• 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.

TPU Performance Summaries with newer games

Final8y

Final8y

Final8y

Soldato
Joined
7 May 2006
Posts
12,183
Location
London, Ealing
RussianSensation said:
Historically ATi/AMD's cards tended to perform a lot better at higher resolutions. This trend continues as in the latest games AMD seems to have closed the gap in performance at high resolutions (or perhaps NV's Kepler/Maxwell drivers are less optimized for newer games).

Newer games added by TPU: Shadow of Mordor, COD : AW, Ryse Son of Rome, Civ: BE, Alien Isolation, Dead Rising 3.

The updated performance charts more or less mean that 980 has no chance whatsoever to keep the performance crown against the 390X in high resolution gaming, which means NV's GM200/210 is a must launch in 2015 to maintain the Maxwell momentum:

no hotlinking images please!

1) 290X ~ 780Ti and 980 is only 9% faster than a reference 290X at 4K.

2) 295X2 is now 61% faster than a 980, a gap that increased from 49% when testing was done with older games in September.

3) Titan loses to a reference 290 non-X.

Considering the current prices of 290X, 295X2 and 290X CF, the already overpriced 980 has now entered the comically overpriced Titan / Titan Z levels.

1440P is more of the same:

no hotlinking images please!

1) 780Ti has nothing extra worth talking about over the 290X while 980 is just 11% faster than the 290X despite its market prices approaching near double that of the 290X.

2) 780 non-Ti reveals itself as a very poor card for high rez gaming without overclocking, barely 12% faster than Ghz Tahiti. Very disappointing for a product that cost $650 and had so much potential early on. For 780 users at 1440p or higher, overclocking is a must now to each 290/290X/970 levels of performance.

3) Titan loses to a reference 290 non-X.

Source:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Colorful/iGame_GTX_970/27.html

It's pretty remarkable that AMD's $250 290 and $300 R9 290X are barely behind the 970/980 despite being such old products. As many gamers made note of during the launch of 970/980, high resolution gaming has not really moved from 1 year ago by anything tangible. We are talking 9-12%.

If R9 390X manages a 30-35% gain over the 290X, it'll put the 980 in a mid-range $399 class for next gen products. Hopefully GM200/210 brings at least 50% performance over Titan Black and 390X delivers a solid gain over the aging 290X. :thumbsup::thumbsup:
Click to expand...

RussianSensation said:
Nope. In almost all of the newer games Kepler's performance is way below expectations with 970 / 290X > 780Ti, 980 beating 780Ti by 20-35% (!) instead of 5-10%, 7970Ghz ~ 780, and 290 > Titan and 7950 V2 ~ 680 or faster. Sorry, that is not normal.

The Crew is yet another game where NV threw Kepler under the bus:

2560x1600 MSAA:
980 = 51
970 = 47
290X = 46
290 = 42
780Ti = 38 (!)
Titan = 35 (!)
780 = 33
7970Ghz = 32
680 = 26

^ 3 FPS faster for the Titan vs. 7970Ghz!!
http://www.techspot.com/review/925-the-crew-benchmarks/page3.html

Sorry, NV is purposely neglecting Kepler because Unity, DAI, FC4, Mordor, COD:AW, Dead Rising 3 are all new games and Kepler tanks vs. Maxwell/Tahiti/Hawaii for no apparent reason. This is forced obsolescene or complete disregard for your customer base. Are you seeing how much the Titan and 780 aged compared to 7970Ghz/290? Too make matters worse, all these cards from NV cost more than their AMD competitors. It's ridiculous when you pay more and your card ages faster.
Click to expand...

http://forums.anandtech.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=36961261

Same context been discussed here by many 7 series owners.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1528827/techspot-the-crew-benchmarked



[Discussion] Has Nvidia forsaken Kepler cards? Has AMD stepped up their game massively followed Maxwell’s release? Or is there something else at play…

As you probably know, every time TPU does a review of a graphics card, they publish a graph comparing average relative performance between the reviewed cards and all other cards. In their most recent review, they have added quite a few new games, including Alien Isolation, COD Advanced Warfare, Civilization BE, Ryse, and Shadow of Mordor. These are all games released shortly after Maxwell’s arrival to the market, and with the inclusion of those games, the average relative performance charts have changed significantly in ways that were not necessarily expected. Below is a comparison of new and old results:
Click to expand...
Too many results to cut and paste.
http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2one2z/discussion_has_nvidia_forsaken_kepler_cards_has/
 
Last edited:
almighty15 said:
What's the point of this thread? It's been known since launch that the AMD do well at high resolution.

This is nothing but a baiting thread.
Click to expand...

Well, no. It's been known that maxwell isnt as good at 4k as Hawaii, and doesnt scale as well as Kepler. But What's interesting is the downwards trend in performance of kepler relative to maxwell and hawaii and not just at 4k but everything down to 1080p.
 
Last edited:
The updated performance charts more or less mean that 980 has no chance whatsoever to keep the performance crown against the 390X in high resolution gaming, which means NV's GM200/210 is a must launch in 2015 to maintain the Maxwell momentum:
Click to expand...

Can i ask who ever thought that it would match the 390x?
Personally i'm hoping for 20% plus from the next gen top cards on both sides
 
The only thing I will say though is Just 11% faster is quite funny lol.

None of them are really 4K cards, you just pick the lesser of two evils

triss said:
Can i ask who ever thought that it would match the 390x?
Personally i'm hoping for 20% plus from the next gen top cards on both sides
Click to expand...

Anyone with half a bowl of sense could have told you the 390x will be faster than a 980GTX
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day, there isn't much in it. Not enough to care IMO anyway.

Dunno what the 295x2 and 690 are randomly doing in there though.
 
Nothing too much. It's nice to see what they do, but everything else in there is a single gpu card. No biggie...

At first, I was wondering why they compared the 295x2 to a 980, but then I noticed it to do with the performance gap increasing.

Look, it's a bit early for me :p
 
whoa so amd's high end cards have finally managed to catch up with nvidias mid range GM204 cards.

wonder how things will look when amd high end is compared to nvidias full fat maxwell high end when released?
 
Kepler tanks in COD:AW?
Then why am i getting 100fps+ on a single titan at 1440p?

Same with Mordor, sli scaling is not perfect but still 100+fps

They were running then at stock clocks no doubt, then surprised that cards that run at 1300 out of the box are beating cards that run at 900
 
Last edited:
Cyber-Mav said:
whoa so amd's high end cards have finally managed to catch up with nvidias mid range GM204 cards.

wonder how things will look when amd high end is compared to nvidias full fat maxwell high end when released?
Click to expand...

Not to be pedantic but your referencing of GM204 as midrange is wrong. 980GTX is infact NVidia's flagship product. People looking at paper specs and saying it is midrange purely on its bus width is just a case of the blind following the blind.
 
Silent_Scone said:
Not to be pedantic but your referencing of GM204 as midrange is wrong. 980GTX is infact NVidia's flagship product. People looking at paper specs and saying it is midrange purely on its bus width is just a case of the blind following the blind.
Click to expand...



only time will tell, but if its same as GF114 and GK114 then those had mid rangers like gtx 560 and gtx 660, so there could very well be a higher end product based on GM200 architecture. but need to wait and see on it.
 
295x2 61% faster than a 980, bit of a dumb comparison considering the former is a dual gpu card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom