Videocardz says: ASUS STRIX GTX 970 and ASUS GTX 980 listed

AFD said:
I'll just leave this here..

Geforce GTX 980 Alleged Benchmark and TDP Surfaces – Just 170W for ~110% 780 Ti Performance


Dunno. I'm thinking this info could just be one of the guys over at Chiphell making calculations based off of the leaked 870/970 benchmarks. Someone over there also said they were looking forward to an upcoming "MINI" card, so I'm happy with that small glimmer of hope :)
Click to expand...

Seems pretty ambitious for a supposed $499 MSRP. I'd love for it to be true though... setting up a new rig and I'm anxiously awaiting whats coming.
 
While ambitious why did e-tailers drop the prices on 780Ti's by over $150 (to slightly above $500) for a short time if they thought they could still get the $650+ from them once the new cards launched consistently? Better to make smaller margins and get product pushed than have a palette of dead product making no margins. And as with any flagship product the prices never really get reduced in the long term, I remember looking at 680's and 3930Ks 8 months ago and they were still in their $500-550 price range - just the same as launch despite being quite dated at that time.

Given the known fact that Maxwell architecture has improved core performance and power efficiency, I can completely see it scaling that way moving up to a higher TDP than the lower end Maxwell (gotta sacrifice some efficiency in scaling from small to big) - it's still only about 70% of the 780Ti TDP compared to about 50-60% of the 750Ti's direct competitors. Depending upon the specifications (core count, ROP, SMX units, etc) its believable that anywhere from a 10-25% increase in performance compared to a 780Ti could be obtained if they sacrificed a little power efficiency to bump performance.
 
AFD said:
I'll just leave this here..

Geforce GTX 980 Alleged Benchmark and TDP Surfaces – Just 170W for ~110% 780 Ti Performance
Click to expand...

So let me wrap my head around this for a minute. Anyone with a 780Ti, ignore these cards till fall of 2015, does not apply to you at all. You bought a beefy card that rocks and has rocked for a while. Also, its another Nvidia money grab. Same process, less wattage, maybe 10% increase over Ti. I call bullshit and say it ties the 780Ti in actual reviews while they milk $500 out of everyone again while claiming power savings. This is looking like the 2500 core part that was mentioned before, not the 3200 core monster that I was hoping for and others.

Lets go back a little. ATI back in the day use to be power efficient before becoming AMD and Nvidia always had Brute force GPU's that kicked ass. Now Nvidia is all about saving energy while cutting Brute Force??? Because that's what they are showing me right now with this release. So in order to get the Brute Force GPU, we are still going to have a $700 variant down the road (before xmas probably) known as 980Ti? Sounds right to me. Its the same shit they did with 600 series to 700 practically.

Seriously hardcore pc gamers that buy $500+ cards want POWER! I don't care if you have to fire up another Nuclear Plant to feed my need, at least give me an option. I hope AMD announces a part that is 30% faster than regular GTX 980, 50 more watts, and priced at $550 and will be out first week of October. After 10 years, I guess its time to go back to team Red. (I really don't freakin want to.)

This card is no where near the $500 mark, this reeks of $399, specially with all this supposed power savings and old process. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I get why people are worried about the performance, but I'm going to hold out to see some overclocking numbers. With the kind of efficiency these rumors are talking about, we may be looking at some potential overclocking monsters. If that turns out to be the case, there's a good chance I'll upgrade. If not my 780 Classified still has plenty of legs in it.
 
tonyftw said:
http://videocardz.com/52166/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-gtx-970-gtx-980m-gtx-970m-3dmark-performance

If those numbers are true, guess I will wait for gm200.
Click to expand...

Has anybody noticed that VC seems to be running 343.91 driver on these cards? Couldn't find anything anywhere about it, seems like it's some kind of secret sauce ES version or something...

Also, have a ook at these Fire Strike scores for 780:

980 core/ 1502 mem = 10777 graphics (driver 337.88)
980 core/ 1502 mem = 10590 graphics (driver 335.23)
967 core/ 1502 mem = 10672 graphics (driver 340.52)

(all 3 results obtained on Win8.1)

VC 780: 1006 core/ 1502 mem = 10008 graphics

There's something very peculiar about that 343.91 driver. Either it doesn't play well with Kepler, or VC is running Win7.

I'm really hoping those results are real and not the product of a secret sauce driver tweaked for Fire Strike for Maxwell.
 
Matthew Kane said:
Is this going to be worth it from 2 680 4gb's?
Click to expand...

probably not, no. a 780 Ti is slightly slower than 770 sli, and 680 = 770. proposed performance puts this card within +/- 10% of a 780 Ti, making it either even slower than or on par with 680 sli.
 
Odellus said:
probably not, no. a 780 Ti is slightly slower than 770 sli, and 680 = 770. proposed performance puts this card within +/- 10% of a 780 Ti, making it either even slower than or on par with 680 sli.
Click to expand...

OC'd 780 ti beats out oc'd 680 sli, as well as stock to stock, in most circumstances. This card should be a bit faster than the 780 ti, consume far less power, and be far more overclockable. And far cheaper. :) as well as having 4gb of ram instead of 2gb on the 770/680 sli he has. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade in my opinion.
 
GoldenTiger said:
OC'd 780 ti beats out oc'd 680 sli, as well as stock to stock, in most circumstances. This card should be a bit faster than the 780 ti, consume far less power, and be far more overclockable. And far cheaper. :) as well as having 4gb of ram instead of 2gb on the 770/680 sli he has. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade in my opinion.
Click to expand...
If its anything to go by, that link shows 770 sli easily being a bit faster than a 980. Its a side grade at very best plus he clearly said he had 4gb cards.
 
Viper87227 said:
Seems pretty ambitious for a supposed $499 MSRP. I'd love for it to be true though... setting up a new rig and I'm anxiously awaiting whats coming.
Click to expand...

I agree it seems ambitious, but it does make sense. Nvidia lost out on all three current gen console design wins. The PC is now their primary market, at least until the next console cycle. They need to do everything they can to push PC gaming to make up the lost revenue. They've been pushing the PC for the last 12 months or so precisely because the PC is all that's left to them. It's also why they're making the Shield line, to replace lost console revenue.

Lowering prices on their flagship GPUs makes a lot of market sense. They'll miss the margins of the 700 line, but should make it up through additional sales.
 
How are they "lowering" their prices? If its $499 for the GM204 980 then its similar to when they launched the previous midrange GK104 680 for $499. If anything they are raking in more money selling these midrange chips for high end prices.
 
misterbobby said:
How are they "lowering" their prices? If its $499 for the GM204 980 then its similar to when they launched the previous midrange GK104 680 for $499. If anything they are raking in more money selling these midrange chips for high end prices.
Click to expand...

The x80 card isn't midrange.
 
Terpfen said:
The x80 card isn't midrange.
Click to expand...

Were you not here when the card was released? Everyone speculated(still do) that the GTX 680 was really just a midrange card and Nvidia decided to milk it since AMD didn't really do anything impressive at the time with their cards. Pretty much GTX 680 was actually a GTX 660 in those people's eyes. Not my opinion, but that's what he meant.
 
xIronCrossx said:
Were you not here when the card was released?
Click to expand...

I've been on this forum far longer than you have.

misterbobby said:
Please pay more attention to what I am actually saying. AGAIN, as in the case of GK104, its a midrange chip being used here so they are not "lowering" prices at all.
Click to expand...

Yes, I read what you said. Again: the x80 card in Nvidia's lineup is not a midrange card. I don't care about what you think about the GK104's capabilities. Nvidia markets the x80 card as a high end card.
 
Terpfen said:
I've been on this forum far longer than you have.



Yes, I read what you said. Again: the x80 card in Nvidia's lineup is not a midrange card. I don't care about what you think about the GK104's capabilities. Nvidia markets the x80 card as a high end card.
Click to expand...

But it was, the 680 was a midrange card. Thats why it was rebadged to a 770 because Nvidia wasnt ready to release the 780/780ti cards when the 680 card was ready.

It's the same case here with the 980/970. They are midrange parts. And if the performance is what the leaked benches show, is a DAMN good midrange card.

Just not good enough to replace anyones 780/780ti's.
 
Terpfen said:
I've been on this forum far longer than you have.



Yes, I read what you said. Again: the x80 card in Nvidia's lineup is not a midrange card. I don't care about what you think about the GK104's capabilities. Nvidia markets the x80 card as a high end card.
Click to expand...


We can play (and have) the silicon naming debate all day long and show historical records that show the GTX 600 Series broke the norm, but at the end of the day I wouldn't say 170W TDP w/110% performance over a GTX 780 Ti @ $499 is ground breaking. First off, I don't think that's going to be true at all. It sounds absolutely stupid for a high-end card (even if it is a mid-range chip sold at high-end blah blah) period.

At the high-end you care less and less about TDP. In fact it's usually the one time the trend is opposite. Given those "rumors" are taken at face value. Yeah that would be impressive TDP for basically a 780 Ti. The price? That's what the GTX 780 Ti should be priced at anyways. The 10% boost from a 780 Ti? Not going to win many awards there or woe the crowd. The TDP would be the only thing that stands out on that card and when you are talking about the enthusiast crowd that makes up 10% or less of all purchases, that's very disappointing in general. We've had basically the same performance at this point since Feb. 2013 (Titan) or 18 months with almost nothing significant for a next-gen release?

Lets look at this objectively.
 
Terpfen said:
I've been on this forum far longer than you have.
Click to expand...

Congratulations, except that has nothing to do with it. Doesn't matter if you were here in 2005 or w/e when the card was released in 2012. Maybe you missed the whole situation where some people were saying the GTX 680 was actually just a GTX 660 and Nvidia was milking it because AMD's cards weren't really that impressive. I was trying to explain to you what he meant, thanks for not getting the point though and being condescending.
 
Terpfen said:
I've been on this forum far longer than you have.



Yes, I read what you said. Again: the x80 card in Nvidia's lineup is not a midrange card. I don't care about what you think about the GK104's capabilities. Nvidia markets the x80 card as a high end card.
Click to expand...
You really have trouble following the conversation here. YOU were the one that said Nvidia was lowering prices. For the THIRD time they are NOT lowering prices as once AGAIN they are using a mid range chip for a high end SKU. So just like with the GK104, they have way more flexibility on pricing. They are not doing you any favors as its quite the opposite that is true making high end money on mid range chips. The real high end GM200 equipped top card most certainly will not be just 500 bucks unless there is a very compelling reason for it to be.
 
xIronCrossx said:
Congratulations, except that has nothing to do with it. Doesn't matter if you were here in 2005 or w/e when the card was released in 2012. Maybe you missed the whole situation where some people were saying the GTX 680 was actually just a GTX 660 and Nvidia was milking it because AMD's cards weren't really that impressive. I was trying to explain to you what he meant, thanks for not getting the point though and being condescending.
Click to expand...
He seems to be missing the point on everything. :confused:
 
Liger88 said:
We can play (and have) the silicon naming debate all day long and show historical records that show the GTX 600 Series broke the norm, but at the end of the day I wouldn't say 170W TDP w/110% performance over a GTX 780 Ti @ $499 is ground breaking. First off, I don't think that's going to be true at all. It sounds absolutely stupid for a high-end card (even if it is a mid-range chip sold at high-end blah blah) period.

At the high-end you care less and less about TDP. In fact it's usually the one time the trend is opposite. Given those "rumors" are taken at face value. Yeah that would be impressive TDP for basically a 780 Ti. The price? That's what the GTX 780 Ti should be priced at anyways. The 10% boost from a 780 Ti? Not going to win many awards there or woe the crowd. The TDP would be the only thing that stands out on that card and when you are talking about the enthusiast crowd that makes up 10% or less of all purchases, that's very disappointing in general. We've had basically the same performance at this point since Feb. 2013 (Titan) or 18 months with almost nothing significant for a next-gen release?

Lets look at this objectively.
Click to expand...

About that 170W TDP... Assuming nVidia didn't push GM204 to its limits already with the GTX 980, I actually view that as a positive thing. As in there should be tons of OC headroom since you're basically getting 250+W performance for only 170W. Or am I missing something here?
 
n=1 said:
About that 170W TDP... Assuming nVidia didn't push GM204 to its limits already with the GTX 980, I actually view that as a positive thing. As in there should be tons of OC headroom since you're basically getting 250+W performance for only 170W. Or am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

Yes its called power limit. Nvidia will enforce it like they did with all other Nvidia cards.

Doesn't mean overclocking wont work, just that its limited.
 
Right. But what if the power limit could be removed by modding the vBIOS? Laptop cards not only have a power limit, but I can't even adjust the voltage with a stock (and thus useless) vBIOS. Flash an unlocked vBIOS however, and everything (power/temp target, voltage) becomes freely adjustable.
 
n=1 said:
Right. But what if the power limit could be removed by modding the vBIOS? Laptop cards not only have a power limit, but I can't even adjust the voltage with a stock (and thus useless) vBIOS. Flash an unlocked vBIOS however, and everything (power/temp target, voltage) becomes freely adjustable.
Click to expand...

When the power limit is removed (well you cant remove it, but you can increase it, which is what I did with my MSI lightning, which increased it to 287%). You are still limited by a max of 1.21v period.
 
1.21V that's it?! I thought desktop cards ran ~1.15V at stock.

My 780M runs at 1V stock and can go up to 1.2V with a modded vBIOS. 1.2V is the hard limit, and I would never recommend going up that high (or over 1.1V for that matter), but that (suicide) option is there. Surprised desktop cards are so restricted in comparison.
 
n=1 said:
1.21V that's it?! I thought desktop cards ran ~1.15V at stock.

My 780M runs at 1V stock and can go up to 1.2V with a modded vBIOS. 1.2V is the hard limit, and I would never recommend going up that high (or over 1.1V for that matter), but that suicide) option is there. Surprised desktop cards are so restricted in comparison.
Click to expand...

Yap. So if you increased your voltage to 1.21v. You are still limited by the power limit of each card.

Sure your boost clocks get to 1300mhz at 1.21v. but as soon as you hit that power limit (which would be pretty quickly) it will start to throttle.

With the MSI 780 lightning I had. You could download a bios that basically got rid of the power limit, and I used a tool to increase my volts past the Nvidia hardlock of 1.21v.

On a side note. MSI got in ALOT of trouble for trying to bypass nvidia's hard limits, and basically had to delay the 780 lightning release. Can't remember where i read that one though.
 
Interesting, I thought going beyond the voltage hardlock required a hard mod, at least that's the case for mobile cards. (but really, you're practically begging for trouble at that point)

Is that tool Kepler Bios Tweaker by any chance?
 
I wonder if ASUS would release a mini 970 like they did with the 670 and 760 with the rumoured low TDP?
 
Groats said:
I wonder if ASUS would release a mini 970 like they did with the 670 and 760 with the rumoured low TDP?
Click to expand...

I'm really hoping so. Been waiting for a worthy successor to the ASUS Mini (MSI ITX) 670 and 760 for a very long time.

Something similar to, or slightly better than 680/770 performance in a short PCB format would be awesome. I hope they don't drag their feet again, and can get one out shortly after launch this month.


Hell, if the 170W TDP on the 980 is true (same TDP as the 760), perhaps a mini 980 ITX card is in the works?? I'd buy that sucker right now!
 
n=1 said:
1.21V that's it?! I thought desktop cards ran ~1.15V at stock.

My 780M runs at 1V stock and can go up to 1.2V with a modded vBIOS. 1.2V is the hard limit, and I would never recommend going up that high (or over 1.1V for that matter), but that (suicide) option is there. Surprised desktop cards are so restricted in comparison.
Click to expand...

It varies by factory sample but the general range is 1.075-1.1v for desktop GTX 780 video cards as to what they come set at stock.
 
I see. I can tell you for fact that mobile cards (at least flagship cards) pretty much all run 1V at load with the occasional spike to 1.012V at stock. Although each card can be undervolted to a different extent so that's the variation I suppose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top