First tests of Nvidia's 980 and 970
-
It is undeniable that the 20nm will make a pretty big leap, but it would surely be good to see it with 6GB as well, and an SLI 970 for $660 is a bit hard to match, no matter how good the 20nm one turns out to be.
Regards.
The price with Nvidia Patagonian is a mystery... you might be surprised, as with the GTX970, which costs more than 1000€ for a TITAN.
What is pretty clear is that a GM110 in 20nm with the power it is supposed to have, plus the die size, etc., we will be talking again about absolutely outrageous prices. The thing is, it could easily take a year for that to happen. Since the 20nm process is still far from mature, Nvidia already has its new architecture in 28nm and now, in about 6 months, AMD will have to make a move with the 20nm, which is its only lifeline, since they have pushed this node to the limit and can't make a move anymore, except to lower prices.
So, there is still a lot of time to see those supposed GM110s. Or 210s or whatever they want to call them...
Regards.
-
The price with Nvidia patagónico is a mystery…it can surprise you,like with the GTX970,that stabs you with more than 1000€ for a TITAN.
What is quite clear,is that a GM110 in 20nm with the power that it is supposed to have,plus the size of the die etc..we will be talking again,of absolutely outrageous prices.The thing is,it can perfectly pass a year for that.Since the 20nm process is far from mature,nvidia already has its new architecture in 28nm and now from here to about 6 months,it will be AMD's turn to make a move with the 20nm which is its only lifeline,since they pushed this node to the limit and they can't make a move anymore,except to lower prices.
So,there is still a lot to see,of those supposed GM110.Or 210 or whatever they want to call them..
Regards.
AMD will soon make a move with an R9 390X to face the GTX 980 and as always it will surely be $ 50-100 cheaper
I didn't think it would take so long for a 20nm, they are already talking about the GTX 990 for Q4/2014
MSI Lightning GTX 980Ti and 990 ¿Double core and GM210? - Benchmarkhardware
[PC Tuning]GeForce GTX 990 and probably Titan X on the way!
Salu2
-
AMD will soon move its pieces with an R9 390X to face the GTX 980 and as always it will surely be $50-100 cheaper
I didn't think it would take so long for a 20nm, but now they're already talking about the GTX 990 for Q4/2014
MSI Lightning GTX 980Ti and 990 ¿Double core and GM210? - Benchmarkhardware
[PC Tuning]GeForce GTX 990 and probably Titan X on the way!
Salu2
I don't know what card AMD will move except for the one with liquid cooling + exaggerated consumption. They already have 2 architectures in 28Nm.La the last one clearly thought for 20nm.La the only way they would have to be able to compete with Nvidia would be to release a new architecture again that is much more efficient in performance/W. And not doing it in 20nm would be a waste.
But well, if they want to release monsters that eat watts, with liquid hybrids to be able to compete with graphics cards of 256BIT and 160W of TPD, it's up to them and those who buy them.
Un saludo.
-
I don't know what card AMD is going to move unless it's the one with liquid cooling + excessive consumption. They already have 2 architectures in 28Nm.La the last one clearly thought for 20nm.La the only way they would have to be able to compete with Nvidia would be to release a new architecture again that is much more efficient in performance/W. And not doing it in 20nm would be a waste.
But well, if they want to release monsters that eat watts, with liquid hybrids to be able to compete with graphics cards of 256BIT and 160W of TPD, it's their business and those who buy them.
Best regards.
Maybe they could take away computing power, to gain some performance and above all lower consumption, but I don't see it interesting to sell 512-bit graphics cards for less than 300€, I don't think it will be profitable for them.
They would have to improve performance/watt quite a bit, for my part I hope they can release something good, because if not Nvidia won't have any rush to release something better and above all won't lower prices.
But the thing is that the 290 and 290x need good coolers, a better PCB than these Maxwells and better and more expensive electrical components, that's why it's difficult to try to make something bigger if they don't make an adjustment to the architecture to lower the TDP, and more so to then have to lower prices, although Nvidia doesn't seem to want to put them in too much trouble, as they give performance drop by drop.
Best regards
-
I don't know what card AMD is going to move unless it's the one with liquid cooling + excessive consumption. They already have 2 architectures in 28Nm.La the last one clearly designed for 20nm.La The only way they would have to be able to compete with Nvidia would be to release a new architecture again that is much more efficient in performance/W. And not doing it in 20nm would be a waste.
But well, if they want to release monsters that eat watts, with liquid hybrids to be able to compete with graphics cards with 256BIT and 160W TDP, it's up to them and those who buy them.
Best regards.
To be honest, I don't really think these graphics cards are a bomb with their low consumption and being fresh but AMD has something coming and they're not saying anything but everything points to the R9 390X
And from there comes that the GTX 990 arrives before the end of the year to compete with the new AMD we'll see what they have prepared for us.
Salu2.-
-
The truth is, I also don't really think these graphics cards are a bomb with their low consumption and freshness, but AMD has something coming and they're not saying anything, but everything points to the R9 390X
And from there it comes that the GTX 990 arrives before the end of the year to compete with the new AMD, we'll see what they have prepared for us.
Salu2.-
I don't think that's the reason for the 990's release, if it comes out it's because it will be easy for them to put two GM204s in a dual, but well, if AMD brings competition, welcome it, it's always good for the buyer that there is competition, no matter what brand they buy.
saludos
-
I don't know what move AMD is going to make, other than liquid cooling and excessive power consumption. They already have 2 architectures at 28Nm.La, the last one clearly designed for 20nm.La. The only way they would be able to compete with Nvidia would be to release a new architecture that is much more efficient in terms of performance per watt. Not doing it at 20nm would be a waste.
But hey, if they want to release power-hungry monsters with liquid cooling hybrids to compete with graphics cards with 256-bit buses and 160W TDPs, it's up to them and those who buy them.
Best regards.
Nvidia also has 2 architectures at 28 nm, in fact, they have 2 architectures plus 3 revisions of these (original Kepler, bigkepler-gpgpu or GK110, "refined-betamaxwell" Kepler with the GK208, and in Maxwell, 1.0 and 2.0):
(to see SMX/SMM schematics and changes, go to the spoiler)
!
! The first Kepler is the "mainstream" or "performance" chip, designed for GeForce cards and with less consideration for GPGPU, especially in scientific contexts, which is why its DP power is reduced, not capped as happens with GeForcees based on GK110 (except the Titan, that hybrid product).
!
! The SMX of the GK110 is not actually identical, not only because of its much more powerful DP, but also because of how the cache works, since for example the texture cache also functions as an ordinary data cache, there's no need to associate data with textures as happens with the GK104 (purely GPGPU functionality).
! Between both chips, the most radical change is on a larger scale, in the GK110, they bet on computational density rather than purely rendering characteristics, which is why in each GPC there are 3 SMX (basic processing unit for 3D, since it basically does all the steps of the graphics pipeline except the final pixel writing to VRAM or handling AA), and not the 2 SMX of the GK104. The bet is clear towards computing (also in a larger L2, proportionally, it's triple when it shouldn't be more than 50% of the GK104 if its design were strictly scaled up for more power).
!
! The GK208 is a curious experiment, where Nvidia made some steps prior to simplifying the SMX that would end up in Maxwell's SMMs, they begin to rebalance units that are not as used as hard shared between two schedulers (it's, to compare with something, like "cores" in a multicore system, they handle the "threads/processes" that are the shader streams to be executed, and can send more than one instruction to execute simultaneously, hence why Kepler has some difficulty reaching maximum use of its hard in certain environments and that's why this redesign, which is based on the principle of less is more, sharing what is far from a 100% workload).
!
! Maxwell 1.0 of the GTX 750, here we already see the final facelift of the SMMs vs SMX, each SMM can in optimal circumstances render as an SMM, but with much less execution hard. Drastic changes like the massive L2 and putting 5 SMMs per GPC instead of the 2-3 SMX per GPC of the Keplers are part of its hallmark.
!
! Maxwell 2.0, not only changes the balance of SMMs per GPC again to reduce it to 4 SMM per GPC, which is a sign of a greater orientation towards 3D (I repeat, each GPC acts as a mini GPU capable of processing from the first geometric stages to "spit out" pixels already processed and to send to memory via ROPs, lowering the number of SMMs in Maxwell 2.0 allows making them somewhat more compact). But it also makes "unnoticed" changes like increasing the L1 caches and the shared memory of each SMM, in one case doubling it and in another increasing the size by 50%, possibly to compensate for small caches.
!In short, AMD is not so limited by the 28 nm process because they have "played all their cards", their redesigns around GCN 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 are not even as many as the redesigns Nvidia has made in their chips, which says less but does them and sometimes without warning (GK208 is the best example).
Nvidia could perfectly release a chip of greater power at 28 nm that would rival the size of the GK110, it's even relatively easy for them having as a template a GM204 of just under 400mm2:
Increase the hard of the GM204 by 50%, you would get a chip of just under 600mm2, only marginally larger than the GK110, and with a power possibly much superior (6 GPCs, 3072 CC, 24 SMMs, 3 MB L2 and 384-bit bus, all this they can do right now, if they want, and even probably could recycle the PCB of the GK110 for this, as they have done between GK104 and GM204).
AMD hasn't burned their cards, because despite being "hot/hungry" as the relatively large Hawaii (460mm2, not much larger than the GM204, but with equal or superior power consumption to the GK110), they can very possibly revise their architecture as they did with Tonga, as they did with Hawaii itself and others, and achieve the balance they don't have today in terms of consumption.
It is supposed that the collaboration with Synopsis, a company with which they have reached a long-term agreement, resulted in 2 graphics chips with "revised consumption", one is Tonga (greater than 350mm2 said the Synopsis note, it must be this one), which may not be very successful but has fixed something regarding Hawaii in terms of tessellation, to begin with, and another is an unknown chip larger than Hawaii (greater than 500mm2).
I hope they refine this more, but at the very least they will have fixed the problems of Hawaii with tessellation that were not up to expectations (Hawaii should be at least twice as competent as Tahiti in this, and normally its advantage was much smaller, Tonga already demonstrates that it could be done better surpassing Hawaii in this).
500mm2 allows for a lot of redesign, being the larger chip, although it's not a technical marvel that advances the situation much, it will probably offer more performance, at least that. And if there's luck and they have worked and aimed better than with Tonga vs Tahiti at the problems of Hawaii with this replacement, enough to not only match the GM204s, but perhaps even match a possible "big Maxwell" at 28 nm. Or at least compete against its entry-level flavors.
-
Nvidia también lleva 2 arquitecturas a 28 nm, de hecho son 2 arquitecturas más 3 revisiones de éstas (kepler original, bigkepler-gpgpu o GK110, kepler "refinado-betamaxwell" con el GK208, y en maxwell, 1.0 y 2.0):
(para ver esquemas de SMX/SMM y cambios ir a spoiler)
!
! El primer kepler es el "mainstream" o "performance, el chip pensado para tarjetas geforce y con menor consideración a GPGPU de ámbito sobre todo científico, por eso su potencia DP es reducida, no capada como pasa con las Geforce basadsa en GK110 (excepeto las Titan, ese producto híbrido).
!
! El SMX de los GK110 en realidad no es idéntico, no sólo por el tema de su coma en DP mucho más potente, sino también por el funcionamiento de la caché, ya que por ejemplo la caché de texturas funciona también como una caché de datos ordinaria, no hace falta asociar los datos a texturas como pasa con el GK104 (funcionalidad puramente gpgpu).
! Entre ambos chips el cambio más radical está sin embargo a mayor escala, en los GK110 se apuesta por la densidad de cómputo que por las características más puramente de render, por eso en cada GPC hay 3 SMX (unidad de proceso "básica" para 3D, ya que básicamente hace todos los pasos de la pipe gráfica excepto la escritura final del pixel a VRAM o manejo de AA), y no los 2 SMX del GK104. La apuesta es clara hacia el cómputo (también en L2 más grande, en proporción, es el triple cuando no debería ser más que el 50% del GK104 si siquiera su diseño a rajatabla y lo "escalara" para mayor potencia).
!
! El GK208 es un curioso experimento, donde nvidia hizo unos pasos previos a la simplificación del SMX que acabaría en los SMM de Maxwell, se empieza a rebalancear baterías de unidades no tan usadas como hard compartido entre dos schedulers (es, por comparar con algo, como si fueran "cores" en un sistema multicore, manejan los "hilos/procesos" que son los streams de shaders a ejecutar, y pueden enviar más de una instrucción a ejecutar simultáneamente, de ahí que kepler tenga cierta dificultad para alcanzar uso máximo de su hard en ciertos entornos y por eso este rediseño, que se basa en el principio de que menos es más, compartir aquello que está lejos de una carga de trabajo del 100%).
!
! Maxwell 1.0 de las GTX 750, aquí ya vemos el lifting final de los SMM vs SMX, cada SMM puede en circunstancias óptimas rendir como un SMM, pero con mucho menos hard de ejecución. Cambios drásticos como la masiva L2 y meter 5 SMMs por GPC en vez de los 2-3 SMX por GPC de los kepler, son parte de su sello.
!
! Maxwell 2.0, no sólo cambia otra vez el balance de SMMs por cada GPC para reducirlo a 4 SMM por GPC, que es una seña de una mayor orientación a las 3D (repito, cada GPC actúa como una minigpu capaz de procesar desde las primeras etapas geométricas hasta "escupir" píxeles ya procesados y a enviar a memoria por ROPs, bajar la cantidad de SMM en Maxwell 2.0 permite más GPCs al hacerlos algo más compactos). Sino que también hace cambios "inadvertidos" como el aumento de las cachés L1 y la memoria compartida de cada SMM, en un caso duplicándolo y en otro aumentando el tamaño en un 50%, posiblemente para compensar cachés pequeñas.
!En definitiva, AMD no está tan limitada por el proceso de 28 nm porque haya "gastado todas sus cartas", sus rediseños entorno a GCN 1.0, 1.1 y 1.2 no son ni siquiera tantos como los rediseños que ha hecho nvidia en sus chips, que lo dice menos pero los hace y a veces a la chita callando (GK208 el mejor ejemplo).
Nvidia podría perfectamente sacar en 28 nm aún un chip de mayor potencia y que rivalizara con el tamaño del GK110, lo tiene hasta relativamente fácil teniendo como plantilla un GM204 de 400mm2 escasos:
Aumentar el hard del GM204 en un 50%, le saldría un chip de 600 mm2 escasos, sólo marginalmente más grande que el GK110, y con una potencia posiblemente muy superior (6 GPCs, 3072 CC, 24 SMMs, 3 MB L2 y bus de 384 bits, todo esto lo puede hacer ahora mismo, si quiere, e incluso seguramente podría reciclar el PCB de los GK110 para esto, como ha hecho entre GK104 y GM204).
AMD no ha quemado sus cartas, porque a pesar de lo "caliente/tragón" que es el relativamente grande Hawaii (460mm2, no mucho más grande que el GM204, pero con consumos igual o superiores al GK110), muy posiblemente puede revisar su arquitectura como hizo con Tonga, como hizo con el propio Hawaii y otros, y conseguir el balance que no tiene hoy en día en consumos.
Se supone que la colaboración con Synopsis, empresa con la que ha llegado a un acuerdo a mayor plazo, dió como resultado 2 chips gráficos con "consumo revisado", uno es Tonga (>350 mm2 decía la nota de Synopsis, tiene que ser éste), que quizás no sea muy exitoso pero algo ha arreglado respecto a Hawaii en temas de teselación, para comenzar, y otro es un chip desconocido más grande que Hawaii (>500 mm2).
Espero que hilaran más fino con éste, pero como mínimo habrán arreglado los problemas de Hawaii con el teselado que no estaban a la altura de las expectativas (hawaii debería ser como poco el doble de competente que Tahiti en esto, y normalmente su ventaja era mucho menor, Tonga ya demuestra que se podía hacer mejor superando a Hawaii en esto).
500 mm2 dan para mucho rediseño, siendo el chip más grande, aunque no sea una maravilla técnica que avance mucho la situación, posiblemente sí ofrece más rendimiento, como poco. Y si hay suerte y han trabajado y apuntado mejor que con Tonga vs Tahiti a los problemas de Hawaii con este relevo, lo suficiente como, ya no igualar a las GM204, sino quizás igualar a un posible "maxwell grande" a 28 nm. O cuanto menos competir contra sus sabores de entrada.
Espero que saque algo y fuercen a nvidia a sacar algo que suponga un avance mas claro, por que lo que esta ocurriendo es que cada vez avanzan menos en rendimiento y los precios suben.
Si ahora la 970 cuando se asiente en precio no esta mal, pero tendrían que dar pasos mas grandes en rendimiento, lo del consumo esta bien pero a mi lo que me convence es el rendimiento.Si sacan algo potente y que consuma poco se agradece pero dar pasos de 15 o 20% me parecen una miseria,
espero que no hagan como Intel que da con cuentagotas y nunca baja de precio, además capando el OC a muchos procesadores.
Por eso espero que AMD saque algo y pueda haber mas competencia y sobretodo un ajuste en precios.saludos
-
I hope they come up with something and force NVIDIA to release something that represents a clearer advancement, because what's happening is that they're advancing less and less in performance and prices are going up.
If the 970 is not bad now when it settles in price, but they would have to make bigger steps in performance, the power consumption is fine but what convinces me is performance.If they release something powerful and that consumes little it's appreciated but making steps of 15 or 20% seem like a pittance to me,
I hope they don't do like Intel that gives it out drop by drop and never lowers the price, besides capping OC on many processors.
That's why I hope AMD releases something and there can be more competition and above all an adjustment in prices.regards
This time they have a pretty good excuse: There's no 20 nm process available with the capabilities they need.
They still have room to use the 28 nm process with Maxwell and a "superchip", which demonstrates the great work done, but let's not be mistaken, Maxwell is much better in consumption, and a little better in performance per mm2, but only a little better than... the GK104. Which is the chip designed only for 3D in Kepler.
300 mm2 vs 400 mm2, 33% more area, and a performance that exceeds 50% comfortably with the GTX 980 (comparing apples to apples). In reality per mm2 the performance improvement should be around 10%, yes, accompanied also by an important consumption improvement.
Against the GK110 the ratio seems much better, but the authentic equivalent between GM204 and GK110 is comparing "very capped" chips or the 100% whole ones, and there it comes to GTX 980 vs 780 Ti, which also have good OC margins both. The improvement is repeated, and it may seem like a great use of the much more reduced area of GM204, which it is, but as always the GK110 is not only designed for games. Or its genetics in that sense are not as pure as GM204 or GK104, which are chips 100% oriented for 3D.
With these resources this is what NVIDIA can work with, for now. If it were necessary they would surely release something more powerful, but that depends on what they have to wait for the 20 nm and to what extent they are willing to release a "GM210" with the possibility of:
Being more oriented towards 3D than the "average" of large chips. After all the GM204/107 are good in GPGPU except in DP floating point, and they are not entirely horrible in this either (looking only at GeForce, against Tesla it's another story).
A light version of the "authentic GM210 of 20 nm", with less execution hard in total, but significantly more than the GM204. I can't get out of my head that the GM204, even being such a powerful chip, would not cease to be a really small chip at 20 nm, 200 mm2, which would place it perfectly against the range of cards like GTX 660 and similar. And that NVIDIA has always hovered more around those 300 mm2 for the performance chips lately.
But of course, the need (28 nm instead of 20 nm), fires the imagination. For now this is what we have, a little more power, less consumption, and "round" cards despite seeming "modest" by total figures. Perhaps something "big" will come out in a few months, but I think the leap of maxwell showing everything it is capable of will be when it moves to a smaller manufacturing process.
-
MSI still does not change the HDMI 1.4a specificationsMSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 4G [Review] | El Chapuzas Informático - Part 3
Review of MSI GTX 970
On the external side of the MSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 4G we find two DVI outputs, one completely digital (DVI-D) and another that also offers analog image (DVI-I) to be used together with the DVI-VGA adapter, although we must note that both allow a maximum resolution of 2048 x 1536 @ 60 Hz. They are joined by HDMI and DisplayPort outputs that do allow reaching 4096 x 2160 pixels (4K), but HDMI only allows 30 Hz at that resolution and DisplayPort does allow reaching 60 Hz. When buying a 4K monitor/TV we must bear in mind that if it does not have a DisplayPort input we will not be able to enjoy that resolution at 60 Hz, although perhaps it is still a bit early to worry too much about this aspect.
-
MSI sigue sin cambiar las especificaciones de HDMI 1.4a
MSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 4G [Review] | El Chapuzas Informático - Part 3
Review de MSI GTX 970
En el lado externo de la MSI GeForce GTX 970 Gaming 4G encontramos dos salidas DVI, una completamente digital (DVI-D) y otra que ofrece también imagen analógica (DVI-I) para ser usada junto al adaptador DVI-VGA, aunque debemos anotar que ambas permiten una resolución máxima de 2048 x 1536 @ 60 Hz. A ellas se suman salidas HDMI y DisplayPort que si permiten alcanzar los 4096 x 2160 pixeles (4K), pero HDMI solo permite 30 Hz a dicha resolución y DisplayPort si permite alcanzar los 60 Hz. A la hora de comprar un monitor/televisor 4K debemos tener en cuenta que si no tiene entrada DisplayPort no podremos disfrutar de dicha resolución a 60 Hz, aunque quizás todavía es algo pronto para preocuparse demasiado por este aspecto.
La Gigabyte si tiene HDMI 2, de todas formas están bajando bastante las 780.
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 780 Windforce rev2.0 3GB GDDR5 GV-N780WF3-3GD Tarjeta Gráfica
http://xtremmedia.com/Gainward_GeForce_GTX_780_Phantom_3Gb_Gddr5.htmlComo sigan bajando lo mismo monto otra, aunque están bien las nuevas tecnologías que traen las 900, pero no paran de subir, pues hay mucha demanda y una 780 sigue siendo un pepino.
Al menos se anima un poco el mercado con ofertas.
saludos
Esta vez tienen una disculpa bastante buena: No hay proceso de 20 nm disponible con las capacidades que necesitan.
Aún tienen margen para usar el proceso de 28 nm con Maxwell y un "superchip", lo cual demuestra el gran trabajo realizado, pero no nos equivoquemos, Maxwell es bastante mejor en consumo, y un poco mejor en rendimiento por mm2, pero sólo un poco mejor que… el GK104. Que es el chip diseñado sólo para 3D en Kepler.
300 mm2 vs 400 mm2, un 33% más de área, y un rendimiento que supera el 50% holgadamente con la GTX 980 (comparando peras con peras). En realidad por mm2 la mejora en rendimiento debe andar sobre el 10%, eso sí, acompañada además de una mejora en consumo importante.
Contra el GK110 la relación parece mucho mejor, pero el auténtico equivalente entre GM204 y GK110 está en comparar a chips "muy capados" o a los 100% enteros, y ahí toca GTX 980 vs 780 Ti, que además tienen buenos márgenes de OC ambos. La mejora se repite, y puede parecer un gran uso del área mucho más reducida del GM204, que lo es, pero como siempre el GK110 no sólo está diseñado para juegos. o su genética en ese sentido no es tan pura como el GM204 o el GK104, que son chips 100% orientados para el 3D.
Con estos mimbres es con lo que puede trabajar nvidia, de momento. Si hiciera falta seguro que saca algo más potente, pero eso depende de lo que tenga que esperar por los 20 nm y hasta qué punto está dispuesto a sacar un "GM210" con posibilidad de:
Estar más orientado a 3D que la "media" de chips grandes. Al fin y al cabo los GM204/107 son buenos en GPGPU excepto en coma flotante de DP, y tampoco son horrendos del todo en esto (mirando sólo a Geforce, contra Tesla ya es otra historia).
Una versión light del "auténtico GM210 de 20 nm", con menos hard de ejecución en total, pero sensiblemente más que el GM204. No se me quita de la cabeza que el GM204, aún siendo un chip tan potente, no dejaría de ser un chip realmente pequeño a 20 nm, 200 mm2, lo cual lo colocaría perfectamente contra la gama de tarjetas como GTX 660 y similares. Y que nvidia siempre ha rondado más esos 300 mm2 para los chips performances últimamente.
Pero claro, la necesidad (28 nm en vez de 20 nm), dispara la imaginación. De momento esto es lo que tenemos, un poco más de potencia, menos consumo, y tarjetas "redondas" a pesar de parecer "modestas" por cifras totales. Quizás salga algo "gordo" en unos meses, pero me da que el salto de maxwell mostrando todo lo que es capaz, será al pasar a un proceso de fabricación menor.
Pero este GM204 en 20nm seria pequeño no? además creo que Maxwell sobretodo estos performance se habían diseñado para 20nm supongo, pero viendo que el invento del GM107 les salio bien y que no para de retrasarse los 20nm decidieron sacar estas a 28nm.
Ahora mismo ese proceso ya debe ser mas barato y podían haber puesto mejores precios, sobretodo a la 980, por que es mucha diferencia con la 970, de todas formas viendo como están bajando las 780 quizá pretendían no canibalizarse ellos mismos, aunque con la 970 no solo canibalizan a la 780 sino que también a la Ti.
saludos
-
The Gigabyte does have HDMI 2, anyway they are lowering the 780 quite a bit.
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 780 Windforce rev2.0 3GB GDDR5 GV-N780WF3-3GD Graphics Card
http://xtremmedia.com/Gainward_GeForce_GTX_780_Phantom_3Gb_Gddr5.htmlIf they keep lowering the price I'll buy another one, even though the new technologies that the 900 series bring are good, but they keep going up, because there's a lot of demand and a 780 is still a great card.
At least the market is getting a bit more active with offers.
regards
Apparently the MSi would be the only one with HDMI 1.4a :ugly: I think it's fine if you can get another GTX 780 at a good price even at 4K it would go very well.
Salu2
-
Apparently the MSi would be unique with HDMI 1.4a :ugly: I think it's fine if you can get another GTX 780 at a good price even at 4K it would work very well.-
Salu2
Well I think that for 1080p the SLI of 780 is exaggerated, I prefer a 970 to put it in the living room, there I remove the 480, I want HDMI also to see if I can get some games and movies in 3D, anyway the television is HDMI 1.4 and I wouldn't take advantage of HDMI 2, but since the case is not one of those that have very good ventilation then the less it consumes and the less heat to dissipate the better, I gain silence and I will gain a lot in temperature, which could serve me to overclock the CPU more.
But SLI I think is already for resolutions 2560x1440 as a minimum, for 1080p one is very good, two already seems like a lot to me, because I play everything with very high details with just one.
saludos
-
Between a 780Ti that does 1250mhz and a 970GTX, I wonder which one would overclock better if the change comes out to 100e, which one would be better or perform more? Is it to be expected that the performance of the TI with its less GB will drop in terms of future games? Or is it better to save my money and keep my 780GTX and wait for the next generation or a future 980ti?
-
Between a 780Ti that does 1250mhz and a 970GTX with who knows what overclock if the change costs me 100e which one is better or would perform more? Is it expected that the performance of the TI with its less GB will drop for future games? Or is it better to save my money and my 780GTX and wait for the next generation or a future 980ti?
I wouldn't change for anything, I wouldn't change even the 780, maybe the 970 is a little more powerful, but I think it's a pittance what I can gain.
I would certainly wait until February or March when the 20nm ones seem to be out, although I know what they release in 20nm is going to be expensive, but it's also possible that there will be more competition, if it's about waiting I don't mind doing it with a 780 than with a 970.I don't see a problem with Vram with a 780 or 780Ti, if they were two or three and I played at 2560x1600 maybe it would be a bigger problem, but with one I doubt it a lot and much less playing at 1080p.
I know one doesn't have the power to put 4x of SSAA, or things like that and that's why I think 3 GB is fine.
saludos
-
I wouldn't change for anything, I wouldn't even change the 780, maybe the 970 is a little more powerful, but I think what I can gain is a pittance.
I would certainly wait until February or March when the 20nm ones seem to be coming out, although I know that what they release in 20nm is going to be expensive, but it's also possible that there will be more competition, if it's about waiting I don't mind doing it with a 780 or a 970.I don't see a problem with Vram with a 780 or 780Ti, if they were two or three and I played at 2560x1600 maybe it would be a bigger problem, but with one I doubt it a lot and much less playing at 1080p.
I know that one doesn't have the power to put 4x of SSAA, or things like that and that's why I think 3 GB is fine.
regards
No, that change doesn't make sense. Even in my case and starting from a weaker GTX 770 to the GTX 970 (the one that for price could interest me), the gain although visible is not a big deal to rush out and change the graphics card (+33%).
This new family of graphics "excites" me, because I also really liked what I saw with the small GM107, and I was eager to see performance chips based on Maxwell. There are also extra advantages like all the technological novelties (MFAA, DSR, new video encoder, improvements in many areas, 4 GB of VRAM, etc), which starting from a GTX 770 seem more interesting than from a GTX 780, which is very close in many areas.
But of course, one thing is what logic says, I have an internal rule that estimates that for the visual improvement between two graphics cards to be clear, they must be a minimum of what the more powerful one gets out of the previous one of 50% of performance, this allows being able to activate a series of effects or improvements in AA or resolution, enough, to improve the visual quality clearly, maintaining the same fps rate, the rule speaks of that minimum but the optimal is to double the power, where the advantages are numerous and numerous (not only can you improve the quality a lot, but you can also improve the fps rate).
The 33% average that a GTX 970 gets is not enough (yes what the 980 gets), even so, if you counted the OC seeing how well they go up, you could raise that percentage, but I doubt it up to 50% from an OC vs OC point of view (probably 40%).
Even said the above, which is the rational and logical, I think the "passionate" part and the improvement is enough to be appreciable, and of longer duration. But speaking strictly logically, said change is not profitable. Less with a GTX 780.
Although in these forums many times it's not about doing what is more logical, but what fills you the most as a user passionate about new technologies. Or not?
-
No, no tiene sentido ese cambio. Incluso en mi caso y partiendo desde una más floja GTX 770 a la que la GTX 970 (la que por precio me podría interesar), la ganancia aunque ya visible tampoco es una barbaridad para salir a cambiar corriendo la gráfica (+33%).
A mí esta nueva familia de gráficas me "emociona", porque además me gustó mucho lo que ví con la pequeña GM107, y tenía ganas de ver chips prestacionales basados en Maxwell. Hay además ventajas extras como todas las novedades tecnológicas (MFAA, DSR, nuevo codificador de vídeo, mejoras en multitud de apartados, los 4 GB de VRAM, etc), que partiendo de una GTX 770 se ven más interesantes que desde una GTX 780, la cual está muy cerca en multitud de apartados.
Pero claro, una cosa es lo que diga la lógica, tengo una regla interna que estima que para que sea clara la mejora visual entre dos gráficas, deben ser un mínimo lo que le saca la más potente a la anterior de un 50% de rendimiento, esto permite poder activar una serie de efectos o mejoras en AA o resolución, suficientes, para mejorar la calidad visual de forma clara, manteniendo la misma tasa de fps, la regla habla de ese mínimo pero lo óptimo es duplicar la potencia, donde las ventajas son nutridas y numerosas (no sólo se puede mejorar bastante la calidad, sino que además se puede mejorar la tasa de fps).
El 33% de media que obtiene una GTX 970 no es suficiente (sí lo que obtiene la 980), aún así, si se contara el OC visto lo bien que suben, podría subir dicho porcentaje, pero dudo que hasta el 50% de un punto de vista de OC vs OC (seguramente un 40%).
Aún dicho lo anterior, que es lo racional y lógico, creo que la parte "pasional" y la mejora es suficiente como para ser apreciable, y de mayor duración. Pero hablando de forma estrictamente lógica, no renta dicho cambio. Menos con una GTX 780.
Aunque en estos foros muchas veces no se trata de hacer lo que sea más lógico, sino lo que más llena como usuario apasionado de las nuevas tecnologías. ¿O no?
A mi me gusta lo del DSR, pero con una 780 que tampoco es mala en OC, no veo que me compense, espero a otras que me supongan una mayor ganancia, o quiza si bajan las 970 y veo un SLI barato.
Pero viendo como esta la cosa lo dudo por que son vistas y no vistas y no paran de subir, hay mas demanda que oferta y asi es difícil que puedan bajar.
saludos
-
Thanks for your feedback. I'll save my money for the next generation. DSR is not available for the 780, correct me if I'm wrong.
Sent from my GameBoy
-
Thanks for your feedback. I'll save my money for the next generation. DSR is not available for the 780, correct me if I'm wrong.
Sent from my GameBoy
DSR no, but maybe with the next ones they'll release another new technology, if it doesn't run 1080p with 4xSSAA, I don't think it could with DSR and a 970.
Regards
-
The DSR no, but perhaps with the next ones they will release another new technology, if it doesn't move 1080p with 4xSSAA, I think it also wouldn't be possible with DSR and a 970.
Regards
It does seem that it will come out, for the Keplers in theory. After all, it is a pure soft technique, or if not, almost (perhaps the final downsampling is done with hard, but it is a trivial matter to perform via shaders, besides having dedicated 2D hard the graphics, including a resolution scaler).
