Battle of the titans "780 ti Vs 290x" first results.
-
With bios mod and at 1.21V and maintaining stable frequencies
Interesting..although not shocking…I'll comment on a few things later.I'll comment, this is one of my TITANs at 1329MHZ..there is indeed 18MHZ between them, but in this test it's more decisive to have more bandwidth than 18MHZ of core, and yet the TITANs take the lead even if it's by a hair.The voltage used is more than enough since "it" is no longer there, my worst TITAN.
One of my good TITANs, it does that to you with 1.26-1.28V…that's a lot compared to the Ti.But what I compare is clock by clock, and with equal core and bandwidth, the TI doesn't pull more, on the contrary, it pulls less, a hair but less..something strange strange..
-
ALL the TIs are B1, no matter what GPUZ says, that is certain. The issue is that GPUZ will not read the new microcode properly, it only reads the header and incorrectly identifies the chip, but believe me, the ELPs are B1. Structurally they change and it is not a rehash as I have read around, but the changes in the ELPs are not so substantial to notice an excessive difference between these and the Titan. Initially the Vcore was unlocked since in the Titans, the sub-nucleus regulator controlled the total consumption of the card and depending on the fan's consumption, it lowered the power to the CPU as a self-regulating system. This series is different in that aspect, it prioritizes the GPU's Vcore regardless of the fan's, setting minimums so that throttling is hardly noticeable since Nvidia has listened to users and assemblers who fought for this. So even if the TDP does not go up, it allows for more power to the core. In fact, the BIOS are very, very different between these and the Titans. The TDP is parametrizable in this series
-
Well, let's break it down.
The graphics card seems to be voltage unlocked by default, but it's not really the case, or at least not on this S.O. that I have for testing and it's not clean. Because the R9s went through here, I tried the MSI voltage mod on the TITAN and on top of that I have it from downloads etc.. I mean, it's possible, I don't know, that the MSI, having it already altered to modify the TITANs, tells you that you can raise the voltage up to 1.30 but it's just an optical effect, because really with stock bios no voltage is applied with any progama.Ni MSI or EVGA. Moreover, if we add that the skynet mod bios only unlocks voltage up to 1.21V, the maximum allowed by Nvidia, the numbers add up. 1.21V if it applies.
Now let's go to the OC, it's enormous, to see how a card with an apparently so bad ASIC, is capable of doing 1300MHZ in the air with just 1.21V… and yes, they are definitely B1.. BUT, the reality is that those 1300MHZ are almost below the 1300MHZ TITAN. Something inexplicable since it's supposed to have more CC, more TMUS and more bandwidth. At least that's what I see in synthetics. Playing I feel it, but I can't give an opinion of a single card since at 1600p with one it doesn't measure up and I fit 4.Si if at least they were 2, I could say how it goes with respect to the TITAN SLI, but with just one, just like it happened to me with the R9s I can't comment because all framerate seems low to me.
However I can say that to be just one, it holds up very well against games at 1600p and there are no variations of boost up to 1200MHZ with stock bios.
I'm going to stick with my TITANs because right now they perform almost more at equal clocks, I don't like to blame the drivers for these things, because besides it doesn't make sense being the same architecture. But I can't think of anything else... something doesn't quite work.. this card at 1310MHZ should eat the TITAN and not the other way around as is happening to me.
Anyway.. let it have time who wants, I'm sure it will end up performing what it should within not much (if Nvidia hasn't played us with a future hypothetical but real, TITAN ULTRA). But since I already have that performance and I don't feel like waiting, I'll stick with my TITANs.
JOTOLE!! now more than ever finish those INVENCIBLE bitches with those wonderful ASICs.. hehe.. my girls... how much I miss them...:wall: (I curse the sticky gooey liquids)
Regards.
-
Well, let's break it down.
