Is Nvidia toying with AMD when it comes to GPU performance?

[Viper1]

disolitude said:

When looking at the last few generations of GPUs for Nvidia, one can spot certain patterns. 

2010: Geforce 400 Series

High end: GF100

Midrange/Low end: GF104,106,108...

2011: Geforce 500 Series

High end: GF110

Midrange/Low end: GF114,116...

Then we look at the GPUs released last and this year, we see:

2012: Geforce 600 Series

High end/Midrange/Low: GK104,106,108

2013: Geforce 700 Series

High end: GK110

Midrange: GF104

Looking at these patterns I think it is very clear that Nvidia held back the GK110 (Titan, GTX 780) in 2012 after seeing what AMD offered with their Southern Islands (HD 7xxx) cards. The GTX 680 flagship that is based on GK104 was meant to be a midrange card but Nvidia realized it will be enough to compete with AMD for now. This is why the power consumption is much lower than AMD and they have a 256 bit bus. Nvidia has never had a 256 bit bus on a flagship video card (appart from the 9000 series refresh). 

All this allowed Nvidia to repackage the GK110 GPU as the Titan and GTX 780 in 2013 and catch AMD without a competing GPU for at least 6 months if not more. 

AMD really needs to step up their game and deliver with the Sea Islands (HD 8xxx) series to keep this GPU race competitive. Nvidia will shortly deliver their Maxwell GPU's and raise the bar again while AMD still doesn't have a competitor to match Nvidias 2012 GK110 GPU. If AMD aren't able to stay competitive, the pricing for high end GPUs will skyrocket and no one wants to see that.

GeForce FX 5xxx, GeForce 6xxx, GeForce 7xxx (7900 GX2 even had a 512 bit bus), Geforce 8xxx (a few had a 384) and GTX 6xx series had 256 bit busses on their flagship cards.

I also thought AMD was skipping Sea Islands as a retail series (OEM only) and are going straight to Volcanic Islands?