By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC - nVidia announces the GTX 780 Ti

Pemalite on 24 October 2013
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:


You forgot those:

Arma III 4k: 7.9

Bioshock Infinite 4k: 7.3

Battlefield 4 4k: 4.9

Total War: Rome 2: 12.8

Hitman: Absolution 4k: 42.8

Call of Juarez: Gunslinger 2560x1600: 30.6

I listed Bioshock Infinite.
Battlefield 4 isn't released yet, drivers aren't final, wait for release and nVidia and AMD to get a few months of driver tweaking.
Arma 3, needs more CPU than GPU if anything.

And it would be nice if you provided a link and also stated if that's in favor of Titan or the 290X, not to much to ask so I have *some* clue as to what you are talking about and where you get your information from.

Well, looking at benchmarks, it seems that both pale in comparison to the 7990 anyway so, if you're getting something, might as well get the 7990.

I have triple 7970's. :P I'll be getting quad 290X's.

I just wish AMD would hurry up and fix the frame latency issues.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Around the Network
Captain_Tom on 24 October 2013
CGI-Quality said:
Captain_Tom said:
CGI-Quality said:

Yeah, the 4K area is the one place it does top the Titan. No arguments there.


Well it still beats it at 1600p as well, and honestly if you are using a Titan for anything less than that, you are wasting money.  My 7970 OC'd still maxes out absolutely every game at 60 FPS in 1080p...

 

It's just my opinion, but even in 1080p it still trades blows for half the price.  I wish I could underline that like 5 more times.

Nobody argued with "trading blows", but you and I both know that's what you initially said. Thus, you exaggerated. No big deal, just know that's what occured.


Well no it isn't like what the 7970 did to the 580, but considering this time the cost is half as much, it is just as big of a deal to me.  I care much more about price/performance, than absolute performance.  Also I cannot wait to see the 8GB Toxic addition.  That is what I am REALLY excited for...



Captain_Tom on 24 October 2013
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:

There's more than a few fps differences from Titan to the 290 according to the benchmarks on page 7.


I only go by Anandtech, with a spinkle of Linustechtips.
So with that in mind...

Metro 4K res, High Quality: Titan is 1.1fps slower.
Metro 4K res, Low Quality: Titan is  4.9fps slower.
Metro 1440P, High Quality: Titan is 2.6fps slower.
Metro 1080P, Very High Quality: Titan is 5.4fps slower.

Keep in mind, you can generally have a margin of error of around 2%.

Hows about an AMD endorsed Title? Battlefield 3?
4k res, Ultra Quality: Titan is  2.5fps slower.
4k res, Medium Quality: Titan is 0.1fps slower.
1440P, Ultra Quality: Titan is 8.3fps faster.
1080P, Ultra Quality: Titan is 14.6fps faster.

Crysis 3?
4k res, Medium Quality: Titan is 3.2fps faster.
4k res, low quality: Titan is 1.7fps faster.
1440P, High-Quality: Titan is 5.8fps faster.
1080P, High Quality: Titan is 7fps faster.

Another AMD title?
Bioshock Infinite.
4k res, Ultra quality: Titan is 3.4fps faster.
4k res, Medium Quality: Titan is 1.3fps slower.
1440P, Ultra Quality: Titan is 6.6fps faster.
1080P, Ultra quality: Titan is 9.8fps faster.

Not exactly a home run for AMD is it? I ask you... Is that kind of performance delta really worth it to upgrade from Titan to the 290X?

Do keep in mind that the "uber" or "fast" bios is essentially an overclock, it's really not fair to compare unless you also do the same for Titan.
Also, Titan runs cooler and uses less power and is far more silent.
nVidia also offers PhysX and Adaptive V-Sync (You need a 3rd party tool for AMD to have the same functionality.), faster game profile releases for Multi-GPU set-ups.

AMD have also yet to fix the frame latency issues too, it's been how many months?

You can check my numbers here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review


Honestly I have never trusted anandtech's numbers.  They always deviate heavily towards Nvidia from my other three websites: Techspot, Techreport, and Tom's Hardware.

Also is anyone actually considering upgrading from a Titan?!

When you get a top-end card, I would think you would have no need to upgrade for at least a year.  The only exception I can think of is 580 -> 7970, but even then I personally wouldn't have...



ethomaz on 24 October 2013

Titan still perform better than 290X.... the good news is that 290X is cheaper.

Now what nVidia will do with GTX 780 TI? I was expecting the 290X to beat Titan to force nVidia to release the full GK110 but that was not the case.

 Maybe GTX 780 TI will be a card close to Titan with a better price... just to match the 290X.

PS. The 290X noise level and temperatures are terrible... AMD and nVidia need 20nm ASAP.



Captain_Tom on 24 October 2013
ethomaz said:

Titan still perform better than 290X.... the good news is that 290X is cheaper.

Now what nVidia will do with GTX 780 TI? I was expecting the 290X to beat Titan to force nVidia to release the full GK110 but that was not the case.

Maybe GTX 780 will be a card close to Titan with a better price... just to match the 290X.

PS. The 290X noise level and temperatures are terrible... AMD and nVidia need 20nm ASAP.


Well they may still force Nvidia's hand if they release another driver update that gives +10-20% performance.  The 7950 went from barily beating a 660 Ti to trading blows with a 670, and the 7970 GHz beat the 680 buy a full 10%!

 

Also Mantle is wild card I cannot wait to see played.  

 

If Nvidia really wants to soundly keep their $1000 throne, I think they will have to release a highly overclocked Full  GF110 with the same superfast RAM the 770 uses...



Around the Network
klepp0906 on 24 October 2013
HikenNoAce said:
klepp0906 said:
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:


Not according to the benchmarks posted in this thread.


If you think 2-5 fps difference on average is worth $500+ then be my guest.


Moot point anyway - it seems that the RX 290X is more powerful.

It's not a moot point, it's exactly the point.
If you already have a Titan or two, there is zero point in side-grading to AMD.

There's more than a few fps differences from Titan to the 290 according to the benchmarks on page 7.

Faaaaake. I wonder how dumb people will feel when the card launches and mainstream reviews are up? Or are people buying what is being sold here too dumb to realize they're being dumb? Now that's philosophy :p

Are you an nvidia fanboy?

Nope, I'm a realist. Post when official benches are out. Btw, how does pointing out edited benchmarks passed off as something else make me a fan of anything? Lol



Captain_Tom on 24 October 2013
klepp0906 said:
HikenNoAce said:
klepp0906 said:
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:


Not according to the benchmarks posted in this thread.


If you think 2-5 fps difference on average is worth $500+ then be my guest.


Moot point anyway - it seems that the RX 290X is more powerful.

It's not a moot point, it's exactly the point.
If you already have a Titan or two, there is zero point in side-grading to AMD.

There's more than a few fps differences from Titan to the 290 according to the benchmarks on page 7.

Faaaaake. I wonder how dumb people will feel when the card launches and mainstream reviews are up? Or are people buying what is being sold here too dumb to realize they're being dumb? Now that's philosophy :p

Are you an nvidia fanboy?

Nope, I'm a realist. Post when official benches are out. Btw, how does pointing out edited benchmarks passed off as something else make me a fan of anything? Lol


They are out, and you are in denial...



JEMC on 24 October 2013
ethomaz said:

Titan still perform better than 290X.... the good news is that 290X is cheaper.

Now what nVidia will do with GTX 780 TI? I was expecting the 290X to beat Titan to force nVidia to release the full GK110 but that was not the case.

 Maybe GTX 780 TI will be a card close to Titan with a better price... just to match the 290X.

PS. The 290X noise level and temperatures are terrible... AMD and nVidia need 20nm ASAP.

That's my biggest dissapointment.

My case isn't up to the task .



Please excuse my bad English.

Former gaming PC: i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Current gaming PC: R5-7600, 32GB RAM 6000MT/s (CL30) and a RX 9060XT 16GB

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

klepp0906 on 24 October 2013

So have we seen the reviews on any of the reputable sites? Such as pcper? Anandtech? Seems the 290x barely beats the 780 in most areas. What did you expect for 550? I think it performs excellent for the price, only a fool would have believed a 500 dollar card would be faster than the titan this soon.

Nvidia knows what's on the horizon for their competitors and vice versa..



klepp0906 on 24 October 2013
Captain_Tom said:
klepp0906 said:
HikenNoAce said:
klepp0906 said:
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:
Pemalite said:
HikenNoAce said:


Not according to the benchmarks posted in this thread.


If you think 2-5 fps difference on average is worth $500+ then be my guest.


Moot point anyway - it seems that the RX 290X is more powerful.

It's not a moot point, it's exactly the point.
If you already have a Titan or two, there is zero point in side-grading to AMD.

There's more than a few fps differences from Titan to the 290 according to the benchmarks on page 7.

Faaaaake. I wonder how dumb people will feel when the card launches and mainstream reviews are up? Or are people buying what is being sold here too dumb to realize they're being dumb? Now that's philosophy :p

Are you an nvidia fanboy?

Nope, I'm a realist. Post when official benches are out. Btw, how does pointing out edited benchmarks passed off as something else make me a fan of anything? Lol


They are out, and you are in denial...


Denying what exactly rofl. My post was correct. Doctored bench jpgs out, credible results in, and nowhere does it "destroy" let alone beat the titan. Was never meant to. It does compete with 780, which was to be expected