The graph seems to be voltage unlocked by default, but in reality it's not, or at least not on this S.O. that I have for testing and it's not clean. Because around here the R9s passed through, I experimented with the MSI voltage mod on the TITAN and on top of that I have it from downloads etc.. that is, it's possible, I don't know, that the MSI, having it already altered to modify the TITANs, tells you that you can raise the voltage up to 1.30 but it's just an optical effect, because really with stock bios no voltage is applied with any progama.Ni MSI nor EVGA. Moreover, if we add that the skynet mod bios only unlocks voltage up to 1.21V, the maximum allowed by Nvidia, the numbers add up. 1.21V if it applies.
Now let's go to the OC, it's enormous, to see how a card with an ASIC that seems so bad, is capable of doing 1300MHZ in the air with just 1.21V… and yes, they are B1 for sure.. BUT, the reality is that those 1300MHZ are below the 1300MHZ TITAN. Something inexplicable since it's supposed to have more CC, more TMUS and more bandwidth. At least that's what I see in synthetic benchmarks. When playing I feel it, but I can't give an opinion of a single card since at 1600p with one it doesn't measure up and I fit 4.Si if at least they were 2, I could say how it goes with respect to the TITAN SLI, but with just one, just like it happened to me with the R9s, I can't comment because I think all framerate is low.
However, I can say that for being just one, it holds up very well against games at 1600p and there are no variations in boost up to 1200MHZ with stock bios.
I'm going to stick with my TITANs because right now they perform better at equal clocks, I don't like to blame the drivers for these things, because besides, it doesn't make sense being the same architecture. But I can't think of anything else... something doesn't seem to be working right.. this card at 1310MHZ should eat the TITAN and not the other way around as is happening to me.
Anyway.. let it have time who wants, I'm sure it will end up performing what it should within not much (if Nvidia hasn't played us with a future hypothetical but real, TITAN ULTRA). But since I already have that performance and I don't feel like waiting, I'll keep going with my TITANs.
JOTOLE!! now more than ever finish those INVENCIBLE bitches with those wonderful ASICs..jeje..my girls...how much I miss them...:wall: (I curse the sticky gooey liquids)
Regards.
Hahaajajaa, they're ready already…........ and everything correct ;).
If the very commercial name indicates it, 780 TI, this one comes to give a turn to the 780, but Titan is a lot of Titan. I'm doing tests too, with the images I see of the Ti, and at equal clock, Titan is still above.
I know there's talk that it may be a driver issue, which is strange, since they have the same architecture and what improves in one will improve in the other. There's something we're missing but this TI doesn't come to cannibalize Titan.
If we're right the one that will hit again will be the Titan Ultra, whatever name they come out with. And of course another one that will come to occupy the price range of 1000 €.....
Salu2.....
-
Jajaajajaaa, ya están listas…........ Y todo correcto ;).
Si es que hasta el mismo nombre comercial lo indica, 780 TI, esta viene a darle una vuelta a la 780, pero Titan es mucha Titan. Yo estoy haciendo pruebas tambien, con las imagenes que veo de las Ti, y a igualdad de clock, Titan sigue por encima.
Sé está comentando que puede ser tema de drivers, cosa rara, ya que llevan la misma arquitectura y lo que mejore en una lo hará en otra. Algo hay que se nos escapa pero esta TI no viene a canibalizar a Titan.
Si estamos en lo cierto la que dará un golpe de nuevo será la Titan Ultra, sea cual sea el nombre con que la saquen. Y por supuesto otra que vendrá a ocupar el rango de precios de 1000 €.....
Salu2.....
OLE OLE Y OLE!
ya están por fin..;)
Y lo que tu has visto es lo mejor de esta gráfica,ya que ese test,el firestrike es puro ancho de banda,por eso se le dán tan "bien" a las AMD..lo peor es esto:
Aquí ya importa la fuerza bruta y no tanto el ancho de banda del cual ván mas que sobradas,por eso se la atragantan muchísimo a las R9…y estoy seguro,que las TITAN a 1320MHZ sacan mas..no recuerdo cuanto pero estoy prácticamente seguro..
Vamos a ver,no quiero que se me malinterprete...6000 puntazos en X de 3D Mark 11 són 6000 puntazos..pero es que están a casi 1320MHZ y encima se supone que es el chip completo del GK110..hay cosas que no cuadran nada..pero nada..y en los unigines igual..
Saludos.
-
Bueno,vamos por partes.
La gráfica parece estar desbloqueda de voltaje por defecto,pero en realidad no es así,o por lo menos no en este S.O. que lo tengo para pruebas y no está limpio.Porque por aquí pasaron las R9,experimenté el mod de voltaje del MSI sobre TITAN y encima lo tengo de descargas etc..es decir,es posible,no lo sé,que el MSI al tenerlo ya alterado para modificar las TITAN,te diga que puedes subir voltaje hasta 1,30 pero es solo un efecto óptico,pues realmente con bios de stock no se aplica voltaje alguno con ningún progama.Ni MSI ni EVGA.Además,si añadimos que la mod bios de skynet,solo desbloquea voltaje hasta 1,21V,el máximo permitido por Nvidia,las cuentas salen.1,21V si lo aplica.
Ahora vamos al OC,es descomunal,ver como un gráfica con un ASIC aparentemente tan malo,sea capaz de hacer 1300MHZ al aire con tan solo 1,21V…y sí,són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si són B1 seguro..PERO,la realidad es que esos 1300MHZ están casi por debajo de los 1300MHZ TITAN.Algo inexplicable puesto que se supone que tiene mas CC,mas TMUS y mas ancho de banda.Por lo menos es lo que veo en sintéticos.Jugando lo siento,pero no puedo dar una opinión de una sola gráfica puesto que a 1600p con una no dá la talla y yo calzo 4.Si só
-
There is no technical reason, except for the amount of VRAM (but that doesn't seem to be the case), for the Titan to get not the same, but more performance even if it's a pittance compared to the GTX 780 Ti at equal frequencies. There isn't here, but since the difference is negligible there shouldn't be any differences either. I also have to tell you that you can't base it solely on a test as artificial as 3DMark (which I stopped using since 06 as a test of tests for obvious reasons) to reach those conclusions, because it doesn't even work remotely similar to games. I don't know what the main limiting factor is, but since Vantage the scenes and effects used are totally disconnected from what a real game graphics engine would be (the scenes are simply ridiculous as a "representation" of a game, they abuse some effects and fall short in other points, etc.).
Also, when we talk about almost 10,000 points (6,000 and some), a difference of about 20 points is not that it's "slightly better", it's exactly the same (6492/6477 = 1.0023, that is, the difference in those results is 0.023%, totally negligible and in fact much less than the also ridiculous difference in frequencies of 1329/1311 = 1.0138 or 1.38% difference in frequencies, in any case, almost 6X times more difference in frequency than in graphic score).
Even so, the scores should be different except that the current 3Dmark has an amazing dependence on an identical factor in both chips, such as ROPs. But that doesn't happen in real games, where there are titles very skewed towards shaders, others limited by ROPs, others by bandwidth... but it's never an absolute dependence.
You can be sure that if it depends even a little on the capacity of shaders/texturing, at equal frequencies the GTX 780 Ti will take the palm, supposedly the bandwidth can also go in its favor in the case of stock or memory at the limit if they are of those that go almost to 8 GHz, in the same way that a large dependence on ROPs would balance the scale or, in case of needing more than 3GB of VRAM, it would happen that in that case the Titan would gain some ground.
But come on, there is a huge difference between exceeding 1.3GHz with 1.21V and doing it almost at 1.3 (1.28?V), in consumption and possible durability of the graphics card. Don't forget that over time you can put the same barbaric voltages on the Ti as on the Titan, if they are not fully unlocked yet. It's that 1.21V is not "stock voltage", but it is in the range of usable voltages in everyday life without problems in Kepler. That is the best proof that it is not the same chip, too many results very close to 1300 stock by air, and many results that exceed it by tweaking the voltage "normally". That "almost" doesn't even happen with the small Kepler, that 1.3 is achieved, but it is also not "guaranteed".
You are absolutely right.. but it turns out that this happens in all synthetic tests. It happens in 3DMARK 13, in the 11 which have nothing to do as I explained above, it happens in the 2 unigines... one tessellating and the other which is totally different... etc.. it happens in all synthetics.
And if a graphics card has more CC, more TMUS, more bandwidth... etc. and is the same architecture, it doesn't add up.
It's as if a GTX 780 could have done that with TITAN. And it never happened.. small differences, even negligible in many cases, but always the bigger one won. Now curiously it doesn't happen. And it's strange, even if it's by 0.75%..
This can also be translated to game benches, in which I am not a fan in many cases. But if you put the TITAN at 1020MHZ of core, instead of the 1000 it usually goes, and especially you put the same bandwidth as the 780Ti. The results become reproducir.No the Ti wins. It's not that it "loses".. but I won't deny that it's strange.
Of course it is INCREDIBLE that a graphics card with a monstrous chip reaches 1300MHZ with just 1.21V... and obviously, as soon as the voltage is unlocked, it will go over it with flying colors even if only by frequency reached. But it shouldn't be just that..
Also, although the consumption of TITAN fully unlocked, with voltages to the hilt and MHZ through the roof, is crazy, it can exceed peaks of 400W. To say that this is even worse in that aspect. Because with just 1.21V I have managed to detect in an approximate estimation, peaks of 400W of expenditure for her alone. Because I have a peak in the equipment of 563W, when in idle it is at 129. And they have been graphic tests in which the processor, an Ivy, also doesn't think it contributes more than 75W to that suma.Si you put 1.30V or even more, we can approach the incredible figure of maximum peaks of 450W or even perhaps more.. and that is something totally unfeasible to maintain by any means including RL. Because the phases would be in monstrous danger of simply being vaporized..
But well, this is already my own speculation that doesn't have to occur. But that the TI at 1300MHZ with 1.21V consumes the same as the TITAN at 1300MHZ and 1.30V.. and that, it's also not normal..
We will have to keep investigating..
-
But come on, there is a huge difference between exceeding 1.3GHz with 1.21V and doing it almost at 1.3 (1.28?V), in terms of consumption and possible durability of the graphics card. Don't forget that over time you will be able to put the same barbaric voltages on the Ti as on the Titans, if they are not fully unlocked yet. The fact is that 1.21V is not "stock voltage", but it is within the range of usable voltages in everyday use without problems in kepler. That is the best proof that it is not the same chip, too many results very close to 1300 stock by air, and many results that exceed it by tweaking the voltage "normally". That "almost" not even with the small kepler, that 1.3 is achieved, but is not "guaranteed" either.
ELp this is what I wanted to tell you when I referred to voltage unlocking. In Titan with the stock BIOS, I wouldn't dream of putting that voltage, and according to Nvidia, 1.21V is the limit they consider safe for Titan.
The issue of consuming more is, I suppose you have measured it with a power meter at the wall and there should be some difference for having both different memory speeds because I suppose this will be different when you have passed the bench. This increases consumption and needs a little more core power, but I don't know exactly how much it would be. Performance should be higher in TI, I will try to find out why your results were like that in that bench, but even though it is said that it is the same architecture, it is not exactly so and with small variations in the drivers, things have to change. With the next drivers more adapted to the TI, this greater muscle should be noticed in this type of work -
You are absolutely right..but the thing is that this happens in all synthetic tests. It happens in 3DMARK 13, in the 11 which have nothing to do as I explained above, it happens in the 2 Unigines... one tessellating and the other which is totally different...etc. it happens in all synthetics.
And if a card has more CC, more TMUS, more bandwidth...etc. and it's the same architecture, it doesn't add up.
It's like if a GTX 780 could have done that with TITAN. And it never happened.. small differences, even negligible in many cases, but the bigger one always won. Now curiously it doesn't happen. And it's strange, even if it's by 0.75%..
This can also be translated to game benchmarks, which I'm not a fan of in many cases. But if you put the TITAN at 1020MHZ of core, instead of the 1000 it usually runs at, and especially if you put the same bandwidth as the 780Ti. The results become reproducir.No wins. The Ti doesn't lose either...but I can't deny it's weird.
Of course it's INCREDIBLE that a card with a monstrous chip can easily reach 1300MHZ with just 1.21V...and obviously, as soon as the voltage is unlocked, it will surpass it with ease, even if only by frequency reached. But it shouldn't be just that..
Also, although the fully unlocked TITAN, with voltages through the roof and MHZ through the roof, has crazy consumption, it can exceed peaks of 400W. To say that this one is even worse in that aspect. With just 1.21V, I've managed to detect in an approximate estimation, peaks of 400W of consumption for it alone. My system has a peak of 563W, when idling it's at 129. And these were graphics tests in which the processor, an Ivy, I don't think contributes more than 75W to that suma.Si. If you put 1.30V or even more, we can get close to the incredible figure of maximum peaks of 450W or even maybe more..and that's something totally unfeasible to maintain by any means including RL. The phases would be in monstrous danger of simply being vaporized..
Well, these are just my speculations that don't have to come true. But the fact that the Ti at 1300MHZ with 1.21V consumes the same as the TITAN at 1300MHZ and 1.30V..and that's also not normal..
We'll have to keep investigating..
Well, a peak of consumption is just that, a peak. We would have to measure for a while with graphic load and take the average consumption to have a good estimate.
Another issue is that apparently the Ti you got might not be one of "the best". If the ASIC is well read by gpu-z (because it does read the register that gives this information, what I don't know is if the scale with which it obtains the final % is well applied), this could explain that it's a chip a bit more "greedy" than the average when it comes to consuming (worse ASIC, worse consumption with the same voltage and frequency conditions as another chip of the same stepping but with a better ASIC).
The use of faster GDDR5 may also have something to do with consumption, although the Titan with its chips of double capacity shouldn't be too far off in this point.
The difference between a Titan and a GTX 780 is greater than between the Ti and the Titan. In the first case, 2 SMXs are removed, and it goes from 12 SMXs to 14 SMXs (that is, 1/6 more shader and texturing power), all this looking at equal frequencies (and it doesn't add up that the GTX 780 is one where the disabled SMXs fit into the same GPC, so it would also lose rasterization/geometry capacity).
The difference between the Ti and the Titan is just one SMX, from 14 to 15 there is much less difference (1/14 extra). What makes the difference in stock is mostly the frequencies and this supposed new stepping (I'm one of those who, seeing these frequency results, don't doubt much about the B1 being more than real), the mems (frequency in the background), and of course, if we equalize the frequencies we eliminate much of the difference that exists in stock.
There are many reasons that could explain that apparent equality, possibly because something is not working correctly (who knows, maybe the voltage applied is "different" due to the use of Afterburner, or it fluctuates even if only slightly in records, or any story of false measurements or problems with monitoring programs that mask some kind of data that escapes us). The difference at equal frequencies shouldn't be important, we already know that (a maximum of 7%, and this is a theoretical maximum).
What "calls my attention" about this chip is the crazy frequencies it seems to be capable of reaching, and that sooner or later during these coming months all GK110s will be based on it (because I suppose that all production of the A1 will be replaced by the B1, if it hasn't already been done and we're living off the remnants of the previous stepping, except for 100% new models). If it also comes with a high quality ASIC, it can be quite a "beast" (and with all the necessary limits unlocked and a control/monitoring software that gives us reliable information 100%).
Of course this won't change anything in the current market, but I find it interesting from a technical point of view, more than likely the GTX 780s sold during the holidays will be "better" than the current ones, and those of January-February even more so (ratio between units existing with A1 and B1). This should also happen with Titan if it's not replaced by a new model, but we'll see that over time.
-
Effectively, a default memory as fast as 7GHZ makes the consumption more elevado.Si. If we add to this that I have pushed them quite hard, obviously the consumption goes up. Trying to have more bandwidth than the R9 with a smaller bus has its drawbacks. As already happened to the 770 with respect to the 680. But in that case it was essential.
In other matters, I have tried the review drivers 331.70. And I must say that I have not observed any improvement and yes, an urgent instability when doing OC that does not happen with the official ones.
Best regards.
P.D. By the way, the experiments with the graphics card are over. I have to return it tomorrow and I will put back my 4 WAY SLI of TITAN remouged.. I hope that this time there will be no problems and everything will be correct..;)
In summary. Great graphics card, great performance, great OC, but I expected more.. maybe with drivers or with a little more time you can get all that potential that it seems to have but does not completely transfer, at least in synthetic tests. But it is clear that for those who already have a GTX 780 or TITAN, it is silly to make the change.
-
In case the news is of interest or useful to any affected person who has the gtx780ti.
Nvidia blames Galaxy for the problems of its GeForce GTX 780 Ti | El Chapuzas Informático
Best regardsSent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2
-
Damn, the 290s will be hot, but those models with so much OC on the 780 Ti, they literally burn your PCB! LOL
Besides, they comment that there are more affected models;
_So far, we only know the official information, but if we continue to echo the Chinese media, we know that in addition to the Galaxy assembler, Colorful, innovision, Asus, Sauter, Inno3D and Gigabyte are also affected, with Asus being the second brand to request the return of their graphics products.
_I don't know what's worse, that your graphics card is messed up because of the heat, or that the graphics card burns your entire PC xD. Luck that Nvidia makes some damn good and quality products…My god. Burning your PC won't happen, but messing up your motherboard almost for sure...and what a laugh...
-
Damn, the 290s will be hot, but those models with so much OC on the 780 Ti, they literally burn your PCB!LOL
Besides, they comment that there are more affected models;
_So far, we only know the official information, but if we keep echoing the Chinese media, we know that in addition to the Galaxy assembler, Colorful, Innovision, Asus, Sauter, Inno3D and Gigabyte are also affected, with Asus being the second brand to request the return of their graphics products.
_I don't know what's worse, that your graphics card is messed up because of the heat, or that the graphics card burns your entire PC xD. Luck that Nvidia makes some damn good and quality products...My god. Your PC burning down won't happen, but messing up your motherboard almost certainly...and what a joke...
What do you want us to say that both are crap? well it's clear that both AMD and Nvidia have completely ignored the consumption issue and have released some abortions.
That Galaxy is at 1322 MHz, you have to be a psychopath to put those frequencies on a graphics card for sale to the public, the AMDs come so tight that they don't go up a damn thing and these come so loaded that even if they go up, these things can happen, so they go to the limit.
Now both manufacturers if they want something decent are going to have to dig deep into their pockets to put in quality components that are more expensive, and in the end they are still going to be safer than the Titan and the 780 which are not slouches either.
It's just that consumption mattered so much a while ago and now it doesn't seem to matter anymore, it doesn't matter what cards go for the mid-range consume like high-end ranges, there are no limits here.
-
Man, you don't have to say anything to me Fjavi, since I'm not going to buy either the 290x or the 780 ti, but when Nvidia does something wrong, you can also comment/opine, right?
PD; With this news, I wouldn't risk putting more voltage or having an extreme OC to play...
Best regards.
-
Man, you don't have to tell me anything about my Fjavi, since I'm not going to buy either the 290x or the 780 ti, but when Nvidia does something wrong, we can also comment/opine, right?
I admit that if the 780Ti explodes it's a piece of crap, I say it clearly but it's annoying that you can't say it when AMD lowers frequencies or gets to 94º in winter, that's why I think they're all a piece of crap.
I criticized the 480s harshly and none exploded, they never lowered frequencies, on the contrary, you could do a good OC with them, that's why I say call everything by its name, if it's a piece of crap it doesn't matter if it's Nvidia or AMD, you have to see if these Nvidias are custom or reference, if it happens to all of them then they will have to withdraw them and make them right or not make them, but AMD also has a big problem when it gets hotter.
Besides, I don't think the custom ones will give good results in CF, I mean that unless the 20nm come out soon I don't want any of these new cards, because they come loaded.
Of course you can opine but we all opine, why do some opinions (news) fly across the net while others are sweetened, excused, justified, when here none have justification.
It's that if one's card breaks and they put a driver in recently, the news "driver burns graphics" spreads like wildfire, but if the others have microstuttering, vsync doesn't work, CF doesn't work with more than two cards, not a peep is said, that's why it's clear what there's more intention to disseminate.
-
I admit that if the 780Ti explodes it's a piece of crap, I say it clearly but it's annoying that you can't say when AMD lowers frequencies or gets to 94º in winter, that's why I think they're all a piece of crap.
I criticized the 480s harshly and none exploded, they never lowered frequencies, on the contrary you could do a good OC with them, that's why I say call everything by its name, if it's a piece of crap it doesn't matter if it's made by Nvidia or AMD, you have to see if these Nvidias are custom or reference, if it happens to all of them then they will have to withdraw them and make them right or not make them, but AMD also has a big problem when it gets hotter.
Besides, I don't think the custom ones will perform well in CF, I mean that unless the 20nm come out soon I don't want any of these new cards, because they come loaded.
Of course you can have an opinion but we all have one, why do some opinions (news) fly across the net while others are sweetened, excused, justified, when here none have justification.
In ELPE's thread there has been a lot of discussion and criticism about that aspect you mention about the 290x, and I think the same. That the 290x are a piece of crap. But that a card like the 780 ti with OC, burns your PCB, with the card stopping working, and on top of that frying your motherboard… Well I don't know what's worse.. Let's hope they are isolated cases, because if not I'll have a problem with both companies... In the end they will compete to see who is the first to burn the GPU ;D
-
In the ELPE thread, there has been a lot of discussion and criticism about the aspect you mention of the 290x, and I agree. The 290x is a piece of crap. But a graphics card like the 780 ti with OC, where the PCB burns, the graphics card stops working, and on top of that, it messes up the motherboard... I don't know what's worse.. Let's hope these are isolated cases, because if not, I'll have a problem with both companies... In the end, they'll compete to see who's the first to burn the GPU ;D
I usually wait to see in which models it happens. If the one that explodes is a Galaxy Hof and comes to 1322 MHz, to be honest, I'm not too surprised, because putting that chip and that frequency already seems risky to me. But if it happens to all of them, even the reference ones, it's because they messed it up. Now they'll have to do something to prevent that from happening or they'll get tons of lawsuits. And rightly so.
What's most annoying is that in the end, they'll cut off our OC more and we'll lose, just like with Intel and Kepler, and they'll keep cutting it more and more.
-
Mas claro, agua….
"Finally it's official what we announced yesterday, yes, there are problems with some GeForce GTX 780 Ti graphics cards, although Nvidia has blamed the graphics assembler Galaxy, which blames itself for making an unauthorized design reference change that has negatively impacted 55 of its graphics cards, claiming that no one else has been affected. A problem that could be due to the Galaxy GTX 780 Ti HOF, which reaches the impressive figures of 1322 MHz for the GPU and 7600 MHz for the memories, a pretty impressive performance."
;D
-
Mas claro, agua….
"Finally it's official what we announced yesterday, yes, there are problems with some GeForce GTX 780 Ti graphics models, although Nvidia has blamed the Galaxy graphics assembler, which blames for making an unauthorized reference change in the design that has negatively impacted 55 of its graphics cards, claiming that no one else has been affected. A problem that could be due to the Galaxy GTX 780 Ti HOF, which reaches the impressive figures of 1322 MHz for the GPU and 7600 MHz for the memories, a quite impressive performance."
;D
But they say there are more brands, what should be seen is if it happens to the reference ones, the 590 was reference and the failure was Nvidia's here we have to see if it happened with some customized ones.
because it could be due to some assembler, it has only happened in China and it is quite strange because here they are giving them quite a hard time, with bios voltage increase or power target, that is, it is strange that none of those with bios to more voltage and very high power target have not exploded, besides quite high frequencies. -
But they say there are more brands, what should be seen is if it happens to the reference ones, the 590 was a reference and the failure was from Nvidia here it remains to be seen if it happened with some customized ones.
because it could be because of some assembler, it has only happened in China and it is quite rare because here they are giving them quite a hard time, with bios voltage increase or power target, that is, it is strange that none of those with bios to more voltage and power target very raised have not exploded, in addition to quite high frequencies.Nvidia barely acknowledges the cases of Galaxy….
