have been for over a year, as AMD have nothing to respond with (bad times for GPU fans). AMD then come up with the 7970, and charge £439 for it at launch, which is what Nvidia are charging for their GTX 580 3gb.

AMD are the biggest robbers ever, and people are completely up in arms. The thing is, though, they are only using their competition for a pricing guide. When that competition wasn't there (Fermi delays, poor yields, too hot, too loud, guzzle power) AMD charge what they think they can get away with - £300. The problem with Nvidia as I see it is that they are prepared to charge whatever the heck they like, ignoring the competition and the economic climate.

Kepler mid range at launch, again extracting the urine.

After that? well Nvidia had something AMD could not compete with at any price, so they set the prices for GK110 at any price. £800+ for the top card, £600 or so for the 780.

Now at the present day. Nvidia are still charging £500 for the 780. Well, actually no they're not, they're charging £550, but some retailers are competing and selling it for around £500. AMD release the 290x and again, because they're AMD they're not allowed to charge that much. They charge £450 for a card that pretty much is on level peggings with the Titan, yet AMD are all sorts of bad words and a cheap ass terrible company for charging that much.

What will happen now? the Nvidia cards have been given a reality slap, and prices will drop accordingly. That would not happen if it were not for AMD forcing them to drop prices, yet people can't see that.

I dunno. It's almost as bad as the Intel lot wanting AMD CPUs out of the way so they can brag endlessly about how they have the best processor, failing to realise that the only thing keeping Intel in check with their pricing is AMD.

I still remember the 80s when Nintendo dominated with the NES. We were stuck with the same console for bloody years. It was so boring.

Agreed.