• 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.

Official GTX750TI review thread

Boomstick777 said:
^^ This.

The GTX 880 will be better performing than older 7XX cards, but also cooler running, quieter. Have more OC room and use less power. All good things..

My ti's will be on MM as soon as GTX 880 launches lol :p
Click to expand...

I think that 880 will be quite a while.. :)

Especially the binned versions for special cards. Of course, watercooling reference people will enjoy the cards a bit earlier.
 
Seems a nice little card hopefully when the software lets it o/c further we will see what it does when its fully powered
 
oooh, as someone whos not a big big gamer this card is looking super interesting.

ive pretty much always gone ati because they tend to be better for power consumption and i had been looking at the 260x but now im not so sure.

def interested to see where prices go in the next month or so and if any additionally powered cards come out so you can have a play with some proper OC'ing.
 
Any idea when the mid-range will hit? Some people think a couple months, some think Q3/Q4 (with 20nm).

I'm guessing GM106 will be the slowest card worth upgrading to from a 7850, etc.

GM104 will be out of my price range :p
 
mark2410 said:
eh?

how is the 750ti not a mid range card?
Click to expand...

Progress, that's how. x50 nomenclature is for low-end parts.

Mid-range is x60 (460, 560, 660).

x70 and x80 are high end. That's how it's been for years now.

You can't say "it performs like last-gens's mid-range so it's mid-range". Unless you don't expect progress.

Progress is good, y'all.
 
well i would have said the 50s and 60s are midrange, id prob even given count the 40s bing midrang granted lower midrange. 50 bing mid mid range and 60 s upper mid range.

that puts the 10s 20s and 30s as the the comparable low/mid/upper lower end cards. then the 70s 80s and 90s being the three higher end card ranges.
 
Well the improvement form the top GK107 card to the top GM107 card (650 to 750ti) is astounding considering they are on the same node. Ok so die size has gone up by 25% but performance has nearly doubled and for very similar power usage.

Bench 650 vs 750Ti

This certainly looks good for the higher tier chips that will be coming latter in the year, especially with a die shrink to help get round the increased die size issue.
 
i dont think nvidia bothers with a midrange anymore

their cards seem to go from rubbish>ok>awesome>overpricedawesome
AMD has won the £150 performance for atleast 3 years now? 560ti was their last big midrange hit?

ppl who dont have the attention span to read reviews(im almost there) think just because nvidia have the fastest card means all their cards are the fastest

760 was such a boring card but sold lots and lots!
 
l2ez4m said:
Today, four GM107-based cards in a mining rig should be able to outperform a Radeon R9 290X for less money, using less power.
Click to expand...

~1000kh/s@270W@450£

This might somehow ease price gouging in Us.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are lower than real world, I am guessing they rushed the review so didn't have time to fine tune, people are seeing in excess of 300KH/s per card. It's something like 40% more KH/s per watt than an R270.
 
Last edited:
Marine-RX179 said:
That's kinda odd...the card is bus-power and require no additional PCI-E 6pin according to review...I thought cards can only draw 75W max from the PCI-E slot?
Click to expand...

Toms Hardware said:
Non-Contact Direct Current Measurement at the PCIe Slot
Non-Contact Direct Current Measurement at the External PCIe Power Supply
Direct Voltage Measurement 3.3 V / 12 V
Click to expand...

It seems to be going past the rated TDP!

TH was measuring graphics card power consumption.
 
ubersonic said:
Those numbers are lower than real world, I am guessing they rushed the review so didn't have time to fine tune, people are seeing in excess of 300KH/s per card. It's something like 40% more KH/s per watt than an R270.
Click to expand...


Good. so Cryptocoin miners will no longer buy AMD GPU's and the prices for those will normalise again.

Happy days.
 
ubersonic said:
I wouldn't be so sure, Nvidia appear to be beating AMD on efficiency, AMD are still winning on numbers, and a lot of people prefer numbers to efficiency.
Click to expand...

Most people prefer profit to numbers, if Maxwell is 40% more efficient than GCN then the numbers add up for Maxwell.

As soon as the bigger more powerful Maxwell GPU hit the market CryptoCoin will move from AMD to Nvidia entirely. then retailers will price gouge Nvidia.
 
Last edited:
The problem with slower cards,it means you need more computers to run them.

Its an up front cost and running cost balance.

However,TBF its only the R9 280X which has been affected massively by price increases.

ubersonic said:
THG measured it at 68w peak load under GPGPU.
Click to expand...

THG measured as much as 141W peak when gaming,meaning the cards is cheating regarding its TDP.

Remember this is a card only measurement.

People are thinking of using a picoPSU to power this card. It better be a 200W job then.

Intel did the same thing with its phone chips. They would massively breech TDP to look good in benchmarks over short term.

Nvidia Boost 2 does the same thing. Reviews have shown the issues over longer time periods.

A lot of these new boost mechanisms from AMD and Nvidia are cheats. Very few sites test extended 10 to 15 minutes runs,or even try them in more cooling limited situations. The tests are run mostly on open air benches in air condition offices or a huge high end case,with the side open in an air conditioned office and usually the runs are under 3 minutes long. You see a best case scenario in reviews ESPECIALLY with reference coolers.

The GPU boosting mechanisms are overly aggressive,unlike with desktop CPUs and have way too much variation according to conditions. They are very dependent on cooling and environment conditions. You can see what aggressive boosting does for laptop CPUs - different models show different scores and in some ways the boosting with cards is probably a bit worse.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom